Wednesday, December 14, 2011


Which part of this says "Parking Space"? The posts, the green paint, the sharrow markings, the "No Stopping" signs or the sidewalk? Hey, United States Postal Service, YOU CAN'T PARK HERE!!!

Missing The Point

And while I am at it, San Francisco Department of Public Works, just in case you didn't get the memo, YOU CAN NOT PARK IN BIKE LANES, ESPECIALLY WHEN THE ADJACENT TRAFFIC IS DRIVING MORE THAN 50MPH!

Bernal Cut

Just because you are "official" does not give you the right to be "officially" blind, selfish and discourteous. Enough said.


  1. I hear you. Things like this frustrate me, too. But I don't believe either of these locations are *bicycle* parking zones, either. Just saying... ;-)

  2. If you block me with a motor vehicle and I can't get around you in my lane, I am getting off and taking a picture of you. I think it can be justified, especially as I am not what people are dodging in these situations.

  3. Come on - they re-route auto traffic for construction, etc and work on adjacent buildings, properties, etc - I don't think you can realistically expect that bike lanes won't be temporarily unavailable. Just like any traffic situation where lanes are reduced you will have to merge with either the auto traffic on your left or the pedestrian traffic on your right. I'm not sure about mail truck but the other van looks like it needs to be there. I'm sorry that you were inconvenienced on your way into work.

  4. If they are going to block bicycle lanes in high traffic areas that are dangerous to bicyclists then they should make accommodations to ensure that cyclists passing will not be endangered getting around them. This is what they have to do for vehicle traffic and pedestrians. In the case of the lower shot one of the three lanes of car traffic could have been cordoned off for bicycle use until the DPT was finished. Having cyclists enter 50MPH traffic is not an "inconvenience" it is life threatening (and yes, it is 50MPH and it stops for no one). As to the top shot, that infrastructure was placed there specifically to stop that situation because it was causing a hazard to the cyclists who pass through there.

  5. The flashing lights means it's okay, right?

  6. Not sure about CA, but in TX it is not inherently illegal to park in a bike lane, unless there is also a No Parking sign.

  7. " in TX it is not inherently illegal to park in a bike lane, unless there is also a No Parking sign". Please tell me this is incorrect -- why even bother having a bike lane if it's also a parallel parking zone? That's so incredibly dangerous. Imagine a cyclist zipping along in the lane and a car suddenly deciding to parallel park a bit in front of the cyclist, BACKING up to get into the parking place, towards the oncoming cyclist. The mind boggles. I hope this is bad information!

  8. "they re-route auto traffic for construction"

    Therefore, the motor vehicle is free to stop in roadway; right?

  9. It's legal. Under section C. Enough vitrol already.

    (c) This Section shall not apply to public utility vehicles while such vehicles are operating, maintaining, or repairing facilities of the public utility or are being used in connection with providing public utility service.

    And bonus:

    (d) This Section shall not apply to commercial vehicles if an exemption is reasonably necessary to load or unload merchandise or passengers at any hours except between 7:00 a.m. and 9:00 a.m. and between 4:00 p.m. and 6:00 p.m.

  10. Sorry, I just found out that section has been removed. In this case I believe CVC section 21211 exception (c) would apply. Thoughts?

    Sorry for the anonymous post, I don't have a google account and setting one up is a lot of trouble for a (mostly) lurker.