0SPUR SPUR BOARD OF DIRECTORS

r d Adhi Nagraj Anne Halsted Carl Anthony Brad Paul

Veronica Bell Rich Peterson "Ul1 Chris Block Chris Poland ( Larry Burnett Teresa Rea

David Friedman Michaela Cassidy Byron Rhett Madeline Chun Rebecca Rhine Charmaine Curtis Wade Rose

Alexa Arena Oz Erickson Paul Sedway Andy Barnes Manny Flores Victor Seeto Emilio Cruz Geoff Gibbs Elizabeth Seif el Bill Rosetti Gillian Gillett Carl Shannon Lydia Tan Chris Gruwell Chi-Hsln Shao V. Fel Tsen Ed Harrington Doug Shoemaker

Dave Hartley Ontario Smith Aldan Hughes Bill Stotler

Mary Mccue Chris Iglesias Stuart Sunshine Laurie Johnson Michael Teitz V.J. Kumar Mike Theriault

Bob Gamble Susan Leal Will Travis Dick Lonergan Molly Turner

I m nl " John Madden Jett Tumlin Co Janine McCaflery Steve Vettel Linda Jo Fitz Jacinta Mccann Francesca Vietor

Hyrdra Mendoza Fran Weld Ezra Mersey Allison Williams

Co-Chairs Terry Micheau Cynthia Wilusz Lovell Michael Alexander Mary Murphy Cindy Wu Paul Sedway Jeanne Myerson

CHAIRS & COMMITTEES

Pr09ram CommlttHs

Bob Gamble

L I r Pl Laurie Johnson Chris Poland

Hou Ing Ezra Mersey Lydia Tan

ProJ ct Review Charmaine Curtis Mary Beth Sanders Reuben Schwartz

Tra portallon Anthony Bruzzone

Water Polley Bry Sa rte

I

Larry Burnett Libby Selfe!

Optr1tlng Committees

Audit John Madden

an Larry Burnett

flu Hem nip Tom Hart Terry Micheau

l• utlve David Friedman Anne Halsted

Bob Gamble

Mary Mccue

IVI

Ht b hip Bill Stotler

Inv 111ent Ann Lazarus

Major Donor Linda Jo Fitz Anne Halsted

dGlvln,i Michaela Cassidy

Sliver SPUR Dave Hartley Teresa Rea

SAN JOSE ADVISORY BOARD

Teresa Alvarado Andy Barnes Chris Block J. Richard Braugh Larry Burnett Brian Darrow Gordon Feller

2 JUNE 2013

Garrett Herbert Dr. Mohammad Karla Rodriguez Qayoumi

Lomax Robert Steinberg, James MacGregor FAIA Connie Martinez Lydia Tan Janine Mccaffery Kim Walesh Anu Natarajan Jessica Zenk •

LETTER FROM THE DIRECTOR

Vision First

Taking down a freeway is not a new idea in San Francisco. Two major

freeways - the double-decker freeway that rounded the Embarcadero

and the Central Freeway which cut through Hayes Valley - were

demolished and replaced with surface boulevards. Both of these were

severely damaged in the 1989 Loma Prieta earthquake, leading some

to quip that the gods had their own planning agenda in mind for San Francisco - one that didn't include elevated roadways.

Of course it wasn't the earthquake that actually got the freeways taken down; it was the hard work of individuals who wanted to see

something better in their city. In 1990, then mayor Art Agnos called for the Embarcadero Freeway to be taken down and lost his re-election bid

Sarah Karlinsky

is SPUR'S Deputy

Director

the next year. In the late 1990s, multiple competing ballot measures were placed before

voters representing very different visions for Hayes. Valley - some seeking to rebuild the

Central Freeway and others to create a new surface boulevard and park in the form of Octavia Boulevard. Ultimately, both freeways came down and few would argue that the city isn't the better for it.

Such changes in cities don't just happen. People have to develop a vision for change and

convince ·others that such change is good. People with technical expertise need to weigh

in to make sure the details work; politicians have to find the political will to make it happen.

The people who had the vision in the first place need to hold on to that vision and push

forward even when all hope seems lost.

This is the path forward with all great transformations, not just with the boulevards, but also with the creation of regional treasures like the Golden Gate National Recreation Area

and Crissy Field and the development of BART. We hope to add to these successes with the creation of a Transbay Transit Center, a reimagined Ocean Beach, a thriving downtown San

Jose and a high speed rail system that will connect all of California.

This issue of The Urbanist is about a new big idea. Actually, three big ideas. The first is

to have Caltrain and high-speed rail travel underground through Mission Bay. The second

is to take down Highway 280 and replace it with a surface boulevard. The third is to move

the railyards at Fourth and King in order to redevelop the site with jobs, housing and retail.

