The kinder, gentler median installed by SFMTA at Great Highway and Balboa
A couple of weeks ago, we wrote about a traffic median at the intersection of Great Highway and Balboa that was the victim of much abuse from cars.
Cars that were turning left onto the Great Highway from Balboa would run over the small island that was placed there to assist pedestrians that are crossing. But the sign on the median to warn drivers was so short that cars would run right over it.
Neighbor Hugh B. estimated that the sign had been replaced at least a dozen times by SFMTA.
Good news – the SFMTA finally got the message and decided to try a different approach at the intersection. This week they removed the 8 inch tall island and installed a 3 inch high island with eased edges in its place.
Hugh for one is happy with the change, telling us “I had to push a car off of the old one last week”.
We’re not sure if a sign will be installed on top of the new 3 inch high median but at least if a car runs over this one, it won’t mean a trip to the repair shop.
Sarah B.
The obliterated sign meant to alert drivers to the presence of the island.
I see these are similar to the graded medians they’ve been installing on California recently. Makes sense to me!
Oh okay so they removed any barrier to vehicles invading pedestrian space, got it.
Finally! Constantly hitting that curb was killing my suspension. But there are still some streetlights, mailboxes and old ladies I can’t seem to avoid. SFMTA, please get on this!
SFMTA has effectively narrowed the pedestrian crossing by moving the bulb out of where cars turn and into the pedestrian crossing. This can become even more dangerous to pedestrians who have strollers as they will have to merge into other pedestrians or navigate the hump when there are more than two or three people crossing in either direction.
I wish they would get rid of the dangerous planter boxes on Balboa while they’re at it.
I guess I don’t get why it was hard to not just drive in the median.
i guess it’s too difficult to keep your car off the giant concrete median after smoking all that weed on the seawall
let’s here it for giving pet peeves int’l newsworthy attention instead of talking to the reasonable SFMTA as others suggested, they’ve been revamping lots of stuff, especially buse stops; the article in the richmond per se prob wasn’t the trigger
I must assume MTA has too much money if it undertakes construction projects where the more effective, more logical, and much more cost-conscious alternative — to screw down those tall, visible, non-damaging plastic reflectors that everyone can immediately see and which act as a solid protective barrier — could have been installed in minutes for a few dollars.
@4THGENRICHMOND. exactly. Well said.
Cars were crashing into a small barrier and sign intended to sign and protect a pedestrian crossing.
How can the correct solution be to reduce the size of the barrier, remove the sign, and move it into the pedestrian pathway, also reducing the size of the crossing?
Should it not be the opposite? Should not SFMTA increase the size of the barrier to make sure the existing pedestrian crossing is protected? WTF?
SFMTA, be on notice that pedestrians and crossings need more protection against 2 ton killing machines, not less.
Killer drivers squeak “accident” and drive away scot-free. Maybe with a $150 ticket. Sometimes.
Injured pedestrians and bicycle poeple go to the hospital and the morgue.
action request:
SFMTA: please;
(1) bring back the sign, (2) the raised barrier to prevent cars driving into the (supposed to be) protected safety area in the middle of the crossing, and (3) restore the proper width to the pedestrian crossing.
If one car hits some piece of traffic infrastructure, then yes that’s probably driver error or an accident. But if many different drivers in many different situations are all having problems with that piece of traffic infrastructure, it starts to become reasonable to assume that the problem is not that Every Single Driver is an idiot, but instead that there’s a fault with the piece of traffic infrastructure.
So in this case the reason people were hitting the old curb, and why SFMTA moved it back into the crosswalk area (leaving it only 6 feet wide, OMG how will pedestrians cope!), was because the old bulb was placed too far out from a simple traffic engineering perspective. There are certain turning radius restrictions in any car, and if you’re turning onto Great Highway and into the leftmost lane (which is the lane you’re supposed to turn into, i.e., the lane closest to you), the old curb configuration made it difficult to simultaneously make the turn while safely aligning with the left lane (that is, without having to veer into the right lane).
They should have removed the old concrete curb and built a new one that is 4 foot tall to protect the pedestrians
Sierrajeff, Many of SFMTA’s revamps of crosswalks throughout the city have included moving bulbs into the pedestrian crossing when there is zero evidence the original bulb was never hit by vehicles. In general, these crosswalks are reduced by 25% effective use. If they were honest, SFMTA would merely reduce the width of crosswalks from 6 feet to 4 feet and be done with it. The only “logical” reason I can come up with are various Fire Department access rules and turn radius demands. The fire station closest to the crosswalk in this article has only small trucks and surf rescue equipment.
I detect a little absence of cultural awareness in installing this replacement curb. Sure the “regular” folks with their BMWs, Teslas, and SUVs will be able to sustain a hit to the new curb with minimal impact. But us low-riders with our classic Chevys and Fords will still be taking hits to our suspension cause low is the way we go. Maybe you guys just just can’t imagine how after a few hits of weed (yes we have our medical authorization cards) at the fire pits or at the seawall those concrete curbs just become magnets for our flashy wheels. Its sort of like joints are hazardous to our joints I suppose.
The real problem with that particular median (and the one at fulton) is that once stopped at the crosswalk, the median can fall into a blindspot of the driver (particularly those in taller vehicles with large hoods). If stopped for a while say to allow a group of pedestrians to cross or waiting for the red arrow to turn green at fulton, the little median is invisible and drivers not familiar with the intersection may cut their turn right over it.
As practiced by the SFMTA and many other governmental organizations, “Transportation Planning” is not based on science, but the current “hot thing” and politics. In the 1990’s Light Rail was all the rage. These days, “bus ways” and “traffic calming” are all the rage. The taxpayer supported transportation planners will always do what is in and politically correct for that decade and be dammed about the science. They care about their promotions and pension and little more.
For decades the science had shown that “clutter” or “noise” in your field of view is one of the most single elements that can lead to an accident with another car, bike, or pedestrian. That is why for the last 40 or so years automobiles have gotten larger and more “open” windows for a better field of view. It is also why many states have instituted laws that do not allow for things like GPS’s or Disabled Cards to be in the window.
So, what does the SFMTA do? They institute things that make the intersections more visually busy. More clutter for you mind to sort out. All this in face of the clear science to the contrary.
Of course this stuff is brought to you by the same people that spent millions on the count down Walk – Don’t Walk lights. You know, the devices that people interpret as “how long they have to start cross” as opposed to understanding that the count down is “how long I have to finish crossing after I started on the walk sign”.
The answer is to raise the fines through the roof and then enforce them. All the rest will solve one problem and just create another.
@JD “For decades the science had shown that “clutter” or “noise” in your field of view is one of the most single elements that can lead to an accident”
You’re going to need to provide a citation to that. For decades, bad planning practice was to have “clear zones” so cars flying off the road wouldn’t hit anything. However, because things like street trees or on street parking create visual friction which slows traffic, best practice is now to try to get fewer cars flying off the road in the first place
There are reams of legislative discourse behind the California Vehicle code § 26708 sections below. If anyone is really interested in this topic, then go pull the legislative record for this section of the code and all the documentation is there to document my statements. In addition to that information, one can go over to UCB to the Institute of Transportation Studies Library and I am sure they will provide you with more information then you want on the subject.
*************
(a)(1)?A person shall not drive any motor vehicle with any object or material placed, displayed, installed, affixed, or applied upon the windshield or side or rear windows. (2)?A person shall not drive any motor vehicle with any object or material placed, displayed, installed, affixed, or applied in or upon the vehicle that obstructs or reduces the driver’s clear view through the windshield or side windows. (3)?This subdivision applies to a person driving a motor vehicle with the driver’s clear vision through the windshield, or side or rear windows, obstructed by snow or ice. (b)?This section does not apply to any of the following: (1)?Rearview mirrors. (2)?Adjustable nontransparent sunvisors that are mounted forward of the side windows and are not attached to the glass. (3)?Signs, stickers, or other materials that are displayed in a seven-inch square in the lower corner of the windshield farthest removed from the driver, signs, stickers, or other materials that are displayed in a seven-inch square in the lower corner of the rear window farthest removed from the driver, or signs, stickers, or other materials that are displayed in a five-inch square in the lower corner of the windshield nearest the driver. (4)?Side windows that are to the rear of the driver. (5)?Direction, destination, or terminus signs upon a passenger common carrier motor vehicle or a schoolbus, if those signs do not interfere with the driver’s clear view of approaching traffic. (6)?Rear window wiper motor. (7)?Rear trunk lid handle or hinges. (8)?The rear window or windows, if the motor vehicle is equipped with outside mirrors on both the left- and right-hand sides of the vehicle that are so located as to reflect to the driver a view of the highway through each mirror for a distance of at least 200 feet to the rear of the vehicle. (9)?A clear, transparent lens affixed to the side window opposite the driver on a vehicle greater than 80 inches in width and that occupies an area not exceeding 50 square inches of the lowest corner toward the rear of that window and that provides the driver with a wide-angle view through the lens. (10)?Sun screening devices meeting the requirements of Section 26708.2 installed on the side windows on either side of the vehicle’s front seat, if the driver or a passenger in the front seat has in his or her possession a letter or other document signed by a licensed physician and surgeon certifying that the person must be shaded from the sun due to a medical condition, or has in his or her possession a letter or other document signed by a licensed optometrist certifying that the person must be shaded from the sun due to a visual condition. ?The devices authorized by this paragraph shall not be used during darkness. (11)?An electronic communication device affixed to the center uppermost portion of the interior of a windshield within an area that is not greater than five inches square, if the device provides either of the following: (A)?The capability for enforcement facilities of the Department of the California Highway Patrol to communicate with a vehicle equipped with the device. (B)?The capability for electronic toll and traffic management on public or private roads or