SFist: SFist Photo: Warm Water Cove Going to the Dogs?

otherthings

Sun, 12 Aug 2007 22:37:13 -0800

guest[19]: I totally agree that they should have handled this better. The good news is that it's not too late to change this situation. We can bring back the art and music without bringing back the trash and needles. There was a guy named Mike Ernst from SPUR distributing feedback forms at the Cove last Saturday, asking people what their vision is for the future of this park. That form is now available online. I’d encourage you all to fill it out, and let Mike and SPUR know what your vision is for the future of Warm Water Cove (mine includes lots of free space for art, music, and general carrying on!) Warmwater Cove survey (pdf) Also, please spread the word about this survey to all your Tire-Beach-loving friends. If enough people fill these out and say they want the art and music to stay, it could have a big impact.

guest

Tue, 07 Aug 2007 21:03:39 -0800

I visited this park for the first time the week before they painted over the walls with my two dogs. I wanted to see for myself what it was really like there. First, it’s located directly under that huge smokestack thing that spews out big clouds of pollution all day. I’m sure the air quality in this park, considering the location, would give most kids/dogs asthma or cancer PDQ. Not the safest place to bring the kids or family dog on a regular basis – unless toxic air exposure doesn’t bother you. I do not think they should have painted over the art that was on those walls – the graffiti was mostly really amazing and incredibly well done. It was criminal that they covered this work up like that. I’m so glad I got to see it, but upset they decided to destroy what I thought was legitimate street art. Yes, there was some stupid, ugly tag type graffiti (and yes, there was a penis on one of the walkways) without any value whatsoever painted on the benches and walkways - that absolutely needed to be cleaned-up/removed. They needed to clean up/replace the benches and tables, clean-up/repave the walkways, perhaps put in some cool plants/greenery - get the dog folks involved, too. But the REAL issue in the park is the amount of trash! I swear I felt like I was walking over some sort of landfill - and some of the trash was from the artists (lots of empty paint cans). My dogs have urban ‘pads of steel’, otherwise I would have freaked and not walked with them though there – it was really dangerous. And it’s a really small park, too. Too small to be a destination DPA, but it could (obviously, does already) work for people who live nearby and need a place to do an off-leash leg stretch. The best way they could have handled this whole thing would have been to keep the art (yes, the work I saw on the walls there WAS art), and join forces with the artists to make the park a better place for everyone, including the artists. They could’ve enlisted the artists to help with getting rid of the trash, ask the artists to do some self-policing as for trash and non-artist tagging activity. I’m sure if they had been treated with respect, they would have been happy to get involved with the clean-up and maintenance. If RPD (or whoever spearheaded this project) had just thought, for once, to legitimize the existing group of unique park users, I bet the artists would have been an incredible asset, and advocates for this park. What I can’t stand about SF's management of the city's open spaces is their utter inability to recognize who's currently using the park and work with these primary park users to do what’s in the best interest of the individual park and serves the primary users best (obviously, I’m not referring to drug addicts, homeless, prostitutes, rapists, muggers, etc.). Legit recreational park users such as skateboarders, dog walkers, graffiti artists, jugglers, whatever – need to be recognized as legitimate worked with. These users love these parks (especially underused parks in non-touristy locations), they use these parks daily, and if you just ask, and give them some authority and inclusion, they can be your best assets and advocates. Shutting them out and criminalizing legit park users only creates conflict and "whitewashes" over the unique diversity found in SF’s open spaces.

brian_brooks

Tue, 07 Aug 2007 14:36:34 -0800

Someone paid for the Sistine Chapel - really? I just thought that Michelangelo when bombing one night and my butt isn't white.

mariconsoy

Tue, 07 Aug 2007 13:46:20 -0800

Matt, the thing on Sat was not just graffiti removal on the walls. Benches and garbage cans, signs too. Teams of people picked up garbage. A special team dealt with the used syringes and there were plenty of those. Another team weeded and spread mulching over the dead grass. It was a general cleanup, but granted, tag removal was a big focus.

guest

Tue, 07 Aug 2007 13:08:51 -0800

Ahem... those of you who are talking about painted penises need to check yourselves. I've been documenting the walls at Warm Water Cove on a weekly basis for three years, and have seen not one painted penis. Not one. So where are these imaginary penises coming from? You might ask your therapist about that. ;-) Of course, that deprives you of your favorite strawman. The fact is that the best of the work painted on those walls held great aesthetic appeal for a substantial number of people. Graffiti haters can paint over it, they can hurl insults at it, but they've already lost the culture clash: young people love it, and it's now the fulcrum on which our visual culture is turning. Regarding "abandonment", it is of course the City of San Francisco that abandoned the park in the first place. The graffiti writers, fringe artists and punk bands are the only ones who have kept the place safe from more serious crime during this park's long and lonely latchkey childhood. Now, suddenly, big Daddy SF wants to reassert his paternal rights? So be it. But the park knows who its real daddy is.

guest

Tue, 07 Aug 2007 13:04:37 -0800

Someone paid for the Sistine Chapel to be painted. No one is paying these fools to paint on other people's property. If you love their "art" so much, why don't you invite them to paint it on the side of your house or on your car? Remember, art doesn't have to be on a canvas! There should be a huge sales tax added to spray paint and large markers to help pay for the cleanup. They have this stuff locked up at most art stores. I first I thought it was to deter vandalism, but it's really locked up to keep "artist" from stealing them. Real artists don't steal or deface other people's property. If you think you're so gansta, then why don't you move your lily-white butt out of the San Francsico slums and let the real poor people live there. You can then move to O-Town and show them how it's really done. You so bad!

mattymatt

Tue, 07 Aug 2007 13:00:31 -0800

J's comment is the smartest analysis of the problem I've read so far. Some graffiti is nice; some sucks; and allowing it to grow organically can sometimes contribute to the dereliction of an area. But the graffiti can't possibly be the biggest cause of blight here -- what about all the industrial waste, the trash, the lack of lighting and pedestrian amenities? Surely they're be doing more damage than the graffiti, right? If the city contracted with some really talented artists (like Gmzeeo, for example) the graffiti might even help reduce the blight that's there.

