SF walkability analysis by Catscan

Abstract:
In my non-statistically-significant opinion, SF is both extremely walkable and extremely non-walkable at the same time.  Depends on who you are and which way you look at it. I guess even in a city that has a lot,  you still can't have everything.

Introduction:
Tom and I have done a LOT of walking (or wandering) around since we arrived. Mainly because driving on the right-hand side is a bit nerve wrecking,  but also because walking and catching public transport is so easy! Well, for us it is. 

Method:
A raw collection of my qualitative observations from wandering around Dogpatch,  Potrero Hill,  the Mission and Downtown, photographed on a Nexus 5 smart phone and systematically analysed sporadically in conversation with Tom while eating dinner in Mexican restaurants, drinking coffee/wine/beer at our locals in 'Dogpatch' and of course,  walking. 

Results:
Pros
-Gridded Street layout
-Street names moulded into the concrete on corners for pedestrians to read,  in ADDITION to street signs
-Destinations everywhere! The corner shops are fruitful (literally...  For another post),  so many places to walk to
-Public transport is smart, connected frequent, easy and mostly welcoming- haven't waited more than 8 or so minutes for a bus,  usually less
-Car parking is harder. Both at destinations and at home. With mostly medium-high higher density housing most apartments only come with 1 parking space,  and you have to pay for it
-Mostly pleasant walking environments, depending on where you go
-WIIDDEE footpaths
-Pedestrians have right of way over cars so much that motorists are generally pretty good at giving way at intersections.  4 way stops are also awesome.

Cons
-No public seating/benches ANYWHERE! Hardly noticed til we felt like sitting down for a rest.  All that we've seen have been owned by the shops they've been outside,  or temporary otherwise
-Hardly any public toilets
-Smells of urine occasionally (probably partly due to the lack of public toilets)
-Fear of rough areas
-Poorish condition of some footpaths (Cracked,  raised etc.)
-HILLS

Discussion:
I was impressed by most aspects of the walkability around here,  such as the wide footpaths and how easy it was to navigate our way through the gridded street layout (even for us lost people), but I squeeled with excitement at the first sight of street names which were moulded into the footpath. So simple yet made our trip as pedestrians much easier. It just got better and better the more we walked,  until we got tired. 

No benches to sit on. To rest after climbing a big hill in Potrero Hill we'd have had no choice but to sit on the concrete. I wonder if there's a reason for the lack of seating and public toilets. 2 things I've become accustomed to seeing everywhere at home. Is it because they attract trouble? Do the benches give homeless people somewhere to sleep,  and do the bathrooms need too much maintenance? Is it different in other cities and in the burbs?

So for the young,  fit and resourceful toilet-finder (which we don't really even qualify for),  it's perfect. 

Recommendations:
More seating and bathrooms- but interested to know why things are the way they are.