it is in an area that contains an abundance of housing at a variety of densities. it is an appropriate neighborhood forit is in an areh public transit system. the former u.s. would have generated a higher traffic impasse that it would for young people with limited income. it will help offset the need for private vehicles. the commission spoke specifically about how this project fits in with the residential character and how in neighborhoods such as this they can provide resources for young people. this is desirable and much needed affordable housing. the commission found that the physical attributes of the

project and the housing itself to be compatible with the neighborhood and the surrounding structures. the reuse of an existing building that has been part of the community fabric. they have found that this is compatible. contrary to comments, the project is not yet approved. at this point, the matter is in your hands before you. we respectfully request that the board of supervisors upholds the planning commission's decision. >> thank you. any questions for planning? please turn cell phones off. supervisor chu: 8 follow up to the question i had earlier. you talked about the density bonus and how the project

sponsor could have requested a higher density level. what that had required that they come to us for any approval to get to that level or could that have been done without any action? >> the state housing density requires that cities or jurisdictions require an avenue or ordinances for requiring exemptions including density increases. it could have been required either through a universal or it is adopted through this board that it is applied in any case. it has been a process in san francisco. additional community input is required for everything that comes forward. >> thank you. supervisor farrell: just to clarify real quick, mine are standing that the state has the

density bonus of 35%. the local jurisdictions have to grant a law to do that. san francisco has chosen not to do that yet. that's the process we have in place to promulgate the 35%. that is how we do it. >> any other questions? colleagues, why do we not move to the project sponsored? you can divide up the time as you see fit between the two different appeals? >> good evening, board of supervisors. i am the executive director and the project sponsor. joining me for my presentation

today is parcel low not am the executive director of ge services. through our statements today, we will address a myriad of issues brought up. we went to address process. back in 2009, community housing partnership applied for this issue from the housing ordinance. called for housing developers to come together and create house for youth ages 18-24 that at were risk for homelessness. they asked that baby in a transit rich neighborhood. study showed that too much affordable housing in areas that are saturated. there are specific warning

points to have this in a low crime rate neighborhood and did not have saturation. there are two brokers along side the search. it was for sale. it met our criteria. it would fit up to 24 units. it would be delivered vacant. it was in a transit-rich neighborhood with a low crime rate. the minute we were awarded funds for a loan, we began community outreach. we began by saying that we were looking for offices in district two. we began community out reached.

we have support letters from residents in district two, from city-wide organizations and a documentation of over 65 community outreaches we have had. i would like to address how this will impact the neighborhood. this is a rich and vibrant neighbor to any community in seven francisco. we will have 24-hour staffing on-site. we will be a good community neighbor. by coming together with the neighborhood groups, we could come together with medication. they have already agreed to 4 mitigations on neighbor's requests. we are providing 24/7 staffing. we have a desk coverage 24 hours

a day, six days a week. we created over 3000 square feet of community space. we have limited overnight guests to over 10 per month. we committed to forming a project advisory committee that would be present through the operation stage of the process. upon execution of this agreement, the neighborhood group walked away. they decided to come here today and have their administrative appeal. they were unable to reach a partnership with us. we feel that we made every attempt possible under current law and regulations to address the neighbor's concerns. the kids will have a lease. they will sign it. they will have topay rent and be

a good neighbor. we feel this has the right set of tools to be a successful project. i will now how barcelona to come forward to talk to you about the design of the building. >> good evening. i would like to distribute some drawings to the board. 13 there. there is also --

>> your time is continuing. >> we have been doing affordable housing for over 20 years. we have designed and constructed over 1300 units in san francisco. it is the kind of work we like to do. we believe that is why it market street wants to work with us. we will go to the next page that we cover. >> could you get to the microphone? >> the basement consists of a community room with storage. there is also a laundrey that serves the residence. we are installing an elevator echoes from the basement to the

second floor. the ground floor is very spacious. there are a lot of the amenities that are available to residents. these services are about 300 square feet. the program illustrated 50 square feet. there was some confusion on the appellatnt's calculation for the kitchen. these are all very expansive spaces for the residents to use. the dining accommodate 17 seats, which is 71% of the population of the building. there is also a lounge, a property manager, and a resident manager accessible on the ground floor. when you go to the next plan on the second floor, this is where the elevator services are.

