Posts Tagged ‘access’

Our SFMTA Wants to Claim It’s Increasing Parking Up at Twin Peaks, But It’s DECREASING Parking – One Simple Trick!

Thursday, July 14th, 2016

What the SFMTA’s Twin Peaks Figure 8 Redesign Project is a gonna do is get rid of these, these people from the top of Twin Peaks, particularly on busy dreaded sunny days, like this one:

7J7C0776 copy

Most of the tourists on top of that twin came from all the cars you can see on the left side. But all that parking is gone now, so tourists aren’t going to go to the top of Twin Peaks as much anymore.

What’s that, “good,” you say? Well OK, but why doesn’t the SFMTA just come out and say that? Instead, we get this:

Twin Peaks Figure 8 Redesign Project Frequently Asked Questions – April 8, 2016 version:

Will any parking be added or removed? No parking is being proposed for removal. Today, informal (illegal) parking takes place at the center of the Figure 8 and occasionally in the outer lane of the roadway. This project will formalize parking at both the center and south intersections, increasing the number of available stalls. Parking in the travel lane will no longer be possible.

So they’re not “removing parking,” they’re simply blocking cars from getting to the parking spaces? And you can’t park on the side of a highway in CA anymore, is that correct, really?

So the real answer to the question Will any parking be added or removed is:

Yes. Hell yes.

But who are these people so uncouth and “informal” that they think they can park their rental cars on the side of the road and walk up a hill for a look-see? Just fucking tourists, that’s all. And it’s not even the same ones day after day and year after year – it’s a constant flow of new people from all over the Bay Area, California, ‘Mericah, and The Rest Of The World. Those are the people the SFMTA and the Rec and Park (RPD – it’s Frisco’s name for the Parks and Recreation Department) are getting rid of, at least on busy days.

As with most things in Life, there are trade-offs. Our SFMTA wants to deny that, oh well (at 2:10)…

A Few Beefs with the SFMTA’s Marketing of Its Plan to (Somehow) “Increase Access” to Twin Peaks

Tuesday, April 19th, 2016

Here you go:

Making Room to Enjoy Spectacular Twin Peaks by Aaron Bialick
Friday, April 15, 2016

But the SFMTA isn’t really making anything is it?

Access by foot and bike is pretty limited, the road that loops around the mountain top in a “figure 8” is underused by car traffic and the loop’s intersections are confusing.

OK, well, “access” by foot and bike will still be “pretty limited” after the SFMTA completes the scheme it came up with, right? And let’s take a look at that road, on a dreaded sunny day:

7J7C0776-copy

Now, would you say that the east (left) side of this figure 8 is “underused?” No, not at all!

car-free access

Hey, is being “car-free” a good thing? Like is it as good as being something like herpes-free? One wonders.

On Tuesday, the SFMTA Board of Directors will consider approval of a pilot phase…

This means that the SFMTA is going to do what it wants to do, with the little bit of money it can scrape up to enact its ideology.

The project was shaped with community feedback…

First of all, there’s no community up there atop Twin Peaks. Second of all, if there is, it’s tourists (international, national, regional, and local) and this plan cooked up by the SFMTA is about as anti-tourist as one could imagine.

We’d also create legitimate parking spaces at the center and south intersections to address the illegal parking that already occurs.

WHAT WHAT? So all these People With Cars, the hundreds of People what congregate up there sometimes, they’re parking on the side of the highway “illegitimately?” So it’s legal but it doesn’t comport with SFMTA ideology? Or maybe it’s illegal, but our SFMTA hasn’t seen fit to put up signage what explains things nice and clear for visitors who don’t really have a good handle on English? And so all the scores of places where people park now and, indeed, the past century, all of that was not and is not “legitimate?” Whoo boy.

So the plan is to decrease access IRL and advertise this paint job (that doesn’t add ANYTHING) as one what will “increase” access.

Will that cost anything? Yes.

Will it cost the vaunted SFMTA anything. No, not really. Just a bit of paint…

 

Our SFMTA’s Plan to “Increase Access” at Twin Peaks WIll Actually Decrease Access – Trying to Figure the Figure 8

Friday, April 8th, 2016

IDK, man. On the one hand, SFGov promotes the 49-Mile-Drive, but OTOH, SFGov wants to make it more difficult.

Take a look here down below – where are all these cars going to go after this plan gets going?

The plan, advertised as one what would “increase access,” will decrease access, obviously. Parking areas will be decreased by a whole lot. Oh what’s that, that’s a good thing AFAYAC, Gentle Reader? Well, fine – but let’s agree that taking out scores of places for people to park is going to make for a less-busy Twin Peaks, for better or worse.

