The Chron pushes 8 Washington

Look -- nice paths for rich white people!

The Chron's urban design writer, John King, thinks that the 8 Washington project would be a dandy addition to the San Francisco waterfront:

The project's allure is what happens on the ground. Jackson Street would extend east as a 47-foot-wide pedestrian path; Pacific would conclude at the new triangular park. A narrow greenway north from Drumm would be widened to 37 feet.

The open spaces are the work of Peter Walker, who also designed nearby Sidney Walton Park, the green heart of otherwise drab Golden Gateway. What's envisioned at 8 Washington extends the artful simplicity of that popular space. But it takes cues from the transitional location, offering pathways and nooks rather than trying to upstage the waterside drama.

So the landscape is going to look nice.

But there's a lot more to a project than the way it looks. I'm not going to go all Form Follows Function here, but before you evaluate how much green space the development will have and what pedestrians will encounter, you have to ask another question: Why are we building this thing in the first place?

And to that, there is no good answer.


It's still baffling why the Bay Guardian supports the alternative, that is, preservation of a parking lot. The opportunity cost to the City of turning the 8 Washington project down is immense! Worse, the SFBG continues supporting very privileged NIMBY neighbors in "protecting" tennis courts at a private, luxury swimming and tennis club. Does the SFBG have an alternative proposal for SWL351 that makes any sense?

Posted by Guest on Nov. 21, 2011 @ 3:31 pm

A coalition of neighborhood associations commissioned a comprehensive waterfront planning study by Asian Neighborhood Design released earlier this year which recommended that a viable trust-consistent use for Seawall Lot 351 would be for a new “Waterfront Bike and Transit Center.”

The Waterfront Bike and Transit Center – with bike storage, showers and lockers, bike repair, a café, bike rentals, car share, and recreation related retail – would complement the existing active recreation uses in the area, create recreation synergies with the nearby Ferry Plaza Park, and establish this prime waterfront location as a major new “green” destination that would draw visitors and residents alike and would facilitate their enjoyment of San Francisco Bay.

Download a copy of the community plan and read it for yourself here - the Seawall Lot 351 recommendation is on page 39 of the plan:

Posted by Guest on Nov. 21, 2011 @ 5:22 pm

Anyone who uses that needs to be ignored out of hand.

Posted by guest on Nov. 21, 2011 @ 5:45 pm

The project is 3.2 acres so what would we do with the other 3.1?

The problem with that idea is that it doesn't prevent the building of market rate housing. We need a plan to keep rich people from moving into the area (or better yet, to keep them out of San Francisco entirely). A 'Wealthy Persons Exclusion Act' would work perfectly.

Posted by District 3 Vet on Nov. 21, 2011 @ 7:08 pm

Let's start with you...

Posted by Aragorn on Nov. 21, 2011 @ 7:15 pm

Give all the money to the occupy SF movement. Power to the people! Smash the state!

Posted by Guest on Nov. 21, 2011 @ 3:45 pm

I think it sounds great. I might buy one of the units. But one on a higher floor, so that I can pelt the homeless below with scraps of food.

Posted by Chromefields on Nov. 22, 2011 @ 12:18 pm

A “Waterfront Bike and Transit Center”?? That sounds terrific! Who could possibly oppose it? But wait, who pays for it? Those things are not businesses - they require enormous public subsidies. Where is THAT supposed to come from? Wouldn't a "Transit Center" require the Port to provide a huge economic subsidy to one of the City's nicest neighborhoods and some of its most privileged residents simply because the folks are horrified that new housing is being proposed there? The parking lot on SWL351 is public land - shouldn't it be put to a use that benefits all of SF instead of a public gift to some very entitled NIMBY neighbors?

Posted by Guest on Nov. 22, 2011 @ 12:37 pm

> Sounds like federal funding for the Downtown Transit Center are drying up, yippie, yet more vacant lots (let's make a giant Urban Garden/Park there, we could even install a few very simple 'housing' structures and give shelter to a few folks who would be interested in 'working the land'.
> Funding also dubious for the Central City Subway to nowhere; kinda like Michela's Million Dollar Ramp to Nowhere, but on a grander scale.
> Multi million dollar condo's on the waterfront and at Candlestick Point State Park.
> Park Merced 'redevelopment' and destruction of affordable housing.
> The ongoing saga of Lennar's Urban Renewal Landgrab.
Will it ever end. The Barbarian's tore down the gates long ago, now they are raping and pillaging our communities in the name of 'progress' - aka 'profits'; all with the connivance and cooperation of civic 'leaders', many of whom were elected or appointed to represent and serve our interests.
Yes, 'the peasants are revolting', about damn time.
Just my 2c.

Posted by Patrick Monk. RN on Nov. 22, 2011 @ 2:07 pm

Quite a bit less than 2 cents worthy IMO.
Where is the vision for the future of SF in all of that nonsense?
Just change nothing anywhere ever? Where the rest of the world evolves, changes, grows? Just because you have an irrational fear of change? Because you're good with the SF hyperbole vernacular?
We wouldnt have either bridge, or BART if people like you were at the helm

Posted by Guest on Nov. 22, 2011 @ 2:56 pm

I accept change/impermanence/pain/suffering, they are givens, though as I get older I do find it a little more challenging to adapt and accept. I embrace life, and as a long time hospice nurse also embrace death. I am blessed to have lived through the last of the 'good times'. My primary 'fear' is for the next generations and a society that has no vision for a sustainable future, only instant gratification and profit. I'm glad to be pushing 70 and not 17.
Could you explain exactly how the 'rest of the world' is evolving and growing, and why hundreds of millions of people are protesting, and thousands of children dying of disease and starvation every day ?
Just my 1c.

Posted by Patrick Monk. RN on Nov. 22, 2011 @ 5:22 pm

If you equate development in SF with pain and suffering, children dying, disease, and starvation, then I am not surprised you react the way you do.
You should also realize though, that this is particular to you - and what is the alternative? Change nothing anywhere ever so you feel better?
Sorry but this is a discussion about development - not a save the world infomercial.

Posted by John Galt on Nov. 23, 2011 @ 7:31 am

The only two options are do everything or do nothing?

Posted by marcos on Nov. 23, 2011 @ 9:20 am

Marcos "the sexually promiscuous misanthrope"
In this town, unfortunately with development it is an everything vs nothing argument. The reality is that the politically powerful THD/Peskin inc. in partnership with sfbg want to see nothing on this site. THD has been lobbying against 8 Washington for YEARS

Posted by Guest on Nov. 23, 2011 @ 10:40 am

Ad hominem, reductio ad absurdum, is that all you've got? What makes you think that the financing is going to be around for this kind of thing in two weeks time?

Posted by marcos on Nov. 23, 2011 @ 11:43 am

What business is it of yours how they finance this? Why do you personally care if the developer can or cannot finance it?
Just another NIMBY who likes to hear themselves talk.
"people wont want this development"
"people wont live there full time"
"there is no need for this development"
"the units wont sell"

Posted by Guest on Nov. 23, 2011 @ 12:04 pm

What business is it of mine? The California Government code specifies what business development is of the people. The fact that real estate finance led to the economic collapse in which we are mired makes it my business.

The fact that the Eurozone is collapsing in a pile of unsecured debt means that all of the undercapitalized banks are about to go belly up, take most of the financial system with them, and freeze residential construction financing is all of our business and will pretty much preempt any outlandish development schemes like this, putting developers out of business.

Posted by marcos on Nov. 23, 2011 @ 12:39 pm

you sir, have a massively inflated sense of self importance

Posted by Guest on Nov. 23, 2011 @ 1:00 pm

Except if they are developers of housing built immediately post quake in your case eh Mark?

Posted by Guest on Nov. 23, 2011 @ 1:01 pm

Post-quake rebuilding was not part of a real estate bubble that crashed the economy. What we've got going on right here is the financial equivalent of crack cocaine.

You all are scared. You would not be engaging us unless you were threatened. You are outnumbered. We have you surrounded. You should have anticipated this.

Posted by marcos on Nov. 23, 2011 @ 1:20 pm

Just so I am clear, when you mean "we", you're referring to your multiple personalities? Or you and tim Redmond and sue hestor? Maybe Chris daly ? John avalos? I feel sort of special knowing I'm surrounded!

Posted by Guest on Nov. 23, 2011 @ 2:17 pm

Marcos is like a progressive version of a talking doll. Pull a string and he'll dutifully recite any of four progressively approved cliches.

Posted by Guest on Nov. 23, 2011 @ 2:19 pm

and now they are a powerful force that outnumbers, threatens and scares?


Not only does your post seem creepy and a little delusional, it also directly contradicts what you wrote about two weeks ago.

Posted by Longtime Lurker on Nov. 23, 2011 @ 5:03 pm

Are you really incapable of, or unwilling to, recognize and understand that we live in an interdependent world; that while every action taken by every individual may seem to be insignificant, the cumulative impacts can be disastrous; unfortunately for our future there are many others like you. Yes, this is 'about development', but the development of a strategy for planetary survival, not the profits of a few speculators. Wake up, open your eyes, see the big picture.

Posted by Patrick Monk. RN on Nov. 23, 2011 @ 9:19 am

What is your point? If a leave falls from a tree in boston, a child goes hungry in Africa?
Seems to me if we are going to survive as a planet then we need to invest in dense development in our cities and this development is just that investment.

Posted by Guest on Nov. 23, 2011 @ 10:34 am

that he like William Bennett and Jerry Fallwell care more than you do, so his appeal to higher standards, standards that he is the living embodiment is factually right and your opinions are just that, and wrong.

When the world is revealed as it is for our progressives thats how everything works.

Posted by guest on Nov. 23, 2011 @ 10:51 am

No, Monk's point is more fundamental and concrete than that. Bad real estate development has direct causes and impacts intimately intertwined with global capitalist economics and the well being of everyone and every thing.

Again, see the David Harvey speech 'The Neoliberal City' to get a solid grasp of these dynamics - at:

Posted by Eric Brooks on Nov. 23, 2011 @ 12:07 pm

arguments are not the big picture.

Posted by Chromefields on Nov. 23, 2011 @ 9:40 am

Someone made a reductio ad absurdum case at the OccupySF GA last night. I called him on it, people called me out as if I'd gone ad hominem on him, as if I'd said that he was absurd! Had to clarify that I was using a logician's term of art to address the structure of his fallacious argument, not going ad hominem on him. Sheesh.

Posted by marcos on Nov. 23, 2011 @ 10:39 am

What is most absurd is that I, once again, allowed myself to be reduced to responding to myopic morons.

Posted by Patrick Monk. RN on Nov. 23, 2011 @ 11:39 am

...and not waste any more time here. So enjoy the holiday, even those of you who think that if you've seen one redwood tree you've seen them all, and that ketchup is a vegetable-like pepper spray.

Posted by Patrick Monk. RN on Nov. 23, 2011 @ 11:46 am

you did, and though you do indeed tower over mere mortals, it's never too late in life to work on one's self-control and sense of self-importance. But Happy Thanksgiving! Ketchup is delicious on a redwood tree.

Sympathize with your plight, Marcos. It's dangerous to attempt Latin in a country where most people can no longer distinguish between "loose" and "lose."

Posted by Chromefields on Nov. 23, 2011 @ 12:14 pm

I would far rather see someone fail to distinguish between the mere spellings of 'loose' and 'lose', than fail to distinguish, as you do, between right and wrong, fair and unfair, moral and immoral, decency and insult, respect for others and your kind of smart ass disdain for everything that lives and breaths; all because you have no respect for, nor can you distinguish, your self...

Posted by Estel on Nov. 23, 2011 @ 12:45 pm

I have never made any claims to 'moral superiority' or 'higher standards', that is an assertion you have made, facetiously I imagine; though why striving to achieve an even slightly higher level of consciousness should be attacked in such a derogatory tone escapes me. It continues to amaze me how so many 'conservatives', many of whom claim to be 'Christians', express opinions and conduct their lives in ways that are a refutation of the teachings of Jesus. I consider myself a budding buddhist; sorry guys but that is just a spiritual belief, not religious dogma; and try to live and act in accordance with those teachings, which include taking responsibility for your actions and the effect they have. I don't think anything I have said here is radical, revolutionary or original, just common sense. I constantly fuck up and fail to live up to my 'ideals', but that doesn't mean I'm gonna give up. Some of you might think about spending a few minutes over Thanksgiving reading your Bible, Matthew.25:31-46 might be a good place to start.
Just my 2c.

Posted by Patrick Monk. RN on Nov. 23, 2011 @ 1:40 pm

"Are you really incapable of, or unwilling to, recognize and understand that we live in an interdependent world;"

One right after another

"have never made any claims to 'moral superiority' or 'higher standards',"

"though why striving to achieve an even slightly higher level of consciousness"



When I tried to adhere to some of the "progressive" doctrines it kept coming back to that all this progressive dogma is no better than being a right wing born again Christian.

There are so many commonalities in belief pathology that it's a bit amazing. Two all encompassing doctrines where opinion is fact, where appeals to authority are made to those better at rotely making the revealed truth/opinion seem like high higher states of being.

Posted by Matlock on Nov. 23, 2011 @ 1:56 pm

Trying to conduct a reasonable conversation with neanderthals is worse than a root canal without anesthetics. Sorry 'matlock' that last sentence is gobbledygook. You seem to have no comprehension of personal beliefs or the value of moral codes.
Not surprising. I'm done.
Remember Alcatraz.

Posted by Patrick Monk. RN on Nov. 23, 2011 @ 3:04 pm