in under ceqa the interim controls should pickup that up there was an report for the emeralds a sub component he read it when i first became a commissioner that was not adopted i want to understand the interim controls overlaying it how document or on the money and help to inform whatever documentation needs to be handed in under our sdmdz something i'm raise that issue for the other issues mentioned by the conversion of the sro hotels to tourist hotels on short-term rentals all that needs to be turned in to into the enforcements planning and planning department we understand exactly what is happening i think the short-term rentals legislation that was passed should go a long time with the interim controls up to thirty days the other portion of this we have approved demolition of a multi story building down to the frame next to a school willing over the top of a school in the neighborhood i'm concerned again, the health of the children i want to make sure that the plan the project sponsor has for the construction all that stuff a well documented and he had community understand that

what would the mission describe when you start the emeralds plan who is it the mission and what housing were projected in terms of income level for the housing because the plan was adopted in december of '08 guess what we've had pardon me 898 we've had amazing changes in that 98 we have had recessions a lot of vest on housing in the community and we've had google buses from santa fe to make amuse salaries to come into the mission so we've had people make serious suggestions and what you should actually have a staff person at every meeting they're checking off the box of names their defective to say at at least and staff has to learn with the developers are saying the standards to apply are just as important as having a hearing a hearing without staff really knowing what the content of the area plan is what the consent of the general plan, what the conditional use standards are not a hearing it is going through the motion we've had a lot of that in the city so i would basically is a you have your operating on an eastern neighborhoods area plan that is magnificentlyly 0 up to date

ericson and president of emerald fund. just one point before i address this issue. i was on the committee that senator leno's committee on affordable housing. i went to meetings for nine months every wednesday at 12:00 o'clock and contrary to what supervisor peskin says we considered economics of that affordable housing very, very carefully, spent an enormous amount of time on it and widely supported by many of the market rate developers contrary to what supervisor peskin says. i was one of them. i worked very hard on it. it was very good legislation and that should be the way what we approach this legislation. we should do an economic analysis to make sure it's prudent. i have passed out a letter that was signed by the people who build, develop and construct well over 90% of the housing in the city. you can not build despite what supervisor peskins and i would love to hear the names of these individuals. you cannot build with 25%. it is impossible. it drives the land below zero. you can't do it. you have raised this twice that you talked individually. i have had budgets run by six of the

streamlining so the comments typically one hundred unit in the emeralds and they're providing the unit onsite and have a large project authorization and getting some of the more reserving requested rear yard closer and open space so that will not be eligible there are exceptions they're requesting look at a 15 unit project in the rc-4 providing their that unit obesity and coming in with a clufks u conditional use authorization because the building so is over 50 feet in height and rear yard they'll have a class of 32 exception there is not eligible because there is a a variance the variance is counted in the exception take a similar project but let's remove the variance and they're coming in are a conditional use authorization for the height this is potentially eligible as kur7b9 drafted, however, take the same project with the conditional use authorization for height but let's say located in the upper tenderloin historic conservation district because this is a national district no longer be eligible for the streamlining process so there are a number of potential considerations that may

affordable housing bonus plan lick the emeralds and market octavia that is a great question but we have a good answer for that first, i want to put in context the affordable housing bonus program compared to market octavia and eastern neighborhoods those plan areas were smaller in size and increased did density in those neighborhoods by 40 or 50 percent and the case of eastern neighborhoods we're talking about converting a neighborhood into a residential feel so there was a lot of from that was necessary to support that new residential development the case of those affordable housing bonus program on average we're increasing the density by 6 percent rather than 40 or 50 some neighborhoods up to 23 percent but the sail is so different pan at area plans i agree we need a response on the infrastructu infrastructure. >> so what is our response so right now there's been a really big change how the city plans for capital improvement plan it started about a couple of years before the area plans were adopted this committee bricks together many of the different capital agencies and really deputies

, i'm against the continuance this is the same thing we tried to pass emeralds or eastern neighborhoods the very people that want the continuance are the same ones we don't want to go project by project we want rules to follow and when the project conform to the rules they should be approved now not good enough blaming everything on the project we pass those interim controls and we have crafted with other projects some reasonable accommodations which shouldn't be necessary but i think in deference to those people that don't represent the community certain people are certain points of views that everyone in the mission district or money in the smaller proposed cultural district there are a lot of people that live there all kinds of ethic groups and we have to represent them going i don't like the tail wagging the doggy will accommodate some concerns by making suggestions hopefully getting it done today first of all, i think we can drop the amount of parking drop it 10 stalls and use some of that space to address the most important thing that's replacement of pdr i would lik

supervisors during the emeralds rezoning they tell you where they wanted housing and how much pdr we need and not and where they wanted the pdr to go this so-called carve out contradicts the eastern neighborhoods rezoning and undermines the mission controls and not part of term sheet adopted at the board of supervisors with an 11 to zero vote thank you. >> good afternoon. commissioners mission recipient working for mission and office of economic workforce development and finally we come today, i that being asked to provide more affordable housing and i think this is a good thing because everyone has to put responsibility on part of solution and we are all happy we're increasing the inclusionary housing and i still there are many things to develop i think even the private developers have more inclusionary housing from the mission we have been fighting because we have been displaced because a lot of pdr has been cross and the jobs for our people the blue collar jobs like the union people to be supporting and more affordable housing in the mission we don't want to grandfather the mission we

