We are told that affordability is the Number One issue for voters this year

Investigating the Safeway closures turned into a multitude of detailed investigations that are summed up here rather well on this site by agricultural organizations.  https://www.affordabilitywatchca.org 
They cover some of the major reasons I have been talking about for the high cost of food and huge changes In California’s agricultural industry. https://www.affordabilitywatchca.org/food

This week we saw some possible good news on the Marina Safeway. Someone is taking the nearby park issue seriously according to the sfist.

Opponents Say Proposed 25-Story Marina Safeway Project May Not Be Eligible For Fast-Tracking

By Leeanne Maxwell : sfist – excerpt

The proposed 790-unit Marina Safeway redevelopment was granted fast-track status under a state housing law, but opponents argue the project may not actually qualify because the law requires that the majority of the surrounding land already be developed for “urban uses.”

The latest challenge to the proposed 25-story Marina Safeway redevelopment centers on whether the project should have been allowed to bypass a full environmental review, as the Chronicle reports. In a letter signed by several neighborhood groups, Marina Supervisor Stephen Sherrill argues the project does not qualify for streamlining under Assembly Bill 2011 because the law reportedly requires at least 75% of adjoining parcels to already be developed for “urban uses.”

Sherrill contends the requirement isn’t met because much of the property surrounding the Safeway site consists of parks and open space, including Marina Green, the Marina Yacht Harbor, and nearby land managed by SF Recreation and Park or the National Park Service at Fort Mason...(more)

New Melgar-Lurie plan for affordable housing is great; cutting other funding is not

By Tim Redmond : 48hills – excerpt

Expanding the Housing Trust Fund could bring in $125 million a year. Repealing Prop. I could wipe out almost as much

Anything that adds more money for affordable housing in San Francisco is, by default, a good thing. The Council of Community Housing Organizations is celebrating new legislation, originated by CCHO and and SF Community Land Trust, that would increase the city’s Housing Trust Fund to as much as $125 million a year.

It’s not an unusual approach, by historic standards: In essence, the Trust Fund would grow as part of what we used to call “tax increment financing.” The additional property tax money that comes in from the city’s radical upzoning would in part (a fairly small part) be dedicated to affordable housing. It’s also called “value capture.”

Sup. Myrna Melgar took on the legislation to make this new approach happen, and Mayor Daniel Lurie signed on, and it will wind up on the ballot in November. The plan is to make sure the trust fund is in the City Charter, so no future mayor or supervisors can divert the money to other purposes.

Since it’s a defined revenue stream, the city could issue revenue bonds against it, bringing in immediate money for housing.

All of that is good. As CCHO Executive Director Quintin Mecke notes:

“Today, more than 17,000 approved affordable homes sit in San Francisco’s pipeline — entitled, designed, and waiting. Ready for permits. Ready on zoning. Waiting only for funding.

The Housing Trust Fund, as currently structured, falls short of what that pipeline demands.

The proposed Charter Amendment can begin to change that. This is a transformation, and we should name it as one.”…

UPDATE: Melgar told me there is no deal involving Prop. I; the only deal was to reduce the amount of required affordable housing in new projects. She said she is not currently supporting the BUILD Act.

Former Sup. Dean Preston and his allies are circulating petitions that would make Prop. I permanent–and would mandate that the money go for affordable housing. Lurie will oppose that.

Some folks will say that Preston and SF’s chapter of the Democratic Socialists of America are undermining the “deal” that trades away Prop. I and inclusionary housing for this new, valuable, steady income source.

But Mecke told me that in his meetings with Melgar’s Office and Lurie’s Office, nobody said that the new trust fund hinged on everyone supporting the repeal of Prop. I and the cut in affordability requirements. “I was never asked to agree to a deal,” he said.… (more)

This continues to be one of the most convoluted way to operate an affordable housing plan. No matter where you look there is a “gotcha”. Perhaps when the dust settles one may be able to look at what options remain for the voters to respond to in November.

Meanwhile, what is being done to get the people who need housing into the thousands of empty units, some owned by companies that are or will soon declare bankruptcy and may well owe the city millions of dollars in back taxes.

We hear that Parkmerced is largely empty and the owners are broke. What can’t these properties, which can’t be in worse shade than some of the affordable housing projects we hear about, be turned into a temporary housing project for the people who are already signed up for housing?

