Transcripts For SFGTV Planning Commission 20240712

On each item on this agenda. Channel 26 and sfgovtv. Org are streaming the number across the screen. Each speaker will be allowed two minutes to speak. Theyre opportunities to speak during the Public Comment period are available by calling 415 6550001. Again, that number is 415 6550001. The meeting i. D. Is 1467294222. Again, thats 1467294222. Press pound and pound again. When connected, you will hear the meeting discussion but you will be muted and in listening mode only. When an interest of interest comes up dial star 3 to be added to the speaker line. Best practices are to call from a quiet location, speak clearly and slowly and turn down your television or radio. If you may submit Public Comment. Email myself to the lapped usee and traffic clerk at ericamajor. If you submit Public Comment a email it will be forwarded to the supervisors included as part of the official file. I was asked upon are expected to appear on the board of supervisor agenda on august 11th unless otherwise stated. Supervisor peskin thank you, madam clerk. Clerk item number one to allow arts activities and social service or philanthropic facilities and covid19 recovery activities as a temporary use in a vacant groundfloor commercial space and affirming appropriate findings. Members of the public who wish to provide Public Comment should call 415 6550001. The meeting i. D. Press pound and pound again. If you have not done so already please press star 3 to lineup to speak. You are only need to press this once to get in line. Thank you. Supervisor peskin thank you, ms. Major. Colleagues, we heard this last week. We had to continue it for one week given the amendments. I believe that ms. Amy bine art is here on behalf of the chief cosponsor of the legislation thats been co sponsored by myself, supervisor haney, supervisor fewer and ms. Binear, is there anything that you would like to say before i open this up to Public Comment . This is paul, supervisor and im staffing on this item. We contributed a lot to this agenda so i apologize for confusion. We appreciate supervisor peskin and preston and safai and encouraging legislation. We discussed in the week prior to make it more responsive to the covid19 were in so you will notice the amendments of helping facilitate the greater use of vacant spaces with covid19 recovery and response activities so we welcome any additional feedback from the public and will take any supervisor peskin colleagues , do you have any questions for the chief sponsor or members of the Planning Departments who are available for questions . No questions. Supervisor peskin im sorry, say that again . I just said no questions. Supervisor peskin got it. So, seeing none, madam clerk lets open this up for Public Comment. Clerk yes, mr. Chair. Operations can you check to see if there are callers in queue. If there are callers that are ready. If you have not done so press star 3 to be added to the queue and your hand is raised and you will be notified. Any callers . There are four callers in the queue. Supervisor peskin thank you. Caller hello, everyone. My name is mary. Im a resident of the district 1. Im also a parent and former student of city college, San Francisco. Im here today to comment on the balboa reservoir contract maam, maam. We are going to get to that item. That item is further down the calender. Im sorry, go ahead ms. Major. Clerk so, again. This is for item number 1. Its the planning code to allow arts activities and social service and philanthropic facilities in covid19 recovery activities. If you are in line for balboa, please press star 3 to get out of line. Next speaker, please, for item number one. Caller i was originally here for balboa but i also believe that having some form of arts and Services Open or accessible to the public is crucial in these times. Thank you for your comment. Feel free to comment on the balboa items later. Next speaker, please. Hello. Im here to address the issue of non essential construction that is taking place in tenant occupied multifamily apartment buildings in San Francisco. Am i in the right spot . Supervisor peskin no, sir. I am the author of that legislation. Its not on todays calender. There will be an opportunity to speak about that in the future. Today, it is not on our calender. Caller my apologies, we were given wrong information. Supervisor peskin there was a thought it would be on todays calender but it turned out not to be the case. Caller is that now posted elsewhere on the website . Supervisor peskin no, on the website you will not see it. We dont yet have a date. Were working on a date. Hopefully we will see it soon. It is not on todays calender. If you email me at aaron. Peskin sfg. Org i will have our office keep you informed. Caller ok. Excellent. Thank you, very much. Supervisor peskin thank you. Next speaker, please. Caller mr. Chair, that completes the queue. Ok. Public comment is now closed. Colleagues, do we have a motion to send this item as heard on july 20th, as amended on july 20th as heard today to the full board with recommendations . So moved. Moved by supervisor safai, madam clerk, on that motion a roll call, please. Clerk on the motion as stated, supervisor preston . Aye. Supervisor safai. Aye. Supervisor peskin. Aye. Clerk you have three ayes. Supervisor peskin thank you, madam clerk. Can you please read the next item. Clerk item number 2 is an or dennance amending b planning code for the conditional use and approval process and the application fee for a uses of commercial space and affirming appropriate findings if members of the public wish to provide Public Comment, call the number 415 6550001 and the meeting i. D. Is 14672942222. Press pound and pound again to speak. If you have not done so already press star 3 to lineup to speak. The system prompt will indicate you have raised your hand. When we get to Public Comment you will notify that you have been unmuted and you may begin your comments. Supervisor peskin thank you, ms. Imagine o i would like to thank my co sponsors, ronen, fewer and haney and invite my colleagues on this panel to feel free to join as co sponsors. I do really want to thank my chiefofstaff who came up with a catchy phrase, c. U. , conditional use. Commissioner mandelman had a report in march the meaning through this legislation and i think weve all experienced this, arose out of mine and other offices work to help Small Businesses through the permitting offices and where weve all repeatedly encountered frustrations as applications would get lost on the desks of staff at Planning Department or more often repeatedly be transferred from one planner to another. We also reeyes th rerealize thee storefront conditional uses to be treated in much the same manner as conditional uses for extremely large developments which were aimed at regulating things like off Street Parking consistent and curb cuts consistent with longstanding policies of the city. The poster child in my district for this legislation is inaudible which took some 340 days after submitting an application, which should have been streamlined and as i said earlier super mandelmans report really showed all of the deficiencies. The fundamental premise of this legislation is that rather than the first way, which is everything is subject to inaudible longtimeconsuming conditional use or second wave which is everything is principally permitted as a matter of right. What this legislation does is finds the third way. It gets rid of the conditional use process but still allows healthy, Meaningful Community input and dialogue and is we really dug into the Planning Departments Community Business priority Processing Program which they had some cute name for, which i cant remember, which the Commission Adopted by resolution in 2030 and it was well intended but has been less than perfectly implemented as demonstrated by accounting and more recently, tractortrailer big apple. And under this legislation, those projects who have been automatically eligible for a hearing on the consent calender of the Planning Commission within 90 days, not 365 days. And there is still a staff report that would have to address whether the project meets the criteria of conditions and that is necessary and desirable but theres no reason that Small Business owners, particularly during this pandemic, should be hiring lawyers and permit expediters to make their case. Lastly, this legislation, would slash the fees in half which is, i think, commonsense during this pandemic and i commend this legislation to you and with the support of the Small Business commission and i also will, in a minute, invite supervisor ronens office through a binard to address the committee and i want to thank supervisor ronen for being my first cosponsor on this effort. But most importantly, i want to thank a whole series of communitybased organizations and individuals. Betty lilly, with the china Town Merchants Association and the north Beach Business Association that voted unanimously to support this legislation and the