policy one instrument and generalized mechanism and the specific contours the site in this case the site that is proposed is one that is particularly difficult to work with with family housing this is a resident of a same block and the reason for that it is a particular dimension of the site but the complexity of that intersection for the 4 lane golf carrying a lot of traffic the freeways on the side and a lot of bus traffic coming down the street in an area that is difficult for business it is a difficult street to have families living i know there will be a lot of objection but take time to walk down the street you'll quickly find that is a difficult corner to have a

lot of children running around that is important class of hours for the city because of the recent investment that sfmta has made into the intersection a nice bus stop returning dune there a good candidate for the area this is an important ear the community can support more residents and this particular property allows us to do that in a with my that dense fizz the residential occupancy without causing more congestion because of bicycles and transported it is a parting observation there is a difference between folks that have come up here and given feedback there are familiar with the project at hand and folks that are approaching the situation in a general policy

prospective i respect the policy a fan of affordable housing and broad family hours in this case, i think the contours the project merit attention to the argument that planning together with the developer are making thanks. >> is there any additional public comment? >> good afternoon planning commission members i'm tom as i'd like to fully support this project the affordable units are by design and young people myself would appreciate to have those units on the math allow me to stay in the city with those projects i fully support it and hope that will be approved thank you. >> is there any additional public comment okay seeing none

public comment is closed commissioner antonini. >> i have a question for mr. reuben during one of the presentations one of the public speakers said that there was some discussion be there obey onsite if it's rental and offsite or vice versa my understanding the project sponsor was in favor of paying the number two, fees. >> i wasn't perp involved in the conversation i'm a reporter here george the principle who's here had conversations with s bs n a more than conversations presentations i believe that they evolved to the point that s b h n a was comfortable with the exception if i might indulge that plan we're talking about

this is the code section 207.6 that allows for deviation from the dwelling unit that is caudal called the irregular sites with physical constraint i mean, that's in the code section here's the policy adopted with the market octavia plan and it says open small irregular lots a lot is less than 35 hundred square feet if that code section and that policy tellers there is a lot of results in everything everybody says and the boos because of that i believe they were

comfortable with the exemption to the dwelling unit mix they said george to do something that the code didn't mandate to put the affordable housing on site he was unprepared to do mayor conversations as we move forward i'll be happy to address it by the way, george knows the site well as i said he's owned this building for 17 years and owns and built the building next door and he is an owner principle of paragon realty and know the rental and sales market better than anyone in the room pretty comfortable with that and not comfortable with the 2 bedroom units.

>> i agree one of the speakers was talking about for more profit the reason 2 bedrooms are not comfortable where w when i have to do that you have to have hallways and other spaces that can't be used it is dead space because the requirements of 2 bedroom that there are minimum sizes don't want to speak as as architect i'm not one i'm sure the owner would have owned this when it was still a pharmacy i remember it was on the corner happily named hub pharmacy but it turns out that 38 percent of the household are singles living alone as opposed to 1/3rd in new york we have a huge population of people not only don't have

families with children but don't have spouses or mates living with them there's a big demand for smaller units i'm an advocate for family styled unit however, a place for everybody and mr. reuben pointed out the market octavia to allow this exception we have to agree whether or not the con sprant are a wise one i think if there's a lot that lends itself to having smaller units one bedrooms and studios certainly this site because of the physical con think restraints on the unit and on the issue of offsite they're giving open this project $2 million plus to build

affordable housing and that's probable a lot more efficient than awarding 6 lucky people renter or owners of the property point the number called for in this plan it seems to me was not on dollars for inclusionary housing we kind of dealing the city a bad card by not allowing them to be paying to build nor affordable housing and we've seen projects today, we approved one hundred percent and last night two sro unit one of the reasons that project came before us just the last practice writing project was not built 4 years not enough funding to build it so if we don't wisely

use your opportunity to add to the affordable housing fund it is a mistake although i'll support in project either way in terms of what is being built there's a lot of talk not building enough we need more multi bedroom units in the city according to the statistics 46 percent of what we've approved were 2 bedrooms 79 percent 3 plus bedrooms and 33 one bedrooms and 4 percent were studios this is figures of units for sale i don't know every for sale not much built in this area it sound like that will be a good mix i'm under oath i know some of the commissions have questions or comments they want to make it is extremely good

project. >> commissioner richards. >> try to gather any thoughts first of all to the people in the audience and fellow commissioner i'm for the project so i want to make that clear i spent probably 7 or 8 years probably nearly 9 years dealing with market octavia i was in the trenches i was president of the neighborhood association we thought it was important we build houses for all family types not only for people that want a mix so we fought for this but by not building the two bedroom unit we're prey excluding t you might want to leave it up to the architects

the architect maybe arranging having a core it would be possible i think that one of the ones one thing that resonates if someone said it is a fallacy we're one block away from a transit i recall a new york times that linked poverty with the personal family transit has to work i look at this and say if there is a family without a car getting to work easy they'll spend less time making the connections picking up which were from school things like that we'll have less turnkey children this is a pro family living without a car and having work negotiate i think i went down to visit

david barker on fulsome street and we sat at a coffee shop and got a baked good and went to the gym and went to take food home i thought who wouldn't it be great to center the folks living in the neighborhood inside the building i looked a chart on affordability types of those people that i encountered this is the type of housing for them i know there you know there's a discussion onsite versus oven the project sponsor is ready to pay 6 percent more to be in this development this is incredible given the money to the mayor's

office i can't classify that as legitimate at all in the upper market we have projects we really push for all of the unit to be affordable on site to be a diversity of occupations and a rich fabric for the neighborhood not to put segregate people where they can afford to live i have concerned and lastly concerns on designs i don't want to get into today i don't want to do a design by commission but more rich conversation for the market octavia i'll work on and i'll talk about those but not today thank you. >> commissioner hillis. >> thank you since we're getting market octavia credentials i thought i'll mentioned i was involved in the city side managing the

operational boulevard parcels i remember this issue distinctly coming up at the end of the day remember why we talked about that exception in the code you know somewhat having to do with the octavia parcels that were narrow and long and concern about the significant 40 percent 2 bedrooms into those projects so and i also i mean, i wasn't a huge fan of the 40 percent two bedroom project by project i'm a bigger fan of plan wise it is difficult to enforce that so you come down to a project by project if you look at how the city has evolved really it is 3 flats with 3 bedrooms and bigger projects tend to be smaller unit

which i think works i get the notion of wanting to have no more sizeable unit in the overall market octavia plan we've deposit that so i don't think we're running a risk if we grant in exception for the 40 percent rule we're opening the floodgates we're being specific in market octavia this is possible so certainly it is fairly significant jason your original letter on this was kind of any sentiment when i read it i think having the 40 percent exception to 40 percent and then having the offsite instead of the onsite didn't sit well, it was interesting to hear about your open on the off site maybe in

the drawings what it about look like with the 40 percent 2 bedrooms we'll talk about that. >> i did bring a couple of coops from your discard file prior to meeting with the hayes valley folks it was it was actually an original design if we put 2, 2 bedroom unit there is a 2 bedroom unit on the backside on the page we've showed on the gore you wouldn't get 7 unit on a floor you'll lose 3 unit because of that and i also said to the client i

looked this and said those are a little bit dis20r9d by makes a dent in the density that's a marketing question i think other question that was brought up here and shows in that plastic bag as well as another one we said all right. take it a little bit further and get it down to see if it works we tried to put a 2 bedroom on market street and, yes, we're successful we have a 2 bedroom 8 hundred and 42 square feet with a bedroom in the book and one adjacent to it is a very poor plan that is an architect plan it is a 2 bedroom do we want to do this make the sacrifice because it's a small unique we can technically do it as you can see the core of the building and the core of the building there's no place to put it on site and

it takes up 70 to 17 of the floor plan is circulation it is a difficult one we looked at it didn't brush it off we didn't say we wanted all one bedrooms we looked at it with the planning department and went through that i think the comment that we felt was plausible to this was if there is any you site in san francisco in atomic that measures up to the criteria its unique and small is this site we passed that test. >> how many unit total. >> if we do this the 40 percent roughly it came out to instead of 48 but roughly 42 or - if we

stacked it with 40 percent or more you get into cut it into half 36 or 38 if you don't stack it it becomes inefficient and costly i have to make that it's a challenge we can do it a great price. >> do you want to address the onsite? commissioner president fong >> yes. and can i make a comment. >> deputy city attorney susan cleveland i want to remind the commission point planning code states clearly the developers choice as to whether they provide onsite or off site or the fee it is in the code in section .5. >> i know the neighborhood

