SAN FRANCISCO | Projects: Under Construction, Approved, and Proposed - Page 443

viewguysf · #**8841** Posted **Dec 11, 2017, 6:31 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pedestrian

Well, I fit all those criteria and my answer is "no". Facilities with "services" for older people including a contingent of gays reflective of the SF demographic is fine. But I've never wanted--and can't see myself ever wanting--to associate exclusively with gay people or live in a building full of nothing but . . . .

I think you could imagine it much better if you weren't fortunate enough to own your own condo, lived in a rent or eviction precarious situation, could no longer negotiate stairs or whatever in your home, etc. Many people who came here in the 70s to escape oppression now find themselves in danger of being forced out of the only city they've know and loved for all of their adult lives. The difference with many LGBT seniors is that they often don't have a family or other support network. It's also about empathy and wanting (or being able) to comprehend other's situations, desires, ideas, needs, fears, and so forth.

I also see this as applying to those wanting to maintain our common quality of life here in a myriad of ways.

pseudolus · #**8842** Posted **Dec 11, 2017, 6:37 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by viewguysf

I think you could imagine it much better if you weren't fortunate enough to own your own condo, lived in a rent or eviction precarious situation, could no longer negotiate stairs or whatever in your home, etc. Many people who came here in the 70s to escape oppression now find themselves in danger of being forced out of the only city they've know and loved for all of their adult lives. The difference with many LGBT seniors is that they often don't have a family or other support network. It's also about empathy and wanting (or being able) to comprehend other's situations, desires, ideas, needs, fears, and so forth.

I also see this as applying to those wanting to maintain our common quality of life here in a myriad of ways.

well said

Pedestrian · #**8843** Posted **Dec 11, 2017, 6:53 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by viewguysf

I think you could imagine it much better if you weren't fortunate enough to own your own condo, lived in a rent or eviction precarious situation, could no longer negotiate stairs or whatever in your home, etc. Many people who came here in the 70s to escape oppression now find themselves in danger of being forced out of the only city they've know and loved for all of their adult lives. The difference with many LGBT seniors is that they often don't have a family or other support network. It's also about empathy and wanting (or being able) to comprehend other's situations, desires, ideas, needs, fears, and so forth.

I also see this as applying to those wanting to maintain our common quality of life here in a myriad of ways.

I fully support--and said I support--senior housing that's inclusive of all senior demographics and meets all the needs you talked about. But I see no need for exclusively gay housing and would personally find it oppressive. In case you haven't noticed, gay people can be "bitchy" toward each other so that's no guarantee of empathy or neighorly support.

ozone · #**8844** Posted **Dec 12, 2017, 3:43 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pedestrian

I fully support--and said I support--senior housing that's inclusive of all senior demographics and meets all the needs you talked about. But I see no need for exclusively gay housing and would personally find it oppressive. In case you haven't noticed, gay people can be "bitchy" toward each other so that's no guarantee of empathy or neighorly support.

Sounds like a personal problem to me.

coyotetrickster · #**8845** Posted **Dec 12, 2017, 4:10 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pedestrian

I keep asking myself: "Self, as a senior living in San Francisco, a town where gay people are far from isolated and have no need to hide, would you want to live in what amounts to a gay ghetto?"

Why do we need these projects for subsets of the senior population? Why can't senior housing be for all seniors (there is an argument to be made that poor seniors don't fare well in mixed public housing and are sometimes preyed on by younger residents so housing just for seniors probably is needed)?

Dude, I can't believe you are this clueless. First, the city has already been around the proverbial block regarding fair housing laws, and it lost. The project will provide preference to neighborhood residences, but it cannot, by law, exclude other senior citizens who are not gay or lesbian (if you are questioning by 65, you are pretty much a lost cause). However, due to the neighborhood preference component, a majority of the residents will be gay.

For many out gay men and women, being elderly ends up with a re-closeting. This is due to a myriad of reasons and may be harmful. The fact is, queer spaces are needed across the entire age spectrum. While social hour might be a bit cattier than those in ma and pa's assisted living community, these are elderly residents who deserve care in their final years, and to be able to stay in the place that is their home.

homebucket · #**8846** Posted **Dec 12, 2017, 4:47 PM**

San Francisco Mayor Ed Lee dead at 65

Sad news this morning. Sounds like he did a lot for the city, from the early days where he fought for low-income minorities to modern era, where he helped see the revitalization of the tech industry and the return of the Warriors to San Francisco.

1977 · #**8847** Posted **Dec 12, 2017, 5:50 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by fimiak

The Powell & California condo project has begun. 44 units at 875 California. The parking lot is currently being torn up. This is a California St. postcard altering project.

http://hoodline.com/2016/04/planning...mpaign=stories

Found this on Flickr:

Powell Street by Liji Jinaraj, on Flickr

Pedestrian · #**8848** Posted **Dec 12, 2017, 6:15 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by coyotetrickster

Dude, I can't believe you are this clueless . . .

For many out gay men and women, being elderly ends up with a re-closeting. This is due to a myriad of reasons and may be harmful. The fact is, queer spaces are needed across the entire age spectrum. While social hour might be a bit cattier than those in ma and pa's assisted living community, these are elderly residents who deserve care in their final years, and to be able to stay in the place that is their home.

First of all, thank you for calling me "dude". I recently had a conversation wth someone about whether a 72 year old white guy can be a "dude" and I guess I can be.

Second, "clueless" often means not in sync with the prevailing "progressivism" in San Francisco and I take your accusation in that light. I know I am not and haven't been for 40 years. But the city is all about "diversity", no?

What do you actually know about "the elderly"? In as much as I am one as are most of my friends (relics of gay San Francisco's golden age, all of us), I have to suspect I am more in tune with their needs and wants than you may be so no lectures on the subject, please.

Here's to you, dude.

Quote:

Originally Posted by ozone

Sounds like a personal problem to me.

No, I think it's a very widespread problem.

Pedestrian · #**8849** Posted **Dec 12, 2017, 6:20 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by homebucket

San Francisco Mayor Ed Lee dead at 65

Sad news this morning. Sounds like he did a lot for the city, from the early days where he fought for low-income minorities to modern era, where he helped see the revitalization of the tech industry and the return of the Warriors to San Francisco.

It's not as bad as it could be. Apparently London Breed, who, as it happens, was my supervisor, will be Mayor. While not a booster of development like Ed Lee, she's not aggressively hostile to it.

There are several members of the Board of Supervisors who would have been much, much worse. I'm looking at YOU, Jane Kim, and YOU Aaron Peskin.

Jerry of San Fran · #**8850** Posted **Dec 13, 2017, 1:01 AM**

In reference to Pedestrian's query/comment: the reason for a need for housing is

1) LGBT seniors are often shunned in mixed communities & discriminated against.

2) The fact is that other groups of people have gotten preferential treatment in public housing in San Francisco leaving LGBT seniors out.

I should point out the fact that the new housing mentioned is being built for a specific community, but the housing cannot be discriminatory. In spite of the concern that a certain racial/ethnic group would outnumber the LGBT numbers that did not happen - maybe that is a sign of prejudice that it did not happen.

Housing for an affinity group will not appeal to everyone (not everyone wants to live in a nudist friendly community for seniors).

colemonkee · #**8851** Posted **Dec 13, 2017, 2:16 AM**

If they use the right materials and finishes, Powell & California could end up looking quite nice.

timbad · #**8852** Posted **Dec 17, 2017, 9:26 AM**

crane going up on east slope of Potrero Hill

hotel, Third and Townsend. also noticed the Happy Donuts down the street had been gutted; not sure what’s going on there.

