Posts Tagged ‘save’

Great Drought of 2014: Ten Percent Mandatory Outdoor Irrigation Conservation Measures Announced for San Francisco

Tuesday, August 12th, 2014

As expected, here it is:

“Tuesday, August 12, 2014

S.F. Public Utilities Commission Ratifies 10% Mandatory Outdoor Irrigation Conservation Measures

Restrictions Comply with State Water Resources Control Board’s New Emergency Regulations for Outdoor Urban Water Use

San Francisco, CA – On August 12th, the San Francisco Public Utilities Commission (SFPUC) passed new emergency outdoor irrigation restrictions for all of its retail customers. The regulations feature a mandate to reduce potable water use by 10% for outdoor irrigation of ornamental landscape and turf. They also require that the SFPUC implement its plan to reduce wasteful outdoor water use.

The new restrictions for outdoor irrigation take effect mid-September and last through June 30, 2015. Only water customers that have metered irrigation accounts will be issued a usage allocation based on a 10% reduction of their 2013 usage. During that September – June timeframe, customers’ usage must not exceed their allocation. Customers will be able to track how they are doing on each bill. At the next scheduled meeting of the SFPUC, Commissioners will consider an excess use charge of 2x the billing rate for every unit in excess of a customer’s allocation. While metered irrigation accounts are the easiest to track, the SFPUC is asking all of its retail customers to comply. Edible food gardens and areas that are irrigated with non-potable water are exempted.

Concurrently, the SFPUC will also be implementing an education-first plan to reduce wasteful outdoor water use by prohibiting certain water-wasting activities, which include:

· Watering outdoor landscapes in a manner that causes excess runoff;
· Using a hose, without a shut-off nozzle, for any purpose;
· Using drinking water in non- recirculating fountains or decorative water devices; and,
· Washing down driveways/sidewalks except for health and safety purposes.

The exemption for health and safety purposes is strictly limited to: the removal of human and animal waste; the removal of liquids and substances that cause odors, sticky, slick and unsafe conditions for pedestrians; and, the elimination of conditions that attract insects and vermin.
Reports of water waste will be tracked through 311. The SFPUC will be focusing on education and training, not policing and fining. Reported water wasters will be sent a warning notice for reported violations. Only after three warning notifications, clear documentation, and a site-visit by SFPUC staff, will citations be considered. Fines will start at $100 per violation and will require approval by the SFPUC General Manager before issuance. Fines are a last resort only and appeals will be routed through the City Controller’s office.
The new regulations will assist San Francisco in meetings its 10% conservation request. Fortunately, customers have consistently met and exceeded the 10% voluntary conservation request this summer. This savings-spree is making up for lost time earlier in the year when customers were not meeting their goals.

- Total Hetch Hetchy Regional Water System storage stands at 61% of maximum storage capacity.

- As of August 4, total water savings has dramatically swelled to 3.9 billion gallons of water – almost triple from what it was on June 23.

- If the current conservation trend continues, the SFPUC projects meeting the 10% savings goal for the entire year. This will stave off the need for additional system wide water restrictions this year.

“We don’t know when this drought will end,” said SFPUC General Manager Harlan L. Kelly, Jr. “The mandatory outdoor irrigation reduction is a small, but important step as we continue conserving and diversifying our precious water supplies.”

The SFPUC provides reliable, high quality drinking water to 2.6 million customers in San Francisco, San Mateo, Santa Clara and Alameda counties. Updates and additional information will be available at sfwater.org/conservation.

Uh Oh: The “Parking Angels” App is Coming – Something Like This Could Cost the Corrupt SFMTA MUNI DPT a Lot of Money

Monday, August 4th, 2014

What’s this, a way for people to band together against our corrupt SFMTA?

You tell me, Gentle Reader

Hey, what would you do if you knew you were spilling tens of thousands of gallons of petroleum into our San Francisco Bay?

Our SFMTA had a question like this. It failed. Oh well. See below.

