we have about 320 units now. so, we should have 300 more just in the last two years -- excuse me, in the next two years. because so many of the units are coming online now are rental. so, it's a really good time to set forth our rental program rules. almost every rule in here is coming directly from renters and building owners who are curious to know how the program works. so, we've structured a rental program. we're trying to strike a balance between becoming too involved in the rental units and setting out some parameters for the renters and the project owners. these are private buildings with restrictions on their units. we don't own the unit. and we make that clear, but at the same time we get asked lots of questions about how the program could and should run. so, here's what we've done. we've set out some allowable reasons for rejecting a renter in the first place. stating explicitly that you -- a project sponsor or project owner can reject a renter if they can't pay rent, they don't meet the rent income sta

if that permit come in 98 it would have to say going from two units to three units to change the unit count. if someone filled out an application then and we should have flagged that because that's not right in 87 the last permit was for two units and we have one that says three. now i don't have it in front of me but i betd it says existing three units and it got missed missed and there was the other permit for the reroofing that said existing three units, so i would say of the 3r report probably need to be reviewed and corrected in my opinion but i haven't had the chance to speak to our record staff. >> okay. so what you're saying is the 3r report gets modified by every new permit? >> it should, yes. >> it should. if it is consistent but the 98 permit is in my mind and change from the 87 permit going from three to two units and converted and the rear floor and breakfast area and remove third unit and two family unit with garage and two family dwelling and 98 we have a new one for three family dwelling but no description on this report and converted back to three units and i don't th

it's probably not going to happen and having units 15 units in a small building that is an economy unit and in an area that is not for student housing but may be it's for uss may be it has practicality to it and there are a lot of factors that are not necessarily addresses and may be in phase two and this is a wild idea from rodney but i would suggest breaking it up in a larger pool and give 25 to market rate and 25 to senior and 25 to affordable and 25 to market rate and share that category and i realize that,that is accurately creating different categorize which you are trying not do so it would be nice to spread that out and southerly, i'm not sure how we are going to vote but i'm supportive of the microunits and i'm supportive of the cap but i would very much like it put the condition if we can on the study and bring some signs to it when it's completed. >> commissioner woo? >>> thank you i also want to be supportive of supervisor wiener and how they have couple to with a way to pile and and understand what these units are being used for and in inc., the idea of putting a criteria o

and reduce the size -- the allowable size of efficiency dwelling units to have living units as small as 150 square feet as long as the total size including the bathrooms and closets was no smaller than 220 square feet. the proposed ordinance today will add a new definition to the planning code and efficiency dwelling units for living room that is smaller than 220 square feet. this definition in the planning code applies to market rate units and not affordable housing or student housing and approved at 375 units and capd and after the approval of 325 units the department submit a report to the board of supervisors that would assist the board in its consideration of as to whether more reduced efficiency dwelling units should be allowed. the proposed ordinance would also amend section 135 to require whenever possible market rate micro units provide common usable open space rather than private open space and add a new section to require the provision of interior and whon buildings in which there are 20 or more micro units. common rooms and meeting or game rooms or dining rooms would sati

rate units. we already know the answer is no. but to what extent do they need to or not need to. and then there's conversation going on about parking, the unbundled parking policy the planning department and commission implemented years ago and how it applies to the below market rate units. we have a policy in place. we haven't touched it for ownership unit. [speaker not understood]. i'd like to talk to you while i'm here as part of doing our informational hearing now because i've been the one primarily working on this over the last few years about the significant changes that you'll see in the procedures manual for owners -- for the ownership program, the rental program and the ones that affect developers most and i can answer question about the program in general as well. we have about 1200, to set some framework, we have about 1200 units that have been produced through the program. that's since '92, 1992 because it was actually a policy for 10 years. we didn't produce any units during those ye

for the unit. and then we allow project sponsors who are unable to find a buyer when units are new to do the same. and we're allowing children under 24 to remain off loan and title. and i just want to point out a few things require conforming ordinance amendments. so, the -- any increase in income beyond what's stated in the use restrictions such as the conditional use authorization for the new unit and the allowance for the project sponsors to raise the qualifying income level after six months of marketing or the exception for the current owners to raise the qualifying income level after six months of marketing will require an ordinance change and allowance from the ordinance. but i just want to clarify the pricing never changes. this is sometimes confusing to people. the pricing stays the same. it's just you can broaden your net and bring in more people to the program. so, it's only the qualifying income level that would go up, not the price of the unit. and then we also need to update the ordina

