Posts Tagged ‘San Francisco’

The Driver of This BMW has No Fear = Goofy Looking All-Electric Car Deserves One Ticket for the Front and One for the Rear

Monday, March 30th, 2015

The driver of this ride was nowhere to be seen.

P1200274 copy

Man, that’s bold.

Good-Bye William R. De Avila Elementary, Now It’s “CHINESE IMMERSION SCHOOL, CHINESE IMMERSION SCHOOL, CHINESE IMMERSION SCHOOL”

Monday, March 30th, 2015

You know, back in the aughts, I was thinking that De Avila Elementary / Dudley Stone School was going to keep its name after it reopened to become a Chinese-language immersion school. But no, the name of this place, if you had to say it in just three words, is “CHINESE IMMERSION SCHOOL.”

See?

P1200187 copy

It looks like a private school, non?

Now mostly, they prefer to teach Cantonese, as opposed to Mandarin.

The answer to WHY’S THAT has to do with local politics.

OTOH, if you want to get all nuanced, then:

Why Cantonese First?

I can think of a few other reasons, but anyway…

Anyway, there’s your branding, and now I know why nobody understands when I mention the De Avila school…

Tech Bro on an Electric Skateboard Thinks He’s a Car, Tackles SoMA Streets

Monday, March 30th, 2015

At first I thought Brocephus was simply standing in the crosswalk, but no, he was waiting for the green in the #2 lane of 7th Street.

And off he goes, looking like an Apollo astronaut exploring the Moon:

7J7C4491 copy

Forward, ever forward…

Debunking the Debunkers: “Charles Vincent, Chris Bucchere, and the SFPD”

Monday, March 30th, 2015

Look what popped up in my inbox:

Saturday, March 28, 2015 Charles Vincent, Chris Bucchere, and SFPD

Take a look and then come back here – that’s how the dedebunking business works.

On March 2nd Charles Vincent, 66 years old, was riding his bike at the intersection of 14th and Folsom in San Francisco when…

When he ran a red light, per the SFPD police report (which I’ve ask to see, but haven’t seen yet), right? The problem with telling the story the way DJ Connel tells things, is that that makes it StreetsBlog-style advocacy journalism. Why not instead tell the story straight? Moving on.

“The DA is not gonna charge that person with a crime because…”

Because the DA would have to get a guilty verdict from a notoriously-slack San Francisco jury. By way of example, you and your GF can have about 14 drinks at the Foodies’ New Favorite Bay Area Restaurant and then run over a Eurpoean visitor and then stop and then move his bicycle off of the street(!) and then switch seats and then make a run for it and then, later on, you get a little bit of jail time, less than a year, perhaps just a few months. So that’s your because. IMO, a different question is whose fault the accident is. (I thought the PR said it was the cyclist’s?)

If someone is in violation of code, it’s sanctionable to kill them with your own violation?

Well maybe, it depends on how the violation relates to the harm. (I’ll point out that sanctionable is a particularly poor word choice here.)

Rewind to the Chris Bucchere case…. Chris rode his bike at approximately 31 mph…

Oh no no no. It was “at least 31 MPH.” If you want to go for “approximately,” then the answer if 35 MPH.

This case brought out a wave of rage against Chris, indeed against cyclists in general, which caused the San Francisco Bicycle Coalition to attack him…

Whoa, slow down here. What happened was that he got carried away with Strava, so he’d repeatedly “bomb” down segments of steep streets to see how fast he could complete the “Castro Street Bomb” or the “XXth Street Bomb” and, even though he was experienced with how pedestrians behave on Market street, he crossed over it way over the limit and then he made a bizarre post on the Internet. So if that’s what you want to simply call “the case,” that’s fine, but there’s a reason why this accident became international news. I certainly didn’t feel any “wave of rage” directed at me and I don’t think that the SFBC would have cheered him on absent any purported generalized wave of rage. The people who were really mad were on SF2G, boards like that. Bucchere was way off the scale.

Indeed there’s little question Chris was being reckless…”

Oh, this is quite an admission. The next step after reckless is purposeful, and nobody thinks this accident was purposeful, right? So, yes, pretty reckless. Something I do after I’ve entered an intersection legally, you know, IRL legally, is to stop just before the crosswalk at the far side of the intersection, so as to avoid hitting one or more of SF’s horrible peds. Too bad Bucchere couldn’t have thought of that. Or even slowing down a little bit – that could have helped a lot.

“But the question is here is one of fairness, whether drivers are treated comparably to cyclists…”

Well, let’s look at the case of Randolph Ang. No 35 MPH, no Strava “King of the Hill” aspirations, no internet ode to a bicycle helmet posted five hours later. He got community service, performed at, at least in part, the San Francisco Bicycle Coalition. No felony conviction, certainly. His post-accident behavior seemed more understandable, right?

The Bucchere case, on the other hand, went something like this: A: “That speeding cyclist blew through the stop sign and hit the pedestrians legally crossing the intersection – throw the book at him!” 

Uh no, for a lot of reasons. The people who voiced emotion against Bucchere, which included, of course, most of the cyclists who commented, (including one who said he’d feel embarrassed to continue wearing a jersey with a certain club name on it) didn’t really get into Sutchi Hui being legally in the crosswalk or not. And this wasn’t a California stop at a stop sign, as this intersection was and is controlled with electronic signals. No no, it was Bucchere’s attorney who talked about Bucchere entering the intersection “legally,” but of course this couldn’t have been true since he was speeding, so oh well to that. And big factors were what he posted online and his fascination with Strava

“But the video shows he [Bucchere] entered the intersection legally.”

Uh, do you mean on a yellow, DJ Connel? I think that’s what you mean. He was speeding though, right? Is speeding legal?

A: “Well, never mind that — he still plowed into those pedestrians legally crossing the intersection!”

Uh no, you’re putting words into peoples’ mouths here.

B: “But if he entered legally, and was near the speed limit, it’s impossible the pedestrians entered the intersection legally…

Whoa, whoa. He didn’t enter legally ’cause he was way over the limit, right?

A: “Well, never mind that — someone says he ran a stop sign during one of the blocks before the intersection.”

Well, stop signs – it looks like he did that too.

I’m not defending Bucchere…

Really? I think you are.

Amelie Le Moullac is just the most egregious of so many tragic cases where cyclists have been killed and blame-the-victim has been the first line of investigation.

Then cite all the many cases then, Dude. I don’t know, what about 2014? All of the deaths in SF were the fault of the cyclists themselves, right? Do you want to get into lessons learned here, DJ Connel? I don’t think you do.

You want to say that Bucchere was reckless but he was at the same time “legal.” You want to debunk myths, but you add some of your own.

So how does that help?

If you want to help, why not pour through all the police reports with at least one transportation-related fatality from last year. I’ll get you started, from a report I can’t link to, after the jump. Maybe you’ll learn something, IDK. Here’s something linkable, from Heather Knight. I’ll tell you, politically, this data proved to be unpopular with SFGov and, for whatever reason, the SFPD commander in charge of traffic got transferred to Timbuktu shortly after this bit came out. So there might be a bias involved, but not the kind you’re looking for.

All right, hop to it. For whatever reason, your blog is Google-worthy, so anything you write about Chris Bucchere gets sent out as a Google alert to those MSM journalists who haven’t yet cancelled their Bucchere Google Alerts. So, unlike any comments you might post on StreetsBlog, actual real nonactivists will look at what you have to say…

(more…)

UC Berkeley Prof Lydia Chavez Threatens to Shut Down Mission Local by June 1st Unless Shes Gets Money from Readers, Bidnesses?

Friday, March 27th, 2015

This here is pretty much all I know about Mission Local which has gotten a lot of funding from UC Berkeley over the years.

And here’s the current threat to shut down, from Founder and Managing Editor Lydia Chavez – it’s called 31 Days of Mission Local:

mlml copy

So let’s see here, try a Norelco shaver or a delightful bed from Costco.com (save $100 now!) for just a month and it will, how do we say, transform your life? OK fine! So is Prof Chavez hectoring me here? I need to “care more?” I need to become a “better neighbor?” Whoo boy.

