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
We need more housing projects like 65 OceanDear 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… 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 healthy. I do respect the efforts of neighbors who have concerns about this project, who are motivated by the goal of making the neighborhood more inclusive and protecting our most vulnerable residents, even though I disagree with their understanding of this particular project and its impacts. I think the best way for the planning commission to respond to their concerns is to prioritize opening up wealthy, exclusionary neighborhoods elsewhere on the south and west of the city so that all neighborhoods share in the challenges and opportunities of providing new homes. The commission should study this and also use its discretion to expedite approval of new housing in neighborhoods that have seen little change to the built environment amidst the housing crisis. Zack Subin 192 Caine Ave P.S. I bike by this location on my way to work and would love to see it contribute to the neighborhood with more people on the street and on bikes and supporting the neighborhood restaurants and businesses on Mission Ave. ___________________________________________________ Zack Subin San Francisco, CA 94112 [email removed] | [email removed] | [email removed] https://www.facebook.com/zsubin https://twitter.com/zack_subin https://www.linkedin.com/in/zachary-subin-9b6435bb/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
65 Ocean Ave Case No. 2016-006860ENV10/23/2019 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