-

ff

fothIy Bit

LJ 4e in Fracisco
A

yPtnThg
1:1
p

mt-

r
/
lie has fought to protect it, he has left his loved ones in its trust, he lives for the claN he will return to it. \\e, in his home town, are responsible to him for its growth, its development, its welfare. Carefully, now, we must prepare the plans for its future, his future. They must be practical plans, comprehensive challenging l)1a115 that solve todays proheims, set the pattern for tomorro\\ S impro\ ements and form the basis for a constant, Continuous gross tha Master Plan, ever changing, building, and expanding! The City Planning Commission, through this monthly publication hopes to bring to you, the citizens of San Francisco, the story of the progress of the Master Planwhat it is, how it is formulated, how it is activated, how it grows! Your comments, your suggestions, your ideas are .s elcorned, your support is sought. We know you join with us, with all San Franciscans, in sponsoring the program that will provide the best for the future of our city, for the future of HIS CITY.

x
A STATEMENT FROM MAYOR LAPHAM

he City Planning Commission is to be con gratula/ed for undertaking this publication to further inform the citizens of San Francisco on the developmen/s of the Master Plan. The substantial progress the Commission has made on the Master Plan in the past year augurs well for the future.
4

WHAT IS THE MASTER PLAN

p
- - - - -

The Master Plan is one of the essential tools for building a great city. It is more than single map. A map shows things as they are: the Master Plan shows what should done. It is a representation of ideas for civic improvement, the best that can be developed by citizens and officials working together. Since the city grows and changes, its plans must also change. The Master Plan, therefore, is a flexible instrument. It will be constantly refined to meet new prospects and needs.

THE USES OF LAND

IjjII_ul

6.

PUBLIC BUILDINGS
Public buildings form an important part of the structure of the city, and the quality of service rendered by them depends In large part upon where they are and how they are fitted into the general city pattern. This is assured by the Master Plan.

/ =!

The modern city is a vast problem of space. Formulas for the proper and efficient use of land are basic elements of the Master Plan. The aim is to determine the quantity of space needed for all prospective uses, and to plan the most advantageous arrangement of these areas.

Milk

_ri

2.

FREEWAYS, HIGHWAYS AND STREETS

Traffic is the life-blood of the city. The freeways, highways and streets are the channels through which this vital flow moves. They must be adequate, and they should form a system like the blood vessels of the body. Our streets were never planned originally for this purpose.

1.

REDEVELOPMENT AND HOUSING

m4tn
, Imm

Blighted districts and slums are costly. They provide miserable homes for children and drive people out into the newer, more spacious suburbs. Such old areas must be rebuilt along modern lines. The Master Plan will be the broad general guide for such work.

TRANSIT
Transit Is the service of carrying people from place to place. It needs improvement badly. The freeways, highways and streets provide the routes. Vast sums can be wasted, and important benefits lost by failure to correlate plans for public ways, and streetcar and bus routes.

B.

SUBDIVISION DESIGNS
New methods of developing subdivisions and new ideals for home neighborhoods are constantly appearing. The benefits of such progressive effort can be brought to this city by a systematic check of all subdivision plans. Proper standards and principles must be set in the Master Plan.

OMM IN
will,

milin

lr ! l/~Fil

4.

TRANSPORTATION
Transportation deals with the delivery of materials Into and the shipment of products out of the city by rail, ship, plane and truck. Every function of the community is affected by the location and character of facilities devoted to this service. They are an important part of the Master Plan.

9.

RECREATION, PARKS, PLAYGROUNDS

Parks and recreational facilities are regarded as essential in the modern city. When open spaces for such purposes are not provided by private land owners, the obligation fails on the city. The designation of areas for such uses becomes part of the process of city planning.

5.

UTILITIES
Electric power, telephone service, water supply, sewers and other services all have to be planned. They can be fitted into the structure of the community with greatest economy and efficiency if there is a Master Plan.

10.

THE CITYS APPEARANCE

The appearance of the city generally reflects the cultural level of its people. Investments in architecture, gardens, and civic centers can easily be ruined by ugly surroundings. The comm as a whole must have standar Is beauty, cleanliness and decency. is a mark of civic consciousness and true greatness.

