Throwback Thursday: Remembering the Embarcadero Freeway
Yes, but: Back in the postwar era, such developments were all the rage thanks to urban planners like Robert Moses who championed the car as a symbol of modernity and progress.
Flashback: Construction for what was then called California State Route 480 began in 1953, with the first leg of the project connecting drivers to North Beach and Chinatown opening in 1959.
The goal was to connect the Bay and Golden Gate bridges and ultimately create a network of crisscrossing freeways across the city.
Friction point: The movement to stop its completion gained momentum with "The Freeway Revolt" in the early 1960s, led by local environmental and civic activists like Sue Bierman who galvanized throngs of angry San Franciscans to protest new freeway construction.
The other side: Business and community leaders in North Beach and Chinatown like activist Rose Pak, fiercely advocated for keeping the highway because it was seen as crucial to maintaining their local economies.
Her efforts proved victorious when voters rejected demolition proposals in 1986.
The intrigue: It wasn't until 1989 when the Loma Prieta Earthquake caused significant damage to the freeway that calls to tear it down would yield success.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Miami Herald
31-07-2025
- Miami Herald
Tesla Robotaxi pulls ahead of Waymo in San Francisco
Tesla (TSLA) may have started the robotaxi race running behind Waymo, but it has taken the lead in the pair's hometown of San Francisco. Silicon Valley, located in the San Francisco Bay Area, is the home of both Tesla and Waymo, as well as Waymo's parent company, Alphabet. After years of beta testing in the city, Waymo finally made Waymo One (think Uber, but for autonomous vehicles) available to the public in June 2024. Related: Alphabet's Waymo flexes on Tesla Robotaxi with latest update Waymo had nearly 300,000 signups at launch, which has only grown since. As of July 2025, Waymo One is available 24/7 to customers in Los Angeles, Phoenix, as well as the San Francisco Bay Area. Waymo partners with Uber in Austin and Atlanta. Waymo also says it has plans to expand to Miami and Washington, D.C., in 2026. It has been testing in Miami in since December. Waymo's current fleet features over 1,500 vehicles spread across its four current host cities, but by next year, it expects to more than double its fleet with more than 2,000 new additions. Meanwhile, Tesla just launched in Austin in June. But on Thursday, July 31, Tesla officially launched Robotaxi in San Francisco. San Franciscans can hail Robotaxis through the app, but just like the service in Austin, there is a human "safety monitor" in the passenger seat making sure everything is working properly. Thanks to the months of safe testing, Waymo One users in San Francisco get the added privacy of having a truly autonomous riding experience without another human present. But while Tesla is behind in some areas, it's starting off life in the Bay Area with a huge advantage over Waymo. A user on X (the former Twitter) and Tesla enthusast @JoeTegtmeyer posted a map with the Tesla Robotaxi's coverage area overlaid on Waymo's. It doesn't take a cartogropher to see which company has the advantage. So even though Tesla Robotaxi is months behind Waymo One and still needs human training wheels, the Robotaxi has a lot more space to roam in the Bay Area. Earlier this year, Tesla said that its FSD system has driven a cumulative total of 3.6 billion miles, nearly triple the 1.3 billion cumulative miles it reported a year ago. More Tesla Robotaxi Tesla's newest Robotaxi rival has experence and deep pocketsTesla robotaxi safety called into question after frightening videoTeslas faces its most serious court battle in years But according to Musk, the FSD in regular Tesla vehicles is a lower grade than the technology Robotaxi uses. So this more advanced technology has a long way to go to catch up to the real-world traffic miles Waymo has driven. While Tesla Robotaxi is just getting off the ground in Austin and San Francisco, Alphabet's Waymo has been testing its cars on U.S. streets since at least 2018. Since then, Waymo robotaxis have driven more than 100 million miles autonomously, doubling its mileage from just six months ago, according to a company update. "Reaching 100 million fully autonomous miles represents years of methodical progress now accelerating into rapid, responsible scaling," said Waymo Chief Product Officer Saswat Panigrahi. "As we expand to serve more riders in more cities, we'll encounter new challenges that will continue strengthening our service." Waymo had reported traveling 71 million miles autonomously in March, after reaching 50 million at the end of the year. In May, Waymo said its Waymo One app registers over a quarter of a million paid weekly trips across Phoenix, San Francisco, Los Angeles, and Austin. Related: Tesla fans flock to social media to celebrate Robotaxi launch The Arena Media Brands, LLC THESTREET is a registered trademark of TheStreet, Inc.
