Residents alarmed by program encouraging density in residential developments

By Laura Dudnick : sfexaminer – excerpt

It’s widely agreed that more than one solution is needed to solve San Francisco’s housing crisis.

But allowing taller development projects in the less dense west side of The City shouldn’t necessarily be one of them.

That’s according to the some 100 residents, primarily from the Sunset and Richmond districts, who packed a community meeting at the Ortega Library on Thursday night to address concerns with a housing program introduced by Mayor Ed Lee and Supervisor Katy Tang last month that seeks to increase below­-market­-rate units throughout The City.

The Affordable Housing Bonus Program would apply to some 30,850 parcels in San Francisco, primarily in areas zoned as neighborhood districts where commercial use is either required or permitted on the ground floor, with residential units above. Projects that develop at least five units of housing would benefit from the program.

Incentives for developers would include taller height limits — ­up to an additional two stories — and increased density for building 30 percent of the homes on­-site as below-market-rate. Developers of at least 10-­unit projects are required by current city law to include 12 percent of on­-site homes as below­-market-­rate or pay a fee.

Taller buildings, however, did not sit well with residents at the meeting, who argued oceanfront property along the Great Highway is ripe for developers who want to take advantage of the program. Tang emphasized that it’s highly unlikely a wall of developments will rise along the water anytime soon.

All of the sudden, we’re going to get these seven­-story buildings on the beach ­— that is very unrealistic,” Tang said.

City planners estimate the program would apply to some 240 sites throughout San Francisco, potentially bringing up to 4,000 below­-market-­rate units in the next two decades.

While residents at the meeting supported building more below­-market­-rate housing, many voiced strong opposition to increasing density in a neighborhood they opted to live in specifically because of the shorter buildings, more open space, beach views and ample parking.

“My main concern with the program is that it’s going to change the culture of this neighborhood dramatically. We’re not made to have high­-rises,” said Ann Grimaldi, a longtime Sunset district resident…

Tang emphasized the program will not take effect until next year. An informational hearing is scheduled at the Planning Commission meeting next week, and the legislation must still receive approval from the Board of Supervisors.

“We are in no rush to pass this legislation,” Tang said… (more)

“Tang emphasized the program will not take effect until next year.” Next year is two months away. Most of the fights at City Hall are between the developer-freindly administration and the residents who want to regain control of their city. It started in the Mission and the Eastern Neighborhoods, but has spread to the westside of town. The Affordable Housing Bonus Plan is the proof that the Mission Moratorium is the first step to stopping the highrise spread to the Ocean. The first place developers will strike is at the ocean. See the maps below for proof of that the plan has no limits. In fact, the plan is to remove all limits. More details are here.

Dissension in the streets, but Lee coasting to victory

By Joshua Sabatini : sfweekly – excerpt

Like his predecessor before him, Mayor Ed Lee is coasting to a second term victory.

So much so it may seem he spends more time at press events for his District 3 appointee Julie Christensen in a nail-biter contest against progressive challenger Aaron Peskin than stumping for himself. Ask his campaign, and they will say the mayor’s main focus is ensuring his $310 million affordable housing bond passes with two-thirds of the vote…

The only candidate “debate” the mayor engaged in on the so-called campaign trail was more of a staged question-and-answer that left most people underwhelmed. He generally came off scripted, similar to how he operates when he attends monthly question time sessions before the Board of Supervisors, and by some accounts seemed disinterested…

While the mayor may not have a contest on his hands, there are three contests on the ballot that would have a direct impact on his next four years in office: Proposition I, the Mission moratorium; Proposition F, tougher restrictions on short-term rental platforms like Airbnb; and the District 3 supervisor race, according to McDaniel.

“If the progressives get [Prop.] I passed and [Prop.] F passed and Peskin wins, all right, they have a strong case to make that the mayor needs to work with them and change what he has been doing,” McDaniel said. “If that doesn’t happen, I think the mayor will have a sense of being vindicated in his style of governance and results-oriented approach he has taken.”… (most)

New study shows Mission in dire trouble

By Tim Redmond : 48hills – excerpt

City report says Latinos are getting forced out, working-class people are getting forced out, families are getting forced out — and building new market-rate housing isn’t going to help.

OCTOBER 29, 2015 – A report released yesterday by the city’s Legislative and Budget Analysts puts to rest, for good, the idea that San Francisco can stabilize housing prices by building more market-rate units.

The study of displacement in the Mission, requested by Sup. David Campos, shows the dramatic decrease in Latino population in that neighborhood and projects even further displacement in the future.

It also looks at how much housing the city would have to build to bring prices down to the level of the rest of the country: 15,300 units a year. If the city had built 459,000 new homes since 1980, the crisis might not be so bad, the report notes.

Under that scenario, the population of one of the densest cities in the nation would have more than doubled, to 1.7 million.

The cost of providing infrastructure for that many people would be astronomical and would dwarf even the relatively robust city budgets that we’ve seen in recent years…

Opponents of Prop. I, the 18-month halt in market-rate housing development, are spending hundreds of thousands of dollars trying to convince voters that it’s a bad idea They point to a study by the city’s economist that says stopping new buildings will only make things worse.

That study had its problems – but anyone who thinks more building or more luxury housing is going to trickle down and prevent displacement in the Mission hasn’t paid any attention to the history of housing in SF.

And now we know that the “build-and-build-and-the-rent-will-come-down” line is, to say the least, wildly optimistic. Unless we want to double the population of the city, or more, in the next ten years… (more)

News Flash! Big Win in the Mission.

News Flash!

Big Win in the Mission. Monster Crumbles.

Deals itself a Crushing Blow!

Breaking news!

PRESS CONFERENCE & RALLY: MONDAY August 24, at 12 NOON 

No More Monsters in the Mission from zRants on Vimeo.

Song Lyrics:
No more Monsters in the Mission.
We don’t need that ugly Site.
We need homes we can afford.
And for this we organize.
No more Monsters in the Mission.
We don’t need that ugly Site.
We need homes we can afford.
And for this we vote prop I.

NO Monster in the Mission!
YES on Prop I!
Studio 17
NO Beast on Bryant!
Affordable housing not luxury development!

More details