learning process and in the period we've visited the policy and suggestion user suggest outside of the building envelope and understand the city didn't want to incentivizes the dwelling unit forces short-term rentals but once we have created a set of laws that are exorbitantly we suggest little the occupant should not be treated definitely and the residents shouldn't be treated different from the population and lastly beyond the planning and zoning issues the program success relies an breaking other barriers the marketing program simpler and cheaper and fund those unite we currently to you accept staffs modifications to be effective at making a dent in

the hungarian. >> thank you very much. >> next speaker, please. >> i moved to san francisco i'm a teacher and i've moved hero with eager unless i saw the housing market i went to 4 or 5 people to take me in a roommate i ride a bicycle to work and go by this whereon development in moovb this is an empty space i would love to see you know where some commercial space if it makes sense can be converted to the adu unit honestly it is tough as a developer if there is a whole bunch of rules and good

people make the rules but not flexible enough you bank our head i'll encourage making this as flexible as possible that people can turn into condos people low not all choose that but include that flexibility and a porch in the back i honestly don't think that will have angle effect the ground is not doing much if you can do that thanks for your idea. >> next speaker, please. >> hello planning commissioners mark on architect and we wrote the book with the planning department and in general i'm supportive of the planning staff's recommendation and for the 3 supervisors for

presenting this at the end of the handbook we suggested if it is successful needs to be expand to the entire city a lot of buildings types of are not necessary the best for adding adu's but in the western part of city adding more space easier assess you'll see a lot more people chief suhr's to add those - a couple of 09 items we've noticed working with clients being allowed to add more than one unit in larger building is useful and most people that are in the dense neighborhood have little impact like nob hill don't own cars and lou gehrig's disease an expansion with things like overhangs lightwells and maybe a small expansion into the

rear yard will make projects feasible that are not feeble right now. >> thank you, mr. hogan. >> so excited to be in front of you again, i want to draw your attention to two of the 25 percent reduction and retail space those are important we need that this bit more extra space and a few points about making sure we remove the adu's allowed in some of the buildings if you're in a dense neighborhood to add as much housing as possible and moving forward with those proposals and hopefully merge into something great and supportive of this and look forward to seeing that with the board of supervisors. >> thank you. >> next speaker, please. >> good afternoon,

commissioners my name is paul wormer in general support of concept of adu's of accessory dwelling units that the in-law unit part that puts in to support family members we're talking about here is not the conventional historical adu and that's a concern looking at some of the planning staff recommends what it is doing we're effectively going to up joan significantly and by the way, there maybe merit i'm not arguing about it let's be honest about what we're doing your looking at adu's of 11 hundred and 90 square feet this is not a small edition it maybe value add and add family housing but we're really pushing the envelope of

changing the zoning lose effectively setting up situations to let developers in new construction wave quality of life conditions with exposure and so on that maybe a justified thing to do but maybe not limiting to adu's if this let's us put in buildings with with more units let be honest we need to review and rice oh, an adu and how great for one family between and legalize the existing one and at the same time put in the permissions for completely new construction to do multiple units no rip which are adu's and primary unit in the followed and written and i'm concerned that - they

maybe the right consequences but is this stuff in the zoning code to facilitate building more - other considerations to take right now it is creating a tremendously large vaguely defined opportunity and people find ways to take advantage and where respect to the rear yard fill in we're in the period of extreme weather or weather events and surfaces if you're phil in under a deck under soil that water drains into ground water if you're putting a dwelling unit by code your into the sewer and significantly increasing the load on the city sewers with perhaps unintended consequences that's the ceqa

issue. >> thank you, mr. wormer. >> next speaker, please. >> hi, my name is matt i work for an engineering firm that works with construction firm we do a lot of the clients with new units we're overloaded by doing the engineering for volunteer upgrade from a business stand point we see this legislation to add new units citywide add those unite would the adding additional costs of retrofits and quickly being able to add units for people at affordable prices homeowners and people that are looking to rent for more price listed thank you. >> thank you good afternoon.

commissioners peter cohen, san francisco council of community housing organizations. we are very supportive of idea of expanding secondary unit adu's citywide you horde the history at the beginning from lee hefner in some respect the idea we can do this today on this 5 or 6 years a decade ago that was such a controversial idea is a big step forward folks talk about flexibility though we are in support of the proposal that was before you first, i guess from supervisor peskin and realized a competing proposal flexibility in this town is speculation that's exactly where the problems with the zoning codes provides this flexibility so the attention between flexibility and certainty is there we'll august

who what you're taking something as a pilot and expanding it citywide do that in a disciplined way and come and tinker and enclose our porches and other things to look at go has to do with with the planning code for two of the issues for adu's has been and continue to be resolved in the proposal 3 things one eviction history should be one of the eligibility criteria we don't want to be rewarding homeowners that losses tenants only to come back and capitalize on value to the property so the eviction standard is important secondly, the limitation are restriction, if you will, on short-term rentals we know from ground level for those out not fold that love of

our short-term rentals are happening in secondary unit the illegal units they're out of sight and out of mind this allows them to be cleanly use for the purpose naturally affordable unit and not subdivide and create a cottage industry of saleable commodity from the combining from the sponsors and the media naturally affordable rental studios for students or young folks the idea as rental housing and sold in the community is important again if so how we avoid speculation we're in support of supervisor peskin resolution small changes that will happen and looking forward it advance forward

thank you, mr. cohen. >> good afternoon, commissioners rob poole/san francisco housing action coalition. it is excited to see we're supportive of sear dwelling units and since founded we've used this is as a smart solution to add a more naturally informational way for the horticulturalist and even on a personal note it is exciting how far in 3 or 3 and a half years it was going from the pilot programs to district by district and citywide is exciting momentum and getting good solutions out of that i'll say we want to be concerned about proposing that is too roifkt or con district- a number of

applications relative to sites not overwhelm a challenging process for to add an adu and make that more difficult it is less likely to be built if thai are they'll be illegal we have too much of those and supportive and hopefully, a great project out of this. >> next speaker, please. >> my name is a mitch someone that recently moved to the city and came to voice any support for adding affordable housing in light of having a hard time of finding housing. >> any additional speakers on this item.

