5 ms·

That's the most generous possible interpretation of the situation. It may be correct, I'm just noting. I ride my bike to and from work pretty much every day in

That's the most generous possible interpretation of the situation. It may be correct, I'm just noting. I ride my bike to and from work pretty much every day in SF, and I readily admit that adding these markers most definitely does interrupt and disrupt traffic flow. The fact of the matter is, sometimes delivery vehicles and service vehicles need to stop and block traffic. They tend to pull over as far as possible to the right, so as not to impede auto traffic. Often this means pulling over into the bike lane. (Note that when there is no bike lane, these vehicles block the right-most lane of auto traffic and cars just go around without getting too hot and bothered. But I digress.) Erecting the markers prevents this behavior in many instances. You can decide to be in favor of the new bike lane markers, but you can't pretend that the added markers aren't a unilateral alteration to traffic flow that does have an effect.

alwaysdoit 10y ago
You mean, sometimes delivery vehicles and service vehicles illegally choose to stop and block traffic.
- stanleydrew 10y ago
  Sure, and sometimes I illegally jaywalk. These are common occurrences that, I believe, are generally accepted with grace and understanding by the rest of us and keep our society running smoothly.
  - voxic11 10y ago
    But it's undemocratic. A small number of people are determining how best to keep society running smoothly. Shouldn't they follow the democratically decided rules?
  - jdavis703 10y ago
    But when you jaywalk you make sure the road is clear, no? How can the delivery driver ensure no one else uses the bike lane while they make their drop off?
  - gohrt 10y ago
    "Jaywalking" law, including its slur of a name ("jay" = "crazy", for the crime of walking in your neighborhood), was installed by the automobile lobby to give automobile users priority of the majority of society, to increase automobile sellers' profits..
    - jrockway 10y ago
      > to increase automobile sellers' profits How's that working out for them.
      - TheCoelacanth 10y ago
        Well, they managed to entrench themselves in society so thoroughly that the government bailed them out when they collapsed due to their own incompetence, so pretty well.
  - TulliusCicero 10y ago
    Jaywalking pretty much only puts yourself at risk. Blocking traffic puts others (usually many others) at risk. That's a pretty huge difference that you can't just paper over.
- ams6110 10y ago
  What are they supposed to do to make a delivery when there is no off-street parking at that address? Fling it out of the vehicle as they drive by?
  - apathy 10y ago
    Actually I'm pretty sure DHL (Destroy, Hide & Lose) has a patent on that, so, not without paying royalties.
  - alwaysdoit 10y ago
    There are yellow loading and unloading zones throughout the city designated for that purpose.
  - TulliusCicero 10y ago
    If that's a problem the city has to address it somehow. Saying, "well in order to do our business we have to randomly put others into physical danger" is not acceptable.
rrdharan 10y ago
I agree that they change traffic flow. But it is interesting there's an implicit car-prioritization bias in the behavior you're describing. The delivery/service vehicles choose to block the bike lane instead of blocking a lane of traffic. This gets complicated quickly once you factor in total impact and so on, but I just want to point out that a person on a bike doesn't necessarily deserve less priority than a solo driver, for example. Plus there's the fact that blocking the bike lane is indeed illegal as noted by the other commenter. Although I sometimes think that we don't really know how bad it would be if all delivery drivers had to comply with all parking laws - maybe we'd all be starving in the nicely flowing streets due to a lack of food.
- stanleydrew 10y ago
  Yes, I think if the more militant of my fellow bicyclists could move past their calls to "enforce the illegal blocking of bike lanes at all costs!" we could actually have a reasonable discussion about traffic flow prioritization for cars vs bikes. I don't know if everyone would necessarily be safer if vehicles who decide to stop did so by blocking a lane of auto traffic while leaving the bike lane clear. It would introduce a visibility issue which would prevent cyclists from seeing anyone walking in front of the stopped vehicle to and from the curb, for instance.
- BurningFrog 10y ago
  A bicyclist can get past any inconveniently parked vehicle, with some effort. Cars, OTOH, just have to stand there and wait, and it doesn't take many minuted for a major gridlock to form. And that's why I think it's reasonable to block bike lanes over car lanes. Why you have to block anyone is maybe the more important, but much harder question.
  - hiou 10y ago
    Almost like a question for democracy to decide as opposed to vigilante justice?
  - megablast 10y ago
    A bicycle has to veer into the car lane (dangerous) or go on the footpath (illegal and dangerous). A car has to go from one lane to another lane.
bsimpson 10y ago
There's a Dutch traffic design principle that states traffic lanes should be separated by speed and mass. Pedestrians, cyclists, car drivers, and transit operators each have their own independent infrastructure, because lighter/slower road users are by their nature much more vulnerable to harm when they collide with something faster/heavier. This traffic design principle is at the core of Vision Zero, the goal of eliminating all traffic fatalities. The difference between politicians in Holland and San Francisco is that the Dutch actually implement principles like this one to reduce traffic deaths, rather than using Vision Zero as an empty platitude at election time. I'm furious for my own safety when drivers block the bike lane on Fell St. Cars are pouring down the hill at 40mph+ and not expecting a cyclist to take the lane, yet cyclists don't have a choice when their only other infrastructure is blocked by a selfish driver. Yes, parking in San Francisco sucks. We can all agree on that. But, if you're going to park illegally, use a driveway. It's way less dangerous than blocking a bike lane, and it inconveniences fewer people too.
- stanleydrew 10y ago
  Yes the Dutch are way ahead of us with this. It's disappointing, but I do think we'll get there eventually. I'm not sure what part of Fell St you are talking about, since the only part with a bike lane that I'm aware of is the section between Scott and Baker and there's no hill on that part. But I think you probably mean the section leading up to the left turn merge at Divisidero where there's also a lot of cars waiting in line for the gas station on the corner. I do sympathize, since as a cyclist myself I don't find that to be very safe either. I guess I don't understand the part that makes you "furious for my own safety" though. You have the power to be safe in this situation. Just stop behind the blocking vehicle until it's safe to go around. The traffic light at Scott will eventually be red, which will block the traffic on Fell "pouring down the hill at 40mph+". My own frustration with my fellow bicyclists' behavior is that a lot of us seem to think we deserve to never have to stop for any inconvenience ever. That we for some reason deserve to never have our feet touch the ground. Sometimes traffic slows or stops in front of you. Sometimes you have to wait until it's safe to go around. Automobiles do this all the time and don't often complain by slamming on the horn or endangering themselves and others by suddenly swerving and taking the lane. Those that do take those actions in response to the minor inconvenience that is stopping and safely waiting are rightly derided as jerks.
TulliusCicero 10y ago
> The fact of the matter is, sometimes delivery vehicles and service vehicles need to stop and block traffic. They tend to pull over as far as possible to the right, so as not to impede auto traffic. Often this means pulling over into the bike lane. So putting other people in danger while breaking the law is okay as long as you're doing it as a part of your business? Why is it okay for them to block the bike lane, but not okay to block the car lane?
- closeparen 10y ago
  Are you willing to - Never take a taxi, Uber, or Lyft unless both ends of your trip have parking or passenger loading zones available? - Never have food, a package, or mail delivered unless your building has a dedicated cargo loading zone? - Never shop at a store or eat at a restaurant which lacks a dedicated cargo loading zone? Short term double parking is okay because living in a dense area would be totally infeasible if no one broke that law.