:1 + * ?111
2

SAN FRANCISCO CITY PLANNING COMMISSION

THE JOB AHEAD as I see it

L. DEMING TILTON Director of Planning IN APRIL we open our gates to visitors from many famous cities. Paris, the queen of all, will be represented. South American neighbors will walk up Market Street, comparing it with the broad, dignified boulevards of Rio dejaneiro and Montevideo. Citizens from Russia and England will tell us of the plans which they have made for new towns to take place of those destroyed. These friends from abroad will know a good deal about city planning. It is an important activity where many of them live.
Sunsetdistrict of homes, protected by proper zoning.

PLANNING COMMISSION PROGRESS

The Commission in 1944, held 38 special meetings, in addition to the regular biweekly meetings, so numerous were the matters requiring the commissions attention. port and on June 6, 1944 the Board of Supervisors approved the rezoning.
POSTWAR PUBLIC WORKS IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM

IGHBORHOOD MEETINGS

An innovation is the holding of evening neighborhood meetings. In this way the fullest expression of opinion is obtained from the greatest number of property owners and citizens within an area affected by a particular study of the Commission. Such meetings proved invaluable while the Sunset rezoning and Telegraph Hill building height limitation legislation were under consideration.
SUNSET REZONING

Over 69,000 San Franciscans, 10,000 home owners, were given the protection of First Residential zoning when a major portion of the Sunset District was rezoned. The Ordinance of 1921, passed when most of the district was sand dunes, classified the area as Second Residential, permitting multiple dwellings. However, 987, of actual construction through the years was single family homes. To prethe nature of the district, rezoning First Residential was proposed within the neighborhood. The overwhelming opinion of all who attended favored rezoning. The Commission submitted its re-

The Mayor requested the Commission to prepare a comprehensive Public Works Improvement Program to have the city ready for postwar construction. Departments were asked to submit a listing of their plans, programs for land acquisition and construction, and method of financing. To assist the departments in compiling the information, the Commission prepared a Postwar Public Works Improvement Handbook, a concise form for reporting, and the staff held conferences with all departments. Suggestions from citizens, improvement clubs and civic organizations were solicited and over 500 received and reviewed. The Commission added proposals resulting from its own studies, and, thanks to the close cooperation of the Chief Administrative Officer and department heads the preliminary report was delivered to the Mayor on time, on October 1, 1944. Revisions and refinements have been made and the full program, totaling over $131,000,000 is now available for review and recommendation by the Mayors Citizens Committee. Projects submitted by the Commission itself were: Marginal Freeways, Terminal Sites (for downtown park(Continued on page 4)

Their coming moves us to reflect a bit about our own future. First, we should look into the mirror! Hard-working old San Francisco has become careless and slovenly. Pride in the appearance of the city has been weakened by the war. It needs a stimulant. Opera, music, and the impressive landscapes of the Park are deeply appreciated, but a spreading civic ugilness is accepted without protest. Defacers of the citysign-painters and billposters, news-vendors, rubbish dumpers and othersoperate with a free hand, often in violation of city ordinances. The April conference may help us by opening our eyes. The move to polish up would be better, however, if it could be translated into a sustained, constructive program. Certainly the city we see about us is not a proper symbol for either the present or the future. San Francisco should be able to stand proudly alongside the noblest cities of the world. The task of making it that kind of a city is large, but not beyond our capacity. The key to our future is the Master Plan. During the year the basic work on this document will be completed. It will show what needs to be done as time passes to create a new and better. city on this superb site. The people must understand the purposes and value of the Master Plan. Conferences on it must be held and means found to translate it into reality. Civic leaders must strive for its execution in the same spirit as statesmen will work to secure the peace of the world. This is the challenge to us growing out of the momentous days of April, 1945.

NEIGHBORHOOD NEWS
Numerous letters from civic organizations are received and welcomed by the Commission. Typical is the following from the Parkside District Improvement Club: "Gentlemen: The excessive and detrimental redivision of established lots into smaller panels, which has occurred with increasing frequency in the Parkside District, was considered at a recent meeting of the Parkside District Improvement Club. This problem has become even more serious in this single-family home district since the introduction of the so-called "Title Six" type of residential buildings. The area of normal lots in the Parkside-Sunset is 3000 sq. ft. for lots on Avenues, and 2500 sq. ft. for lots on Streets, but the redivision of lots by speculative builders to increase the number of building sites has produced a large number of very small lots, many of them having an area of only 1,437 sq. ft. Such lots can be used only by overcrowding the lot and by increasing the population density of the district. So far as we can ascertain, San Francisco is the only city that does not protect its residential property owners by regulating minimum lot sizes. Oakland, Berkeley, Alameda, Martinez, San Mateo, Redwood City, Palo Alto, San Bruno and many other cities have established minimum lot size of 4000 sq. ft. The F.H.A. standards set a minimum lot size of 4000 sq. ft. for all communities except San Francisco. In the Parkside District there is no established minimum lot size. This is a deficiency that should be corrected at the earliest possible time. To check the trend of excessive redivision of lots and to prevent the injury caused thereby, not only in the Parkside, but also in many other districts in San Francisco. The Parkside District Improvement Club recommends the enactment of adequate regulation of lot sizes. We trust you will give this your most serious consideration for the betterment of the entire City."
E. LA PLACE, Pres.

Commission Progress
ing), a Central Produce Market, Tideland Reclamation, Completion of the Civic Center and Redevelopment Sites.
LAND USE SURVEY

I WHAT OTHER CITIES ARE DOING

CLEVELAND, OHIO

Particularly important to the Master Plan of San Francisco, to any city so constricted in area, is the use of land. Utilizing the $100,000 WPA survey left incomplete in 1940 as a base, the staff secured the necessary additional information, made corrections, prepared basic data maps and analyzed the area, use and zoning of all San Franciscos blocks. With the comprehensive study as a textbook it is now possible to project the land use pattern toward which San Francisco should strive.
TELEGRAPH HILL HEIGHT LIMITATION

A vast area of the St. Clair-East 55th Street district of Cleveland was devastated by a gas explosion and fire last October. The Second annual report of their Planning Commission shows the intent to bring about at least one blessing from that chaos in presenting redevelopment plans that call for: "a small playground, a residential section replatted into wider lots than formerly, a rearranged street pattern to discourage trucking and through traffic, and new zoning to more effectivel y separate business and industry from homes."

The Commission again moved its meeting to the district affected when requested by the Board of Supervisors to study bills proposing to protect the panoramic view from Telegraph Hill by placing height limitations on buildings. Passage of the bills with minor changes was recommended.
OTHER STUDIES

CITY PLANNING COMMISSION

PUBLIC HEARINGS
ROOM 282 CITY HALL

ZONING MATTERS
APRIL 19, 1945 3P.M.

Studies completed or under consideration include: John McLaren Park boundaries; Circulation, with particular emphasis on the Market Street congestion; a second Bay crossing; Urban RedevelopmentLegislation and the Rehabilitation of San Franciscos blighted areas; Completion of the Civic Center; Down town Parking Terminals; Calvary and Laurel Hill Cemetery Development and a Central Produce Market.

Northwest corner 37th and Taraval; Northeast corner 36th and Taraval;

Second Residential to First.

Southeast corner Beaumont Avenue and Lone Mountain Terrace;

Fi,st Residential to Second.

Southwest corner Greenwich and Van Ness;

Second Residential to Commercial.

North side of Precita Avenue, between Coso and Shotwell;

Second Residential to Co,,zmercial.

Southeast corner of Mission and Oliver;

Commercial to Light Industrial.

SAN FRANCISCO CITY PLANNING COMMISSION MICHEL D. WEILL, GARDNER A. DAILEY L. DEMING TILTON

President

GEORGE W. JOHNS, Vice-President MALCOLM MacNAIJGHTON MRS. CHARLES B. PORTER J. ROGER DEAS

Sec. 562, P. L. and R. U. S. POSTAGE

Paid
San Francisco, Calif. Permit No. 4412

Director of Planning
Room 252 City Hall, San Francisco, 2.

Secretary

CHARTER, Sect. 116, Paragraph 3. It shall be the duty of the commission to make, maintain and adopt, . . . a master plan of the physical development of the city and county, which plan . . . shall make recommendations for the development of all areas . . . including, among other things, the general location, character and extent of streets, viaducts, subways, bridges, boulevards, parkways, playgrounds, parks, squares, aviation fields and other public ways, grants, and open spaces, the general location of public buildings and other public property and the removal, relocating, widening, narrowing, vacating, abandonment or extension of any of the foregoing ways, grants, open spaces or buildings.