asked it. >> one sentence on what warner said i've been doing this a long time there are a few things that are impossible 2 bedrooms can go there or in there it is z does that make sense george is managed those buildings himself he owns a few building and the difficulty of managing b m r is esteem we know that that's not an excuse i recognize the pressure that people are under today and if i was asked i'd say would we volunteer to put them onsite knowing what we know now reading the tea leafs we could leaf here with the project i'm sure george about volunteer to

be have all the bmr's on site and i share the sentiment of the hayes valley the combination is not working, of course question for the planning staff have we granted the two bedrooms open the market octavia this is another plan. >> this is other areas not that i'm aware of other projects. >> is this k5u6r9d out for other lots. >> the planning code was for all the district it applies to r.c. o and other eastern mixed use district. >> generally i'm supportive of a project i understand the

sentiment of having the inclusionary on site it is interesting our next item is an sro project which has small unit that are allowed by code with no inclusion is more troubling but this we'll stick around to discuss that. >> sorry to clarify i slightly misspoke the od shaped is for market octavia it is only in the r.c. o and slightly different process in wavering this in those neighborhoods. >> that's what i thought the octavia lots are 18 feet deep. >> commissioner moore. >> i think the rules for establishing the market opposed

to the neighborhood faces american people unusual challenges and stuck its head out on the challenges of the changing city i believe we need to make a reattempt to uphold the unit of if is slightly moved scale if a greater exchange for the site would show on south american floors two bedroom unit and on the on the building should make an attempt to come down with credible solution and on the other hand, it will be heavy open the undersized not mailer comfortable smaller unit to make an attempt to establish laundry common aerospace in order to set the inner ability

to have the living space those restraining order requirement that typically have for affordable units or the project we saw earlier on eddy and taylor i think we need to find every creativity we believe that the marketing will be more lenient to counter act that that gives something back to the project that project takes more than it gives based on the obviously issues pointed out by commissioner richards it was with respect to the principles of market octavia this project could go back and find a comfortable percentage of 2 bedroom unit moonl the one bedroom unit and not try to ask for an exception the way it does

that is a reasonable commitment to support the project but not on the extreme terms presented today, i want to personally - i personally have a problem with an architect who tries to stand here and tell us what he can't do and sell this to this commission i believe there has to be an attempt you have enough experience in your practice to not try to sell us something because the majority of us are not architects but i think you need to show us why it didn't work and do it with the persuasive diagrams couldn't with a solution which we can judge the project at least the

one that applies to market octavia i marngs make a motion to continue the project and try to 10r9 out if there projects delivers two 2 bedrooms to the market and slightly modified approach to discussing policy market octavia will design guidelines for this project. >> second. >> commissioner can i add this item is only before you because of the conditional use abuser the mixed modification if they have a project with no delineation it wouldn't require a conditional use and not before you. >> would you go over that. >> certainly staff correct me if i am wrong the item a conditional use authorization because they're seeking to modify the mixed use the

conditional use is not no longer required it is similar to the case that was one black blocking east at 1600 market street that was built it had the ideal variance for the bay window and rear yard modification that lot is 55 hundred square feet with 23 unit that are provided as part of the offsite for buchanan and market street and are you asking to go back and examine the mix is not an option. >> not at all but if we create an alternative that didn't require yeah. in order to cock it may not come back as an alternative. >> that is acceptable that is really digging deeper we're not trying not to make that project

happen. >> do you- do we is there a motion and a second. >> if you'd like to call the question otherwise. >> i'd like to offer i'm going to take a different approach personally i like od things that is y what makes san francisco interesting a couple of weeks we celebrated the alleys and put together the alleys and the activation and the less than grid of market octavia i think that od shaped lots are interesting in san francisco's history the building on columbus it is very interesting architectural architectural junction it changes the grid we need to let them do from an exterior point

of view i have 90 afro-problem it is clear it is allowable to deviate from the bedroom allocation based on od shaped lots they tell us black and white we should give those folks to put their money into the design and make the exterior stand out i like the flat exteriors but f this is a critical intersection for the transit as well as building into that intersection. >> thank you very much i am actually i'll say a couple of things actually like the pack that there are smaller unit here i think it takes the pressure off the multi bedroom unit you

have families a house or apartment full of unrelated adults pcp i'm troubled by itself mixtures thought you smaller sizes i think that is problematic the first one to understand the argument of naturally affordable units and the prices fluctuate we'll have a different conversation 5 or 10 years from now about the prices in smaller unit lesser square footage i understand that argument but i think that we have a policy in the city that is moving towards a seethe of our housing outline types of that are permanently affordable and available to classes