Archive for the ‘housing’ Category

EVENT: “Affordable Divis Community Planning Workshop” Coming to THE INDEPENDENT Saturday, December 5th 2015 – Character, Housing, Transit, Infrastructure

Monday, November 23rd, 2015

7J7C0268 copy

“Windsor Terrace” Isn’t – Or Do You Just Live in the Inner Sunset? – The Answer Will Amaze You

Wednesday, November 4th, 2015

The answer is that you live in the Inner Sunset. Sorry.

But if you want to say that you live in Windsor Terrace development or subdivision of the Inner Sunset, that’d be fine.

7J7C0003 copy

Mind the grow-houses

Pink Ranger in Jordan Park: House Rich, Car Poor – Halloween 2015 in the 94118

Monday, November 2nd, 2015

Go go, Power Ranger:

7J7C8280 copy

Twitterloin Update: How Do I “Live NeMa?” – I’m Glad You Asked, New Market Building! – SF’s City Part of Town

Monday, October 5th, 2015

Here’s the question, from the new NEw MArket Building on Market in our Twitterloin / Mid-Market /South of Market / Tenderloin Adjacent area, you know, The City Part of Town:

How do you #liveNEMA?

And here’s the answer – like this, via The Lofts at SoDoSoPa:

And here’s your catchphrase:

NeMa: 24 months old and still no rent control.**


* NEW YORK TIMES: The prospective changes to the Tenderloin — a noirish haunt of Dashiell Hammett’s Sam Spade and arguably the central city’s last working-class neighborhood — have given rise to a new nickname: the Twitterloin.

* FORTUNE: Welcome to the Twitterloin, where tech-savvy cool meets gritty hood

**After 10 months of living in the NeMa, you just might ask yourself why you’re getting hit with a rent increase what’s 25 times more than most of your coworkers are facing, just saying…

Million-Dollar Housing in the Richmond District: French Vanilla, Strawberry, Vanilla, Pistachio

Tuesday, September 29th, 2015

7J7C6633 copy

Largish boxes in The Sand Waste,
Largish boxes made of ticky tacky,
Largish boxes on the sand dunes,
Largish boxes all the same.
There’s a yellow one and a pink one
And a white one and a green one,
And they’re all made out of ticky tacky
And they all look just the same.

SURPRISE! Local Airbnb-Type Room Letter OPPOSES Prop F – Let’s Read “Emey” Meyerson’s Take on SF’s Airbnb Mess

Thursday, September 24th, 2015

[UPDATE: Another reaction here. Oh, and another reaction here, from Sara Shortt.]

I don’t know who Medium Corporation‘s Emey is – what, a Scott Wiener fan, an Airbnb room/unit letter, a person who also makes money from “marketing, politics?”

Anywho, I sort of asked for somebody to tell me why Prop F is bad right here, so I’ll read through this and respond, you know, in real time.

1. So Prop F is worse than I think? So you think I think it’s bad, but you’re here on Medium telling me that it’s even worse than I think it is? Well, that’s not right at all. I think Prop F is great.

2. So like I’m not responsible for what signature gatherers say, right? ‘Nough said. Should I point out how Airbnb says/does similar things? OK then.

3. Yes, STR’s are already regulated by SFGov, but poorly. That’s why we have the Prop F, to fix what they call regulatory capture.

4. Airbnb-type outfits are the primary problem, right? I’ll concede that there are others out there. But that doesn’t mean we shouldn’t regulate Airbnb, right? Airbnbers oppose Prop F because, unlike the current regs, it wasn’t written with input from Airbnb itself. Like, should VW write our air pollution laws?

5. Well, Prop F isn’t the worst way to go about things. A worser way to regulate Airbnb is to have Airbnb write the rules what cover Airbnb’s business, right? What we’ve had so far from Supervisor Chiu has been a disaster, right? And then our dominant political faction assumed that something like Prop F wouldn’t make the ballot. And that takes us up to now. Hey, let’s take a look:

“After Mayor Lee and the Board of Supervisors screwed up short-term rental legislation not once but twice, voters now face a choice: keep current law or replace it with Prop F. Those upset over “ballot box planning” should blame City Hall for not enacting the handful of changes that would have either prevented Prop F from going to the ballot or ensured its defeat.”

