Madison WI style bike lane tried in SF on Valencia Street.

https://sfstandard.com/2023/12/08/san-francisco-small-business-protests-valencia-street-bike-lane/

We'll see if it stays or not. Some businesses--where the $$ comes from,
after all--are not happy.

pH in Aptos

On 2/18/2024 7:19 PM, pH wrote:
> Madison WI style bike lane tried in SF on Valencia Street.
>
> https://sfstandard.com/2023/12/08/san-francisco-small-business-protests-valencia-street-bike-lane/
>
> We'll see if it stays or not. Some businesses--where the $$ comes from,
> after all--are not happy.
>
> pH in Aptos

The center bike lane solved one problem, vehicles constantly blocking
the regular bike lane, and double-parked vehicles. The alternative may
be even less liked by merchants, actual parking enforcement and
protected bike lanes.

--
“If you are not an expert on a subject, then your opinions about it
really do matter less than the opinions of experts. It's not
indoctrination nor elitism. It's just that you don't know as much as
they do about the subject.”—Tin Foil Awards

On 2/18/2024 9:19 PM, pH wrote:
> Madison WI style bike lane tried in SF on Valencia Street.
>
> https://sfstandard.com/2023/12/08/san-francisco-small-business-protests-valencia-street-bike-lane/
>
> We'll see if it stays or not. Some businesses--where the $$ comes from,
> after all--are not happy.
>
> pH in Aptos

Plenty of bad ideas in SF:
https://www.kqed.org/news/11976026/san-francisco-appoints-first-non-citizen-to-serve-on-elections-commission
--
Andrew Muzi
am@yellowjersey.org
Open every day since 1 April, 1971

pH <wNOSPAMp@gmail.org> wrote:
> Madison WI style bike lane tried in SF on Valencia Street.
>
> https://sfstandard.com/2023/12/08/san-francisco-small-business-protests-valencia-street-bike-lane/
>
> We'll see if it stays or not. Some businesses--where the $$ comes from,
> after all--are not happy.
>
> pH in Aptos
>

It doesn’t seem either by google maps or
https://youtu.be/0N40Q7VO-fQ?si=HqW48R-GB48a8nZ0

Own video explaining how to use it that it’s a terribly well designed or
thought though unless most just travel up/down it? Even then it seems to be
suboptimal again caveats.

I think they aren’t being brave enough and trying not to upset people, that
amount of car parking wouldn’t be tolerated in a similar street in london
or other cities.

Mainly there would be a bus lane and so on.

I have seen some designed with keeping the cyclelane next to kerb and
parked cars between cyclelane and the road though never ridden such a
system though have a floating bus stop near hampton court with parked cars
between the bike lane and the road, which I’m not terribly keen on, in that
it feels like a door zone canyon!

Roger Merriman

On Sun Feb 18 19:37:46 2024 sms wrote:
> On 2/18/2024 7:19 PM, pH wrote:
> > Madison WI style bike lane tried in SF on Valencia Street.
> >
> > https://sfstandard.com/2023/12/08/san-francisco-small-business-protests-valencia-street-bike-lane/
> >
> > We'll see if it stays or not. Some businesses--where the $$ comes from,
> > after all--are not happy.
> >
> > pH in Aptos
>
> The center bike lane solved one problem, vehicles constantly blocking
> the regular bike lane, and double-parked vehicles. The alternative may
> be even less liked by merchants, actual parking enforcement and
> protected bike lanes.
>
> --
> ?If you are not an expert on a subject, then your opinions about it
> really do matter less than the opinions of experts. It's not
> indoctrination nor elitism. It's just that you don't know as much as
> they do about the subject.??Tin Foil Awards
>

Vallencia like a lot of streets in San Francisco simply isn't wide enough for protected bike lanes in which case Frank's method of simply taking the lane is probably best. Cars should NOT be driving at the speeds they do in San Francisco and unless you've been there you probably don't understand the problems of cars driving 35 or 40 where 25 is dangerous with pedestrians jaywalking because the blocks in places are so long.

On 2/19/2024 8:03 AM, Roger Merriman wrote:

<snip>

> It doesn’t seem either by google maps or
> https://youtu.be/0N40Q7VO-fQ?si=HqW48R-GB48a8nZ0

They haven't gone down that street, or taken satellite photos, since the
bike lane was installed.

