Posts Tagged ‘Owners’

Here’s One of the Snowy Plover Signs that Dog Owners Like to Vandalize Over at Ocean Beach

Wednesday, August 27th, 2014

As a form of protest over Federal leash laws that everybody else in America is cool with.

7J7C5947 copy

Oh well

Monomaniacal Single-Issue Voting Run Amok: “DogPAC: I Have a Dog and I Vote!”

Thursday, July 24th, 2014

I’ll tell you, Supervisor Scott Wiener, for one, lives in fear of running afoul of these people, the very same people who vandalize the “no dogs allowed” signs our Feds put up on certain parts of our Federal lands:

Click to expand

Our Feds wonder why Bay Aryans can’t abide the rules the rest of America accepts with no trouble at all…

So look out, little Western Snow Plover. The dog pacs of the world say that you’re nothing special and that, in fact, you don’t even exist – they say there’s no such thing as a Western plover anything. OK fine.

As seen at Ocean Beach near Taraval, 1200mm focal length:

Good luck, little plover.

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.

An Oldie But a Goodie: The Store Formerly Known as “T&A Market” on Market Outlasts an Actual T&A Market Next Door

Friday, June 14th, 2013

Click here to see how things were in 2010, before the time certain people realized the meaning of “T & A.”

And this is how things are today in 2013:

Click to expand

You gotta figure the world-famous Market Street Cinema isn’t coming back anytime soon considering its URL has been sold off.

And I worry.

I worry about Mercedes, Porsche, Lexus, and Ferrari, among others.

How will they pay for business school now?

“14 reviewsRating Details

Category: Adult Entertainment  [Edit]

1077 Market St
(between Jones St & Golden Gate Ave) 
San Francisco, CA 94103
Neighborhood: SoMa

(415) 861-2727

What we found out was, as long as you drop a lot of cash, ANYTHING goes in this place. ANYTHING. Once you’re in the “Members Only Lounge”, it’s a whole new world. Yup, Chris Rock obviously had never been to Market Street Cinema, because…yeah. Even the stripper was real with us, she was like, “You can call this a whorehouse, or a party house, or whatever, but guys come in here and spend thousands of dollars, so, we’re still here.” I doesn’t get more real than that.

Painting the “Russian Embassy” of the Western Addition is a Biiiiiig Job – A Freaking Decayed Giant – Start at the Bottom

Friday, June 7th, 2013

Here’s the quote, from the 1960′s:

Up at Fulton and Scott is a great shambling old Gothic house, a freaking decayed giant, known as The Russian Embassy

And here she is now, getting one shade of muddy green replaced with another:

Click to expand

It would take me all summer to paint this monster

UPDATE: Apparently, someone spray painted “NO PERMIT PARKING IN ALAMO SQUARE” on the side of this hulk last month. As opposed to just hanging a sign? Would a frustrated, car-owning Alamo Square NIMBY do that to a house as an ironic punishment or did the owners themselves do it? It’s a  mystery. Haighteration, the Lower Haight Blog, has the latest on the issue of the SFMTA’s horrible horrible permit parking scheme.*

*I’m eligible to pay MUNI $104 per year for a permit but I don’t believe in the system so I don’t buy the permit. I’m sure the SFMTA would love to jack up the cost  to like $1000 but they can only charge a “fee” based on expenses. I believe that the “expenses” included the pay, benefits and retirement of 15 Parking Control Officers / meter maids but I don’t know that for sure. Quite sneaky to do that, SFMTA.

Look at This Scene in Golden Gate Park: Coyotes and People Getting Along – Maybe Dogs and Owners are the Problem?

Wednesday, April 17th, 2013

You know who has a lot of shots of coyotes in Golden Gate Park? Nature photographer Dina Boyer does.

Check it:

Click to expand

And check out the rest of her set as well – she has a lot of great shots in there.

I’ll tell you, since the return of coyotes in numbers in GGP, there have been numerous dog incidents but no coyote incidents.

Interesting, non?

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…

Those Chevy Volt Hybrid Owners Drive All Right, But They Don’t Park So Hot – “It’s OK, I Drive an Electric Car”

Friday, November 2nd, 2012

First of all, the Chevy Volt hybrid car is a hybrid car. Yeah, I know it was going to be an electric car, but GM lied to us all, which is its right to, but a hybrid is a hybrid, right>

Second of all, sales of the the Chevy Volt hybrid car are abysmal, so that’s why you don’t see them causing a bunch of accidents, you know, the way the drivers of a hybrid car line from another manufacturer are famous for. I can’t recall seeing a crazy driving maneuver done in a Volt.

Third of all, Volt drivers park in the craziest places, as if they think they’re special.

Thusly:

Click to expand

That’s the MO of one Volter, like every day.

The driver prolly thinks you are stupid for not parking in crosswalks yourself.

On It Goes…

The BUILDING OWNERS AND MANAGERS ASSOCIATION OF SAN FRANCISCO Expresses Reservations About a “Better” Market Street

Wednesday, October 31st, 2012

Right here:

“Discussion Points: This a long-term project (breaking ground in 2016, at the earliest), and BOMA members discussed near-term concerns for the various department staff to consider as they move forward in the information gathering phase of this effort:

The homeless population. How can you improve Market Street (adding parklets, nodes and general public gathering spaces) without considering the existing homeless population?

Impact of future design and construction on the ground-floor businesses that line and/or are immediately adjacent to Market Street.

Maintenance costs after build out – who pays?

All forms of conveyance should be considered when improving Market Street. I’m sure you’re doing this but East/West travel across Market should be carefully reviewed.

Continuous outreach to the business community and other stakeholder groups to be sure that the City understands the issues of concern before final design consideration and construction.”

Will this so-called Better Market Street effort yield a Market Street that looks anything like this?

No, it won’t.

Oh well.

Still the focus groups continue, still the Project Manager drives forward.

OK fine.

Will the Project Manager ever get around to asking the existing users of Market Street what they think?

No, never.

As per usual.

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: