1950 Mission Street Site

The development rights for the former Phoenix Continuation High School site at 1950 Mission Street, a half-block from the contentious 330-unit building proposed to rise at Mission and 16th, have been awarded to Mission Housing Development Corporation and BRIDGE Housing.  The team plans to build 165 apartments for low-income families on the site.

“Twenty percent of the apartments will be set aside for formerly homeless families; projected rents for the balance of units will be affordable to families earning between 45% and 60% of area median income, though deeper affordability could be achieved depending upon final sources of financing.

Among the planned amenities are a courtyard, community room and kitchen, media lab and supportive services spaces, as well as artists’ studios and a proposed mural walkway. A rooftop garden is also envisioned as a space for community events and resident gatherings.

The project will also provide dedicated space for Mission Neighborhood Centers’ Head Start, Early-Head Start and Mission Girls Programs. Additionally, MissionIMPACT will provide the surrounding neighborhood with a commercial office space that serves as a one-stop center for the needs of the Mission’s small business and nonprofit community at affordable rental rates.”

Currently home to the San Francisco Navigation Center, a resource for the homeless in San Francisco, the City has been working behind-the-scenes to fast-track the development of the nearly one-acre Mission District parcel which is zoned for development up to 85-feet in height.

The estimated budget for the proposed development is around $81 million, or roughly $490,000 per unit, which doesn’t include an accounting for the land.

19 thoughts on “Mission District Site For 165 Affordable Units Awarded To Developers”
  1. FYI as they go, Mission Housing (seized back from hijackers a while back) is (hopefully, still) actually one of the very few honest affordable housing players. They tossed the non-profit-inc embedded scam artists and made Valencia Gardens what it is. Drive by Valencia Gardens and then drive by Potrero View and you will notice the startling difference. As for the 16th and Mission project, it should move forward. Its just fine and its opponents are just working a grift.

    1. Generally agree–though on that last note, I suggest you question your assumptions. Not all of us who take issue with certain projects are swindlers, and using that broad brush suggests that this one may not be as fine for SF as you assert.

  2. Below Market Rate houses are sold at a very low valuation. City will collect much less property tax but still need to provide the same level of services. Actually, for low income residents, city will need to provide much more expensive services using the taxpayer dollars.

    Seems it is better to limit residential development and reduce the city population instead. It is better to build more offices and collect more tax for the city.

    1. Because there’s no more places to put them in the Tenderloin and the politicians and other “deciders” live in the other neighborhoods.

    2. more affordable housing has recently been and will be built in both soma and mission bay than in mission, besides dogpatch, pier 70, showplace sq, downtown, ….

  3. Wow! Almost half a million for each unit? I wonder if the city could spend less money per unit in a different area.

    1. Well we have very special homeless people here. They deserve $500k+ housing units. If this was even out in Stockton, sheeeeet, you’d build 3 units for that price! But ess eff’s homeless are special, so very special.

    2. No it couldn’t. The site is already publicly owned land. So its location is irrelevant. Its the same general contracting/labor pool and development cost structure whether you build in the Bayview or Mission or Marina. Land costs aside, you could build it in Oakland and it would cost pretty much the same (with the only major variance in cost possibly being permitting/impact fees). One reason why there has been very little new multifamily construction in Oakland during the current business cycle – the construction & indirect development costs are about the same in Oakland as in SF, but you can get much higher rents in SF.

  4. I’m all for more affordable housing – but $490,000 per unit? Rly? Not including the land? That is ridiculous.
    The City could build this in Stockton for half the cost and save the taxpayers $40 million plus?
    Just shows how out of touch with reality the City’s political leadership is.
    With programs like these it is no wonder only 5% of the people who need help in the City get it and 95% who need help in the City get Zip Zero Zilch Nada (screwed).
    There has to be a better way to do business.

  5. I have always found the tiles in the sidewalks in this area very appealing. It is unfortunate that we do not see more of this.

  6. What are we complaining about? I have seen the light. $490k per unit is a total bargain compared to $888,889 per unit (see 4 posts above)!

    Shoot, I now wonder what the price will be for the parcel the city outbid everyone on 16th st between Valencia and Guerrero. Maybe they can break $1mil on those. So instead of sloganeering “no million dollar condos” they can change it to “million dollar condos for the homeless.”

    Brought to you by “only in SF” productions.

Leave a Reply

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