I asked Tony Pierce for his analysis of our American Apparel predicament, and here’s what he said:
ive spent a lot of time in the mission. i lived on folsom and 23rd, i lived on 24th and potrero, and i lived next door to the old yellow levis building on clinton park. that place had a dishwasher, a washer dryer, a fireplace, and… a garage. i have much love for the mission. especially around 16th and valencia of which you speak. and trust me, im not crazy about ben n jerrys or the gap on haight ashbury but i liked amoeba plenty when it was a bowling alley. therefore i believe that we should just let business happen the way its going to happen. noone would be complaining if they wanted to be on mission and 16th. therefore its not that they wanna come to the mish, its that they want to come into the funky part. control is an illusion. let there be socks.
Link. Thanks, Tony!
Wow, Tony making sense.
The busblog makes me miss LA, for a minute or 2. I can enjoy the pictures without putting up with the place.
ha. it really is an illusion.
i watched the latter day ‘horton hears a who’ witht he 4 year old today.
the kangaroo reminded me of the whole political climate in SF< and the mission in specific.
played by carol burnett. she can play stephen elliott in the movie rendition of his "struggle" after he becomes mayor.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xcxGeiUbLSM
4 year old said the movie was "pretty good but not really really good"
2 things..
1: What legal grounds does anyone have to challenge AA? That they don’t like it…? Grow the fuck up.
2: T-mobile @ 17th…. kind of a bit bigger monolith, aint it?
i’m not really sure of the exact “no formula retail” rules. anyone know for sure? i believe it’s actually legislated, no?
i do think “nimby” is the basic grounding of the legal argument, and since in SF everything has to go by a committee of some kind, that committee can be swayed.
i was actually thinking that the whole “no formula retail” sounds a little unconstitutional…pursuit of happiness and all.
someone said this is an interesting look at the cultural divide that happens between valencia & mission streets. would anyone care if AA was going in on mission street? there’s plenty of derelict storefronts there too…and bigger.
probably when you cross valencia, it’s MAC territory.
and i love it when i agree with mcas.
zinzin, thanks for being on top of this one on all the posts, and for your always lively, entertaining – and relevantly incisive – points.
there are no general provisions in prop g – the relevant law – for “no formula retail”; however, hayes valley and north beach are designated as special areas in which there can be no formula retail.
for neighborhoods such as the mission, however, there is a requirement in prop g for review of every application for lease or purchase by any formula retail business. the review is supposed to consider a list of things, including whether there are already any formula retail businesses of the same type in the area, how many of them, and how much retail space is available, perhaps for local retail businesses of the same type.
not only does this contradict the claims that stop american apparel and stephen elliot have made about american apparel setting a precedent or creating a legal opening for other formula retail, but, ironically, this could lead to exactly the opposite conclusion:
what is the best way to prevent gap and other formula retail clothing stores from opening in the mission?
let american apparel open, then tell the planning commission that we already have enough formula clothing retail, and to leave the remaining spaces for local businesses!
thanks C. for the kind words.
and the explanation.
so glad you liked my answer. and weirdly, thats a photo from my apartment when i lived at the end of 24th street just past potrero.
rock on!