Comment Archives: stories: News: Development

Re: “SF backs project to house homeless veterans

I think if you should have served 10 years or more to get vet housing. Lets see, between the low income, drug addicts, illegals and homeless vets, the middle class get kicked out of sf? I served 15 years I'm middle class, productive member of society and my family and I get sh*t from sf.

3 likes, 0 dislikes
Posted by rrrrrrrrrrobbit on 09/24/2014 at 3:18 PM

Re: “Mixed-use development at Mission BART plaza scrutinized at school board committee meeting

Mr. Blue says its going to be a game changer for the working class Latino community.
Game changer indeed! 42 units will be low income units so that should help the working class Latino community & the low income community at large. It would be wonderful for low income Latino children to live in a clean, safe, comfortable new home to call their own vs the mold, bed bug rat infested places that low income folks often times live in. 4 people in a 1 bedroom should not be the norm...especially for the children.
I have not read tangible proof that somehow the developnment is going to "be devasatating to the community".
If all we see is drug dealing, drunks, fights and people pissing on the plaza it stands to reason that the change can only be positive. Yelling & screaming like "nutjobs" understandably may be the emtional tie some have to the community. The reality is that communities change and change is beyond our control. Years ago the Mission was an Irish neigborhood. Today a large part (not all) of the Mission is Latino. Tommorow it will be something else.. Trying to hold onto a community because its "ours" is based on misguided personal identity but not reality.
Developing the area is going to lowe crime, offer much needed housing, bring in more business and development in the residual. If the area was clean and safe or even BECOMING cleaner and safer some might think that developing the area was not necessary. As it stands the numbers don't lie. The area needs to be developed and it will be.

0 likes, 1 dislike
Posted by 16TH & MISSION WILL BE DEVELOPED on 09/17/2014 at 2:33 PM

Re: “Mixed-use development at Mission BART plaza scrutinized at school board committee meeting

They obviously did not send notification to community members, or most members who attended and opposed at the last meetng were not able to attend this one. The last meeting the majority opposed.

Maximus = Predatory Equity Investment

rents will be $3500 and up.

2 likes, 1 dislike
Posted by goodmaab50 on 09/17/2014 at 7:55 AM

Re: “Mixed-use development at Mission BART plaza scrutinized at school board committee meeting

"The existing situation at 16th and Mission is not safe or ideal for residents, children and commuters. We plan to make our case that a thoughtful, community-focused development at this location will transform the area into a safe, transit hub for residents and the surrounding businesses."

Same could and should be said for Civic Center Station/U.N. Plaza. Has anybody walked by there when there isn't a crafts/arts fair or farmer's market? It is a mess! It's drug users and loiterers all over the place. I can't believe this City can't grow a pair and sweep up the trash. Same with 16th St. Station. I mean how hard would it be for the same cop to do a drive by every hour or so. When they come around the 3rd or 4th time and see the same exact people sitting in the same exact spot day after day, it's pretty logical to draw the conclusion that such folks are loitering. Add to it open and flagrant drug use, profanties being yelled, and general foul odor and then try to spin it as adding to our cultural fabric of this City? No way.

I'm not saying we need $1M 1bd/1ba condo towers all over, but if its an improvement to an otherwise blighted area, I say, why not?

8 likes, 1 dislike
Posted by SweepUpTheTrash on 09/16/2014 at 1:08 PM

Re: “Mixed-use development at Mission BART plaza scrutinized at school board committee meeting

The "affordable housing" is a paradox, because other people have to be taxed to pay for it (OPM, Other People's Money), while those other people have less money to pay for their own housing while the "affordable housing" takes away units that would otherwise contribute to the supply.

8 likes, 1 dislike
Posted by broke on 09/16/2014 at 12:10 PM

Re: “Mixed-use development at Mission BART plaza scrutinized at school board committee meeting

As you said, the "vast majority of the speakers at the meeting backed the project." There were about 50 speakers at the School Board who spoke in favor of building new housing, with actual on-site affordable housing, at 16th and Mission (which hasn't happened in the Mission for what, 8 years?), and with a massive investment in nearby Marshall Elementary. There were only 4 or 5 opponents who all sounded looney tunes especially the last guy from the Latino Club who just started yelling at everybody like some kind of nutjob.

18 likes, 6 dislikes
Posted by Uhhhhh...more housing please on 09/15/2014 at 11:09 PM

Re: “Sale to developer approved for portion of SF Flower Mart site

The city is infested with real estate developers, smelly rodents, being fed by our champion of the rich Mayor Ed Lee! Shun the poor and snub the middle class. These are their new mortars,

1 like, 1 dislike
Posted by Paul on 09/13/2014 at 9:23 AM

Re: “Sale to developer approved for portion of SF Flower Mart site

The article said "a company is trying to make a profit!" Oh my shame on them...that's just horrible. Who in their right mind would want to profit!? As I sit here and read this article surrounded by adds. Ironically though, I'm sure the Examiner doesn't make much profit because their journalistic style is so left of center that its not even funny. Why not report issues unbiased and watch the readers return for good honest, factual reporting.

