Transcripts For SFGTV Latino 20240703

Properties listed on the california register for home sf projects. In addition, we align with this Committee Previous comments about the value of public input via dr and cu and we will advocate for citizen participation in the planning process. Thanks again. Thank you. Next speaker, please. [indiscernible] we are getting a lot of wind and background noise. If you can speak into the microphone. I apologize. Sorry. My name is pria with the [indiscernible] Planning Coalition as i said. As written the legislation takes out the opportunity for public input and review when there are ways to shorten the approval process and retain the voices of low income communities of color which include cultural districts. There is no reason to attempt to silence or dissempower communities or undermine democratic processes and supported by the Housing Element action 8. 4. 21. The rep coalition hopes this Committee Reject this legislation and commit to working with marginalized communities to write new legislation to implement the Housing Element in a way that further fair housing. Thank you. Thank you. Next speaker, please. Good afternoon supervisors. [indiscernible] qul want to say how much i appreciate your discussion today and especially the [indiscernible] and what it has done to our community here in north beach and in many other neighborhoods throughout the city. We need all of the protections in place. We also need to be sure that Senior Housing is not then removing the ability for those seniors to not have access to transit. Unless these changes are made, i cant possibly support this and ask that you kill it. Thank you. Thank you. Next speaker, please. Sorry, hello, this is kate bloomburg and live in a rent controlled unit in district 10 and strongly support this legislation. I believe that housing as speculated investment will continue until there is greater supply of housing and we need to remove constraints in order to enable this. Our transit will never be secure until we have more housing and more density. If we try to move our housing costs would be tripled or quadrupled after 22 years in rent control, and thats not attainable situation so lets stop pretending that housing is affordable for anyone in this city aside from a few millionairs and billionairs. San francisco needs more housingism i support this legislation and appreciate chair melgars work to make it work. Thank you. Next speaker, please. Good afternoon. Thank you so much for convening and continuing to try and wrestle this unattainable bill that you have in your hands. Couple of simple points, we have about 40 to 75 thousand units that are currently sitting empty in San Francisco. Why not rehab those units and put them back on the market as affordable units or do whatever you want but do something because they are sitting empty. What happened to finding landlords for keeping units empty . And the other thing is, this does fall under urban renewal and potentially redevelopment. All those for gentrification and mass exodus of people of color, minorities and people who make the city the diverse and gorgeous tapestry that it is historically been. Why not table this bill, [indiscernible] remove all the thank you for your comments. Next speaker, please. Good afternoon chair melgar, president peskin, supervisor preston [difficulty hearing speaker] sounding like a number of amendments brought forward that will take steps towards the baseline alignment with [indiscernible] want to insure we take further steps including chair melgar housing framework associated tenant protection and retaining the action plan 2020 [indiscernible] two areas required to complete the baseline alignment would be removing state density bonus stream pm line priority equity geographies. Majority of all housing projects built uncommunities of color and are never the understanding this provides some type of blanket override of all [indiscernible] to remove areas vulnerable from displacement from streamlines [indiscernible] thank you. Thank you. Next speaker, please. Scott Brown Mission liberation center. This ordinance must be voted down. [indiscernible] in the high income category, 22 thousand units constructed in the last 7 years, which is over 175 percent of the target in that category. For all other incomes, low, moderate and very low, less then 6 thousand units constructed combined. That is less then 35 percent of the Housing Element target. Chair melgar statement nothing nefarious is going on. The city is sold out to developers. There is 60 thousand unaffordable Housing Units vacant in the city now and 15 residents sleeping in the streets or cars because they cant afford market rate housing you interest trying to build more of. The ordinance will exacerbate the housing affordable and amendments cannot fix the disaster. Vote it down. Thank you. Next speaker, please. Good afternoon. [indiscernible] the srf organizing director with Community Action calling in support of the legislation. As emphasize a couple weeks ago, a lot of this is stuff we already agreed to in the Housing Element and i appreciate the work by chair melgar and supervisor mandelman and [indiscernible] introduce amendments,er get it right, we should do that. This is work we said we were going to do. [indiscernible] is something we need to do. You know it is real problem. We know the process takes a long long time. Longer then anywhere in california and thats unacceptable. You can really do better and do more quickly. Please support this today. Thank you. Thank you for sharing your comments. Next speaker, please. My name is stephanie with [indiscernible] calling in to voice opposition. This is something that will exacerbate the homeless problem in the city and cant understand how people would see the amount of people so unfortunately and rely on Affordable Housing and say we should get rid of it. Thalities we need to think about the people that need housing and you need to refurbish the housing we have. [indiscernible] sitting there and make it so that Affordable Housing so people can live instead of doing what you can to gentrify San Francisco,b which is part of what this is. So, yeah thank you stephanie for sharing your comments with committee. Next speaker, please. This is kim from the San Francisco labor council. This morning my executive board voted against supporting this legislation. We feel this legislation would be devastating to working families in San Francisco and nothing to reassure them of their homes and doesnt do enough for affordability in San Francisco. We urge you to vote this legislation down. Thank you. Thank you. Next speaker, please. Yes , renee [indiscernible] and here to say i oppose this and please vote this down. I sent a detailed letter to the committee and board et cetera earlier today regarding this ordinance. I feel everyone keeps talking about affordsability, but this program is not affordable. They need to revamp the program. Also, simple math is, they say we need 82 thousand new units. Half for affordable which isnt affordable but there are 60 thousand vacant units, convert them. There are 142 thousand approximately in the pipeline been built, going to be built. Use that for Affordable Housing. We need housing for all, not just some sum. We need to revamp so it is affordable and works. You cannot fasttrack from the Planning Department and get rid of ceqa. We need to think about that and the thank you for sharing comments. Next speaker, please. Good afternoon chair melgar and supervisors peskin and preston. [indiscernible] rep coalition. Rep strongly urge the committee to make significant amendments to focus on equity and if not possible please reject the legislation and work with communities to move forward the implementation actions in the Housing Element approve bide the board earlier this year referenced in the letter rep sent to Committee Last week. Our communities need a affordable and dignified housing. 57 percent of the housing must be affordable to low and moderate income houses. [indiscernible] we cant continue to fall further behind and need commitment to insure we dont. The rep coalition helps the Committee Reject the legislation and commit working with communities on new legislation to influence the Housing Element to further fair housing and center racial and social equity. Thank you. Next speaker, please. Hello supervisors. [indiscernible] district 9 mission resident calling to reject the very large legislation fraught with loop holes and incentives specifically for Affordable Housing. Been encouraged by the opening of the 100 percent Affordable Development in my neighborhood and know public input and review were key allowing neighbors in the community to advocate and negotiate for them. Please do not streamline process at the expense of most vulnerable residents. Thank you. Thank you. Next speaker, please. Hi. Thank you. My name is skylar here from green action for health and Environmental Justice calling on behalf of myself, our members supporter and constituents across the city. Oppose the Housing Production ordinance as it is attack on the community, environment and Affordable Housing. This ordinance further gentrify San Francisco and push current residents ouf of the city driving middle working and lower middle class san franciscans out of the city or on the streets. San francisco [indiscernible] vast amount of office space that can be converted to thousands apartments. We do not need more housing construction, we need to make the housing affordable. [indiscernible] establish redevelopment zones that allow corporate real estate to build unhealthy housing on toxic and radio active sites. Government agencies claimed are cleaned up. [indiscernible] after the Housing Development [indiscernible] the site was not clean or remediated. Please vote down thank you for sharing comments. Next speaker, please. Hello. My name is magic altman from potrero hill. I want to say when we press 3 it says you raised your hand to ask a question which does not respect we are calling into comment. I asked this to be changed over and over again. Also,b the way our structure is, the mayor doesnt have to talk or listen to us at all. We need to change that. Also we give a land use acknowledgment every day. I suggest the first step making that haveactually have oholone representation at the Land Use Committee because they say, not listening to the people. Every comment has shown you the people who live work and care about each other and community and homeless is being disregarded in this ordinance and just for the money over and over again. Reject this. Get advice from people that are in the community and care about each other. Thats what you are hearing over and over again. You know this is wrong. Do the right thing. Thank you. Thank you. Next speaker, please. Hi. [indiscernible] senior disability action. Speaking in opposition to the Housing Production plan because it will impact senior disabled people displacement and no affordable right of return. The gentrification by the ordinance push city rents higher driving many senior disabled san franciscans with limit means out of the city or on the streets. This promote building high priced housing that is not affordable. Calls housing mostly