“Supervisor Ross Mirkarimi introduced legislation that would require the one-for-one replacement of any demolished housing units. The proposed law, introduced Tuesday, was inspired by the recently approved Drew School expansion.”
Expansion prompts demolition law proposal [Examiner]
Drew School Expansion Plans Pass Their Appeals Test(s) [SocketSite]

Recent Articles

Comments from “Plugged-In” Readers

  1. Posted by MirkSucks

    sMirk, why not address the root cause of housing problems rather than continue to put band aid on top of band aid?
    Oh, it’s because our supes are in the pocket of special interest groups. Oops.

  2. Posted by Conifer

    Further proof that the government of the PRSF really owns all the property, not individuals. Fair warning to anyone who wants to invest or develop here.

  3. Posted by whatever

    Who’s going to decide whether it’s “sound”?

  4. Posted by Mystery Realtor

    Communism is alive and well in San FRancisco

  5. Posted by NewBuyer

    OK, he has now lost all the points he gained for saving Bay to Breakers…

  6. Posted by salarywoman

    Would this apply to combining condo units?

  7. Posted by CityPlanner

    This would change virtually nothing; it’s already city policy and applied in 98% of all cases (and it’s already virtually impossible to combine units salarywoman).

  8. Posted by Miles

    I’m with CityPlanner – I thought this was pretty much the case since the Residential Demolition Ordinance went into effect a few years ago.

  9. Posted by Jimmy C

    I guess they fixed the horrible schools, bad streets and the balooning pension obligations and now can focus on trivial items which won’t get approved.
    Great way for the dwarf waste everyone elses time.

  10. Posted by salarywoman

    It’s not virtually impossible to combine units now. It’s just difficult and time consuming and none of the units can be “affordable.” I know of several condo combinings that happened recently (within the past year and a half). In all cases these were each million dollar + units that would have rented out at a minimum of 4K a month, give or take. The owners had bought them with the intention of establishing primary residences (across units if need be) and had never had any intention of renting them.
    But if these projects had been required to somehow add two or more units to the city’s inventory I don’t see how they could have possibly gone ahead. Hence my question.

  11. Posted by resp

    salarywoman, i’d be very interested in hearing more about condo combinations. find it very hard to believe it was allowed without meeting (what i think are) 5 tough critera.
    also this proposal does not seem applicable to dwelling mergers, just physical demolitions.

  12. Posted by BobN

    If the BOS really cared about the number of housing units, they’d do things to streamline the building process, both the approval process and the actual building code.

Add a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *