1951, they are already woodframe structures with gable roofs and feature similar massing, orientation, and design. Additional buildings on the property include a onestory woodframe boiler house constructed circa 1922, and a onestory garage and storage structure constructed in 1958. The site features include various metal tanks for water and pesticides, two hand dug wells, a woodframe shed, in approximately 20,450 square feet of open space. The subject property, as a cut flower nursery from 1921 until 1990 by the garibaldi brothers. They immigrated to San Francisco from italy in the early 20th century and were one of several italian born families that owned and operated cut flower nursery is in the city, particularly in the portola neighborhood, 770 woolsey was one of 20 similar cut flower nurseries in the portola district in the early 20 th century. The garibaldi family were also members of the San Francisco Flower Growers association, which was a Business Group established by the loca
A lot of back and forth, and that takes a long time and drives costs up. Now, like in many cases thats great, you know. I have devoted my career to an Affordable Housing development so the more Affordable Housing the better. We have also seen deals and in your District Supervisor recently after a very lengthy community iterative process and the expenditure of millions of dollars, two developments trying to go forward could not in fact. And so that is thats what sometimes happens when the risks are great, the costs are high, and we get these Great Community benefits that then tip those particular parcels and i think you know the two that im thinking of. I do know the two you are thinking of, and one has been purchased by the city and 100 Affordable Housing. I dont know if its the worst outcome from that project. I dont think we need to belabor this point, i dont think you can point to one example and thats what worries me, right . I mean aside from little excellent arguments made by my
Question . Miss hartley . Thanks. Supervisor walton my apologies. I didnt know if you were done with your presentation. So the first thing i just want to say and then, i have two questions. But of course, we are responsible for stepping up to fund teacher housing. Its our job to do that as a city. Our teachers live here, they work here, so thats our job. So whether its educator housing, housing for city employees, housing for lowincome communities, of course its our job to fund that housing, and it should not be the burden of those people to provide those jobs. Its our job. I hope were not saying that because the educators or School District did not put up any money for housing, that its their fault, because its our job to put up money for housing. My first question and thank you, director hartley, for the presentation. Wheres the bulk of all housing being built in San Francisco. Well, the bulk of housing being built in San Francisco is d6 and d10. Since 2008, there was about 28,000 ho
Go over the sites design and program of the master plan. San franciscos Housing Affordability and shortage has long been an issue and the city has developed several policies and programs to attract them. In 2014, propertie proposition d with 33 units being affordable. In support of proposition k, former mayor ed lee launched the public land for Housing Program calling for 4,000 units on public land by 2020. 50 of which will be affordable. So the Planning Department and the office of Economic Workforce Development to select the site, public land especially that can be built for housing and also provide Public Benefits those four sites are initial sites. There are more sites not shown in the map. They can help reach 27 of the targeted 4,000 units. The balboa website is in the south was nearby the balboa park station right next to city college of San Francisco, just north of ocean avenue commercial district surrounded by neighborhoods like sunny side, inkel side. This is under utilized 17
Is this the Planning Department that we the citizens of San Francisco are paying for . Were playing for a Planning Department that is not examining the cost of transportation and the dangers of transportation increasing the gridlock. You are responsible for this. Frankly, again, as i raised earlier, the mayor and the developers are running San Francisco and they dont give a damn as long as they can make profit by building more construction. This is insane. Its outrageous. The fact you have nothing to say about it, you dont get to the specifics tells me you really dont care either about what is going on in San Francisco. The gridlock is a responsibility of the Planning Department. You are improving more and more construction, Mass Construction without agreeing there should be transportation, proper transportation. Thats political incompetence and malfeasance in my view. Where is the Planning Commission . Where is the director of planning in San Francisco about the gridlock . What is you