Looking east at the new crosswalk on the north side of Market Street. Photo: Aaron Bialick

The SFMTA opened a new crosswalk this week along Market Street across the three-way intersection with 14th and Church Streets, eliminating the need for people to cross in a longer two-step phase. The crosswalk, which comes as part of the ongoing Church and Duboce Track Improvement Project, was installed along with a new right-turn vehicle signal to create a safe window in the traffic sequence for pedestrians to cross.

But Streetsblog reader Joel Franquist says he witnessed the aftermath of a car crash which he believes was caused by a flaw in the new traffic signal sequence, and he’s concerned that it will continue to create a risky situation for people walking, biking, and driving through the intersection:

The new right turn arrow is for drivers turning off Market to go west on 14th St. (or north on Church). These drivers used to go with the with the rest of the traffic on Market, which meant there was a 10-second gap before Church got the green (during which drivers going east on 14th got the green light). Now these cars proceed immediately before the cars on Church do. There are actually a lot of these cars because 14th leads directly to Roosevelt and destinations such as Ashbury Heights.

I started observing the intersection [Thursday] around 4:30 pm, and noticed that just about EVERY time the light turns green for Church, there are still cars crossing Church headed for 14th on the new arrow light. Often these cars are still on the other side of Church when the light changes. Everyone on Church — drivers, pedestrians, bicyclists — doesn’t have a good view of these cars coming off Market, especially if they are behind a J that’s boarding passengers.

The new crosswalk (not shown) connects corners along the north side of Market Street, completing the triangle across both 14th and Church. The new right-turn signal controls westbound vehicle traffic along Market turning right onto Church or 14th. Image: Google Maps

It was easy to predict that there would be an accident if someone going southbound on Church simply went without looking when the light changed green. And sure enough, when I went out again around 6, there had been exactly this type of accident. A car coming south on Church had broadsided a car headed toward 14th. The car that was hit happened to be a UCSF Police car. The accident caused closure of 14th Westbound and one land of Church southbound, backups on all three streets, and a re-route of the 37 bus.

The problem is a dangerous one and will result in more accidents if not fixed. The new timing is especially dangerous for bicyclists and pedestrians coming south on Church and crossing 14th St., or for bicyclists headed for 14th with the right turn arrow. If the UCSF Police car had been a bicyclist, the rider would probably be dead, and it would not be his or her fault.

It’s true that drivers who end up blocking Church mostly enter the intersection on the yellow or red arrow. But they are encouraged to chance it because the light only lasts ten seconds. And when the problem happens nearly EVERY time the light cycles, then the timing needs to be changed. Also, it can happen to a driver who goes on the green, if the car in front of them is turning into Church and is delayed by pedestrians legally crossing Church.

You might be wondering what the change was supposed to accomplish. Well, the change means that pedestrians crossing 14th can now proceed most of the time, instead only when Church has the light. And the city opened a new crosswalk that allows pedestrians to cross both 14th an Church on one light, instead of having to wait for two lights. (The new crosswalk couldn’t previously exist because it would not have been safe at any time.) So the new setup is more pedestrian-friendly (at least if cars obey the lights).

There were also numerous cases this evening of drivers simply running the right turn arrow while red, and pedestrians crossing Market stepping in front of the cars turning off Market onto 14th. However, much of that will presumably lessen as regular users of the intersection become used to the changes. And some of that confusion also predates the changes. It’s a complicated intersection, and will always confuse some people.

SFMTA spokesperson Paul Rose said the agency “will continue to monitor the situation and make any necessary adjustments.”

Have you visited the intersection since the change? Share your observations in the comments.

One section of the faltered plan for Second Street. Image: SFDPW

A plan for streetscape improvements on Second Street has faltered after the city agencies overseeing it neglected to implement them before dedicated funds expired.

The project that won’t receive the funds is a package including bike lanes, pedestrian safety improvements, and road repaving on Second Street between Market and King Streets.

The San Francisco Board of Supervisors, acting as the SF County Transportation Authority (SFCTA) Board, approved a measure today redistributing the expiring $4.8 million in federal funds to three other projects in order to avoid forfeiting them.

The Department of Public Works (DPW) and the SFMTA “failed to steer the project toward successful implementation,” states a memo from DPW Director Mohammed Nuru and SFMTA Director of Transportation Ed Reiskin to Jane Kim, supervisor of District 6, which includes Second Street. “While we are deeply disappointed that the project has stalled at this juncture, we want to assure you that both DPW and SFMTA are dedicated to implementing this project in the near future.”

The SFCTA, which oversees transportation financing in San Francisco, approved the funds in 2010 from a federal Congestion Management Agency Block Grant. That grant was awarded on the condition that it be spent by February 1, 2012.

But in what the SFCTA called a “surprise,” the SFMTA and DPW failed to meet that deadline after a series of communication breakdowns between the agencies. The SFCTA board called today’s special last-minute hearing to vote on a new plan to divert the funds.

According to an SFCTA document [PDF], $3.4 million of the diverted funds will go to the Cesar Chavez Streetscape Improvement Project, $948,200 to the Two-Way Haight Street Project, and $529,815 to add overhead SFGo signs on Second Street — a program aimed at facilitating wayfinding for drivers which has faced criticism for making city streets look more like freeways.

The memo details a long sequence of bureaucratic tangles, including the agencies’ failure to finish revising plans for the bike lanes on Second in response to public feedback. The bike lanes are one of 11 SF Bike Plan projects not initially greenlighted by the SFMTA Board of Directors. The SFMTA’s project revisions stalled in 2009, and DPW’s project manager was not aware the bike lanes have not been legislated.

Biking and walking advocates said that regardless of the merit of the projects now receiving the funding, the redistribution sets a dangerous precedent for protecting dedicated funds.

“While it’s a relief that city leaders are committing to advance critical pedestrian and bicycle safety improvements on Second Street, we are still deeply concerned that nearly $5 million could almost fall through the cracks,” said Leah Shahum, executive director of the San Francisco Bicycle Coalition. “This should be an urgent wake-up call that city leaders must do a better job of prioritizing pedestrian and bicycle projects and working together for safer streets. As someone who worked hard to pass the [Proposition B] streets bond last fall, I worry about the city’s readiness to deliver on tens of millions of dollars of pedestrian and bicycle projects that people are clamoring for.”

Staffers from the three agencies said they were working on a new plan to fund the Second Street project, which may now cost as much as $8 million, “depend[ing] on the desired level of bike improvements that come out of the planning phase,” according to the memo. Potential funding sources include the Prop B street improvements bond, Proposition AA (a local vehicle license fee), and the federal One Bay Area Grant. Staff said they are continuing the public outreach process, and the new timeline sets project completion at no sooner than 2015.

“This isn’t about picking one project over the other,” said Walk SF President Manish Champsee. “However, I do think there is a contract, if you will, between public agencies and the public, that when the public is promised something such as pedestrian safety and walkability improvements, that those improvements do get made.”

A "stripped down" version of the street plan showing the basic geometry of changes planned on Jefferson Street between Jones and Hyde. See full PDF here. Image: SF Planning Department

As the plan to revamp the public realm on Jefferson Street in Fisherman’s Wharf develops, planners recently announced that two blocks of the project could be brought to life by summer of 2013 in time for America’s Cup.

At a recent public meeting, staff from the San Francisco Planning Department’s City Design Group presented the latest designs for the Fisherman’s Wharf Public Realm Plan. Some changes have been made from concept designs presented as late as last year, including the decision to rescind a proposal for a curb-less “shared street” where cars are allowed, but people are granted priority. Instead, the project will feature curbs as conventional streets do, though it won’t include curbside car parking.

Despite the change, the project is still intended to transform Jefferson into a “beautiful, lively and memorable street that strengthens the identity of Fisherman’s Wharf,” planner Neil Hrushowy told the San Francisco Chronicle:

The work will include adding 15 feet to the sidewalk along the water side of the street, where visitors now must wend their way past crab stands, street vendors, entertainers and outdoor dining tables that take up much of the walkway.

On the other side of Jefferson Street, current plans call for the removal of parking meters, trees and other sidewalk obstacles.

The biggest changes will be to the street itself. The wider sidewalk will mean a narrower roadway, with no street parking and traffic limited to two 11-foot-wide lanes. For the first time in decades, Jefferson will be opened to two-way traffic, dramatically slowing the cars and trucks and making the road safer for cyclists and pedestrians.

“This is a way to show San Francisco as a model for a pedestrian-priority city,” said Walk SF Executive Director Elizabeth Stampe. “I look forward to more projects like this throughout the city to benefit residents as well as visitors.”

Restoring two-way vehicle traffic on Jefferson and Hyde Streets is another one of the main differences compared to previous designs, along with maintaining the current streetcar alignment and shelving restrictions on private autos, according to the Planning Department’s presentation from the meeting [PDF].

The rationale for the changes, the department says, is to “simplify the design, improve bicycle safety, calm the street, increase [the] flexibility of circulation, minimize cost,” and speed up the timeline.

Construction is being expedited on the project’s first phase between Jones and Hyde Streets — two of the five blocks in the project scope — to greet the hundreds of thousands of additional visitors expected for the America’s Cup yacht races next summer. Work on those blocks doesn’t include the rail tracks and overhead wires for the F-Line streetcars, making it “the easiest, quickest way to get the project in the ground and demonstrate the plan to the community,” Hrushowy told the Chronicle.

“I think it’s important to have projects like this in extremely visible places,” noted Stampe, who said she hopes the city will also consider piloting wayfinding signs in the area to help visitors be aware of how quickly they can walk to various destinations.

As for the rest of the project, no timeline has been set yet, but it will require finding an additional $7.5 million in funding on top of the $5 million identified for the first phase, according to the Chronicle.

Planners are consulting with merchants as they finalize the plans for details like street furniture, pavement, and lighting. Those are set to be presented at another community meeting later this month. Construction is scheduled to begin in October.

Jefferson Street as it looks today. Photo: SF Planning Department

A rendering of a previous proposal for a "shared street". The project will still look similar this, but will include differences like curbs separating the roadway from the sidewalks. Image: SF Planning Department

San Francisco's first green bike box installed along with a left-turn bike lane on Scott Street two years ago. Photo: SFBC/Flickr

As bicycle traffic increases along the Wiggle, improved crosswalks and other potential traffic-calming measures could help assuage complaints police say they’ve heard from some residents that stop sign violators are making it a less comfortable place to walk. Though no significant bike-pedestrian crashes are known to have been reported, police have begun stepping up enforcement in the area against people on bikes (and drivers, they say) who officers determine to be running stop signs and red lights.

“That’s not going to solve the problem,” says Morgan Fitzgibbons, co-founder of the Wigg Party, a group focused on promoting environmental sustainability in the neighborhoods around the Wiggle. He said rude or dangerous behavior is limited to a minority of bicycle riders, and while an education and outreach initiative on the streets would be a good idea, the root of the problem is that “these streets are simply designed for cars.”

