April 5, 2013
Competing India Basin Shoreline Plan: A 15-Acre Adventure Park
As we first reported earlier this week, the 15 acre parcel of San Francisco Bay front property which is in foreclosure and scheduled to hit courthouse steps this month sits at the center of the former San Francisco Redevelopment Agency’s plan for a major mixed-use development and new India Basin Shoreline neighborhood.
But there is a competing vision for the site: a 15-acre San Francisco Adventure Park (click on the proposed park design to enlarge):
With funding from the EPA, the San Francisco Parks Alliance has spent the past two years conceptualizing an open space alternative for the site as a part of San Francisco’s Blue Greenway Program, calling for the transformation of the southeastern waterfront into a world-class series of parks and trails woven through industry and new development.
With an aquatic dog park, mountain biking, bouldering, bonfire pits, boat launches, an exercise circuit, serpentine grasslands, skating, and parkour facilities amongst other planned features, the proposed adventure park would diversify the recreation options for San Francisco citizens, relieve pressure on our natural areas and open spaces, and host larger scale activities that cannot occur or are damaging to other San Francisco Parks.
Once again, the site of the proposed Adventure Park, or mixed-use neighborhood, is currently scheduled to hit the courthouse steps in two weeks. And as always, we’ll keep you posted and plugged-in.
∙ San Francisco's Great Blue Greenway Vision And Interconnected Plans [SocketSite]
∙ 15 Acres Of San Francisco Bay Front Property Up For Grabs [SocketSite]
First Published: April 5, 2013 12:00 PM
Comments from "Plugged In" Readers
Uh, cuz we're just awash in housing opportunities?
How are people supposed to get to this ultra remote (for SF parks) park?
Posted by: Bob at April 5, 2013 12:28 PM
"How are people supposed to get to this ultra remote (for SF parks) park?"
You can get to this area currently by taking the 19 or 44 buses. It will also be easily accessible to the people who live in Bayview-Hunters Point. They after all too do live in the city...
BTW, humans don't have to inhabit every single piece of empty land.
Posted by: Willow at April 5, 2013 12:49 PM
I say, smush the two plans together. Housing! Parks! Retail! Office!
Posted by: Patrick at April 5, 2013 1:33 PM
I find it troubling that this design concept wall the park off from Innes, assuming a double row of what appears to be low scale housing development served only but what appears to be a local serving ring road. In this neighborhood, I would want to make sure that any large scale public investment has lots of eyes on it, and more permeability from Innes would certainly help. When the Navy Yard gets going, Innes is going to be a more important corridor, and not just the dead end it is today.
Posted by: curmudgeon at April 5, 2013 2:17 PM
This Blue Greenway thing would be immensely cool if it really happened. From the Giants project in Mission Bay to via Pier 70 to this "Adventure Park" and why not connect it all the way down to Candlestick Point if they're gonna do something real with that.
But it's gonna take a serious effort by the SFPD. Anything within a quarter mile of the Bay needs to be a heavily patrolled zero-tolerance zone, otherwise it's naive to think that "regular folks" will go there for recreation.
As it is right now, the new bike path along Terry Francois is a magnet for sketchy activity after dark with drug deals going down in relatively plain view in cars parked on TF. The cops are never there except for traffic control before/after Giants games and the area is very poorly lit. Car break-ins are common too.
Until Mission Bay is cleaned up, why even bother with this Blue Greenway further south?
Posted by: formidable doer of the nasty at April 5, 2013 2:36 PM
Those are important concerns curmudgeon and formidable doer of the nasty. Anything that can be done to facilitate "self surveillance" will be more sustainable than increasing the burden on the SFPD. It is possible that the project sponsor here expects that the park will be closed at night which is kind of a shame since the bayfront can be enjoyed at nighttime.
Municipalities around the bay are already stinging from overbuilding and not being able to maintain what is built. Libraries, police stations, community centers, etc. that were funded by voter initiatives now sit mothballed. Lets make sure that the city has the ability to not only build this but to keep it clean and operational.
Posted by: The Milkshake of Despair at April 5, 2013 3:23 PM
at 1st i thought adverture park meant something Like "great america" . Where is the adventure in this park? not that an amusement park is an adventure either
Posted by: spencer at April 5, 2013 4:01 PM
It would be cool to have an amusement park there. Maybe not the greatest use of the location, but...
Posted by: lyqwyd at April 5, 2013 4:23 PM
It's called Golden Gate Park.
Posted by: sf at April 5, 2013 8:58 PM
Drug deals on Terry Francois? Count me skeptical. I ride my bike thereabouts all the time, including dark times.
On the other hand, further south, past Heron Head, it is a different story entirely. Would not go there, chums.
Posted by: lark at April 5, 2013 9:29 PM
The amusement park could be transit oriented with ground floor retail... or something.
Posted by: Joel at April 6, 2013 12:43 PM
The scale of this park is out of whack, there are several acres of parks already planned on the former shipyard all along the waterfront that actually have money dedicated to their construction. This park is being proposed on private property. As is Rec & Park can barely maintain their existing inventory of parks. Whoever designed this needs to more realistic about the cost of maintenance, grading and acquisition. I think a smaller scale waterfront park mixed with more development and retail makes sense. Pretty pics alone do not make a Plan.
Posted by: Janet at April 8, 2013 9:02 AM