IDK, in any other part of California, there’d be a button to push for peds wanting to cross Sunset at Yorba. And that would make the light go red and then the peds would cross.
But for some reason, SFGov put in a button that merely flashed yellow lights, because, because why? Because a flashing yellow light is better than no light at all? Au contraire, not at all. IRL, the flashing yellow HAWK lights at Yorba are a big failure. The only thing they succeeded in is creating cases for the District Attorney to ponder.
IRL, peds don’t need to push no button and they don’t even need to look before they cross over Sunset – no matter what they do here, any collision will be the fault of the driver. Who designed this set up, one wonders.
Anyway, the SFPD is well aware of the carnage of course, so here’s how it responds whenever somebody gets run over. Look to the right of the photo and you’ll see an unoccupied SFPD van just sitting there to put a little fear into the minds of drivers:
These signals only flash yellow, unlike the examples of HAWKs I’ve seen on the web.
Who approved these signals? What was the intent? Was it to save money? Was it to spend money? Why didn’t SF put in traditional lights a long time ago?
And is this crazy set-up* a factor for the DA to keep in mind when deciding how to handle accidents? Well, I’ll answer this one:
Oh Hell Yes.
San Franciscans obvs. can’t handle having a single simple freeway taking traffic from the south up north towards the Golden Gate Bridge, so Sunset Boulevard (or Parkway or whatever people cal it) is part of the solution. But it hasn’t been managed properly.
That is the fault of whom?
*I can’t think of a situation where a vehicle vs. ped collision at this intersection could be the fault of the ped, unless the ped had been running in the crosswalk. So you end up with a dead ped and a driver who’s legally at fault – is that a good situation?
All right, camera right shows a light-colored Chevy properly waiting at the red arrow light to turn from westbound Fell onto southbound Masonic. The confused driver is in the blue two-door Honda – she wants to make the same turn to get from NoPA to SoPA but she’s in the wrong lane.
Click to expand
Of course back in the day, the Honda driver would have been driving properly but things changed at this intersection about a half-decade back. Check it. Anywho, she sat there waiting to turn left even though she had a green to proceed straight on Fell Street.
That pissed off the driver of the car behind her, so then its driver is all “hoooooooooonk!” You know, at the Blue Honda Chick.
She doesn’t budge ’cause she knows she wants to turn left, you know, from the wrong lane.
Oh, here she goes, around the Chevy:
Now all that honking attracted the attention of the Park Station police, who also made an illegal left from the wrong lane in order to follow the blue Honda driver onto southbound Masonic. Here they are near Oak:
The moral of this story is that drivers will never get used to this unique intersection set-up. The reason being is that the San Francisco Bicycle Coalition overruled the traffic engineers who originally had cars on Fell turning left at the beginning of the green light phase for Fell Street. But you see, that had car drivers “going first.”
On It Goes…
And oh, what you’re supposed to do when you make a mistake driving is to just go with it, go with the flow, you know, respond to stimuli. So like if you’re in the westbound lane and you have a green to go straight then you should go straight for a while EVEN THOUGH THAT”S NOT WHAT YOU WANT TO DO RIGHT NOW.
Obliviously, you can’t just make up your own traffic rules…
See? He’s driving the wrong way. He felt that the drivers ahead of him weren’t being aggressive enough moving past the stop sign:
Click to expand
Oh well. (It’s true that the drivers ahead of him could have paid more attention, I s’pose.) The driver shaved about five minutes off of his trip so I guess that’s a small victory for him.
Anyway, the way to avoid this mess is to cut through the Great Parking Lot of Fulton (minding the peds, of course, the worst in the world hang out around here) to get on Hyde easily. Otherwise, you’ll be in this mess on Grove for ten minutes or whatever.
But why are you the most TV-obsessed transit agency in the world?
Why have you hired a litany of Kent Brockmans and Cookie Kwans* to make real-looking fake TV bits?
Is there some kind of military-industrial complex where every television “transportation reporter” in the Bay Area ends up doing gigs for BART to fool viewers into thinking that they’re watching the news?
Is this why the televised MSM lets BART get away with all the stuff BART gets away with?
I doubt any of these sell-outs still works at the stations what made them famous (I assume, as my govmint digital converter box died last year so all I can get on my 20-year old Sony is snow), but they were on the air in the Bay Area fairly recently. Here’s the partial tally – this is what I’ve noticed in the BARTtv collection from just the past six months.
Mark Jones of Bubb Rubb and L’il Sis fame – KRON4. This report is particularly egregious. Perhaps the BART Police’s informant was fed bad information on purpose in this instance? Remember, that was the allegation at the time. You know, from the Uhuru group. And then, per BART, after all those “groups” did all that planning, the “sneak attack” “fizzled.” Or maybe there was no sneak attack, BART? I don’t buy BART’s narrative, personally, but you are free to swallow whatever the fuck BART spoon feeds you, certainly, hook, line and sinker:
And of course, Linton Johnson, who used to be a weekend anchor at KNTV San Jose. Start at about 9:45 to hear him defend his egregious misstatement of law from last month (about BART’s duty to balance the public’s constitutional Right to Safety against the 1st Amendment.) Then he goes, “I am a journalist.” (And I thought he was just a PR hack who costs BART $170+K per year.)
BART, you’re a god-damn embarrassment, that’s what I’m saying.
*Love that opening. Also, still loving Blue Skies after all these years, so imprinted am I.
If this version of BART’s Proposed Call Service Interruption Policy were put into action as-is, it would mean that BART could do whatever it wanted to, whenever it wanted to.
So, what’s the point in having a policy that says this?
And hey, whatever happened to BARTtv? Seems as if it’s “off the air” these days. How many former Bay Area newsmens has BART hired lately, cause I see three of them on Orwellian “BARTtv news” from this year alone.
Should BART be broadcasting video clips designed to confuse the viewer over what’s news and what’s BART propganda?
Should BART have a former TV newsman making policy?