See 50 of the units under this program be affordable to low and moderate income as defined by the way i just did. So lowincome is below 60 moderate many income below 120 one we think that ultimately even though this exceeds the targets that we saw in proposition k, we think its a valuable use of the asset of the city to try to sort of engineer change in the boder market, demonstrate opportunities and really figure out what he can do to sort of super Housing Construction in the areas that hasnt been as robust as the market rated sector. I wanted to reiterate the point earlier, through this analytical process, our work determines that a site is not a good fit for housing and the exampling that was brought up to us in a per pdr district, i think we see beneficial reuse opportunities as benefiting the city atlarge and the city could coordinate with the owner agency to make that happen obviously through community en[tkpwaeuplts ] and engagement with the policymakers. So were not leaving asi
Neighborhood into the San Francisco grid, which will be a big improvement. I did see one thing on view 5. 313 and this is only an alternative. But it does show a very well articulated area, but then it shows an area that looks like its almost the same height. I think this is probably this is a reduced development alternative. So i dont think that is representative of what the project would be looking like in the planned alternative. But i want to make sure that all the parts of the development are wellarticulated and are not just the same height all along in any part of the development. So that was one area that i wasnt quite sure what its going to look like in the preferred alternative. Of course, the inclusion of retail is very important, and the open space. Those are a couple of other things. And finally, the transportation issue, which was raised by many speakers. I mean, i think some attention should be given to looking at trying to get some sort of extension from the 3rd street l
Not only in the lowincome area, but in the moderate income area. I think that plays out from a number of different issues. Part of which is that there arent as many or as sort of effective subsidy sources to actually provide the low market rate between 80120 of area median income. We think that is a critical part of moving forward and getting through this Housing Affordability challenge, that the city is now in. So we are trying to set up an approach to these sites that is not only transparent to the public, but allows to us analyze and bring forward new opportunities to demonstrate strategies especially in this income level. But obviously we do want to support the Mayors Office on housing moh pipeline of housing projects because of subsidies that allow these project those move forward, to find the sites that hit that sweetspot and can be feasible and move forward and develop housing for people who really need it. So were sitting up overall portfolio goals today. We would like to ident
Or i or don faulk would know if they were discussing this with Senior Housing developers. They met with tndc project managers, doing a preliminary analysis that went to the Mayors Office of housing. They said they were very interested in it. Now can this site be available . You had turned down the conditional use. So we decided with don that the logical thing would be to get in touch with the Methodist Church and find out. The result was that this lawyer told the methodist that they shouldnt get involved with it and each and every methodist i talk to, they are all interested in Senior Housing, but the lawyer said no. So what was the result . Tndc was subpoenaeded and threatened with litigation and they had a lot of expense. I think you have heard about that. So they want to come forward and do the full analysis, which might be thousands of hours and the offer that they were told would be welcomed after the judge ordered them to talk. All right . Now the methodist administrator said we