>> sir. >> hello association and neighborhood the coalition hadn't studied that thoroughly i cannot make a comment in regards to the coalition but several things one i'd like to know from the planning department has an estimate how many adu's will be developed? and because that could have a very important impact and the reason i say that again developing the planning department is doing a great job building and building and building but building the wrong kickoff units in the past this one appears it maybe hitting the mark, however, there is a disconnect between that planning department and transit lease fire department, education we need to have importantly

transit to find out if transit will be able to support tens of thousands of new people there has not been a connection and transit is getting worse >> so i think that at some point in the future transit should be studying perhaps in front or the first row we - they know what the situation is you know but there's no connection and what are the fees will there be fees to pay for some of the public services that will be needed and lastly in regards to building misinforms has a limit number of area of opportunities site and i

think that planning department needs to think about that and reserve those opportunities sites for worthwhile projects and be serious about that thank you. >> thank you, sir. >> any additional speakers on this item seeing none, public comment is closed. commissioner antonini. >> thank you all interesting discussion interesting subject i have some thoughts on that the first part of it operationally is my agreement with supervisor wiener's and supervisor farrell that is shouldn't be allowed in rh1 d areas of the city san francisco is a second densest city in the united states other large cities they have more square footage and smiles and have huge areas of family homes all rh1 detashld

homes a limited part of san francisco that allows for this type of housing housing that appeals to people with the children generally like this kickoff arrangement, in fact, we bought our home in 1976 on that west side we can have a home rather than in a dpupgs or in a place wall to wall what this side the retrofitting changes the nature of the neighborhoods people bought into thinking they're in a single-family neighborhood you've created rh2 that were rh1 deattached i think that hopefully ma many of the parts of city have sophisticated residential parts of city have cc&rs not allowing this and

legal precedent over this but a lot of the areas not sophisticated enough to put this into their cc&rs or rh1, convinced that doesn't have an association the, if any, areas that people will migrate we drive our family to the peninsula they want to raise their children in a type of environment america is used to not a bunch of extra neighbors next door than one family that's what i'm in charge of interesting of whether 5 or 10 units i don't have strong feelings on that part find it i'm in favor of keeping the existing legislation that allows it to be coordinated with the

seismic upgrades makes a lot of sense you want to do both things another ones and, of course? important not 0 throwing in a bunch of utilities units but liveable safe pursuant take the place of a lot of housing that exists that are firetraps we see that all the time people are killed we've tried to cram two them housing in two little spaces in not upgraded areas the other concern those are legal questions i mean can the legal unit be under costa-hawkins not unit this is a question that legal the court will have to decide are legal advice to decide and the same thing regarding owner move-ins which are unconstitutional protected

to occupy ones own home i don't know if we can put anything in there not possible for someone that taken advantage of their own right to more often their home not to be discriminated against they were - >> i can answer the first one the costa-hawkins question the ordinance the first legislation adu's basically create this process for the costa-hawkins agreement if an applicant is getting wildfires from the planning code requirements and they're eligible for the kotz or if their belief is eligible.

>> they're getting something the other unit that allows the waiver make sense thank you. >> appreciate that. >> i have a few more comments the representative from supervisor peskin said we have to have a minimum size more than legally allowed make sense we have to make those liveable units not just clauses this or that we are trying to put more people especially units with kitchens that are operating unit you need to certain amount of spaces i'm in favor of the subdivision and separate sale of the unit one of the problems in the city is lack of homeowners it is about the exact opposite of rest of the united states 2/3rd's of people own their homes 0 in this city only 1/3rd own a lot of problems are displacement are because a high percentage of people have not

control over their dwelling units the more we create more homeowners opportunities fewer people will be displaced they own the unit so that is important ground floor retail allowing taking up to 25 percent make sense reis tons of empty rob's over the city that can be utilized for occupant and allowing the expansion of buildable areas into the rear part of a unit or expanding to conform with a needed light and air restrictions probable make sense again, it has to be careful written and nuance so we don't get huge additions to create this unit work and as far as short-term rentals i agree with one of the speakers whatever we pass citywide should

create one class of hours with different laws citywide doesn't make sense whatever evolves in terms of short-term rentals should be applied evenly for all unit over the city not special restrictions for those types of united those are any main feelings i'm a little bit worried the merge restrictions because a situation where somebody buys and hope happens to have a second unit they're saying i only have one family their stuck and have to go to a cu to make their house more buildable some flexibility on morgu mergers unit those are basically

any feelings and commissioner moore. >> what about me. >> commissioner johnson i'm sorry i'm getting hungry thank you commissioner antonini taking notes hopefully get to a motion relatively quickly. >> thank you to staff and supervisor cohen's supervisor farrell and supervisor wiener for taking the time to work on this i'm newer to the planning department but aware the challenges around adu's and happy another that point i'm start by saying i know that based on the time that was allowed and all the staff with no recommendations in theirs write up i'm going to say i think we should recommend approval with modifications different than i said last week but the changes that we'll suggest today are in coping with

the soul of the proposed legislation last week we were talking about changes on legalization sorry the last time i felt disappointed liquor the amount of moifthdz were different legislation i'm consistent a couple of things good hopefully get to a motion and removing a cap and the staff so opine on the language to put in density controls even though we're moving the cap on unit weigh actually get the liveable units i'd like to see staff recommend the language there. >> i mean, i, talk about the sizes and explain the procedures

the design review procedures but one and 3 unit in the pipeline of adu's the afternoon size is about 6 hundred over yeah, over 6 hundred not seeing a lot of small unit some studios and the city is averaged a larger size three hundred and 73 square feet not a lot of 200 and 50 plus units and the results i'll defer to kate the planning. >> kate connor planning department we're looking at the property dwelling units all the accessory dwelling units need to meet a requirement a partial

waiver wire reducing the exposure but need a 15 by 15 feet open area to the that restricts the number of unit and maybe have 1 units but have each one of the unit meet the enclosure requirement significantly hampers a number of unit and have that assess to light and air. >> it sound our existing systems what support a no cap with a leaguer number of adu's we have the processes to make sure their liveable and certain sis and you'll that. >> correct i'll move forward so my next comments on modifications both or in addition to what the department said mr. wormer said proposed a

comment make no bones that about increasing density we're adding accessory dwelling unit for a mom or grandmother to live in those could potentially be rent-controlled unit to adults and we're creating density in that way i think i'll say that that is a good thing we want that but i'll say this is the urban stated to goal of this legislation i agree with i am skeptical about allowing those sort of unit in new development is it so from the building is not there and your building new buildings we want to make sure those buildings are of a same liveability and not understanding why a new construction you know again from building being there why to allow units that are inferior to other unit in the samect

so if you could policemen the rationale behind the departments supporting the new construction miscellaneous. >> that recommendation will mostly be applicable to determine 0 construction so it will on allow adu and smaller sized buildings 1 to 4 in the areas that are density controls not a lot of empty lots basically, it applies to new construction in 89 density allows 3 unit they would add a 4 unit this has to on the smallest amongst the unit but basically allowing with only above the density limits because we're loufr it in a residential building we want to provide the same opportunity.