And hey, are these people glorious Pedestrians / People With Bikes or are they terrible, horrible People With Cars? One simply can’t tell. Some locals walk and bike up here, but I see very few tourists attempting to do so. Mostly they come by tour bus or car, FWICS.

7J7C3442 copy   7J7C3450 copy  7J7C3460 copy 7J7C3463 copy 7J7C3465 copy 7J7C3466 copy

On It Goes…

Will the SFMTA/RPD’s Car Ban Plan for the East Side of Twin Peaks Increase Access or Decrease Access? Take a Look at This Photo

Tuesday, March 15th, 2016

Take a listen, to Phil Matier here.

And then take a look, at what an Ivy Leaguer / Attorney / Former Gavin Newsom Jogging Buddy Who For Some Reason Is In Charge Of Our Park System has to say here:

As he sees it, the plan “increases the recreational accessibility of the area and makes it safer for bicyclists and pedestrians.”

As for safety, we’ll have to wait and see. But as for “accessibility,” this is going to be a Big Fat Decrease.

Here’s the east side of Twin Peaks Boulevard as it looks when the parking lot at Christmas Tree Point is all fulled up:

7J7C0776-copy

Where are these people going to go? Not Twin Peaks, that’s for sure. This plan will decrease access, certainly. (Or is the SFMTA going to run a shuttle bus up here? IDTS)

And oh, here’s how Phil Ginsburg attains access himself, using a car:

7J7C1999-copy-450x675

News: “Increased Internet Access at the Library!” – Plus, Our SFPL is Waiving Lost Card Fee – Plus Free WiFi

Friday, September 5th, 2014

Here’s a fresh press release from Our San Francisco Public Library:

Increased Internet Access at the Library!

Effective Sept. 5, library computer users will have greater access to Internet-enabled computers throughout the library system. Computer users will be able to reserve up to two one-hour sessions per day, as opposed to the current limit of one hour per day. The second hour is contingent upon availability. The increased time is in response to patron need and popular demand, and provides better service and utilization of library resources.

“The Library is dedicated to free and equal access to information,” said City Librarian Luis Herrera. “We believe that these additional hours will better serve our library patrons.”

In addition, most of the Main Library’s Internet Express computers, will have increased time limits, from 15 minutes to 30 minutes. Free Wi-Fi is available for both card holders and non-card holders at the Main Library and all branches for those who wish to bring their own devices. In addition, library patrons may be able to borrow a laptop computer for in-library use at branches when desktop computers are not available.

All library users are encouraged to apply for a free library card. Use of library computers is free to card holders, and, as part of the initiative to provide more access to our library users, Library staff will waive the lost card fee and issue a free replacement card through June 2015.”

Hurray!

Hey MUNI, Your Thing is Up! A #6 Parnassus Driver Tools Down Market With An Access Panel Propped Open – Peds Beware

Wednesday, May 8th, 2013

This wasn’t a sidelined bus waiting for help to get back on the road. No no, this was an operating #6 Parnassus heading inbound on Market just the other day.

San Francisco’s infamous jaywalking* peds will now need to keep an eye out for this kind of thing:

Click to expand

*Uh, jaywalking isn’t illegal because of Big Oil. No no, jaywalking is illegal because Big Government wants to protect you from killing yourself. Yet another conspiracy theory debunked…

What’s Up With Battery Caulfield Road in the Presidio – Have the Feds Closed It Yet? A Premature Road Sign

Thursday, August 11th, 2011

Well here’s what the 15th Avenue Entrance to the Presido looks like these days.

See that? It’s for bikes only now – cars need to use 14th Avenue: 

Click to expand

Which is as expected, fine.

But what’s up with this new sign with the garbage bag over it?

This is right outside of the Presidio Landmark Apartments* on infamous Battery Caulfield Road

I was bold enough to take a peek under the garbage bag. It said something like “Road Closed 110 Feet.”

Oh noes!

I haven’t heard of any conflict yet, so assume that this sign is not currently operational.

Speaking of which, here’s part of the actual Battery Caulfield, AFAIK – it was a Nike Missile base, your know, for the Russian Bear Bombers and whatnot. They stored the Nikes horizontal and then would open the pod bay doors to fire. And you can see the flat top of Mount Sutro in the background – that’s where the fire control base was for the SAMs of the Presidio, back in the day:

Anyway, wazzup with BC Road closing? I gots to know.

*Speaking of which, just look – cars in the parking lot. Personally, I wouldn’t pay four figures a year just to park in the West Bay, but that’s how they do it these days. Anyway, my point is that, unlike last year, there are people actually living in the Presidio Landmark. It took a while, and the looky-lou’s were pissed off that they had to apply for an appointment just to check things out, but the joint probably doesn’t feel like the hotel from The Shining anymore.

