the project does not protect the relative affordablity of existing housing, nor does it increase the number of permanently affordable units or supported housing. the project is not of a design that enhances neighborhood character as you've seen. the proposal features a stark facade with a flat roof and roof deck and thanks to the front yard variance is going right up against the street. lastly, they say they're reestablishing, in quotes, residential use from 799 castro. they're demolishig it. they're building a new addu, which is great, but that doesn't explain what's happening here. >> thank you. are there any additional speakers? no? all right. so we'll close public comment and open it up to commissioner comments and questions. commissioner richards? >> i guess i'm probably one of the people that live closest to this site. i live across the street two blocks up, so i know this site very well. there's a lot going on here. i mean, we've got a cu for demolition of a unit. we've got variances, we've got some design issues. i think the first thing that i'll throw out and i'll wait, let

this is a minimum requirement plus one, in terms of affordablity. and we submit the conditions should be included that would blunt these impacts: higher affordablity and conditions with respect to the ground floor space. i think i'm going to have to yield the rest of my time since we're running short here. >> jerry ortiz, united save the mission. this has been -- been a lot of bad faith negotiations that have gone into this. the reason we have 20% of this now, is we had to press for this and it had to be continued on. there has not been much effort to try to work with the community, so this project, as mr. weaver mentioned, is 80% luxury development, so i think it -- to really kind of help mitigate that, we need to have that at 25%. also, i find -- as a graduate of two workforce development programs, both located in the mission district, i find it deeply offensive that you have a program that teaches kids how to gentrify their own development, so the other projects is not fitting in with the neighborhood. this space was traditionally mdr, not a high

so there's major concerns with the affordablity of this project. we're going to let this project go up, putting our children at risk, casting a shadow over the school, for a building in all likelihood that they're never going to live in, especially our homeless been any development in the mission. well, that's wrong information. there has been 17 developers that have developed luxury housing in the mission. we have -- in the mission, we are ground zero for evictions. we have lost 10,000 people, 8,000 of those being latinos. that is gentrification. it's that simple, and why are we here? because we have -- of those -- you look at san francisco, you have 3,000 children who are homeless. ask your superintendent: out of those 3,000, 1800 of them are from the mission. i speak to teachers all the time, and they say children fall asleep in class because you have a child that is sleeping in a car and not getting a good night rest, is not getting a nutritious, warm meal every day. so what do we need in the mission? we need affordable housing. the rest of the

my community should be able to fight for affordablity, 100% affordablity, so i ask all of you not to support this proposal. thank you. >> president hillis: thank you, miss sandoval. if we can just refrain from clapping, it helps the comment process. >> hello. my name is scott weaver. i'm here to oppose the project. yeah, we need for housing, but there's also the question of where you put it and who you how's, and if you put luxury housing next to b.a.r.t., you're going to have -- rich people aren't going to be using b.a.r.t., they're going to be using uber. we've been showing that over and over again. this is a conditional use application, which means that by right, the developer doesn't have the right to combine these lots. he has to demonstrate that it is necessary and desirable to do so, and if you look at any objective standards for discerning necessary and desirable, well, first of all, this is a gigantic project right on mission street, a block from the mission cultural district, and a block from -- or within the mission family corridor. that it is in a community that is alread

>>commissioner cook: we met, personnel labor relations and affordablity met on october 26th. we heard an update on the proposed parcel tax, and the next meeting will be november 30th. >>president walton: thank you, commissioner cook, and i just want to reannounce that commissioner norton and i did do a committee switch, so i am now on building and grounds, and commissioner norton is now an ad hoc personnel on affordablity. it was announced at the last meeting, but i just wanted to publicly announce that again. seeing no more announcements, vice president mendoza-mcdonnell. >> building and grounds for november will be cancelled, and we'll meet again in december. >>president walton: thank you, vice president mendoza-mcdonnell. section m, other informational items... nothing -- commissioner mendoza-mcdonnell. >> before we do that, there's a couple of acknowledgement i wanted to make related to them that have happened. i just want to thank everyone that attended our spark sf g l gala. for somebody that worked on it, i just thought it was a really great, great opportunity for -- i

we talk about the streets, we talk about affordablity, we talk about design, we talk about a broad range of things, and commissioner richards, he went into a lot of things in state law, and if you ought all those topics that we touch on in a pie chart, our actual authority is, like, that small supplies, and i think that's something that i want to start off by saying today, and we'll see where we end up on this project. we just had a project where there was sud, so we were able to argue for more percentage, but yet, we are constrained with this one. that's a box we've been put in, which is really unfortunate. in a world where state law wasn't what it was, and our constraints weren't where they were, i would be sitting here saying send it back unless there's more, but it's challenging for us to be able to do that. i also -- people have mentioned -- commissioners have mentioned the state density bonus law which has some contradictory affordable requirements, but there's also an affordable housing act, that commissioner melgar didn't mention, we are in risk of a lawsuit if we disapprove proj

of course, the remaining problem is their affordablity. he was a leader in the fight against homelessness, developing and implementing something called a navigation center, which i had the pleasure of visiting, and which has proven to be effective in handling chronic homelessness. lifetime proponent of the environment, leading san francisco to reduce greenhouse gases by 27%. and of course, he always remained a steadfast champion for human and civil rights. i'd also like to note that his election and his six years of service as mayor were paramount for the asian community. ed's election brought a tremendous pride to this community, and rightly so. san francisco's history in prior centuries is marked by prejudice against the chinese community. in prior centuries, from mistreatment by the police to restrictive deeds in real estate, san francisco was not a friendly place for the issue i don't know -- asian and chinese culture. however, times change, the community fights for its rights, and things improve. in 2011, when ed became mayor, this co