<snip>

> I think they aren’t being brave enough and trying not to upset people, that
> amount of car parking wouldn’t be tolerated in a similar street in london
> or other cities.

Don't get me started on this subject! Too late.

San Francisco likes to use their streets as public parking lots. In fact
they just passed an ordinance allowing new development in the city to
have no off-street parking (after developers pushed for this). Removing
on-street parking is not going to happen.

What actually needs to happen is to put in a multi-level parking garage
and get parking off the street. In downtown San Francisco, the financial
district, Chinatown, there are underground parking garages. In North
Beach and the Embarcadero there are above ground parking garages. These
are publicly owned or privately owned. Often you have to walk a few
blocks to your destination. Some other parts of the city, entities that
need a lot of parking will have their own parking lots, either under,
over, or beside their business (hospitals, supermarkets, shopping centers).

But in some neighborhoods there is just insufficient off-street parking
so the streets become the parking lots.

Most cities have specific requirements for the number of parking spaces
for residential, retail, commercial, and government buildings. This
includes single-family homes. This requirement is in place to reduce
parking sprawl and to avoid turning public streets into taxpayer-funded
parking lots.

Because providing parking spaces is expensive, requiring either more
land for surface parking lots, or above-ground or under-ground parking
garages, there has been lobbying by development interests to eliminate
parking minimums and to export both the cost and the land for parking
onto cities. Underground parking costs about $80,000 per space in
California while above-ground garages cost about $40,000 per space.

Developers use a false narrative to push for the elimination of parking
minimums. These narratives can be appealing to those that lack critical
thinking skills:

1. Eliminating parking minimums will reduce the cost of housing because
the expense of providing parking will not be incurred by the developer
who will pass on the savings to renters and purchasers.

2. Eliminating parking minimums will result in people buying fewer cars,
reducing CO2 emissions.

3. Eliminating parking minimums will result in increased use of public
transit since it will make parking more difficult, both at home and at
businesses.

None of these are actually true of course. The reality is that removing
parking requirements is a gift to developers that will increase CO2
emissions, reduce the use of public transportation, decrease
sustainability, increase crime, increase gentrification, displacement
and exclusionary housing, and hurt low and middle income workers.

On 2/19/2024 10:29 AM, sms wrote:
> On 2/19/2024 8:03 AM, Roger Merriman wrote:
>
> <snip>
>
>> It doesn’t seem either by google maps or
>> https://youtu.be/0N40Q7VO-fQ?si=HqW48R-GB48a8nZ0
>
> They haven't gone down that street, or taken satellite
> photos, since the bike lane was installed.
>
> <snip>
>
>> I think they aren’t being brave enough and trying not to
>> upset people, that
>> amount of car parking wouldn’t be tolerated in a similar
>> street in london
>> or other cities.
>
> Don't get me started on this subject! Too late.
>
> San Francisco likes to use their streets as public parking
> lots. In fact they just passed an ordinance allowing new
> development in the city to have no off-street parking (after
> developers pushed for this). Removing on-street parking is
> not going to happen.
>
> What actually needs to happen is to put in a multi-level
> parking garage and get parking off the street. In downtown
> San Francisco, the financial district, Chinatown, there are
> underground parking garages. In North Beach and the
> Embarcadero there are above ground parking garages. These
> are publicly owned or privately owned. Often you have to
> walk a few blocks to your destination. Some other parts of
> the city, entities that need a lot of parking will have
> their own parking lots, either under, over, or beside their
> business (hospitals, supermarkets, shopping centers).
>
> But in some neighborhoods there is just insufficient
> off-street parking so the streets become the parking lots.
>
> Most cities have specific requirements for the number of
> parking spaces for residential, retail, commercial, and
> government buildings. This includes single-family homes.
> This requirement is in place to reduce parking sprawl and to
> avoid turning public streets into taxpayer-funded parking lots.
>
> Because providing parking spaces is expensive, requiring
> either more land for surface parking lots, or above-ground
> or under-ground parking garages, there has been lobbying by
> development interests to eliminate parking minimums and to
> export both the cost and the land for parking onto cities.
> Underground parking costs about $80,000 per space in
> California while above-ground garages cost about $40,000 per
> space.
>
> Developers use a false narrative to push for the elimination
> of parking minimums. These narratives can be appealing to
> those that lack critical thinking skills:
>
> 1. Eliminating parking minimums will reduce the cost of
> housing because the expense of providing parking will not be
> incurred by the developer who will pass on the savings to
> renters and purchasers.
>
> 2. Eliminating parking minimums will result in people buying
> fewer cars, reducing CO2 emissions.
>
> 3. Eliminating parking minimums will result in increased use
> of public transit since it will make parking more difficult,
> both at home and at businesses.
>
> None of these are actually true of course. The reality is
> that removing parking requirements is a gift to developers
> that will increase CO2 emissions, reduce the use of public
> transportation, decrease sustainability, increase crime,
> increase gentrification, displacement and exclusionary
> housing, and hurt low and middle income workers.
>
>

