On Tuesday, the Valencia center bike lane received very different receptions before two city bodies: A legal challenge from merchants, and applause from cyclists.
In the morning, three Valencia Street businesses filed claims against the city, claiming they’ve suffered negative economic effects due to the bike lane: Amado’s, a bar and music venue which closed in November; Rossi, an art gallery; and Yasmin, a Middle Eastern restaurant. The businesses are seeking financial relief for what they say are dwindling sales.
But in the afternoon, more than a dozen people applauded the bike lane in front of the San Francisco Municipal Transportation Agency board during a meeting to discuss the board’s evaluation of the project. The speakers, largely Mission residents, said the bike lane makes Valencia safer, but suggested improvements.
That is the opinion of the transit agency, too. Last week, SFMTA released a long-awaited evaluation of the first three months of the bike lane, finding that cycling and walking along the corridor was essentially unchanged, but that far fewer cars used the street — and fewer cars made illegal left turns or double-parked.
Still, the evaluation noted 11 collisions between cyclists and vehicles, mostly due to left turns and U-turns, and wrote that “further design revisions and increased enforcement” could reduce that number.
The SFMTA board urged the project’s team to address some of those immediate safety concerns, like preventing illegal left turns and U-turns, and to continue working on a redesign that would replace the center line with two side-running ones. Those would be sandwiched between the sidewalk and parking spaces, so that cyclists would be protected from street traffic by parked vehicles.
The board will revisit the bike lane later in the year. The center lane is a 12-month pilot project that started in August 2023, and could be replaced with a new design before or after that time is up.
Most of those speaking before the board said they would support a redesign, but also said the current configuration is working well.
“The center-running bike lanes are the best thing since sliced bread,” said Robin Leavitt. “Please keep them.”
A survey of more than 1,000 members of the San Francisco Bicycle Coalition, released last week, found that cyclists had mixed opinions about the current safety barricades — plastic bollards and rubber curbs — and that most preferred side-running bike lanes. The most popular long-term vision for Valencia Street is to make it free of cars altogether.
Shirley Johnson, who lives in the Mission and frequently bikes down Valencia, said she once opposed the lane and had written to SFMTA asking them not to install it. But now? “I am now a convert,” she said. “I love the center-running bike lane.”
Some of the board’s members were surprised at the feedback: “Oh, not everybody hates it. Great!” said Dominica Henderson, one of the agency’s directors.
Still, a contingent of Valencia merchants are displeased, and a few have begun the legal process. The claims filed Tuesday are precursors to lawsuits, and the city has 45 days to address them before the merchants can take legal action.
James Quadra, an attorney for the shopkeepers, wrote in a statement that ”While our clients support sustainable transportation and safety improvements, it cannot come at the expense of the livelihoods of local entrepreneurs, businesses and the communities they serve.”
Kevin Ortiz, the president of the San Francisco Latinx Democratic Club, works as a consultant with some of the businesses, and said that the bike lane’s impact has been “disastrous.” He said upwards of 20 other businesses will be proceeding to file claims, too.
The claims come after repeated complaints from businesses along the corridor. One of their major concerns is the number of parking spaces that were removed by construction of the new bike lane. A tally by Mission Local showed some 67 spots were removed — 48 because of the bike lane itself, and 19 because of a state law requiring visibility around corners.
Businesses have also complained about lowered sales, but the agency did not present a conclusive evaluation to how the bike lane affected businesses during its first three months.
However, by reviewing recent sales-tax data, Mission Local found that businesses along the Valencia Street corridor sold more goods from July to September, after the bike lane was constructed, compared to the same period the previous year.
Martin Muniz, one of the public speakers, said that, moving forward, the agency should look to cycling infrastructure in the rest of the world, and adopt tried-and-true design.
“I think the lesson here is that SFMTA needs to go big, or go with international best practices,” he said, “instead of trying to please everyone, and thus pleasing very few.”
Kudos to Mission Local for doing the work around sales tax data. It’s so lazy for some of these businesses to blame their woes on a traffic safety measure for the corridor. SFPD should do some targeted enforcement here, it would make a difference.
So merchants are suing because they are no longer allowed to treat the bike lanes as their private parking lots? A little self awareness about how you were breaking the law the last 10 years and endangering cyclists all that time would go along way.
Those bike lanes honestly suck to bike in. You are on the right of the parked cars in a narrow, wiggly concrete trap. Then you have to cross the car lane to get in the middle. Then you are trapped in the middle. I hope you don’t want to go inside anywhere or turn! Then you cross the car lane again to go to a regular unprotected bike lane. Valencia was easiest to bike when it was a continuous unprotected bike lane. Uber ruined that.
