ask you to support supervisor avalos and supervisor kim's ordinances to include group housing we didn't think that wealthier people want to live if; however are the hoishgz this is a all of a sudden housing of people making up to hundred percent of ami are wells fargo to pay for it is important that the vendors that are building this type of hosing how's are including us in the mix we hope you'll agree this ordinance should be applicable to group housing in the tenderloin we have a lot of parking lot small and narrow and developers radio icing those for new projects in case it if make sense to build the full sized unit there's a project you're familiar with at tucker and las vegas worst and another project we've learned about potentially

on turk street by mosser and i minimal we'll see more and more of those promotions their profitable and gastrothing to build on parking lot we want to make sure that the development in the tenderloin is done effectively addendum by supervisor christensen might be a good idea i fail to see how it relates to group housing and not be in this conversation that is a month long dialog specifically with group housing thank you very much and i hope you'll agree that group housing should have more units. >> is there any additional public comment on this item? >> those who want to speak line up open this side of the room.

>> i'm mary i'm a resident of c w in the tenderloin next to the church i was fortunate they decided to build okay. thank you. >> i was fortunate that the glide community wanted to build our building we pay over thirty percent of our income in rent and the data after - impacted that the city will consider having low income parents below the current ami citywide rate to instead based the rates on the neighborhood what the residents make i hope that in this amendment it will go a lot way for people

getting affordable housing thank you. >> thank you. next speaker please. >> good afternoon commissioners tim costing with the housing action coalition i ask i look at the legislation before voting on it decision hastily passed subjecting group housing to the inclusionary ordinance will significantly raise its cost of production that is an intrivenly affordable housing which is rapidly growing need and characterizations by a small living space that shares kitchens and communities rooms just the prveng of the city adapt this ordinance causing cased a how's project so switch to 0 anymore conventional project they have the potential

to reach the middle-income folks without subsidize we're not aware of this affordability in the city. two group housing is an especially affordable how's for seniors san francisco is facing a tsunami of aging bible baby boomers that needs the housing any challenges for senior citizens seniors are certain to include something that looks like group housing the proposed ordinance if consider this we believe there are large number one numbers of the senior that are trapped in smaller homes an excellent spur on tuesday considered this fact we believe that the consequences of george this issue are enormous and 3 the the inclusionary rate is for a cheaper product the

inclusionary rates are applied to conventional units it recognizes the units are smaller nevertheless that seems to say that folks in small living spaces with shared amenities will be charged the same as higher incomes like barbecues and others rooms this is ironic that people claim is supply and demand don't apply to san francisco because the market only produces luxury housing we believe that makes building go this cheaper housing project more difficult and finally for the staffer report upgraded the inclusionary units should be exempt from bonus calculations we're not sure how to evaluate this most of the areas have adapted area plans that removed

the density limits there are probably not that many areas about this density limits which group housing might benefit we suggest public health this together with the bonus ordinance before you move on it and for those reasons we believe that did current version promises large unintended consequences i suggest it be studied further thank you >> next public speaker. >> good morning, commissioners i'm steven i'm a future ucsf student a hospitality house i did become a resident of san francisco to a single unit room for 4 people of san francisco and i think the group housing is

good because it supports the future things that we are trying to get done in san francisco whether it takes time or the how's works itself anti until you know the student finds his job or their reunited with family off the streets looking forward to supporting others hopefully and i think this is a good - it should be good influence on other people that are coming into san francisco so - >> i hope it goes into effect

thank you. >> good afternoon commissioners my name is kevin i'm the community advocacy interim store the faithful fool ministry and for the masses coalition weighing we are on the corner of hide and to my attention in the tenderloin for over 1-800 years i'm here to support the inclusionary housing requirement for group housing over 6 thousand 5 hundred homeless people living on the streets of san francisco with less than 2 thousand completed plus the group housing development on turk and leavenworth will be over 2 hundred micro units taeshth people michael over hundred and $10,000 a year three to four times what the average person in the tenderloin makes this sediment will have zero to

be routine by the planning commission, and may be acted upon by a single roll call vote and further have the daytime gentrification and loss of creativity and artists and nonprofits and loss of community-based organization already effecting the soul of this city i'm asking to close this developer will that and back the inclusionary housing clarification for the people on the margins of our city to know in your heart that poor people matter none of us can afford the living expensive we must not displace the residents that have called this home for generations let's stand united for san francisco that works for everybody rich or poor homeless or housed for the inclusionary housing for a difference city is it pathways out of poverty for people from all walks of live a

quality of life that we pass into our children and be proud of thank you. >> thank you. >> whew it's difficult to follow that (laughter) and i'm jackie the dhd of hospitality house in the co-chair of one of the co-chairs for the massive coalition hospitality house has 4 programs right across the street and kitty corner to the group housing proposed that you know full well, only leavenworth and turk i'm here to support the legislation to clarify the inclusionary housing requirement applied to group housing i don't know anyone is august that housing crisis locate san

franciscans are being adapted and leaving their homes more and more people are finding themselves homeless and people that are homeless can't afford to get a unit and waiting literally years to find housing pr people are literally launching in drop in centers like hospitality runs across the street from one the proposed housing developments if all people want to move into 0 place of their own it is unbeknownst consciously that a developer can development market rate housing with no inclusionary unit and avoid the low inclusionary housing requirement we hear that the city wants at&t all san franciscans to share in the prosperity i encourage you to vote yes, sir. on this amendment so we can see movement to that end thank you.

>> thank you. next speaker. >> good afternoon commissioner i'm weekend i'm from hospitality house i'm fortunate because i do live in a below market rate in the city it's a big big i can't tell you self-worth and just being self-esteemed boost i can live in affordable housing here in the city with people that haven't struggled in homelessness and incarceration and i dictionary you're well aware there's a problem in the 75 city about how's the planning code requires the how's projects with 10 or more units has housing occupants and all have below market rate in them at the present moment there are developers that are providing

shelters if special needs group but the ones that are kitty corner from hospitality house if not to follow the inclusionary ordinance i support the adapting the inclusionary program for group housing for the great opportunities for numerous san franciscans self-interest let's be a part of the solution giving give us a boost for ava place to call home thank you. >> thank you. next speaker. >> good afternoon commissioner passport cohen with the housing organizations we fully support the commissioner avalos supervisor kim ordinance to have the closing the loopholes it was brought up from two policy this is correcting something that should b have been dealt with

first place i see in incredible argument and it makes all developers play by the same rules whatever their regular housing or whatnot we need a minimum affordable units before me people said it is disappointing to hear the hawk circumstances by which developers should be examined from the most basic contribution to our affordable housing needs they're entitled from the developers can take advantage it becomes a policy for the hawk i hope they'll support closing the bumper i hate to see that become policy i want to take a minute to talk about the new amendment in the

12 hour to this amendment your heard 24 group housing being discussed out of left field on monday we hear about the amendment to deal with the c-3 district has nothing to do with with the group housing this is a technical part of planning code and it may well be a needed clean up to the code there's a lot of cool things we should do but procedurally something brought to our shop with no code language whosoever and whoever the stakeholders trying to solve this urgent we highly recommend you do not advance recommendations on this amendment reject that all the time and respectfully ask the supervisors to come forward with others legislation to be discussed by

the public and stakeholders on the ground and deliberate as a commission we're setting policy here and taking time and being patient to deliberate is important, in fact, it's one of the reasons you have to do clear up in the if i were to is something overlooked not rush to judgment and forward the housing as is and kwok a different piece of legislation and work with the local c-3 commissioners and us stakeholders as well thank you. >> next speaker >> good afternoon commissioner i'm joel wilson i work on hospitality house urging your support and, yes vote on the promoted amendment to the inclusionary housing ordinance we believe that the amendment language is consistent with the original that 0 intent

inclusionary housing affordability ordinance and it's a positive step forward in making sure that the existing - this particular project that motivated the amendment and future projects at a minimum don't exacerbate the housing crisis and particularly with a project of this type of that targets individuals earning far more than the existing residents of the neighborhood one has to make sure that there isn't any un2nd consequences in terms of making it more difficult for the residents surviving in the neighborhood we hope that you'll act accordingly a yes vote sends a strong message to the board that our planning commission is firm

lift ev'ry voice and sing ly behind this and hope you'll do so i wanted to reflect on a previous comment that was made by one of the commissioners in terms of transparency and open process here the comment made we don't want to provide another tool to screw up things that's the disdain for the civil process and frankly it is up to the people to oftentimes screw up and i think that it is important for this public body to take all the steps necessary to insure that everybody has ample opportunity to participate and not just those who play the insiders game the fact that a number of people show up and make their option convene didn't 345e7b that's a good positive comment on the process that is up to you to make sure your

casting a net as far as possible to make sure that everybody has an ample opportunity to participate in the democratic process and weigh in on policy that effect the public thank you. >> thank you. next speaker. >> thank you, commissioners jim south of market again in 1989 in the aftermath of the earthquake special proportions were adapted for south of market regarding group housing that separated it it of the unlike the tenderloin group housing was to be treated as how's not to be some dormitory or youth housing it was our understanding in the

western edition we were talking about actual harvey rose how's this was an inclusionary requirement somewhere between the older zoning and new zone they provisions explicit get cleared up i sent a letter to commissioner avalos office signed by a dozen former members of the central selma for the inclusionary requirements it was clearly our intent from the beginning i was in shock when 78 fulsome street can gambling came before you and qualified as group how's with affordability because they removed the oven from those eloquent kitchens as mr. collin mentioned on harrison where michael intend to weaken out of

