By Thomas K. Pendergast
Between 15th and 25th avenues along Geary Boulevard are at least 34 empty storefronts, so it is no surprise that merchants still hanging on are under stress wondering if they might close as well.
What is called the “heart” of this Richmond District commercial corridor was already struggling even before the pandemic, which then made everything worse.
The San Francisco Municipal Transportation Agency’s (SFMTA) plan to convert angled parking to parallel parking as part of the agency’s quick-build project for improving traffic safety and reducing travel time on the 38-Geary bus line has become an issue of extraordinary interest and vitriol.
Complicating the issue is the San Francisco Public Utilities Commission’s (SFPUC) plan to rip up the street and replace aging sewage and water lines starting in 2025. The survival of these businesses through the construction is a major concern for many in the business community.
The main issue of the moment, however, is that angled parking generally provides more parking spaces than parallel parking, so many merchants asked the agency to delay the changes until after the SFPUC does its work.
That was the motivation for local merchants and community members to hold a mock funeral on the day before a critical vote by the SFMTA Board of Directors for some of the more prominent businesses of the recent past that have closed.
At this event, former District 1 Supervisor Sandra Lee Fewer asked why it is so urgent to do this now instead of later.
“We know that the 38 ridership is down from pre-pandemic levels; they haven’t even instituted the express buses back,” Fewer said. “Most of these businesses along Geary have not picked up to pre-pandemic levels, so the elimination of these parking spaces at this time will be detrimental to them.
“But more than that, the SFPUC is embarking on a complete sewer replacement project along Geary on the same area in a year, and so the merchants are saying ‘Can’t you wait until after they do this sewer project to do this?’ because they’ll be hit twice.”
Fewer noted the impact of other similar projects in the City.
“We’ve seen what happens with construction along any major corridor,” she said. “We look at Taraval Street and the small businesses that have been impacted there. We look at Van Ness. We look at the central subway; what’s happened to the Chinatown small businesses.
“Any time there’s construction, small businesses take a hit.”
Sean Kim, the owner of Joe’s Ice Cream, also brought up the timing.
“I cannot say I can survive because during the pandemic we lost all of my reserves. I used all my checking account money but the government helped, so we just survived,” Kim said. “But we don’t have any extra money to survive. The SFMTA is trying to do a quick build but, for us, it’s a quick destruction.”
Kim mentioned that construction on the sewer replacement will go to 2027 and then the SFMTA comes back in 2027 to do its main project called the Geary Improvement Project, which will involve heavy construction, not just painting and striping and moving bus stops like the quick-build project.
“Which means, for us, from now on until 2027-2028, is four to five years. We cannot survive those constructions,” Kim said.
Kim said they’ve been asking the SFMTA to postpone the quick-build project until after sewer work. If they do it now, he sees it as just a waste of money.
“They keep telling us there’s state funding; if they don’t do it this year, they will lose that money,” he said. “But it’s taxpayer’s money. Why do we have to waste that money?”
District 11 Supervisor Ahsha Safai also voiced his concern.
“In my district a number of years ago, very similar to this, the SFMTA decided they were going to destroy our small village on Mission Street,” Safai said. “There was angled parking. There was support for businesses. And there was the ability to do rapid transit without destroying the fabric of small businesses but they didn’t listen.
“And now they’ve had to come back and do all types of traffic calming, traffic lights, because all they’ve experienced is pedestrian fatalities, pedestrian accidents and essentially undermining the infrastructure.
Safai said he sees the parallel on the west side.
“The same thing is happening now on Taraval,” he said. “I was with a business owner on Taraval just last week who lost $1.5 million in revenue while that construction project has been going on. There is no consideration for businesses.”
At the SFMTA Board of Directors meeting the next day, project manager Liz Brisson explained that after the angled parking is converted to parallel parking, three lanes in each direction would be created; two for general traffic and one designated as a transit-only lane.
They estimate that someone traveling round-trip through the project area from Palm Avenue to 31st Avenue would save about 5.5 minutes per day, which adds up to 22.7 hours for someone traveling daily over the course of a year.
