San Fran is collapsing. Streets are closing, the School Board is being Recalled. Crime is everywhere and the DA is supporting the criminals, wanting more victims. The homeless have taken over the streets—with human and dog poop everywhere. You can find many of the city officials in jail, not city hall.
“The good news is San Francisco city leaders already have committed to reduce carbon pollution by half this decade through increased vehicle electrification and by increasing the share of trips that occur via walking, cycling, public transit and shared electric vehicles from 50% to 80%.
The bad news is these goals build on longstanding policy commitments that until very recently have not been matched by bold action. Annual traffic deaths and serious injuries are essentially unchanged over the past decade. Transportation continues to be a source of daily frustration for transit riders, bicyclists and drivers alike, while emitting almost half of the city’s direct carbon pollution in 2019.
Guess the ‘leaders; do not understand their climate policies are killing what is left of San Fran.
Opinion: How S.F. can achieve its transportation climate goals and become a model for the country
Large cities must phase out gasoline cars entirely by 2030. In other words, in eight years
By Zack Subin, Special to The Examiner, 2/8/22
For the United States to reach its climate goals, we must reduce vehicle miles traveled 20% by 2030 even as we electrify more than a quarter of the vehicle fleet nationwide. And according to the International Energy Agency’s 2050 road map to a stable climate, large cities must phase out gasoline cars entirely by 2030. In other words, in eight years.
This is an eye-popping goal for cities. However, San Francisco has the financial resources, compact size and strong public support for climate action needed to achieve this.
The good news is San Francisco city leaders already have committed to reduce carbon pollution by half this decade through increased vehicle electrification and by increasing the share of trips that occur via walking, cycling, public transit and shared electric vehicles from 50% to 80%.
The bad news is these goals build on longstanding policy commitments that until very recently have not been matched by bold action. Annual traffic deaths and serious injuries are essentially unchanged over the past decade. Transportation continues to be a source of daily frustration for transit riders, bicyclists and drivers alike, while emitting almost half of the city’s direct carbon pollution in 2019.
This is due to The City prioritizing cars on approximately 95% of its public street space, though cars account for only 50% of trips. Policies that prioritize driver convenience over the geometric realities of cities result in ubiquitous congestion and scarce parking, even when there is no more space left to provide.
Car space vs. human space
During the pandemic, cities such as Berlin, Milan, Bogotá and Manila reallocated street space and expanded bike networks. In San Francisco, city leaders launched and expanded several initiatives to reallocate street space for more efficient and socially beneficial uses. The City added to its transit-only lane and protected bike lane network. It launched a new Shared Spaces program including parklets for outdoor dining with thousands of participating small businesses. The City created a Slow Streets program that appears to enjoy strong majority support.
The City also added two car-free street segments during the pandemic: two miles of JFK Drive in Golden Gate Park and four oceanside miles of the Great Highway (since reopened to cars on weekdays pending further study). These streets provide safe places for travel and recreation, with JFK Drive seeing an average of 14,000 people walking, biking and rolling daily, a 36% increase in usage — while traffic crashes causing serious injury dropped from 10 per year to zero.
In making these changes, The City has shown early successes in tailoring interventions to local needs. Engaging with community-based organizations, speed limits were lowered and right turns on reds eliminated throughout the Tenderloin, where residents are disproportionately vulnerable to injury from both vehicle traffic and environmental and health hazards.
However, the status of Slow Streets and car-free streets is uncertain, with key decision points coming this year. First up is JFK Drive, subject to a campaign by nearby museums to restore car travel — counter to the wishes of 70% of the 10,000 respondents to a city survey. It will be voted on by the Board of Supervisors in the next several months.
The City’s transportation agency and Mayor London Breed are pushing forward, announcing a bold expansion of these initiatives as part of the Vision Zero Strategy to eliminate traffic deaths. Most importantly, they propose to weave protected bike lanes, Slow Streets and car-free streets together into an integrated active transportation network spanning much of The City by 2024. Making this network a reality throughout The City will require sustained commitment from all its leaders — as well as changes that may be inconvenient for many residents.
While pandemic street changes were made quickly during a public health emergency, they can be enhanced going forward to bolster equity and public health objectives. As long as The City maintains focus toward a connected network safe for all ages, abilities and backgrounds, design details can be tailored to neighborhood needs.
Street changes often are opposed based on flawed reasoning that they will worsen traffic congestion and reshuffle vehicle travel onto neighboring streets. This is a misunderstanding of the principle of induced demand — the more (free) space we give to cars, the more people will drive. RMI and partner organizations developed the SHIFT Calculator, which illustrates the direct relationship between adding more car travel lanes and the resulting climate pollution.
Moreover, there is also evidence that induced demand works in both directions: When we remove roadway lanes, traffic can simply disappear, not be reshuffled onto other streets as some fear, because people’s transportation habits adapt. They drive alone less and substitute with other ways of getting around: pandemic-era bike lanes have contributed to large increases in bike ridership across European cities.
Scaling up our ambition
San Francisco can — and must — be a model for the low carbon city of the future. In addition to reallocating street space, it can deploy multiple strategies to reduce vehicle miles traveled. Equitable pricing strategies can better account for the social costs of parking and driving while protecting low-income residents. The City’s compact geography can be used to bring people and destinations closer together by relaxing planning restrictions, intermingling residential and commercial spaces.
The City can commit to fully funding reliable transit and extend coverage to underserved neighborhoods like the Bayview. And as San Francisco already is the least car-dependent city in the Bay Area, it can commit to building more housing within The City to catalyze emissions reductions throughout the region.
We cannot solve big problems without making bold changes. San Francisco should follow the lead of its sister city, Paris, which has undergone a transportation and livability revolution under the leadership of Mayor Anne Hidalgo, reallocating space for cars to space for people. These efforts achieved a 54% increase in biking in a single year.
Despite the usual complaints from a minority of the electorate, Hidalgo was reelected resoundingly in 2020 and progress has accelerated. Transportation moves have coincided with successes in building an inclusive city: Over the past decade, Paris has experienced a surge of homebuilding that has moderated housing prices.
San Francisco leaders have the opportunity to follow through on the city’s Vision Zero Strategy and successful street initiatives not just to achieve climate goals but to become a model for the United States and the entire world.
