Fulton Street was Never Like This Before Octavia Boulevard – The Unintended Effects of the SFMTA’s Octavia Boulevard

You know what the architect of excessively-wide Octavia Boulevard says about it now? She says we built it too wide.

Anyway, at the time, former District Five Supervisor Ross Mirkarimi warned about the unintended effects of this brainchild of property-owning Hayes Valley millionaires.

One of the effects of gridlock on and around Octavia Boulevard is that it now makes sense for drivers to avoid Oak in the AM.

Thusly:

Click to expand

Is this a good thing?

I think not.

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

10 Responses to “Fulton Street was Never Like This Before Octavia Boulevard – The Unintended Effects of the SFMTA’s Octavia Boulevard”

  1. Rob Anderson says:

    Ross supported the new, unimproved Octavia Blvd. the whole way, Jim. I was there at the opening ceremonies in 2005, where he even made a speech lauding the new street that now carries a lot of the former freeway traffic that used to go over the neighborhood on that wicked Central Freeway overpass. Now more than 45,000 cars a day come through the middle of Hayes Valley. John King has also written a number of columns praising the street as a bold planning!
    http://district5diary.blogspot.com/2005/09/octavia-boulevard-gateway-to-new.htm

  2. sfcitizen says:

    Didn’t say he didn’t support it. What he did was exprese concern, at the time and after, about the effects the blvd plan would have on surrounding areas, particularly in D5.

    Turning Oak and Laguna into a parking lot is one of the effects…

  3. Rob Anderson says:

    I’ve followed this issue since the awful new boulevard was being constructed, and I never heard/saw Mirkarimi express any concern.

  4. sfcitizen says:

    Fair enough. He spoke of the issue more than once. At this event, for one: http://sfist.com/2007/01/26/octavia_blvd_protest_support_for_injured_cyclist.php

  5. Rob Anderson says:

    No, that issue is about the right turn onto the freeway at Market and Octavia, not about Octavia Blvd. itself. Mirkarimi, like every other prog in SF, thought it was a great thing to take down the Central Freeway there, even though that’s brought the freeway traffic onto to surface streets of Hayes Valley. The Bicycle Coalition and Mirkarimi insisted that motorists trying to get on the freeway at Market/Octavia shouldn’t be allowed to make the easy right turn onto the freeway there because of the danger to cyclists. Instead motorists now have to go all the way to 13th and South Van Ness to get on the freeway.
    http://district5diary.blogspot.com/2005/11/anti-car-conspiracy-hinckle-joins.html

  6. sfcitizen says:

    No, RM turned to D5 and waived his arm to the northwest to cover HIS district. That’s what he was talking about at the time. He had heard complaints about the Blvd. even at that early date. He spoke of this on 2-3 occasions IIRC.

    One specific area of concern was/is the southern side of Oak betwixt Laguna and Octavia. RM was pro-homeowner on that one. And on the northern side they decided to allow parking, which is also pro-homeowner. That should be a lane 24-7 IMO. But I digress…

  7. Rob Anderson says:

    Completely wrong on this, Jim. Mirkarimi and city progs supported taking down the Central Freeway overpass, continue to support the Market/Octavia intersection fiasco, support the Market/Octavia Plan—40-story highrises at Market and Van Ness!—and helped UC ripoff the old Extension property a block off Octavia. Maybe you can provide some more links to exonerate Mirkarimi for what he and his prog comrades have wrought in Hayes Valley.

  8. Alai says:

    I can understand people who say Octavia is too wide, or that it would have been better served with a different design.

    I don’t understand people who say Hayes Valley would benefit from an elevated freeway down the middle.

    Now that there is finally some construction along the edge, I think that view will be even more incomprehensible.

  9. sfcitizen says:

    After he voted for it, he fretted about the unintended consequences of it. That’s what I’m saying.

  10. sfcitizen says:

    Who made it too wide? Why are there two lanes dedicated for parking 24-7? Why are there two slow lanes with stop signs and stop lights?

    Hayes Valley is a crossroads, it’s not really a destination per se.

    Would Hayes Valley have been hurt if the off-ramp went over Market Street? The way things are now, outbound Market peds only have 6 seconds each signal phase to start walking? So why then are Hayes Valley people allowed to legally turn left with their own signal phase?