for families making over 230 thousand per year affordable. We have 50 percent [indiscernible] for those income levels. This plan build housing for the wealthy, displacing people with disabilities and give away to corporate real estate. Please oppose this corporate attack on San Francisco seniors and disability community. Thank you. Next speaker, please. Good afternoon committee members. [indiscernible] please reject this legislation. This legislation [indiscernible] [difficulty hearing speaker due to audio quality] thank you. Next speaker, please. Hello. My name is christine hanson. Thank you supervisors for your efforts to curb unexpected consequences in advance of the passage of this ordinance. Supervisor mandelmans comments about potential danger to board and care home is a great example for the need to protect important elements unique to our city and our neighborhoods. The community is your best partner in this. We are your eyes on the ground. But this ordinance will pull the rug out from under Community Efforts to do just that by closing the community out of the process. The need to keep our voice present in the process is crucial and we are your best ally towards building truly Affordable Housing. Please remember that. Thank you for sharing comments. Next speaker, please; hello. Howard wong, San Francisco tomorrow opposing the legislation. I think we need amendments to guide our city towards Affordable Housing, and better design and planning of affordable and low Income Housing and homeless housing. As a member of port advisory bodies i worked on pier 70, mission rock, which had 30 and 40 percent Affordable Housing. I ink the we also have to look at architectural invasion around the world like the work of [indiscernible] of france. [indiscernible] of japan. We have to look at concepts of house. What is housing . Social housing, [indiscernible] micro housing. I think the professional Architectural Community and Planning Community should be able to weigh in to provide those guidelines and how we can be better use existing space. Existing thank you for sharing comments. Next speaker, please. Hello. Calling on behalf of cap street. Neighbors in the Mission District and are particular speaking on behalf of dozen of Senior Citizens many with hearing and mobility and do not have a luxury of affordable or accessible internet or calls so speaking on their behalf. I like for the legislation to be rejected. I do not know if it can be amended. It does not have rightsgets rid of Affordable Housing rights. Does not protect tenants and most importantly silences the voices of our most in need in our community. I have been to dozens of Planning Commission and the [indiscernible] well healed developers with the most financial Legal Resources who usually try to get around special rules and usually fall back on playing dumb or better [indiscernible] then ask for permission. Thank you. Next speaker, please. Rudey gonzalez, San Francisco building trades. Stands in opposition along the San Francisco labor council. Associate with mr. Peskins comments. This feels like small ball. If it was a legitimate aproseal the mayor office would have approached this with care. [indiscernible] inclusion era zoning based on evidence and supply conversation. [indiscernible] thats the big win is go for Major Projects with important density connected to transit squu fordability. This is a attempt to fight with the board and pit you all [indiscernible] scrap it, start over and do something real. Thank you for your comments. Next speaker, please. Hi. My name is lori leaderman, district 7. Urge you to oppose this legislation. It is invitation to demolish homes and businesses while providing [indiscernible] eliminate appealing project where evictions are manipulated. [indiscernible] fails to protect small neighborhood serving business vulnerable to demolition. Recipe for displacement. While providing much needed exemption for so called priority equity geography fails to recognize vulnerability that prolifiate in well resource neighborhoods. If this was a rational plan it would recognize San Francisco lost population, 10s of thousands approved Housing Units yet to be built due to not so called constraints but to high interest rates. Please oppose or dramatically amend the legislation. Thank you. Thank you. Next speaker, please. Hi. [indiscernible] Affordable Housing alliance and also work with San Francisco antidisplacement coalition and rep coalition and want to associate with a statement that you received from them. If there isnt any notice or fact finding hearing, we need to find another way to protect rent control housing otherwise we just rely on the say so of developers who all too often like asking the fox, were there any hens in the hen house. That is just an adequate way to protect rent controlled housing. Thank you. Thank you so much for sharing comments. Next speaker, please. Hi. [indiscernible] calling on behalf of support of the legislation. Think it is important to [indiscernible] housing in San Francisco. Couple comments made about the number of vacancy. I think that is a inaccurate. Vast majority are things between rental so like, if i rent my unit and somebody rents out a unit, they move out and there is a week between but the next person comes, if they check at that moment it counts as vacant unit. The idea there are 60 thousand units for the plucking is a lie and excuse not to build new housing. The vacancy [indiscernible] 4 thousand units which is great. Lets get those online, but we have to build more housing. The second thing is sb330 protections are key as [indiscernible] said. If you remove