SFist: Oh No, Ed Jew!: Arson

Jerry Jarvis

Tue, 29 May 2007 13:39:49 -0800

How long will it take?

rick

Tue, 29 May 2007 13:24:01 -0800

How long befoer this whole ordeal is called TapiocaGate?

CRS

Tue, 29 May 2007 11:22:08 -0800

NoeValleyJim (16): I do believe you are being catty. I got it that you were referring to the previous poster, "sfstop's" post, despite the fact that you didn't tag it with the posting number. But because there was no precedent to your use of "it," "chatty," or "catty" I was looking for one or the other of those references, which aren't there. So your post seemed to be just sitting there referring to... what? As can happen in email and general online posting, if one doesn't actually reference that to which one is referring, it doesn't make sense to readers. There is no inflection to point the reader in the direction the writer intends. I'm sure your post made perfect sense to you, the writer.

NoeValleyJim

Tue, 29 May 2007 00:42:44 -0800

I was responding to the previous poster, which you would have realized if you had noticed the last word "sfstop" which is the posters nom-de-plume. I was accusing him of being catty, because he was complaining about the previous posters spelling. Many times in the past, the sfist staff has asked posters to either be funny or nice, or preferably both. Next time I will type r-e-a-l s-l-o-w so you can get it, okay?

CRS

Mon, 28 May 2007 23:15:15 -0800

Can someone please explain what NoeValleyJim means in (4)? And what does johnv.sf mean in (11)? Both comments seem to be non sequiters.

CRS

Mon, 28 May 2007 22:26:38 -0800

andrew (9): My point about the house's window replacements that are not in keeping with the originals is that he is probably ignoring a directive from the Planning Commission to "replace with same."

Tiffany

Mon, 28 May 2007 19:09:57 -0800

Just a quick delayed update in response to the comment about projects across the street from this house. There are no projects across the street from the house, as I am pretty sure, I lived across from the house. The projects are one block down, but yes, it is a bit generous to call it Laurel Heights.

Bob

Mon, 28 May 2007 13:58:01 -0800

...it's pretty much the western edition. do m&r even live in the city? I don't know if someone who says Western Edition has any right to talk about knowing the city.

johnv.sf

Mon, 28 May 2007 12:56:35 -0800

hey everyone, i think sfstop or sfstupid is "The Jew". We have a rabbit in the bush!

sfstop

Mon, 28 May 2007 10:39:31 -0800

M&R both live in Piedmont.

andrew

Mon, 28 May 2007 09:42:03 -0800

OK, that takes the cake. Maybe the guy took bribes, and maybe he doesn't live in hs district. But he used VINYL WINDOWS!! Throw the bum out, I say!

rut

Sun, 27 May 2007 20:22:02 -0800

um, that's being very generous calling that address laurel heights....maybe kaiser heights. i bet it didn't sell because there's a housing project across the street and it's pretty much the western edition. do m&r even live in the city?

liz

Sun, 27 May 2007 19:58:20 -0800

"Anyways" almost makes you cry, huh? Lame. It's a funny word tightbutt.

CRS

Sun, 27 May 2007 17:16:49 -0800

Here we go. Larger photos of the architectural details. Those arches should have been retained... Before; www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/object/article?o=1&f=/c/a/2007/05/27/BAGLRQ2BQP1.DTL After: www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/object/article?f=/c/a/2007/05/27/BAGLRQ2BQP1.DTL&o=0

CRS

Sun, 27 May 2007 15:40:51 -0800

As someone who has watched my share of Planning Commission hearings, I wonder how his window and door replacements got through the Commission. On a house of this age and apparant caliber, the replacement windows and door aren't something the Planning Commission would have approved of. It's much easier to see in the print edition of the Chron, but if you look at the before and after photos of the house in the M&R column, you can see that prior to torching, the windows and door had been narrow with arches at the top. The replacements look too modern for the building. Who knows, they may even be vinyl! Where's a Buiding Inspector when you need one? Before and after facade photos here: www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2007/05/27/BAGLRQ2BQP1.DTL

NoeValleyJim

Sun, 27 May 2007 14:16:41 -0800

It is supposed to be "chatty" not "catty" sfstop.

sfstop

Sun, 27 May 2007 12:59:27 -0800

"Anyways"?????? I love SFist, but it almost makes me cry to see non-words used by high schoolers show up here.

Sal

Sun, 27 May 2007 12:02:45 -0800

(Only $5 million with 13 houses in San Francisco? That doesn't sound right.) Have you ever heard of propertyshark.com? Of the thirteen properties listed in the article you linked to (which, btw, describes the list as property that is or =was= owned by Supervisor Ed Jew and his family, at least four are not currently owned by H&A Jew, Ed Jew or the Jew Trust. (I only checked five addresses before ran out of the "free six reports a day" that propertyshark.com allows without a subscription and didn't go any further. ...) The five I checked: » 1490 Newcomb Ave. sold by Ed Jew & Lorene Chan in 1998 » 1679 32nd Ave. sold by Ed Jew 2003 » 940 Jackson St. Sold by Ed Jew & Lorene Chan in 1999 » 1027-1029 Washington St. Sold by Ed Jew 1997 » 266-268 11th Ave. owned by Jew Trust H&A sold to Jew trust 1998 Perhaps some of your other amateur investigative reporters can actually check with propertyshark.com to see how many of the other eight properties are owned by the family at this point in time.

Tiffany

Sun, 27 May 2007 11:49:25 -0800

Having lived on the same block of 2626 Sutter, I can tell you the rumor on the street was that the arson occurred out of revenge for Jew evicting the former tenants. The rumor was Jew evicted the tenants because one of the tenants died from a drug overdose. After the overdose, Jew evicted the tenants, put the house on the market, and quickly afterwards, the arson occurred. This was the crux of the neighborhood gossip. I make no claims to the veracity. I got to watch the whole fire and the arson crew who came afterwards. Fun times in Laurel Heights.