Posts Tagged ‘Phil Ginsburg’

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:


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:


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:


How To Get Reserved Parking on the Streets of San Francisco: Become an SFGov Department Head – Doesn’t This Look Bad?

Tuesday, March 8th, 2016

I think it looks bad.

7J7C1999 copy

What’s wrong with MUNI, Phil Ginsburg?

Old White Guy, Old White Guy, Less Old White Guy: A Random Sample of SF’s Supposedly “Diverse” Golf Course in San Mateo County

Monday, July 6th, 2015

So that’s 100% white guys. (Of “course,” our n=3 here, but even so. I mean, the people who take advantage of this golfing subsidy skew white, male, older, wealthier, right? I mean, am I wrong here? Disabuse me, Gentle Reader, if necessary.)

These are the only people I’ve ever seen at the white elephant known as Sharp Park, which, oddly, is operated by San Francisco even though it’s not even located in San Francisco.

7J7C9976 copy

So, why would Interim Mayor Ed Lee go against the Board of Supervisors, who wanted to sell off / give away / otherwise rid ourselves of this light-skinned loxodontine from Way Down In Pacifica? Well, middle-class welfare tends to be hard to eliminate.

And then there’s this constituency:

“City management of the golf course is handicapped by a sclerotic labor contract that has some employees earning six-figure salaries* for work that pays less than half of that on most golf courses.”

Oh well. I suppose our southernmost “run-down” golf course will continue to make us a national laughingstock.

And who’s going to pay for the $20-$30 million* worth of deferred work what this ball-and-chain needs?

I don’t know.

Oh well.

*Practically everything in Frisco is “sustainable” these these days. But what about Sharp Park? And then there’s this, from our drought-addled Year of the Lord 2015:

Dan Noyes:How do you respond to this not being fixed for four years?”
Gavin Newsom’s Jogging Buddy / Political Booster / Lawyer: “Well, that’s probably not exactly accurate. There are a series of leaks in the system and we manage them as best we can.” 

50,000 gallons? That’s a Cosco Busan bunker oil spill-worth of water daily. Oh well.

OMG, The JIMMY is Back in Speedway Meadow! – Annual “OLD CAR PICNIC” Coming Saturday – Motorcycles & Bicycles Welcome

Wednesday, October 15th, 2014

Well this is news! Via The Richmond District Blog comes word of the return of [Jimmy’s] Old Car Picnic to Golden Gate Park.

What’s amazing is that San Francisco’s Recreation and Park Department, which in its current iteration is a money-hungry, mafia-esque outfit run by a lawyer* who worked on the Gavin Newsom campaign back in the day, relented after first trying to impose dramatically higher fees. Do you want me to cite all the annual events that the RPD has fee’d to death under the Ginsburg Regime? I could do it. Except now I’ll need to take Jimmy’s Old Car Picnic off of that list.

This lowering of RPD’s highly inflated fees is unprecedented, is it not?

Anyway, all the deets:

Saturday, October 18, 2014
Speedway Meadow
Golden Gate Park San Francisco, CA
7 am to 4 pm

Park your vehicle on beautiful Hellman Hollow (aka Speedway Meadow) for a donation to benefit the developmentally disabled.

Cars & trucks $40, motorcycles $20, bicycles $10.

1987 or older year limit for vehicles. no vehicles larger than 3/4 ton pickup. No other vehicles allowed on meadow. No exceptions. No in & outs.

No vendors or amplified music. Please respect the Park and its neighbors. The SFPD will be on duty and issue citations for traffic and parking violations.

San Francisco Old Car Picnic benefits programs for the developmentally disabled.

Bring your BBQ! Bring your camera! Everyone is welcome!!!”

All right, see you there!

*I’ll tell you, compared with this irate lady, I came down on the other side of the Stow Lake Boathouse vendor issue, and the Beach Chalet soccer field issue as well, but she’s spot-on on the subject of Phil Ginsburg, who dreams of becoming Mayor, someday:

“For Ginsburg, who began using the words “privatization” and “Golden Gate Park” together almost immediately after his jogging buddy, then-Mayor Gavin Newsom, appointed him, Stow Lake is just the beginning. If Ginsburg has his way, every inch of Golden Gate Park will be “privatized” and bringing in boatloads of cash. Ginsburg left his position as Newsom’s chief of staff in 2008, citing as the reason the ambiguous “desire to spend more time with his family.” Evidently he quickly grew tired of his family because he accepted the Rec and Park job just one year later, even though he had no experience managing parks. In August of last year, he quietly fired every Rec and Park director (the low-paid people who actually do the hands-on work) and hired more six-figure middle managers. Each is expected to generate revenue up to 10 times the amount of their salaries, effectively turning them into sales people.”

Here’s the Trouble with Phil Ginburg’s Rec and Park: The Soul is For Hire, And They’ve Sold the Heart – Two Examples

Wednesday, August 20th, 2014

Here’s one example:

After 30 years, medieval archery event leaves Golden Gate Park due to fees

And here’s another:

After 25 years, steep permit fees shut down Jimmy’s Old Car Picnic in GGP

Instead of those events, we now have corporate events, because they provide thousands of dollars to Phil Ginsburg, no questions asked.

Like this tent going up in the Panhandle now. What’s this, Jimmy’s New Car Picnic, sponsored by Ford?

7J7C5912 copy

Prolly not, but this tent is from some entity that has effectively outbid all those community events that Phil Ginsburg’s new-school approach has literally chased out of town.

Oh well.