Candy-Ass Cow Hollow NIMBYs Object to Presidio Traffic Study

Here’s what’s funny about the certain rich NIMBYs of Cow Hollow – they don’t want auslanders coming ’round to their backyard. So of course that’s why they oppose any increase in traffic in the Presidio due to, I don’t know, building a museum, or a lodge, 0r reopening a moribund movie house. They moan about all that potential traffic they do.

But then, when the Presidio Trust starts experimenting with closing streets to cars as a way of decreasing traffic, the neighborhood associations don’t like it neither. Here’s the thing – Congress, in its Wisdom, put the Trust, not the National Park Service, not flighty, nearby homeowners, not nobody but the Board of the Trust, in charge.

Does San Francisco want to buy the Presidio from the Feds? No. Does San Francisco want the Feds to sell the Presidio to the highest bidder and have the place go all-condo? No. So oh well.    

What’s the Law? Let’s see.

Where will the rich kids of Cow hollow joy-ride in their exoticars, fast as lightning, now? Not amongst the eucalyptus of windy Presidio Boulevard, that’s for sure.

img_1122-copy

Poor little richers

 Here’s Da Law:

Title 36: Parks, Forests, and Public Property
PART 1001—GENERAL PROVISIONS

§ 1001.5   Closures and public use limits.

(a) Consistent with applicable legislation and Federal administrative policies, and based upon a determination that such action is necessary for the maintenance of public health and safety, protection of environmental or scenic values, protection of natural or cultural resources, aid to scientific research, implementation of management responsibilities, equitable allocation and use of facilities, or the avoidance of conflict among visitor use activities, the Board may:

(1) Establish, for all or a portion of the area administered by the Presidio Trust, a reasonable schedule of visiting hours, impose public use limits, or close all or a portion of the area administered by the Presidio Trust to all public use or to a specific use or activity.

(2) Designate areas for a specific use or activity, or impose conditions or restrictions on a use or activity.

(3) Terminate a restriction, limit, closure, designation, condition, or visiting hour restriction imposed under paragraph (a)(1) or (2) of this section.

(b) Except in emergency situations, a closure, designation, use or activity restriction or condition, or the termination or relaxation of such, which is of a nature, magnitude and duration that will result in a significant alteration in the public use pattern of the area administered by the Presidio Trust, adversely affect the natural, aesthetic, scenic or cultural values of the area administered by the Presidio Trust, require a long-term or significant modification in the resource management objectives of the area administered by the Presidio Trust, or is of a highly controversial nature, shall be published as rulemaking in the Federal Register.

(c) Except in emergency situations, prior to implementing or terminating a restriction, condition, public use limit or closure, the Board shall prepare a written determination justifying the action. That determination shall set forth the reason(s) the restriction, condition, public use limit or closure authorized by paragraph (a) of this section has been established, and an explanation of why less restrictive measures will not suffice, or in the case of a termination of a restriction, condition, public use limit or closure previously established under paragraph (a) of this section, a determination as to why the restriction is no longer necessary and a finding that the termination will not adversely impact resources of the area administered by the Presidio Trust. This determination shall be available to the public upon request.

(d) To implement a public use limit, the Board may establish a permit, registration, or reservation system. Permits shall be issued in accordance with the criteria and procedures of §1001.6.

(e) Except in emergency situations, the public will be informed of closures, designations, and use or activity restrictions or conditions, visiting hours, public use limits, public use limit procedures, and the termination or relaxation of such, in accordance with §1001.7.

(f) Violating a closure, designation, use or activity restriction or condition, schedule of visiting hours, or public use limit is prohibited.

So that’s that, right? Do you see anything in there about seeking counsel from unelected, self-proclaimed representatives of the Cow Hollow?

How they jive and jingle/ when you’re in their backyard
How they jive and jingle/ when you’re their sacrifice

 Oh well.

And oh yes, when C.W. Nevius talks about how “everybody hates” the temporary road closure, he must have a very narrow definition of “everybody.” Reality regrets the error. (Reality used to be a friend of his.)

Oh well.

And oh yes, they’re closing another one:

Battery Caulfield Road Closed October 12-26, 2009

The next phase of remediation for Landfill 10 in the Public Health Service Hospital (PHSH) District will require a temporary two week closure of Battery Caulfield Road in order to re-grade and resurface the road and adjacent parking lot. The closure will be in effect Monday, October 12 through Monday, October 26. The closure starts at Battery Caulfield and Wedemeyer Street to the north, and at 15th Avenue and Wedemeyer to the south.
There will be no “through traffic” access from Washington Boulevard to 15th Avenue through the PHSH District during this time. For safety, there will also be no PHSH District access for pedestrians, bicyclists, and hikers.
Work hours for the Landfill 10 project are 8am to 5pm. The contractor will use several pieces of equipment including a grader, a loader and an excavator, with a crew of approximately 10. Additional clean soil and other materials will be imported to Landfill 10 to raise the grade, per the approved remediation plan. Construction traffic will continue to enter and exit the site via Battery Caulfield Road. Noise impacts for this phase of work will be similar to that of current PHSH District remediation activity. Dust monitoring and control measures will be part of daily operations.
If you have any questions, please contact Diana Parker, Presidio Trust, at 415.561.5468, or dparker at the presidiotrust.gov.

Will people be able to find their way to the Kimochi, Inc. fundraiser this October 17th at the Officer’s Club?

Most likely.

Feel the need, the need for screed, after the jump

P.O. Box 28052
San Francisco, CA 94129
Re: Presidio Trust’s Traffic Calming Study for Presidio Boulevard

Dear Messrs. Middleton and Boland and Mrs. Lombardi:

The Cow Hollow Association (CHA) represents the interests of over 1,800 households in the
neighborhood directly adjacent to and most affected by changes and development in the
Presidio’s eastern area. This letter is in response to the proposed traffic study planned for
Presidio Blvd. between Simonds Loop and W. Pacific Avenue.

We understand that the temporary month-long closure for a traffic study and the possibility of
permanently closing Presidio Blvd. inside the park stems from concern over an anticipated
increase in commuters using the new Doyle Drive/Girard exit and cutting through the park to
the Presidio Gate. We appreciate the Trust’s efforts to study and manage traffic within the
Presidio, and although this concern may be valid, we do not believe that closing Presidio Blvd.
is a reasonable solution.

CHA, along with Pacific Height Residents Association (PHRA), Marina Community
Association (MCA) and over 120 Presidio tenants, strongly objects to closing Presidio Blvd. to
the public, and wants to work with the Trust to find a solution that addresses the potential
traffic problems without creating new problems for the Presidio tenants or shifting additional
traffic into the surrounding neighborhoods. If the Trust is proactive in working with those
most affected by these changes, it will arrive at more effective and workable solutions and will
avoid offending the community.

The prospect of permanently closing Presidio Blvd. should be taken off the table for the
following reasons:
• The traffic problem is anticipated to originate from the new Girard exit. That is the
area that should be studied and the area where the traffic calming measure should be
implemented. If done properly, the cut-through traffic will be discouraged before it
even reaches Presidio Blvd.
• The impact of the redirected traffic from Presidio Gate will be felt along the
residential cross streets of Pacific, Jackson, Washington, and Clay as drivers make their
way to either the Arguello gate or Divisadero – the closest options for drivers to get to
the north end of the City from the Presidio Gate area.
• Divisadero will take the lion’s share of the redirected traffic. Divisadero is already
greatly congested, especially at Lombard and its very steep grade makes it a poor
choice as an alternative route.
• The impact of significantly more drivers using Divisadero will be felt along Vallejo,
Green, Union, Filbert and Greenwich as many of those drivers avoid Divisadero and
zig-zig their way back to their destinations on the eastern portion of the park or
northern areas of the City, as they already do to some extent.
• The rerouted traffic to Arguello will significantly increase traffic at the very center of
the Main Post, the acknowledged heart of the Presidio’s National Historic Landmark
District.
• Drivers will use W. Pacific more often, creating increased risk to the children and
families using Julius Kahn playground, the tennis courts and the playing field and
reaching Julius Kahn from the east side of the park will become onerous.
For over five decades, the Presidio has always taken its share of the City’s traffic movement
and given its proximity and access to the City, it should continue to do so. Two centuries ago,
San Francisco invested in bringing roadways to the Presidio in order to link it to the
surrounding communities. The City designed traffic patterns and built infrastructure in the
region of the Presidio based on the integration of Presidio roadways to those of San Francisco.
Closing this roadway, even on a temporary basis, is a dramatic change whose potential
negative consequences should be carefully evaluated.

If the Trust nevertheless proceeds with the current 30-day closure for the traffic calming study,
the CHA requests the following information: Which streets/intersections inside and outside
the Presidio will have traffic counters? Which cross streets from Presidio to Arguello and
from Presidio to Divisadero will be monitored? Of all the cross streets monitored, is there a
baseline that will be used to compare the statistics? What is the methodology the Trust will
use to assess the environmental impact of these changes on the park and surrounding
neighborhoods?

We want to work with you, as we have done in past, to find a solution that anticipates and
properly manages the traffic problem off the Girard exit without shifting it to residential
neighborhoods inside and outside the Presidio.

Please call me (415) 749-1841 to arrange a time to discuss this further.
Sincerely,
Lori Brooke
/s/
President, Cow Hollow Association
cc:
Alan Silverman, Marian Community Association
Cow Hollow Association Membership
Jay O’Connor, Presidio Tenants representative
Margot Parke, Pacific Heights Residents Association
Michela Alioto-Pier, District 2 Supervisor

Tags: , , , , , , , , ,

Comments are closed.