Thread by @_fruchtose

Hello San Francisco. I'm attending the September meeting of the Haight-Ashbury Neighborhood Council. I'm mainly here for an update on the appeal of 1846 Grove St.

hanc-sf.org/24-home/563-se…

First up is announcements. Next is the introduction of a new Park Station Police Captain. Then it's NOPAWN (1846 Grove St). I may update sporadically before then. First announcement is the victory of Prop C (2018) in the courts. $492M is available for homelessness.

We're having some technical difficulties. Some HANC board members and the new Captain Pedrini are having technical difficulties logging into the meeting.

Henry Tang is here from NOPAWN.

Captain Pedrini is reviewing his experience, expressing his goals for Park Station, and talking about shift schedules.

Someone named JACQUEL FIELDER has called into the meeting 🤔

Captain Pedrini answering a question about defunding the police: Conference of Mayors says that it shouldn't be about defunding but about changing and retraining the police.

HANC President Tes Welborn says technical difficulties are ongoing. A dozen people are having trouble logging on.

We're now starting on the appeal of 1846 Grove St. Tes Welborn says it will be going to the Planning Commission on September 20. [I thought it's the SF Board of Supervisors?]

HANC VP Bruce Wolfe will screen the presentation. Henry Tang is calling in due to technical issues.

Presentation is starting.

Tang: We appreciate the opportunity to make a connection to a fellow neighborhood group. You'll see why NOPAWN—primarily neighbors on the block—is opposed to the project.

Tang: 80% of the project will be built against the fences of the adjoining lots. There's a narrow entrance via alleyway. Two people cannot pass in the alleyway. Proposed project is 4 dwelling units in 4 buildings.

Tang: project does not meet CEQA or project planning requirements. We hired fire safety consultant who says that the development would lead to an unsafe condition and violate ADA requirements.

Tang: community outreach was designed to bypass residents of NOPAWN. They reached out to NOPNA and HANC. One of my neighbors who belonged to HANC invited me to the HANC meeting. At a meeting with NOPAWN, our concerns were belittled or dismissed.

Tang: the Planning Commission meeting was the first in COVID-19 and had technical difficulties. Our speaker was shut out of the presentation. We were shocked that the project was approved. It didn't get a fair hearing. In contrast, this meeting is going great. [LOL]

Tang: "The density is excessive" and the unique egress renders it unsafe. The approval has been faulty. It hasn't obtained the necessary variances. It would set a precedent for future unsafe developments and deteriorate quality of life for all SF residents.

Tang: We would like a letter of opposition from HANC, either provided to us or the full board.

Q1: Are these all market-rate units?
A: They are all market-rate. This lot is very close to CCSF, St. Mary's Hospital, and USF. There are no units below market-rate. It's not clear if they're to be rented or for sale. Developer has not made that clear.

Welborn: How long is the passageway?
Tang: It's 50 feet at 3.5 feet wide and then opens to 6 feet for another 50 feet. Building code says it should be wider. We'll air this at the hearing on Sept 29.

Karen Fishkin, Recycling Chair: There are real concerns about access in case of fire. How would fire trucks and wheelchairs gain access?

Tang: Those are precisely our concerns. In the event of an earthquare or fire, they'll be rushing in and residents will be rushing out. The gate will take a few inches off of the alley.

Tang: The developer's proposal is that residents will shelter-in-place—but I would grab my family and go in an earthquake.
Welborn: It makes sense to the developers but not the neighborhood.

David Woo: What was the Planning Commission's rationale for passing the project?

Tang: An SF planner said they have a 1997 precedent for the Class 3 CEQA exemption. But the exemption says that up to 6 units are allowed only in 1 building. We believe that residents did not have a chance to speak in the continued meeting.

Tang: There were a lot of attendees in the first meeting—17 or 18 opposed, one in support. At the second meeting, our speaker was caller number 32. AT&T cut us off because there was a 4-four meeting limit. They had to renegotiate that, and after nobody was allowed to speak.

Tang: We submitted two appeals: one based on CEQA, the other on conditional use. Appeals will be heard on Sept 29 if not continued again.
Q: Do you have an attorney?
Tang: No, we're a scrappy bunch of neighbors. We put pennies together to hire a fire consultant.

Welborn: Let's ask Calvin Welch, Land Use Chair, if he has thoughts on the project.
Welch: I believe the presentation was very accurate. The question whether wants to take a position and how quickly we can turn a position around.

Welch: I would have no problem supporting the neighbors' position and oppose the project.
Welborn: I personally support the neighbor's opinion on the project opposing it. We can take this to the board meeting next week.

