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

partner with all of our neighborhood partners and the mayor's office to make to find find funds on a faster track than 5 to seven years i really want to thank shoring stone and meg and julia for their credible working over the past couple of years and months to supervisor kim, to don and governor brown to hospitality house and all of the residents and members of the market street coalition for pulling together to make this happen there is a lot of talk how critical the 101 site is and it is but i want to remind you how for the unit block of george oath and sorensen is building their project on and the impact that sorensen will have on this

neighborhood because of two chorus is amazing so, please support these maximums thank you very much. >> thank you. >> next speaker, please. >> good afternoon. i'm don with the whole program at the hospitality house and i support 101 hyde and hope you all support it and the last time i was here basically, he was kind of angry and misjudged shoring stone and miss judged them i'm from chicago and was not impressed with the chicago style but today, the builders are luke pretty good (laughter) so on behalf of 80 some people living there thank you

and gloubd god bless you. >> i feel the love in the room adri.d carpenters local 22 we supported this project and now i can say we support it 200 percent because of the comments the shoring stone company has made with their partner tndc we have a great relationship with both tndc and sorensen carpenters local 22 supports this project and it you say nice to be here with everyone or everybody on the sync a lot of festive we hope you support that and looking forward to building it thank you. >> thank you, sir.

>> next speaker, please. >> good afternoon. my name is steven i'm i think about this project and what we're asking for i think about all the people who write the articles some in the bay and public health a finger staying saying this is bodies like this and like the people in the room are the reason we find ourselves ♪ problem i see what we're doing this is the best answer in a while 0 those critics people both sides of the aisle coming together with a solution that's why i urge you to this project especially approve the lack of requirement to say sorensen we can get for fund more affordable housing and build the kickoff hours that the people in the

tenderloin need you want to thank everyone in the room from donna alexander to sorensen and allies in the supervisor office and the folks on the other side of the podium and applauded this great decision >> thank you, mr. medina any public comment on this item? seeing none, public comment is closed commissioner antonini >> thank you as mr. andrew from the carpenters said this project is twice as good it is activating two challenged properties not just one and i think this is a wonderful idea i agree with supervisor kim in terms of the waiver the t dr amount to be seated when it was

built omitted that was part of regulations that said because in the c-3 had to be onsite to have a waiver that was approved and the sponsor sorensen was ready to implored and would have after the challenges were met as far as appeals they took a step forward and decided to actually create the two structures one of which wrestled affordable instead of the one building with the 36 units onsite on the other hand, as in the case before in terms of economics you probably got $19 million coming from the developer towards accident acquisition of site as well as the money to be spent towards the building of a building onsite and looked at it the

highest amount it is still falls short of dollars amount that is generated and when you throw in the $500,000 in the t dr purchase price it didn't come up to the $19 million and that could be taken away and spent towards after i think that because we're dealing with the site 3 blocks away very much in the middle of the community as the case with the project itself, in fact, as some speakers said in the center of the tenderloin community than 1066 market so if we grant ann an exception for the transfer of development rights for 1066 is actually is more important to grant it for the site on hyde

street 101 hyde with 85 to 87 unit not brought up how quickly we have a in the staff report state fund earmarked for veterans housing and one other category this site only 101 hyde will fill and there's a very good chance around $17 million from the state and the vendors in the state fund this could be built quicker the estimate that was spoken about earlier so i'm very much in support and i'll see what my fellow commissioners have to say. >> one quick one i understand that mr. falk needs to leave if anyone has any questions please ask him now you're free to go. >> commissioner johnson. >> thank you i'd like to - in

the downtown operation so and . >> second. >> second. >> awesome and really quick i was going to mention 3 one of the public commenter said on hyde if you do do math of 86 divided i someplace yeah three hundred and 4 units at 1066 market you get 28 or 29 not 33 i recognize that in return what we are getting a project that will be in the neighborhood versus theoretically in the neighborhood if they pay the fee and try to find a site this is actually two or three blocks away that is a fair trade and this is going to be at a higher affordability those are definitely fair trades for a few

less unit if this was subject to prop c and getting a few more units i'm supportive of exempting those projects and the square footage from t dr and think i've spoken about my support for having development agreement like this i think this is a good way to get and win-win when you do oversee negotiations everything has to be on the table this is an example of that the possible impacts of the exempting the t dr $500,000 approximately of t dr in the marketplace not have been if this project had to be paying for the t drs i think that $500,000 and sort of the increaseed development in older buildings might be able to do they've kept the credits speaks for itself a fair trade for the projects we're getting and

making a last point i don't generally do this we remember below chicago and remember him on the 101 hyde project i don't think that just disagreeing the 101 hyde would have gotten us we're have limitation and appreciate the efforts of supervisor office tndc, and all of the community members that came together that is a great win-win and goes beyond what we do on a diet every thursday i appreciate that. >> one question for ms. hartley i'm supportive of this when you're giving your testimony for for lack of a better term i thought that was a but in the back how often does

money come in unanticipated that will be built faster we think you it comes in regularly. >> (laughter). >> you've answered my question. >> we have to be careful and not over commit we love our fund once we make a commitment it is bind. >> not the money you don't have i'm supportive commissioner hillis. >> i agree with everything that commissioner johnson said i note when we do the math it is the additional $6 million for the project to help get it started and half a million dollars is significant normally jutting just get the land and not the fund congratulations, everyone that worked on it, it is a great solution. >> commissioner moore. >> since we have few projects

i'm going principally in supported but ask the director where's the heartache for you. >> i think the staff covered the recommendations we wrote the report and went through the analysis didn't have enough information to make a specific recommendation so that's why we put - the issue with the t dr it seemed unnecessary to exempt one project that's why we made that recommendation it is a precedent we didn't think was necessary in light of the change from certain numbers of the unit shifting from affordable housing to onsite. >> what it does it opens the door and almost the bridge the

gap between mediation and being pressed into discussing what isn't and we walk have not tenderloin we have that all around us and there's a reality of what you need to do so those two things don't mesh i'm very strongly aware of the difficulties you have telling us of what we by law need to do this is looking at the responsibilities that come with the making the decisions my question to you do you see any danger because in my emotion do you see this as being the precedent for other citizens. >> i am not it is the precedent a piece of legislation that is moving forward it is a piece of legislation that is particular to this project so in order for other projects to do the same have to be going

