Dr. Manhattan I presume?
An acquaintance of mine, a transportation planning consultant, recently told me about a friend of his, and ex-co-worker in San Francisco who is also a transportation planner. After a number of years working on projects in the Bay Area, this planner moved to New York City after getting a job there. While working on a project in downtown Brooklyn, he attended a public meeting where someone stood up and said “stop trying to turn us into Manhattan!”
Proof that Manhattanization is in the eye of the beholder. Actually, while I was living in New York, Donald Trump attempted to build a tall residential building in Mid-town Manhattan and the neighborhood came out and effectively blocked the building as well, so it seems that tall buildings are not even appropriated in Manhattan, so perhaps we should change the charge to “Kuala Lumpurification” or “Dubai-ification” where building up appears to be encouraged.
Reading a lot of stories about development around the Bay Area, it becomes clear that while every declares their own city or neighborhood unique and special and therefore unfit for any density (which is usually not high-rises, but 2-4 story apartment buildings). Last Sunday’s Chronicle featured an opinion piece that shamed Alamedans in it’s audacity and fear mongering (It actually used monster-movies as it’s literary motif). Some quick highlights:
A huge, scary monster is growing in San Francisco’s South of Market area. Like an atomically deranged creature from a 1950s horror movie, the first of the Rincon Towers is oozing upward, sucking light from sky and street. Its three-block shadow chills the hearts of all who pass under it, even for a moment.
Bred for expensive, high-density housing in a joint venture by the mad scientists at the Board of Supervisors, the Planning Commission and real estate speculators from San Diego, the black blob makes it obvious that urban planning in San Francisco is run by the Boys from Brazil and architects who used to design sippy cups for Satan.
…
“Manhattanization” made high-rises glamorous. San Francisco’s urban plan ignores a glorious geography in favor of an “interesting” skyline but characterless streets. Sunlight never touches a large portion of downtown sidewalks. …..
Be afraid. Very afraid.
It’s a master stroke of fear and loathing and Alameda’s NIMBY crowd needs to step up to the challenge or be shamed. We can’t afford to let San Franciscans overshadow us with audacious language, spurious claims and me-first. If you read the opinion piece, you’ll notice that SF’s streets never see sunlight, but the Rincon Tower will somehow block the not-seen sunlight. Views of the bay, available to only a few well-to-do folks, will be blocked, but the residents are snobs looking down their noses at the plebes below. Awesome.
With development on my mind, I’ll tell you that the Alameda Democratic Club is having their July meeting next week and the topic is Measure A. The featured speakers are Helen Sause of HOMES and Barbara Kerr of…well Barbara Kerr. The meeting will be held at the Alameda Hospital from 7-9pm. Arrive early to get good seats. More info can be found at the Alameda Democratic Club website once the info has been updated.

Phill Williams
July 6th, 2007 at 10:30 pm
“Manhattanization” is _almost_ appropriate when talking about downtown San Francisco … but in Alameda it’s utterly ridiculous.
I think we should start talking about a different problem — “Los Angelization”. (Or maybe “Orange Countization”?) It’s what happens when everybody’s biggest worry is “Manhattanization”.