View the San Francisco for Thursday, July 18, 2024
From left: Ed Siu, president of Chinatown Merchants United Association of San Francisco; Mei Zhu, owner of Mei’s Groceries; and Daisy Xian, owner of New Golden Daisy’s BBQ, are seen near a delivery zone on Stockton Street in Chinatown.
merchants and advocates say increased parking restrictions across the neighborhood are significantly hurting businesses — and their frustrations have been compounded by what they describe as a lack of communication and action by the San Francisco Municipal Transportation Agency, the bureau that oversees The City’s transit infrastructure. Of course, parking in Chinatown has historically never been easy, which is why many visitors either take public transportation to the neighborhood or park in the garages such as the one at Portsmouth Square.throughout the neighborhood — curbs where, for certain periods during the day, only commercial vehicles are allowed to park and unload goods — that have been installed since the COVID-19 pandemic. “There were quite a bit of yellow zones already,” said Rosa Chen, planning director with the San Francisco Chinatown Community Development Center. “But during the pandemic — perhaps with all the different programs that were happening — it created this feeling that there’s a lot more yellow zone than necessary” It’s unclear how many yellow zones have been added. An SFMTA spokesperson pushed back on the notion that the number of yellow painted curbs have dramatically risen. “Most of these yellow zones have been in effect for years, but perhaps it’s taken some time to be fully evident by the businesses in the area,” the spokesperson said. The SFMTA does not currently keep comprehensive maps of The City’s curb colors, though the agency said it’s in the process of creating a database — called “the Digital Curb” — which will do just that. “The reason for yellow zones is the same in Chinatown as anywhere else: We need space for goods loading so that trucks and cars don’t double-park and block the bus or other traffic,” the SFMTA spokesperson said. “This is especially important in Chinatownand such a large portion of the population relies on Muni ... with frequent Muni service rolling up and down Stockton still well-patronized, keeping the travel lanes clear is very important here.” The times that the yellow-zone restrictions are in effect vary, but in Chinatown they generally last from 7 a.m. to 4 p.m. Merchants and advocates who spoke to The Examiner called on the agency to reduce those hours to 7 a.m. to noon. After that, they want the spaces to revert to normal parking curbs for the rest of the day. They argued that those four added hours of parking per day can make a substantial revenue difference, since most shops close around 5 p.m.Parking restrictions in Chinatown limit spaces to delivery trucks for much of the day on the district’s narrow streets. While conventional wisdom suggests the majority of Chinatown visitors and residents either take public transportation or walk, community stakeholders said the lack of parking punishes two key parts of the neighborhood’s clientele: the elderly and people from outside Chinatown. “With so many yellow zones, when people do come visit, it’s really hard for people to find parking, and it’s gotten to the point where people just don’t even want to come to Chinatown,” Chen said. San Francisco Chinese Chamber of Commerce President Donald Luu said that, in a vacuum, The City’s Chinese community would prefer to shop in Chinatown because the neighborhood has the most complete selection of Chinese groceries and other traditional products anywhere in The City. “You want to go to Chinatown ... they always have fresher barbecue meat or seafood and sometimes the price is better. Chinatown has a lot more variety,” said Luu, who lives on the west side. But according to Luu and Ed Siu, president of the Chinatown Merchants United Association San Francisco, the parking constraints are enough of a deterrent that Chinese residents outside Chinatown, such as those in the Sunset and Richmond districts, are electing to shop closer to home along corridors such as Irving Street and Clement Street. “The City is not encouraging them to come back,” Siu said. “No parking space, so what are they going to come back for? They find their own markets over there.” Chen said that her family used to eat dim sum in Chinatown a lot, especially because many of her relatives live in the neighborhood. But due to the parking situation, her family now more often than not decides to eat meals in nearby cities such as Daly City, South San Francisco or even Milpitas. “Even though my parents say ‘oh, but we can just stay in Chinatown,’ everyone responds with, ‘ugh, but that means we’re going to have to find parking.’” she said. “That means we have to go really early, we gotta do this and that.” In addition, business owners said elderly Chinese people frequently need to drive right in front of stores to access them because of their mobility limitations. But the yellow zones have made that more difficult. “If it’s a yellow zone, and they’re in the shop for a minute, and there happened to be a meter maid there, they’re going to get a $100 ticket really fast,” said Steven Lee, owner of three Chinatown businesses, including the historic restaurant Sam Wo. “So of course, nobody wants to take the chance. So that means they’d rather go to Clement Street or somewhere that’s easier to park to buy their food.” “Sometimes the customers want to buy stuff in our store, but