Proposed Bosworth Bike Lane

Click here to see the SFMTA proposal to extend and make safer the bike lane on westbound Bosworth Street.

Staff met with about 30 neighbors at a Wednesday meeting organized by the Glen Park Association.

Please read the proposal and get ready to express a preference—survey coming soon!

(Estimated construction to begin spring, 2017)



Filed under SFMTA, Uncategorized

6 responses to “Proposed Bosworth Bike Lane

  1. Jon

    Can’t say I’m thrilled with this proposal.

    I think they are grossly underestimating the impact to traffic, particularly during the morning commute. The likely option that involves the car merge that will be implemented right after Lippard will very likely cause an even greater/longer backup down Bosworth during commute times that will likely extend well past the light at Diamond. A similar bike lane with forced merging was implemented several years back on a stretch of Laguna Honda Blvd., and to this day the backup/congestion during commute hours is insufferable and dangerous. Just the other day, there was a car stuck in the right lane at the Diamond traffic light, and the backup that ensued as cars needed to merge left to get around him (at around 7:40AM) extended all the way back to just under the tunnel/bridge coming off of the San Jose Ave. 280 exit ramp (as cars turn right onto Rousseau to get to Bosworth).

    If this proposal happens, the perhaps unintended consequence will be that most folks who need to turn onto Elk St. (such as myself) will probably opt to turn right on Diamond instead and go up Chenery St. to get to Elk, thus increasing the traffic along that side/residential street and also in front of the St. John school entrance which is not a good thing. And the buses that often block the right turn lane to Diamond now that the outlane was foolishly removed at this intersection a while back will contribute to this being even worse.

    Bottom line: Is this really necessary given that the report states that only 14 bicycles used this stretch on a typical day during the afternoon commute hours versus the 1000s of cars that need to use this same stretch on a daily basis to try to get around and/or to work on time?

    And before anyone asks, no, biking myself or taking public transportation is not an option for me for legitimate reasons I don’t have the time to spell out here. Nor is moving to a location closer to my work nor is changing jobs realistic for me and my family again for very legitimate reasons.

    SFMTA: Please do not implement this proposal as it is unneeded and will do more harm than good, IMHO.

  2. Stephen Labovsky

    This is in reply to Heather World’s item that appeared on the Glen Park Association News, yesterday.
    On Wednesday, November 30th, at a meeting held at the GP Public Library, some three dozen friends and neighbors came together to learn about SFMTA’s new, “Bicycle Safety Project” on Bosworth and O’Shaughnessy. After a 20-minute presentation by SFMTA’s Thalia Leng, there followed a lively Q&A, and a lengthy discussion about two possible options. Some of the most important comments came from cyclists who frequently use this extremely busy thoroughfare, one of whom had had an accident along this route.

    The meeting lasted until 8:00pm and could have gone on a lot longer had they not needed to close the library. In the end, the consensus in the room was that we could not hold a vote at that time, as more discussions were needed, to clarify a few important details.

    But now we learn that the Glen Park Association has decided that the project will be put to an on-line vote, available to all their members, most of whom were not at the Wednesday meeting, and therefore not privy to the general discussion. GPA, V.P. Scott Stawicki, briefly alluded to this unusual idea at that meeting, but there was certainly no unanimity by the attendees.

    Prior to Wednesday’s meeting, the GPA had been engaging with SFMTA, regarding this project, for three, long months. But now, according to Mr. Stawicki, it’s the 11th hour, and there’s an urgent need to have an instant vote, using his on-line contrivance.

    Ultimately, this project should be about the safety of bicycle riders in our community, which makes it far too important not to be carefully evaluated, before a real, democratic vote takes place.

    Stephen Labovsky

  3. Dave Kieffer

    Just picking up in this discussion . . .

    I understand the point of only 14 cyclists on an average day. The question is: what multiple of that number would emerge if that stretch were not so dodgy for cyclists?

    More cyclists take more cars off the road — making for less traffic for those who must drive.

    I’ve ridden a bike across the U.S. which may suggest I’m something other than a wimp, but I’d have to say that stretch along there is daunting for a fair number of folks who might otherwise be riding this route — where cars roar down the right turn lane and then swerve into the left lane before the light.

    • Cal

      The statistic for people on bikes is not each day as stated, only the 4-6pm period. Many cyclists presently prefer NOT to ride during the height of the rush hour. I personally try to avoid those hours

  4. Julia Raskin

    Thanks to the SFMTA for these two options to improve Bosworth for people biking. I agree that if this stretch were safer, more people riding bicycles would probably be using it as it connects the BART to other residential areas. Between the two options, I would prefer the preferred option (Option B) as it limits conflict areas/mixing zones and Improves 2 pedestrian crossings in addition to the benefits of Option A. However it seemed at the meeting that some members of the GPA feel unprepared to make a vote and need more time with the proposal. I would urge the transportation committee to allow those folks time to review and ask the questions they need to comfortably cast a vote.

    Glad to see that people are engaging in this process with the City and I hope that this stretch of Bosworth will be improved for people biking and walking on the street.

    -Julia Raskin, SF Bicycle Coalition

  5. Jon

    While I also appreciate the need for a civil discussion on this matter, I would point out that the vast majority of folks who use cars/vehicles to get through this stretch of roadway as part of their daily commute likely do so as they simply do not have the option of using a bicycle. Thus the argument that more bikes would lower the amount of vehicles and thus the traffic problem that I foresee would not occur doesn’t really hold water, IMHO.

    For proof, just look at traffic on the San Jose Ave. offramp now that the bike lane was added over a year ago now that reduced this stretch by one lane. The backups there in the morning and late afternoons on any given weekday are much worse that they were before the bike lane, often stretching well into and beyond the underpass and onto the 280 freeway. And the increased amount of bike traffic is nominal at best.

    Yes, increased safety for bicyclists is important, but it has to be done within reason, and in this case, an overly-intrusive bike lane is just not needed and will have unintended consequences that will decrease safety in other areas such as more vehicle collisions due to the need to merge, and more traffic going on Diamond and up Chenery and through the school zone (again IMHO).

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s