SF Supervisor to Intro Legislation to Lower Speeds

Marcoose

50-50
At the end of Tuesday's meeting, Supervisor Norman Yee (District 7) said that in the future he'll introduce legislation to lower speeds in San Francisco. Supervisor Yee cited the number of vehicular-related deaths so far in 2019 (8, I think he said), and that speed is one factor (TBD), visibility, etc.

Politicians being politicians, who knows if this is posturing, or appeasing his base, or he really means it, or if only at problem areas, or across the City, etc. And who knows if this has legs at all.

Neither here or there, but IMHO this is an invitation to increase citations and revenue. (Yeah, a good dose of cynicism.)

The next Board meeting is 2 April, and I'll be there for another agenda item, and will try to learn more. In the meantime, you can learn about and contact the supervisors here: https://sfbos.org/
 
Last edited:

NSR500

すけべ
More like distracted drivers, fake taxi (Uber/Lyft), food drivers (DoorDash), distracted pedestrians, scooters, bikes, and tourists.
 

Krooklyn

Usual Suspect
More like distracted drivers, fake taxi (Uber/Lyft), food drivers (DoorDash), distracted pedestrians, scooters, bikes, and tourists.

Because that's a much harder problem to solve the politicians will just try to solve the ancillary issue of speed. :thumbdown

I'm not in SF, but this kind of weak-sauce legislation is the kind of shit that would cause me to vote someone out. That's either a fundamental lack of understanding of the real issue(s) or a conscious compromise - either way, not the kind of politician I'd want to represent me.
 

Matty D

Well-known member
Yeesh, what a waste. Problematic drivers don't pay attention to the posted limits regardless. And if this passes, good drivers will get caught in the inevitable sting operations.

Thumbs down!
 

yumdumpster

Well-known member
I just got back from Edinburgh and the posted limit in the whole city is 20mph.

No one there actually drives that slow. The laws dont mean anything if you dont enforce them.

That being said the survivability of accidents goes down precipitously for pedestrians over ~15 MPH I believe. Once you hit 30 its starting to get pretty low.
 

Marcoose

50-50
...this kind of weak-sauce legislation is the kind of shit that would cause me to vote someone out.

And then there are the old sayings, 'the perfect (politician) is the enemy of the good (politician)' and 'the devil (-ish politician) you know it's better than the one you don't'.
 

Climber

Well-known member
The perfect storm, distracted (texting) and/or aggressive drivers and pedestrians who (are encouraged by cities that cater to idiot pedestrians) don't bother looking to see what's coming before stepping out into the road.

You can't legislate a fix, you have to raise them properly and stop catering to stupid behavior, both with the pedestrians and the drivers.
 

Joseppi

no longer bikeless.
yet they give junkies free clean needles and safe places to shoot up, hahahahah really sad to see what has become of San Francisco
 

ZCrow

Well-known member
The speed limit is already 25 MPH almost everywhere. How low are you going to go?!?!
 

JHicks

Basically Homeless
Why does anyone still live in that shithole? It’s like they enjoy high crime and horrible living conditions....
 

boney

Miles > Posts
The solution to traffic deaths and the realization of Vision Zero (call it Vision 5- we will never see zero, it's just not possible) is the elimination of Uber, Lyft and other rideshare companies.

Follow along for a second:

Studies show that rideshare drivers 1) spend more miles without a fare than with one 2) are the cause of 50% of the increase in traffic since the recession and 3) take passengers off public transportation, not out of their own cars.

If they were off the streets we would have less traffic, public transportation would move faster (more people would use it) and frankly, the attitude of drivers would get better. NOBODY likes that rideshare drivers continuously block entire lanes of traffic to pick up a fare, make 3-point (or more) u-turns mid-block, and generally spend more time looking at their phones than traffic. This last point responds directly to the fact that drivers are constantly frustrated on the streets in SF and always trying to "make the light" or keep in with the timing of them, or just generally acting frustrated. I realize SF is trying to eliminate cars altogether, but that isn't real either. The best approach is a comprehensive solution that evaluates the situation objectively, unlike the current method which is mostly driven by emotion.

We would see instant benefits to eliminating them in SF. I would even suggest that nobody would miss them after a few months. Then we could go back to just hating taxis.
 
Last edited:

XPEHBAM

Фиг вам &#1077
Why does anyone still live in that shithole? It’s like they enjoy high crime and horrible living conditions....

jobs for me personally. it's rather nice to have "walk for 5 min" as your commute
 

moto-rama

Well-known member
As long as there is No Enforcement, like the last 20 years or so, they could lower the limit to 5mph city-wide and things would not change one bit.

Speed cameras on roads where those fatal accidents take place would have an impact. Sloat, Sunset, 19th, Fulton, Lincoln have all had spectacular fatal accidents.
What they do immediately after a death is have a community meeting, say this must stop, send out 20 cops for a couple of days, then disappear.

Every single time.

Then a few weeks later, all is back to normal, 70 mph in 30 mph zones....
 

MAD750

has been around the block
It'll die as soon as they find out the cost. Berkeley was going to try it once until they found out the cost. Per state speed limit is 25 unless posted otherwise, that's why there's no signs on most streets. Anything other than 25 you have to post it.
 
Top