sent to just a couple of people. i am the president of the rosa parks peasants association. you know, looking at these pictures, it started hesitating. it is nice looking, but listen to us. the rosa parks and building was built in the '60s. it was a hospital, and in 1973, three more levels were added to

the building. you know, we have the 12 stories of that kind of office. it was converted at that point in two housing facilities for seniors and others. hallway's duty that addition, they have three and five degrees of pitch. the windows are turned, and they are leaking. several apartments are very flooded when we have rain.

it was built on soil without preservation, and it needs a lot of work, because we have a lot of problems. the building, adding a new building to the old ones, there are damages to rosa parks, the collapsing of the property. and even the earthquake comes along, we will be buried in the rubble of this building. the occupants of the building is worth 250 cents, approximately 300 people, not including the

care providers and other workers. it would add another 200 people. [chime] i have to finsih. president migish. president miguel: thank you. you can submit that in writing. your time is up. >> thank you. >> your time is up. submit it in writing. >> i submitted it. >> other people have to be allowed to speak. >> if you allow me to -- president miguel: i cannot. the rules are everyone gets the same amount of time. three minutes. i'm sorry.

we've already had your comments in writing, we will consider it. it is still open for other people for public comment. >> i'm so sorry. we'll have to turn to -- president miguel: is there additional public comment on this item? in that case, public comment is closed. commissioner antonini: thank you. i'm surprised there isn't more comment, but i have questions for the project sponsor for the staff, maybe. the first part of this was the shadow allowance. i was reading this over, and i'm not saying this is a very good project, but we have to analyze all projects equally. if i am reading this correctly, they say that this will increase the shadowing about 5.4% of the

total potential sunlight annually on the buchanan street mall if i am meeting that correctly, bringing into a situation where the new total shadow coverage would be approximately 30% of potential available sunlight. and i know that the 295 restrictions are very strict. i just wonder how this is being applied, and i know we have had other projects were there have been minuscule increases, we have had long discussions over it, so i wanted to talk to you about what the staff's feeling is on this. >> you are correct, in other parks, there are minuscule amounts that we allow. in the memo that was issued to

staff, it spoke to specific parts and that actually have shadow load limits or the buchanan all is not a specific limit identified. there is a limit established. commissioner antonini: there are 14 parts in the downtown area that have a numerical value, but this is outside of that area so it is more of a subjective call by the commission about whether this is adverse. i am glad we were able to discuss that because i think the public can sometimes be confused. there is a different between the 14 parks that have the specific numerical amount, and there are allowances even under those situations. they are stricter than is the situation where the parts that do not fall under the

jurisdiction. >> in terms of your concern about the numerical data, if there is a 40-foot-building, the shadow impact -- there would not be a study necessary for that 40-foot building. if one was done, it would be a 0.5% increase compared to this 50-foot building. commissioner antonini: the 40- foot building would cast a shadow that is 90% of what is being cast. that is fine, i realize that. as i say, this is a very good project. i don't think we have any objections, but i was concerned about the architectural renderings. they look very nice on the billboards of their -- of theiu

there. we have to be very careful working with architects and staff to make sure that the product comes out to be a drafted one. we want to make sure that this presents well to the public, may be the architect can comment about that. >> thank you. we have been working with the client to develop a palette of materials, and these are works in progress as we are finalizing the concept, getting into design development. we are interested in having the best possible combination of those materials, that presents

the best front to the streets, so we will be happy to work with the comments that we receive to make sure that that happens. commissioner antonini: anything you can do to try to soften it wherever possible, as the presence of the street, it is always appreciated. it makes it a lot more attractive than the window treatments are important. commissioner borden: i think this is a great project, i am glad you have and the community successful on the ground floor to create light. a lot of buildings in that part

of town are not related to the street. i think that it is a great use of the site and will actually be an improvement to what is their right now, -- there right now. plus, we get senior affordable housing. i get the shopping center, the open space, is quite substantial, but it is not because of this project. it is from the previous project before. i will move to approve with conditions. commissioner moore: there are several aspects that i would like to know. the second one, i am very much impressed, and i want to point out that we have a long block here where the building has expressed itself in six parts,

which is distinctly different as to protect against a very monolithic building. it makes the old upgrade and kind of creating yet being lower and differentiated in its part. i think this is a wonderful example to upgrade the neighborhood pedestrian significance -- experience. we're not here to comment on what the public said earlier. i am concerned that the residents, there is probably somebody that can guide people with concerns and to work with them at this particular body is not there to basically deal with these issues. i find it very interesting.

