Category Archives: planning

One more group housing project that won’t skirt its affordability obligations

145 Leavenworth Street

 

by JIM MEKO

Supervisor John Avalos has amended the inclusionary housing legislation he recently introduced to apply affordability requirements to buildings that have not yet received their building permits as of May 2015.

The amendment would embrace two Tenderloin “group housing” projects, at 361 Turk Street and 145 Leavenworth Street, that are scheduled to go before the Planning Commission on June 4. Continue reading

Leave a comment

Filed under housing, planning, politics, social justice

Signatures add up to democracy with a small “d” in San Francisco

How the Board of Supervisors votes next Tuesday on Supervisor David Campos’s interim controls on the construction of market-rate housing in the Mission will determine whether signature gatherers fan out across the city in support of a November ballot initiative that would put a moratorium on market rate housing in the Mission.

Negotiations also continue between Kilroy Corporation and the vendors at the Flower Mart even as they report that they’ve already collected 7,000 signatures to place a “Save the Flower Mart” measure on the same ballot.

And former Board of Supervisors President Aaron Peskin has already submitted the 1,000 signatures necessary to put him on the ballot to challenge District 3 Supervisor Julie Christensen, Mayor Ed Lee’s choice to replace David Chiu on the Board. Continue reading

1 Comment

Filed under planning, politics

Kim dumps more noise into Western SoMa neighborhoods

heklina

by JIM MEKO

Hard on the heels of her vote to restrict your ability to sue noisy nightclubs, Supervisor Jane Kim introduced legislation last week that would open up primarily residential portions of the Western SoMa Plan Area (from approximately 7th Street to 12th Street, from just shy of Mission Street all the way down to Harrison Street) to Limited Live Performance permits. Continue reading

Leave a comment

Filed under entertainment, planning, politics, Uncategorized

“Co-living” scheme succumbs to practicalities of affordability

Screen Shot 2013-12-17 at 6.14.28 AM

Build Inc’s cluster of six story buildings at 1532 Harrison, across the street from the SF Eagle, will no longer pursue an unconventional “co-living” arrangement that takes advantage of the city’s “group housing” code provisions, bowing to pressure to provide a more ordinary housing model that comes with the inclusionary housing requirements most housing is already required to provide. Continue reading

2 Comments

Filed under planning, Uncategorized

Campos proposes moratorium on new housing in the Mission

Supervisor David Campos proposed a halt to new housing production in his District this week.  Continue reading

Leave a comment

Filed under housing, planning, politics, Uncategorized

After 8 months, developer still hasn’t complied with city planning rules

The story of 660 Third Street is a sad example of how big commercial property owners can get away with ignoring zoning rules

by ZELDA BRONSTEIN
48hills.org

Last September supporters of PDR (Production, Distribution and Repair) jobs — and the rule of law in San Francisco — thought they’d scored a rare victory, when the Planning Commission told the owners of the PDR-zoned property at 660 Third Street that it would not authorize their illegal conversion of the entire property to office space. But more than seven months later, there are still office tenants in the space that is supposed to be limited to PDR, and the building manager is advertising office space for lease, as Planning officials struggle to get the owner to comply. Visit 48hills.org to read the complete story.

Leave a comment

Filed under planning

Why one-way streets are bad for everyone but speeding cars

An EIR is currently underway to study whether Folsom Street should be converted to two-way traffic.

An EIR is currently underway to study whether Folsom Street should be converted to two-way traffic.

by EMILY BADGER
The Washington Post

“Traffic tends to move faster on a wide one-way road than on a comparable two-way city street, and slower traffic means fewer accidents. The rest of these results are theoretically connected to each other in complex ways. To the extent that vice flourishes on neglected high-speed, one-way, getaway roads, two-way streets may be less conducive to certain crimes. If they bring slower traffic and, as a result, more cyclists and pedestrians, that also creates more “eyes on the street” — which, again, deters crime. A decline in crime and calmer traffic in turn may raise property values — which may also increase the demand of residents to police and care for their neighborhood.” To read the complete article, visit The Washington Post blogs

Leave a comment

Filed under crime watch, economics, planning, public safety, quality of life, transportation