Here’s the flier what’s been popping up on car windshields lately:
Click to expand
So let’s see here, is the SFMTA going to eliminate “all parking” on Masonic? No.
Was the community outreach [aka SFMTA focus group study] more than pro forma? Yes.
Did more than 50 people participate? Yes, well more.
But* anyway, here’s the protest website.
*There’s just too much spin in this flyer. If people just make stuff up, they are no better than acheerleading SFMTA Project Manager
Do area real estate interests demand “distinctive” bike racks for the “dramatically” (soon-to-be) “transformed” and “world-class” Golden Gate Park Panhandle?
Yes.
Click to expand
BTW, how much did you all spend to truck that small public bathroom (in the background there) all the way to SF (from Kentucky!)and then have it installed betwixt Fell and Oak?
“Discussion Points: This a long-term project (breaking ground in 2016, at the earliest), and BOMA members discussed near-term concerns for the various department staff to consider as they move forward in the information gathering phase of this effort:
The homeless population. How can you improve Market Street (adding parklets, nodes and general public gathering spaces) without considering the existing homeless population?
Impact of future design and construction on the ground-floor businesses that line and/or are immediately adjacent to Market Street.
Maintenance costs after build out – who pays?
All forms of conveyance should be considered when improving Market Street. I’m sure you’re doing this but East/West travel across Market should be carefully reviewed.
Continuous outreach to the business community and other stakeholder groups to be sure that the City understands the issues of concern before final design consideration and construction.”
Will this so-called Better Market Street effort yield a Market Street that looks anything like this?
No, it won’t.
Oh well.
Still the focus groups continue, still the Project Manager drives forward.
OK fine.
Will the Project Manager ever get around to asking the existing users of Market Street what they think?
No, never.
As per usual.
That proposed CityPlace mall has a new name and they’ve just started working on getting it built.
See?
“…its name has been changed to Market Street Place, reflecting how even this blighted part of San Francisco’s main thoroughfare...”
And see?
Click to expand
This is all new. The whitewash went up on Monday, I think, and now we have the ads what say SHOPPING PLACE and whatnot.
This is what it will look like, without the homeless and the criminals and the iPhone fences and the drug dealers milling around out front:
More photorealistic:
Reverse angle:
The mall has it all. Actually, it’s a mall like any other from Anytown, USA. (Boy, John King is going to looooooove this, huh?)
All right, now let’s all thank the Carlyle Group for helping us out:
“The following is a list of both current and former employees and advisors.
The problem with the 49 Square Miles Project is that nobody checked to see if San Francisco is actually that big.
Here’s the answer from Wikipedia:
Now, did they include the Farallon Islands? Hell yes, plus tiny parts of the North Bay and the East Bay that we also have, through Accident of History:
“Several islands—Alcatraz,Treasure Island and the adjacent Yerba Buena Island, and a small portion of Alameda Island, Red Rock Island, and Angel Island are part of the city. Also included are the uninhabited Farallon Islands, 27 miles (43 km) offshore in the Pacific Ocean.”
So, having proved that, let’s fix the Chron’s graphic:
You know Chron, you could have rounded up to 47 and you could have even rounded up to 50, if your ardor for California’s Fourth-Largest City demanded it.
But you can’t round up to 49.
Sorry, Chronicle.
Wiki wins again.
I’ll tell you, I don’t exactly know how San Francisco managed to get (basically) free water and (basically) free electricity through flooding half of the good part of the Yosemite National Park area, but somehow, through bribery, corruption or whatnot, we got a sweetheart deal to take advantage of Hetch Hetchy in perpetuity.
Of course the right thing to do would be to start sharing the benefits of Hetch Hetchy with the rest of California, or at least pay market price for what we’re getting, or just tear down the damn dam altogether. Something like that.
But the single-party state of San Francisco doesn’t want to do anything like that. The single-party state of San Francisco wants to hold on to the Hetch Hetchy deal for as long as possible. Maybe some Republicans can help us find the right path…
Speaking of which, the federally-funded Central Subway [cough, BIG DIG II, cough - and you know, Boston's Big Dig is different because it had a chance to actually benefit people] project is useless and horribly corrupt. It will burden San Francisco for decades, whether it gets used or not.
Why don’t we stop this thing [cough, BRIDGE TO NOWHERE, cough] right now? And Feds, why not just call it even? So we won’t pay you back the $200,000,000 but you all will end up saving big bucks.
It’ll be up to you, Congressional Republicans, to save us from wasting money on the Central Subway [cough, ROAD TO NOWHERE, cough - hey, I bet you didn't know about that one!]
The Central Subway to Chinatown is the replacement for our long-dead Embarcadero Freeway to Chinatown. And somehow, calling the Central Subway the Subway to Nowhere is considered racist and hurtful, but calling the Embarcadero Freeway the Freeway to Nowhere, well, that’s good times. See?
Click to expand
“YOUR TURN! RE-SCRUTINIZE THE CENTRAL SUBWAY BOONDOGGLE.
Everyone should re-scrutinize the Central Subway—in light of growing Muni deficits and cutbacks. The Federal Transit Administration (FTA) hasn’t granted final approvals. And Congress has a mandated 60-day review period. Instead, let’s shift hundreds of millions of dollars into citywide Muni.
PETITION: http://tinyurl.com/No-to-
The Central Subway means more Muni service cuts and fare/ fee increases.
The Central Subway Project has drained over $500 million of state and local funding from the citywide Muni system. Facing a $19.6 million deficit in 2012 and $33.6 million in 2013, San Francisco’s Municipal Transportation Agency (SFMTA) threatens more service cuts and fare/ fee increases—after cuts/ increases in 2009 and 2010. SFMTA projects $1.6 billion in budget deficits and $25.4 billion of capital needs over the next twenty years. While Muni infrastructure crumbles, Muni’s $1.9 billion in deferred maintenance is a ticking nuclear bomb.
Muni wouldn’t have budget deficits—if scarce dollars were used wisely.
The Central Subway Project has usurped over $500 million of state/ local funds from system-wide Muni needs—exacerbating system meltdowns and rider discontentment. Service cuts, fare increases, parking/ meter rate hikes, painful traffic citations and frustrated Muni riders have subsidized the Central Subway Project. No degree of service cuts and fare/fee increases will offset Muni’s mismanagement of assets and existing funds.
PROP K 2003 has higher, legally-mandated citywide Muni priorities.
http://www.sfcta.org/content/
Instead of the tiny 1.7 mile Central Subway, hundreds of miles of Transit Preferential Streets can be created with the Central Subway’s existing state/ local funds—benefiting all Muni riders, taxpayers and neighborhoods.
With its uniqueness, character, Mediterranean-scale, geographic beauty and topographic splendor, San Francisco’s northeast quadrant is a natural pedestrian realm. The distance from Downtown to Fisherman’s Wharf is 1-½ miles. Columbus Avenue is 1 mile long. Washington Square is 1 mile from the Powell BART/Metro Station. Chinatown is ½ mile from Market Street. As seen in cities throughout the world, these are distances opportune for a pulsating street life.
From an urban planning perspective, robust pedestrian and surface transit assures wider economic vitality—with very efficient costs and more immediate jobs.
The Central Subway’s own reports depict an abysmal project.
http://tinyurl.com/CS-Charts .
CPUC (California Public Utilities Commission) cites pervasive Muni safety Issues.
In the 3-6-12 SFMTA Board Agenda: “Conference with Legal Counsel: Existing Litigation—Investigation into the Operations, Practices and Conduct of the SFMTA Regarding Ongoing Public Safety Issues, California Public Utilities Commission, I. 11-02-017, Issued on 2/24/2011.”
CPUC PRESS RELEASE:
http://docs.cpuc.ca.gov/
“The California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) today began penalty considerations based on CPUC staff allegations of pervasive safety concerns regarding the San Francisco Municipal Transportation Agency’s (SFMTA or Muni) light rail system. This action was taken after CPUC safety inspectors found numerous safety violations on Muni’s light rail system in San Francisco. In their report to the CPUC, the inspectors have alleged that SFMTA has been chronically unresponsive to alleged violations and other findings.”
PUBLIC SENTIMENT:
http://www.gjel.com/blog/san-
“If you’re a regular Muni rider, you know that delays are common on weekday commutes to and from work. You might not know, however, that San Francisco’s transportation agency has routinely fallen short on safety inspections for the past year and a half, according to a report released this week by the California Public Utilities Commission.”
DON’T LET LOBBYISTS OVERRIDE YOUR INTERESTS.
If the Central Subway were truly a sound transportation project, than politicians, public officials and lobbyists wouldn’t be needed to twist the arms of the public and decision-makers. Instead, a multi-million dollar media campaign has pitched the Central Subway like snake oil and subprime derivatives, using Muni funds to lobby Muni’s own customers, governing bodies and officials.
CITIREPORT: “Lobbyists Turn Millions into Billions”:
“Money Follows Controversy
The top ten clients who promised payments for lobbying surfaces some of the most controversial issues at City Hall.
California Pacific Medical Center promised the most in payments for lobbying, at $750,985. Aecom, which is leading the Central Subway and other projects, ranked second at $360,000. Third was Millennium Partners, also at $360,000.”
NEW YORK TIMES: “Out Of Office, but Not Out of Things to Say”:
“His [former Mayor Willie Brown] law firm represents prominent clients, among them Aecom, an engineering firm involved in San Francisco’s central subway project, and the California Online Poker Association.”
EPOCH TIMES: “San Francisco Mayoral Debate gives Glimpse of Chinatown Politics”:
http://epoch-archive.com/a1/
“CCDC [Chinatown Community Development Center} also gets a juicy subcontract related to the Central Subway project, including $30,000 a month to spend on ‘community outreach’.”
WALL STREET JOURNAL: “The Billion-Dollar-A-Mile Subway Makes Perfect Sense”:
http://online.wsj.com/article/
NOTE: Even while the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) is evaluating the Central Subway project, the FTA Administrator defended the project in the Wall Street Journal—responding to an Editorial that blasted the Subway Boondoggle. The conflict of interest is worsened by transit data that shows the Central Subway decreasing transit service levels and travel times for tens of thousands of riders.
Instead of Muni service cutbacks, fare/ fee increases and crumbling infrastructure, imagine how the Central Subway’s hundreds of millions of dollars in existing state/ local funds could revitalize the citywide Muni System. Political leaders do pay heed to well-reasoned arguments of their constituents.
Join with SaveMuni.com in lobbying Washington and Sacramento.
And if the blue sky mining company won’t come to our rescue
And if the sugar refining company won’t save us
Who’s gonna save us?
This is right when the symphony let out:
Click to expand
It depends on which yardstick you use whether Project Homeless Connect has been a success, or an abject failure, or something in betwixt…
Here are two of them.
As seen on Baker Street:
Click to expand
And parked behind these were two more guesthouses, you know, the South Wing.
Why do so many people live in vehicles on the Streets of San Francisco?
We can talk about that sometime…
