Richard. One Year Anniversary on the Planning Commission. I figure we can celebrate a light moment in this craseyness today but i want to talk about why 75 howard is a important project because this is a question about our values. As people who live in city and people in the bay area as whole. There are people thattled you 0. 16 production in shadow was more important that people that can live in the city. People told you that [inaudible] parking garage was more important that people that can live in the city. There are people that told you we are a violation and the 20 people that came out for housing are irviolation of neighborhoods. That is a question about values. Do you want to be a welcoming and open sit aetd that brings now people in or do you want to shut off the gate and force people to be displaced because there isnt enough housing to support them . I dont want to be aigated community, i want to be San Francisco. You mentioned somebody said that we are techies and so on, today is burning man so they are all out there. They work for non profit. Im so sorry all right folks. I think that is enough. The conversation that we are having todaythere are a lot of folks coming here to fight the soma project. [inaudible] i want to say all those people should support putting luxury housing in a luxury neighborhood. It is moving the welthsy people who would move into the the mission and soma and tenderloin to move to those areas and by voting this project and gaechbs the height you vote against Affordable Housing in the tenderloin and [inaudible] at the end of the day this isnt just about numbers and shadow squz values. It is who we are as san franciscan and whether people that want to come and live here are a violation or benefit. I know it is a long day but beg you tomorrow and next week and months and years aheads to make the right decision because we are counting on you. Our live jz dreams and hopes are counting on you. Thank you so much. Good evening. My name is betty macy and live on [inaudible] i make close to 200 thousand a year and cant afford to live here. What i would ask you to please consider is that yeah, the shadow of a large building are a legitimate concern to the Planning Commission but how about the shadow over the life of the people who live here and cant afford it. Who live here and liferberize here and been here for 20 year jz cant stand it. I would like to remind you rincon tower 2 was biment and opened earlier this year. I would like to remind you it sits half empty because the higher floor unit rent for 10 thousand a month each. That building is now for sale and why . Because they are going convert them to condoes. What about that action . What about those homes that were supposed to build affordable home. I dont see them and cant find them or live in them. I spoke to the audience, buster. Im sorry. It infeariates me to know at my squaij salary and cant live here and hear these people talking about the community and impact to the culture providing more housing. I would like to ask anybody here where is it. Please do not approve this project or projects like it until real Affordable Housing are in the city and until people who are your made and clean your toilet and cook your food and watch your kids can afford to live here. Next speaker please. Fwood evening [inaudible] coalition of San Francisco neighborhoods and neighbors association. I just want to have maybe a slightly different approach here. On Cathedral Hill we are working with developers to build 1 thousand new units. We have 5 projects thatd we are working with now, 4 of them were in agreement with the project sponsors and we are building 4, 2 fiver 0 units code compliant buildings with Affordable Housing on site. Green buildings, ree dused parking, increases bike. It is possible to build code compliant buildings that contribute to the community and allowtuse put our working people in the neighborhoods, not pay fees for pipe line projects in bay view or treasure island. It is possible to build, this is a code compliant good building, people can live there, the developer can make a profit and doesnt have to be a question of us against them so i urge you to approve this as a code compliant project. Thank you. Next speaker please hello, my name is theresa [inaudible] part of the south of Market Action xhitey and im appalled that there is a zero on site Affordable Housing and this isi was part of the giant Development Negotiation and we thought of that thoroughly about housing on site. 40 percent on site from 45 percent ami to 150 percent ami. From different ranges of people, from people working in the ball park to teachers. These luxury condoes who are going to afford this . Who are going to be able to live this . This is just ridiculous how this development are very much putting up for home. When someone talked about the shadows, as someone who fought protecting the shadow at [inaudible] it is not just shadows, it is about the usage of the park and rincon park isnt used by people. This is also increasing the shadow so we have to think aboutwhy are the Planning Commissions here . We have this zoning and these laws and need to be reminded why are these laws here . It is justat the end of the day are we just likewhy are these [inaudible] if we are violate [inaudible] every time zoning process comes in and nob nub there is no community input. So, this is ridiculous. Good evening [inaudible] from the mission sr collaborative also born and raised in San Francisco. Grew