The not-historic laundromat project is being delayed again, developer threatens lawsuit against SF

By Dianne de Guzman : sfgate – excerpt

The will-they-won’t-they dance of whether a Mission laundromat will be turned into local housing has reached another roadblock in its quest, and this time the developer is threatening a lawsuit.

The 75-unit building proposed at the Wash Club situated at 2918 Mission St. recently passed the hurdle of the city determining whether it was a historic site. Spoiler: It’s not — but now the San Francisco Board of Supervisors are onto a new topic regarding the building.

Namely, its shadows.

An appeal was filed by Mission organization Calle 24 which called into question whether the shadow cast by the potential building would have an impact on two neighboring schools.

Sup. Hillary Ronen addressed the issue in a Board of Supervisors meeting, asking whether both schools were considered in the Planning Commission hearing for the building, according to SF Weekly… (more)

There is a bit more to it than is covered in this article. Stay tuned as YIMBY Action and caRLA get ready to flex their newly armored muscles thanks to Scott Wiener’s bills that are being rammed through the state legislation. Next up is a newly amended SB 828, that is stuck so far in the Assembly as the clock ticks toward looming deadlines. See page for actions to oppose the bill: https://sfceqa.wordpress.com/oppose-sb-828/

Legislative Website Info

Livable California goes to Sacramento to argue against SB 828

LC1by: Susan Kirsch : marinpost

A five-member team traveled to the State Capitol on Monday, May 21 and met with Senator Ricardo Lara, Chair of the Senate Appropriations Committee, aides of Appropriations Vice Chair Senator Patricia Bates, and the aides of Senators Jim Beall, Steven Bradford, Jerry Hill, and Jim Nielsen.

Our team consisted of Jorge Castaneda (Coalition to Preserve LACoalition to Preserve LA), Tes Welborn (Haight Ashbury Neighborhood Council), Michael Goldman (Sunnyvale City Council memberSunnyvale City Council member), Susan Kirsch (Livable California), and Ileana Wachtel (Coalition to Preserve LA)

Our message was clear.

Reject Scott Wiener’s SB-828, which changes the methodology for calculating Regional Housing Need Assessments (RHNA) quotas.

Unfortunately, as of Friday, May 25, Senate Bill 828 had survived with a mishmash of amendments. Even with those amendments, the bill remains riddled with problems, most of which is that it lacks any plausible reason to even be considered.

Sunnyvale City Council member Michael Goldman pointed out the fallacy of the one-size-fits-all bill that would require every city and county to zone for housing at all income levels, as a magic solution to our affordable housing crisis.

As Goldman stated,

“Cities don’t construct housing, developers do. Cities can’t make developers build low income housing. Threats to penalize cities for not meeting RHNA quotas don’t have impact when it is the builders who are not building. Land in the South Bay is selling for $7M to $10M per acre. At this rate, it is impossible to get developers to construct affordable housing without subsidies from the state. In addition, housing is a net drain on city finances while office space is a net plus.”

Haight Ashbury community leader Tes Welborn described how residents are already stepping up with housing solutions. San Francisco passed a bond measure to tax themselves in order to get funding for more housing.

“SB-828’s top-down, heavy-handed approach ignores the work of cities like San Francisco, Wiener’s home district,” Welborn said, pointing out that Wiener didn’t talk to his constituents about the bill. “It caters to developers’ profit motives and escalates tensions between cities, counties and the legislators, rather than foster a collaborative approach to meet housing needs.”

Ileana Wachtel and Jorge Castaneda, Coalition to Preserve LA, presented facts and figures from the West LA Community Plan Area that show unbuilt zoning capacity that meets housing needs at all income levels. “The zoning already exists,” Wachtel explained, “but developers fail to build, holding out for greater profit margins.” Wachtel added, “This bill threatens to permanently, unnecessarily destroy open space, industrial land, and parklands.”

I wrapped up the presentation with a recap of why the Senate Appropriations staff report recommended allowing this bill to die in committee. The bill increases state expenses over $2.3M in the first two years and then adds an estimated annual expense of $741,000.

But more troublesome, the bill doesn’t make provisions to cover the local costs to implement it. The bill concludes,

No reimbursement is required . . . because a local agency or school district has the authority to levy service charges, fees, or assessments sufficient to pay for the program or level of service mandated by the act.

In other words, it is an unfunded state mandate.

Considerable administrative expenses and the costs of providing public services will all be passed on to local cities and counties (and local taxpayers), but they will need to fend for themselves to find the money, while developers will reap bigger and bigger profits.

Perhaps it’s this irresponsible scenario that prompted the California Chapter of the American Planning Association, in their letter of opposition to SB-828, to write,

New RHNA requirements that simply can’t be met would set up local governments to fail.

Livable California is grateful to the members of the Senate Appropriations Committee and their staff for meeting with us.We’re inspired by working together to combine the power and diversity of Northern and Southern California; large and small cities; and elected and volunteer community leaders.

Good government is possible when we work for it on a regular basis. It’s not enough to cast our votes in an election and think our part is over.

If you’d like to know more about Livable California, visit our website at www.livablecalifornia.org.

You’re invited to join us as we strive to work smarter, not just harder.

Thanks for your efforts to stop the spread of state control over local jurisdiction over local land use issues. The future we take the power away from the communities the less influence we have over how our government functions. Leaders are only leaders when they serve the people. They lose their power and influence when they try to force unwanted changes on their constituents.

 

CaRLA lines up cities to sue

This is YIMBY, who is supporting CaRLA and pushing legislation to allow more lawsuits against cities by taking state power away from local jurisdictions. This is why we oppose YIMBY and the state legislators who are pushing these bills. This one is SB 827. The Board of Supervisors voted to oppose it 8-3, but, San Francisco voters need to join the millions of California voters all over the state to pressure their state representatives, Wiener, Ting and Chiu, to withdraw SB 827, 828 and all the other bills that YIMBY is pushing.

SB 827 Wiener, Transit-rich height increase. This bill would impose a state-mandated local program based on a Transit-rich housing density bonus, (amendments),  Amended and referred to Sen Transportation and Housing Committee. This one was killed in Committee.

SB 828 Wiener, Housing Element change. Establish a methodology for the comprehensive assessment on unmet need for a prescribed number of units of housing built in each local area. Sen Transportation and Housing Committee. This is now on suspension in the Appropriations Committee.

 

SB 831: Senator Wiener’s Wacky World on Steroids Must be Defeated!

By Hydee R. Feldstein : citywatchla – excerpt (includes a great graphic)

CALL TO ACTION-On January 4, 2018, Senator Bob Wieckowski introduced SB 831, a bill that would have amended the just-last-year enacted “Granny Flats” sections of state law to require, rather than simply permit, cities, states and other municipalities to provide by ordinance for the creation of “junior accessory dwelling units”, or so-called ADUs…

The original version of Senator Wieckowski’s bill left the substance of the ordinance up to local authorities and expressly permitted the local authorities to include the type of restrictions included in the 2017 version of the ADU law – restrictions on the size and number, compliance with typical utility, safety and habitability regulations and requirement of owner occupancy.

As originally proposed, SB 831 appeared to have little effect on Los Angeles, a city that has already passed an ADU ordinance since SB 831 left in the express requirements that a locality could require a permit for and otherwise expressly regulate the plans, size, setbacks and other attributes of an ADU, including limiting ADUs to a single 500 square foot structure per owner occupied lot.

Then, on March 13, 2018, as cities and their residents were becoming aware of Senator Wiener’s authored bills – SB 827 and 828 – he signed on as a co-author to Senator Wieckowski’s SB 831 with amendments. Those “amendments” twisted the concept of ADUs into a junior version of Wiener’s dystopian landscape – tall, skinny buildings filled with dorm rooms and bike racks dropped in to disrupt, displace and destroy single family and small multi-family residences. SB 831, as amended by Senator Wiener, now:..

SB 831 IS SCHEDULED FOR HEARING BEFORE THE SENATE COMMITTEE ON TRANSPORTATION AND HOUSING ON APRIL 17 AT 3:30 PM STATE CAPITOL BUILDING, ROOM 4203, 10th and L Street. You can find the agenda here(more)

Please read and comment on the source and check out the graphics.
Agenda and action item is SB 831

Wiener’s Even More Onerous Senate Bill 828

While Senate Bill 827 is getting all the attention it deserves, sitting in its’ shadow is another equally onerous Senate Bill proposed by Scott Wiener and likely authored again his partner in crime Brian Hanlon – See Senate Bill 828 with the innocuous title “Land Use: Housing Element”

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…

SB 828 dramatically increases RHNA quotas(more)

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.

%d bloggers like this: