By Audrey Liu
On June 16, Supervisor Connie Chan delivered a press release criticizing the proposed Geary Boulevard Improvement Project. The press release expressed concerns that the project “would remove 30% of parking on the corridor,” dampening the recovery of small businesses that were hurt by the pandemic.
This is not true. The project as currently proposed includes a net loss of 48 parking spaces, or an average of 1.4 spots per block, representing “less than 2% reduction in area-wide parking supply within one block of the project area,” according to the San Francisco Municipal Transportation Agency (SFMTA). So yes, the Geary corridor may lose a small amount of parking. But, in return for a less than 2% loss in parking, the Geary Improvement Project makes the street faster for transit riders, and safer for everyone.
The project’s segment of Geary, from Stanyan Street to 34th Avenue, is notorious for hurting our fellow community members. From 2010 to 2021, traffic violence on the corridor injured 578 people and killed five. Of the injured, 145 were people walking. Although it is tempting to blame individual drivers or pedestrians for the tragedies, this overlooks one of the biggest culprits: street design. It has been shown in multiple studies that drivers do not drive according to the speed limit, but based on the “signals” the road gives them. A road whose design is perceived as wide and with few obstacles encourages drivers to speed.
The inverse is also true. A red bus lane visually narrows the street for drivers, and is likely part of why the recent Geary Rapid Project, which brought similar changes to Geary between Market and Stanyan streets, reduced excessive speeding by a whopping 81%. Pedestrian bulb-outs and median refuges also make it easier for people to see oncoming cars and reduce the amount of time that people are exposed to traffic while crossing the street. These safety features make street crossings safer for everyone, but especially seniors and people with disabilities, who are disproportionately affected by traffic violence. These improvements will save lives.
In terms of transit benefits, this project will include bus stop improvements and signal priority, so that buses are less likely to get caught behind red lights, in addition to the dedicated bus lanes. The net effect will make the 38 and 38-R buses – that are packed to capacity during rush hour – less likely to get stuck in traffic or behind red lights. The earlier Geary Rapid Project made buses 18% faster and 37% more reliable along the eastern stretch of the boulevard. We should demand that the SFMTA extend these benefits to the rest of the community and the Richmond.
Let’s also think about what a less car-centric street looks like. Geary currently has up to six lanes of private vehicle traffic, making the corridor loud and difficult to cross. Just one block away lies Clement Street, a corridor with fewer lanes and calmer traffic. Clement has many thriving businesses, restaurants with lines out the door, and plenty of people exploring the street.
I live near Balboa Street and visit the Clement Street Farmers Market every Sunday. I notice that any time I am on Clement, I feel empowered to visit businesses on a whim while running my errands. And because the street is so pleasant, I am encouraged to stay longer to socialize with friends, shop and dine. I do all of this without having to think about parking.
This is not to say that we should try to transform Geary into Clement. As a major arterial and transit corridor, Geary serves vital needs for our City in addition to being a significant commercial street. But failing to improve the experience of people walking and riding transit as our City adds new housing will only exacerbate the existing danger, noise and congestion on Geary. This will hurt businesses and the community.
No doubt, Supervisor Chan has good intentions in listening to the concerns of merchants and other neighbors, but I believe she should give more weight to the broader benefits of this project to our community. At the heart of the merchant association’s argument seems to be the belief that any change which reduces parking spaces will hurt small businesses, and that this loss outweighs any benefits the project might bring.
Over 37,500 people ride the 38 and 38R every day, and improving this line will make it more convenient for people to visit this commercial corridor by transit. We all benefit when people can travel without creating more traffic, pollution, and noise. And everyone – including those in private vehicles – is safer when fewer drivers are speeding.
We deserve better. Let’s say yes to a faster, safer Geary.
Audrey Liu is a D1 immigrant resident, local transit advocate, a cyclist with a few too many close calls and a volunteer with Faster Safer Geary, an independent campaign in support of the Geary Boulevard Improvement Project.