They also figure that about 5,600 metric tons of carbon dioxide would be removed each year from the air due to about 7,000 car trips switching to transit, which equivalent to 10 square miles of forest planted.
She says the parking loss from 34th Avenue to Palm and Jordan avenues would have been a total of 70 fewer angled parking spaces on Geary Boulevard. But with the addition of 39 parking spaces added on adjacent cross streets, the net angled parking loss would be reduced to 31 spots.
“We do understand that the 25th Avenue to Park Presidio Boulevard segment is where the heart of the Geary commercial core is and where there is some concentration of the parking loss and where parking is most important,” Brisson said. “In that segment of the corridor, the net parking loss per block is 1.5 spaces.”
Fewer, however, questioned this particular figure.
“We’re talking about a stretch between 15th and 25th specifically and we are looking at those lost parking spaces,” she said. “Yes, you can add spaces at 31st Avenue and you can add spaces at 14th Avenue or on the side streets. But we’re talking around this corridor between 15th Avenue and 25th Avenue being really the heart and soul of the Geary merchant corridor. And we need the spaces here for that.”
According to SFMTA figures, out of the total 31 angled parking spaces that will be removed, 16 of them are between Park Presidio and 25th Avenue.
“It’s been a contentious item and it’s been like that for some time,” SFMTA Director Stephanie Cajina said. “There’s been a large amount of compromise throughout this journey, a lot of negotiations that community members have had. I think everyone has a huge stake in this project being successful and success is defined differently for all the stakeholders here and that’s palpable today.”
Director Manny Yekutiel said he understands the merchants’ concerns because he runs a business.
“I know what it’s like to have businesses closing all around you and wondering when yours will be next. Three major businesses closed a block away from my business in the last few months,” Yekutiel said. “Today we are planning for the Geary of the future just as much, if not more, than addressing the Geary of today.
“After being briefed by staff, I feel confident that this agency, that’s us up here, has bent over backwards and gone above and beyond to try to ameliorate the concerns from my people, the merchants, including moving multiple bike-share stations to add additional parking and keeping two lanes for car traffic.”
Yekutiel said he was concerned about the tone of the conversations between the City and the merchants.
“I must express my thoughts on the level of rancor that has proceeded today’s meeting; voices raised, horrific accusations, generally high levels of drama and leaders in our City on all sides of this debate acting in ways unbecoming of leadership,” he said. “This discourse on this project is the perfect microcosm of what is hampering our fair city from being the best version of ourselves.”
The Board then voted unanimously to begin the quick-build project this fall and not wait for the SFPUC construction to begin.
Categories: SFMTA
Richmond Review/Sunset Beacon 
Stop whining. This project is long overdue. It’s absurd to ask “Why now?” It’s been 20 years of kvetching which has received more attention than it ever deserved.
LikeLike
You totally ignored any of the article’s points, as usual.
LikeLike
Disrupting businesses and traffic for a savings of 5 minutes? The SFMTA is an autocratic city bureau that needs a leadership change. They purport to have open community meetings then make already determined decisions. Bus ridership is not going to improve with a five minute faster trip. It’s going to improve by decreasing crime, improving frequency and reliability, and improving bus stops which have broken glass, graffiti, dirt, homeless people sleeping in them. Well at least they moved the little used bike rental stations. All the SFMTA measures to move people to bicycles has not moved the dial significantly, nor decreased traffic injuries per their own Vision Zero reports.
LikeLike
I think Christina is still waging last year’s battles with the not so subtle dig at “bike rental stations.” JFK Promenade. The GreatWalkway. Slow Streets are now the reality. Set in concrete. The Geary transit project, delayed for 20 years by people who are living in a fossil fuel fog, is finally a reality.
LikeLike
The Great Walkway is only on the weekends instead or 7 days a week, thanks to common sense. Enough with your constant hate for cars. The vast majority of San Franciscans use a car for transportation. The War On Cars must be right up your alley. People don’t ride MUNI because the service sucks for all the reasons Christina mentioned, not because it’s 5 minutes too slow. Get over yourself
LikeLike
For once Leeheidues gets one thing right, I’m still fighting the battles over the corrupt SFMTA which has been infiltrated by the SF Bike Coalition to the point they have been fined by the SF Ethics Committee for illegal lobbying. “In the Matter of San Francisco Bicycle Coalition, San Francisco Bicycle Coalition Education Fund, Brian Wiedenmeier, and Janice Li – The Commission approved a total of $11,325 in penalties through a settlement agreement with the 501(c)(4) non-profit the San Francisco Bicycle Coalition, its associated 501(c)(3) Education Fund, and two former employees for 12 lobbying counts and one campaign finance count. The law requires that lobbyists register and report their contacts of City officers so that the public can have confidence in the fairness and responsiveness of local government decision-making. Without this transparency, the public is not aware of potential influences on government officials. Over a period of five years from 2017 to 2021, Respondents Wiedenmeier and Li, Executive Director and Advocacy Director for the Bicycle Coalition, respectively, made a total of 389 reportable lobbying contacts on behalf of the without registering or reporting as lobbyists, as required under City law.” We have email evidence of collusion between the SF Bicycle Coalition and SF Park and Rec to sway outreach surveys and hearing by giving the SFBC advance notice of surveys and hearings “to get their people out”. We have the history of the SFMTA publishing an advance agenda claiming 4 slow streets were to be considered and instead 17 were approved including the much disputed slow Lake Street. Meaning it was a foregone conclusion. Leeheidues continues his repetitive posts that perfectly reflect the intent of rabid bicycle enthusiasts who want to force cars out of SF despite SFMTA studies showing bicyclists comprise about 2% of residents of the western side of SF, that bus ridership continues to remain low, and the personal car use ROSE over the past few years despite the bike rental stations, the street closures, the creation of bicycle lanes and temporary bike parking stations that at the last SFMTA budget meeting eclipsed money earmarked for road repair. Now the SFMTA wants to imperil small businesses that are just recovering from the pandemic by making changes that result in a FIVE minute improvement in transit time with a fast build, knowing that in one year the street will be torn up again for the sewer repairs and all that work will be undone. Insisting on building now instead of delaying until AFTER the roads are torn up for the water and sewer work is illogical unless you are infiltrated by the anti-car side like the SF Bike Coalition has done. Public works is finally being cleaned up for it’s corruption, SFMTA and SF Park and Rec need to follow.
LikeLike
These comments are filled with rage and incredible anger at one citizen, Mr. Heidhues, pointing out the obvious.
Changes need to be enacted by the city if Transit First City and Vision Zero SF goals are to be met and not tabled nor kicked down the rabbit hole of inertia.
Drivers feel entitled to sole ownership of our streets. Yet prioritizing cars over people has resulted in the deaths and injury of a number of pedestrians and cyclists this year, and it has every year, in San Francisco.
I have seen a childhood buddy lying in the street of 2nd Ave between Lake and California Streets after being hit by a car. The street was unsafe for kids to play in in the 1950s. Slow Lake Street has made 2nd Ave a bit safer for kids.
My bicycling friend was hit-run by a driver running a red-light of a 25th Ave intersection in the Richmond in the 80s. He woke up in the hospital to face mounting medical costs to repair his broken clavicle, ribs, etc. He bears lifetime scars. Crossing high speed 25th Ave is still dangerous.
My daughter saw a driver hit a woman crossing at 39th Avenue to get to the 38 Geary bus stop. The impact knocked the woman’s dentures out of her mouth. My daughter told me it was not a pleasant sight and never talked about it again. Crossing 39th Ave to get to the Geary bus stop is still dangerous.
It is time for drivers to stop painting Mr. Heidhues with the same hate-mongering brush they paint all advocates pushing for safer streets, better public transportation, and greater stewardship of our planet, for our climate is being destroyed by greenhouse gas emissions from drivers refusing to give up their dependency on the private automobile.
LikeLiked by 1 person
The issue is the removal of parking on Geary between 15th and 28th Avenues. That’s what the merchants are fighting. This is a very short stretch of the 38 Geary bus route. MTA’s Liz Brisson conflates the data when she reports a time savings of 5.5 minutes, at the most, between Palm and 30th Aves. The time-saving between 15th and 28th Aves. is approximately 30-45 seconds! It’s misleading and deceptive for MTA to present the data the way they do. And this time savings of a fraction of a minute will cost merchants their livelihoods. As word gets out that parking on this stretch of Geary is more difficult, shoppers and diners will go elsewhere. This is a needless tragedy and must not be tolerated. It’s ironic that at the same time MTA is pushing for this quick build to increase transit ridership, it’s also considering reducing transit lines throughout the City. Sorry, Mr. Tumlin, you can’t have it both ways.
LikeLike
The “tragedy,” a misuse of that word in this context, is that The City withstood and accommodated this whining for 20 years before finally saying ENOUGH. There is no proven evidence that limiting vehicular traffic has a negative impact on business. Quite the contrary. A more pedestrian friendly environment entices consumers. It’s a boon for business. Motorists continue to deny the world is changing and will continue to choke on their rhetorical hot air fumes
LikeLike
May I remind the naysayers of improvements to the Geary bus line that Mr. Sean Kim, one of the most strident foes of a dedicated Geary bus lane, has removed several parking spaces for his own benefit – to build a parklet for the customers of his business – Joe’s Ice Cream. I have walked by Mr. Kim’s parklet and seen his customers chatting blithely away in their seats with nary a concern they are “costing” others “their livelihood” eating ice cream from Mr. Kim’s store in parking spaces they occupy exclusively for Mr. Kim’s benefit and for no other businesses. If Ms. Barish believes only the people wealthy enough to own cars are the ones who shop and dine at the businesses on Geary, she should think again. I walk the Geary corridor daily and there is a lot of foot traffic with people getting on and off the Geary bus. Many elderly people with shopping carts ride the bus shopping on Geary. To insinuate that only people wealthy enough to own and maintain cars is the population upon which the businesses on Geary are dependent is both patrician and discriminatory.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Imagine if David Heller, a name that is somehow not mentioned once in this article, and people such as yourself had spent the last 20 years working with the city toward a walkable street like Clement, instead of fighting the future with every once of your strength. You would have realized about 10-15 years ago that you don’t need two lanes for private vehicles past 15th, and you could have kept your angled parking. Or you could have gotten center running BRT, and also not touched the parking. David Heller has no one to blame but his own demands – he’s getting most of what he wanted: nothing.
LikeLiked by 1 person
A walkable street like Clement is not realistic. Unlike Clement, Geary is a major thoroughfare from downtown SF to the ocean. It’d be nice, in a perfect world, if that wasn’t the case. But that’s just not the way it is now or in the foreseeable future.
LikeLike
Elizabeth Heidhues, obviously not a dispassionate observer. “Pointing out the obvious” is not so obvious, particularly not with his bombastic scolding rhetoric.
Children should not be playing in the street, particularly since the SF Park and Rec boasts there’s a park within a 10 minute walks for practically every SF resident. A slow Lake that encourages children to play in streets is a poor model for decreasing traffic injuries, particularly when Mountain Lake park is one block away with a full playground dedicated to recreation and having no cars. Encouraging people to walk in streets closed to cars but still allowing bicyclists to run stop signs/lights with impunity creates a false sense of security. I once watched an intersection on Clement for some time and I would say most cars observed the stop signs and red lights whereas 90% of bicyclists did not. Better to have modes separated, pedestrians on sidewalks, bicyclists on protected bike lanes and cars sharing the road. If what the SFMTA is currently doing is so effective, why have Vision Zero data showed no real change in injuries? You really think 45 seconds to 5 min of a shortened bus commute is going to get people back to riding buses? Hardly given the problems I outlined in my first post. All those efforts have also NOT increased bicycle use by West Side residents by any large percentage per the SFMTA modes of transportation studies done regularly.
LikeLike
My goodness, Ms. Shih. In the 50s children played ball and learned to roller skate and ride their bicycles in the streets right outside their homes. Our mothers could see us from the windows of the houses we lived in. I suspect you would like to take away from people their choices as to how they want to lead their lives. Ordering children to play only in parks or making it impossible for bicyclists to cycle on safer streets is rather like abdicating the freedoms of others to the pursuits of your own particular lifestyle. Nonetheless, you asked and answered your own question about our safety in our streets. You stated Vision Zero data is showing no decrease in deaths and injuries from people being struck by motorists. Not by bicyclists. Not by pedestrians. But by motorists. It’s getting boring. Ciao!