Current stop sign laws, pointed out Fizgibbons, are tailored for car movement. While Idaho has allowed bicycle riders in that state to treat stop signs as yield signs with positive results for nearly 30 years, California requires both bicyclists and drivers to come to a full stop. Advocates say the Idaho approach — which still requires bicyclists to slow down and yield to others who have the right-of-way — simply legitimizes common practice, since people on bikes can safely negotiate smaller intersections like those on the Wiggle without the need for a full stop, while also clarifying expectations between different users.

“If you start designing the streets for the use that it actually receives, then you’re going to engender an attitude of respect from cyclists,” said Fitzgibbons. “I think when you start making the Wiggle a known place [for bicycles], and create that identity around the Wiggle, then you can start holding the cyclists who use it to a higher standard.”

Last September, SFMTA planners looking to transform the Wiggle into a more walkable, liveable, and bikeable place sought inspiration from Dutch planners, who in recent decades have pioneered and refined street designs to safely accommodate people on foot, on bikes, and in cars.

Waller Street at Steiner on the Wiggle, where a temporary bike corral was installed for display in late 2009. Photo: SFBC/Flickr

During the two-day ThinkBike workshops, planners took a ride along three of the city’s main bike corridors: Market Street, Polk Street, and the Wiggle. Drawing on Dutch expertise, the groups sketched conceptual re-imaginings of the streets and listed recommendations for a more pedestrian- and bike-friendly environment. This year will see the first of those ideas [PDF] implemented on the Wiggle.

In the coming months, the SFMTA plans to install “green-backed” sharrows (seen already on Market Street at Van Ness) and continental crosswalks (a.k.a. “zebra-striped” — one was installed along Steiner last year) along the route from Steiner to Scott Streets, states an SFMTA report [PDF] submitted to the SF Bicycle Advisory Committee last week. The report also mentions that “wayfinding and traffic engineering improvements to the Market/Duboce/Buchanan intersection are under consideration.” The critical bikeway link on Fell and Oak Streets, connecting the Wiggle to the pathway on the Panhandle, will also come next winter — a few months sooner than recently reported — according to an SFMTA presentation.

"Green-backed" sharrows, also called "super sharrows", will be painted along the Wiggle in the coming months, the SFMTA says. Photo: Bryan Goebel

Come summer, the Church and Duboce Track Improvement project is expected to be completed with an exclusive green bike “channel” on Duboce near the Church intersection, connected by paint markings guiding bike riders across rail tracks in the intersection, said SFMTA planners. Green-backed sharrows will also be installed on Duboce to complement the others, and other improvements include new lighting, wider sidewalks and boarding islands, greening, new pavement treatments, sculptures, and more.

The San Francisco Bicycle Coalition “looks forward to immediate and longer-term improvements to the Wiggle, a critical biking pathway and a wonderfully vibrant residential and commercial area,” said deputy director Kit Hodge. “Communities in the Duboce Triangle, Lower Haight, Alamo Square Area have been making piece-meal improvements to the Wiggle area for years, which has improved local commercial corridors and enhanced the experience for those walking and biking.”

“The creative energy and desires for art and greening can be joined with long-supported traffic calming in the neighborhood to create an improved large-scale neighborhood — starting right now.”

Measures like raised and more-visible crosswalks, bulb-outs, reduced car traffic, and other traffic calming improvements could help make walking across streets on the Wiggle more comfortable. But until they come, police seem to be targeting behaviors that aren’t necessarily the most dangerous, particularly when compared to the danger from drivers. Bicycle commuter Stuart Krengel said he and a friend were ticketed by an officer last week for a stop sign violation while making a right turn onto Pierce Street from eastbound Page Street.

A rendering of Duboce at Church Street after the completion of the Track Improvement Project expected this summer. Image: RHAA via SFMTA

The officer, according to Krengel, told the riders they were required to put their foot down at the stop sign. ”We made a safe right turn, and got made an example of,” said Krengel, who claimed the officer dodged questions about the legitimacy of the citation and seemed unfamiliar with the Wiggle, but said police would be targeting stop sign violations there for six weeks. On Market Street, police were also spotted today “running a sting on cyclists running red lights,” according to a report from Uptown Almanac.

SFPD spokesperson Albie Esparza denied that police were targeting bicyclists for any particular period of time. “There is enforcement because of complaints from the community that bicyclists are running red lights, not stopping at stop signs,” he said. “It’s a safety effort. We want to make sure that people are aware that they can get a citation for not obeying the rules of the road.”

The SF Bicycle Coalition, said Hodge, believes “there shouldn’t be any question: pedestrian safety always comes first.” At the same time, the organization continues “to work with the city to prioritize the enforcement of the most dangerous behavior from all road users, ensuring that our streets are safe for everyone,” she said. ”We’re excited to see the city putting energy into this vibrant corridor, where a huge and growing number of people are biking and walking.”

The ThinkBike sketch of Scott Street between Page and Oak.

While Page and Pierce — the corner where Krengel was ticketed — isn’t technically on the Wiggle, Scott Street (one block over) could benefit from concepts sketched at ThinkBike. Many drivers and bicycle commuters move quickly through the somewhat wide intersection of Scott and Page, which lies next to a slope on Page — another popular bike route.

To calm Scott, ThinkBike planners recommended redesigning it as a “slow shared street” which doesn’t separate bikes and cars, but deters cut-through motor traffic and slows speeds using features like wider sidewalks with chicanes, more greening, and a planted traffic circle in the intersection (an idea that has been tried unsuccessfully on Page before).

Plans to implement the more substantial recommendations have yet to surface, but Fitzgibbons says the ThinkBike workshops and the initial projects coming out of it are encouraging. Still, he’ll wait until they’re on the ground before declaring progress.

“There’s often a gap between the good intentions of many people who work [at the SFMTA] and the implementation,” said Fitzgibbons. “What you end up having is a political leadership — namely the mayor, and on down from there — who instead of wanting to do the right thing and improving the city, they’re more concerned with taking everybody’s temperature.”

“When that’s your goal, you’re always going to run into people who aren’t on board. If that’s your tactic, you’re never going to get anything done.”

The SFMTA plans to implement guideway markings recommended at Duboce and Church Street.

A sketch of the intersection at Duboce, Steiner, and Sanchez Streets drawn by planners at ThinkBike.

An SFMTA report says staff is considering "wayfinding and traffic engineering improvements to the Market/Duboce/Buchanan intersection," where the gateway to the Wiggle lies.

"Bulb-outs", or curb extensions, like this one at 7th Avenue and Irving Street could be installed more easily under a new proposal. Image: Google Maps

The proposal, sponsored by Supervisor Scott Weiner and Mayor Ed Lee, was moved forward by the SF Board of Supervisors Land Use and Economic Development Committee today. It would streamline the bureaucratic process for building sidewalk extensions (a.k.a. “bulb-outs”) — a street design tool often used by planners to calm motor traffic, improve pedestrian visibility and comfort, and ease transit boardings at stops — by eliminating an outdated requirement for changes to sidewalk widths less than one block long to be approved by the Board of Supervisors.

“This will be a significant improvement in our process in terms of making our city more pedestrian-friendly and safer for pedestrians, improving the vibrancy of our commercial districts, and creating more public space that is not for cars, but rather for people,” said Wiener.

“Upon adoption of the Better Streets Plan, we’ve seen more and more projects come through for minor sidewalk changes such as corner bulb-outs for individual projects that don’t exceed one linear block,” said Nick Elsner of the SF Department of Public Works (DPW), the primary agency responsible for implementing sidewalk extensions. ”This would greatly expedite and make the process much more efficient.”

According to legislative documents [PDF], the proposal would amend an ordinance passed in 1910 requiring project approval from supervisors, which “result[s] in a very lengthy process and often lead[s] to project delays.” It would also establish a speedier approval process for the SF Planning Department, but projects would still need to be approved by other affected agencies like the SFMTA. The change would save the DPW an estimated $2,500 in processing costs for a block of construction, said spokesperson Gloria Chan, and the SF Planning Department would save about $1,375 in reviews.

Bulb-outs, the documents note, are an important tool in pursuing the city’s goals of improving the pedestrian environment. Stephen Shotland of the Planning Department said the proposal is intended “to be able to move projects forward that really are consistent with the General Plan and consistent with the adopted Better Streets Plan,” which, along with several neighborhood plans cited in the documents, call for improvements like widening congested sidewalks, minimizing crossing distances, and discouraging high-speed car traffic on local streets. “Staff would be able to review projects to make sure that, in fact, is the case,” said Shotland.

The proposal passed the committee today without objection and is expected to go before the full board in the coming weeks.

At Walk San Francisco’s big member bash last month, Mayor Ed Lee celebrated San Francisco becoming the first big city in the state to take swift action to make neighborhoods safer for kids to walk to school by implementing 15 mile per hour zones at 60 schools out of 180 to come.

Mayor Lee speaks at a Walk to School Day press conference in October. Photo: Marianne Szeto

“We will, in our lifetimes, get to zero” pedestrian deaths, declared the Mayor, calling for “experimenting out of the box with every possible idea to make streets safer.”

The mayor set a bold vision for San Francisco, and an “out of the box” approach may be just what we need to reach it. But to stand by his commitment, Mayor Lee must provide the leadership our city needs to make smart, immediate investments to improve pedestrian safety in 2012.

Over half of the city’s serious and fatal pedestrian crashes occur on just 7 percent of the city’s streets, according to the Mayor’s Pedestrian Safety Task Force, which started work last year on former Mayor Gavin Newsom’s December 2010 Executive Directive on Pedestrian Safety [PDF].

That finding can provide critical guidance for the city to effectively direct its resources — from traffic enforcement to street redesigns — to save the most lives. Streets that are safer and more pleasant to walk on, research has shown, also tend to increase home values and benefit the bottom line for local businesses and city coffers.

We have the funds available to invest in safer streets. San Francisco voters in 2010 approved Prop AA, a vehicle license fee that helps fund pedestrian safety improvements, as well as last fall’s Prop B, which provides $50 million in bonds for both walking and biking.

As Mayor Lee begins his first full term in 2012, here are a few key initiatives he can take to save lives and help boost the economy:

Half of the city's serious and fatal pedestrian crashes occur on 7 percent of its streets. Image: SFDPH

• Create a Pedestrian Action Plan to fix 10 miles of streets per year. New York City has committed to improving pedestrian safety on 60 miles of streets per year, and San Francisco can set similar goals. The Better Streets Plan was a good start, but it lacked any commitment by the city to implement it. How much will the city do, and how soon? What can city agencies do to reduce the costs and time it takes to calm motor traffic and widen sidewalks?If Mayor Lee is serious about pedestrian safety, he will set clear goals for delivering the better streets our city has been promised for so long.

• Pilot low-cost projects to fix the worst streets. It’s time for a new approach to fixing our most dangerous streets with the haste we need. Mayor Lee can support low-cost pilot projects to make quick and visible changes by scaling up the parklet-and-plaza approach — let’s see what happens if we paint SoMa’s high-speed arterials to look less like freeways, install a parklet along an entire block, and put planters on street corners to make crossings safer. This week’s pilot project to reappropriate car parking lanes for pedestrian space on Stockton Street in Chinatown during the Chinese New Year is an excellent example of a way to support the local economy and improve the pedestrian experience.
• Enforce the laws that keep people safe. San Francisco police are now systematically enforcing the new 15 mph speed limits around schools, but we need to expand this strategy citywide to target the most dangerous behaviors like speeding and red-light running. Mayor Lee must work with the Police Chief Suhr and District Attorney Gascón to make it clear to the public that endangering others will not be tolerated.
• Make Sunday Streets a part of the city landscape. Sunday Streets is a proven success, and it shouldn’t just be a pilot anymore. It’s more than a street fair, more than an event — it transforms car-dominated streets into public space and provides health benefits that outweigh the costs of running the program. Mayor Lee can show his pride in Sunday Streets by making it a permanent and regular part of the city landscape that residents can rely on. San Franciscans should be able to know that on Sundays throughout spring, summer, and fall, they won’t have to worry about cars on streets like 24th in the Mission, Grant in Chinatown and North Beach, or the Great Highway along Ocean Beach.
• Use the America’s Cup “People’s Plan” to make the streets work better for people. This is the year to show the world that San Francisco has smart alternatives to snarled traffic. Let’s put up wayfinding signs showing how long it will take to walk to the water. Let’s finally really get rid of the Embarcadero Freeway by providing more room for people to enjoy the waterfront on foot or by bike. Let’s expedite transformative projects like the Fisherman’s Wharf Public Realm Plan and reserve some streets exclusively for walking — who knows, we might like it so much, we’ll never go back.

Mayor Lee knows that improving streets can make the city thrive. Getting Prop B passed was a great start; now it’s time to walk the walk and use it wisely.

Image: Great Streets Project

The 2011 Parklet Impact Study [PDF], released yesterday by the SF Great Streets Project, measures changes in pedestrian volumes and activity at three new parklets built last year. The study, which also includes pedestrian surveys and business surveys, calls to mind the public space analysis of pioneering urbanist William H. Whyte, who recorded usage patterns of New York City plazas in the 1970s.

Comparing sites on Valencia, Stockton (in North Beach), and Polk Streets before and after parklets were installed, the authors found higher rates of “stationary activities” at all three locations. None of the businesses reported a drop in customers due to the removal of curbside parking. Basically, the Great Streets Project has quantified how carving out new public spaces from parking spots makes for a more sociable city.

Here are the key findings listed in the report:

Average foot traffic on Stockton Street increased 44% from 304 to 438 people per hour after the parklet was installed. However, there was no significant change in foot traffic at the Valencia Street and Polk Street locations.

The number of people stopping to engage in stationary activities significantly increased at all three locations, especially on weekdays. The greatest increase was on Polk Street where the average nearly tripled from four to 11 people at any given time.

There was also an incremental increase in the number of bikes parked in each location.

The results of the pedestrian survey varied greatly by location. While perception of the area as a good place for socializing and fun increased on Valencia and Polk Streets increased, it decreased on Stockton Street. Perception of the area as a place that looks clean increased on Polk and Stockton Streets, but decreased on Valencia Street.

Although only one of the seven businesses that replied to the business survey observed that customer levels had increased after a parklet was installed, none had observed a decrease in their customer levels.

Five of the seven businesses observed that most of their customers are primarily from the surrounding neighborhood and arrive to their establishment by foot.

None of the businesses reported significant concerns about the parklet regarding loss of nearby street parking or other impacts on their business.

A raised crosswalk and landscaped sidewalk bulb-outs now grace the entrance of this block of Newcomb Avenue. Photo: SFDPW/Flickr

After a six-year-long process, residents of Newcomb Avenue in the Bayview joined city staffers yesterday to mark the completion of the “Model Block” project, a prototype for street design that’s better for the environment and more conducive to neighborhood life.

The block had been characterized by speeding traffic and illegal dumping. With this redesign it should be a safer, more sociable street thanks to the addition of landscaped chicanes, sidewalk bulb-outs, 20 new street trees, raised crosswalks, and other traffic calming improvements. The new landscaped surfaces will absorb rainfall and prevent stormwater from overloading the sewer system.

“To see the finished project, something this great in the Bayview, is unbelievable!” said Newcomb resident Mardina Graham in a press release from the Department of Public Works. “I have lived in the neighborhood all my life and have never seen anything like this before, perhaps in other neighborhoods yes, but not here.”

Residents will organize community cleanup days to keep the street “clean and green,” according to DPW, while the performance of the new stormwater treatment facilities — projected to reduce runoff by half — will be monitored by the city.

Landscaped chicanes along the curbs are designed to slow drivers. Photo: SFDPW/Flickr

See more photos after the break.

Newcomb Avenue before the redesign in May during a press conference for the project's groundbreaking. Photo: Aaron Bialick

Photo: SFDPW/Flickr

Department of Public Works Director Mohammed Nuru speaks with neighbors, the mayor, Supervisor Mali Cohen, and other city staffers at a ribbon-cutting ceremony yesterday. Photo: SFDPW/Flickr

Photo: SFDPW/Flickr

Images: MTC

For more than 15 years, bicycle advocates in San Francisco and the East Bay have pushed for a west span path to connect bike commuters to the east span path expected to open between Oakland to Yerba Buena Island by 2014.

“We’re very encouraged that Caltrans and the Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) have come up with a design that works for the west span and the touchdown on either end,” said Dave Campbell, the program director for the East Bay Bicycle Coalition.

“This new study not only affirms the feasibility and benefits of the pathway, it also puts this important project in line for funding,” said San Francisco Bicycle Coalition Executive Director Leah Shahum. “Now, the city and the region are showing their commitment to connect not only the East Bay and San Francisco, but also San Francisco’s own neighborhoods, which is critical as Treasure Island is developed. This is an exciting step for a much-needed bridge between communities.”

The project would still take up to ten years to plan and construct once the estimated $500 to $550 million in funding is secured, said John Goodwin, spokesperson for the MTC, which manages regional transportation funding. Last night’s presentation of the project study report, funded by toll revenue, was just one step in developing the project initiation document, expected to be completed next summer, which will allow agencies to begin the funding search. After that, roughly five years of planning and five years of construction lie ahead.

The study report “shows that the project is possible, but not that it’s affordable,” said Goodwin.

While the cost has risen about $200 million from its original 2001 estimate, potential transbay bike commuter Tina Crawford pointed out to KTVU today that “we spend a lot more on transportation options for cars so I think it’s about time we offer this alternative and have a showcase for bike commuting in the Bay Area.”

Despite the lengthy project timeline, advocates praised MTC Executive Director Steve Heminger for helping to push reluctant engineers and staff to take on the daunting design and funding challenges.

Engineers from Caltrans and the Bay Area Toll Authority last night presented a number of possible ways [PDF] to connect the path to downtown San Francisco and the bridge’s east span across Yerba Buena Island. The impact of the additional weight would also have to be mitigated, possibly by counter-weights and shortening the suspension cables, they said.

In downtown San Francisco, the west end of the path would have to navigate around the existing off-ramp as well as buildings and other planned developments, but engineers presented several possible configurations. The ramp could land bike riders and pedestrians in parks planned for the areas near the highway offramp, or on the short and narrow Lansing Street. One proposal would even connect to the roof of the planned Transbay Terminal, where stairs and elevators would provide the only way down. In any case, ADA requirements would mean the path would have to avoid including steep slopes and narrow passages.

On Yerba Buena, planners must also determine the best way to connect the east and west spans of the bridges by navigating the island’s terrain. Nine alternatives had already been considered and put aside, including a path suspended through the bridge tunnel above motor traffic, due to reasons including the lack of right-of-way, poor user experience, and interference with Coast Guard operations.

Advocates and officials said they plan to begin searching for funding after the project initiation document is completed and a preferred alternative is chosen next summer.

One proposal for a downtown off-ramp.

Another proposal includes two variations that would land the ramp adjacent to a planned dog park.

One proposal for the connection on Yerba Buena Island.

The project schedule.

An artist's representation of what streetscape improvements to 21st Avenue could look like.

When San Franciscans voted to fix crumbling streets by approving Proposition B, they also approved nearly $90 million for pedestrian, bike, and transit projects. It will give certain Muni lines the power to change traffic signals, and pay for sidewalk improvements and bike lanes.

“Prop B gives us the opportunity to really catch up on our streets—not just fixing potholes, but actually making the streets better from an urban design perspective,” said Gabriel Metcalf, executive director of SPUR.

Elizabeth Stampe, executive director of Walk SF, said the value of these projects will make the borrowing worthwhile. “These are exactly the kind of investments that it makes sense to use a bond for,” she said. “They are long-term improvements that will improve the safety and walkability of our streets.”

Much of the money is assigned to specific projects, but the largest chunk—$50 million—will be divvied up through a political process. This money could be used to stripe bike lanes, plant trees, install new lights, or otherwise improve streetscapes. Planners will be holding meetings in 2012 to determine where this pot of funding should go.

“I think the biggest opportunities for pedestrian improvements are on the neighborhood commercial streets,” Metcalf said. “These are the central places within every neighborhood in the city, the places where activity is concentrated and where we want to create a truly comfortable and inviting public realm.”

The San Francisco Bicycle Coalition will be advocating for money to go to dedicated bike lanes, said Executive Director Leah Shahum. “They are proven to draw more people onto bikes, improve safety, and connect neighborhoods with real, low-cost, bang for your buck,” she said, before reeling off a list of streets where a little money could go a long way: Masonic Avenue, Jefferson Street near Fisherman’s Warf, Polk Street, the Embarcadero, Ocean and Geneva Avenues. “This is just a partial list,” she said. “Obviously there’s not enough money to do everything.”

The funding has the potential to save lives. More than half of pedestrian deaths and severe injuries occur on just 6.7 percent of streets by length, noted Tom Radulovich, head of Livable City. “I don’t want to miss that opportunity. As they move through the city, any time the resurfacing touches on of that 6.7 percent, we should be making improvements.”

The rest of the $90 million, beyond the $50 million for streetscapes, breaks down as follows:

• $20.3 million for Muni signal priority: Stoplights will be programmed to sense approaching Muni vehicles and turn green, said Municipal Transportation Agency representative Paul Rose. “It will give signal priority to our fleet so that when they come to a stoplight they get through faster,” he said. “It will cut travel times and prevent bunching up.” Rose said Muni has not determined which routes will receive this technology first.
• $14 million for pedestrian curb cuts: Pays for the construction of 1,767 new curb ramps to make sidewalks more accessible to wheelchairs, strollers, and those using walkers. Spots that people with disabilities have identified will get top priority.
• $8 million for sidewalk improvements: Flattens sidewalks cracked by age or tree roots.
• $7.3 million for seismic retrofits: This will go to fix concrete that has buckled with movement, and to repair structures (bridges, tunnels, retaining walls, and stairs) that could fail in an earthquake.