RELATED:

How a CCHO idea became a $3 billion Charter Amendment — and why the fight isn’t over.  (By Quintin Mecke, SF CCHO : substack )

 

 

Sewage Flooding: Neighbors Fear Wastewater From Ingleside’s New Housing Will Overwhelm Strained Sewer

by CASEY MICHIE : inglesidelight – excerpt

In the span of minutes the sewage and stormwater flooded Ashton Avenue. (from Inglesidelight)

“We experienced firsthand the adage shit goes downhill, and I have the toilet paper in my backyard to prove it.”

L. Richard Billups woke up Christmas morning to find his 2000 Chevrolet Corvette ruined.

An overnight storm caused a flood of brown stormwater and sewage out front Billups’ home on Ashton Avenue, where he has lived for about 50 years in San Francisco’s Ingleside Terraces. The flood destroyed his car’s electrical systems, monitors, carpet and seats.

“The insurance company said the cost would be more than the car is worth as far as market value is concerned,” he said. “That’s the price to them. It meant a lot more to me.”

Video footage provided to The Ingleside Light by a neighbor shows the brown water rushing from Ocean Avenue onto Ashton Avenue around 2:43 a.m. on Dec. 25, overrunning gutters and pooling on sidewalks and yards…

The incident was the latest in a series of combined stormwater-sewage floods that residents say the city has repeatedly failed to address. With the 1,100-unit Balboa Reservoir project underway and a seven-story mixed-use developmentproposed nearby, neighbors are demanding upgrades to an undersized sewer under Ocean Avenue before increased wastewater from additional residents adds further strain to a sewage system they say has been inadequate for years… (more)

Where are the YIMBY comments on damage when infrastructure is not taken care of prior to constructing new developments? Must neighbors wait till the damage is done to sue for relief? How are the insurance companies going to handle these cases?

S.F. eyes $125M annually for affordable housing, more than double current funding

By JOE RIVANO BARROS : missionlocal – excerpt

Melgar, Lurie also announce immediate $70 million injection to preserve housing

Existing affordable housing that needs protection. photo by zrants

Supervisor Myrna Melgar plans to introduce legislation Tuesday that would more than double San Francisco’s annual budget for affordable housing to some $125 million, part of a bargain she hammered out with Mayor Daniel Lurie.

Melgar said her proposal would vastly expand the city’s capacity to build affordable housing by allocating $125 million annually into the city’s Housing Trust Fund, up from the $52 million that goes into it today, while also extending the fund for another 30 years. That would be a total of at least $3.75 billion.

The increase would be funded by “allocating a portion of future property tax growth every year” to the fund, according to a press release sent by Melgar and Lurie.

“I cut a deal with the mayor,” Melgar said, to use property taxes “coming from the increase in the value of all properties in San Francisco” as a result of last year’s upzoning.

The proposal would take the increase in future property taxes and “put it aside” into the low-income housing fund, Melgar said.

“Housing is not getting built at the pace we need, and the consequences are all around us,” Mayor Lurie said in a statement. “Today, we’re jumpstarting affordable housing in San Francisco.”… (more)

It is good to hear someone mentioning the need to preserve the existing affordable housing as an immediate plan. Given the economic  reality that we are living in, it is naive to expect new housing will be built any time soon. That is no one’s fault, unless you want to blame the national condition we are living in, but, placing the blame does not solve the problem. Giving into reality and what is possible now does.

 

Please Help the landowner of the four undeveloped lots at 1230 – 1240 Twin Peaks Blvd. donate his property

The lot owner would like to donate the property to either the city, the RPD and/or a nature conservatory.  He does not want to sell the property and have it developed for housing units.  He has asked the surrounding neighborhood, Midtown Terrace Home Owners Association (MTHOA) to take the lead in helping him donate his property.  To sign the “Donate the Land” petition contact: Midtownterrace.org

If the property were to be donated, it would remain in its natural state and probably be planted with California native plants.  The landowner would also donate $50,000 towards property maintenance.

This property is at the gateway of the Panorama Drive side of Twin Peaks Blvd.  If the donated lots were kept in a natural state, they would greatly compliment the entrance of the new Promenade that is being built on the top of Twin Peaks.

Twin Peaks is the second-highest natural point in San Francisco (922+ feet), surpassed only by Mount Davidson.  Unofficially the number two (2) tourist destination by volume, Twin Peaks is a premier, world-famous attraction renowned for offering the best 360-degree, panoramic views of the City and Bay.

TIME IS OF THE ESSENCE:If the landowner cannot donate his property, it will be sold to a developer. This will lead to prolonged construction, an unattractive building, public safety issues, parking problems, traffic congestion, noise, quality of life concerns for surrounding residents and increases in crime. Please Contact: MidtownTerrace.org and Myrna Melgar 415-554-6516 or MelgarStaff@sfgov.org

An update from Los Altos Hills

By Lynn La : calmatters via email:

Horses are welcome in Los Altos Hills, among other communities in the Peninsula that appreciate a rural lifestyle, where some vineyards and orchards struggle to survive.

