San Francisco news briefs

Parking perks for professors

Once more the University of California is providing expensive perks to professors. This time it is the Hastings College of the Law trying to provide cheap parking. The neighborhood is well served with an underground city garage and many private surface lots, and there is no need for more parking except to try to keep the price of parking low.

Four years ago the college proposed to build an 885-space garage to generate revenue - and was shot down (thanks especially to the intervention of state Senate Speaker John Burton). The college's own Financial Analysis showed that the project would barely cover mortgage payments plus the city's parking tax, even with a low state-backed interest rate and optimistic patronage predictions.

The new proposal is for a garage with 430 spaces at Golden Gate Avenue and Larkin. The smaller garage would interfere less with transit, but we predict that it would also probably be even less financially feasible since a smaller garage has many of the same capital and operating costs as a larger garage of the same height (nearly as many ramps, and a similar level of daily staffing) but less revenue. One worrisome piece of evidence is that Hastings is claiming in court that parking is part of its educational mandate and that therefore it is not required to pay the parking tax.

We suspect that Hastings can make more money - and improve the urban environment - by providing housing for its students and others who want to live downtown.

Too much parking elsewhere

At a time when new housing in much of the city is limited to 0.75 parking spaces per unit, the San Francisco Group is opposing two projects that would include excessive parking.

A proposed luxury condominium at 8 Washington St. (on the Embarcadero, with Bay views) would include 170 of the city's "most expensive" housing units. The developer intends to retain most of the site's existing tennis courts and both of its pools. The two eight-story buildings would include ground-level retail with 260 residential parking spaces and 350 commercial parking spaces in three underground levels. The project is supposed to remove 230 existing parking spaces, but would still add excessive commercial and residential parking in an area with good transit and ample transient parking under the nearby Embarcadero Three and Four.

At Stanyan and Haight, developers propose a 28,000-square-foot upscale market with 62 residential units above and a three-level underground garage for 180 cars. We support the concept of residential over commercial, but this amount of parking would draw motorists to John F. Kennedy Drive, further degrading Golden Gate Park and complicating future efforts to close the Drive on Saturdays. The extra traffic would also impact the Page Street Bikeway entrance to the park. The proposal is overwhelmingly car-oriented in a transit-rich area. This parking would be nearly twice the Planning Code minimum parking requirement for the market, plus one full space for every residence.

Transbay Terminal

The project to convert the old Transbay Terminal into a modern intermodal station for high-speed rail, commuter trains, and regional, long-distance, and Muni buses is a step closer to the possibility of starting construction.

The good news is that the Planning Department has proposed building three tall residential towers (one over 1,000 feet) as part of the terminal's redevelopment-project area. Through selling the land for these towers to developers, the department would bring in funding for terminal construction. If this scheme succeeds, it could make the difference in enabling the terminal to move ahead.

The San Francisco Group, working with many other transit advocates and Supervisor Chris Daly, have for some time been working to advance the terminal project. We campaigned for Proposition C on the November ballot, which would have pushed Mayor Newsom to be more directly involved in the terminal project. Even though Prop C did not pass, we believe that our campaign efforts did motivate the Planning Department to its current new level of activity.

There is still not enough funding, however, for one important part of the project, namely the extension of Caltrain from its current termination at Fourth Street to the basement of the new terminal. Initially, therefore, the terminal will be constructed over a structural box ready for the construction of the rail extension and a rail station when funds are available.

Treasure Island wetlands

As Treasure Island is converted to civilian use, it should become an example of sustainable living.

The plans, for example, include construction of a wetlands to remove pollution from stormwater, and also of a tidal wetlands. These wetlands will help teach about sustainable water treatment, as well as serving as attractive, easily accessible natural areas and homes for shorebirds and other wildlife.

Because the current practice of discharging the island's untreated runoff into the Bay is unacceptable, and because wetlands take time to develop, we urge the developer to construct these as soon as possible, in Phase One of the project.

Treasure Island transportation

The developer projects that island residents will take a bus or a highly subsidized ferry to and from the city, while visitors will come by car or ferry to do upscale shopping, dining, sightseeing, picnicking, etc.. The developer plans to charge for parking and to charge an exit fee for driving to San Francisco during peak hours. These fees are to fund the ferry, buses to San Francisco and Oakland, and shuttles to the ferry. Residents should be able to find most necessary services available on the island, within convenient walking distance.

The Sierra Club agrees with much of this, but with some significant differences. We want to see many fewer parking spaces, and we want to see residents get to San Francisco by a quick ride on the bus using their fast pass rather than by a longer ferry ride at three times the cost.

Also, the development agreement for the island should specify that no funding for ferry service shall ever come from the San Francisco general fund or the Metropolitan Transportation Authority budget. All private autos traveling between the islands and San Francisco should be charged exit fees at least as high as the tolls for crossing the bridge from the Oakland side. This is not only fair, but it should help reduce driving and help encourage local-service businesses to locate on the island. The exit fee can help to fund the ferry, some developer-provided shuttles, and bus service to Oakland. San Francisco's Muni should provide bus service to San Francisco, and Muni should receive all revenues from curbside parking fees and parking taxes (from the small number of visitor garage spaces), just as in the rest of San Francisco.

Banning disposable food-service-ware waste

Supervisor Aaron Peskin's proposed Food Service Waste Reduction Ordinance is a great start, but could go further to prevent pollution and reduce the waste stream. The current draft ordinance would ban the blown form of polystyrene (often known by the trademark name `Styrofoam'), but it should be broadened to ban all forms of polystyrene, as well as other non-recyclable plastics.

The ordinance will affect only private restaurants and retail food vendors, city departments, and city contractors and lessees in the course of doing business with the city. Caterers and non-profit food providers will be exempted.

The ordinance would require all disposable food-service ware (cups, clamshells, plates, etc.) to be biodegradable or compostable, but it includes an unnecessary exception if there is no affordable alternative. Many restaurants have already demonstrated the adequacy of offering take-out in paper or cardboard containers, lined when necessary.

The ordinance requires the city to prepare a list of acceptable compostable products, which should help everyone meet the requirements, but we need to increase the availability of receptacles for depositing our compostables.

WhatYouCanDo

To find out when the ordinance will be heard by the Supervisors' City Operations and Neighborhood Services Committee, check the Board of Supervisors web site at www.sfgov.org/site/bdsupvrs

Contact the supervisors on this committee:

Jake McGoldrick (District 1)
(415)554-7410
Jake.McGoldrick@sfgov.org
fax: (415)554-7415

Bevan Dufty (District 8)
(415)554-9698
Bevan.Dufty@sfgov.org
fax: (415)554-6909

Fiona Ma (District 4)
(415)554-7460
Fiona.Ma@sfgov.org
fax: (415)554-7432

Urge them to ban all food-service ware that is not either durably reusable or collected for recycling or composting in San Francisco.

Howard Strassner

Heritage Trees

San Francisco has recently passed a heritage tree ordinance.

Our city is blessed with many trees 75 - 100 years or more old, some of which are truly remarkable specimens. The California buckeye on McAllister at Second Avenue is an example of a stately old California native that has somehow withstood pressures from urban development and natural forces. The San Francisco Group urges each supervisor to identify and promote at least one heritage tree from their district each year.

Pinky Kushner