“ADA Abuse” in the Richmond District, 2011

Tuesday, March 29th, 2011

Question: When four-star-Yelp-rated Han Il Kwan restaurant way out there in the West Bay, in the Middle Richmond District, precisely, had to close down recently for extensive refurbishment, as reported in the excellent Richmond District Blog, was that an example of “ADA abuse” or was it an example of the Americans with Disabilities Act, the Unruh Civil Rights Act, and the California Disabled Persons Act functioning as designed?

Answer: This one’s easy. Increasing costs for businesses and/or shutting them down is an example of the Americans with Disabilities Act, the Unruh Civil Rights Act, and the California Disabled Persons Act functioning as designed.

What some call “abuse” of the law, I call use of the laws.

Via Jim C

Next question…

Disability Laws and Regulations

Presidio Update: Battery Caulfield Road Shutdown Meeting to be Held in Early October

Wednesday, September 1st, 2010

Now you have even more time to email snail mail in your comments about the closure of Battery Caulfield Road in the Presidio.

Soon, you might not be welcome to test drive your new Lambo on Battery Caulfield. Oh well:

Click to expand

The latest skivvy:

The Presidio Trust is considering two approaches to limit vehicular use of a portion of Battery Caulfield Road:

 1) limitation of vehicular use during weekday peak AM and PM hours, 7 to 9 am and 5 to 7 pm, as well as on weekends (Alternative 1); or

2) limitation of vehicular use at all times (Alternative 2).

The proposed limitation on vehicular use is intended to reduce cut-through traffic to maintain public health and safety, to protect environmental values, to protect natural resources, and to avoid conflict among visitor uses.

By restricting the use of Battery Caulfield Road, the Trust also intends to reduce the amount of traffic through the 14th and 15th Avenue gates.

The Trust invites comments on both of these proposed limits of public use. Send comments to: John Fa, The Presidio Trust, 34 Graham Street, P.O. Box 29052, San Francisco, CA 94129-0052, or via email to: batterycaulfield@presidiotrust.gov.

Please make sure your comments have your name and contact information. Comments must be received no later than October 15, 2010. All written comments submitted to the Trust will be considered, and this proposed use limit may be modified accordingly. The final decision of the Trust will be published in the Federal Register.

To view a copy of the Federal Register Notice click here.

The Trust will be scheduling a meeting the first week of October. Information on the meeting will be disseminated as soon as details are confirmed.”

Tell the Presidio How You Feel About Battery Caulfield Road Shutting Down – Deadline Sept 1.

Monday, August 2nd, 2010

Well you have the entire month of August to snail mail in your opinion about the Presidio Trust shutting down Battery Caulfield Road. Deets below, initial reactions here.

(And hey, speaking of that whole area, there’ll be a tour and update meeting at the new Presidio Landmark apartments starting at 6:30 PM tonight, Monday, August 2nd. Get the deets over at the Richmond District Blog.)

El mappo:

Click to expand.

Basically, you’re going to need to use the tunnel, or 25th Ave, or Washington. The Presidio Trust doesn’t want you driving past the old hospital just to “cut through.” The short version:

“The Presidio Trust is considering two approaches to limit vehicular use of a portion of Battery Caulfield Road: 1) limitation of vehicular use during weekday peak AM and PM hours, 7 to 9 am and 5 to 7 pm, as well as on weekends (Alternative 1); or 2) limitation of vehicular use at all times (Alternative 2). The proposed limitation on vehicular use is intended to reduce cut-through traffic to maintain public health and safety, to protect environmental values, to protect natural resources, and to avoid conflict among visitor uses. By restricting the use of Battery Caulfield Road, the Trust also intends to reduce the amount of traffic through the 14th and 15th Avenue gates.

The Trust invites comments on both of these proposed limits of public use. Send comments to: Planning Department, Presidio Trust, 34 Graham Street, P.O. Box 29052, San Francisco, CA 94129-0052. Comments must be received no later than September 1, 2010. All written comments submitted to the Trust will be considered, and this proposed use limit may be modified accordingly. A subsequent Federal Register notice will provide a response to comments, identify the decision, and give 30-day notice of implementation. We will email this second notice to you as well. The final decision of the Trust will be published in the Federal Register.

The gritty nitty:

(Oh, by the way, don’t be surprised to learn that your license plate might somehow get recorded when you make your cut-through trips through the park. That’s one of the ways they keep track of you.)

So that’s it. The full monty, after the jump.

(more…)