>> do we need to motions? >> you can have separate motions or one motion that encompasses both projects. commissioner antonini: i just want to make sure that we are -- >> from the one motion, i would ask for both components. commissioner antonini: one for c.u. and one for shadows. it looks like you have the funding in place for this to go forward. >> emily lynn, we have secured the local funding. what is left for us to secure is the tax allocation that will be applying for the spring. commissioner antonini: what will

the total impact be in terms of the revenue at the cost of the project? >> it was approximately $40 million. commissioner antonini: thank you. president miguel: i think this is an excellent project, the public comment, those here in the audience, i'm sure took note of them. try and work with the individuals, i am sure it is not the first time you have heard this. >> on the motion for the chateau -- shadow being not adverse and the conditional use is approved with conditions.

commissioner antonini: aye. commissioner borden: aye. commissioner moore: aye. commissioner sugaya: aye. president miguel: aye. >> the motion passed unanimously. i just will note that i will issue a different emotion numbers for each. you are now a hot item number 14. 151 third street. >> good evening, members of the planning commission. the request is for the termination of compliance with section 309 regarding the expansion of the existing san francisco museum of modern art. the existing sf moma is about

225,000 square feet. it would demolished existing buildings and construct a new edition of approximately 230,000 square feet, reaching a height of approximately 200 feet. as part of the project, an existing building at folsom street will be demolished to accommodate the relocation of the fire station number one that would result in the expansion of the project on howard street. the construction of the new fire station would be faced with the overall project given the fire destruction and protection services. you may recall in november 2011 the commission considered several actions regarding the expansion and the associated fire station relocation. adoption of findings under the california environmental quality act and regulations of the board

of supervisors for a general plan amendment associated with the project. the board of supervisors rejected an appeal and certification of the environmental impact report. the first leading was subsequently passed on second reading january 24. the action before you is to consider the design of the expansion itself as well as several exceptions being requested in accordance with section 309. the project sponsor will give a detailed explanation, but i would like to request for exceptions. the upper portions of the building will exceed the limitations of the cut. given the dimensions, it would be difficult to design a building that strictly complies. the site is situated toward the interior and with a context of taller towers, it would not be readily apparent. views of the building will shift

dynamically depending on the perspective. the unique design incorporates progressively smaller force of the upper levels that would reduce the apparent goal of the structure at its most visible light and preserve views of surrounding buildings including the historic pacific telephone and telegraph building to the east. the project also requires an exception for ground level wind currents. this section specifies and comfort criteria for wednesday levels require a new development designed to avoid creation. while the project would not eliminate all existing convergences, it would not result in a net increase, nor would substantially change the duration or the intensity. the project includes more than required number of spaces,

however, the spaces do not strictly comply. these variances will be considered by the zoning administrator at a future public hearing. i like to note the following publication, we received two additional pieces of correspondence on the project, one of which was transmitted directly to you from adjacent property owners that expressed concern about expression of the ground for -- a floor plan of the project. there is a letter in support of the project from a property owner in the area as well. i would like to briefly note to changes to the conditions of approval that we can recommend, number one is changes to the language regarding t program, ad art piece is intended to be

satisfying the public art requirement. the project will go to the standard review and selection process. it was not able to be installed in the project. i would like to strike the reference to the transit impact development fee as it would apply to the property. that he does not apply for this project because it is a nonprofit cultural institution. in conclusion, staff recommends support of the project, it enhances the cultural viability to the city and enhances the economy of the city of san francisco in terms of encouraging tourism. i am available for any questions you may have. president miguel: project sponsor? >> director of sm moma. -- sf moma.

we are at an exciting time, yet today we have our sights set on a larger prize. we believe that we can become one of the greatest museums anywhere in the world. we will not lose sight of our community as we grow and the educational programs will touch many more people than ever before. i am here to speak about the educational value, but to emphasize the way that the design will positively impact the neighborhood. it is important to place this in context. when we opened our doors in 1995, there was no community at all. south of mission was dominated by parking lots, and warehouses, and vacant lots. today, it bustles with activity. 100,000 of those visitors come to the museum of the many free days that we offer. it is filled with restaurants,

hotels, and conventioneers. you might said developed because of the positive impact that we have had. we firmly believe that through the extension of the museum, we can have the same positive impact on the neighborhood we had in the 1990's. one aspect of the expansion plan is of particular interest. the new trans bay terminal will have opened. visitors to the city coming through public transportation will enter the city and our direction. we believe that there is a terrific opportunity to revitalize those streets and making the ministries particularly vibrant and sons. as you know, the 1995 building orleans to the west. they were developing plans for two additional entrances. the other may be accessed.