Taken together, these changes would have an enormous positive impact on the eastern part of San Francisco, helping to make better connections between SOMA, Mission Bay and

Potrero Hill while strengthening our regional transit network. The plans and diagrams in the following pages are meant to be part of a conversation

that is starting to percolate among increasing numbers of people interested in replacing

portions of Highway 280 with something better. Our work is meant to lead to more

questions and ideas. more thinking , more asking "What if?". It is the first step forward on

what will be most certainly a very long path toward change. We look forward to continuing

the conversation - and to creatively facing the challenges ahead. •

Cover illustration by Shawn Hazen. The Urbanist is edited by Allison Ariefl and designed by Shawn Hazen, hazencreative.com. THE URBANIST

JUNE 2013

News at SPUR

Draft Central Corridor Plan: Looks Good, Needs More Height Last month the planning department released a draft of the

Central Corridor Plan, the result of several years of planning

efforts. The plan represents an enormous opportunity to

build on the substantial transit investment in the area, most

notably the $1 .6 billion Central Subway project, as well as

existing transit in the form of the Fourth and King Caltrain

station and the N Judah, as well as many local bus lines.

There's much to like in the Central Corridor Plan, including

greater flexibility in zoning with an eye toward encouraging

job uses as well as streetscape and biking improvements.

However, the plan doesn't go far enough in promoting

housing and especially job uses in this transit-rich location,

one of the few remaining areas in San Francisco where

going big makes sense. SPUR will continue to analyze the

plan, supporting all the great aspects while advocating for

improvements.

THE URBANIST

Ensuring Better Standards for BRT At its May meeting, the Santa

Clara Valley Transportation Authority (VTA) approved an

EIR addendum for the Santa

Clara/ Alum Rock Bus Rapid Transit project. The 7.2 mile­

project will serve downtown San

Jose, the HP Pavilion, San Jose State University, Eastridge Transit

Center. Mexican Heritage Plaza

and hundreds of businesses along

this corridor. SPUR worked with

VTA. the City of San Jose and other stakeholders to ensure that

a station would be located at San Jose City Hall and helped redesign

the downtown station to better

suit a dense urban setting. SPUR

will continue to advocate for a high standard of bus rapid transit

(BRT). one that will be a model for future BRT projects in the region.

Imagining a brighter future for the

Sixth Street corridor.

led by the Health Trust and the

city, as numerous neighborhoods

in San Jose are considered

food deserts - areas where residents have limited access to

fresh food. By removing existing

permit and zoning barriers to

small-scale fresh food retail

operations. the ordinance will

allow vendors to pilot new

business models that also help

increase residents ' access to

healthy foods.

Sixth and Market Intervention Brings Out the Community On May 18, SPUR partnered with

Twitter, Neighborland, SFMTA,

Rebar and URBAN SPACEship,

among other groups, to close

a parking lane on Sixth Street,

between Market and Stevenson Streets, and ask neighbors and

visitors alike to envision the future

San Jose Makes Selling of that corridor. Hundreds of Fresh Food Easier people participated. responding The City of San Jose recently to the question: "How do we

amended its vending ordinance to create a safer Sixth?" The ideas

make it easier for mobile vendors generated will help to guide the to sell fresh fruits and vegetables throughout the city, including on private land in residential neighborhoods. SPUR supported

this change, an effort

future of Sixth Street. •

JUNE 2013 3

THE FUTURE OF 280

Taking Down a Freeway to Reconnect a Neighborhood Three big urban planning moves that could transform

San Francisco.

Summary: Highway 280, the

Caltrain railyards, and plans for

high speed rail create barriers

between SoMA, Potrero Hill and

Mission Bay. But San Francisco has the opportunity to advance

bold new ideas that enhance

both our transportation system and the public realm.

By the Boulevard Task Force

All renderings courtesy of AECOM

unless otherwise noted

4 JUNE 2013

After the Embarcadero and Central Freeways were

severely damaged in the Loma Prieta earthquake,

San Francisco took a tragic situation and turned

it into a great urban planning success story: the

creation of the Embarcadero and Octavia boulevards. Taking down these freeways and replacing them with

surface boulevards created enormous positive land use changes in the surrounding neighborhoods. This

enabled San Francisco to reconnect with its waterfront

and supported the creation of the Market and Octavia

Neighborhood Plan.

San Francisco now has another opportunity to take down a freeway while creating major transportation infrastructure improvements in an important area

of the city. Currently, the stub end of Interstate 280

creates a barrier between the developing Mission Bay neighborhood and Potrero Hill. At the same time, the

Caltrain railyard - 19 acres stretching from Fourth Street to Seventh Street between King and Townsend

- forms a barrier between Mission Bay and SOMA.

The obstruction will only get worse if current plans

for high-speed rail proceed, forcing 16th Street

and Mission Bay Boulevard into depressed trenches

beneath the tracks and the elevated freeway.

SPUR believes that these challenges can be

addressed with a few dramatic urban planning and

THE URBANIST

18TH nn

THE URBANIST

FIGURE 1

What would a surface

boulevard look like?

Replacing 1-280 with a surface boulevard

would create many opportunities for

improvement, including the creation of

new green spaces that would help to link

many neighborhoods.together.

JUNE 2013 5

THE FUTURE OF 280

1 CEMOF is a new 20-acre faci lity located to the

north of Diridon Station in San Jose, replacing an

old 22-acre yard formerly located on the same site

and consolidating most of Caltrain's maintenance

and operations in one location. CEMOF is Caltrain's

centra l control facility, with water treatment and

6 JUNE 2013

FIGURE 2

The 280 elevated freeway and piles

The 1-280 freeway and supporting piles

form a barrier that is difficult - and in

some cases impossible - for pedestrians

to cross. The Caltrain tracks run between

these piles.

