Hayes St needs to to be restored to the vibrant business corridor that it was pre-pandemic!
last updated 1/17/25
The permit holder/HVNA has applied for another year term of the Hayes Street Closure; this matter was heard and approved by the SFMTA Board at this week’s hearing. Their new approved term includes an extension of Saturday hours thereby expanding the street closure programming.
There are a multitude of reasons why we do not support the continuation of this experiment on our business corridor. Below is an outline of some of the key principles that support why we disagree with the current course of this street closure.
- We have observed the dwindling use of the street closure post pandemic. This closure has waned.
- Expanding the programming schedule is a step backward – not forward. This was intended to be a temporary program due to the pandemic. Those conditions and reasons for a street closure no longer apply.
- The financial harm it continues to impose on Hayes Valley independent small business operators is negligent and unsustainable.
- The Hayes Street closure is a one of a kind closure; there is no active business corridor in San Francisco where a temporary closure is occurring present day.
- We’ve been in communications with SFMTA since the start of the current permit term to address our concerns and questions. Unfortunately there has been no progress or headway on that front. There has not been a defined process since the start of this closure (2020) which leaves the potential impacts of extending this street closure for another year problematic and reckless.
- Each week the permit holder is in violation of the permit conditions. Repeated inquiries about our concerns have fallen on deaf ears. Moreover emergency access is being jeopardized which simply defies logic.
- The unilateral control that has been granted to the permit holder is über problematic. It is dumbfounding that this sketchy-at-best permitting process has yielded a situation where a permit holder has the ability to produce events (of seemingly any type) on a regular and ongoing basis that compete directly with locally owned and operated businesses and create a large influx of traffic that has direct and significant fiscal impact. It’s time to revert back to the standard SFMTA permitting process on an event basis. The control for events happening on a weekend basis should not be in the sole control of the HVNA. It’s a well known fact that they receive kickbacks for events which presents a conflict or interest.
- There has been zero outreach or dialogue about the current closure conditions while the permit holder continues a campaign for a permanent street closure. This sets a dangerous precedent. We’re concerned that their ongoing pr efforts to close Hayes will only further divide the neighborhood when merchants are struggling to recover from the pandemic. (We’re in a time when small business is in preservation mode and is simply unable to vocalize a position without the fear of backlash or retaliation! Hello? who is standing up for the needs of small business in San Francisco?!)
- Hayes Street Closure is a political and divisive initiative that has pitted neighbors, businesses and community groups. The worst part is the SFMTA has allowed the permit holder to run with a false narrative which includes touting a global petition as a means of support that has gone unchecked.
- Proponents are trying to sell you on an event programming schedule to justify this closure. Hayes Valley has several venues for events, in fact there’s a big vacant open space (Parcel K) right next to Hayes Street! We need to think critically about the insistence for a closed street which is situated right next to Parcel K which is often referenced as a ‘town square/plaza, living room, and critical open space’ – its illogical not to have it used for events.
- The reason put forth that this closure is needed for more open space is unfounded. Hayes Valley is not short on open spaces. Within a mile of this stretch of Hayes Street there are a number of open spaces: Koshland Park, Laguna Mini Park, Civic Center Plaza, Hayes Valley Playground, Memorial Court, Margaret Hayward Playground, Jefferson Park, and Alamo Square. Additionally, the current landscape of Hayes Valley offers several underutilized open spaces/streets ‘as is’ such as Linden Alley, Proxy, Buchanan Mall, Page Street, and vacant parcels R & S.
- The Planning Department has identified every alley in the Market Octavia neighborhood as potential “living zones,” – that’s a couple of dozen blocks on which slow streets and pedestrianized/non-car-centric outdoor areas could be developed. We should redirect our focus on these alleys. On any given day these Alleys particularly Linden Alley between Octavia and Gough (which is directly behind Hayes St) is underutilized and could stand a makeover for better optimal social use.