Guess what, our SFMTA now wants you to vote yourself a rent increase in order to give it more money. You’ll have your chance to vote on it November 4th, 2014.

Ah memories:

SAN FRANCISCO (November 2, 2009) – The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency is taking action against the San Francisco Municipal Transportation Agency following federal violations of the Clean Water Act and Resource Conservation and Recovery Act.

On the page:

Overview and Location of Facilities

The City and County of San Francisco is a municipality organized under the laws of California that operates the San Francisco Municipal Transportation Agency (“SFMTA”) and the San Francisco Public Utilities Commission (“SFPUC”). The SFMTA operates a diverse fleet of trolley cars, street cars, light rail, alternative fuel vehicles and 495 diesel buses that are serviced and re-fueled at facilities owned and operated by the SFMTA. The SFPUC provides water, wastewater and municipal power services.

Between November and December 2005, approximately 940 barrels (39,488 gallons) of red dye diesel fuel were discharged from one of the Municipality’s underground storage tanks (USTs) at the John M. Woods Motor Coach Facility (Woods Motor Coach Facility). The diesel spread through a piping system into a storm drain, through wastewater collection piping to a pump station, into Islais Creek and eventually San Francisco Bay.

The discharge was caused by a ruptured hose. The leak continued for several days, as sensors, flashers and alarm reports and other leak indicators were ignored. This failure by SFMTA to comply with federal requirements for the management of USTs resulted in the release of diesel fuel and Clean Water Act discharge and pretreatment violations.

After this spill, EPA conducted inspections at several of SFMTA’s facilities and identified violations of EPA’s spill prevention regulations at three of them: Flynn, Kirkland, and Marin.

The five facilities covered by this settlement are in the City and County of San Francisco:

  • Woods Motor Coach Facility – 1095 Indiana Street
  • Flynn Motor Coach Facility – 15th and Harrison Street
  • Kirkland Motor Coach Facility – 151 Beach Street
  • Marin Fuel Stand – 1399 Main Street
  • Southeast Water Collection System Pump Station”

Spot the Missing Building: Motorcyclist’s Polished Helmet Offers a Fish-Eye View of the Western Addition

Monday, August 4th, 2014

Take a close look at this motorcyclist’s helmet on Geary – in between the two tall buildings, you can see the coming construction site of 1481 Post.

Dude gives off a Hank Schrader vibe:

Some people who opposed the 8 Washington Wall on the Waterfront project just might support a tall spire on the top of Cathedral Heights, right?

I think so.

Anyway, all moto helmets should be chromed, huh?

A 36-Story, 416-Foot Tall Condo Building at Post and Gough? Some Hate 1481 Post Already – A Dramaturgical Dyad

Tuesday, July 1st, 2014

Well, here it is, the proposed 1481 Post Street, from the ADCO Group.

And here’s your welcome:

Welcome to 1481 Post Street: An Iconic Residence Reflecting Years of Neighborhood Input and an Innovative Approach to Urban Growth.”

And here’s one possible future for Geary and Gough, as “seen” from our Chinese Consulate on Laguna:

Click to expand

And here comes the backlash, here’s the concomitant anti-1481 Post Street group, SOS Cathedral Hill, or SAVE CATHEDRAL HILL, or something like that.

That’s what you call a dramaturgical dyad, redolent of 8 Washington, IMO.

SocketSite has the deets.

BTW, this group is claiming “No Community Outreach,” but what they really mean is no community outreach this month or no community outreach right now.

If anybody has a non-maudlin argument or anecdote or something against this building, I’d like to hear it. ‘Cause, so far, I haven’t heard it yet.

It seems to me that 1481 Post would slot right in with all the others in this part of the Western Addition, in this part of town betwixt the Tenderloin and J-Town…

The 2007 “Stanyan Street Commons,” a Community Garden near USF, is Now Lost to History

Tuesday, January 28th, 2014

Back in the late aughts Victory Gardens were all over the place, remember? Let’s look back to that time in aught-seven when “guerrilla gardeners” took over the land in front of some lady’s apartment complex at Fulton and Stanyan and just started gardening.