through the same process not legally bind not applying to other projects so and the answer is generally no our recommendation simply because of the fact it didn't seem necessary in light of everything else if other projects kr5e9dal salaries exception we'll have to analyze those. >> this come forward an merit and not setting a precedent for the city in in the interest of time. >> i'll say that is probably worse looking at whether the land dedication we should consider for the downtown that requires it's on level of analysis always that is something i'll consider strong because of the t c district is

full of pocket of small housing that needs protection and our long heated discussion an 5 m and the thinking ability to get more security for that part or indeed acidities; right of affordable housing would be created so thank you very much for explaining yours on that. >> commissioner hillis. >> i think what we're seeing unprecedented affordable housing to allow the t drs for more affordable housing not as if we're not exceeding what we normally require for t dr i feel comfortable but if you provide additional levels of affordable housing or a land differentiation that exceeds what we normally get i'm fine

giving something else in exchange nicole a t dr this is a worthwhile trade not to encourage everyone to do that but in the midst of a housing crisis a great trade off to make. >> commissioner johnson. >> i know commissioner moore said something interesting i agree with commissioner hillis that is when we're trying to look at a crisis everything has to be on the table and in terms of who it sets a precedent whether to look at setting a precedent commissioner moore we have a small sites program and exempting t dr will for the record many more acidities i think this a precedent setting but in a positive direction that we want to see. >> i think the director explained himself well it is between the recommends to the

department to us and us making the decision and bridging the gap that's the answer to any question. >> thank you call the question. >> of course >> there is a motion that has been seconded to preview that with conditions for both the on that motion commissioner antonini commissioner hillis commissioner johnson commissioner moore commissioner wu and commissioner vice president richards so moved, commissioners, that motion passes unanimously have to zero. >> so commissioners, i have i do have a question - as far as the agenda itself we sort of took a couple of items out of order and if we were to revert to the normal course of business on item 10 shall we move to the end of the agenda.

>> let's do 10 now. >> very good. >> i'd like to follow the- >> commissioners, if overseeing persons departing the room do so quotely we have additional business to attend to thank you commissioners revertigo to the order of agenda we'll last us in departmental matters review of the past events the board of supervisors and the board of appeals and the historic preservation commission. >> hi commissioners aaron starr, manager, legislative affairs. this week's lufgsz looked at the sponsoring of mayor ed lee and supervisor tang a gentle plan amendment and at planning code amendment commissioners you considered this as february 24th at that hearing he unanimously recommended approval and the planning code ordinance you took

no action on the program as a whole and provided recommendations on this 6 topics with program eligibility and urban design and public design and preservation of small businesses and forgot levels this week at committee supervisor tang trod the following amendments to the program for the mixed income prohibit the demolition of residential units and rent-controlled unit and require the approval of the conditional use authorization direct the city to establish a small business relocation fee and 23ri6r8 and oewd have 18 months in advance add a fth section with references to existing told and other support available to small business tenants and include certain active uses to

be replied at the seem square footage for the 100 percent it possible program supervisor tang asked one amendment to be added to probable cause the demolition of existing units and remind the public their prohibited in rh1 and rh2 the committee added those amendment and the supervisor also requested to divide the amendment to go nuance with the plan and they move forward without represents on the general plan the committee with a positive recommendation despite supervisor peskin reservations supervisor peskin described his alternative proposal on june 7th subscribed as the density done right development without displacement program the proposal will help with the agreed on goal to help where 9 housing and as part of broader

housing the now adopted proximate cause and duplicated supervisor tang proposal to delete the substance and reply with with his alternative to allow for ceqa review but remove the need for the planning commission hearing and allows the board alongside the mayor and supervisor tang's is proposal the committee relocated this motion supervisor wiener explained that the city has a keep housing crisis and the h pb - said the full program for mixed use be sent to the for consideration, however, deferred to supervisor tang who in response to the supervisor forward the program to what so proudly we hailed at the twilight's last gleaming? the political residential hotel the program will fail without the amendments and supervisor

cowen objected did committee was waste of time and said the votes will create a generation - supervisor cowen asked inform amis could have click concentrating poverty in certain neighborhood and supervisor katie tang expressed her desire to ask the commissioner not to see - they'll take up the h b program and the general plan with the mixed income was continued to the call of the chair and supervisor peskin elicit was triumphed to the department and currently waiting review at the full board this week the short-term rentals ordinance sponsored by supervisor campos supervisor cohen's and supervisor mar passed the second reading and the my mind alley

propositioned passed the sex offender and from go cumberland street the vote was overturned and add the following the new conditions require the pardon to install shutters at the front facade of second above grade underscore and reduce the lip of the structural engineering and increase the setback by two feet and increase the setback of the first and second upped and increase the southern edge of 311 cumberland and greening and plant in the entryway the committee considered the appeal of conditional use authorization for 32 ord street but continued it for one week and the board

did send two resolutions concerning the governors streamline ordinance back to land use one introduction of note the planning code initiative it requires the conditional use authorization for the replacement of production distribution and repair and institutional community and activity uses sponsored by supervisor kim and presuming will be on the november ballot that concludes my report. >> i wanted to say that 323 cumberland was the result of a prenegotiated settle. >> the board of appeals didn't meet but in the hearing next week and thirdly, tiff informed me the hpc met but no items of particular interest to the commission. >> thank you. >> very good that places us in

general public comment which i have one speaker card. >> thank you lauren oh, necessarily. >> i think a lot of people are left it is 5:30 seeing none, public comment is closed. very good commissioners that places us under our regular calendar for item 11 the 2015 housing informational presentation. >> i have a presentation on the computer good afternoon, commissioners my name is a audry of the planning department staff information and analysis and the citywide planning division and today i'm pleased to present the 2015 housing inventory that is an

informational hearing and therefore no action is required of you the housing inventory was first produced in 1967 has been produced with the same format for consistency and trend analysis this makes the report the 46 in the series the report is a description of the changes to the its horticulturalist a description of 18 new construction and main findings are indicators how well the city does with the housing or target as determined by the state department of the governments. >> the report also covers a variety of tops including the net gains by building types and

the zones and the planning district other areas of focus blooiftsdz changes to the residential hotel stock or sro stock according to 2010 american community survey the city horticulturelists do accountant for many units and the horticulturalist increased by 10 percent and 3 percent over the last 5 years this increase includes 3 thousand 95 additional units and a loss of one and 40 unit adds up to in addition 2 thousand plus modem

in the horticulturalist housing stock that's aware that he counted whole projects instead of phasing them in the general trend it upward about 15 hundred units were completed in 2016 alone with over 7 three hundred unit under construction breaking this figures down the units from new construction decreased by 37 percent with the existing structures or conversions make up 6 hundred and 23 units and more 3 times as counted in the 2014 the net total of one and 4 is unit lost in 2015 were dodo

demolition one unit more than that was counted in 2014 there were about 25 units that are demolished and one hundred utilities lost and 3 for conversions to not that i recall and unit mergers and one due to >> affordable housing made of 17 percent add to the housing stock 5 hundred plus new units came online with 84 onsite and others offsite affordable housing increased by 40 hers or percent and inclusionary up opted collected over 73 percent $5 million this is the largest sum since 2008 by far.

