we clearly intended to do this but did not want to be limited in terms of where we utilize the inclusion in fees, and i am using the number of inclusion in fees that would be generated in the neighborhood overall. we will be importing more of them to the neighborhood than the neighborhood would generate with the subsidies and the financing for the affordable housing. with all due respect to the neighbors, and i have tremendous respect for them, and for their commitment to affordable housing, with a very lovable neighborhood. we would prefer that this fee remain in designated, for the typical practice. thank you very much. >> public comment on this item? i have a few speaker cards.

kirk lynn, jason henson, jim worshall, and julia sullivan. if you are ready. >> the one thing i have not heard from the developer is how many units they are going to ask for, because the last three projects that have been in this area, -- they are with the low income housing. we need a low-income housing. i live at 158, and i have seen, just on my walk here, passing by this project, 27 homeless

people. camping out, in doorsteps. on the street itself because there is not enough low-income, housing. in the area and in san francisco in general. we keep letting them -- we will just move this off to the next development. i asked this body to say, until they tell you exactly how many low-income housing slots that there will be in this -- did not allow for this to go forward. >> speakers who i have called. if you are ready. >> good afternoon. i am a 36-year homeowner and

resident -- and i am concern about the density of this project, and i would affirm the need for housing -- and i am curious how the density of this project contrasts to the density of the other blocks of the area. the density is much higher than the other blocks in the area. i am concerned that a lot of variants on the office reloading. people want to be able to get their groceries near where they live, and to take their suitcases near where they live, and the traffic problems on oak and laguna, and the craziness, octavia, and of st. are just legendary. tragically, we have had one death in the neighborhood already.

there needs to be considerable attention to the of st.f -- off- street loading. i appreciate the greenery in this area and to reduce this and the open configuration as much as they have is too great, and i would ask for you to ask for them to provide for more open areas. >> i am jason anderson, and we have sent you a letter regarding this project. there are a lot of different details to this project. we support the concept but i want to focus on the affordable housing. we talk about how we are cautiously in support of the project because we feel strongly that there should be

inclusionary housing mixed into the market-rate developments, not in a separate building. we understand that right now, the city policy and law is that the developer can choose to do this option. we understand we cannot ask you to force them to do the on- site, but we have bulleted three ideas, that we would like to see you -- maybe encourage the developer into putting in writing. the first is that there is distrust on legislation that is going to go to the voters in november and the possibility there -- we have spoken to the developer, that with a 12-% inclusion in, rather than 15%, this could be attractive to them and they could look at doing this. it is important to have this on-

site, rather than segregated and separate housing, for the low- income. the second option is the directing of the land dedication aspect, and this came up with the 2001 market, which you reviewed a few years ago, which was the whole foods on dolores market. supervisor winner -- wiener agreed to carry the legislation but this disappeared. i have spoken with the supervisor's office and they could be interested in working on that option, not just for this project but future projects so that we can get the mixed-income development. that is with the city policy needs with in those parts of the city experiencing a very high rates of growth. and the third option, was

directing the fee into the plan area. this does have some appeal to it, although we do have reservations because this would be one market rate development, and in one, separate, below- market rate development. i just want to reiterate that this is what is important to the neighborhood and we believe this is not just a neighborhood issue but a city-wide issue. i thank you for your time and i hope that you can give this some attention. thank you. >> i am jim with the neighborhood association and i would like to start by just -- saying that i agree with everything the previous speaker said. they hoisted very accurately for the community. we include -- we believe in

inclusionary housing, and we want the community to be as the verse as possible, and to give the lower-income people a chance to live in a development like this. i appreciate everything that the director had to say, but, this is one element that we feel very strongly about. i will go a bit further than henderson did, in voicing my support for the project. there are some elements of this project that the developers have worked carefully with the community on, bringing real talent and resources to this plan. that this is very commendable. the use of the alley as a traffic flow, to minimize the effect of the garage, and the different mappings and the appropriateness of different buildings, the variety of the architecture, and the high

