Drive-in Update: More jobs, more expensive housing and water

If you have not been out to the Bayfront lately here is a photo of the big 301 Airport Blvd. project's progress.  Suffice it to say it is rolling along.  With B'game real estate prices up more than 25% year-over-year and rents up about 14% (see the post directly below this one) it would appear that forces are in place to keep us on that trajectory.  Here is the next big demand driver.

Of course there are no new water sources for any of this and, in fact, the Chronicle just reported

Water bills in San Francisco are set to rise steadily over the next four years, after the approval of a rate schedule by the city’s Public Utilities Commission.  The city’s combined bill for water and sewer services will climb by an average of 8.4 percent, or around $10, each year through 2022, according to the commission.

So you know we are not far behind since we all feed off of Hetch Hetchy which they control.  Build it into your family budget now.

Comments

[Steve Kassel]

The state's water problem isn't that we don't have enough rainfall and snowpack. The problem is that we don't store enough of the runoff.

We know which side of the aisle rejects all water storage.

[Joe]

Yep. Right on. There is a little money for repairing dams and reservoirs. A sliver for desalination plants as noted by the Mercury News in January:

California water officials have approved $34.4 million in grants to eight desalination projects across the state, including one in the East Bay city of Antioch, as part of an effort to boost the water supply in the wake of the state’s historic, five-year drought.

The money comes from Proposition 1, a water bond passed by state voters in November 2014 during the depths of the drought, and it highlights a new trend in purifying salty water for human consumption: only one of the projects is dependent on the ocean.
-----------------
And $100 billion for a railroad...... go figure.

[[email protected]]

How long has that drive in been empty?

I believe a minimum of 45 years.
The first movies I ever saw was there.
Remember seeing two movies on the same evening?
Intermissions?
I saw Mary Poppins and some really scary Don Knott's movie that had blood on piano keys, and Garden Shears stuck in a Portrait.

[Steve Kassel]

I moved to San Mateo County in 1985 and the drive-in was definitely operating.

[Steve Kassel]

I want to see a Ballot Initiative for ending the Hi Speed Rail completely. I contacted one conservative group, about doing so and the response of the organization's president to me was, "Got $3,000,000?".

[resident]

https://www.sfgate.com/news/article/Burlingame-s-drive-in-days-at-turning-point-3131486.php

March of 1997 was near the end. 21 years is not quite 45 years.

[Jennifer]

I'm fairly sure the facility was in business roughly from 1965-2001

[hollyroller]

Being the only Drive-In Space, the last Drive-In within California, you would think that some wealthy people from Silicon Valley/Hollywood would be able to make a Boutique Film space as a Drive-In.

[Laura]

Wow, didn't even know this was in the works! Why not stop the State mandated construction instead! Coming in the near future, we will no longer be able to shower and do a load of laundry in the same day.

http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2018/06/07/tammy-bruce-californias-new-water-rules-are-making-people-flee-golden-state.html

[BillyGBob]

Material generated by a conspiracy-theory-happy blogger, quoted by the Washington Times, and routed through Fox News warrants a basic amount of scrutiny, and this one is no different. The bill in question does not regulate individuals and makes no references to specific indoor uses (such as showers/laundry/etc). To quote the SJ Mercury-News: "Standards will be based on a formula that is made up of three main factors: an allowance of 55 gallons per person per day for indoor water use — dropping to 50 gallons by 2030; a yet-to-be determined amount for residential outdoor use that will vary depending on regional climates; and a standard for water loss due to leak rates in water system pipes."

[Peter Garrison]

Cancel HSR and build dams.

[Steve Kassel]

Virtually every item in that Fox News article is false. Completely false. Publishing crap like that is truly incredible and anything ever said on ZeroHedge is ALWAYS a lie.

[Joe]

I like the Journal's quip about Moonbeam's latest restrictions: "We hope Californian's like their French baths". :-)

The SacBee did a tortured denial of the impact of the limits:

Under the bills Brown signed, individual water agencies will be required to factor in the 55-gallon target into their water-efficiency goals, but it's just one part of a utility's conservation calculations.

State regulators in consultation with local water agencies also will set limits on how much water can be used to water lawns and fill swimming pools. Outdoor use accounts for the lion's share of total residential consumption in much of California.

But those outdoor standards will vary greatly from one district to the next. The legislation allows for places like Sacramento with comparatively large yards and hot, dry summers to use more water outdoors than in foggy coastal regions where yards are small and cool weather lessens the need to water as much.

Gomberg's home in the Bay Area uses 25 to 35 gallons of water per person daily, even with "a toilet that isn't ... even as efficient as some of the newer models, I'm embarrassed to say." (The more low-flow toilets I have put in the more water I have had to use since they don't work)

Gomberg said the 55-gallon figure isn't new. State lawmakers set it as the standard for indoor use almost 10 years ago, an amount that is greater than what's allowed in many European countries. (PSST: LIKE FRANCE?? :-)

The rest of the excuses are here:

http://www.sacbee.com/news/state/california/water-and-drought/article212605634.html

But there can be no doubt about the bottom line: we cannot build tons of new commercial and residential space AND have enough water. Won't work. Only a dishonest politician will say differently.

[Here comes Facebook (VR) to Burlingame.]

"The SF Business Times reports that Facebook has leased the entire Burlingame Point waterfront office development.
Burlingame Pointe looks to be a pretty stunning office project when complete, taking advantage of proximity to the SF Bay in a way few developments on the Peninsula do. The 750,000 sf project was once heavily rumored to be slotted for occupancy by the Chinese ECommerce behemoth, AliBaba. Apparently, Facebook intends to place its Oculus VR group in the new facility." -Opinion of Value blog email.

[hillsider]

Unlike the idiotic supervisors in SF, I hope Facebook puts in a HUGE, FREE employee cafeteria otherwise "you will never eat lunch in this town again"

[Steve Kassel]

Hillsider, you are right on both counts. The SF Board of Stupidvisors conveniently forgets that Facebook and others with mega cafeterias employ a huge number of well paid people to plan, cook and feed thousands of employees.