[Carfreeliving] Treassure Island mass development, green?

[Amber Elizabeth Crabbe]

Treasure Island doesn't HAVE to be inaccessible without a car--there
will be a bike/ped path connecting it to Oakland when the East Span is
complete, and a coalition of advocates are working to get a similar
pathway on the West Span to connect TI (and the East Bay) to the rest of
the City.  See http://www.sfbike.org/?baybridge for more details.

I was on TI for the first time a few weeks ago, and found the whole
thing quite surreal--with a 24-hour human-accessible path, I think it
could be quite a unique place to live car-free, if it's done right.  I
don't know much about it's future wrt water rising, but I don't think
the future of sustainable transportation on TI is hopeless.

Wouldn't it be nice if in addition (or as a substitution) to subsidizing
the ferry service, the developers would be willing to subsidize a
non-polluting, tourist-attracting, right-to-access-providing
bike/ped/maintenance pathway on the west span of the Bay Bridge?

Amber Crabbe

-----Original Message-----
From: Carfreeliving-bounces at livablecity.org
[mailto:Carfreeliving-bounces at livablecity.org] On Behalf Of Jason
Henderson
Sent: Monday, December 19, 2005 10:32 AM
To: Joshua Switzky
Cc: hitesh at sonejifamily.org; carfreeliving at livablecity.org;
Carfreeliving-bounces at livablecity.org
Subject: Re: [Carfreeliving] Treassure Island mass development, green?

I agree with Josh on the wetland/ farming angle. Sticking thousands of 
people on Treasure Island is negligence. This is not real land, and will

get wacked in a few years by sea-level rise. It will not be 
"sustainable" from a transport perspective. The ferry idea is not going 
to cut it. They use a lot of diesel and do not carry a lot of people. 
RM2 made it clear that Muni and other transit agencies were denied funds

while ferries got huge subsidies for carrying far fewer people daily. 
This development will be car dependent and the people out there will get

angry at their mobility situation - and demand more parking in SF.  
Eventually the  "demand" to live on the island village will gradually 
decline and it will be a boondoggle. Or maybe a ghetto.
 How much parking is proposed, by the way? 1:1?

-jh
 

Joshua Switzky wrote:

>
>
>I think John King hit on an important point: no towers should come
close in
>height to the Bay Bridge towers. The bridge is one the most important
>structures and visual symbols of the bay area, and we shouldn't muddle
it
>up with other towers in the bay nearby. I'm not a fan of towers in the
bay
>at all the view from the east bay to SF and vice versa is our postcard
view
>-- the flat expanse of the bay connected by a grand bridge with a city
>rising up dramatically on either side. To stick a bunch of towers in
the
>middle of that, competing with all the other elements, is just
>short-sighted. And in fact, they are not necessary to achieve the
density
>sought, which could be achieved with a few more 8 story buildings.   I
lean
>more to turning the entire island into a wetland wildlife/bird
preserve. I
>do like the organic farming idea.
>-j
>
>
>
>

>             Hitesh Soneji

>             <koolkwote at yahoo.

>             com>
To 
>             Sent by:                  carfreeliving at livablecity.org

>             Carfreeliving-bou
cc 
>             nces at livablecity.

>             org
Subject 
>                                       [Carfreeliving] Treassure Island

>                                       mass development, green?

>             12/16/2005 03:13

>             PM

>

>

>             Please respond to

>             hitesh at sonejifami

>                  ly.org

>

>

>
>
>
>
>you guys see this?
>
>http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2005/12/15/DDG7DG7HVP1
.DTL
>
>
>__________________________________________________
>Do You Yahoo!?
>Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
>http://mail.yahoo.com
>
>_______________________________________________
>Carfreeliving at livablecity.org mailing list
>to facilitate and promote car-free living in SF
>To unsubscribe:
>mailto:Carfreeliving-request at livablecity.org?subject=unsubscribe
>or, for all options, go to:
>http://livablecity.org/mailman/listinfo/carfreeliving_livablecity.org
>
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>Carfreeliving at livablecity.org mailing list 
>to facilitate and promote car-free living in SF
>To unsubscribe:
mailto:Carfreeliving-request at livablecity.org?subject=unsubscribe
>or, for all options, go to:
>http://livablecity.org/mailman/listinfo/carfreeliving_livablecity.org
>
>
>  
>

-- 
Jason Henderson 
San Francisco CA 
(415)-255-8136
jhenders at sbcglobal.net