[Carfreeliving] [sfbike] Market and Octavia

[David Baker]

and some bike "sharrows" on the side lane of Octavia going towrds Hayes
would be nice.  Cars jump over to avoid the congestion on the main part of
Octavia Blvd.  The side lane is too narrow for them to get by a bike, so
they honk at you if you're riding there because they can't speed up to
Haight.

On 2/5/06, A P Thornley <apt at thornley.com> wrote:
>
> Thanks for the heads-up on this, Susan, and thanks to Rich (and others,
> perhaps), for the great follow-up note to Supes and others about the real
> story and real need for improvements (engineering, enforcement, education)
> at the celebrated Market/Octavia/freeway intersection. I think Rich's letter
> is a perfect collation of the history and rationale for prohibiting Market
> Street traffic direct access to the freeway and the steps that should/must
> be taken to make it more nearly complete and less perilous for Market
> Street's users (pedestrians, transit riders, cyclists, dogs, baby carriages,
> motorists, etc.). This is not the SFBC vs. common-sense motorists, this is
> Market as a livable "main street" vs. convenience for impatient motorists,
> who have other options for freeway access (and never had direct-from Market
> access during the many years the freeway ramp complex stood -- nobody "took
> away" that right turn off Market, it was never there) . . .
>
> One other important fact: The resolution forbidding the right turn off
> market onto the freeway does not set out a six-month trial for the banned
> turn. Mr. Anderson says
>
> As the media accounts noted at the time, the no-right-turn ban is a
> six-month trial. The text of Resolution 508-04 confirms this . . .
>
>
> Actually Andy Ross got it wrong in the Chronicle and Stuart Sunshine
> didn't correct him, in print or subsequently, and now this canard is
> "general knowledge". Smart citizens can read the resolution here:
>
>   http://sfbike.org/download/bike_network/bos_508_04.pdf
>
> Passed the Board unanimously (10 ayes, Ma absent), signed by Mayor Newsom
> 8/25/04. No mention of the banned turn being a six-month trial, but it does
> say that DPT should collect data during the first six months of operation
> and make adjustments and add traffic controls and signage "as necessary to
> maximize the safety of pedestrians and bicyclists through the intersection".
> In view of the fact that they (DPT/MTA) haven't yet done all the things they
> were supposed to do by the time the intersection opened (see "Further
> Resolved" punch list), we ought to stop talking about a phoney trial and get
> on with the safety improvements . . .
>
>
> Take the Market lane,
>
>
>         --Andy--
>
>
> At 2:40 PM -0800 2/3/06, Coffin, Richard S. wrote:
>
> DO NOT waste your time directly engaging Mr. Anderson or PROSF.  He has
> made it clear that he does not support safer streets for transit, bikes,
> pedestrians, or even cars for that matter.  I have talked to Mr. Anderson a
> few times and he is not rational about the "rights" of road users in San
> Francisco.  He has the fundamental belief that the streets are too dangerous
> for bikes and therefore, no one should ever bike on city streets.  Period.
> Ever.  "Every cyclist is crazy."  He was one of the few opponents to the
> popular safety improvements at San Jose/Guerrero last year.
>
> You will notice his blog has no comments, that's because no one cares.
>
> I sent the following to Ross as a general heads-up if this issue arises.
> And cc:'d Dufty and Daly, whose Districts all intersect at this location.
> Not sure where the "6-month" review is at.
>
> -R
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
> -----------------
>
> Dear Supervisor Mirkarimi:
>
>
>
> You may have received some recent correspondence from other constituents
> concerned about the intersection of Market and Octavia.  To date, I am
> unaware if there are any staff reports issued on the safety and operations
> status; however, I was one of the numerous concerned citizens who worked
> hard with Matt Gonzalez and his staff in late 2004 to get the right turn
> from E/B Market onto the New Freeway eliminated for both an improved street
> environment for pedestrians and improved safety for cyclists.  Actually, it
> was a restoration of the original boulevard design from the changes made by
> ISCOT; thanks to the taxi representative who sought access everywhere all
> the time and one DPT staff member who believed that having a dedicated auto
> turn lane would be safer for bikes and pedestrians despite the increased
> high-speed traffic that would use this route if the turn onto the freeway
> was accommodated.
>
>
>
> The so-called "false sense of security" phenomenon may be real and can
> increase danger in any life situation; however, all other transportation
> advocates feel that the benefits of reduced traffic volumes, shorter
> pedestrian crossings, and a simpler intersection configuration outweighed
> theses risks.
>
>
>
> Therefore, in light of the continued violation of this ban by vehicles, I
> ask you to consider the following:
>
>
>
> 1.      Support the SFBC push to get DPT et al. to implement colored bike
> lanes or other creative safety markings across this intersection, (Caltrans
> likely still needs to approve these for the city of SF use)
>
> 2.      Encourage SFPD enforcement of the right-turn ban, especially at
> rush hour.
>
> 3.      Encourage DPW/DPT to install more descriptive and larger signage;
> both at the banned turn and back at Duboce and other locations where drivers
> SHOULD be turning to access the freeway.
>
> 4.      Educate cyclists to the dangers of vehicles making unexpected
> right-turns here and throughout the city (illegal turns from Market Street
> downtown occur routinely and are incredibly dangerous to bikes and
> pedestrians) Many of the bike skills classes offered by the SFBC already do
> this, and co-sponsored safety brochures by TA/DPT also include this info;
> however, more education might increase the awareness.  The SFBC could
> possibly get a mini-grant from DPH to do this and I have copied Mr. Andy
> Thornly, program director of the SFBC on this issue.
>
> 5.      Consider asking DPW to install a new sign at the intersection
> saying "Cyclists Caution!  Watch for illegally turning vehicles!" which
> would serve the dual purpose of educating cyclists and vehicles attempting
> to still violate the banned movement.
>
>
>
> As always, I thank you for your continued support of a safer, healthier,
> and more equitable transportation system in San Francisco through increased
> walking, cycling, and transit use.
>
>
>
> Sincerely,
>
>
>
> Richard S Coffin, PE
>
> District 5
>
> Former President, Walk San Francisco
>
>
>
>
>
> From: Rob <rmajora at comcast.net>
>
> To: Ross Mirkarimi <Ross.Mirkarimi at sfgov.org>
>
> CC: PROSF <home at prosf.org <%3Chome at prosf.org>>
>
> Subject: Right Turn onto New Market Street Freeway Ramp
> Date: Fri, 27 Jan 2006 14:36:00 -0800
>
> Ross:
>
>    You probably remember last year's kerfuffle over the ban on making a
> right turn onto the new freeway ramp on Market St. across from the new,
> unimproved Octavia Blvd. It turns out that your predecessor carried a
> resolution on behalf of the cycling community to put this ban in force in
> 2004, much to the annoyance and inconvenience of city drivers. As the media
> accounts noted at the time, the no-right-turn ban is a six-month trial. The
> text of Resolution 508-04 confirms this:
>
> "Further resolved, that the Department shall collect data related to
> traffic, bicycle, and pedestrian safety and flow during the first six months
> of the opening of the freeway ramp, and shall make adjustments to and shall
> implement any additional traffic control devices and signage as necessary to
> maximize the safety of pedestrians and bicyclists through the intersection,
> and the Department shall report its findings to the Board of Supervisors at
> the end of that period."
>    The six-month trial will soon be over. Can we assume that DPT has been
> diligently collecting data on this experiment and will soon announce its
> findings? We can only hope that the city, with your support, will end this
> preposterous inconvenience to the city's 464,000 drivers and jackhammer up
> the huge bulb-out that actually makes this intersection more dangerous to
> city cyclists.
>
> Regards,
>
> Rob Anderson
>
>
>
> http://district5diary.blogspot.com/2005/11/anti-car-conspiracy-hinck
> le-joins.html
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://livablecity.org/pipermail/carfreeliving_livablecity.org/attachments/20060205/d221b6ab/attachment.html