Some days during evening rush hour, ubers and delivery drivers blocked up the entire lane. If you want to see how this should be done, go to Pacific Ave in Santa Cruz. Four huge garages. Minimal traffic on the street. Almost all car traffic in the Mission is someone circling around looking for parking.
If you think about it, though, all of these issues are caused from drivers, not bike lanes. Drivers making illegal turns, drivers parking illegally, and drivers making it hard to pull over and stop at your favorite shop. Unless we can fix bad drivers (we can’t), we’d be better off opening Valencia to pedestrians, cyclists, and micromobility users. Moving the bike lane wouldn’t solve how dangerous Valencia Street is because of drivers.
Oddly enough, both automobile drivers and bicyclists are human beings, and as such, members of each group engage in rude and dangerous behavior. Demonizing either of them is just melodrama, based on the consumerist attitude that people who buy the same kind of product that you do are the good guys.
The point isn’t “demonization” as much as the obvious fact that one of those vehicles inherently has more capacity to do immense damage, and thus has a far greater impact on public safety and quality of life, than the other.
There is, as far as I could find, one pedestrian death due to a cyclist in the past 20 years here, whereas cars kill dozens of pedestrians in SF annually. If we can’t trust that people will consistently take the responsibility of handling a vehicle seriously, it’s time to cordon off some infrastructure for non-car use.
“There is, as far as I could find, one pedestrian death due to a cyclist in the past 20 years here”
Bernaltron, two at least. A cyclist killed an elderly pedestrian on a crosswalk at Castro and Market a few years ago. And one of those bike/rickshaw contraptions on Embarcadero also killed a pedestrian.
So “only” two but as a percentage of total miles cycled versus driven, the percentage death rate may be closer than you think.
No, they are mostly caused by the lack of parking. No driver double parks, blocks a bike lane or endlessly circles because he/she wants to. But rather because there is no parking because the city has failed to replace parking lost to parklets, bike and bus lanes, “daylighting” and other ideological changes.
The bike lane should move to Mission Street, which is already ruined for cars anyway.
All of this rigmarole because SFPD can’t be bothered to get out of Mission Station, out of their patrol cars, to enforce the bike lane against Uber.
I’ll have to strongly agree with marcos.
“and increased enforcement”
Duh. Like … really DUH ….
Why didn’t they try “increased enforcement” first?
All they had to do was amble out the fortress 50 feet to start writing tickets.
So what crimes should SFPD ignore so that they can harass drivers more?
perhaps we can also look into parking underground since parked cars don’t really need any good views and taking an elevator up or down makes little difference. perhaps if there is very little space, we can look into those automated parking garages where the cars get stored by a machine that is like an elevator so there is no need for stairs or ramps and has a smaller footprint. google what they’re like in japan.
I’m sure drivers would love to pay for however much that bullshit idea costs to implement
Agreed. Supervisor Mandleman is trying to do the same thing to Church St between 16th & Market, & the merchants & neighbors hate it. Already 3 businesses shuttered there. No traffic down Church–only the J & the 22, which sporadically come, & an entire taxi lane that NOBODY uses. When the Bike Coalition began, they said they only wanted to share the road. But that was a lie. They have taken over, take no responsibility & blame everything on shuttles, buses & cars. And guilt-trip you if you question it!Taxpayers paid for the many accommodations the SFBC demanded. Do they not understand, that the elderly & disabled cannot ride bikes? Do they not get that tourism is our main industry & tourists usually drive cars? If cyclists would only agree to pay for a license & registration, just like motorcyclists & everyone else does, it might pay for all this nonsense–the stupid Valencia Street especially, since it cost thousands to put in & now taxpayers will have pay more to get it dismantled!. But one merely needs to suggest that
bicyclists need to be regulated, cyclists selfishly will blow up with anger in your face.
What on earth are you talking about?? I live there and the neighborhood is in favor of it. We’ve had 2 new businesses open recently, and the transit lines bring through way more people per hour than cars ever could. Live in the suburbs if you want to have to drive everywhere. (By the way, you know some disabled and elderly DO ride bikes and can’t drive, right?)
By last December, taxpayers had spent more then $1.5 M on the Valencia bike lane (cost initially was estimated at $590K). To reconfigure it will cost just as much if not more. It’s time that bikers see themselves as the 1%-2% of the population that they are. They don’t “need” to bike on Valencia–they “want” to bike on Valencia. If they happen to put half of the street’s merchants out of business, they seem to believe that this is their right.
It is high time we stop catering to this tiny fraction of the population and instead prioritize the area’s economic health. And it’s high time that the rogue SFMTA heed the needs of residents and merchants rather than catering to the bicycle coalition.
Hmmm… wasn’t the business loss for Amado’s the flooding they had last year? & Yasmin was closed because of a fire.
Also, if a bar is complaining they lost a lot of sales because parking got harder, I have other concerns.
This is nonsensical. The liveliest nightlife neighborhood in Oakland, Temescal, has protected bike lanes. Bike lanes encourage business. If these businesses are suffering, maybe they should reconsider how they are being run.
are you talking about center bike lanes or just regular protected bike lanes?
center bike lanes are great if you want to use it as a freeway to ride through a neighborhood but it become a bit more dangerous if you want to stop along the way to shop.
I didn’t know Oakland has center bike lanes. I thought SF made all the news since no one else was doing center bike lanes.
I appreciate that ML did some research and found based on sales tax revenue, business IMPROVED, after the Valencia Street bike lane opened..which gives the Lie to the whining kvetching motorists..who will trot out every lame argument to preserve their false sense of hegemony over the road.
I would’ve preferred parking-protected bike lanes, and would welcome a switch to that version, but these businesses are the same ones who have been opposing any bike infrastructure in the neighborhood whatsoever.
I’ve been going up and down Valencia for a good 15 years now, sometimes with my kid for dinner, and this last year in particular has been eye opening. I’m not going back for falafel at Yasmin, nor can I go to any other restaurants that sign on to this open contempt for their customers who don’t drive.
No solution is going to please everyone, but in my opinion the best solution would be to have protected bike lanes near the sidewalks, with parking/delivery/drop-off zones next to that and car traffic going down the middle- essentially what already exists on Valencia outside of this corridor. Businesses will have to compromise and get rid of their parklets, which they should be more than happy to do if the current situation really is as dire as they make it seem.
I really like the center running lanes and find them much less stressful to ride in. I live nearby and use the center lane to pick up my new Baggu bag etc, and a bit mystified why some cyclists find it challenging. It is very challenging for cars and trucks to double park on Valencia now, and maybe that’s what some of the opponents want: the return of the Doordash lane (former configuration ).
tbh the center bike lane is not the worst thing in the world, but it’s juuust bad/unusual enough for everyone to project their problems on, real or imagined. is your crappy business not doing well? bike lane! almost murder a cyclist when you made a left turn? bike lane! collide with another bike when you salmoned up the incoming lane to hit your strava segment? bike lane!!!
valencia already has protected bike lanes from 14th to market. there’s no reason why something like that couldn’t be done instead.
I have lived in the Valencia Corridor for 30 years. I worked in the bars for most of this time. Before there was a bike lane on Valencia there was two lanes of 2 way traffic and shuttered businesses galore. Past 10 PM it was a ghost town in huge parts of the area. Mission street makes sense as the transit corridor with Bart and the 14 being the main routes through the mission. Valencia is flat and bisects easily several other flat bike lanes. Between Dolores and Potrero there are 5 two lane traffic routes to freeways and neighborhoods. Bicycle riders are not asking for more then they deserve. Just a safe way of passage in there own neighborhood getting around to others or others coming here. Merchants have lost illegal double parking and clearly they are fuming but let’s be clear. The bike lane is not the problem to their success and I would argue that because of them this area began to thrive.
hopefully they can just go back to the original plans to extend the bike lanes that are next to the sidewalk, trash might accumulate there but just use the 311 app and report it for DPW to come clean it up. there’s some trash ending up in the center bike lanes as well. At least if there is a little more room next to parked cars, there is less likelihood of people getting doored since there will always be someone getting out of the driver side but not necessarily the passenger side and hopefully they can see they are away from the sidewalk and look before they hit a cyclist. as always, this too is a work in progress and hopefully we can continue to work to make this better in the future.
They’re horrible and put the bikers in a dangerous situation because they have to cross over to get back to the right side the rest of the way. No place to stop. How about waiting for a parking spot IF one opens up? Blocks fire and police lane in an emergency, do they drive down the center and what do the bicyclists do?
“The SFMTA board urged the project’s team. . . to continue working on a redesign that would replace the center line with two side-running ones. Those would be sandwiched between the sidewalk and parking spaces, so that cyclists would be separate from traffic by parked vehicles.”
This seems like a no brainer, but what do I know. If only we had 100 years of urban design research showing bike infrastructure that the SFMTA project team could have referred to. Oh wait. . .
They all sounded like they got paid by the city.