San Francisco Chronicle
16-07-2025
- San Francisco Chronicle
San Francisco sets parking limit on RVs to clear vehicle dwellers off streets
People living in RVs in San Francisco will soon be barred from parking longer than two hours on all city streets unless they get a permit, a move that critics say has caused significant distress among the hundreds of RV dwellers who live in the city. The San Francisco Board of Supervisors this week gave initial approval to a law from Mayor Daniel Lurie that would impose strict two-hour parking limits for oversized vehicles to deal with the hundreds of people living in vehicles on city streets. The board voted to approve the plan in a 9-2 vote, with Supervisors Jackie Fielder and Shamann Walton voting no. Lurie introduced the legislation in June as a way to tackle the proliferation of vehicle dwellers in San Francisco with a combination of increased funding, enforcement and outreach. For years, San Franciscans have seen people sleeping in vehicles and in RVs amid a dire housing affordability crisis. The mayor's plan will impose a two-hour parking limit for oversized vehicles on all city streets, with the exception of commercial vehicles parked in industrial areas. Supervisor Myrna Melgar, who sponsored the legislation on behalf of the mayor, said the legislation also includes several additions made during negotiations with other supervisors and the mayor. The law will include a refuge permit system, which will allow people living in vehicles to apply for a renewable 6-month permit, contingent on compliance with community rules around such things as waste disposal and neighborly behavior, as well as ongoing work with housing support services. People living in RVs will also have access to a buyback program that will provide financial support for those willing to relinquish their vehicles in exchange for aid toward securing permanent housing. Both programs will allow the city to track RV dwellers in order to better provide them with services, Melgar said. 'In a city as wealthy as ours, I think it's on us to build a system to support people to success, and not pretend that by leaving them to be out on the streets, we are doing the progressive thing,' Melgar said. The board's approval on Tuesday highlights how the alliance between a moderate majority on the Board of Supervisors and the mayor's office has significantly changed City Hall politics. Just last year, Mayor London Breed was blocked from making minor changes to the city's parking rules by a progressive board of supervisors that often clashed with her. Now, a year later, Lurie has a moderate board working with him to push his agenda, having already passed laws to address the city's fentanyl crisis and permitting issues. Melgar said Lurie's legislation is 'great progress' over what was proposed by Breed. The new policy is expected to go into effect this fall. Despite her reservations about the plan, supervisor Connie Chan said she ultimately supported it because the mayor showed he is working in good faith to get RV dwellers housed and not just taking punitive action against them. 'San Francisco voters want us to deliver solutions with public dollars, and our city's most vulnerable cannot wait for the perfect policy,' Chan said. 'Mayor Lurie and his team and especially Supervisor Melgar have demonstrated in good faith that they have a thoughtful approach and compassionate solutions.' But supervisor Walton was sharp in his criticism of the mayor's legislation. 'More RVs than shelter builds equals an ineffective and impossible plan… a plan to fail,' Walton said. ' T his would be an attack on people trying to have a shelter in this expensive city, and they would lose their only homes.' For those living in RVs, the prospect of having nowhere to park legally has been stressful. During a walk near Lake Merced on Tuesday, San Francisco native Bill Russo told the Chronicle he lives in an RV because he wanted to be completely 'self-sufficient.' Because he has secured a disabled person license plate, Russo only has to move his RV for street cleaning every two weeks, as opposed to the every four hours as required of other RVs in the area. But Russo said he will be subject to the new restriction and will likely receive a temporary special permit allowing him to park in the city for only six more months. 'I'm counting on the delays and the fact that this won't be executed,' Russo said Meanwhile Devin Plant, a nearby RV dweller who said he has been parked in the city for just over a month, is mainly worried about what will happen to community members who don't have a way out. RV dwellers are 'going to deal with harsher conditions,' Plant said, and will 'end up under a bridge." "People don't understand this is what happens,' he said. Plant plans to leave the city this week for a guest services job he has lined up in Yosemite National Park.