I --I

SAN FRANCISCO

The News Bulletin of the San Francisco City Planning Commission

San Francisco is a city which has known the benefits of change. Eight times destroyed by fire, the city arose from the ashes to become more prosperous, more beautiful. Cemeteries have been removed to make way for the needs of the living. Ramshackle buildings have been replaced by skyscrapers. Even reenforced concrete structures have been razed to make possible our magnificent Civic Center, and our great Bay Bridge and its terminal. San Francisco has welcomed change whenever it would provide better living for its citizens. Today we have a new opportunity for improvementthe Community Redevelopment Act legislation through which dilapidation, decay, and blight can be obliterated. Property values surrounding such areas can be improved; the setting for our landmarks enhanced; and beautiful, modern housing provided for our people. VOLUME N 1
. -.

REDEVELOPMENT AND HOUSING

Blighted areas exist in practically all the older California cities. Early dwellings havtr deteriorated; some have been converted to commercial or to industrial uses; many ar outmoded and obsolete. No community can be wholesome and liveable with blight spreading and destroying values. These districts must be rebuilt with adequate ope space, recreational areas, and proper facilities. The Community Redevelopment Act now permits cities to undertake this important constructive task.

CONDITIONS PREVAILING IN SLUMS AND BLIGHTED AREAS

TYPICAL LAND COVERAGE NUMBER OF FAMILIES -

68% 85

IIIIIiIIlt1iJ!
LACK O7 VENTILATION NARROW LLEYS STREETS .IOUSE LESS THAN ONE LOT WDE 6ETERIORATION RATS BROKEN STAIRS DETERIORATION ACCUMULATED GARBAGE NO TREES OR PLANTING OBSOLESCENCE LACK OF SUN VIEWS, OPEN SPACE
.

OVERCROWDED

MIXED USES

TOO GREAT A PERCENTAGE OF LAND COVERAGE

THE PROCEDURES
COMPLETION OF THE APPROPRIATION OF

MASTER PLAN

FUNDS

kR
CONDEMNATION OF

____

CONSTRUCTION OF

LAND

NEW HOUSING

CONDITIONS PREVAILING AFTER REDEVELOPMENT

TYPICAL LAND COVERAGE 29.2% NUMBER OF FAMILIES - - 136

PLANTING

RECREATION AREA

PLEASING DESIGN SUN, VIEWS, OPEN SPACE ALL RESIDENTIAL USE

SPACIOUSLY PLANNED INTERIOR WELL KEPT, MODERN BUILDINGS

LIGHT, AIR, VENTILATION

SMALL PERCENTAGE OF LAND COVERAGE Designed by Barbara J. Borhe

SAN FRANCISCO CITY PLANNING COMMISSION 2

REDEVELOPMENT WILL PAY

By CHESTER MacPHEE Member, Board of Supervisors Blighted districts contain slums, areas of low value, and useless property. They exist in almost all cities of California. They block civic progress and handicap business. Buildings are in various stages of decay. They fall down and burn up, endangering life and other property. Housing is bad and family life crowded, insanitary, and disagreeable. People leave such areas for the suburbs. These areas are like cancers: they do not cure themselves. They provide less income, while the costs of police, fire protection, welfare and other public services increase. They block progress, handicap business and industry, and destroy opportunities for useful employment. They will be worse, unless we remove them by a surgical operation. In a report recently submitted to Congress it was stated "in the average large city, slums and badly blighted districts of metropolitan areas represent: 20% of the residential area, 33% of the population, 5% of the major crimes, 607c of the juvenile delinquency, 50% of the arrests, 60% of the tuberculosis victims, 507c, of disease, 35 17c of the fires and 45% of city service costs by owners, yet provide but 6 1/c of the real estate tax revenues." These figures are adjusted averages and may or may not be applicable to San Francisco at the present time, but they do show the need for official action. Our own blighted areas show excessive fires, juvenile delinquency, arrests, traffic accidents, and health and welfare costs. I want to direct attention particularly to the high service costs in these areas, and to the low tax returns which they produce. The Mayor, the Board of Supervisors, and all department heads must know that blight is costly and injurious to our city. As city officials we must be prepared to do something about it. The Community Redevelopment Law, passed in 1945, now gives us legal power to replan and rebuild these districts. We can assemble land, demolish the rotten old buildings and offer private capital an opportunity to rebuild on these sites. I believe that we can count on Federal aid, and the State may be willing to provide funds for redevelopment. If the City itself is farsighted and courageous, and does its part, there is plenty of private money ready to help do this job. Many citizens have come to me in fear about the plans of the City for rebuilding these blighted districts. I sympathize with them, for no one likes to be disturbed in his home or to have his properties taken over for a public purpose. But I find a great many more citizens who see trouble ahead for San Francisco if we do not take proper steps to reclaim property in these convenient, easily accessible blighted districts. They urge us to go ahead, paying the cost, whatever it may be. I am in greement with them, and believe that a slow, determined, humane attack upon slums and blight will pay large dividends in the future.
EXHIBIT A
STREET

