3 ms·

So 712 apartments, 212-car basement garage, and “additional parking will be included for 327 bicycles”. Even right out of college, I would not have purchased o

by amluto 4y ago

So 712 apartments, 212-car basement garage, and “additional parking will be included for 327 bicycles”. Even right out of college, I would not have purchased or rented a place in SF above ground level with no back yard, no car parking, no bike parking, and no good access to transit. Good luck to the developers, but I think this is a mistake. If they increased it to, say, 1000 bikes worth of parking, maybe.

bifrost 4y ago
It'll be no bikes worth of parking when the thieves find out where this is.
- amluto 4y ago
  Secure bike parking underground isn’t that hard. You can have locked doors, gates, and cameras. And possibly even 24/7 attendant coverage. It’s the bikes parked outside that will disappear fast.
  - bifrost 4y ago
    Nope, addicts break into buildings routinely and steal bikes from "Secured" parking.
    - amluto 4y ago
      A 712-unit building can afford real security. This is solvable, even if it takes some time, and the developer and the HoA have a strong incentive to solve it.
      - bifrost 4y ago
        Its not solved now in larger buildings in SF. As long as addiction and bicycle theft remains unchecked, having "bike parking" is not viable. Also, Biking to downtown from that area is probably unfeasable for most people. I've been biking here my whole life and even though I live midway on that commute I would never want to do it. I only know ONE single person who ever did it, and he basically did it to make the spandex biker crowd look weak. San Francisco is not and will never be a city that bikers do well in.
        timr 4y ago
        I find this conversation hilarious, because I have the "unique" experience of getting locked out of my SF building in the middle of the night, because a drug addict LITERALLY CUT THE STEEL GATE OPEN, and my neighbor "fixed" the problem with a bike lock. That said, SOMA is a bit different than outer sunset. But still, folks who underestimate the resourcefulness of a drug addict are underestimating the power of nature itself.
        bifrost 4y ago
        Preston and Haney have ushered in the tenderloinization of the rest of the city. Outer Sunset now has encampments and fenty folders, if we don't do something to reign in the DSA we're going to be needing a lot more than bike locks.
jabbany 4y ago
> Even right out of college, I would not have purchased or rented a place in SF above ground level with no back yard, no car parking, no bike parking, and no good access to transit. Eh, ultimately doesn't seem like an issue to worry about. I'm pretty sure given the right price, there are plenty of people more than happy to overlook these inconveniences. If the developers think it makes financial sense to build as is, who are we to stop them ;-) People can adapt to all kinds of limitations as the need develops. Pretty sure if the demand for bike parking goes up, there will be people lining up to convert their car parking into bike parking for the right price. Same with public transit, if you really had 700+ voting households that are starting to demand public transportation, I would think the demand would be addressed in a reasonable timeframe.

by amluto 4y ago

bifrost 4y ago

It'll be no bikes worth of parking when the thieves find out where this is.

amluto 4y ago
Secure bike parking underground isn’t that hard. You can have locked doors, gates, and cameras. And possibly even 24/7 attendant coverage. It’s the bikes parked outside that will disappear fast.
- bifrost 4y ago
  Nope, addicts break into buildings routinely and steal bikes from "Secured" parking.
  - amluto 4y ago
    A 712-unit building can afford real security. This is solvable, even if it takes some time, and the developer and the HoA have a strong incentive to solve it.
    - bifrost 4y ago
      Its not solved now in larger buildings in SF. As long as addiction and bicycle theft remains unchecked, having "bike parking" is not viable. Also, Biking to downtown from that area is probably unfeasable for most people. I've been biking here my whole life and even though I live midway on that commute I would never want to do it. I only know ONE single person who ever did it, and he basically did it to make the spandex biker crowd look weak. San Francisco is not and will never be a city that bikers do well in.
      - timr 4y ago
        I find this conversation hilarious, because I have the "unique" experience of getting locked out of my SF building in the middle of the night, because a drug addict LITERALLY CUT THE STEEL GATE OPEN, and my neighbor "fixed" the problem with a bike lock. That said, SOMA is a bit different than outer sunset. But still, folks who underestimate the resourcefulness of a drug addict are underestimating the power of nature itself.
        bifrost 4y ago
        Preston and Haney have ushered in the tenderloinization of the rest of the city. Outer Sunset now has encampments and fenty folders, if we don't do something to reign in the DSA we're going to be needing a lot more than bike locks.

jabbany 4y ago

> Even right out of college, I would not have purchased or rented a place in SF above ground level with no back yard, no car parking, no bike parking, and no good access to transit. Eh, ultimately doesn't seem like an issue to worry about. I'm pretty sure given the right price, there are plenty of people more than happy to overlook these inconveniences. If the developers think it makes financial sense to build as is, who are we to stop them ;-) People can adapt to all kinds of limitations as the need develops. Pretty sure if the demand for bike parking goes up, there will be people lining up to convert their car parking into bike parking for the right price. Same with public transit, if you really had 700+ voting households that are starting to demand public transportation, I would think the demand would be addressed in a reasonable timeframe.