EdSane

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 25 posts - 1 through 25 (of 252 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • in reply to: BASEMENT SUITE -SEPARATE ENTRANCE/KITCHEN AND BATH $1,100.00 #960023

    EdSane
    Participant

    DebiG- Sounds like a great deal for what’s offered. I would advise however that you note any non-refundable items on a lease agreement as a ‘fee’. A renter is entitled to receive a deposit back at the end of a period as all deposits are refundable. Good luck with your search.


    EdSane
    Participant

    The tips is just the owner deferring wage costs directly to the customer rather than through the cost of items. Employers are allowed to pay under the Seattle minimum wage as long as the difference is made up in tips. In instances like this I assume that the owner is splitting the tips so that all workers make the minimum wage (which would have to be paid regardless of tipping).

    in reply to: Aggressive QFC security accused my son of stealing #937903

    EdSane
    Participant

    Sounds to me like the security officer was attempting to use discretion rather then make a larger issue out of petty theft. To be clear you can be detained for shoplifting if you conceal an item, pass the last point of sale and are heading towards the exit (where those pesky baskets are located). I’m not sure why QFC managment gave some other impression in this case but the last place loss prevention wants to tussle with someone is outside the store in a parking lot where accomplices often times have vehicles and/or weapons. As a parent I would have been elated that it had only gone that far rather then having the police called and a trespass noticed issued. The re-training they’re likely to get is to not avoid paperwork and bust them for stealing. Also, the security guard is the authority figure in this story and it doesn’t seem like they’re the ones with the issue…

    in reply to: Rant: Yet another off-leash dog at Lincoln Park #933274

    EdSane
    Participant

    Sorry to hear what happened to you. My partner and I both carry mace when we take our dogs walking because of all the self entitled jerks throughout WS with their off leash dogs.

    in reply to: Current List of dog-friendly places? #932651

    EdSane
    Participant

    Beverage Place (21+) & Beer Star (all ages) are two drinking establishments that are dog friendly. If the new dog is a pup I recommend visiting Puppy Perfectors over in Columbia City. They run a puppy playtime on Sundays which is all about socialization.

    in reply to: Child Safety On Our Streets #922776

    EdSane
    Participant

    @KBear, I disagree with your opinion that the route drivers use isn’t important or an issue. With the proliferation of various driving apps (Waze etc) residential streets are getting congested in ways that were never intended by city planners and traffic engineers. We shouldn’t be using residential streets as thoroughfares for automobile traffic (Note: this is not relevant to bicycle traffic). We as a city are already reacting to this by introducing varying methods of traffic calming. Such as this in my old stomping grounds:

    http://mynorthwest.com/710694/traffic-diverters-getting-mixed-reaction/

    The city could have diverted those resources to more important projects if only its citizens would use a little common decency and understanding of why we direct traffic through arterials etc.

    As to the OP, children should be supervised whenever they are in a roadway or close proximity and posting signage which can be helpful does not negate their responsibility. Signage should not be put physically in a roadway to cause an obstruction. We already have processes in place to request speed humps etc. We all have to share the road and that means we all take responsibility for our own safety and the safety of others. It only works when we all follow the rules. I also recommend getting a dashcam for your vehicle.

    in reply to: Dumpster Placement on California Avenue #922304

    EdSane
    Participant

    I should also mention that if there were concerns around the permit issuance SDOT can be contacted here: SDOTPermits@Seattle.gov

    It doesn’t bother me but in the Westwood/South Delridge area I would welcome this kind of development over some of the blight I see daily (burned out buildings left to fester).

    in reply to: Dumpster Placement on California Avenue #922252

    EdSane
    Participant

    A quick search shows that they’ve paid for several ongoing street use permits. Though the description is not very specific. I assume this is the one allowing the placement of the dumpster in a city right of way (e.g. sidewalk area).

    https://web7.seattle.gov/sdot/PayPermitFees/PermitInfo.aspx?Permit=358819

    in reply to: RV at Ridgview Play Field for last two years #920857

    EdSane
    Participant

    @killagram, how does this impact your life?

    in reply to: Free Right Turn Ok By LA Fitness? #919861

    EdSane
    Participant

    The arrow is signifying the direction of travel for the lane it does not block you from turning right after coming to a complete stop.

