Back in August, we reported on plans that were underway for a new parklet on the north side of Clement Street near 3rd Avenue (in front of Cumaica Coffee).
In his monthly newsletter today, Supervisor Eric Mar included a sketch rendering of said parklet. The sketch shows an L-shaped bench at one end, planter boxes on the street side, and a counter level span on the street side. A bike rack sits outside the east end of the parklet.
If you’re new to the world of parklets, they are mini “urban” parks that have been installed in parking spaces around the city. Usually they take over 2 or 3 parking spaces, and each has their own individual design. They were developed as part of the city’s Pavement to Parks program; its goal is to reclaim or offer additional public open space in areas that are lacking.
The cost for constructing and installing a parklet varies, but averages around $20,000. Typically businesses foot the bill (after all it does add more seating right outside their door) or funds are contributed via donations.
Back in September, some residents took over the proposed parklet space during the worldwide PARK(ing) day event, to show how it could be used as a recreational space.
There are currently 36 parklets in San Francisco (view map), including three in the Sunset District. The Mission has the highest concentration of them along the Valencia Street corridor.
Mar mentioned the proposed parklet in his newsletter because he is looking into the impact that parklets have on communities:
“As parklets proliferate, it is important that the City study and understand the impact they have on communities. While evidence to date suggests that the increase in pedestrian activity outweighs the loss of parking, we need a stronger understanding of the overall effect so that we can work with businesses and residents better. To review all of these issues, I am convening a hearing at the Land Use Committee.”
Mar says that if residents have any input on parklets that they’d like to share with his office, they should contact his aide Nick Pagoulatos at nickolas.pagoulatos@sfgov.org or 415.554.7412.
Sarah B.
it says the parklets goal is to reclaim or offer additional public open space in areas that are lacking.
isnt clement 5 blocks from ggp
If that’s Mr. Mar’s own sketch, I suggest he doesn’t quit his day job to be an artist… Is that a roll of barbed wire on the far left? A planter-box full of grey weeds? An old mattress in front of the right-side benches, or perhaps a puddle or open hole in the deck? You’re not really selling it for me. 😉
I really hope they don’t put in those god-awful circular bike racks. They are probably the least functional City infrastructure right now, and that says a lot for a City with Ed Lee as it’s mayor.
It’d be interesting to see if any studies were done to measure the percentage of local residents vs. visitors (SF residents, tourists, etc.) who frequent businesses in areas with parklets, and the economic impact to the area. Areas such as the Mission, which have a proportionately smaller number of personally owned vehicles, may benefit from parklets, but what of neighborhoods such as ours which have a significantly higher average household income and cars per capita compared to the rest of the city? (U.S. Census, Trulia, etc.)
The Inner Richmond Clement corridor attracts various consumers who patronize New Chinatown shops–that is, a demographic leaning heavily towards first and second generation Asians and Russians. If the parklets were to remove parking spaces in an already heavily trafficked area, what are the alternative modes of transportation for visitors? MUNI is unreliable as is, and Express Service does not run on weekends–what would attract non-locals to visit?
Another point to consider is cultural perception from Mr. Mar’s various constituents. Even if the businesses usually “foot the bill,” will this parklet be for actual public use, or be unofficially restricted to patrons of the businesses in the immediate vicinity? Who will be responsible for communicating the use and intent of said parklets to community members and external consumers unfamiliar with the parklet concept (especially to the non-English speaking community?). There are a lot of viewpoints, issues, and costs to be addressed, and given that you have various local parks and playgrounds in the immediate area, it seems like a lot of city work hours, taxpayer dollars, etc. will go into this single project for a single, specific area.
Given how congested Clement gets on the weekends, I can’t see this as being an especially pleasant place to sit and read or have a cup of coffee. (I assume Cumaica Coffee is footing the bill for the parklet?) I’d also like to know if the city or local businesses will maintain the parklet. There are a couple in the Mission that have become eyesores: piles of litter left all over the space, which eventually spreads to the other parts of the street and sidewalk; furniture vandalized and uncleaned; dead plants (which is really sad—apparently no one took the time to at least water them) and planters which have been used as toilets. I love public greenspaces, but not when they’re abandoned and left to rot.
