Friday, January 26, 2007

Study: Subway plan falls short, is costly

Rachel Gordon, Chronicle Staff Writer

Friday, January 26, 2007

San Francisco’s proposed $1 billion-plus Central Subway that would bring light-rail service into Chinatown is a costly investment that would do little to address future transit needs, according to an independent study commissioned by the city’s Municipal Transportation Agency.

City officials dispute that assessment, arguing that the project would help ease congestion on traffic-clogged streets.

Engineering consultant Thomas Matoff, the city’s former director of transit planning who was tapped to analyze the project, said that if the goal is to efficiently improve service, the Central Subway plan falls short.

“As proposed,” Matoff wrote, “this project does not appear to do that — it promises to combine high capital costs with higher operating costs and … does not, apparently, effectively meet the market needs in the corridor it is intended to serve.”

The proposed subway would connect to the new T-Third line, which serves the city’s southeastern neighborhoods and opened for limited service this month.

The 1.7-mile Chinatown extension would add four stops: an aboveground platform on Fourth Street near Brannan Street and three underground stations near Moscone Center, Union Square and the heart of Chinatown. Eventually, the line could be extended into North Beach and the Embarcadero.

Planners estimate that the Chinatown extension, years in the works, would be used by more than 20,000 riders a day. The goal is to open it in 2015.

The federal government has committed $762 million to the project. A combination of state and local money, including sales tax and bond revenue, is expected to fund the remainder.

Next month, city officials are expected to find out whether the proposed project will remain on the federal funding list; there is no indication that it will be removed.

“This is a good project that has a lot of community support,” said Nathaniel Ford, who runs the Municipal Transportation Agency. “At this point, we are seeing how we can make it better.”

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-San Francisco, has long championed the project that resulted, in part, from the demolition of the Embarcadero Freeway after the 1989 Loma Prieta earthquake. The freeway had provided a conduit into Chinatown and North Beach, and neighborhood business leaders fought an unsuccessful battle to save it.

While the proposed subway would not replace the freeway, its boosters, including Chinatown political powerhouse Rose Pak of the Chinese Chamber of Commerce, say it would benefit local businesses and residents.

“To my mind, the ivory tower consultant was totally ignorant of the on-the-ground realities of Chinatown and San Francisco,” said Board of Supervisors President Aaron Peskin, who represents Chinatown and surrounding neighborhoods in the northeast sector of the city.

Matoff was not available for comment. His report, issued in April, only recently surfaced publicly and was distributed to the Municipal Transportation Agency’s governing board Thursday.

Since the report was written, the plan has been reworked in part to address some of Matoff’s concerns. For example, stations have been redesigned to limit the distance people would have to walk to transfer from the new subway line to another Municipal Railway light-rail line or BART.

Agency officials believe they have found ways to shave about $130 million off the previous $1.4 billion cost estimate. Among the ideas: Using two tunnel-boring machines instead of one to save time and money, and reducing the size of stations and boarding platforms. However, shorter platforms require shorter trains, which in turn would limit capacity.

A more detailed financial analysis is under way to see whether the new cost estimates hold up, said project manager John Funghi. Even if it does, the project still faces a funding gap of about $86 million — an amount that Funghi said isn’t insurmountable.

Mayor Gavin Newsom, who inherited the project when he took office in 2004, said he is committed to keeping costs under control. “This will not be a Big Dig redux,” he said, referring to Boston’s underground roadway that came in billions of dollars over budget.

Matoff suggested in his report that the Municipal Transportation Agency’s Central Subway vision is shortsighted.

Among his concerns: the decision to not design a tunnel that could accommodate both trains and buses, which would allow buses to bypass the congested surface streets; the agency’s continued insistence to use “high-platform” vehicles that slow boardings because people must step up into the busses and trains; and the location of the Union Square station that “may make a future Geary light-rail line (connection) more expensive.”

Representatives of several transit advocacy groups, including San Francisco Tomorrow, San Francisco Planning and Urban Research Association (SPUR) and Livable City, have voiced concern over the project.

“There is no question that the corridor needs a subway. The northeast corner of San Francisco has the highest (population) density of any part of the country west of Chicago,” said Gabriel Metcalf, executive director of SPUR. “But they don’t have the plan right yet. There are flaws. They have a lot more work to do.”

Chronicle staff writer Edward Epstein contributed to this report. E-mail Rachel Gordon at rgordon@sfchronicle.com.

Posted by M at 16:18:13 | Permalink | No Comments »

No welcome mat for adult film studio

SAN FRANCISCO Activists prefer building be used for housing

Marisa Lagos, Chronicle Staff Writer
Friday, January 26, 2007


A plan to turn the old armory building on Mission Street into a porn film studio has run into a wall of opposition, with several community groups expressing outrage that a company specializing in bondage videos intends to move into their family-filled neighborhood.

The backlash against Kink, a Web-based pornography distributor currently housed South of Market, has prompted Mayor Gavin Newsom’s office to take notice but caused other city officials to simply shrug apologetically.

Because the company, which has quietly called San Francisco home since its founding a decade ago, doesn’t plan to make any structural changes to the building, it will not have to seek approval from the city Planning Commission, officials said.

The structure already is zoned for commercial and industrial use, which under San Francisco law includes film production.

“The planning code … is not really worried with moral propriety,” said Amit Ghosh, director of the city’s planning department. The building, bought by Kink in December for $14.9 million, is listed on the National Register of Historic Places. It was built in 1912 and served as a military induction and training center during the two world wars, but has sat empty since 1970 and been the subject of bitter neighborhood fights over development and gentrification during the past decade.

Members of several community groups, however, say that elected officials have a responsibility to address their concerns, regardless of what city planning law dictates, and recently sent a letter to both Newsom and Supervisor Chris Daly, whose district includes the armory, demanding they take action.

Sam Ruiz, the executive director of Mission Neighborhood Centers, said the groups would like to see the city hold a hearing to allow residents to voice their concerns.

Ruiz and others say a porn dungeon is not an appropriate neighbor for the families that live nearby and several schools in the area. They also are angry that the building is not being used for affordable housing.

“This is not about moral issues — it’s about respect and tolerance,” he said. “The community was never told about the intent to buy this building for adult film purposes and for bondage films.”

Ruiz and Roberto Hernandez, a longtime community activist, said that there are numerous neighborhood groups working to promote anti-violence initiatives and improve the area, and that Kink’s films do not mesh with those goals.

“How do you tell a child from a school right down the street they are going to be filming pornography there?” he asked. “Is it appropriate to have a business (near) a school that is tying up women and exploiting them?”

Peter Acworth, CEO and founder of Kink, insists that no one is being exploited.

“We have a clean and safe work environment, the models are well paid, and they are explicitly covered by workmen’s comp,” he said, adding that many of the company’s employees are “lifestyle players,” who enjoy bondage on their own time as well.

Beyond that, he said, the film company will be a good neighbor. Acworth already has met with a housing organization and a merchants group, he said, and is open to meeting with others. He also has reached out to the mayor’s office and Daly, he added, but was unable to talk about the sale publicly before it was finalized because of a verbal confidentiality agreement with the building’s previous owners.

Acworth said he also would like to explore the idea of turning part of the armory into an assembly room for community use, he said, and plans on making improvements to the exterior. “It’s not a porn shop at all — it’s not as if it’s open to the public,” Acworth said. “I have been in business for 10 years” in three other locations in the city “and I’m not even sure the neighbors knew what we were doing,” he said.

Daly said he would not step in unless the building needs special approvals from the Board of Supervisors, but for now doesn’t have an opinion on his new neighbor. He noted that there have not been any affordable housing proposals for the site in years.

Newsom spokesman Peter Ragone said the mayor’s office is looking for ways to halt the move.

“You don’t want to seem prudish, but in this case there was an opportunity for affordable housing that has now been lost, at a time when the city is desperate for that. And the fact that there’s going to be a bondage and S&M porno studio in the vicinity of schools gives pause,” he said.

Posted by M at 16:15:09 | Permalink | No Comments »

Hollywood, the Sequel: Less Shabby, More Chic

Monica Almeida/The New York Times; The Geisha House, a new restaurant on Hollywood Boulevard, has been part of the area’s transformation.

By JENNIFER STEINHAUER, Published: January 26, 2007

LOS ANGELES, Jan. 25 — For decades, tourists deposited themselves at one of the most famous intersections in America — Hollywood and Vine — and looked around in puzzlement, wondering what exactly they were supposed to be seeing.

The New Hollywood
The New York Times
Monica Almeida/The New York Times; Along with its famous tourist attractions, the Hollywood neighborhood now has many retail stores and restaurants that also draw Los Angeles residents.

The surrounding Hollywood neighborhood had fallen into such miserable disrepair that its main consumers were people seeking drugs or tattoos. Many entertainment companies were long gone. Crime was rampant, incomes were depressed, and people who labored in the industry that gave the neighborhood its fame were nowhere to be found.

But in a few weeks, work will begin on a luxury hotel and a collection of $1 million condominiums at Hollywood Boulevard and Vine Street, joining a skyline of condos and trendy new hamburger and sushi outposts rising among the mid-20th-century architecture.

 

That Los Angeles neighborhood, which had been promised a comeback for a good 40 years, seems to have finally achieved it, a cross-continent bookend to the transformation of Times Square in New York, with one key difference: Los Angeles residents, not just tourists, have found reasons to go there and live there.