Yes, a complex problem and an excellent example of the
principle that every policy decision benefits someone while
harming someone else.

I seldom extol SF policy, but their dynamic pricing for
parking meters seems like a great idea to me.
--
Andrew Muzi
am@yellowjersey.org
Open every day since 1 April, 1971

Tom Kunich <cyclintom@yahoo.com> wrote:
> On Sun Feb 18 19:37:46 2024 sms wrote:
>> On 2/18/2024 7:19 PM, pH wrote:
>>> Madison WI style bike lane tried in SF on Valencia Street.
>>>
>>> https://sfstandard.com/2023/12/08/san-francisco-small-business-protests-valencia-street-bike-lane/
>>>
>>> We'll see if it stays or not. Some businesses--where the $$ comes from,
>>> after all--are not happy.
>>>
>>> pH in Aptos
>>
>> The center bike lane solved one problem, vehicles constantly blocking
>> the regular bike lane, and double-parked vehicles. The alternative may
>> be even less liked by merchants, actual parking enforcement and
>> protected bike lanes.
>>
>> --
>> ?If you are not an expert on a subject, then your opinions about it
>> really do matter less than the opinions of experts. It's not
>> indoctrination nor elitism. It's just that you don't know as much as
>> they do about the subject.??Tin Foil Awards
>>
>
>
> Vallencia like a lot of streets in San Francisco simply isn't wide enough
> for protected bike lanes in which case Frank's method of simply taking
> the lane is probably best. Cars should NOT be driving at the speeds they
> do in San Francisco and unless you've been there you probably don't
> understand the problems of cars driving 35 or 40 where 25 is dangerous
> with pedestrians jaywalking because the blocks in places are so long.
>

It’s 5 lanes wide, that’s plenty wide enough, two full of parked cars, two
with moving cars and another lane for turning/fire/or the segregated bike
lane.

It’s about sharing the space, don’t think there were not folks horrified at
loosing parking spaces in london but realistically like a number of cities
cars are having to cope without being the favoured mode. In london it’s a
decreasing mode and has been for quite some time.

Roger Merriman

On Mon, 19 Feb 2024 08:05:04 -0600, AMuzi <am@yellowjersey.org> wrote:

>https://www.kqed.org/news/11976026/san-francisco-appoints-first-non-citizen-to-serve-on-elections-commission

How else would you get someone to talk with the "Gooks"?
--
Cheers,

John B.

On 2/19/2024 5:53 PM, John B. wrote:
> On Mon, 19 Feb 2024 08:05:04 -0600, AMuzi <am@yellowjersey.org> wrote:
>
>> https://www.kqed.org/news/11976026/san-francisco-appoints-first-non-citizen-to-serve-on-elections-commission
>
>
> How else would you get someone to talk with the "Gooks"?

Yet Frank is the racist in this forum....

On Tue, 20 Feb 2024 06:08:56 -0500, zen cycle
<funkmasterxx@hotmail.com> wrote:

>On 2/19/2024 5:53 PM, John B. wrote:
>> On Mon, 19 Feb 2024 08:05:04 -0600, AMuzi <am@yellowjersey.org> wrote:
>>
>>> https://www.kqed.org/news/11976026/san-francisco-appoints-first-non-citizen-to-serve-on-elections-commission
>>
>>
>> How else would you get someone to talk with the "Gooks"?
>
>Yet Frank is the racist in this forum....

You missed the point as I was quoting a term often heard here when
USians are talking about citizens of this country.
--
Cheers,

John B.