The building, owned by Hawk Lou, at 22nd Street (Mission St.) was stuck in a lawsuit after a deadly fire in 2015. Controversy arose over the landlord’s alleged negligence. The location is now approved by San Francisco’s City Hall for a new apartment development. Mission activists wanted it to be 100% affordable, but that did not happen, leading to outrage over the decision.
Highlights
- The long-vacant site, affected by the 2015 fire, was approved for a new 10-story building on Thursday, May 15.
- Landlord Hawk Lou’s alleged negligence in maintenance was believed to have caused the fire; therefore, activists wanted 100% affordable housing in this case.
- The case complied with state laws, so the City Hall had to abide by that and approve the building for market-rate housing.
Housing Apartment is Approved for Mission Street Location
Currently, the site at 2588 Mission and 22nd Streets is swampy and vacant. It has been unused for the past 10 years after a fire. This Thursday, the Planning Commission of San Francisco gave their approval to the landlord for building a 10-story apartment.
181 housing units with 9% reservation for affordable housing have been approved. It was a controversial case, and the community activists demanded that this development be sold as 100% affordable housing. However, the Commission justified the decision by citing state laws as the reason. The project complied with the Density Bonus Act and the Housing Accountability Act, and therefore could not be rejected as it offered both high-density housing and affordable units.
A Complex History Ignites Community Outrage
The site at 2588 Mission Street, at 22nd Street, once housed 65 residents and several retail stores. In 2015, a fire destroyed the building and led to one casualty and some injured residents. The rest of the residents and businesses over there had to be displaced.
Residents filed a lawsuit against landlord Hawk Lou, alleging negligence in the building’s maintenance. Faulty wiring and nonfunctional fire alarms were allegedly cited as contributing factors to the disaster. This led to the call of activists to make a 100% affordable project at this site. However, the principal planner informed us that this request is not legal as the approved project aligns with all state laws.
The Commission faced significant public backlash over the decision. People were furious as they felt their rights were overruled by the power of rich landlords and developers. Even the Commissioners were not satisfied with the decision, but they had to abide by the law.
Now that the project is approved and the development will take place, the only upside in this situation is that an unused space will be utilized again. Although residents must settle for only 9% affordable units, the remaining units will be sold at market rates, likely to higher-income families