It was beautiful vandalism, man. The venture had lots of support from the City and NGOs, that’s for sure. But things didn’t work out.

Here’s how it looked back in 2007…

Via IndyBay, image reversed for your pleasure

…and here’s how it looked in the summer of 2010, during what should have been the start of harvest, harvest time. Weepin’ time, reapin’ time, harvest, harvest time:

And now the transformation is complete. Here’s the scene in 2014 – the former garden is now a fully-paved parking lot:

And now you know the rest of the story…

Coalition of 48 San Francisco NIMBY Groups Opposes the Coming Changes to Masonic Avenue

Friday, November 15th, 2013

Well, this is news to me. See below.

I’m not seeing a path for victory for the SaveMasonic people, just saying. I mean the SFMTA wants to spend money, the money was gotten, so why would the SFMTA change its mind all of a sudden now that it’s gotten what it wanted?

A recent window sign seen on, where else, on Masonic:

All the deets:

“Metropolitan Transportation Commission
101 – 8th St
Oakland CA 94607
Re: Agenda Item 9(a) – OBAG – Masonic Avenue Complete Streets — MTC,
September 25, 2013

Dear Ms Worth:

The Coalition for San Francisco Neighborhoods (CSFN) is an “umbrella” organization comprised
of 48 individual San Francisco neighborhood associations representing thousands of the city’s
residents.
At its September General Assembly delegates from the CSFN member organizations voted
unanimously in support the following resolution.
Resolved, that the CSFN urges that elected officials, the SFMTA, the
SFCTA, and the MTC must
1. rescind and withdraw their approval and support of the current
Masonic Ave redesign plan,
2. adopt an alternate plan that maintains traffic flow,
3. retain curbside parking on Masonic Ave,
4. establish a better, alternate bicycle route on nearby streets, and
5. install pedestrian safety improvements.
The proposed Masonic Avenue Complete Streets project is estimated to cost $18 million at a
minimum. This money could be better spent. Many affected residents did not receive notice of the
project; adequate EIR has not been performed.
The Coalition for San Francisco Neighborhoods, which reflects citywide neighborhood concerns,
passed this motion unanimously. We urge you to take into account deeply-felt neighborhood
concerns about this. A large part of the city will be negatively impacted by this ill-thought-out
plan. These plans for Masonic Avenue would thwart neighbors’ efforts for real improvement.
In reviewing the plan that you now have before you, we found that there will be significant
impacts that warrant careful inspection and consideration.
CSFN respectfully and very strongly urges you to withdraw the Masonic Avenue
Complete Streets project from OBAG funding until such time as it can be
meaningfully studied, reviewed, and presented to the public.
Thank you for your careful deliberations in this matter; we appreciate your support and
action.

Sincerely,
Judith Berkowitz

President

Cc: Vice Chair Dave Cortese, Alicia C. Aguirre, Tom Azumbrado, Tom Bates, David Campos,
Bill Dodd, Dorene M. Giacopini, Federal D. Glover, Scott Haggerty, Anne W. Halsted,
Steve Kinsey, Sam Liccardo, Mark Luce, Jake MacKenzie, Joe Pirzynski, Jean Quan,
Bijan Sartipi, James P. Sperling, Adrienne J. Tissier, Scott Wiener; Kimberly Hughes,
Georgia Lambert

Coalition for San Francisco Neighborhoods Resolution Regarding Masonic
Avenue Complete Streets