same thing we tried to pass emeralds or eastern neighborhoods the very people that want the continuance are the same ones we don't want to go project by project we want rules to follow and when the project conform to the rules they should be approved now not good enough blaming everything on the project we pass those interim controls and we have crafted with other projects some reasonable accommodations which shouldn't be necessary but i think in deference to those people that don't represent the community certain people are certain points of views that everyone in the mission district or money in the smaller proposed cultural district there are a lot of people that live there all kinds of ethic groups and we have to represent them going i don't like the tail wagging the doggy will accommodate some concerns by making suggestions hopefully getting it done today first of all, i think we can drop the amount of parking drop it 10 stalls and use some of that space to address the most important thing that's replacement of pdr i would like project sponsor to commit to doing whatever i don't ne

helpful how what would the mission describe when you start the emeralds plan who is it the mission and what housing were projected in terms of income level for the housing because the plan was adopted in december of '08 guess what we've had pardon me 898 we've had amazing changes in that 98 we have had recessions a lot of vest on housing in the community and we've had google buses from santa fe to make amuse salaries to come into the mission so we've had people make serious suggestions and what you should actually have a staff person at every meeting they're checking off the box of names their defective to say at at least and staff has to learn with the developers are saying the standards to apply are just as important as having a hearing a hearing without staff really knowing what the content of the area plan is what the consent of the general plan, what the conditional use standards are not a hearing it is going through the motion we've had a lot of that in the city so i would basically is a you have your operating on an eastern neighborhoods area plan that is magnificentlyly 0 up to

that is the way we should be viewing this situation think of people as individuals i know that emeralds took 10 years we've bone on this two years these myers are productive sxhivengs as identified a lot of things that need to be looked and the historic part is really important ways we don't want to see a incentive to destroy a lot of our historic houses of they don't qualify because it is what people come to san francisco because we have victorians or eras we want to preserve we should incentivizes towards gas stations no longer here and other types of uses that are a little bit better certificate sites not saying out of the question having others included and also been stated there's an overproduction of market-rate housing not true under production relative to a demands for housing at high prices that exceeds and will continue to exceeds productions and is invading and will invade the housing stock that is what it is all about i know that some i've heard opposition to building housing for middle-income residents but, you know, they're going to be here out of college and group and col

same thing we tried to pass emeralds or eastern neighborhoods the very people that want the continuance are the same ones we don't want to go project by project we want rules to follow and when the project conform to the rules they should be approved now not good enough blaming everything on the project we pass those interim controls and we have crafted with other projects some reasonable accommodations which shouldn't be necessary but i think in deference to those people that don't represent the community certain people are certain points of views that everyone in the mission district or money in the smaller proposed cultural district there are a lot of people that live there all kinds of ethic groups and we have to represent them going i don't like the tail wagging the doggy will accommodate some concerns by making suggestions hopefully getting it done today first of all, i think we can drop the amount of parking drop it 10 stalls and use some of that space to address the most important thing that's replacement of pdr i would like project sponsor to commit to doing whateve

the way we should be viewing this situation think of people as individuals i know that emeralds took 10 years we've bone on this two years these myers are productive sxhivengs as identified a lot of things that need to be looked and the historic part is really important ways we don't want to see a incentive to destroy a lot of our historic houses of they don't qualify because it is what people come to san francisco because we have victorians or eras we want to preserve we should incentivizes towards gas stations no longer here and other types of uses that are a little bit better certificate sites not saying out of the question having others included and also been stated there's an overproduction of market-rate housing not true under production relative to a demands for housing at high prices that exceeds and will continue to exceeds productions and is invading and will invade the housing stock that is what it is all about i know that some i've heard opposition to building housing for middle-income residents but, you know, they're going to be here out of college and group and col

for the emeralds a sub component he read it when i first became a commissioner that was not adopted i want to understand the interim controls overlaying it how document or on the money and help to inform whatever documentation needs to be handed in under our sdmdz something i'm raise that issue for the other issues mentioned by the conversion of the sro hotels to tourist hotels on short-term rentals all that needs to be turned in to into the enforcements planning and planning department we understand exactly what is happening i think the short-term rentals legislation that was passed should go a long time with the interim controls up to thirty days the other portion of this we have approved demolition of a multi story building down to the frame next to a school willing over the top of a school in the neighborhood i'm concerned again, the health of the children i want to make sure that the plan the project sponsor has for the construction all that stuff a well documented and he had community understand that should this project move forward i think that is the third project we've had

and president of emerald fund. just one point before i address this issue. i was on the committee that senator leno's committee on affordable housing. i went to meetings for nine months every wednesday at 12:00 o'clock and contrary to what supervisor peskin says we considered economics of that affordable housing very, very carefully, spent an enormous amount of time on it and widely supported by many of the market rate developers contrary to what supervisor peskin says. i was one of them. i worked very hard on it. it was very good legislation and that should be the way what we approach this legislation. we should do an economic analysis to make sure it's prudent. i have passed out a letter that was signed by the people who build, develop and construct well over 90% of the housing in the city. you can not build despite what supervisor peskins and i would love to hear the names of these individuals. you cannot build with 25%. it is impossible. it drives the land below zero. you can't do it. you have raised this twice that you talked individually. i have had budgets run by six of the