“Hollywood is a testament to people’s desire to live in places with some sense of history and a sense of place,” said David Malmuth, a developer who brought the Kodak Theater, home to the Academy Awards, to Hollywood and also oversaw the renovation of the New Amsterdam Theater in Times Square.

In the last several years alone, more than $2 billion has been spent on projects in the neighborhood, including mixed-use retail and apartment complexes and new schools and museums. Many urban planning experts see something other than a confluence of low interest rates, a tight housing market and developers with a gleam in their eyes.

The Hollywood renaissance represents a potential future of much more of Los Angeles, a sprawling, horizontal city where vertical, dense and at least somewhat walkable neighborhoods with public transportation are increasingly in vogue.

“It is a comeback that shows there is some demand for a more urban way of life,” said Anastasia Loukaitou-Sideris, chairwoman of the Department of Urban Planning at the University of California, Los Angeles. “It is a comeback that is based not only on entertainment and commercial spaces, but mixed use and housing, at the same time the city is building its rail service.”

Among the many celebrated neighborhoods of Los Angeles, the 25 square miles of Hollywood have long stood out.

Outside of the Walk of Fame, the circular Capitol Records building and other historically sumptuous landmarks, the neighborhood is a richly diverse community of 222,694 people — from the wealthy residents peering out at the world from the hills above Hollywood proper, to the middle- and lower-income inhabitants of the streets below.

Like a great old house, the bones of Hollywood remained mostly untouched in its down years by large-scale development and the more unfortunate inclinations of contemporary urban planners. Yet years of disinvestment in the area, led by the fleeing of the movie studios, took its toll.

“It just needed a huge surge of capital investment to bring those buildings back,” said Christi Van Cleve, a partner at Roschen Van Cleve Architects, which has restored several buildings in the neighborhood.

Proponents of the new Hollywood have a data point they love to trot out: in the 1980s, the average stay on Hollywood Boulevard was a depressing 28 minutes, or about the time it can take to find a parking spot in the thriving nearby city of West Hollywood. People slept in the streets, and a drug trade prospered among boarded up historic sites.

By the early 1990s, three major projects proposed for the area had fallen apart. Subway construction was just beginning, leaving a sinkhole in the street and traffic nightmares all around. The Los Angeles riots and an economic recession had done little to brighten the hopes of Hollywood, and private equity wanted no part of it.

Then, in 1993, “Jackie Goldberg came along,” said Leron Gubler, president of the Hollywood Chamber of Commerce, referring to the Los Angeles city councilwoman representing Hollywood at the time who went on to become a state legislator. “She said, ‘Nothing is going to happen here until we address some of the basic problems,’ ” Mr. Gubler said.

The Community Redevelopment Agency, a city-sponsored revitalization effort, had begun to pay for street improvements, fixing up facades on buildings. Next came a police foot patrol paid for largely by the transit authority.

In 1995, Ms. Goldberg and the chamber staff decided to create a business improvement district along six blocks on Hollywood Boulevard. The next year, the district was established with $600,000 raised through business owners, who had their trepidations. They had heard the “Hollywood is back” storyline before.

“It was a challenge,” said Mr. Gubler, who at one point nearly stalked the owner of the Hollywood Roosevelt Hotel to get the last signature on a petition needed to get it all done. The hotel — founded in 1927 by a syndicate of Hollywood stars like Mary Pickford and Douglas Fairbanks, and home to the first Academy Awards — had as much at stake as any luminary.

By 1997, thanks to armed guards, crime in the area had dropped over 50 percent. “That is when we began to see the light at the end of the tunnel,” Mr. Gubler said.

At the same time, Mr. Malmuth, the developer, took an interest in Hollywood. He and others focused on the corner of Hollywood and Highland, a major intersection ripe for commercial development. Mr. Malmuth joined a development firm that committed to a mixed-use project that would become the home of the Academy Awards ceremony.

The Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences, which had been sniffing around for new options for the Oscars, embraced the idea of a live theater surrounded by retailers and other tenants.

“When I took this into the board of governors, I thought it was going to be a hard sell,” said Bruce Davis, the executive director of the academy. “At that time, Hollywood definitely had a seedy reputation.”

The Hollywood and Highland project, first proposed at a cost of $150 million in 1998, came to fruition in 2001 at a cost closer to $600 million. Slowly, a steady stream of interest among other commercial developers followed, and nightlife and restaurants — the dual forces of urban renewal — came too, as did the final piece, new housing.

Now cruising east on Hollywood Boulevard toward a sea of glittering lights, the sleazy motels and tattoo parlors begin to give way to Starbucks and a Virgin Megastore, and the hopelessly chic Geisha House, a giant emporium of oyster shooters and sashimi “igloo style,” and the sort of people who spend a good chunk of their week in Pilates classes.

