| |
Posted Apr 4, 2023, 3:18 AM
|
|
你的媽媽
|
|
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: The Bay
Posts: 11,586
|
|
Here it is. I highly doubt anything will happen though as it's not a realistic proposal. Not exactly the best place for such a tower. If anything it'll galvanize the NIMBY movement and make it stronger. More reasonably scaled projects like the one above would be much better as it's more appropriately scaled for the existing neighborhood and more realistically achievable.
Edit: Actually it looks like it is the one above. In the article it mentions the most recent proposal was for 12 stories and 400 units, at 2700 Sloat. I'm not sure what made them suddenly jump to 55 stories and 560 feet. Will be interesting to see how this plays out.
Quote:
A 55-story condo tower near Ocean Beach? S.F. officials give thumbs-down
J.K. Dineen
March 31, 2023
San Francisco’s campaign to meet state housing goals by opening up the west side to increased density is set to face its first big test: a 50-plus story tower in the Outer Sunset District.
But, so far, it’s off to a rough start, with both city planners and the neighborhood supervisor giving the proposal a thumbs-down.
CH Planning LLC, a Reno real estate company, was planning to submit a proposal to build a 55-story, 646-unit development two blocks from Ocean Beach on the site of the Sloat Garden Center, according to an interview the developer did with the San Francisco Business Times.
While the developer had yet to file an application, San Francisco Planning Director Rich Hillis confirmed that CH Planning had indicated that it intended to submit paperwork for the 560-foot development, perhaps as early as Friday afternoon.
Hillis said the location is perfect for density, but the height of the project contemplated would not be in compliance with zoning regulations. While the developer planned to take advantage of the “state density bonus” — which allows for 50% more density in exchange for a higher percentage of affordable units — the building proposed is several times taller than zoning allows, he said.
“A residential project on this west side site next to the street car is exactly what we envisioned in the housing element,” Hillis said, referring to San Francisco’s recently adopted state-mandated plan that requires the city to plan for 82,000 housing units over the next eight years. “Unfortunately the developer misrepresents what’s allowed by the planning code and state density bonus.”
Hillis said “high-density housing here makes complete sense, but it defies logic that a site with a 100-foot height limit and a 50% density bonus would yield a 560-foot building.”
Supervisor Joel Engardio said that he was set to meet with the development team in mid-March but that “they canceled it.”
“That was a few weeks ago, and now I read about it in the newspaper,” he said. “That is not a good start as far as community outreach.”
Engardio said he agreed with Hillis that the acre site at 2700 Sloat could “hold a lot of housing” and that the area — with wide avenues and proximity to transit, the zoo and the beach — would be perfect for family-oriented development.
But he said he would favor six-story buildings with courtyards and ground-floor retail.
“Change is coming to that area,” he said. “But 50 stories at the beach is not realistic. We need housing on the west side that is going to attract families.”
The new proposal is the fourth iteration of the project in three years. The development originally was proposed to be eight stories with 213 units. The proposal then increased to 12 stories and 283 units, and then to 400 condos, using San Francisco’s Home-SF legislation, which allows builders to tack on two extra floors in exchange for agreeing to make 30% of the housing affordable.
Sonja Trauss, executive director of YIMBY Law, said John and Raelynn Hickey’s interpretation of what the law allows is correct, based on the state “bulk code” law, which regulates massing. The developer is planning on building four towers on top of one podium, which they argue makes it in compliance. But the city says that the four towers would be considered a single building, and so would exceed density limits.
“We think the project is very exciting — more housing is more housing,” Trauss said. “And what better place to build it than by the beach?”
She said the city’s negative response to the project shows its not serious about meeting its housing element goals.
“The city has an opportunity to get 600 units built there and they seem to want no part of it,” she said.
The property is owned by 2700 Sloat Holdings LLC, which bought the 30,000-square-foot site in 2020 for $8.5 million. The developer, CH Planning LLC, is headed up by Raelynn Hickey, who is listed as the company’s manager, according to public records.
In a text, Hickey said, “I have been involved with affordable housing most of my life and it gives me great pleasure to have an opportunity to take part in developing more of this badly needed housing stock.”
Hickey said, in texts, she has “surrounded” herself with “some of the best quality consultants in the business, including architects, civil engineers, (mechanical) engineers, affordable housing consultants, land use attorneys, litigation attorneys, marketing consultants, land use attorneys, and many more.”
Hickey’s husband, John Hickey, is referenced in the Business Times article as a consultant on the project. John and Raelynn Hickey are also both listed as treasurer, secretary and director of a separate company, an affordable housing group called Lifetime Affordable.
While there is no record that CH Planning has developed housing in San Francisco, John Hickey made news in 2004 when he proposed three 500-foot towers on India Basin in San Francisco’s Bayview-Hunters Point neighborhood. That project was shot down by city planners.
In addition, John Hickey’s business practices have drawn the attention of federal law enforcement agencies. In November 2005, he was convicted by a federal jury on two counts of securities fraud and eight counts of mail fraud after a three-week trial in U.S. District Court in San Francisco.
In March 2006, U.S. District Judge William Alsup sentenced him to 97 months in prison and ordered him to pay a $15,000 fine and $17.4 million in restitution, after he was found guilty of defrauding more than 700 investors, according to a news release at the time.
Trauss said the city would not be faced with a 560-foot tower had it approved the earlier version of the project, which could have been scheduled for a hearing at the planning commission last June.
“They had an opportunity to have 200 units and then 400 units and they didn’t get to the point of scheduling a planning commission hearing,” Trauss said.
But she called the delays “a blessing in disguise.”
“We ended up with a bigger project,” she said.
|
https://www.sfchronicle.com/sf/article/a-55-story-condo-tower-s-f-s-ocean-beach-17869660.php
|
|
|
Prev
Linear Mode
