This article is so auto-centric, the author only considers the safety of people inside cars. Banning left turns in cities is a GREAT idea! The group of people most threatened by left turning cars are people walking. Control F for "pedestrian" or "walk" in this article. Nothing. American traffic engineering is so car-dominant, they fail to consider the most vulnerable road users. Pedestrian fatalities in the USA are at 30 year highs. Design for the healthy human living habitat we desperately need. Good human habitat requires safe walking infrastructure for humans of all ages, sizes & abilities.
indeed. and that "rural" lifestyle really often involves driving far and often, therefore pushing your fossil fuel & auto (ev or otherwise) externalities on other people.
i think we should remove the cars from the cities, not remove the people from the cities. People were there first after all
The core of san francisco, probably 30% of the city's 49 sq mile landmass, and where 60%+ of the population lives, was built before cars existed. Most of SF was a walking/horse city, and then a walking/streetcar/cablecar city.
True, alongside downtown Berkeley, Oakland, and Palo Alto (maybe a few others)
Nonetheless, mass transit in SF is still pretty crappy. Muni is notoriously unreliable and slow (it's often faster to jog than take Muni -- to say nothing of biking).
As someone who lived in Palo Alto for almost a year without a car... there is so much to be desired for public transit. Outside of the few blocks near University, it quickly becomes a walking wasteland. My bike, on the other-hand, was a divine gift from the heaven and, when combined with CalTrain, enabled a fairly large world-bubble.
The two largest complaints in cities with scooter sharing are (1) users riding on the sidewalk because they don’t feel safe on the road and (2) users parking on the sidewalk because all street space for storing personal mobility devices is allocated to 4,000 lb cars. A climate conscious city can get more people using zero emission vehicles like bikes and scooters and solve the issues above by (1) creating protected bike lanes so scooter users of all ages and abilities feel safe riding on the street and (2) converting one or two car street parking spots on every block to bike and scooter parking.
However, street parking has been a 3rd rail of local politics in American cities. Demographics are pointing to change: last year SF added 8,500 residents but car registrations dropped by 1,800. More protected bike lanes, less personal cars, more ride sharing/autonomous cars and more scooters is the future - most boomer politicians running American cities today just don’t get this yet - they and their friends live in highly appreciated SFHs,have a personal car and a place to store said car, maintain a low prop13 tax rate, and reminisce of 1974 when people were moving out of cities and they could always find free parking right in front of their favorite restaurant. But the demographics are changing, our streets will transform as a result and for the sake of our planet, it couldn’t happen soon enough
Much of the on-street parking is paid parking. If you're proposing that these scooter companies pay per hour that each scooter is left on the sidewalk, I think that's a great idea.
Really, I think its probably only a small fraction. Most residential neighborhoods have free parking, even many commercial areas. Do we have stats on this to be sure?
Parking, even in “free” residential areas is time or permit restricted. So even if payment is not direct there are other indirect payments and constraints.
Not left on the sidewalk, the scooter should be left on the street - a dozen scooters in the space formerly occupied by one car. And they should absolutely pay to use that space! Residential permits in SF are $150/yr. 50c/day per spot. Less than 5c per day per scooter. I think scooter and bike share companies would eat this opportunity up
If you live in SF and want to help, the team doing this is on Twitter at @sfmtra and looking for volunteers and donations. Safe biking is good for the health of humans,their communities, and the environment
um, have you been to sac? Given the choice, people (both founders of the companies & the best employees) would rather live in the bay area vs. sac. Hence the price difference. SF bay people are paying for things like: 20 min access to world class airport, one of the most human friendly climates on the planet, access to the capital of the internet & the people from around world building said internet, a stop on world tours of every major music act or performance, Ocean, Bay, coastal ranges, the ability to get to work, beach, entertainment without getting in a car, etc etc. I personally trust the wisdom of the crowd and find the best places on the planet to live/visit are often the most expensive: NYC, Copenhagen, Tokyo, Paris, Maui, Coastal Los Angeles, SF
ah, i remember those early dinners and fancy cheese plates that weren't orange nor formed into a brick.
i've found that potential employees are getting more and more savvy about evaluating culture.
One thing we do at Sincerely to share our culture and evaluate the candidate's character is to play a board game at lunch during interview days. The candidate drops their guard, treats communication less like an interivew, and we get to see deeper into their real character. And they get to see one of the ways we like to interact with our teammates outside of shipping products.
Octopart has always inspired me. Just one of those quiet, confident, heads down YC companies we can be proud to call a peer. Sam - this is such an awesome story - thanks for sharing
this lecture by kevin is bomb. i love the examples of personality and delight he sources from multiple startups including his very successful startup wufoo. Also - on startupclass.co you can watch the lecture at 1.5x speed which i find ideal for these startup lectures.