Golden Gate Restaurant Association and the San Francisco chamber of commerce with that i would like to call on this. Amy im just unmuting myself and thank you so much. Chair peskin and Committee Members. Ledge lay supervisor peskin we can barely hear you. Is that better . I will speak loudly. So i just want to take two minutes, first to express supervisor ronens strong support for the legislation, which shes signed to as cosponsor. This legislation, for most neighborhoods is a reasonable and effective way to remove unnecessary burdens and costly delays for Small Businesses that are able to take the lead to get started during this time of so much uncertainty. But second in the main reason i wanted to speak is to thank supervisor peskin and especially legislative aid lee hephner for working with our office and the calle24 district on amendments that chair peskin is going to introduce today or has always speculated to the members. The calle 24 was added to the planning code in recognition of the need to protect the historyy and culture of the latino cultural district in the heart of the mission. Calle is not a destination but home to newcomers and long time families, artists, mom and pop stores and its been hit by overwhelming displays and now the brunt of the covid19 crisis. The cu process has been used by calle to ensure Community Input and to proactively and effectively engage with merchants to the corridor. Were happy to continue working with planning and the cultural district to refine how the c. U. Process works on 24th street but for now we really appreciate its being exempted from the new rules. I just want to say thank you. Supervisor peskin thank you. And, i do believe the originations of the 1986 neighborhood commercial district legislation long for even my time was the notion neighborhood selfdetermination. So, i completely welcome those amendments, which i have in deed circulated to my colleagues and will go through shortly but before i do that, on behalf of the Planning Department, i believe we have mr. Sanchez. Are you there . I am here, yes. Thank you. Thank you, very much. Good afternoon, supervisors, Diego Sanchez with Planning Department staff. Supervisors, on may 28th, the Planning Commission considered this ordinance after some deliberations the Planning Commission voted 4 3 to recommend the ordinance with modifications and the modifications include in lieu of essentially codifying the priority Processing Program or going by the cute name of cb3p we should permit at the first story use that contributes to retail vitality for a period of three years and other measurs limiting them. That concludes my remarks and im available for questions, thank you. Supervisor peskin so, colleagues, do you have any questions from mr. Sanchez . No, sir. Supervisor peskin seeing no questions, and this does not happen very often anymore because the legislative and the executive branches are actually working much closer in collaboration than has historically happened. Many, many years ago, my colleagues, supervisor jake introduced proposition d and amendment to the charter that split the appointment on the Planning Commission to the board of the exercises supervisors ano mayor. As mr. Sanchez just said, this was a 43 vote at the Planning Commission. Three from the appointees of the peoples house, the board of supervisors, who actually agreed with the legislation without amendment for to the executive branch that actually wanted to go with the two choices. One of the two choices. The choice of everything is principally permitted but, i think weve done a pretty good job of parsing this and weve done that by making sure that those kinds of uses, adult entertainment, tobacco use, a number of other uses that are traditionally very controversial and impactful to neighborhoods, are not set into the context of this legislation. Quite frankly, there were a number of things that went before the Planning Commission relative to peer relief that Planning Department staff did not comment on and with all due respect to mr. Sanchez, actually the department, and mr. Star, there are a number of things that were put forward relative to the types of uses that they could have recommended to the commission. Instead, we ended up with as, mr. Sanchez represented by a 54 vote but three came from the board appointees and the fourth from the executive branch. With that, why dont we open this up to Public Comments, unless there are any questions from my colleagues. I just had a quick question, chair peskin, maybe for you, im just curious of the exempted uses in the legislation that you mentioned from the ones that are likely to be more controversial and requires some input. Does that track the what is already exempted under the existing Planning Program or are these new classes of exemptions . Yes. So, the answer to supervisor preston is that does track what the i forget the fancy term they use, the cp3p or 3pp or whatever it is, whatever the fancy term was, jess, that tracks and fundamentally, what we are doing is co cot a and were bringing the time down to the neighbor groups so desire and if that does not happen, the fees are refunded in whole to the applicant. So with that, lets open this up to members of the public for Public Comment. Madam clerk clerk thank you. We have 18 listeners with two in queue to speak. Operations is double checking to see the callers. If you have not done so please press star 3 to be added for item number 2 to speak. That is the planning code conditional use review and approval process. Supervisor peskin first speaker, please. My name is lakula and im a resident of district 11 and African American woman, who has lived in this area for 70 years. Im a lifelong learner and a retired r. N. With the city and county of San Francisco. I have witnessed, over several years, 20 years, the continued efforts to privatize the lands of the puc has long granted to the supervisor peskin with all due respect, i do not, in any way, want to interrupt you and i very much would like you to comment on the balboa reservoir items which are 7 and 8. Let me finish, sir. Im very concerned and adamant leo posed to the puc and other parties attempt to privatize this public land. This is not acceptable to our community. I dissen franchise the African American community, the city college land and usage of the supervisor peskin with all respect, and your comments have been heard and noted by me and my colleagues, we are going to get to that item. Right now, were talking about streamlining conditional use authorization in our neighborhood commercial districts. You are welcome to come back and comment under item 7 and 8 and we have heard what you have to say but madam clerk, are there any other individuals who would like to speak to item 2 on todays calender . Clerk operations is checking. This is Public Comment for item number 2 on the agenda, the planning code on conditional use review and approval process. Folks that are waiting to speak on items number 7 and 8, the balboa reservoir project should not be in queue. If you are in queue express star 3 to remove yourself. If you would like to speak on item number 2, go ahead and press star 3 if you have not already and well call you and your line will be notified that you have been unmuted and you may begin. Supervisor peskin next speaker, please. Good afternoon, supervisors. My name is chevy and director of Public Policy at the Golden Gate Restaurant Association and i am calling on item number 2 and were commenting here to show support for this ordinance which will save Small Businesses and especially the independent restaurants we represent both time and money. Weve continuously advocated for the city to look at how to make it easier to open and operate a Small Business in San Francisco and this legislation does that. Thank you to supervisor peskin and supervisor ronen, fewer and haney for sponsoring this ordinance, we hope this committee will show support and continue it to the whole board. Thank you so much. Supervisor peskin thank you, next speaker, please. Caller good afternoon, members of the board and supervisors. My name is gale gillman, a 20year resident of north beach. Im calling in support of item number 2. In a time when Small Businesses are facing numerous challenges due to covid19, and the recession our economy is entering into, legislation to streamline and cut these in half to incentivize Small Businesses is critical. San francisco is a community of many small villages. It include streets to irvine avenue to grant avenue our Small Businesses are the life blood of San Francisco. I really hope the board of supervisors will continue this forward to the full board and i fully support passage of item number 2. Thank you. Supervisor peskin thank you ms. Gillman. Next speaker, please. Caller good afternoon, supervisors. My name is robert and i live in district 5. I support this legislation but i would appreciate some amendments. I see 24 theres language that still would allow neighborhood groups to appeal or to lengthen the approval