emerald green will soon bring up. i can model it. i could model it. that sort of what i see around town. i'm so proud to represent this business to feel so strongly about this and so much a part of san francisco and ipo is such a legacy and so important to the culture and look of this city. we become important to the education community. we become important to the designers i'm important to the di wires as the times change and people need different things we think really hard and dig deep and supplied them we have changed with the times. we also have a website in order to survive people worldwide. we are also proud to be a destination shop for people come from all over the world who make an effort to come to union square many times just to see-are big sign went up in 1964 and were so very proud of our son and you can see the sign from everywhere but tickly from union square and that often is the only sort of flagpole people have to come and see bright text. again, i'm very proud you've created this application just putting it together was fun. thank you. >>[applause] >> thank you.

. >> thank you very much. next speaker please. >> hi. my name is oz ericson and president of emerald fund. just one point before i address this issue. i was on the committee that senator leno's committee on affordable housing. i went to meetings for nine months every wednesday at 12:00 o'clock and contrary to what supervisor peskin says we considered economics of that affordable housing very, very carefully, spent an enormous amount of time on it and widely supported by many of the market rate developers contrary to what supervisor peskin says. i was one of them. i worked very hard on it. it was very good legislation and that should be the way what we approach this legislation. we should do an economic analysis to make sure it's prudent. i have passed out a letter that was signed by the people who build, develop and construct well over 90% of the housing in the city. you can not build despite what supervisor peskins and i would love to hear the names of these individuals. you cannot build with 25%. it is impossible. it drives the land below zero. you can't do it. you have raised this twic

much. next speaker please. >> hi. my name is oz ericson and president of emerald fund. just one point before i address this issue. i was on the committee that senator leno's committee on affordable housing. i went to meetings for nine months every wednesday at 12:00 o'clock and contrary to what supervisor peskin says we considered economics of that affordable housing very, very carefully, spent an enormous amount of time on it and widely supported by many of the market rate developers contrary to what supervisor peskin says. i was one of them. i worked very hard on it. it was very good legislation and that should be the way what we approach this legislation. we should do an economic analysis to make sure it's prudent. i have passed out a letter that was signed by the people who build, develop and construct well over 90% of the housing in the city. you can not build despite what supervisor peskins and i would love to hear the names of these individuals. you cannot build with 25%. it is impossible. it drives the land below zero. you can't do it. you have raised this twice that you

emerald fund. just one point before i address this issue. i was on the committee that senator leno's committee on affordable housing. i went to meetings for nine months every wednesday at 12:00 o'clock and contrary to what supervisor peskin says we considered economics of that affordable housing very, very carefully, spent an enormous amount of time on it and widely supported by many of the market rate developers contrary to what supervisor peskin says. i was one of them. i worked very hard on it. it was very good legislation and that should be the way what we approach this legislation. we should do an economic analysis to make sure it's prudent. i have passed out a letter that was signed by the people who build, develop and construct well over 90% of the housing in the city. you can not build despite what supervisor peskins and i would love to hear the names of these individuals. you cannot build with 25%. it is impossible. it drives the land below zero. you can't do it. you have raised this twice that you talked individually. i have had budgets run by six of the market rate

much. next speaker please. >> hi. my name is oz ericson and president of emerald fund. just one point before i address this issue. i was on the committee that senator leno's committee on affordable housing. i went to meetings for nine months every wednesday at 12:00 o'clock and contrary to what supervisor peskin says we considered economics of that affordable housing very, very carefully, spent an enormous amount of time on it and widely supported by many of the market rate developers contrary to what supervisor peskin says. i was one of them. i worked very hard on it. it was very good legislation and that should be the way what we approach this legislation. we should do an economic analysis to make sure it's prudent. i have passed out a letter that was signed by the people who build, develop and construct well over 90% of the housing in the city. you can not build despite what supervisor peskins and i would love to hear the names of these individuals. you cannot build with 25%. it is impossible. it drives the land below zero. you can't do it. you have raised this twice that you talke

department and the board of supervisors during the emeralds rezoning they tell you where they wanted housing and how much pdr we need and not and where they wanted the pdr to go this so-called carve out contradicts the eastern neighborhoods rezoning and undermines the mission controls and not part of term sheet adopted at the board of supervisors with an 11 to zero vote thank you. >> good afternoon. commissioners mission recipient working for mission and office of economic workforce development and finally we come today, i that being asked to provide more affordable housing and i think this is a good thing because everyone has to put responsibility on part of solution and we are all happy we're increasing the inclusionary housing and i still there are many things to develop i think even the private developers have more inclusionary housing from the mission we have been fighting because we have been displaced because a lot of pdr has been cross and the jobs for our people the blue collar jobs like the union people to be supporting and more affordable housing in the mission we don't wa