2022-02-10 · 26 comments · 11 / 15
Please oppose the faux fourplex bills being heard this ThursdayPlanning Commission Staff Commission Affairs, I am writing regarding case numbers 2021-012237PCA and 2021-012246PCA. These two fourplex bills, sponsored respectively by Supervisor Safa and Supervisor Mar, are not real solutions to San Francisco's housing shortage or the affordability crisis. I respectfully ask for you to oppose them. My husband and I are two of the many homeowners in San Francisco who are intere… Planning Commission Staff Commission Affairs, I am writing regarding case numbers 2021-012237PCA and 2021-012246PCA. These two fourplex bills, sponsored respectively by Supervisor Safa and Supervisor Mar, are not real solutions to San Francisco's housing shortage or the affordability crisis. I respectfully ask for you to oppose them. My husband and I are two of the many homeowners in San Francisco who are interested in building additional units on their property, but today's building and regulatory costs, lack of predictability in the application of the planning and building codes, and the uncertainty of ever getting approval make adding additional units cost prohibitive unless one is a millionaire and can afford to take the project on without concern as to its ultimate cost. Both Safa's and Mar's bills fail to take this into account, and instead pile on even more building restrictions that will make it even more difficult for any fourplex project to pencil out. Both proposals include very stringent requirements on minimum lot size, rear yard, and building design that will drive up costs far beyond what they are even now. They would also introduce requirements for subsidized affordable housing four-unit buildings that are completely impractical. San Francisco has an affordable housing problem, but trying to make homeowners responsible for fixing it won<U+2019>t work. Most of us can only just afford to stay in our own homes. This is just yet another instance of city officials proposing steps that will actively discourage the building of additional units, rather than encourage it. The Board of Supervisors needs to legalize fourplexes to address our pressing housing issues, but it needs to be done in a way that makes it affordable and feasible for most of San Francisco<U+2019>s homeowners, not just those who are wealthy and connected. Sarah Preisler [email removed] 1001 Potrero Avenue San Francisco, California 94110show more Please oppose the faux fourplex bills being heard this ThursdayPlanning Commission Staff Commission Affairs, I am writing regarding case numbers 2021-012237PCA and 2021-012246PCA. These two fourplex bills, sponsored respectively by Supervisor Safa and Supervisor Mar, are not real solutions to San Francisco's housing shortage or the affordability crisis. I respectfully ask for you to oppose them. I write this having built an ADU while performing a siesmic retrofit. What a w… Planning Commission Staff Commission Affairs, I am writing regarding case numbers 2021-012237PCA and 2021-012246PCA. These two fourplex bills, sponsored respectively by Supervisor Safa and Supervisor Mar, are not real solutions to San Francisco's housing shortage or the affordability crisis. I respectfully ask for you to oppose them. I write this having built an ADU while performing a siesmic retrofit. What a waste of two years our affordable studio became a upper market one bedroom. So many rules and regulations driving up the cost of new homes. The two supervisors don<U+2019>t want anything built their goal is to make it as impossible as can be to build anything. All while championing their pro housing stance. We have real proposals to allow fourplexes in bills written by Supervisor Mandelman. His legislation would work much better than the two bills being heard this Thursday, as it proposes incentives as well as sensible rules that would create more homes for all San Franciscans. CD Lucey [email removed] 615 Elizabeth St San Francisco, California 94114show more Please oppose the faux fourplex bills being heard this ThursdayPlanning Commission Staff Commission Affairs, I am writing regarding case numbers 2021-012237PCA and 2021-012246PCA. These two fourplex bills, sponsored respectively by Supervisor Safa and Supervisor Mar, are not real solutions to San Francisco's housing shortage or the affordability crisis. I respectfully ask for you to oppose them. We have real proposals to allow fourplexes in bills written by Supervisor Mande… Planning Commission Staff Commission Affairs, I am writing regarding case numbers 2021-012237PCA and 2021-012246PCA. These two fourplex bills, sponsored respectively by Supervisor Safa and Supervisor Mar, are not real solutions to San Francisco's housing shortage or the affordability crisis. I respectfully ask for you to oppose them. We have real proposals to allow fourplexes in bills written by Supervisor Mandelman. His legislation would work much better than the two bills being heard this Thursday, as it proposes incentives as well as sensible rules that would create more homes for all San Franciscans. The Board of Supervisors needs to legalize fourplexes to address our pressing housing issues, and if they fail to do so then I believe voters will be willing to organize for a real solution. Colleen Beach [email removed] 807 Ulloa Street Apt 4 San Francisco, California 94127show more Oppose the fake 4-plex billPlanning Commission Staff Commission Affairs, We need housing. And politicians that just "don't get it" are here in San Francisco too (Mar and Safai). Both of the proposed laws are so laden with conditions and restrictions that they will effectively cause nothing to be built. It is quite difficult to legislate Utopia. The Soviets tried for 75 years. Safai and Mar are essentially trying to do the sam… Planning Commission Staff Commission Affairs, We need housing. And politicians that just "don't get it" are here in San Francisco too (Mar and Safai). Both of the proposed laws are so laden with conditions and restrictions that they will effectively cause nothing to be built. It is quite difficult to legislate Utopia. The Soviets tried for 75 years. Safai and Mar are essentially trying to do the same thing. These laws would make it so complex and difficult to build a fourplex residence that it simply will never happen. If what they are trying to do is circumvent SB-9, then they would be better as representatives of the Town of Woodside where city officials came up with wacky rules to disallow the new units. This is about case numbers 2021-012237PCA and 2021-012246PCA. Thank you Chris McMahon architect home: 203 Eureka St. San Francisco, CA 94114 Christopher McMahon [email removed] McMahon Architects 4111 18th Street Suite 6 San Francisco, California 94114show more Please oppose the faux fourplex bills being heard this ThursdayPlanning Commission Staff Commission Affairs, I am writing regarding case numbers 2021-012237PCA and 2021-012246PCA. These two fourplex bills, sponsored respectively by Supervisor Safa and Supervisor Mar, are not real solutions to San Francisco's housing shortage or the affordability crisis. I respectfully ask for you to oppose them. We need proposals that actually increase the amount of housing in our community… Planning Commission Staff Commission Affairs, I am writing regarding case numbers 2021-012237PCA and 2021-012246PCA. These two fourplex bills, sponsored respectively by Supervisor Safa and Supervisor Mar, are not real solutions to San Francisco's housing shortage or the affordability crisis. I respectfully ask for you to oppose them. We need proposals that actually increase the amount of housing in our community, not symbolic bills that will never actually get used because of the constraints they impose. We need to maximize the number of affordable units that get produced, not the percentage. 50% of 0 new units is still 0. Rob Donnelly [email removed] 31 Buena Vista Terrace San Fracisco, California 94117show more February 10th Commission Hearing Items No. 10a and 10b Case No 2021-012237PCA and Case No. 2021-
0122446PCADear President Tanner, Vice President Moore and Fellow Commissioners Diamond, Fung, Imperial and Koppel: Good morning. Sorry for the tardy email on items 10a and 10b for today, but there was a lot to read and think about. Back on November 18, 2021, at the hearing for the Supervisor Mandelman Ordinance as amended by Staff with further recommendations from the Commission, the Financial Feasibility Analysis on SB 9 had… Dear President Tanner, Vice President Moore and Fellow Commissioners Diamond, Fung, Imperial and Koppel: Good morning. Sorry for the tardy email on items 10a and 10b for today, but there was a lot to read and think about. Back on November 18, 2021, at the hearing for the Supervisor Mandelman Ordinance as amended by Staff with further recommendations from the Commission, the Financial Feasibility Analysis on SB 9 had not been published or analyzed by Staff. Now there are two Analyses and both are fundamentally the same <U+2014> for either SB9 or for multi-plex units <U+2014> and they detail the challenges and lack of truly effective financial incentives to achieve the goals. It is not clear if even <U+201C>streamlining<U+201D> as it is generally thought of would make a difference. At the November 18th hearing, one Commissioner suggested just approving the corner lot legislation from Supervisor Mandelman. And that seemed like a very good idea and still may be. The Supervisor Mar/Supervisor Safai Ordinances being heard today raise very important issues about housing and affordability. These are the same issues that Section 317 as written, could have dealt with this past decade if the Demolition Calculations had been adjusted as intendedand the Commission could still adjust them per Section 317(b)(2)(D), regardless of what the Board does or doesn<U+2019>t do. So far there are at least six applications filed using SB9 and SB330. The current objective standards that Staff has used to define projects and the Commission has used to deny Requests for Discretionary Review such as the Residential Design Guidelines could apply. Perhaps the best course for now would be to see how SB 9 projects play out over the next several months and see what the trends are and see what is wrought. Please see the attached article from the Wall Street Journal if you haven<U+2019>t already and please compare this article with the two Financial Feasibility Studies. Thank you. Sincerely, Georgia Schuttishshow more Ahsha Safai · spoken · 2022-02-10 · support
