Posts Tagged ‘fog’

FOG Rally, a Questionable Charity Event / Lifestyle

Friday, October 28th, 2016

Ferrari Owners Group Rally?

7j7c3202-copy

Speaking of which:

I was out on the 2013 FOG rally with a bunch of other cars,” recounts Kevin Enderby. “I came over this crest in the road and saw a line of cars stopped right on the other side. I got hard on the brakes but never found out if I could stop in time—the car behind me hit me and pushed me into the car in front. Then the car behind him hit him and pushed him into me, again, and that pushed me into the car in front, again.”

It’s Late August, So Manhattanhenge is Here on McAllister Street, and Parallels, on Dreaded Sunny Days

Wednesday, August 31st, 2016

Just look at this – the sun! We hates it! We hates it forever.

20160830_064856 copy

How to Beat the Cold During Outside Lands – Robe or Smoking Jacket, You Make The Call

Monday, August 8th, 2016

Actually, OL16 was quite nice, at the end.

But nothing beats a cozy bathrobe for those colder moments:

20160806_144025(0) copy

Our SFMTA Wants to Claim It’s Increasing Parking Up at Twin Peaks, But It’s DECREASING Parking – One Simple Trick!

Thursday, July 14th, 2016

What the SFMTA’s Twin Peaks Figure 8 Redesign Project is a gonna do is get rid of these, these people from the top of Twin Peaks, particularly on busy dreaded sunny days, like this one:

7J7C0776 copy

Most of the tourists on top of that twin came from all the cars you can see on the left side. But all that parking is gone now, so tourists aren’t going to go to the top of Twin Peaks as much anymore.

What’s that, “good,” you say? Well OK, but why doesn’t the SFMTA just come out and say that? Instead, we get this:

Twin Peaks Figure 8 Redesign Project Frequently Asked Questions – April 8, 2016 version:

Will any parking be added or removed? No parking is being proposed for removal. Today, informal (illegal) parking takes place at the center of the Figure 8 and occasionally in the outer lane of the roadway. This project will formalize parking at both the center and south intersections, increasing the number of available stalls. Parking in the travel lane will no longer be possible.

So they’re not “removing parking,” they’re simply blocking cars from getting to the parking spaces? And you can’t park on the side of a highway in CA anymore, is that correct, really?

So the real answer to the question Will any parking be added or removed is:

Yes. Hell yes.

But who are these people so uncouth and “informal” that they think they can park their rental cars on the side of the road and walk up a hill for a look-see? Just fucking tourists, that’s all. And it’s not even the same ones day after day and year after year – it’s a constant flow of new people from all over the Bay Area, California, ‘Mericah, and The Rest Of The World. Those are the people the SFMTA and the Rec and Park (RPD – it’s Frisco’s name for the Parks and Recreation Department) are getting rid of, at least on busy days.

As with most things in Life, there are trade-offs. Our SFMTA wants to deny that, oh well (at 2:10)…

A Few Beefs with the SFMTA’s Marketing of Its Plan to (Somehow) “Increase Access” to Twin Peaks

Tuesday, April 19th, 2016

Here you go:

Making Room to Enjoy Spectacular Twin Peaks by Aaron Bialick
Friday, April 15, 2016

But the SFMTA isn’t really making anything is it?

Access by foot and bike is pretty limited, the road that loops around the mountain top in a “figure 8” is underused by car traffic and the loop’s intersections are confusing.

OK, well, “access” by foot and bike will still be “pretty limited” after the SFMTA completes the scheme it came up with, right? And let’s take a look at that road, on a dreaded sunny day:

7J7C0776-copy

Now, would you say that the east (left) side of this figure 8 is “underused?” No, not at all!

car-free access

Hey, is being “car-free” a good thing? Like is it as good as being something like herpes-free? One wonders.

On Tuesday, the SFMTA Board of Directors will consider approval of a pilot phase…

This means that the SFMTA is going to do what it wants to do, with the little bit of money it can scrape up to enact its ideology.

The project was shaped with community feedback…

First of all, there’s no community up there atop Twin Peaks. Second of all, if there is, it’s tourists (international, national, regional, and local) and this plan cooked up by the SFMTA is about as anti-tourist as one could imagine.

We’d also create legitimate parking spaces at the center and south intersections to address the illegal parking that already occurs.

WHAT WHAT? So all these People With Cars, the hundreds of People what congregate up there sometimes, they’re parking on the side of the highway “illegitimately?” So it’s legal but it doesn’t comport with SFMTA ideology? Or maybe it’s illegal, but our SFMTA hasn’t seen fit to put up signage what explains things nice and clear for visitors who don’t really have a good handle on English? And so all the scores of places where people park now and, indeed, the past century, all of that was not and is not “legitimate?” Whoo boy.

So the plan is to decrease access IRL and advertise this paint job (that doesn’t add ANYTHING) as one what will “increase” access.

Will that cost anything? Yes.

Will it cost the vaunted SFMTA anything. No, not really. Just a bit of paint…

 

Parkmerced Update: The “Townhomes” of Infamous “800 Summit” (“From the Low $1,000,000’s”) are the McMansions of Frisco

Monday, April 11th, 2016

Well Summit 800 has certainly been getting attention the past week.

(And I’ve commented earlier.)

So now let’s take a visit Way Down South, even souther and wester than Parkmerced, which everyone would agree is pretty far south and west already, and make the case that these condos / townhomes / whatever are the McMansions of Frisco.

So what’s a McMansion, big housing on a small lot?

7J7C4196 copy

Well, you can’t get smaller lots than this, right? I mean, these places are abutting:

7J7C4188 copy

And take a look at this wall, below – no windows, right? Are they going to put more condos / townhomes / whatever in later on to cover this up? I mean, nobody else has windows on the side. Anyway, this is your McMansion hallmark – such a small separation betwixt units that there’s no real use for windows on the side:

7J7C4187 copy

“No City Limits” is the sign what’s mounted near the city limits, oddly. I mean this is the city limits, right?

7J7C4186 copy

All right, take a look. (And I’ll add that I’m not saying these units are McMansions, I’m saying that they’re the McMansions of Frisco.)

“In U.S. suburban communities, McMansion is a pejorative term for a “mass-produced mansion”. An example of a McWord, “McMansion” associates the generic quality of these luxury homes with that of mass-produced fast food by evoking the McDonald’s restaurant chain.[1] The neologism “McMansion” seems to have been coined sometime in the early 1980s.[2] It appeared in the Los Angeles Times in 1990[3][4] and the New York Times in 1998.[5] Related terms include “Persian palace”,[6] “garage Mahal”, “starter castle”, and “Hummer house”

The term “McMansion” is generally used to denote a new, or recent, multi-story house of no clear architectural style,[8] which prizes superficial appearance, and sheer size, over quality.
Such very large, indeed expensive, but “mass produced” homes may sit on large lots: that is to say, an entire division of McMansions may be created (perhaps dozens or more at once), each on a large lot. However, in another usage “McMansion” is used pejoratively to refer to a house which replaced a smaller house, in a neighborhood of smaller houses, which seems far too large for its lot and thus crowds adjacent homes. (Indeed, such a McMansion may lack side windows due to the proximity to the boundaries – another McMansion-related cliché”

 

Our SFMTA’s Plan to “Increase Access” at Twin Peaks WIll Actually Decrease Access – Trying to Figure the Figure 8

Friday, April 8th, 2016

IDK, man. On the one hand, SFGov promotes the 49-Mile-Drive, but OTOH, SFGov wants to make it more difficult.

Take a look here down below – where are all these cars going to go after this plan gets going?

The plan, advertised as one what would “increase access,” will decrease access, obviously. Parking areas will be decreased by a whole lot. Oh what’s that, that’s a good thing AFAYAC, Gentle Reader? Well, fine – but let’s agree that taking out scores of places for people to park is going to make for a less-busy Twin Peaks, for better or worse.

And hey, are these people glorious Pedestrians / People With Bikes or are they terrible, horrible People With Cars? One simply can’t tell. Some locals walk and bike up here, but I see very few tourists attempting to do so. Mostly they come by tour bus or car, FWICS.

7J7C3442 copy   7J7C3450 copy  7J7C3460 copy 7J7C3463 copy 7J7C3465 copy 7J7C3466 copy

On It Goes…

Using Photoshop to Market Blue Skies to Foreigners – Selling Summit 800 Condos/Townhomes Deep in the Fog Belt

Tuesday, April 5th, 2016

Well, here you go, it’s Summit 800, “from the low millions.”

It’s the talk of the town these days.

But Google “summit 800 san francisco” and all you see are highly uncharacteristic blue skies. Isn’t that odd? I mean, we’re deep in the Frisco Fog Belt down there in the lower left corner of SF County, right?

Anyway, these shots come up in the above search. Don’t these Honolulu-style cloud look familiar? Aren’t they exactly the same in both images? What are the odds of that?

shop1 copy

shop2 copy

(Something’s gone wrong here!)

IDK, man. I just feel sorry for the out of towners buying these places.

Enjoy your fog, Newcomers!

The Reason Why These Planes Take Off So Close Together is Because of SFO’s Runways are Too Close Together – Any Help?

Wednesday, March 23rd, 2016

Nope, no help.

7J7C9473 copy

Check for yourself: SFO RUNWAY SEPARATION.

Will the SFMTA/RPD’s Car Ban Plan for the East Side of Twin Peaks Increase Access or Decrease Access? Take a Look at This Photo

Tuesday, March 15th, 2016

Take a listen, to Phil Matier here.

And then take a look, at what an Ivy Leaguer / Attorney / Former Gavin Newsom Jogging Buddy Who For Some Reason Is In Charge Of Our Park System has to say here:

As he sees it, the plan “increases the recreational accessibility of the area and makes it safer for bicyclists and pedestrians.”

As for safety, we’ll have to wait and see. But as for “accessibility,” this is going to be a Big Fat Decrease.

Here’s the east side of Twin Peaks Boulevard as it looks when the parking lot at Christmas Tree Point is all fulled up:

7J7C0776-copy

Where are these people going to go? Not Twin Peaks, that’s for sure. This plan will decrease access, certainly. (Or is the SFMTA going to run a shuttle bus up here? IDTS)

And oh, here’s how Phil Ginsburg attains access himself, using a car:

7J7C1999-copy-450x675