While the Mayor’s Office works on a few carrots for developers in the city (deferred payments and a few reduced fees), the Board of Supervisors affirmed their approval of Supervisor Avalos’ Just Cause eviction extension by a vote of 7-3 (Chu, Dufty and Elsbernd voted no, Alioto-Pier was absent) and the Mayor remains positioned to veto.
If vetoed, Supervisor Avalos is expected to introduce narrower just cause eviction legislation which would only apply to foreclosed upon post-1979 buildings. And in other Avalos legislation news, design criteria for city cell phone antennas has been introduced.
∙ Developer fee changes outlined [San Francisco Examiner]
∙ Just Cause Eviction Extension Approved, But With Four Key No Votes [SocketSite]
∙ ‘Just cause’ eviction legislation wins board approval, faces veto from mayor [Examiner]
∙ City weighs design guidelines for cell phone antennas [San Francisco Examiner]
Something else the tenant protection people are very worked up about is the Ellis eviction at Jasper Place in NB. Anyone’s got an update of whether these ever went through? The 2007 buyers are getting a lot of heat and a Realtor last week-end suggested me to visit this place. This looks like a giant can of worms…
While I like the idea of requiring large cellphone antenna facilities to look better, the way that this law is implemented by requiring large facilities to garner neighborhood input ensures that it will only apply to affluent neighborhoods.
Poorer immigrant neighborhoods are less likely to put the energy into opposing ugly cell towers and will continue the blight.
A better solution for all would be to just define objective criteria for what makes a good antenna installation and apply that evenly across the city.
If I wrote such guidelines I’d exclude those fake trees and super fat flagpoles. Who do they think they’re fooling ?