Developments OKd:
Controversial S.F. developments get supes’ OK after more units added
The San Francisco Board of Supervisors approve two controversial projects that show the power of affordable housing in the current political landscape.
The San Francisco Board of Supervisors approved two controversial development projects late Tuesday night that show the power of affordable housing in the current political landscape.
After agreeing to increase its affordable housing commitment from $9.7 million to $15.7 million, Paramount Group won unanimous approval for 75 Howard St., a 133-unit condominium building that was opposed by the Sierra Club, the Friends of Rincon Park and some of the No Wall on the Waterfront coalition that killed the 8 Washington St. condo project on the Embarcadero two years ago.
“The Paramount Group is pleased that the Board of Supervisors unanimously rejected this baseless appeal,” said Alex Clemens, a spokesman for the developer. “This will allow the tear-down of a 550space parking garage and the creation of new housing, market rate and affordable, for all San Franciscans.”
The board also voted, 8-3, to approve 5M, a 4-acre redevelopment of the San Francisco Chronicle property at Fifth and Mission streets. A sweeping reimagining of a transition block between SoMa and downtown San Francisco, 5M will include a 630,000-squarefoot office tower, a 400-unit luxury condo tower and a 220-unit apartment building.
The developers, Forest City and the Hearst Corp., which owns The Chronicle, have also agreed to building an 83-unit, $24.5 million senior housing complex at 967 Mission St. and contribute $18.3 million for an affordable family development
at Eddy and Taylor streets.
The plan was stridently opposed by several neighborhood nonprofit organizations who argued that the $1 billion investment would stamp out what remains of a working-class enclave of residential hotels and subsidized housing buildings that has long been a center of the Bay Area’s Filipino community. Supervisors John Avalos, Eric Mar and David Campos voted against it.
‘Build a future SoMa’
Moments after the vote, opponent Angelica Cabande of SOMCAN — the South of Market Community Network — sent out a news release blasting the vote. “The close to 100 supporters of the community appeal held down public comment for four hours, telling the board that you cannot build a financial district in a neighborhood. It will result in the displacement of the Filipino, working class and multicultural community in SoMa because of increased land value now conferred to the four acres in the heart of SoMa,” she said.
John Elberling, executive director of the affordable housing owner Todco, who had earlier criticized the project’s affordable housing commitment, said that opponents were “making the perfect the enemy of the good.”
“We’re getting a safe and clean community park SRO tenants have asked for for decades, a senior housing site and money to build it that Sixth Street has needed for decades,” Elberling said. “Gentrification will happen with or without 5M, but 5M directly helps us build a future SoMa where we still belong.”
Package of benefits
In the end, the developers were able to put together a package of affordable housing, traffic improvements and community contributions that most supervisors were comfortable with.
“It was clearly prudent of them to take advantage of an offer that generous,” said Tim Colen of the Housing Action Coalition, which advocates for affordable and market rate housing.
The approval was made more politically palatable by the developers’ last-minute agreement to increase the affordable housing percentage from 33 to 40 percent.
“If we can’t support a project at 40 percent (affordable housing), I’m not sure what kind of project this board can support,” said Supervisor Jane Kim, who had negotiated the deal with the developers.
Both projects had been in the works for years — 5M for seven years, 75 Howard St. for four — and both had their environmental studies appealed to the Board of Supervisors by opponents.
Supervisor Scott Wiener pointed to 75 Howard St., which is compliant with existing zoning, as an example of a development that should not have taken as long as it did to win approvals.
“Last night was a great night for housing in San Francisco, but it also exposed, for everyone to see, why we are in the housing crisis we are in,” Wiener said.
Waterfront project
The fight against 75 Howard St. was led by Jon Golinger, who coordinated the No Wall on the Waterfront coalition that successfully torpedoed the proposed 8 Washington St. condominium project in 2013 and successfully pushed Proposition B, legislation that gives city voters a say on projects to be built on Port of San Francisco land that would exceed current height limits.
Golinger said the 11thhour increase in the affordable housing payout at 75 Howard “is taking a page out of the 8 Washington playbook.” He argued that both projects should have included affordable units on-site.
Before the vote, Golinger said that the opponents would likely sue to stop 75 Howard and would consider putting the project on the ballot.
“Working people deserve to live on the waterfront, too, just like people who can buy luxury housing,” he said. “They are trying to paint this as good for affordable housing, but just as with 8 Washington St., it’s 100 percent luxury on-site. They are just putting a bunch of money in a pot that might be used to build affordable housing, someday, somewhere.”