Cyclists: Let the Backlash Begin (or Not)
Muni Ticket Agent Arrested After Assaulting Juvenile
So Much For That Plastic Bag Ban
Verizon Droid: Big Deal? Or Just Another Late Arrival Rival?
Feinstein : Will She Or Won't She?
What with all the Ed Jew Borderline and guy taking off his nose business at our city's seat of government, we almost missed some interesting news about the Market/Octavia onramp of bicyclist injury! The Board of Supes has authorized local transit people to put in a raised median strip at the rightmost lane at the intersection, to discourage people from illegally turning onto the highway.
We're not absolutely positive that's going to solve the problem for good (and will it be difficult for bikers to negotiate? We have no idea because there is no way in this world we'd ever bike in this town -- the mere idea fills us with terror!), but it seems like maybe if you're forced to stop, you might then look up and see the "hey, I'm not supposed to turn right here" sign and not do it. Or is that too optimistic of us to think?
Dufty sponsored the resolution, with Daly and Mirkarimi co-sponsoring (it's sort of right in the middle of all their districts, huh?), and the vote was 10-1, with Peskin voting against. (....mmmmm? Anyone know why Peskin's against it?)
Picture we borrowed from a post of SFist Jim's!
add to stumble upon
add to reddit
tweet this
post to facebook
I can't wait for more Bicycle Coalition assholes to get run done at that intersection. Selfish fuckers deserve what they get for foisting these decision changes on the city.
Excuse me, "design changes" is what i meant.
P.S. I still want more bicyclist run down in an orgy of blood and severed limbs! HOORAY SEVERED LIMBS!
just make it legal to turn as it was planned first, "no right turn" was a temporary solution, it is not work.
Notice that the Bike Lane ENDS at the next block
[4] stop with that commonsensicalness sheeeit biitch where do you think you is? You ain'ts in commonsensicalnessland. you is in SF. BIKES RULES, CARS SUCKS. BLEET BLEET BLEET!!
Wow, the comments are particularly insightful today.
I say the median might work. Let's see what happens.
5:
are you seriously trying to say that bikes do not go any farther down market?
also, how many of those guests come from the same IP?
"Wow, the comments are particularly insightful today."
A good reason to get rid of guest comments entirely.
"I say the median might work. Let's see what happens."
My money's on continued accidents. I was at the hearing on Tuesday and all the pro-barrier comments were knee-jerk. I don't think people understand the psychology involved in cars turning right there. They also don't understand the psychology of the false sense of safety bicyclists will get from the barrier. I don't like the idea of spending money on this to "see if it will work". No one can seem to point to a study that shows the effects of barriers on accident rates that's applicable to Market/Octavia, which should be a clue that maybe this intersection is so broken that patchwork like this won't fix it.
Almost every accident that has occurred at this intersection could have been prevented if cyclists had looked to see if a car could turn into them. This proposed design encourages cyclists not to look. As a cyclist in the city you need to ride like anything can happen and look everywhere. It's like playing a game of Asteroids.
I will continue to generally ride a different route to avoid this intersection, and when I do go through it I'm going to go around the left side of the barrier to take the lane. It's easy to get enough speed to not piss off cars before getting back to the bike lane by the end of the intersection.
"are you seriously trying to say that bikes do not go any farther down market?"
I think "5" is making my argument: don't put a bike lane where it's not safe to bike. That forces cyclists to check for traffic and avoid accidents. I think cyclists pay more attention where there's sharrows rather than bike lanes, and more attention still where there's no bike lane at all. If you get hit outside of a bike lane, at least the City and the SFBC didn't imply to you it was a safe place to ride by having a bike lane there.
How about this easy fix: a big fucking mirror that bicyclists can look into to see if cars are coming? Put the big mirror (tilted to face the bikes) right above the big No Right Turn sign on the median (tilted to face the cars).
[9} said: "Almost every accident that has occurred at this intersection could have been prevented if cyclists had looked to see if a car could turn into them. This proposed design encourages cyclists not to look. As a cyclist in the city you need to ride like anything can happen and look everywhere. It's like playing a game of Asteroids."
STOP this crazy talk! STOP IT! Bicyclists don't have to look anywhere when we rides our bikes. We can fly through space and time just be twitching our lips. We are invincibleserists!!!
[8] "also, how many of those guests come from the same IP?"
In the same discussion thread like this? Probably a lot of them. I'm most of the guests posts in this thread.
Don't feed the trolls
I am #5 and that is all I wrote. If you go down market, you would see that the bike lane currently ends at Valencia Street. In that photo there is an SUV parked in the bike lane, and I would encourage keying the door, but beyond that, the bike lane is not striped for a few blocks. Sadly I can't find a current satellite photo in a very high resolution (google still has the overpass, yahoo is during construction and too low res, MSN has a current photo, but its also low res)
"How about this easy fix: a big fucking mirror that bicyclists can look into to see if cars are coming?"
I think that's a good idea so long as sunblinding isn't an issue -- convex mirrors like you see in blind driveways. More than possibly letting cyclists see an oncoming car in time to take evasive action it has a general "watch your ass" message. Probably more effective than 5,000 extra "no right turn" signs that some might prefer.
"Anyone know why Peskin's against it?
Because he's the one supe with a brain in his head. :^)
#5: People like you are why the SF bike community has a bad name. How would you like it if someone encouraged destruction of your property?
Now, now, #5. The SUV had been pulled over by a motorcycle cop. I hate 'em, too, but control yourself - it's not even a Hummer.
I wonder how infeasible/expensive it would be to have a railroad-crossing-like device installed to work with the light? Sure it'd be a bit pricier than concrete, but the possibility is still there with the median for suckas to make the (now even MORE dangerous) right turn.
Market Street sucks to bike on, period.
I still vote for the pop up bollards. Light turns red and bollards pop up on the on ramp. Right turn problem solved.
Off topic, but I'd also like to see this on the center lanes on market to keep private cars out of the "Bus Only" lane.
#5 again I get kind of ugly when I am forced out into traffic by someone parked in a bike lane with a public parking lot a half a block away. As do I while walking with bikes stopped straddling a crosswalk, especially at Oak and Scott where there is now a special stop line to give bikes their own little stopping area in front of the cars, yet more than 50% of the time there are bikes stopped straddling the crosswalk so pedestrians have to go around them, generally into oak street. When cars park in such a way to completely block a sidewalk I'm the a-hole who calls DPT and gets you that $80 ticket. As for the motorcycle cop, bike lanes are not park and get a latte lane, stop the guy in the parking lot.
I am #5 (#15, #21 too)
I pointed out the lane terminating at Valencia to show how stupid the rational of fearing a back up for no right turn. There is only another 10 or so car lengths of bike lane, yet it doesn't so much back up. Also when I ride or walk in that (My) neighborhood, I'd rather have a car who wants on the freeway, off neighborhood streets. This want goes up by 10X if it is a driver unfamiliar with the highway entrance. As a pedestrian, cyclist, driver, who lives in the area I really feel/felt ripped off by Matt G, and Ross M kowtowing to the SFBC
BTW Ross, when is the fence coming off the Scott Street portion of Duboce Park, its been 3 months!
I'm #1,3,2,12,13, and 6
And seriously, I want to see a river of blood from run down SFBC members at the corner of Market and Octavia, it's only just considering they created this problem in the first place.
I'm #24. (Unless someone else submits right now!!!)
It's not the BIKES that would back up due to the right turn, it's the CARS. If there were a right turn, cars would back up to at least Dolores and maybe Church. Bad for everyone.
I Am5
No crap, its the fear of cars backing up, if it was that big of a problem they would be backing up already, because Gough is worse in the mornings than a direct route to the freeway. Instead they are searching the surface streets for an on-ramp. Get them off the road. And if the SFBC wants cameras, I want license plates on bikes.
"I still vote for the pop up bollards. Light turns red and bollards pop up on the on ramp. Right turn problem solved."
It'd be fun to watch them pop up on cars running the red light on Octavia (coming from Fell). Built sturdily enough they can fling cars around pretty excitingly. I'd show up every evening rush hour with beers. :^)
"SFBC ... created this problem in the first place."
It's not that simple. I hate to defend the SFBC, but the original design is pretty much what we have now (minus some "safety" features), and the SFBC supported it when it was unveiled. The SFBC didn't come up with the "no right turn" idea either, but they supported it strongly.
#26 - What? Didn't Caltrans want this built with a sane, completely reasonable right turn pocket, but was prevented from doing so by the idiots at the BOS??
(I will still make that turn whenever cops and bikes aren't there, just to stick it to SFBC, to drive fewer blocks, to pollute less, to waste less gas, to... be sane in the city that isn't.)