Killing the Bay Views One Stadium at a Time by zrants
By now most Bay Area residents know what California Senate Bill 827 is, and what its authors Scott Wiener and Nancy Skinner say they want to accomplish. Most residents are also aware that there is opposition to the draconian nature of this bill.
The purported objective of SB 827 is to force all cities and counties in California to build lots of housing along all transit routes. Theoretically, the increased supply would bring prices down; while proximity to bus and rail routes would encourage residents to ride transit, not drive their cars. Do these objectives ring true in the context of today’s California housing “market.” Does proximity to transit translate into increased transit ridership? Does SB 827 even make any sense?…
Would SB 827 bring housing prices down? Would SB 827 get people to take public transit? What is the elasticity of SB 827? Would SB 827 work with flexible transit schedules?
Opposition to a state bill that would increase housing density and heights near transit routes is building. Now one city lawmaker is threatening legal action.
Supervisor Aaron Peskin on Monday pledged to sue the state to overturn Senate Bill 827 should it be approved.
“I am an unabashed opponent,” Peskin told a packed crowd of San Franciscans at a Board of Supervisors Land Use Committee hearing on a resolution he authored that would put The City on record as opposing the bill.
Peskin said the bill carried echoes of the redevelopment of the Western Addition, which displaced much of The City’s black community, and places San Francisco on the “precipice” of displacement.
Though the Board of Supervisors has no authority to direct the City Attorney’s Office, Peskin said he would explore the possibility with the office… (more)
When did our lawmakers in Sacramento decide that it is OK to powertrip us the way that Trump is stepping on their authority? The power grab out of Sacramento is not lost on the voters. Citizens from San Diego to Eureka have gotten the message that Sacramento is attempting a major shift in state Land Use and zoning policies, and they are fighting back. What are the options if you don’t like what is happening? At least two recalls are on the ballot so far due to angry voters. More may follow.
Legal pushbacks are already coming from both sides. Our ex-mayor, governor-wannbe, Newsom, lead the suit against San Francisco over who has the right to determine the development of the waterfront. The state settled that one. YIMBYs, lead by Sonja Trauss, who is running for D-6 Supervisor, are suing cities they claim are not meeting their YIMBY density goals, using the 1982 Housing Accountability Act . SB 827 and 828 will give the YIMBYs more fuel to sue. If you want to stop this power grab send letters to the Board of Supervisors and your state legislators to let them know how you feel about the state power grab and SB 827 and 828.
For decades every city and county in California has been given a housing quota, or “Regional Housing Needs Assessment” allocation (RHNA, often pronounced ree-na) that it must plan for. Cities don’t build housing or submit housing proposals (a fatal flaw in Wiener’s Senate Bill 828 we’ll come back to) but these quotas require that cities and counties produce specific numbers of units at different income levels.
These quotas are calculated by a number of regional government bodies such as the Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG), the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG), and the Association of Monterey Bay Area Governments (AMBAG)…
Senate Bills 35 and 828 – A deadly cocktail…
The fundamental flaw of Senate Bill 35 is that cities do not control how many development proposals are submitted for approval. Yet, SB 35 holds cities accountable for how many units they approve. Anyone can easily understand this disconnect. Wiener and Hanlon who authored SB35 chose not to…
Thankfully a lot of California cities and counties are demanding their state reps oppose this bill. NO amendment will work when the intent is to overturn local jurisdiction over land use and zoning, as these bills are doing. Either you are for centralized government and the state control of your city or not.
I asked if anyone has any data on how long tech workers stay in their jobs, since we are building homes for them to shorten their commutes. I was directed to this article. Please share this with credit to the source.
How Long Do Employees Stay?
… We already know Amazon’s turnover rate is among the highest but what about other tech disruptors and titans? Whose employees stick around the longest, and whose are heading for the hills?
Facebook had the highest average employee tenure at just over two years, with Google and Oracle not far behind (at just under two years). But here’s a surprise: The highest turnover rate didn’t belong to Amazon. It was Uber that lead the race to the bottom, with 1.2 years of the average employee tenure…(more)
If the average stay at a tech job is less than two years, how can we build housing that cuts commute times for workers who move every two years and why are we disrupting and displacing our communities to make room for a temporary work force?
Please share with credits as follows: Fair Use Statement: Want to share our content for noncommercial purposes? Feel free to share and geek out on the data with us, just link your readers back to this page.
California needs affordable housing. But legislators must follow the data, not anecdotal evidence from monied interests, to find a legislative fix that will encourage development consistent with California’s priorities.
Communities throughout the state, particularly poor and minority neighborhoods, need permanent housing without risking health or increasing carbon emissions.
Some profit-focused developers point a finger at the California Environmental Quality Act as a key obstacle to building more housing. The facts tell a different story. Today’s streamlined CEQA protects public health and natural resources while giving voice to disadvantaged communities.
Multiple recent studies show that CEQA is not a significant barrier to development. Since its adoption in 1970, CEQA has been updated regularly. Senate Bill 226 in 2011 simplified the review of urban infill projects and affordable housing near public transit…
The 2016 proposal put forth by the governor, for example, offered exemptions to high-priced housing units, favoring developers while clearing the way for projects that would have increased air pollution and encouraged sprawl.