Last fall, CalMatters covered the saga of the well-to-do Silicon Valley suburb that set aside some land for denser development in compliance with state housing law, only to scale back its plans once a developer proposed a major apartment project for the site. Since then, regulators with California’s Housing Department signed off on the town’s about-face.

Now, the California Housing Defense Fund, a pro-development legal advocacy group, is suing the town, arguing that its housing plan violates state law — even if the state’s own regulators don’t see things that way.

Is it possible the legal YIMBY arm is reaching too far as it attacks the root of its support? How much is too much and when is it time to retreat? The peninsula is known for its excellent local food sources that feed fine restaurants in the Bay Area.

Keep Crocker Real

 

By Keep Crocker Real released files this week. A lot is at stake. We need to hear your voices. Thursday, February 19, at 10:00am, City Hall, room 416. It’s item 9 on the agenda:

 

 

SYNTHETIC TURF PROGRAM – POLICY AND PROTOCOLS
You can documents on our website: keepcrockerreal.com/files

While you still can consider visiting Hummingbird Farm on February 22, from 11:00am to 2:00pm. where we will hang artwork from our If Nature Could Talk event on the 100+ trees Rec & Park intends to cut down. (We won’t damage the trees.) This is a great way to pay tribute to the historic trees and wildlife that will no longer be around if the “renovation” plan goes through unchanged.

If you want to learn more about the harms of plastic, author Judith Enck’s is giving a talk at the Commonwealth Club titled, The Problem with Plastic on Thursday, February 19 at 5:30pm.

This fight for a better neighborhood park isn’t over yet. We look forward to meeting and working with you soon. keepcrockerreal.com

Calmatters has a number of articles on various attempts made by state legislators to stop the installation of Astroturf. If any of these legislators are still in office, one might contact them to find out how you may help them bring the matter forward again.

Key  Legislative Actions and Trends

  • California SB 676 (2023): Signed into law, this allows cities and counties to restrict or ban the installation of artificial turf on residential properties. It effectively reverses a 2015 law that had prohibited local governments from doing so to encourage water-wise landscaping. This is why Rec and Park is holding hearings on the matter now.
  • California AB 1423 (2023): Proposed legislation that aims to ban the manufacturing and sale of artificial turf containing PFAS (per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances).
  • Colorado SB24-081 (2024): Prohibits the installation of artificial turf containing intentionally added PFAS on state property starting January 1, 2026.
  • Local Bans: Certain municipalities, such as Boston, have implemented prohibitions on installing new artificial turf in city parks.

Environmental and Health Concerns Driving Legislation

  • Chemical Exposure: Studies have found PFAS, lead, and BPA in artificial turf materials, which can leach into the environment and be ingested or absorbed by users.
  • Microplastics: Turf breaks down into microplastics that wash into water sources.
  • Environmental Impact: Artificial turf creates “heat islands,” reduces biodiversity, and prevents soil aeration

California’s blockbuster legislation faces rocky rollout

By Sam Dillon : msn – excerpt

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/californias-blockbuster-housing-legislation-faces-rocky-rollout/ar-AA1W4Md0?ocid=socialshare

There is a bit of a disconnect between theory and results with the Wiener bills. Art by sfbluecomics.

Mass confusion over the meaning and implementation of SB79, which amounts to unlimited growth near mass transit, is sweeping California’s largest cities that are targeted by the one of the most draconian bills ever devised. After turning over the Pacific coastline to developers, and blaming cities for the housing shortage, Senator Wiener, has managed to make almost everyone mad at him. Now it turns out his penchant for writing long, detailed, prescriptive bills is not playing well with the public or city officials who are charged with enforcing what has been described as developer wet dreams.

In his haste to divide and conquer Wiener has succeeded in dividing both his friends and foes, often referred to as YIMBYS and NIMBYS. Wiener is not enjoying a lot of support from the press either. He relies heavily on the Abundant crowd in Silicon Valley, that his constituents are being hammered by. If you were not recently laid off by a high tech firm, you may have lost your income to Waymo or been evicted from a gentrified neighborhood.

Wiener is fighting a Dead horse that is obvious to everyone but him and people are ready to fight back.

There are some gems in this article that covers a lot of the history of how we got here and where the Wiener of the world want us to go. Here are a couple of pull-quotes from the article:

S.F. housing is hottest topic in first debate between District 2 supervisor candidates

by IO YEH GILMAN : missionlocal – excerpt

In the first debate between the two candidates for San Francisco District 2 supervisor on Tuesday evening, housing was the most contentious topic.

