>> so i am not going to get it. i will work on that later. i will slide it around. actually, you have all of this in the booklet. i am representing 45 lansing street development l.l.c., it is affiliated with crescent heights, a marketing company that's brought more than 70 high quality urban projects to homeowners. crescent heights has been the recipient of numerous design and development awards including a gold medal award of excellence for the metropolitan in san francisco. actually the quality of their product can be evidenced by reviewing the five-star reviews. i am just going to read two or three quick ones because they pertain to their strategy of

how to bring affordable units to the market. if you are looking for a modern place that is affordable, come here. i live in this luxury high rise and i really love it. another says the convenience that the provide is utterly invaluable. facilities are great. it is well done. what you are hearing is a mix of quality with afford ability. and that is why we have substantial community support. the neighborhood association submitted a letter. i actually gave an additional letter to linda today for distribution. and they are favoring this project as it has been favored in four prior votes unanimously for the quality of the building. for the realization of the plan.

the architecture retains the project that was unanimously approved in 2007. the cite is a preferred tower cite and it blends with the existing context. it is providing a scale on lansing street which would be to the back of the building. this is the harrison street. and the way that it provides that is that it has a lot of detail. the building actually has two faces, the harrison side is the more urban side. that is where all of the vehicles come in and the loading comes in. when you get to lansing it is a finer detailed scale. like many of the better designed buildings, it is a

building that has a lot of different aspects to it or prospects to it as you look at it from different positions. one of the elements that i want to draw your attention to is the first exception, which is the exposure exception. i don't know if you are familiar with the -- there is a little union gas station on the corner adjaceant to the project and they hike on that site to 65 feet. the exposure requirement actually deals with distance -- deals with exposure from the lot line. and the reason that this exception has been approved every time previously is that with a 65-foot height limit you won't even reach the lower podium of the building. all of the units above will have exposure even though it is situated where it is.

this building has gone through two different designs. it was extended again in 2009 and 2010. but the magic of developing a high rise building is really how you approach the market. obviously we are coming out of one of the most difficult times we have had since the great depression. and crescent has taken an aggressive stance on this building. they are targeting a size and unit mix which they believe will be affordable to a wide spectrum of san francisco homeowners. they need to do that in order to make the project financeable to large scale lenders. they are trying to schedule it for opening in 2014. that is how far out you have to project with the time for construction. this is an extremely bold move in this market to decide to

build a building for 2014 that shows a great deal of optimism and hopefully wisdom in bringing these projects online at that time. we are also providing flexibility ottoset of the marketing. there are studio units and there is a possibility if a demand arises to actually combine a studio in the two bedroom to create three bedroom unit potential. so what we are doing is keeping a maximum option available to be able to respond to the market. it is loved by the lender it is and buying community and it protects the developer as well.

the units are smaller than units that have been up there and that is by conscious design on the part of the developer. that is what people have done to get in trouble on a lot of these units, they were buying gross square footage. what this developer has done and is attempting to do here is moving what would have been expensive individual unit area into common area amenities so you can have what you need but don't need to pay for it inside your unit things like business center where you can leave your unit without having to buy a bedroom that is never utilized. it reduces the unit size, reduces the unit cost and then you can get what you need from the building.

this responds to the parking exception to see the ratio. in balancing the parking interest we have clearly acknowledged the city's policy on providing less parking. even though the unit count is going up to 320 and the parking count is for 265. at the same time we are trying to satisfy the customers and the lenders. i must say unfortunately the lenders have as much to say about parking as the consumers do. one of the things that happens when you will not have independent access to your car where it will be by means of the intermede rear it is more like car storage than parking.

for the most part you are not going to make short-term trips out of a building like this but you do have to provide the car storage in order to give people a notion that they can go away on a weekend and live a life that has the great lust for our individual ownership of cars built in to make it markable and financialable. we are assuming that some of these units, particularly studios, will be sold to buyers without parking and will make full use of available public transit. our anticipation is that people that buy two bedroom units will want a car. so that was the way we struck that balance. we are also involved in

creating amenities, exception number three deals with the open space. the open space is met with an agreement that you will see after we work out the details with staff for lansing street improvements. there will be improvements built as a part of this project . you have in your booklet this image which shows the materials and the finish on lansing street. the actual required amount of space to create to satisfy the open space requirement would be the dark box. but since it seemed ridiculous to cut it off we are extending it to first street because it is the right thing to do. now, this goes further and

