SAN FRANCISCO | Projects: Under Construction, Approved, and Proposed

[fflint]

Originally Posted by jaypkatl

Love how the Bike lane on Polk has created Traffic on a section of Polk that rarely had backed up traffic - Nice going - Stupid Bikes!

If you are complaining about traffic, then you are part of the problem.

Anyway...the only silver lining about the passage of Proposition B is that it only covers a sliver of waterfront land rather than the entire city. Ed Lee should have opposed it--nobody but nobody would come out against it except SPUR and a few developers--and the lopsided NIMBY victory is the fruit of the city's political class refusing to advocate for professional planning.

[jaypkatl]

Um - No - I dont think anyone should own a car. But Bikers are worse than cars as Bikers dont obey the traffic laws or the law about not riding their bike on the sidewalk. I almost get run over by a bike on a daily basis, not a car.

[fflint]

No person in San Francisco is "almost run over by a bike on a daily basis." Unless "almost getting run over" is a twisted way of saying "being within a few feet of a slow-moving bicycle," your claim is obviously false.

As for our city's chaotic streets, you're ignoring one group of road users and fixating on another. Motorists are just as guilty of rolling stop signs as bicyclists are, and motorists also speed, make illegal turns and illegal lane changes, travel and park in transit-only lanes and bike lanes, double-park, park on sidewalks and in crosswalks--any honest observer will acknowledge motorists are just as lawless as bicyclists in this city. And more critically, motorists injure and kill pedestrians in large numbers.

The statistics clearly prove motorists are the real threat to pedestrians' safety (and that of bicyclists and even other motorists) in San Francisco. On an average day, three motorists each hit a San Francisco pedestrian, and just last year motorists killed twenty pedestrians. Bicyclists, on the other hand, have only killed two pedestrians in the last decade. That is a tiny fraction of the carnage caused by motorists--a tiny fraction. The bigger threat is clear and unambiguous to anyone not blinded by angry emotion. You come across as little more than a bike hater ("stupid bikes!") whose intellectual honesty is entirely sublimated to your bias.

Anyway, back to projects and construction...

[hruski]

Originally Posted by jaypkatl

Um - No - I dont think anyone should own a car. But Bikers are worse than cars as Bikers dont obey the traffic laws or the law about not riding their bike on the sidewalk. I almost get run over by a bike on a daily basis, not a car.

This is incredibly ironic, because the protected bike lane on Polk is designed specifically so that bike riders don't have to go on the sidewalk on that stretch of the street. Before the bike lane went in, the sidewalk was the only way to traverse that section of Polk without literally going against oncoming traffic.

[jbm]

not to denigrate bicyclists, as i fully support encouraging fewer cars on the roads...i'm largely a pedestrian when it comes to getting around town. i'm lucky enough to be able to walk to my job. but i walk through/around the intersection at 12th and market multiple times a week and i'd estimate 90% (not exaggerating) of bicyclists i see blow right through the red light every day. while it is a low risk intersection, there is a dedicated bike line (as there should be), but the blatant disregard of the red light is striking.

[hruski]

Originally Posted by jbm

not to denigrate bicyclists, as i fully support encouraging fewer cars on the roads...i'm largely a pedestrian when it comes to getting around town. i'm lucky enough to be able to walk to my job. but i walk through/around the intersection at 12th and market multiple times a week and i'd estimate 90% (not exaggerating) of bicyclists i see blow right through the red light every day. while it is a low risk intersection, there is a dedicated bike line (as there should be), but the blatant disregard of the red light is striking.

I know the exact light you're talking about and you're exactly right...it's an extremely low-risk intersection. The bicyclists who blow through it know exactly what they're doing.

[fflint]

We really should get back on topic in this thread, but I will agree bicyclists and pedestrians do indeed proceed through 12th/Market on that ridiculously long red--but only going inbound. Outbound is another story.

There's virtually zero cross-traffic coming across the southeastern side of the intersection from either Page or from 12th, there's no left turn from Market and Franklin heads in the other direction. With non-existant cross-traffic, I really don't have a problem with peds and bicyclists acting accordingly. If it were dangerous, that would be a different story--as we see at the northwestern side of that instersecion, where Market instersects with Page and Franklin. Because of all the Market Street traffic turning northbound onto Franklin (the last legal left turn on Market until Drumm Street!), nobody rolls through on that side on either bike or foot.

The city ought to just ban traffic on Page and 12th from crossing Market and eliminate the red light at 12th/Market, or at least keep it green unless and until a pedestrian hits the beg button to cross Market.

[POLA]

Originally Posted by hruski

I know the exact light you're talking about and you're exactly right...it's an extremely low-risk intersection. The bicyclists who blow through it know exactly what they're doing.