J

Tue, 07 Aug 2007 12:19:14 -0800

Look, you all are getting all bent out of shape over whether graffiti is art or not... but it is only one part of the equation. Think of the wall paintings as something organic...perhaps like prairie grass. Put the prairie grass where you want it, and it's called prairie grass. If it shows up in your manicured lawn or on the golf course, it's a weed. Wall paintings are the same. Some of the works are truly great works of art. Put those where someone wants them (sistene chapel, murals in the mission) and they remain art. Paint a wall somewhere else with a scribble illegible tag, especially where it's not wanted, then it is considered ugly and negative...and you should get rid of it. The problem with (illegal, unswanted)graffiti in general is that most of the time, it does not add anything valuable to the landscape. Also, by the nature of it being illegal, and takes some time to create, it gives the impression of an unsafe, unsecure, unfriendly, unpatrolled, etc. area in which other deviants and vagrants can do whatever-the-fuck they want on this land. By removing the tags and penises, it sends a message that this place may not be so abandoned afterall. Turning into a safe, people and family friendly park is a good thing. Maybe the city should allow some of the better graffiti artists to put some work up on those walls, once they have been cleaned. Or would the "artists" refuse, because it is no longer sticking the finger up at the man.

mariconsoy

Tue, 07 Aug 2007 12:18:47 -0800

Yes, children can be trained to call you "Mommy Dearest" and to make you a Martini. But dogs are better because you can't be accused of abuse when you put them in a crate to punish them. Dogs also take much less time to house break.

guest

Tue, 07 Aug 2007 11:59:44 -0800

i was having some folgers just now and tend to agree with many of the comments here, especially the better ones. kids and dogs are just, well, different. dogs are typically shorter, for one thing, and furrier. i bet you could teach a dog to make delicious folgers for you, but it would be difficult to make it just right for that great aroma. kids, on the other hand, can certainly be a trial at times. this has been a productive discussion to follow with my wonderful coffee (folgers).

guest

Tue, 07 Aug 2007 11:47:14 -0800

Dogs are a way bigger turnoff to using a park than graffiti is, as far as I'm concerned. Anyone else feel this way? I'm tired of their waste, their slobber, their boundary issues. Graffiti never jumps all over me when I'm trying to read.

aj

Tue, 07 Aug 2007 11:45:40 -0800

Noe Valley is an off leash dog park.

mattymatt

Tue, 07 Aug 2007 11:44:22 -0800

Gavin's right, graffiti IS an eyesore. Unlike gavinsucks.com, which is extremely attractive and well-designed.

brian_brooks

Tue, 07 Aug 2007 11:38:31 -0800

Graffiti is an eyesore. - lame. Come on we can both argue until we are both blue in the face. Graffiti has many different forms. Education yourself before you comment. One of these days I will be explaining to my kids why there are closed minded assholes in the world like yourself.

Gavin Sucks

Tue, 07 Aug 2007 11:20:26 -0800

Graffiti is an eyesore. If you think it's a art and prefer an open air gallery to a dog park then 'man up' and make a buck! Open you own and chage assholes like me to see the shit you do. Stop costing taxpayers. One of these days you'll have a job and maybe kids too. And, then have to explain why someone painted a penis or the "N" word on a wall. Grow up! Gavin Sucks.com, but he's doing a lot more for Warm Water Cove than SFist!

guest

Tue, 07 Aug 2007 10:54:48 -0800

"Dogs are better than children anyday. They don't vandalize MUNI or spray paint on the side of your house. [3] Posted by: guest | August 7, 2007 10:35 AM " Without children, who will you pay to walk your dog in a few years?

guest

Tue, 07 Aug 2007 10:50:12 -0800

"...if it's REAL art then put it on a canvas fool." never heard of Sistine Chapel.

guest

Tue, 07 Aug 2007 10:35:19 -0800

Noe Valley doesn't have an off leash dog park. Unless you count that patch of dirt near the baseball field. Dogs are better than children anyday. They don't vandalize MUNI or spray paint on the side of your house.

guest

Tue, 07 Aug 2007 10:21:49 -0800

Yay! Another f'ing off-leash dog park! Maybe Warm Water Cove can look like Noe Valley soon!

guest

Tue, 07 Aug 2007 09:50:53 -0800

I'm totally down with painting over the graffit (if it's REAL art then put it on a canvas fool), but what's up with the ugly green? I live near several highway overpasses and they've been recently painted the same ugly color (and there wasn't any graffti on them to begin with). Did they get the "ugly color mixed by mistake" discount from a paint store or what? With all the gay people in SF, you'd think they'd ask one of us for decorating help!