Comparison of similar cases. Every Single Family house is very different. But if you can just give us some perspective on whenever this sits on other mandatory dr cases you have seen. I will defer this to washington. We evaluate this case based on the criteria. Essentially they that had majority of those particular findings to support. As far as trying to job my memory specifically on projects where we have had residential alterations that resulted in creation of a unit that was substantially smaller than what may have been the original configuration when the structure was 1st built, unfortunately i cant think of any specific ones where we had. It has come up. It has been approved in the past. Ideally we prefer the flats, the units be similar to how it was originally constructed, but again that was with this project, it complied with our basics to be able to support the request. But that was a concern. We did mention that to the project sponsors. And again, it is their program that i t
Commissioner antonini. Commissioner hillis. Commissioner moore. Commissioner sugaya. Commissioner fong and commissioner president wu. So moved, commissioners, that motion passes unanimously 7 to zero and places you, mr. Commission matter questions or comments commissioners, i want to follow up on the matter that was raised at last weeks hearing by commissioner moore for the conditions of approval on bush street i reviewed the hearing tape and indeed the staff presenter glen did indeed read the amendment regarding this affordability exponent on the presentation i wanted to follow up with you and the viewing audience. Thank you commissioner antonini. Yeah. Interesting article that will be pertinent for the discussion that follows and it was in the New York Times on sunday june 8th dealt with Affordable Housing in new york city the system is different then here thats a volunteer system if the building sponsor agrees they have to provide 20 percent affordable and they get 33 percent more S
Know, file for a project application and say i want to increase the state law technically. I believe the developer could make a contention but i dont want to opine on that. Sorry christian staff if the developer wants to get a bulgsz request the state law spells it out and a bunch of progress to go to throw a special district with we have to apply and go through for entitlement for a lot of the affordability projects so the project sponsors. Thats for one hundred percent of Affordable Housing projects. Right so we will expand the program and spell out the steps that have a telephone or 20 percent level of fooblts as well. I think given theres already a state law it makes sense we kind of create a standard by which we could move forward with prop c we reduce the be affordability but this could help for the creation of more unit do i think thousands of developers are going to do it no. If new york is an example there might be a few people but were not changing the height and bulk and all
Been great about it but mr. Ram can elaborate i can ice this one we actually have a sdrugs discussion if the developers provide affordable units were allowed to give them more density but we have the inclusionary housing requirement we are looking at brown where it might happen and thats sort of thing but that housing density law has been in place for a number of years and were looking at to implement it. It doesnt actually have a threshold number obviously to be implemented thats the difference here couldnt the dispensary theoretically, you know, file for a project application and say i want to increase the state law technically. I believe the developer could make a contention but i dont want to opine on that. Sorry christian staff if the developer wants to get a bulgsz request the state law spells it out and a bunch of progress to go to throw a special district with we have to apply and go through for entitlement for a lot of the affordability projects so the project sponsors. Thats
Know, file for a project application and say i want to increase the state law technically. I believe the developer could make a contention but i dont want to opine on that. Sorry christian staff if the developer wants to get a bulgsz request the state law spells it out and a bunch of progress to go to throw a special district with we have to apply and go through for entitlement for a lot of the affordability projects so the project sponsors. Thats for one hundred percent of Affordable Housing projects. Right so we will expand the program and spell out the steps that have a telephone or 20 percent level of fooblts as well. I think given theres already a state law it makes sense we kind of create a standard by which we could move forward with prop c we reduce the be affordability but this could help for the creation of more unit do i think thousands of developers are going to do it no. If new york is an example there might be a few people but were not changing the height and bulk and all