reflects the conversations we have had with the community. in our working with homeowners in the vicinity, one of the greatest frustrations has been expressed by the public infrastructure that was part of the plan. when we described what we were doing from lansing we heard from people why don't you do the whole thing. so, this is part of the program that was initiated. we knew that was the office that could help us and we met for the first time to answer the question, who is the we. the we was the neighborhood, the planning department and the mayor's office are the people we met with to bring together a proposal that would allow us to use additional dollars that would be contributed to

complete both guy and lansing street to the standard we are proposing for lansing street in terms of finishes. as michael spoke we had the ability to leverage another $3.9 million in bond financing for other projects. those would include street improvements, harrison street. and we can bring the total improvements between our funds that are the fee funds plus the bond funds. i think north of almost $8 million in public infrastructure, improvements that would happen at once with the construction of the building. and our support is not lost. it is very much a function of our willingness to explore these new dynamics and vehicles

for creating public infrastructure in connection with the building. we have a developer who is doing more by -- and trying to bring to the market that will actually be sold to san francisco homeowners, providing the jobs we all want to see getting back into the market, you thoroughly reviewed this design in the past. it is consistent with your unanimous prior actions. we are giving you opportunities to do neighborhood improvements. i think more than anything else it is an important signal by this development moving ahead at this time. it is a very high end big building that is going to come out of the ground and provide confidence and a signal of not only to the neighborhoods and the city as a whole but the development community that it is time to come back into play and into the market. now i am going to add a footnote.

i have now seen that some people are here to talk about their experiences with this developer. it is actually not this developer. metropolitan is 342 units, there are 14 plaintiff it is who have an action against the number of parties on the metropolitan. on april 5th we received a multimillion dollar demand for settlement. don't believe it would be in your best interest to have disgruntled homeowners. you don't need to know what is going on here. it is outside the range. if you want to know, i am not happy to tell you because i

think it is far afield. if you just look at the numbers, 14 out of 342, you know every major high rise construction that is residential ends up in multiple lawsuits. that is why we insure. that is why we have our contractors bond. and the legal process actually hardens people in their positions. i wish i could come up with a brilliant alternative to litigation. it is not the best anybody ever shows of themselves. i just want to see this system used to review planning and building policy. i appreciate your time. thank you.

>> i am a homeowner, business owner in the city of san francisco. it is not so much whether or not this project should go forward, because it is going forward. it is part of planning. it has been approved. it is a determination of the number of units inside the project. i am for anything within reason that allows construction to occur in the city and county of san francisco. i am a construction business owner in the city. we have been kepressed in this

city for, i would say two or two and a half years as far as construction work goes. we feel it does all of that. we would like to see the commission approve this project and approve the additional units in a timely basis. it is important for us to continue growing with construction in the city, in the areas that are most impacted now, not two or three or four years from now. if the project is ready i do believe that it is in the best interest of everyone, including the people in the area, as long as it, again, meets what the

e.i.r. states. moving in a timely manner. so, i am for the project. >> thank you. >> thank you commission for having me speak. i am a native san franciscoian. i am in favor of 45 lansing and also in favor of the i.s.d. are think the construction of this project will add value and workers for people who currently do not have work. so, i want to make sure that you understand i am in favor of the project. i think that it is important they think we move forward with the project.

the commission sees the project as a positive for the city and that it will open up other opportunities for the locals and for the fellow san franciscoians with respect to work. we are experiencing escalation in cost, a lot of materials are going up. a lot of materials it could conventionally possibly shelf the project because of the cost of construction rising. i want you to keep that in mind in making your decision. thank you very much. >> thank you.

>> good afternoon president and commissioners. first, i would like to thank you for your dedication for the city. my name is john wang. i am an electrical worker in local 6. here in front of you speaking in favor of this project. as you know, the construction is taking the hardest hit in this country. currently we have about over 30% of employment this job can put our skill, highly qualified members to work. and i am urging you guys to move this project forward. and we are looking at this as we need to build 10 more towers like this to put everybody to

work at our union hall. thank you. >> thank you. you can stand up from where you are sitting. >> thank you. good afternoon president and commissioners. i am a field representative with local 22. local 2, i have to say is definitely for this project. what i am hearing today, affordable housing. i am looking behind me. we have carpenters, retired carpenters, out of work carpenters, we do have working carpenters here. this is something that we can possibly with these studios maybe afford to move in. we all want to live in san francisco. we all want to be close by. we are all members of the san francisco local. i think this is a good project. i would hope that you would too. we ask that you pass this.