we had a ad hoc personnel matters and labor relations affordablity meeting on november 30th. the next meet be will be january 25th, and we went over four very important items. we're going to upgrade our on-line hiring system. it's called the human capital system transformation, and everyone's really excited about it. i am, too. it's a lot of great changes in terms of improving the process. we've got to update on the teacher pathway for next year. an update on our paraeducator staffing, and the changes that we're making to the civil service, and classify these examinations. i just also want to highlight that staff highlighted through a conversation with a conversation with vice president men toes amcconnell with the city, those conversations have been accelerated since they've been stalled, so thank you for her leadership on that. >> thank you so much. anymore updates? >> i just wanted to announce that the next meeting of the curriculum and program commitly will be on january 17th. normally, it would be scheduled for the 15th of january , but since that is martin luther king,

let's take advantage of the affordablity that all of the wonderful people at covered california haveone in partnership with us as a city, but also with health right 360, because they don't just work by themselves, they work with community based organizations. peter's described some of them. i happen to know chinese supporter health care -- i happen to know blue cross/blue shield, high numbers, 36,000 people enrolled, and not only do we want all 3700 to reapply and to do it comfortably in the next few months, we want more people so that they come out of the unsured category. we've done a pretty good job. in fact our uninsured number of people is less than 5% because of covered california. it is also less because we weren't just stopping -- covered california is a wonderful thing, and it's so good that we even added our own program to it, our san francisco health plan to make sure additional people can be covered. this is how much enjoyment and how serious we take people's health. in our chinese community and asian community, if you don't have good health, you can't help anybody else,

one, i just think that it is completely impractical in today's affordablity environment to be forcing this singular business segment, and a start-up one at that, to be hiring locally, when so few people can afford to live in this city, and ever fewer people can afford to live in this city. i also believe, i think, based on a survey conducted several years ago that city hall doesn't meet that requirement -- or doesn't meet that threshold today. in this building, we can't hire 50% local residents, so what does it say about our government that they want to regulate a new industry in that way? i also did a little research, so i went on-line and googled the legal challenges to local hire ordinances and turns out there's quite a bit of information out there, and i have a nice little document -- research document that was done about the enforceablity of local hires and the legal challenges to them, and i think i will ask the office of small business to inquire with the city attorney before this thing even gets out of the block for at least an initial look at the legality of such a -- such le

they will meet their incollusionary housing affordablity requirement by designating their on-site as affordable. the project would require 14.5% be designated as the base project, which for the base project of 55 dwelling units, would have been eight units. however since the project sponsor has elected to designate 20% of the base project, 11 units are going to be part of the on-site incollusionary housing program, and this allowed them to qualify for the maximum density bonus of 35%. since the project included rental housing, the project sponsor has entered into an agreement with the city and county of san francisco, and the project sponsor is continuing to work with the city attorney on this agreement. this agreement is not yet finalized, but is required to be executed at the time of the first construction document. the site is located within the mission interim zoning control area, and as required, the motion relevant topics for the commission consideration as it relates to the project are the potential demographic changes, indirect residential displacement, and the new constructi

there will be other questions about it because the commissioners have their shared concerns, rent affordablityand some of those issues. i've been very standing, being a stick in the mud about maximizing the zoning of our city so that, you know, we can build more housing within the zoning that we have. we have capacity, and this does not do that. so i won't be supportive today. >>vice president richards: commissioner moore. >>commissioner moore: i think this reminds me of item 17, good intentions, but too many questions, and there are too many unknowns, including perhaps mr. sanchez could clarify, about the three versus the four units that's supposed to be there. dbi can't prove it, who can prove it. it's a who says it is and who proves it isn't. >> so it's my understanding the 3 r report does say three units and that's part of the notice. it's going from four units to two units for the building, although upon site visit, only three units were found to exist today, but this is going from four under city records from four units to two. >>vice president richards: so looking to entertain a motion

done in this town and that is reflective of the fact that we talk about the housing crisis and affordablability crisis and the issue of the day was jobs as we were in double-digit unemployment at that time. they made a commitment that was one of the first ever instances we ever heard of a developer and builders talking about not only doing mandatory local hiring with respect to the horizontal infrastructure, voluntarily agreeing to make local hiring a requirement of all their general contractors on these different components and the subs that come on, making local hiring a requirement as they go vertical. so to see a 30% overall local hire requirement on all these projects and 50% local apprentices, i think is really unique and gives us a lot of opportunities that we can work with the leadership of the giants and we work directly with jack baer at the time of that agreement, which is really important that the commission also knows that not only as we work to make sure that local residents are getting involved and into these opportunity and the jointly managed state registered apprenticeship pro

i'm hearing all the arguments to affordablity. to me, i'm not a housing expert, but i do deal with a lot of my neighbors that are going through evictions and crises around housing. unfortunately, there's been thousands and thousands of evictions throughout the city. i'm sure you guys are very well known about all of that stuff. but i'm very concerned about a couple of things. the -- you know, one of the things that this -- this group has -- has -- or the planning department and this working group has brought forward is upzoning the mission street corridor to build more dance and higher buildings. okay. all i have to do is look towards the mission district and see what has happened to that community. given that we've lost so many people, i really think it's time that we as a city and you guys as a commission, really think about where we've failed. we have failed, you know, thousands of people. my concern is that when you upzone stuff like that, it's going to feel more speculation and add to more displacement. there are hundreds of