By Audrey Liu
At around 5:18 a.m. on Jan. 31, before twilight or sunrise had struck, a driver set off and headed westbound on Fulton Street. Driving down the hill just before the road’s intersection with Arguello, they proceeded through on a green light. However, an elderly man was still walking across the street. We lost another neighbor to traffic violence in the crash that ensued.
One can hypothesize a myriad of factors that lead to the crash. It was dark out, therefore visibility was reduced. The driver could have been tired. Maybe the victim began crossing the intersection too late. But this isn’t the first traffic crash on Fulton. According to San Francisco city data, in the past year two people have died and almost 50 people were injured on Fulton. Arguello Boulevard, too, is notably a part of SFMTA’s high-injury network, the 12% of city streets responsible for almost 70% of severe and fatal injuries. While every collision has unique circumstances, the overarching pattern is clear and consistent: Fulton and Arguello are undeniably dangerous streets.
Traffic crashes have been coupled with automobiles since their inception. If one were to look at the map of traffic injuries and deaths from 1927, before robust traffic rules and regulation, and compare it with today’s SFMTA map, there are striking similarities. Crashes occur overwhelmingly on main thoroughfares, where cars can drive fast and are near dense population centers like merchant corridors, neighborhoods or parks.
A compelling theory that connects many of our City’s crashes is that vehicle speeds (and weight) increase the deadliness of a crash, and pedestrian density increases the likelihood. The history of traffic engineering has designed our city streets to move cars fast even in the most populated areas.
Looking through this lens, it is no coincidence that Fulton has such a shameful record. In recent years, SFMTA proposed, and partially completed, the “Fulton Street Safety and Transit Project” to address some of these concerns. Daylighting and painted safety zones have improved the visibility of pedestrians in some locations, but the project does not go far enough to address the underlying problem. Cars are allowed to drive at 30 mph, faster compared to a much wider thoroughfare like Geary Boulevard. Critically, a pedestrian collision at that speed could also mean around a 20% chance of death. Fulton is next to a daycare, senior center, coffee shop, residential units and Golden Gate Park. Plenty of people congregate around and travel along Fulton every day, yet there are substandard crosswalks with no signal or pedestrian cycle. The walk timer at Arguello is 50% shorter compared to Sixth, Eighth and 10th avenues. Ultimately, street design and regulation exacerbate these crashes.
Short-term solutions to Fulton’s traffic crashes involve extending walk signal times and installing speed cameras. Long-term solutions could include a dedicated bus lane to increase transit ridership, pedestrian bulb outs, and reduced speed limits from 30 mph to 25 or even 20.
There are exceedingly few municipalities in the world that have achieved Vision Zero, the goal of zero traffic deaths and no serious injuries. While this partly speaks to the scale of the problem – undoing decades of “auto mania” that widened streets, removed streetcars and expanded parking since the 1950s – it also indicates the political challenges involved. Still, there are lessons our City and neighborhood can learn from the few that accomplished this milestone.
Oslo achieved Vision Zero in 2019 by reimagining their streets to be more people focused and public transportation oriented. Parking was removed in favor of miniature parks and pedestrianized spaces. Dangerous arterial roads were redesigned to prioritize biking and buses. And traffic was calmed to much safer speeds. Co-benefits also included significantly reduced transportation emissions and a more connected and vibrant city.
Anxieties and concerns bubble up when road space or parking is reduced in favor of safer pedestrian or active transportation infrastructure. The Richmond is no exception. It is tempting to say that this dichotomy doesn’t exist. But it is not a coincidence that America leads OECD (Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development) countries in traffic deaths and drives the most per capita than anywhere else in the world. Solving traffic crashes will require us to reflect upon our beliefs around transportation and question if the ubiquity of driving is worth the toll on our community.
There is no doubt that the driver who crashed into our neighbor would do anything to avoid this tragedy given the chance to do so. Collectively we have prioritized the movement of vehicles over the safety and livability of our City. What is left for us is to decide whether we want these tragedies to continue. I urge our neighborhood to take a step toward a safer Richmond. Please consider emailing our representatives for a safer Fulton.
Audrey Liu a D1 resident and a local transportation advocate, and member of San Francisco Transit Riders Union, Walk SF and Bike SF.