rent control housing it is [indiscernible] doesnt allow people thank you. Next speaker, please. Good afternoon chair melgar and supervisors preston and president peskin. This is [indiscernible] calling on behalf oub [indiscernible] who is a member of the race equity all Planning Coalition. We strongly urge you to reject this legislation. The more i hear the commenting, the woman who spoke about incomes that is very real and the base we work with and we feel there isnt enough Affordable Housing. We need to prioritize Affordable Housing. [indiscernible] all new housing to be [indiscernible] low and moderate income. We need to do work there before we can give any developers any kind of leeway or give away for them to build more market rate housing that sits empty. I want to thank president peskin for reading our letter from the rep coalition. I really appreciate that and actually looking forward to time concluded. Thank you for sharing comments. Next speaker, please. Can you hear me . We can bearically barely hear you. Mostly background noise. [indiscernible] my name is [indiscernible] i support this bill because we need to build more housing and [indiscernible] [difficulty hearing speaker] thank you for share comments. Reminder for those waiting for a opportunity to address the Land Use Committee for item 4, if you please make sure you are in a quite place, turn down the volume on the television or streaming device and that prevents wind or echo. Next speaker, please. Good afternoon supervisors. My name is robert [indiscernible] a volunteer with San Francisco [indiscernible] i want to remind you that program 8. 4. 5 of the Housing Element says the city will eliminate Commission Hearings on any code compliant project in well resourced neighborhood subject to housing accountability act january 1, 2024. Four months aaway from the deadline yet we are considering the attention of Commission Hearing for housing projects that adhere to the codes. These moments [indiscernible] this board unanimously agreed upon. I dont understand all have good intentions. [indiscernible] for compliance with state law. The clock is ticking and february is fast approaching. If you choose to proceed [indiscernible] thank you for sharing your comments with committee. Please hear from the next speaker. Good afternoon supervisors. My name is steve [indiscernible] sunset residents member of [indiscernible] member of the rep coalition. Public investment is badly needed to build Affordable Housing and sf needs to commit funding through legislation for that housing. This is supported by the Housing Element action 1. 1. 2. We cant risk it all on a bond that might or might not pass and 300 million is a drop in the bucket. This legislation needs major changes. If there isnt significant public [indiscernible] our city will keep repeating the same old mistakes and promote the fallacy the market will solve our problems by building more housing which history tells us is unaffordable and what we [indiscernible] we must do the right thing and commit to equity and fairness by significant funding for Affordable Housing. Thank you. Thank you. Next speaker, please. Supervisors, lorraine [indiscernible] Affordable Housing advocate for seniors. Analyzing circulated and uncirculated amendments i must still urge you to reject constraints reduction ordinance and replace it with an ordinance focused on streamlining only. Affordable housing protection and production and antidisplacement. Such a bill compliant with the Housing Element and build the housing that we need. The constraints reduction [indiscernible] all needed high profit condo building removing existing Affordable Housing, removing the public from Decision Making and remove the regulation that protect the public from unscupulous developers amending would be like slapping a thousand band aids on a terminally ill patient and announcing them cured. Thank you for sharing comments. Next speaker, please. Good afternoon. Georgia shootish. I really cannot get rid of neighborhood notification to groups or nearby Property Owners. I have a question. Why is this legislation needed at all . We have all the other things that the city put forward, the state put forward. We have chair melgars legislation, her sud that seems that should be efficient to get us going between now and next 10 years under the current rhna goals which are questionable. Thank you, take care, good bye. Thank you. Next speaker, please. Hi. Can you hear me . Yes, please begin. Hi, my name is Nancy Hernandez the manager of excelsior resource hub calling to voice support for staffing this entire streamlining process and prioritizing putting effort into making the Housing Element realty. To me this reads by a manifesto from the board in star trek. Outside of our door we have empty condos, vacant commercial units and families sleeping in cars. If this legislation would have been in place 10 years ago, we would have not had any of the recent wins in Affordable Housing we celebrated. Because it was a Public Comment process that transformed the monster in the mishz from 25 percent [indiscernible] to hundred percent offered in the future. It was a Public Comment process that transformed the balboa upper yard to what is now [indiscernible] Public Comment process that transformed 3840 mission from funeral home to what is all most ready to be home for our neighbors. It was the Public Comment process transformed the parking on [indiscernible] it was the people who transformed thank you. Next speaker. Can we please be connected . Stanley, counselor with San Francisco tenants union. Removing transparency in Governmental Affairs is never a good idea. Tenants should have the right to Public Comment where the true history of the building is revealed. We cannot rely on the information submitted to and coming from the Planning Department. This legislation offers a strong incentive for landlords to displace tenants by intimitation which generates no records, to reward landlords who do not file at the rent board, encourage misrepresentation of permit application. After all, there will be no public hearing, no one contesting and no penalty for lying on the declaration. Thank you for sharing comments. Next speaker, please. This is sue hester. Imal district 9 resident. I have been dealing with this issue in the Planning Commission for a long time. Decades. There is recent people i want to commend mandelman, melgar, peskin and preston for raising thoughtful questions to try to get the core issues about how we serve the people of the city. Everyone of the supervisors that has really conscious of who they represent and a lot of people they represent are low income people. Should be commended. The trickle down of housing has been bought into by a bunch of people that have no experience, real experience in building housing. The people that really build Affordable Housing i heard here across the board are having questions about thank you. We have to move to the next speaker. Next speaker, please. Hi. This is adam from d6 and i just wanted to reiterate, we desperately need more homes in San Francisco. There is not enough to meet the demand. We heard a lot about developer, but what we are not talking about all the Property Owner who made millions over the years. In the 70s before downzoning gentrification, the haight was 40 percent black. [indiscernible] pushed forth downzoning across the city. May thaid aload of money for Property Owners in the haight and throughout the city over the years by blocking new housing. We had projects like Trinity Plaza which eliminated some but replaced with more rent controlled housing then there before. If we do nothing the builder remedy is coming. I support the legislation and say, if you want to vote no and let the builder remedy come. Thank you for sharing comments. Next speaker, please. Hello. My name is Gilbert Williams with the rep coalition. I just want to remind the board that in the last 8 years we saw 8 thousand units short of the Affordable Housing goals. Increasing homelessness in the city and falling behind will be disastrist for the city. The current Housing Element commitss us to build 57 percent of our new housing as affordable for low and moderate income. There is nothing in this legislation that addresses that. I havent heard any conversation around that and it is really disappointing. We deserve better as a city. I strongly urge the board to reject this and concentrate on what is needed in the city. Affordable housing for very low, low and moderate income. Thank you. They think Gilbert Williams for sharing comments. Next speaker, please. Good afternoon. San francisco residents Business Owner and licensed engineered. A lot of issues brought up today but me we spend on the front line of [indiscernible] housing crisis every day. The majority of the clients [indiscernible] living in Old Buildings no longer serving us. Every day come face to face with actual physical condition of San Francisco building and we have to give a grade it is d for desperate. Been two years in a hearing or Something Like that and thousand s of dollars for buildings with no saving value doesnt help with housing or equity issues. This legislation is about improving a process we all know isnt working. We all know we are notorious with bureaucracy which is unaffordable for everyone because time is money. The name is literally constraints reduction. Something we all agree on by rejecting this legislation thank you. Next speaker, please. Yes, good afternoon. Can you hear me . Yes, please begin. Thank you. Bridget maily, former president of San Francisco landmark advisory board. This legislation will have grave consequences on our city on multiple levelsism the legislation takes away the ability of neighbors, members of the public, neighborhood associations, tenants and tenants rights advocates to be notified of projects and limit how we engage in the consistersation how we build and what we build in our city. I encourage you to start from scratch. This is not what we need. We need affordal housing. This legislation encourage market rate housing. We dont need more market rate housing, there are thousand Units Available and many vacant units. I also have serious concerns about the impact of this legislation on the neighborhood character and parks we all appreciate in our city and bring millions of tourist dollars to our community. Why is this legislation needed . We have already thank you for sharing comments. Sorry to cut you off, we have to move to the next speaker. Can we please be connected now . Good afternoon. [indiscernible] with united to save the mission, the rep coalition and the Latino Task Force asking you reject this legislation. The peg sud and this legislation exclude many critdical communities and provides nor protections against displacement refusing to [indiscernible] displacement acceleration while simultaneously incentivizeing the production of market rate housing through deregulation is a path to increase homelessness and demand for deeply Affordable Housing when we currently have all most insurmountable deficit. [indiscernible] opened late 2020, 9010 houses applied for 115 units. Since then the need has grown expotentially. Homelessness in the Latinx Community increased