Posts Tagged ‘owner’

Assignment Desk: Just How Fake was the Recent Episode of “Mystery Diners” Taped at Chapeau! on Clement in the Richmond?

Wednesday, February 19th, 2014

I’m saying very fake, or mostly fake.

Last year, Michael Bauer had the Inside Scoop on the recent Mystery Diners fiasco up at Chapeau! on Clement Street in the Inner Richmond:

“It was halfway into our anniversary dinner when things turned for the worst, as the camera crew from Mystery Diners rushed through the dining room with lights and mikes to catch a naughty bartender/actor in the act of giving away free drinks for a group of fake diners.”

I’ll tell you, I don’t have that cable TV so I can’t actually watch all the fakery, but here’s a quite gullible writer on the topic over at Examiner.Com.

I’m auspicious of this whole deal, I tell you.

Oh, EaterSF has this:

This is scripted. This would never really happen in Philippe’s restaurant. I live down the street and go there.”

So, have at it, MSM. Philippe himself prolly would have contractual reasons to tell you to go to Hell, but there are other ways of getting a scoop…

Oh, and SFWeekly had this to say about this particular TV series a few years back

In short, I call shenanigans.

Uh Oh, Now There’s a Lawsuit Against the City for Recent Ellis Act Legislation – SFAA & realtors Fighting Us

Wednesday, 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.

Racist San Francisco Pizza Delivery Map Evolution – Western Addition, Twitterloin, and Potrero are No Go – Yet It’s Legal

Tuesday, April 30th, 2013

[GRUB STREET SF has an explanation from the owner. Plus there's good news for Dogpatch! Sort of. Before 7:30 PM, anyway.]

Remember back in the day, back  more than a half-decade when a joint like Amici’s East Coast Pizzeria could get away with a delivery map like this?

Check it, the Western A and the Potrero Hill PJs were carved out of the delivery areas and the gritty “Uptown” Tenderloin / Twitterloin / 6th Street / Flank area only enjoyed daytime delivery, thusly:

And then came this map, which is a little less racist:

And oh wait, this is the current map still.

(At least the southern part of Potrero Hill isn’t carved out so blatantly these days.)

One wonders what sassy District Five Supervisor London Breed or District Six Supervisor Jane I mean, I’m just saying Kim or feisty District Ten Supervisor Malia Cohen would think about these maps.

This pizza delivery driver safety issue was the talk of the town over at Eater SF and kissing cousin Curbed SF a half-decade back. Let’s review.

Taxi drivers can’t legally refuse to take you to certain areas of San Francisco due to their concerns over personal safety. Non, non, non. That’s a crime called failure to convey that can land a cabbie in the hoosegow. Why are pizza drivers treated differently?

Because in 1996, Supervisor Willie Kennedy gave us a law, (one that became national news), but then it got watered down such that a “reasonable good faith belief” that a driver would be in danger in a particular nabe is now enough to allow the brazen publication of redlined pizza maps.

And check it, flower and newspaper delivery people are off the hook as well.

Note also that there doesn’t seem to be any designated punishment for a violation anyway. Oh well.

To review, cabbies are on the hook, delivery people not.

NB: Dominoes appears to use a different map, or maybe none at all, as it seems they’ll delivery just about anywhere in our seven square.

The More You Know…

SEC. 3305.1. HOME DELIVERY SERVICES.

(a) It shall be unlawful for any person or business entity to refuse to provide home delivery services to any residential address within the City and County of San Francisco falling within that person’s or business entity’s normal service range. A person or business entity may not set its normal service range to exclude a neighborhood or location based upon the race, color, ancestry, national origin, place of birth, sex, age, religion, creed, disability, sexual orientation, gender identity, weight or height, of the residents of that neighborhood or location. Where a person or business entity regularly advertises home delivery services to the entire City and County, that person or business entity’s “normal service range” shall be defined by the geographic boundaries of the City and County.

(b) For purposes of this Section, “home delivery services” shall mean the delivery of merchandise to residential addresses, when such services are regularly advertised or provided by any person or business entity.