Though candidates Stephen Sherrill and Lori Brooke also spent large parts of the debate talking about cars and public safety, their answers on housing drew the most audible response from the crowd of about 200 people gathered at Convent & Stuart Hall, who leaned older and whiter…

Brooke, a longtime neighborhood organizer, criticized the city’s recent upzoning plan, which allows taller, denser housing in the city’s north and west, including on commercial corridors like Lombard and Chestnut streets in District 2…

Neighborhoods United SF, which Brooke co-founded, is part of a coalition currently suing the city to block the upzoning plan.

Sherrill, who was appointed District 2 supervisor by outgoing Mayor London Breed in December 2024, voted for the plan. But at the debate, as he has previously, he distanced himself from it, pointing out that the upzoning was mandated by the state.

If he hadn’t voted for it, he said, the state would have taken over San Francisco’s ability to approve new housing, essentially allowing buildings of any height to be built anywhere…

Brooke pushed back on Sherrill, saying that state takeover wasn’t the “real issue.” That, she said, is YIMBY state laws — the ones that required upzoning and allowed a 25-story buildingto be proposed on the current site of the Marina Safeway right by the waterfront.

This did not let Sherrill off the hook. “My opponent says he doesn’t like [the Marina Safeway development], which is good, but he is endorsed by the very senator and the YIMBY organizations that wrote and championed the laws that made it possible,” Brooke said.

Unlike Sherrill, she said, she would push back strongly against Sacramento.

Sherrill, for his part, said, “I absolutely urge our state representatives to reform some of these laws.”…

Other questions focused on street safety and drugs.

Both Sherrill and Brooke said they think drug dealers with prior convictions should serve mandatory jail time. (“Thank you,” said Moriarty.) Both also agreed that fully staffing the police department was a high priority…

Another big topic: Transportation. Both candidates agreed that Market Street should be reopened to cars (a few people booed, then some cheered). They also both agreed that new housing developments should include more parking.

The city should not prioritize any “single mode” of transportation and should give “appropriate” weight to other forms of transportation, Brooke said, pointing to frustrations over traffic and parking. The city’s “transportation decisions,” she said, have become “less about neighborhood actual function and more about transit ideology.”… (more)

I love the way the media keeps harping on some districts for building less new housing than other districts. There is a good reason for this. Some districts are already built out, and some districts have a large amount of open space or old industrial uses that can easily to converted into new neighborhoods. There is also a different in seismic stress that we saw during the Loma Prieta earthquake. The Marina had heavy damage. Is this the place to build a 25 story housing project?


New Bombshell story from NY Post:   Ex-San Francisco mayor appointed Bloomberg pal to key seat in hopes of landing a job. People ask, is that legal or is that a bribe? Could this effect the election?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Supes approve affordable senior housing project—but discussion raises larger issue

By Tim Redmond : 48hills – excerpt

Nonprofit housers are good neighbors. Speculators are not. But Wiener’s law treats both the same way.

To the surprise of nobody, the Board of Supes Tuesday rejected an attempt to delay or undermine an affordable housing project for seniors at the foot of Bernal Hill. The vote was unanimous.

A few neighbors on Coleridge street complained that the project would reduce the size of an existing park that has been closed for years and was hardly ever used when it was open. It’s a private park, not a city park, and it sits on top of a pedestal with a garage underneath, which makes it unstable anyway.

The project would include a new park that would be much more accessible…

Sup. Jackie Fielder, who supported the affordable senior housing, asked Planning Department staffer Audrey Maloney a pretty basic question. Under current state law, where are people supposed to go to raise questions about a new development in their neighborhood?

Maloney: Under SB 35 (a bill by state Sen. Scott Wiener), the city has no role in this project. The public has no right to a hearing. If it’s compliant with the local zoning, there’s nowhere to raise any questions. It’s approved by right…(more)

I’m going to add one other issue that comes to mind where handing out entitlements to developers is concerned. Not all of the projects are being built as planned. Quite a few change hands and the plans may be altered without any notice.  That is of great concern to the neighbors, and everyone concerned. Thousands of units are on hold. We have no idea what the developers will finally do once they decide to build, if they ever do.

As we all know, and Tim Redmond points out, “But SB 35, and its unholy progeny SB 423, doesn’t just apply to affordable housing projects. It also applies to a huge number of potential market-rate projects in much of San Francisco.” 

We don’t need for the state to declare we are under builder’s remedy because we failed to meet the RHNA goals. We already are.