The barriers went up on Shotwell Street Tuesday, starting an 18-month experiment to see if they can deter prostitution. But on the same day they went up, some neighbors were already unhappy.
The barriers resulted in the loss of about three parking spaces between 20th and 21st streets, and two between 19th and 20th streets. The barriers obstruct a quick exit for some residents, and others are irritated that their views were not taken into account.
The project is part of the city’s efforts to curb prostitution on the stretch, following a lawsuit filed by a group of residents nearly two months ago.
“It is something positive, but it has to be followed by other measures. I see it as one of many elements,” said Ayman Farahat, a plaintiff in that lawsuit. “You put the barriers. You put cameras, then what do you do? Don’t come to us and say you put the camera. We don’t care. What we care about is the outcome.”
Part of Mayor London Breed’s response to curbing sex work away from Shotwell Street included the installation of cameras earlier this year, the presence of more police officers in plain clothes and “Dear John Letters,” warnings to people associated with vehicles involved in prostitution activity.
At present, the blocks between 19th and 21st have traffic deterrents at both entry points. Mid-block between 19th and 20th and 20th and 21st, the city has also put in barriers that include cement blockades against the curb on each side of the street. In the middle of the street is an approximately 12-foot-long, six-inch-tall rubber barrier. Two plastic poles stand on one side of the barrier and one plastic poll stands on the other side.
The SFMTA’s Senior Traffic Engineer, Bryant Woo, said at an earlier meeting that his office had successfully tested the rubber curbs with two ambulances, two fire engines and one ladder truck in May. Passage, he said, was not an issue.
Still, some neighbors are unhappy.
“We’re against the barriers,” said Sandra S., who has lived on the block for 48 years. She explained that they will make it more difficult for her disabled mother to get to the hospital or doctor’s appointments. At the very least, it will make it more inconvenient, and parking in front of the house will be more difficult to find.
Just a few hours after the SFMTA finished installing the barriers, Sandra and a group of neighbors, many of whom live within a couple of houses from where the barriers were installed, gathered to discuss their displeasure. Most of the complaints seemed to be around the process of deciding whether barriers were appropriate in the first place.
Cindy and Art Raedeke, 40-year residents of the block, said the city proceeded too quickly on deciding on the barriers, and called the process “an ill-advised approach to the problem.”
“We know there’s a problem, but all it’s going to do is move the sex workers from this street over to some new street, just like it did from Capp,” said Art Raedeke. “It’s just a short-term solution to a problem.”
The Raedekes said they felt disappointed by the way the city sought the community’s input. They said the only approach from the city came two weeks prior to an SFMTA board meeting on Oct. 1 where the plan was unveiled to commissioners.
Upon learning of the project, the couple, along with their neighbor Dagma Eisele, drafted a letter asking other neighbors to join forces in opposition to the barriers.
“By the time we came into the board meeting, it was a done deal,” said Cindy Raedeke.
The neighbors said two weeks was not enough time to properly have their concerns heard and addressed.
During the meeting, Woo said his office had received overwhelming support for the proposal; however, during the open comment session, half of the 40 people who spoke rejected the project. One of those in opposition was neighbor Galen Joseph, who lives right in front of the barriers between 20th and 21st streets.
“It’s not very attractive [the barriers],” said Joseph. “To be honest, I didn’t think there was such a big problem that we needed this kind of a solution.”
Joseph said she fears the barriers will attract illegal dumping, but added that David Hall, the owner of Shotwell’s Saloon and one of the plaintiffs who sued the city two months ago, assured her he would come clean with a leaf blower on street cleaning days.
While the city will try the barriers for a period of 18 months, some supporters, like Hall, are already proposing new ideas on how to address prostitution moving forward.
“Sure, they need to work,” said Hall, during the SFMTA meeting a couple weeks ago. “Let’s just put them on Bayshore. There’s nobody who lives over there. It’s easy.”
So they will move somewhere else (Shotwell came after Capp) and still nothing really will be solved at all.
Correct. This is not a scalable solution but reactionary nimbyism. If they keep putting up barricades wherever the business moves, eventually the entire Mission will be a fenced-in ghetto.
There are plenty of non-residential areas that would likely create fewer complaints, until it’s legalized/decriminalized.
If prostitution is still illegal, why don’t the cops just get involved?
Because our police department has a really serious laziness/competence problem. Clearance rates for serious crimes have fallen by half since the turn of the century, even as per capita spending has doubled. SFPD is just not doing the work anymore. If they aren’t even bothering to solve serious violent felonies, you can imagine how little quality of life beat work they are doing.
Remember, Calle 24 didn’t want the flimsy plastic barriers at intersections on Shotwell because they claimed they were somehow triggering or oppressive. Shotwell is the least slow slow street in the city and that’s a shame. People in the Mission deserve nice things too.
These barricades are unsafe and unproductive. Since they’ve been up, I’ve watched multiple cars drive on the sidewalk to get around them. Amazon trucks have backed up the whole block.
I’m a 30+ year resident who has co-existed with sex workers for decades. These barricades are the result of a small group of wealthy residents that doesn’t understand what it means to live in a city. Their advocacy has resulted in barricades that threaten the safety of pedestrians and bikers!!
> Their advocacy has resulted in barricades that threaten the safety of pedestrians and bikers!!
They just have been installed and no incident has been reported AFAIK, so it sounds like fear mongering.
It’s also dismissing how dangerous the slow street was before, with cars speeding and hitting parked cars, drivers threatening people walking on the street, women being harassed by johns.
You’re also miscategorizing who doesn’t want to have crime and prostitution. A long-term neighbor leaving in a multi-generation home was at the hearing in favor of a change.
The fact that there is more crime is in no way because long-term or lower-income residents prefer crime, but a mix of residents not wanting to interact of the police and the police having lower priorities for them.
The WalkSF agenda at work.
> during the open comment session, half of the 40 people who spoke rejected the project
Only one of them was a Shotwell resident. Most of them seem to have never seen Shotwell St… They should have left their address to give to pimps as they are so keen to have prostitution, stabbings, and murders on their block and think that Mission residents only deserve crime.
I’m a 30-year resident of Shotwell Street. The new barriers are ugly and will probably attract graffiti, but they accomplish the goal of eliminating through traffic. I for one appreciate the quieter nights and am willing to accept the tradeoffs. Anyone opposed to them should read the lawsuit that prompted the city to install these barriers: https://newspack-missionlocal.s3.amazonaws.com/mission/wp-content/uploads/2024/08/Shotwell-lawsuit.pdf. Will the prostitution activity move to another location nearby? Probably. But something needed to be done. If the DA isn’t going to prosecute prostitutes and johns for engaging in these crimes, then the city needs to legalize prostitution and establish licensed brothels—which should not be located in residential areas, and especially not on Slow Streets.
For the record, this Shotwell neighbor (between 20th and 21st) fully supports the street closures…
No one has the right to “conduct business” in a public area (i.e. the streets or sidewalks) with a direct nuisance effect. Street prostitution inevitably brings loudly arguing johns/pimps/prostitutes to the detriment of the neighbors. A woman explaining that she can make $1000 a night vs. very little in Oakland is not an excuse to engage in the practice here. If she is supporting kids or parents there are social programs that can help. Dropping harmless but annoying eggs on those who persist in engaging under your windows is an effective deterrent. Pelting a car (don’t do it while it is moving lest the driver crash or hit someone) is also a harmless but effective deterrent.
Grocery Outlet on nearby South Van Ness and 23rd should have an ample supply. Make sure you clean up the egg mess on the sidewalk the next morning.
As a Shotwell resident since 2008, I enjoyed my first full night of sleep year in two years. Since the barriers went up, I have not been awakened in the middle of the night by horns beeping, revving motors, bass woofers, screeching tires, slamming car doors, drunk drivers swerving to avoid parked cars on our very narrow street, sex workers, johns and pimps shouting and fighting. The barriers are not an ideal solution, and I am not opposed to sex work per se, but perhaps it will inspire the sex trade to relocate to a less residential neighborhood where the noise will be less of a nuisance.
If they don’t want the barriers take them out, take out the cameras and they can deal with the prostitution.
It’s not like I like the trade, you block them and they will move, god forbid they come up to Guerrero, Dolores and Church. All these out of towners move it next to a ho stroll, the stroll will always be there, should have done your homework.
The complaints come mostly from the surge of crime linked to what happened after the barricades were installed on Capp.
It seems like most of the activity that happened over multiple blocks on Capp + some on Shotwell got suddenly concentrated over 2 blocks on Shotwell.
There should have been mid-block or intersection barriers to reduce through traffic on this (and all) Slow Streets anyhow!
We love the street closure. Property value go up📈 traffic go down. who loses? Criminals? Car owners? Who cares?