    For reference:

    https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/transportation/is-it-ok-to-turn-right-on-a-red-arrow/

    • This reply was modified 4 years ago by EdSane.
    in reply to: Seattle Homeowners: Fight for Your Property Rights! #919522

    EdSane
    Participant

    I’m not aware of a concrete proposal to enact changes with the current tree removal process… A tree group has put forth a proposal for the council to discuss in August but that to my knowledge isn’t something they’ve directly endorsed. As is, you don’t need a permit unless it’s exceptional, it’s on public land (parking strip) or on an environmentally critical area (e.g. at risk of landslide). That all seems reasonable. We also don’t know if the final recommendation will allow offsetting the tree cutting by planting elsewhere or if anything will be enacted at all.

    https://crosscut.com/2018/06/can-seattles-trees-survive-its-boom

    in reply to: Door to Door magazine sales #918435

    EdSane
    Participant

    They knocked on my door in the Westwood area a couple days ago. When I declined they were polite and left. I had the feeling that the door to door sellers were generally honest and were likely just as scammed as the people they sell to. I googled the company and that seemed to confirm my suspicions.

    in reply to: Vote out Lisa Herbold #916876

    EdSane
    Participant

    The majority of the city council lacks the political will to take effective action. Overall, I’m satisfied with Lisa Herbold’s work. She’s an elected official tasked with the impossible. This city does not currently have a consensus that would actually solve this issue (which is why politicians don’t take more dramatic action). Personally, I like the take that Redfin’s CEO had on the latest head tax:

    https://www.redfin.com/blog/2018/05/doing-our-part-seattle-head-tax.html


    EdSane
    Participant

    @WSB, the poster stated south west “seattle”, not Burien or unicorpororated king county. The minimum wage is 14 for small business in Seattle unless they contribute to healthcare which is why I asked. Either they provide healthcare, the posting is deceptive or they do not pay the city minimum wage. It’s a fair question to ask.


    EdSane
    Participant

    What kind of medical do you offer?

    in reply to: Seattle Bicyclist #907354

    EdSane
    Participant

    @JoB, To me this is more discussion then rant but to each their own I suppose. I’ve grown tired of the ‘fireworks’ discussion and how that thread was essentially everyone talking over everyone else including that it is lost on anyone that my position was that the law should be enforced 364 days out of the year and that blanket bans/prohibition usually do not curb behavior. In fact my thread of logic is consistent to this issue too. I don’t believe enforcing traffic laws will completely stop this behavior either. It is a social/civic issue that I believe will only change over time as opinions evolve (or driver-less cars which ever come first). I’ve already stated that here briefly.

    If you wanted to start a thread on bad drivers or a particular spot where many break the law I would participate. I use to rent an apartment on Avalon prior to and after the street conversion for the RapidRide Line. Now you have drivers impatiently going around the bus rather then stopping. I do believe there are bad drivers and I wish SPD had a more beefed up traffic division to handle a city the size that we’ve grown to… The discussion started regarding bicyclists and I was keeping my thoughts to that topic.


    @mark
    , by tribal I mean more the ‘defense as one’ not in the sense that all are one. Similar in my mind to gun rights enthusiast who perceive an attack on even those who break the law as an attack on all.

    There are certainly cyclists that feel exempt from traffic laws. As to passing on the right. I’m fine with bicyclist doing that and it is totally legal. I actually think its smarter and safer for the bicyclist to scoot ahead at red lights so they don’t get hit from behind and also as a driver it is easier to see them as I make room to pass. My issue is that some bicyclists insist on passing the car at speed when there is not enough room (e.g. traffic is 15mph and there are parked cars, tight lane with no dedicated bike lane). They shouldn’t be squeezing themselves within inches of my mirror just to get one or two spots ahead.

    As to the Idaho Stop Law, I’m not too familiar with it but from what you’ve stated I’d be interested in how Seattle might adopt such a law. The stop sign as a yield sign sounds fine in theory however I wonder if the average bicyclists would slow down as they approached or blow through at speed. I’m not cool with the red light being treated as a stop sign especially on major arterials.