San Francisco Chronicle
23-06-2025
- San Francisco Chronicle
Three ideas to save S.F. Muni that have nothing to do with cutting service
The future of transit in San Francisco stands at a pivotal moment. The Municipal Transportation Agency faces a projected $322 million budget deficit by July 2026, driven by declining fare and parking revenues and lagging pandemic recovery that has cut general fund revenues. The agency has already started mass transit service cuts and plans more to bridge the funding gap. These cuts will hit low-income riders hardest. It's a fiscally fraught time. Yet San Franciscans should ask themselves why bus and train service are on the chopping block even as we continue to subsidize the most expensive, inequitable and polluting mode of transportation in the city: the private car. Consider the numbers. A residential parking permit in San Francisco costs just $190 per year, or 52 cents per day — a bargain for exclusive use of public curb space in one of the most expensive cities in the world. San Francisco has about 275,500 on-street spaces, but only 10% are metered. The rest are largely free, and permit zones are limited in their geographic coverage. The result? A hidden subsidy that benefits those who can afford a car — who, statistically, skew wealthier. Now, imagine a more rational system: If we priced private car parking on public infrastructure much higher, but still below its actual value, at $104 per month — far less than private garages and the same price as a monthly Muni pass — and expanded the Residential Parking Permit program to cover 50% of city streets instead of just 10%, the city could generate an estimated $172 million annually. That's based on scaling up to 137,750 permits citywide and charging $1,248 per year per permit ($104 per month for 12 months). That alone could erase over half the Municipal Transportation Agency's projected shortfall. Downtown San Francisco is becoming vibrant again. Yet on streets like Montgomery — home to some of the city's most dynamic companies, which are defining the future of work for the rest of the world — it feels like 1975, where cars still barrel through at over 40 mph during rush hour, even as hundreds of pedestrians head to work. Our policies still treat downtown like a freeway exit instead of a civic commons. As a result, downtown is less vibrant than it could be, less friendly to commuters and pedestrians and shoppers. Dense, walkable urban metropolises are among the most enjoyable places. Europe's car-lite cities are beacons of global tourism. And yet we have engineered a civic core in San Francisco that is far more conducive to commuters in private cars than to the tourists and employees of downtown companies. There's a proven alternative. New York City's congestion pricing program, launched in 2025, charges most drivers $9 to enter lower Manhattan. It has already reduced traffic by 13%, improved bus speeds and funded critical subway and infrastructure improvements — all while lowering emissions. It's also started to make the civic core of New York City a much more pleasant place to be — with fewer cars honking, fewer cars idling with their exhaust, fewer pedestrian injuries and deaths in the nation's densest city. San Francisco has debated congestion pricing for nearly 20 years. Let's act — not only to increase funding for transit, but because it will just make San Francisco a nicer, more beautiful place to live, work and visit. We've punted on other common-sense ideas as well. In 2023, the city backed off a proposal to extend parking meter hours after drivers complained. That decision alone cost the Municipal Transportation Agency $18.5 million annually, according to city estimates — money that could've saved dozens of Muni operator jobs. We also need reliable sources of income for transit funding more than ever, given the lack of support from the state government. In May, Gov. Gavin Newsom released his revised budget, which cuts funding for transit, including $700 million that had already been allocated, though not distributed, after prolonged transit advocacy back in 2023. Transit advocates fought to include this money in the latest revision of the budget, which awaits the governor's signature, but the fight is far from over, and overall transit funding from the state should be considered a precarious possibility, not a certainty. When Muni funding declines, riders feel it immediately. In April, the Municipal Transportation Agency's board approved sweeping cuts affecting five bus routes, including the 5 Fulton, 9 San Bruno, 31 Balboa lines being shortened to terminate at Market Street, and the 6 Haight‑Parnassus and 21 Hayes are being merged into a single route. These changes reduce direct transit access to downtown and require additional transfers, increasing commute complexity, time and crowding on remaining routes — hardly a recipe for a reliable transit system. We cannot keep asking transit riders to pay more and get less while car owners enjoy vast subsidies and free rein over public space. Congestion pricing, expanded meter hours and reformed parking policy are not radical ideas. They are the foundation of a city that values fairness, climate action and fiscal responsibility. Joe DiMento is a San Francisco resident and public school parent who loves the 52, 35 and 24 Muni line and the BART.