Enjoy the Thanksgiving weekend. Streetsblog San Francisco will be back publishing on Monday.

Chris Duderstadt's rendering of a public plaza on display at Irving Street and 10th Avenue. Photo: Aaron Bialick

In the midst of the bustling Inner Sunset Street Fair on Sunday, a canvas on the corner of 10th Avenue and Irving Street re-imagined the street as an inviting, car-free public plaza.

This is just an idea — but it could happen if we wanted it to, read the text accompanying a photo-realistic rendering of a pedestrian plaza on Irving Street between 9th and 10th Avenues.

“I’ve been wanting to do this for about twenty years,” said designer Chris Duderstadt, who lives around the corner on 10th Avenue and has worked on engineering projects in Golden Gate Park. He introduced his vision to the neighborhood for the first time at Sunday’s street fair, the only regular opportunity for the community to use their streets as public spaces.

“Imagine this seven days a week,” said Duderstadt.

The rendering drew a rotating crowd, as groups spent several minutes at a time in front of the canvas discussing what the project could do for the neighborhood. The rest of the paper canvas was covered by written comments reflecting an overwhelmingly positive response.

Photo: Aaron Bialick

“We don’t have anything like this out here,” said Joe Chickos, owner of the block’s Blackthorn Tavern. “[Car] traffic is able to get around this one block easily. It’d help all the merchants on this block and raise everybody’s property value, as well, because it’d make it more of a stop-off destination than just a walk-by.”

The block of Irving between 9th and 10th typically feels more like a parking lot than a commercial street. Although many businesses line the sidewalks, few amenities attract people to linger. Residents can venture into the recreational open spaces of Golden Gate Park, but the plaza would provide a place to meet within the neighborhood itself.

The plaza concept met with an enthusiastic reception from District 5 Supervisor Ross Mirkarimi and neighborhood SFMTA Board member Joél Ramos, who both attended the fair.

“It looks like a place that I want to be all the time,” said Ramos. “Instead of feeling like the corridor stops at Ninth, it extends it.”

"Collision" performs at the street fair at Irving and 9th Ave. Photo: Aaron Bialick

“I think it’s a great idea,” said Mirkarimi, who noted that Sunday’s display is just the beginning of the kind of extensive community process needed for such a project. “Talking this through and having a very open but persistent conversation and getting all the feedback is exactly the best way at arriving at making it happen.”

Duderstadt pointed out that it would require a long-term sponsor on the Board of Supervisors to see it through. Mirkarimi’s supervisor term ends in 2012, and he is currently running for sheriff.

The neighborhood’s first parklet, located on 9th Avenue in front of Arizmendi Bakery, has seen no shortage of visitors since it opened last month. Parklets, said Mirkarimi, can serve as incubators for more expansive reclamations of public space.

“Once you get over the hump of establishing the idea,” he said, “where people can see it and experience it, it becomes less controversial.”

The parklet on 9th Avenue. Photo: Aaron Bialick

Photo: Aaron Bialick

Irving Street at the fair. Photo: Aaron Bialick

Kids play in what's normally a car parking space on 10th Avenue. Photo: Aaron Bialick

More comments on the plaza concept. Photo: Aaron Bialick

William Cox was walking in this crosswalk Tuesday morning, just like this man, when he was run over and killed by an SUV driver. Residents say the intersection of 14th Street and Noe has long been a trouble spot. Photo: Bryan Goebel

On most recent mornings, 59-year-old William Cox walked several blocks from his Mission District apartment to the bustling Peet’s store on Market Street in the Castro for his daily dose of coffee, crossword puzzles and conversation. He had given up his Jeep Cherokee shortly after moving to San Francisco from San Rafael two-and-half years ago and got around mostly on foot and transit. On Tuesday morning, he paid a visit to his best friend, David Douma, who lives across the street from Peet’s.

“Around 9 a.m. he would usually ring my phone to announce he was at my front door, and then he would hang out in my apartment for awhile, every day,” said Douma.

On this day, Cox — known to his friends as Bill — arrived early, around 8:24 a.m., because he was scheduled to help a friend who lives near Ocean Beach move some large musical equipment. It was in his nature, said Douma, to always offer help when a friend needed it. He didn’t stay as long as he usually did, and left a half-cup of coffee behind. Cox then stopped at nearby Rosenberg Deli, Douma later confirmed, before embarking on the four-block walk up Noe Street to catch the N-Judah train.

Sadly, he never made it.

According to San Francisco police, Cox was in the crosswalk on 14th Street at Noe around 10:39 a.m. when he was run over by an unidentified driver behind the wheel of a Ford SUV who had been southbound on Noe, and was making a left turn onto 14th. Cox underwent two operations and despite the best efforts of trauma surgeons at San Francisco General Hospital was pronounced dead at 5:36 p.m., becoming the 10th pedestrian to be killed on the streets of San Francisco this year.

“The surgeons told us that not only was he hit, but he was injured from head to foot. He was completely run over,” said Douma, who was listed as the emergency contact, and spent the afternoon at the hospital with his husband, Claude Wynne, and some of Cox’s roommates and closest friends.

Police said the driver stopped, and cooperated with police, but was not cited or arrested. Details about the driver were not made available.

“We don’t usually release that kind of information,” said SFPD Sgt. Michael Andraychak. The investigator handling the case, Inspector Clifford Cook, would only confirm that the driver was a male and that there were witnesses. He referred Streetsblog’s calls to SFPD public affairs and said he was still in the process of conducting the investigation and it would be up to the District Attorney to decide whether charges would be filed.

‘A Gentle Man’

2008 photo of William Cox courtesy of David Douma and Claude Wynne.

When Douma first met Cox at a bar in SoMa a few years ago “he was coming out of his shell.” As Douma tells it, Cox had been in a long-term relationship with a man suffering from pancreatic cancer and had served as his partner’s full-time caregiver until his death. Cox then decided to move to San Francisco.

Although Cox had a hearing problem and other disabilities, Douma said “he flat out refused to consider himself a handicapped person.” Douma bristled at the suggestion made in some media reports that hearing had anything to do with Cox’s death: “There is no excuse for a left-hand turning vehicle to clobber a pedestrian in the crosswalk.”

Cox wore a small hearing device and “it was amazing what that man could hear with that little thing.” Douma recalled that when he and Cox would go into cafes or bars with loud “boom, boom” music, which he has a very low tolerance for, “Bill would would just reach in his pocket, turn down his device, give me an impish grin and stick his tongue out at me.”

Douma said those who knew Cox, including the regulars and some of the staff at Peet’s, were terribly saddened to hear the news of his death. Gentle was the common word members of the congregation at St. Giles Episcopal Church in Moraga used to describe Cox, who was a volunteer greeter and usher and attended services there on a semi-regular basis, Douma said.

The parish priest said in a newsletter that he was “a gentle spirit who was extraordinarily kind and self-sacrificing ” while a member of the choir described him as “the perfect gentleman.”

Last night, according to Douma, Cox’s two older brothers, Clyde and Darrel, arrived in San Francisco from Hawaii.

A senior (pictured behind the white car) stepped off the curb, and into the crosswalk, but was forced to stop as a driver ignores the pedestrian right-of-way and speeds through the crosswalk. Photo: Bryan Goebel

A Troubled Intersection

Fourteenth Street at Noe is a four-way intersection with stop signs, and sits at the bottom of a hill, surrounded by Victorian homes and apartments, landscaped sidewalks with street furniture and tall trees, and Davies Medical Center. The famed Duboce Park, with its renovated playground, is just one block away, and McKinley Elementary School is a block up the hill at 14th and Castro.

When I visited the intersection yesterday afternoon, I encountered large volumes of walkers that reflected the neighborhood’s diverse population: a group of schoolchildren, medical staff from the hospital, seniors with armfuls of orchids, mothers pushing strollers and neighbors carrying satchels of produce from the Castro Farmer’s Market at Noe and Market. At the same time, I witnessed drivers who blew through the intersection, many talking on their cell phones or texting.

“It’s like everybody’s racing to the next stop sign as fast as they can,” said Emma, a resident who lives near the northeast corner. “It’s stupid. I hear a lot of honking and there’s a lot of traffic.”

According to the SFMTA, the traffic volume on the street is about 4,500 vehicles per day. Many drivers are rushing to the freeway. It’s been a known problem area and residents have been fighting to get traffic calming measures in place, said Peter Cohen, who sits on the board of directors of the Duboce Triangle Neighborhood Association. Although ladder crosswalks were recently striped, something that took several months to get, a frustrated Cohen said a lot more needs to be done.

“I’m pretty grumpy about the whole situation and it’s really tragic that someone was killed because we raised this issue several years ago,” said Cohen, who lives just a half-block down and walks through the intersection daily with his children. “The intersection of 14th and Noe and 14th and Duboce are really pedestrian hazard intersections, and it seems like it’s not even really an issue for the city.”

Drivers like to speed down the hill on 14th Street at Noe.

A group of schoolchildren near the crosswalk where Cox was killed.

Cohen said he pointed out to the SFMTA that there is a lot of high-speed traffic coming down the hill on 14th, and felt as if the agency shunned his requests to implement more traffic calming measures. He suggested removing some of the parking around the intersection to daylight it, and get rid of some of the blind spots that currently exist for drivers.

“How many deaths do we have to see for the city to get serious about committing resources to making it safer to walk?” said Elizabeth Stampe, the executive director of Walk San Francisco. “Drivers frequently fail to stop at 14th. It runs like a mini-freeway through a quiet neighborhood. We know how to calm these streets and save lives. The city needs to commit to fixing a certain number of miles of these dangerous streets every year.”

For Douma, and Cox’s close circle of friends, the sadness is mixed with anger. Douma, who used to live on 14th Street and said he was “almost clobbered by drivers a few times,” is furious the driver wasn’t arrested.

“Just on the basis of the fact that that vehicle hit and ran over Bill, the driver should have been detained and arrested on suspicion of vehicular manslaughter, and sort it out later,” he said. “By not detaining that driver now there’s the window of not taking responsibility for one’s actions.”

“And I’m not a conservative,” Douma continued, “I’m a bloody bleeding heart liberal but there are just some things that have to do with justice and doing right by other people that get triggered when something like this happens, and this is a case.”

The pedestrian environment on eastern Cesar Chavez Street is in desperate need of improvement. Photo: SF Planning Department

New designs have been drawn up for eastern Cesar Chavez Street and will be presented to the community next week, nearly two months after a contentious meeting in which attendees were told, just days before the striping of new bike lanes, that plans for a road diet were being scrapped by the Mayor’s Office and Port of San Francisco because of concerns from industrial businesses about reducing road capacity for trucks hauling goods.