Categories: Commentary
Richmond Review/Sunset Beacon 
“No doubt, Supervisor Chan has good intentions in listening to the concerns of merchants and other neighbors” I disagree. Connie’s only intention is to get reelected. Long ago she made the political decision that walking away from her 2020 environmental pledge. Welding herself to the car centric voters of D1 is the road to Four More Years. Not with my vote. Connie’s entire tenure has been one big act of disrespect towards those in D1 seeking a more car free environment.
LikeLiked by 1 person
How typical of the opinion author and the recent responder which perfectly reflect the true intentions of bicycle activists in SF which is a “car-free environment”. How illogical is it to close safe streets (Lake, Cabrillo, the Great Highway) and divert traffic to high injury streets (Geary, 19th Avenue, Sunset, Fulton, Lincoln) then complain about high traffic and demand lane narrowing, speed bumps etc? The 2021 SFMTA study showing car use went up 13%, bikes 1%, walking 2% and muni use decreased 11%. Why does the SFMTA continue to cater to the small and vocal bicycle activist groups when they only represent 3% of SF residents (again from the SFMTA mode of transportation studies)? Even summaries of the pro-bike efforts by the city show that adoption of bicycles as the primary mode of transportation has not risen despite the millions of dollars spent on infrastructure (rental bike racks, bike paths) – people shifted to ride sharing and not bicycles. Climate change arguments are a sham, the UC Riverside study showed carbon emissions and smog increased five-fold along 19th Avenue in the post COVID recovery period and one of the postulated reasons was the closure of the GH and diversion of traffic to the remaining north south arteries. Claims that the Geary Blvd improvement projects decreased transit time on the 38 Geary in reality means it decreased 4 min, again per their interim report of the results of the past improvement projects. Really, a decrease of 4 min is worth the disruption to small businesses? The reason Muni use is declining is perceived lack of safety, convenience, efficiency – spend SFMTA money on increasing the frequency and reliability of buses, decreasing crime on buses and bus stops. I applaud Connie Chan’s efforts to address the needs of her constituents (small businesses) and not further compromise the efficiency of traffic by all users in the interests of a very small minority (bicyclists).
LikeLike
I LOVE this well-written response to this article and halfway through, I knew the author was a transit advocate and cyclist no less. This cyclist feels empowered to visit businesses on a whim?! That’s an insult to small businesses in need of STABLE PROFITS so they can recover from the pandemic. Cyclists and SFMTA are killing small businesses, because they only care about themselves – they are not businesses owners, families, people with disabilities – they don’t care about these communities. Thank you for speaking truth!!
LikeLike
Christina. If memory serves me correctly. 63 percent of the electorate voted YES on J for JFK PROMENADE and 65 percent of the electorate voted NO on I to bring cars back to The Great Walkway full time. I am appreciative that Richmond Review publishes a piece which reminds the readership there are many in San Francisco who want and will work unwaveringly for car free spaces
LikeLiked by 1 person
“less than 2% reduction in area-wide parking supply within one block of the project area,”
Since you live in the neighborhood, you know that the side street parking in front of residences is rarely available. If you’re trying to go to one of the small businesses on Geary, your only hope is one of the metered spots on Geary.
“The earlier Geary Rapid Project made buses 18% faster”
The SFMTA is saying that the speed up for a 38 Geary bus will be 5.5 minutes, round trip, during rush hour (which I assume is their best case scenario). That is only 2.75 minutes per trip. A 38 Rapid bus will have even less of a speed up, only 2.1 minutes.
Regarding speeding cars and pedestrian safety, a more effective and much cheaper alternative would be to have traffic lights at every intersection and time them for the speed limit. We all know that for years on Sunset Blvd when the lights were timed, no one sped because you just couldn’t get there any faster with the lights timed. Having a traffic light at every intersection would also provide safer crossing for pedestrians.
“Just one block away lies Clement Street, a corridor with fewer lanes and calmer traffic. Clement has many thriving businesses, restaurants with lines out the door, and plenty of people exploring the street.”
