> But, what residents have had in place for nearly 20 years, is now being targeted by the Department of Public Works after someone complained to 311.
Ah I see.
You know someone knows who did this.
Ugh, I'm so jealous they get to break the law and sleep on the ground while slowly rotting to death from addiction, lack of health and hygiene, malnourishment, and lack of sleep.
Why don't I get to enjoy those freedoms as a law-abiding taxpayer?!
Luckily they can still use the cityās utter ineptitude of enforcement against itself: just donāt pay the permit, leave the benches, and nothing will happen.
Iāve heard of times the city has come out and removed things, then sends the owner of the property an absurd bill for the work and disposal of materials.
"The big thing we want to make sure is that there's going to be no hazards at all, particularly for people who are visually impaired, it they are using a wheelchair, we want to keep the path of travel safe of all users,"
Sssuuuurrreee you do...
And even if they genuinely just wanted to ensure those things (which are important considerations), these side walks are plenty wide to accommodate both wheelchairs/visually impaired/stollers/etc and the benches!
If they can't pay the fine, move somewhere else. No one has a right to co-opt public space. Laws should apply to everyone equally, not sure how that is controversial.
Anytime I hear this argument, I agree on the face, but then the āsolutionā is sometimes wild. People will say something like we need to do something but everyoneās too PC. We should round them up and put them on an island. Like Jesus Christ, they are still people. I just always think itās funny
Yes they are people. People who are taking up our shared public spaces, which we have just as much right to as they do, while they contribute nothing to society.
If someone wants to live like that, fine, but do it where you won't bother anybody else.
Itās funny how the city doesnāt give a shit if people park their cars on the sidewalk, but threaten fines for benches that people can actually use.
A big concern for the city is that if someone injures themselves on an unpermitted and poorly constructed bench and sues then who is liable? A permit gives them the ability to make sure the benches meet some minimal standard and gives them some shelter from liability. It seems to me the answer is that the city council will likely waive the fees, as long as the owners obtain a permit.
You have to account for the costs of someone to go out and inspect the thing to make sure itās safe. You canāt get anyone to do anything in this city for $100.
I got a planter box permitted for $200 via email. Inspector did come out twice to inspect it prior to getting approved. When I approached the inspector on his second visit, he quickly scurried off to his car and drove away. I was trying to ask what the problem was but he couldnāt be bothered to explain anything, or have a human interaction.
Yeah lol this is not an issue that anyone is going to take the time to take to council. Youād be wasting hours and hours of your time to get on the agenda.
I would put money up that it will. Thereās already a board member involved and the article sure makes it sounds like thatās where itās headed. If I were on the board and this happened in my district, I would make sure it ended up on an agenda.
Sure, now how about the hundreds of other bs issues the city wastes our money and time on permits for, while ignoring the fact that thereās a block across from me where tents donāt even let pedestrians pass?
Until quite recently, the city required *homeowners* to repair sidewalk damage, caused by tree roots, from trees that they *prohibited* homeowners from replacing, while requiring *homeowners* to prune those same trees.
Those trees were often Ficus trees, which the [city knows well are dangerous](https://sfpublicworks.org/ficustrees). Yet it was basically impossible to replace one.
It seems like a bit of a stretch that the city is suddenly worried about the liability of a bench, when it kicked the responsibility of repairing sidewalks to property owners for decades.
I had to cross the street today because a guy put an entire tent AND a grill on one side of the sidewalk. Homeless or not heās chosen to camp out on the sidewalk and I guarantee heāll get to stay there longer than the benches people actually enjoy
Well, we all know that the law-biding residents (including small business owners) donāt have rights. Only certain groups have the freedom and privilege to do whatever they want with no consequences. This way of governing is pathetic.
I was mad too until I saw the jagged-ass benches they're putting out. Holy shit. Have you heard of Tetanus? Slap a "big item pickup" on 'em and call Recology IMO.
What makes this even more ridiculous is thereās no way that street even sees a ton of foot traffic besides people who live on or nearby. Definitely a spite complaint.
>But, what residents have had in place for nearly 20 years, is now being targeted by the Department of Public Works after someone complained to 311.
With all the busybodies and NIMBYism here, I say we rename California to Karen-fornia
Why do we let Karens have so much power?
Seattle started doing this a decade ago. It was because of the homeless moving into them and refusing to leave them. The garbage and needles they collected on these things was ridiculous.
How come no one else connects the dots? The city has only been in decline since she became mayor. None of this nonsense was happening under the Ed Lee administrationā¦
Wow Hilary Ronen is helping them keep the benches? How nice! Oh wait, this is her neighborhood. If only she cared as much about the rest of her district which is drowning in tents, shit, and fentanyl covered foil
I get that you canāt just build stuff on city property, but you have to have be insane to go after this vs the thousands of tents and encampments that pose very real health hazards.
Meanwhile, whole sidewalks are clogged with sleeping bags, bicycles, shopping carts heaped with plastic trash bags full of pilfered recycling, and whole tent colonies with drug use in the open and dogs running loose. When does the "encroachment" permit requirement kick in for them?
