photos or renderings, that is a big factor. two of the three most dense lines in the city, two of the streets that have been designated have been on the books for 15 years. it is priority for the city to change the ways buses will run. so why can't the smith group factor that into some of their renderings as though it might happen. the loading also is ignored. it is all of this that is not in the real world. also, where is the tunnel rendering. we talk about this wonderful pedestrian visit that is going on, but at the same time, they don't want it.

>> good evening, president. i am speaking on behalf of dr. but buckley. -- bob bukclye. -- dr. bob buckley. i have that a psychiatrist for over two decades. they received a unit that seems to be a danger to themselves and others. you can stabilize them and transfer them for follow-up. those facilities are rapidly being a eliminated.

the plan includes zero beds and a new procedural facility. they struggled under the crushing weight of the emergency unit that is graded for 18 patients. it is dangerous to patients and staff. saint luke's used to be the overflow valve. that is when there were acute patient beds. the psychiatric unit since 2005 last year, the relocated in the geriatric psyche and it.

where they intend to close. thank you. president olague: if there is additional public comment on this item, please come to the microphone at this time. >> we have a physician on the way and he is stuck in traffic. >> we will have to close the public commentary. >> we can read for him. president olague: two minutes. it is fine to represent someone else. >> i am here to present the membership of the organizing committee, especially my colleagues have served as a director of pediatrics, and i am

still working. i can attest to the psychiatry. occupational medicine and other services. it is a wonderful thing, but they also managed to struggle a lot of the hospital. they will provide, for example, the intensive care nursery and occupational medicine. this has had negative consequences to both buy and patients and their working-class parents. we have members of the planning commission exercise your provisions to save the low income working population. it also makes no sense to transfer services from a hospital to an upper class area

near downtown. the plans before you do not reflect community medical leave. today is bike to work day, and it is significant because transportation is a major issue. it is basically famous for the permanent traffic jam in front of it. the only other people in southeastern san francisco that have a difficult time getting to it, my colleague and a psychiatrist and i met with the only physician on the health commission that spoke to several points and resolutions. [chime] president olague: you are welcome to submit those comments if you like. is there any additional public

comment? public comment is closed. commissioner antonini: thank you. i appreciate all the comments. the one the found the most meaningful was from john, the architect that says the art and science of medicine is constantly evolving and buildings must adapt. i am thankful that we're looking at a project in which they planned to invest $3 billion in the economy. our job is to make sure that we address concerns, but overall, this is a terrific project. let me talk about the size and i think the topic was supposed to of been for. going to them briefly, i think it was extremely well done. i don't have any comments on that. st. luke's, i think it is very

well done. also, i think the part of the hospital element there, the largest part of the element is a little bit started with the way it is designed with the white walls and windows that are just sort of perched on there. i think that can be improved a little bit architecturally. the rest of it is certainly good the way that it opens up to the neighborhood. i think that is great. i don't have allot of commons for the medical office building. or rather on the hospital itself. it could certainly use some refinement here and there architecturally. they did a very good job of articulating the height, the perceived tight with the buildings. but on the area side, there isn't any kind of the fine to

break between the height of the hospital and the adjoining building. i am not saying that there has to be a big setback, but architecturally, will fill a lot better if a some sort of break at that point, some sort of element that would be more respectful of the buildings on either side. also, some of the upper floors of the building of the kind of portrayed a 50s type of architecture in my mind, from what i could see. and there was a side of it that had a checkerboard pattern that unfortunately reminded me a bit of the one that was not too successful. the overall design is pretty good. some of the elements of think me a little bit of refinement to make what i believe is a good,

green, thought out design that works. while i am not being critical of the way it is brought together, mainly just of the design things. that is what we were talking about, the 63 foot hospital at 63-65 feet through most of that. that is what i would like to see. i realize it has to be higher at the aspect. i think it would be a lot more respectful. briefly, some other things that came up, i asked earlier today during the hearing, what is the geographic center of population density. a budget is pretty close to where this hospital is planned on. and if you do some figures, i think that this is the perfect