time from three months to five months and according to the budget and legislative annalist office, the average wait time for a Planning Commission hearing is around 10 months. So effectively in the worse case, it would cut the approval time in half. Five months is still pretty pathetic for approval time. Were still requiring Small Businesses to spend tens of thousands of dollars on the rent while they wait for a hearing. [please stand by] its interesting that the speaker addressed that because there are very few instances where an establishment of an organization that has been recognized by the Planning Department, has objected to see this kind. I do believe what this legislation is aimed at is giving businesses to get with the neighborhood, to have that dialogue and give them modicum leverage but it has been used very few times. Remember, at the end of the day, any of this can be brought to the board of supervisors. Its really good when neighbors and businesses work it out of the front end. I appreciate those comments. Next speaker please. Im chris shollman. Im a resident of district three and nonprofit director. I wanted to call in and support this legislation. The cost and time for going through conditional use and other entitlements affects businesses in several ways. In addition to the time and cost when businesses enter leases and it also prevents businesses moving forward on projects. We had number of projects in my neighborhood that did not move forward because businesses did not have resources to go into commitment. I appreciate this legislation. I fully support it. I ask for Honorable Committee to forward this to the full board. Supervisor peskin thank you for your comments. Next speaker please. I have a question only. [indiscernible] [indiscernible] im wondering about the Liquor License issue here. Supervisor peskin thank you ms. Chapman. Unfortunately, this is not set up for dialogue. Are there any other members of the public who like to speak to item number two . Yes. Im president northeast business association. We totally support this legislation. Encourage the board of supervisors to pass it as soon as possible. For years we advocated that conditional use permit and permit process should be streamlined. I want to speak for the organization and my own personal position as a business in north beach. Thank you. Supervisor peskin next speaker please. I wanted to respond a little bit supervisor peskin. This only applies to long established neighborhood association. The law does not state that. It says association d11 and d4, [indiscernible] its been previously used for giving associations leverage to force us start up businesses to pay rent and i will try to i wish they take that provision out. Theres no vetting here. Contrary to what supervisor peskin said, anybody can be a Neighborhood Organization. I can be a Neighborhood Organization if i register myself with a department. Either take out those provisions. Thank you. Supervisor peskin are there any other members of the public who like to address item number two . Clerk that completes the queue. Supervisor peskin thank you, Public Comment is closed. Let me say, Neighborhood Organization has to actually be in continuous Good Standing for a number of years and apply to the Planning Department in order to receive that coveted status. There are fewer and fewer of them overtime. I do want to say to supervisor preston who asked a question that i did not answer entirely correctly because my staff said couple of things which is that number one, the way the Planning Department has done this both informally in 2013 and formally five years ago in 2015, required individuals or applicants to apply for either the expedited permit or go through the traditional process. It was very rare that Planning Department said youre in the wrong bucket, you should go to the expedited situation. This actually requires automatic screening of all applications to make sure that you qualify. Also, we actually expanded the eligibility to provide priority processing for uses that were not a part of the Planning Departments regimen of the last eight years. I wanted to put that on the record. With that pursuant to the request from supervisor ronens office and colleagues you are in receipt of this. I will go through it. Some of these are minor technical insertions on page 1, line 21. The insertion of the file number page 23 insertion of the date it went through the Planning Commission and resolution number that is repeated with file number and the plannings Commission Resolution number on page 2. Then there is the language with regard that you see on page 3 which speaks to the fact that this is a community that is all laid out at on page 3 and one line on page 4. Reiterated on page 5 at lines 9 and 10. I would like to make the motion for the amendments who are not substantive and do not require rereferral to the Planning Commission with regard to the pages requested by staff supervisor ronen. Madam clerk . Clerk on the motion as stated by supervisor peskin. [roll call vote] supervisor peskin colleagues , i would like to invite you if you want, no pressure, to cosponsor the item as amended. Please sign me as a cosponsor. Me as well. Supervisor peskin on the item as cosponsored by the two members, my two colleagues on this committee, to send this item with recommendation to the full board without objection. Roll call please. Clerk [roll call vote] you have three ayes. Supervisor peskin thank you. Could you please read item 3. Clerk [agenda item read] supervisor peskin thank you. I want to congratulate supervisor fewer for not only getting prop e on the ballot all plot to her staff and doing lot of the staff work but getting it passed about. This is subsequent legislation to help implement that. Were delighted to be joined by supervisor fewer. The floor is yours. Supervisor fewer the legislation before you today is prop e that passed almost 70 of voters. I want to thank my cosponsors of the initiative, supervisor peskin, haney and walton as well as the mayor and entire board of supervisors for supporting prop e and helping us ensure the voters overwhelmingly passed it last year. I want to thank planning staff, the Environmental Team for all their work on the addendum to the e. I. R. One of my Top Priorities during my time as supervisor of district one has been to bring more Affordable Housing to the west side and thats why i wanted to author this initiative. Im proud to say that thanks to the passage of prop e and the prop a Affordable Housing bond in 2019. We have a 100 affordable Senior Housing project moving forward in district one. Im so grateful for partnering with my office to deliver 100 new permanently Affordable Homes to seniors in my district. This project alone has made my offices work on prop e worthwhile. It is not the only project that seeing the benefits of this passage. The educator Housing Project has benefited from the zoning and streamlining provisions of prop e. Tndc is in Due Diligence phase for another potential site. Were excited about this project. Ordinance before you today will expand these Affordable Housing opportunities even further by establishment baseline height of 50 feet for 100 Affordable Housing projects and educator Housing Projects. And reducing the minimum lot threshold from 10,000 square feet to 8000 square feet. Removing the minimum threshold for vacant lots in surface level parking lots. My office work for the Affordable Housing developers and financing experts to develop both their original proposal and this amendment based on practical real world experiences. Thank you to the council of Community Housing organizations and their affiliates for partnering with us on this important legislation. Thank you also to supervisors mar, peskin and haney and safai for cosponsoring this ordinance. Thank you to the Planning Commission for the recommendation of this legislation. Thank you chair peskin for allowing me to speak on this. I hope i have your recommendation to the full board. Supervisor peskin thank you supervisor fewer. Good afternoon supervisors. Im audrey maloney. Planning commission heard this item on july 16th. After some discussion as supervisor fewer stated, voted unanimously to approve the item as proposed. Thank you. Supervisor peskin thank you. That is music to my ears, except when you guys opposed legislation when its not. Okay. Why dont we open up for Public Comment. Clerk thank you mr. Chair. Operations is checking to see if theres callers in queue. We have 23 in the queue. Supervisor peskin thank you, first speaker please. Good afternoon supervisors. My name is george fleischman. Im an attorney representing the appellants and balboa reservoir. I want to speak briefly on this item. I feel like it is related. This item is about Affordable Housing and its about educator housing. Its about facilitating 100 Affordable Housing. My clients believe thats an extremely laudable goal. We encourage the board to do everything it can to increase that kind of housing. Thank you. Supervisor peskin