and then if you translate that into units, 59% of the units are on-site, 26% of the units are off-site. there's a really big -- one really big off the project, has 170 bmr units. and 60% paid their fee, okay. so, the on-site option is the most popular. >> does the city have a preference? do we rather because the percentages get higher units off-site, [speaker not understood]? >> i don't have it [speaker not understood]. >> and then a follow-up on commissioner borden's question, i still don't think i understand like the lottery process. when a lottery is used. walk us through quickly. i built some units, i'm a developer. i have three bmr units, i'm ready to go. what happens? >> you get your units priced, fill the form out and i send you pricing for your units and this is what your maximum prices are. you submit a marketing plan and that marketing plan says you have to publicize your units for a 28-day period which is moving to 45 for ownership, 28 for rental. and that means we post it on our website, we send out an e-mail alert to 10,000 people that have signed up through the city. the

on efficiency dwelling units. the commission's recommendation was to refine the concept of a cap and that was based on a lengthy discussion about when micro units would count toward the numeric cap, would it be at the time of entitlement, would it be at the time of construction, or perhaps at the certificate of occupancy. further, the commission discussed the reporting requirement and recommended that the board of supervisors clarify the content and the timing of the report [speaker not understood] amendments address that concern. the second modification proposed by the planning commission was that the board not add a new definition to the planning code. rather, that the new common and open space requirements should refer to the definition of efficiency dwelling unit used in the building code. third, the recommendation from the commission was that the maximum requirement for interior common space be replaced with the minimum requirement of 10 square feet of common interior space per efficiency dwelling unit and i

or the means to change and control the global order twenty years after the end of the cold war the united states and many of its allies continue to support individuals and groups around the world with the goal of influencing or even overthrowing foreign governments as america's influence the kleins relative to the rise of others is democracy promotion still in washington's interest. in each state. to cross-talk the export of democracy i'm joined by my guess in. washington john glaser he's an assistant editor and blogger for antiwar dot com thomas carruthers he is the vice president for studies at the carnegie endowment for international peace and charles who chen he is a senior fellow at the council on foreign relations and a professor of international affairs at georgetown university right gentlemen cross-talk rules and in fact that means you can jump in anytime you want john if i can go to you first where is america's democracy promotion program globally since the end of the cold war and in particularly in light of the the the uprisings in the arab world well the u.s. has been very trou

like the unit. the second preference is living or working in san francisco. yes, they're equal, and you're correct. >> i knew this policy of certificate of preference from urban renewal, seems like that was a long time ago. seems like most of the people would have already relocated. it may not be a very large percentage that takes advantage of this claim. >> i understand there are about 700 active certificate of preference holders who are getting mailings every time we announce a new housing opportunity. >> but i'm not sure that many of them actually activate that. >> they very well may own, you know, their own home. >> because it's a considerable period of time and you probably have the statistics. it's nice if that offer goes out and euro belieed to do it i think it's a good policy. i'm certainly someone who is now lives elsewhere and work in san francisco. [speaker not understood]. the other is fine, too. then i have questions and this is kind of basic -- you probably answered this during the ear

states in the united states as its monroe doctrine i want can't japan have its equivalent. in its neighborhood i mean it is the rising power it will be the largest economy in the world. well i think for the chinese you know this. trying to manipulate and it may be. in some cases encouraged nationalistic responses to world events particularly in its near neighbors whether in central asia russia or particular more recently in the south china sea the islands of japanese japanese islands you know what you do that's a difficult tire to riot and once you let it out of its cage it can spin out of control and the new leaders of china they're most worried about domestic spill and they need to keep that economy moving in order to control their domestic population and nationalism could be a very destructive force for the so the harmony that this new leadership seeks to. keep in place jonathan how does the leadership balance those two issues continuing to grow the economy but to have more of an activist foreign policy i don't want to use the word aggressive but activist well i think fi

they ruled that this property was a two unit building rather than a three unit building. in fact a review of the history of the building permits issued on the property show it was consistently recced as a three unit building. in may of 2012 a report by the building inspection and three family dwelling. 498 hoffman and building code occupancys is r2 which is three residential units or more. although it's in a zoning district rh2, house to family, so in other words it was recognized recently as may of this year that this is a non conforming use but legal use as a three unit building. many other building inspection department permits were issued. in 1947 this is listed as a three unit building. in 1986 was listed as three unit building. the housing department shows it as three unit building. in 1999 an application was issued showing description of building, three units. less specific and i want to be honest with you is a report in the san francisco report data in 1997. it shows present authorized use unknown while the building occupancy of r3, two units of less, and 1999 per