FIGURE 3

The freeway ramps

The freeway ramps form a tangle at

the edge of the railyards, creating yet

another barrier.

FIGURE 4

Sixteenth Street crossing under the freeway

Sixteenth Street currently runs at grade,

heading under the elevated freeway from

Potrero Hill to Mission Bay.

storage tracks, an on-site fueling facility, service

pits and a machine to wash trains. About 150

people work at CEMOF performing maintenance,

and roughly 120 Caltrain train crew members are

based there.

transportation infrastructure moves that could transform this divided part of the city while also generating funding for several key regionally

important transit projects - namely, the

electrification of Caltrain , the extension of Caltrain

into the Transbay Terminal and putting high-speed rail underground, as opposed to having it travel at

street level through Potrero Hill and Mission Bay,

which would require crossing streets to go below

grade. While the path to making these changes

will be a challenging one, SPUR believes that it

is worth developing this vision further to see if it

can be made into reality.

1. Existing Conditions

Right now, several massive infrastructure barriers

separate Mission Bay, Potrero Hill and SOMA from one another. 1-280 runs along Seventh Street, cutting

off Mission Bay from Potrero Hill. Sixteenth Street, which is slated to become a future transit connector

with a bus rapid transit (BRT) line, travels under 1-280 and across the Caltrain tracks.

To the north. the Ca/train railyard creates a large

barrier between Mission Bay, Showplace Square

and SoMa. taking up three long city blocks. Pedestrians. bicycles and vehicles cannot cross the site between Fourth Street and Mission Bay Boulevard, and a tangle of freeway ramps clutters

the southwest edge of the site.

Currently, the Caltrain railyard is used for train

storage and layover and for light servicing such

as emptying garbage and cleaning restrooms.

All of the important maintenance work is done at Caltrain's Central Equipment and Maintenance

Facility (CEMOF) in San Jose.1

Meanwhile, Mission Bay is currently being

developed into a regional employment center. The Mission Channel and the park are difficult to

access from the surrounding neighborhoods due to

their proximity to the freeway ramps, limiting their

potential use by workers and residents in Showplace

Square. Potrero Hill and SOMA. To add to these barriers, future plans for high­

speed rai l ca ll for lowering 16th Street below surface level in order to allow trains to run at street level

in the Ca/train right-of-way. If this happens, the entire

intersection of 16th and Seventh streets would

be subgrade, as would Mission Bay Boulevard. These

changes would undermine plans to upgrade 16th

Street into a viable transit, pedestrian. bicycle and

traffic route.

THE URBANIST

THE URBANIST

FIGURES

High-Speed Rail Authority proposal for 16th and Seventh streets

In the California High Speed Rail

Authority 's current proposal, 16th Street

would run in a depressed tr.ench under the

high-speed rail train.

FIGURE 6

An elevated view of the High-Speed Rail

Authority proposal

Portions of Seventh Street would dip

below grade as they approach 16th Street.

FIGURE 7

High-Speed Rail Authority proposal for Mission Bay Boulevard

Mission Bay Boulevard would run beneath

high-speed rail in an underground loop

structure.

2 . Future rail transit infrastructure

Significant regional transit improvements are slated

for downtown San Francisco and the surrounding area. Caltrain has planned a system upgrade to

electrify its tracks and purchase new electric trains

that allow for faster acceleration and deceleration, more service and greater flexibility regarding the

number of cars per train. Additionally, the second

phase of the Transbay Transit Center project -known as the Downtown Extension - will provide an

underground Caltrain station at Fourth and Townsend

and extend Caltrain into the new Transit Center. While both the Downtown Extension and the

electrification of Caltrain are moving forward, they are not yet fully funded. The Downtown Extension

will cost $2.6 billion, and Caltrain electrification $1.5 billion, but both projects face significant funding

challenges. At the same time, the California high-speed rail

project is in the process of being developed. The

idea is that a high-speed train will ultimately connect

San Francisco to Los Angeles, with up to four trains per hour arriving at the Transbay Transit Center.

The current high-speed rail business plan calls for a so-called "blended system" for the 50 miles between

San Jose's Diridon Station and the Transbay Transit

Center, meaning that Caltrain and high-speed

rail would share two tracks for most of that distance.

This plan will require grade separation at many

intersections where trains cross above or below

automobile traffic, and without conflict between the

two (see Figures 5-7).

Now is an important time to engage in the discussion of how Caltrain operates in San Francisco,

as Caltrain and the City of San Francisco are undertaking a feasibility study to explore reducing

or eliminating Caltrain's footprint at Fourth and King.

This study will provide an opportunity this year

to modify Caltrain's electrification project as long as the study results do not significantly delay Caltrain's

electrification process or result in substantial additional capital or operations costs. The landscape

of future federal funding for major transportation projects is changing to reward transit-oriented

development. giving us the opportunity to take a fresh look at potential development opportunities.

This is good timing, as it will take at least a decade

for high-speed rail to move north and for the region's other federally funded major transportation projects (Central Subway and BART to Silicon Valley) to be

completed.