In a nod to the corner’s glamorous past, there will be an 11-story W Hotel at Hollywood and Vine. It was there that the famous Brown Derby Restaurant opened in 1929, and for years remained the watering hole for studio executives and “the talent” streaming out of nearby film studios — more Spago than Spago today.

The restaurant fell to seed like much the neighborhood in the 1970s, and closed in 1985. In a depressing coda, most of the building burned in 1987, and it was demolished in 1994. The new project at the intersection, expected to open in 2009, will include the 300-room W Hotel and a 14-story luxury condominium tower. Across the street, a converted office building has sold out its luxury condos, including one to Charlize Theron, said Eric Garcetti, the Los Angeles City Council speaker whose district includes Hollywood.

“People are seeing stars here again,” said Mr. Garcetti, who helped pass an ordinance to increase housing in the area. Developers creating apartment and condo complexes with city money are required to set aside 20 percent of the units for low-income residents, and a few sites offer more, like one along two blocks at Hollywood and Western, in colorful block buildings that look like a Mondrian painting.

But displacement of the residents who stood by Hollywood at its worst — the seamy underbelly of neighborhood renewal — is no doubt happening.

“The more they put up big flashy apartments, the more difficult it is to make ends meet,” said Tita Stallings, who has lived in Hollywood for 20 years. “As a low-income single parent, it scares the hell out of me.”

Larry Gross, the executive director of the Coalition for Economic Survival, a tenants’ rights organization, estimates that at least 1,000 units of low-income housing have been lost to development over the last five years.

Mr. Garcetti said he has struggled against this tide, requiring developers, for instance, to offer jobs to local residents and pay higher wages, and pushing for more affordable housing. “We don’t want the people who laid the groundwork here to get pushed out,” he said.

The Gap is in Hollywood now, which may just about say it all. And the subway is now open for business, ferrying people in and out of the area and setting the foundation of what may become a new Los Angeles, with fewer cars and more urban living.

Posted by M at 05:49:09 | Permalink | No Comments »

Great plans for the park

Ken Smith takes his proposal to build the Great Park over time to the board today.

BY SONYA SMITH IRVINE WORLD NEWS

Lead Great Park designer Ken Smith wants to host a grand opening once a year for the near future for a different section of the park.
He will discuss the proposal with the Great Park board today.
The plan starts this summer with launching the passenger-carrying, orange balloon; a mini-park around the balloon would open the following summer. The phasing plans continue on – with the park’s development continuing for many years.
“This park will take years to build out but people will start visiting immediately,” Smith said Wednesday. “It will develop over time.”
And that phasing plan shows the park will all be somewhat developed in the next seven-year-period, some areas more than others.

Yehudi Gaffen, construction manager on the park design team, said areas that cannot be developed will be roughly graded and planted with seeds. Other, distinctive elements such as the sports park will open as money permits.
“Each year one great thing will open based on available funding,” Gaffen said.
The phasing decisions largely come down to money. The suggested plan is loosely based on available money – the development will cost approximately $419 million, so far $333 million is available for design and construction.
Of the $333 million, $100 million will come from money paid by the Lennar Corp. as developer fees, $233 million will come from property tax revenue. That tax revenue is based on the value of the Lennar Corp.’s land that will surround the Great Park.
The phasing plan does not include possible sources of revenue from increased property tax reve
nue, state grants, Measure M money, sponsorships, and $201 million available for shared public roads and utilities with nearby development, among other sources.
The phased planning approach can be seen in the amphitheatre. Smith’s team says it can be built first as a concert lawn with open grass seating and an open area for performances. But, as more money may become available through sponsors and private donations a permanent amphitheater shell will be built.
“If we’re lucky enough to get a sponsor or other funding we want to be ready to accept that and make it happen,” Gaffen said.
Some areas depend on more than just money to become complete. The canyon, for example, will be shaped and trails will be created. But it will take many years of growth to make the canyon as lush as Ken Smith has envisioned.
The park’s civil engineer, Pat Fuscoe, said Ken Smith wants the
park’s developed and undeveloped lands to blend together, while maintaining safety around active construction zones.
“The ongoing development of the park will even become part of the experience,” Fuscoe said. “People can come and watch it being built.”
The phasing plan proposed by the design team will be considered today by the Great Park Board. If approved, it will be sent to the council for review. If approved by the council a design contract will be negotiated – based on the phasing plan – and that would need council approval.
Already, though, the design studio at the old base is preparing to detail the park’s schematics and construction plans. Gaffen said the studio has had about 60 employees and in the next two years will include 300 to 400 employees because of the increased workload.
“We’re all jazzed,” Smith said. “The work is going to ramp up and it’ll be very exciting.”




Posted by M at 05:03:38 | Permalink | No Comments »