You two are insane if you think bikes are the problems with our streets. The sheer number of vehicular homicides alone should be of some concern.

[hruski]

Originally Posted by POLA

You two are insane if you think bikes are the problems with our streets. The sheer number of vehicular homicides alone should be of some concern.

You misunderstood my post. I was defending cyclists choice in crossing that intersection on red. That red shouldn't be a red, since there's never any traffic crossing Market from the right.

[fimiak]

The car marge on polk/tenth street between Market and Mission is INSANE. All hours of the day and night there are near-collisions and outbursts of horn honks. When traffic is light cars RIP down the street, not realizing that vehicles can come out of Jessie St. or the Twitter garage. It is a bizarre cross section, and drivers dont seem to like staying under 25mph because they are usually on their way to the highway.

[jbm]

another awful intersection is market x gough. all cars coming north have to turn eastbound on market, and cars coming south can also turn eastbound on market. the problem is that the crosswalk is 20 feet into the intersection so if cars aren't paying attention, they can come real close to plowing through pedestrians. the city has actually just started doing work on the intersection, hoping the results are positive, but who knows.

[fflint]

Another great JK Dineen article describing how a "historic Mid-Market office building is poised to become home to the city's first Japanese-style "capsule" hotel, the hospitality industry's take on the superefficient micro apartments that are popping up in South of Market." Basically, the Grant Building at 1095 Market St. and will be converted into a 200-room hotel run by London-based Yotel. Rooms may be as small as 170 square feet.

He also touches on other hotel activity nearby:

[Gordo]

Cool stuff, though clearly Dineen has never been to a Japanese-style capsule hotel if he thinks that "rooms as small as 170 square feet" are even remotely comparable to capsule hotels in Japan. Capsules in Japanese capsule hotels are literally the size of a twin bed and stacked two or three high, with communal bathrooms, etc. These are just normal hotel rooms, just slightly smaller than typical US hotel rooms.

[fflint]

I think he's just using the language provided by the developer and operator. Also, he noted 170 sq. ft. rooms at the Yotel property in Manhattan are about 50% of average Manhattan hotel rooms. I don't know (and he didn't mention) the average size of a San Francisco hotel room, but it's entirely possible they're larger than those of Manhattan.

It's also interesting that the developer renovating the Renoir Hotel across Market from the Grant Building just bought the one-story Donut World right next door, on the corner--wouldn't surprise me at all if that becomes a tear-down.


The Aida (left) and Renoir Hotel (right) are about to get a new neighbor with the Grant Building's remake into a Yotel (center). Photo: Lea Suzuki, The Chronicle
source

[a very long weekend]

wow, that donut world building purchase is great news! that lot is zoned up to 120ft tall!

[tall/awkward]

Hey everybody,

Is there a new building design I'm not aware of? I just looked at the city model at

http://steelbluellc.com/splash/

and there's a building just below and to the right of 181 Fremont that does not look familiar...

[tall/awkward]

PS Whoever Steamboy is makes excellent diagrams!

[minesweeper]

Originally Posted by tall/awkward

Hey everybody,

Is there a new building design I'm not aware of? I just looked at the city model at

http://steelbluellc.com/splash/

and there's a building just below and to the right of 181 Fremont that does not look familiar...

I believe you're referring to this diagram? http://steelbluellc.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/05/SF_FutureDiagram.jpg

That's a placeholder for Transbay Block 5, which is going to be a 550-foot office tower.

Proposals are due later this month and they'll select a winner later this year. Read the RFP here: http://sfredevelopment.org/Modules/ShowDocument.aspx?documentID=6428

[simms3_redux]

^^^Curbed ran a story on this back in April and Steelblue rendered the massing exactly like the rendering that Curbed used, which comes from Figure 4 of the link Minesweeper provided...


http://sf.curbed.com/archives/2014/04/04...r_will_be_commercial_not_residential.php
http://sfredevelopment.org/Modules/ShowDocument.aspx?documentID=6428

[mt_climber13]

Originally Posted by minesweeper

I believe you're referring to this diagram? http://steelbluellc.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/05/SF_FutureDiagram.jpg

That's a placeholder for Transbay Block 5, which is going to be a 550-foot office tower.

Proposals are due later this month and they'll select a winner later this year. Read the RFP here: http://sfredevelopment.org/Modules/ShowDocument.aspx?documentID=6428

Wow look at all those street trees and greenery! But why is Harrison Street getting the shaft?

Something really needs to be done about the traffic congestion. It would be cool if a tunnel were built under Harrison and first streets to connect to the bridge and allow this area to flourish with pedestrian activity because now it's a 4 Lane highway.