Proposition B: Does Rec and Parks really need it?

A plan to redevelop Coit Tower and install a soccer field in Golden Gate park has sparked controversy among environmentally friendly San Franciscans.

Proposition B as it is known has come under fire from Aaron Peskin, former president of the Board of Supervisors, the San Francisco Tenants Union (SFTU) and the Haight-Ashbury Neighborhood Council (HANC).

The plan would see the city spend more than $600,000 annually to repair the murals and maintain the structure of San Francisco landmark and tourist attraction Coit Tower.

But it is a proposed renovation to soccer fields on the West End of Golden Gate Park that has proved more controversial. Under Prop B, seven acres of artificial turf and 150,000 watts of light will shine every night of the year until 10 p.m.

The renovation is a joint initiative between the Recreation and Park Department and the non-profit City Fields Foundation that will cost $13.2 million. It is the overlap between public and private sector investment that has many up in arms with SFTU Manager Ted Gullicksen saying public parks should be for the public.

“Privatization of the parks and using them as fundraising for private parties and that sort of stuff is a huge concern,” said Gullicksen.

HANC Director Michel Welch agreed but said her organization also opposed the construction of a soccer complex in Golden Gate Park for its impact on the environment.

“It is simply an opportunity for the current Rec and Park administration to further its goal of commercializing our parks,” Welch said. “The western end of Golden Gate Park is supposed to be “wild and natural” as set forth in the Master Plan. Artificial turf and stadium lights do not qualify in this case.”

“The Sierra Club and Audubon Society have also worked to defeat the use of artificial turf and stadium lights,” she said.

Former District Three Supervisor and President of the Board of Supervisors Aaron Peskin have been campaigning against the huge sum of money earmarked for the project.

“It is among a litany of things that show Rec and Park are not listening to neighbors and voters,” Peskin said.

“Rec and Parks have not spent approximately half of the $185 million from 2008.”

That $185 million was set aside to allowed Rec and Parks to renovate nine city parks.

But for all the political talk, it remains unclear exactly where local residents stand on the development with many finding themselves more opposed to the lights than the environmental impact or public/private overlap.

Local resident and University of San Francisco (USF) student Marisela Castaneda said she prefers the synthetic turf, but not the lights.  “I think if they want to convert the field to turf, that’s fine but I think they don’t need lights to improve the field,” Castaneda said.

“If they want to improve the field, the lights are a different component.”

Another local resident and USF student, Vincente Patino said he used to play at the Beach Chalet Fields when he was a child.

A previous field he used to play on in Crocker Amazon Playing in South San Francisco has been renovated with synthetic turf and lights across a very large area.

“I was nostalgic for the old grass fields, but it was actually really good when we went to play on it,” Patino said.

“I had no complaints except that when you fell it hurt a little more, but the facilities were nice and clean to play on.”

Patino does not support the development because of his nostalgia for the old grass fields, but says he has never seen them properly maintained.

He also understands there are concerns about covering such a large area in plastic.

“One of the concerns is that they think it’s going to get really hot and not absorb the heat and natural grass because it’s just plastic, “ he said. “If the sun gets hot and melts the plastic, it gets admitted in the air.”

“Another concern is the flood lights, the big lights that will shine on field, and that could create a pollution as well.”

“I don’t think the disastrous effects that would come with turf grass are all that bad, but I think the flood lighting might be a problem just for the folks who live around it.”

The San Francisco Chronicle reported $195 million will be given to the city’s parks, with $9 million being set aside for Golden Gate Park and $12 million going to community nominated projects.