quality throughout -- we're all very pleased with that in this development. the other thing that has happened here, is that they are staying on the market of octavia, which is something that we are pleased with with more bike parking, to make this good for the residents. when you look at these elements of what is -- what is beautiful development has done, i would ask you to keep your files of this so that when you look at some of the other large developments in the community, you have a real place of reference. this is affordable, in this highly desirable neighborhood, to build the architecturally rich and well-acquainted buildings. it is liable to have good, open

spaces. these are the elements that we applaud, and hope that you take as the kind of basis -- basic standard -- that you should go forward with. when you hear about the architects or developers talking about this, and the good architecture materials to not pencil out, i hope that you keep this as a point of reference. the parcel -- as you know -- these are currently -- there may be a transition where -- if they are developed quickly, it will be a viable but if there is an interim, with the form can continue some level -- we appreciate this. >> i am julia sullivan.

thank you for the opportunity to speak. a couple of months ago we reviewed this project in detail and give this project our strong support. we like the mixed use of the project, along with the rich designs, and the architecture firms. this is a proposal that will improve and of all the neighborhood and strengthen the sense of place, including the new st. hickory, where none currently exists. we recognize that the parking is an important consideration, in this neighborhood. we support how the project sponsors have capped the parking ratio. and, also, there is the strong commitment to bicycling and car sharing. and with regard to the housing affordability, among many other

benefits, this project makes the payment of $9.60 million to the mayor's office of housing, to help an agency in desperate need of funding, with the subsidies and the affordability of the federal and state and local level. which are collapsing. this is an excellent project and a great addition to the neighborhood, and we request that you approve this without delay. thank you very much. >> thank you. >> good afternoon, commissioners. i have lived in the area -- such as commissioner miguel for over 35 years. i appreciate the concept of growth in the city, and change will happen.

there are -- differences that -- through the meetings with the planning commission, and the neighborhood, the hayes valley neighborhood corp. -- that we have with regard to the architects current plans, that are being presented today. the density that is allowed for is inconsistent with what is in the neighborhood. this will reflect in the increased traffic and -- the neighborhood small streets and alleys that way appreciate our quiet, and are that way because they're not offloading, they are not transit corridors. from places like oak and laguna, and octavius streets. they are quiet and walkable.

we appreciate what has been happening but i will say, the concept that the street has been green -- is inconsistent with the truth, which is a this is green in the area of the architects. and the merchant areas that benefit. we would like to see and we insist on affordable housing, on-site, not of sight. this is the consensus of almost everyone that i have spoken to in my neighborhood. and our other wheelchair access as, or the approval -- for all aspects of this project and are there sunshine -- does the alley on hickory need the sunshine requirements by the city on the winter day, with the height of

the five-story housing? i do not think so. i am also concerned about the east and the west hours of being open for the park, and i would love to see the north and south solution for access to the north and south greenways. the east and west greenways. the north and south is open, and they say daylight hours. i would love to see what hours that they are open. thank you. >> a couple more speaker cards. john prescott, david price, -- >> i am a resident of hayes

valley for almost 40 years, i have attended a couple of the meetings regarding this project. i want to know about the contaminants, and if this will cause a problem. this is probably from the overhead. another concern is from ahead of me, this will tower my building by two floors. i am concerned about the shadow on the alley and how much daylight that we will get. and i am concern about the number of parking spaces being reduced. there was a mention of 120 and

now this is 91. i feel that because the building is on octavia and a street, this is a freeway ramp to the east bay, and many of the residence may be living and working on the peninsula. this puts to much pressure on the area right now for the parking spaces, and i think this should go back to 120. i am concerned about the parking and the elimination of some of the parking spaces on octavia boulevard. i am concerned about, if we will make this this way, and take the privilege away from those who want to park on the alley, these are some of my concerns. i am in agreement with the proposal of the developer to

change the way traffic moves through the complex, to the lower part of octavia. this eliminates a lot of traffic on hickory alley, and i am concern about the narrow end of the street. the access to the fire department. they had some comments in their report about the fire hydrants. and there is the developer of this lot, and how this would affect them if they narrow the street and the fire department cannot get down the street. thank you. >> and is there additional public comment on this item? >> i live in the neighborhood and i have a quick comment about the vegetation removal, this

means a removal of residence, that have been there -- this is the time i have been in the community. these are the towering trees that are on the corner of octavia. i did not hear any comments, or mention of the fact that -- to save these community residents have been there for 40 years, and the birds and other animals. they're just not humanoid and just not concrete. and the new architectural designs. >> is there any additional

public comment? >> i am a field representative of local 22. we will continue this until the developer puts forth a plan, about four years ago, i was working with the office of economic development, with the development the government, we mentioned this briefly. the city would address this interest. this is after it is sold to the private developer.

this is the enterprise apprenticeships opportunities. this is part of the sale legislation. we think that this project would be coming up with that plan. this is the covenant, covering four large parcels in the area. this is absolutely imperative that they deal with the policies established by the board of supervisors. part of this is who we are dealing with. i want to let the commission know that in march of 2011, we passed the resolution asking for them to make certain that they

uphold the standards. and these developers on their nose at the board. this is a subcontractor that we have come across. this is part of the project. this is part of the dry wall. this is the company that has been fined for significant wage and hour violations. this is the sacramento area. i hope that you verify. before you let this move

forward, but for the developer -- they can do this right. they're making sure that they do this right. >> i am part of the environmental justice nonprofit based in san francisco. with the san francisco local hiring policy for construction. local 22, the carpenters, develop the economic justice development company as described. these standards -- they are enforced on one of the largest parcels of development and octavia corridor.

this is the cabinet -- and the past history with avalon bay has said that the verbal guarantee is not good enough. and a conditional use permit, there is the written guarantee between the community and labor. until there is the compliance plan, we are going to see a representative -- a repetition of what happened, at ocean avenue, leading to the board of supervisors having the labor practices, and with the board of supervisors -- these are important issues to work out. we would ask that this be continued until the good work force development can be insured on this project.

>> good afternoon. i am danny campbell. we are here because we believe this kind of project is vitally important. and each project must be judged on the package of its benefits. we appreciate that they use the achievement workers on this project, and this is largely the result of the economic justice and community covenant -- with the prevailing wages, and there

in the state approved a program that would give them real middle-class jobs. and a career in the trades. we share these concerns, that they have been put forward -- and you know that they have had significant problems out of the ocean avenue project, where the out of city construction workers were employed and played wages -- paid wages, and the first source higher policy calls that a plan be submitted to the city, but how many and what type of new hires will be placed on the project. considering avon bay's part in this project -- this should be reviewed and we currently have

over 50 san francisco residents, with some tough neighborhoods. they need to work on this project. over the next three years, you will vote on projects just like this for dozens of construction and it -- construction hours, and only with the right kind of public policy and leadership will those projects make the difference for hundreds of families in the city. they can result in higher profits, and they can reinforce the compact between the train workers and the finance developers. they are committed to working through the board, with the other city leaders to create the work force housing -- for the economic position. thank you very much.

>> and is there any additional public comment? the public comment portion is closed. commissioner antonini: my first question is for the staff, dealing with parking. with market octavia, with the testimony and the language it was stated that the sponsors could have 35 more offsite. and we wonder which is the case here. >> according to the planning code we could have 147 residential of speed spaces, and

so this is within the amount that they can request. >> maybe because they're not all under the same parts of the market -- there is a higher allowance. with the market octavia. >> in this case -- this is split. this is the maximum cap. you cannot go over. they are complying because there underneath the maximum cap. >> i have concerns about the parking demand, and it would seem as though we would go with a higher amount of on-site parking, and have a larger number of the car share spots,