potrero view

March 2009

Divisive Traffic Congestion Fee Proposal Prompts Calls for More Transit

Lisa Tehrani

Potrero Hill residents tend to rely on their cars.  With wide streets, ample parking and few transit options, many locals claim that driving is an essential part of their daily lives.  That may change, though, if the San Francisco County Transportation Authority (SFCTA) implements a program that would charge drivers to use certain roads during the busiest times of the day as a way to reduce traffic congestion.

 Under SFCTA’s proposal, 18th Street could serve as the southern boundary for one of the congestion zones.  Residents that live even one block south of the zone who drive north to get to the gym, freeway or grocery store during peak traffic hours could be charged to do so.  SFCTA is considering assessing a $3 fee between 6 and 9 a.m. and 3 and 7 p.m. during weekdays.  There’d be no charge on weekends. Discounts might be provided for residents living within a zone, and for people with limited incomes or disabilities.

SFCTA presented the proposal at a Potrero Boosters Neighborhood Association meeting in January, with a hostile response from meeting participants.  Zabe Bent, SFCTA principal planner, described two scenarios for the congestion program.  Under the first, called the Double Ring, a fee would be assessed to enter or exit the City at specific locations, with another charge to enter or exit the downtown area.  The second, titled Northeast Cordon, would include San Francisco’s northeast quadrant, with Divisadero Street serving as the western boundary and 18th Street as the southern one.  The projected $35 to $65 million dollars in fee revenues would be used to improve transit service and City streets, including calibrating traffic signal timing, resurfacing roads, adding bike and pedestrian pathways, and installing real-time information systems.  

The San Francisco Bay Area is the second most congested region in the country.  And while Potrero Hill doesn’t currently suffer from significant overcrowding, SFCTA considered future population increases when determining possible program boundaries.  According to SFCTA, traffic bottlenecks hinder the regional economy, and significantly contribute to greenhouse gas emissions.  Without action congestion isn’t going to improve:  the Bay Area’s population is expected to steadily increase, prompting more traffic.  SFCTA projects that vehicle-related greenhouse gas emissions would decline by 15 percent under the plan.

Meeting participants expressed concerns about the proposal’s cost to drivers and impacts on local businesses.  According to SFCTA, other cities with similar programs, such as London, have experienced a positive impact on local businesses by increasing the amount of people that can access their services.  However, Topher Delaney, a Dogpatch-based landscape architect, stated that program adoption could prompt her to move to a less expensive location outside San Francisco.

Meeting participants expressed outrage that the Northeast Cordon zone would cut the neighborhood in half, consequently charging residents to access essential services, such as the University of California, San Francisco community center and Potrero Shopping Center.  Former Boosters president John deCastro, with support from other meeting attendees, asserted that there’s inadequate bus service to the Potrero Shopping Center, a mile away from his house, and that he always drives there as a result.  In response, Bent explained that SFCTA is considering ways to keep neighborhoods whole.  “Moving the boundary is certainly something we are going to be looking at in the next couple of months,” she said, as is providing residents that live within a zone a fee discount.

Another meeting participant estimated that under the proposal he’d have to spend more than $1,000 a year to take his children to and from school. Bent responded that SFCTA is working with the San Francisco Unified School District to expand school bus programs, and develop ridesharing or carpooling options. “We have looked at providing discounts to school age children,” she stated.

Some meeting participants said that they hoped that the City’s recent transit analysis, the Transit Effectiveness Project, or TEP, performed by the Municipal Transportation Agency and San Francisco Office of the Controller, would improve transit in Potrero, but have come to believe that it will make things worse. One attendee joked that TEP stands for “Transit Elimination Project.”  TEP recommendations include discontinuing the 10 Townsend, which is used to go downtown, and the 53 Southern Heights, which accesses Bay Area Rapid Transit (BART). The 22 Fillmore, a popular bus line that also links with BART, would be rerouted around Potrero.  Meeting attendees pointed to the difficulty of getting downtown, with the T-Third light rail line providing little help given its inconsistent service.

Tony Kelly, Boosters president, stated that Potrero Hill residents have been asking for additional transit options for more than a decade, especially in light of the significant new housing slated for Showplace Square.  “I want to support this idea,” said Kelly, “But I also want to take transit when I go to Civic Center and downtown, but I can’t because the service is dismal.”  Dick Millet, Boosters vice president, agreed. “You got to write in a guarantee that the transportation system is there,” he said.  “It is hard to see beyond what we have today, but part of the goal is to improve what we have today and the options that are available,” responded Bent.  She noted that congestion fee funds could be used to offer more transit alternatives.  “As the study is finalized we can get a better sense of the services that would be in the package,” she said.

The San Francisco Board of Supervisors will ultimately determine whether to adopt the fee program.  The Board was originally set to consider the proposal this winter, but, according to Bent, “People want more time to understand the benefits and impacts and talk through the process. We also need to complete the economic impact analysis.”  The Board is likely to review the concept over the next several months.

Subscribe to The Potrero View

All rights reserved. Copyright © 2006 The Potrero View.

Content on this site may not be archived, retransmitted, saved in a database, or used for any commercial purpose without the express written permission of The Potrero View or its Publishers.