when you calculate the total number of the accessible units, we have five including the resident manager. that total was 20% of the units. we are going way beyond that in terms of flexibility. we do substantial work on the first floor. those are all accessible completely. about half of the building is totally accessible. the third floor i will not go into too much detail. it does not have any accessible units on that floor. the tabulation sheet i gave you print -- breaks down in detail all of the units. they vary in detail from 100

detail fromto 209 square feet. in terms of seismic analysis, are seismic engineer is making are building more seismic resisting. i think that is about it. if you have any questions, i could answer. >> colleagues. next speaker. >> good evening, supervisors. i want to speak briefly about the need for housing and about the expectations and the work that the young people will be doing while they are housed. the note that was released came

out of the san francisco mayoral task force. that was comprised of representatives and young people. that is one of the most primary needs for young people. it is estimated that there are 3700 young people in san francisco that are at risk for homelessness each year. we are able to house about 400 of those youths currently. that is why this particular project was selected for the neighborhood. the young people are expected to be engaged in education and employment. the development of life skills and self-sufficiency. we operate over 200 units of housing in san francisco.

the young people that stay in our program the various about two to three years. youth move in and moved out. most of us do not live where we move -- where we lived when we were 22 years old. the common areas and bedrooms are designed to provide a nice comfortable place to live at is not so comfortable you are bored to want to stay there the rest of your life. young people are working on the skills that they need to exit. they will have a job. they will make doctor's appointments, in developing peer relationships. 75% of our young people go on to independence. are there any questions that i can answer?

>> any questions, colleagues? madame clerk, is there still time on the roster? >> there is eight minutes and 57 seconds left. >> i would ask if there are any presentations left. if not, we can proceed to public comment. >> i want to thank the board for hearing this. i would like them to consider the need for this housing and dispersing affordable housing to all districts. >> thank you. why do we not move to public comment in support of the project? if folks could line up on the left side of the room. if there are folks in our overflow room, we will take folks two minutes at a time.

we are going to have to take this line outside of this room. why do we not hear from our first speaker, please? >> thank you, supervisors. i am a passport member of the association. i am a current member of the youth services. i am uniquely familiar with the neighborhood and market street. it has 13 programs and sites throughout the city. i support the program in our neighborhood. i do wish that the project would cost less than it cost. if we cannot increase the density of the project to 24 units, that will only make the project cost more. i hope that you approve this

project. until the project is completed, there will be youths not receiving these services. the youth are in desperate need of the housing and the services that market street can provide. >> thank you. >> good evening, supervisors. i lived and worked in san francisco. i testified in support of residential programs in support of disabled people since 1977. that was for a house designed for 16 years. despite its liberal reputation, the neighborhood opposition to the program was vicious.

the board of supervisors supported the program and allowed it to open. that christmas, the angriest neighbors brought cookies to the house. that program is still open. during the 1990's, the same agency tried to open a residential treatment program in pacific heights for individuals that had banned in locked facilities. it has many pro bono lawyers. this board approved the program. a few neighbors know that the handsome building houses a program for mentally ill people, nor should they. the san francisco board of supervisors has voted for programs despite neighborhood opposition. they work for the individuals who live there. unlike other bay area cities,

over several decades, you have to approve projects like the one before you today. projects operated by competent people. you cannot ask for better sponsors. there is no reason not to approve this project or to support it. you have been supporting excellent programs for over 40 years. why change now? >> next speaker. >> good afternoon. i am a youth. i am on the board of theyouth advisory. i am here because this is something that directly affects me. i have been here for three months. i came here from oregon that with $20 in my pocket. within 30 days, they help me get

into a housing option. they transferred me into a shelter. i was able to finish gathering my birth certificate, my license, getting into college, and finding a house outside of the shelter. i am on two waiting lists for housing options. i heard people before me say that my peers, the concerns would be that we would be rambunctious or we would take up space. those are valid concerns. every week i work with six dedicated homeless youths including myself to try to change those assumptions. every day i see dedicated youth that are tried to get off the streets and are trying to do better with their lives. we chose this location just like

the neighbors did. this is a safe place where we can get on our feet. i felt that their concerns are valid. we are doing the best that we can. we as youth are doing the best we can to be productive citizens. we hope you will do this for us so that we will have more places to live. >> thank you. next speaker. >> i am a nearby resident of the project. i've lived there for over 20 years. i think it is a great neighborhood for children. that is why i am excited about welcoming these kids into the neighborhood. i think it is a great place for these kids. there is an incredible need for this housing. we have been incredible

opportunity to provide more of it where there will be safe and they can get on with their lives. i also happen to be a former board member of larkin street and a former board member at the research organization. i am also a developer. i see all this opposition as a completely normal part of this process. it makes these projects better in the long run. i think that the organizations have made modifications to the programs that will make it better for the community in the long run. i think that the process has worked great. i think now is the time to be done with it. i think the opposition was grasping a little bit. cancelling the project to say that this violates any aspect of

ceqa is a little bit nonsensical. i am hoping that you will approve this project. we can get these kids off of the streets and into our neighborhood. thanks. >> president, supervisors, my name is joel lipsky. i am a member of the board. i am a former director at the mayor's office of housing. i was there until january. i helped to draft it when the project was rewarded funds. i need to emphasize that i'm not speaking on behalf of this. i am speaking as a citizen of the city. all i want to say is i'm

extremely relieved to hear that the real reason that we have this appeal has to deal with process and transparency. those are things that the department can work on to prevent this kind of brouhaha in the future. they are in support of youth housing. that is not about keeping the kids out of the neighborhood, even banks are low in coming and coming from these different neighborhoods. even if they had not gotten used to the idea of living with rules. they are valid concerns about where the kids are going to fit into the neighborhood. they may not, at if bay field -- if they feel unwelcome. i want to appeal to the

appellants. . they are going to feel that they are not welcome because they are expected to misbehave. they are going to hear a lot of stuff. some of it may not be true. >> thank you very much. >> thank you very much. >> good afternoon, supervisors. i am here to represent the harvey milk democratic club. the club is in full support of the collaborative effort of the community housing and larkin street youth services. if we want to prevent our youth

from slipping through the cracks, we must provide them the opportunity to succeed. shelters are full of domestic -- youth that are dumped on the street after the foster system runs out. those who have run away from trauma from coming out as queerer in hostile families. it is deeply saddening to hear it neighbors labeling potential tenants as criminals orthotics. 75% of the listeners admit that they have more concerns about the tenant population than design, planning, or financial costs. this is blatant discrimination and counterproductive to g theoal of establishing a safe

communities city-wide. they are not battling violence or criminal records. the units are combined for 24 stable prescreened young adults ages 18-24 who are in desperate need of affordable housing. we believed larkin street and the community housing partnership have a stellar partnership as good neighbors to route the city. we want to give them an opportunity to thrive in a safe community with access to recreational resources. we urge you to support the housing development. >> thank you. next speaker. >> thank you, mr. president. my name is rev. arnold townsend. san francisco naacp and the opportunity council. unlike one of the other

speakers, i would like to be as optimistic as he is. i have been around this process for a long time. this has everything to do with people who do not want those kind of people in their neighborhood. having bad not one of those type of people all of my life, i am very familiar with it. you cannot pull the oowool over my eyes. children who are not on parole or probation, they have not done anything wrong. wrong has been done to them. most of them from the day of their birth. we are losing our sense of compassion. we are losing the moral high ground when it comes to meeting the needs of the most challenge people in our society. these youths who are agaiing out

of foster care. they might get a better response bank they were with the tea party. it is painful and disgusting when they say that there should be an oversight committees who determines what the children do in their house. who wants an oversight committee for the residents that are complaining about this to determine what they do in their house? you have got to be really thick skinned and mean-spirited. i bet all of these people have sat and looked and said that somebody needs to do something. i bet they never realized that they would have the opportunity to do something. >> thank you. next speaker.