Thursday, July 09, 2009

Michael Jackson: child molester

It had to be said, and it's good that a gay man said it. As reported in Fog City Journal, Supervisor Bevan Dufty to the Board of Supervisors: Michael Jackson “was the child of an abusive household who then went on to use wealth and privilege to do questionable things, and to basically purchase children...Sorry, I can’t absent myself from that responsibility. I’m sad for his passing. I am sad for the tortured life that he led, but I have to acknowledge that I think some very unfortunate things were done and were excused based on wealth and privilege.”
http://www.fogcityjournal.com/wordpress/2009/07/07/san-francisco-supes-reflect-on-life-of-michael-jackson/#comments

Labels:

Monday, July 06, 2009

Cutesifying Divisadero

Even allowing for the fact that the article on Divisadero is a fluff piece in the fluffiest part of the Chronicle, the Style section, it can't be allowed to define this neighborhood:

Long known as a gritty stretch of seedy dive bars, failed businesses and low-income housing, Divisadero Street has functioned primarily as a multicultural thoroughfare from Market Street to the Marina, rather than a destination in itself. Recently, however, the section between Haight and McAllister streets, commonly known as the Divisadero Corridor, has seen an influx of vibrant, independently owned boutiques, galleries and bars, along with restaurants like bustling Nopa, which have illuminated an often neglected area. While some stores are north of Fell and the Panhandle and therefore technically in the area known as NoPa, others are decidedly south and aren't---though it's a subject of fierce debate.

In fact Divisadero has never had a lot of "seedy dive bars"---at least in the time I've known this area, and I first lived here way back in 1962. Nor have I ever heard anyone "fiercely debate" about how the area is defined. Only real estate agents care about that.

But it's good that the article gives some of the small businesses in the area some ink, though what they really need---especially the restaurants---is more parking if the area is ever going to be a "destination." And I suspect that, unfortunately, most of these "vibrant" businesses won't survive the recession. The Ninth and Irving area shows how it can be done, with some small parking lots that make the area more accessible, even though the metered spaces only allow you an hour without feeding the meter, not enough time to have a leisurely lunch in one of the many restaurants in that neighborhood. That area also has the large underground garage in nearby Golden Gate Park, where you can park as long as you want and walk over to the neighborhood.

The article mentions that a "$3.4 million revitalization plan is also under way between Waller Street and Geary Boulevard to make the street safer and more inviting with bus stop improvements, wider medians planted with trees and upgraded lighting fixtures." This is the party line from our meddlesome city government; they consider whatever they do to city neighborhoods an "improvement." Along with more parking, what Divisadero Street needs most is to be repaved and something useful done with the old Harding Theater property, which, thanks to Supervisor Mirkarimi and Dave Tornheim, is evidently going to remain an eyesore in the middle of the neighborhood for a long time.

Hard to see how the city can do much with the narrow medians without narrowing the traffic lanes or eliminating street parking. As the city's website on the Divisadero "improvements" tells us, the city is going to put a bunch of bulb-outs on the intersections, which will make it even more difficult for traffic---including Muni's #24 line---to negotiate this busy street.

From the city's site:

One of the goals of the Divisadero Streetscape Project is to improve Muni service along the street. In addition to widening sidewalks at 6 locations where there are bus stops, there is the need to decrease delay for buses and improve reliability. On Divisadero, there was a problem particularly in the southbound direction during the evening rush hour when average bus speeds would drop to ~5 mph, or somewhat faster than walking speed. This was due primarily to traffic congestion. Initially, the Municipal Transportation Agency proposed a part-time tow-away along the west side of the street from Fulton to Oak to create room for a bus lane during the most congested periods. This idea was presented at community meetings in Summer 2008 but rejected due to concerns of losing parking and adding vehicular capacity on the street directly adjacent [to]the sidewalk.

This is a reference to a community meeting attended by around 40 people, all of whom were underwhelmed by the city's Powerpoint presentation selling this idea, which would have taken away all the street parking on the west side of that part of Divisadero for a bus lane, even though the #24 line is the only bus that runs on Divisadero.