- Our supervisor has been MIA on this matter but we know he’s a proponent of the street closure because he is anti-car. He’s turned his back on the longest standing locally funded merchants on our business corridor. He’s been working with the permit holder in plain sight to shut down Hayes (this explains the 100% lack of engagement at the community level!) This is an epic failure of neighborhood and small business representation. Even the Director of the SFMTA admits “Dean Preston is leading with a set of untrue messages”.
- Traffic congestion in Hayes Valley is an issue that SFMTA has not successfully dealt with. We question the justification of a closure that compounds the matter and which will only further jeopardize future funding for maintenance and public transportation.
- Last year we finally began to unravel the reasons why SFMTA was not going to renew the permit. After the HVNA and Dean Preston took the issue to the media the SFMTA caved in on their own recommendation to scale back the closure from 3 days to 1 day. What changed?
- There’s a reason we advocated to reopen the 500 and 300 block of Hayes. For the permit holder and SFMTA to not consider why the only support for this closure stems from businesses on the 400 block is mind boggling. SFMTA hasn’t considered the community as a whole and in the process has shut out our small independent operators that have put their sweat equity into their businesses only to have city hall and the HVNA/permit holder walk all over them!
- Our repeated requests to SFMTA for an extension of time to have this item heard when new City leadership enters in January has fallen on deaf ears. We continue to witness an ongoing bias towards the closure and permit holder with the obvious effort to squeeze this through without any serious dialogue to address ongoing concerns. (Communication excerpts 1, 2 and 3 directed to SFMTA.)
- Circumventing the restoration of Hayes Street is counter to the Market Octavia Plan.
- Worth noting the HVNA and the permit holders have managed to control the narrative “about saving car free Hayes/ promoting a promenade” during closure dates and on the “community bulletin board” (which sits on city property and they fully control) which highlights another vantage point that has been exploited.
Notable takeaways from the SFMTA 11.19 hearing:
- It was evident that the SFMTA Board was dumbfounded as to why this initiative was even brought before them and said “gotta believe we could find better uses of our time than worrying about the hours for brunch in Hayes Valley” which clearly points to a lack of understanding and governing policy for this temporary street closure. The suggestion of having ISCOTT oversee this matter is also invalid since this is a high volume street and not in their purview.
- A convenient omission by the program manager occurred at the 11/19/24 SFMTA Board meeting: public comment leading up to the SFMTA hearing was close 202/224. This demonstrates the ever increasing opposition for the continuation of this experiment.
more info on our Summer Roundup
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/06b68/06b68fc054f0743bb90d14b04c7780c51eedaa7a" alt=""
I live near the closure and find it absurd that this road block has gone on this long. It’s clear that the HVNA is trying to exert control with an aim to shut the street down altogether. This is ridiculous. I agree they can have their events at the park or the empty lot. Business owners are being ignored thanks to Dean. Hope Bilal doesn’t fall for this overreach on a critical merchant corridor. Plus, why is this happening here only? There’s no closure on Haight St, Fillmore, Divisadero or Chestnut?
There is a lot of great common sense thinking here. The best question that any city department can ask themselves is ——- Tah Dah——- how do we serve the largest amount of people. “Serve” in this case would mean, allow for mobility, safety, recreation, sidewalk repair, tree trimming, policing, They should NOT be serving the folks with the most money, or the folks that are the loudest and most organized.
Also, a lot of merchants are afraid to speak up against the street closure for fear of hurting their reputation in the neighbors/customers.
Hayes valley is now known as being a huge horrible traffic jam and everyone I know avoids it.
Thanks for all you have done and keep doing to shine light on this issue. Covid is over and so is this notion that we have to play in a block while causing more traffic issues and more challenges to the sm. biz who have absorbent leases in this neighborhood. It’s getting ridiculous. The SFFD is having to ram through the barriers, the 21 is on the next street and traffic is backed up all around for what?
Open this block up and redirect efforts and monies to improving the half ass projects that preceded this failed experiment.
You guys got it right questioning why Parcel K can’t be used to host social events if the will of city hall is to not build. Makes sense to change its use to something more community driven, at least while its future development plans are hold. I think HVS has some great ideas that I am glad are getting out there.