his affordability obligations by some sort of group housing scheme with empty nesters and high you tech populations so if you're entertaining friendly amendments that our recommending to the board of supervisors add in other friendly amendment that addresses cleaning up that 5 foot extra height will that while you clean up this inclusionary requirement thank you. >> kim national union of health care workers the national union of health care is happy to stand with the how's advocates and urge you to

pass it and pass it today thank you. >> 0 is there any additional public comment. >> good afternoon commissioners commissioner burns legislative aide to supervisor christensen supervisor christensen's was offering those amendments you received in the packet we've viewed the ordinance as a inclusionary group housing and are supportive and hope to include an additional definition to the zoning district the existing language section hundred 24 is broad we wanted to see that brought into the inclusionary project program for the permanent housing we hope you see the good policy intents thank you. >> thank you. >> is there any additional public comment okay. not seeing

none, public comment is closed commissioner antonini. >> yeah. i know the language is confusing and contradictory and something needs to be done, however this legislation is not the right method we have a short history of the san francisco we don't go back to the time of the earthquake we built denseer and all the time and as time passed we built apartments if the outer sunset no separation of homes and made them affordable those are examples of private industry solutions to problems that is what group housing could be you know the problem here is not the fact that group how's is you know group housing but the fact the dpifgz are not clear if you

want group housing to be technically a different kind of housing people share common areas and kitchens whether it can ownership or rental then define it that way it will, of course be less expensive than a full kitchen unit it will provide a solution for a group of people who are in the middle income groups that can't afford normal market rate housing but don't qualify for the inclusionary or subsidized housing problem with that legislation is it drives up the costs for 88 percent to benefit the 12 percent that benefit we've been going through this in 2001 it is a good thing it has it's benefits but going to raise the cost of the number one

inclusionary housing to subsidize but the better way to restrict this this should be across the board not group housing that only applies to low income but regardless of how much the person is making buying this how's e housing by nature that will be less expensive two singles living lee alone in san francisco is increasing rapidly this is a formula but a lot of flaws first of all it didn't make expectations for seniors it certainly you want to see of this legislation passes there is a situation where senior housing will be exempt from the inclusionary requirements so i don't think that is ready yet and also in regards to the modifications that the staff has proposed certainly exposure is a

good one you want the same quality of life even if it is a smaller unit having the quality of life had adequate xoefr but not crediting the inclusionary contradicts what the first one does your congressman for density whether it is a inclusionary unit or not member gallo r making that more dense and perhaps more california law phonetic i'm not in favor of that amendment the staff is recommending in terms of supervisor christensen it is unrelated but good legislation it taking into account units that are alexander above and beyond to allow them to be available for people macro

up to hundred 50 percent rental rooiblth restricting it to two and three bedroom units but this is going to be a requirement are part of legislation i don't see how this can be included due to prop c didn't we limit the amount of inclusionary that one could charge those were voluntary inclusionary that came with the cost of hacking kins or the project sponsor. >> this is a volunteery program if we want to provide the affordable housing it is accountable affordable to hundred and 50 percent ami and the code is making adjustments to say it is not a mandatory program. >> what benefit do they get by doing this voluntary is it a density bonus. >> the units will not count

towards their s n r calculations. >> that's the good thing i like the whole idea but not sure we want to do that with density there's a density that is what question decide is correct for a certain area if we ma'am misses that density and maximize that more because you're adding inclusionary units we're going beyond what we believe is the proper density i like the rest of the legislation it make sense yeah deputy city attorney susan chesterfield knolls hundred 24 is in the code since i believe the 1980s with the bonus in sxhaj for the affordable units so it's been existing the current proposal because it was an older affordable housing mechanism there were no

provisions for monitoring or other long term retention of the affordable restriction so the current proposal to privilege those types of units into the mayor's office of housing and community development monitoring procedures and to make sure that all of those technical issues would apply to those units as well. >> it predates any prop c issues. >> hundred 24 f units predate prop c and were in existence with prop c was operating arrest one final comment in terms of group housing over the years i've had a lot of patient that lived in residents hotels this is the same thing is it allowed people of limited income to live in a room they had meals provided and had to provide the food on their own if they were late they had common areas and

much more be affordable this is kind of what we should be looking at in terms of group housing for rental or for sale and it should be structured in such a way it has to be or required to be less expensive than a normal rental or ownership unit would be. >> commissioner richards. >> one of the things that surprised me other than than mr. collin nobody from the department came to speak any developer in the audience right now bona fide developer no i want to talk with this with the bona fide developer who is not here but this is going to discourage housing what is going through any head the standard housing versus g