Yesterday evening, a mother bicycling with her two children queried the city on alternate bike routes, after discovering a crosswalk in the Panhandle's multi-use path was closed at Masonic Avenue.
Apparently the panhandle bike path is closed? With no bike detour? @SF311 pic.twitter.com/Fvc5IstzA0
— Elisabeth Snider (@SanFranMiniVan) February 2, 2017
The crosswalk in question—pictured in Snider's original tweet—is the one that accommodates traffic from the Panhandle's multi-use path. As Snyder found, it hadn't been replaced with an advertised bicycle-kosher alternative.
Though it's often hotly contested, the northern Panhandle path is a city-approved, legal accommodation for bicyclists and pedestrians to share the road.
But instead of responding with a bicycle-approved alternative to the path, a representative from the city's 311 Twitter account commented incorrectly on the path's legal status:
@SanFranMiniVan Per SFPD, crosswalks are for walking just like sidewalks and should not be used for bicycles. ^JM
— SF311 (@SF311) February 3, 2017
Ben Jose, a representative of the SFMTA, confirmed this morning that the Panhandle multi-use path is, in fact, a legally shared bicycle and pedestrian zone.
But the 311 representative, apparently unaware of the exception, refused to back down.
@humofthecity and who would you suggest that I call at 6 PM to verify this? SFMTA offices are all closed at that time. ^JM
— SF311 (@SF311) February 3, 2017
The spat culminated with intervention from the SF Bicycle Coalition this morning.
Wow, jarringly incompetent, rude response by @SF311 @sfmta_muni to mom trying to bike with her kids. Thread: https://t.co/LILmL9pvWh
— SF Bicycle Coalition (@sfbike) February 3, 2017
Suffice it to say, 311 is under some pressure for this one.
The SFMTA's Jose said in a phone call this morning that they knew about the misinformation, and that "we're following up with 311 so they can address that."
Meanwhile, the crosswalk is back open for regular business.
