I appreciate your thoughtful comments – and thanks for sharing them on the Rincon Hill Neighborhood Association blog!

I agree 100% that an integrated, single SoMa public benefits fund would be the equitable way to mitigate increasing demands on infrastructure. I’m afraid what we have now is very unfair because developers face some of the most expensive land acquisition costs in the City AND not one but two infrastructure fees. It will be interesting to pay attention to how quickly mid-Market develops compared to Rincon Hill – maybe it isn’t an apples to apples comparison, but money is being syphoned away from RIncon Hill to benefit mid-Market, and meanwhile developers seem to trade the rights to develop in Rincon HIll instead of actually stick a shovel in the ground and start building their approved projects.

Rincon Hill isn’t quite a neighborhood because there are no community meeting spaces. We’re on an island right now. Almost all of the businesses are designed to serve the weekday office workers, often closing at 3pm on Friday and not re-opening until Monday morning. Those restaurants open on the weekends are much too expensive for under $80k earners like me who live here. The Ferry Building comes close to providing a common meeting spot on Saturday mornings, but it certainly isn’t any single neighborhood’s hang out. I was hopeful about the Guy Place pocket park, but until more buildings go up, there’s no money for that simple little park to be built … and the streets are horribly dangerous for pedestrians. It is shameful that San Francisco wants to create this walkable neighborhood, but the City hasn’t done a damn thing to make it safe for people to walk around.

I don’t think that it is the stabilization fees themselves that are preventing Rincon Hill from becoming a livable, sustainable neighborhood, although the SoMa stabilization fund could be better integrated into planning and public benefits in the rest of SoMa.

A public benefit fee of $20/square foot was imposed in the Eastern SoMa Plan area, which includes South Beach and South Park immediately south of Rincon Hill and the 6th Street corridor. The Western SoMa Task Force just recommended to the Board of Supes that the same public benefit fee also be collected in Western SoMa. The Western SoMa Task Force also asked that it be included in the Eastern Neighborhoods Citizens Advisory Committee, which includes Eastern SoMa, but also the Mission, Potrero Hill, and the Central Waterfront.

SoMa Stabilization fees are paid by development on Rincon Hill, but can be spent elsewhere in SoMa. This may make some sense, as sites for affordable housing, for example, may be cheaper outside of Rincon Hill, and some impacts of development, like Rincon Hill’s traffic, affect surrounding neighborhoods. East SoMa fees are different; although they are raised by development within East SoMa, they cannot be spent on Rincon Hill or in Western SoMa, but can be spent in the Mission, Potrero, or elsewhere in Eastern Neighborhoods. Western SoMa would like to be represented on the CAC that spends the fees, and coordinate its public benefit projects with Eastern Neighborhoods, but so far is separate.

I think that the three SoMa planning areas that collect and disburse fees – Rincon Hill, Eastern SoMa, and Western SoMa – ought to be integrated into a single SoMa public benefits fund, with an integrated CAC that represents all the SoMa neighborhoods. SoMa’s infrastructure needs are best planned together; a street like Folsom, for example, runs through six different planning areas (Rincon Point/South Beach, Rincon Hill, Transbay, Yerba Buena, Eastern SoMa, Western SoMa), but requires a coordinated approach from end to end in order to become the great pedestrian and transit street that many of us want it to be.

Likewise, a more integrated approach to promoting housing diversity across SoMa – rental and for sale, market rate and below market rate – would make the various neighborhoods in SoMa more complete and balanced; some neighborhoods, like Rincon Hill, are exclusively expensive condos (the chief reason for me why Rincon Hill still feels rather artificial and un-neighborhoody), while others are almost exclusively below-market-rate rental.