6. Uh, is it “really hard to find the text online,” like actually? Uh no. Google “PROP F SF” and then after you click on the first hit, click on THE MEASURE. Easy peasy, huh, LIAR?

7. “It’ll blow your mind.” O rly? We’ll see. Hey, you know, my mind’s already blown by the number of meetings that David Chiu’s office had with Airbnb reps to create the first unworkable regs – is it 60 fucking meetings? 60 meetings to create an unworkable mess? Mind blown. Already.

8. So, you promise us Prop F but now you’re coming in with how it’s existing hotels what don’t want private Airbnb hotels in the Parkside. Let’s see, who’s against Prop F – it’s Airbnb and the superhosts, right? As expected, right? (And I’m thinking your hotel worker union types would be big Prop F boosters as well.)

9. You know, some Airbnbers who let out rooms support Prop F, right? Are they crazy?

10. I’ll field this one. Cleaning a house before guests arrive is not assisting anyone to offer a short term rental.

11. Well, if your neighbor “prevails,” then your neighbor gets money. If you neighbor doesn’t prevail, then not. Simple. You’re missing the “prevailing” part, Mediumer.

12. And if a taxi driver refuses to pick you up because s/he doesn’t like your color, creed, whathaveyou, that’s a misdemeanor too, right? Laws need to have teeth, right?

13. Yep, a quarterly report. No biggee, it would seem.

14. So let’s see here, illegal in-law units shouldn’t be on Airbnb, right? Is this so surprising?

15. What Airbnb should do is keep track of its own rentals, for a start, huh? Shouldn’t be too hard.

16. People will still be able to Airbnb after Prop F passes, right? But Prop F should really put the hurt on Airbnb hotel buildings.

17. Prop F can totally be fixed, if necessary, by a judge or two or more, or by a vote of The People. Yes, we can visit this issue again later.

18. What’s this?! “I have been a part-time homesharer in SF since last year.” This should have been the first line of your bit, non? Ah, man, I don’t think I would have read your whole bit if you had been upfront about your conflict of interest. And why is my Google Chrome underlining “homesharer?” Oh that’s right, it’s because you made it up. Let’s try something else, something honest, like “room letter.” See? No underlining. Case closed.

19. Oh, this Medium bit is ending abruptly, after the Big Reveal. All right, yeah, well, that’s just, like, your opinion, man.

The (Proposed) DEMONS ON DIVISADERO – Big Housing Meeting Tonight at 7PM – Club Waziema, 543 Divis

Monday, September 14th, 2015

Get all the deets on tonight’s meeting here, from Nuala Sawyer of Hoodline.

Now here’s what one existing building looks like right now:

7J7C4839 copy

Just saying.

There are pros and cons to having taller residential buildings in this part of the Western Addition, of course…

Dennis Herrera Throws Down: Cracking Down on Developer Angelo Sangiacomo – TRINITY APTS / “SOMA SUITES HOTEL”

Tuesday, September 8th, 2015

Here’s a new update on this sitch.

“Herrera subpoenas Trinity over rent-controlled apartments used as ‘SOMA Suites Hotel’

“After request for cooperation is met ‘with obfuscation and deflection of responsibility,’ City Attorney moves to compel production of evidence in housing investigation

“SAN FRANCISCO (Sept. 8, 2015) — City Attorney Dennis Herrera today formally subpoenaed documents and information relating to the apparently illegal use of Trinity Place residential units — including at least 16 rent-controlled apartments — for tourist accommodations as “The SOMA Suites Hotel.” The administrative subpoenas served on Trinity’s ownership and a single lessee of some 23 dwellings comes after a month of “repeated, unsuccessful attempts” by Herrera’s office to gain voluntary cooperation in a City Attorney investigation of potentially unlawful and unauthorized uses of the properties at 1188 and 1190 Mission Street.

