Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Housing Project 2200 Mission topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Commission approves amendment allowing sale of 23 units at 2200 Mission after sponsor cites contractor fraud and financing problems

San Francisco City Planning Commission · January 10, 2008
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

The commission amended a 2001 finding to permit sale (owner‑occupancy/condominium) of a 23‑unit mixed‑use project at 2200 Mission, citing construction problems, contractor liens and lender refusal to finance rental product; staff recommended approval with conditions to avoid prolonged blight.

The Planning Commission voted unanimously to amend a prior conditional use finding for 2200 Mission Street (case 2000.692C) to allow the originally‑approved 23 units to be sold (owner‑occupied condominiums) rather than remain as rental housing. Department staff documented that the semi‑constructed building had been a local blight and that the project sponsor — Howard Ngoh — had experienced contractor fraud, liens and a court‑approved bankruptcy that hindered access to financing for rental housing.

Ngoh told the commission he is a long‑time Mission District merchant and that lenders would not finance the project as rental housing given the liens and debt service obligations; he said converting to condominiums is the only viable path to complete construction, open a ground‑floor market and clear debts. Staff recommended approval because the alternative appeared to be an unfinished building and no housing or retail at the corner.

Commissioners discussed whether alternative public financing or housing‑department support could enable rental outcomes; staff said they had explored options but found the project’s financial obstacles significant and recommended a case‑by‑case exception. The commission approved the amendment with standard conditions, noting the sponsor remains subject to inclusionary housing requirements for for‑sale units (the three below‑market units remain in place).