THE DAILY KERNEL

After viewing this post, TDK Reader DP makes a request:

The proposed parking near the archeological site of El Presidio de San Francisco is a severe negative impact on the special nature of the historic site.

Are you able to describe this aspect in more detail?

Yes, I think I can describe what people may be upset about. The archeological site of El Presidio de San Francisco is the seminal archeological feature of the Presidio historical period beginning in 1776, and a key feature of the National Historic Landmark District. Page 35 of the Main Post SEIS envisions a restored El Presidio site as a major historical element of the main parade ground and, I believe rightly, a major visitor attraction.

Unfortunately, other leased buildings crowd this particular site. My understanding is that Building 39 is leased to a tenant for at least another 30 years and their lease agreement includes parking within a certain distance of the building.

How does this parking impact the El Presidio site? Two proposed future parking areas for this building are shown on Page 27 of the Main Post SEIS. Page 95 of the document shows a table indicating that there will be 75 parking spaces at the El Presidio site for Alternatives 2 (the Trust preferred alternative) and 2A. 

The figures on Page 35 and Page 27 are not at the same scale. It is a little difficult to make out how the parking translates from Page 27 onto Page 35, but here’s a go at it. Parking is allocated directly adjacent to the most archeologically sensitive site on the Presidio and ironically, it’s not even for visitors to the site! (Maybe, they can squeeze in.) The parking area largely eliminates the intimate plaza, and brings noise and traffic almost on top of a culturally precious area. Clearly, reality is not quite the vision depicted on Page 35.

The Trust says they would prefer not to have the parking in that spot, but that their hands are tied. (I thought they were in charge.) They will try to get rid of the parking in 30 years, or so. Maybe.

Parking rules!

–Doug Kern

Tags: El Presidio site, History, main post, parking, SEIS

Tags: Conflict, History, New Construction by Doug
1 Comment »

This past evening, Monday 28th, the Presidio Trust held a workshop to discuss the transportation, parking and traffic impacts resulting from the Main Post museum, lodge and theater proposal. The meeting began at 6:30 p.m. and lasted until a little after 9:00 p.m. The meeting was well-attended by the public and Trust staff. I estimate that the crowd was over a hundred people.

Let me commend the Trust staff who led the meeting. They made a Powerpoint presentation, fielded questions and actually responded to the audience in real time. In my own experience the Trust rarely responds to questions in real time at large public meetings. Such a format is difficult to pull off without a reasonable command of the data. The audience asked a lot of detailed questions and made comments. The Trust responded, sometimes acknowledging that the comment was a “good point.” It was conversational, not confrontational. Refreshing.

I left the meeting feeling that transportation impacts had not been fully analyzed, however. Several audience member questions or comments stood out. Here is a small sampling:

• How will large events on the main parade ground add to parking and traffic?
• How will the Girard exit from Doyle Drive impact and add to Presidio cut-through traffic?
• Parking structures attract more cars and have no place in a national park.
• The proposed parking near the archeological site of El Presidio de San Francisco is a severe negative impact on the special nature of the historic site.
• Visitation and the resulting traffic/parking problems may be grossly underestimated.
• Prior to pushing ahead with a preferred alternative, planners should better understand the greater impacts to surrounding neighborhoods.
• How will the Trust expand services such as MUNI, when MUNI is considering reductions in service to the Presidio?
• The Trust proposes new signaling as mitigation for poor level of service at gateway Presidio intersections as traffic increases. What are the issues and costs of those proposed mitigations to the local neighborhoods? Higher traffic speeds and flow resulting in more pedestrian accidents?

I learned that there is a 217-page Appendix A to the SEIS, specifically on transportation, that was not included in the printed version of the SEIS. This document includes level of service reports for existing and future conditions at various intersections for all of the alternatives.

This meeting was a healthy exchange of information on the specific and highly important transportation component of a very controversial proposal. I hope the communication lines stay open.

–Doug Kern

 

 

Tags: main post, parking, SEIS, traffic, transportation

Tags: New Construction by Doug
1 Comment »