“About the Project – The primary goal of the Masonic Avenue Street Design Study is to identify how Masonic Avenue between Geary Boulevard and Fell Street can safely and efficiently accommodate the needs of all roadway users, including but not limited to … motorists.”
ALL RIGHT, EXACTLY HOW DOES THIS PROJECT “ACCOMMODATE THE NEEDS” OF “MOTORISTS?” OH, NOT AT ALL? THOUGHT SO. MOVING ON.
Objectives:
1. Engage representatives of all constituencies within the community who would be impacted by changes to Masonic Avenue…
ALL RIGHT, WHICH REPRESENTATIVES OF THE “MOTORIST” “CONSTITUENCY” WERE “ENGAGED?” ANY AT ALL? YOU KNOW, THE OCTAVIA BOULEVARD PEOPLE “ENGAGED” MOTORISTS AS FAR AWAY AS MONTEREY BOULEVARD, OUT THERE WITH CLIPBOARDS AND EVERYTHING. DID THE MASONIC AVENUE PEOPLE DO ANYTHING LIKE THAT? OH NO.
2. Improve transit operation.
THIS PROJECT WILL UNIMPROVE TRANSIT OPERATION ON AND AROUND MASONIC – THERE’S NO QUESTION ABOUT THAT. IT’S GOING TO SLOW DOWN THE BUSES THAT USE MASONIC, INCLUDING THE OCCASIONAL #5 FULTON AND #21 HAYES.
3. Improve pedestrian and non-motorized access to transit.
SO TRANSIT USERS WILL HAVE “BETTER ACCESS” TO REDUCED BUS SERVICE? I DON’T GET THE BETTER ACCESS PART – YOU’RE TALKING ABOUT A BUS STOP? ALSO, WHAT’S “MOTORIZED ACCESS TO TRANSIT?”
4. Increase the safety of pedestrian crossings.
YOU KNOW, THE PRIOR PROJECT MANAGER IS ON THE RECORD AS STATING THAT THIS KIND OF THING IS BAD TO DO LIKE NOW BECAUSE IT WOULD HURT THE CAUSE OF PUSHING THE ENTIRE PROJECT THROUGH. KIND OF SAD, REALLY.
5. Increase motorist compliance with traffic rules and regulations.
UH, WHAT, WITH TREES? IF I WANTED TO INCREASE COMPLIANCE WITH TRAFFIC LAWS, I’D JACK THE SPEED LIMIT UP TO 40 MPH. NOW, THAT WOULD HAVE SOME SIDE EFFECTS, BUT IT CERTAINLY WOULD REDUCE THE INCIDENCE OF SPEEDING, RIGHT? OR, HAVING HOURS-LONG TRAFFIC JAM UPS DURING THE MORNING AND EVENING DRIVES WOULD REDUCE SPEEDING, IS THAT WHAT YOU’RE GETTING AT?
6. Reduce the number of vehicular collisions, especially those involving pedestrians and bicyclists.
HOW? BY PLANTING TREES? WE’LL SEE. HEY DIDN’T THE RECENT OCTAVIA BOULEVARD / MEDIAN PROJECT INCREASE THE NUMBER OF VEHICULAR COLLISIONS ON OCTAVIA? YES IT DID. HOW WOULD YOU EXPLAIN THAT?
7. Support neighborhood vitality by creating a more inviting and accommodating public realm.
BY PUTTING IN A MEDIAN AND PLANTING TREES? SO, LET’S TAX AMERICA, CALIFORNIA, AND SAN FRANCISCO TO CREATE A “REALM” ON 3000 FEET WORTH OF STREET PRIMARILY FOR THE BENEFIT OF THE WEALTHY PROPERTY OWNERS AND PRIVATE SCHOOL(S) WHAT ARE ON THE STREET? ALL RIGHT.
You see, Octavia used to be a regular old street until Redevelopment (a bad idea from the 20th century) and the failed Octavia “Boulevard” experiment (a bad idea from the 21st century) came along.
“The replacement freeway and Boulevard were charged with ensuring a level of service comparable to the previous structure and configuration. This has been achieved…”
In no way, shape, or form does the newish Octavia Boulevard have a level of service comparable to the old Central Freeway.
And, BTW, did the Central Freeway block Fell, Oak, Page, Haight and Market? Nope. Does Octavia Boulevard? Yep, every day, all the time.
(This is an example of misplaced confidence, of the hubris.)