The new designs will not be made public until the August 24 meeting, where options for short-term and long-term plans will be presented. Sources who have seen the designs say the short-term plan does not remove a travel lane like the original plan. Instead, it would remove parking to add one-way protected bike lanes on both the north and south sides. The short-term plan is part of an air quality grant to improve biking and would not change the sidewalks.

“The plan that was going to go out in July was going to put a bike lane between a parking lane and a bunch of trucks,” said Peter Albert, the manager of urban planning initiatives at the SFMTA. “It seems like the low hanging fruit in that whole thing was the on-street parking, so why was on-street parking for basically two dozen spaces so sacrosanct that it was forcing bicyclists to pit themselves against trucks and buses?”

Under the new designs, he said, “the bike experience is much better because you’ve got no parked cars or dooring to the right, you’ve got complete clarity on your path and the trucks don’t have to intersect with you in any way.”

The Problem with Evans

The tricky part is where Cesar Chavez intersects with Evans Avenue and turns from four lanes into five lanes. There are two options for what to do at that hairy intersection in the short-term plan.

The first would get bicyclists through the intersection by removing a westbound lane on a 600-foot stretch of Cesar Chavez just west of Evans and east of Connecticut. That would leave enough room to paint protected bike lanes, and when compared to the original Bike Plan proposal, would slightly improve traffic flow for autos. The less-than-ideal option for the intersection, which is sure to encounter opposition from bicyclists, would not include any bike lanes, and only use sharrows to guide bicyclists through. Walking advocates don’t like this option either, as it leaves no room to widen the woefully inadequate sidewalk pictured above.

The long-term proposals, part of the Eastern Cesar Chavez Community Design Plan — which covers Cesar Chavez from Hampshire to Illinois — offer a better solution. The Planning Department is proposing a cantilevered path to widen Cesar Chavez Street around the Evans Avenue intersection to accommodate a total of 4 lanes of traffic, bike lanes, and sidewalks. They also plan to present proposals for a two-way protected green cycletrack with a six-foot buffer, and another option that would offer one-way protected green bike lanes on the north and south sides with six-foot buffers.

Pedestrians Won’t See Immediate Improvements

This is what pedestrians currently have to contend with on Cesar Chavez near Mississippi. Photo: SF Planning Dept.

The new drawings for short-term options don’t address the skinny sidewalks because, unlike the road diet that was originally envisioned, the eastbound lane on eastern Cesar Chavez would not be removed. Without doing that, there is little room left on the 59-foot wide street to expand the sidewalks and build bike lanes.

Albert said a $79,000 Bay Area Quality Management District grant being used to re-stripe Cesar Chavez isn’t meant to cover widening sidewalks, but the paint will serve “as a footprint of a road we’d like to be much better in the long-term.”

“I’m confident that either one of [the short-term options] is vastly better than what we’re living with right now,” he said.

“The sidewalk has got to be fixed. In the near term, at the bare minimum, the bike lane project should set the stage for improving walking conditions,” said Elizabeth Stampe, the executive director of Walk San Francisco.

Albert said he definitely “wants to revisit with the community this whole idea of a transit line along Cesar Chavez,” and that that’s one reason why removing a traffic lane along the entire stretch doesn’t make sense right now.

Trucks, Private Autos and Pollution

The June community meeting where the audience was told the road diet was being taken off the table failed to directly relay what the underlying issue was:  industrial businesses expressing concerns that reducing road capacity would increase congestion and hurt their bottom line. David Beaupre, a senior planner at the Port of San Francisco, repeated this concern in an interview with Streetsblog yesterday.

“If we start to impact the capacity of Cesar Chavez it’s going to negatively impact the economic opportunities to that part of the city,” he explained. “It’s going to begin to push those types of businesses out of the city, which means, you know, the food distribution, the auto repair shops, the cleaning services, and people are going to have to start driving more to get their services in south city or wherever.”

Beaupre acknowledges, however, that the majority of traffic on Cesar Chavez is not trucks, but private automobiles, but said eliminating a lane could impact the transit option, because”Muni can’t run if there’s only one lane.”

As a general rule, traffic engineers consider 2 percent of all vehicle traffic to be heavy traffic, or trucks and buses. Sources told Streetsblog the SFMTA was currently gathering comprehensive traffic flow data on eastern Cesar Chavez that should give everyone a clearer idea of the traffic make-up. It’s expected to be presented at next week’s meeting.

Beaupre also expressed a concern that reducing the capacity would create more pollution because of idling trucks, and force them to divert onto quieter neighborhood streets in the Bayview. But Peggy da Silva, the educating and training manager at Veritable Vegetable, which is located on Cesar Chavez and uses a fleet of trucks to haul organic produce, said trucks face tighter air control regulations than private automobiles.

“There’s a lack of understanding in the community about trucks. People think, because they’re big, that they pollute more and they don’t necessarily. Professional drivers are also probably less of a risk to people than, you know, your average person driving down the street,” da Silva said.

The project area. Image: SF Planning Dept.

Reducing Private Auto Traffic

Da Silva said the city should prioritize the movement of goods on Cesar Chavez by reducing private vehicle traffic on the street, which would reduce air pollution and the risk of injury and “support the health of our re-emerging industrial sector in Southeast San Francisco.”

“We don’t want the trucks idling. I think that’s an agreement for all of us. Therefore, we need to make sure that the essential vehicles on this street can move,” said da Silva.

Albert, the SFMTA official, called the latest designs breakthroughs, and said he hopes the August 24 meeting can move beyond “pitting trucks against buses against bikes against pedestrians.”

“It gives us the opportunity to pilot a much better environment,” Albert said. “If it works really well, if we manage the congestion, we provide the bikes their protected path, then we can come back with confidence and say this works for the community, everybody likes this better, let’s go back and find the capital funding to make the pedestrian improvements substantial.”

The community meeting on Eastern Cesar Chavez will be held Wednesday, August 24th from 6-8 p.m. in the community room of the Good Samaritan Family Resource Center at 1294 Potrero Avenue. Download the flyer here [pdf].

Market and Kearny and 3rd Streets, 1909. (Photo: San Francisco History Center, SF Public Library)

“Whose Streets? OUR Streets!” yell rowdy demonstrators when they surge off the sidewalk and into thoroughfares. True enough, the streets are our public commons, what’s left of it (along with libraries and our diminishing public schools), but most of the time these public avenues are dedicated to the movement of vehicles, mostly privately owned autos. Other uses are frowned upon, discouraged by laws and regulations and what has become our “customary expectations.” Ask any driver who is impeded by anything other than a “normal” traffic jam and they’ll be quick to denounce the inappropriate use or blockage of the street.

Bicyclists have been working to make space on the streets of San Francisco for bicycling, and to do that they’ve been trying to reshape public expectations about how streets are used. Predictably there’s been a pushback from motorists and their allies, who imagine that the norms of mid-20th century American life can be extended indefinitely into the future. But cyclists and their natural allies, pedestrians, can take heart from a lost history that has been illuminated by Peter D. Norton in his recent book Fighting Traffic: The Dawn of the Motor Age in the American City. He skillfully excavates the shift that was engineered in public opinion during the 1920s by the organized forces of what called itself “Motordom.” Their efforts turned pedestrians into scofflaws known as “jaywalkers,” shifted the burden of public safety from speeding motorists to their victims, and reorganized American urban design around providing more roads and more space for private cars.

Typical street scene in 1909, long before private cars had become a major problem. (Photo: San Francisco History Center, SF Public Library)

For decades, over 40,000 people have died each year in car crashes on the streets of the United States. This daily carnage is utterly normalized to the point that few of us think about it at all, and if we do, it’s like the weather, just a regular part of our environment. But it wasn’t always this way. Back when the private automobile was first beginning to appear on public streets a large majority of the population, including politicians, police, and business leaders, agreed that cars were interlopers and ought to be regulated and subordinated to pedestrians and streetcars.

It’s almost impossible to imagine the speed with which conditions on urban streets changed at the dawn of the motorized era. Here’s a quote from the California Automobile Association’s Motorland magazine in August 1927 describing the rapid growth in car ownership:

In 1895 there were four cars registered, in 1905 there were 77,400 in use, in 1915 the total had risen to 2,309,000, and in 1925 there were 17,512,000 passenger automobiles on the highways, and the total is now in excess of 20,000,000.

Motorland magazine cover, July 1927

With over two million cars clogging city streets in 1915, and death and injury tolls rising, cities took various measures to address the problem (quoting from “Fighting Traffic”):

From 1915 (and especially after 1920), cities tried marking crosswalks with painted lines, but most pedestrians ignored them. A Kansas City safety expert reported that when police tried to keep them out of the roadway, “pedestrians, many of them women” would “demand that police stand aside.” In one case, he reported, “women used their parasols on the policemen.” Police relaxed enforcement.

Pedestrians on Market Street, 1937. (Photo: San Francisco History Center, SF Public Library)

The common usage of the streets by all was considered sacrosanct and attempts by motordom and/or police to regulate people’s use of the streets was widely resisted. Plenty of police didn’t agree that pedestrian behavior should be criminalized on behalf of motoring:

New York police magistrate Bruce Cobb in 1919 defended the “legal right to the highway” of the “foot passenger,” arguing that “if pedestrians were at their peril confined to street corners or certain designated crossings, it might tend to give selfish drivers too great a sense of proprietorship in the highway.” He assigned the responsibility for the safety of the pedestrian—even one who “darts obliquely across a crowded thorofare”—to drivers… By 1916 “jaywalker” was a feature of “police parlance.” Police use modified the word’s meaning and sparked controversy. “Jaywalker” carried the sting of ridicule, and many objected to branding independent-minded pedestrians with the term… The New York Times objected, calling the word “highly opprobrious” and “a truly shocking name.”

Typical of auto industry-sponsored advertising shifting the burden for road safety from motorists to the children who had customarily been able to play in the streets safely. (Motorland magazine)

Anti-jaywalking campaigns came to San Francisco too.

In a 1920 safety campaign, San Francisco pedestrians who thought they were minding their own business found themselves pulled into mocked-up outdoor courtrooms. In front of crowds of onlookers they were lectured on the perils of jaywalking.

In 1941 jaywalking became a topic of interest in local papers, with several images captured of women jaywalking. (Photo: San Francisco History Center, SF Public Library)

Clearly 20 years of anti-jaywalking campaigns in San Francisco and the country as a whole had not convinced people to abandon their customary ways of crossing public streets. (Photo: San Francisco History Center, SF Public Library)

In 1942 this shot at 5th and Market shows the women walking against the signal. (Photo: San Francisco History Center, SF Public Library)

As the 1920s continued, more and more cars were being sold, and the streets were both crowded and contested. Streetcar operators blamed cars for clogging thoroughfares and slowing down their lines, causing late runs and generally inconveniencing passengers. Motorists parked everywhere, jamming curbsides two-deep, when they weren’t weaving through chaotic urban streets. Attempts to regulate and standardize traffic patterns began during this era, with lanes, crosswalks, traffic signals, and parking regulations slowly emerging as “solutions” to the problems created by tens of thousands of private cars filling the streets.

February 3, 1927, Van Ness and Fell Streets, with helpful labels to show what motorists are doing wrong. (Photo: San Francisco History Center, SF Public Library)

More 1927 instructional photography. (Photo: San Francisco History Center, SF Public Library)

When sales slumped in late 1923 and into 1924, analysts speculated that the market for cars was saturated (at about 7 Americans per car at the time). The car industry consisted of dozens of companies, who began to fail or merge during this first contraction in sales. The industry reorganized its public relations and launched concerted efforts to redefine “saturation”:

There was no “buying-power saturation,” [motordom] said. The real bridle on the demand for automobiles was not the consumer’s wallet, but street capacity. Traffic congestion deterred the would-be urban car buyer, and congestion was saturation of streets.

By the late 1920s, a young graduate student named Miller McClintock had become the nation’s pre-eminent traffic researcher thanks to his 1925 thesis “Street Traffic Control.” His career is a window into the process of private corruption of public interests that riddles American history up to the present.

In his 1925 graduate thesis Street Traffic Control, the old McClintock had maintained that widening streets would merely attract more vehicles to them, leaving traffic as congested as before. The automobile, he wrote, was a waster of space compared to the streetcar, noting that “the greater economy of the latter is marked.” “It seems desirable,” McClintock wrote, “to give trolley cars the right of way under general conditions, and to place restrictions on motor vehicles in their relations with street cars.” He described the automobile as a “menace to human life” and “the greatest public destroyer of human life.”

Two years later all had changed. McClintock wrote of “the inevitable necessity to provide more room” in the streets. He called for “new streets” and “wider streets.”… In 1925 McClintock virtually ruled out elevated streets as expensive and impractical; two years later he urged that they be considered.

What had happened in the two years between the diametrically opposed advice given by McClintock? He had been hired by Studebaker’s Vice President to head up the new “Albert Russel Erskine Bureau for Street Traffic Research,” which was first placed in Los Angeles where McClintock was teaching at UC, but a year later moved by Studebaker to Harvard University, where the car company continued to fund the ostensibly “independent” institute. As the years went by McClintock became one of the foremost authorities on traffic planning, though his organization dropped the “Albert Russel Erskine” from its name when the chairman of Studebaker Motors committed suicide in 1933!

McClintock came to San Francisco early in his career. In the August 1927 Motorland magazine, he penned an article summarizing his research “Curing the Ills of San Francisco Traffic”: “… it is recognized that an ultimate requirement for the solution of street and highway congestion is to be found in the creation of more ample street area.” And sure enough, it was in this exact period that San Francisco embarked on a series of street widenings throughout the city, including for example, Capp Street and Army Street in the Mission District. Interestingly, McClintock’s traffic study shows the predominant car-free life of San Franciscans at the time:

On a typical business day studied by the traffic survey committee, 1,073,963 persons entered and left [the central business] district during a fourteen-hour period from 6 a.m. to 8 p.m. Vehicles of all types, including streetcars, carried 744,667 people in and out of the district, In addition, 329,296 pedestrians entered and left the district during the same period… In no other city is there such a large pedestrian movement into the central district, nor such a large outrush of people during the noon hour. Both of these conditions may be attributed to the large capacity of apartment houses immediately adjacent to the district…

Incredibly, streetcars were used by 70 percent of the people depending on some kind of transportation to get downtown, while only a quarter used passenger cars, but the latter made up 61 percent of vehicular traffic as compared to 11 percent for the streetcars! What has been poorly understood in the triumphant narrative of the private automobile is how cars benefited from enormous public expenditures, even when they were being used by a relatively small minority of the population. New infrastructure to accommodate motorists far outstripped any public investment in public streetcar service, let alone any subsidies for the privately owned lines. Meanwhile, electric streetcar companies were slowly going bankrupt, with their fares publicly restricted and the public streets on which they operated slowly being taken over by private vehicles.

Traditional use of the streets by pedestrians was being criminalized by new traffic codes. McClintock put forth a new Uniform Traffic Ordinance, adopted by San Francisco’s Board of Supervisors, which was intended to “legislate jaywalkers off the streets,” crowed a Motorland magazine editorial. In 1915, Ford already had a factory at 21st and Harrison in the Mission making Model-T’s, and by the mid-1920s, the new car business was fully ensconced along Van Ness Avenue in San Francisco:

Chevrolet dealer at Van Ness and Sacramento, 1933. (Photo: San Francisco History Center, SF Public Library)

Rambler dealer, Van Ness Avenue, August 1964. (Photo: San Francisco History Center, SF Public Library)

Interior of Don Lee Cadillac showroom (now AMC Theaters). (Photo: San Francisco History Center, SF Public Library)

Don Lee Cadillac dealership, Van Ness and O'Farrell, 1928. (Photo: San Francisco History Center, SF Public Library)

Miller McClintock continued his work on behalf of the auto industry from his bought-and-paid-for perch at Harvard University.

Miller McClintock [became] the impresario of a new kind of highway road show. In the spring of 1937, the Shell Oil Company combined McClintock’s traffic expertise with the talents of the stage designer Normal Bel Geddes to build a scale model of “the automobile city of tomorrow.”… Others interested in the rebuilding of cities for the motor age adopted Shell’s technique. At the 1939 Golden Gate International Exposition, United States Steel displayed its vision of San Francisco in 1999, with wider streets, cloverleaf intersections, and an elevated highway.

Overshadowed by the far more successful World’s Fair in New York City, and in particular by the tone-setting “World of Tomorrow” exhibit there built by General Motors, the 1939 US Steel vision of San Francisco in 1999 is worth peeking at:

"San Francisco in 1999" Golden Gate International Exposition, 1939. US Steel financed this diorama, meant to reinvent San Francisco as a Corbusian radial city with a new rationalized and centralized port combining all piers in a single monumental jetty extending from 16th Street. (Photo: San Francisco History Center, SF Public Library)

This close-up from the US Steel 1939 vision of San Francisco in 1999 shows the intersection of 7th and Howard streets with elevated roadways passing under each tower. (Photo: San Francisco History Center, SF Public Library)

Here’s a description of the exhibit by Richard Reinhart in his book on the 1939 Golden Gate International Exposition “Treasure Island: San Francisco’s Exposition Years”

Artist Donald McLoughlin had prepared a dioramic view of San Francisco in 1999 for the US Steel exhibit in the Hall of Mines, Metals and Machinery. This prognostic nightmare showed the city stripped of every vestige of 1939 except Coit Tower, the bridges and Chinatown. All maritime activity had disappeared from the Embarcadero. Shipping was concentrated at a super-pier at the foot of 16th Street.

North of Market Street every block contained a single, identical high-rise apartment house. South of Market, sixty-story office towers of steel and glass alternated with block-square plazas in a vast checkerboard pattern. Elevated freeways ran through the geometric landscape.

McLoughlin correctly anticipated the removal of maritime activity from San Francisco’s waterfront, though his massive modern pier is spread along the Oakland bay shore rather than on a prominent pier jutting out from 16th Street. Visions like this, and the better known version in New York, informed the post-WWII population as it fled cities for the suburbs. Those who remained though, had a different idea of what our cities would become, and thanks to their stopping the highway builders in their tracks in the late 1950s and early 1960s, San Francisco was not crushed in this way.

Interesting to recall that while 30,000 citizens were mobilized to stop freeway building in San Francisco (the very same elevated, pedestrian-free streets McClintock had come to endorse as an industry flack) thousands more, mostly African American and white youth, staged a vigorous civil rights campaign along auto row, demanding that blacks be given equal treatment in hiring by auto dealers, especially Don Lee’s Cadillac dealership.

Crowd cheering civil rights employment settlement with auto dealers, 1964. (Photo: San Francisco History Center, SF Public Library)

Contrary to the fervent wishes of today’s motorists, streets have not always been the domain of cars. Clever marketing prior to the Depression led to radical redesign of both the physical streets and our assumptions about how public streets should be used. As we ride to and from work on our bicycles these days, or get together in Critical Mass or Bike Party social rides, we are participating in a new push to redefine how streets are used, and most importantly, how we think about public space. While we haven’t yet found a new consensus, the rising tide of bicycling, parklets, Sunday Streets, car-free zones, etc., all amply demonstrate that the private car’s days are in decline. Add a dollop of global warming and a couple of scoops of cheap fossil fuel scarcity, and the question of Whose Streets is once again a key issue of social contestation. Perhaps at least we can stop blindly accepting death and mayhem as an inevitable and natural consequence of our social transportation choices!

Cartoon by Jean-Francois Batellier, a French artist who sells his art and books on the streets of Paris.

Ed Reiskin at today's press conference, surrounded by members of the SFMTA Board. Photo: Bryan Goebel

The San Francisco Municipal Transportation Agency (SFMTA) Board of Directors has appointed a regular bicycle and Muni rider to become its Chief Executive Officer, ushering in a new era of leadership that advocates hoped would dramatically improve sustainable transportation in the city.

Ed Reiskin, the current head of the Department of Public Works (DPW) who hasn’t owned a car since 1991, promised to make safety for all modes of transportation his top priority.

“I see transportation as essentially important to maintaining and enhancing the quality of life for the people of San Francisco,” Reiskin told a packed room of reporters, advocates and SFMTA and DPW staffers this morning. “I see no reason why we can’t have the world-class transportation system that this city deserves.”

Reiskin was chosen after an hour-long interview with the SFMTA Board of Directors Tuesday for his wide reputation as “a truly gifted leader” and “a fast learner,” said Board Chair Tom Nolan.

“That was the most important thing to us,” said Nolan. “We wanted somebody who knew San Francisco, who understood the politics here, the dynamics of city government, and was passionate about being a San Franciscan, and we found that, definitely, in Mr. Reiskin.”

The SFMTA would not confirm what salary Reiskin is being offered but the Chronicle reported he’s committed to a three-year contract, and will be paid an annual salary of $294,000, $15,000 less than his predecessor, Nathaniel Ford, who left July 1. The SFMTA Board will vote on the terms of his contract and the appointment on August 2.

Ed Reiskin takes the podium at this morning's press conference. Photo: Bryan Goebel

Advocates, Electeds Praise Reiskin

Sustainable transportation advocates roundly praised Reiskin’s demonstrated ability to engage staff and move projects forward that improve conditions for transit riders, pedestrians and bicyclists.

“He’s someone who rides the ride and walks the walk,” said car-free SF Board of Supervisors President David Chiu. “Today, the future of transportation in San Francisco is brighter.”

Reiskin, who lives with his family in a car-free household in the Lower Haight, was born in Chicago and gave up his car when he moved to New York City twenty years ago. He has since lived in Boston and Washington, D.C., before moving to Oakland in 1999 where he met his wife, a San Francisco native, and moved to the city nine years ago.

“I love cities,” said Reiskin. “I think cities are incredibly important and have the potential to enable people to access education, jobs, culture and diversity, interaction and innovation.”