(c) Notwithstanding any other provision of this Section, it shall not be unlawful for a person or business entity to refuse to provide home delivery services to a residential address if (i) the occupants at that address have previously refused to pay in full for services provided to them by that person or business entity; or (ii) such refusal is necessary for the employer to comply with any applicable State or federal occupational safety and health requirements or existing union contract; or (iii) the person or business entity has a reasonable good faith belief that providing delivery services to that address would expose delivery personnel to an unreasonable risk of harm.

(Added by Ord. 217-96, App. 5/30/96; amended by Ord. 295-96, App. 7/17/96; Ord. 222-02, File No. 021462, App. 11/15/2002)

Mid-Market Skeleton Key: Your 24″ Drop-Forged Bolt Cutter – A Mystery at Little Cafe, 6th and Market in the Twitterloin

Thursday, April 11th, 2013

Little Cafe, 995 Market, heart of the corrupt Twitterloin:

It’s go time:

Click to expand

OMG, LAN Airlines Gave Away Hundreds of Round-Trip Tickets to South America at a Random Oakland Restaurant Last Night?

Thursday, January 24th, 2013

Yes.

Yes it did.

Just look at these happy patrons over at Jack London Square’s Bocanova restaurant.

Thusly:

And thusly:

Man, if I had knowed, I would have loaded up the Land Cruiser with eight souls and headed on over there.

And then I’d have been off to Sud America to see Paradise Falls or to party like an impossible-to-fire BART spokesmodel or to do something, man.

Damn!

Well-played, LAN Airlines.

Well–played, Edelman PR

All the deets after the jump.

(more…)

Attention Dog Owners: Golden Gate Park is, Once Again, Coyote Country, So Leash Your Critters Accordingly

Monday, January 14th, 2013

You see this? This is JFK Jr. Drive in Golden Gate Park from over the weekend:

Another great nature shot from famous San Francisco photographer David Cruz. As always, He’s Everywhere You Want To Be

So this is a good time to review the rules:

“Can my dog walk around the park with me beyond the designated off-leash areas?

Yes, your four-legged friend may accompany you throughout the park if you both obey the leash laws of California.”

Otherwise, you’ll become another derided dog owner, like this one:

Remember, as soon as you use the term “voice control” you lose…

What the New “Lucky Strike” Upscale Bowling Lounge in SoMA Looks Like, Now That It’s Open

Friday, September 21st, 2012

It looks like this:

Click to expand

Quite a lot of stuff going on in that shot, huh?

I hadn’t seen the place since it opened up in March 2012.

This is what things look like back then:

The thing about Lucky Strike at 200 King near 4th Street is that’s it’s not like any bowling alley you’ve ever seen. Call it a “gastropub-ish funhouse” or an “upscale bowling lounge” instead.

Get the deets here and now let’s take a look.

Exterior at 200 King:

Click to expand

L.S. on the left, AT&T Park on the right, kitty-corner:

And the CalTrain station is to the right as you look outward:

Here’s the main bar and restaurant seating area. The idea of the communal tables on the left is to have them at Goldilocks height, not too low and not too high, to allow mixing and conversation betwixt those sitting and those standing.

OMG, this place is bigger than I thought it would be.

Moving on to the Einstein Room, with billiards and other diversions to entertain your brain:

But lets go further in, let’s go bowling:

Shoes shoes shoes!

On the way to the lanes:

I don’t know what this is:

Here we go, here are some of the lanes:

The main bowling area will have art all around, made by innumerable local artists. Here are some Obey Giants from Shepard Fairey, who used to be local.

Moving on past the Lebowski Wall(!) to…

…the Green Room, your own private party space with your own private lanes! OMG.

Can you imagine what kind of large, rich, youthful companies have already made reservations to rent out the Green Room and portions of the main bar area? Oh yes you can, give a guess and you’ll be correct. Anyway, here are the special Green Room lanes, one of which is named in honor of Brian Wilson, a part-owner.

In short, Lucky Strike is going to be awesome.

See you Friday!

He’s Ba-aaack: Infamous Pacific Heights Foreclosee John Lee Hudson – BONUS: Cheesy ACQUIRE Replicar

Monday, June 25th, 2012

Or maybe John Lee Hudson isn’t back but his car sure is, having been spotted in the Financh on Friday.

(Parked illegally, of course, with the four-way flashers flashing.)

As seen on Halleck Alley in the heart of the 94111 – note ogler taking a snap while gushing about this 100% fake 1928 Mercedes Benz SSK replicar:

Click to expand

Now, if I had gotten taken down by Jim Cox over at the Socketsite in this fashion, well, I’d have left town vowing to never come back.

But some people are shameless.

Even more shameless than Hollywood Foreclosure King Nicolas Cage, who used to own 1945 Franklin* before JLH et ux. 

Anywho, this ride is not a “Refurbished 1936 Mercedes Excalibur,” just saying.

*I think he was the one who added the garages to the front – at least that’s what the nanny told me back in the day.

The Feds Make a Deal to Set Aside More Space for Western Snowy Plovers, San Francisco’s Cutest Birds

Thursday, June 21st, 2012

The Center for Biological Diversity is crowing about more room being designated for the Western Snowy Plover along the west coast.

San Francisco isn’t getting more space for these critters but they already have as much as they need here now, not that some area dog owners agree with the way things are these days.

Anyway, here are some San Francisco Snowy Plovers and the also the deets of the new agreement with the Feds are below.

(Oh, and remember, as always, plover rhymes with lover.)

A snowy plover on Ocean Beach _not_ being harassed by a dog:

Now, Ocean Beach Dog, ooh, somebody over there got an off-leash ticket from the Feds a looooong time ago. (Can you guess what year by looking at the website design? Sure you can.) Oh well. Well, the Feds don’t like Ocean Beach Dog and people what behave like Ocean Beach Dog. The Feds consider us Whacko City, USA because of outfits like OBD, oh well.

Most dogs don’t bother the boids, of course. Can you see the snowy plover?

But some dogs do harass the birds. (These aren’t actually snowy plovers near Lawton and the Great Highway but the dogs don’t know or care about that.)

(Get those Ocean Beach birds, good boy!)

And here’s the sitch up in Crissy Field:

See the birds, see the unleashed dog?

Is is surprising to you that an unleashed dog could find and chase these plovers? What was surprising to me was to hear that this particular boid flew up from Morro Bay (where it was banded and which is like way south of here) all the way up to the Marina District:

Keep on keeping on, plovers:

More Than 24,000 Acres of Critical Habitat Protected for Western Snowy Plover

PORTLAND, Ore.— In response to a Center for Biological Diversity lawsuit, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service today designated 24,527 acres (38 square miles) of critical habitat to protect the Pacific Coast population of threatened western snowy plovers in Washington, Oregon and California.

“Protecting critical habitat will help this lovely shorebird continue on the path to recovery,” said Tierra Curry, a conservation biologist at the Center. “Species with federally protected habitat are more than twice as likely to be moving toward recovery than species without it, so this puts a big safety net between plovers and extinction.”

Western snowy plovers breed primarily on beaches in southern Washington, Oregon, California and Baja California. Today’s designation includes four critical habitat units in Washington (covering 6,077 acres), nine units in Oregon (covering 2,112 acres) and 47 units in California (covering 16,337 acres).

Snowy plovers were listed as a threatened species under the Endangered Species Act in 1993, when the coastal population had dropped to 1,500 birds and plovers no longer bred at nearly two-thirds of their former nesting sites. That Endangered Species Act protection allowed the population to increase to more than 3,600 adults by 2010.

Plovers are recovering but still face many threats, including widespread and frequent disturbance of nesting sites by humans, vehicles and off-leash dogs; crushing by off-road vehicles; global climate change; pesticide use; and habitat loss.

The western snowy plover was first granted 19,474 acres of critical habitat in 1999. In 2005 the Bush administration illegally reduced the critical habitat to 12,145 acres, eliminating protection for thousands of acres scientists believed necessary for the snowy plover’s survival and abandoning key habitat areas crucial for recovery. In 2008 the Center sued over the unlawful reduction of the plover’s habitat protections, leading to a settlement agreement with the Service and today’s revised designation.

