Posts Tagged ‘wider’

Good Idea: The Panhandle Bike Path Should Be Widened

Tuesday, June 2nd, 2015

It used to have four foot wide lanes.

Then it got six foot lanes, but now it’s lots busier these days, with all manner of transport upon it:

7J7C8826 copy

And the SFPD and Rec & Park drive upon this path with Crown Victorias all the time too, right?

So what’s wrong with eight foot lanes, I ask you.

(Oh, no other “improvements” are required, no beautification efforts are required, or desired. Just work on the basics, SFGov.)

It Looks Like Somebody Wants a Wider Golden Gate Park Panhandle Bike Path – Or, is Planning for One, Anyway

Wednesday, May 6th, 2015

I’ll tell you, in my day the Panhandle Bike Path was a mere eight foot wide. And then it went to twelve foot, the way it is now.

But how about 16 feet – what the heck would be wrong with that? JMO.

Anyway, they just got finished repaving the southwest corner of Fell and Masonic, so the bike path got widened to 14 feet, if only for a short section:

P1220942 copy

I’ll get my 16 foot bike path, someday. (Prolly with a laundry list of expensive aesthetic “improvements” that I won’t notice, but anyway, someday…

The Bike Lane in the Golden Gate Park Panhandle Should Be Widened

Friday, November 15th, 2013

Some people call it a Multi-Use Path, but really it’s a bike lane that peds can use as well.

Click to expand

Anyway, widening would make things better all around.

Look Ma, No Hands! – Heading West on the Panhandle Bike Path – Should This “Wilderness Trail” Be Widened?

Tuesday, January 8th, 2013

You know, before somebody, some ped gets clobbered?

Click to expand

It will happen like this – a roadie traveling west, the downhill direction, will be “making time” or “flying” at 20-something MPH and s/he will clobber a pedestrian, perhaps Chris Bucchere-style.

So, I think wider would be better.

I mean, you wouldn’t want to narrow the thing, would you?

You Don’t Like Bikes on Sidewalks? Well, “Then Put a Flippin Bike Lane on Divisadero!”

Monday, October 10th, 2011

[UPDATE: Oops. Speaking of which, there are a lot of different possibilities for Oak betwixt Baker and Scott. Taking out the parking lane on the south side of Oak is an idea. In the meantime, take the lane. Or head up Baker to Fulton to Divis to McAllister and then roll all the way down to Mid Market and beyond – that way you avoid the horrible part of Octavia and SFPD bike enforcement actions, etc…]

Appears as if Carly Schwartz, Founding editor of Huffington Post San Francisco, has a beef with the Livable Cities / Livable Streets movement, at least as far as Divisadero is concerned:

Then put a flippin bike lane on Divisadero! Thanks

Now that’s interesting because the City, instead of just taking out the useless median on Divisadero, well, the Powers That Be, the City Family, actually went in there a few years back and made the median wider so now there’s less room for bike riders.


Click to expand

Does it look like, as some say, there’s “excess roadway space” here? Not at all, IRL.

And the sidewalks are like ten feet wide.

So sure, ride your bike on the wide sidewalks of Divis. I mean, I seriously doubt you’ll ever get a ticket.

Or “take the lane,” it’s your choice. (But I don’t advise taking the lane on Divisadero, uphill or down, personally.)

So, how do we fix the horrible thing our City Family and the Livable City movement just inflicted on the Commonweal?

Well, how about narrowing the fast lane to make the slow lane wider?

Or, how about narrowing the median to the width you’ll find north of Geary and then taking out the useless vegetation?

Or, how about just taking out the whole damn useless median? What’s that, it would cost $$$ to move the light standards? Well, get some money from the Feds. Didn’t they just pay money to fuck up Divisadero just a few years back? I think so. So maybe they’d pay to take the light standards out of the middle of the street and put them in the comparatively wide sidewalks of Divis. You know, shovel ready, jobs jobs jobs! What’s that, local businesses and area NIMBYs and real estate interests prefer the trees in the useless median and other aesthetic stuff? Well, who put them in charge?

(Or, maybe we could narrow the wide sidewalks, but that would cost even more.)

So maybe Divis doesn’t deserve a bike lane, but how about just giving back the space that was taken for useless trees?

Wouldn’t that be a start?