thank you for your comment. Next speaker please. Good afternoon supervisors. Im theo gordon. Im a renter in district five calling to support this legislation. I would like this to pass and go further. Prop e was a watereddown version what the mayor originally proposed to do birate process for affordable educational housing. Lets expand this much further and say if you building anything, that has this amount of Affordable Housing or any type of land, you get year permits automatically if you go through fire and safety. Theres no reason Community Groups or neighbors living in multimillion dollar houses should be able to put a break on people who are most needy guess housing. Progressive city doesnt ask for permission before build housing for needy people. Thank you. Supervisor peskin thank you. Next speaker please. Hello im a renter in district one. I want to say i think this really important first step in addressing the citys Affordable Housing crises. I strongly support it. Thank you. Supervisor peskin are there any other members of the public who like to comment on this item . Im here representing united educators of San Francisco. Were here to ask for your support of the legislation as proposed by the Planning Commission. I want to be able to say that together with this leadership of supervisor fewer and peskin as well as with Community Partners and Affordable Housing organizations came together and worked on this legislation. We urge for your support. Thank you. Supervisor peskin thank you to the united educators of San Francisco. Next speaker please. Good afternoon supervisors. Im robert. I live in district five. Im enthusiastic support of this bill. I ask you to go further, actually. In district five, theyre looking at 730 stanion street. Which is 100 Affordable Housing development. Its great we have a site zoned for 85 feet in height. I think it will be great if we could have 100 Affordable Housing sites zoned across the city, especially on the west side where we unfortunately have not seen enough 100 Affordable Housing development. This is a great step forward. Thank you. Supervisor peskin thank you. Next speaker. Hello supervisors. Thithank yousupervisor fewer ant cosponsors for bringing this forward. The conversation was had at the Planning Commission about the size of parcels. Im glad that such projects will be constructed on parcels greater than 8000 square feet which contains only surface parking lots do not demolish any existing buildings. Im fully in support of this. Thank you. Supervisor peskin thank you. Next speaker. This is jonathan randolph, i want to say opposite of her comment. Planning commission did discuss the 8000 square feet versus 3000 square feet limit. I thought it was odd to hear him arguing that we should keep it at 8000 and have less opportunities for Affordable Housing down to the 3000 limit. You probably will keep it at 8000. I want to hear one concrete argument for why not to keep it why not to bring it down to as many parcels as we can down to the 3000 limit . Otherwise, i think this is really good legislation. Please pass it. I was wondering about that part. What is the actual argument for keeping it at 8000 square feet instea . Thank you. Supervisor peskin next speaker please. Im the policy manager i like to take the opportunity to thank supervisor fewer and all of those who championed prop e and worked on the legislation. I want to express our support for this item. Prop e is making strides in our community. As supervisor fewer stated in the process [indiscernible] this amendment will further expand outside opportunities for what can be affordable across the city. Additionally we are extremely supportive the prop e amendment that will help ensure viable projects for educator communities in San Francisco. Thank you. We are in full support. We look forward to seeing our entire city benefit from this. Supervisor peskin thank you. Next speaker please. Good afternoon supervisors. Im cheryl ogilvy. Im supportive this legislation. I think its wonderful. I think we can go little bit farther. This can go farther. It should definitely be used to the benefit of building much more Affordable Housing especially since we are pushing toward our element. I think it would be important since the numbers for our arena. San francisco should push to them toward the ceiling. I think its really important for us to understand that theres a lot of overcrowding, especially in my district. Which is district nine. I appreciate seeing more affordable units to be spread throughout the city along with md9. I think its very important for us. We need to prevent overcrowding and well require lot of housing at all income levels in order to do that. Thank you. Supervisor peskin next speaker. Im not sure how you reduce overcrowding increase density. Next speaker please. Good afternoon supervisors. Im the counselor Community Housing organization. Im happy to support this very important piece of legislation. Thank you supervisor fewer. Is the things were talking about. The fact that was presented to the voters and passed overwhelmingly carrying other important measures with it is as important as the measure itself. The idea that san franciscans from the west side to the east side support more density when done right when it took talks affordability and keeping generation in the city and providing opportunitys for newcomers who not as wealthy to live in the city. Its critically important. Im so happy to be part of the city that supports this kind of work. Thank you supervisor fewer and looking forward to seeing this move forward. Supervisor peskin next speaker please. Clerk that completes the queue. Supervisor peskin all right. See nothing other members of the public for this item, Public Comment is closed. Supervisor mar, youre name is on the roster. Were joined by colleague, supervisor mar. Commissioner mar i wanted to thank supervisor fewer and her legislation and all their work on proposition e. This has been stated. This is extremely important streamline 100 Affordable Housing development. This is important on the west side which hasnt received its fair share of investments in Affordable Housing. Really excited to see this impact of property and starting to play out on the west side with low income senior Affordable Housing project that supervisor fewer mentioned. For the educator Housing Project, in the outer sunset, prop e is really going to allow 134 teachers and educators to move into their new Affordable Homes up to a year sooner than they would have without prop e. Finally in district four, we identified over 50 potential Development Sites Affordable Housing. Those will be smaller sites and many of them are in that range of 8000 to 10,000 square feet. These amendments that were considering today will benefit and streamline 100 Affordable Housing development in my district. Supervisor peskin before i go back to the primary author of this legislation, i do want to say in the almost 20 years that ive been on and off the board of supervisors, some of the supervisors were moderate and some of them were progressives. All opposed additional density on the west side. Those supervisors like myself and supervisor preston who come from the east side of the city, have lived with density for over 100 years in not all of us are as old as i am. The entire electorate and their elected representatives on the west side of San Francisco has profoundly changed in the last decade. When i first try to pass legislation, a set of progressives and moderate supervisors rallied together and killed that legislation. It later on became the law of our little land. The notion that this kind of legislation would be forwarded by westside supervisor embraced by another west side supervisor from the richmond and sunset respectively, means that we are turning a page in San Francisco. I welcome it and embrace it and was glad to be part of that. I want to thank my chief of staff who worked on this. I want to thank all my colleagues who showed up in supervisor mars district when it kicked off the campaign. It was a great morning. Supervisor fewer thank you very much for your early support. I wanted to say that, these amendments before you today were developed by really on the ground experts. That build 100 Affordable Housing. They know that Affordable Housing at 3000 square feet will not be built. This is a practical experience for people who built Affordable Housing. Thats why were changing in the legislation today from 10,000 square feet to 8000 square feet. I wanted to add that with this other amendment is making the threshold at 50 feet, that they can also add three stories of density or height to their development on top of the 50foot baseline height. I think i was very remiss in not thanking my outstanding legislative aid and your outstanding aid. Kudos for all their help on this. I think it is something that the west side supervisors are looking at the lack of Affordable Housing in our district and looking for ways to build. There are 100 Affordable Housing. Some people said