Welch: Please include Planning Commission's resolution with the letter you'd like us to review. I'd like to see conditions for approval.
Tang: There's one condition. If the Fire Department finds any issues with the project, it goes back to the Planning Commisison.

Welch: Did you ask Supervisor Preston for the letter from the Fire Dept? He knows the project.
Tang: Supervisor Preston is great. He's been very involved. He's talking to the Fire Dept. I think we'll be able to talk to them.

Welborn: Imagine the construction process going on with this 3.5-feet-wide alleyway.
Welch: They'll erect a crane and lift everything over the buildings onto the site. That's how it's done nowadays.

ang: They had to get permission from the people in the building that would be under the crane.
Bruce Wolfe jokes that this is how the Fire Dept would put out fires, too.

We're now moving on to ballot measure endorsements.

Welborn: Calvin, are you able to speak on Prop 15?
Welch: You're fine, Tes!
Welborn: It's going to tax rich people to redistribute some of the funds to go back to community services and schools.

Welborn: CA used to lead the nation in schools. We're now down there with Arkansas and Missouri. Mayor is in support. I heartily recommend it.

Karen Fishkin: People need to know that 15 only affects big business.
Welborn: Calvin, you have the floor [on H and K].

Calbin: Prop K has already been endorsed by the board. It's a state requirement that requires a vote before a project by simple majority that low-income housing can be built, persuant to State Constitution Section 38.

Welch: We don't get to vote on $10M condos—how many of those do we need?—but we have to vote on low-income housing. Language is the same as it's always been done periodically. It's been done before in 2012's Prop C.

Welch: Language allows the city to [quoting language] "construct and/or acquire low-rent housing". Prop C passed with 65% in 2012. This one should pass. We don't get to vote on market-rate housing, or luxury housing. Interesting.

Welch: HANC has not taken a position on an extraordinary 97-page measure that changes the business and taxation code. It's being sold as a way to save small neighborhood businesses in a post-COVID-19 world [Prop H].

Welch: It amends the zoning of over 2 dozen neighborhood commercial shopping centers. It's 91 pages of zoning changes, 6 of business and taxation. It principally mandates four uses in all districts on all floors.

Welch: Let me explain. Haight St has more residential than commercial units from Central to Stanyan. Dwelling units are on the 2nd & 3rd floors. For 70 years there has been a struggle against businesses above the ground floor.

Welch: Now there are rules that no business can displace a residential unit above the first floor. I think everyone should read the ordinance. It is stunning. It mandates 4 uses everywhere, on all floors.

Welch: Those 4 uses: movie theaters on the 2nd & 3rd floor, animal hospitals on any floor—I kid you not, professional offices, and for-profit and on-profit social services. I don't even know what a for-profit social service is.

Welch: Prop H creates such a use and allows them in any floor in neighborhood shopping districts. It's being sold as a cheap way to create cheap space for non-profits. Page 8 of the bill says non-profits are defined as institutional or community use of a charitable nature.

Welch: The language strikes language that prohibits for-profit services. Very bizarre. Movie theaters, professional offices, animal hospitals, and for-profit social services.

Welch: I'm missing something—I don't quite understand the demand after COVID-19 for animal hospitals and movie theaters on the 3rd floor at Haight & Masonic. This is all ministerially done. It's the most curious land use policy.

Welch: Never once heard by a supervisor's committee [that's not true] or the Planning Commission. The Mayor sent it directly to the Board. BOS never held a hearing—it goes straight to the ballot. I strongly urge that HANC opposes it until the bill is heard before the public.

Welch: This thing is huge and a little bit wacky. "It's Trumpian in nature."

[Dude, it's a bill about small businesses.]

Welch: It's Trumpian in style. It's quite remarkable. It's an act of the mayor.

Welborn: "I want to comment on the use of offices—to be able to put offices where there are currently apartments would be a danger to our neighborhood.... on any floor."

Welch: The unlocking of Prop C funds is in another measure, not this one. The Prop H changes waive fees for applications for land use permits and building inspections.

[That's in the case when SF Planning messes up processing an application, but this seems to have escaped him.]

Christin Evans, Treasurer, is asking about releasing Prop C (2018) funds and changes to exempt a certain amount of money in sales from taxation—to a floor of $2M.
Richard Ivanhoe, Membership Chair, says that's in Prop F.

Welch: This is part of the permitting speed-up. It requires suspension of fees. There is a section in Planning Code amendments that speaks to volume of non-alcoholic sales.

Welch: It's clear they have not removed public hearing process for bars or mainly sells alcohol. That sill requires 311 notice. But they remove hearings for restaurants becoming other things. As I read it, this allows you to do other things and not have a public hearing!

Evans: I think it does give opportunity for more WeWork-type spaces coming into the neighborhood.
Welch: Shared office space is one thing—but so is simply office space! You can turn a restaurant into an office! It deadens the street to have professional offices on the 1st floor

Evans: Lack of process is fine. But in a 96-page document, there are some things which would benefit Haight-Ashbury community. What I have seen in merchants looking for rental space, I have seen Homeless Youth Alliance search in vain for an appropriate space.

Welch: Why would you remove the language in the existing code about non-profits!?!
Evans: There are businesses like independent bookstores that are technical retail but are evolving business models that can operate technically as "for-profit" but are not profitable.

Evans: I'm fine if we want to oppose based on process alone, but there are things in here which could be useful.
Welch: No one in Planning as opined what they are. Supervisors haven't said how it would benefit shopping districts in their neighborhoods. Please read it!

Welch: A number of the pages reiterate permitted uses of principally four uses in 24 neighborhoods—animal hospitals, movie theaters, professional offices, and social and philanthropic services that can be profit-making!

Welch: That you both agree on the lack of public process makes this sweeping citywide change questionable. Let's take it to the board next week for a vote. It sounds like something the board should seriously consider.

Kyle Smeallie from Dean Preston's Staff is now discussing Prop I. There is a proposal to fund a rent relief fund. It would allow landlords to get some money back in exchange for forgiving rent.

Kyle: And there's a permanent affordable housing fund, possibly for a community land trust, affordable housing, etc. [Listing the many endorsements I can't type very quickly.]

Welch moves that HANC endorse Prop I. It has a second. HANC members are voting. No votes against. Motion passes. HANC will endorse Prop I.

Welborn: There are a number of state propositions. HANC has taken a position of Yes on 15, 16, 17, 18, and No on 22.

Welborn: Prop 21—it's not something we've discussed. Does anyone have thoughts on it?

[Calvin Welch has left and there is only silence for a good 10 seconds.]
Q: Does it amend Costa-Hawkins?
Welborn: Not technically, but I'm not incredibly informed on it. It does an end run in effect.

Welborn: I know HANC has always taken positions to support rent control. We'll look into this one a little more at our board meeting.

Welborn: Christin, I know you had a guest. Are they coming?
Evans: They were scheduled for 8 PM. But now that Calvin is gone, maybe we can discuss H without yelling. [LMAO]

Evans: Mayor's Office of Housing and Economic Development has been working on zoning changes we've been looking at with suspicion, rightly so. Council of District Merchants' Associations showed a positive response. Primary motivation was not movie theaters, believe it or not.

Evans: Goal is to create hybrid shared workspace model for cafes. Formula retail restrictions would apply but it would allow flexibility for restaurateurs and cafe owners. I don't know why that's necessary. They're doing this already.

Evans: We have a complaint-based system and people are not complaining. We should have a deliberate conversation about examining our neighborhood association.

Evans: There's overlap with Castro + North Beach in that we have competing interests with tourist- and resident-serving businesses. That creates extraordinary rent pressures. Even before COVID, we had more vacant storefronts than ever before.

Evans: We should send a message to landlords about what we'd like to see in those spaces. I'd like to have a point of view on resident- and tourist-serving businesses.
Welborn: You'd like HANC to look further into this and make a recommendation to our supervisor?

Evans: It could also be a post-election meeting topic.
Welborn: It seems like in a year we've made major changes to our neighborhood corridors already, and supervisors opted out of those changes. So this should have more input from the public.

Evans: Haight-Ashbury Merchants' Association opposed Vallie's bill, which ended up changing just District 5. I just got a message that my guest had an urgent meeting and had to jump off.

[I take it that the guest was Jackie Fielder.]

Welborn: It sounds like the measure will either pass or fail and based on that we can respond.
Q: Does Prop H affect rental housing stock?
Welborn: As I understood it, current regulations have distinct rules about 2nd-4th floors of buildings.

Evans: Right. For example, Amoeba Music had a medical marijuana business on the second floor. They had to have a conditional use process to allow that. At the time, Haight St did not allow non-residential uses on the 2nd floor.

Evans: In practice, we did not have high pressure in recent years to convert residential spaces to commercial. I suspect that's because residential uses have been lucrative to landlords. Some businesses have expressed interest in office space over the years.

Evans: There was a wholesale food business which was interested called Buyer's Best Friend. We have very little office space in The Haight.

I'd like to attend some more, but I have to get going. The conversation is still ongoing. Thanks for reading.