up in a one bedroom apartment with 6 people and upgraded to a sro and im sick and tired of the [inaudible] and grow sf and the people who still believe in supply z demand econmics [inaudible] it is only 100 percent luxury condoes no on site Affordable Housing because people can afford Affordable Housing dont deserve to live in this neighborhood. Im tired of this. You all know there is a crisis in the city. You all know people cannot afford to live in this city. You can build build build build build build build build from the pricing will stay the same. They are not going go down. You can build all over the city, it doesnt work here. Throw your economics 101 textbooks away because it wont work here. It is a different environment. Do you eve chb care about the city and just want to build luxury condoes all the time . You claim to care but how many care . The people up here speaking for this the [inaudible] and grow sf how menopy care about the city . They want to come to the the city and make it better for them and dont give a crap of people that are displaced and the [inaudible] and poor people that are nob nub gone gone gone. People i want to Elementary High School with cant afford to lichb thip city. Every project out of here is focused on market rate housing. There is amorally imperative to deny this project. Whether that speaks to you or not is not up to me. My entire life has been here and sick and tire said of seeing this. Im tired and your are tired and everyone is tired. You cant keep doing this and can hear you talking in the back saying shut up. Im tired of this happening. No one that i grew up with, everyone of them was poor. None of them live in the city. It isnt because they dont want to it is because they cant afford it. There is no where for them to go. Good evening, it is really late. My name is [inaudible] im with the south of Market CommunityAction Network and soma Action Committee. We are here today to ask you to reject this project because of numerous reasons. One, the 75 howard would be taller than the 8 washington along the water front towers that San Francisco voters rejected and [inaudible] two, 75 howard would harm rincon park. According to the Planning Department eir they found every development of substantial height approximately 100 feet or taller on the project site would shadow rincon park. There is no feasible mitigation to reduce this impact to a less than significant level. This is in the draft eir page 4 h 2425. The shadow maps produced by this developer dont go past 6 p. M. Which is when many local residence use rincon park and shadows are at the longest. Shadow diagrams are unrelabel because they dependent on aceral height info of the surrounding buildings and that is extremely difficult [inaudible] numerous errors have been pointed out showing buildsings heights as a point of reference the developer should put one map showing the shadow created by this project alone. It feels like for the Planning Department we hope that you actually remember what planning is about and that is to make sure that information like this is available to the public. We are dealing this with other projects in San Francisco and we are seeing a pattern of developers could just develop without providing all this proper public input. It is sad to see that this body is turning into this place of where we will just be able to just look at what fees and what Community Benefits should we suck up and just so we dont have to deal with the problems of shadows, of displacement, but in realty those are things that should bow what this department and body should be looking at because you are helping shape our neighborhood. You are helping shape San Francisco. We need to Work Together on those things, that is why we are critical about we participated in the [inaudible] and central soma and thosE Developments to make sure our neighborhood is built properly. Thank you. High my name is [inaudible] grew up ichb San Francisco. I dont have friends that live in San Francisco when i grew up and that was a sad revelation i just had. What i want to say is that someone asked before are you going say and i didnt know about this project but when i heard about thE Development it disturbed be like i always thought that below market rate housing meant on site housing just so those peoplethat is what i thought. This is the first time im hearing you can pay off that portion so that housing can be somewhere else and that feels like we are making sure theall the rich people Stay Together and the poor people are out there and we can keep this in a certain way. That is how i felt and why i had to step up saying it doesnt feel like San Francisco. The San Francisco i grew up in had a lot of diversity and inclusion, justice and cultural equity. What people dont understand that they are not san franciscans so i urge you to take that on and make sure those things are things that prevail in what we do here and hope there are more developers and more landlord out like Cathedral Hill that figure out a way to put Affordable Housing on site and should look that Planning Department for those kind of tweper landlords that want to stay in San Francisco from San Francisco. I think that would be great. Thank you. My name is diane [inaudible] with south affMarket CommunityAction Network. I approve this project because there is zero on site on this project and because they are building 100 luxury units. [inaudible] income levels and we are over producingwe produce twice as much lexry