Ask the Clement Street small businesses if they would want 30% of their parking spaces removed.
“At the heart of the merchant association’s argument seems to be the belief that any change which reduces parking spaces will hurt small businesses, and that this loss outweighs any benefits the project might bring.”
Kim [owner of Joe’s Ice Cream] said he lost a significant amount of business when the city took up four parking spots on his block for a week while they removed the damaged Alexandria Theater sign. “That week, we lost 16% of our revenue,” Kim said.
And yes, I think supporting our local small businesses outweighs speeding up the bus by 2.75 minutes.
“Over 37,500 people ride the 38 and 38R every day, and improving this line will make it more convenient for people to visit this commercial corridor by transit. We all benefit when people can travel without creating more traffic, pollution, and noise.”
Again, we’re talking about a 2.75 minute speed up. Do you really believe that such a miniscule speed up will suddenly induce people from beyond Stanyan to visit Outer Geary businesses? And you forgot to mention that the SFMTA project will cost $56M.
LikeLike
Hello fellow Richmond Resident,
Another key point regarding the time improvement that most red-lane advocates seem to conveniently forget (or ignore) is that most of the calculated average time savings from the prior Geary Rapid changes and this proposed project actually comes from 3 other factors:
1. elimination of stops
– prior changes removed 2 bus stops and several 38R stops
– this project will remove the 12th Ave stop completely and 1 38R stop
2. moving stops to the far side of intersections
– this allows the buses to us the transit signal priority technology giving buses more green lights and eliminates the bus getting stuck at a red light after the passengers get on/off
– this reduces wait times from right turning vehicles who are at the red light and have to wait for pedestrians before moving out of the buses way
3. installation of sidewalk extensions at several stops such as 25th Ave, 20th Ave, and 6th Ave, as well as eastbound at Arguello (westbound already exists).
– this improves the bus flow since it does not have to merge back into traffic when starting back up from a stop – it is already in the traffic lane
By SFMTA’s own calculations, almost 2 full minutes of the projected 2.75 minutes of 1 way time savings will come from these changes. So simply applying basic math and logic, the elimination of 30% of the parking in the Geary Corridor between 15th Ave and 24th Ave for the installation of a bus lane in that section will save riders less than 1 minute of transit time.
I am for the safety improvement items in the Geary project, but the parking reduction and bus lane just seems like a waste of time and money for such a small improvement in transit time. And it has the added risk of jeopardizing local businesses and jobs which are needed in our area.
LikeLike
As a legacy business on Taraval all I can say is DO NOT LET THEM DO IT! We are 2 years into a complete disaster. Taraval has been destroyed and there is no end in sight. I am seeing businesses disappear. The loss in revenue is due specifically to the lack of access for the consumers. This is true for both goods and services. I am hearing from residents and my customers about the removal of parking. Clients will not venture into these areas. When we voice our concerns SFMTA ignores us. Our city has been hijacked. Our future is being forged by people that will not be living here in the future. SF has enough problems without creating additional ones and alienating the vibrant small businesses that make each neighborhood unique. If you live in that area, fight fight fight!
LikeLike
Sadly, in a city utilities need to be replaced regardless. Sewer, water, power. None of this lasts forever. That work is the most disruptive, takes the longest, and is most visible. Sinkholes, flooding, gas leaks, power outages, water main breaks; we all complain how things are in bad shape but this is what it takes to fix them! Sadly because construction work windows have been shortened to accommodate traffic, this work takes longer and costs more.
We need these upgrades, we need better options to get around. It’s sad to see how businesses fight for their bottom line but not for the community that LIVE there.
LikeLiked by 3 people
You are correct, the utilities need to be upgrades, which is disruptive in itself. But that is a different, though related, topic.
Regarding the Geary plan specifically, the SFMTA’s proposal is to make all the changes for the parking, bus lane, etc now, and then have the SFPUC come in and rip up the street 1.5 years later – increasing the disruption periods. And the SFMTA will have to spend the money again to paint the lanes, etc.