Herrera initially requested cooperation from developer Angelo Sangiacomo and his legal counsel in an Aug. 5, 2015 letter that sought a full account of the uses of residential units authorized under the city’s 2007 agreement for the Trinity Plaza Development Project (since renamed Trinity Place). But the request was instead met “with obfuscation and deflection of responsibility,” according to a letter from Herrera that accompanied his subpoena to compel Trinity’s production of requested evidence.

“I find your responses on behalf of your clients particularly difficult to accept given the nature and history of the properties,” Herrera wrote to Trinity’s attorney, Andrew Wiegel. “The Trinity Plaza Development Project permitted your client to build high-density, largely residential buildings that, among other things, would preserve 360 units of rent-controlled housing. The benefits of those units that your client committed to provide in the Development Agreement continue to be critically important to the City, especially at a time where the paucity of affordable housing is driving out long-term residents, disrupting communities, and altering the very fabric of our City. Leasing a number of those units to the same individual, under the facts and circumstances we believe to have been the case, violates the letter and spirit of the Development Agreement, and the conditions of approval for the Project.”

A primary focus of the investigation Herrera identified in his letter is the developer’s business relationship with Catherine Zhang and her company, LUMI Worldwide. According to evidence so far established in the City Attorney investigation, Trinity Management Services entered into leases with Zhang for 16 apartments, each subject to rent-control, and each exclusively intended for residential occupancy. Apart from recognizing the obvious — that a single individual can’t simultaneously reside in 16 apartments — Trinity’s management knew that Zhang was subleasing the rent-controlled units, according to Herrera, in apparent violation of its own lease provisions expressly forbidding subletting, and its development agreement with the city. The arrangement may also violate state and local law.

“Leasing a number of those units to the same individual, under the facts and circumstances we believe to have been the case, violates the letter and spirit of the Development Agreement, and the conditions of approval for the Project,” Herrera wrote. “For these reasons, you have left me no choice but to formally subpoena this information.”

Apart from the 16 rent-controlled apartments at 1188 Mission Street (where “The SOMA Suites Hotel” is located, according to its marketing content), another seven Trinity Place apartments at neighboring 1190 Mission Street were also leased to Zhang for concurrent and overlapping periods. Evidence indicates that Zhang similarly subleased those apartments to tourists for short-term stays. Although none of the apartments at 1190 Mission Street is subject to rent-control, the use of dwellings in both buildings is restricted to residential housing under terms of the 2007 development agreement and related City approvals. Herrera today served a similar administrative subpoena on Zhang and LUMI Worldwide.

Additional documentation from the City Attorney’s Office’s investigation is available at:

BRUTAL: New “CAUTION” Sign Depicts Drunk, Moneyed, iPhone-Distracted San Franciscans Fleeing High Rents by Running to Oakland

Tuesday, August 18th, 2015

[UPDATE: Oh, it’s a coffee cup, not a red Solo cup – see Comments.]

Ouch, this one hurts.

From Jeremy C. Owens  – left to right, OAKLAND, Drunk San Franciscan, iPhone-Addled San Franciscan, Moneyed San Franciscan, SAN FRANCISCO:

CMtFcasVEAA7hKr copy

If only this sign had Oracle Arena heading the other way…

Historic Yelp Typo for Expensive SoMA Flophouse: “We Had Bats In Our Room” – Should Be Gnats? Cats? Rats?

Monday, August 17th, 2015

I’ll tell you, this blows me away:

“…Best Western Plus Americania recently posted rates of $460 a night.”

Isn’t that a tad pricy, you know, considering?

Anywho, Andrea M says:

We had bats in our room…


This can’t be right, right?

It’s gotta be gnats, right?

Are bats attracted to humidity? One assumes not. But are gnats attracted to humidity? One assumes so.

Otherwise, bats, rats OR cats would be somewhat disturbing.

Almost as disturbing as the idea of paying $460 to stay a night (plus hotel tax, like 15%) (plus $30, for parking!) (plus hotel tax, like 15% on the parking fee) at a Best Western motel at 7th and Market…