place to put the hospital because it does put forward access equally from all parts of the city as well as outside of the city. a and the traffic can be mitigated. i think they provide lots of parking which is very important because a lot of people will come by car. even though we encourage them to use public transportation, that will be the largest amount of ongoing traffic spread over a 24-hour cycle. if people can get in and take part, i don't think it will be as bad. a month and the traffic will be as severe. you may not have as much traffic, but you have fewer streets to accommodate. i think the plan is a good one. i was asked why we haven't had

more answers on the alternative analysis that was done in the economic impact. you don't have to necessarily address each one. this is the plan that is the preferred option. this is the one that we have to direct our attention to. there was another comment about having a single rooms. somebody correct me if i am wrong, but because of various privacy requirements, hospitals have to have exclusively single rooms. that is what i have been told. this is the perfect economic engine to push an area that has a lot of vacancies. what we really want to see, we want to see traffic and activity and employment. but we don't want to see is

stagnation and empty buildings. i do have a question that was raised numerous times about whether the hospital plans to have that as part of their system, i don't know what the answer is. it is something that was brought up on the number of occasions and should be addressed. are they going to be part of the plan? and also, there were comments about emergencies in the south of market in the mission area. there will still be emergency services at st. luke's as far as i thknow. for someone the grew up many miles from the hospital, it may be many miles we have as many

hospitals as lead to end is close to each other as close as we are. you have problems, it is something that you don't have to go to every day. we are providing a lot of services in a very close area. and finally, there was comment about the import situation. i think that will be worked out. i am confident that the hospital management and others are dealing with these impacts. those are my main concerns. commissioner fong: just a couple of observations. i think it is important that 7 it is has seismic cost battles. i want to thank or knowledge of

the architect presentation that i thought was very nice. i know that we should not be lured by pretty pictures, but whether that is the location, i also want to and dollars the community concern. i understand all of them from jobs and traffic concerns to the doctor that mentioned psychiatric funding. we feel that every day. folks on the street and i am sure need more medical attention than they are able to get. but what kind of draw questions in my mind about the traffic flow, how many rooms and maybe some conflicting information. how many beds, what the ratio of service folks and hotel workers are two guests and how that relates to patients.

when trying to draw a conclusion, when it was running at full capacity, it was somewhat comparable to what this might be. i think the architects have done a very good job of getting the vehicles off the streets. and really trying to get that loading and unloading off of san francisco streets. this presentation was helpful to me and hopefully, we can get down the road on both sides. commissioner moore: i feel hard- pressed talking about architecture when the building itself has not been challenged enough by community concerns and those issues that are basically undecided. i believe that the size of the

hospital and the current configuration is too large, but be that as it may, it is really the imbalance between distributing services and equitable way. and these locations that are being discussed. but really want to engage in a discussion about architecture. the fear for me, personally, approaching this discussion as an architect that there is a programmatic lack of disclosure which guides the discussion today. the architecture is one of the mudhole vital functions. and for some reason, we are talking about where it stops and ends. there are more subtle things to

it. of believe it will have to be discussed when we are talking about the full solution of buying into a building and also its delivery functions. that makes it difficult for me to talk. i've expressed my concerns about size of the buildings. i am fully aware of the already impossible traffic situations on all streets surrounding. when i go to the planning department but i sometimes do during the week, believe it or not, it takes me 45 minutes to come from the corner of sacramento down to the bottom of market where i walk across to go to the mission street address of

the planning department. that is unacceptable. i do sometimes drive a car. i say that because i do agree with anybody that comments on traffic in particular because of hospital requirements, most people do come with cars for visiting hall or as patients. i think it creates a problem. i don't what to talk about the architecture there. over all, it remains too large. the question that i really would like to discuss in detail with the architect, where are you taking your architecture from? we're very proud having spent a number of historic buildings,

when we were trying to recapture it, zero buildings that would occur, they start celebrating it as a boulevard. i do not think that the vernacular chosen for the building, but really a acknowledges these strong presence of historic buildings. it is basically an oversized building that in its treatment of windows has little or nothing to do with what we are all quite proud of. and even if it is a highway, has a great history of the extremely important buildings. whenever there is an empty storefront, i am sad that we have a hard time recapturing the scale of the streets. these buildings are very much

