— By Kevin Montgomery (@kevinmonty) |
According to the transit wonks over at Streetsblog, work crews began installing the Bay Area Bike Share stations yesterday, ahead of next Thursday's five-city launch. This is wonderful news for both commuters and news junkies: as we saw during NYC's roll-out of bike sharing this spring, commuters absolutely loved it and conservatives lost their collective shit (most famously, WSJ editorial board member/Crypt Keeper Dorothy Rabinowitz's rant about the program's totalitarianism). Oh yes, by next week, we can expect to see delighted smiles on the face of riders and C.W. Nevius and his merry gang of blowhards foaming uncontrollably at the mouth.
Let's just hope these bike racks don't meet the same fate as Zeitgeist's…
[via Streetsblog]
Comments (19)
I, for one, welcome our new bicycle overlords
The clock is ticking! They’d better start mailing out the keys ASAP or it’s going to be a sad launch day.
I think these are a great start, but I wish the coverage were better. When do they plan to expand to the Mission, further up Polk St, and down the Wiggle to GGP?
Just ”cause we’re not 100% pro-bike all the time does not mean we’re “blowhards foaming…at the mouth.”
I do find it more than a tad strange that so many of the pro-bike cohort, at least the ones I know, are the same people that bemoan the displacement of families and older residents from San Francisco. The convenience of the bicycle is limited to those who can a) ride it and, b) carry what they need on it; whether it be groceries, clothing, or an infant.
The continued attepts at marginalizing the car is going to continue to marginalize those who cannot - either through health, age, or familial circumstance - ride a bike.
I know what you’re going to say, that “cars are not being marginalized.” But let’s be serious here. If those spearheading the pro-bike movement had their unfettered way, they would be. One only needs to look at that utility box on Church and Duboce posted on here a few days back. While certainly beautiful, the vision is massively inconvenient for anyone without a tremendous amount of free time or for those who can set their own working hours (no one-stop-shop grocery, nary a car in sight). It’s pandering to those who many feel are homogenizing the City - the young, the wealthy, the healthy.
As a pedestrian who has never driven, it’s frustrating to see this war going on between bikes and cars while we’re left in the lurch. Sure, cars kill more people. But I think many of us have had our fair share of near-death experiences from bikes who seem to take a militant approach to the road, “this is my road too, goddammit, and I’ll show you by blowing through traffic lights and crosswalks!”. There’s a push for rights and benefits but without responsibility.
Too bad we can never have a reasonable discussion about such things. It always ends up with foaming at the mouth on both sides of the transportation equations - car drivers and, yes, bike riders.
Okay, but it sounds like you forgot about the buses, a fast pass/ clipper card isn’t very expensive for seniors and is free for the younger crowd.
No, I didn’t forget MUNI. I just believe telling parents of young children and those in, say, their 60’s to “get on a bus” instead of getting in their car in order for the City to promote bicycle use is basically telling them that this City is not for them anymore. I rode MUNI every day when I lived in SF and found it to be very conveient and safe. But I’m also six foot five. I’m not going to rip into MUNI, but I could see young parents and those a bit older finding MUNI to be intimidating, given some of its riders, and very inconvient if one is carrying a load of shopping - I think we’ve all seen the sneering on the part of some entitled patrons when they have to move a seat or two or even, gasp, stand (the horror of it all).
Maybe SF’s future is as a place that exists to fuel the needs/wants/desires of a certain subset of the Bay Area’s population. Whatever. That’s fine. I just come here for work these days so I don’t really have a horse in the race. But I do think it’s disingenious to promote a singular way of transport while complaining about an ever-growing singular population.
I’m agreeing with you that my experience has been that the buses are usually convenient and they have always been safe for me, Phone apps assisting both aspects.
I think you are saying that the buses are often not welcoming. I agree for the 14,22,33,49 buses, it is nearly 100% that are graffiti tagged on the inside, and the graffiti gives the perception of “anything goes”, “no one cares.” People with limited ridership, then easily accept the stories that the bus is a free for all jungle of dystopian proportions. Blog comments often reflect that.