Now the first graf here, who and what is university-degree’d-up LC taking aim at here? I’m thinking it’s directed at SFist and people like college degree-less Eve Batey, who also tried to make a go of things, back in the aughts. What a contrast. (If Lydia could link to examples of what she’s talking about, that could help her readers. Perhaps she could take the time to do that the next time she comes down to visit us from the penthouse in her ivory tower.)

And what’s this, Lydia Chavez thinks I’m naive to not pay money for news? I think she does.

And then this earnest, earnest, ever-so-earnest journalistic crusader is going to talk about her “sense of humor?” What?

And then comes the punchline of her ransom note – it’s give me money or else.

Mmmm…

And she offers “business memberships?” IDK, seems that kind of thing might come with a bit of baggage, huh?

And IDK, until I saw all this hectoring, I never had an unfavorable impression of the ML.

An alternative would be to simply announce that you all are shutting down and then wait for the reaction? You’d get attention from the MSM and some thought pieces about you and The Bay Citizen (and the like) and whathaveyou and, through that process, maybe you’d end up with some monetary support as well.

SPUR = WASP? Here’s Your Racist Recent History of “SF Planning & Urban Research”

Friday, March 27th, 2015

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)

Here you go.

And here’s the actual document itself, from our California Historical Society at 678 Mission Street:

P1190873 copy

Here you go, under “Issue B”

P1190864 copy

Click to expand

P1190862 copy

P1190863 copy

P1190866 copy

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.

Cranelandia – How Much Money Does SF Mayor Wilie Brown Make Off Of Each One? – A Dozen Cranes from This View

Friday, March 27th, 2015

Start counting:

7J7C4310 copy

La mise en scene from Mission looking south:

P1190886 copy

Cranes = money, for certain people, right?

Does San Francisco Really Have a “French Quarter?” Not Really, Despite What Microsoft Says

Friday, March 27th, 2015

Well, here it is, from the Bing Maps:

fq copy

(IDK, this is less offensive than “Uptown Tenderloin,” one supposes, you know, coming from San Francisco’s non-profit profiteers.)

French Quarter sounds a bit, grandiose?

Here’s the cure, as usual, from wilds of the Internet:

Ha. No one here knows by that name. There’s not a distinct boundary for the collection of French-serving restaurants and businesses near the French Consulate, the church and school of Notre Dame des Victoires on Bush Street. But apparently it’s been dubbed by some hotel marketing person as the “French Quarter.” Belden Alley and Claude Alley intersect with Bush Street, and each have some French cafes. On Bush/Grant Ave. is the Cafe de la Presse — a coffee house with French and international newspapers, and restaurant. There’s Cafe Claude on Claude and some other bistros. Plouf! is an excellent mussel house on Belden…”

All right, keep on Binging, Microsoft.

Cylinder Sally, Market Street: We Send the 49ers to Santa Clara and This is What They Send Back

Thursday, March 26th, 2015

7J7C4239 copy

“Slow” #5 Fulton Driver Totally Pwns “Rapid” #5L Limited Driver on Market Street, Once Again.

Thursday, March 26th, 2015

I’ll tell you, when I first saw the Orwellianally-named #5R Fulton from our inefficient SFMTA, I thought it stood for Regular, you know, as opposed to Limited.

Isn’t that sad?

Anyway, yeah, out in the Richmond District, 5Ls travel faster than 5’s, but the tables turn on Market Street, when the regular #5’s regularly pass by the vaunted #5R’s (nee 5L’s).

Here’s the pass from the #5…

7J7C4236 copy

…and then he’s gone, leaving me and the #5L driver in the dust:

7J7C4238 copy

I’m thinking that unless you live Way Out West in the boonies of SF County, 5 > 5L.

Or, in the New Math, 5 > 5R.

Isn’t it ironic.

Dontcha think?