Skip to main content

tv   [untitled]    June 8, 2015 9:00am-9:31am PDT

9:00 am
elected officials i've not sown what or someone like what happened here today not seen a community so moved by what is happen on the ground that 8 housed into a hearing there are still people lined up to speak didn't doesn't happen just because so it is about the reason why those folks came out i asked you to ask yourselves what you do to pie colleagues if you're own district was golden o going drove 8 hours and hear from our constituents how power less they feel we have an opportunity to give this community a chance to take
9:01 am
charge of its own disney we may not agree but the fact should mean something. (clapping.) >> now let me say this is you know someone started the hearing in public comment this is our cell man thank you for the supervision for so many of us there are so many reasons this is important to people there's so many today, we're talking about a community that wants to preserve it's identity that wants - i hope colleagues have not decided that to the extent you air on the side of
9:02 am
giving this community the benefit of the doubt i believe they deserve that benefit i'll say this to our community and i'll end with this i hope my colleagues do the right thing i hope that mayor ed lee can work with us to do the right thing but i also know that this is not the end this is the continuation of a movement because we have started something in the mission and - regardless of what happens or didn't happen here tonight this community will continue to we're not going away i want to end up with this quote from a writer who said all the forces
9:03 am
in the world are not show powerful as an idea which time has spoken the idea builds housing for the middle-income and middle-income in san francisco is a time who's time has come thank you. >> 1 o'clock this hearing has been held and now filed madam clerk read item 39. >> an urgency items for the demolition of informs gain or loss of 5 or more resident unit for the distribution and create the permit for a hundred percent affordable housing in a portion of the mission plan funded by
9:04 am
the north side of caesar chavez and the west of bryant and route 101 and van ness and madam clerk call the roll. >> on item supervisor kim supervisor mar commissioner hwang no supervisor wiener. >> hold on just a second. >> supervisor cohen i was expecting an opportunity to ask questions for the staff i everything it is late we went straight to 0 vote i - >> i apologize supervisor cowen so supervisor cowen. >> thank you so alright madam president. >> so colleagues is there a motion by madam chair rosales
9:05 am
and supervisor farrell it has been rescinded at this time i'll recognize supervisor cowen. >> i have several questions about the policy discussion we have before us on this particular item a lot of the questions are district towards the staff how proximate causes and units will be impacted and schedule are affordable how many units will actually be affordable? >> the question is how many projects and units will be impacted by this legislation and .
9:06 am
>> thank you very much and sorry for the delay. too many notes. >> [inaudible] >> [inaudible] >> so our current pipeline shows that there are about 33 projects that would be in the area of mission moratorium that would be affected by the proposed ordinance and this is a total of 1574 net new units on
9:07 am
the line. all of these we do have the inclusionary requirement which is 12% so we know that the minimum will be met. when developers are going through the pipeline they declare whether they will actually build units after their approvals happen or provide fees to the mayor's office of housing that we can do the projects that the mayor's office of housing does and at this point there is a limited that are affordable but we would get the minimum and in addition some of the projects are subject to hiring requirements than the standard inclusionary. >> okay. it's really late and usually on a normal day i would be able to follow all of that. it's like 11:16 o'clock. >> [inaudible] >> excuse me. we're trying to deliberate so if members of the
9:08 am
public are going to continue with out bursts we will have you removed at this time. it is late in the hour and we want to get to a vote and respect the process and all the members of the board of supervisors to ask questions. thank you. >> so my question are there affordable proposed units that would be stopped under this legislation that wouldn't be allowed to go forward and being built? >> yes. if i was doing math i would do the 12% of the 1500. we could get out my iphone. >> [inaudible] >> thank you very much. the man is good. and so those are either units or in lou fees paid to the mayor's office of housing on the units. >> and the property on julian could be impacted? and clarify that project on 80 julian so the audience -- 80 julian.
