SAN FRANCISCO: 1 dissenting voice holds up park upgrade

San Francisco Chronicle ^ | 7/25/12 | C.W. Nevius

[SmithL]

The renovation of Lafayette Park in Pacific Heights looked like one of those rare San Francisco projects that everyone liked.

It will receive $10 million as part of a voter-approved parks bond. The neighborhood is so supportive it raised an extra $500,000 for a nature-themed playground. Even the city's famously fractious dog-walkers are happy - among the six community outreach meetings, one was devoted specifically to the designated dog area.

The bathrooms will be renovated, paths will be repaved, tennis courts resurfaced, and a new picnic area will have an overlook with killer city views. One quarter of the park has been demolished and is under construction. Everything looked ready for a spring ribbon-cutting. But it's become a victim of the famously liberal policy of allowing appeals for every project. We're the city that can't say yes. Shannon Gallagher, an attorney who lives across the street from the park, is a perfect example. She filed a complaint with the San Francisco Board of Appeals on July 17 that has effectively halted construction and could increase the cost of the renovation by $10,000 a day. The City Charter allows for the appeal, and the earliest a hearing can be scheduled is Sept. 12.

"I don't want to have an argument," Gallagher insists. "I want the city to do its job."

It is another of the city's tyranny-of-the-few moments. With a working knowledge of the system and a little well-placed paperwork - building permit reviews must be filed within 15 days of the issuance of a permit - it is possible for one person to pay a $175 fee and delay the entire process.

"I would say that in comparison to other cities, this is pretty rare,"..."In other cities and states that I'm familiar with, the issue is zoning. Once you get a building permit, you're done."

[Navy Patriot]

The Chronicle could solve this overnight by simply publishing Shannon's picture, home address, phone number and birth date on the front page.

It is tolerant San Francisco, after all.

[RC2]

And the spending goes on. $10 Million on a park in these times? They need to stop spending. We need to follow the money on this one.

[livius]

An attorney. Quelle surprise.

This is a lovely park in an area that doesn’t have a lot of parks. It actually was getting overrun with dogs to the point that you couldn’t just lie there and get a tiny sunburn on the one sunny afternoon of the year (an SF tradition) and you couldn’t take your kids into the playground because it was full of dog poo.

The renovation was supposed to make it usable for everybody. But I guess Shannon (this is a she-Shannon) doesn’t want that. It’s hard to say exactly what she wants, in fact.

[Kartographer]

If she was a member of the ‘Tea Party’ this would have already be done as well as all posted on line and flyers pasted out across the city.

[Robert A Cook PE]

From the SFGATE’s story ...
“While many see Gallagher as holding the park project hostage, the city has gone out of its way to make sure that residents like her have a system where their concerns are heard.

And she has a long list of issues with the renovation.

She argues against “the destruction of historically significant artifacts,” when that issue was given a “categorical exemption” by city planning, even though a historical review found no problems with the project. She claims a 4,000-square-foot cement pad for the picnic area was never mentioned, when it has been a part of the design for at least two years. She doesn’t think there’s enough lighting, and wheelchair access is on the wrong side of the park. She also claims planners “falsified documents.”

All of which would have been good points to raise at public meetings.

“I attended some of them,” she said.”

Sounds like not only is she wrong about the purpose or intents of her complaints, she is wrong about the specific facts of her complaint.

Something else is going on here with this lawyer. Extortion to the company trying to do the work? Opposition to any construction at all?

[matt04]

She is a liberal. She wants to get her 15 minutes to show how much she cares about the blades of grass that would be killed by pouring the concrete picnic area.

[Michael.SF.]

The City is full of wasted money on BS PC projects. Case in Point:

San Francisco Fire Department Auxiliary Water Supply System

This pump station was built after the 1906 earthquake and is now being retrofitted and upgraded. They are obligated by the city to save the "historical structure" to do so poses many engineering requirements that are getting very expensive.

At a meeting I attended, one of the city leaders demanded that money be saved. In all seriousness he said:

"We need to use the current pumps and save some money."

The pumps are from 1908 and are obsolete, but this clown wants to save $400-650,000 on a $24,000,000 project. This system is designed to supply sea water in an emergency for fire water use. Yet he wants to use 100 year old pumps. No one argued with him and the engineer was told to investigate this possibility.

[Drill Thrawl]

This quote from the nitwit is priceless.

"Angela Bauman of Bauman Landscape & Construction, which the city hired for the project, says the company is losing as much as $10,000 a day in fees for leased equipment, salary for on-site foremen and an office trailer, all sitting idle.

"I am sure there are ways around that," Gallagher says. " The queen hath spoken and thus it shall be. Reality be damned.

[Drill Thrawl]

Here’s a priceless item from the sidebar of the article. http://www.sfgate.com/bayarea/article/Human-waste-shuts-down-BART-escalators-3735981.php

[livius]

All of SF is populated by raving loony liberals (which is why I don’t live there anymore) so I don’t know what her thing is. Perhaps her 15 minutes and perhaps she’s just a nutcase.

I can’t think that she’d get any financial compensation out of this, but on the other hand, it’s possible that she’s opposed to anything at all happening there. If she had had serious concerns, she could have attended the meetings and raised these points, but she didn’t.

One thing that always bothered me about that park was a horrible incident in the early 70s, when a toddler was kidnapped from the park, tied to a board and stoned to death by a couple of 10-12 yr old “free children.” There was a large single-mother hippie population in the apartments and houses across the street, and they let their kids run wild. Mom was totally stunned when her son and his friend were identified as the killers, because she had been off doing yoga (IRRC) while he was killing a small child in the basement garage.

[Bon of Babble]

Bleecchhh!!

Thanks for that link (I think).

I ride the BART all the time when I’m in SF and a lot of them are constantly out of service.

Geez, I never want to step on one of those escalators again!!

[Prince of Space]

We used to take our dog to that park when we lived in our garden apartment on California St. @ Buchanan in the late 70s. It’s beautiful!

[Mr. K]

$10 millions for a park? wow- they must be rolling in dough

and it is an EXISTING park- no need to buy land and install plumbing ... it just UPGRADES

Must be nice to have extra money just laying around