JUNE 2013 7

THE FUTURE OF 280

3. The big moves

There are several big urban planning and infrastruc­

ture moves that could leverage the large transporta­

tion investments described above while addressing urban design challenges. Taken together, these

moves improve the entire area, knitting together

SOMA, Mission Bay and Potrero Hill. They also have

the potential to generate financial value by develop­

ing newly available land and making existing land

more valuable. This value can in turn be recaptured

by the public sector to fund transit and urban design improvements. Taking such steps could be transfor­

mative for the area and for the city as a whole.

The big moves are:

1. Putting Caltrain and high-speed rail underground

2. Tearing down 1-280 and replacing it with a surface

boulevard

3. Redeveloping the Fourth and King railyards and

the surplus freeway parcels

8 JUNE 2013

While any of these moves could be undertaken

independently of the others, done in tandem they

have the potential to greatly benefit all of the surrounding neighborhoods while providing funding

for the large transit improvements described above.

Big move#l: Put high-speed rail and Caltrain underground

Today, Caltrain runs from the 22nd Street Station

through a tunnel under Potrero Hill , proceeding

at street level from Mariposa Street into the Fourth

and King railyard, where it currently terminates. As described above, Caltrain is expected to run

underground, together with high-speed rail, from

Fourth and King to the Transbay Terminal as part of

the Downtown Extension.

However, there are several issues with the current

Downtown Extension plan. The new rail tunnel

portal planned for Seventh and Townsend Streets

would inhibit the development potential of the

FIGURE 8

Disconnected Neighborhoods

Current infrastructure cuts through existing

neighborhoods, creating barriers such as

the freeway overpass and supporting piles,

seen below (Figures 2-4).

THE URBANIST

railyard. Also, this portal will include a tight track The 22nd Street station could move to 16th Street,

curve on a grade (slope), which will substantially limit or perhaps Cesar Chavez, allowing for a connection

train speeds. Furthermore, grade separation will be to Mission Bay and linking 16th Street bus rapid required for high-speed rail at both 16th and Seventh transit (BRT) and Mission District buses. This

streets. which will create additional neighborhood underground option also allows the rai/yard to be

barriers as described above. developed and for the public to recapture some

There are several possible options for the Ca/train/ of the value of that development. Tradeoffs include

high-speed rail extension that would reduce its revisiting the alignment options, and possibly

impact on Mission Bay and Potrero Hill, deliver a additional costs.

better urban design and create a superior technical alignment into Mission Bay and the new Transbay

Transit Center. All of the options have advantages and Big move #2:

disadvantages and require further study. However,

all would begin track undergrounding north of Cesar Chavez Street, be run completely under Mission Bay,

feature a Mission Bay Station and then proceed to the

new Transbay Transit Center. There are many benefits to these options, all

of which would let 16th Street and Mission Bay Boulevard remain at the surface. The rail alignments

could eliminate the tight curve at Seventh

and Townsend, allowing the trains to run faster.

THE URBANIST

Tear down 1-280 and replace it with a

surface boulevard

Currently, 1-280 runs above street level along and

above the existing Ca/train tracks, touching down just south of the Caltrain railyards at Fourth and King. What would happen if 1-280 instead touched down between 17th and Mariposa Streets and the remainder of the freeway was replaced with a surface

boulevard?

FIGURE 9

Transit concept with high-speed rail and Caltrain underground

If high-speed rail and Caltrain move

underground, many other urban design and

transportation benefits could follow. The

image above shows one possible version of

a future underground high-speed rail and

Caltraln alignment.

JUNE 2013 9

THE FUTURE OF 280

15' 1idewalk

10 JUNE 2013

10'1ow away lane 11' 10' 8' median 10' 11'

10' tow 20' multi-modal pathway away lane with 4' vegetated buffers 25' sklewalk

minimum 200' nght of way

FIGURES 11AND12

Potential access to Mission Creek Park if

the freeway is removed

FIGURE 10

New Mission Bay

Boulevard (section)

In addition to accommodating cars, the

boulevard could include a separated bike

lane and graciously sized sidewalks.

70' deep development sd8

Access to Mission Creek Park is currently

obstructed by the freeway (left). If the

freeway were removed, Mission Creek

Park would become an asset to the entire

area. The drawing below shows a future

view of Seventh Street to Mission Creek

and beyond .

THE URBANIST

That would allow for radically improved

connectivity between Mission Bay, Showplace Square

and Potrero Hill, with crossings at 16th Street, Irwin

Street, Hooper Street and Berry Street. Mission Creek

Channel would become accessible to neighborhoods

to the north and west. And parcels of land that

previously were used for highway infrastructure

could be redeveloped, and their value recaptured.

The boulevard itself would allow for vastly

improved bicycle access, including a separated

bicycle path. The boulevard would also support

THE URBANIST

an improved pedestrian experience. allowing for

people to comfortably use the liberated street

grid. Wide sidewalks could be added to either side of

the boulevard to encourage pedestrian activity.

Many other possibilities for urban design

improvements would be created as well. A new, greener Hubbell Street would link Mission Creek to

Jackson Playground. A series of smaller pedestrian

plazas and areas of widened sidewalks could sustain

an active streetscape south of Mission Creek. San

Francisco could have its own version of New York

FIGURE 13 AND 14

Potential future view from Daggett Street to Mission Bay

The freeway forms a barrier throughout

Showplace Square/Potrero Hill. The view

shown at left looks east from Daggett Street

to Mission Bay. Removing the freeway

would greatly improve the connections

between Showplace Square/Potrero Hill

and Mission Bay (below).

JUNE 2013 11

THE FUTURE OF 280

::.. ~ ~,

M-1 _...t J .::.. 1 ! J'

City 's High Line if a segment of the freeway were

repurposed as a raised park. And perhaps most

important, the Showplace Square/Potrero street

grid could be reconnected with Mission Bay.

The removal of the freeway and the

undergrounding of high-speed rail and Caltrain offer another way of thinking about land use in the

area. With these changes, 16th Street could become an important transit spine, especially when BRT is

implemented along the corridor. The area at Seventh

and Townsend could become a mixed-use gateway

to the rest of the community, and the Fourth and

King intersection could become a more successful

commercial , transit-oriented development (TOD).

12 JUNE 2013

T I

..t... 't • ..

~ ~.,, ,..

" ' ' )t

" +-I T

f

16TH ST BUS RAPID TRANSIT

•• •• • •• I • • I'~ • I • .... • CALTRAIN •

1 \_\ • t BELOW-GRADE • • 1" I HIGH-SPEED RAIL • • "' rl t

\ T

,\\ > \ I

\,.~ W-.-\~~~ \ \ \ ~\. ,.. l 1

• \

• • • • :,,

FIGURE 15

One possible growth concept supported by freeway removal

Replacing 1-280 with a boulevard would

create opportunities for new develop­

ment, including a potential mixed-use,

transit-oriented development node at 16th

Street if the Caltrain stop were moved to

that location.

THE URBANIST

FIGURE 16

Opportunity sites and

connectivity

The removal of the freeway would create op­

portunities for new development and value

recapture, both on land previously within

the existing 1-280 footprint and another land

within the vicinity of the new boulevard.

- =softsite

<-·• = new connections

~----_: =existing 1·280 footprint

THE URBANIST

J __ .._6THST

JD O__. 1 T. l)X.1.-..-...

J .. D--...a .~

J D DD nnnnn

JUN E 2013 13

THE FUTURE OF 280

Value generated from development in all these

areas could be recaptured to fund further public improvements.

Big move#3:

Redeveloping the Caltrain railyards

In our 2007 report A New Transit First Neighborhood,

SPUR explored the opportunity to develop new buildings over the Fourth and King Caltrain station

using air rights (the rights to develop over a piece

of land or infrastructure) as a means to pay for both

electrifying Caltrain and bringing high-speed rail

into the Transbay Transit Center. This study assumed

that the railyard would stay in its current location

and that any new development would need to be

built above the railyards.

14 JUNE 2013

Fortunately, a recent San Francisco Planning

Department study took this idea to the next level.

In its "4th and King Street Railyards: Final Summary

Memo," the department explored two development

scenarios for the site: one where the air rights above the railyard are developed while the railyard

remains in use (which would require building above the railyard), and another where the railyard is

relocated, allowing the entire site to be developed

as a blank slate. The second scenario has two variations: one where only the railyard is moved,

and another where the railyard is moved and 1-280

is replaced with a surface boulevard.

This last scenario would provide the greatest

benefits . It would allow for much better urban design, greater development capacity and greater

opportunities for value recapture because the

land would become more valuable when it is no

FIGURE 17

The redevelopment of

the Caltrain railyard if the

railyard were relocated and 1-280 were replaced

with a surface boulevard

This diagram of the development of the

Caltram railyard from a recent planning

department study shows development at

grade, allow mg for the creation of a new

linear park while also making the most of

the replacement of 1-280 with a surface

boulevard .

THE URBANIST

longer adjacent to freeway ramps. The planning department's study shows that the net potential value that could be created for the public sector ranges from $148 million all the way to $228 million if the railyard were moved and the Caltrain site

redeveloped. In order to redevelop the railyards, the complex

ownership of the site will need to be addressed. As the planning department memo points out, the underlying railyards are owned by Prologis/ Catellus, the entity that owns Mission Bay. However, Caltrain

owns an easement to the railyards. This easement is only to construct and operate a railroad , not to undertake other types of development.

Any future development on the railyards will need to substantially benefit rail infrastructure and Caltrain operations in order to incentivize Caltrain to alter its footprint to allow development on the site.

THE URBANIST

Conclusion The three big moves discussed here have the potential for tremendous positive impact on many

important San Francisco neighborhoods. While each can be completed independently of the other, the benefits are strongest when they are undertaken together.

In order to move this vision to reality, many steps will need to be taken, including completing further

study, determining Caltrain's post-electrification storage needs, engaging in community outreach and education, and determining what resources will be needed to make these changes.

We hope that the City of San Francisco, with participation from regional partners and the

Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC), will take the first step and study the big moves

outlined above. Studies should include a cost-benefit analysis of each step, as well as an analysis of what the impacts would be to projects that are already in advanced planning stages (such as Caltrain

electrification and California high-speed rail). City staff estimate that the cost of completing these studies is roughly $2 million.