housing in the city as the [inaudible] for people making more than 85 thousand dollars a year which i definitely dont, we are making more than double what the [inaudible] goals are. At 80 percent of ami, so 57,000 dollars for people, they only intiteed about 30 percent. Less than 80 percent the city only built 55 percent. In 2007 San FranciscoPlanning Department issued a study that showed that for every 100 units of market rate housing it created depend for 43 affordable units so you may service the luxury class with these units but where and when are the 43240do the math, where are those going to be built . It will be put on and on forever. We have to look at the Affordable Housing e needs of the city and take into consideration the cities goal squz the studies that show we dont need more luxury housing in the city, we need more Affordable Housing. Thank you. Is there additional publicthere he is. I will start my clock again. Good evening. [inaudible] look, it is [inaudible] build the housing and dramatic water front housing will [inaudible] for those who need it. That is perposerous on its face. This is housing for the 1 percent. This is housing for the globeal elite. Starting at 2 thousand dollars a square foot and up. That is what this is. Only one person noted it was going to provide just the absolute bare minimum the city law allows or requires for affordable inclusionary housing. At 12 percent. In this case cash it out. 12 percent. We have a uber luxury project doing just 12 percent inclusionary. What no one mentioned but what i want to get you to Pay Attention to is the developer is asking for every goody they can get that makes their project more valuable every possible way. A parking variance, this variance, this conditional use. Most of all, 20 more feet and exception to your bulk limits. 2 more floors of condoes add that level sell for 4 thousand dollars a square foot and that is about 30 thousand feet at least. 120 Million Dollars goody from you a 20 feet you dont have to give them. What are we getting back . The profit from that after development cost, 30 million . Pick a number. 25 million . What do you get back . What is the sit a getting back for giving 20 more feet, nothing. You are not getting anything back. Why dont you tell them double the inclusionary which means double the fee in this case from 9 million to 18 million and well giver you that 20 feet and 120 millions. That is what you need to do and whailt the department has to use the leverage it has and ever exception and variance that you grant is worth money, big money and get us more Affordable Housing or at least more money for it. Otherwise [inaudible] it down. Good evening im [inaudible] from south of Market Action committee. I havent agreed with johnilatey but i have to say i think today i am. When we look at the calendar to see when this item would come up and realized the alphabet of exempttions you will grant them. This not something that doesnt have an effect in our nairbld. Many of you may know about the rincon hill stabilization fund. This was created particularly to make sure those height increases and exsempens would benefit and stabilize the neighborhood for the long term and that is model that needs to be looked at again. You are granting a lot of wealth to this development. It is also something that is a standard so essentially we had a majority of the housing built in soma. Practly 50 percent . Yeah, that. So 12 thousand units over out of 21,000 of the city over the most recent housing balance summary. So, with that though there has been efforts to make sure there is inclusionary housing that benefits this naird but i want to you to look at it from a planning perspective and not from the mayors perspective or from a development deal, on that sense i want you to think about how this impacts this neighborhood, south of market. You can transformed this whole area over the past decade and this is just over the recently before that there was a lot morE Development. The people who lived here are not talking from a place of asking for so much more, they know the value of this land and the impacts that will effect them. We had 13 different Redevelopment Areas here. We are perfectly aware of what the land is work and how you are packaging these deal said to makE Development happen but you are not aware of what we get in return and that is decent job jz Affordable Housing in the neighborhood, something that remains and grows the neighborhood so we have a chance to continue to sur vive. I urge you to think about when you think about passing this project and the one well talk about next because you need to take a stance how the neighborhood is shaped for the long term. Thank you. Good eeskening Planning Commissioners. We are here today late and should give ourselves a pat on the back. This project before us im shocked to hear it has no on site Affordable Housing and offers 20 percent off site affordable. How after prop k can any developer bring a project before the Planning Department and the Planning Commission with anything less than 33 percent affordable which isnt enough to begin with. How anyone can bring forth a project that has no on site affordable. As it was said, house frg the 1 percent, this is housing for the global 1 percent this is not serving the needs of san franciscans. If you think this will tricker to the folks in sro and the Homeless People on the streets i dont know what to say, but that is ubsurd. We cant approve projects designed strictly