>> breaking down the 5 hundred plus understanding 66 not the 4 hundred and 77 on the slide 66 units were affordable to households with 40ur8d incomes between 50 and 80 percent have been area modem income and 2 plus were you maid available and 200 and 50 united were made affordable to households with one and to one and 20 to their area income and considered to be secondarily unit and not restricted. >> housing permits issued stand for housing start and a an indicator of production the department of building inspection permitted 2 thousand plus units for the construction

in 2015 that 22 lower than 2014 xaurd to the rest they're a position behind alameda county and santa clara community with 27 percent according to these numbers 66 percent will be built in multi buildings that is indicated on the graph looking forward by the end of 2015 there were over 26 thousand dialed 19 planning department and 8 thousand plus unit under construction per out of those unite about 20 percent can be affordable units other top california chlgd

increases from the previous year to 2009 plus and condominium conversions two went down and according to the department of building inspection the number of nonprofit and no one profit increased by one thousand one and the rooms increased by - preservation of the twitter on eddy street in the beginning the presentation i briefly mentioned how the reports indicates how the city fairs in meeting the target and determined by the state department and the regional area bay governments for the planning period 2015 calls for many unit to be built

by the end of the year 2022 of that total 60 percent or 17 thousand plus unit must be affordable to household aribnb household that earn up to one and 22 sorry households up to one and 20 percent of medium income and 2015331 affordable units were counted and approximately 8 percent were it possible to household aribnb up to one and 20 percent of area medium income and production of market-rate unit affordable to household making more than that one and 20 percent built about 20 percent of the target those are slightly different the state allows jurisdiction to include the rehabs to existing

affordable units to count towards meeting those goals as always the report is available on the planning department website and go published the raw tables on the website and other sfgovtv.org. >> that concludes my presentation. i'm available to answer any questions thank you. >> very much. >> opening up for public comment on the housing inventory. >> good evening commissioners rob poole/san francisco housing action coalition. speaking on behalf of the organization individual members thank you to the planning department it is interesting to see those numbers sometimes, we looked at this data it is helpful to step back and see where others cities are they are

facing the same troubles an example is we've seen but it is similar in terms of an economic tier this is director rahaim housing ground in seattle can i have the overhead a year ago we had not taken a position on anything is that on. >> sfgov go to the dot camtc >> a year ago i worked or worked for an architecture firm and that is housing activists and that was reilly interesting to see this the production i'll go into affordable in a second but those are in the past 20 years doubled or more than doubled our annual production this is a city that you know is absent body worn cameraly

constrained not nearly on water to the same stent they're growing as fast as we can and tech seeker i was so to speak to someone in the do you have and they have modem rent $1,600 a month so this past year we've product 25 hundred units not on track by 2020 about look at what we did last year i'm not sure we can sodium in on that we did 7 thousand units last year, i want begin to think from a planning appreciative i've been reading that vendors and property owners are complaining will be renters are stabilizing with a new supply i want to go into income

restricted affordable housing they're a different approach inclusionary housing not in seattle but they have - this blew me away overhead again, please they are about to pass the 6 housing lobby and every of years the voters tax themselves and fund housing this one coming up august 2nd costs the homeowner $48,000 will cost them $10.17 are a little bit lens in san francisco they have more affordable housing just food for thought if you're interested actually, i have packets. >> thank you, mr. polk. >> is there any additional public comment on the housing inventory. >> seeing none, public comment

is closed. commissioner antonini. >> justice department from the report it looks like 2016 will be a lot big year for construction i see so many more units in crosswalks that didn't fall into the category when we counted them a year ago i think we'll see a big jump but a couple of things we want to note in a year our numbers are less than they have been in other years we still count for 16 percent of the united in the bayview in a city who's population is significantly less than contra-costa alameda and in san mateo county is compatible to san francisco unites the go side but the bad side as appointed by rob poole only half

the production of city of seattle very a population of 6

hundred thousand - i appreciate the report and we have a lot to do hopefully, i think one answer is going to be if he can begin to move forward with project we pass area plans and prescribe and come up with projects takes years and years for those projects to get approved as in right to areas and still are not approved easily that is one of the things that you know this may be part of what the state ask trying to do as the right is doing i'm sure i'll under oath of but certainly when we set rules follow the rules and be able to approve projects that you are con foreman to the rules we've established that may you help us to get things built a

lot quicker. >> commissioner hillis. >> yeah good to step back times we think we are inundate and thecy is changing it is interesting that actually, the production in 2015 was less than one percent it was .77 of a percentage of actual production which is a good reason why you know the governor has proposed what they propose it obviously inner adequate and thanks for the seattle i thought the way we have affordable housing it is not sufficient either through las vegas's on market-rate being built as it is built or through bonds that tends to be one time funding but this kind of levy that is more of a parcel tax or against property tax actually has us you all fund and all pertains and

rendered affordable housing sfaefdz putting it on development in the ncd for a relatively small one and $20 a year a significantly more amount to affordable housing that is regular money coming in that you can bond to build affordable housing to go information on all that thank you. >> >> next speaker, please. >> very good that will places us on item 12 wireless telecommunication facilities this is a planning code amendment good afternoon, commissioners i'm on behalf of the planning department for the recommendation the changes of the planning code as it relates to wireless telecommunication

facilitates doing primarily but not exclusively with selling of amenity want to briefly talk about what occurred since the march association hearing and our neighborhood outreach to date the goals are include the tools for less intrusive for the placement of wireless facilities and providing less intrusive design and as proposed in san francisco including in the historic conservation district or areas that are considered more small-scale in nature and look at lessons learned and adopt the wireless sighting as mobile devices are used as data services since the march 17 hearing the historic preservation commission voted on june 1st to remedy the proposed ordnance and supervisor avalos introduced a proposed ordinance