9:09 am
>> i see 179 julian. 80 julian. 80 julian is -- >> supervisor campos correct me if i am wrong but i believe 80 julian say project for -- is it a halfway house? do you recall. >> i am showing it's a project with seven units. so i think the plan department has an application that states this is a eight unit supportive housing project for single mothers sponsored by a native american non-profit organization. >> so that you're telling me that could be tied up if this legislation moves forward? >> yes. that's on my list of affected projects. >> okay. okay. hold on. hold on. for these projects that have been proposed but not entitled has the sponsored indicated they plan to do on
9:10 am
site inclusionary or pay for fee? >> they're required to do one of those. >> i know they're required but in the pp a applications have they indicated one way or the other? >> are you asking for a specific project or in general? in general we have an indication there will be about 17 units on site. >> okay. how many units have been built in the mission over the last five years? >> in the last five years there have been about 500 units completed in the mission district. >> okay. how many of them have been affordable units? >> i'm showing nine-point 4% of those were affordable, about eight. >> eight? >> i'm sorry. oops. 141. >> 141 out of 500. so my next set of questions have to do with impact fees and the
9:11 am
infrastructure, so impact fees are not just used to fund affordable housing. they're also used to fund key infrastructure projects. in the eastern neighborhoods such as park and transit. many of you have heard a lot of discussion about the challenges that we are facing in the southeast that we have a over proliferation of buildings being built yet we don't have the infrastructure to support them so one of the things that i am concerned about is this impact if this legislation moves forward how will it impact these fees, these dollars? in particular i am concerned about the east-west traffic, public transportation from 16th and mission into the bay view -- dog patch neighborhoods, so my understanding that the impact fees generated in one neighborhood are not necessarily earmarked for the neighborhood. is that correct? >> that's correct. they're for the whole eastern neighborhoods
9:12 am
area. >> so when you're we're talking about impacts it impacts the mission and all of the neighborhoods in the planned area? >> that's correct. >> okay. so has the eastern neighborhood program, the expected impact fees from this project? >> yes, the citizens group worked with the staff to do programming every year and look at what projects are ready for funding and they kind of target out the projects they would like to get built. >> can you tell me what projects in the mission district are earmarked to receive the impact fees? >> okay. in the current listing the projects include but not limited to the 16th street 22 fillmore, rapid transit proves, disbar field square the aquatic center and pool
9:13 am
improvements and the jury commons and playground and the jose coronado playground and equipment and to rehabilitate the mission rec center. >> okay. correct me if i am wrong the eastern fees can. >> to fund any of the improvements throughout the plan? >> that's right. >> and the mission district requires that 75% of their fee revenue is required to go to affordable housing in the mission. >> that is only in one zoning district in the mission. that is for the mission nct. >> okay. only in one area and is there funding going to the other zones in the mission? >> for affordable housing? yes. >> okay. so i'm under the impression this is a large revenue source for them, and is that correct? >> yes.
9:14 am
>> do you know how much? can you quantify 75%? >> oh for just the 75%? yes the 75% -- it depends how long the moratorium is in place. if it's in place for the full -- to affect all of the pipeline projects it would be $7.2 million approximately. >> all right. so just a few weeks ago the board of supervisors unanimously supported federal funding application for the 22 fillmore /16 street rapid transit improvement. it's my understanding that some of the projected impact fees were developed to support this project. what would that impact be on the 22 extension without these fees? >> that would be a good question for muni. they're
9:15 am
currently thinking that these impact fees will go toward that fund. there maybe other funds that could be rearranged. i don't know the answer to that but i know it's affected by the loss of the funds. >> i see. can you tell me what the estimated impact fee lost if the legislation passs? >> overall for -- so we just went over -- it would be almost 2 million from just the one housing fee in the mission and for all of the inclusionary housing funds we're estimating that those would be 100 -- almost 125 million. >> 25 million or 125 million? >> 125 million. >> okay. just for the folks at home i noticed that supervisor campos shaking his head in disagreement. when i am done i will definitely turn it over to you so we can get a dialogue going. i have a
9:16 am
question for the mayor's office of housing. >> [inaudible] >> okay. i apologize that my back is to you mr. lee. are you ready? >> yes, i am. >> okay. what types of projects -- what types of projects does this -- should this legislation move forward -- how does it slow down given the fees are not used to fund a variety of affordable housing priorities? >> the mayor has budgeted -- has credited a very ambitious affordable housing budget in part to address many of the concerns that the members of the audience have raised today. i think we're all in concert about the need for more affordable housing, and the inclusionary fees or the impact fees are clearly a part of what is needed to fund what is a very ambitious
9:17 am
affordable housing goal. the mayor's goal is clearly the 10,000 deeply affordable units. they must be subsidized to make them financially feasible to leverage outside resources. and the types of housing that would be funded would include everything from senior housing to supportive housing to low rent housing to public housing so all the fees that are collected for the purposes of affordable housing get leveraged probably two times over. >> all right. a couple of questions for you olson on just the sites for possible acquisition so it's my understanding that the community working with the mayor's office has identified 13 possible sites. you have heard it in the comments from public comment,
9:18 am
and 13 possible sites in the mission that would be acquired and developed for affordable housing. could you please give us a sense of the process for acquisition of these sites? how long does it take? >> well, i'm not quite sure of the exact location of these 13 parcels that were identified -- >> [inaudible] >> i'm not quite sure of the exact locations of the parcels. i see the map but the map is not in the greatest detail that i can actually see it, so i do have that particular copy. i would like to say that even prior to this hearing after a walk down south venice with supervisor campos the mayor directed my staff to actively look at a variety of parcels in the mission, and we have done that. we're in the process of doing that. some of those
9:19 am
parcels might be these 13, but the mayor has directed staff to look at acquiring some of the parcels to preserve the affordable housing -- >> so can you -- >> what we found out in this process is that the mayor and supervisor campos walked down south van ness and the mayor looked at many sites along that walk and staff basically followed up with the owners of all those sites, sites that appear to be under utilized may have long-term leases on them. sites that may appear to be ripe for housing development maybe tied up with another use, or the owner may not be interested at all at selling their property housing, affordable or otherwise, so the process of
9:20 am
looking at those sites is really much more so than doing an analysis of sort of the capacities of the sites and whether -- what planning would call a "soft site" and would take us talking with the individual owner and seeing if the owner was actually interested in selling that site or not and at what price. given the run up and the prices of land and the expectations in the city overall the whole notion is also the question of is it appropriate price? >> can you -- >> so the fact it's a solve site does not necessarily mean it's available. >> >> i get it. maybe i can interject here briefly. what exactly is the city's process for acquisition? >> well the city's process for acquisition -- if we were to get into a letter of intent would be
9:21 am
to bring that property back to this board for authorization to actually enter into a purchase and sale agreement for the purposes of acquiring it for whatever real estate purposes on behalf of my department for the purposes of creating additional affordable housing. >> so what's the source of funds used for the acquisition? >> the sources of funds are varied. one of the things that again we had the luxury or we had the fortune of the mayor and the board seeing the need for additional affordable housing funds when the redevelopment agency went away, and through the vote of the people we have the housing trust fund, but the housing trust fund in of itself is not sufficient to cover all the -- to replace redevelopment funds in whole, so the mayor's
9:22 am
office of housing uses both the housing trust fund, federal funds, both community development block grant funds and home funds in addition to our inclusionary or jobs housing linkage fees. historically the mayor's office of housing relied predominantly on our linkage fees for their gap funding. in addition to the housing trust fund and the proposed housing bond that the mayor is proposing and bringing through the board process the mayor has also worked with the governor's office to try to recapture some of that redevelopment funding -- funds that were previously lost with disillusion, and the mayor announced the other day that one of the things that the trailer legislation would do finally passed would create an
9:23 am
additional $500 million in capacity for affordable housing in the remaining legacy project development areas and that would increase the budget that we have for our affordable housing over the next six years from 1.1 to 1.6 billion dollars for affordable housing which we hope to leverage two times over. >> so what are some of the tools available to use in order to help this real serious issue? >> the staff is working on a variety of things. as the mayor has mentioned in the past we're working on a variety of administrative things to speed up the approval of affordable housing. the mayor has provided an executive directive to all the city departments to expedite the approval of affordable housing. the mayor is also looking at a variety of changes in the inclusionary program that
9:24 am
would facilitate the production of affordable housing. we're looking at an affordable housing density program that would require -- would allow developers to have more height in exchange for doing more affordable housing above the baseline affordable housing, so and we're also looking at what we call the accelerated fund which would try to tie up parcels, more other housing in anticipation of the permanent funding from the city overall as well as the small sites program which was something started with the housing trust fund. a goal of the small sites fund and any other acquisition fund would be to acquire existing rent controlled buildings and preserve them as long-term affordable housing. >> so you said the [inaudible] fund and the small site program. what was the other one? >> i think it would be the
9:25 am
affordable housing density bonus would be another tool that we're trying to do in addition to changes in the inclusionary program which would facilitate additional on site and off site developments. >> has the department began to look at other zoning strategies or land preservation models? that's something you heard from public comment today. it could be applied to any one of the 13 sites. >> yes. i think i talked a lot bit tonight about the mission 2020 plan. this is a plan that would seek to ensure that the mission continues to house low income and moderate income residents and as this is an expedited planning process that is already under way and an eight month process that we expect to wrap uch this fall and the goal is retain and create
9:26 am
affordable housing as well as producing housing for low and middle income residents. >> okay. thank you. thank you. just i want take a moment and talk to the folks that are here. the reason why i am asking these questions because these are the kind of questions you need to have answers to should the 45 day pause happen. these are very important questions. the legislation that we have before us -- >> [inaudible] >> wow. >> [inaudible] (audience speaking). >> well thank you. i'm not ashamed of myself. i am actually very proud of myself because -- >> [inaudible] (audience talking). >> unfortunately i am asking questions to understand the impact would be and these are questions that everyone in the room needs to know about, so
9:27 am
supervisor campos i think you wanted to ask a couple of things and then i wanted to talk about one more thing. >> supervisor campos. >> i don't want to ask any questions. i just want to make a point about sort of this whole discussion and let me say that i think it's important for us ask the questions that need to be asked to the extent that people have them. i think that we need to have as much clarity but let me be very clear that the analysis that that supervisor cohen is engaged in is an analysis that needs to be had. we have in fact requested that the city's chief economists do that analysis, but as the economists noted to us for the question that is before this board which is the 45 days, the economist decided there is no
9:28 am
economic impact so he's not going to engage in that analysis. that analysis is an analysis that properly should be done if the board decides to do the 45 day pause, and i think that if the board does that then i think we should engage in this discussion, but with all due respect to planning when they're talking about 7.2 million, whatever the act amount is, that's not because of the 45 day that is before this board. that could very well be the impact if we approve something that goes up to two years beyond the 45 days but the question before this board right now is the 45 day pause, and that pause by any measure based on what we have heard from the economist, based what we heard from the budget and legislative analyst there is no impact. now, i look forward to working with you supervisor
9:29 am
cohen to figure out how we can address an impact going forward if the 45 day period is provided, but again the way that the law works is that you're supposed to engage in that conversation and that analysis once that 45 day period has been approved. >> thank you. supervisor cohen did you have any follow up questions? >> no. they all have been answered. thank you. >> thank you. supervisor kim. >> i just wanted to make a couple comments and first i just want to thank the audience and the community that came out today. seven hours of public comment and it's not that we haven't done that in san francisco before because we are san francisco and we can do that but i have to say this was an incredibly moving night for me and. [applause] -- and while at times heart breaking incredibly
9:30 am
inspirational and what i noted on the most tonight was the extraordinary number of young people that came out tonight. [applause] it is really heart warming to see san francisco residents born and raised here raising a new generation of leadership that is going to be leading the vision of the city and you're here in this room today, and all the older folks in the room it's great to see you. we have seen you here for many, many years for decades since i was an organizer in the neighborhood and i want to say thank you for tonight. [applause] >> supervisor mar. >> i just wanted to say to my colleague supervisor cohen they think the questions are really important. i agree with supervisor campos of the answers but i did want to address the commen