    Again my outrage is directed at the bicyclists who break the law and don’t share the road. There are a few I encounter daily. I’m all for common sense laws. I just want a little enforcement too. It doesn’t bother me if a bicyclists gets ahead of me or is faster due to traffic.

    in reply to: Seattle Bicyclist #907319

    EdSane
    Participant

    @AJP, you just stated we can’t go after bicyclists there are more important things. That fits right inline with my reasoning that we’re only bringing up bad drivers to cloud the issue concerning bicyclist. I think we can walk and chew gum. Specifically, when something is a cultural issue (attitudes), active discussion and civic engagement is what curbs issues. For example, the cellphone law is a step in the right direction but its more the social shaming aspect that will eventually win over the crowd (not police enforcement). However, I don’t see the bicyclist crowd acknowledging any issues without the ‘but drivers’ which tells me this is more about tribal identity then anything else.

    With regards to conduct. We all need to display the same conduct to each other when driving, riding or walking. It only works because we have a system of rules and expectations and we take predictable actions. Bicycles should not run up the blind side of a car within inches, they should stop at traffic control signals and yield to pedestrians. They’re not exempt because they’re less likely to cause death or injury to anyone but themselves. In fact their unpredictable actions could have severe consequences when drivers react or over react in an attempt to avoid an incident. Accidents are dynamic and chain reactions happen all the time.


    @TSurly
    , please re-read the firework thread. I stated unequivocally that I did not discharge any unlawful fireworks at all. I merely advocated that they should be legal. I have many friends where they are legal and I went there. But again this line of attack is meant to discredit me the person and not my point or even add to the discussion. The topics arn’t even related unless you want to compare two nights a year to commuting every day.

    in reply to: Seattle Bicyclist #907239

    EdSane
    Participant

    @mark47n, the thread was directed at bicyclists and issues they present specifically to cars. I don’t see this as a bone of contention. Issues on drivers is a separate topic. Which is why I pointed out that the document you presented is only helpful if it’s acknowledged that the code of conduct drivers are expected to show towards riders is equally shown by bicyclists. For example, I need to give at least 3 feet of room when passing a bicyclist. They should give me the same courtesy too and not slide within inches of my mirror at 15 mph on a crowded street or take up all of Delridge when there are no parked cars and staying to the right was both safe and prudent. This is what I mean when its a cultural attitude. An us vs them mentality that many bicyclists display when they ride around and some of them intentionally antagonize drivers.

    To be clear my wish for some form of registration has nothing to do with needing licensing for rules of the road. I’d be happy if bicycle serial numbers were large and permanently affixed to be easily read. I feel that a lot of the issues (both bicycle & drivers) are that people feel ‘anonymous’ when they are out in public and that should not be the case when they are utilizing public roads.

    As to the article I cited. My point there was that the data is clearly being collected including a section on pedestrian accidents. This leads me to believe that police do actively investigate issues. I don’t disagree with a lack of citations. But my point is that this is not limited to bicyclists. In the majority of non-major (no fatality or serious injury) accidents where there is a lack of direct evidence there is unlikely to be any citation. I’m just not buying into a conspiracy against bicyclists.


    @tsurly
    , I’m sorry that happened to you. However, the theme of the thread was directed at misbehaving bicyclists. To me this is more of a civics issue rather then political. But, it seems this is fracturing along tribal lines which is more true of politics then anything. It seems to me that the underlying theme of your posts is that we cannot at all address issues with bicyclists until all bad drivers are dealt with. This seems more related to how political parties argue that we can’t talk about ‘this’ issue until ‘that’ issue has been handled. How would anything work with those types of ultimatums? And again I ask what was the purpose of the personal attack other then to discredit my voice rather then discuss the topic at hand?

    in reply to: Seattle Bicyclist #907035

    EdSane
    Participant

    @mark47n, I grant that you have a right to the road. I read through the document you linked and though it was geared towards educating drivers I believe many bicyclist would gain something out of reading it too. Because we’re suppose to share the road and properly yield the right of way. By being assertive bicyclists are failing that and by blowing through red lights and stops signs they fail it. Sure, I’ve broken traffic laws (5mph over is about the only one intentionally). If we observed a driver constantly blowing through the crosswalk next to Boren K-8 (not yielding to peds), blowing through red lights down Delridge or failing to yield at stop signs around the junction. I’m sure they would get a mention on this blog. Yet, I see all of this regularly with multiple bicyclists. This tells me it is a cultural issue with their mentality. So maybe they need a wag of the finger from members of their community. Your angle to denigrate drivers just seems to be away to obfuscate the topic of the thread which is about bicyclists.

    As for liability. To be clear they are not required to carry insurance they are still liable for any actions they take. This is why both drivers and bicyclists should carry cameras. If you blow through a red light and hit my door panel you pay.

    Finally, the comment about drivers not being charged or ‘getting away’ seems pretty disingenuous. If the police did not personally observe the incident, there are no witnesses to corroborate the story by either party and the physical evidence is unclear who had the right of way the police will more then likely assist with the exchange of information and document that an incident occurred. They are not going to cite either driver in that scenario. Now if a major collision or death occurs a full investigation would ensue and final charges would be left to the prosecution team though the officers would make a recommendation.

    Feel free to check out page 63
    https://www.seattle.gov/Documents/Departments/SDOT/About/DocumentLibrary/Reports/2017_Traffic_Report.pdf

    in reply to: Seattle Bicyclist #906861

    EdSane
    Participant

    To be clear I don’t think bicyclists should be in the streets at all if there are sidewalks available. I realize that opinion is in the minority and that we are required to ‘share’ the road. That said I’m tired of the cyclists who break traffic laws and hog the road. Those actions are dangerous and can/do lead to injury. And I think there would be less of those actions if they had a large identifying tag on the back of the bicycle.


    @TSurly
    , why the personal attack?

    in reply to: Seattle Bicyclist #906755

    EdSane
    Participant

    So you don’t believe they should be licensed when they utilize public roads? btw, I don’t care if there is any cost to this registration. To me this is directly related to accountability. We don’t have that currently and if bicyclists are going to be a serious form of transportation they should be treated as such.

    in reply to: Seattle Bicyclist #906705

    EdSane
    Participant

    @TSurly, I agree a dashcam also capture bad drivers too! and certainly helps with an insurance claim when it is a he said he said situation. That said, wouldn’t you agree that cyclists need the same accountability. They should also carry ‘license plates’ so we can identify the ones who flagrantly break laws and potentially lead to accidents. mark47n admitted on this very forum that they disregards traffic control laws and I wonder if the calculus of that choice is directly related to the anonymity of cyclists. Drivers do not have that luxury.

    in reply to: Seattle Bicyclist #906635

    EdSane
    Participant

    Only advice I can give is to invest in a dash cam. Best thing I’ve installed in my car. Bicyclist are liable if they cause damage to your vehicle because they failed to follow the law and having video evidence helps.

    in reply to: not innocent fun #906070

    EdSane
    Participant

    Thank you NBNW and Wes C. Addle for actively adding to the conversation.

    My intent was to advocate and actually bring forth a viewpoint not being expressed and I feel that I have accomplished that. I’m not interested in further participating in this thread as it has devolved beyond a conversation.

    in reply to: not innocent fun #905870

    EdSane
    Participant

    Lol. JoB a more comparable analogy would be if you were my neighbor would I take issue if you were to throw a loud party once in awhile that impacted my sleep. I’ve had those neighbors and no I wouldn’t have a problem with it. One night of bad sleep every once in awhile is perfectly fine and I’m not going to ruin an evening for a dozen people over that if it is rare.

    To be clear what you and other individuals keep trying to state that intentionally disturbing someone with actual malice and/or dangerous activities is somehow the same as fireworks on holidays. It isn’t.

    I’m all for going after people who light them off at other times of the year or even potentially during football season but when all you advocate for is a total prohibition then don’t be surprised that it’s another law that would never be enforced. Cops are not going to go around and start fining thousands of people on holidays.

Viewing 25 posts - 1 through 25 (of 252 total)