Community meeting tonight to discuss whether a skatepark or dog park or something else entirely should go under the freeway next to Zeitgeist

Man, seems like we posted this exact news like a jillion years ago. When will this actually happen???

(Thanks, Devin!)

29 Responses to “Community meeting tonight to discuss whether a skatepark or dog park or something else entirely should go under the freeway next to Zeitgeist”

  1. Tia Farga says:

    This is so not fair! Why do other neighborhoods have to do all the work (and funding + maintenance) themselves (see: DPW Street Parks Program) in order to see changes made to areas neglected by DPW. It’s so wrong because the number one means to funding for SF Street Parks, is through the Community Challenge Grant which gives priority to projects supported by businesses. This area has a lot of businesses which could participate, unlike areas of the City lacking in legitimate businesses for blocks on end.

    The City continues to fund projects in already vibrant areas and leaving blighted neighborhoods behind. :(

    • chumpguy says:

      I live in Western SOMA. There’s not a lot of parks (or any?). What other area has City owned land and demand for more parks?

      Not sure why you think businesses should pay for this, as they already will.

      • Tia Farga says:

        I’m not saying businesses should pay for it. I’m saying that the Community Challenge Grant is more likely to approve a project that is supported by local businesses. By support, I mean that businesses would give their approval for the project and maybe write a letter of support. (The CCG doesn’t really ask for much but when you have little to no businesses around you, it’s a lot.)

        There’s unused DPW land all over town. In neighborhoods where tourists don’t go, neighbors must organize and work very hard for a long time and get very little help from the City or non-profits in order to make the area more useful and pleasant.

        • scum says:

          This land is owned by Cal Trans and will be leased by The City.

          • Tia Farga says:

            That the City will be paying the lease and not neighbors might be even more unfair.

            Anyway, DPW and the Office of Economic and Workforce Development at City and County of San Francisco are organizing – that alone is an enormous service of which other neighborhoods are not privileged to receive.

  2. chumpguy says:

    Sounds reasonable enough, in general. I just know there are no parks in my neighborhood, so this looks like a logical place to put one.

  3. slushed says:

    Water park!

  4. scum says:

    Having animals and kids playing under freeway ramp with all the auto particulates spewing about does not seem like a great idea to me.

    • TJ says:

      Originally there was supposed to be a small playground as well as a basketball court. The City has since removed that feature and replaced it with parking for city service vehicles. I believe that’s mostly what this meeting is about.

      I’m bummed since as others have mentioned there aren’t any other open space areas near this location. Having it be under a freeway ramp isn’t ideal, but it’s what we had available. I’ve spent plenty of time in the zeitgeist biergarden and never was bothered by auto emmisions. And it’s not like people would spend all day there- it’d be a space to get out and stretch, swing across a jungle gym, and generally get outside but without having to make a trip to Dolores or Duboce parks.

      • scum says:

        There is going to be a skatepark, people spend hours at those. The fumes from cars above and at street level will be nasty over time.

      • Tia Farga says:

        Duboce Park is less than .5 miles away
        Patricia’s Green on Octavia is less than .5 miles away.
        Dolores Park is .9 miles away

        I’m not arguing that activating that space is not a good idea. I think what I’m trying to say is that many other neighborhoods are not so privileged. It’s more of a matter of equity.

        • TJ says:

          Patricia’s Green is a traffic median with grass on it.

          If you want more parks in whatever area you’re championing then you should definitely advocate for that. The more parks the better.

          You said:
          “In neighborhoods where tourists don’t go, neighbors must organize and work very hard for a long time and get very little help from the City or non-profits in order to make the area more useful and pleasant”
          That’s actually exactly what neighbors around this park have been doing for what seems like an _ETERNITY_ in order to make this park happen. It seems awfully silly that you’d choose to poo-poo this project on some kind of bizarre sense of inequality.

          • Tia Farga says:

            I’m sure it seems like an eternity to the young and privileged (if you consider Patricia’s Green a mere street median than you are extremely privileged) but to others, it was just yesterday when we were hanging out at Zeitgeist watching the overpass being built. Believe it or not there are San Franciscans who have actually been working (and I mean really doing work, not just b.s.ing) to get more neglected areas improved.

            Like I said, I’m not against activating the space at all. It might be hard for you to wrap your mind around the idea that the world is not black and white. You can still be for something but feel disheartened by the inequity (BTW, joven – equity and equality are two different things. Look it up.)

          • Brillo says:

            They’re redoing Boedekker park in the Tenderloin. Not sure where the funding is from, but that’s an underprivileged neighborhood, right?

          • truth says:

            i think someone is paying Tia Farga a set amount for every time she gets defensive and uses the word ‘privilege’ without actually contributing anything to the conversation. she’s not identifying which neighborhood she claims has had so many people petitioning for a park for several years but still has no outdoor space anywhere nearby. let’s see if it exists, wonder if it’s as densely populated as valencia and duboce?

    • Devin says:

      They did an air quality study and it’s fine. Just build it already.

  5. manfreckles says:

    thought tony hawk already donated 10k towards this skate park…

  6. Putanesca says:

    Skateparks under overpasses are great – look at Burnside and the commando spot in Oakland.

  7. Erik says:

    No reason it can’t be all three.

  8. TinyTim says:

    What we need is another dog park. Let them get all the exercise while the humans stagnate. Skateboarding around dog poop smears, as if there wasn’t enough Hershey droppings all along Market from Valencia and Octavia to 10th Street.

  9. real talk says:

    build a skate PLAZA!! not some old man giant bowl bullshit no one wants to skate

  10. Highway Rob says:

    Neither! Skateboarders & dogs suck! The skaters will be drunk & stoned out and will cause mayhem. Forget the dogs. Too many yuppies and their ugly dogs walking around. Also, we’ll be walking around looking down most of the time stepping over dog poop. No way! Put a garden or some other shit there. Skate & Dog parks suck!

  11. Ι juѕt couldn’t depаrt уouг
    web site prіor to ѕuggesting thаt
    I aсtually loved the usual info a persоn provіde to уouг guests?

    Is going to be bacκ often in ordеr to check οut new posts

    Feel free tο visіt my web-sіte
    - V2 Cigs Orlando

  12. Nude News says:

    Vеry nіce article. Ӏ certаinly apprеcіate this website.
    Keep writing!

    Feel free to visit my pаgе Nude News

  13. In fat no matter if somеone doeѕn’t be awаre of аfterward іts uρ to othеr vіsіtors
    that thеy will help, so here it occurs.

    Feel free to ѕuгf to my blog post camper vans for sale

Leave a Reply

Current month ye@r day *