I'm going to concentrate on the buildings that are never cleaned.

I've got about 10 to 12 buildings in the immediate area that are months overdue for cleaning.   They are going to be my main concern.   I will continue to make some other reports when it is convenient to do so, but in terms of where my effort will go, I am going to concentrate on the long overdue buildings, and will be selective in adding new buildings.    If I have a second priority, it will be newsracks.

The cityscape is not going to change without cleaning the many prominent graffiti that has been on building for years. So that is where my attention should be,and for report location of 3 to 4 'months I'm being told to wait before reporting them again.

195 Lexington to get an Art murel.

SF311 sent me a note today that the owners of 195 Lexington have done everything possible and are going to get a city mural on their building. But today their building was posted with a notice that DPW had found graffiti on their building and that they had 30 days to clean the graffiti or respond. Its hard to understand that notice going up today because the graffiti is from May with more on top.

DPW Letters going out for 18th Street Buildings.

On 2 or 3  buildings on 18th Street between Valencia and Mission that I don't think I reported, DPW today put up signs of graffiti notice.  Saying DPW has found graffiti, you have 30 days. etc.


These were not on buildings that I see as the problem buildings.   Maybe somebody else reported those buildings rather than me. 


Got to go.

Think: timeframe to get to first cleaning is 6 months, second cleaning is 1 year.

I'm going to think in longer time periods.   For example, how should I approach things if the first cleaning is on average 4-6 months, and the second cleaning is 9-12 months.

I kinda hope no one is reading this blog, because it is more of a personal notebook that happens to be public, than a blog.    But if you do read, and have an idea to help, send me a comment.

How to deal with too many overdue and closed without reason building reports

I'm trying to figure out how to deal with too many overdue by month reports on buildings, and the tendency of the DPW building department to close out cases with statements that the graffiti has been abated.

More thought on how frequently I should report again buildings not cleaned long after a report.

This is a second part of a posting asking myself, and anyone who wants to comment, how frequently should I report again buildings not cleaned long after a report was made?


Other factors, is how frequently, I would be wanting to check the overdue reports, and resubmit them. 

Two or three times a week sounds like a first estimate.

How large is my "inventory" of late responses?
How would that "inventory" break down in >90 days, >60 days.   >45 days?
How many is too many to report to SF311 per day?   3,4, or 5?


Part of the answer will come by doing,  then adjust.   Try to use humor or good in post.   Use same wordage, for ease of search.

How often should buildings / newsracks that are not cleaned be reported again.

This project of trying to achieve an ambivalent change in the Cityscape of Dolores Park over to Capp Street by using social media is now 100 days old.

A major issue now is how to deal with the cases that were reported months ago, and are not being cleaned.

What is the right frequency of followup for buildings not cleaned.

What form should the followup take?


Does once a week follow-up on reports three month old sound right?

MissionReporter has done some great posts. Thanks.

MissionReporter has been doing some great reports to SF311 about  graffiti in the nearly the same area as me.   Yes!!!!!!!

DPW again closes graffiti reports without work being abated.

It is happening too frequently, that DPW closes graffiti reports without abatement.  This time for 2250 Mission Street.



UPDATE.   After I posted this and followed up with DPW, the building at 2250 Mission Street was cleaned of graffiti.   

Still no call backs from DPW's Vieng

Called again to repeat last Friday morning's call, at about 830 this morning.  Again voice machine.   No call back yet.  its about noon now.

No Call back yet from Jonathan Vieng

On Friday morning, I called Jonathan Viegn about the issue of city reports describing that the graffiti at 2345 Mission STreet was abated, but it was not.  I got his voice mail.   No call back yet.

How about a spreadsheet of overdue buildings/ reports ?

How about a spreadsheet of overdue buildings/ reports ?

The top ten  list was feeling tired and boring.   The new spreadsheet is going to be my overdue accounts sheet.

Like those bill statements that show accounts overdue my more than

• 30 days,
• 60 days,
• 90 days, and 
• 120 days.

If anyone reads, give me some feedback.

False reports of graffiti being cleaned in DPW notes.

This would be a serious problem, after taking the time to volunteer and report graffiti, someone at DPW turns around and falsely writes notes in reports that the graffiti has been abated.  That is what I found to have happened with conveniently numbered address of 2345 Mission Street.