So if the Geary project get approved, why not simply wait until the SFPUC does their work in 2025 and have the bus lanes and parking changes implemented then. Do it all at one time.
I personally am not in favor of the SFMTA Geary project, but if it goes forward, it should be done in a logical manner that does not waste money – as opposed to the wasteful proposals of the SFMTA which would require redoing some of the work in 2025.
LikeLike
Thank you for this, Audrey. As a fellow transit rider, and as a parent and someone who currently has a disability that prevents me from biking or driving–yes, we need these improvements in the Richmond.
Tens of thousands of daily riders of the 38/38R deserve fast, convenient, safe transportation. And we all deserve safer streets with fewer deaths and injuries. ❤
LikeLiked by 2 people
Audrey, you make so many good points. Thank you for writing this.
For those concerned about local businesses, most evidence shows that the more walkable an area is, the better businesses do. For example in New York, on streets that were closed to cars during the pandemic, sales actually increased.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Once again you are twisting and manipulating facts to server your agenda and calling out others as making false statements when their statements are also factual.
Parking reduced only 2% and Sup Chan’s statement is not true?
1. You are using a very broad region for your parking calculation which includes all parking spaces on Geary and all the side streets from Stanyan all the way to 34th Ave between Anza to the south and Euclid or Clement to the north. This includes:
– many blocks on Geary where the bus lane already exists and the parking is and always has been parallel parking, and
– many side streets that are all residential with permit parking taking up almost all the spaces on a continuous basis
You are using data that, while technically correct, is not relevant to the discussion.
2. Supervisor Chan is speaking of the “Geary business corridor” between 15th Ave and 23rd Ave – this is the area of largest parking reduction – which IS about a 30% reduction in parking on Geary.
You go on to claim that the changes in other parts of Geary “reduced excessive speeding by a whopping 81%” – again you are dramatically twisting facts. The 81% is based on the number of tickets issued – and as anyone who spends a lot of time walking and biking on Geary east of Stanyan (as I do) can tell you, the speeders are still there, they just are not being ticketed. In fact, many drivers use the bus lave to speed down Geary to get around the congestion in the remaining lanes. Just last week I was narrowly missed by a driver speeding down the bus lane as I stepped off the curb to cross at 7th Ave. The driver was not only speeding in the bus lane but also ran a red light to get down Geary faster. And as many of you know, there were no police there to monitor the traffic – even though we were 1 block from the Richmond Police Station.
If the police would start enforcing the traffic laws, that 81% “improvement” would mostly disappear.
Finally, comparing Geary to Clement? Geary is very differently designated and serves a very different purpose. That said, I too am often on Clement, and not just for the Farmers Market. Clement suffers from some of the same, and possibly worse, issues as Geary. Go down Clement on any day of the week and you will see cars double parked and blocking traffic on almost every block from Arguello to 8th Ave. Cars are making illegal U-turns and make turns while pedestrians are in the crosswalks. Unless you live in the area, driving to Clement and parking is very difficult and affects cyclist and pedestrian safety.
Businesses on in the Geary corridor rely even more on automobile traffic for their livelihood. They need to parking to survive and to provide jobs in the area. You may live in a world where you don’t need to shop by car or work in the Geary area, but many do.
So once again, your twisted “truth” is not representative of what most of us live like in the city.
LikeLike
I used to live at Anza and 6th and my child was almost killed when we were trying to cross Geary. These safety improvements cannot come soon enough. Your parking spot is not worth somebody going to the hospital.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I used to ride the 38R everyday for several years. ALL of the delays were in the downtown area east of Gough St. There were never any delays west of Gough. Ride the 38/38R and see how often the bus misses a light due to traffic congestion. It never does.
As others have pointed out the bulk of the time improvements for the buses will be from removing stops! This is not much of a bargain.
Muni should use the money to look for ways to decrease delays in the downtown area and not waste it on projects like this.
In the coming years, the city is looking at significant shortfalls due to empty office space downtown. The money we have is better spent on keeping the buses running and on other important projects.
LikeLike