Comments on: Fracking the Mission

By: mission neighbor

mission neighbor — Sun, 21 Oct 2012 15:22:09 +0000

http://www.waterboards.ca.gov/sanfranciscobay/undergrd.shtml

By: blah

blah — Sat, 20 Oct 2012 03:50:28 +0000

You know what else raised prevailing rents? When I did an OMI on my crazy tenant and took the fucking unit off the market. Bwah ha ha. Suck it, peons.

By: En-Chu Lao

En-Chu Lao — Sat, 20 Oct 2012 01:17:32 +0000

This is the type of equipment they needed a few years ago when that fat woman was photographed letting go of a deluge of explosive diarrhea against the side of a building.

By: ALWAYS HIGH

ALWAYS HIGH — Fri, 19 Oct 2012 23:00:27 +0000

IF BY FRACKING YOU MEAN CLEANING UP AFTER I PEE OFF MY ROOF

By: Whataperv

Whataperv — Fri, 19 Oct 2012 21:03:03 +0000

Do you know what raises rent more than adding more housing units to a neighborhood?

When you moved in four years ago, you were part of a wave of new residents that pushed rents up 25+%. Demand in the Mission has gotten higher and higher over the last decade, with astronomical rents appearing around 2007/2008. They’ve continued to ramp up ever since. This is because more people want to live in the neighborhood. Landlords have realized they can charge a shit ton and get qualified renters and so they do. The availability of shitty, yuppie attracting condos has nothing to do with that. You’re part of the problem that you’re complaining about, which is why some of us, who were living in the Mission before you, are looking at neighborhoods that are cheaper and have a better quality of life.

By: here ya go

here ya go — Fri, 19 Oct 2012 19:40:05 +0000

http://www.sf-moh.org/index.aspx?page=308

I thought everyone knew this. the relevant part:

Section 415 of the Planning Code requires residential developments with 5 or more units to pay an Affordable Housing Fee. Project sponsors may apply for an alternative to the fee in the form of providing 15% of their units on-site or 20% of their units off-site as affordable to low- to moderate-income households. These percentages are higher in certain parts of the Eastern Neighborhoods Plan Area. Project Sponsors in the certain parts of the Eastern Neighborhoods Plan Area may also apply for the alternative of dedicating land for affordable housing.

By: hot tubber

hot tubber — Fri, 19 Oct 2012 19:10:25 +0000

Hey buddy, Marin County called and it wants its NIMBY back.

By: Troy

Troy — Fri, 19 Oct 2012 18:54:29 +0000

You moved here 4 years ago, and you’re complaining about the neighborhood becoming more expensive and crowded?

Hilarious!

By: GG

GG — Fri, 19 Oct 2012 16:57:16 +0000

Please cite your source for the provision in the law that permits paying a fee to avoid the “affordable” housing requirements.

By: Pito

Pito — Fri, 19 Oct 2012 16:52:50 +0000

For example, rent in X block that contains 50 units is around 1500/mo for a one bedroom apt, a developer buys a corner of this block and builds a 25 unit structure with premium commercial space on the first floor where there used to be 8 units. Rent on these “luxury” units ends up being around 2000/mo for a one bedroom, but two thirds of the size of the available rentals around it. The perceived value of the older units shoots up because of their size and parking availability (which shrinks down drastically after you add this kind of new development to the area). You end up with an apartment which real value is $1500 being rented out for around $2000 because it can offer you space and parking. Nothing changed in the neighborhood you just crammed new people in, effectively reducing the quality of life of older residents, and making the developer a lot of money, which lets not forget is the actual goal of this development.

By: Dan

Dan — Fri, 19 Oct 2012 15:47:56 +0000

It’s amusing that Pito rented an apartment in the Mission 4 years ago, and is worried that condos being built now (or years in the future) are gentrifying Valencia Street. You, Pito, are one of the gentrifiers of the Mission, a process that has already happened over the last 20 years. Condos built at Valencia and 23rd St won’t make a difference one way or the other– rental vacancies near there are already snapped up at insane prices, and right now that site is just a toxic dump. Rents are going up because there are tens of thousands of new tech jobs in the area, that pay enough for people to bid up the few vacancies available. There will be stabilization or drops in rent only when the economy here slows down again. (The only developments that might be large enough to make some difference in supply and demand of rental housing are the large complexes like Trinity Plaza at 8th and Market, where 1700 rental units are being built.)

By: eyeballs

eyeballs — Fri, 19 Oct 2012 13:21:52 +0000

OH, COME ON!

you know you like trolling too.

By: En-Chu Lao

En-Chu Lao — Fri, 19 Oct 2012 06:21:11 +0000

You people have it all wrong. It’s going to be the newest Café to think that it’s the be-all of coffee brewing. Some stick in a flannel shirt and five pounds of beard will take 15 minutes to annoyingly explain the “proper” way to brew a cup.

By: brooklynize

brooklynize — Fri, 19 Oct 2012 05:37:02 +0000

Yeah…it’s way better to build more housing out in the ‘burbs where people drive everywhere.

By: dude

dude — Fri, 19 Oct 2012 05:06:16 +0000

Something similar is going on at 23rd St and Potrero. It’s a many many years-long process, at least in that case. At least ten years so far. Yes, ten years. So likely don’t expect any condos any time soon.