>> i'll ask that make sense - the department proposed the administration forgive the new construction for 4 or less units okay - >> i was thinking to lower that 4 to a lower number i see where you're coming from at the same time, if the intent to add a unit into a new constructed building figure out a way to make it an equal unit; right? i envision this you've got a space inferior to the rest of the building and figure out a way if you're starting is from scratch figure out how to make that a liveable equal unit from the begin and victims but i'm kind of still there i'll say agreeing with most of

department qualifications and say i'll agree with commissioner antonini on only not having adu from rh1 d i think again, the purpose of this we are increasing density so we want to have it in zoning areas to have more units like rh2 and rh3 i'm sort of on the fence about that would i'll say if we were allowing adu's put is this way allowing adu's in the buildable envelope behind the rhd let me get back that's where i'm the fence and last one i definitely support coping the

seismic upgrading and the we talked about evictions had if discussion we talked about legalizing the unit want audi feel like a back award look there's nothing what we can do about the evictions that considered looking at eviction history going forward from the date of legislation or finding ways to line up the provisions around the eviction history or creation of adu's we talked about last week in legal listings unauthorized units. >> commissioner moore. >> i'm very supportive and

here's why supervisor wiener keyed off the project effectively if the castro about a year or two years ago spend a lot of time on the delays and come to middle ground supporting that and launch it citywide is good as a broad idea, however, i believe the the devil is in the details and am in support of supervisor cohen's approach it is a little bit more measured a little bit more conservative and more checks and balances i believe the high degree of the details required that the design guidelines it provided critical details that ms. connor

described in the dialogue how we interpret the details i see that as necessary we have a large spread of standard of care in those types of projects that come in front of the fuss the hoist standard of care will be for those are market-rate housing and it didn't need affordable we need to have if we want to be flexible and deal with the cap we have to have specific standards for size of units between to and bedrooms their needs to be standards of what is acceptable if we are even talking about looking at 24 percent ground floor retail i'll say that since the retail is discussed mostly in older buildings mostly not already

built with the 15 feet height floor inform floor ceiling height we need to remember that ground floor residential can only occur at a minimum by 3 feet above sidewalk there is a sub i will interpretation into how we want this to happen we'll not see the issue i'm concerned about is that we're using the seismic soft story retrofit podium as a writer for this particular dwelling unit legislation and the point i want to make when you look at the mandatory compliance tiers and the implementations days that are attached to them we already have missed the train leaving the station on compliance tier one

and two and tier would one-on-one have building and rh1 and are for assessor dwelling units those were buildings where you had to have the screening form and evaluation september 14th and have plans by september 2015 and got to have this built by 2017 the majority of buildings in those areas are already going gone through the process and gotten their permit and maybe at the beginning of the construction the second tier which is buildings containing more than 15 units with their original form in september 2014 and had to have their small in by september 2016 that was basically a most or 20 two away

the type of works e work to submit your plans you're fully design plans 0 through dbi is extremely expensive we've missed those opportunities i believe we need to look at it and change the timelines for people that could have used this soft story legislation are left in the cold as i said the train has left the station i think that is a level of details i'll ask 80 us to strongly look at some pie in the sky but which you have an answer to that. >> actually yes, thank you commissioner moore four projects in the process through the seismic upgrades they're still obstacle for the accessory dwelling units under the program

it depends on what the seismic work and they make the judgment a call we've look at the projects through the seismic retrofit and how the soft story is influenced by the number of accessory dwelling units that are added some change but they're still gobble. >> i believe that you may have to talk to people who are in the process of doing it to understand what it takes what it costs if you have started and not thought about it there are a kind of general reference that is a miss understanding and a comprehensive understanding what what involved if we start with the soft story retrofit right now while we're discussing this it would be a different discussion i want to make sure

we're on the on the same page it could be a deal breaker this is a comment i'd like to make just to get the two efforts properly integrated for the moment that's all i have to say. >> thank you. i'll go next, i time to remind you we're not talking about existing in-law units but creating vacant go blank spaces not a kitchen and a bathroom i want to make sure that people remember that i have a lot of thoughts here i guess first over on the coverage i look at the map staff are the gallops in some of the areas rh1 d eligible applause

for the accessory dwelling units is rhd called out. >> no. >> this is eligible citywide map. >> it is for the an eligibility map it shows percentage of open area on each lot. >> thank you so i can't for the life of me understand why we roll this out to the city we have a project on culturalimberland - i don't sut by rhd everyone needs to take their share of housing - how many rh1 d parcels are there.

>> i don't have it in front of the me right now but. >> anyone know i'm assuming those are kinds of places - >> so i don't support not allowing the rh1 ds on the cap i can live with it is a cap we had a minimum size not smaller than x when it the requirement on size a unit and bedroom what will it come up to be on the state code does anyone know. >> i don't believe the state provides a minimum size for adu's but the same minimum size the state has for all unit i think 200 and 20. >> so a motorbike unit.

>> sorry i found the answer 12 to tell us plus. >> out of three hundred and 80 thousand it is a small and big number it could produce hundreds and hundreds of units generally st. francis and sea cliff i'm thinking okay. >> so i'll reiterate i'll not support a recommendation that didn't have that in terms of the one of the things on unit size what is bothering me their subordinate if you have a coverage in nfl allows it in a one and thirty feet lot can they build an adu we're not saying they center to be subordinate but i bow a cottage is that an adu.

>> in the back kur7b9 not loud in the rear yard but space in the buildable area like one thousand square feet to do that but if there is space. >> sure we have a dr coming on the 30th with a cottage they have the one and 37 linear feet wide it is big and the urban intended consequences an adu 12 thousand square feet has nothing to do with that's an up zoning but not the intent that is is a luxury house. >> family already i'm sorry so when we are talking about marry supervisor wiener's and supervisor farrell are talking

about it in fill portion that have that there is more limited than we're recommending. >> i'll support of in fill version versus i got the the logic but every time we think we've solved the problem and got the mouse it gets away i look at the unintended consequences and someone drives a truck through and they do i think starting off with the envelope of the building existing is a great idea and work up to relaxing that in the future on commercial space i love to see what that looks like a project on 18 street we'll hear

that or 10 o'clock across from the cobbler one is a residential unit it takes away from the neighborhood what is the 25 percent if we allow this under supervisor farrell could it about in back of retail space or in front of it. >> is can't eliminate the whole so it will i mean, i can't imagine it being in the front our unit is in the back you're taking space from the back. >> you know, we have retail space i see what in the back of

the pet supply they put the dog food and cat food stuff like that i can imagine you can make that - they cut a whole in the side or glow the store there are a lot of unanswered store they put it to use this is an interesting idea won't be opposed but want to see more specification on, on new construction that is throwing me a little bit truly an up zone an rh2 with 3 units not i have additional space and create an additional unit what i see happening someone tried to gain the city they created a vacant space and all of a sudden as long as a size limits i don't

like the idea of equal unit but - you have exposure to issues and with a multi luxury units let's be serious this is a concern i have on that i'm not sure i can support that but open to it eviction history i'm a pro common sense, however, the person that occupies the unit now bend from the prior evictions in any way, shape, or form, however, we're trying to create units if we want to proactively what's happening what happened if i rent my unit and the person that bows it evacuees the people and sell it

several owners or years away your back at it again 0 why not just call it liquor it is and say an ellis act vocation we bend you knew wrote a you recall getting into it was spelled out the other thing no monitoring we had that locate who knows what happened who knows if they evicted someone and sold it no monitoring not a way to do this so that's - the best way to stop containing the system is preventing that is a hard way to do it i've been here one or the other year nature prohibiting where you want to be then do it or find a way to make sure that you're not containing the system i could work you, you with on

that short-term rentals those are supposed to be rental property portable you know again gaining the system we have a short-term rental lot maybe a little bit more has not been enforced 18 hundred units and people complaining about the process a smoke careen i'll not support short-term rentals for rental in the adu's that are created subdivide and sold my first, i bought a place in 18 and was affordable a tic they're incredibly expensive an 6 hundred square feet it is 6 k a lot of money and more it possible than a 1 hundred square feet i i get it the ability to

want to own i don't know that was part find a payment that is a way for people to get homeowners it is a good things but we need to make sure no gaining of the system and someone raised the issue of fees in terms of impacting impact fees if you're in a certain planned area. >> in a plan area their subject to impact fees. >> generally after the rest of the city the fees apply. >> no outside planned areas. >> so one of the questions he come back with the we had the castro first, i was in the neighborhood when we had it and supported it if i read it correctly 3 applications not castro i read in the staff report why the number of

applications so low why not was the area two small can you give me an area was it driving that the seismic is big your redo the unit but what did you think is holding people back. >> it is hard to say speculating a certain amount of restrictions that people may not feel liquor enough of an incentive to put in an adu or they're safe i didn't about new rolls and construction and doing everything we can to promote this program we actually hired one of our enough summer interns to do more marketing. >> with another note stepping back on the subdivision and sale i think that we don't want to create and cottage and sell that if we would allow that conditional use with a rental

period of time 5 years rent it out and sell it now the tenant was evicted and capitalize make maybe a way to do that cleanly and lastly i think honestly, when i read the report maybe to my last question the cost of doing this is so how i don't have that in my bank account we should have a pool of money it is not beyond reach they can pay it back over 7 or 10 years that's my initial thoughts. >> commissioner wu. >> thank you to the commissioners i'll try to you put together a motion to see if we can move this item i agree with what commissioner vice

president richards said just now maybe i'll try to talk a little bit longer than i'll put it out and commissioner moore i want to use commissioner peskin legislation as a baseline but want to suggest we provide. >> couple of recommended modifications one of which no limit on the number of adu's in a building with 5 or more units while implementing a unit size i'm not going to form the umbrella we've had discussion will the average of application have been submitted and also the two hundred and 20 square feet number in the state code so somewhere in between those numbers and also a modification to define the build envelope to include the fill in only b you

know on our chart only letter b of this poise what about decks. >> i don't feel good about decks. >> and correct the planning code with with respect to the feet and i want to make a comment been the commercial space in chinatown a non-starter no underutilized space on the ground floor in chinatown the legislation as promoted calls out those mixed zoned zones and maybe other mcds i'm not sure but i think it warrant future investigation. >> and the mergers as proposed in supervisor peskin - that's

it everything emotional e else as proposed. >> we completed the environmental ceqa and my colleague is here for an addendum to the housing. >> do you have copies of it. >> mistakes planning department staff the addendum was transmitted by i'm we posted the addendum on the departments website yesterday afternoon. >> thank you mr. starr. >> i was sort of keeping notes and comments i wanted to address did rh1 d those districts are

prime spots to add adu you have access on the side an adu in the back i don't have reference to the back they have setback their 35 feet wide instead of 25 feet wide i understand you moving to a single families residence the best places to put autdz that's why staff is recommending that with regard to adding to new construction when someone comes in for a did he 00 and building a huge house a tool for us to add to preserve some sense ever affordability they can add an adu you can add to the motion with new construction in a single families with seven

hundred and 50 feet or someplace that was our thinking in allowing the new construction and commissioner vice president richards smoking spoke about building. >> new construction and add in a few years an adu we acknowledge that can happen and not making people wait 3 years. >> i think thulz i guess there are seems to be retrofit under the seismic retrofit add as many units as possible and we're recommending that is our most successful program as commissioner vice president richards in castro 3 were added but the seismic retrofit was over one hundred they're doing construction and adding a unit is not a big deal we want to proffer that part. >> commissioner moore.

>> ask one quick question would you mind talking about seismic and soft story those are two different things. >> soft story buildings symmetric's they're identified as having a soft story and full sized retrofitting doing recidivist on all floors. >> that's the difference when our describing that the adu location is on the wrongs underscore we need to distinguish there are buildings 3 are not soft story candidates can be voluntarily retrofitted to add units by x numbers to the ground floor versus what comes in under the soft story retrofit that is time and compliance specific as i said earlier that is a great opportunity if those compliance frames timeframes

would coincide with what we're currently discussing we're way behind soft story retrofit they started in 2014 and many of the unit toyshops i find have already glutton not able to participate in this part of program that's the only thing i'm point i'm trying to make. >> one more thing allowing the condo buildings it didn't make sense to require the condo board to set up ero for or for this rental unit in the building is rental yes should be rent-controlled units not condo but a building all condo it is logic california to allow it. >> the motion on the stable without a second is no - one

unit for 5 or less. >> or less and with 4 with a minimum we're asking what the specification is statewide and not allowed new construction, prohibits i'm going over - the supervisor peskin part no allowing new constructs and allowing construction of rail and go prohibiting subdivision of sale. >> so what if it is in buildings that are condo a ton of applications. >> okay. >> could be a - >> can we work off the draft resolution i'm sorry. >> you give us tools we'll use them. >> (laughter). >> so some of the stuff i'm repeating i'm trying to

understand is already explicit in the supervisor cohen's resolution and so the supervisor peskin resolution with the changes - >> number 2 you said didn't. >> number 2 you're recommending against. >> against. >> number 2. >> new construction. >> this is page 17 and 18 raw eliminate 2. >> 3, just the buildable envelope and i was suggesting rooms. >> it was number 4. >> number 4 eliminating but not 3. >> 5 merger recommendation.

>> i said to keep it in this chart as prohibit mergers. >> so not taking number 5. >> number 6 allow adu's to be subdivide and sold separately when the building is already condoed. >> 7 history. >> not taking this staff recommendations and 8. >> i believe. >> and 8 is good very good i appreciate that there's a motion on the floor do i hero a second. >> commissioner antonini. >> i'm not supporting for the reasons i sat down earlier i don't want to see that an, an rh1 d for the reasons i want to see subdivision and sale of units at condo to help more

homeowners i think using some the ground floor retail makes a lot of sense and have the same laws applies to unit as short-term rentals citywide and also i think we - i don't want to see reciprocation on owner move-in not being allowed to have created new units because of that situation and also would like to see situations units can be merged prohibitions doesn't make sense. >> commissioner moore. >> i'm can be in support of one and 8 that did work for me, the communication of condos that by basically operate under completely separate set of guidelines including issues of internal

arrangements for building traerlts that flies in the radar and doesn't rise to be addressed like some things suggested in the 6 staff mentioned. >> commissioner johnson. >> i'm open to changing that the issue that staff brought up if you're in a condo building and you build an adu it is unclear two actually who the owner is. >> it depends on how the space is subdivide and a common space. >> i'm okay would the motion we've uplifted what is issues are. >> so we're taking 6 out entirely? >> wait. >> i thought you were okay with the recommendation just

allowing. >> i was but commissioner moore is trying - >> you want to remove the modification appropriated by staff on 6. >> my thought is what incentive with a this with a condo to have that you have to have a rental unit to survey to the association. >> you can't. >> kate planning department staff if i might enter rejected a few condo buildings with three or four unit and trying to address an accessory dwelling unit if they had that it will be the entire hoa this is sometimes a difficult thing toe conceive modify the cc&rs and being allowed to separately accepting

sell them they'll not have to manage it as a rental. >> what is the process to condo lists it - >> the process for being able to you know convert it to a condominium we'll be adding a unit and considered new construction under the subdivisions laws first misdemeanor the cc&rs for the construction and apply with the public works for a new construction condominium to add that condominium to the building. >> this is not typically a somewhere in their opinion there be renting it i want to add a unit we want to sell that that is typically hsa what happens. >> there is the ability to be able to attribute the accessory

buildings to two condos not where it is located within the common area maybe the hoa is controlling it but something that is close to one prairie unit that could be attached to the one unit. >> commissioner johnson. >> i would like to hear with commissioner moore has to say. >> in one second i - okay. i want to get to a yes vote i'll say that no matter which woo i don't know how to do on number 6 i support off possession of sale we want to promote ownership and just increase city clerk's office stock? general to have it conversation it was smart commissioner wu to say self-buildings that are condoed and i'll say on the eviction

control i'll hope that when this goes forward to the board of supervisors we normal lists it on the books with the fees around legalizing unauthorized units we have different rules around controls we have for property with is an eviction history the only thing on rh1 d how formal comments are trying to think and talk at the same time i'll not spend a lot of time trying to clarify myself i think we have a version that sounds like it is going to move forward i'll say based on mr. starr's comment notability to define the buildable as the current emotion it is the built envelope includes the space it

sounds like it is basically going to before he include the rh1 d the purpose to center more open space in a rear yard are ability to have larger spaces in entrances our saying they're essentially the adu has to be in the built envelope with the exclusion of a porch or other fill in space you'll not be using that additional block open space to illustrate it in the map; is that correct. >> that's correct. >> for the most part those buildings are in the west side of the city they have smaller footprints so there's not a lot of space to play with i mean keep that in mind it to fill ins and stuff will help blue not phil in under x will not be

covered it is very small expansion so those areas have a smaller building fonts we think that is expansion to the building buildable envelope will be okay there will be less space. >> i ago if you expand to property with more space if we don't include the entire buildable envelope with an adu you intend to have more open space we are saying in this motion you're not going to be agreeable to put an adu you can't build a - i saw a lot of head shaking our motion it operationally is doing the option in case people care about that to make sure we're able to

have adu's equally in rh1 d. >> i agree the motion will not allow you to sort of exist the land in rh1 d but having the setback is a huge thing in buildings with a garage and maybe. >> person door it is harrowed to preserve our garage and do a unit in the back it allows for you know direct and 0 other benefits to rh1 d besides the land because of setback that is the only thing i'll ada. >> maybe we can - and the facts that condominium are to become more and more rental income for two people that have moved away is i think a serious

concern that in many condominiums their converted with 100 percent of ownership living in the building that is uncompletely unobserved to the observe the voting power for adding the unit besides other restrictions in doing that would forward to those who are absentee landlord at the basically couldn't bow a home in san francisco but a condo to secure their own investment in the smaller form of ownership i believe this idea of adding a unit is counter to protecting those people that in many cases are not jornt in o majority in condominium i'll say that with

caution i've brought this up for years and years with the condo mergers those registration are outside the jurisdiction of the board or the homeowners as the body that lives there, there are corporate rentals and airbnb oh, any cousins is coming you canned get out and say my neighbors i've got only so many cousins we're openly pandora's box unless we have clear legislation and tools by which we monitor what is happening in condominium is not the time to do that are our so two thoughts before we take the vote tool commissioner johnson's point on the entitlement that are dependent

on the condominium conversion i'd like to make ac an amendment to the motion to go with the recommendation on number 6 i know the condo is complex bull at least we recommend it be studied future. >> accepted. >> so the motion includes to study the issue of condos. >> and adu's. >> yes. >> just affordable residential housing and if you're creating adu's but condo not under rent control the pandora's box i agree with commissioner moore we should locate those not today that was amenable to the maker. >> yes. commissioner antonini. >> just to balance the distances brought up by commissioner moore i have many

friends and patience unusually empty nesters that sold their large enemies in out allowing areas or on the west side of san francisco and moved into condominium as their permanent residences in the east side of the city you have to balance the people from condominium to people moving both condominiums both things happen at the same time. >> commissioners, if there's nothing further, we'll move on to there is a motion there is a motion that has been seconded to adopt a resolution for approval with modifications specifically staff recommendations one adding to establish a number of minimal unit size and excluding 3 and 4 and including 5 recommending further study an of with the condo issue and excluding 7 and

including 8. >> could you go over that one more time. >> there will be the motion so adopt a recommendation for approval with modifications that staff recommended to include one, establishing a minimum unit size excluding two and three and including 4 and excluding 5 a question for future study on 6 and excluding 7 and including 8. >> on that motion commissioner antonini. >> no - commissioner johnson commissioner moore commissioner wu and commissioner vice president richards so moved, commissioners, that motion passes 4 to one with commissioner antonini against. >> thank you we're going to take a thirty minute good after to the san francisco planning commission regular hearing for

thursday, june 16, 2016, commissioners, we left off on item 9 excuse me - item they were we will be taking items 15 ab out of order for case numbers market street a planning code amendment and downtowns project authorizations. >> good afternoon tina katie tang i'm defer to the colleague on the floor. >> sorry we were late we had to go to a bar to eat i understand sit in on marathon meeting the commissioners, i do want to interest thank you for

considering this and acknowledgement hard work avenue both our project sponsor scoring stop sign and the members of tenderloin nibt neighborhood community on the dmes package before us today that includes the acquisition of 101 hyde street a fully entitled project if project ownership of market-rate development to the mayor's office of housing 87 permanently affordable unit for the residents in the tenderloin the proposed ordinance before say you a a lot of moving parts again, i want to recognize the parties in their creativity and they're ten city that a final project was brought forward one it the inclusionary housing requirements so forth in section 415 of the planning code will be waived for this project at

market street and an exchange of the warrior the ordinance will require a dedication of land located on hyde and authorizes the city to accept this land dedication and exempt 21 thousand plus square feet of proposed development from the calculation from the floor ratio and the requirement for the purpose of pdr 101 hyde is a meaningful site for tenderloin as the former u.s. post office that many resident are depended on on the mail as you may know is often i'm sorry the u.s. positively has refused to deliver mail to the sro hotel even as the hotel prayed mailbox and treat them difference this office on 101 hyde was a space

that resident 0 could be connected to the world getting bills and important information about their livelihood to assure one of the soft sites will be 100 percent permanent affordable housing with a huge victory for the community as you may know you know this well as is a policymaker prefer onsite affordable units it is more diverse community and unit that come online with the inclusionary housing haitians been a critical component to helping san francisco meet our affordable housing production gallop and this provided completely by a private developer community however, this particular case the tenderloin has expressed earns ask of the income ranges that are defined that the policy are too high for the neighborhood and means with worried that residents in the tenderloin in the eligible g i believe for the

affordable units on market street for example, the afternoon students just two blocks if ten 66 market is medium range income 25 thousand plus for the family 6 two the same family needs to make twice as much for a 55 percent medium income that is required under the planning code pr during the hearing at the planning commission two months ago you heard from community members they're concerned that the affordable units were frankly out of reach to the neighborhood and while the thailand i tenderloin asz has many protection they're concerned about displacement in the neighborhood and the desire to sure that long term residents have the ability to live here before a community driven solution that prioritize 0

without displacement arrest after the old postal site community members saw an opportunity to improve an 3w4r50i8g9s corner with affordable housing thank you to the project sponsor for being committed to working with the community and recognize that the project sponsor initially came to you with onsite affordable housing and didn't select the in lui fee as developers do in san francisco and because of this i don't support of planning department represents to not exempt 1066 market our on the pdr from the project sponsor didn't onsite lee they lipped and moved towards a deal despite uncertainties regarding the local owners and took a risk for a proposal that everyone could

get behind you want to recognize this project will not only deliver the land the project sponsor will also dedicated 6. $5 million for future development costs which will sure a future nonprofit developer that wins a project with the mayor's office of housing while did funds are shovel ready and in the meanwhile to prayed e provide an amenity like a food hall up to $1 million the ordinance again waves the requirement for the project sponsor to pay for additional pdrs and my desire to wave this so all sides resources dedicated will be available so far the affordable housing and for the activation at 101 hyde street and finally, the site will be transferred to the mayor's office of housing upon closing and wanted to acknowledge several partners that worked on putting this thing package together

tenderloin neighborhood and the hospitality house and market street for the mass, randy shaw our jeff with the mayor's office and our city attorney's office and our planning department and department of real estate as well as the mayor's office of housing we had to work quickly to get around a lot of known factors i'm pleased 23 that sore stop sign got the deal it is all deals are different and trader to the individual neighborhood that the development impacts i'm proud to stand here and strongly support this proposed ordinance before the planning commission. >> thank you very much any questions from the fellow commissioners seeing none. >> i'll go back to my long budget committee. >> (laughter). ms. chang govern planning

department staff as supervisor kim said the bronchial before you is two actions fewer consideration one review and recommendation on the draft initiated by supervisor kim and two review an action determination the proposed planning code is codified and allows the land to meet inclusionary housing requirement not an option in the c-3 zoning district and exempts 41 hundred plus from the calculations and this is unusual but the department didn't find enough information for a recommendation on the overall ordinances for the following reasons a physique analysis to waive the costs of proposal although on appraisal ordered by itself department of real estate not ready until mid-july and is

with 85 units with affordable and provide more units than the bmr option provides didn't mediate the land and urban mixed use the only criticism alternative and finally, the 100 percent on hyde can be constructed it uncertain fwas the board of supervisors my wish to approve the proposal we recommend that the 21 thousand plus square feet previously dedicated burglar not exempt from the calculations and the requirement to purchase the pdr for the building exceeding the base 6 to one should be maintained this recommendation is because a the project didn't provide the occupant affordable units and more the project with the pdr for this area intended

by - known historic conservation resources from the exemption is appropriated as allowed this had diminish site from $2,000 it should be noted did mayor's office of housing finds the site it well positions to receive state funds that reduced the 101 hyde would be development staff mississippi ms. kate from the mayor's office of housing and community development it here to address the commission the department did not have a recommendation but recommends the approval or inclines the department finds the production of how are you helps a annihilate that said the motion in your packet has been written for the board to consider into projects even the previously approved project at the board members or the new project with the planning code amendment

before you today should the deputy decide that allows this without exempting the floor area previously by no longer dedicated to below-market-rate housing it remains the number of units and expectations as before the project will be seeking exceptions to the rear yard and ground floor wind current as directed by the commission the project sponsor will continue working on the design of the project however, the proposed ordinance changes necessary finding with the closings for area and transfer rights and changes the conditions of approval to the project a couple small changes that have been made on the resolution the resolution should read revolve rather than moved and further be it

resolved, no overall shout out supervisors act the commission hereby recommends the 21 thousand plus square feet previously dedicated to onsite below-market-rate should not think exempt from the session and the resolution to that effect under the compliance maximum floor to the following statement the planning department recommends that the 21 thousand plus square feet not be exempt from floor area calculations from the board he has this the project sponsor shall be required to participate in the pdr the same statement was addressed to condition 7 related to the development rate since the publisher staff got two letters of support from a long term resident at the city and the