LikeLiked by 1 person
Elizabeth Heidhues, the people that want to tell others how to live are the ones that insist everyone should ride bicycles (like Lee Heidhues) no matter their physical capacity, their occupation, their work schedule, their children’s schools and after school activities. If you want to live in a neighborhood where children can ride bicycles and play in the street you might want to try suburbs with cul de sacs or rural areas. And you might not invest in parks in SF since you don’t want to use them for their intended purpose namely recreation and would prefer to play in the street. I actually looked at the Transbase data base of injuries and where they occur; among bicycling injuries it’s now bicyclists doing it to themselves. Injuries to pedestrians in bike/pedestrian accidents are usually attributed to unsafe operation of the bicycle. And bicyclists and scooters do kill pedestrians as well when they use the same spaces – hence Paris’ recent ban of e scooters. New York’s proposed regulation of e bicycles because of deaths from e bike battery fires.
LikeLike
Christina. Victors are magnanimous. We overcame the incessant well funded Cadre of The Entitled Motorists. We prevailed at the legislature. The ballot box. The courthouse. A trifecta. We will continue the campaign and achieve further victories for pedestrians and cyclists.
LikeLike
Lee Heidues, ha ha ha, apparently you don’t know the definition of “magnanimous”….Look it up.
LikeLike
Christina, Elizabeth a Luddite is for the complete elimination of cars from our lives. You’re beating your head against the ground, to her delight.
LikeLike
Noonan, well, I could be beating my head against the ground. However, I had a working mother (as I was) so mothers won’t be conveniently watching outside the window as we played in the street. In fact, I think we would be getting yelled at for playing in the street.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I want to emphasize the most salient point made by Rolling Eyes re the Geary Transit project opposition, “fighting the future with every once of your strength.” Rolling Eyes said it much more succinctly than I ever could. It’s a shame SFMTA and assorted City Hall officials, elected and otherwise, were able to obfuscate, delay and, ultimately, fail in their campaign to deny the reality that cars no longer rule San Francisco.
LikeLike
The problem is that transit is not improving to meet the demand and dreams of those opposing cars. Taking away cars w/o improving transit is a lose-lose proposition.
LikeLike
Ms. Shih, as for your denigrating my mother, discrediting her memory by suggesting she didn’t work, and lifting YOUR mother above mine, let me tell you about my mother. My mother worked hard her entire life. She brought my sister and I with her to St. Monica’s where she manned the school cafeteria in the 1950s. She worked at convents and rectories and she spent her hard-earned money on our education and our parochial school uniforms. My mother, only 4’ 9” and severely disabled, took care of and raised the children of single divorced mothers in the 1950s and beyond. Her work never ended. But it was the only work she could find in those times having a disability. However, she wasn’t uneducated and intolerant, like you seem to be. So please Ms. Shih. Leave my mother out of your offensive comments about me.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Elizabeth Heidhues. I quote: “Our mothers could see us (playing in the street) from our houses we were living in”. I responded that working mothers could not be doing that (if they were working someplace outside of their home). Apparently your mother also did not watch kids from her home playing in the street during all the hours she had to work. You can take that as a personal attack but it’s just a statement. I stand by the comment that working mothers or not most parents I know would tell their children not to play in the street.
LikeLike
Elizabeth Heidhues, and if we are going to revert back to the 50’s then you should stop wearing seat belts (oh dear, that would abdicate your freedom to choose how to live) and take up smoking (oh dear, another abdication of your freedom to choose how to live). Oh, and don’t forget bicycle helmets, another abdication of your freedom. Those “orders” are impinging on your pursuit of your particular lifestyle. Just like your desire to close off streets to cars is impinging on the lifestyles of others who choose not to ride bicycles exclusively because gee, maybe they have to carry tools and equipment, or work odd hours when it’s unsafe to use bicycles/public transit. Yes, it’s getting boring all right hearing from the bicycling evangelicals.
LikeLike