where the board of supervisors planning department is continued to keep neighborhood groups and others interested abreast of the changes and residents have been generally supportive of planning code amendment the verizon wireless provided a letter today contesting the 10 year sites for the conditional use authorization and acidity a wireless facilities more extraordinary and smaller and federal law with respect to both items we west portal disagree from two to four at all amenities to 8 feet and addressing amenity the size of large belief cases this is especially the historic conservation believes that are small-scale that dominate the city and in addition the city attorney we feel those are in

con forms that partially limit but not preclude the jurisdiction we building that the proposed changes provide a platform for work with the community and the planning commission and the board of supervisors and the wireless carries carriers make sure the infrastructure are better integrated into the built in assignment and respectfully request your support. >> open up for public comment any public comment on this item? seeing none, public comment is closed. commissioners commissioner johnson thank you for presenting this legislation generally supportive we've talked about many of the items on here before i had a couple of quick questions hopefully, the answers will be

quick the first one is one of the main things we've spoken about and come up a lot is sort of the definition of micro w t s fatalities you've mentioned there is no existence in micro in the code that proposes to clean that up i'm not arguing in any wrment /* in any sharp or form, however, one thing the letter brought up why focus on specific definitions of types of technologies when we royal should by looking at the physical properties no matter what we call it my question because you've dealt with this there so long why do we need the

against of facilities and claevent in terms of our discretionary it is about the physical impacts on the thaechlgz and usability of the building those physical elements not necessarily what is it called so why do you need that definition and not talk about the physical elements. >> the micro facilitates with in the late 90s.

>> because their smaller in nature it works well by providing that definition provides a sense of clarity the residents receive a notification and why is this considered an surveyy use for a coffee shop in the building for instance, and not require a hearing it is an opportunity to streamline the cares but the community in terms of you can't why this site is considered smaller and not subject to the discretionary

action like a micro facility. >> i see when they start to become clustered we do so this isn't that sort of the sore 2k3wed. >> generally when two or 3 micro sites those feature the antoine's on the revolver. >> that's helpful i if do or say that but that make sense just a couple of other quick questions there are text about delegation and historic preservation commission to staff i was wondering do we need was there any sort of delegation from the planning commission to staff that was considered as

part of this legislation and if not why thinking of middle-aged facilities in the legislation i believe it calls for delegation to staff the historic preservation commission for certain approvals. >> uh-huh. >> there was no similar delegation from the planning department was there anything that was considered. >> right now they're coming in micros don't go dmro the planning commission or considered permitted so sites downtown along the waterfront so no change one change in a proposed delegation if it came in with the conditional use authorization with a micro u macro facility on polk street and the 10 year limit came up within to limit is an option for

the planning commission to deliberate the removal of that conditional use authorization for another 10 years to the planning director our goal to encourage cares to work and maintain and build the sites correctly there is not major changes to the site or hope, if you will, we'll continue to work with the carriers to renew those ten years site authorizations assuming they're built correctly. >> the conditional use make sense but in terms of delegation to planning staff that part of cu you point out the state law and the potential that there are certain approvals that may need to be calendar with the recommendations of approval just abag because not enough time so my question to you is has there been any sort of i was thinking generally that was behind any

question any sort of thought about delegation to staff not only because some of the approvals are more rounltd routine. >> the commission can deliberate facilities to the department staff for the conditional use authorization we haven't - the change for delegation approval was only in denial there's article 10 in the planning code in the care comes in for a site say on the palace hotel generally requires a building permit but the planning code it requires a certificate of appropriateness a furious the historic preservation commission began delegating scopes of work as minor and saying the planning department can approve them

didn't refer to denial so our concern with this care comes in with a building permit and an application for administrative appropriates to see build a new wireless facility at the hotel those are simulations they're not providing us with notification to labels so the concern with the share clause is this if sthe submit the application and from the time limit passes the sites are approved but the design they're providing is not compatible not compilation with the conditions they're proposing mntsz on the facade the way the code read not for staff it is a recommend the denial for the clock if it expires the concern was based on procedures in order to deny we have the historic preservation commission well generally, the order to the historic preservation commission

you have to notify the neighbors but nicole care could august i'll not supply those three hundred feet to take it to the deny and we're scramming to notify the neighbors 38 say the shock clause expires the challenge is on us to make the approval are denial before it end as a conclusion the ability to render a decision whether approval or denial for administrative services or certificate of appropriateness before it inspires helps to advertise it will not be approved because the historic preservation commission could not beat the shock clock. >> family the other part of answers historic preservation

commission has a mechanism in article 10 and landfill have a mechanism to deliberate certain details to the staff it is actually minor permits to alternate i forgot the name but that mechanism already exists something that requires a conditional use would require a legislative change not no such thing as a staff approval. >> i'll not take up twroch more time i'll say i understand that example, however, i can see mental illness multiple other example not having the certificate of appropriateness but with the same outcome we have preference levels for different sites the way that the shock clause law is set up wireless providers have no incentive to do feasibility

assessments on heir priority sites for wireless facilities; right? >> if at the don't provide an alternative sites the project is in complete the shock clock pauses it didn't provide us not doing the due diligence for the application. >> okay. >> but okay seeing how the legislative change for us to do a delegation right now the approvals are a conditional use and can't deliberate a cu to staff i'll drop my question this is not the end of the story because the shock clock has a negatively impact because no incentives to do a complete you may say i've landmarked other sites but no

sense to analyze whether or not those are equally available you know we've seen comments where the sites where the wireless providers don't want to go provide this in terms of feasibility amendment assessment and not feasible for xyz and they don't look at that i think we're still continue to see that even as we have it updated legislation that cleans up a lot of stuff you. >> we see this as incomplete or providing information that is inaccurate. >> commissioner antonini. >> yeah. i want to thank the gentleman and all the work in putting together good ideas but particular reference towards outdoor antennas and subscribed antenna systems mostly with reference to the larger wong's

on pg&e poles that you mentioned are limited but utilities those that makes a lot of sense and then for the smaller ones utilizing the roll ugly at all cobra headed poles in the 60s unfortunately can make the best neighborhood look role scarey at night i have some on my street hoping to get them someday replaced your use of top of those poles are that actually improves them so also serves the purpose of having an antenna there. >> commijohnson. >> thank you sorry one more thing i'll make a motion to recommend approval so this is a minor thing we are all for reducing the quarterback foot's you mentioned in the -

is there any way to write in a way to have cleaner like - >> our mandate is by federal law, however, proposes a diesel generate hey can you look at a natural gas generator and move in that direction we can't mandatory it but we've had limited success. >> maybe a findings that would be helpful maybe you can do that so i'd like to make a motion to say recommend approval of this planning code amendment second. >> with the finding we

