STORYLINE Downtown

This storyline has only one article

Viewing thru of

Close timeline

No high resolution image exists...

Progress bar

Loading images
Slideshow image

Now that city leaders have dedicated $2.7 million in funding to add cars to the K Street pedestrian mall, what exactly does the city hope to achieve from the effort?


Mayor Kevin Johnson and city staffers have said that the move to include cars on K Street would be a boon for business and would also make the street safer.


Johnson said at a Monday press conference that automobile traffic on K Street — banned since the late 1960s — would create numerous advantages for the city. “It increases visibility for all the retail...stimulates our activity in terms of K Street, and pedestrian malls are a thing of the past,” he said, adding that the cars would also improve public safety on the thoroughfare.

The city plans to make the area bordering Eighth and 12th streets on K Street ready for cars by mid-to-late 2011, said Denise Malvetti, a senior project manager for the city’s Economic Development Department. The estimated $2.7 million construction and design budget for the project comes from local transportation funds for economic development projects, she said.

Funds for the project do not come from the city’s general fund, an April 27 report from the city’s Economic Development and Transportation Departments noted.

The construction part of the project’s budget includes funding for new stop lights and for reprogramming existing stop lights, Malvetti said.

In making their argument for adding cars to K Street, city staffers are citing the work of Downtown Works, a consulting group that wrote a report on downtown issues for the city and the Downtown Sacramento Partnership.

“Downtown Works strongly recommends the city of Sacramento follow the direction of dozens of other U.S. cities and re-open K Street to vehicular traffic which will both aid in the reconnection of the grid and enhance the retail viability,” the April 27 staff report states.

Eugene, Chicago and Louisville are some of the cities that have reversed course to add cars to their pedestrian malls, according to the report.

Councilman Steve Cohn said he backed the idea of including cars on K Street, but he raised concerns about an $800,000 portion of the budget that would have otherwise been spent on streets in his district.

Cohn’s concern translated into the following City Council decision: During the city’s budget process, the city will re-examine the project’s funding sources.

Transforming K Street into a pedestrian mall was “a mistake from the beginning,” Cohn said.

Also on Tuesday, K Street business leaders and local organizations that promote economic development spoke in favor of letting people drive their cars on K Street. These supporters included developer David Taylor; Kevin Greene, policy manager for the Downtown Sacramento Partnership; Mike Testa, vice president of communications and public affairs for the Sacramento Convention & Visitors Bureau; Richard Lewis, executive producer of California Musical Theatre; and Sid Garcia-Heberger, operator of the Crest Theatre.

Greene said that cars on the street would boost public safety and be “a key step toward a greater retail viability.”

Downtown resident John Deeter was the lone speaker at the meeting who opposed the idea. He called K Street “a refuge” from cars.

Photo by Suzanne Hurt.

Kathleen Haley is a staff reporter for The Sacramento Press.

 

Liked this article? Share it with your friends:

Conversation Express your views, debate, and be heard with those in your area closest to the issue.RSS Feed

April 28, 2010 | 3:53 PM
Why not a compromise? Open parts of the mall to cars to generate traffic for the stores, but also leave the pedestrian look in place so that when there are events the streets can be closed to cars.
4 0
REPLY
April 28, 2010 | 10:24 PM
The problem is they aren't getting rid of the "mall" part--they're just getting rid of the "pedestrian" part. Meanwhile, other cities are adding features like bike boulevards and enhanced pedestrian walking areas in their downtown cores.
2 0
REPLY
April 28, 2010 | 4:01 PM
One picture speak thousand words... HORSES???

I prefer the rendering that shows a Prius next to light rail, although, as I mentioned earlier, it would have been funnier if it had been a speeding Bbbbmer picking off teabaggers on K...... Oh well.....
1 3
REPLY
edited on  April 29, 2010 | 12:40 PM
Sacramento has the perfect climate, a car-free zone ready for fresh energy and a diverse population that loves to gather outside for events (Thursday Night Market on K St., Farmer's Markets, Second Saturday, Friday Night Concerts). Put that climate, energy and people together in a vibrant outdoor courtyard setting for dining, shopping, residential and entertainment. It will be a destination for locals and visitors.

How is allowing people to drive through without stopping to park, going to "be a boon for business"? Cars run across K on the numbered streets already. If businesses want visibility, perhaps some genius could consider ... advertising? Squandering the opportunity to keep K St. pedestrian is a waste of resources and it's dumb.

The real killer of K Street was the imposing, internalized Downtown Plaza. That space needs to be opened up, not to cars, but to the K St. Mall and Old Sac Tunnel, as a connector rather than an obstacle. The Convention Center also cut off K St. and the K St. bike lane that locals used to get to the K St. Mall.
1 2
REPLY
April 29, 2010 | 2:05 PM
Regardless of the well intentioned thoughts on what K Street SHOULD be, the market has spoken on the issue of circulation. It left. It left a decade ago. It didn't hold community meetings, it didn't outreach for concensus. It left.

Sid Garcia-Herberger described it perfectly at Tuesday's CC meeting when she described the rejection after rejection she got trying to lease space around the Crest plaza because...there was no traffic on K. Maybe you think she doesn't really understand some deeper urban planning truth about K Street, and didn't describe the situation properly to the tenants she was trying to lease to...and maybe pigs can fly. If there is ANYONE in town that "gets" K Street, Sid does.

There are many reasons for K Streets' decline and it will take many solutions to re-invent it, but from a tenants perspective, no one will lease space on it without auto traffic. Housing will help tremendously and that's in works. But even there...the private developers who will invest, and the City who will invest public funds BOTH agree auto circulation is necessary.

If Sacramento had a derth of pedestrian friendly environments, maybe there'd be justification for prolonging this failed experiment...but it has miles of the finest walking streets anywhere. We all know it and love it.
1 0
REPLY
April 29, 2010 | 8:29 PM
The market left before the pedestrian mall was built--it moved to the suburbs, where land was cheap and new development heavily subsidized, and parking lots obvious to the residents of this new car-centric postwar world. Government makes the rules of the marketplace.

Adding two lanes of 15 mph auto traffic, competing with light rail and bicycles, with no additional parking, may be a suitable amount of token traffic to soothe the fears of retailers uncomfortable with dealing outside their standard retail model, but it won't be particularly useful as a vehicular street.
2 0
REPLY
edited on  April 30, 2010 | 5:18 PM
"The market has spoken"? Circulation was truncated by the Convention Center and the Downtown Plaza bomb shelter. Previously, Sacramentans used to walk and ride bikes down the length of K Street, all the way to Old Sacramento. Slumlords exacerbated the problem as businesses moved and were not replaced.

"It didn't hold community meetings, it didn't outreach for concensus."

That's an odd swipe at the process, Mr. Rich. Now the consultants have been paid big bucks to tell developers and civic leaders to do something that defies logic, common sense, budgetary realities, the potential value of a car free site AND the public will. What's wrong with including the opinions of the actual people who will be living with the results for decades to come (until the next time K St. is ripped up, replaced, de-autoed)?

"There are many reasons for K Streets' decline and it will take many solutions to re-invent it, but from a tenants perspective, no one will lease space on it without auto traffic."

Auto traffic that passes through so that people can see something they can't stop for, in order to know that it's there, is pointless and an insult to most people's intelligence. When the pedestrian corridor is revitalized, even the scared-to-walk-in-downtown folks will venture out of their autocentric comfort zones. THE NUMBERED STREETS RUN ACROSS K ST. EVERY BLOCK.

"If Sacramento had a derth of pedestrian friendly environments, maybe there'd be justification for prolonging this failed experiment...but it has miles of the finest walking streets anywhere. We all know it and love it."

Sacramento has a dearth of pedestrian friendly auto-free environments, including courtyard cafes where people can sit and dine without sucking on car exhaust and traffic noise.

As Mr. Burg says,

"Adding two lanes of 15 mph auto traffic, competing with light rail and bicycles, with no additional parking, may be a suitable amount of token traffic to soothe the fears of retailers uncomfortable with dealing outside their standard retail model, but it won't be particularly useful as a vehicular street."
0 0
REPLY
April 29, 2010 | 2:27 PM
Can some one explain how 4 blocks on a dead end street with no street parking planned will help generate traffic? I guess if you have loading zones and taxi zones it would help, but I don't think that's part of the plan. Hmmm, now that I think about it, I'm sure all the new clubs will have vallet.

Another backroom deal.
2 0
REPLY
Leave a Comment
User icon
Type your comment in the box below Edit your comment in the box below

Type tags into the box below. Use commas to separate your tags.

Please Log in or Sign up

Existing Members

Sign In Progress bar Forgot Password?

New Users Create an Account Here
Progress bar
Verification email has been sent. To validate your account open the link provided in the message.
There was a problem sending your verification email. Please contact support@sacramentopress.com
Progress bar Login background Tag cloud top Tag cloud background Tag cloud bottom Login manager background