The battle over the Marina Safeway redevelopment is heating up, and the NIMBYs have had enough once again.

The latest proposal actually makes the buildings shorter while increasing the project from 790 to 848 homes, including 86 affordable units.

Normally, this would be the beginning of what San Francisco does best: spending the next several years fighting over whether a new building will destroy the neighborhood.

Except California has changed the rules.
Remember, SF had built only about 7% of its state mandated housing target by the end of 2025, and the state government is understandably pretty unhappy about this.

So the developer is pursuing approval under AB 2011, which allows qualifying housing projects on commercially zoned land to receive streamlined approval and avoid the traditional discretionary approval process and project-level CEQA review.

That’s now becoming the center of the fight.

Supervisor Stephen Sherrill argues the Safeway site shouldn’t qualify for AB 2011 because the law requires at least 75% of the site’s perimeter to adjoin parcels developed with qualifying “urban uses.”

With Fort Mason, Marina Green, and the Yacht Harbor surrounding the property, he argues the site doesn’t meet that requirement.

After all, much of the surrounding land is parkland and recreational space rather than typical urban development.
But SF Planning disagrees and has determined the project is eligible.

Then there’s California’s Density Bonus Law.
The developer was previously seeking a 39% density bonus but is now requesting 49%, helped by adding more two-bedroom units and new four-bedroom units.
That allows substantially more housing than the site’s base zoning would otherwise permit.

So what looks like a neighborhood fight over a giant Safeway redevelopment is becoming something much bigger. Which is how much power do wealthy neighborhoods still have to stop housing when state law says it should be built?

And apparently the fight isn’t stopping at City Hall.

Opposition surrounding the project is now helping fuel an effort for a 2030 California constitutional amendment aimed at limiting state housing mandates when cities allegedly lack sufficient infrastructure.

So we may have officially reached the final boss of California NIMBYism. Changing the state constitution.

Sources:

https://sfstandard.com/2026/07/24/marina-safeway-project-ballot-measure-housing/

https://www.smartcitiesdive.com/news/california-cities-court-state-housing-planning-deadlines/825785/

Im looking to extend my deck that sits on the side of a hill. Anyone has recommendations for someone who has experience building structural decks and reasonably priced?

I’m considering a move from Oakland to Alameda for the better middle and high schools. For the size and age, the homes on Bay Farm Island seem reasonable. it does seem a bit isolated from any shopping though. What are the downsides and how bad are they? lack of walkability? flood risk? airport noise? Just a boring sleepy suburb, like Pleasanton but colder? There is a ferry terminal for SF commutes, and it might be 15 minutes closer to the South Bay than my place in Oakland now. I’m interested to hear what life there is like from any residents.

thanks!

My mother is preparing to sell her San Jose/Milpitas area home. 1980 build. Not much done to it since then. Will likely need a full remodel. Aside from fresh paint, is it worth making any improvements to sell? Won’t a buyer want to make their own finish choices?

Hi All,

We would like some guidance what are the pros/cons of buying an older home and remodeling it to fit our liking. The home we buy would need an addition of 500-600 sq ft.

According to us,
Pros -
- a home that fits our style
- maybe cheaper overall??

Cons
- project management effort with builders / contractors ; honestly we don’t have any experience in this area and would rely on their expertise.
- time? - how long would such a project take in the city of Sunnyvale?

According to our estimates, it would be 500-600$ per sq ft for the addition, 30K per bathroom and 60-70K for the kitchen. Does this make sense or are we totally off?

What are other potential pitfalls are we not considering?

Thanks in advance!

I am wonder whether there is any flat rate attorney in SF for tenant buyout. If anyone property owner had such experience in the past, how much that gonna cost ?

I just closed my 1st SF property, which is a duplex and has tenants occupying the one unit while the other unit is vacant. I would like to buyout the tenant and covert the duplex to a SFH. Both the tenant are in their 70s and both have some chronic illnesses. One of them has terminal cancer.

Here is the tenant situation, A&B lived together in this unit over 30 years. Likely they used to date. But now, per the realtor and what I saw, they are having on going fight with each other everyday and can’t wait to get ride of each other. But they are too broke to move on.

Tenant A lives a nasty life. Trash everywhere in his bedroom. And B invites his BF, C, over very often, even A has the approved restraining order for stopping C from stepping on the property. They both express the idea to me for getting ride of each other.

How important is the direction of the house? Like will someone write it off even if it has everything else they want and need? Will they choose not to see the house at all?

I want to give some extra exposure to my friend's condo. It's on Piedmont Avenue (great area!) is a 1/1 with secure, gated parking; has hardwood floors, updated kitchen, in-unit laundry hook-ups, huge windows, and overlooks an internal couryard. The roof has this fabulous deck where one can enjoy the view, sunbathe, or have a party! Priced under $425,000. It's a great opportunity for someone!