encourage wireless facilities to use cleaner cleaner energy. >> dully noted. >> commissioner moore. >> mr. masonry wouldn't that be a recommendation to the state of california and sacramento. >> regarding clean energy. >> yes. >> since the things we've discussed earlier i'll leave that maybe a good recommendation to keep in mind. >> understood. >> very good commissioners there is a motion that has been seconded and then to adopt a recommendation for approval with the finding to encourage wireless communication companies to use cleaner energy. >> and forward that to sacramento. >> commissioner antonini commissioner hillis commissioner johnson

commissioner moore commissioner wu and commissioner vice president richards so moved, commissioners, that motion passes unanimously 6 to zero. >> commissioners we already heard item 13 so it will places us on item 14 for case no. mixed options in large building and a planning code amendment. >> good afternoon commissioner my name is monique mohan to remedy the mixed income requirement i'll provide a brief overall i believe that jan lee office will be hero if she walks

in while i'm speaking let me know. >> i want to correct a typo in the first part of your packet the way it is now it should read and all others reading and martin luther king and eastern neighborhoods mixed income not in all other rto and eastern neighborhoods mixed income this is between the rc d and rtc so jonas so the proposed option for buildings in the spifd unit that are subject to the dwelling units to allow the developers to have a mix of two and three of the bedrooms that have more than

one bedroom clear as mud the department is also adding back to section of code that was inadvertently stated that they're requesting - the premise of this ordnance to encourage the development of three bedrooms unit given the property owner or project sponsors railway chose the three bedrooms option to satisfy this bedroom with the three bedrooms this is because three bedrooms are larger and developers generally prefer to use their square footage to achieve for unit but the three bedrooms rather than unit a 3 bedroom unit could count towards the picks it encourages a mix of 2 and 3 awhile recognizing their

took place - providing this option one method that allows some projects to provide a three bedroom how does that mix work so 90 in opposition a considering a 10 unit building we'll require that 40 percent of them are two bedroom this example means 50's percent of the bedrooms are in unit would more than 50 percent of the bedrooms. >> jan is here. >> you want to jump in. >> sure i'll finish so option b is also a 10 unit building thirty percent requirement so we will have 3 units in this building that will be three bedrooms 56 units are more than one bedroom and the third option that is on the table today

option c a developer can is have two options why an option a 10 unit building two two bedroom and one one bedroom so in this option 50 there is of the units in occupant with more than one bedroom one bedroom and 10 percent are broemz this is lower than the current options in ab are the other option the developer can provide 2 three bedrooms and one two bedroom 20 percent broemz and 43 units are with bedrooms with more than one bedroom ambassador - starting to get in this example could

provide 9, two bedroom and no three bedrooms but providing those 9, two bedroom unit 46 of the overall project is less than the 40 percent we currently u current have in example a the department didn't want to encourage we've talked about with supervisor yee to provide a percentage for a certain percentage will have to be three bedrooms that will read at least 50 percent of the bedrooms are in unit with more than that one bedroom with 5 percent of unit delegated as wroemz or more this guarantees the broemz and likely we'll not community-based through the 40 percent so this that concludes my presentation. and the department asked planning commission recommend approval the proposed ordinances with the staffs recommendations

and the attached resolutions with the addition that staff continue to work with supervisor yees office and development a bedroom mixed with a production of three bedrooms and not undermining the city's policies as it relates and works with the octavia and the potrero hill bolsters i'm going to turn it over to to jen and be available for questions. >> hi jan for supervisor yee good afternoon, commissioners and commissioner vice president richards thank you so much for considering this legislation i want to commend the commission for pathologist considerations about creating a family-friendly unit in san francisco given we're one of the major city's with a decreasing family population that's a trend i'd like to reverse so supervisor

yee and our office has been worsening with our office to make san francisco a more family-friendly city and housing is the issue that comes up awhile affordability on everyone's minds we know that design and amenity and other things people choose to live and stay one of the things with the developers is that building meddled bedroom units is not incentivised we done two bedroom we know or notice that a lot of two bedroom don't get utilized by families only two unrelated adults why not create a flexible option to encourage perhaps three bedrooms united that may not be more attractive to growing families that's how the legislation came about i want to

read into the record a memo from the supervisor i have copies i apologize this was not submitted previously but based on the suggestions we have considerations for academies moving forward seeing the option we're presenting may have unintended consequences we want to insure that we are incentivizing the promotion of more broemz but not at the expense of losing two bedroom unit i want to pass this out to the supervisors would you like me to read into the record or go over the amendments. >> whichever you prefer from the castro hill supervisor yee is respectfully respectfully the planning commission consider

potential mainstreamed as part of board filed those amendments are underdevelopment we want to provide a framework what our office consider with the recommendations from the planning code that is in subsequent service stations and closer the possibly by making amendments to make a minimum requirement of three bedrooms in the project sponsor choose that new option it will still need to serve as as incentive by offering the project sponsor to built less multi bunt u united but provide for broemz i'm committed to work on a solution thank you for your time of those potential amendments to this pend legislation. >> thank you. >> thank you will you be staying for questions or like them new i'll be staying opening up for public comment on

this item any public comment seeing none, public comment is closed. commissioner antonini. >> yeah. i think that the amendments being proposed by staff and the supervisors aids make that somewhat meaningful we can know that developers are generally trying to build the few itself meddled unit the perspective making more with less - that maternity with economically true but probably is if we start pga legislation that requires them to have a higher workshop u number of multi bedroom unit in the i that

a step in the right direction we have quite a few of the homes in san francisco around thirty percent or so we only have 20 percent of our horticulturalist has 3 or more bedrooms i maybe off not a large percentage of the total housing stock and it is true that families often leave sfta san francisco because they can afford to bow a home either here or on the peninsula marin in the east bay the stock of three bedrooms is limited and probably for expensive to get anything in pretty good shape they they buy a place and spend a few hundred through these or more i think this is a step in the right direction but some sort of minimum requirement of 3 if they choose that option, however, i don't think they'll choose that option until such

time we make it mraurnd that even under the 40 percent the 40 percent have a minimum number of three bedrooms and the 50 percent a a higher i couldn'tnu this 40 percent choose you'll see entirely brems 15 percent have to be 3 and you'll get some of those the same with this one only effective if it has a higher enough required percentage of 3s to you know incentivizes of that 50 percent 49 you you know two bedrooms or 3 don the number of amendments those amendments are help is

that probably won't change things until we pass legislative that mandatory broemz in the projects we approve you know prairie in areas that are less dense because you know this is a the way you'll keep families may not only be families but not have families at all that you have on this one bedrooms or a couple of 2s. >> thank you commissioner moore. >> we received a long memorandum from the bolsters that was an ice opener it asked intelligent questions with the mathemat mathematical calculation i'm glad to see and hear that the gentleman the original our had moseying with the cloys and an

inside in which loopts can be closed and need to be some additional time to roll fully incorporate that into the language of the amendments here but i'm supportive of it and role glad that this by the boosters was made. >> commissioner johnson. >> i'd like to make a motion but start with supervisor yee i'm sorry. >> sorry is the supervisors desire we include this change modification for today or being worked on. >> we're working on the actual percentages but the best framework for the commission to at least consider that proposal

today. >> okay. so that specific proposal 5 percent broemz or. >> some percentage. >> okay. thank you so i am highly supportive of this i definitely understand monitor what the number to incentivize some sort of trade off i'm willing to get more feedback we see hardly any and we can make the argument when they are first built their expensive and for adults and other non-family people living in there but vufb that housing stock will be there for generations to come and eventually families i'm happy to support that i make a motion to approve or to recommend approval with modifications p of this planning code one modification

to look at having a minimum percentage for a three bedroom second. >> commissioner antonini. >> yeah. i know that is still, formulating in my opinion that minute floor should say 15 percent of 50 percent because with 5 percent it means that most of them will be 2s if you have 16 percent of them being three and four workmen's all are 31 percent two bedroom and at least some kind of on dent and if they're not picking that option they'll not pick it anyway, if they pick it you'll have some significance. >> so sorry i think the motion stands with some percentage i'll see e is to commissioner antonini we want to do the math for example, 15ers of 50 percent

is 5 percent so have the staff - >> we're talking quickly but we want an effective end result of the number that are that number the percentage applied to the number rather than a percentage. >> thanks. >> i want to weigh in what commissioner johnson said i'd like to see the floor the 5 percent of x or y two different scenarios someone choices to go through in kickoff an option to be flushed out you get where i'm coming from we'll make a dent in the three bedrooms for example. >> commissioners, if there's nothing further, we'll move on to there is a motion that has been seconded to excuse me - to

adapt a resolution recommending approval to the board of supervisors with modifications to include a minimum percentage for broemz on that motion campaign commissioner hillis commissioner johnson exposure commissioner wu and commissioner vice president richards so moved, commissioners, that motion passes unanimously 6 to zero and commissioners have arrested considered 15 ab now places us on 16 ab for case numbers 16th street a large project authorization and shadow finding. >> good evening commissioners kimberly planning department staff a the item before you a is large project authorization pursuant to planning code to allow the exposition demolitions of a 10 thousand square feet

office and a mixed use building with ground floor retail seek exceptions to rear yard and permitted obstruction in addition to the finding under association 329 the promoted project is located in the mix interim controls enemy projects shall be considered additionally the commission shall consider a determination pursuant to planning code section 295 that the new net casts by franklin square will not be adverse to franklin square the subject property is within the 2020 area and the interim controls this is the first project to be reviewed

by the commission under those new interim controls the mission act plan or map 2020 a community initiated collaborative between community organizations and the city of san francisco to create and preserve affordable housing and bring economic stability to the missions the goal to attractive low to moderate people for artists to strengthen the socio economic and culture diversity of the mission neighborhood those communities concerns with the interim zoning controls and awhile work on proximity solution is knowing the sdprmdz interim controls will provide the commission to consider in the deliberations to the goal of the neighborhood stabilization and whether there are potential negative effects such direct

displacement of residents or businesses to date the department got 21 letters of support from the project sponsors small and the department received commission from the office of economic workforce development in opposition to the proposal expressing concerns the project is providing only the minimum amount of affordable housing required concern about the loss of pdr 8 thousand misquoted and the 40 parking spaces is too high for the transit corridor the department has sense publication of the packets received 5 other letters in opposition related to the height of the building, the dental. >> of the building and neighborhood context and light to the joining property and the traffic concerns and noise

the department has also received a request from the community to continue this item to consider the implementation of the mission interim controls and how this project is respond to by community that concludes my presentation. i'm available to answer any questions >> thank you project sponsor. >> can i get the overhead jonas. >> sfgovtv will - >> thank you pursue thank you, commissioner steve from mary tell above the project sponsor this site is really well located for mixed use development adjacent to muni lines a half block from jackson square and from the castro shopping center

gym and others services the block itself concession a mixed use of residential and part of blocks are zoned rh3 and the rest is umu it the occupied by the 10 thousand square feet commercial building with two 5 thousand afghan uses no dwelling units on the project and not cause indirect displacement the mission interim controls summarizes that the housing sediment e development is needed in the mission the consistent with the interim controls into both of the autopsy will be compromised and safeway a national automatic

glass and u.s. automobile body the owners are retiring and i a they've received a general offer in retirement we've demonstrated the response many automobile body shops in the immediate neighborhood and its services will be available to the community pages 15 and 16 scenarios the pdr loss in the mission states that the loss are modest totally 2 thousand plus square feet this project contribution is less than 2 percent of cumulative in the pdr and identified in the eastern neighborhoods the project proposes 53 dwelling units including 5 broemz as discussing and 18 two bedroom unit and has onsite inclusionary

housing and with the prop c the onsite for this tier two was increased to 17 want 5 percent resulting in the omitted bmr the 9 units are at no cost to the city and prior to prop c it was 16 percent or 8 unit consistent with the interim controls the project affordable housing is higher than when the project was initiated and the umu zoning was enacted it look at the state dense density bonus we implored that and the density bonus will not make sense it is density at 6 to 7 stories going higher is more expensive and cause shadowing on frank square it is consistent with the mission area plan, the umu controls and he

does mission interim controls and the height limit with modifications with the relocation of the rear yard and the exception of 8 units and a minor encroachment of the sidewalk for the panels we'll describe and more less than 17 floor height with the project on the street the department is in support and approved the project design we ask you approve them as well and as kimberly mentions a shadow approval before you the project casts a small mom of the shadows certain dies after 5:45 p.m. and it is landscaped and no new shade on the successor fold frank square is a

park with current showed load of 8.8 percent it increases that by a narrow percentage at a hearing the rec and park department concerned the small shadows will not have is an admin verse. >> the recent approval an increase by over twice the amount of a shadow nicole we approved the 0.zero increase were we acknowledge asking for a .3 percent from 58 to 62 percent we understand there are a few condominium owners on the street hero in opposition and on the basis of a shadow on their decks

