Posts Tagged ‘district’

Why San Francisco Loves Mini Coopers: Being Able to Park Between Driveways in the Avenues – Three in a Row

Tuesday, January 20th, 2015

Via SF photographer James Corrigan, who says:

IMG_8708 copy

“Give me 146.6 inches of curb space in the Inner Sunset and I will find you parking. Advertisement for the Mini-Cooper.”

Absurd: Nestle Pure Life Bottled Water Delivery Driver Blocks Southbound Fillmore by Double Parking 3x in 2 Blocks

Thursday, January 15th, 2015

What’s this? It takes just one truck double parking in our defunct “Jazz District” to back up Fillmore Street all the way across Geary?

7J7C9142 copy

Yep.

7J7C9149 copy

Dude stopped at least three times to deliver huge water bottles on both sides of the street, like he had all the time in the world

7J7C9147 copy

And he seemed to double park closer to the middle of the street than the right side.

Anyway, I tended to bidness and then came back up Fillmore northbound and Dude was still there on Fillmore, except this time he nosed in a bit. Here’s your reverse angle:

7J7C9150 copy

Don’t we get water from Hetch Hetchy? So why do we need Nestle to deliver these huge bottles as if we had the worst water in the world?

7J7C9153 copy

Nestle charges extra for San Francisco deliveries and this impossible delivery situation is part of the reason why.

IMO, this job, which is unecessary in the first place, is too big for one person to do without cutting corners…

8000 Cal, 94121: What the End of California Street Looks Like at the Lincoln Park Steps – Big Art

Tuesday, January 13th, 2015

The Richmond District Blog has the deets.

7J7C0725 copy

I gotta say, I approve of quiet groups who actually do things. You know, LESS YAMMER, MORE HAMMER

Well, Here It Is, The Richmond District’s New Academy: The SF Baseball Academy – Inside of the Old Bridge Theatre

Thursday, January 8th, 2015

Here it is, this mothership is fully operational – the open house was last month.

The marquee, oddly, used to sing the praises of Supervisor Mark Farrell, until recently:

7J7C2077 copy

Read all about it from this bit in the San Francisco Chronicle. Noteworthy:

“He hit a bit of a rough patch while in college. On a visit home for the holidays in 2007, he got embroiled in the infamous “Baker’s Dozen” incident, in which a group of visiting Yale students got into a fight with some hometown boys at a New Year’s party. Though he was a latecomer to the fisticuffs, Aicardi was named in a civil suit seeking damages, along with his brother Richard. In the end, no charges were filed against him and the matter was settled privately...”

In other words, settled privately for big bucks. I’ll just add that the straight-shooting Matier and Ross team had a different take on the “I’m 20 deep and my boys are coming” incident, where jelly and beer were mixed in a quite unappealing fashion. If somebody wanted to say, well, I’ve made a public apology and I’m struggling to move on, ala Sheriff Ross Mirkarimi, well, it’s never too late to do something like that, whether you claim you’re barred from doing so or not. Moving on…

I used to turn the lights on at an old Landmark theatre and the all the fuse panels looked a little like this – I’ll tell you, the monthly electricity bill was through the roof, it was a major expense. I’m sure it was similar at the Bridge. Like, even if somebody gave the building to you for free, would it be worth the time and money to operate it as a theatre? I don’t think it was.

So maybe this academy will make money or maybe it’s more a labor of love. We’ll see.

Fulton Street Tableau: Aggressive Pedestrian, Helpful Driver – A “Freeway Revolt” Pushes The Richmond Farther Away

Monday, January 5th, 2015

Man, you won’t catch me crossing Fulton just hoping that drivers will see me and stop. Oh no.

But this woman took the plunge. See the driver signalling to others? That’s what it takes sometimes:

7J7C1833 copy

I don’t know, we had The Freeway Revolt so now we have streets like Fulton acting as substitute freeways.

The SFMTA spends its money inefficiently, so it says it can only afford to install something like five traffic lights per year. (Oh, it’s so hard, it’s so hard to do, they say. No it’s not, but anyway…)

So, we don’t want freeways and we won’t tolerate any transportation-related deaths (or we won’t tolerate any transportation-related deaths starting in 2024). This doesn’t add up.

So, slow down Fulton if you want, but what that does is push the Outer Richmond farther and farther away from San Francisco…

LINOLEUM LARRY’S? This Place on Lombard Looks Like an FBI Front, or Like “Best Quality Vacuum Repair” on Breaking Bad

Wednesday, December 31st, 2014

It’s hiding in plain sight!

7J7C1655 copy

Ghost Car, Arguello – Classic First-Generation Malibu – Rolling In My Six-Four

Monday, December 22nd, 2014

[UPDATE: Reference to the hundrum Richmond District omitted. And somehow, I accidentally changed my Canon’s Mode switch to Manual, which I didn’t think was possible, you know, due to the safety. With my 1D, this would be impossible, but with a 5D, it’s possible, obvs to me now. Anyway, this photo was way overexposed. It was all … foggy.]

Or is it a ’65? I can’t tell.

Nevertheless, this ride was an arresting sight, creepin’ down Geary turning towards Arguello in the Richmond District:

7J7C0807 copy

 

All this guy needs is 16 switches, and hollow-points for the snitches.

And maybe some D’s.

Play us out, Dr. Dre.