We believe that this approach could be a regional

and national model for how to use thoughtful development to retrofit past planning mistakes and pay for new infrastructure. We estimate that land

value recapture from new development could cover a significant portion of the costs of the big

infrastructure moves. Land value recapture won't work everywhere, but it is a strategy that could be used more broadly in American cities. San Francisco has the potential to bring all the pieces together -neighborhood place-making, environmental sustainability and economic development - by rethinking its transportation infrastructure in the 1-280 corridor. •

Boulevard Task Force

Hogan Edelberg, AECOM

Lisa Fisher, AECOM

SPUR Staff

Ratna Amin

Sarah Karlinsky

Tomiquia Moss Gillian Gillett, San Francisco Mayor's Office

James Haig-Streeter. AECOM

Jacinta Mccann, AECOM

Greg Riessen

Tetsuya Yaguchi, AECOM

A special thanks to AECOM and the San

Francisco Planning Department for their

help and support in this effort.

JUNE 2013 15

Over the last year, San Francisco has been

showcased as the home of the World Series

Champion Giants and the NFC Champion 49ers as

well as dozens of Olympians who competed in the

London Games. Momentum is building toward the 34th America's Cup, which San Francisco is hosting

this summer. But the city is a great training ground for professional and recreational athletes alike. While

many cities have great public playing fields, pools

and recreation facilities, few have the hills, winds,

views and natural features that make this city a great

(and grueling) place to train and compete.

16 JUNE 2013

Mild weather allows for year-round outdoor training. Strong winds favor sailing, kitesurfing and

windsurfing. Water and waves support kayaking, surfing and swimming for the brave and wetsuited.

The hills - and the stairs built to navigate them -provide challenging opportunities for interval training

by bike or on foot. Using the city as an outdoor gym,

recreational and competitive athletes experience San

Francisco in a unique way. On Saturday mornings,

I'm debating with myself whether to walk, bike, run or

maybe check out that stand-up paddle board class

I just heard about. Here are some heart-pumping

locations for your next urban workout.

fl In Glen Canyon Park, rock

outcroppings challenge climbers

and narrow trails bring out the

inner mountain goat in runners.

Keep an eye out for one of the park's resident coyotes.

Jean Eis berg is a planning consultant at

Urban Planning Partners, Inc. and a former

NCAA All-American athlete. Kurt Gross is a

product designer in San Francisco.

THE URBANIST

llJ Neon Nikes? Check.

Lululemons? Check. At the Lyon Street Steps, the people are as

attractive as the flowers, and they

will help motivate you to run one

more set.

THE URBANIST

B Expansive views greet cyclists

on Twin Peaks. You can turn this

into interval training, climbing

up from Portola Drive and riding

down toward Clarendon Avenue.

Then repeat.

B High winds, currents, vessel

traffic and fog make San

Francisco Bay off of Crissy Field a challenging place for both

beginner and professional sailors.

D It's competition day. After the

swim and bike come the run on

Baker Beach and Sisyphean climb

up the Sand Ladder, two of the

reasons the Escape from Alcatraz

triathlon is known as one of the toughest courses in the sport.

JUNE 2013 17

CITY NEWS FROM AROUND THE GLOBE

Urban Drift

Off the Grid 1' Channa Horwitz (1933-2013) had

been working with orange grid

paper since the 1960s, using

it as the underlying structure

for incredibly lush and varied

drawings driven by a highly

systematic process. But as

traditional as her medium was, her work, writes Sharon Mizota of the Los Angeles Times, "was also

prescient, evoking the malleable

spaces of digital animation, in which anything becomes possible within a highly regimented grid of

pixels ." "Channa Horwitz's Work Goes off the Grid," by

Sharon Mizota. Los Angeles Times, 5/9/13

Nature's Triumphant Recipe for

Water The common ingredient that

makes both New York's pizzas and

its bagels irresistible? The city 's

tap water. Eddie & Sam's Pizza in

Tampa, Florida is so convinced

that the restaurant transports

1,000 gallons of it from the Catskill

springs that feeds NYC's reservoir.

18 JUNE 2013

Brooklyn Water Bagel Co. , on the

other hand, is looking to replicate

from cheap gas prices to the rapid

expansion of the workforce during the Baby Boom generation - no

longer exists. Further, as others have reported the millennials

see a future far less dependent

on driving. So what to do in

response to this paradigmatic

shift? PIRG recommends that

a new vision for transportation policy should revisit plans for new

or expanded highways, refocus

federal resources on key priorities

(like infrastructure and expanded

transit) and evaluate projects based on societal benefit. In sum,

use transportation revenue where

it makes the most sense. "A New Direction: Our Changing Relationship with

the Water's chemistry through a Driving and the Implications for America's Future,''

patented 14-step filtration process www.uspirg.org/reports/usp/new-direction

so it can deliver the perfection

that is a New York bagel all over

the country. The secret to New York 's water? A light touch: Had it

not been for the exceptional past efforts of city officials to invest

in their naturally filtered water

supply, this prized ingredient

wou ld have long been lost.

http://grist.org/citles/new-york-citys-water­

brought-to-you-by-mother-nature/

Driving Is Over

U.S. Pl RG (the federation of

Public Interest Research Groups)

has released a new report called

"The Driving Boom," announcing that a six-decade-long period of

steady increases in per-capita

driving in the United States is

over. Americans today drive fewer

total miles than they did eight

years ago, says the report, and the

unique combination of conditions

that fueled the driving boom-

These Streets Were Made for

Walking

"Nobody Walks in LA" may be

the unofficial theme song of Los Angeles. but Margot Ocanas, just hired as the city's first-ever

"pedestrian coordinator," plans

to change that. Following the

example of New York 's Janette

Sadik-Kahn, she's embraced the temporary: In early 2012 she was

a driving force (pun intended)

behind LA's conversion of 11,000

square feet of street and parking

spots into Polka Dot Plaza. In her

newly created role, she plans to launch a "Streets for the People"

project to make the city more

pedestrian friendly ... no easy feat in

a city where pedestrians count for

about a third of all traffic fatalities.