Now, what kind of signal timing does it take to accommodate a 3000-mile-long freeway ending on Market Street. Well, let’s take a look here. Do you notice that Market street peds have about four seconds to begin the journey across Octavia during the 95-second cycle? Why is that? I mean, that means that any given ped on Market has over a 95% chance of having to stop and wait for all those cars on Octavia to go by. Is that fair? Now, what about cars and streetcars and bikes and buses and whatnot heading outbound on Market – do you think it’s much better for them? Well, it’s not. Just 20-something percent of the traffic signal cycle allows traffic to flow uphill on Market at the Octavia Intersection. Why are the lights so biased in favor of the cars driving through on Octavia, you know, as opposed to Market Street?
Check it (oh yeah, that’s some homeless dude coughing at the end there, not me.)
Now, the term “fork-tailed doctor killer” used to be the nickname of the Beechcraft Bonanza, you know, the plane what killed Buddy Holly on the Day That Music Died. But that whole V-Tail sitch got addressed and now, Beech makes those Bonanzas with regular old straight tails. So let’s recycle this phrase and use it for Octavia Boulevard, why not?
Here’s the fork of the tail:
Now, how can I justify blaming the whole “Boulevard Movement” fad of the aughts for an famous accident that killed that UCSF doctor if the UCSF van driver ran a red light? Well, take a look at this:
Click to expand
See? Sometimes half the lanes of Oak have a red light and the other half have a green. Does that make sense? Well, if you’re struggling to make pathetic Octavia work and you don’t want traffic routinely backing up to Golden Gate Park, well then you yourself would be tempted to do whatever you could to help Octavia flow.
Does this unorthodox design factor in human nature, you know, the nut behind the steering wheel? No, it doesn’t. The fact is that car drivers, those sheeple, follow the pack. If the car to the right goes, then they want to go.
Of course, drivers should do better, but we need to factor in their behavior when we design roads, right?
What we shouldn’t do is to let Hayes Valley insiders, that very small but very influential group, to design anything for the rest of us.
And BTW, why on Earth are left turns allowed on inbound Market onto Octavia? Could it be for the convenience of those Hayes Valley insiders? Check it out. You’d think that Hayes Valley types would be satisfied with being able to make a left at the prior intersection or the next intersection, but no, traffic on Market has to wait on a dedicated signal for a dedicated lane of drivers.
Does that make sense?
Why not this? Why not narrow Octavia dramatically and just give up on the whole boulevard experiment? Just take out the frontage roads and all that on-street parking and those medians and that would be a good start on “completing” the Horrible Octavia Experiment, turning it into a “Complete Street.” Even the Great Designer of Octavia admits now that the boulevard is too wide.
And let’s get rid of that left turn lane that was built just for the NIMBYs of Hayes Valley. Why should Market Street, the more important one, take a back street to Octavia, which is basically a glorified freeway onramp?
And why not give people on Market Street half the time of the light signal and then the people on Octavia the other half? Wouldn’t that be more fair?
“Before the destruction of the Central Freeway, condominium prices in the Hayes Valley neighborhood were 66% of San Francisco average prices. However, after the demolition and subsequent replacement with the new Octavia Boulevard, prices grew to 91% of city average. Beyond this, the most dramatic increases were seen in the areas nearest to the new boulevard. Furthermore, residents noted a significant change in the nature of the commercial establishments in the area. Where it had been previously populated by liquor stores and mechanic shops, soon the area was teeming with trendy restaurants and high-end boutiques.”
This isn’t my “preferred option,” but it’s the preferred option, so there you go.
Click to expand
How much will this cost?
Tens of millions, before overruns. $50,000,000 per mile or about $50,000 a parcel depending on how you look at it.
Who’ll pay for it?
Local, state, and federal taxpayers, just like the Bridge to Nowhere (let’s do something for Alaska) and the Chinatown subway (let’s do something for District 3).
Why does the public hearing notice enumerate the dozen-and-a-half parking spaces to be added but then leave out the hundred-something parking spaces that will be taken out?
Because this is a political document written by a politician.
Well, is there a cheaper, safety-only option to go along with the SFMTA’s “preferred option?”
Not that I’m aware of. Safety improvements have been held hostage over the years on account of this big maghilla project. The Project Director will tell you that if you ask him.
Do you have something against wide medians filled with trees that can never ever, ever, ever be removed for any reason at any time in the future, the likes of which can be found on Octavia and Divisadero?
Yes.
Any advice for cyclists in the mean-time?
Yes. Cyclists should stay the hell off of Masonic between Turk and Fulton. Use the wide, underpopulated sidewalks, and, if you want, run the red light at Golden Gate to get a head start on traffic going downhill to Fulton.
(Personally, I’d start by getting rid of all the parking spaces and all the medians – I’d de-boulevard the boulevard.)
Notice the color of the traffic lights?
Anyway, here’s the info. It’s as close as you’ll get to an admission from the Powers That Are that maybe, just maybe, Octavia isn’t just the most perfect thing ever.
