Wiki has a critical stance:
I would say, AT TIMES most contaminated, sure.
(It can’t be so so contaminated all of the time, right? Else our ER’s would be full, right? I mean, people swim in these pools on Baker Beach…)
The basic idea is to take out one of the four lanes of Fell and one of the four lanes of Oak along the Golden Gate Park Panhandle from the Baker Street DMV to Stanyan and turn them into dedicated bike lanes.
You don’t need to even look at the report to know that this idea is “feasible” – obviously, our SFMTA can do this if it wants to:
But why does the SFMTA want to do this? This is not stated in the report.
As things stand now, you can ride your bike on the left side of the left lanes of Fell and Oak, or on the right sides of the right lanes of Fell and Oak, or in any part of any lane of Fell and Oak if you’re keeping up with traffic (but this is especially hard to do heading uphill on Fell), or on the “multi-use pathway” (what I and most people call the bike path) what winds through the Panhandle.
So, why not widen the bike path again, SFGov? It used to be 8 foot wide and now it’s 12 foot wide, so why not go for 16 foot wide? (Hey, why doesn’t our SFMTA simply take over Rec and Park? You know it wants to.)
My point is that it would also be “feasible” to somehow force RPD to widen the current bike path (and also the extremely bumpy, injury-inducing Panhandle jogging/walking path along Oak) independent of whatever the SFMTA wants to do to the streets.
Anyway, here’s the news – check out page 12 of 13. No bike rider (or what term should I use this year, “person with bikes?” Or “person with bike?” Or “person with a bike?”) is going to want to sit at a red light at a “minor street” when s/he could just use the bike trail the SFTMA figures, so why not just allow them to ride on Fell and Oak without having to worry about traffic lights at all? And the pedestrians? Well, you’ll see:
“Minor Street Intersections
The minor cross-streets in the project area from east to west are Lyon Street, Central Avenue, Ashbury Street, Clayton Street, Cole Street, and Shrader Street. Each is a consistent width of 38’-9” curb-to-curb with 15-foot wide sidewalks. All of these streets are discontinued [Fuck man. How much colledge do you need to start talking like this, just asking] at the park, each forming a pair of “T” intersections at Oak and Fell streets. The preferred control for the protected bike lane at these “T” intersections is to exclude it from the traffic signal, allowing bicyclists to proceed through the intersection without stopping unless a pedestrian is crossing the bikeway. Due to the relatively low pedestrian volumes at these intersections, it is expected that people using the protected bike lane [aka cyclists? aka bike riders?] would routinely violate the signal if required to stop during every pedestrian phase, creating unpredictability and likely conflict between users on foot and on bicycles. This treatment also recognizes that in order to attract many bicycle commuters, the new protected bike lanes would need to be time-competitive with the existing multi-use path that has the advantage of a single traffic control signal for the length of the Panhandle.
Excluding the protected bike lane from the traffic signal requires installing new pedestrian refuge islands in the shadow of the parking strip. The existing vehicle and pedestrian signal heads currently located within the park would also need to be relocated to new poles on the pedestrian refuge islands.
Implementing these changes would cost between $70,000 and $150,000 per intersection, and require the removal of approximately four parking spaces per intersection. Over the eleven minor-street “T” intersections along the Panhandle (excluding Fell Street/Shrader Street which which has been discussed separately), the total cost would be between $0.9 and $1.5 million dollars and approximately 48 parking spaces would be removed.
This design introduces a variety of benefits and compromises [“compromises!” Or maybe “costs,” as in a cost/benefit analysis?] for pedestrians crossing to and from the park at the minor intersections:
– Pedestrians would be required to wait for gaps in bicycle traffic to cross the protected bike lane (which may present new challenges to people with low or no vision). Design treatments for the protected bike lanes (e.g., stencil messages, rumble strips, signs) should also be considered to clearly indicate the necessity of yielding to pedestrians to people on bicycles.”
This is from yesterday, but it’s been like this for decades:
Back in the day, you’d see broken U-locks (which you didn’t necessarily want to leave on scene and you definitely didn’t want to get caught with) in the bushes. But these days, there’s less effort and more reward in leaving the lock alone and simply taking parts, oh well…
Here it is, your Bunker Road Tunnel* to Rodeo Beach and beyond.
The driver of this old Datsun(!) pickup truck seemed to be giving this cyclist a little bit of room, but then a shout came out…
…from this guy going the other way. So whoops, the Datsun driver moves a yard or two to the right. Thusly:
Bikes have dedicated lanes in this tunnel but cars don’t. Does that mean that bikes don’t have to wait up to five minutes for a green light the way cars have to? I know not. The surfer dudes in the 4WD pickup could not possibly look more like Marin Locals, like Regulars on this stretch of road, but the driver was surprised to see a cyclist going the other way? Now because it’s a tunnel, shouting works, but what if dudes had had the radio on and couldn’t hear? There could have been an accident.
A single-lane tunnel carries Bunker Road from the Rodeo Valley to U.S. 101. Built in 1918, this tunnel is known as Baker-Berry Tunnel but also known as the Bunker Road Tunnel or the Five Minute Tunnel. A date stamp on the western entrance to the Baker-Barry Tunnel lists 1994, which may have been the year the tunnel was retrofitted for earthquake protection or reconstructed for other reasons. Additional work was completed in 2013 to allow for wider approaches for bicyclists. A traffic signal governs the flow of traffic into the tunnel, since only one direction may proceed at a time.
*Some mock the Yelp for rating a tunnel:
“Solid four-star tunnel… Screw you, Yelp.”
“What can I say, it’s a hole in the ground..lol”
The fake cherry trees of January are now a deep purple, ’cause they’re plum trees.
That means that the cherry trees you see these days are real cherry.
Accept no substitutes…
Consarnit, back in the day our Panhandle Bike Path was just eight foot wide. But then people started using it more, so it got widened to 12 foot. We should up that 16 foot, why not.
And on the Oak side of the GGP Panhandle, we should certainly redo the crazy wavy surface ASAP, and widening, well again, why not?
Oh what’s that, you’re waiting to get the irrigation installed? All right, well that’s already been taking a long long time, and one questions why we’re irrigating in the first place, and walkers and joggers are falling down all the time, due to this outrageous neglect from SFGov.
Our GGNRA feds are not prepared for a dreaded sunny (Satur)day at Baker Beach:
Unless beach-goers are going to pack all their cardboard all the way home, this is as good as they can do, one supposes…
Here you go, this is what it looks like when the RPD spends thousands of your hard-earned to steam clean the McKinley Statue. (Hey, whatever happened to KKK Katie?)
Get up to speed on this neverending game of cat and mouse here – just keep reading down.
IDK, are these people contractors paid by the RPD / SFGov? Prolly. Looks like a pretty easy gig, just get some machine and some green vests and then you’re raking in some sweet sweet govt cash:
And actually, I don’t know how much offensive Nazi graffiti was cleaned up this go-around. I hadn’t noticed any.
Perhaps these people were just cleaning the steps this go-around and this wasn’t a five-figure budget-crusher for the Arts Commish / Rec and Park Dept? I know not.
I can see why elements of SFGov, politically-connected, white & wizened millionaires who live in million dollar houses far outside the city limits, want to just throw up their arms by throwing up a metal fence around these steps at the eastern edge of Golden Gate Park. Oh, and local real estate interests, the realtors who live and “prospect” in the 94117 – they want an ugly fence as well, around this iconic meeting place.
I can see why, it’s their cry for help. But I don’t approve of no fence.
(And, mind you, the very same people who want the Great McKinley Fence are those who 86’ed the harmless Panhandle Bandshell a few years back…)