out of scale. but let that stand for a moment as something -- what we can avoid it at a certain level. it still needs to speak to the street as ideas. i am not quite sure that that has been done. of the particular medical office building, it is like from outer space. it is such a powerful presence and i believe is being negated. by the way, this building meets the corner. it is between what is important to us. for many years, we have talked about the planning department as it was presented to us the bus rapid transit. we don't talk about that anymore. the discussion has basically

disappeared altogether. i do believe there is a need for some form of improved and bus traffic, particularly recently, we have major schools. major high-school at the bottom of north point and today where students who live in a completely different part of the city take the bus home. at 2:30 or 3:00 going to mission and the market, it is accentuated us already. there are students that have to take public transit. we hope that we would find transit improvements. together with building more residential, begin continuously pushing into think we're missing something here. i could go on.

i am not completely opposed to some aspects of the architecture. i personally cannot feel that this is the moment to respond in detail to that. commissioner borden: i am not going to say too much, but i would agree with the commissioners ha, ha the point that they highlighted, i think there are major issues. it looks masses. i think that that needs to be worked on also. that size and scale, it is quite large. there are elements of the project that is very attractive, some of the streetscapes. i think there's a lot more work still to be done on this project. the biggest concern is the issue

of traffic. we are not discussing traffic today, but it is a big concern. we couldn't help but notice the lack of cars. with that be the bus rapid transit lane? that is within the realm of what we looked at today. we looked at examining this further, but the comment would be to let's look at how we are scaling and massing these buildings. in trying to create a more safe corridor for people even though it is more than one. that is the heart of where the challenges are in the design. i think saint luke's can be done really well. there are some relief thoughtful things.

the major design issues are around the venice project. commissioner sugaya: just to echo support for some of the other commissioners or all of them, and the medical office building, i think commissioner moore isn't thinking about designing it as a historic building, but just thinking about the building next door. to me, it kind of looks like the hall of justice. some people know what that means. [laughter] i think there needs to be some more attention paid to the building across the street which i personally think is too big.

and i would like to have staff give us a point by point. i can't remember it anymore, it was so long ago. if we could get a point by point analysis, what it requires an says inverses this particular project, and the commission would appreciate that. and some other things. thank you for the presentation. i think we have a long way to go. this is what i was thinking about. in terms of the scale and everything, the argument has been made. there have been some presentations about the program had said that you needed this kind of size in order to have

the facilities within one building so that when new patients for their, they could rapidly get the services necessary if there were complications. and a lot of the services that were necessary would be there. what i am thinking, if that is the case, if you're trying to make the argument for a facility, how does that work in other hospitals that say only have 250. i am sure there must be hospitals like that. you're building those that have a lot fewer beds, and the think with the community is saying, why are you centralizing everything in one location and ignoring places like st. luke's. the issue has come out before

about the possibility of having more facilities in having more services at st. luke's, for example. i think, there has been general discussion around that. it might be good if we can take a look at that a little more closely. president olague: i am going to be brief tonight. we have a couple more hearings coming up where we will be discussing the development agreements. at some point, given the discussion that we heard here tonight among commissioners, we will have to have follow-up meetings with staff. an additional meeting added where the commission is addressed without the staff so

we have more of an objective perspective on some of the issues we are raising. it is hard to talk about a building and not talk about what is going on inside of the building. those are the concerns i heard today by members of the public. charity care, psychiatric care, some of the use is being reduced or transferred to other facilities. those of the types of questions that we will want a little bit more detail on. what is the current zoning? a special use district. what are the details of that? and a special use district verses what is being proposed, it is being interpreted by staff. there was mention of a lot of

the bus transit. i guess we need some kind of an update of what is going on there. i am not clear about what is going on there. also, the physicians organizing committee seems to me to be composed of individuals who work at st. luke's primarily or have worked at st. luke's. at some point, i would like to have the opportunity to get a sense of what their role is there, what are some of the services currently being provided once this new complex is in place and what is being moved out. we just want to get a sense of that to get an idea of the that to get an idea of the bigger picture.