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?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

What you should know about the Upzoning

If you live in SF, or in the state of California you have probably heard something about Upzoing plans. If you are confused about the maps and the plans, you are not alone. See the September meetings listed on the calendar for where you may go to learn more: https://csfn.net/csfn-events/

People who try to follow it are constantly finding themselves running down another rabbit hole that leads back to Sacramento and our most controversial State Senator Wiener. After Wiener and Newsom removed the authority of the California Coastal Coastal Commission to control development on the California coast, Wiener is pushing SB 79 to remove single family zoning from the entire state. See the map below that attempts to illustrate the effects of SB 79 on the SF Zoning map

This iMap is supposed to indicate he targeted areas for SB 79

Wieners enemies may outweigh his friends, but his friends hold a huge,  powerful purse and they are shifting him toward Washington. Some would like to see him go just to get him out of Sacramento, but others want him permanently out of politics. Given his close ties to the most unpopular SF Supervisor in SF, and the disdain hundreds of cities and communities around the state have for him, Scott may need more than money to win the Washington post he covets.  But we are here to look a the maps.

The SF Planning Department has created many maps and overlays and new ones are popping up all the time.  Everyone appears to be confused.

The below map that indicates where density decontrol may be applied  is perhaps the most disturbing as it covers the entire city, including those neighborhoods that were already up zoned in the Eastern Neighborhoods.
Density decontrol is a new term that applies to the minimum size of a unit. It appears there is no minimum requirement where destiny decontrol is applied.

We understand the height limits along the pink areas are also open to density decontrol.

Given all the various maps and re-zoning at the state and local levels, the one question no one can answer is, how do all the state and local density laws affect each other? Can developers apply state density bonuses on top of city height limit increases? No one seems to know the answer.

Find out more by attending one of the September meetings where discussion will be held and SF Planning explains the plans and the public gets to ask what is means to them.

PRESS RELEASE: SAN FRANCISCO HERITAGE PROTESTS PLANNED DEMOLITION OF CITY LANDMARK

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

July 21, 2025 [SAN FRANCISCO]—San Francisco Heritage, the city’s leading preservation nonprofit, protests a planned demolition of 447 Battery Street, one of San Francisco’s 320 designated city landmarks, and calls on the Board of Supervisors to preserve the building.

As part of a proposed development agreement between the city and developer Related California, 447 Battery Street—the former Jones Thierbach Coffee Company warehouse and San Francisco Landmark no. 299—is proposed for demolition to make way for a mixed-use luxury office/hotel tower at 530 Sansome Street and new city fire station.

“This is unprecedented,” said Woody LaBounty, SF Heritage President & CEO. “Since the city’s landmarks program establishment in the late 1960s, only 320 have been designated and none have been intentionally destroyed.”…

“Landmarks are more than old or attractive buildings,” LaBounty said. “From the Mission Cultural Center to the Rainbow Flag in the Castro to City Cemetery in Lincoln Park, they tell our collective story. By establishing that they can be erased for needs of the moment we open the door to losing any of them.”

San Francisco has more than 200,000 parcels, but only 320 designated landmarks under Article 10 of the Planning Code. The purpose of Article 10 is described as necessary to promote the health, safety, and general welfare of the public through, in part, “the enrichment of human life in its educational and cultural dimensions…by fostering knowledge of the living heritage of the past.”… (more)

Confederacy of NIMBYS cheer Peskin, criticize Melgar on housing

By KELLY WALDRON : missionlocal – excerpt

As dozens of slides on the evils of new housing construction flashed on the screen, the 100 or so residents gathered Wednesday night at the Scottish Rite Masonic Center agreed on one thing: Board of Supervisors President Aaron Peskin best represented their views, while the local district supervisor Myrna Melgar did not.
Peskin, who is running for mayor and spoke for around 10 minutes, often skeptical of new market-rate housing, was a clear winner for the crowd. District 7 Supervisor Melgar, who represents the area in which the meeting was held and is running for re-election there, attended but did not speak. She was not a fan favorite — and she made it clear the feeling was mutual.
“These are not my people,” said Melgar about the event put on by Neighborhoods United, a coalition of over 50 neighborhood associations across the city…(more)  
 
Melgar was invited to speak but just sat in the audience and said nothing. One of her opponents, Stephen Martin-Pinto was in attendance and gathered a lot of support last night. There were a lot of people from D-4., D-7, and D-11 that I recognized.

RELATED:

An Open Letter to Mission Local reporter Kelly Waldron