The #24 supposedly runs every ten minutes, but in my experience it doesn't. Hence, during the busiest time of the day all the street parking on the west side of Diviz would have been lost to neighbors and visitors, with an occasional south-bound #24 speeding along next to a sidewalk no longer buffered by parked cars. And there would surely have been many other vehicles doing the same thing in an under-used bus lane during the busiest time of day. The assumption seems to be that the southbound traffic on Diviz is somehow more serious than the northbound traffic on the east side of the street, even though, during commute hours, congestion is caused by people traveling in both directions on Diviz on the #24 and in trucks and cars.

Whether we like it or not, Divisadero Street is going to be cutesified by the city, probably with those faux-antique light fixtures like on Octavia Boulevard and a banner telling us what neighborhood we live in. Let's hope they at least spare us those stupid benches on the medians on Octavia that no one will ever sit on.

Labels: , ,

Friday, July 03, 2009

Mirkarimi grandstands on the budget

Supervisor Mirkarimi is posturing on the city's budget deficit, as reported in the SF Examiner:

Mirkarimi requested to put on reserve about $1.3 million for 50 percent of The City’s public information officers, $2 million for the 311 call center and $900,000 for the Community Justice Center. In addition, he requested setting aside funding for the salaries, each in excess of $100,000, of high-ranking mayoral staffers, including Kevin Ryan, the Mayor’s director of criminal justice; Wade Crowfoot, director of climate protection initiatives; Hydra Mendoza, director of education; and Astrid Haryati, director of greening.

I agree on some of these questionable expenses, especially Crowfoot, who's paid more than $162,000 a year for, as far as I can tell, advancing the Bicycle Coalition's agenda from the mayor's office, a function that organization does pretty well on its own. But Mirkarimi's posturing includes only employees and programs favored by the mayor. What about his favorite programs, like the Bike Program in MTA, where there are eleven (11) full-time employees (what do they do all day?).

And then there's Critical Mass, which, as Channel 5's Joe Vazquez reported last month, city taxpayers pay more than $10,000 a month for an escort of city cops on overtime. Vazquez got a classic bit of Mirkarmi flab-gab in response to his question about that expense:

But one of Critical Mass's biggest supporters, Supervisor Ross Mirkarimi, says they're not getting a pass. "Any kind of traffic enforcement, especially when it's mobile and rotating like that, costs the city money for a police escort," Mirkarimi says. "So the police department needs to provide us their budget to determine if that is an applicable use."

So how exactly is Critical Mass "not getting a pass," and why do we suspect that the Murk will find the expense "an applicable use"? Only because there's no organization that takes responsibility for the illegal monthly, traffic-disrupting demo.

The reponsible thing for the Murk to do: disavow Critical Mass and urge the city's cyclists to discontinue the illegal demonstration. Of course he won't do that, since the city's bike people---he always gets the SF Bicycle Coalition's endorsement---are among his most important constituents. And the Bicycle Coalition, in spite of its mealy-mouthed disclaimer, supports Critical Mass by listing it on its online calendar.

The coaliton's executive director, Leah Shahum, had her life-changing bike epiphany at the first Critical Mass demo she attended. Critical Mass is thus both a recruiting tool for her organization and a way for them to keep in touch with the young rads in the great, planet-saving bicycle movement.

Mayor Newsom might have been able to call out Mirkarimi for being a hypocrite on the expenses surrounding Critical Mass, but since he too now endorses Critical Mass he's in a poor position to do so.

Seems like an issue Jerry Brown could use against Newsom in the campaign for governor.

Labels: , ,

Tuesday, June 30, 2009

District 5 Diary on the radio tomorrow

I'm going to be on the radio tomorrow morning, 9:00 a.m. to 10:00 a.m., KQED 88.5 FM (http://www.kqed.org/). Also on the program: Bert Hill of the Bicycle Advisory Committee, Jamie Whitaker, Rincon Hill critic of the Second Street bicycle project, Leah Shahum, executive director of the SF Bicycle Coalition, and Rachel Gordon, reporter for the SF Chronicle. Since all of these folks support the Bicycle Plan---though, as a reporter, Gordon probably claims to be impartial---I'll be out-numbered and won't have time to say much. All I can do is light one candle in the darkness!

