65 OCEAN AVE

2019-08-29 · 3 comments · 0 / 3

Lily Wong · email · 2019-08-29 · oppose · source packet

Planning Commission Meeting 8.22.19 General Public Comment RE: 65 Ocean Proposed
Development Dear Planning Commissioners: My name is Lily. I grew up in San Francisco and am one of the few remaining San Francisco natives that tenuously cling to living in this City. This is my home. This is the place where I found my voice. This is where I was educated by the best teachers and mentors. This is the city where I learned about a diversity of cultures and perspectives, and grew into the person I&… Development Dear Planning Commissioners: My name is Lily. I grew up in San Francisco and am one of the few remaining San Francisco natives that tenuously cling to living in this City. This is my home. This is the place where I found my voice. This is where I was educated by the best teachers and mentors. This is the city where I learned about a diversity of cultures and perspectives, and grew into the person I'm proud to be today. This City is now one where I'm constantly disappointed by policies that do not help the people I grew up with. Of all my friends I keep in touch with from my younger years, 8 out of 10 have moved out of the city - either due to evictions or unaffordability. It hit my friends of color the most. I literally have one black SF- native friend remaining who lives in San Francisco, and he is at risk of eviction. I was inspired recently by my neighborhood youth who gathered to protest luxury development in their neighborhood, and saddened that young people - who should be looking forward to a life of opportunities - are now fighting for just their livelihood. The City's policies - policies that commissions like yours pass - are limiting our young people's options before they've developed their own aspirations and dreams. Your policies are causing young people to focus on fighting for their basic survivability. Your policies are causing displacement. 65 Ocean is a terrible project and is an example of these such policies. The project does not take into consideration the needs of the community. Just last year, dozens of people were nearly killed because they were living under a laundromat that caught on fire. That laundromat was literally around the corner from the 65 Ocean site, and existed because the City is unaffordable. If people had access to affordable housing, they wouldn't risk their lives living in unsafe conditions. There are units still sitting empty at a housing site at 5050 Mission Street because the rental rates do not match what the neighborhood needs. There's a supply there, but no demand. Because you've created a city where housing is a luxury and not a right. Your policies are causing harm to our community. I'm also enraged that my one opportunity to protest this development is on a Thursday afternoon - when I have to work. The people of the Excelsior are working class people. We don't have the time and most don't have the ability to take time off of their paid jobs to come down to City Hall to tell you to your face that WE NEED AFFORDABLE HOUSING. Supply and Demand does NOT work for housing. I'm requesting a response from the commission regarding my comments today. I want to know that you actually care about development of affordable housing in the city. Specifically I want responses to: 1) My demand for affordable housing to be at 65 Ocean. The community needs 100% affordability, but I will settle for 80% - since 80% of my friends growing up have been displaced by City policies. 2) I demand that future developments, especially in my community, are made 100% affordable. 3) I demand a hearing in my neighborhood - at a reasonable time (evenings or weekends) so working class people can actually attend and understand what's going on. 4) I demand that the hearing is made accessible to people, including having language translation in Chinese, Spanish, and Tagalog. ~Lily Lai Yu Lily Wong Masters of Public Policy / Masters of Dispute Resolution Pepperdine School of Public Policy / Pepperdine School of Law; Straus Institute Cell: [phone removed] A crisis is an opportunity for you to create something new and something different. We don't just resist, but we create something new ~Grace Lee Boggsshow more

Annelisa Luong · email · 2019-08-29 · oppose · source packet

Planning Commission Meeting 8.22.19 General Public Comment RE: 65 Ocean Proposed
Development To Whom it May Concern, My name is Annelisa and I am concerned about the proposed development on 65 Ocean. I was born and raised in the Ocean/ Mission/ Ingleside area, where my fixed-income parents still reside. What helped our family feel safe and helped us have our needs met were spaces that welcomed low-wage and working class people that spoke diverse languages. Today, many such residents and bu… show more

Mario De Mira · email · 2019-08-29 · oppose · source packet

65 Ocean Ave Development Excelsior/District 11
Dear Planning Commission, I am writing you regarding deep concerns about the 65 Ocean Ave project that is being proposed in the Excelsior neighborhood of San Francisco. The 65 Ocean Ave project is a market-rate development that will not address the housing needs of working families in the neighborhood, and will further exacerbate San Francisco's affordable housing crisis. The development is mostly studio units… show more