Chiu said that when he began working with Reiskin years ago, he “was someone who was incredibly well respected by the neighborhood leaders not only in my district, but throughout the city as someone who not only understood detail, but someone who got the big picture of what we need to do to move things forward.”

San Francisco Bicycle Coalition Executive Director Leah Shahum said Reiskin “has the know-how and the proven leadership ability to take San Francisco where we want to go in terms of safe, accessible, inviting streets and neighborhoods for all.”

“At a time when people in San Francisco are eager for more options to move around our city in ways that are easy, affordable, healthy and good for the local economy, this is a great step forward,” said Shahum. “By choosing Ed Reiskin, the agency’s leaders are signaling their commitment to an even stronger, more innovative SFMTA that really can become a world-class transportation agency serving the needs of our diverse citizens and visitors.”

Gabrielf Metcalf, executive director of the San Francisco Planning and Urban Research Center (SPUR), said Reiskin is “a great manager and change agent, who knows how to work within government in a way that motivates and inspires staff, and he’s also someone who has a full appreciation of the multiple roles that streets play in city life.”

Reiskin’s colleagues said that his skills as an adaptive and competent leader should compensate for any lack of experience running a transit system. As a former director of 311 and now DPW, he manages $2 billion in capital projects.

“Governance of streets and transportation is very fragmented in San Francisco, and Ed is well-regarded by his colleagues in other agencies,” said Livable City Director Tom Radulovich, noting that Reiskin “has supported projects like the sidewalk widening on Valencia and Linden Alley, Pavement to Parks, parklet, and bike corral programs, and the re-think of Market Street.”

“I think it’s important to keep in mind that the MTA is not just about Muni,” said Supervisor Scott Wiener. “Muni is the 800-pound gorilla, but the MTA governs all transportation in San Francisco, from our roads to our taxi system, and of course Muni.”

“What we need is someone who has the vision to be able to integrate all of that and have a great global transportation system in San Francisco,” he said.

Reiskin said that his experience as DPW Director showed him that coming in as outsider has its advantages. ”I can ask a lot of questions and come in with a fresh perspective,” he said.

Supporters lauded his performance at DPW, where he quickly learned the ropes within months of starting the job in 2008 after being appointed by then-City Administrator Ed Lee.

“Just a few years before” Reiskin became the DPW director, the agency “had virtually declared war on public seating, so Ed has overseen quite a turn-around towards the idea of streets as public spaces,” said Radulovich.

“Give me a month, and I’ll be very versed in all this,” joked Reiskin.

Reiskin said he plans to “spend as little time in my office as I can and as much time in the field talking to folks so I can understand the organization so that I can engage the people in the department in making it work.”

His priorities range from improving safety for street users, to engaging Muni operators positively to implement the new labor contract, to implementing solutions to speed up Muni.

Here are his responses to questions on a number of issues:

• On the city’s Transit First Policy:“I think it’s really forward thinking and outstanding,” he told reporters. “There’s no question, with the Transit First Policy, we want to emphasize and shift people as much as possible to more sustainable modes of transportation, but it doesn’t mean cars are bad and people who drive cars are bad. I think we have to make it more convenient for people not to be in a car… and let the results speak to people in terms of whether or not they want to get out of their car. I think we have to earn it.”

  “I would like San Francisco to be a place where you don’t feel like you need to own a car.”

• On improving biking and walking conditions: ”The streets and sidewalks need to be safe, inviting and welcoming for people to want to” walk and bike. “It’s good for the city, it’s good for the climate and environment, it’s good for the health of the people, so it’s a win all around.”

  Funding bicycle and pedestrian improvements is “exceedingly important,” he said. “Every person that chooses to walk or ride a bike is potentially one less car that’s on the road.”

• On how to improve Muni reliability: “I don’t walk into this presuming to have all the answers for the MTA,” he said. But “just as a very frequent Muni rider, I believe there is some low-hanging fruit in efficiency to be found and conditions to be improved upon. I think some of the solutions to making Muni work better are with the operators. These are the folks who know it and do it every day. I think engaging them in a positive and constructive way, and not focusing on grievances and discipline, but focusing on how to make the system better, I think that’s the way to build morale.”

  “The idea that [the Transit Effectiveness Project] needs environmental review to make transit work better seems kind of absurd to me.”

• On negotiating with the Transit Workers Union to implement the new labor contract: “I don’t see this as management versus labor. I see this as MTA employees all working towards a common goal of improving delivery of service.”

  “I don’t want One Van Ness (the MTA building) to be seen as some ivory tower issuing edicts from afar.”

Timothy Papandreou, SFMTA Deputy Director of Transportation Planning, said he thinks Reiskin “has the temperament and the managerial skillset that can really help us, being multi-modal.”

“You don’t have to be an expert in every mode, but you have to know how to manage people,” said Papandreou. “We’re going to have a great opportunity to start translating the Transit First Policy into work.”

As the MTA updates its Strategic Plan, he thinks Reiskin can help “hold the [Board of Directors] and everyone else accountable to it.”

Streetsblog Editor Bryan Goebel contributed reporting.

Landscape designer Walter Hood gives a walking tour of the promenade after today's ribbon-cutting ceremony and press conference. Photos: Bryan Goebel

San Francisco cut the ribbon on an innovative public space “in the heart of downtown” today that will greatly improve the pedestrian realm in the Union Square shopping district. Hundreds of people spilled into the two-block Powell Street Promenade on Powell between Ellis and Geary for the official grand opening.

“Two-thirds of the millions of annual visitors make their way down here to Union Square and that’s why it produces 10 percent of our sales tax revenue,” said Mayor Ed Lee. “They love coming here, and why not link the historic cable car stop on Market Street and make the experience of getting up here and the rest of the city a wonderful experience.”

Lee lauded the spirit of cooperation on the project between the various city departments and the Union Square Business Improvement District. He called automobile company Audi a “great corporate citizen” for providing the $890,000 it took to construct the promenade, which became an immediate magnet for passersby.

“This unique public private non-profit partnership creates a safe, green, forward thinking and contemporary space for everyone to enjoy,” Lee said in his prepared remarks.

Landscape designer and architect Walter Hood designed the eight six-foot wide parklets, which have been hailed as the marquee project of the city’s Pavement to Parks program.

Audi said the promenade “was inspired by the same philosophy of design and innovation that defines our approach to car making.” The company’s logo was clearly on display at today’s press event and its symbol emblazoned on the solar towers. No official advertising is allowed in the promenade, however.

Both Lee and Supervisor David Chiu gushed with praise for Audi. Chiu, who is car-free and gets around on an electric bicycle, even encouraged the automobile company to donate some new cars to the city.

“We could not do this without the generosity of an amazing car company and I do hope, some day, in addition to seeing the Audi symbols here as part of this parklet, that we see more Audis traveling throughout San Francisco, so feel free to donate a couple to the city if you like,” Chiu said.

“I’m still jazzed about that car that I still have in my mind that appeared in the Iron Man movie. The Audi 8, he just comes roaring in. I said, I want one of those if I ever get that kind of money,” Lee told the crowd.

"The Promenade prioritizes the needs of pedestrians, transit users and cyclists by creating an exciting public space in Union Square," said David Nadelmen of the Union Square Business Improvement District (at podium).

A large crowd assembled in the promenade on the west side of Powell to watch the press conference.

Supervisor David Chiu speaks to the crowd.

The Space

Aluminum ribbons are one of the promenade’s main features. The aluminum was fabricated into benches and tables that allow people to sit or stand while enjoying a cup of coffee, checking email or socializing. For tourists, the space provides “a comfortable place to plan.”

“We’ve taken over the parking lanes to design wider sidewalks for people to walk and take a breather,” Hood explained before giving a walking tour of the promenade. “People will be able to stroll, as well as sit, and even lie down.”

The promenade itself is “built in connecting modular segments on an ADA accessible, slip resistant aluminum and wood grating bolted to the street.” The free WiFi is connected to the solar panels along with LED lighting, which gives the aluminum platforms “a glow from the grating.”

“This idea of movement, this idea of materials, of technology, of sustainability, we tried to wrap it all up into one simple gesture,” Hood said. “We basically want to illuminate the beautiful aspects of design within the public realm.”

City officials said the promenade should also help calm traffic. Powell, famous for its cable car line, was clogged with cars at many points during today’s press conference, including a few Audis that shuttled some of the company’s executives and staff to the ceremony.

David Nadelman of the Union Square Business Improvement District said the promenade is widely supported by merchants. It will be kept clean and maintained by the Union Square BID.

Powell Street has some of the busiest pedestrian volumes in the country, just behind Times Square. Some 100,000 people will typically travel through the area on foot on the weekends. The promenade may one day lead to the pedestrianization of those two blocks of Powell, which are scheduled for a cable car overhaul and repaving in 2014.

Hood demonstrates the free WiFi. An Audi passed by right as I snapped the shot.

"You can stroll, as well as sit, and even lie down," said Hood, demonstrating the different uses of the space.

With all the restaurants and eateries in the vicinity, Hood said people can use this table to enjoy a cappuccino, for example.

"We wanted to introduce a material that created one sculptural effect," Hood said of the aluminum rails.

The federal transportation bill by Rep. John Mica would focus on the federal highway system, not sustainable transportation.

Public transit programs in California could take a $468 million annual hit under the proposed transportation bill unveiled last week by Rep. John Mica (R-FL). The Mica plan would also potentially result in the loss of 17,565 annual jobs, according to an analysis [pdf] by Transportation for America. Overall, T4A predicts the scaled-down bill would result in a 37 percent reduction in federal investments in public transportation when compared to current levels.

“What you will see, more than likely, is transit agencies taking what money they have available for operations and shifting some of that over into making up that federal cut for the capital expenses,” said Ryan Wiggins, the T4A Southern California field representative. “What they might be forced to do is a combination of fare increases, and/or service cuts.”

“This is the federal government not investing in our infrastructure. That’s what it is,” said Randy Rentschler, a spokesperson for the Metropolitan Transportation Commission. “I think there are some elements to it that are positive, but often what matters most is the money, and the money is clearly inadequate.”

In San Francisco, SFMTA spokesperson Paul Rose said Muni would be forced to defer or delay some major capital investment projects, including work on the Central Subway, Van Ness BRT, the replacement of trolley coach and motor coach vehicles, and an upgrade of rail and overhead line infrastructure. It would also force the agency to “defer fleet rehabilitation of motor coach and historic fleet vehicles which will impact service due to lack of available vehicles” and delay the scheduled replacement of 35 paratransit vans, along with other projects.

The bill would also eliminate any federal guarantee for bicycle and pedestrian programs. Wiggins said T4A fears that money which typically comes from federal transportation enhancement funds would all be funneled to big infrastructure projects, and bike and ped programs would get neglected by state transportation agencies.

Dave Snyder, the executive director of the California Bicycle Coalition, was more optimistic, considering the strong advocacy for biking and walking in the state.