alwaysdoit 10y ago

You mean, sometimes delivery vehicles and service vehicles illegally choose to stop and block traffic.

stanleydrew 10y ago
Sure, and sometimes I illegally jaywalk. These are common occurrences that, I believe, are generally accepted with grace and understanding by the rest of us and keep our society running smoothly.
- voxic11 10y ago
  But it's undemocratic. A small number of people are determining how best to keep society running smoothly. Shouldn't they follow the democratically decided rules?
- jdavis703 10y ago
  But when you jaywalk you make sure the road is clear, no? How can the delivery driver ensure no one else uses the bike lane while they make their drop off?
- gohrt 10y ago
  "Jaywalking" law, including its slur of a name ("jay" = "crazy", for the crime of walking in your neighborhood), was installed by the automobile lobby to give automobile users priority of the majority of society, to increase automobile sellers' profits..
  - jrockway 10y ago
    > to increase automobile sellers' profits How's that working out for them.
    - TheCoelacanth 10y ago
      Well, they managed to entrench themselves in society so thoroughly that the government bailed them out when they collapsed due to their own incompetence, so pretty well.
- TulliusCicero 10y ago
  Jaywalking pretty much only puts yourself at risk. Blocking traffic puts others (usually many others) at risk. That's a pretty huge difference that you can't just paper over.
ams6110 10y ago
What are they supposed to do to make a delivery when there is no off-street parking at that address? Fling it out of the vehicle as they drive by?
- apathy 10y ago
  Actually I'm pretty sure DHL (Destroy, Hide & Lose) has a patent on that, so, not without paying royalties.
- alwaysdoit 10y ago
  There are yellow loading and unloading zones throughout the city designated for that purpose.
- TulliusCicero 10y ago
  If that's a problem the city has to address it somehow. Saying, "well in order to do our business we have to randomly put others into physical danger" is not acceptable.