But the success of programs like

CicLAvia (LA's version of SF's

Sunday Streets) not to mPntion the

· mere fact of hiring a pedestrian

coordinator, is cause for optimism. "LA Pedestrian Coordinator. Plans to Get LA

Walking," by Kath leen Miles. The Huffington Post.

10/31/12

Stories for Every Journey ,J,

Perfect for the global urbanist,

Australian air carrier Qantas has

released a series of 10 tailor-made

works of fiction for its flights, each edited to fit neatly into the

duration of a particular route. A

lengthy trans-Pacific trip nets

an odyssey-length work while something more bite-sized will

accompany the odd hour-long

domestic flight.

https://www.prote.in/en/feed/2013/05/s tories­

for-every -journey •

ti

\)A

• I I

di

• ft

i

I ~

I I

THE URBANIST

UNBUILT SF

- - --- -~-

'J --

PROPO!iiEO PA.Rt<. 0£.VE.LOPHENT O N na 5 1TE OF Tt.lE. PRE SE.NT UNr - e o ST ATES Ml )JT ~ UILOIN C.

---

_.or-..l·i ,. ----- -_.. -_,..., .... -

-·

MARIO J. CIA.M P ! AR CWITECT. J.. I A ALl....W C. MAJtT'IM ASSOCl.lT[ .l.RC1.1 1TIC:T1 ~I J.

Turning Granite Into Gold Today, Ws a distinctly urban community gathering

spot, ideal for people watching while enjoying a

French--pressed Cup of Rwanda Mwasa frqm Blue

Bottle.

But back in 1958, the Old Mint site was envisioned

as something else entirely.

The Mint became "old" when, in 1936, a "new"

Mint was built at a new site at Hermann Street near

Duboce Triangle. Meanwhile, the Old Mint site sat idle

though it saw its share of development proposals

including this one by modernist Mario Ciampi ,

designer of the Brutalist Berkeley Art Museum. His

1958 design envisioned a park encircled by new office

buildings that would be known as "Gold Plaza."

Though Ciampi 's design retained the columns of

the Old Mint (also known as "The Granite Lady"), his

proposal inspired one of San Francisco's first ever

20 JUNE 2013

preservation campaigns and was never realized.

The Old Mint was designated a National Historic

Landmark in 1961.

In 2003, the U.S. General Services Administration

turned over the key to the Old Mint to the City of

San Francisco. In 2007, the Board of Supervisors

and the Mayor approved legislation to transform a

290'-long portion of Jessie Street stretching between

Fifth and Mint Streets into what we know today as

Mint Plaza.

You can see more unbuilt San Francisco this fall:

SPUR, AIA San Francisco, Center for Architecture

+Design, Environmental Design Archives at UC

Berkeley, The California Historical Society and the

San Francisco Public Library are pleased to present

Unbuilt San Francisco, a collaborative exhibition on

view from August - November 2013.

SAVE THE DATE!

Unbuilt San Francisco Exhibition Opening September 6, 5:00 - 9:00 pm

Annie Alley, between 678

and 654 Mission Street,

San Francisco

THE URBANIST

INTRODUCING ...

New Faces at SPUR

THE URBANIST

Christopher Axel Barrios SPUR 's Front Desk Ambassador Christopher

Barrios graduated from the University of California ,

Berkeley with a bachelor of art 's degree in society

and environment and a minor in sustainable design.

Christopher is interested in smart growth, with an

emphasis on greater access to public transit systems

and mixed-use development. In the near future,

he hopes to return to graduate school to pursue a

master's degree in either city planning or landscape

architecture.

Laura Hobbs Front Desk Ambassador, Laura Hobbs is a San

Francisco native and an undergraduate at the

University of Michigan, studying biology and Spanish.

She hopes to bring her experience in a wide range

of urban environments, coupled with a scientific

understanding of biolog ical principles, to a future

in sustainable urban development and research.

Outside the classroom, Laura is involved with the

Environmental Issues Commission, a sector of central

student government, and the University of Michigan

Bike Ambassadors program, which is currently

working with the city of Ann Arbor to get more bike

lanes on its streets.

Elisabeth Mart San Jose Public Programming Intern Elisabeth Mart

completed her undergraduate work at the University

of California , Berkeley in 2011 with degrees in political

science and history. She received her master's in

public history from Royal Holloway, University of London this past September. A bit of a political

junkie, El isabeth hopes to soon make her name in

the nonprofit world and has interned previously for

Senator Dianne Feinstein, Mayor Gavin Newsom and

the Commonwealth Club of California.