I know when I want to relax with a nice cup of coffee, there’s no place I’d rather sit that mere feet from the honking, exhaust-spewing, congested mess that is Clement Street. And I completely trust the elderly drivers, buses and delivery trucks not to run into me as I lounge in what’s basically the street.
Just out of curiosity, wasn’t this originally planned to go in front of Toy Boat at 5th? Wonder what happened to that.
In the past few weeks we have been out walking around in the haight, mission and inner sunset – each time we enjoyed one of these little parklets – they are really nice and bring a sense of community to the area – i can’t see any real negatives to the change – along with the farmers market – these all seem like nice up-grades to our already nice neighborhood
There are *already* benches to sit on outside of numerous businesses on Clement st.
Georgio’s Pizza and Toy Boat are a couple that come to mind. Plus they don’t take away any parking spaces nor are they close to car exhaust.
So, no one will sit outside on Clement, because it’s too dirty and congested– and there are already lots of benches for sitting outside on Clement.
And Clement is honking, exhaust-spewing and congested– and we mustn’t reallocate any space away from the source of the honking, exhaust-spewing congestion.
It’s like Stockholm Syndrome, or something.
Just make it happen already.
@Alai- Clement Street is a major retail and business artery. There are some apartments and homes along it, but if you’ve ever walked/biked/driven down the street on a Saturday between 10 a.m. and 8 p.m., you’d see that the place can be crazy and even unsafe for anyone not encased in a steel and plastic shell. (And even then: thank you, old lady in the Mercedes SUV who backed out of a space on Clement and 5th Avenue without looking behind you and slammed into the front of my already battered Camry last December.) I think the shortage of parking in front of Clement Street shops also contributes to the madness, so taking away two or three spaces isn’t going to help.
I’d really prefer to see a parklet on California. Less traffic, yet there’s a long stretch of concrete with little public greenspace. There was a discussion here earlier about traffic-calming measures on California and 22nd. Why not a parklet in front of Angelina’s Catering?
By the way, here are some statistics, which make for interesting reading:
http://1.usa.gov/11KtizL
http://1.usa.gov/11prixU
Total SF numbers are on the left, with the four Census Tracts which make up the inner Richmond to the right. Tract 401 is the northeast quadrant which contains Clement from Arguello to 6th. (402 is NW, from 6th to Park Presidio Blvd., 451 is SE, 452 is SW).
The interesting figures, to me, in comparing census tract 401 to the city as a whole: higher public transportation commuting (36.1% vs 32.7% for the city) and lower median family income ($60k vs $87k for the city). Also, households with no vehicles available account for 34.8% of households, vs 30.1% for the city.
All of which is to say that despite what some people seem to think, the Inner Richmond is hardly an auto-centric place. Customer surveys in SF have consistently shown that a large majority of customers at local businesses do not drive there.
Therefore, parklets and farmer’s markets are fine things which can be enjoyed by everyone.
I think those links got a bit mangled. Allow me to try again:
Income and employment statistics
Labor statistics
bicyclesalad: Parklets belong where the pedestrian traffic is the greatest. That’s where people want to be, and that’s where we should make room for them to be.
Also, I guarantee you that a parklet will never back into you! That’s a safety improvement right there.
This seems like the latest installment on an ongoing series. Well-intentioned city staffers with ideas that look good on paper but not in reality. The Anza turnaround and Kennedy Drive curbside bike lane are epic fails that seem to be the brainchilds of the same set of cubicles. To be fair, this one sounds more useless than disastrous (although as some other commenters already pointed out it seems inevitable that a car or bus will plow into one of these things), and although I’m not at all a fan of Eric Mar, his explanation of the process seems reasonable.