Monday, Sept. 27: SFCTA Hearing Room, 100 Van Ness Avenue, 26th Floor OPEN HOUSE: 12:00–2:00pm PUBLIC WORKSHOP: 5:30–7:30pm
Persons requiring translation services should contact the Transportation Authority at 415-522-4800
Background
The Market-Octavia neighborhood has seen several transformative efforts recently, most notably the opening of the Octavia Boulevard/Central Freeway project in 2005 and the adoption in 2008 of the Market and Octavia Better Neighborhood Plan. Octavia Boulevard is the first facility of its kind in the United States in 80 years, redefining traffic engineering practice through context-sensitive solutions. The Octavia Boulevard project has delivered a transportation facility that provides neighborhood access to a regional freeway while providing an attractive public space. A timeline of key Octavia Boulevard events is shown below.
This Circulation Study will quantify and evaluate the performance of the transportation system in the Market-Octavia area and recommend changes for improving travel options and traffic distribution in the area. The study will focus on multimodal and system-level perspectives. These multimodal transportation issues include:
Transit routing and reliability, and connectivity to regional transit
Automobile traffic circulation
Pedestrian crossings and facilities
Bicycle access
General wayfinding
Travel demand management strategies
The study will help support and advance key priorities of the 2008 Market and Octavia Better Neighborhood Plan including improved pedestrian circulation and transit facilities, as well as conversion of streets from one-way to two-way operation.
As the study area is both an active local neighborhood and a critical element of the transportation system for regional traffic coming to, from or through the area, the proposed solutions will need to address local, citywide and regional needs. This map of the general local area is consistent with the Market-Octavia Neighborhood Plan. Click here to see the study area map.
Study Objectives
The objectives of the Study are to:
Document existing conditions of the transportation system
Identify a multimodal package of transportation improvements through technical review and public input
Develop cost estimates for these top-priority projects
Establish a funding and implementation strategy that considers appropriate levels of contributions from public and private sources.
The Central Freeway and Octavia Boulevard Circulation Study will serve as a vehicle for discussion and coordination among local and regional stakeholders, while providing policy guidance for ensuring integration with the larger regional and long-term needs.
Potential Project List
As area needs are studied and possible solutions prioritized, information on potential projects will be posted here.
Study Products and Schedule
Preliminary Draft Existing Conditions Report. Includes Origin-Destination Survey from October 2009. Completed.
Public and Stakeholder Outreach. Engagement with key stakeholders and community groups. Ongoing. Key events planned for September 2010 and November 2010.
Technical Analysis and Project Development. Based on existing conditions and needs assessment, and stakeholder input, an evaluation framework will be developed for potential solutions, resulting in project screening and the selection of up to three potential projects. Conceptual designs will be developed for these three potential projects. September/October 2010.
Funding and Implementation Plan. Funding plan, including fair-share contributions, and implementation roles, steps, and issues. December 2010.
Final Report. Culmination of all recommendations and designs. January 2011.
For More Information
Send an email to Margaret Cortes or call 415.522.4826.
This is what last night’s meeting, the Second Masonic Avenue Street Design Community Workshop, looked like. It started 15 minutes late, had a half-hour break scheduled, and it began with a rehash for all the new people. You can see their raised hands here:
Anyway, for those reasons, I didn’t stick around. But here are diagrams for the choices on offer for Masonic. You can also see them at Bike NOPA.
Actually, the City has has already decided which proposal it likes best so far. Here’s your Options Matrix, in order of preference:
And here are each of the proposals, one by one:
Click to expand. It’ll get extra big.
This one adds a huge median and brings Masonic down to one lane each way at night:
This one adds a huge median and has no room for parked cars. Note the public policy disaster Octavia Boulevard appears to be cited favourably, as if there’s nothing wrong with it:
So there you have it. About 60-something people were on hand when I left.
The City doesn’t want three lanes of traffic using Masonic during the morning and evening drives, that much is for sure.
Something that wouldn’t take four years would be to:
Just push back the encroaching landowners, get them off of public land and then just decriminalize bikes on the sidewalks of this part of Masonic, the same way that some other sidewalks allow bikes in town.
But that doesn’t seem to be under consideration.
Now you’d think that people at these Different Masonic meetings would make choices based upon this kind of ranking:
1. Safety
2. Flow
3. Aesthetics
But the folks that Fate allows to show up at these meetings seem to make choices based upon this ranking:
1. Aesthetics
2. Aesthetics
3. Aesthetics
O.K., we’ll see have to wait and see how this one goes.
Anyway, this exercise in ascertainment bias, exactly the kind they warned us about in colledge, exactly the kind of bias the City wants, will be at 6:30 PM on August 10th at that rich prep school that costs $100-something per kid per day.
Click to expand.
Maybe it will look like Octavia “Boulevard” when all is said and done…