Whereas, Masonic Avenue is an arterial road used daily by 32,000 vehicles, 13,000 bus riders,
over 1,000 pedestrians; and
Whereas, the proposed Masonic Avenue redesign will permanently remove two traffic lanes during
rush hours resulting in increased not reduced congestion on Masonic and surrounding
streets; and
Whereas, pedestrian safety will be lessened, not strengthened; pedestrians boarding the bus or
crossing the street must step over the bicycle lane; and
Whereas, EMS response time will be reduced; new traffic lanes are inadequate for wide emergency
vehicles; and
Whereas, the loss of 167 parking places will adversely affect residents, disabled, seniors, visitors
and others; and
Whereas, MTA counted 31 bicyclists during peak hours on Masonic Ave; nearby Baker St. with
less than 10% of Masonic Ave traffic provides an alternate bicycle route; therefore be it
Resolved, that the CSFN urges that elected officials, the SFMTA, the SFCTA, and the MTC must

1. rescind and withdraw their approval and support of the current Masonic Ave
redesign plan,
2. adopt an alternate plan that maintains traffic flow,
3. retain curbside parking on Masonic Ave,
4. establish a better, alternate bicycle route on nearby streets, and
5. install pedestrian safety improvements.

Hey SFMTA! Why Not “Complete” Polk Street All the Way to Grove and Eliminate These Parking Spaces in Front of City Hall?

Friday, April 26th, 2013

OMG, would you look at this?

I mean check out all these deadly, beastly automobiles parked on Polk, the very same street that the SFMTA is trying to “complete” don’t you know:

Click to expand

I know, why don’t you take out all these spaces and replace them with a separated bike lane or something, SFMTA?

After all, Transit First, right?

Oh, what’s that? These are the spaces that the Board of Supervisors and their aides park in for free every day so that’s where you just happened to end your campaign of completion?

But don’t you care about safety, SFMTA?

Mmmmm….

“This project seeks to implement aesthetic and safety improvements for all users of Polk Street between McAllister and Union Streets. In accordance with the City’s Transit First policy, improvements will primarily be focused on people who walk, use transit and ride a bicycle along Polk Street. The project is funded by Proposition B General Obligation Bonds and is part of an overall citywide effort to curb pedestrian and bicycle collisions and to provide a safe north-south connection for people on bicycles. Pedestrian and bicyclist collision and injury data on Polk Street point to a corridor in need of safety improvements for all those who share the road. In fact, the southern portion from Sacramento to McAllister Streets is part of the 5% of San Francisco streets that have more than half of the City’s most severe pedestrian collisions.”

Is the SFMTA Organizing People to Attend the Upcoming Meetings to Eliminate Parking on Much of Polk Street? Pretty Much

Friday, April 26th, 2013

Organizing people to support whatever the SFMTA wants to do? Yes.

Now, does the SFMTA give lots of money to the San Francisco Bicycle Coalition?

Yes, certainly.

So what does all that money buy?

It buys this kind of thing:

The SFMTA has just announced it will be holding the third official Polk Street Improvement project meeting series on Saturday, April 27 from 10 am to 1 pm and Tuesday, April 30 from 5 to 8:30 pm at 1300 Polk St (at Bush) at the First Congregational Church Fellowship Hall. Please take a moment to read what’s at stake at these meetings. For a year, the SFMTA has conducted widespread community outreach and has developed proposals that will address the urgent safety needs on Polk Street (where once a month someone on a bicycle AND walking is involved in a collision).

If you support safety improvements to Polk Street, it is critical that you attend one or both of these SFMTA Community meetings on April 27 or 30 and speak up for the improvements proven to make biking and walking safer and bring more people to a commercial corridor.

RSVP below so we know that we can count on you to come to the April 27 or 30 SFMTA Community meetings to speak up for safety on Polk Street:

Polk Street Meetings RSVP

The SF Bicycle Coalition wants to know that you will attend the SFMTA meetings on Saturday, April 27th from 10 am to 1 pm and/or Tuesday, April 30th from 5pm-8:30 pm in support for safe biking and walking on Polk Street. Both meetings — hosted by the City, not the SF Bike Coalition — will be at 1300 Polk St (at Bush) at the First Congregational Church Fellowship Hall.