Categories: From a Reader
Richmond Review/Sunset Beacon 
Yes, pedestrian safety is often touted as the rationale for slow streets, road closures like the Great Highway etc but there is NEVER an explanation for why the SFMTA, Park and Rec and the city close low injury streets (Lake, Great Highway) and divert MORE traffic to known high injury streets (Geary, California, Fulton). All the measures described have been attempted for the past decade with NO improvement in Vision Zero statistics. Doing the same thing over and over again thinking the results will change is the definition of insanity. Promoting bicycling has not resulted in increased bicycle use as the primary mode of transportation according to the SFMTA’s own data, at least not in the western part of SF. It still remains in the 2% range. I don’t doubt that intersections are dangerous but encouraging people to walk and “recreate” in streets instead of using sidewalks is counterproductive. Totally separating bicyclists from motorists is the safer approach instead of “slow” streets which still allow bicyclists, pedestrians and vehicles on the road. Improving public transportation instead of detracting (like the recent SFMTA’s proposals for reduced service) would do more to encourage less use of cars. I wrote to the SFMTA after watching a 38 Limited bus pass another bus using the transit only lane then proceeding for the next 10-15 blocks using the right traffic lane and NOT the dedicated transit lane. So after losing street parking, removing half of the left turns etc for the rapid build, the respondent from the SFMTA said that buses are not mandated to use the transit lanes and could use the traffic lanes if desired. You disrupt a neighborhood to improve transit and then don’t use the dedicated lane? Really? Pedestrian safety includes pedestrian education (wear bright colors at night, wear lights if possible, don’t look at your phone while crossing, check for traffic and don’t assume cars will stop for you), driver education (make sure you have eye contact with a crossing pedestrian, obey traffic laws, be extra careful at right turn on red corners and making lefts), and bicyclist education (follow traffic laws including stopping at red lights and stop signs, not passing to the left of cars, watching for people IN cars opening up doors in parking lanes).
LikeLike
Thanks for taking the opportunity to publish a totally incoherent rant and illuminating a perfect example of ‘strawman argument,’ all at the same time! I think you didn’t go far enough—you should’ve also blamed electric vehicles and scooters and smartphones with bigger screens. Maybe the Vision Pro, too. And the Central Subway, and High-Speed Rail. Really anything that’s more of a tangible thing now than 10 years ago when Vision Zero was adopted in the US.
For those who actually care about plausible things to blame for more pedestrians on Fulton: I posit that the laws of physics have something to do with it. SFMTA has failed once again in its ‘quick build’ mindset to slow cars down in a meaningful way. Thus the carnage continues.
LikeLike
As a society, we decided that eliminating all COVID deaths was not worth the cost and collateral damage. If we can justify that reality, then perhaps we should be open to the idea that eliminating all traffic fatalities may not be worth the cost and collateral damage. I’m not claiming to know the exact balance, but “VisionZero” supporters believe there is no cost or collateral damage that is too great.
LikeLike
Wow! Y’all are on a roll here! I forgot about Covid as a possible strawman. Thanks, Outer Richmond resident, for sharing your ignorance of how epidemiology works and sharing your disdain for fellow humans with that comment.
LikeLike
By your charming words, anybody who disagrees with your analysis is ignorant, hates people, and “doesn’t actually care”. The irritation you seem to be expressing may be karma. Respectfully, double check your understanding of “straw man argument”. Neither Christina nor I distorted someone else’s argument to make it easier to attack or refute. We expressed disagreement with policies enacted under the guise of the Vision Zero program. It seems like you are also unhappy with the effectiveness of the actions taken by SFMTA. My opinion is that while the goal of Vision Zero is admirable, the costs to achieve that goal probably outweigh the benefits. I don’t want to see any “carnage”, I just happen to believe that our limited tax money is better spent on other things, like public schools.
LikeLike
You can ask why residence get 28 seconds to crosswalk Street 22nd and Fulton in 18 seconds at 37th in Fulton. One answer might be to re-engineer Fulton Street to put in small roundabouts like in the presidio Lincoln inGirard Rd
also we need a new leader ship in a new way of letting board directors MTA two of the board members Live in the Richmond District what are they down to slow traffic down on Fulton Street.
LikeLike