Posts Tagged ‘lanes’

The “SFMTrA” Puts Up Traffic Cones on Golden Gate Avenue

Thursday, June 30th, 2016

Here’s the scene at the foot of Golden Gate yesterday during the Evening Drive – what’s new is the orange traffic cones:

7J7C7925 copy

Our SFMTA didn’t put up the cones, the SFMTrA did. See?

CmKF7wvUkAAlw05 copy

So of course these cones are unofficial (unlike this one from last week, when a made member of our City Family put an orange cone near the curb so drivers wouldn’t run over the legs of people warming up in the slow lane of Market inbound).

On it goes

The Advisability of Riding Your Bike Through the Bunker Road Tunnel Whether the Light is Green or Not

Tuesday, June 28th, 2016

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…

7J7C7821 copy

…from this guy going the other way. So whoops, the Datsun driver moves a yard or two to the right. Thusly:

7J7C7822 copy

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.

Seems that waiting for the green would be safer. There’s room for debate, I suppose. (I think I’d want to see a sign saying it’s OK for bikes to proceed afore I ran a red light…)

EPILOGUE:

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”

Wow, That was Fast: Here’s the New Bike Lane on the Twitterloin Part of Golden Gate Avenue – Lots of Congestion Already

Wednesday, June 22nd, 2016

So I heard that the beginning part of Golden Gate in the ‘Loin, the Tender / Twitter -loin, was going to get a bike lane just a few weeks back. And I says to myself, I says, “I better check it out afore things change.” And I did but then I thought, no, neighboring McAllister is a much better way to travel inbound, even though our SFMTA / DPW just recently rejiggered the traffic lights in front of the troubled Hibernia Bank Building most unhelpfully.*

But then a week later, I saw this – it’s just a paint job, for now:

20160617_064739 (1) copy

Speaking of signal timing, I think you’d really need to hustle to make the green lights. I’ll be satisfied to be delayed by just one red light from Polk to Market – prolly the one at Hyde Leavenworth.

Anyway, speaking of that area, drivers turning right from GG onto Hyde just might get in your way. A lot. We’ll see how this works out.

Oh, and here we go – on the same day, just by coincidence, I came through in a car. Lots of backed up traffic, as one might expect, oh well. See the pedestrian timer? The light turned red soon after and it was stop and go at each intersection even though traffic was not backed up at the intersection with Market, oh well:

IMG_9643 copy

So now Golden Gate seems more like the foot of troubled 6th Street, which is the SoMA street what GG feeds into.

IDK, maybe I’ll start using this part of GG every day. The new bike lane is in beta, more or less, so we’re not yet aware of all its issues.

Well see…

*So they take the trouble to make the foot of McAllister a two-way street and things seemed to be working out, but then they make the intersection with Market a mess with blocked #5 Fultons all over. Perhaps this is due to nearby construction? Our SFMTA has a real problem with traffic light timing – it’s like it doesn’t care a whit. The SFMTA isn’t a safety organization, it’s an un-safety organization. This isn’t a money problem, it’s a management problem. Sry.

Wow, the New “Red Carpet” Transit Lanes of Market Street Really Stand Out

Tuesday, May 3rd, 2016

Or “so-called red carpet,” if you’d prefer.

7J7C5134 copy

‘Cause that’s what people call them.

Even though they’re not.

The Dog What DIDN’T Bark: Mansion-Dwelling Millionaires in the Western Addition Seem to Have No Problem with THE URBAN SCHOOL Construction

Tuesday, January 26th, 2016

What’s this? It’s just a simple massive 50-feet steel beam double-parked for a long time in front of historic million-dollar-plus mansions.

IMG_9743 copy

Why? Well, it’s a part of the lengthy, noisy extension at THE URBAN SCHOOL, a private high school what costs three times (3x) as much as tuition at our University of California campuses.

And yet, nary a peep I’ve heard from the nabes.

Just saying…

The Great Restriping of Oak Street Near Masonic is Now Complete – Let’s Hope for Less Congestion

Wednesday, August 26th, 2015

Background.

Here’s how she looks with the new striping:

7J7C2126 copy

The leftmost lane allows drivers to turn left or go straight – this seems like a mistake to me, but, then again, lots of things the SFMTA does seem like a mistake.

To me.

Haight Ashbury’s Urban School Has Done All It Could to Keep Motorists from Parking in This Towaway Zone on Oak

Tuesday, August 25th, 2015

That’s the update regarding this sitch on Oak betwixt Masonic and Ashbury.

7J7C2083

The big issue was notice, but notice has been achieved.

Three cheers.

Next comes the lane restriping…

Good Idea: The Panhandle Bike Path Should Be Widened

Tuesday, June 2nd, 2015

It used to have four foot wide lanes.

Then it got six foot lanes, but now it’s lots busier these days, with all manner of transport upon it:

7J7C8826 copy

And the SFPD and Rec & Park drive upon this path with Crown Victorias all the time too, right?

