Committee forwards 950 Market / 180 Jones package to Board after debate over fiscal assumptions

The Land Use & Transportation Committee voted on Feb. 13 to send ordinances for the 950 Market / 180 Jones package to the full Board with a positive recommendation after a week of supplemental analysis and extensive public comment.

Sponsor Supervisor Jane Kim described a negotiated package with developer Group I that dedicates the 180 Jones parcel for at least 60 step‑up affordable rental units (intended for households at about 40% area median income) and seeds a $300,000 fund for the Compton’s District cultural initiative. The ordinance also establishes an 180 Jones affordable housing fund and accepts a $2,700,000 gift referenced in the ordinance; Kim said the developer committed additional voluntary benefits and land dedication that community groups negotiated over many months.

Committee members pressed city staff for a clearer fiscal accounting. Chair Mark Farrell said earlier materials — notably a December planning memo — had shown an apparent developer benefit (about $2.4 million in an initial staff snapshot), and he and others sought a reliable, city‑vetted analysis before the committee considers similar one‑off exemptions in the future. The Mayor’s Office of Housing and Community Development (MOHCD) presented an updated analysis. Kate Hartley (MOHCD) said the developer disputed key assumptions in the December memo — notably the condo sales price inflation rate used in the model — and MOHCD revised inputs (including carrying costs for deferred in‑lieu payments, graywater and TDR credits, and a $1 million increase in developer gift funds). Under MOHCD’s 1.2% sales‑price inflation scenario, the office’s combined adjustments produced a near‑breakeven outcome and, in their modeled case, roughly a $260,000 net cost to the developer when all credits and debits were tallied; Hartley emphasized results vary significantly by assumed inflation and policy choices (e.g., whether fees are paid at first construction documents or deferred to TCO).

Planning staff (Ann Marie Rogers) clarified other line items: a jobs‑housing linkage fee estimate in the draft changed after on‑site crediting for existing uses (e.g., a listed $1.8M draft reduced to an estimated $900k after credit), and PUC review supported the developer’s graywater cost estimates. Developer and sponsor representatives described a voluntary community benefits package they value at roughly $5 million in addition to the ordinance’s $2.7 million gift; items cited included a 2,000‑job construction estimate, rent‑free arts space for the Magic Theatre, workforce training funds and construction‑mitigation money, and a card‑check neutrality agreement with Local 2 for hotel workers.

More than 50 community speakers and representatives of neighborhood and tenant groups, housing nonprofits, unions and arts organizations testified in support, saying the off‑site option would produce more deeply affordable units and important neighborhood programming and jobs. A handful of committee members and staff stressed that procedure matters: several supervisors said they will pursue legislation to standardize fiscal vetting so future off‑site agreements are evaluated on a consistent, defensible basis before committee action.

Supervisor Tang moved, and Supervisor Peskin seconded, to forward items 3 and 4 as amended to the full Board with a positive recommendation; the committee took the items forward without objection. The full Board will consider the ordinances on the scheduled Board agenda; staff said MOHCD and other departments will continue scenario analysis and the sponsor will finalize commitments recorded in the ordinance and associated community benefits agreement.