Developments in Development is a “weekly” column recapping real estate, housing, planning, zoning and construction news.
A source started an interview with me this week by saying “well, the planet is on fire, but otherwise fine.”
So if you’re feeling firehosed by national-level bombshell coverage and haven’t had time to keep up with all of the details of what’s happening, here is the big news: San Francisco lawmakers reached an agreement this week about how much affordable housing developers should be required to include when they build. How did city leaders deliver this news? With pie, of course.
The magic number is 18 percent, apparently, down from the 25 percent voters approved when the issue went to the ballot — except for the Mission and Tenderloin, which stay at 25 percent pending further study. Over time the percentage for the rest of town will rise back up to 24 percent. Point of interest: Supervisor Hillary Ronen, a supervisor who recently brokered two deals that raised the percentage of below market rate housing provided by local developments, said in an interview with Mission Local this week “25 percent is absolutely possible,” which has been debated hotly leading up to this most recent decision.
Of course it always gets more complicated than that, because in a city where one-bedroom apartments cost anywhere between $2,500 and $4,000 a month, what exactly is “affordable”? Supervisors have been hashing that out for weeks. One side wanted more of the affordable housing to be available to people whose income is too little to pay market rate but too much to get city housing. The other side wanted more of the inclusionary housing to go to those in the city making the least money.
The compromise – 18 percent for apartments, 20 percent for condos, with affordability “for” people making between 55 and 130 percent of the Area Median Income. You can see the full breakdown at the Business Times.
Developers have pushed back against the idea that they can afford to make 25 percent of buildings affordable, saying that would slow down the production of housing by disincentivizing developers from taking the risk. But as mentioned earlier, three projects (two of them mid-sized) in the Mission just agreed to 25 percent affordable.
But the city’s inclusionary levels are just one factor in the risk analysis of building housing, and it seems it might be getting riskier. Socketsite reports that the number of units in the pipeline is more or less plateauing, but that it might drop.
Another roadblock for getting housing built that developers and architects alike are perpetually displeased with is the city’s glacial planning process. To wit:
A decision on permitting 36 units at 1726 Mission Street has been delayed. The project, which would replace an abandoned sausage factory with several stories of retail and housing, needs a special authorization for large projects. It’s been in the works since 2014.
Similar story at 1298 Valencia Street, a 35-unit project planned for what’s now a gas station at 24th and Valencia. It’s essentially a copy/paste from one block over at 1198 Valencia, a former, unused, gas station currently under construction to become condos.
The 24th Street project hasn’t gotten quite as far and is currently being held up by a discretionary review request. These requests force the Planning Commission to hold hearings and review the design of buildings at the request of neighbors or area organizations, in this case the Mission Economic Development Agency. The hearing, scheduled for this past week, was delayed until June.
Those of you peeved with MEDA for filing several discretionary review requests on buildings along the corridor might take note of the fact that the nonprofit is also finding itself on the other side of that situation.
In its new role as an affordable housing developer, it has has faced its own discretionary review delay for a project at 17th and Folsom streets. My vaguely-educated guess would be that their project at 1990 Folsom Street, just a block over, will face similar hurdles. Community input meetings for that project begin next Wednesday evening.
Here’s one more building that has been in limbo for years, though not because of planning delay: The building next door to the Alamo Drafthouse / New Mission Theater is on the market again, Socketsite reports. You might remember that space as one that was supposed to become an art gallery, but that never materialized. It’s now being marketed as having development potential.
Finally, let’s switch gears and talk about road use planning. Curbed reports that public garages may soon automatically read the license plates of cars that enter and exit. Big Brother is coming… to save you from lost ticket costs.
And after a lull in the hubbub about high-tech autonomous boxes on wheels cruising through the Mission, Supervisor Norman Yee is proposing a ban on autonomous delivery robots using city sidewalks, citing concerns that the elderly could be mowed down by the bots, which whiz around at a stunning four miles per hour. The city already says no bikes and no boards, so I guess it’s no bots either. Guess we’re still waiting on Amazon to figure out drone delivery, then.
A previous version of this column incorrectly stated that the gas station at 1298 Valencia Street is currently out of use. It is still in active use. The column has been corrected.