THE JOB AHEAD ... as I see it

L. DEMING TILTON Director of Planning Many big jobs lie ahead of us. We need schools, larger playgrounds, new bridges, freeways, and numerous other improvements. Near the top of the list comes the biggest job of all, the rebuilding of the slums and blighted districts. The present owners in these areas can do little to clean up slum conditions. Here and there an old structure is renovated, but the neighborhood is still crowded and ugly. The city condemns the worst of the dwellings. But there are over 45,000 substandard homes in San Francisco and we demolish fewer than 200 each year! The City itself must do more than post notices on fire-traps. It must provide both the energy and the funds needed to rebuild its blighted districts. If we do our part, we can be sure that the State and the Federal government will help us. The action program is simple. First, the Board of Supervisors selects an obviously bad area and directs the Planning Commission to make plans for its reconstruction. The money needed to buy the old property and to build the new buildings cannot be determined without a plan. The planning task, therefore, is large and important. It can go forward now, even though actual building may be deferred for several years. Second, as soon as a sound redevelopment project is conceived, the City must "shop" for the necessary funds to build it. There is no dearth of private money for the construction of buildings if reasonable returns can be assured. Finding the public money required for the acquisition of the property, however, is a stumbling block. This may come from a bond issue. The plans for the project will show plainly what the community will gain. Dark, ugly, wooden structures which have outlived their usefulness will disappear. The land will be cleared, wider streets and larger playgrounds can be laid out, and utilities put underground. Then the new buildings can rise. They will be properly spaced for views and sunlight. They will be clean, wholesome, modern, and a delight to the eye. This is what public and private money will buy and present to San Francisco whenever the redevelopment job can be started.

:T

j_

GIANY S1
ANCAVISTA l;ALvai,v)k

LR

PROPOSED
WICHEL H WEILL,.fl JAMES J WALSH GARDNER A SAIL!, CU AR LI! I POUTER

- -= .
SAG FRANCISCO CITY

PAGE

ST

5 j 17tv so

/
ST

0
REDEVELOPMENT
S1411

AREA

PLANNING COMMISSION L HIRING TUTON AIUTC .......... J SO ASP HEY! SIC III..,

It is from the above area"A"recommended by the City Planning Commission to the Board of Supervisors, that the location for the first redevelopment project may be chosen. The project may be one, two, four or even twenty square blocks, depending upon the ability of free enterprise capital to finance it and meet modern housing standards.

STEPS TOWARD REDEVELOPMENT

1. City Planning Commission adopts Master Plan showing areas that are blighted and in need of redevelopment. 2. Board of Supervisors, after a public hearing, designates redevelopment area. 3. Planning Commission selects project area within the blighted district and presents tentative plan for its redevelopment to Board of Supervisors. 4. Redevelopment agency, if formed, cooperates with Planning Commission in preparation of project plan; project plan establishes proper standards and restrictions, indicates necessary and desirable public facilities in area. 5. Board of Supervisors adopts tentative project plan by ordinance, after public hearing. 6. Redevelopment agency prepares or accepts from other sources a final project plan, conferring with other agencies on public facilities and utilities; submits final project plan to Board of Supervisors with complete financial analysis. 7. Board of Supervisors holds hearing upon final project plan and any alternative plans submitted; adopts by ordinance an official project plan; stays execution of official redevelopment plan for 30 days, or up to 60 days, to permit negotiations with property owners in area. 8. Board of Supervisors determines amount of general obligation bonds to be voted upon to form revolving fund; and after passage of bond issue, authorizes expenditure of sums required for acquisition and clearance of property within project area. 9. Redevelopment agency proceeds with acquisition, clearance, and arranges contracts with private interests for redevelopment of property according to the approved plan.
SAN FRANCISCO CITY

PUBLIC HOUSING
R. E. AUDSLEY, Assistant to the Executive

IN THE NEWS TODAY

Indianapolis, Indiana, has a plan to finance slum-clearance which involves no federal aid. A fund is being created out of tax money which will be used to acquire blighted areas, clear them, plan for their redevelopment, and then offer them fqr sale to private enterprise. The returns from each completed project will go into a special fund which will in turn be available for other areas. Omaha, Nebraska, has named two major areas for slum clearance as part of its $43 million civic improvement plan. Included in the plan is $1,500,000 for condemnation of land and landscaping near the main business area. A group of low-rental houses in Princeton, New Jersey, offers attractive, modern housing at $6 per room per month. Rents cover cost of land, construction, maintenance, and financing. A comprehensive program for the newly created Chicago Bureau of Housing Inspection was proposed on May 3 by the Metropolitan Housing Council of Chicago. This program is designed to improve housing conditions in general and to eliminate substandard housing through strict enforcement of health and safety ordinances. Under the new Redevelopment Companies Law of New York State, the Metropolitan Life Insurance Company has conceived and started work on a number of projects. Three of these: Stuyvesant Town, Peter Cooper Village, and Riverton, will be in Manhattan. Altogether, they will house more than 12,000 families, and the estimated cost will run to almost $38 million. The average rental per room in one project will be about $14 per month, and in another about $12.50; the rents for the third project have not yet been decided upon.

Director, San Francisco Housing Authority

The public low-rent housing program in San Francisco is a direct frontal assault upon slums. Within its sphere of operations the San Francisco Housing Authority has undertaken and continues to develop a permament and practical solution to the problem of blight. Low income families gravitate into slum areas because worn-out, dreary housing can generally be had for the lowest rentals. It is the aim of the public housing program to re-house these families in new structures, at rental which they can afford to pay. The housing built for them may or may not occupy the slum areas which have been cleared. When redevelopment takes place, most of the occupants of the blighted district will be required to move. When the new buildings are completed, some families can afford to pay the rents on the new structures and will move back into the same district. The low-income families, however will be in distress unless the public housing program can be expanded and correlated with redevelopment so that all groups are provided for. Redevelopment will be difficult to accomplish unless temporary shelter can be provided for families during the reconstruction program. The Housing Commission is prepared to assist, within its powers, in providing such temporary facilities. Public low-rent housing, as can be seen, plays an important part in the overall replanning so vital to many of our deteriorated districts. The Housing Authority intends to do all it can to make San Francisco liveable for all its people.
COMMISSION

PLANNING

M ICHEL D. WEILL, President J. JOSEPH SULLIVAN L. DEMING lILIaN JAMES J. WALSH

GARON ER A. DAI 1EV, Vice-President MRS. CHARLES B. PORTER J. ROGER DEAS

Sec. 562. P. L. and H. U. S. POSTAGE

Paid
San Francisco, Calif.
Permit No. 4412

Director of Planning
Room 252, City Hall, San Francisco, 2.

Secretary

It shall be the duty of the commission to make, maintain and adopt, . . . a master plan of the physical development of the city and county, which plan . . . shall make recommendations for the development of all areas . . . including, among other things, the general location, character and extent of streets, viaducts, subways, bridges, boulevards, parkways, playgrounds, parks, squares, aviation fields and other public ways, grants, and open spaces, the general location of public buildings and other public property and the removal, relocating, widening, narrowing, vacating, abandonment or extension of any of the foregoing ways, grants, open spaces or buildings.
CHARTER, Sect. 116, Paragraph 3.