Introduction to proposed ordinance
Li Lovett · spoken · 2022-02-10 · support
leg. aide to Sup. Mar – Introduction to proposed ordinance
George Wooding · spoken · 2022-02-10 · support
Support Sup. Mar's
Anastasia Yovanopoulos · spoken · 2022-02-10 · oppose
Incentivize families
Zack Weisenberg · spoken · 2022-02-10 · support
Support Mar's
Jim Chappell · spoken · 2022-02-10 · oppose
Inclusionary requirement
Donna Horwitz · spoken · 2022-02-10 · oppose
Oppose
Ozzie Rohm · spoken · 2022-02-10 · support
Support Sup. Mar's
Lorraine Petty · spoken · 2022-02-10 · support
Support Sup. Mar's
Charlie Sciammas · spoken · 2022-02-10 · support
Support Sup. Mar's
Robert Fruchtman · spoken · 2022-02-10 · oppose
Oppose
Tes Welborn · spoken · 2022-02-10 · support
Support Sup. Mar's
Peter Papadopoulos · spoken · 2022-02-10 · support
Support Sup. Mar's
Corey Smith · spoken · 2022-02-10 · oppose
Oppose
Matt Boden · spoken · 2022-02-10 · support
Support Sup. Mar's
Georgia Schuttish · spoken · 2022-02-10 · oppose
Financial feasibility analysis
Mike Chen · spoken · 2022-02-10 · oppose
Oppose
Bruce Bowen · spoken · 2022-02-10 · support
Support Sup. Mar's
Please oppose the 2 sets of fourplex legislation being heard on 2/9/2022 in their present formPlanning Commission Staff Commission Affairs, Regarding case numbers 2021-012237PCA and 2021-012246PCA - I am writing to respectfully ask you to oppose in their current form and instead to propose modifications that would actually have some effect on housing creation. The 2 bills, sponsored respectively by Supervisor Safa and Supervisor Mar, are not real solutions to San Francisco's housing shortage or the affor… Planning Commission Staff Commission Affairs, Regarding case numbers 2021-012237PCA and 2021-012246PCA - I am writing to respectfully ask you to oppose in their current form and instead to propose modifications that would actually have some effect on housing creation. The 2 bills, sponsored respectively by Supervisor Safa and Supervisor Mar, are not real solutions to San Francisco's housing shortage or the affordability crisis. These bills do nothing to lessen the regulatory burden or the costs of constructing additional rental housing units on existing residential parcels. The both include very stringent requirements on minimum lot size, rear yard, and building design that would drive up costs far beyond a reasonable level and they would also introduce requirements for subsidized affordable housing four-unit buildings that few homeowners could afford. The City should offer tools and incentives, not penalties as these bills propose to do. Instead, there are realistic proposals to allow fourplexes in bills written by Supervisor Mandelman. His legislation would work much better than the two bills being heard this Thursday, as it proposes incentives as well as sensible rules that would create more homes for all San Franciscans. The Planning Commissioners would be well-advised to work with Sup Mandelman on crafting his legislation as they have much real-world experience to offer him. Until sensible legislation is passed by the Supervisors, the Planning Commission should be on record as opposing any half-hearted measures that seem to be more designed to appease some Supervisors' voting bases than offering any real solutions (business as usual for this Board of course). Thank you, Andrew Smith Andrew Smith [email removed] 2775 Van Ness Avenue San Francisco, California 94109show more Please oppose both fourplex bills this ThursdayPlanning Commission Staff Commission Affairs, I am writing regarding case numbers 2021-012237PCA and 2021-012246PCA. While these bills may mean well, I respectfully ask for you to oppose them. These bills add restrictions that would make it difficult for any new fourplex to make financial sense. Both proposals include very stringent requirements on minimum lot size, rear yard, and building design that would drive up … Planning Commission Staff Commission Affairs, I am writing regarding case numbers 2021-012237PCA and 2021-012246PCA. While these bills may mean well, I respectfully ask for you to oppose them. These bills add restrictions that would make it difficult for any new fourplex to make financial sense. Both proposals include very stringent requirements on minimum lot size, rear yard, and building design that would drive up costs far beyond a reasonable level. Mandelman's proposed fourplexe legislation is a much better solution, since it proposes incentives as well as sensible rules that would create more homes for all San Franciscans. Nathaniel Furniss [email removed] 325 China Basin St San Francisco, California 94158show more