Dedicated Bike Lane Plan For Folsom Street Expected To Cost $253,000

The San Francisco bicycling community pushed for improvements to Folsom Street after a cyclist was killed by a truck making a right turn there in August, and city transit leaders on Tuesday announced a temporary plan for the thoroughfare.

The San Francisco Municipal Transportation Agency will establish a dedicated bike lane on Folsom Street between Fourth and 11th streets as a pilot program, agency spokesman Paul Rose said.

By the end of the year, a buffered bicycle lane will go up on the one-way street, which currently has bicycles traveling right alongside cars.

The four-lane street will be converted to three lanes to accommodate the new space for bicycles. The project is estimated to cost about $253,000.

No end date has been set for the Folsom Street pilot program, but it will come under consideration again as the larger Central SoMa Plan, focused on the city’s South of Market neighborhood, moves forward.

A community meeting about the Folsom Street bike lane is slated to take place within the next month or so to gather input from bicyclists, pedestrians, and motorists, Rose said.

A safety campaign headed by the San Francisco Bicycle Coalition was launched in August after 24-year-old Amelie Le Moullac, of San Francisco, was killed by the turning truck on Folsom and Sixth streets on Aug. 14.

Her death, which occurred during the morning commute, was the third such fatality this year and spurred the coalition to ask for safety improvements on popular bike routes that have proved dangerous for cyclists.

Sasha Lekach, Bay City News

Please make sure your comment adheres to our comment policy. If it doesn't, it may be deleted. Repeat violations may cause us to revoke your commenting privileges. No one wants that!
  • bd3517

    I’m curious why the cost is the headline. A traffic light costs $300K, so the cost seems negligible, compared to other public transport items.

  • Chris

    That’s the whole cost of one police officer for a year (salary, pension, benefits, etc.). The cop that screwed up the investigation on Amelie’s accident should be suspended for a year and that should easily cover the cost.

  • tungwaiyip

    Yeah, a very reasonable cost for a project that covers 2/3 the width of SOMA. In comparison, it costs 6 million to widen a few blocks of sidewalk on Valencia.

  • street_equity

    Absurd bias to report the cost in the headline.

    Is 253k a lot of money? Sure. Street improvements of all sorts are incredibly expensive. If you’d like to write an article about that, go for it.

    Until then, how about fair and equal reporting, instead of trying to unfairly drum up opposition to this safety improvement?

  • Forthright

    “A community meeting about the Folsom Street bike lane is slated to take
    place within the next month or so to gather input from bicyclists,
    pedestrians, and motorists, Rose said.”

    Don’t believe for a SECOND that pedestrians’ input will be listened to; for some reason bikies are out to get the pedestrians, who constitute the least of all their worries out on the road. Pitiful

    • The interests of pedestrians and cyclists are closely aligned. Both are vulnerable public right of way users, but there is very little actual bike/pedestrian conflict or injury. Sure both annoy each other, but the real violence is inflicted by motorized transport. More deaths than from drugs or guns, thousands of injuries a year, the largest carbon imprint, and the majority of cancer risk come from the “necessity” to drive. A public health issue for sure.

      • Forthright

        You have no idea what you are saying. My PERSONAL experience is that there is PLENTY of bike/pedestrian conflict. You are a shill for the SFBC plain and simple. Bikers have shown very little consideration for what the pedestrians are complaining about, so your insistence that they share the same interests is false and offensive.

      • Forthright

        Trying to shift the blame to motorists in an attempt to create a “hey the enemy of my enemy is my friend” approach is pathetic and predictable

  • Sean Hughes

    What if the headline said, “Dedicated Bike Lane Plan For Folsom Street Expected To Cost Only $253,000.”?

  • sebra leaves

    The SFMTA needs to spend some of their PR funds informing the public what the rules of the road are.
    The fastest way to solve the cyclists problems on Folsom Street is to install signs that say “Bicycle and right turn lane only.” They have those signs for the bus lanes downtown. How hard is it to put them in the bike lanes.

    • murphstahoe

      For example – you can take a right turn on red – AFTER stopping. Unlike the truck driver who killed Amelie Le Moullac.

    • murphstahoe

      “Bicycle and right turn lane only” does not apply if there is a bike lane. While you must make right hand turns from the bike lane, it is not legal to be in the bike lane prior to 200 yards before the intersection if you are making that right turn. The signage would be incorrect.

  • sfparkripoff

    I don’t recall the Bicycle Coalition chasing down the video when the cyclist plowed through a crosswalk at Castro and Market. The Bicycle Coalition didn’t launch a
    petition for safer streets after the 71-year-old pedestrian died from his injuries.

    The Bicycle Coalition is perpetuating the ridiculous idea that bicyclists are essentially sitting ducks out there in traffic. Yes motorists are out there and they make mistakes just like cyclists do. Why is it that bicycling, alone among all such activities as far as I can tell, is so chock full of participants who seem to loathe having to learn and adopt the best practices of their chosen activity?

    The Bicycle Lobby picks and chooses the causes they want to get involved in based on their own self-interest. They always call for the maximum penalty on motorists regardless of who is at fault in traffic accidents.

    At the end of the day this was an accident. A separated bike lane is not going to “fix” a car or truck turning right into the path of a cyclist? Slowing down traffic is not going to “fix” the trauma that will happen when a moving car or truck collides with a bicycle. These types of accidents will continue to happen as long as cyclists share the road with motor vehicles.

    • 94103er

      Um, the planning department already had a plan in the works to improve the Castro/Market neighborhood for pedestrians. So yes, hopefully factors that led to the collision 2 yrs ago will be mitigated, e.g. light timing and the width of Castro at that intersection.

      And, um, slowing traffic reduces fatalities. That’s a basic fact. See also “Europe.”

      I know it’s exhausting trying to troll every news site, but especially if you’re gonna comment like a week after something’s posted can you try to sound less like an idiot?

      • Forthright

        Don’t be upset just because you have ZERO argument to sfparkripoff’s post! It’s OK!
        The SFBC does indeed choose only cases that they deem favorable to them and ignores the others, just like the bikies on SFappeal