[Female voice w/ Jamaican patois:]
Eeeh, whappn no baby
You look good ina ya car eh
Longtime mi watch ya mi wha chat to ya
And ya a gwaan like ya nuh wha chat to me
So whappn Dre tell em whe di eff a gwaan nuh

Here’s Why the SFPD’s “Focus On The Five” Traffic Enforcement Goal is At Least 40% Wrong

Friday, December 19th, 2014

Here’s your set-up, from The StreetsBlog:

“…only one of the 10 police stations is actually meeting its goal of issuing at least 50 percent of traffic citations for the five most common violations that cause pedestrian injuries.”

But, IRL the the five most common violations that cause pedestrian injuries actually  include:

CVC 21456 – Walk, Wait, or Don’t Walk 

CVC 21954 – Pedestrians Outside Crosswalk / CVC 21955 – Crossing Between Controlled Intersections*

Under the CVC, jaywalkers can either be in a crosswalk (or close enough – if you’re one or two feet away, that might be close enough to be considered “in the crosswalk”) (and, of course, these can be marked or unmarked crosswalks) but doing something wrong (like starting too early or too late or going too fast (running) or too slow (just standing in the crosswalk, for ex.) OR crossing in the middle of a block.

If you look at the math, there’s no way that these violations can be out of the top five.

That’s just one reason why there’s not even a prayer of a chance that SFGov’s “Vision Zero” 2024 can “succeed.” (Oh what’s that, Sweden experimented with VisionZero and it succeeded? Well, not really. Oh what’s that, it was good to try anyway, even though they didn’t get to actual absolute zero, they had a big reduction in injuries? Well, France, among others, didn’t implement Vision Zero and yet it had greater success over a similar time period, right? Oh what’s that, Vision Zero is just a “framing” phrase, a meaningless platitude that pours old wine into new bottles? Well, finally we agree.)

Of course you’re never going to beat drivers Failing To Yield for the number of pedestrian deaths in San Francisco County. But do you think lying about things like Focus in The Five helps your cause?

And are there reasons why it’s far easier to comply with the demands of non-profit pressure groups in the Richmond District as opposed to other districts of San Francisco? Yes there are. Take the same Captain and put him/her in another district and then watch your compliance numbers fall. Why’s that? Do you suppose that the SFPD has a mission, has a job not 100% congruent with “urbanists” straight outta Park Slope and pricey prep schools like Punahou?

Something to think about.

*These are twins, basically. 

If District Two Supervisor Mark Farrell Needs To Be Replaced Soon, Two People with Legitimacy are Abe Simmons and Kat Anderson

Monday, December 15th, 2014

First things first, you tell me how big a deal this is:

Supervisor Farrell directed to pay S.F. $190,000 for violation by John Coté

And don’t niss this part:

“Theoretically speaking, I think they then become the same campaign,” said John St. Croix, director of the Ethics Commission.

Kaboom. Did an effort (from Janet Reilly, or some other Reilly)…

FPPC Stipulation, Decision and Order

…lead to this…

FPPC Letter to Charles H. Bell, Jr.

…almost four long years later?

OBSERVATIONS / QUESTIONS:

1. Why does big news always seem to come out post meridiem on a Day of Frigg, you know, like on a Friday evening? Funny that.

2. Could this situation explain why Mark Farrell nominated (law student(!)) Katy Tang as interim Board of Supervisors President?

3. Is Mark Farrell going to serve out his second term? IDK.

4. If he doesn’t, who’s going to replace him? Mmmm…

The election that District 2 held four years ago was narrowly lost by Janet Reilly, but I can’t see her ever getting appointed D2 Supe in today’s political environment.

Now, what about the people who came in third and fourth, the people who myabe could have / should have formed an ANYBODY BUT JANET ranked-choice voting troika / three-way with Mark Farrell?

Meet Ivy Leaguer Abraham Simmons:

Does he still live in the District? IDK.

Now meet Stanfoo-educated Kat Anderson:

I’m thinking either of these two attorneys could slot right into the job.

You know, if necessary.

Here’s what people have been talking about over the weekend:

Agenda – December 16, 2014

SAN FRANCISCO ETHICS COMMISSION
NOTICE OF SPECIAL MEETING and AGENDA
December 16, 2014, 5:00 P.M.
Room 400 City Hall
1 Dr. Carlton B. Goodlett Place, San Francisco

[EXCERPT]

  • Discussion with City Attorney’s Office regarding potential litigation by the City Attorney’s Office against local committees, including Common Sense Voters, SF 2010; Vote for Mark Farrell for District 2 Supervisor, for violations of local campaign finance laws.  Possible Closed Session.  (Attachments: FPPC Stipulation, Decision and OrderFPPC Letter to Charles H. Bell, Jr.)
    1. Public comment on all matters pertaining to Agenda Item III, including whether to meet in closed session.
    2. Vote on whether to assert attorney-client privilege and meet in closed session under California Government Code section 54956.9 and Sunshine Ordinance section 67.10(d) to discuss anticipated litigation:  San Francisco Campaign and Governmental Conduct Code section 1.114.  (Action.)
    3. Conference with Legal Counsel:  Anticipated litigation.  (Discussion.)
      Number of possible cases: 1
    4. If closed session is held, reconvene in open session.
    5. Discussion and vote pursuant to Brown Act section 54957.1 and Sunshine Ordinance section 67.12 on whether to disclose any action taken or discussions held in closed session regarding anticipated litigation.   (Discussion and possible action.)
      Motion:  The Ethics Commission moves (not) to disclose its closed session deliberations re: anticipated litigation.

I suppose we’ll find out more tomorrow…

Sunset District Princess: A 1960’s-Era Austin Limousine from the UK

Thursday, December 11th, 2014

As photographed by James Corrigan:

IMG_8518 copy

Wow.

IMG_8516 copy