WELCOME TO SPUR'S NEW MEMBERS!

New Busines Members

HMC Architects

Keyser Marston Associates, Inc. Red and White Fleet

Veritable Vegetable

Ne enber Kirsten Muetzel

Avi Asherov Allison Myers

Richard Austin Alissa Nelson

Greg Baker Kristof Neukermans

Jesse Biroscak Lourdes Nicomedes

Corey Block Michael Nulty

Jenna Browning Anne Ording

Natalie Burdick Alex Padilla

Justin Chen Doris Padilla

Joanne Chiu Michelle Parker

Elizabeth Cortez Leslie Payne

Jon Dagostino Alene Pearson

Gregory Davies Craig Peters

Lynette Dias Julie Quon

Neil Dorrel Kris Rideout

Emily Eisenhart Jeremy Robinson

Aaron Fisher Anmarie Rodgers

Rachel Flynn Nicolas J. Rodrigues

Kyle Gebhart Eve Rossmere

Jonathan Ghio Rahmin Sarabi

Melissa Godfrey Madeleine Savit

Avra Goldman Emma Sharer

Anthony Gonzalez Powen Shiah

Kara Gross Marcia Sitcoske

Jenna Hahn Kara Vuicich

Deborah Harvey Renee Woodruff

Robert Hrdinsky Jennifer Young

Minnie Ingersoll Rachel Yu Stephanie Jansen Franco Zaragoza

Maeve Johnston

Larry R. Kasten

Dorka Keehn

Amelie-Phaine Keller

Lydia Kiesling

Alexandru Lefter

Joe Lewis

Wan-Jou Lin

Jody Littlehales

Nikki Lowy

Cindy Ma

Janet MacKinnon

Clay Malcolmson Noriko Marshall

Michael McCabe

Michael McDermott

John Monson

Ned Moran

JUNE 2013 21

MEMBER PROFILE

Wild About the City Tanya Peterson Lions, tigers and bears? They're all part of the urban

experience for this animal-loving San Franciscan .

Tanya Peterson, a lawyer at Hewlett-Packard, served on San Francisco

Zoo's board of directors until she was asked to take on the role of

director in 2008. " It was my children's passion for the institution that

initially attracted me to the zoo," says Peterson, "and that's what

continues to drive me to ensure its longevity."

She describes the zoo as "firstly a preserve and a park ... and a unique way, in an urban environment, to connect with wildlife." She is currently overseeing a new master plan that envisions a zoological park that

represents global conservation zones or "hot spots," which both educate

and immerse visitors in diverse ecological zones. At the end of 2013, the

zoo plans to open a zoological-themed, one-of-a-kind play zone that

encourages children to play in and experience polar, Asian and other

geographic "hot spots." And next year, says Peterson, "the zoo hopes to open a remodeled tropical forest in its South American region, which will house South American reptiles, birds and even a sloth!"

With all of these exciting things

happening at the zoo, we

asked Peterson to describe the

institution's role in the city and

the community.

Zoos are often the first place

people connect with wildlife. A

zoo can ignite a lifelong passion for global conservation and renew

a basic empathy toward animals.

Zoos also are accessible and

affordable to people of diverse

social and economic backgrounds and are attended by multiple

generations. It is one of the few places where three generations of

a family can enjoy a day together!

22 JUNE 2013

How did you first become

interested in cities - and in

SPUR?

While at UC Hastings law school,

I developed a deep fondness for San Francisco, which only

increased over time. Later in

my legal career, I had the honor of sitting on the city's Board

of Appeals, which made me

appreciate the delicate balance between urban growth and

informed planning. It was then

I first heard about SPUR as a unique and objective organization

that recognized the very balance

we were trying to achieve at the

Board of Appeals.

How has the zoo been involved

with one of SPUR's major

initiatives, the Ocean Beach

Master Plan?

The San Francisco Zoo may be the only zoo in the country that

borders an ocean, and our visitors

are simultaneously amazed and

disappointed by Ocean Beach

and its current condition. I very much want to be part of an effort

to revive this special coastal zone,

and thus was eager to participate

in SPUR's task force that is

attempting to address long-term

issues of erosion. conservation

and public access while trying to

maneuver through a tangled web

of multiple jurisdictions and, at

times, competing interests.

So we can guess which city

attraction you love most, but tell

us, what is your favorite ... city?

San Francisco, undoubtedly.

Urban view?

It is still a treat for me to head

to the top of the Empire State Building.

Favorite work of art about cities?

Richard Diebenkorn's Cityscape I

at the San Francisco Museum of

Modern Art.

And, naturally, we can't resist

asking: What is your favorite

animal?

Zoo directors can't have favorites,

although I do have a special

fondness for hedgehogs.

THE URBANIST

0SPUR 654 Mission Street San Francisco. CA 94105-4015

(415) 781-8726 spur.erg

Time-dated material

Ideas + action for a better city

38 West Santa Clara Street San Jose. CA 95113 (408) 510-5688 spur.org/sanjose

·:·

..

Nonprofit Org.

US Postage

PAID Permit# 4118

San Francisco, CA

-i :c m ,, c -i c ::0 m 0 ,, I\) CX> 0