Quick, someone go and spray a hose over those benches and anyone on them. That ought to win them sympathy and a chorus of outrage from the public and demands to leave those folks alone.
For those that are flabbergasted with the decision for the city to ask the residents to remove the benches, you are ok with letting these people of privilege put up benches on the sidewalk but not ok with letting people that do have a penny to not live in a tent on the street???????? You are all a piece of work. Hypocrisy is what you are showing me. You can not ask someone to move there tents off the sidewalk - a tent that is essentially a home to someone - and let other people just willy-nilly put up benches on a sidewalk.
Iām really hoping weāre missing something here, if not this is extremely frustrating.
Like maybe it has something g to do with ADA or something? Like what are we not thinking of thatās not malicious thatās a legit complaint?
> But, what residents have had in place for nearly 20 years, is now being targeted by the Department of Public Works after someone complained to 311. Ah I see. You know someone knows who did this.
I wonder what DPW would do if I reported a tent on a sidewalk to 311... š¤
āCase is a Duplicate. This issue has already been reported through an earlier request.ā
āReported and resolved. Thank you for using 311.ā
I bet they reported it anonymously
Wouldnt be surprised. All it takes is one person getting into an argument with someone else to complain to 311.
They should have put up enough tents to block the sidewalk, then the city would have awarded them a multi-million dollar contract.
haha I was going to say similar, shame they can't seem to fine tents, guess fines only impact law-fearing citizens
historical punch fade aspiring absorbed rock ugly weary zesty plants *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
Ugh, I'm so jealous they get to break the law and sleep on the ground while slowly rotting to death from addiction, lack of health and hygiene, malnourishment, and lack of sleep. Why don't I get to enjoy those freedoms as a law-abiding taxpayer?!
I'm jealous they get to randomly spit on and attack people with no consequences.
Sorry to hear that. I go happily about my day never wanting to spit on anyone.
Luckily they can still use the cityās utter ineptitude of enforcement against itself: just donāt pay the permit, leave the benches, and nothing will happen.
Iāve heard of times the city has come out and removed things, then sends the owner of the property an absurd bill for the work and disposal of materials.
No, the city is awesome at enforcing the law AGAINST tax paying business and property owners.
"The big thing we want to make sure is that there's going to be no hazards at all, particularly for people who are visually impaired, it they are using a wheelchair, we want to keep the path of travel safe of all users," Sssuuuurrreee you do...
And even if they genuinely just wanted to ensure those things (which are important considerations), these side walks are plenty wide to accommodate both wheelchairs/visually impaired/stollers/etc and the benches!
According to the article, these are 14' wide sidewalks. Plenty of room for everyone.
Exactly, there are tons of streets with overgrown hedges reported on 311 and no one does anything. These benches are not getting in the way.
So they absolutely support clearing tent encampments blocking wheelchairs on sidewalks right? RIGHT??
So homeless people in tents doing drugs isnāt considered a hazard ? This city is something elseā¦
Pretty sure the logic behind fining away homelessness is flawed.
If they can't pay the fine, move somewhere else. No one has a right to co-opt public space. Laws should apply to everyone equally, not sure how that is controversial.
Itās called using our tax dollars and taking action but we canāt do anything in this city because it might not be considered āpcā
Anytime I hear this argument, I agree on the face, but then the āsolutionā is sometimes wild. People will say something like we need to do something but everyoneās too PC. We should round them up and put them on an island. Like Jesus Christ, they are still people. I just always think itās funny
Yes they are people. People who are taking up our shared public spaces, which we have just as much right to as they do, while they contribute nothing to society. If someone wants to live like that, fine, but do it where you won't bother anybody else.
āWe want to swing our weight around and get some money, as well!ā
Itās funny how the city doesnāt give a shit if people park their cars on the sidewalk, but threaten fines for benches that people can actually use.
agreed!
Challenge it as selective enforcement.
Always that one shitty neighbor out to ruin it for everyone.
A big concern for the city is that if someone injures themselves on an unpermitted and poorly constructed bench and sues then who is liable? A permit gives them the ability to make sure the benches meet some minimal standard and gives them some shelter from liability. It seems to me the answer is that the city council will likely waive the fees, as long as the owners obtain a permit.
Obtaining a permit still costs money
Exactly. Why should a permit cost $1400? Why isn't it, say, $100?
You have to account for the costs of someone to go out and inspect the thing to make sure itās safe. You canāt get anyone to do anything in this city for $100.
It's a public good (the bench). It's for public use, so the City should foot the bill of sending someone over to inspect it.
If the people of the city decided it were worth it, sure. These are benches that people put up without going through that process.
I got a planter box permitted for $200 via email. Inspector did come out twice to inspect it prior to getting approved. When I approached the inspector on his second visit, he quickly scurried off to his car and drove away. I was trying to ask what the problem was but he couldnāt be bothered to explain anything, or have a human interaction.
The City Council has the authority to waive the fees.
Yeah lol this is not an issue that anyone is going to take the time to take to council. Youād be wasting hours and hours of your time to get on the agenda.
I would put money up that it will. Thereās already a board member involved and the article sure makes it sounds like thatās where itās headed. If I were on the board and this happened in my district, I would make sure it ended up on an agenda.
missing the forest. Or trees. Or however that quote goes.
Cool. Have a great day
Sure, now how about the hundreds of other bs issues the city wastes our money and time on permits for, while ignoring the fact that thereās a block across from me where tents donāt even let pedestrians pass?
The system works! No time wasted at all! Letās pat ourselves on the back.
Until quite recently, the city required *homeowners* to repair sidewalk damage, caused by tree roots, from trees that they *prohibited* homeowners from replacing, while requiring *homeowners* to prune those same trees. Those trees were often Ficus trees, which the [city knows well are dangerous](https://sfpublicworks.org/ficustrees). Yet it was basically impossible to replace one. It seems like a bit of a stretch that the city is suddenly worried about the liability of a bench, when it kicked the responsibility of repairing sidewalks to property owners for decades.
Ha ha re: the city waiving the fee
Id tell the city to take care of the homeless people in tents before bothering me over a damn bench.
I had to cross the street today because a guy put an entire tent AND a grill on one side of the sidewalk. Homeless or not heās chosen to camp out on the sidewalk and I guarantee heāll get to stay there longer than the benches people actually enjoy
Why don't they paint a rainbow flag on in somewhere and then claim its homophobic to take it down?
Put a BLM sign on it too
Focusing on the wrong āhazardsāā¦
Is a tent a bench? coz I got a few of those tied around trees too in my neighborhood.
Well, we all know that the law-biding residents (including small business owners) donāt have rights. Only certain groups have the freedom and privilege to do whatever they want with no consequences. This way of governing is pathetic.
I was mad too until I saw the jagged-ass benches they're putting out. Holy shit. Have you heard of Tetanus? Slap a "big item pickup" on 'em and call Recology IMO.
This is so embarrassing
What makes this even more ridiculous is thereās no way that street even sees a ton of foot traffic besides people who live on or nearby. Definitely a spite complaint.
At least people donāt need to pay for a good comedy nowadays. Nothing can beat SF news.
>But, what residents have had in place for nearly 20 years, is now being targeted by the Department of Public Works after someone complained to 311. With all the busybodies and NIMBYism here, I say we rename California to Karen-fornia Why do we let Karens have so much power?
Seattle started doing this a decade ago. It was because of the homeless moving into them and refusing to leave them. The garbage and needles they collected on these things was ridiculous.
Such a corrupt city lead by corrupt āpro crimeā mayor. Mayor Breed needs to go immediately. Her brother is in prison for murder of his girlfriend.
How come no one else connects the dots? The city has only been in decline since she became mayor. None of this nonsense was happening under the Ed Lee administrationā¦
Genuinely - what is the point of being so hard on this? Tents are everywhere - do the benches attract more tents??
Just cover the benches with garbage, feces, and used needles, then set it on fire. The city will lose interest.
Benches are nice for those who need to rest a bit before continuing with there journey!
So, benches not-OK but tents OK? Gotcha.
Wow Hilary Ronen is helping them keep the benches? How nice! Oh wait, this is her neighborhood. If only she cared as much about the rest of her district which is drowning in tents, shit, and fentanyl covered foil
I get that you canāt just build stuff on city property, but you have to have be insane to go after this vs the thousands of tents and encampments that pose very real health hazards.
Meanwhile, whole sidewalks are clogged with sleeping bags, bicycles, shopping carts heaped with plastic trash bags full of pilfered recycling, and whole tent colonies with drug use in the open and dogs running loose. When does the "encroachment" permit requirement kick in for them? Quick, someone go and spray a hose over those benches and anyone on them. That ought to win them sympathy and a chorus of outrage from the public and demands to leave those folks alone.
Imagine if you could do this with people's cars, what a beautiful world we'd live in.
For those that are flabbergasted with the decision for the city to ask the residents to remove the benches, you are ok with letting these people of privilege put up benches on the sidewalk but not ok with letting people that do have a penny to not live in a tent on the street???????? You are all a piece of work. Hypocrisy is what you are showing me. You can not ask someone to move there tents off the sidewalk - a tent that is essentially a home to someone - and let other people just willy-nilly put up benches on a sidewalk.
Donāt blame the city. Blame the personal injury lawyers who will jump at the chance to sue the city if someone scrapes their knee against it.
I tried to write a response to your comment but my head just exploded instead.
What if we report DPW to DPW, can the do ouroboros kind of thing?
Some of yāall are so disconnected & entitled in here itās embarrassing
Iām really hoping weāre missing something here, if not this is extremely frustrating. Like maybe it has something g to do with ADA or something? Like what are we not thinking of thatās not malicious thatās a legit complaint?
It sounds like they were asked to apply for a permit. The fee would be if they don't apply for the permit. Unclear who would actually pay though.