philadelphia in 1948 to establish a medical practice in the hunter's point area, which had become a black enclave when 27,000 african-americans moved to the city to look for wartime employees. dr. coleman was one of the first african-american physicians in san francisco. in 1959, he constructed 6301 3rd street for a medical clinic. the original team of physicians known as san francisco medical associates, is pictured here with dr. coleman, who is in the bottom, left-hand corner. opening in 1960, it reflected

the styles of the period. dr. coleman was celebrated as a local pioneer. he worked tirelessly to achieve racial equity within the healthcare system and medical profession. and advocated for the environmental justice causes. the center causes bayview-hunter's point. and it's led by physicians and staff that knew and were mentored by dr. coleman. the subject property meets three of the four established priorities for designation. these include properties in underrepresented areas. the properties with strong cultural or ethnic associations

or buildings of the modern era. we have two letters of support for designation. no known opposition. the h.b.c. briefs that it meets eligibility. this concludes my presentation. we're hope to answer any questions. >> supervisor tang: thank you. questions and comments? okay. seeing none, let's -- oh. sorry. colleagues, no questions or comments. now i will call public comment. you may come up. >> good afternoon, supervisors. i'm jason finch, senior vice president with new south parking. this clinic is one of the organizations that we work strongly with. we've donated transportation. we're conducting job fairs and finding paths for employment for the folks they work with. we're here to support the initiative and the important work they do in the community.

thank you. >> supervisor tang: thanks so much. any other members of the public that wish to comment on item 5, please come on up. >> good afternoon, supervisors. i'm pat coleman. and it's no coincidence that i'm related to dr. coleman. and i'm here in support of the landmark designation for the building at 6301 3rd street. in the last '40s, my father left in the east coast because he heard that there was a need for a physician in a small town in georgia. unfamiliar with the customs, he went to the gas station and neglected to call a young teenage whipper-snapper sir, he was a captain in the air force and medical doctor, and he received a punch in the nose. at that point, he said, i'm

headed to california, to serve the people that come to build the shipyards and ended up in bayview-hunters point. i don't know what happened to that small town in georgia, but what i do know is what happened in bayview-hunters point, where he served for 54 years, 24,000 or more patients, many multigenerational and many for free. my father's service to the community is iconic and i think when i'm in the bayview, i never fail to have someone come up to me to tell me a story about how my father treated them. so he's history in the bayview district. and very worthy of the landmark preside designation for the medical center. >> i'm marlena watkins.

i was raised in the bayview community. i remember when the clinic opened and it was a family neighbor in bayview. dr. coleman helped many people. he served the community and he saw a lot of people and didn't charge them. we need that clinic in bayview. and we need to let them continue the work that dr. coleman started. thank you. >> supervisor tang: thank you. next speaker, please. >> good afternoon, supervisors. i'm patty rodriguez, chief operating officer at bayview hunters point clinic, which is at the arthur coleman medical center. our goal is to provide innovative health and wellness services. it has been an honor for us to be invited by pat to be at the

arthur coleman medical center and here to support the designation of an historical landmark for the medical center because we take pride in continuing the legacy of dr. coleman and what he did and he was ahead of his time. that's what we want it do, continue his legacy. thank you. >> supervisor tang: any other members of the public? please come on up. >> madam chair, i'm the senior pastor of true hope and we just celebrated 50 years of pastoring, the 12th of this month. i come here with excitement, with joy, to speak on behalf of landmark being developed for coleman medical center. is with a patient of dr. coleman for several years, prior to his

demising. and this is the third hearing concerning this project, the board of supervisors, planning. and the last point i would like to make is many times i have spoke before the board of supervisors and planning commission. i have never seen a group so excited about the project to the planning commission to the point that they would push one another and it was a unanimous vote. so i'm sure that you, this committee, and i think the recommendation, can be more enthusiastic. you need something positive at bayview-hunters point. you talk about the crime-ridden neighborhoods. and so i would appreciate if you

would do a greater job in approving this project and recommending it to the board of supervisors. thanks very much. >> supervisor tang: thank you. >> hello, board of supervisors. i'm a resident of the area and patient of the clinic. it's just as exciting to see something in bayview become an anchor. dr. coleman's story is amazing. when he saw patients, he went back to school to become a lawyer to help his patients. the man was amazing. having something like that in the community and people of color to get healthcare in an environment that understands them, that's amazing. so i hope that we consider making this a landmark. hopefully it will even be a legacy business. thank you.