“We have some work to do in California to make sure that the kinds of projects that were funded out of enhancements continue to get funded but I’m confident that in most areas of California, anyway, we can maintain that level of funding, if not increase it, thanks to the growing support for this kind of stuff,” he said.

Senator Barbara Boxer, who sits on the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee, has vowed to fight the proposed cuts, and is offering her own proposal.

The new parklet on Valencia Street in front of Four Barrel Coffee. Photo: Aaron Bialick

At least fourteen parklets now grace sidewalks around the city in a movement that has taken San Francisco by storm since the first one was created in March of last year. Three of the newest ones have sprouted up in front of Cafe Abir near Divisadero Street, Tony’s Pizza Napoletana next to Washington Square Park, and Four Barrel Coffee on Valencia Street, which has taken a unique design approach.

The construction of new parklets is just starting to catch up with the demand, notes an article on the Great Streets Project’s website. A study done in April found that 72 percent of people surveyed in the Mission, the Tenderloin, and North Beach where more parklets are planned “said that they would come to the area more or much more often if there were more public places to sit.”

In the Mission District, the new Four Barrel parklet provides a standing-only coffee bar area and hanging bicycle parking, features which are intended to have a “less heavier” but more permanent feeling than other parklets, said Four Barrel owner Jeremy Tooker.

“We wanted to add an improvement and beautification to the neighborhood with the Four Barrel aesthetic” with the wood matching that of the cafe, said Tooker.

Rather than being a place to lock up a bike and stay for hours, the arrangement is designed to encourage more short-term use, he said. More bike parking will be added in the center of the parklet for a total of fifteen dedicated spaces, although Tooker estimated it would probably be able to fit over twenty bikes.

Photo: Aaron Bialick

Photo: Aaron Bialick

Stools will also be provided in the future to discourage visitors from sitting on the standing-only bar, added Tooker.

On Fulton and Divisadero Streets, a parklet was also finished two weeks ago outside Cafe Abir just a couple blocks away from the city’s first one at Mojo Bicycle Cafe.

The new parklet on Fulton Street. Photo: Aaron Bialick

Photo: Aaron Bialick

And in North Beach, the neighborhood’s third parklet was also nearly complete today, except for some greening that’s being added. It fronts Tony’s Pizza Napoletana on Stockton and Union Streets just across the street from Washington Square Park.

Flickr photo: geekstinkbreath

Although North Beach has long been known for its abundance of private cafe seating on its skinny sidewalks compared to neighborhoods like the Mission and the Tenderloin, the Great Streets Project’s article notes that it still lacks places for non-patrons to sit and gather.

“Clearly, people enjoy gathering to relax or eat outside when seating is available,” the article states. “But private café seating only benefits patrons of those businesses, not the hundreds of people walking through the neighborhood who may like a place to rest and relax.”

An auto repair shop on Ninth Avenue in the Inner Sunset. Photo: Aaron Bialick

San Francisco’s many auto repair shops are mostly concentrated along its motor traffic sewers, but when they’re placed without restriction in the thick of restaurants, shops, and pedestrian traffic, can they hinder our city’s most valuable streets as desirable places to be?

“Auto repair shops, and other auto-oriented uses like parking and gas stations, can degrade the pedestrian environment in neighborhoods,” said Tom Radulovich, the director of Livable City.

On Ninth Avenue in the Inner Sunset, one of the city’s many commercial streets, three repair shops sit in the mix of residences, shops and restaurants. Street life is plentiful on the stretch, but the space around the large auto shop between Irving and Judah streets in particular appears empty. Shelby, a resident of the neighborhood, was enjoying a snack outside Arizmendi Bakery a few doors down.

“Randomly, you’ll have a little strip of small restaurants and art galleries, but then you’ll have places like that that don’t seem to fit in because they just got there first,” said Shelby. She also pointed out that many vehicles pulling in and out of some garages, and the illegal parking they attract, can hinder and endanger passersby.

“It sucks as a bicyclist when you’re trying to go up a hill or something and there are three cars double parked,” she said. Cars left on the sidewalk aren’t an uncommon sight, either.

Customers and employees appear oblivious as pedestrians navigate around their cars left on the sidewalk at this shop on Fulton and Divisadero Streets. Photo: Aaron Bialick

Auto shops began appearing in the city around the time of World War I, growing primarily in the 1920s and largely around a stretch of Van Ness Avenue called Auto Row, according to architectural historian William Kostura [pdf]. Construction of buildings designed for fixing and selling automobiles continued throughout the mid-20th century.

Auto repair prior to the war was largely done as a secondary job in various types of mechanical facilities, and “the first business to advertise in city directories under the heading of ‘automobile repair’ was, in fact, a bicycle shop” on Larkin Street which began offering the service in 1904, writes Kostura.

But auto shops, if not integrated carefully, can impact a street’s quality as a place to be on foot, on bike, or to pass through on transit, something that city planners have taken more seriously in more recent years.

Transportation planner Jeffrey Tumlin, a principal at Nelson/Nygaard Consulting Associates, thinks there’s a place for auto shops in commercial districts “provided they treat them respectfully.”

“It’s possible to design them in a way that doesn’t destroy the positive qualities of walkable neighborhoods,” said Tumlin.

“For what’s effectively an auto-oriented use, they have some interesting qualities,” he said. “If you can minimize the damage and the danger associated with the driveway, the buildings themselves can be quite lovely. Watching cars being repaired up on their lifts with repairmen wandering around is a kind of interesting urban activity.”

Although Tumlin said they might not be ideal on the city’s “more precious commercial streets, it’s something that can lend authenticity and local character to the more work-a-day centers of neighborhoods.”

“If you recognize that some percentage of San Franciscans will continue to own cars for a long time, that repair needs to happen some place,” he said. “And for people who are getting their cars repaired, when their car’s in the shop, they need to be able to get around without their car, so putting auto repair shops in an industrial ghetto doesn’t really work very well.”

In order to lessen the impacts of auto shops on pedestrians, cyclists, and transit “and make the business a better neighbor,” legislation has been passed to make requirements on auto shops generally more restrictive, explained Radulovich. However, most auto shops were built under the looser regulations of decades ago and “grandfathered” in.

That means a new auto shop built on a neighborhood commercial street like Ninth Avenue today would be subject to stricter requirements, if permitted at all, than it would have been before the 1980s when restrictions on permits were put in place.

Currently, new auto shops are prohibited in residential districts, allowed in industrial districts, and only “conditionally permitted in other neighborhood commercial and mixed-use districts,” said Radulovich. But ”such businesses only have to comply with the current code if they move into another space, or if the building is rebuilt or undergoes certain major renovations.”

For new shops, restrictions are now in place under Planning Code amendments passed in April that were pushed by Livable City and Supervisor Ross Mirkarimi. They require smaller widths for garage entrances, restrict them from being placed “on important walking, cycling, and transit streets across the city,” and require that they be located on smaller side streets where possible, said Radulovich. Car storage is also required to be “screened behind active commercial or residential uses,” he said.

Ninth Avenue. Photo: Aaron Bialick

But constructing new auto shops in San Francisco hasn’t been an issue of late, as the demand seems to be dropping. Joshua Switzky of the SF Planning Department said he couldn’t think of any proposals for new repair shops or gas stations in recent years. If anything, he said demand is so low that on some corridors like Valencia Street, “they tend to be the few development sites that are left.”

Last month, the Planning Commission approved a project to redevelop a closed gas station into an 18-unit residential and commercial building on the corner of Valencia and 20th Streets.

Tumlin noted that auto shops can be converted into other uses, granted they’re designed well, and often have useful features like high ceilings, good natural light, and a lack of columns. San Francisco historian and Streetsblog contributor Chris Carlsson said he “would like to turn them all into community centers.”

Some buildings containing auto shops, like those built in the Tenderloin in the 1920s and 30s, have “spectacular” architecture and “bizarrely contribute positively in many ways to the vitality of the commercial districts there,” said Tumlin. Kostura’s report notes that “former auto showrooms, garages, and repair shops have found adaptive reuse as restaurants, stores or offices.”

This auto shop built in the 1920s at 1765 California Street at Franklin was converted into a grocery store several years ago, though with a parking garage underneath. Photo via William Kostura for the Planning Department

Still, Radulovich said current rules can make converting auto shops for other uses difficult. “While controls on new automotive repair and service station uses have generally become more restrictive, another provision of the code makes it very onerous to convert a service station to another use,” he said.

And, he noted, increased restrictions on auto shops can face resistance from labor advocates. “Some activists are concerned that they are eliminating blue collar jobs from the city, and limiting peoples’ access to auto repair services in their neighborhood,” said Radulovich.

Indeed, any auto shops that are converted or redeveloped would likely have to be phased out.

“If they choose to move out,” said Shelby, “then maybe we can go towards” turning auto shops into public spaces, residences, other businesses. “But that business is already there, and if they’re still making money and paying their due, then I think it infringes on their rights as business owners.”

This article was revised from its original version on June 6, 2011.

Mission Street. Photo: Myleen Hollero/Orange Photography

San Francisco police are trying to find a hit-and run driver who killed 39-year-old Carlos Martinez Saturday morning in the Mission District. Martinez was the seventh pedestrian to be killed by a motor vehicle this year on San Francisco’s streets and the third hit-and-run fatality.

“In the middle of the morning on a Saturday, somebody was killed in middle of a street in the middle of our city,” said Walk SF Executive Director Elizabeth Stampe, pointing out that pedestrians are more typically killed late at night and by drunk drivers. “That’s unacceptable.”

Pedestrian deaths don’t receive as much attention in the media as they should, she said, but “we should all pay attention when somebody is killed by a car, because that could be any one of us.”

Officer Albie Esparza said the man was walking on the 2200 block of Mission Street near 18th Street at 10:30 a.m. when he lost his balance and fell into the roadway. The driver of a white Chevy minivan struck him in the head but did not stop. Martinez died from his injuries at San Francisco General Hospital.

Police only had a vague description of the suspect but the license plate of the vehicle is 6NJL987.

Records from the San Francisco Police Department list six other crashes where pedestrians were killed by drivers this year, mostly on streets with high-speed, high-volume motor traffic. In chronological order, they occurred on Lincoln Way, Geary Boulevard, 2nd Street, Market Street, Masonic Boulevard, and Lombard Street.

Stampe said that even though police conduct stings and target drunk drivers on events like New Year’s Eve, “it’s not helping people to be aware of the crashes that are occurring every day on the streets.”

“This is why it’s such a surprise to everyone when they find out that 800 people a year get hit by cars,” she said. Last year, 13 people were killed walking on San Francisco streets.

A pedestrian task force began meeting in March to coordinate the city’s efforts to improve pedestrian safety. The SF Municipal Transportation Agency has also been implementing improvements especially in District 6 where the bulk of pedestrian crashes take place.

“We need to see clear action and clear leadership on halting the death toll,” said Stampe.