academy that concludes my presentation. i'll be happy to answer any questions you may have. >> thank you very much ms. hartley. >> welcome. >> good afternoon. commissioners kate hartley mayor's office of housing we analyzed this similarly to the way we have analyzed other land dedications and this is we ask whether this opportunity provide the chance to build more affordable housing that our city really needs in this case the answer is yes rather than 36 onsite we have the opportunity to build 85 affordable units for very low and extremely low income housing in the i wanted to that is destressed we're ready and able to accept this and have 5. $5 million immediately available our budget is committed so we can't

consensus construction immediately but seek to consensus construction as soon as possible and if able to secure keep that in mind funds from the state that will accelerate the state go out with a competitive proposal for a team on board and analysis the site and do the community outreach and then get the building built as quickly as we can so that really is the conclusion of any presentation i'll be happy to answer any questions you may have. >> thank you now questions fellow commissioners commissioner moore. >> ms. hartley shed some light honey this report labeled as 5 to 7 or 7 to 10 year timeframe today is estimate is their obviously more 5 to ten years. >> 4 to seven years a the it r

reflexes the fact we have a pipeline of projects waiting to be funded we get annual locations and job fees and other funds we have to budget our lending on a year to year based and completely booked financial our budget it has some validity to it they may come around a new inclusionary project and that opens up the opportunity to accelerate projects very quickly so right now with the funds we know in hand we will have to land bank that site it is something we do acquit often and in many cases it allows us to secure a site that becomes much more valuable hence not able to

inquiry at all. >> the idea ideal sidewalks happens at the same time, a harmonious uus sidewalks if you can online any other scenarios i don't understand how they come about. >> we know we'll have $5 million to get the architecture drawings done and he's soil testing you'll that pretty development work before you start construction there are inclusionary fees that maybe come into mohcd that we don't have in our budget at the moment so if write have additional fund from that source then we can accelerate that

process but can't rely on fund we could a have our other funds are regular we get a set amount of trust fund we doing everything we can and have a very stoppage pipeline of projects in predevelopment that have to which we've committed our fund i guess in answer to our question if i understand it correctly since we have predevelopment and have the land the land is entitled this would make using new inclusionary fees that come in it would make 101 hyde a good place to apply those funds because otherwise the site is really will be really ready to go. >> thank you. >> campaign. >> i didn't have a question. >> just wait to comment.

>> thank you, thank you project sponsor. >> good afternoon, commissioners briggs with sorensen pleased to be here excited to share the progress to increase the amount of affordable housing in the tenderloin a consensus solution to purchase and dedicate 101 hyde street with the 3 times the proposal and i'm going to turn it over to don polk. >> commissioner vice president richards. >> director rahaim i'm don the ceo of tndc they filed that appeal really life sentence to the voices of our community not only the residents but our sister organizations market street for the houses and others we're hearing the affordable housing that will be built at

106 not affordable to tenderloin residents we're pleased with the outcome and grateful for all the work not only sorensen did to get out but supervisor kim the mayor's office, the planning department and lots of other people thank you i'm available to answer any questions. >> thank you opening up for public comment i'll call in groups of 5. >> i know is it so late maybe some people left i'll call 5 people more (calling names) >> yeah. i think those of us in

the neighborhoods are focused on the 101 hyde part of deal that was a building that had a great public use and great meaning to us it was somewhat troubling to us to see that go to private use and we're kind of excited we'll get broad public use the north of market between post and in between van ness and powell 3 thousand people between 45 thousand and 60 thousand people per square mile but there are a lot of visitors and workers there more like 60 to thousand those residents the medium income is 25 thousand you know and actually 2/3rd's of the families range from 8 thousand to 50 thousand you're

saying the density of the inclusionary housing in the original deal and on hyde street only the tip upper tip the residents of tenderloin what apply for obviously in order to get a lower income lovely of housing a lot of things will have to come together they're starting are that project - everything in the tenderloin has been kind of a build around the position that is under it is optimized the retail and services the culture and the politics this is a chance to keep similar population in the tenderloin the 101 hyde street it near the center of the tenderloin the project 1066 market is

serendipitous so the population that moved into 1066 a lease less of a challenge because they're on the edge of the neighborhood thank you it is amazing it an amazing deal. >> thank you. >> next speaker, please. >> good afternoon i'm sorry jackie the executive director at hospitality house and co-chair for market street for the magnificent coalition i wanted to present to you a letter from market street for the mass coalition asking you to please support the project so market street for the mass coalition is the voice of community organizations in the intend mid-market and we serve folks across areas and for the past year been combamd engaged

with the discussions of market-rate developers in lion where the document we put together it is attached around the minimum expectation for the community of new market-rate development one of those the lovely of inclusionary housing needs to be greater than just the bear minimum for a neighborhood like the tenderloin you probable recall that a number of us came before you in march opposing this process it only had 9 inclusionary housing required by law this is unacceptable our community members felt we needed to go back drawing board we're very grateful that the shoring stop sign folks came to the table with us

and - folks that is a landmark site for the neighborhood a lot of folks identify with that and the amount of hours we're able to provide with such deep affordability is very significant so far the neighborhood so we are urging you to approve this project we're urging you to approve the planning code amendment including waving the t dr we want to see this done and moving forward and also support and doing everything we can to try to facilitate additional furnished for the project to streamline that apparently i wanted to recognize the residence of the tenderloin and other community members that stood up for the tenderloin in the process and really said we need to do more and able to come up with a creative solution and

again four those at the table supervisor kim and the folks at mohcd role behind out in this process thank you t thank you, ms. hicks. >> next speaker, please. >> good afternoon commissioners my name is linda i currently work with hospitality house and echo those things sentiments towards 1066 market the 80 plus permit for affordable units will impact the surrounding community 101 hyde is a central location to the tenderloin culture but approving this appeal you'll certainly all of the area when i not displacing the surrounding community but helping them get an opportunity to transform

their lives please approve this deal to provide a truly affordable housing in the tenderloin thank you for your time. >> thank you. next speaker, please. >> game-changer i'm wendy i'm an advocate at hospitality house - today, i'm here to say please approve that 101 hyde an important site for the tenderloin to have housing for permanent affordable housing and wish the tenderloin needs this is a blessing will be a blessing to the community i'll asking you today to approve this to provide truly affordable housing in the tenderloin thank you. >> thank you, ms. click. >> next speaker, please. >> good afternoon planning