So what’s wrong with eight foot lanes, I ask you.

(Oh, no other “improvements” are required, no beautification efforts are required, or desired. Just work on the basics, SFGov.)

The Good and the Bad of Our SFMTA’s Recent Rejiggering of Oak Street Near Horrible Octavia “Boulevard”

Tuesday, April 14th, 2015

What’s this? Well, it’s traffic backing up on Oak from failed Octavia Boulevard all the way up to the top of Alamo Heights, like Fillmore.

Why? Let’s hear about the SFMTA’s 2014 to-do list from Rose Garrett of Hoodline:

Restriping Oak between Octavia and Laguna and reconfiguring parking so that two full right turn-only lanes would stretch the entire block of Oak and two additional lanes would continue straight

What’s happened is a change of driving culture so that nowadays, drivers feel less like suckers when they queue up in the right lane of Oak and there’s less line-jumping to the right between Laguna and Octavia:

7J7C5380 copy

None Shall Pass! over this newly painted solid line:

7J7C5381 copy

Some still do of course, but this happens less than before:

7J7C5382 copy

Now’s not the time to get into why the 100% perfectly earthquake safe Central Freeway was ash-canned for this deadly Octavia Boulevard monstrosity. But now, apparently, is the time to try to fix things, you know, a decade later.

Already, those wishing to stay in Frisco now have a clearer shot of escaping this mess by using the left lanes. New construction with $3000-something per month non-rent controlled studios will dominate the north side of this block. We’ll see how this one goes.

It’s hard for a needlessly prideful political animal like the SFMTA to admit that it made a mistake constructing this “vision” of the New Boulevard Movement or whatever the Hell it was called backed when the failed Boulevard Movement was in full swing. But now, after some Berkeley prof has gotten all that money in consulting fees and basked in the glory of those award ceremonies, our SFMTA is less possessive of its creation – it’s more willing to admit its mistakes, if not through a press release, but at least by trying to fix things.

Now, is it good for traffic to back up a half-mile on a regular weekend afternoon? No, but this is an improvement nevertheless.

Oh My: Rob Anderson and Mary Miles Take Aim at the SFMTA’s Plans for Polk Street

Tuesday, March 3rd, 2015

This was the team that tied SFGov up in knots with an injunction for four long years.

They’re ba-aack:

FROM:
Mary Miles (SB #230395)
Attorney at Law
for Coalition for Adequate Review
San Francisco, CA 94102
TO:
Edward Reiskin, Director
Roberta Boomer, Board Secretary
and Members of the Board of Directors of the Municipal Transportation Agency
#1 South Van Ness Avenue, 7th Floor
San Francisco, CA 94103
DATE: March 3, 2015
PUBLIC COMMENT, MTA BOARD MEETING OF MARCH 3, 2015, AGENDA ITEM 12 (“Polk Streetscape Project”)
This is Public Comment on Agenda Item 12, the “Polk Streetscape Project” (“Polk Project” or “the Project”), on the MTA Board’s March 3, 2015 Agenda. Under the Brown Act and CEQA, you are legally obligated to accept and consider this Comment and to place it in all public files on the Project. Therefore, please assure that this Comment has been distributed to all members of the MTA Board and placed in all applicable files on the Project.
The “categorical exemptions” invoked do not apply to the Project, and therefore you may not lawfully approve the Project or any part of it as proposed, since such approval will violate the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) (Pub. Res. Code §§21000 et seq.)
The Project proposes to reduce traffic and turning capacity on Polk and other Streets by eliminating existing parking lanes, reducing traffic lanes and installing obstructions to traffic flow and turning on this busy commercial corridor.
The unusual and highly inconvenient scheduling of this hearing before the MTA Board after 3:00 p.m., on a day with an extraordinarily long MTA Board Agenda shows the MTA Board’s contempt for the public and the significant impacts of the Project. The hearing should be continued to a date and time when the public can be heard without waiting hours for hearings on unrelated matters, and where the public’s comments will receive the Board’s full and serious attention. The hearing precludes public attendance by many people, including all those people who have to be at work. Combined with the short notice, that scheduling deprives the public of the opportunity to meaningfully participate in the environmental review and administrative proceedings on the Project.
On January 15, 2015, the San Francisco Planning Department issued a “Certificate of Determination of Exemption from Environmental Review” (“Exemption”) claiming that the Project was categorically exempt under Classes 1, 2, and 4 of CEQA, invoking 14 Cal. Code Regs. [“Guidelines”] §§ 15301, 15302, and 15304. None of those categorical exemptions apply to this Project. Further, the significant cumulative impacts on traffic, transit, parking, loading, and air quality caused by the Van Ness BRT project one block away, and by the CPMC Project at Van Ness Avenue at Geary Boulevard, make the Polk Project not categorically exempt. (Guidelines §15300.2) Both of those Projects also present “unusual circumstances” precluding categorical exemption of the Polk Project.
1. The Polk Project Does Not Fit Within The Categorical Exemptions Invoked…