i also want to thank supervisor cohen's office, she's been instrumental in aiding through the process. thank you. >> supervisor tang: any other members of the public that want to comment on item 5? seeing none, it's closed. perhaps we can get a motion on this item. >> supervisor kim: positive recommendation to the full board. >> supervisor tang: without objection. all right. new we're joined by supervisor peskin. madam clerk, if we can call call 6. >> clerk: item 6 ordinance amending the planning code cannabis retail and medical cannabis dispensaries in chinatown. >> supervisor tang: thank you. welcome, supervisor peskin. >> supervisor peskin: thank you. last year when we were working

on our retail cannabis delivery, i indicated that i would be back relative to the amendment before you today. i want to thank you, madam chair, and supervisor kim, for your co-sponsorship, along with supervisor fewer. and i think you will find in the legislative file a letter from the community tenants association that outlined some of the concerns of the community, which for the record, are broader in nature than the way that community concerns were recommended and responsibly so by advocates and perpetuated by the media last year. but they really center around concerns about gentrification and rents that chinatown has been fighting. i am on record being 100% access

to cannabis be it medical or retail in nature. having said that, district 3 is very well served. we have the second highest number of existing permits and 14 new pending permits. so given the geographic nature of the third supervisorial district, exempting out chinatown will not diminish access as we have pending applications throughout the district. finally, to supervisor safai, i always love it extol the planning commission support for the legislation in so far as they have not supported this legislation, will not be extolling the planning commission's recommendation or lack thereof as to this legislation. i also want to thank our former colleague and now mayor london breed for her support of this

legislation. and i'm available to answer any questions. >> supervisor tang: thank you, supervisor peskin. yes, aaron starr, planning department. >> good afternoon. aaron starr, legislation affairs. this would prohibit retail and medical cannabis from chinatown. planning commission heard the item and voted to not approve. >> supervisor peskin: i extol it when it's a recommendation for approval. this is tolling for disapproval. if passed, the mayor has indicated that she will sign it with zeal and it will become law with all the respect to the

planning members that didn't approve it. >> supervisor tang: okay. any members of the public that wish to speak on item 6? okay. wow. no one. seeing none, public comment is closed. all right. can we get a motion? >> supervisor kim: motion to move forward with recommendation to the full board. >> supervisor tang: we're in the middle of the vote. >> do we have to amend the planning commission? >> planning commission held a hearing. that blank is fine. the board must, however, make its own finding of consistency with the general plan. and we can work with the

supervisors' office on that piece. board and planning made a number of findings with the original cannabis ordinance and i think it's largely going to be a matter of working that out. >> supervisor peskin: so we can amend those at the full board? >> correct. >> supervisor tang: okay. supervisor safai? >> supervisor safai: i want to be added a as co-sponsor and say that i appreciate the theme of respecting the district supervisors' issues when it comes to issues like this. hopefully we'll have further conversation in the months to come. >> supervisor tang: i recall another supervisor wanting to do the same. with that, we'll move this forward to the full board without objection. >> supervisor peskin: thank you, colleagues. >> supervisor tang: madam clerk, can you call 7-11 together? >> clerk: amending the general plan central soma making

environmental findings. item 8, amending the zoning maps for the soma social use district and other amendments to consistent with the soma plan and appropriate findings. item 9, ordinance amending business and tax riegistratioie provide a streamlined approval process for certain housing projects within districts with an expedited board of appeals process. item 10, amending planning codes soma with appropriate findings. item 11, amending special tax financing law to authorize tax of facilities and services related to the isn't central son

with other amendments. >> supervisor tang: thank you. i will turn it over to supervisor kim. >> supervisor kim: thank you, colleagues. this is the beginning, at least at the board of supervisors of what i hope will be not too c convoluted of a process. i've had the honor of prose -- presiding over central soma and now this, i think i've got it covered, along with special d.b.a.s including treasure island and mission bay. it's been 10 years in the making. it was one of the first briefings i got as a member of the board of supervisors in 2011. i thought we would pass it before the end of my first term. now it's nearing the end of my

second term and i'm happy that we're finally hearing this here at the land use committee. i want to recognize a number of individuals at the planning department, including john ram, our director, who is here to present today, josh whitsky and lisa chen and maya -- i don't know her last name. maya small, for your tremendous amount of work on this plan. there's a lot of technical details, which i've really been swimming through over the last month. i will be making, i think, about 48 amendments today. we will have to continue this to next week. i will have more amendments to introduce next monday which i will go over in broad categories at the end of the planning department presentation. i also want to recognize sara

phillips, anna dagna, peter milgenic, mark blake. not everyone is on this list. and i apologize, because i talk to everybody by their first name, so i apologize if i don't get your last name correctly. a couple of things, when this plan began, it began as a way of increasing office and jobs in the city and county of san francisco. we were setting this during the time of a recession and also wanted to grow employment opportunities for san franciscans and bay area and south of market, where we're building the subway, the neighborhood where we will be building more jobs. throughout the last 10 years, we've been working on a number

of policy frameworks and goals that we wanted central soma to achieve. i'm really proud that even before the plan came to us today, we were able to work out some goals and not fight over it as it often happens. the first is proposition that our office passed in 2014, proposition k, which was to achieve 33% affordable housing. this plan has ambitiously taken on this goal and i'm thankful to the planning staff for working to ensure that we would hit 33% affordable housing. second, we didn't want to lose p.d.r. it's important that we grow and maintain other types of jobs, whether it's in retail, nonprofit, arts, manufacturing, other living-wage jobs that

don't necessarily require the same degrees and education as office jobs do. as i mentioned, this plan really began as a study of how we can accommodate jobs as the bay area grows and a transit-rich district that includes the new central subway, caltrain, and hopefully an extension through the district plan and maybe even eventually high-speed rail one day. understanding it could be the location where a lot of our public transportation networks would meet, we wanted to accommodate more jobs. over the time that this plan has been studied, we have entered into a housing crisis that i think would have been even difficult to anticipate in a city that's always not created enough housing. so over the last couple of months, our office had been working very closely with the planning department and our community in increasing the

plan. as you all know, we've increased capacity from the 7,100 originally stated from 8,300. this -- we're also, and one of the amendments that i will make today, is to rezone parts of the plan to maximize additional residential housing opportunities, since this is what we're hearing the most today. and we're rezoning north of harrison and south from sally to m.u.g. sorry about that. and we are also working on a separate ordinance to permit 100% affordable housing on sally lots in south of market.

without the plan, parcels would be $500 million compared to $2.1 billion we're introducing today. that's $500 million in traffic infrastructure and $185 million in open space. it's not important that we just grow jobs and housing, but also that we grow the community where it's pedestrian and bike safety, transportation infrastructure, parks, rec centers and a swimming pool, coming to south of market. as i mentioned, i will introduce about 48 amendments today. it's hard for me to keep track because we've added some, deleted some. and then another set of amendments. i will bring up some large policy pieces that we will be discussing as the plan moves forward that i will not discuss

right now, ranging to requests from the community around anti-displacement efforts, as well as good jobs, ensuring the jobs that we create in central soma are jobs that go to our residents and i will mention some of those afterwards. i will start by asking the planning department to come up with the general presentation on the central soma plan. finally, i want to thank -- this has gone through many staff members, but april zonronski and bobby hang, to thank them so much, because it was a heavy lift. it is a lot more work to do and a lot more staff members that will get involved. without further ado --

>> thank you very much, supervisors. i'm thrilled to be here today to talk about this plan, which inde indeed, we have been working on for the better part of the a decade. i would like to think this plan has taken the best lessons from all the other plans, and we think we have learned over the last decade about the best and not-so-good components and learned how to improve them. we're here to present the central soma plan. lisa chen will present the bulk of the plan. i want to thank a few other folks who are here and some who are and some aren't. mayor's office of community development, key player. sfmta was involved. recreation and parks department, especially on the public

benefits. office of public finance as well. if i may, in addition to the planning staff you mentioned, want to mention a few names from other parts of the department, especially those in the environmental impact report, which is necessary to make this happen. jessica range, project manager, liz white, chris kern, and many others worked on this complicated e.i.r. an effort like this takes a team, a big team, and it's a complicated plan. and then finally, it's very important to mention the community folks, the nonprofits, business owners, all who have shaped this plan and it's evolved extensively over the last several years. so the central soma plan we believe will create a mixed-use neighborhood, leveraging the city's investment in the subway

line. we believe that the growth that this plan enables will be 5 million to 6 million square feet of office. and 8,000 units of housing. that growth will be leveraged with $2.2 billion public benefit package, to create an inclusive neighborhood. it will fund many needs, walkable, bikable streets, social services, and half of the public benefit package is for affordable housing, which is the first time we've been able to say that within one of our plan areas, i think. the process has in earnest been seven years. in addition to the smaller community meetings, there's been 10 open houses and other events and, of course, dozens of

meetings with neighborhood groups. we do believe, and i know there's been a lot of discussion in the last couple of years, the city's economy has changed dramatically in the time we've been doing this plan. as i walked over here today, i thought about the fact that we approved, you approved, six years ago this month, transit center plan. when you approved that plan and what would be the sales force power, there was serious concern that it would never be built because no one would lease that much office space in a single tower. and that was only six years ago. and how the world has changed unexpectedly and we did not anticipate the pace of change that's happened over the last six years. we believe this is the best place in the region to accommodate that growth. and we believe that we can accommodate a substantial number of housing units here in this

plan area and this will be one of the densest neighborhoods in the city. and it will have more housing units than transportation and rincon combined. so that's not small. we're strongly supportive, as was the planning commission, it creating the state's first housing sustainability district, which was put forward by david chu. we believe that half the housing units can be processes through that mechanism, which we think will increase the pace of new housing production in the area. as you know, the plan maximizes studied 8,300 units. i know you are working on adding to that, supervisor kim. that's great. we've been looking at how to add 200 to 300 more.

several projects that we believe can be entitled soon after the plan is approved, propose to gift land to the city for affordable housing. one of the advantages of the plan, the large development sites will include land for affordable housing. in a city as densely developed as we are, land for affordable housing is often what we face as a critical issue. with that, thank you for your time. thank you, supervisor kim, for introducing this with former mayor farrell. and i will hand this over for a more complete presentation. thank you. >> thank you, john, supervisor kim, members of the land use committee. if i could get the overhead, and i've submitted packets for you as well as letters from the department of housing and

community development and the state. state.

>> we have an implementation plan that describes the action in responsible agencies to realize the plan's vision and the implementation matrix and the guide to urban design and key development site guidelines, resolution and ordinances to establish the district. and finally we have the creation of the housing sustainable district in central soma to create a ministerial review process for some housing projects under ab73. the plan's vision, as we know is succinct. our aim is to create a sustainable and environmentally. supervisor kim have already mentioned how this area is an ideal place for growth.

we hope to leverage the city significant investment in the central subway and transform this neighborhood into a new hub for housing and jobs. we've a three-prong strategy to get there. accommodate demand for jobs and housing to change the zone to go allow more growth. we will leverage this growth for fees and taxes to fund much needed infrastructure and services and third help preserve and enhance neighborhood character. it's building on what is already great about seem a. including diversity of residents and jobs and a lot of p.d.r. jobs, truly eclectic mix and it's a hub for culture and night life. at the same time, we want to address what is not so great about the neighborhood including high present, dangerous streets, a distinct lack of parks and greenery and inefficient zoning to fund public improvements. this philosophy is 'em badded n the goals. it's a chapter in the plan document with policies and

implementtation measures. goals 1-3 are accommodated growth and maintaining affordable housing strategy and how the plan will improve transportation, parks and environmental sustainability. goal 7 is about historic and cultural preservation and goal eight is about the urban design and character of the neighborhood. as has been already mentioned, it's been a long journey to get to this point. the planning process began in 2011. since that time there's to plans published in 2013 and 2016. during this time, we also conducted the environmental impact report. all of this culminated in the adoption of the plan on may tenth. and as was already noted, during this period, we spoke with thousands of people to really help shape the plans' vision. including 15 public workshops and events, 17 hearings at the planning, and as well as two hearings here at land use

committee. and here again it's just a list, a partial list of the many advocacy groups and neighborhood organizations that we've met with or presented over the years. in terms of the vision of the plan, the next slide shows what the area could look like before and after central soma. this image shows existing conditions. and here is plan development under central soma. development under the plan is in yellow while the area in blow show surrounding development approved or under construction. development is concentrated in the southwest portion of the plan, primarily industrial area where many of the large development sites are located. and in the northeast corner closer to downtown. the plan would create 16 million square feet of new development, split between non residential and housing uses. this would yield enough space for 33,000 jobs and 8300 housing units. this is a more detailed look at the change in development capacity.

this map combines our zoning and height changes. as you can see on the left, there is limited potential for development. about half of the area zoned for industrial and most other areas allow moderate development of 30 to 85 feet. if central soma is adopted we could see this increase significantly adding mid rise and highrise buildings of 130 to 400 feet in some locations. while the prior images show the physical elements of the plan, the public benefits is really about the human element. it's about the services and infrastructure that will serve the people of soma now and in the future. as was already mentioned the plan will quadruple the benefits so $2.2 billion during the plans build out which is anticipated at 25 years. in addition, the gross would raise $1 billion in additional general fund taxes. this is an estimate that's based on the best information available but the actual amounts raised would depend on the timing and extent of the development projects.

here over the next few slides are the public benefits that can be funded by the plan. this list was developed through a process working extensively with our partner agencies, policymakers and the community. the public benefits package is non binding. actual expenditures are subject to board approval and this is all-out lined in the implementation program document. as was mentioned half of the revenues will go towards affordable housing to reach our goal of 33% affordable units and 500 million for transit. we'll fund $185 million for parks and rec facilities for both exiting and new facilities. $180 million will go towards building and preserving p.d.r. space to ensure no net loss, due to the plan. $110 million will go to complete streets to transform the streets into bike and thorough fares. 110 million to cultural preservation to fund non-profit

services as well as to preserve the old mint and historic gems. 70 million to environmental sustainable to make the neighborhood a world-class example of green and resilient development and $65 million will go to schools and childcare to serve the growing population. here is another way of looking at the public benefits package shown by funding source. over a third of public benefits will be provided on site by projects, such as affordable housing. the rest comes from a mix of existing and new development requirements. these new requirements are outlined on the next two slides. here are the new fees and taxes for residential development. projects will be required to pay these in addition to any existing requirements such as the eastern neighborhood fee. each parcel getting up under the plan is assigned to a development tier depending on how much an increase they're getting and the requirements are scaled accordingly. the new fees include central

soma community infrastructure fee, which would fund transit. the new mel a rooze and construction of non-profit facilities. here say list of new funding sources from non residential developments. non residential pay central soma fee. in addition they will be required to pay for transferable development rights, publicly-owned public open spaces -- excuse me. privately owned public spaces and p.d.r. and another critical element of our public benefits package is the key development sites. they are large sites where we have crafted more site-specific exceptions and zoning requirements in exchange for providing public benefits above and beyond what is required in the plan. the planning department has been working with these sites for several years to hone these

proposals and the public benefits provided. which fall into the categories listed here. they're providing affordable housing, parks and recreation facilities, community facilities, low rent or extra p.d.r. as well as bike and pet improvements. the housing sustainable district is critical to our public benefits package streamlining housing projects that chose to provide on site affordable units and use wage or union labor. as adopted it would be the first in the state under assembly member david chu's bill. it would create projects to receive 120-day ministerial review establishing the district would make the city eligible for in sen tive payments from the state. last week we received a letter from the california department of housing and community development stating they have done an initial evaluation of our proposal and found it to be consistent with 8073.

it's part of the public record for your reference. the bill requires the district provide 20% affordable units, central soma will provide 33% and that the area have anna proved e.i. r. for specific projects, the bill requires developments to provide 10% on site affordable units and they use either prevailing wage or skilled and workforce labor depending on their size. central soma would add local criterion projects lo not be eligible unless they're 100% affordable. properties with existing housing and mixed use projects that include over 25,000 square feet of office are also not eligible. projects would need to comply with the central soma e.i.r.

the 120-day clock begins and it would go through a public hearing prime to approval. when approved, projects must sikh seek a permit or extension. this is the use it or lose it clause. i also wanted to highlight the special text financing law amendments before you. these were also heard last month at the rules committee. in chapter 45 section 10. these amendments are being made so the special tax direct will add eligible uses for tax revenues. these include but are not limited to grants to non-profit or public social service organizations. some of our environmental sustainability investments including air quality mitigation and technical studies and park programming and activation. to clarify today you are not acting on these specific category but amending within the code so the subsequent special

tax district formation documents will be able to site to these spending catagories. this is technical amendment. so that was the whirlwind plan overview. i'm going to highlight the key areas where the plan has changed since it was last heard at land use and transportation committee. they fall into three catagories. jobs housing balance. public benefits package and development requirements. under jobs housing balance, we've heard a lot under this area. we've heard a desire to maximize housing production. especially affordable units. we heard we should streamline the production process and the review process as much as possible. and that we should protect and produce affordable housing early on in the plan through aggressive site acquisition. in response, we've made changes to the plan. we have modified the zoning to add 20% more units up to the maximum allowed in the e.i.r. of

8300 and we have explored room on top of that as will be discussed later. we have developed the housing sustainability district to streamline housing production. we've worked with some of the key sites that are planning to dedicate land for affordable housing and we are working with to develop a strategy to accelerate affordable housing acquisition and development. amy chan is here if you have any questions about that. the next set of feedback we heard was related to the public benefits package. the request were at follows. affordable housing was already mentioned. provide funding for social and cultural programming. plan for future capitol needs. since the redevelopment area there is set to expire. fund neighborhood cleaning and maintenance and work with the school district to support existing schools and plan for future growth. support development of good jobs such as living wage and unionized jobs for low income households. and keep the conditional use

authorization for replacement which is required under proposition x. here is a snapshot of what has changed. we have increase housing over all which has resulted in 230 more affordable units up to 2900 total. we were also able to allocate funding to meet a number of the questions mentioned that were shown in this table. if you recall from last year, there was a 70 million-dollar t.b. d. bucket in the tax so we've been able to allocate that to the uses that were requested. and finally we added a public policy goal supporting good jobs in the general plan amendments. here are items that have not been fully resolved as they may require discussion or legislative action. we've heard from stakeholders to re-evaluate the eastern neighborhoods community advisory committee or c.a.c. as well as the soma stabilization fund to understand

if it would make sense to reorganize and merge elements of these two groups to create a single c.a.c. this was actually one of the recommendations of the planning commission, however, this would be a pretty complex undertaking and would require trailing legislation. staff are continuing to work with the school district to assess future school capacity needs and how growth may be accommodated and we're happy to discuss conversations if you like. the good jobs goal has been added to the general plan amendments however it might need to be flushed out through trailing legislation. and finally, i'll just note the conditional use requirement for p.d.r. replacement was not reinstated. as we feel it would add unnecessary process since p.d.r. will be required outright. the impact on housing and specifically the streamlining benefits we expect to see from the housing sustainable district. we estimate that 75% of parcels

that currently have active p.d.r. use may be eligible for streamlining. which would mean that the conditional use requirement would negate most of the benefit of this law. the last category we heard about was development requirements, first we know that the market has changed a lot since we did our financial analysis back in 2016 and now some projects are less feasibility particularly and rental housing. projects also express wanting greater flexibility and exception similar to our planned unit process. in response, we did drop the special tax on rental housing, which was 1.75 per square foot. however, we did not take the proposal to change the proposed zoning structure. we feel that this is in keeping with the commission's feedback and the goals of the plan. we did however add the potential for site-specific exceptions for the large key sites as part of the section 329 large product

authorization process. these exceptions would be reviewed on a project by project basis at the planning commission. finally i wanted to chose by highlighting a little bit of what is in the package of 35 recommendations adopted by the planning commission on may tenth. they were proposed by staff and recommended by commission. in the interest of time, i'm not going to go over them in detail but we're happy to answer questions. the categories of recommendations relate to the design standards and exceptions to allow flexibility and preserving good design. passenger and freight loading requirements to streamline and i will prove our current review practices. grandfathering for the city's transportation demand management or t.d.m. program to allow grandfathering for projects that have been in the pipeline for a long time. modifications to our active youth requirements on ground floors to allow for hotel uses.

allowing alternate uses in p.d.r. replacement space, including uses such as non-profit social services or other desirable uses. policies relate today our key development sites including crafting zoning exceptions to projects and adding a key site at 505 brennan street. the park fee rare and a one-acre park at 598 brandon street. establishment of the special tax district and allowing it to fund the soma stabilization fund and finally re-evaluating the structure and geography of the c.a.c. as was already mentioned. there are also a number of other clarifying non sub sta tive amendments. so this, in conclusion, here are the list of items before you. this concludes our presentation and staff are here to answer any questions. >> thank you so much.

i did forget to adjust how incredible it is that you've been able to take on the plan after steve who did spend 10 years working on it. thank you for coming up to speed so quickly and also helping me meddle through all the technical details of this plan as well. i just did want to state just members of the public and the land use committee knows one of the issues that was brought up in terms of the recommendations from the planning commission was grangrandfathering in the key ss that submitted their application before september 2016 to only meet 75% of the requirements in the t.d.m. policy. that amendment has not been included yet. it's not because i will not support it but i do think that there's still quite a bit of work that our office needs to do to understand the benefits and

value that we're con verring to these key sites. whether they can meet 100% of t.d.m. because that would be the ideal goal and so that conversation will be on going. so, are there other presentations from other members? from other departments? seeing none, i just want to mention a couple of larger policy areas that our office will be following up on and that will be a discussion here at land use committee that also came up. both through the planning commission hearing and over community meetings, the first is a good jobs program which i mentioned at the introduction which is to ensure we're not just creating thousands of jobs in the central soma area plan but that we're also creating a good pipeline of jobs for san francisco residents whether it is through the hotel jobs that

we're creating and janitor and security jobs developed through the office buildings and of course for our construction jobs and so we're working on trailing resolutions that would ask for a plan as a requirement of your major development through the central soma plan. second, the housing sustain ability and i'm excited about piloting in the central soma plan. we're working with the community around a number of different concerns. particularly around anti displacement efforts that the community wants to ensure in exchange for streamlining the process as of right housing projects within the central soma plan. it's important that we allow projects that are building housing to move forward. in particular, the fact that we are exceeding affordability requirements throughout the plan i think is an important point to

note. but we also want to make sure that we have a balance plan moving forward and so i will work through that process with the community. there is of course, the conflict with proposition x, which i authored, which we passed in 2016 and understanding that we would have to eliminate the c.u. requirement, which is a very important piece from the communities and how we can have that interface with h.s.d. that's still something that our offices is working out. i know at minimum, we will be requiring the c.u. for non residential projects. but we do need to figure out a way to eliminate for housing projects so we are modeling through that. third, we are still looking at anti displacement mitigation that can move alongside the central soma plan and i know that there are a variety of