2019-10-03 · 1 comments · 0 / 1

Sarah Wilson · email · 2019-10-03 · oppose · source packet

Proposed development at 65 Ocean Avenue
Dear Commissioners: I am writing regarding the housing development that Presidio Bay Ventures is proposing to build at 65 Ocean Avenue. I live on London Street a few blocks from the proposed development. I am also the parent of a child who attended The Crayon Box Preschool. Our family<U+2019>s preschool was located at 65 Ocean Avenue until a few years ago, when the developer purchased the property and the sch… Dear Commissioners: I am writing regarding the housing development that Presidio Bay Ventures is proposing to build at 65 Ocean Avenue. I live on London Street a few blocks from the proposed development. I am also the parent of a child who attended The Crayon Box Preschool. Our family<U+2019>s preschool was located at 65 Ocean Avenue until a few years ago, when the developer purchased the property and the school had to move to a different neighborhood. Recently I learned that the developer<U+2019>s plans include a space for the preschool to return to the 65 Ocean site. While it would be wonderful for Crayon Box to be able to return to its former site, I am concerned about how this proposed housing project will affect the surrounding neighborhood. Development of high-end luxury rental housing in the Excelsior and nearby neighborhoods is already increasing pressure on the people who live here. I understand that 75% of the units in the proposed 65 Ocean development would be rented out at market rate, which would make them totally inaccessible to the many poor and working-class people who already live in the district. A project that adds as many market-rate units as this project would exacerbate the upward pressure on rents across the neighborhood. I also understand that the majority of the housing created under the proposed project would be studios and one-bedroom apartments. But the Excelsior is the neighborhood with the highest proportion of families and intergenerational households in the City <U+2013> households that won<U+2019>t fit into a studio apartment. As much as I want Crayon Box to move into a new space at 65 Ocean, I am concerned that allowing the Presidio Bay Ventures development to go forward as proposed will hurt my neighborhood and bring even further displacement of my neighbors. I am asking you to make sure that any project that the Planning Commission approves at 65 Ocean Avenue is a 100% affordable housing development, where Excelsior residents can afford the rent <U+2013> and that it include a ground floor space for the Crayon Box Preschool to return to and stay long-term. I know this can be done, just as a 100% affordable housing project was approved and is moving forward at the former Valente Marini Perata funeral home site a few blocks away on Mission Street. The 65 Ocean Avenue site can serve families with young children and, at the same time, provide housing for working-class families in the Excelsior and help keep them from being pushed out of the neighborhood and the City. It is up to you to make sure that any development at the site does all of these things. Thanks for your consideration. Sincerely, Sarah Wilson 378 London Street San Francisco 94112show more

2019-10-24 · 42 comments · 22 / 19

Charlie Sciammas · spoken · 2019-10-24 · oppose

Appeal of the PMND

Juliano Rodriguez · spoken · 2019-10-24 · oppose

Opposition

Sari Rodriguez · spoken · 2019-10-24 · oppose

Opposition

Carlos Bocanegra · spoken · 2019-10-24 · oppose

Opposition

Antonio Diaz · spoken · 2019-10-24 · oppose

Opposition

Leticia Arce · spoken · 2019-10-24 · oppose

Opposition

Susan Marsh · spoken · 2019-10-24 · oppose

Opposition

Natalie Kim · spoken · 2019-10-24 · oppose

Opposition

John Jimenez · spoken · 2019-10-24 · oppose

Opposition

John Avalos · spoken · 2019-10-24 · oppose

Opposition

Zack Subin · email · 2019-10-24 · support · source packet

We need more housing projects like 65 Ocean
Dear Planning Commission and Staff, I<U+2019>m writing to support the approval of 65 Ocean Ave. This is a well-designed project that takes advantage of the HOME-SF program to expand access to affordable housing in a way that maximally addresses our housing shortage. Building new homes for all income levels near transit is just what we need to be doing to make our neighborhood more accessible, diverse, and h… show more