Here is the May 4, 2010 picture of 2345 Mission Street after it was re-reported because the graffiti had not been cleaned.

Yesterday, I reported 2345 Mission Street again for graffiti blight,

@SF311 Building #graffiti #SF #blight ! 2345 mission St reported May 2010 still http://twitpic.com/2c56om

 
and SF311 responded that

@DPClean several reports have been sent to DPW regarding this building. according to notes graffiti is abated only to be hit again. ^BM about 22 hours ago via CoTweet in reply to DPClean

• Reply
• Retweet

I asked for the DPW supervisor's name and telephone.   Thankfully, SF311 provided it.  Jonathan Vieng at 415-695-2181. 

So, I immediately called Mr. Vieng, but only got a voicemail,  If I get a call back, I will try to update this blog.   

Take a look for yourself and compare the May 4 picture of graffiti on 2345 Mission Street, and three month later August 6th,picture of graffiti. Its the same graffiti. It was not cleaned. On the lefthand side, the vandal added color to his graffiti, but it is the same.

In the three month that this address has been reported, not only is someone at DPW failing to work to remove graffiti, but they are helping to keep the blight in place bu falsely writing in department notes that the graffiti has been abated.

If on the long standing graffiti locations like 2345 Mission Street, the inspectors falsely write in reports that the graffiti has been repeated abated only to be tagged again, than there is a serious problem.


To make matters worse, 2345 Mission St under major renovations with workmen there nearly every day. They've got the ladders and  personnel to easily fix the graffiti, but instead have taken the route of getting DPW reports to falsely state the graffiti has been abated.   Something really stinks here.

Response to the Mission Mission Article. DPW on privte residence

Last blog posting, I linked to a commentary on Mission Mission blog, about DPW painting over graffiti on a private residence. The posting asked, how could that be happening, if DPW does not "advertise" that service on its website.

Here is my take. Two ways.

One, DPW does the work, and the property owner pays the bill. This happens after the owner is noticed of the graffiti, and has a chance to respond at a hearing. If the owner does not show up to the hearing, or doesn't give a good excuse, then the City will bill the owner. And it sounds like it could be an expensive bill. Still, it sounds like the owner has more protection against being billed than happens for parking tickets.

Two, Alternatively, the owner shows up, and explains what has happened, and maybe, just maybe if it is fair, the City will there after remove the graffiti on its dime. The notices that I have seen posted imply that if the owner is an 80 year old women on limited income, the City will agree to clean the graffiti for her. Another option, is that the owner shows that the location is one that is hit by graffiti at an excessive rate, and that the owner has cleaned the graffiti a bunch of times already. If the owner shows that he has tried to keep the property free of graffiti, and essentially it more the City's fault for letting the graffiti situation get out of hand and the building is repeatedly graffitied, than again the City will pay for the clean up.

For those who might object to the City paying for cleaning graffiti on private property, on my twitter account, I linked an article that says that New York City will paint over graffiti on private property for free.

Interesting commentary on MissionMission

http://missionmission.wordpress.com/2009/06/03/sf-dpw-painting-over-graffiti-on-private-residences/

click link

Tweeking my approach.

Over August, I am going to be doing less "prowling" as it was called by the local paper. My goal is going to be working on the long term graffiti sites on Mission Street between 18th and 20th, and the increasing problem of commercial graffiti.

Secondly, I have to look to bring others into the project.

Anyone want to help me report graffiti??

This has been previously reported and has been issued a work order to complete. Service Number 684112. ^JT 2351 Mission Street, second floor.

@DPClean SR 696955, The City's goal is to post a Notice and send letter instructing owner to abate within 30 days.^MH

Your Service Request number is: 705579. ^JT
Back of Giant Value

Need to be a general

Changing the look and feel of graffitied, neglected urban space is a major task not easily accomplished. I want to make an ambiental change in the area by 18th/ Mission St but a battle fatigue is nearly inevitable. I wonder if cleaning up Mission St. a crusuade that can not be won? Perhaps it is an endevor that needs a wise general more than foot soldier. I ve got to collect forces use opportunities and think ahead.