ordinances that the community has been working on with other offices including a first right of refusal and that supervisor sandra fewer has authorized that she will be introducing, hopefully soon that can move alongside the soma plan. we are separating the c.a.c. which i strongly support, into two separate neighborhoods. one from east-central and another advising body which will be the mission, the waterfront, where as eastern neighborhood grows, i think it makes sense to have two citizen advisory bodies that recommends how to spend down fees and the south markets case, the upcoming c.f.d. funds which will generate a lot of new infrastructure as well as community benefits for the plan. there's a number of issues around key sites that we're

still working through. i am also holding on fees and land dedication back into key sites as part of their benefits. in part of my evaluation of the value we're conferring to key sites. and finally, working our way through another company ordinance around the community facility district to make sure we're putting forward the strongest e.f.d. planned for the city and for central soma. next week, i will introduce a series of amendments for key sites and large projects that were requested by the project sponsors. many of them do require referral to the planning commission so that is why they have not been introduced today. we will be working through those amendments next week. so, i believe i have gone through most of the major items that both policy wise and

technical that i wanted to ensure that members of the public and members of the land use committee understood. at this time, through the chair, i'd like to open up for public comment. >> great, public comment is now open. >> thank you, chair tang. i only have two cards in front of me but i know there are many other speakers for this item. first i have cynthia gomez of local 2, kevin carole of the hotel council and please just lineup to speak on item 7-11. >> all of the amendments --

>> thank you so much. >> good afternoon. supervisor kim, and to the other honorable supervisors, my name is catherine, i'm on the board of san francisco architectural heritage. today i'm representing heritage president mike bueller who couldn't be here but submitted a letter for your consideration. i'll summarize it. to say that of the many community benefits to be derived from the central soma plan, san francisco heritage is pleased to commend the city planning department for prioritizing reactizatioization of the mint. the old mint has potential to be

a community asset and anchor for neighborhood in transition. until recently, the mint was seriously neglected. the city assumed ownership from the government in 2002. in 2015, heritage successfully nominated the mint to the national historic preservations annual list of 11 most endangered historic sites. in 2016, the california historical society and the city formed a partnership to develop the long-term vision for the mint. the partnership has made great strides in activating and planning for revitalized mint. essential to the partnership and the mint's future restoration is the city's 20 million-dollar commitment through the central soma plan representing 1% of the total public benefit generated by the plan. in 2018, alone, central soma plan was considered at five

planning commission hearings, one historic preservations commission attended by dozens of advocates expressing strong support for the mint. what's most important, i think for this committee to know, is that nearly all planning commissioners and historic preservations commissioners called. the commission voted unanimousl- >> thank you. >> next speaker, please. >> good afternoon, i'm cynthia gomez here at local 2. i will acknowledge, first of all, this process has come through many years and probably dozen of hearings representing a great deal of hard work. in particular today, i wanted to

call out a few steps that we think are incredibly positive. the goal is to create good jobs are a model of what can happen when public policy and community advocacy come together. we really want to thank all of the work -- honor all the work that was done to bring these good jobs trailing policy in. in particular, there are a few projects that we wanted to call out and call attention to. one is one of the key development sites, the vasser projects. it's an example of what can happen when the development and the community can come together and have a productive conversation that leads to voluntary agreement that provide good jobs. the one vasser project the development sponsors have come to an agreement that guarantees good jobs for construction and staffing of the hotel, which will be a tremendous boone to the neighborhood. and i have learned that that project sponsors also hoping to put a rooftop bar and add to the

city's stock of rooftop bars so we hope whatever they need to get done in order to get that rooftop bar, we will be able to get ushered through. and there's another project where there's a deal and the project sponsor has signed an agreement for good jobs for construction and staff and we want to urge that whatever process is needed to make sure that 816folsom has a total on that spot and get exemptions has needed, we wanted to make sure that the process is preserved for both of those to be possible. so, thank you very much. and i look forward to the rest of the hearing. [ please stand by ]