SF Bike Route Tool Accuracy and Experience Optimization Need
Problem
The existing SF flat-route tool has notable shortcomings in path planning accuracy, user interface experience, and consideration of non-slope factors such as road surface quality, discontinuous segments, and area comfort. Users report erroneous routing suggestions and confusing UI interactions, and the tool lacks optimization for bike lane connectivity and avoiding crowded areas. Additionally, users desire the ability to customize the trade-off between 'flattest' and 'shortest distance/minimum elevation gain'.
Pain points
- Routing suggestions are inaccurate, prioritizing non-flattest streets (e.g., 25th Ave + Geary over 23rd Ave)
- UI interactions are confusing: continuous slider over discrete options, unintuitive color coding, misplaced altitude labels
- Lacks consideration of bike lane connectivity and road surface quality; discontinuous segments and area 'chaos' are not properly handled
- No customizable trade-off between 'flattest route' and distance/elevation gain; users must manually balance slope versus distance
Questions to verify
- Would you like to customize the trade-off between 'flattest route' and 'shortest distance/minimum elevation gain'?
- Which non-slope factors of bike paths are most important to you (road surface quality, connectivity, area comfort)?
- Have you ever had to detour or adjust your route due to erroneous path suggestions from a routing tool? Please describe.
Evidence
It would be neat if it there were an option which added distance and elevation gain, but minimized the grade.
It's not accurate. I mapped it from my house on Cabrillo St in the outer Richmond to 4th avenue and it says I need to climb 25th avenue then walk Geary instead of correctly telling me to use 23rd avenue that is completely flat.
There's a weird thing going on at 22nd and San Jose in the Mission, where it doesn't seem to understand that you can simply continue down 22nd, but instead takes a hook down San Jose before backtracking.
As a life-long city cyclist, with a fable for going fast while staying pedantically lawful, I found that my prefered routes are not about avoiding hills, but about: 1. The length of uninterrupted high quality bicycle ways (e.g. no traffic lights crossings etc.), a 2 km uninterrupted path beats a 1 km route with a ton of crossings and traffic lights 2. The quality of the bicycle path surface. I accept a slightly longer path if the road surface doesn't resemble a moon landscape
Disclaimer: this card is distilled by AI from community discussions as “pain point evidence”. It is a starting point for need analysis and validation, not a “validated market need”. AI has analytical limits; please open the original discussion above to manually verify before key decisions.