by 55 percent. Our rent controlled units hold 1217 people per unit. Each unit lost is not inconsequential. We need to see creation of housing legislation thank you. Could we hear from the next speaker, please . Good afternoon chair melgar, supervisor preston, president peskin. Francisco [indiscernible] cultural foundation, united save the mission and Latino Task Force. Please reject the proposal which is irresponsible legislation and unresponsive to the needs of families earning 2050 thousand a year. It is violation of furthering the fair housing, which is detailed in the present Housing Element. Thank you very much. Thank you. Next speaker, please. Have we found unattended line . Perhaps we come back around. Sorry, i unmuted. I have a comment how home owners made millions. There are plenty that have not made millions. Some of these laws will effect the[indiscernible] so it is not just home owners, it is things they are not considering with the financial thing saying if they sell their house and get into one of the units they are better off. They wont be better off. They have to pay capital gains, they wont have as much Financial Freedom or did not have a mortgage and low property taxes because they worked hard for it or bought it when they thought they couldnt afford anything decades ago. They will lose a lot of the Financial Freedom and power and be in a worse situation and may be a poor soul on the streets we are all concerned about. All making millions from their own home, sorry that is just not always the case. Thank you. Thank you. Next speaker, please. Hi. Good afternoon. My name is amy binard, i spent many years developing Affordable Housing with Community Based non profit and participating with the race equity Planning Coalition. I urge you to reject this unnecessary and potentially devastating legislation. Experience in the previous rhna cycle when housing were on steady crimes developers flooded the market with units far beyond the reach of most san franciscanss. Not hindered by process not at all. [indiscernible] Affordable Housing Development Needs money and sites. This legislation is hodgepodge of code changes instead of enabling 50 thousand units of Affordable Housing we desperately need. A gift to developers and diversion from the Housing Element goals you recently adopted and urge you to reject this now and redirect your attention to the real work needed allocating funding for Affordable Housing and identifying and acquiring sites across the city. Thank you for hearing my comments today. Thank you for sharing comments. Next speaker, please. Good afternoon. [indiscernible] Green Belt Alliance and strong supporter of [indiscernible] needs to remove barriers to spur Housing Development. There is need and demand for new housing in the bay area all income levels and question isnt whether [indiscernible] but where. Vast majority of housing built is Single Family sprawl in the Central Valley to shift the paradigm we need big city [indiscernible] like San Francisco to start changing policy making easier to build the housing we need where we need it. Environmentally sustainable in climate resilient ways. The ordinance will do just that. Thank you. Thank you. Next speaker, please. Good afternoon. Jonathan [indiscernible] resident of district 2 and a lead northern neighbors Neighborhood Group here. I urge you to support this legislation. It is absolutely critical to attack our housing crisis headon and this is only a small piece of it, but necessary piece in a city where processes are unpredictable and add up to real cost prohibiting the kind of Infill Development we desperately need to fight climate change. Besides all that, it is just very clear that if you do not pass this legislation, hcd will have to step in and do something if the city is un[indiscernible] tackling the housing shortage and so you absolutely have to have this legislation to make good on the Housing Element promises you already made and make sure we tackle our extremely dire housing shortage. Thank you. Thank you. Madam chair, we have no further callers in the queue. Alright. Thank you so much mr. Clerk. Public comment on this item is now closed. I understand that president peskin wanted to ask a few questions of one of the commenters who had presented some data that we didnt quite finish, and go ahead. If i in my Unlimited Power of inquiry could ask mrs. Rom to present the balance of her slides. I know they are in the record but it would be etifying to see them. Thank you so much president peskin, chair melgar for allowing to finish going through these numbers. So, i believe i reached this slide where i was showing a deep dive on a three year page starting from 2018 reveal the vast majority of the cu were business change of use and when it came to dr majority involves Single Family homes. Looking at dr filed in 2018 against project with Single Family homes, reveal the great majoritysorry, overhead is not showing this. So, looking closely at the numbers for 2018 where dr were filed for Single Family homes, we find out that 26 of them were for expansions with no added units. As the green section of the pie chart shows, only 7 projects dr were proposals to add one or more units. The rest that are shown in the shades of gray were expansions alterations or legalizing unpermitted work. This is problem supervisor mandelmans monster home tackled. Expanding and tearing down small homes do not add units. Moving on to showing the pattern forim sorry. Just making sure that i [indiscernible] sorry about that. So, moving on to do a deep dive for conditional use authorization for 2018, the highest number was as you see for non residential, and the second one comes down to Single Family homes. As i said before, the vast majority of non residential cu were for change of use. Now lets look at cu for Single Family homes in the same year. As the green section of the pie chart shows there were more proposals for Single Family homes that added units. But, when you look at the ones that did not add units, while obviously this is something that chair melgar your legislation actually took care of, so there is no problem. Right now we will not have conditional use authorization for Single Family home s and the ones that generated units as you see on the pie chart in the green section of the pie chart, that is great. Something actually happened, demolition happened that actually brought more units. But the oneit isnt insignificant if you look at the merger units and those in the red, these were getting rid of units. One other thing that i would like to actually point out and that is the dr for multiunit buildings. That is also of value to cover, because there was a discussion about rent controlled homes, multiunits that basically demolition is going to be protected against demolition because sp330 will come to the rescue or maybe this particular proposal is going to be amended to out law demolition of tenant occupied housing. I just wanted to show this slide that actually shows that even with respect to existing multiunits buildings, we do have quite a bit that were expanded with no added units. Now, that brings me to the point i would like to make and i wish this was somewhat covered in this discussion, that it isnt just demolition. You know there is a concept called rent eviction where tenants get moved out and bought out because the building is going to be expanded and as you know, our demolition law and what the threshold that is described for what is constitutes demolition in this city is very very lax. So, often times what comes across as demolition, what is truly demolition comes across as renovation and goes through. So, not giving notice, be it demolition or alteration to tenant occupied housing does not serve the tenants who happen to make up 64 percent of the city, the majority of residents. I urge you as you think about amendments, think about how we could protect the unprotected properties in this town. Thank you so much for allowing me to go through this. Sorry it was a little out of sync. I really appreciate you doing all the data crunches. That is good work. Thank you. President peskin. Thank you chair melgar and thank you mrs. Rom. Going back to supervisor mandelman baby with bath water, if what we are after is Additional Units, Additional Units, that seems to be what we are after director hillis is nodding in the affirmative, then why dont we just focus maybe a question to the mayor representative, why dont we just focus this on constraints reductions for those things . So, when you are dealing with dr for expansions and happens to be eviction, why do we care about constraints there because thats a opportunity for somebody to say there were in the midst of rent eviction. But, if the mission and objective is and think we all agree we want this, more units, then how about we reduce constraints there and then 317 and 311 and dr still apply in these other areas where you are not getting Additional Units . Why not . Thank you for the question. Happy to take that feedback back to colleagues and set up conversation for that conversation to happen. Can we have mr. Hillis . To answer your question, a lot of thisi think currently 317, you can expand the Single Family home. You can expand a Single Family home to 4,000 square feet as long as it fits in the envelope of the planning code. You cant tear down that home and build three 1200 square foot units. I think some of this is trying to get at that, like allowing that to happen. I dont think we are saying we encourage demolition of Single Family homes everywhere, but right now the incentive is to expand the Single Family home. It is economically probably more valuable and the process is easier. I think we are trying to say, level that Playing Field and if not demoing Historic Building that had tenants, allow for the opportunity to convert that into a three unit building where the underlying zoning and your legislation allows for that. I think in a lot of cases this does that. Allow for a large lot in rh2 districts to have four units if it is greater then 25 by hundred foot lot. 50 by a hundred, allow it to have 4 units. That is what the under lying zoning is getting at. Now you need a cu to do that. I think this is getting at some of that. Does all the do it . We can argue about it but think a lot of the legislation is trying to do that. Im arguer for playing bigger ball which is like the legislation i did on a temperary basis that the Planning Commission heard to make permanent the outcome before the committee before too much longer, which is if you want to expandmonster home, we are saying that path is much more difficult. If you want to build three units that path is going to be a lot smoother. Im not thats not the case now. In your legislationyou spent a lot of time rezoning to allow for four units, six units on the e corner. The approval now is much more difficult to build the 3 our 4 units then to expand the Single Family home. Can i ask a question while you are still up there . The question that you are nodding in the negative while supervisor mandelman was talking about the board and care homes. This doesnt get rid of that, nor the land romat cu. It calls out a couple cu that it does eliminate [multiple speakers] laundry