thank you. >> good afternoon. my name is dan byer. contract's license number 92. i have been in the city since 1900. this project creates jobs, approximately 1 00 per week for the next 28-32 months. that is a boom to the economy. it creates a better living condition for people. it supports the b.m.r. of the city ask county of san francisco and supports a growing and viable area. i thank you for the time to talk to you. i urge you to approve it. >> thank you. >> good afternoon commissioners and madam chairman.

i too am in favor of this project on behalf of our members. we ask you to move forward on this. it is a good project. it was previously approved by the planning department. what is to not like? you have affordable housing, a chance to put local contractors to work and local residents to work. and maybe give our members that live and work here an opportunity to buy affordable housing. please consider moving this forward. thanks very much. >> thank you. i am owner at the metropolitan. on my card i actually am not opposed to the development.

i have some serious issues with the developer. full disclosure, i am one of the owners that mr. atkinson talked about. there are 23 units at the metropolitan that are under litigation with the developer at crescent heights, to manage the metropolitan project they created to limit their exposure as is the norm. there are significant outstanding issues in our respect and our view. mr. atkinson started out by talking about how the devil can cite scripture for his own purpose. he went on to say most developments have some sort of

litigation. that is absolutely true in the case. they have developments all over the country that are currently in litigation. there is more down here. it is definitely their experience to find themselves in litigation. you know unfortunately i have to dive into one or two of the issues so that you can get an understanding. mr. atkinson used the term aggressive for this developer. that is a perfect adjective. in all respects they have seriously aggressive and marketing strategies. basically they oversold these units. their glossy brochures, their word of mouth, their written --

i can site many things as to how my unit was sold to me as an 874 square foot unit. eight months to the day after i killed escrow they recorded with the city assessor as 795 square foot. that is 10% less than i bought. i think that is irrefuteable. so that is an issue of their integrity and aggressive selling tactics. so, construction defects. i don't know if you remember there was a scaffolding around the metropolitan for almost a year because the tile started to fall off. safety issues, possibly. but in my particular unit, let me talk to that. when i bought the unit i couldn't get into see it because it was perfect timing on their behalf. things were selling

brilliantly. they cited fire code as to why i couldn't get in. when i did get in eventually there was a carpet on the unit. what i didn't realize is that the carpet underlied an unfinished floor which did not meet the specification of greater than one inch of grade over 10 feet. when two years ago the carpet came out, this was revealed. >> thank you. is there any additional public comment? >> i didn't realize i had a time limitation. probably good. but there is another side to the story. >> everyone has three minutes. thank you, sir. >> good afternoon. i am jamie whitaker. i am president of the neighborhood association. hopefully you received the letter supporting 45 lansing street project. this is one step forward for the neighborhood to potentially

get some of the infrastructure improvements that are badly needed by existing residents. and get a little closer to becoming the most densely populated portion of the city of san francisco which would restore bus service and everything else needed. please approve this project. thank you. >> thank you. >> commissioners i will be very brief. this project we have been waiting for for a long time. we have had folks out of work for a long time. it could start as early as the end of this year and the beginning of next. good god, let this work. >> good afternoon commissioners. my name is javier flores.

i am here to support the project. as you know, you probably hear many opinions. but we are really suffering. i am not talking about our members. i am talking about people that will be involved in this project. please, support this project. it is one of the good things that you guy consist do. today is a good day. tomorrow will be another better day. >> i don't know if you want to ask if any of your other members are here if they want to stand up at this time. stand up to show their support. >> thank you. >> uh-huh. thank you. >> good afternoon commissioners. local 377 here in san francisco. i am speaking on behalf of my members. we really need this work. we thank the commission for

their diligence on this and we are very much supportive. thank you. i am a member of local 22. and also a resident and property owner in san francisco. i want to speak in support of this project. the san francisco government, the state government and the federal government, we hear about the deficits and shortages. part of what is driving that is unemployment at high wage jobs like our construction jobs. and that means nothing is getting paid in to the tax coffers. i think we need to move forward on this project. you know, inspect it as carefully as you want. i think i can speak for all of us in the building trades we