[Carfreeliving] Will LA leapfrog San Francisco?

Wed Aug 24 18:13:58 MDT 2005

David, I don't disagree with the Top 20 pace assessment....if I was king 
and could make wholesale changes to the democratic process, bureaucratic 
(I'm getting good at spelling that) hoops, and the funding process, at 
least 15 of them would be completed by now.  We would like to see things 
get done faster as much as anyone, I think, but the realities we have to 
deal with...
Mike

"David Baker" <davidbaker at dbarchitect.com> 
Sent by: Carfreeliving-bounces at livablecity.org
08/24/2005 04:58 PM

To
<Carfreeliving at livablecity.org>
cc

Subject
RE: [Carfreeliving] Will LA leapfrog San Francisco?

would you guys make up? please?

I agree with both sides to this issue, but let's be inspired to do even 
better than we've been doing, which given all the issues is pretty good. 
When you're close to an issue the problems seem to come to the fore, while 
visitors to SF from other cities tend to think we've got a little bike 
heaven going here.

Though Mike, and don't take this personally, it's hard to think of a 
better word than "glacial" to characterize the implementation of he top 20 
bike network projects!

Don't shoot! Please!

db

From: Carfreeliving-bounces at livablecity.org 
[mailto:Carfreeliving-bounces at livablecity.org] On Behalf Of Mike 
Sallaberry
Sent: Wednesday, August 24, 2005 4:15 PM
To: Carfreeliving at livablecity.org
Subject: Re: [Carfreeliving] Will LA leapfrog San Francisco?

'deep, I think your email is spot on, as someone who's grown up riding a 
bike here and has ridden in many cities/towns in the US and some outside 
the US including every cyclist's wet dream, Amsterdam. 

I'm tempted to respond to Tom's emails, but it's a waste of time.  He's 
demonstrated a number of times a cynicism towards many of us who work for 
the city and a disregard for facts.  And he wonders why he doesn't hear 
planners speak delightfully of the work here...I often do, but not with 
him!  He makes one want to put up a wall than stick out a hand.  What can 
you do? 

Anyway, happy trails, 
Mike 

Michael Sallaberry, P.E.
Associate Transportation Engineer
San Francisco Department of Parking and Traffic
25 Van Ness Avenue, Suite 345
San Francisco, CA 94102
(415) 554 2351
(415) 554 2352 (fax)
Bicycle Hotline (415) 585-BIKE
http://www.bicycle.sfgov.org 

Amandeep Jawa <deep at worker-bee.com> 
Sent by: Carfreeliving-bounces at livablecity.org 
08/24/2005 03:35 PM 

To
Carfree Living <Carfreeliving at livablecity.org> 
cc

Subject
Re: [Carfreeliving] Will LA leapfrog San Francisco?

Perhaps, the term "constant negativity" was unfair, and of course, we 
should imagine better and we deserve better.

But nowhere do I suggest complacency and thankfulness.

I only mean that
- suggesting a new bike park in LA means they will "leapfrog" us is a 
bit hard for me to believe.
- I disagree that the beginnings of a bike lane on Market is more 
dangerous than no lane at all.
- Is the Embarcadero & Panhandle bike paths such a disappointment?  I 
particularly like the Embarcadero.

And also I wonder if these paths in LA and NY are designed for 
commuting or recreational riding.  I'm not saying I know, but only 
that it seems to me that we have been very focused on utilitarian 
bike paths, rather than recreational ones & perhaps that is part of 
the lack of "delight" you speak of.  I suppose Wilshire is a major 
street & probably a major commute route, but will its lane be a 
delight?  The fact that we are focusing on putting bike paths on 
already crowded SF streets seems to make it very difficult to make 
them much grander than they are.  If the choice comes down to a few 
lovely Embarcadero-style bike boulevards vs. a complete city-wide 
network of "thin and stingy" bike lanes, I'll go with the latter. 
(Of course, I would prefer a complete city wide network of grand bike 
boulevards, but I'm just sayin...)

None of this is to say we shouldn't imagine better, or that the pace 
of change is acceptable, only that though we could & should do 
better, we are not doing so poorly as your tone implies (to me at 
least.)

'deep

On Aug 24, 2005, at 3:03 PM, Tom Radulovich wrote:

> So I should stop being constantly negative, and just be thankful 
> that bicycling in San Francisco is better than bicycling in Santa 
> Clara county or Los Angeles. And content myself that we are making 
> slow increments of progress, and should have a complete bike lane 
> network several decades from now. Great.
>
> What is so negative to imagine that bicycling in San Francisco 
> shouldn't be as good as the best facilities in the best cities, and 
> that the pace of change should be other than the glacial, muddling 
> pace of transportation bureaucracy? We deserve much better than this.
>
> Tom Radulovich
> tomrad at well.com
>
>
>
> On Aug 24, 2005, at 2:38 PM, Amandeep Jawa wrote:
>
>
>> Come on folks!
>>
>> While your critiques are good (as usual), progress is being made, 
>> good progress, and though it is difficult & far from perfect, the 
>> constant negativity is not very productive.  The Market Street 
>> lanes exist at all.  The Bike Plan has been approved.  Things are 
>> dramatically better for cyclists here now than when I started 
>> riding about 10 years ago (the Valencia lanes come to mind).  I 
>> would SOOOOO much rather ride my bike in SF than in LA.  Hell if 
>> you don't believe me, get out of our little bubble & ride your 
>> bike in Santa Clara County as I do every day & you'll see the 
>> difference.
>>
>> I'm not saying that we can rest, or that we are done, only that 
>> you don't get so lost in the struggle to see that we are making 
>> GOOD progress.
>>
>> 'deep
>>
>>
>>
>> On Aug 24, 2005, at 2:18 PM, Tom Radulovich wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>> Jason,
>>>
>>> A bike lane down Wilshire would be great, and if it happens 
>>> before we get one the length of Market Street, shame on San 
>>> Francisco. Wilshire does have a rapid bus line, one of 22 rapid 
>>> bus corridors either in operation or being planned in LA County, 
>>> while we have yet to build, or even plan, one.
>>>
>>> As I made my way down the Market Street lane this morning, 
>>> dodging the pools of fetid water in the rotted pavement and 
>>> double-parked Fed Ex trucks and tour buses, I realized that there 
>>> is absolutely no sense of joy or beauty or delight involved in 
>>> San Francisco bike planning. The best we can do is design 
>>> facilities that are marginally safer than riding in mixed 
>>> traffic, but what if the city set out to create bike lanes and 
>>> paths that are a delight to ride on? The bike path along the 
>>> Hudson River waterfront is designed not only for safety, but is 
>>> designed to be attractive and fun as well. A friend from LA who 
>>> lives there part time just bought a bike because he liked the 
>>> path so much, and wanted to be able to ride on it. Will anyone 
>>> look at the existing Market Street lane and say, "Cool, I want to 
>>> get a bike so I can ride on that!"?
>>>
>>> My friend Jeannene tells the story of going to Vancouver and 
>>> seeing Larry Beasley, Vancouver's Planning Director, say in a 
>>> public meeting "We want to design a city that delights you." When 
>>> was the last time you heard a bicycle, pedestrian, or transit 
>>> planner here speak of delight, much less lay it out as an 
>>> imperative of planning? When I was walking through Paris, I 
>>> definitely got the impression that many of the better boulevards 
>>> and promenades were designed to delight the walker, not just to 
>>> keep us out of the way of cars. The Mayor's first "clean and 
>>> green" project, the median landscaping and blue and gold fences 
>>> (which are really there deter pedestrians from jaywalking on Van 
>>> Ness and messing up traffic flow) are clearly aimed beyond the 
>>> merely functional and are aimed at delighting the motorist. So 
>>> where are the projects aimed at delighting bicyclists? As others 
>>> have pointed out, the Panhandle bike paths are rather grudging 
>>> and stingy accommodations compared to what they could have been, 
>>> and Market Street and Embarcadero, which should be our grand bike 
>>> boulevards, are pretty sad.
>>>
>>> Maybe it is the bureaucratic mindset of most transportation 
>>> planners; I encounter the same "practical" mindset in transit 
>>> planning here, where Muni buses are designed without padded seats 
>>> so that they can be hosed down, much like the design of cattle 
>>> cars. Maybe our movement has set its sights too low, focusing on 
>>> technocratic aspects of design, and emphasizing safety while 
>>> forgetting the importance of amenity, not to mention beauty, joy, 
>>> or delight. But what is the point of living in a city that where 
>>> joy and delight are not imperatives? I understand that sometimes 
>>> incremental improvement is all we get, but there also seems to be 
>>> no vision for what could be. I fear we could end up with a 
>>> continuous bike network, but one so thin and stingy it fails to 
>>> attract people to bicycling.
>>>
>>> Tom Radulovich
>>> tomrad at well.com
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Aug 23, 2005, at 10:04 PM, Jason Henderson wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>> What about a bike lane on Wilshire? That would put LA
>>>> ahead of San Francisco!
>>>>
>>>> I am reading "Long Emergency" by Kunstler. Anybody
>>>> read it?
>>>> -jh
>>>>
>>>> --- Tom Radulovich <tomrad at well.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> LA is creating a continuous bicycle path along the
>>>>> LA river, and
>>>>> dedicated a new "Bike Park" last month:
>>>>>
>>>>> http://www.smmc.ca.gov/PressRelease/Crystal.pdf
>>>>>
>>>>> Meanwhile, the rutted, discontinuous bike lane on
>>>>> Market Street has
>>>>> become a parking lane, with no apparent enforcement,
>>>>> which might just
>>>>> be more dangerous than no lane at all. Aargh!
>>>>>
>>>>> Tom Radulovich
>>>>> tomrad at well.com
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> Carfreeliving at livablecity.org mailing list
>>>>> to facilitate and promote car-free living in SF
>>>>> To unsubscribe:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> mailto:Carfreeliving-request at livablecity.org?subject=unsubscribe
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> or, for all options, go to:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> http://livablecity.org/mailman/listinfo/ 
>>>> carfreeliving_livablecity.org
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Jason Henderson
>>>> San Francisco CA
>>>> (415)-255-8136
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Carfreeliving at livablecity.org mailing list
>>>> to facilitate and promote car-free living in SF
>>>> To unsubscribe: mailto:Carfreeliving-request at livablecity.org? 
>>>> subject=unsubscribe
>>>> or, for all options, go to:
>>>> http://livablecity.org/mailman/listinfo/ 
>>>> carfreeliving_livablecity.org
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Carfreeliving at livablecity.org mailing listto facilitate and 
>>> promote car-free living in SF
>>> To unsubscribe: mailto:Carfreeliving-request at livablecity.org? 
>>> subject=unsubscribe
>>> or, for all options, go to:
>>> http://livablecity.org/mailman/listinfo/ 
>>> carfreeliving_livablecity.org
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> ----------------------------------
>> Amandeep Jawa
>> ----------------------------------
>> deep at worker-bee.com
>> 937 Valencia St.
>> San Francisco, CA 94110-2320
>>
>> Home: 415 255 6257 (ALL MALP)
>>
>> personal: http://www.deeptrouble.com
>> political: http://www.sflcv.org
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Carfreeliving at livablecity.org mailing listto facilitate and 
>> promote car-free living in SF
>> To unsubscribe: mailto:Carfreeliving-request at livablecity.org? 
>> subject=unsubscribe
>> or, for all options, go to:
>> http://livablecity.org/mailman/listinfo/carfreeliving_livablecity.org
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>

----------------------------------
Amandeep Jawa
----------------------------------
deep at worker-bee.com
937 Valencia St.
San Francisco, CA 94110-2320

Home: 415 255 6257 (ALL MALP)

personal: http://www.deeptrouble.com
political: http://www.sflcv.org

_______________________________________________
Carfreeliving at livablecity.org mailing list 
to facilitate and promote car-free living in SF
To unsubscribe: 
mailto:Carfreeliving-request at livablecity.org?subject=unsubscribe
or, for all options, go to:
http://livablecity.org/mailman/listinfo/carfreeliving_livablecity.org
_______________________________________________
Carfreeliving at livablecity.org mailing list 
to facilitate and promote car-free living in SF
To unsubscribe: 
mailto:Carfreeliving-request at livablecity.org?subject=unsubscribe
or, for all options, go to:
http://livablecity.org/mailman/listinfo/carfreeliving_livablecity.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: /pipermail/carfreeliving_livablecity.org/attachments/20050824/4e7cc099/attachment.htm