SAN FRANCISCO | Projects: Under Construction, Approved, and Proposed

[Pedestrian]

Originally Posted by timbad

I have never had any cause to fear for my safety while walking in SF.

If you are a sizable, youngish male who looks street smart and isn't carrying tempting "bling" including an exposed cell phone, there's no reason you should. A quick scan of the site "Nextdoor", though, reveals how it is for young or vulnerable looking women and others and the shocking thing is how few of them report the crimes, often advised by police not to bother (meaning the Chronicle's statistics are not very valid).

I'm 6 ft, 250 lb and usually wear a hoody walking about. Almost no one bothers' me either but sometimes: Yesterday some teen twerp came barrelling down the sidewalk on a scooter )illegal to ride on the sidewalk) expecting me to get out of his way and I didn't cooperate (I think my weight is double his). My left side collided with his right and I was hoping to send him sprawling--didn't happen sadly.

But I know about the real crime and criminals who inhabit SF sidewalks and the areas on Market and otherwise near Civic Center BART and the 2 Mission BART stations are some of the worst (because they offer easy access to Oakland, home of many of the drug dealers). I know because some of those criminals used to be my patients like I explained above. Sorry to say, you don't know what's going on as a casual passer-by. And all but the crazies will probably leave you alone. But who here will argue SF streets aren't full of crazies? And you think it's safe until you find out otherwise.

[Pedestrian]

New Renderings Revealed For Related’s 530 Sansome Street Tower, Financial District, San Francisco

[Pedestrian]

Planning’s preliminary review of Amazon’s plans to build a 58-foot-tall distribution and delivery station upon the Prime Showplace Square parcel at 900 7th Street, a nearly 6-acre parcel which is bounded by 7th, Berry, De Haro, Carolina and Channel Streets, has been completed. And while the review didn’t raise any red flags, it did outline a number of concerns and (non-binding) recommendations.

From Planning’s assessment:

To accommodate the mix of [Production, Distribution and Repair (PDR)], design and nearby residential uses in Showplace Square, development in the area must balance the need for goods movement with the safety and mobility of pedestrians and bicyclists.

The project site sits at the nexus of Showplace Square, SoMa, and Mission Bay…[and as] an especially large city block fronting six city streets, the project site has the unique opportunity to improve the connections between neighborhoods.

As currently designed, the Project would bring significantly more trucks, cars, bikes and pedestrians to the area without improving connections for them. The proposed design would foreclose opportunities for a walkable, urban frontage along 155 De Haro and fronting the project’s own site, should the use ever change from a last-mile facility.

Given the project’s location, size, street frontage, and goods movement activity, Department staff recommend connecting the street grid by extending Alameda and Carolina Streets. This recommendation would enhance access for deliveries, vehicles, and pedestrians and is consistent with public input to the Showplace Square Open Space Plan update.

In addition, to provide safe access between the aforementioned neighborhoods, Planning would like Amazon to add pedestrian and bicycle safety features along Berry Street. The Department is recommending that Amazon explore the inclusion of “a small retailer or coffee shop” overlooking the proposed open space, to “greatly enhance the compatibility of the building with surrounding context.” And as “the proposed number of parking spaces [at the facility] would induce a significant number of trips and conflict with City policy of prioritizing sustainable travel modes,” Planning is recommending that the proposed number of off-street parking spaces for facility staff be reduced.

https://socketsite.com/archives/2021...posed-but.html

San Francisco continues with the stick approach--force people out of cars by making parking them, washing them, and fueling them near impossible, and taking away as many of the traffic lanes and even streets they require as possible, rather than the carrot approach of making transit efficient, as inexpensive as possible, reliable and safe so that people will prefer to use it. It'll be interesting to see just how "progressive" Mr. Bezos really is when its a hassle for him (and his work force finds another cause for complaint, namely that they can't come to work by their chosen means).

[Pedestrian]

Meanwhile, literally up the street, there's:

Design District Lab Development on the Boards
April 28, 2021

Plans to raze the 22-foot-tall World Gym and office building, which fronts De Haro from 15th to 16th Streets, in the design district at the base of Potrero Hill, have been drafted.

As envisioned by Aralon Properties and massed below, a 5-story laboratory building would rise up to 68 feet in height upon the Showplace Square site which is zoned for PDR (Production, Distribution and Repair) use.

And in addition to 180,000 square feet of lab space, the development as proposed includes a basement garage for 130 cars, with a storage room for 19 bikes and a 17,800-square-foot roof deck for the building’s tenants.

[Now]




[Proposed]

https://socketsite.com/archives/2021...he-boards.html

[iamfishhead]

Originally Posted by Pedestrian

If you are a sizable, youngish male who looks street smart and isn't carrying tempting "bling" including an exposed cell phone, there's no reason you should.

Fair point. I'm more average sized, but I do work out and have generally not had problems. I knew a woman who was 5'2 and lived in the Tenderloin and she was pretty vocal about how she didn't always feel safe there.

[crazy amy b]

Bling? Did we time warp back to 2003?

[Pedestrian]

Originally Posted by crazy amy b

Bling? Did we time warp back to 2003?

I searched for a synonym for general items of obvious value. You got one? I'll substitute it.

What happened in 2003? Didn't seem special to me as it passed (except it was the beginning of the climb out of the dot-com crash in the Bay Area).

[craigs]

Originally Posted by Pedestrian

San Francisco continues with the stick approach--force people out of cars by making parking them, washing them, and fueling them near impossible, and taking away as many of the traffic lanes and even streets they require as possible, rather than the carrot approach of making transit efficient, as inexpensive as possible, reliable and safe so that people will prefer to use it. It'll be interesting to see just how "progressive" Mr. Bezos really is when its a hassle for him (and his work force finds another cause for complaint, namely that they can't come to work by their chosen means).

San Francisco continues the good work of moving away from the mistake of mid-20th century auto-centricity: providing space for alternative forms of transportation on shared public roadways such as bike lanes, red transit lanes, etc.; pedestrianizing some streets to provide space for residents to be outdoors during the pandemic; upzoning auto-centric parcels in desirable areas to enable their highest economic use; and turning street spaces formerly used for the public storage of private automobiles into parklets where San Franciscans can gather and eat, socialize, read a book, etc.

[Pedestrian]

Originally Posted by craigs

San Francisco continues the good work of moving away from the mistake of mid-20th century auto-centricity: providing space for alternative forms of transportation on shared public roadways such as bike lanes, red transit lanes, etc.; pedestrianizing some streets to provide space for residents to be outdoors during the pandemic; upzoning auto-centric parcels in desirable areas to enable their highest economic use; and turning street spaces formerly used for the public storage of private automobiles into parklets where San Franciscans can gather and eat, socialize, read a book, etc.

Yeah, yeah yeah. How do you get to your out-of-town location, teleportation? I bet you own a car. I don't (in SF) as it happens so I guess I take the moral high ground if I'm right. But still my Uber or my ZipCar need auto lanes to move in and places to gas up and park and do what they must, elitist libs like you aside.

San Francisco was designed for horses, carriages and cable cars. The past is beside the point. The overwhelming choice of San Franciscans for getting around town is cars. All the rest is fantasy. And in spite of it all, very few car-owning city residents have abandoned that mode with all the efforts of city government to make them miserable.

[craigs]

Originally Posted by Pedestrian

Yeah, yeah yeah. How do you get to your out-of-town location, teleportation? I bet you own a car. I don't (in SF) as it happens so I guess I take the moral high ground if I'm right. But still my Uber or my ZipCar need auto lanes to move in and places to gas up and park and do what they must, elitist libs like you aside.

San Francisco was designed for horses, carriages and cable cars. The past is beside the point. The overwhelming choice of San Franciscans for getting around town is cars. All the rest is fantasy. And in spite of it all, very few car-owning city residents have abandoned that mode with all the efforts of city government to make them miserable.

Okay, boomer.

If approving of San Francisco's ongoing reversal of the mistaken auto-centricity of the mid-20th century makes me an "elitist lib" then so be it. Proudly so.

[homebucket]

I own multiple cars for trips out of the City, but my preferred method for getting around in the City is not by a car. Usually walking, biking, or riding public transit. It's a more enjoyable way to experience the City anyway.

[timbad]

Originally Posted by Pedestrian

...
San Francisco continues with the stick approach--force people out of cars by making parking them, washing them, and fueling them near impossible, and taking away as many of the traffic lanes and even streets they require as possible, rather than the carrot approach of making transit efficient, as inexpensive as possible, reliable and safe so that people will prefer to use it.

I don't think it's accurate to say there is no carrot - in fact, at least some of what you perceive of as a stick *is* the carrot: giving street space over to transit, bikes and sidewalks is an effort to make those work more efficiently, safely, and pleasantly. I have appreciated it where it has happened.

we've already talked about the declining need for car fueling, so I think that is a non-issue (in fact, is probably smart planning to slowly phase out and replace with more productive uses). although maybe some thought should be given to converting gas stations to charging stations, if it hasn't already?

parking demand may also drop considerably if on-demand self-driving cars really do become common. seems we're headed that way, though this is still somewhat conjecture I think?

someone recently posted data that showed that per-capita car registration in the City is (slowly) declining, so there is that too.

[craigs]

I think the city is moving in the right direction when it comes to mobility.

[Pedestrian]

Some pics from my walk today:

Corner of Turk & Larkin (where the Kahn & Keville tire store used to be):


5M--both buildings


5M--the office tower


5M--the affordable housing


By the way, I also went by the 50 Jones building at Jones & Turk. They had 3 security guards in front to protect would-be renters from the neighborhood habitué's . . . and from the looks of things they needed them. The Tenderloin appears to me, after a 5 months absence, worse than I've ever seen it. People staggering in the street, tents everywhere and garbage, and obvious drug deals and drug use. Contrary to what I said previously about Market St, that was the most sedate side of the building by far (although the check cashing place on the corner of Jones & Market had its usual "corner boy" ready to supply your chemical cravings). I can't imagine people willing to pay the kind of rent I expect this new building will be charging to have to pass through the gauntlet on Jones they will have to to get home.

[timbad]

^ welcome back and thanks for the pics!

[twinpeaks]

Originally Posted by craigs

Okay, boomer.

If approving of San Francisco's ongoing reversal of the mistaken auto-centricity of the mid-20th century makes me an "elitist lib" then so be it. Proudly so.

I'm with you. So much public space is dedicated for car storage and traffic, it's waste of valuable resources. I'm a gen-X, but fully support public transport and use it as much as possible around the city and via BART to Oakland. I own two cars, but mainly use it for commute and trips outside the City.

[twinpeaks]

Originally Posted by homebucket

I own multiple cars for trips out of the City, but my preferred method for getting around in the City is not by a car. Usually walking, biking, or riding public transit. It's a more enjoyable way to experience the City anyway.

[crazy amy b]

Originally Posted by Pedestrian

Yeah, yeah yeah. How do you get to your out-of-town location, teleportation? I bet you own a car. I don't (in SF) as it happens so I guess I take the moral high ground if I'm right. But still my Uber or my ZipCar need auto lanes to move in and places to gas up and park and do what they must, elitist libs like you aside.

San Francisco was designed for horses, carriages and cable cars. The past is beside the point. The overwhelming choice of San Franciscans for getting around town is cars. All the rest is fantasy. And in spite of it all, very few car-owning city residents have abandoned that mode with all the efforts of city government to make them miserable.

Lie Lie Lie

https://sfgov.org/scorecards//transp...uto-mode-share

But I guess that's normal behavior for elitist cons like yourself.

Imagine owning property in two different states and calling someone else elitist.

[Pedestrian]

Originally Posted by homebucket

I own multiple cars for trips out of the City, but my preferred method for getting around in the City is not by a car. Usually walking, biking, or riding public transit. It's a more enjoyable way to experience the City anyway.

I'm in almost the same situation. I own 2 cars and 2 motorcycles. Both cars and one cycle (scooter really) are in AZ in my garage. I keep one scooter in SF for shopping and trips across town. I walk most places or Uber/Lyft--today I walked from Van Ness to Yerba Buena Park. I belong to ZipCar for when I need a full-sized vehicle (let's say I buy something bulky like a new TV).

"Public transit" is another matter. I used to be a frequent rider, buying a monthly pass and once I commuted daily on BART. But I haven't been on Muni since COVID came along and likely won't feel comfortable doing so until it's well into the history books.