3 likes, 3 dislikes
Posted by Great Reporting Not on 09/12/2014 at 9:21 AM

Re: “Sale to developer approved for portion of SF Flower Mart site

Butt out, City Hall. This is a private sector business transaction. Shall we mandate what percentage of roses they sell versus tulips and daisies? How about a penalty or special tax should they decide to focus just on roses....because we value diversity. Elected officials, please fix our housing crisis - brought about by your own insane housing policies - and our flailing transportation system FIRST before you take on even more "noble" battles that have no impact on the average citizen. Is it really so horrible if the space-gobbling flower warehouse moved to a more sensible location, like South San Francisco, and made way for much-needed housing??

7 likes, 6 dislikes
Posted by Reality Check on 09/12/2014 at 7:58 AM

Re: “San Francisco property tax take to exceed $2 billion for first time

We were about to purchase a home in SF but after reading this, we canceled our purchase and decided to stay where we are which if far away from SF>

Posted by Dradels on 09/11/2014 at 11:55 PM

Re: “Uber plans to build new headquarters in Mission Bay

Wait till winter comes. Uber drivers will really have something to bitch about. They are an unregulated suppy that will destroy the market place for all but mostly themselves.

0 likes, 1 dislike
Posted by Zabe13 on 09/07/2014 at 11:23 AM

Re: “Threatened with tech development, SF Flower Mart allies rally for City institution

It's not a building, idiot. San Francisco is NOT about money. It's about culture, art and a host of things you wouldn't understand. We need to retain what makes San Francisco special. If the rest of you are about the money thing - please go live in Silicon Valley and stop white washing our city. The last thing we want is to turn into a Disney version of ourselves like New York did.

Posted by SF Girl on 09/07/2014 at 1:12 AM

Re: “SF pushes forward with rebuilding of Alice Griffith housing development

" includes 1,600 homes, 27 to 40 percent of which will be below market rate" - what happens to the rest of the tenants?

Posted by SF Native on 09/06/2014 at 1:24 PM

Re: “Cathedral Hill tower plan ignites height-limits fight

People living in a high rise insisting that no other high rises be built near them. Only is SF. And we wonder why we have a housing crisis.

4 likes, 2 dislikes
Posted by Reality Check on 09/06/2014 at 11:19 AM

Re: “Cathedral Hill tower plan ignites height-limits fight

Mayor Lee's policies of finding more housing for the rich at any cost, violating any rules, will prevail! He is committed to having a hideous skyline full of massive monster buildings. Look at the crap the rich are buying on Market Street. It is all ugly and all for the rich, We need new bums downtown!

5 likes, 8 dislikes
Posted by victor on 09/05/2014 at 4:45 PM

Re: “Cathedral Hill tower plan ignites height-limits fight

I think they should build it. From the viewpoint of the neighbors it sounds like we shouldn't build anywhere seniors live which is bogus. There will always be someone opposed to a building in their neighborhood but that just isn't realistic.

7 likes, 5 dislikes
Posted by J Stephens on 09/05/2014 at 3:55 PM

Re: “Cathedral Hill tower plan ignites height-limits fight

i love it. Neighbors here are fighting the heights and will likely win. But when the city dumped 450 foot building on south van ness and mission streets less than 35 feet from a neighborhood of housing with heights less than 3 stories nobody blinked an eye. The poor neighborhoods expressed their desire for a better transition space between 450 foot building and 45 foot building and there was zero response from the planners in charge, from the planning commissioners, and then Chris Daly whose district this impacted, went the recusal path. Power and money always wins in the end.

7 likes, 4 dislikes
Posted by power and money on 09/05/2014 at 9:33 AM

Re: “Cathedral Hill tower plan ignites height-limits fight

Build it already, and built it even taller. We have a housing crisis, in case you haven't noticed. People need a home to live in. Sorry if that creates a shadow or some wind or blocks a view....but this is a city and a city need to change to meet the needs of all of its residents, not just the fortunate entrenched residents who "already have theirs".

15 likes, 7 dislikes
Posted by Reality Check on 09/05/2014 at 9:29 AM

Re: “Cathedral Hill tower plan ignites height-limits fight

Ben Johner. Agree. Methinks if Ed were at all concerned about the jam packed and historically overcrowded Geary bus lines, he would have ensured that the useless Central Subway would have gone up Geary where it should have been built in the first place.

6 likes, 4 dislikes
Posted by citizenkarma on 09/05/2014 at 9:10 AM

Re: “Uber plans to build new headquarters in Mission Bay

That's quite a gamble for a quasi-legal operation that has been banned in Germany, France, and various American cities (and counting).

4 likes, 2 dislikes
Posted by Ragazzu on 09/05/2014 at 8:58 AM

© 2014 The San Francisco Examiner

Website powered by Foundation