rrdharan 10y ago

I agree that they change traffic flow. But it is interesting there's an implicit car-prioritization bias in the behavior you're describing. The delivery/service vehicles choose to block the bike lane instead of blocking a lane of traffic. This gets complicated quickly once you factor in total impact and so on, but I just want to point out that a person on a bike doesn't necessarily deserve less priority than a solo driver, for example. Plus there's the fact that blocking the bike lane is indeed illegal as noted by the other commenter. Although I sometimes think that we don't really know how bad it would be if all delivery drivers had to comply with all parking laws - maybe we'd all be starving in the nicely flowing streets due to a lack of food.

stanleydrew 10y ago
Yes, I think if the more militant of my fellow bicyclists could move past their calls to "enforce the illegal blocking of bike lanes at all costs!" we could actually have a reasonable discussion about traffic flow prioritization for cars vs bikes. I don't know if everyone would necessarily be safer if vehicles who decide to stop did so by blocking a lane of auto traffic while leaving the bike lane clear. It would introduce a visibility issue which would prevent cyclists from seeing anyone walking in front of the stopped vehicle to and from the curb, for instance.
BurningFrog 10y ago
A bicyclist can get past any inconveniently parked vehicle, with some effort. Cars, OTOH, just have to stand there and wait, and it doesn't take many minuted for a major gridlock to form. And that's why I think it's reasonable to block bike lanes over car lanes. Why you have to block anyone is maybe the more important, but much harder question.
- hiou 10y ago
  Almost like a question for democracy to decide as opposed to vigilante justice?
- megablast 10y ago
  A bicycle has to veer into the car lane (dangerous) or go on the footpath (illegal and dangerous). A car has to go from one lane to another lane.

bsimpson 10y ago

There's a Dutch traffic design principle that states traffic lanes should be separated by speed and mass. Pedestrians, cyclists, car drivers, and transit operators each have their own independent infrastructure, because lighter/slower road users are by their nature much more vulnerable to harm when they collide with something faster/heavier. This traffic design principle is at the core of Vision Zero, the goal of eliminating all traffic fatalities. The difference between politicians in Holland and San Francisco is that the Dutch actually implement principles like this one to reduce traffic deaths, rather than using Vision Zero as an empty platitude at election time. I'm furious for my own safety when drivers block the bike lane on Fell St. Cars are pouring down the hill at 40mph+ and not expecting a cyclist to take the lane, yet cyclists don't have a choice when their only other infrastructure is blocked by a selfish driver. Yes, parking in San Francisco sucks. We can all agree on that. But, if you're going to park illegally, use a driveway. It's way less dangerous than blocking a bike lane, and it inconveniences fewer people too.

stanleydrew 10y ago
Yes the Dutch are way ahead of us with this. It's disappointing, but I do think we'll get there eventually. I'm not sure what part of Fell St you are talking about, since the only part with a bike lane that I'm aware of is the section between Scott and Baker and there's no hill on that part. But I think you probably mean the section leading up to the left turn merge at Divisidero where there's also a lot of cars waiting in line for the gas station on the corner. I do sympathize, since as a cyclist myself I don't find that to be very safe either. I guess I don't understand the part that makes you "furious for my own safety" though. You have the power to be safe in this situation. Just stop behind the blocking vehicle until it's safe to go around. The traffic light at Scott will eventually be red, which will block the traffic on Fell "pouring down the hill at 40mph+". My own frustration with my fellow bicyclists' behavior is that a lot of us seem to think we deserve to never have to stop for any inconvenience ever. That we for some reason deserve to never have our feet touch the ground. Sometimes traffic slows or stops in front of you. Sometimes you have to wait until it's safe to go around. Automobiles do this all the time and don't often complain by slamming on the horn or endangering themselves and others by suddenly swerving and taking the lane. Those that do take those actions in response to the minor inconvenience that is stopping and safely waiting are rightly derided as jerks.

TulliusCicero 10y ago

> The fact of the matter is, sometimes delivery vehicles and service vehicles need to stop and block traffic. They tend to pull over as far as possible to the right, so as not to impede auto traffic. Often this means pulling over into the bike lane. So putting other people in danger while breaking the law is okay as long as you're doing it as a part of your business? Why is it okay for them to block the bike lane, but not okay to block the car lane?

closeparen 10y ago
Are you willing to - Never take a taxi, Uber, or Lyft unless both ends of your trip have parking or passenger loading zones available? - Never have food, a package, or mail delivered unless your building has a dedicated cargo loading zone? - Never shop at a store or eat at a restaurant which lacks a dedicated cargo loading zone? Short term double parking is okay because living in a dense area would be totally infeasible if no one broke that law.