Labels: ,

Monday, June 29, 2009

Making traffic worse for everyone but cyclists

Anonymous writes:
"I'm kind of amazed that someone would dare say that 6 percent of trips are by bicycle! Where's the proof? The US Census Bureau reports that number as 2.2 percent. Check it out":
http://factfinder.census.gov/servlet/DTTable?_bm=y&-state=dt&-context=dt&-ds_name=ACS_2007_3YR_G00_&-mt_name=ACS_2007_3YR_G2000_B08301&-tree_id=3307&-_caller=geoselect&-geo_id=05000US06075&-search_results=01000US&-format=&-_lang=en

To be fair to the bike nuts, the Census Bureau chart you've linked is about "means of transportation to work," not all trips in the city by bicycle. Even so it's interesting to note that the commuting-by-bicycle number hasn't changed much in years: The MTA's San Francisco Transportation Fact Sheet of October, 2008 (available on MTA's website), tells us that 80.6% of city residents either drive/carpool, take public transportation, or "motorcycle, taxicab or other" means to get to work, as opposed to 2.3% who bike to work (9.6% walk to work, and 7.6% work at home).

And the San Francisco County Transportation Plan of July 2004 (also available online), has even lower figures for "all internal trips" by bikes, putting the percentage at 1% without giving a percentage for bike commuters, probably because the number is embarrassingly low (page 51).

In short, the city is about to implement a Bicycle Plan that will make traffic worse for more than 80% of San Francisco's commuters.

The SFCTA's Transportation Plan has this interesting paragraph about transportation and the city's economy:

Visitor travel and tourism are integral to San Francisco's economy. The city attracts almost 14 million visitors per year. Of this total, about 10 million arrive from outside the nine-county Bay Area. The transportation needs of business travelers, tourists and other visitors must be planned for in order to support this growing sector of the city's economy. For example, visitors unfamiliar with the city's transportation system rely on easy-to-read maps, good signage, and pleasant walking, transit and taxi environments to navigate the city's attractions easily and efficiently (page 41, emphasis added).

Do these folks ride their bikes into the city? Nope, according to the Visitor's Bureau---which says the city actually had more than 16 million visitors in 2007---25% of the 4.74 million visitors who stayed in city hotels in 2007 rented cars while in the city (http://www.sfcvb.org/research/). Most of the four million visitors to the city from the Bay Area probably drove into the city, though some no doubt arrive on BART.

The Bicycle Plan will not only make commuting worse for more than 80% of the city's population, it will also make negotiating city streets more difficult for millions of tourists, who, according to the Visitor's Bureau, spent $8.24 billion here in 2008, providing $527,612,802 in direct revenue to the city.

Labels:

Saturday, June 27, 2009

The city's contempt for Muni passengers

As the city fights an ongoing battle against illegal billboards and advertising, it continues to allow ads on the sides of Muni buses that prevent passengers from getting a clear view of their city. In spite of paying lip service to the notion that San Francisco is a "transit first" city, in reality Muni passengers are treated as strictly second-class citizens.
http://www.sfexaminer.com/local/The-Citys-clearing-ads-off-the-streets-49054491.html

Boom or bust, the city never gets around to finding enough money for Muni, which has a chronic budget deficit, the excuse for allowing the advertisements that cover bus windows---they need the money! Only Supervisor McGoldrick questioned the practice shortly before leaving office.

The latest sign of the city's disregard for those of us who rely on Muni: the rush to implement the Bicycle Plan, which, as the massive environmental impact report tells us, is going to jam up traffic all over the city, including the Muni system that already has chronic on-time problems.

Labels:

Thursday, June 25, 2009

"You were right all along..."

Anonymous writes:
"I'm a little overdue but I'd like to congratulate you on the vindication of your points by the EIR[on the Bicycle Plan]. You were right all along, and it was outrageous that it took a lawsuit before the City would actually do a real analysis of the impact of the Bike Plan. Great work. You're an example for people everywhere who put reality before ideology."

Yes, the city government is completely enthralled with what I call BikeThink, the ideology of bike people everywhere.

But being based in reality is not enough when you combat ideologues who a priori are in possession of the Truth. The EIR on the Bicycle Plan tells us that it's going to screw up traffic ("significant unavoidable impacts") all over the city, including slowing down Muni lines 9, 10, 12, 27, 30, 43, 45, 48, and 52. San Francisco is about to abandon the pretense of being a "transit first" city in favor of becoming a "bicycle first" city, elevating the interests of a small minority above the majority of city residents.

Labels: