Save the Central Freeway -- Vote Yes on J
by Adam Sparks

Everyone agrees that San Francisco traffic is in gridlock. It’s a nightmare. However, some folks think the answer to our traffic problem is to dump another 93,000 cars onto city streets. They’re crazy. They’re insane!

The voters, fed up with governmental inaction in rebuilding the freeway, passed Proposition H in 1997, to restore the freeway. The next year a band of ne’er do wells came up with an alternative street plan, Prop. E, which also passed. This plan for a boulevard is in reality nothing more than a parking lot with trees.

The Prop. E campaign was deceitful. It didn’t indicate that a freeway would be torn down and neither does the current Prop. I in its main explanation. Moreover, not- withstanding the battle over statistics, the facts are that an estimated 93,000 cars will be poured onto city streets. This is something this city doesn’t need. We need less cars on the streets. The Octavia Boulevard plan is taking us in the wrong direction.

Moreover, the state pays for the maintenance of the freeways, the city will have to pay for the maintenance of the boulevard in perpetuity, these expenses will be competing against Muni, AIDS services, senior programs, etc. That’s insanity.

The housing that will be created from either Props. I or J will be nearly identical. Don’t be persuaded by scurrilous claims of Prop. I proponents.

In November, voters will decide once again whether to rebuild the Central Freeway, which was damaged in the Loma Prieta earthquake. The Central Freeway must be rebuilt. It will save: time, money, the environment and people’s lives. Let’s look at each factor in detail:

1) Time. The Octavia Boulevard Plan will create an instant bottleneck. The Octavia Plan’s street alternative design has two lanes exiting the freeway South of Market Street and will try to cross Market street into a two lane road. In contrast, currently three lanes exit the Fell Street off ramp of the freeway and go into three lanes on Fell Street westbound. And even this is barely adequate, particularly during rush hours.

The Octavia Plan will constrict traffic, as compared to the Central Freeway by 52 percent according to a 1997 Caltrans study. The study also indicated that it will slow the commute. If just four minutes of travel time are lost in each direction, multiplied by the 93,000 cars that use the freeway each day, 37 weeks of time will be collectively lost each day by hapless commuters. This is time away from people’s loved ones.

2) Environment. Freeways are ugly, but they’re necessary to a modern transportation system. When the Embarcadero Freeway was torn down, it opened up a major view corridor to the bay. This will not happen by tearing down the Central Freeway because there is no major view corridor that will open up. Moreover, the Embarcadero Freeway carried a fraction of the commuter traffic as compared to the Central Freeway. The Central Freeway, also known as part of U.S. 101, is a major regional component to our Bay Area transportation system, not only taking drivers to the northern and western parts of town, but also serving traffic moving north and south to other parts of Hwy. 101. Most of us consider ourselves environmentalists, so is tearing down a vital Bay Area freeway. Environmentally friendly? No way.

Thousands of pounds of additional particulates, nitrogen oxide and carbon monoxide, will be spewed in the air each day due to both slower moving traffic and increased stop and go traffic, caused by waiting for lights, pedestrians, etc.

South of Market is gridlocked now. Just imagine what will happen when 93,000 more cars are dumped there. That’s insanity. There’ll be more gridlock in the South of Market area as thousands of cars seek alternative routes. More road rage.

Noise travels up, so an elevated freeway reduces sound impact on shops and homes. Putting the traffic on the street level will increase the decibel level on the streets.

3) Money. $22 million dollars was just spent by Caltrans to retrofit the Central Freeway. That work was only just substantially completed this year. That money will be flushed down the toilet if the freeway is torn down, unless voters save it this November.

4) Lives. There are already more traffic-related injuries happening around the area of the damaged Central Freeway according to the police department. People are getting killed and injured on the streets. Putting that many more cars on surface streets, mixed with pedestrians, is a recipe for disaster.

Not to be overlooked in this new ballot initiative is a major provision mandating the city to develop a comprehensive, annual traffic study, preceded by quarterly public meetings. San Francisco lacks a formal traffic plan. How else can the absolute insanity that is now called driving the streets of San Francisco, be explained?

A comprehensive traffic study might encourage drivers to park in satellite parking garages outside the downtown core and tale the shuttle to their offices. A comprehensive traffic plan might also develop a network of bike and public transit-only routes, or even pedestrian malls on certain streets within the downtown core. This is the kind of transportation balance that might be achieved with the passage of the new Central Freeway and its transit plan ordinance this November.

“I” is for insanity. Vote no on Prop. I and yes on J. Save the freeway.

Adam Sparks is with San Franciscans for Transportation Solutions.