its the thing of the past. We have proven its not true. Thank you chair and thank you colleagues. I hope you will support this legislation today. Supervisor peskin thank you supervisor fewer. Before i call on supervisor preston, i have to not to get in congratulatory nonsense, really shot out supervisor katie chang who was one of the first west side supervisors who was going to go down that road at their own political peril. Supervisor preston thank you chair peskin. Thank you supervisor fewer for your leadership on this. Proud to support prop e and like to see added as a cosponsor to this legislation. I find legislation like this refreshing. I think so much of our discussion around housing, often intentionally by those that profit for market rate housing. Intentionally try to conflate the discussion around market rate housing, which is one discussion with a discussion around housing that is affordable to working class in San Francisco. What you saw in prop e, what you see in this legislation is a clear signal that were serious about housing for the working class in San Francisco. That were serious about housing our educators and were not going to buy into this frame which decides who is prohousing, who is antihousing all that based on what one thinks of multimillion dollar luxury housing. Which does not allow a discussion of Affordable Housing to be held hostage to discussion of highend housing. Im happy to talk about market rate housing and happy to talk about Affordable Housing. I appreciate the legislation for being clear on the issue right now that is one of the greatest challenges of the city. Which is Affordable Housing. Well talk about the housing balance later in the agenda. We are absolutely failing as a city to build Affordable Housing. The way that we get there is through 100 affordable projects. That will be expanded based on this legislation. I want to recognize and really associate myself with the comments that chair peskin made about my colleagues in district one in district four in neighborhoods that historically have not always welcomed greater Affordable Housing and high density Affordable Housing. Supervisor fewer, supervisor mar, i want to express my appreciation for your ongoing leadership in making sure that we are creating Affordable Housing opportunities for working class here in San Francisco, all over the city including on the west side. Supervisor peskin thank you. Supervisor safai. Supervisor safai thank you mr. Chair. Thank you supervisor fewer for all your wonderful work on this. Thanks to the united educator, preview mar, everyone. District 11 is one that falls little bit on the east side. Weve been a good example in the last three and a half years, weve been able to push forward 375 units of Affordable Housing. Two of those projects are 100 affordable. I can tell you that accelerating the process saved significant cost to the project. Quicker things can move, the easier things are able to be built and the overall financing of the project changes. With the help of yourself, supervisor fewer and the work we did with the mayor to get the additional matching funds, that then ultimately able to accelerate state financing process. When people say, whats the point of doing this. Why do we need to streamline. That is one of the biggest reasons. We want to get people housed quickly as we can. Educators and others that are being forced out of the city because they are no longer able to afford to live here. Two, the quicker we move, the quicker were able to finance the project and keep the cost down. I want to appreciate all the hard work. I want to point out that it definitely can be done with the right Community Process and what weve experienced in our district over the last four years, moving these projects forward is that if you do the right outreach, if you talk about the project in the right way and you express not only that theres an ability for those in the neighborhood and the application process to benefit from it. They see theres a stake in the process for them. I wanted to thank you all for your hard work and proud to support prop. Supervisor peskin thank you supervisor safai. If there are no other comments from the author, Committee Members or supervisor mar, colleagues who would like to make a motion on behalf of supervisor fewer to send this item with recommendation to the full board without objection . So moved. Supervisor peskin roll call plaza. Clerk [roll call vote]. You have three ayes. Supervisor peskin thank you. This entire conversation has been a perfect segway into the next two items. Please read items four and five together. Clerk [agenda item read]. Supervisor peskin thank you. Before i call on the requester for these hearings, supervisor mar as ive been going down trip down memory lane and in booking my former colleague, supervisor tang. With regard to both these items and underlying policy that surrounds them want to invoke the name of supervisor jane kim. Whos the author of the housing balance report concept and a different proposition. I want to state that for the record. With that,ly turn it over to supervisor mar. Commissioner mar thank you so much chair peskin and members of the Land Use Committee for your time to discuss the importance timely topic of Housing Affordability and housing stability needs. The Global Pandemic and our shelterinplace responses has revealed the importance of stable and secure housing and the Public Health of the growth inequality weve accepted in San Francisco. The housing policy decision made here in San Francisco have allowed a segment of the population to work remotely. Some of them quickly migrated to other cities after coming to San Francisco during the recent techdriven job and economic boom. It also forced working class essential workers who are highly dependent on public transportation, travel from suburbs risking their lives to work in a period of high unemployment. Renters cannot pay rent, homeowners cannot pay their mortgages and we anticipate eviction or foreclosure in the coming months ahead without government intervention. The future of jobs and work is uncertain. We dont have projection data on the scale of the impact. This is the context of today within which we should be looking at housing policy. With where we are and what we need to do to focus whats ahead. In addition to responding to new challenges caused by covid19, we must reflect on our citys housing policies to date and the path forward to solve Housing Affordability in a more strategic and impactful way. The Planning Department has been working on report and strategies before the pandemic. Its right now initiating the process for the state mandated updated element. The Housing Element is our road map for housing policies. The timing of this update is important as we see what the pandemic and Economic Crises is revealing about current housing policies. Planning staff will be presenting on these today. My goal is to discuss how they fit with in our Housing Needs of low to moderate income workers, resident and communities. Last year, i commissioned a job report from the budget and legislative analyst office. The board of supervisors unanimously passed an ordinance they sponsored requiring an annual report from the Planning Department which was due this past april. Im disappointed that the report is still not complete. But today we will hear from planning staff about the scope of that report. Well get precise completion time line. The budget legislative analyst revealed that job growth over the past decade has been uneven with high wage jobs growing by 14 but lower wage jobs by 11 . The b. L. A. Said Housing Production has been exceeding the needs of high wage workers, we fail to build housing for low and moderate income house holds. Low income households have declined by 23 despite growth in low wage jobs in San Francisco. Now, during covid19 health crises, this disparity has become a matter of life and death, depending on who can afford to shelterinplace and who cannot, who can live close to their job here in San Francisco and who must commute great distance. This pandemic as well as the Racial Justice movements are quite a tragic killing of george floyd highlights what we known. We need a new framework for housing policy its centred on having affordability and stability and centred on racial and social equity. We should not be led by the whims of private Market Development and real estate speculation and housing dictated by profit motive. We need to be guided by our citys actual Housing Needs for its residents and workers. The status quo does not work for the majority of san franciscans. Even with one of the biggest developments in city history. The status quo ignoring the role of Economic Development policies on housing and we are meeting the need of our residents and communities. We need to ask the right questions and get the data to tackle the problem. This includes data on racial demographic, resident affordability, homelessness, commute patterns pattern and hg trends. In the mist of a pandemic and