At 75, biking is not a practical mode of transportation. I don't have a bike though have had random thoughts of getting one for short pleasure rides in AZ but it is not ever going to be my way to get from point A to Point B at this stage of life. And I think there are plenty of San Franciscans who feel the same way. Bikes are practical transportation mostly for the young and healthy and a large part of the city population is neither. The MTA and Planning Dept. need to remember that.

[Pedestrian]

Originally Posted by crazy amy b

Lie Lie Lie

https://sfgov.org/scorecards//transp...uto-mode-share

But I guess that's normal behavior for elitist cons like yourself.

Imagine owning property in two different states and calling someone else elitist.

So in your 8th post you are calling someone who's been participating here for a decade or so a liar which means, in case you are so ignorant as not to know, an intentional teller of untruths. You are rude, nasty and don't know what you are talking about. None of your posts that I've seen contributed anything to the discussion here about building so one needs to ask why you crawled out from under your rock onto this site?

Despite everything, San Franciscans are driving more
By Adam Brinklow Feb 4, 2019, 3:31pm PST

Last week, the San Francisco Municipal Transportation Agency (SFMTA) released its annual SF Mobility Trends Report, a regular assessment of how San Francisco is getting by when it comes to getting anywhere.

Compiled by SFMTA staff, the report assesses which methods of transit SF residents are most likely to use, employing everything from traffic counts to official ridership stats from transit agencies to Census data about bike use . . . .

Among the conclusions:

On a certain timeline, mass transit and bike use is up in SF [this was just before COVID hit]. According to the report, since 2010 San Franciscan’s use of bikes is up six percent, and use of mass transit (BART, Muni, and Caltrain combined) is up five percent, in contrast to a national trend that’s seen mass transit use decline across the United States.

However, since the turn of the century, mass transit is still down. In the longer run, SF’s mass transit use is down since 2002. In 2003 the city saw a sudden, sharp decline of over 60,000 rides per week and has never reached previous highs since, even as the population increases.

Bicycle use in the city is down in the short run. Since 2010, the number of bike commutes in the city is up, and that figure has also more than doubled since the city first started keeping track in 2005. However, the number of bike trips is also down more than 24 percent since its peak in 2015, a precipitous drop in the short term.

More often people are just driving. Since 2010, vehicular traffic entering the city is up 27 percent. “Vehicle registration per capita has declined by three percent,” says the report. “But since the overall population has grown, the total number of vehicles registered in the city have grown by six percent, adding 26,000 more vehicles.” Subsequently, congestion—measured as both average vehicle speed and peak speed—is up too.

City Hall is quick to point the finger at ride-hailing apps for much of the increased congestion. The report concludes that companies like Lyft and Uber “represent 15 percent of all intra-SF trips.” The report also says that approximately 45,000 Lyft and Uber drivers are active in the city, noting that they “account for about half of the total increase in congestion in SF between 2010 and 2016, with population and employment responsible for the other half.”

The SFMTA’s accounting does its best to accentuate the positive, noting that, despite everything and in defiance of national trends, the city’s preferred methods of transit use are indeed up over the last decade.

However, it’s still clear from the analysis that City Hall has trouble breaking San Franciscans from their reliance on cars . . . .

https://sf.curbed.com/2019/2/4/18211...019-cars-bikes

Looked at another way,

the proportion of San Francisco households who own zero cars increased from 28.6 percent in 2000 to 31.4 percent in 2012

https://sf.streetsblog.org/2014/08/1...san-francisco/

Turn that around and it means that in that year 68.6% of city households did own a car which, is, as I said, a majority. And that's in spite of all the inconveniences the city throws at car owners, starting with the constant risk of theft and vandalism if you don't have a secure garage to park it in. It is likely that until COVID, car ownership declined a few more percentage points but that still means a clear majority of households did own one. And since COVID, my guess would be that the trend may well have reversed, given the viral hazards of riding transit.

Finally, I went to your link and what I learned there was how pathetically few trips are actually made by bike--it appears to be just a couple of percent as I suspected (although the graph is terrible and hard to read with it's multiple shades of just 2 colors). And yet the city is gradually turning it's streets over to them.