Corey Smith · spoken · 2019-10-24 · support

Support

Peter Papadapoulos · spoken · 2019-10-24 · oppose

Affordable housing units

Faye Lacanilao · spoken · 2019-10-24 · oppose

Opposition

Dan Wu · spoken · 2019-10-24 · neutral

response to questions

Riyad Ghannam · spoken · 2019-10-24 · support

Materials, finishes

Gene Alejo · spoken · 2019-10-24 · oppose

Opposition

Alex Volodeff · spoken · 2019-10-24 · support

Support

Amy Aguillera · spoken · 2019-10-24 · oppose

Opposition

Olga Miranda · spoken · 2019-10-24 · support

Forgotten district

Jessie Fernandez · spoken · 2019-10-24 · oppose

Organized opposition

Sarah Wilson · spoken · 2019-10-24 · oppose

Organized opposition

Reina Tello · spoken · 2019-10-24 · oppose

Home SF

Tony Rodriguez · spoken · 2019-10-24 · support

Support

Danny Campbell · spoken · 2019-10-24 · support

Support

April Atkins · spoken · 2019-10-24 · support

Support

Guillermo Chacon · spoken · 2019-10-24 · support

Support

Michelle Anakel · spoken · 2019-10-24 · support

Support

Theodore Randolph · spoken · 2019-10-24 · support

Support

Diana Elraso · spoken · 2019-10-24 · support

Support

Dave Turnbull · spoken · 2019-10-24 · support

Support

Lyndon Ludford · spoken · 2019-10-24 · support

Support

John Corso · spoken · 2019-10-24 · support

Support

Yolanda Sanchez · spoken · 2019-10-24 · support

Support

Olivia Herreras · spoken · 2019-10-24 · support

School

Rafaela Falki · spoken · 2019-10-24 · support

Youth and arts

Miguel Onarondas · spoken · 2019-10-24 · oppose

Opposition

Maria Deruby · spoken · 2019-10-24 · oppose

Just cause

Alex Lansberg · spoken · 2019-10-24 · support

Support

Daniel Greg · spoken · 2019-10-24 · support

Support

Anna Raymundo · spoken · 2019-10-24 · support

Support

Ben Libbey · email · 2019-10-24 · support · source packet

65 Ocean Ave Case No. 2016-006860ENV
10/23/2019 San Francisco Planning Commission 1 Dr Carlton Goodlett Pl San Francisco, CA 94102 [email removed]; [email removed]; Via Email Re: 65 Ocean Ave Case No. 2016006860ENV Dear San Francisco Planning Commission, Yes In My Back Yard submits this letter to inform you that the San Francisco Planning Commission has an obligation to abide by all relevant state housing laws when evaluatin… 10/23/2019 San Francisco Planning Commission 1 Dr Carlton Goodlett Pl San Francisco, CA 94102 [email removed]; [email removed]; Via Email Re: 65 Ocean Ave Case No. 2016006860ENV Dear San Francisco Planning Commission, Yes In My Back Yard submits this letter to inform you that the San Francisco Planning Commission has an obligation to abide by all relevant state housing laws when evaluating the above captioned proposal, including the Housing Accountability Act (HAA). California Government Code 65589.5, the Housing Accountability Act, prohibits localities from denying housing development projects that are compliant with the locality<U+2019>s zoning ordinance or general plan at the time the application was deemed complete, unless the locality can make findings that the proposed housing development would be a threat to public health and safety. The most relevant section is copied below: (j) When a proposed housing development project complies with applicable, objective general plan and zoning standards and criteria, including design review standards, in effect at the time that the housing development project's application is determined to be complete, but the local agency proposes to disapprove the project or to approve it upon the condition that the project be developed at a lower density, the local agency shall base its decision regarding the proposed housing development project upon written findings supported by substantial evidence on the record that both of the following conditions exist: (1) The housing development project would have a specific, adverse impact upon the public health or safety unless the project is disapproved or approved upon the condition that the project be developed at a lower density. As used in this paragraph, a "specific, adverse impact" means a significant, quantifiable, direct, and unavoidable impact, based on objective, identified written public health or safety standards, policies, or conditions as they existed on the date the application was deemed complete. (2) There is no feasible method to satisfactorily mitigate or avoid the adverse impact identified pursuant to paragraph (1), other than the disapproval of the housing development project or the approval of the project upon the condition that it be developed at a lower density. . . . (4) For purposes of this section, a proposed housing development project is not inconsistent with the applicable zoning standards and criteria, and shall not require a rezoning, if the housing development project is consistent with the objective general plan standards and criteria but the zoning for the project site is inconsistent with the general plan. If the local agency has complied with paragraph (2), the local agency may require the proposed housing development project to comply with the objective standards and criteria of the zoning which is consistent with the general plan, however, the standards and criteria shall be applied to facilitate and accommodate development at the density allowed on the site by the general plan and proposed by the proposed housing development project. The applicant proposes to demolish three existing buildings on the project site and to construct an approximately 55 foottall, 191,374grosssquare foot building containing 193 dwelling units, a 5,942gsf childcare facility, and basementlevel garage with a total of 121 parking spaces. The above captioned proposal is zoning compliant and general plan compliant, therefore, your local agency must approve the application, or else make findings to the effect that the proposed project would have an adverse impact on public health and safety, as described above. Yes In My Back Yard is a 501(c)3 nonprofit corporation, whose mission is to increase the accessibility and affordability of housing in California. Sincerely, Sonja Trauss Secretary Yes In My Back Yardshow more

2020-04-09 · 3 comments · 3 / 0

Jody Knight · spoken · 2020-04-09 · support

Project presentation

Theo Randolph · spoken · 2020-04-09 · support

Highly needed project

Corey Smith · spoken · 2020-04-09 · support

Support

65 OCEAN AVE

Hearings

Comments by hearing (49)