* Required
First Name *

Last Name *

E-mail *

Which meeting are you planning to attend? *

Now, could the SFMTA drum up support directly?

I don’t think so. BART, for instance, got in trouble for doing this type of stuff.

But what’s the difference if the SFBC functions as an arm of the SFMTA?

Hey SFMTA, what’s sample bias? Is it this?

“The SFMTA is looking to get input on how the proposed options for Polk Street meet your needs when you’re traveling on Polk Street. Click here to take SFMTA’s survey. and speak up for safety improvements that matter most.”

I think so. Let me Google that for you.

And actually, all the polling you do has sampling bias. Did you know that, SFMTA?

Maybe you don’t:

Officials seemed taken aback by the anger at the Middle Polk Neighborhood Assn. gathering. Every seat in the Old First Presbyterian Church’s community room was filled. The crowd stood several deep along the walls and spilled out into the corridor.Audience members jeered when Edward D. Reiskin, the city’s transportation director, couldn’t say how many of the 320 curbside parking spots along Polk could be taken out under the plan. I don’t have that data,” he said to loud boos, before going with “something like 170″ maximum. The response from the crowd was more of the same.”

All right, SFMTASFBC. Enjoy your staged meetings on April 27th and 30th!

Selfish, Petty-Bourgeois, White, Property-Owning NIMBY Millionaires Oppose Nifty New Potrero Hill Kaiser

Friday, December 7th, 2012

Hey look, Kaiser Permanente is coming to Potrero Hill.

But some people are highly upset:

Selfish,*

YEP. Pretty much.

Petty-Bourgeois,

YEP

White,

YEP. I’d be surprised if they weren’t.

Property-Owning,

YEP. Obsessed with real estate they are, my precious.

NIMBY

YEP. “Oh yes, Kommandant  we totally support your mission of expanding your concentration and extermination camps, but couldn’t you select a more “appropriate” site, perhaps in East Auschwitz, or maybe even Auschwitz Annex? As the saying goes, property values uber alles.”

Millionaires

YEP. “Well, I’M not a millionaire, ” they lie.

Sorry, little nursey, your kind just isn’t welcome on “The Hill.”

Via stepsaheadlearners

And hey, where’s our helipad, you know, that other thing what was supposed to have “destroyed” property values in PH.

Let’s bring the pain, bring the sanctimony, let’s write canned letters  to all these people, why not:

The CEO and Board of Directors of Kaiser Permanente
Kaiser Permanente (George C. Halvorson)
LNK Partners (Phil Marineau)
Kaiser Permanente (Christine Robisch)
Kaiser Permanente (Robert Pearl)
Kaiser Permanente (Gregory A. Adams)
Kaiser Permanente (Bernard J. Tyson)
Kaiser Permanente (Randy Wittorp)
Kaiser Permanente (Jay Murphy)
Kaiser Permanente (Cameron White)
SF Planning Department (Wade Wietgrefe)
SF Planning Department (Susan Mickelsen)
SF Planning Department (John Rahaim)
Malia Cohen
Megan Hamilton
Andrea Bruss
Kaiser Permanente Board Member (J. Eugene Grigsby)
Kaiser Permanente Board Member (Edward Pei)
SF Planning Department (Sarah Jones)
SF Planning Department (Ben Fu)

*I’m srsly. Do these people sincerely care about “historic” corrugated steel buildings? No, not at all. So how stupid do they think we are? 

Would Christina Olague Have “Saved Rent Control?”

Thursday, November 8th, 2012

No, not at all.

So why did people hold a rally about former Interim Supervisor Christina Olague saving rent control?

On the steps of City Hall:

Click to expand

I know not.

Now, if you wanted to say that renters as a group, overall, would have been better off with a Christina Olague, or a John Rizzo, or a Julian Davis as Supervisor of District Five, well then you might have something…

I s’pose it doesn’t matter now.