6 ms·

I haven't used these. Though, being a cyclist in SF I have some opinions. As much effort as SF has put into it, there are still many corridors that don't have

I haven't used these. Though, being a cyclist in SF I have some opinions. As much effort as SF has put into it, there are still many corridors that don't have safe biking paths. Most are very exposed bike lanes, to both traffic and parking cars. Market street, even with the efforts to divert car traffic from it still has many sections where it's very dangerous on a bike. North of market there are nearly no bike lanes... I can't think of one right now, though I don't bike there often. Between embaracadaro and 7th streets there are hardly any north south bike lanes. This all adds up to an unfriendly environment for novice cyclists. And those shared bikes are tanks, which means they're very slow compared to traffic, making them even greater targets. What I believe we need are fully dedicated bicycling only corridors spread around every district of the city about four blocks apart. As it is now, there are few and far between (but it is a million times better than when I first moved here).

fragmede 10y ago
And those are issues after you're already on a bike. I'm in their target market - there's a station near enough where I live, there's a station near the office, it takes less than 30 mins to bike to/from the office, and the journey has no real hills. Here's why I didn't use it yesterday. They wanted to charge me $9 for that trip but it costs me $10 to take a Lyft to the office just after rush hour. Lyft line costs fluctuate from $6 to $20; one way. There's a bus, it costs $2.50 one way. There and back, the bus totals $5. Health benefits of bicycling aside, their 24-hour $9 "membership" makes it not make sense.
closeparen 10y ago
Market is awful for bikes, because the City has decided that make 2 classes of user share space who should never share space: bikes and buses. Buses are slow and stop frequently, and you can't go around them due to the boarding islands. So a bike along Market can go no faster than the slowest bus. It's also incredibly stressful to have a bus behind you and a bus in front of you. When I'm on a bike, I'd take a thousand private cars over 3 buses. Berkeley does this right: we have "bicycle boulevards" a couple blocks over from major traffic corridors. The bicycle boulevards are regular car streets, but only local traffic uses them. There are so many stop signs and bollards that force cars to turn (letting bikes through) that through traffic is much happier on main streets, bikes are happy on the bicycle boulevards, and people who live on them can still use their cars/Uber/Lyft/UPS because that happens infrequently enough to not threaten cyclists. If you live on a street that has no car access, or no curb for cars to stop on, how are you going to get a package? Catch a ride when you don't want to bike today and Muni is too slow? Physically discouraging non local traffic seems to cut it down to low enough levels that biking feels safe, and is much less costly for residents than entirely dedicating their streets to bicycling.
- bluejekyll 10y ago
  Yes. I like Berkeley's boulevards, they are a great compromise for residential areas. I'm thinking more of how interesting it would be if say Minna St. in SF was dedicated to only bicycling traffic...

fragmede 10y ago

And those are issues after you're already on a bike. I'm in their target market - there's a station near enough where I live, there's a station near the office, it takes less than 30 mins to bike to/from the office, and the journey has no real hills. Here's why I didn't use it yesterday. They wanted to charge me $9 for that trip but it costs me $10 to take a Lyft to the office just after rush hour. Lyft line costs fluctuate from $6 to $20; one way. There's a bus, it costs $2.50 one way. There and back, the bus totals $5. Health benefits of bicycling aside, their 24-hour $9 "membership" makes it not make sense.

closeparen 10y ago

Market is awful for bikes, because the City has decided that make 2 classes of user share space who should never share space: bikes and buses. Buses are slow and stop frequently, and you can't go around them due to the boarding islands. So a bike along Market can go no faster than the slowest bus. It's also incredibly stressful to have a bus behind you and a bus in front of you. When I'm on a bike, I'd take a thousand private cars over 3 buses. Berkeley does this right: we have "bicycle boulevards" a couple blocks over from major traffic corridors. The bicycle boulevards are regular car streets, but only local traffic uses them. There are so many stop signs and bollards that force cars to turn (letting bikes through) that through traffic is much happier on main streets, bikes are happy on the bicycle boulevards, and people who live on them can still use their cars/Uber/Lyft/UPS because that happens infrequently enough to not threaten cyclists. If you live on a street that has no car access, or no curb for cars to stop on, how are you going to get a package? Catch a ride when you don't want to bike today and Muni is too slow? Physically discouraging non local traffic seems to cut it down to low enough levels that biking feels safe, and is much less costly for residents than entirely dedicating their streets to bicycling.

bluejekyll 10y ago
Yes. I like Berkeley's boulevards, they are a great compromise for residential areas. I'm thinking more of how interesting it would be if say Minna St. in SF was dedicated to only bicycling traffic...