=v= Kathy Roberts altered some of the wording so as to quote actual parts of Prop. J, and she suggested a few interesting "whereas" clauses at the end. I sent her stuff back to Josh Hart, but it's still early morning and I don't know what he's going to do with it all. At any rate, here's how it looks with those alterations, FWIW. <_Jym_> Resolution Opposing Garage Entrance Inside Golden Gate Park and the Widening of Martin Luther King Dr. to Four Lanes WHEREAS Golden Gate Park is intended to be "designed and managed to afford opportunities for all to experience beauty, tranquility, recreation, and relief from urban pressures" according to the Golden Gate Park Master Plan and WHEREAS the Golden Gate Park Master Plan states that "the order of priority should be to accommodate pedestrians, bicycles and vehicles for the purpose of enjoying the Park" and WHEREAS one of the prime objectives of the Golden Gate Park Master Plan is to "minimize motor vehicle traffic" and WHEREAS the plan approved by the Concourse Authority and the Recreation and Park Commission to widen Martin Luther King Jr. Drive to four lanes will generate additional traffic within the park, as studies have shown that widening roads induces additional traffic* and WHEREAS increasing the number of travel lanes and removing parking along a roadway are generally understood by traffic engineering experts to increase vehicle speeds** and WHEREAS a widened MLK Dr. would be more dangerous for bicyclists because traffic speeds would increase without the provision of bike lanes, forcing cyclists to share a narrow lane with garage, Muni and right-turning traffic onto Middle Drive East and Academy Drive and WHEREAS the Golden Gate Park Master Plan dictates that "when modifications are made to park roads, the minimum travel lane width should be 16' (12' plus 4' for bikes)" yet the outside lanes in the plan for MLK would only be 12' and WHEREAS a widened MLK Dr. would have negative repercussions on park users, especially seniors, disabled, and small children, who would have to now cross 4 lanes of vehicular traffic, particularly dangerous when an intersection is only stop sign controlled, as intersections at 9th and MLK, Middle Dr. E and MLK, and Academy Dr. and MLK and Tea Garden Drive and MLK and WHEREAS a widened MLK would negatively affect the large and diverse commercial interests of the Inner Sunset, represented by the Inner Sunset Merchants Association, by worsening already gridlocked traffic conditions and WHEREAS a widened MLK would significantly add to the delay of transit in the Inner Sunset area, including the vital service provided by the N-Judah light rail line, the 44 O'Shaughnessy, and the 71 Noriega and WHEREAS the Concourse Authority's plan to widen MLK does not satisfy the Judge's order to provide a "dedicated entrance to the garage" as the word "dedicated" is defined as "set aside for special use," and the garage access lanes would be used by other vehicles without an intended destination to the garage and WHEREAS Proposition J, approved by voters in 1998, orders the Concourse Augthority to design "an entrance and exit (or entrances and exits) situated outside of the Park and dedicated exclusively for the underground parking facility," and the Authority has ignored this voter mandate prohbiting a second entrance inside the park, and Judge James Warren of the San Francisco Superior Court has ruled that the design of the second entrance within the park is illegal and WHEREAS locating an entrance to the parking garage in the middle of the Park will attract drivers into the Park, in violation of Prop. J's mandate that the design of the entrances "minimize the potential conflict between recreational enthusiasts and automobile traffic within the Park" and WHEREAS promotional materials and ballot arguments for Prop. J gave the strong impression that the Concourse would be closed to motor vehicles, and autos accessing the underground garage would be separated from recreational users of the Park in order to achieve a "pedestrian oasis" and WHEREAS numerous community leaders endorsed Prop. J, believing that garage proponents would hold true to the letter and spirit of the law, resulting in a park where the impact of the automobile is reduced while access for all is improved and WHEREAS many of those same community leaders have now joined the coalition opposing the entrance inside the Park and the widening of MLK and WHEREAS the new De Young museum is slated to open in October of 2005, and will attract hundreds of thousands of new visitors to the Park, while the only significant transportation improvements have been auto-related, which will result in unnecessary vehicle trips to the Park, directly undermining the Golden Gate Park Master Plan and WHEREAS the public process that has been led by the Concourse Authority in planning the new Music Concourse and surrounding area has been marked by a refusal to incorporate or consider comments from businesses and residents surrounding the Park, or from bicycle, pedestrian, and environmental protection groups and WHEREAS ยง 4.113 of the San Francisco City Charter requires Board of Supervisor approval of any nonrecreational substructure under a public park and WHEREAS MLK would be widened to create a dedicated entrance to the garage and WHEREAS the Supervisors have not yet approved this part of the overall plan THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED THAT The undersigned San Francisco organizations and individuals request that the Board of Supervisors and the Mayor step in and stop the construction of the second entrance to the garage as well as the planned widening of Martin Luther King Jr. Drive. * citation of studies to come