This is what it looks like:
Posts Tagged ‘buildings’
Oh, did I say “political fundraiser?” What I meant to say was event, or better yet, soiree. Never call a fundraiser a fundraiser – that’s the rule.
Anywho, what you do is start off by saying that the official bird of Frisco is no longer the California Quail, it’s the crane. The construction crane! (‘Cause you don’t know to call it a tower crane.) And then you laugh at your own “joke.” And then you blow a few dog whistles, you know, scary names like CHRIS DALY or AARON PESKIN afore you remind one and all how critical their “support” is to you and how, basically, all of us in this room are on the same team.
That’s how it works.
In closing, build, build, build.
I’ll say this – Auto Row aint what it used to be.
This has been The Historic Clocks of Van Ness Avenue, Chapter One: As Seen from Olive Alley.
Uh Oh, Now There’s a Lawsuit Against the City for Recent Ellis Act Legislation – SFAA & realtors Fighting UsWednesday, January 29th, 2014
Read it and weep, San Francisco. We’re getting sued:
“For Immediate Release, January 29, 2014:
San Francisco Housing Associations File Lawsuit to Block Anti-Family Legislation
San Francisco – On Tuesday January 28, 2014, the San Francisco Apartment Association, Coalition for Better Housing and the San Francisco Association of REALTORS® filed a lawsuit challenging the legality of legislation known as the Avalos Ellis Act and Merger Prohibition Legislation.
The legislation was passed by the Board of Supervisors and signed into law by Mayor Ed Lee in violation of building owners’ rights under the state law known as the Ellis Act.
The legislation prohibits owners of multi-unit buildings from combining units in a building for ten years following an Ellis Act eviction or for five years following an owner-move in eviction.
On a practical level, the legislation prevents families who own a building from creating a home that meets their needs. For example, the legislation prevents a family from combining two small units into a larger one to provide a home for a growing family. Couples with young children often find themselves in need of additional space they did not anticipate when they purchased a rental building, yet the legislation punishes them.
Only 2 percent of new housing built in San Francisco since 2001 are single-family homes that provide adequate space for families, often with multiple generations living together. Lack of adequate housing to meet the needs of families has contributed San Francisco losing 5,278 people younger than 18 between 2000 and 2010, according to the census.
“The San Francisco Association of REALTORS® supports the rights of private property owners for the free use of their property as their needs suit them. This legislation only exacerbates the problems families face in finding adequate housing and drives out the families that have created the diversity we want and celebrate in our city,” said Walt Baczkowski, CEO of the San Francisco Association of Realtors.
Because so few single family homes are being constructed, families rely on improving buildings they own, including tenancies in common to add living space. This legislation prohibits them from creating the home they need in a building they own.
“Families are fleeing San Francisco due to a multitude of reasons that include a lack of adequate space for growing families that often include multiple generations. This legislation exacerbates that problem by punishing and limiting options for families who simply seek to create a home that meets the needs of their family,” stated Janan New, Executive Director of the San Francisco Apartment Association. “This legislation punishes hard working families, while doing little to protect renters.”
The lawsuit states that the legislation is pre-empted by state law known as the Ellis Act, which allows building owners to take a building off the rental market and convert those units to condominiums or single -family homes. Under the law, building owners are already required to give occupants up to one year advance notice and provide relocation fees of $5,210 per tenant, up to a maximum of $15,632, plus $3,473 additional for tenants who are senior or disabled.
“My clients are seeking relief from this just-passed legislation which unfairly takes away the right of individuals and families who simply want to create a home for themselves and their family in a building they own,” stated Jim Parrinello, attorney for the plaintiffs.
The Joys of Buzzing Market Street in Your Aging Cessna 310 Twin – What’s the “Minimum Safe Altitude” Over SF?Wednesday, February 27th, 2013
This is a Cessna 310, or something similar, just after it buzzed the Financial at well under Minimum Safe Altitude, which in this case is 1000-something feet above ground level.
Escaping to the northeast:
Click to expand
Now, do I have your tail number? No I don’t. So you win this round, Flyboy.
Regardless, I cry foul.
Until next time…
(And try to not kill yourself or your passengers or any ground-dwellers before then.)