rather than the somewhat current building that i feel of the not engage would-be visitors to the degree that we would wish break the strong emphasis on glass in the design. pedestrians will see directly into the building, pedestrians will see directly into the building. and once inside the museum, there are numerous opportunities to look out at the beautiful city. we're thrilled by the progress of the design and it speaks to progress, openness, and excitement. it will be a more generous member of the cultural community and of the neighborhood. president miguel: thank you. >> good evening, commissioners. we have been working on the site to the northeast of the existing

building and developing the project according to our program that has been developed together with the various stakeholders, and also in contact with various groups surrounding the site. if you can please put up the images, thank you. one of the first things we began with developing this project is a better understanding of the climactic conditions of the sites. it is important to understand the shadows and shattered distances of the existing building on the site before we build anything at all. some of the surrounding buildings cast considerable shadows across the site, specifically the st. regis and w hotels. they cast rather significant shadows during certain portions of the year across the scope for garden. we wanted to create a building that would not cast additional new shadows on the site. some of the first studies we

created were to place the bulk of the building within the paths of the existing power structures that are adjacent, so we put the bulk of the building within this framework as is a starting point for the development of the project. it rises up within us deeper shadows that are created by the tower structures. we also began to look at buildings that can have a minimal impact on the existing buildings, some of the first studies placing the bulk of the building entirely within the zone where the two buildings are being demolished to ward howard street. the problem with that study, once we placed in the administration's at the top of these gallery functions, the building became extremely tall, especially in concert with the buildings neighboring id. you can see with this red line, the kind of extent that such a building would reach if the mass

of the building were placed entirely in that one portion of the site. we did not like that in terms of how it would affect neighboring structures so we began to create a similar program. replaced of the building in a very compact and efficient form that would bring the mass of the building down significantly with respect to the relationship of its neighbors. the eventual passing that we have situated and fixated upon it in the final design, it is relatively low compared to the initial studies that we created. another issue here is that by creating a series of terraces in concert with the terraces of the existing design buildings, we are able to make it an extension of this building and that exists today, so in this diagram, you're able to see the existing building on the left, the expansion building we have designed in the middle, creating a series of terraces from the

sky down toward the street. but also creates the situation where visitors standing in the park, when they look up across the series of terraces, they see the portion of the building that is most minutely detailed and have the finer materials at the top of the building. it is sort of segregated into two groups of materials, so we are exposing that to the public as they approached the building. here you can see a very simple view from yerba buena. the image here is to show you this, the idea of creating a sort of cascade of terraces of away from the building right down to yerba buena. the building as it relates to the building's creates a scaled connection that we feel is appropriate on the sites. that is also visible from a distance as you see from the model, the building becomes a

mediator. a middle-stone building from the very high buildings that are existing their, some of the existing lower structures that will probably remain for quite some time in the future. the building as a connector or link between these scales. it is creating a horizontal quality to the site that we feel is important to the neighborhood. we are opening up the ground floor levels and rising up a new lobby space that will be accessible as it was mentioned, from both howard as well as third. that space will be accessible to the public freely so that they will be able to access, through the site and the building, from one side to the other. what is important about that, we need to create a very even and comfortable flow for people as we move through this building. it will dramatically increase over time as the expansion is

completed. we found that the stairs and side of the building and, while very beautiful, is only about 6 feet wide at the narrow point and this would not necessarily accommodate the large number of visitors expected in the future. we carefully examined it, we understand and appreciate the value of it, and it works in a context in a way that we feel is appropriate. this is the existing staircase up to the atrium. what we're doing is opening it up, maintaining the overlook, maintaining a wide stare for businesses in the future but retaining the beautiful ocular shape from the bridge and the things that people have come to enjoy at love about that space. although it is not part of the per view, it is part of the public experience so we thought was important for you to see that. the gallery spaces open up our toward the street, especially howard street with the new exhibition gallery.

it visually connects howard street and physically connect to howard st., we have created a series of spaces and we have been increasing that since the last time this was presented. now we have two widths we are working with. it actually has been increased, so we are making sure that we give the most space possible to the public that the ground level. the area is also an interesting challenge, it is kind of a rough parking pad with a lot of motorcycles and things parked there. it could be cleaned up and made more useful in the future. we are sort of creating a series of taking over the parking pad, creating a series of terraces