facility. I didnt think so. Did you have something to say . I would like to make a motion that we approve the amendments read into the record by mr. Star that were requested by the mayors office. Lets vote on that and then ill make a motion to adopt my amendments. Motion offered by chair melgar to accept the amendments read into the record by the Planning Department. On the motion vice chair preston, aye. Member peskin, aye. Chair melgar, aye. Madam chair, no opposition. Thank you. I like to make another second motion to approve the amendments that i read into the record. Did you want to Say Something supervisor peskin . Go ahead. I assume that all of these will end up in one new file and if through the chair to deputy City Attorney nelson, you can show them in two different colors to track which were the melgar amendments and which were the mayor Planning Department amendments . That would be helpful for everybody i think. Thank you. Thank you. Motion on the floor offered by the chair to accept the amendments tha she prepared for the committee. On that motion, vice chair preston, aye. Member peskin, aye. Chair melgar, aye. Madam chair, once again no opposition. Thank you. I to make a motion to continue this item to our meeting on october 16. On the motion to continue the ordinance as amended to date certain of october 16 in this committee, preston, aye. Member peskin, aye. Chair melgar, aye. No opposition madam chair. Thank you. Mr. Clerk, lets go back to item number 2. Item 2 is still called but i will mention once again it is ordinance amending the code to delegate board of supervisor approval and admin code 2330 to Real Estate Division and mayor office of housing and Community Development to amend existing leases regarding residual rent payment and lender protection for 100 percent affordsal housing project. Madam chair, we did hear and close public comon comment on this item. President peskin. Thank you chair melgar. As i indicated earlier, i would like to make two amendments on page 2, line 12 to delete the words, enter into and so that reads the authority to amend and then thank you to deputy City Attorney ann pierson for adding our changing subsection 6 to read other then modify the lease as authorized under subsection a5 of section 2 this ordinance of this ordinance, the amendment does not a, materially increase the liability or obligations of the city under the lease or b, change the duration of the lease or c, impose any other new obligations on the city or d, materially decrease the benefits to the city with respect to the property under the lease and my understanding is that language is acceptable to counsel from the mayor office of housing. You want to make a motion . I like to make those amendments to item number 2. For clarity for this through the chair to member peskin, just those two amendments or as well the amendment and the amendments introduced at the last minute, yes. The textual amendments provided by the department and the spot amendments in committee today. On the motion, vice chair preston aye. Peskin, aye. Melgar, aye. Madam chair, no opposition. Okay. Do you want to make a motion we i send this to the clerk or you send to the clerkyou got it. I would like to move to send the item as three times amended to full board with positive recommendation. On the motion the ordinance be sent to board of supervisors as amended with recommendation of Land Use Committee, vice chair preston, aye. Member peskin, aye. Chair melgar, aye. There is no opposition madam chair. Thank you so much. Mr. Clerk, do we have any other items on the agenda . No further business. Okay, we are adjourned. [meeting adjourned] [music] San Francisco developing programs specific low to increase the amount of Affordable Housing throughout the city. The Affordable Housing Bonus Program provides developers to include more housing for i have low, low, moderate and middle income households. This program does not rely on public subsidies but private developers who include it part of their project. Under california density bonus law. Housing prejudices that include affordable on site may be request a density bonus. It is an increase in the number of Housing Units allowed under zoning laws and based on affordable units being provided. However, the state law does not address all of San Francisco needs does not incentivize middle Income Housing. Associating the city is proposing an Affordable Housing Bonus Program for higher levels of Development Including middle income u firsts providing a stream lined application review and approval process. How does the program work in it applies to mixed use corridors in San Francisco. And offers incentives to developers who provide 30 of affordable in projects. To reach 30 , 12 of the units must be affordable to low income household and 18 per minute nap to middle income households. In exchange developers will will build more and up to additional 2 stories beyond current zoning regulations. 1 huh human affordable will be offered up to 3 additional stories beyond current regulations. Each building will be required conform to guidelines ensuring meets with the character of the area and commercial corridors. This program is an opportunity to double the amount of Affordable Housing and directly address the goals established by twenty 14 hosing element and prospect k paddled by voters last year. Pacificly, prop circumstance established a goal that 33 of all new housing permanent to low and moderate incomes this program will be the first to prosecute void permanent affordable projects that include middle income households. To learn more about the program visit