Today’s final rule includes the reinstatement of habitat areas identified by government scientists as essential that were improperly withdrawn in 2005; inclusion of some areas not currently occupied by plovers but important for their recovery; and addition of habitats such as back-dune systems in an attempt to offset anticipated effects of sea-level rise caused by climate change.

The western snowy plover is a shy, pocket-sized shorebird that weighs less than two ounces and lives for three years. Plovers forage for worms, insects and crustaceans in wet sand and in kelp that has washed ashore. The word “plover” is thought to come from the Old French”plovier” or “rain bird” because plovers were seen on sandy French beaches during spring rains.

The Center for Biological Diversity is a national, nonprofit conservation organization with more than 375,000 members and online activists dedicated to the protection of endangered species and wild places.”

Oh, and also remember that San Francisco is for Plovers:

The Horrible Dog Owners of San Francisco: So This is What an Off-Leash Dog vs. Wild Coyote Incident Looks Like

Wednesday, May 16th, 2012

Via SFist comes news of a short video of a dog-coyote interaction in Golden Gate Park. (This is news to me, anyway. Thanks, Norimitsu Onishi of the New York Times.)

Here’s your problem, it’s yet another off-leash dog in Glen Park:

Now, how would this affair end up getting described by a bad dog owner to, I don’t know, a simple-minded reporter the likes of CW Nevius?

Coyotes aren’t dangerous, dogs are dangerous.

“Animal Care & Control Concerned About Coyote Interactions

San Francisco – San Franciscans do not seem to be getting the message about how to coexist peacefully with local wildlife.

San Francisco Animal Care & Control has been notified about individuals who still allow their dogs illegally off -leash in active coyote areas despite education, posters, flyers, signs and barriers all warning dog owners to abide by the law and keep their dogs on-leash or, better yet, avoid the marked areas entirely. These irresponsible individuals are putting themselves, their dogs, and the coyotes and their pups at great risk (see video link below). Accordingly, after seeking expert advice and in collaboration with the San Francisco Recreation and Park Department, San Francisco Animal Care & Control suggested closure of locations in Golden Gate Park where coyotes appear to be anxiously protecting dens.

San Franciscans share natural places with a variety of wildlife, including coyotes. Temporary park closures are for the comfort and safety of people, pets and wildlife during breeding season. Birthing and pup rearing has the local coyotes feeling hormonally more protective which may result in more assertive behavior (as in the video). Our goals are to give coyote families temporary relief from stress (dogs) while ensuring public safety. Preventing confrontations such as this is the best policy.

San Francisco Animal Care & Control receives many inquiries about options for removing the coyotes. Relocation is illegal under CA State law. It is also inhumane. Lethal removal is ineffective and unethical since another coyote will simply take its place, often within weeks. San Francisco Animal Care & Control and coyote experts feel that the local coyotes are here to stay and their hope is that the community learns to peacefully coexist with them.

San Francisco Animal Care & Control encourages the community to be responsible pet guardians; leash dogs where required and respect temporary park closures. Wildlife in San Francisco needs a little breathing room while its young are present. Urban wildlife is part of the health of San Francisco’s parks – part of the heritage and history of our area – and coexistence is possible with a little give-and-take.Link to film of dogs harassing coyotes in San Francisco:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E9vmpgzF8sU&list=UUtZ-dJ3bfs61GpS-9p9rpJQ&index=1&feature=p1cp

The Department of Animal Care & Control is a taxpayer-funded, open door animal shelter. ACC provides housing, care and medical treatment to wild, exotic and domestic stray, lost, abandoned sick, injured and/or surrendered animals. ACC aims to rehome or reunite domestic animals with their guardians and to rehabilitate and release wildlife to their native habitat. ACC responds to animal related emergencies 24/7 including animal abuse and neglect as well as matters of public safety. Animal Care & Control is located at 1200 15th St. (at Harrison.)

Deb Campbell
Volunteer / Outreach Coordinator

Animal Care & Control
1200 15th Street
San Francisco, CA. 94103

Phone:415.554.9427
Fax: 415.557.9950
E.Mail: deb.campbell@sfgov.org

www.animalshelter.sfgov.org”