they don’t have the parking space to pick them up,” said Mei Zhu, owner of Mei’s Grocery on Stockton Street, a block where she claimed a yellow zone was added in the last two to three years. Both Zhu and Daisy Xian, owner of the adjacent New Golden Daisy, said they didn’t know the curb switched into a loading zone until they saw the curb was painted yellow. “We need the parking spaces,” Xian said through a translator. “We need our customers back in Chinatown.” But SFMTA maintained that the spots are critical for commercial drivers and that some of the yellow zones were requested by business owners. Other spots had to be implemented to keep traffic flowing. Ramon Rocha, a longtime delivery truck driver in The City, said the yellow zones are a “huge help” for people in his profession. He said he’s noticed fewer, not more, yellow zones throughout The City in recent years.Ready Refresh delivery-truck driver Ramon Rocha said that without delivery zones, it’s almost impossible to find space to pull over. Rocha said he distributes hundreds of jugs of water each week across the Financial District — a route that includes Chinatown’s busiest streets, Even with the yellow zones, Rocha said it can be tough to find space to pull over. But without them, it’s almost impossible. A lack of curb space forces commercial drivers to double-park in the middle of the road. That poses a traffic and safety threat, especially on crowded and cramped streets like in Chinatown. “You’re putting other vehicles and other drivers in danger, because now you’ve got to go around into the oncoming lanes,” Rocha said. He also said that drivers like himself don’t just deliver goods in the morning and that they need the flexibility to deliver shipments “all day long.” “Delivering these 5 gallon bottles of water, each one weighs 42 pounds,” Rocha said. “So when you’re lugging it from around the corner ... it’s challenging.” Chinatown stakeholders are hopeful to find a middle ground between helping the delivery drivers, relieving traffic congestion and also ensuring there remains enough parking for patrons. Siu said advocates — including himself — have had conversations with the SFMTA and, as recently as last month, have spoken to the agency about their concerns. But both he and Siu said that too often, they feel as if their conversations are being heard without any action being taken.Chen was more pragmatic. She said the SFMTA does communicate with neighborhood stakeholders frequently. “I do want to give some credit to MTA, that they do try to find solutions,” Chen said. “But I think at the same time, they’re just not moving fast enough in finding solutions. I think they listen very well to a lot of the problems and understand the problem. They hear us. But I think the thing the community is missing, is where’s the action then?” When asked what outreach efforts the SFMTA has made toward Chinatown, a spokesperson responded that, “We will continue to engage with the community about what is working and what isn’t — and what solutions may be possible.”The Motel 6 currently located at 1234 Great Highway is slated to be replaced by a 216-unit affordable-housing complex for seniors. Affordable-housing advocates and San Francisco officials say they are cautiously optimistic the next major housing proposal in the Sunset district will avoid an all-too-familiar and all-too-tumultuous roller-coaster ride on its way to fruition. After years of resistance from aggrieved neighbors, an affordable housing project on Irving Street has finally broken ground this summer. Next up, The City is funding a plan to convert what is now a Motel 6 at 1234 Great Highway into a 216-unit affordable-housing complex for seniors. On the surface, it shares several similarities with the now-under-construction project at 2550 Irving St. That development, which celebrated itsin June, will result in 90 units of affordable housing, but only after opposition by a neighborhood group ensnared it in environmental reviews and legal challenges. The Irving Street and Great Highway developments are designed to bring much-needed affordable housing to the Sunset, which has a preponderance of single-family homes and is, in the eyes of city planners, ripe for increased density. Both projects are collaborations between The City and nonprofit housing developer Tenderloin Neighborhood Development Corporation. Both are along main arteries with access to neighborhood amenities and transit. And both are seven stories tall in a neighborhood where such buildings are relatively few and far between, taking advantage of state law that allows extra density for 100% affordable-housing projects.sparked questions from neighborhood residents . However, the project’s backers are optimistic that the review process for 1234 Great Highway will be simpler, less controversial, and a heck of a lot faster than what occurred at 2550 Irving St. Supervisor Joel Engardio has already fielded such questions, but he stressed that “it’s important to point out that there won’t be a wall of seven-story buildings along the coast.” “This is a real exception because 100% affordable, and those avenues along the coast are not being considered for any upzoning,” he said.could serve as yet another litmus test of the recent wave of housing legislation and policy changes intended to shed the types of regulatory hurdles that slowed 2550 Irving St. Legislation sponsored by state Sen. Scott Wiener, Senate Bill 35, represented a sea change in California housing policy when it took effect in 2018. Among other adjustments, it ensured that affordable-housing projects such as 2550 Irving would be eligible for streamlined approvals — but it left avenues for neighborhood opponents to appeal. “SB35 made a project’s planning-level authorizations ‘appeal proof’ but didn’t do the same for the permit to actually put a shovel in the ground,” Planning Department spokesperson Dan Sider said in an email. Conceived in 2019, the project at 2550 Irving St. prompted concerns from neighbors who fretted primarily about environmental contamination at the site, but also traffic effects from the new development and theon the same basis. They also launched a failed effort to have a court issue an injunction against the construction project. Ultimately, construction began this year — but not after the series of challenges added $1 million to the nearly $100 million project cost, the San Francisco Chronicle reported. Assembly Bill 1114, sponsored by Assemblymember Matt Haney last year, removed the ability to appeal a building permit, Sider said. “We’re literally the only city in the state that allows just anyone to stand up, object, and stop a project even after it has received all its approvals,” Haney explained in a statement following passage of his bill, specifically citing 2550 Irving as an example. “To allow that in a city that has such a desperate need for housing is just insane.”TNDC is taking a different approach to that task than it did with Irving Street, attempting to make abundantly plain that it plans to build what’s allowed under city and state law, regardless of whether nearby residents want something smaller. “We could have done a better job of being very clear that this is coming based on state policies and San Francisco being really behind on its goals, and there’s this tremendous need,” said Shreya Shah, associate director of housing development at TNDC, said when asked what the nonprofit learned from the Irving Street ordeal. “To be fair to us, we did say that a number of times. It just did not land well with a lot of the community members.” In other words, the nonprofit developer is open to hearing neighbors’ thoughts on whether the building should open to the property’s lower Great Highway side or its La Playa side — but either way, the building is going to be seven stories and have more than 200 units. TNDC committed to those parameters when it accepted city funding for the project, Shah said. The Great Highway project does face one hurdle that the Irving Street project did not. The site falls within the zone regulated by the California Coastal Commission, and thus must receive a coastal development permit, but that does not prohibit the building from reaching seven stories. Of course, the project’s proximity to the beach is considered one of its assets, serving as a bucolic place for its future senior residents, who will also be served by an adult day health-care center in a commercial space on the building’s ground floor.to meet the goals outlined in its state-mandated Housing Element, a plan that requires it to make way for at least 82,000 homes by 2031.Those who work in affordable housing say they hope that, as projects come online, neighbors will grow more receptive to that kind of growth.“The hope for TNDC is that people in the neighborhood will just become more accepting of affordable housing because they will see how well our buildings integrate into the community,” Shah said. At least one neighborhood group — Outer Sunset Neighbors — say it is supportive of not only the Great Highway project, but housing of all types. “That corner specifically has a lot of potential and more residents will help local businesses along the Irving commercial corridor a few blocks away,” Phoebe Ford, housing lead for the group, told The Examiner. “As neighbors, we also hope this project will include improvements for pedestrians and bikes connecting Golden Gate Park and Great Highway Park.” With the Great Highway project in the queue, Engardio said the Sunset “is really pulling its weight now” when it comes to developing affordable housing. It’s also thea 135-unit affordable housing complex on 43rd Avenue that will prioritize public-school teachers and began accepting applications earlier this year. Engardio said he is confident that the Sunset can take on such projects — particularly on corner lots, which are zoned for up to six stories — without losing its essential Sunset-ness.President Joe Biden — seen with San Francisco Mayor London Breed in The City in May — has proposed a nationwide rent-increase cap of 5% per year. With calls for stronger renter protections growing louder in San Francisco, local tenant advocates are applauding this week’s announcement from President Joe Biden proposing federal legislation that aims to set a national cap on rent increases. Given existing renter protections at both The City and state level, the proposal is expected to offer additional protections to only a relatively small subset of renters in San Francisco.key policy priorities has buoyed hopes, as advocates rally in support of a November ballot measure that could greatly extend the reach of rent-control protections throughout California. “We’ve never seen that kind of signaling from the federal government before,” said Shanti Singh of Tenants Together, a statewide coalition of tenant organizations that is headquartered in San Francisco. “To actually have a sitting president acknowledge that some form of rent control can be part of the solution, that’s a huge move in and of itself, I think.” Tenant advocates say the need for renter protections has grown more urgent in recent years as pandemic-era eviction moratoria have lapsed and, they add, eviction filings have trended upwards in San Francisco. Advocates for local landlords contest this claim, citing separate data. Biden’s proposal seeks to cap off rent increases at 5% per year. To do so, the measure introduces a new penalty for landlords — those who raise rents more than 5% would face the loss of a key federal tax break. Pitched as a “bridge” that will help stabilize rents while a number of other Biden-backed measures aimed at producing more housing take hold, the proposed law would only last for the next two years. It would also only apply to landlords who own more than 50 units of housing.. Biden made the announcement while campaigning in Nevada, a key swing state, which has seen housing costs skyrocket in recent years. Here in San Francisco, the debate over rent control has led to bitter disputes and fierce recriminations during recent meetings of the Board of Supervisors. Last week, the board voted 8-2 to pass a resolution in support ofSan Francisco’s own rent-control law offers significantly stronger protections than the 5% cap contemplated in Biden’s proposal. But due to Costa-Hawkins, The City’s law — first passed in 1979 — remains frozen in place, meaning that tens of thousands of units constructed in more recent decades are exempted.That law, which sets limits on rental increases based in part on the inflation rate, offers somewhat less stringent protections than Biden’s proposal — assuming that landlords are indeed cowed by the measure’s threatened tax penalties. While some advocates point to the Biden proposal’s limited scope as evidence that it would have only marginal impact, others said they are hopeful for bigger gains, arguing that many also doubted California’s rent stabilization law when it first passed. Despite those doubts, “there have been thousands of tenants in San Francisco that have benefited from that statewide law,” said Maria Zamudio, who helps lead the Housing Rights Committee of San Francisco. “It’s a long time coming and the bare minimum that should have been done at our national level to ensure that folks have a roof over their heads and an affordable one at that,” she said of Biden’s proposal. While there are plenty of doubts that such a law stands any chance of passing through a divided Congress, advocates also expressed hope that simply by elevating the rent-cap issue, Biden has helped advance their cause. “It’s a very positive thing to see this show of support from the White House, paying attention to the plight of tenants,” said Mitchell Omerberg, an attorney with the Affordable Housing Alliance. “I do think it’s a big rhetorical move,” said Singh, who contrasted the presidential show of support with the fights that have broken out during recent board deliberations over Costa-Hawkins repeal.“So I do hope if Biden is talking about rent control that we’ll see a little less second guessing of rent control from some of our supervisors — but, you know, that might be too much to wish for,” Singh said. Opponents of rent control often warn that such measures distort the housing market by making new developments less profitable, ultimately hindering construction and the supply of new homes. Such concerns have been voiced locally as well, including by Corey Smith, executive director of the Housing Action Coalition, an advocacy group representing housing interests. Still, when asked for comment on Biden’s proposal, Smith said that he is still reviewing the measure, including the extent of its potential financial effect on landlords. Biden’s plan seeks to limit negative effects on the housing industry by exempting new construction. The proposal received more pointed pushback from advocates for local landlords. “We believe that incentivizing the construction of new housing at all income levels, rather than further regulating the existing housing stock, is the best way to address housing affordability,” said Charley Goss, a spokesman for the San Francisco Apartment Association. Editor’s note: This article has been amended to clarify that the San Francisco Apartment Association contests the claim that evictions are on the rise.Click and hold your mouse button on the page to select the area you wish to save or print. You can click and drag the clipping box to move it or click and drag in the bottom right corner to resize it. When you're happy with your selection, click the checkmark icon next to the clipping area to continue.This is the name that will be displayed next to your photo for comments, blog posts, and more. Choose wisely!Create a password that only you will remember. If you forget it, you'll be able to recover it using your email address.Forgot Password An email message containing instructions on how to reset your password has been sent to the email address listed on your account.
United States Latest News, United States Headlines
Similar News:You can also read news stories similar to this one that we have collected from other news sources.
Page A1View the San Francisco for Wednesday, June 19, 2024
Read more »
Page A1View the San Francisco for Sunday, June 23, 2024
Read more »
Page A1View the San Francisco for Wednesday, June 26, 2024
Read more »
Page A1View the San Francisco for Thursday, June 27, 2024
Read more »
Page A1View the San Francisco for Sunday, July 14, 2024
Read more »
Page A1View the San Francisco for Wednesday, July 17, 2024
Read more »