Whether we want to admit it or not, we’re grappling with some major transportation problems that were triggered by the Central Freeway tear-down and exacerbated by massive museum renovations in the middle of the park that have turned Kennedy Drive into a giant parking lot. I realize I’m going a bit off topic here, but those two actions have directly led to a pretty major disruption to what used to be a pretty functional transportation eco system. I used to bike, rollerblade and drive through the park all the time, now I avoid that area like a plague. It’s forced a lot more traffic onto adjacent streets (New York’s Central Park has major museums on the edges instead of the middle, and those 100-plus-year-old designs seem to work much better for transportation and recreation).
We can Sharrow and Parklet and roundabout and put bike lanes next to curbs all we want, but I think we’d be a lot better off pushing for underground transit connecting the Richmond and Sunset and downtown. I’m sure the cost would be prohibitive, but if we’re serious about creating sustainable transportation and getting cars off the road and enjoying open space, it’s something we should seriously consider and something we need to demand our elected officials fight for.
@Alai- I don’t have business statistics, but the impression I get is that the Saturday shoppers are from outside of the Inner Richmond. I’ve met people from the Sunset, Ocean Beach, and SOMA who shop regularly on Clement, ironically because they regard Chinatown and other retail areas as overly congested and impossible to find parking in. Also, I’ve noticed a number of the drivers on Clement are older. I’m guessing these are the people who would have the greatest trouble hauling their purchases by foot or bicycle back to their homes. I’m all for sustainable transportation methods and pedestrian-friendly streets, but there is a large population of Boomers in the area, and physical mobility is becoming an issue for them.
Maybe we should get rid of the angled parking spaces on Clement? They create more parking, but they are a danger to cyclists and anyone who happens to step behind a car as it’s backing out.
Underground transit isn’t as nice as you may think. The current Muni underground trains are always backed up and suffer worst performance than the Muni buses that travel above ground (according to a report in the SF Examiner). I have no idea why there would be congestion in an underground tunnel with no traffic besides Muni?
Is it a coincidence that many/most parklets in SF reside directly in front of and are sponsored by cafe type businesses? I don’t have a problem with that parklet on Clement. However, with Mountain Lake park less than 3 blocks away and GGP 5 blocks away, the guise of reclaiming pavement for public open space in areas where it is lacking rings hollow. Most parklets are a way for cafe type businesses to increase seating for their customers.
I live exactly on the corner of 4th and Clement. I own a car that I park on the street. I ride my bike and walk on Clement everyday. I shop and eat on Clement everyday. I LOVE THE IDEA OF THIS PARKLET, AND I WELCOME IT!
As with most of these community enriching ideas here’s another that’s a useless cost waste that’d be better spent. Putting people within inches of moving vehicles? Ever try to sit an recreate like that? Enjoy the 2 Clement and delivery trucks at waist level while drinking a cappuccino? This ain’t Paris, people. Spend the money to clean up and repair streets and sidewalks, plant trees (that are right for the area) and improve lighting for night safety and you’re improving Clement street.
A parklet full of happy people drinking coffee, talking, and laughing is a much better use of space than an empty parked car!
bicyclesalad:
Well, one nice thing about being retired is that you’re free to choose when you want to go shopping. Heck, some stores offer senior discounts in the middle of the week, presumably because there’s a lull in their business.
Frankly, though, we should be finding ways to help seniors avoid driving, not encouraging it, both for their health and for ours. My neighbor is in her late 80s, and I sometimes meet her shopping with her granny cart. There are plenty of studies which show that simply walking daily as you get older leads to a longer and healthier life. We should make every effort to make it safe and comfortable for seniors to walk to their nearest commercial strip. For people who can’t walk that far, we should make sure that mobility scooters have easy access.
In the end, I have difficulty believing that there is or will be a large population of seniors who are fully capable of driving themselves safely, but who are unable to walk to the bus or take advantage of other options. If there are, there is a program tailor-made for them: handicap placards. If necessary, we should increase the number of blue parking zones.
As for the angled parking, one possibility is to change it to back-in angled parking. Harder to get in, easier to get out, safer all around.
With due respect to objectors (as they are entitled to issue their concerns)…I like the idea. And even if it was because Toy Boat objected (as they have to issues in the past), I’m glad it’s not in front of their shop anyway — I like that coffee house with the purple awning and it’s less busy at the upper avenues. Plus they have nice shops always trying to make it up there.
Although I love my Asian neighbors too!
I’m generally against the loss of parking, as it’s terrible to begin with and there are less and less spots.
However, I just hope that the MTA doesn’t raise meter rates due to the lost “revenue” from the loss of these meters. (Even though meters are not for revenue, as the MTA perpetually claims). As these parklets seem to be somewhat permanent, who pays for the lost “revenue” of the three meters that are taken out of circulation? Somehow, I think the drivers through increased meter rates, 7 days a week, soon-to-be 24 hours a day.
If the MTA is hemorrhaging money, would taking three “revenue” generating meters out of circulation be wise?
Also, wtf are upper avenues? It’s Inner and Outer.
***My neighbor is in her late 80s, and I sometimes meet her shopping with her granny cart.***
Ageist much? I just bought one, and wish I’d bought it sooner. As a non-driver, I can bring back twice as many groceries as I used to! Probably the best thing I ever bought.
Alai said:
Frankly, though, we should be finding ways to help seniors avoid driving, not encouraging it, both for their health and for ours. My neighbor is in her late 80s, and I sometimes meet her shopping with her granny cart. There are plenty of studies which show that simply walking daily as you get older leads to a longer and healthier life. We should make every effort to make it safe and comfortable for seniors to walk to their nearest commercial strip. For people who can’t walk that far, we should make sure that mobility scooters have easy access.
In the end, I have difficulty believing that there is or will be a large population of seniors who are fully capable of driving themselves safely, but who are unable to walk to the bus or take advantage of other options. If there are, there is a program tailor-made for them: handicap placards. If necessary, we should increase the number of blue parking zones.
—
You are assuming all seniors can walk. Although walking is good for you, it is not possible for every body to do so (see people with rheumatoid arthritis, and other mobility issues). I don’t own a car and I take Muni (for better or worse) but to assume everyone should walk is ridiculous. As my 80 year old father likes to say, wait until you get to my age, tell me if your opinion is still the same…
I am against the stupid parklet.
I love parklets and think they add community congregations to a street … which hopefully will increase sales for the shops and businesses in our neighborhood. Clement Street could be the next Fillmore Street. I say “yes” let’s approve the park let.
I was surprised no one brought this up:
http://sfist.com/2013/06/17/san_francisco_orders_first_parket_r.php
The comments following the story are interesting as well. The general opinion on parklets seems to be sharply divided between the ayes and the nays.
The most perfect place for this parklet would be either in front of the Bitter End, 540 Club or the Neck of the Woods. The smokers could sit in the parklet then and chat amongst themselves instead of blocking the entire sidewalk while blowing smoke in your face as you try to get around them now.
I’m not sure where this drawing came from, but I did get a glimpse of the actual drawings drafted by the artists designing the parklet. They are stunning, and you can see there work in the front windows near the laundry on 4th and clement. Further more, while the claim that we are close to parks is true, there is not a single spot to sit (outside of the bench in front of Eats) on Clement St. without being a paying customer somewhere. Just about anywhere in this city you can walk a 1/4 mile to be in a park, we are no different. This parklet would also add a nice splash of plant life- the last time I checked there was not a single living thing growing between the middle of 2nd and 6th. This parklet is a godsend for folks in the neighborhood that would like to sit outside, enjoy the neighborhood, and meet neighbors.
Also, residents of this neighborhood do not use the metered spots, they park on all the side streets. None of us will miss these 3 spots. This is especially true with the Sunday meter enforcement.