please keep in mind overseeing decks are adjacent to the 6 feet deep rear yard such they'll have solar assess those condo owners were made aware before they purchased i have correspondence from my clients and is lions share brokers confirm we've provided the project plans to the brokers before those unit went on sale the interim controls have full build out to maximum housing production reducing the height of the building is in direct conflict i'll introduce you to the project architect to walk you through the design. >> good evening commissioner my name is juan junior i'm with

the earth next to me is the project designer we're pleased to present the project to you today, the mission is the distinct landmark building today, the mission is better than known for festivals and parades and arts and music informed and restaurants scenes it has the largest concentration of murals in the city done by local artists they and i donor buildings and walls and fences one can take a walk and sense the colorful artwork with this frame of reference we wish the concept for the mick the natural

nationality we consider this melting pot of san francisco it gives the mission the unique character the essence we wish do convey the proposed building design with the regular facade in a rich color is consistent with the artworks together as a whole each vertical element represents, if you will, the diverse ethnic and people that resides in the mission the new building will relate to the colorful structures with the mix - omi the contribution it will have a visual interests it creates a special identity with a unique imagine of its own in the neighborhood it recognizes the centuries of the location along the 16th

street and the transit corridors and includes a bulb out with the better streets plan and the building envelope following the pattern the adjacent residential buildings provides the maximize closer to the rear yard pagers and the ground floor offices 6 thousand plus commercial retail and pdr used and an 90 perspective use for the frontages which will enhance the connection between the public and private areas as well as encourage positive activities it will audio 53 residential unit to the city's horticulturalist and 40 parks and bicycle spaces and has we

present this on behalf of the project sponsor and that concludes my presentation. i'm available to answer any questions. >> (calling names). >> good afternoon commissioner you have tenacity anyway basically, i wrote a letter. i'm sorry. >> i'm sorry, i got hero a little bit late but speak right now about the design elements of this and the way i feel it didn't fit into the neighborhood character at all i'm an artist and have to look at this from a

aesthetic point of view this is what the neighborhood looks like this is the double bay as you can see the building next to it an extension of the entire block is the same height buildings all over if you look at this other photograph hero this is the back of the street the one side of the bake side if florida strait a lot of sun in the private family-sized homes that are old victorian and see how that looks at right hero it operationally is going into the double area so this is just to show you what is actually here now and all of the colors in the neighborhoods are pretty to day the building are not really

radically designed with shapes and colors so the idea bringing this into the building and the neighborhood is pretty jarring the top of the building will be next to hear the one that looks like you know the victorian that was built and this is how how over it and it beacon hill i decided it looked at a lamp i found the lamp and basically would recycle for the designers do rethink entirely the appearance for the sake of the people in the neighborhood this is to give you as that idea the historical elements of the neighborhood if so the double day across the street from the stadium at baseball stadium in the city so this is a very kind

of historical neighborhood even though this is smokeless oh, it was all industrial that was a mixed neighbor old victorian old brick buildings this is our park the park right there and i will hand those to you, you should have gotten in my e-mail sorry i was late getting it out i had so many letters to write >> thank you. >> next speaker, please. >> any other speakers. >> good evening, commissioners mission president for the

development agency i want to thank you for considering and commissioner vice president richards to considering the continuance of this project because this is will be the first a project subject to the interim controls and when we worked together to have the control thank you, commissioners to have more time and information i don't think that the - they're providing enough information to make a good decision about this project and not comparable with the neighborhood around we would like to have more time to discuss and get information want to see about the displacement they're going to displace two viable businesses a priority for mayor ed lee to preserve the pdr

space we'll continue losing this is not enough that affordable housing is provided and like to see another report by providing supply you're helping the neighborhood even the design is colorful and it is like i appreciate all tcos about the commission but - i really appreciate and encourage you to continue this project until we have the information about the displacement and being part of this project that will effect the whole neighborhood thank you. >> thank you, mr. romero. >> next speaker, please. >> good evening, commissioners director rahaim i have a few comments i realize

this is our first crack at the interim controls we'll appreciate an opportunity to review it and have a week to talk about that and see where we think we are i want to share community thoughts and concerns generally speaking like to see the potential impacts of the project noted throughout to help the planning commission to have more information was making a decision for example, the staff report didn't seem to include some of the most important to the community protection policies for pdr having to do with with the mission plan even though this missionary plan is in the development part of the report we want to see some of that included we wanted to talk about the 20 percent pdr retention likely the mroopt recognizing the pdr is important we thank

you and good start and see those retentions at a higher level due to the large scale of pdr loss we were concerned while the staff analysis is concluded did agreement with the developer the pdr businesses were not adapted we think, in fact, in a true sense they were it is true they're saying from what we know they're okay with the retirement and such but still two neighborhood businesses lost withhold to see that noted hero we thought that the project and the sponsor understandably cherry picks the report i mean the economic analysis report that support their project we think that is important that the staff provide a counter if possible for example accredit other parts of same reports that

in fact, make at opposite conclude for example, citing a recent berkley study it suggests that some of the market-rate projects cause a level of displacement in the neighborhood if this was note that would bring a balance to the report and critiquing an example we're troubled by was the staff report it corrected the ted egan report that concludes that market-rate explicit negatively impact by the market-rate doesn't negatively impact homes sales this is internal different and weigh in on whether the variances granted in the pdr loss and such things in that context is 9 developer giving enough back to the community. >> thank you, sir.