interest or in latin america in the same period john's right that in the arab world the united states face spaces mixed interests on the other hand he didn't mention libya where the united states joined a military intervention that did help lead to what's probably pro-democratic change for the arab world does present a mixed picture but i think it's actually sectional compared to how the united states has approached democratic change in most of the regions in the last twenty years ok tom if i could stay to stay with you do you think that the nato intervention in libya was in the name in the purpose for democracy or just geo political interest the un resolution yes the u.n. resolution was about humanitarian intervention in france and britain in the united states ended up taking further in and carrying out an intervention that helped lead to regime change i don't think it was due to sort of deep sinister economic interests i think the united states france and britain actually had the best interests of the b. and actually in their minds and helped contribute to an outcome which will prob

how many one bedroom units -- and how many two-bedroom units? the planning department has been committed to the planning commission to two-bedroom units as a solution to families in the city. but the real world test is, who buys the two-bedroom units? people that have the income and they make it an office. they commute from their second bedroom. so the real-world test is, two bedroom units vs. the reality that you -- remember he talked about his own experience in his own project. you have to cap these number of units. the number of units that we need in the city is for people that can afford housing and everyone knows that what we are approving, week after week whether they are two bedrooms or one bedroom units, it's units are unaffordable to the average person let alone the low income people in the city and i would refer you to mr. mercy's comments at one o'clock. thank you. . >> is there any additional public comments. >>> good afternoon dishes commissioners i'm with the housing of san francisco and i am to show you a letter had a we had submi

military base the united states went along and accepted that and in the middle east now you see the united states learning to adjust to a different kind of government in egypt and actually making i think it's a serious effort to get along with the muslim brotherhood led government in the hopes that you know the united states in a different egypt can get along i agree that the intervention in iraq was misguided and that the united states as charles said greatly overestimated its ability to bring about a political transformation of iraq but that was a military intervention carried out for other reasons which was then justified and tried to turn into a political reconstruction mission ok charles what do you think about that because again there's a lot of hypocrisy here and people on the ground see it ok the americans will support this democratic movement but not that one i mean how do you explain it to them i think you just straight like we're doing on this show and except the idea that there are moments when the united states can lean forward and push democracy there are other moments when t

units that we saw, you were talking about these units potentially being rented at $1500 a month, whichs not a lot of space for $1500. so that kind of goes to the crux of my concern, which is, as we're building these microunits, are we, in a way, creating or exacerbating the problem by setting pretty high bar in terms of how expensive housing is. if a 230 square feet unit is going to rent for $1500, what does that do to the rest of the places in san francisco. that is the concern. because of that concern, if we had the first item, item 15, being presented to us on its own, i would be voting against the legislation. but i do think that the existence of item 39, and specifically the establishment of a cap is something that at least gives me some comfort. not this -- if you will, that i fear would materialize. i think having a cap would allow us to have the ability to assess whether or not the negative impact will actually happen. and so it is with the caveat that it's only until we see what actually happens, once these units are built, that i am willing to give this kind of a pilot a try

what conclusions would planning staff be able to reach by studying 375 units? we dispute that that's a statistically valid sample. second, the 375 unit cap sends exactly the wrong message to the market rate builders and lenders. a cap this small conveys in a fairly direct way the city does not support this type of housing, may soon close the window on it, and investors should proceed at their own peril. more generally this hyper cautious approach to new housing while common in san francisco is frustrating to our members. it is yet another example of the contradiction between the values we espouse and the policies we adopt. while as a city we claim to support housing affordability, especially for the work force and middle class families who have a long-standing tendency to adopt policies that actually result in making housing scarce and expensive, never more so than today. in conclusion, we think this is a good idea. it's long-overdue and should move forward, but we have great concerns how this cap is going to be interpreted. thank you. >> next speaker. >>> good

, not the united states. >> it is not us versus them.you do not have to fight. it is not one or two. it is a global community. there are reasonable region regional powers. do not discount russia. there are a lot of resources in all of these countries, especially africa, so what needs to happen is a global understanding. i believe the united states can work as a partner. who cares if we are number one any more? if you are not number one, you are not. mean?does number one reaso tavis: how much of this is fundamentally about american imperialism? or the notion of? >> it is the mindset. i think it has the most to do with it. woodrow wilson was saying stuff about we are the savior of the world, so there has always been this puritanism in our thinking, this concept that america is exceptional in its own way. we are human beings. if anything, it is a global world, and we can interact. we must get over this complex of superiority. >> you are right. a big part of the story is american imperialism, and the flip side is building up national securit

the conflict in which the united states was acting [inaudible] long-acting hatred for the united states. it involves some 85 million people. there would be regional disruption, the conflict would probably be spreading to syria, creating one large issue. withdrawing from the western part of afghanistan. it would be disruptive of the security of oil flowing through the strait of hormuz. and there is a further uncertainty involved in that kind of an operation common namely how successful would be, in fact. and estimates regarding israel's potential to be decisively effective and estimates depend on the scale of the american attack. even a relatively modest attack by the united states would inflict serious casualties when the ratings for this for precipitation of the spirit are still unknown factors of what happens. there will be a significant factor of human casualties, particularly in places that are larger than some facilities, that have been destroyed or relocated. all of that makes an attack not a very attractive remedy for dealing with the problem. a problem which then would pale with

of the units are primary residents. they're not investor units. i don't know if i can shed anymore light on the question. >>i think you answered it and certainly sounds based on your experiences with hawthorn this is the best you feel that would work best for you and i am certainly supportive, and obviously these units are condo mapped so in the future they had to be sold they could be sold, and i really complement you also on the design -- redesign with an outstanding architectural firm and improvement on the original design and much richer. i did have one question -- maybe it's more for the architecture tekt. you can probably answer. one of the renders look like a masonry finishing on the units and looks richer and some look more pale looking and i'm not sure what the pre-cast material is going to be or appear on that lower frontage that goes up about six floors i believe. i'm not sure of the floors it goes up. >> i think that is primarily a question that we should ask glen scal vo to answer and we have been sensitive

i have legalized dozens of dwelling units, illegal units, for people in san francisco. in the last 10 years, there has been a sea change within the bureaucracy, the building and planning departments, where the attitude has been very proactive in trying to help property owners bring things up to code and to save these old, illegal units, rather than force them to be abandoned. the attitude of the city has really changed a lot and people are more likely to get help from their building inspector rather than enforcement. >> what i had hoped we could do is look at this little hand out for further discussion. starting on page one, it is from a website, home remodeling magazine, there is a long list of things supposedly san francisco-based, adjusted for local conditions, and how much of the cost you can expect to recoup for the work you're doing in the building. if you're doing work because you want to live there and you want to appreciate the improvement, that is different. if you're doing work with a clear eye to how much you can get back, i am shocked to see under the colum

they also spent some smaller naval units and air units. still there, was definitely combat units working with the united states, work with the south vietnamese and filipinos and south korean. >> host: what about casualties? >> guest: the talks tike 500 plus casualties -- i should say 500 thais died in south vietnam fighting what we call the viet cong. it's an important detail to focus on because those who don't know the history of thai involvement tend to dismiss them as the insulting term they use is america's mercenaries, because we paid for the -- a lot of the military hardware and transportation and logistics and extra pay the thai troops received. they also tend to focus on those thais who are engaged in black market schemes. the truth behind it all is that thai soldiers were fighting, were dying, for four years thailand was sort of carrying out the war, what they saw at their war, in south vietnam. so, the casualties are something we should keep in mind. >> host: professor ruth, when did thai relations start to gel? thailand has been

will be back on united.t: i get the point but when this kind of disruption at this time of year on such a massive, potentially a massive scale you have to shake your head. you know what i am talking about. it doesn't get better. >> this is the fourth time this year and you would think certainly there i t department would have been on this before now. march, may, august and now november. stuart: thank you for joining us on such short notice. there is a computer problem that united. it certainly, united's operation and la guardia. a lot of flights are grounded. we waited to see if this is an entire nationwide problem. it is a developing problem and a big developing headache for people travelling by air today. we will keep you up-to-date. the congressional budget office is predicting economic consequences of raising taxes on a ridge. the cbo says 200,000 jobs will be lost if the bush tax cuts expire for only the highest earners, tax the rich you lose 200,000 jobs but that is not stopping the president. >> we sh

it includes slight increase of units to 338. a decrease in parking spaces to 269 with the majority of those in stackers. a minor alteration at the rear of the podium building and continue to have nor commercial space within the building. the project sponsor will present the changes in detail and available for questions or comments. i will turn it over to them. thanks. >> good afternoon president fong. good afternoon planning commissioners. i am edward mercy and here representing jackson pacific. my company and art stone who collectively are and continue to be the original project sponsor developer for 340 fremont street. as mr. teague mentioned we are supporting now an informational presentation of the new design for 340 fremont street. our goals and reasons for electing to redesign a fully approved, fully compliant residential tower were three. the first one was an esthetic visual exterior enhancement or upgrade for the absence of doubt this is not the vex exercise to the contrary. it's attempt to bring a building that we thoug