facilities. (12)?A portable Global Positioning System (GPS), which may be mounted in a seven-inch square in the lower corner of the windshield farthest removed from the driver or in a five-inch square in the lower corner of the windshield nearest to the driver and outside of an airbag deployment zone, if the system is used only for door-to-door navigation while the motor vehicle is being operated. (13)(A)?A video event recorder with the capability of monitoring driver performance to improve driver safety, which may be mounted in a seven-inch square in the lower corner of the windshield farthest removed from the driver, in a five-inch square in the lower corner of the windshield nearest to the driver and outside of an airbag deployment zone, or in a five-inch square mounted to the center uppermost portion of the interior of the windshield. ?As used in this section, “video event recorder” means a video recorder that continuously records in a digital loop, recording audio, video, and G-force levels, but saves video only when triggered by an unusual motion or crash or when operated by the driver to monitor driver performance. (B)?A vehicle equipped with a video event recorder shall have a notice posted in a visible location which states that a passenger’s conversation may be recorded. (C)?Video event recorders shall store no more than 30 seconds before and after a triggering event. (D)?The registered owner or lessee of the vehicle may disable the device. (E)?The data recorded to the device is the property of the registered owner or lessee of the vehicle. (F)?When a person is driving for hire as an employee in a vehicle with a video event recorder, the person’s employer shall provide unedited copies of the recordings upon the request of the employee or the employee’s representative. ?These copies shall be provided free of charge to the employee and within five days of the request. (14)(A)?A video event recorder in a commercial motor vehicle with the capability of monitoring driver performance to improve driver safety, which may be mounted no more than two inches below the upper edge of the area swept by the windshield wipers, and outside the driver’s sight lines to the road and highway signs and signals. ?Subparagraphs (B) to (F), inclusive, of paragraph (13) apply to the exemption provided by this paragraph. (B)?Except as provided in subparagraph (C), subparagraph (A) shall become inoperative on the following dates, whichever date is later: (i)?The date that the Department of the California Highway Patrol determines is the expiration date of the exemption from the requirements of paragraph (1) of subdivision (e) of Section 393.60 of Title 49 of the Code of Federal Regulations, as renewed in the notice of the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration on pages 21791 and 21792 of Volume 76 of the Federal Register (April 18, 2011). (ii)?The date that the Department of the California Highway Patrol determines is the expiration date for a subsequent renewal of an exemption specified in clause (i). (C)?Notwithstanding subparagraph (B), subparagraph (A) shall become operative on the date that the Department of the California Highway Patrol determines is the effective date of regulations revising paragraph (1) of subdivision (e) of Section 393.60 of Title 49 of the Code of Federal Regulations to allow the placement of a video event recorder at the top of the windshield on a commercial motor vehicle. (c)?Notwithstanding subdivision (a), transparent material may be installed, affixed, or applied to the topmost portion of the windshield if the following conditions apply: (1)?The bottom edge of the material is at least 29 inches above the undepressed driver’s seat when measured from a point five inches in front of the bottom of the backrest with the driver’s seat in its rearmost and lowermost position with the vehicle on a level surface. (2)?The material is not red or amber in color. (3)?There is no opaque lettering on the material and any other lettering does not affect primary colors or distort vision through the windshield. (4)?The material does not reflect sunlight or headlight glare into the eyes of occupants of oncoming or following vehicles to any greater extent than the windshield without the material. (d)?Notwithstanding subdivision (a), clear, colorless, and transparent material may be installed, affixed, or applied to the front side windows, located to the immediate left and right of the front seat if the following conditions are met: (1)?The material has a minimum visible light transmittance of 88 percent. (2)?The window glazing with the material applied meets all requirements of Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 205 (49 C.F.R. 571.205), including the specified minimum light transmittance of 70 percent and the abrasion resistance of AS-14 glazing, as specified in that federal standard. (3)?The material is designed and manufactured to enhance the ability of the existing window glass to block the sun’s harmful ultraviolet A rays. (4)?The driver has in his or her possession, or within the vehicle, a certificate signed by the installing company certifying that the windows with the material installed meet the requirements of this subdivision and the certificate identifies the installing company and the material’s manufacturer by full name and street address, or, if the material was installed by the vehicle owner, a certificate signed by the material’s manufacturer certifying that the windows with the material installed according to manufacturer’s instructions meet the requirements of this subdivision and the certificate identifies the material’s manufacturer by full name and street address. (5)?If the material described in this subdivision tears or bubbles, or is otherwise worn to prohibit clear vision, it shall be removed or replaced.
I was the first one to hit it, in a large pick-up truck. Could not see it. Lived here ten years, been driving for twenty. Never had an accident and respectful of pedestrians. It was a bad design.
the previous upgrade killed my left rear tire months ago, looking right to make sure cars stay stopped and turning left caused my blowout cheers to the new softer median