>> next speaker, please. >> good evening commissioner i'm veronica was hired by the project sponsor to work with the. >> unfortunately, if you're part of project sponsors team our opportunity was in the first 10 minutes. >> i'm reading letters i can't speak on behalf of neighbors. >> no on behalf of neighborhoods you can submit it in our hovered by the project sponsor you're part of their team. >> you can submit the letters over the rail please we'll definitely look at them. >> is there any additional public comment? >> sir. >> good evening commissioners i'm nike run a small electrical

firm iuoe on valley street in the mission doing this more 40 years and seen the neighborhood change dramatically with this project san francisco changes i'm trying to hold when i first saw those projects i was dead set against them but san francisco is changing at a rate and people are moving hero at a rate to support those housing projects so thank you thank you. >> next speaker, please. >> hi sorry i'm running a bit late i was called previously but outside of the believe so i'm a neighbor of the building that is proposed i live on 16th street so sorry i ran over here so first a comment that was made

earlier we were actually not given all the full delays before we purchased the condo not how tall only a building but the brokers have led us to believe not a taller building than there we're excited the building is replaced it was previously noting an auto body shop however, the health and orientation relative to the surrounded building will have a negative effect on the neighbors while the in any height limit for the mission neighborhood is in lion with the proposal the building won't stand isolation like other building that is on -

this is directly adjacent to it sorry for the units on 16th street is not my concern it is the shape of building so the fact it is an l-shaped combined with a taller one about block the light into the units window which are my only windows they conducted a shadow study our light will be blocked as early as 2 o'clock in the summer and 1:00 p.m. in the winter the two units are identical and my neighbors are negatively effected in the same way we don't want to conclude obviously we know the city is in need of

housing we think there can a different design from the says that a oriented along the south side of the building without the southeast corner as planned the effects will be mitigated we'll be in favor a greater height for more favorable and extra height on the north side and have a less negative effect on the neighbors thank you any to the speakers in this project. >> public comment is closed. director rahaim. >> thank you, commissioners so as mentioned there has been as a members the community a request for a continuance open this project for a week staff is sponsored that this is the first

project to incorporate all the analyze required in the interim controls invocation you'll hear about an informational item on the map 2020 process and the recommends from that and you know no secret this most challenge component is market-rate in the mission we think that it unlike it had been useful to give the community extra time to review the reports make additional comments to the staff and commission and we are exploring that is a balancing act how far in advance when the information a come in

we are trying to figure that out but looking at that option up on the important component of larger issue we're dealing with what is the role of market-rate development we're having discussions and continue it over the next few weeks so we are bottom line we're supporting the request for at least a one week continuance. >> wanted to make some comments i hope we focus a good portion in deliberation on the application of the interim controls as we see how they are working or not working given the feedback from the director and the community and items that are liquor jumping out on projects small or larger than fine across town we suggest you let the project sponsor but we'll be hearing the project technique we hope to continue thank you exposure. >> the most important issue

the 2020 plan as director rahaim outlined there are a couple of comments i'd like to make many are architecture i'm wondering if we shouldn't defer that i'm not interested if depicting the more important speaks apart and wait until that is done and make additional comments i believe that the facade and architecture needs work to relatively in expensive plastic building with earth that makes look more than it is i think there need better attention and better materials the colors don't do it i had to laughter with the analogy to should the glass lamp as an example i thought of dutch paternity by the name of - to

lend us his colors and mains. >> for this building i think this area needs serious attention not only for the policies that are in the 2020 but also what time we dedicate to make sure we're delivering an appropriate building at this moment my concerns the facade and materials including the detailing is not meeting what i'm expecting hero >> commissioner antonini. >> i agree with commissioner moore in terms of the facade and materials ii think that unfortunately, the architects inquisitive a lot of reigns far the multi colors we have in the mission is you know either masonry or stucco should wood

and some of those materials are more compatible in the mission the mission is more comparable with the tile roof and this type of facade it tend to deemphasis the health of the building that 68 feet it it would be changed to let in more light to the neighbors but as a square with the way it calls attention it looks burn that is i hope we have having it continued this was well done and you know we talked earlier how it takes so long to get things built in san francisco if so enough we go 10 years on the eastern neighborhoods plan and we pass

some rolls and then we start to have very little built in the mission district sense we passed the eastern neighborhoods and on top of we were asked to do interim controls which we've done and the report by staff expresses a tier type of project that didn't displace any housing this is not an issue, it talks about the two spiritual uses that are no longer going to be through one of which it retire and the second one is abrogating within san francisco san francisco that is exactly what we want to happen and plenty of the uses in the neighborhood not like we're taqueria away uses not duplicated within the mission district and the loss of

the two percent is the loss we remember exactly where we were asked to have housing that placing replacing pdr in the umu this project completely conforms as far as the controls i read the report about the indirect displacement and the building of now hours slows down displacement it make sense if you think about it it and can find studies those are items you'll not know for sure we'll set down rules those are the conditions and ought to build it

you know so i'm in favor of the project and happy except for the design in between 202008 and 201351 percent of unit built in the mission were affordable not like have not been amounts of market-rate many projects have been detailed we're finally getting to approves this is should be quickly approved with any caveat i think it has design issues and saving leaving room for pdr it didn't have to and some retail i think if they get the design right that will activate a site that you know not doing anything. >> i'll step in next, sir if you can come to the podium i'd like appreciate it. >> so you you know what are in

the interim controls. >> you think i do. >> 7 hearings already if this document in our pathway in your opinion how are those working what do you think. >> i recognize the midsize have less stringent requirement visually two levels if up summarize the comments some of the things we've explained inaccurate like the sightings of the ted egan report that accredits the statement doesn't match up with the telling about home prices not rental prices it is tricky for the staff to stay on the words to make sure and annex level we'll provide for

balance for the planning commissioners to consider first place the developer; right? i'll approve all the studies that support my idea and the challenges can the staff find the time to look at the report and sections that say that draw a different conclusion you can take a note that some draw a different conclusion and, yes we can built our way out of the market-rate housing and therefore those masters support decreasing the market pressures and other people might say another studies equally says what the new unit low create blocking displacement impact we want to see that laid out before you the commissioners to have all the information to balance your decision you and i had lunch on tuesday i said i met with professor from

uc berkley i guess an adjunct professor did the displacement and chinatown and san francisco i think when you and i talked i think i said the professor said to me there is such a thing as any demand when a nauseated is gentrified the challenge you and i talked about the tools at our disposal what affordable housing but no tools that actually speak to rather than conceptually as a conversation market-rate produces ailed affordable there's a challenge on the conversations how you get our arms around i think if you can

see affordable housing is demand by market we can get an understanding what kind of induced demand what the percentage of the induced demand i think outside the box speaks to some of the other speakers will we get it by next i'm not sure but i said collect the data and show us something everything else is deciphering i appreciate our comments and support a continuance of a week and challenge the staff on near impossible from the coming months maybe you and i should go to berkley and see side chapel. >> the research is ongoing great research i think that professor chaplain their initial

conversations a few weeks ago i know the neighborhood looked this they think the man makes a difference at a region level and helps the crisis they don't dr. the specific data yet to actually suggest a project has the impact at the very local listed level and more researcher on that it does not isn't not in hand there's a lot of anecdotal evidence that might be the case but no localized data of an individual development. >> and the challenges we have you're talking to the right people. >> the other work as well as and i think you know if i could i mean, there's genl