Attorney serving the neighborhood ive never seen a third bathroom in any house in the entire neighborhood. There are no threebathroom houses in the bayview district. And certainly it doesnt make sense to have a threebathroom and twobedroom unit for this single mother and her young daughter. It doesnt make sense. Which leaves the only logical conclusion in my mind that the Property Owner is intending to make this two short term rentals. The upstairs bedroom has been siphoned into units. The planning website reflects. The Property Owner told me this isnt planned but i have a hard time seeing any other possible reality that can occur here. No one believes in the maintaining the Affordable Housing more than i do. But in this case this isnt the hypothetical. Somebody is actually living there with her daughter. And this is potentially lowering her ability to live there in the same way that shes lived there for the past many years. Finally im sorry. I lost my train of thought. The unit oh the
Law you heard about oh we cant do anything about adus because the state says we cant. We cant do anything about this because the state says you cant. Youre widening authority is being constantly narrowed by these state projects that are, these state laws that are one size fits all. And that one size does not fit San Francisco. Youve got to find a way to push back on some of this stuff and particularly in the mission we cant have, you know projects that are done with such low affordability and false data. This project assumes their Traffic Studies or whatever 7 deliveries per day. Seven deliveries per day for 60 units. I get at least one a day myself. You know. Seven deliveries a day. And having adequate accommodation for that . Thats just false data. And its wrong. And it should be reexamined and some changes made to this project if it goes forward. Thank you. Thank you. Next speaker, please. Speaker sir with the black shirt i need a speaker card from you. Thank you. Welcome. Hi. Good
About back here about 7 45, please. Thank you we are ready. Okay. Please be seated. Welcome back to the november 6, 2019 meeting of the San Francisco board of appealing. We are now on item number 7. This is appeal number 19085. Our mission no eviction versus the Planning Commission subject property is 344 shortstop 14th street, appealing the issuance to mm stevenson llc of planning code section 329 large project authorization. Adopting findings relating to a large project authorization for the project proposing new construction of a sevenstory, 78 feet at all mixed use residential building measuring 84,630 square feet with 5,890 square feet of ground floor retail use and 606 dwelling units consisting of four studio units, 25 twobedroom, two bathroom units which would utilize the code section 6591565918 and invoke waivers from the Development Standards for rear yard pursuant to section 134 usable open space 135 and height, planning code 268. Record number 2014. 0948. I need to make a di
Unit. It was created into a twobedroom unit. Shes lived in a twobedroom unit the entire time shes lived there. And the coincidences im talking about ive probably been in more homes in the Bayview District than pretty much any other person in San Francisco as a housing attorney serving the neighborhood ive never seen a third bathroom in any house in the entire neighborhood. There are no threebathroom houses in the Bayview District. And certainly it doesnt make sense to have a threebathroom and twobedroom unit for this single mother and her young daughter. It doesnt make sense. Which leaves the only logical conclusion in my mind that the Property Owner is intending to make this two short term rentals. The upstairs bedroom has been siphoned into units. The planning website reflects. The Property Owner told me this isnt planned but i have a hard time seeing any other possible reality that can occur here. No one believes in the maintaining the Affordable Housing more than i do. But in this
Clear, i mean, this is like eight affordable units out of 60. Okay . So its not 18 percent. And even 18 percent is way lower than the mission needs. These large state projects that come under state law you heard about oh we cant do anything about adus because the state says we cant. We cant do anything about this because the state says you cant. Youre widening authority is being constantly narrowed by these state projects that are, these state laws that are one size fits all. And that one size does not fit San Francisco. Youve got to find a way to push back on some of this stuff and particularly in the mission we cant have, you know projects that are done with such low affordability and false data. This project assumes their Traffic Studies or whatever 7 deliveries per day. Seven deliveries per day for 60 units. I get at least one a day myself. You know. Seven deliveries a day. And having adequate accommodation for that . Thats just false data. And its wrong. And it should be reexamine