Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > California > San Francisco - Oakland
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 04-19-2011, 11:59 AM
 
Location: Oakland, CA
28,226 posts, read 36,923,038 times
Reputation: 28563

Advertisements

John King has an interesting artiucle on the development plans for Treasure Island. Treasure Island: ambitious plan for development

10 years ago this would have been my *dream* location. Then I came back to reality:
  • no transit
  • no amenities yet
  • long development plan
  • annoying routes in and out
I do find it odd it has taken so long to get this developed. The liquefaction factor can't be any worse than Foster City or Emeryville.

A former co-worker lives on T.I. and grew up there. Besides the gas station, you have to leave the island to get anything! I can't fathom that. I am hoping they finish up that grocery store in phase 1 of the project.

I am impressed with the goals for affordable housing, most in SF isn't in an ideal location or close to Downtown. Treasure Island has good potential.

It might be the only transit oriented development plans that is actually a faster commute to downtown SF than West Oakland. (I find it hysterical that taking transit from Oakland is closer to downtown SF than many actual SF neighborhoods.)

Anyway, good read! Can't wait to see this finished along with the Transbay Terminal. Back when I was "life planning" at 10 years ago, I thought I'd live in one of these 2 transit oriented developments. But, the pace has been far too slow. These days I changed my tune, and decided Oakland is a better fit and a lot further along in the subsequent 10 years.

Here is another link on the transit plan: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/articl...MN4G1J0RGQ.DTL

Last edited by jade408; 04-19-2011 at 12:28 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 04-19-2011, 12:16 PM
 
Location: Los Altos Hills, CA
36,666 posts, read 67,617,460 times
Reputation: 21255
Quote:
Originally Posted by jade408 View Post
John King has an interesting artiucle on the development plans for Treasure Island. Treasure Island: ambitious plan for development

10 years ago this would have been my *dream* location. Then I came back to reality:
  • no transit
  • no amenities yet
  • long development plan
  • annoying routes in and out
I do find it odd it has taken so long to get this developed. The liquefaction factor can't be any worse than Foster City or Emeryville.

A former co-worker lives on T.I. and grew up there. Besides the gas station, you have to leave the island to get anything! I can't fathom that. I am hoping they finish up that grocery store in phase 1 of the project.

I am impressed with the goals for affordable housing, most in SF isn't in an ideal location or close to Downtown. Treasure Island has good potential.

It might be the only transit oriented development plans that is actually a faster commute to downtown SF than West Oakland. (I find it hysterical that taking transit from Oakland is closer to downtown SF than many actual SF neighborhoods.)

Anyway, good read! Can't wait to see this finished along with the Transbay Terminal. Back when I was "life planning" at 10 years ago, I thought I'd live in one of these 2 transit oriented developments. But, the pace has been far too slow. These days I changed my tune, and decided Oakland is a better fit and a lot further along in the subsequent 10 years.
We really drag our feet on everything nowadays.

And I can't stand the laughable part of the plan that acts like theyre returning part of the island to their natural habitat as some sort of open space-HELLO? ITS ALL MANMADE!

I say go big or go home.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-19-2011, 12:30 PM
 
Location: Oakland, CA
28,226 posts, read 36,923,038 times
Reputation: 28563
Quote:
Originally Posted by 18Montclair View Post
We really drag our feet on everything nowadays.

And I can't stand the laughable part of the plan that acts like theyre returning part of the island to their natural habitat as some sort of open space-HELLO? ITS ALL MANMADE!

I say go big or go home.
I know seriously. If we return it to the natural habitat, it'll just sink into the bay. :P

I'd like to see more development, but I understand there is a lot to work out around traffic.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-19-2011, 02:15 PM
 
Location: South Korea
5,242 posts, read 13,088,509 times
Reputation: 2958
California and the Bay Area are anti-growth--unlike a lot of states, anyone is allowed to have a say in the undertaking of a major project, which slows everything down--but SF really takes it to a whole new level. Plus TI has a lot of toxic Naval stuff that needs to be cleaned up.

And Treasure Island is too foggy and windy for me. The only good thing about going there is getting a nighttime view of downtown SF if it's not too foggy. I went to see July 4th fireworks there once and we couldn't see anything through the dense layer of fog, and it was freezing out.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-19-2011, 02:56 PM
 
Location: yeah
5,717 posts, read 16,362,886 times
Reputation: 2975
Yeah, living on reclaimed land with limited access and a huge earthquake overdue....sounds great.....
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-19-2011, 10:26 PM
 
1,650 posts, read 3,521,810 times
Reputation: 1142
That island is a really depressing place.... Cold, windy with dilapidated housing.. They should put a proper safe on-ramp to bay bridge from the island. Right now you merge to high speed traffic from a stop sign and could very well get killed in the process.

There's so much abandoned industrial land in Central waterfront and BV/HP that can be developed... The Potrero projects can be rebuilt to much denser housing... There also seems to be lot of wasterd land in Brisbane...Why bother with treasure island?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Settings
X
Data:
Loading data...
Based on 2000-2022 data
Loading data...

123
Hide US histogram


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > California > San Francisco - Oakland
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top