Welcome to ‘Merica, Dude:
Posts Tagged ‘fillmore’
KRON-TV’s Big Stanley Roberts vs. the Little Lebowski of the Southern Wiggle: “I Don’t Want To Release This Footage”Friday, April 24th, 2015
Oh No, Shaming! – “Referee the Wiggle” Event Coming April 23rd to “Red Card” Cyclists at Infamous Waller and SteinerWednesday, April 15th, 2015
I’ll tell you, I’m not a big fan of the vaunted The Wiggle bike route and here’s why:
FOR MOST PEOPLE, THERE’S A BETTER WAY TO GET FROM THE PANHANDLE TO DOWNTOWN, TO GET THERE AND BACK AGAIN
That’s why. This was my stab at promoting the Northern Wiggle,* aka the McAllister Pass,** aka the Hastings Cutoff. *** Some people listened, but most did not, oh well.
Anyway, aside from this route being a third of a mile shorter and faster and safer and relatively ped-free, it NEVER gets any SFPD Bicycle Enforcement Actions, the way, say, the intersection of Waller and Steiner gets.
Speaking of which, now more people are joining the SFPD, to “referee the Wiggle,” if only for a short time.
“Referee the Wiggle
Thursday, April 23, 2015, 3:00pm – 3:30 pm
Waller and Steiner st – The Wiggle
While 95% of cyclists using the Wiggle are really incredibly respectful of other road users, there is that small minority who give us all a bad name. I’ve always wanted to dress as a referee and hand out yellow and red cards to bad cyclists (and maybe some cars and peds too) and I’m using NOW! as my excuse!
Come join me in shaming the few bad cyclists out there and making the Wiggle just a little bit safer and more courteous!”
*I, myself, wiggle from street to street north of the Panhandle on my way inbound to Fulton and Scott – it depends on traffic.
**The pass over Alamo Heights, which the Southern Wiggle route mostly avoids by generally following the route of the former creek what used to drain the kind of valley where the Golden Gate Park Panhandle sits now.
This one from SPUR – San Francisco Planning & Urban Research Association is hard to believe:
The San Francisco Planning and Urban Renewal Association (SPUR) produced a report entitled “Prologue to Action” arguing that, to enable the city to compete effectively, city government should influence growth so that San Francisco’s population “will move closer to ‘standard white Anglo-Saxon Protestant’ characteristics.” (Hirten, Farrell, and Weese 1966)
And here’s the actual document itself, from our California Historical Society at 678 Mission Street:
Here you go, under “Issue B”
Click to expand
It’s, as always, the prospect of a “provincial” SF versus a world-class SF. What SPUR wants is to take tax and fee payer money and give it to … SPUR, so it then can advocate spending more tax and fee payer money on whatever flavor of the month development program its members stand to make money from. Why does SFGov give any money at all to SPUR?
What’s actually changed at SPUR the past four decades, aside from them saying that the UR in SPUR no longer stands for “Urban Renewal?”
What a horrible organization.
“Looking for Work? Come in to the ‘Western Addition Neighborhood Access Point Career One-Stop Center'”Thursday, March 19th, 2015
Man, that’s a mouthful.
Anyway, here’s some recent “outreach” for the WANAPCOSC in the Fill’mo[re]:
Is this place still open?
Did not know that…
That same year, the San Francisco Planning and Urban Renewal Association (SPUR) produced a report entitled “Prologue to Action” arguing that, to enable the city to compete effectively, city government should influence growth so that San Francisco’s population “will move closer to ‘standard white Anglo-Saxon Protestant’ characteristics.” (Hirten, Farrell, and Weese 1966)
The genesis of urban renewal, from a couple decades before:
The presence in the Western Addition District of a high proportion of negro and foreign-born families presents a special problem. As was pointed out earlier, about 26% of the population in this District consists of Negroes, and another 9% Japanese, Chinese, and other foreign nationalities. In view of the characteristically low income of colored and foreign-born families, only a relatively small proportion of them may be expected to occupy quarters in the new development.
Hey SPUR, don’t just do something, stand there.
NIMBY’s vs. the SFMTA: Local Objections to New Traffic Signals on McAllister at Broderick and Scott for the 5 FultonThursday, January 29th, 2015
This effort appears to be similar to the SFMTA’s attempt to add traffic signals on Haight at Scott and Pierce.
This isn’t the worst example of NIMBYism, but I’d say it’s fairly alarmist, fairly absurd.
I’ll just say that, generally speaking, it’s generally harder to get around town these days by car, by bike and by MUNI, compared with ten or twenty years ago. Part of this has to do with our newer, absurdly-wide sidewalks, designed for pedestrian “comfort.”
And yet, most ped and cyclist deaths in San Francisco involve fault from the peds and cyclists. Here’s 2014:
“The Police Department found that in the 17 pedestrian deaths, drivers were responsible for eight and pedestrians were responsible for nine. Bicyclists were responsible in all three instances when they died.”
(I should do a video on how to be a pedestrian in SF. It might involve some jaywalking but it would also involve extreme alertness on behalf of peds. You see, the way to prevent a lot of ped deaths in SF would be to get inside their heads to see what’s going wrong.)
IMO, the SFMTA should leave McAllister alone and then start taking out as many bus stops as politically possible.
I’ll tell you, not that many cyclists pass by Broderick and McAllister compared with Scott and McAllister, it seems, owing to geography. So looking at McAllister and Scott, it seems that the lights will be timed against cyclists using FULTON DIVISADERO MCALLISTER eastbound as an alternative to the already-overcrowded Wiggle route to get from the Golden Gate Park Panhandle to the Financh.
So for my own selfish reasons, I’d prefer that MUNI not make these changes, but who am I to stand in their way? What the MUNI people are saying is that we’ll all be better off overall, and 40 seconds each way each day will add up to millions of seconds, eventually.
In conclusion, meh. If MUNI wants to put in lights, we should let them do it.
Absurd: Nestle Pure Life Bottled Water Delivery Driver Blocks Southbound Fillmore by Double Parking 3x in 2 BlocksThursday, 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?
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
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:
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?
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…