Mission, near Seventh

Seventh, near Mission

99 Rausch (Folsom near Seventh) looking done

Eighth St end of 855 Brannan, starting to wrap up, on the outside, anyway

the existing skyline view from Potrero Hill. SF building well placed for them

SLO · #**8853** Posted **Dec 18, 2017, 2:30 AM**

^^^terrific shots

timbad · #**8854** Posted **Dec 23, 2017, 8:33 PM**

foot of Potrero Hill, north side, looking NE on 17th St at Arkansas at two projects underway (88 Arkansas in the foreground)

and a couple blocks away, a better overview of the massive project across from Anchor Brewery at 1601 Mariposa

view of Florida St side of block between Florida and Bryant St at 18th, which I think is this and this

the view from Diamond Heights (Laidley St)

Jerry of San Fran · #**8855** Posted **Dec 24, 2017, 11:19 PM**

The east side of 150 Van Ness Ave. is now revealed. It looks good. I would have liked to have seen a more exciting skin color. I have not been on the Hayes St. side yet & will post a photo unless someone gets there first.

150 Van Ness Avenue - east side by Apollo's Light, on Flickr

150 s by Apollo's Light, on Flickr

dmncbrm · #**8856** Posted **Dec 25, 2017, 5:14 AM**

IMG_0481 by Dominica Broom, on Flickr

IMG_0482 by Dominica Broom, on Flickr

1500 Mission St. I think?

Excited to see it grow.

Jerry of San Fran · #**8857** Posted **Dec 27, 2017, 6:42 AM**

dmncbrm - a great view of the the site! Yes, it is 1500-1580 Mission Street. Hopefully we will get many more of the construction site in the coming year.

homebucket · #**8858** Posted **Dec 27, 2017, 6:12 PM**

SF tower providing a nice peak to the skyline

botoxic · #**8859** Posted **Dec 30, 2017, 2:26 AM**

from SocketSite:

The proposed development to rise at Fourth and Harrison has been redesigned by HOK for Boston Properties, incorporating a more curvilinear approach which would rise up to a height of 185 feet and yield 765,600 square feet of office space; 34,500 square feet of “modern” Production, Distribution and Repair (PDR) space on the ground floor; 16,100 square feet of publicly accessible open space (POPOS); 4,000 square feet of retail; and a basement garage for a few hundred cars.

The aforementioned POPOS includes a mid-block paseo between Harrison and Perry. And in an effort to pave the way for the project’s approval, the project team is positioning to dedicate 15,000 square feet of the project’s land on the eastern side of the paseo for the development of an affordable housing project.

And then there’s the much bigger story, which is key to the proposed development of 725 Harrison Street but in the context of which the Harrison Street project actually plays a bit part: San Francisco’s Central SoMa Plan.

If approved as proposed and massed at full build-out above, the adoption of the Central SoMa Plan would allow for the development of new office space for up to 45,000 workers and 7,500 units of housing to rise up to 400-ish feet in height in the area roughly bounded by Folsom, Second, Townsend and Sixth Streets.

And while San Francisco’s Proposition M currently limits the amount of office space allowed to be built in the city each year, a proposed ballot measure which is about to start gathering signatures would allow qualifying office developments in Central SoMa to evenly amortize their total square-footage over a ten-year period versus in the year when the projects are approved.

In terms of timing, while the schedule has slipped, the approval process is formally underway and San Francisco’s Planning Department is now anticipating that the Central SoMa Plan should be ready for adoption by San Francisco’s Board of Supervisors in the Spring of 2018.

Link

Pedestrian · #**8860** Posted **Dec 30, 2017, 7:03 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jerry of San Fran

In reference to Pedestrian's query/comment: the reason for a need for housing is

1) LGBT seniors are often shunned in mixed communities & discriminated against.

2) The fact is that other groups of people have gotten preferential treatment in public housing in San Francisco leaving LGBT seniors out.

I should point out the fact that the new housing mentioned is being built for a specific community, but the housing cannot be discriminatory. In spite of the concern that a certain racial/ethnic group would outnumber the LGBT numbers that did not happen - maybe that is a sign of prejudice that it did not happen.

Housing for an affinity group will not appeal to everyone (not everyone wants to live in a nudist friendly community for seniors).

I will remind that my original question had to do with whether those here would want to live in it, not all the other issues raised by other people.

I myself don't want to be isolated in a supposedly compatible demographic group (as determined by social engineeers) and I thought in San Francisco we thought we were about "diversity". No diversity in housing for "specific communities".