commission my name is goes let will with tndc and here to you know ask you all to approve the deal believe that is a win for all parties involved that's my part but also i want to speak on behalf of my colleague lapaorenzo - he's wod with the population and knows from their stories how it is changed his lives for seniors living with integrity and youth and for homeless folks about hope with the affordable housing for people not only have the stability dignity and hope the future but have equity it is imperative for the commissioners to find ways to assure that more

affordable housing will be available for poor people is this agreement between sorensen will provide more housing for the poor he urges you to approve the deal and those are letters from two board members the tenderloin latino association that represented over one filipino resident they approve for the deal as well thank you very much. >> i'll call the rest of the speakers (calling names). >> good afternoon commissioners my name is alexander goldman the

community organizing manager and at the tenderloin corporation like any colleagues i was hero before you in march to ask you to consider requiring the project to provide more affordable housing so as we all know the tenderloin is one of the most low income it is one of 15 places that people can still afford to come and be accepted this is worth preserving to that end i want to encourage you in support of planning code amendment to support waving sorensens requirement and replying that with land dedication and wave the need for the purpose of public defender's we think that is wonderful in the fund go to truly affordable housing on hyde street we hope

you'll consider waving the t dr requirement i want to express gratitude for those who made this to fruition and shoring stone was willingly and able to negotiable and supervisor kim and other people in the city and really a lot of gratitude to the tenderloin community who has been really willows to come to the table and stand up and advocate for their community with others are not able to do that i want to express my gratitude we think this is a compromise and great for everybody intol the first market-rate development in the state approved it is a intofkz thing for this to be truly affordable housing so again, we ask you in support of planning code amendments and attorney-client. >> thank you, ms. goldman.

>> next speaker, please. >> good afternoon commissioner my name is kim i'm here a a mother and grandmother and honored to be a person to work with many, many months and hours to find ways to be able to be in a place like today i'm not a politician my language is poetryy i want to wish to speak a poem to you there was a slight intentional of laughter but disbelief we've been betrayed and at facts it is a staunch morning 12 percent after tenderloin folks are brought occupy out the noise

more affordable housing so many lost people and become angry but wait a whisper started no, it is just the winds say many but the what's his name percent have are saying many more units both homes who side that help our homeless do we come today to make history could do our voices role speak our needs it examination really spreading is dignity to really be restored are we to become neighbors instead of enemies many don't believe because truly withhold to have this celebration of the unit of community but too many still want to belief so, please

prove that day not just the wind but the whispers are really and they're real let them be a reality and hopefully in less than 5 to seven years but we're very happy and grateful and thank you. >> thank you very much. >> next speaker, please. >> good afternoon. commissioners my name is eric as a san francisco native and downtown resident i had trouble with the 1066 market street with 6 of so-called low income units with hyde added the sweet proposal i can now support it it now adds real affordable housing in the heart of tenderloin please approve that deal as quickly as possible in the immediate future.

>> thank you in depth. >> and two last speakers (calling names) good afternoon i'm sorry regularly notre dame in addition, in the tenderloin for 45 years a member of the tenderloin people's congress for now 20 years and the e rc a resident council in the abstained or tenderloin the question how many people can buy their home or condo none they can hardly pay their rent it is expensive thank you for allowing 100 percent affordable housing to be built this go legislation that all future developers must agree to do a ms. shoring stone has done in allowing the affordable housing in their

community homeless victims noise to be the top priority bayview lots to, used for businesses and they - and now they should be a stoppage of use of those means for developers to obtain buildings as owners attempt to sell the unit size should be like the one you feel commissioner johnck comfortable in yourselves not square boxes but given real homes comfortable places to feel comfortable and human beings to decide on giving less than this is saying we don't care been about the

people you put in a position to do good for the people because we like you think you're good people and don't want to be enemies we are one family we should each should respective not one over another but everyone treated equally so after the housing that was proposed put forth thank you but consider the future housing everyone that comes hero for the benefit of richer people also decide as a result of our legislation to also put 100 percent housing along with that bill one 44. >> okay thanks.

>> thank you, mr. meadows. >> next speaker, please. >> thank you overhead please. overhead. >> there. >> okay. this map per the legislation you only have 9 square blocks with the buildings could be proposed because it is all will legal outlets in the proposed legislation i'm john nolte i was not part of coalition i took on hyde for the building itself and dealt with that in the board of appeals and since the mayor's office i don't think corrected what they said about the property is all

right. been with the - the are entitled a lot of the process is already glutton so speed track a - the commission there's a lot of moving parts and currently on the ballot is prop c and in which grandfathers the current property on 1066 market to have offsite 33 percent i'm sorry to say 33 percent offsite affordable housing they're not doing that at 101 hyde so i think this is just so they can get their entitlements not doing wasn't the voters

passed and enforced so the commission has can accept this proposal or they can ask for more i think again to let the property stay unbuilt until funds are available i think that is a travesty to a neighborhood open a block that's been the needs something there and the hope was with the prior 101 hyde since that was preserved it was going to be built that it would - we would have housing and not wit 5 years for the what is proposed and also one caveat the

2000 platoon is implemented with this at leapartially with the pl in front of you. >> thank you, mr. nolte. >> next speaker, please. >> hi my name is a mistake nolte the program development of the coalition of san francisco and we urge the planning commission to support the recommendations to the elected officials of the city and city agencies to diplomat the board of supervisors foil number 160255 as amended by your planning department staff and 101 hyde property is the perfect fit for providing between 20 to 60 percent ami

housing even though the affordable units will not support the tenderloin in the neighborhood housing equity is important we don't see this happening many of the current developments through the planning process in our neighborhood their bmr's or not housing equity for the neighborhood and even though this is what is currently on the books it didn't help us in the current resident to move up to the new units they'll not get involved or be eligible for a bmr unit anyway we're happy to see the tenderloin community come out and speak as one voice and point out the housing developer should be happy including the trade unions thank you very much.

>> thank you, mr. nolte. >> next speaker, please. >> good afternoon commissioner my name is mike from the academy i stood here in march and gave public comment and one of the things i said was sorensen worked extensively to build quality relationship and goodwill in their process up to that meeting and that those relationships and that goodwill was what was drawn on over the past several months to get to this point and this solution the residents of the t l and for the families the majority are at thirty percent of ami are blow this is an incredible solution and out of boxes and didn't fit the regulations or the laws right now but it is an incredible solution this site is a key location and

reclaim and transforming the t l the shared work of the current residences and residents and the new businesses and the developers would be working and moving into the the demerit academy supports this fort and support of effort to waive the requirements to do onsite inclusionary instead of that with the loaned dedication and to waive the need for shoring stone to purchase t department of human resources to maximize the resources towards this project i want to let you know that 5 to seven years i've read 10 years in some of the articles in the past week is too long i assure you that the academy will