Economic Crises, we need to rethink our existing frame work and focus on facilitating more and more market rate housing. I look forward to our discussion on how San Francisco can refocus our priorities to meet the actual Housing Needs of our residents and communities including families, seniors and low to middle income workers. We have Planning Department who will lead the presentation. Supervisor peskin, i want to make a request if youre okay with it. If we can hear Public Comment after the presentation from the Planning Department . Supervisor peskin yes, supervisor mar. As we discussed for you and i, not form of the committee. Well turn it over to planning then well have Public Comment. They will bring it back for the members of the committee and supervisor mar and any other supervisors that want to join to discuss the subject of these two hearings. With that, well open up to the Planning Department. Good afternoon chair peskin. Good afternoon supervisor preston and supervisors safai. As supervisor mar has noted, this is not normal times. These are critical times. We need to assess our work, to be able to identify what needed strategies and policy and plans to meet the needs of our community. Well start with a brief context of our challenges. This is our transdata report and share some key highlights. Some of those are the reports that supervisor mar has requested. They will follow with a presentation with some of the recent reports. I will provide overview [audio breaking up]. Today, supervisor mar has already discussed San Francisco and most of the work is battling with the pandemic like never before. This is impacting all of us at many levels. Many businesses and schools are closed. Many people are experiencing Mental Health challenges. In this context, it is very clear that communities of colour have been hit the hardest. If we look at the latinx community, they only represent 15 of the population. If you see the map, the neighborhoods where we have communities of colour or lower income communities are the ones that have been impacted the most. Clerk looks like were having trouble with the presenter. Merriam, may i suggest you turn off your camera . Is this better . Clerk i think so. I was indicating its a problem. Our housing challenges are not new to the city. Covid19 has highlighted some of our problems in the city. Even few months ago when San Francisco was experiencing growth for 10 years, we have severe homeless problems. Our black population was shrinking. The latinx workers couldnt find Affordable Housing. What covid19 has done, it helped us recognize our historic racial and social inequities. Planning was playing a role, if we look at the racial inequity we can go back to the 1400s for our indigenous people. We can go through some of the ordinance that we passed. Most recently, some of the predatory lending practices and exclusionary zoning for which government is responsible. We can see the cumulative impacts on american indian, black and other communities of colour today. Lack of Affordable Housing, homelessness, displacement is a major issue. This kind of crises, were also opening some new possibilities. We have the ability to imagine the possibilities. We are directed to centre our planning work on racial and social equities. In this context that were reframing our housing work, we can say that were not starting from zero. Since 2016, we started developing a racial and social equity plan. Much work remains. That work can only be accomplished through a process of collaboration with our community. Here is where we need to define or redefine our data reports. [indiscernible] this work also require collaboration with city partne partners. Its something that impacts our neighboring cities. Were going so start first reviewing update reports. Michelle . Thank you. Good afternoon supervisors. Im michelle littlefield. Im the data and analytics manager for the Planning Department. Before we dive in the specific report, i want to give a brief overview of the reports we do prepare for the department specifically within citywide. Then we can dive into the specifics of the housing data, Housing Inventory and the housing balance report. We do three major reporting that are released to the public. The first group of reports are with respect to areas planned monitoring. You can see here, we do variety of reports that are done varying frequencies throughout the year or over multiple years. Really focus of the area plan are to report on the Development Activity that is within each respective Community Area plan and also other metrics that have been identified including the status of transportation initiatives, fees that have been collected through impact fees and other economic information that is collected with respect to those specific target areas. These have different reporting requirements across the board. But the majority of them do hit on today major things with respect to housing, with respect to development and with respect to other major initiatives that are really targeted towards specifically targeting the issues that have been identified that each area plan has been identified to be monitored for that area plan. Supervisor peskin if i can interrupt you for a second. We like to look at colours. Is the reason that these places all the same colours because they are all part of the eastern neighborhoods rezoning . Yes, thats correct. These are actually grouped into a much larger report. Which is for the eastern neighborhoods. That explains the colour coordination for the respective reports. Supervisor peskin wasnt western zuma done separately . As far as i am concerned, they were done the timing when these reports were completed were at the same time. The date for this last report shows the time range between 2011 and 2015. Supervisor peskin this is your reporting, not when legislation was passed to create the area plans. Create. These reports are specifically related to the area plan monitoring following the adoption of the plan. Supervisor peskin got it. Thank you. Great question. Next slide please. The next set of reports, which is the subject of our presentation today are next group of housing reports that are related to Housing Projection within San Francisco. There are four reports that specifically focus on this area of development. One is the 2019 San Francisco Housing Inventory. Thats something that is done annually. Which we will be hearing more about shortly. The other one is a quarterly data set that is developed that is published on the planning website. This focus on the Housing Development pipeline. What is currently under construction in San Francisco. Theres two other reports. One is the housing balance report which you will also be hearing about shortly. That is done twice a year. Once in the spring and once in the fall. Finally, this new report, jobs housing report is something that is new for this year for our work program. That is something that is currently being designed to identify what is appropriate methodology per the requirements of the ordinance that was just passed. That has not been completed yet. That is something that staff is working on. Just couple of slides i will show you new schedule that we have for all the monitoring reports that we do with that. The next slide please. Final step are category of reports we do are the industry inventory which is done every year. The other report, which is called interagency Plan Implementation Committee annual report. Known as the ipic report. Its a very broad analysis of the job and workforce and the general data that is related to the Economic Activity within San Francisco and that is done on an annual basis. The ipci report is something that tracks the impact fees that are collected from Major Development project within San Francisco. It identifies the fees collected within area plan and how those fees are reinvested or appropriated to go back into the communities from which these developments have been upgraded. This is just a general timeline that we have what has been completed. So far which is the housing balance report and the Housing Inventory. Those have been completed on time. Those were due back in april. I would like to take a step back for a moment and kind of provide some context around this schedule that you see before you. Due to the circumstances arising from the covid19 pandemic including the deployment of analytic staff to Serve Service workers, providing data and analysis support for ongoing covid19 Recovery Efforts as well as the hiring freeze that resulted from the projected budget shortfall which impacts the departments ability to fill vacant analytic positions, we expect delays on the delivery of locally mandated reports. I wanted to just emphasize these monitoring reports is ones i just signed over are locally mandated reports. They do not include state mandated reports which include the h. Cd requirement for the annual Regional Housing allocation report that is due at the beginning of april each year. The other one is the California Department of housing excuse me, California Department of finance housing change report that is due also around the same time frame. Those reports are not included here. Those reports were done on time as well. Usually when it comes to housing, housing reports, those are typically the bulk of those are typically done within the First Quarter of each year. Theres usually a big push. We have both state requirements that require submittal of the state reports as well as the two that you see that are completed here. Which is the housing balance report and the Housing Inventory report. Given the circumstances under which we operating. We have a very short data analytic staff that is responsible for preparing these reports. What we anticipate is for the rest of this year for the quarterly pipeline reports, we expect those to be on time. The ones that are targeted for completion where we expect delays to happen are things that include the jobs housing report. That is something that we hope to get to the board by end of this quarter. You will definitely we will definitely provide update it is there are changes dependingen whether or not there are additional deployments from analytics staff. Well keep you posted on that. There are two area monitoring plans that are also due, which is the market and octavia monitoring report and the downtown monitoring report. Then of course, we have the two last one on our list, which is Commerce Industry and housing balance report. Both of which both of which expected to be completed by the First Quarter of next year. Theres an effort, merriam will expound on this little bit as part of our presentation, theres an effort to wide range of efforts. Theres an effort to improve the way we connect the reports so its easier to consume for the public and also to improve the way that we collect data to support these effort. With that, i will turn it over to her who will be presenting on the housing data and housing report and the Housing Inventory supervisor peskin ms. Little field before you turn it over, thank you for that presentation. Thank you to supervisor mar for calling this hearing. Do you present any data in any of these reports that look at the rest of the region . Granted, we as lawmakers and society are responsible for our county. Relative to regional Housing Needs assessments and other reports, i dont ever see anything that i can recall but there are lot of reports that shows for instance, whats happening in San Mateo County and marin county. As part of the Housing Inventory, there is one section that does point to Housing Construction activity in their region. Thats actually really great feedback. If im hearing correctly, benchmarking opportunity to see how well we are doing relative to other jurisdictions within the bay area. This is something this is an ongoing conversation. We are in communication to look at regionally more broadly how can we share data more efficiently. Thats significant undertaking. We are working with over 100 jurisdictions across the bay area. Just trying to find simple ways. We all require the same thing to the state. If we can start there, we can begin to kind of work through the different agencies and their i. T. Departments and their data team if they have a data team. Really moving towards creating data standards across the region with respect to permit and permit activities. Theres a regional goal and effort right now to move towards that. Supervisor peskin it would be great to see an apples to apples dashboard for the region. I agree. Thank you for the i appreciate that. Thats something were looking at. Supervisor peskin you mentioned that you are understaffed and under underfunded. How the half of you funded . If you dont know the answer, its not leading question. Do you come out of permit fees . How do you prepare these reports get funded . I dont know the exact breakdown. I can get back to you on that question. Supervisor peskin last but not least, relative to policy recommendations to the director or to the commission or to the law making body, other than information, how does that percolate upwards . How does supervisor peskin what policy recommendations like merriam put something forward that talk about rate history and exclusionary housing in the modern time. Do these reports say, hey, Planning Commission, you should adopt these policies . Hey board of supervisors, mayor, should adopt these policies . Merriam can certainly chime in to this as well as she goes through and with james on the strategy piece. I think that is something that as policy initiative are being developed. These are conversations that we have internally about what data are we collecting. If were not collecting the data, are other agency collecting that data already. If not, do we need to source this new data and kind of foiling out how to figure out how to fund that. Especially in light of covid, this is something that we are definitely keen on and trying to identify what data is being collected right now. Theres a lot of opportunity through the Economic Recovery Task force and the work that is being done on the Disaster Service worker deployment arena. Theres data that is actively collected on the ground now to support and inform Emergency Response by the city. That is definitely potential there to connect with those agencies and the task force to really identify whether or not they are collecting that new source of data and to literally connect it. One question, how can we make it easier for people to understand and number two, how can we draw clear line between the data that is being collected and the policies that they are intended to inform. That is an ongoing process. Supervisor peskin last but not least, it is my recollection that the department used to, i think it stopped in 2013 or 2014, correct the data on the number of new tendencies and common that were being created and cease doing that. Do you have any information about that . That question actually does sound familiar. I believe we got a similar question around that, mentioning that recently as well. Thats something that we can look into. With that would require theres definitely a data collaboration between planning and some of the other permitting, Affordable Housing agencies. That is an area that i think we could definitely look into and consider including that as part of the effort to improve these reports. Supervisor peskin thank you ms. Littlefield. If you can look at my contention and historic recollection and tell us whether indeed the city through planning or mohd gather that information. When it stopped and why it stopped and why we ought to do that again. That would be well received. Well turn it over to your colleague. Thank you very much. Thank you, michelle. Good afternoon supervisors. Im a senior planner with the data and Analysis Group and Land Use Community Planning Team at the Planning Department. Today ill be presenting on various housing reports published earlier this year starting with the 2019 Housing Inventory report. The Housing Inventory is a Planning Departments annual survey of Housing Production trends in San Francisco. The report details changes in the citys Housing Stock including Housing Construction, demolition and alterations. Supervisor peskin when you say units lost, do you mean units lost to demolition or do you mean units lost because they were no longer affordable . If units lost to demolition, unit mergers, loss of illegal units and also if there was a correction in records. Supervisor peskin that would not be for instance a historically rent controlled or affordable unit becoming a market rate unit. That would not be included in that number . No. That wouldnt be included. This is just the physical loss of a unit. Supervisor peskin those numbers would be included in the housing balance report . Yes, thats correct. Supervisor peskin thank you. Next slide please. The construction of new housing unit in 2019 sorry, go back one more slide. Construction of new housing in 2019 totaled about 4850 units. If you go to the next slide, that Affordable Housing made up about 31 of new units added to the Housing Stock in 2019. About 1456 total affordable units were completed in 2019 including 405 inclusionary units. Total number of units completed increased 126 from the previous year. Supervisor peskin when you say affordable, do you mean what a. M. I. Constitutes affordable in that number . This is anything below a 80 a. M. I. Basically, affordable units includes these districts affordable units. The 1456 units that are counted as affordable units include thats counted very low income, low income and moderate income units as well. Supervisor peskin that gets you to a total of 1456 . Yes, thats correct. Supervisor peskin thank you. While production numbers increase substantially from the previous year, the number of applications permitted to construction decreased. Housing permits issued are an Economic Indicator of future Housing Production in the city. The department of building inspection permitted by 3000 net units for construction in 2019. This is 52 less than total number of permitted in 2018. This trend is reflected across the bay area counties, the total number of permitted units last year decreased overall as well. In february of 2020, the Planning Department published the most recent pipeline report. Which reflects snapshot in time of Development Activity during 2019 q4. During this point, there were approximately 74,000 net new units in the pipeline as a text box at the top shows. About 19 of these units are affordable units. Not all projects under review have confirmed to be affordable. This number may change overtime. About 39 of total net new units are multifaced projects. Now ill be going over findings from the most recent housing balancing report completed in march of 2020. The housing balance report is completed biannually to monitor report on housing balance between new market rate and new Affordable Housing production. The housing balance is defined as the proportion of all new Affordable Housing units to the total number of all new Housing Units for a 10year year accounting for any loss of units removed from protected status. The housing balance report found that the city housing balance is 21. 