mal mots

While I praise the SFist for bon mots, I have to slap the City Supes and personal friend Bevan Dufty upside the head for closing 30 feet or so of 17th Avenue and calling it a "Pedestrian Plaza."

The intersection of Castro and 18th is a traffic nightmare. Anything to take traffic away from gay-ground-zero would be beneficial. But for anyone in a vehicle crossing from neighborhoods north/west of Market to the east/south of Market, 17th Avenue becomes one-way for a couple of blocks and traffic redirected to Market to return to 17th and continue eastward/south of market. 17th is the only through street, such as it is, over the hill and across the City for many blocks north or south of this meridian. I think this will only make traffic matters in the Castro worse.

Personally, I hate that they've closed this access corridor to the Mission/Potrero Hill/SoMa, and can only assume it will push traffic to the more congested 18th and Castro intersection, which is overflowing with pedestrian traffic as it is (only one left turn possible per light, which the entire detouring traffic would need to take), or route commuters through one series of doglegs out of the way on one side of the intersection, only to repeat the multi-turn detour on the other side.

The only benefit I see to this closure is perhaps a business one of connecting the stretch of shops and restaurants along Market Street to the stretch along Castro Street, removing one "Walk/Don't Walk" hurdle for walkers.

But to call this tiny bit of concrete a "Pedestrian Plaza"? It only runs the length of the gas station for heaven's sakes. The other side is a couple of apartments, a Nice Cuts, a tanning salon, a narrow 24-hour diner, and Twin Peaks on the corner fronting Castro Street.

While the closure does not remove street parking, it does remove the ability to "round the block" while looking for parking as one circles the Castro.

Facebook commenters have wondered why this was never advertised or discussed (I saw this in the SFist), and one man pointed out that it was raised in the business district meetings—which of course would not include anyone who does not live/work/own in the neighborhood. I only heard of it from Bevan's newsletter after it was a done deal (and I subscribe to Bevan's newsletter as it seems to be the only source of City planning information pertaining to the Castro).

The "plaza" was approved as temporary until July 11. But the City pulls that bait and switch all the time. The Bike Coalition won against commuters by getting a temporary permanent ban against turning right onto the freeway from Market street.

We'll see how this shakes out. I really do hope they are tracking traffic patterns and release the findings.

There is a YouTube video of the press conference, but I can't get it to load. Maybe my answers are there.

Regardless, in these times, is this really where the City should be putting its money and resources?

end rant.

Update: From Streetsblog.

From the press releases:

"I know that many of you have been talking about this for... at least 13 or 14 years. Formally it's been at least a decade since community groups came together and talked about converting this pavement into a plaza," said Newsom. "I refer to it as 'democratizing this public realm' and the street realm, and looking differently in terms of our open space, open space in terms of taking back this pavement, and converting it into plazas.
...

DPW Chief Ed Reiskin, considered the driving force of the project, was pleased with the result, though they repainted the plaza at the last minute to the new color (the Mayor was unhappy with the yellow). In the end, Reiskin estimated that the plaza cost between $20,000-25,000, including resources and labor.

And while residents on Hartford did NOT want this (understandably), merchants did. And have been talking about it for a reported dozen years.

I will try not to hate this. But I will continue to be annoyed that in the name of "less traffic" the City has created greater traffic inefficiency. And it's annoying to hear lines like "More people and less traffic is a recipe for a great city." and "this has basically felt like a freeway on this street, such fast moving traffic coming East on Market Street." Like it is a surprise that the five lane and sole east/west corridor across the City (to parts beyond the midpoint-termini of Bush/Pine/Oak/Fell) is busy. I just don't buy the idea that making the crossing more inefficient will make for less traffic, just more traffic congestion. And tick that road rage meter up another notch.

I saw this as a car owner and one who drives when necessary, but chooses to walk or MUNI whenever possible. I am not anti-pedestrian. But SF pedestrians are by witness a reckless lot, heeding neither stop signs or traffic signals.