For the families with the relatives in the 70’s and 80’s, (particularly those that shouldn’t be driving) the bus is a great option that helps keep them active and social. For the families that families with children that are not part of the homogenization, I see them on the bus typically.
What you and those of your ilk don’t understand is that nobody is trying to eliminate cars. The “pro-bike” agenda is really just about creating a viable and safe alternative for folks who wish to get around by bike. Right now our bike infrastructure is a joke, and thousands and thousands of people who would like to get around by bike even occasionally don’t feel safe doing it.
If we provide even a skeletal safe bike network for people to use, thousands more people (who are able) will ride a bike. That will free up parking and eliminate congestion for the quadriplegic 80 year old mother of 8 who is also a plumber straw men you speak of.
It is hyperbolic to call the bike infrastructure a joke. Clearly the bike situation has been neglected, and the there is a backlog of improvement that should happen. There are tens of thousands of San Franciscans that would like to use their bikes more often but don’t feel good about it they way things are.
Strawman? My aunt lives here. She’d in her early 60’s. My little sister lives here too. She has a 10 week old. Both are as close to being plumbers as you are at being funny. What you and your ilk needs to understand is that pushing back a bit and questioning the critical mass/bike coalition agenda does not make us anti-bike, conservative mouth-foamers, nor should it be greeted with pompousness and snark.
I think people are objecting to your either/or attitude, as if improving bike infrastructure automatically means hating on babies and old people. Perhaps if biking were safer and more widespread, even you would see it as a viable form of transportation for many people, not just those with “a tremendous amount of free time”.
And as long as we are relying on personal anecdotes to make our points: I bike my 2 year old every day, sometimes with groceries, I work 50+ hours a week and my 65yo father-in-law can ride 100 miles in under 5 hours.
To clarify, I only made personal anecdotes after a prior poster made a comment about presumed strawmen and my “tremendous amount of free time” comment was really about the Farmer’s Market in place of the Safeway. And I’m not saying improving bike structure “automatically” means hating on babies and old people. I’m saying improving bike structure at the expense of other transportation options, like emphasizing a Farmer’s Market over a Safeway, could (could!) further what is becoming a City for the loose 18 to 45 age demographic, which is something many, on here and elsewhere, seem dismayed about.
There is plenty of room for bike infrastructure improvements and I don’t know anyone who’s against them (as long as they’re well thought out). There’s room for Farmer’s Markets. Maybe because I frequent blogs/sites such as this, but I hear so much disdain for cars and for big chain stores when those do provide a lot of convenience for people who aren’t as blessed as myself or your Robocop-esque father-in-law. I’m not trying to be overtly contrarian. I’m just trying to shake up the pro-bike, fuckbigboxstore echo chamber.
Somehow I don’t think it’s a safe assumption that one local muralist’s vision of the future is the same as most local bicyclist’s vision of the present. I haven’t heard the bicyclist crowd clamoring for small canals to be installed on every curb, for example.
“I haven’t heard the bicyclist crowd clamoring for small canals to be installed on every curb, for example.”
Ha. Very true. They would be quite nice though. Albeit a tad mephitic after a while, I’m sure.
Whoa bro, careful there. You’re about to make sense in the comments section of a blog.
Totalitarianism? I think the WSJ editorial board needs to put away the tin-foil hats.
It’s weird to me how they’re putting so many of these stations within *seconds* of each other, rather than spreading them out in a useful way. As it stands, I will never have cause to use this. If it provided more south and west outposts, it could actually be useful.
Sure, “they may eventually” is great and all, but it still seems strange to start with such density in such a small area. I’m talking about a matter of blocks, not miles.
Yeah, that’s my feeling as well. I applaud the goal of bike sharing stations, but they need to be spread out to the rest of the city to actually be useful for most people.
They’ll grow the number of stations, but its pretty dismal now and just downtown. It should have started in the Mission/Potrero Hill/Castro.
By comparison, Valencia Spain, where I sometimes live and is much smaller than SF…
They started with 50 stations and are now at 275. That system is such a dream.