5 . The expanded cumulative housing balance is 28. 6 . The expanded cumulative housing balance increased by little bit more than 1 from the previous year. We also submitted our regional Housing Needs allocation to the state by april 1st of this year. The regional Housing Needs assessment is the represented housing need for each jurisdiction. We authorized 3297 units in 2019. We have met 65 of our total allocation. Supervisor peskin we built 17,373 . Thats correct. Supervisor peskin do we get an award for being almost 50 above in that category . When we report our rina goals to the state, we address whether weve made met met that initl goal. We met 50 above moderate income level. Supervisor peskin relative to the question i asked ms. Littlefield about how that compares to other cities or counties in the region who have exceeded their market rate by 1 or in this case almost 50 . How does that compare . We havent yet conducted any analysis of comparisons for income levels across the bay area. I do believe that abag and h. C. D. Look at comparisons across the state. Particularly with comparisons to cities of similar sizes. I can definitely look into that further and get back to you with specifics with how other cities compare. Supervisor peskin just doing the math here, which is the rina goal was 12,536. The total units built was 17,373. Instead of saying that we achieved whatever the math is, 140 or whatever, why do you stop at 100 . Why dont you say we overachieved . We could look at this multiple ways. I do think that in this case because we are just reporting on whether weve met the goal or not, we measured the progress by how much initial goal we met in this case, we did meet it 100 . Youre correct. In report in term of reporting to h. C. D. , we do state that we met that minimum goal. Supervisor peskin im not trying to argumentative. Couldnt it say in that box, 100 goal met 140 built. It feels a little bit like were lying with statistics. Looks like we met the goal 100 . But in reality, in that category, we overbuilt while on the other three categories, very low and moderate, we met at best 50 and worse 31 . We dont say that relative to luxury housing we overachieved about. It seems like if any member of the public, including the supervisor saying, great we met one out of four. In reality, we overachieved in luxury category and underachieved in every other category. Lot of our moderate low income communities are tied to the other categories as well. For example in 2019, we built about 1450 affordable units and about 400 were inclusionary units about third of last years Affordable Housing production is actually directly tied to the above moderate income category. Supervisor peskin im not talking about how things are financed. Im talking about the way data is presented. Relative to the fifth column, total remaining rina by income levels the bottom right hand box say zero, should say minus 3800. Thats the way you do math and present numbers. Im not talking about the fact that a developer is making less profit because the developer had to do some amount of inclusionarinclusioninclusionar. We do in various reports always explain that 100 metric means that weve met the goal but we have not actually were also explaining that weve met the minimum goal but that the additional that weve built above that goal does not actually stick to rina allocation. We do plain that in the report. We can take that under consideration and be more fair about the specific percentage. Supervisor peskin at minimum an asterisk in that box. We produced i guarantee you that if we did 140 of very low, low or moderate, we would proudly show it as 140 . Its kind of telling that in the luxury box, we pretend we just hit our target in reality, we overachieved on that side and underachieved on the other side which is making the argument you made. Maybe inclusionary rate should be high. I agree with you. I will think about reporting it that way in our future report. Supervisor peskin next Planning Department member please. My name is james pappas im senior policy planner. Im going to talk about our housing and stabilization strategies work that the Planning Department has undertaken over the last few years. These projects include three main efforts. The first is Community Stabilization initiative completed in fall of 2019. Next is the Housing Affordability strategy completed in spring of this year. Then the current recovery strategy which is under way in response to the pandemic and Economic Crises. These are all one time efforts meant to respond to pressing concerns of Community Members and policymakers. They analyze existing and potential policies, programs and investments. The Community Stabilization initiative focus on protecting and stabilizing communities, especially vulnerable populations as well as mitigating displacement. The project looked at how all residents but especially vulnerable residents, can try and benefit and contribute to the city culture and economy. The project has two main deliverables. One is an inventory and assessment of policies and programs including both existing and potential policies. The second is an executive summary and report that offers an overview of existing conditions, current efforts and priorities for ongoing stabilization. The Community Stabilization strategy looked at five key areas of existing state policies and programs including tenant protections and housing stabilization, Affordable Housing preservation and production, culture stabl stabilization and Workforce Development program. Community stabilization effort identifies potential policies for programs to expand or implement new. For example, some of these key potential policies include a housing registry that would allow us to track occupancy and housing costs in particularly in our erental housing. We can work with state policymakers to expand local authorities to provide tenant protection. We can continue to expand and support those experiencing homelessness and provide services to those vulnerable populations. We now turn to the Housing Affordability strategy project. The project coordinated with the stabilization, focus more on the question how do improve affordability and the reach the citying housing target. Project was a collaboration between planning staff and team of consultant to analyze policies and investment. It also included extensive outreach with Public Forums around the city and Community Focus groups in english, spanish as well as engagement with advocates, nonprofit and for profit developers, communitybased organizations and researchers. The analysis from the Housing Affordability strategy, as well as citywide and Neighborhood Housing planning. [please stand by]. Then we looked how we could sustain these efforts over time, which is the way we know we will make progress over the longterm on our Housing Affordability challenges. We looked at 30 years. The affordability target included in the strategy project would meet our current low and moderate households through production of new units as well as preservation. We came very close last year to our overall Housing Production targets. We have struggled in the past coming in with less than half of this number of affordable units as well as lower level of production of housing overall. I wanted to add that we did not exam whether these targets were the perfect targets or acknowledging we have struggled to meet these targets in the past. We wanted to look at policy and investment to allow us to meet these at minimum and leave that discussion open to the public and policymakers about whether different targets should be pursued in the future. One of the key policy issues we explored was where new housing would be added and what it would look like. Initial analysis showed that we do need to add additional capacity for housing to be able to sustain the level of