I suggest MTA engineers spend some time up on the terrace, taking in the view. Will provide more information than sfpd crash reports…

2) regarding the standard rant against bikes in #11. yes, like all other modes, some cyclists suck. but cyclists are not operating 2 ton vehicles with 250hp that can KILL. Countries like the Netherlands get this and put the onus for safety on the operators of the vehicles that can do the most damage – to the point where drivers are expected to be ready for cyclists to do crazy, unexpected, illegal things and respond to avoid collisions. So there are different ways of viewing the car-cyclist relationship.

‘But the surge of bicycling in Portland has not been free of incident. The Oregonian newspaper and bloggers have reported on “bike rage,” drunken biking, hit-and-run bicycle accidents and other problems. Drivers complain about bikers who ignore traffic rules or hog narrow roads, phenomena some irritated motorists attribute to feelings of entitlement or moral superiority.

Mr. [Representative Earl] Blumenauer brushes off this criticism. “They are burning calories, not fossil fuel, they are taking up much less space, they are seeing the world at 10 miles per hour instead of 20 or 30,” he said. “And even though there are occasionally cranky or rude cyclists, they are no greater a percentage than cranky or rude motorists.”

Plus, he added, “they have really fought for their place on the asphalt.”’

Not a popular sentiment judging by previous posters, but bikers are not the best road citizens either and as a car driver I feel their belligerence on the streets. I know lots of bikers and almost none of them make proper stops at intersections, wear helmets or use night flashers or don’t have brakes at all. Getting a good head of steam on a downhill stretch is no excuse to blast illegally through intersections. It would be plainly fatal at this one, but around Lower Haight, in the Mission, in Hayes, bikers rarely respect the traffic laws.

For car drivers wanting to get onto the freeway, being blocked when clearly access is possible, they’re forced to go down to Valencia and make that sharp right turn. I’ve seen accidents there too. Why not let cars get off your precious Market St. and continue on their way? Bikers will have more room to maneuver on the street if they do.

However, had MTA developed a dangerous conditions inspection system and rectification plan as brought forth by Greg Hayes back at the Bicycle Advisory Committee in 2002, then there would be a ranked list of problem spots which would be made safer according to a plan.

That is not the case, and it appears that the MTA is simply groping blindly trying something, anything to fix a poorly engineered solution based on the metrics of broken bones and lives.

-marc

If SF is really a ‘transit first’ city, why is the first idea Mr. Fleck has come up with is to remove the bike lane, rather than the car lane or, say, the freeway on-ramp?

One of the problems the city will be facing in court on Jan. 22 is that they are arguing in another case that the Market/Octavia intersection is already safe.

Rather disconcerting that I suffered a severe fracture of the back at 7th & Market due to such a design and Jack considers there to be “no history of any problem”. I guess I should have sued the city in order to get their attention. And don’t they take into account that the street is downhill there meaning that bicyclists go much faster than at other places, indicating that providing a safe and separated lane is even more important?

And when is DPT going to release figures showing the rate of collisions now compared with the previous poor design. My guess is that the figures would show that making design improvements to the separated lane greatly improved safety. Maybe they should make simply implement some of the additional design improvements that have long been suggested by the SFBC.

Nor can I resist the temptation of creating pinch points at intersections with MUNI islands as exists further east on Market. It is really fun to have trucks take up almost all of the lane and have to negotiate around their bulk.

As far as next steps go, can we please figure out a way to add some more light rail tracks at Market and Octavia, just like at Church and Market and while we’re at it, how about some cheese grater ventilation holes for the subway at that spot?

NOTHING this controversial EVER gets on the fast track in this City when it comes to traffic improvements. Why are cyclists being excluded from the discussion, the solution and being run roughshod over by MTA staff in this instance? What does it mean that Supervisors, Assembly Members and a State Senator are opposed to this solution, yet 6 mayoral appointees are able to command the CIty Attorney to sue?

Don’t blame me, I voted against Prop E.

-marc