There is a disturbing trend in national politics to substitute falsehoods for facts. We can’t let that happen with the laws that protect our natural resources, public health and economy. CEQA keeps the Golden State clean and green by promoting transparency and public accountability.
Allen Hernandez is executive director of the Center for Community Action and Environmental Justice in Riverside. He can be contacted at Allen.H@CCAEJ.org… (more)
A train stop by the Warriors’ new stadium in Mission Bay is set to double in size to accommodate the championship team’s ever-growing fanbase, but the cost to rebuild that stop has also grown by $6 million…
When the Chase Center opens in 2019, the San Francisco Municipal Transportation Agency hopes to rebuild the 160-foot-long light-rail platform at the site to 320 feet long to accommodate more trains and throngs of blue-and-yellow-clad passengers. Officially dubbed the UCSF Platform and Track Improvement Project, the station is also across from UC San Francisco Medical Center at Mission Bay.
The project will include not only the lengthened platform, but the installation of new rail for the T-Third line and train detection and control systems, utility work above and below ground on sewers and electrical lines and street and sidewalk improvements…
“Due to recent bid environment and additional scope, the Project currently has an overall project shortfall of $17.6M,” SFMTA staff wrote. The SFMTA has been working with The Mayor’s Office to identify potential fund sources to address the shortfall.
The Mayor’s Office said no additional dollars from The City’s general fund would be used for the project… (more)
Rent controlled homes cannot be demolished for SB 827 without local govt demo permit; every displaced tenant will have a Right to Remain Guarantee – which is really only a right of first refusal upon completion at the rent previously “enjoyed” by the tenant in their demolished unit (see #4)
Local demo permit process shall remain
Displacement protections: moving expenses & 42 months rental assistance for comparable unit in the area; right of first refusal…
Local setback and yard requirements remain enforceable
State density bonuses may be added
Transit rich projects only qualify within 1/4 of a transit stop on a corridor; not the corridor itself
Street width changes from curb to curb to property line to property line; the width threshold for the taller heights is now 75 feet instead of 45 feet.
Parcels affected are residential and mixed use; not industrial
SB827 projects may be eligible for SB35 streamlining
This really doesn’t change much. It’s still a power grab, and the heights didn’t change, if anything state density bonus impact is confirmed. We always anticipated the local inclusionary requirement would be present.
By George Avalos, Bay Area News Group :santacruzsentinel – excerpt
SANTA CLARA – Solutions to the Bay Area’s increasingly brutal traffic and housing woes won’t necessarily arrive with ease, said business, government and political leaders Friday, at a conference focusing on Silicon Valley’s ability to compete against other innovation hubs.
The Silicon Valley Competitiveness and Innovation Project conference, held in Santa Clara, focused primarily on solutions to the region’s toughest challenges, but also brought sobering revelations about the area’s difficulties.
“For the first time ever, we are seeing more people leaving Silicon Valley than are migrating into this area,” said Brian Brennan, a senior vice president with the Silicon Valley Leadership Group, which sponsored the conference.
During 2016, Silicon Valley and several other innovation hubs experienced a net exodus of residents, according to U.S. Census Bureau population estimates. Silicon Valley endured the departure of an average 42 residents a month… (more)
If we look back a few years into past history we can see that a lot of promises to bring jobs into the Bay Area were made and a lot of “good deals” to employers succeeded in bringing high tech jobs here. Assumptions were made that enough money would come in to pay for all the structural changes that fast population growth would bring with it. Studies prove how unrealistic assumptions can be.
The study, by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration and UC Davis, establishes a stronger link than ever before between air pollution and the lotions, perfumes, hair sprays, and other grooming and cleaning products that Bay Area residents use every day…(more)
I am posting this for my friends who are particularly sensitive to anything scented. Cigarettes were early targets but, now scientists are reporting problems with many household products. Construction dust and cleaning supplies are huge contributors to the particulate matter in the air.
Significant developments on both sides of the Atlantic shine a light on developing regulatory issues for autonomous vehicles.
The first notified insurance claim against a (semi) automated vehicle manufacturer has been brought in the US. Reports have also arrived from California indicating that drivers may be becoming over-reliant on partially automated vehicles in a manner inconsistent with their actual abilities…
First US claims
The first claim against an autonomous vehicle manufacturer has been filed against General Motors, following a collision in San Francisco between a Cruise Automation 2016 Chevrolet Bolt and a motorcyclist.
The motorcyclist alleged that the car had swerved into his path, after failing to complete a move into another lane. GM has denied this, stating that that the motorcyclist had in fact caused the collision.
There are several interesting questions which arise out of this incident:
If the claim proceeds to Trial and liability is found to rest with the vehicle, then whose responsibility is the crash?The vehicle owner?The vehicle was believed to be operating with a driver assistance feature at the time and the manoeuvre was within that the stated capabilities of that feature;
In the alternative, is it GM’s responsibility that the car did not respond to the presence of the motorcyclist correctly?…(more)
This appears to be an insurance company take on the autonomous vehicle industry. I’ve been looking for that.