it is really alarming and appalling. the in memorial is about people who have died, we need to prevent that in need to be a city that does everything we can to ensure the livability of neighborhoods and insure pedestrian and bicycle safety. a few problems are the way that this calculates the amount of traffic. it calculates on the basis of square feet, it doesn't matter how many floors of parking, it generates the exact same number of trips. if that were true, there wouldn't be bothering to put in the excess parking. that assumes that we are wrong in the developers are wrong. the profession of economic is wrong. supply has nothing to do with

the band or use. it assumes that the general plan is wrong. if you have a short-term parking meter, convert long-term parking to short-term parking. it says the planning code is wrong. it says the purpose of the parking control, the maximum and minimum has been more than double. the purpose is to provide for reasonably -- it generates congestion. secondly, we have proposed mitigation. follow your own plans and improve the affected intersections at fifth and at sixth. fifth and markets, important

pedestrian routes. we're told that those are in feasible. this project will generate additional automobile trips. there is no mitigation for the bicycle and pedestrian impact. this project needs to mitigate the impact so we can have this project and have a more livable and save neighborhood. this does not get us there. we urge you to support the livability and the safety of this neighborhood, reject this and ask them to find out what automobile trips they will generate and come up with effective medications for the

excess parking if that is what we're going to approve with this project. i will now turn it over to the third appellant. >> thank you for hearing in our appeal today. i will echo what my fellow appellants have said. i don't think this is adequate. the idea that the number of trips generated will be the same matter how much parking is in a project is hard to believe. but also would like to for the concerns that we're all concerned about market street. i would like to see this project move forward. in helping market street, we can't make sixth street even worse. this project will only make that

worse and we would like to see the amount of parking reduced in this project or we would like to see effective medications. we appreciate the efforts of supervisors daly and the part in interest. president chiu: let me ask if there are members of the public that wish to speak on behalf of the appellant. >> i am with the san francisco bicycle coalition. we filed comments that echo the comments you have heard, and want to echo that we're very supportive of this project coming forward. the offices were at the corner of sixth and a market for five years. we work and live in this area, we're very keen to see

improvements come to this block of market. but the question comes down to, how do we conduct analysis that is meaningful indefensible. the notion that providing 200 more parking spaces will not create more trips is ludicrous, frankly. honestly, it is an exposure to any kind of legal contest that might come to this environmental finding. we do not want to stop the project, we want to improve the environmental analysis. as this city moves toward changing the way that we analyze transportation impacts, as a move towards discontinuing the use of level of service and we move toward evaluating trade generation, it is troubling to see environmental document come forward that makes such a flimsy

estimates of auto trip generation. it must do a better job of evaluating parking and the surplus. on behalf of the 11,000 members of the bicycle coalition and the hundreds of thousands that travel by bicycle, we find that this is not adequate. we urge you to hurry up and develop a more common sense indefensible way to evaluate impacts of excess parking. i want to note that the environmental impact report doesn't really estimate pedestrian -- president chiu: next speaker. >> can you put my sled up, please? >> it will come up in just a second. >> i am a photographer, writer,

historian. i did the photography that put the tenderloin in the national register. i recently did a survey specifically for today just to show the visual and architectural consistency with the south side of market street. i began just opposite the plaza, that is the grant a building there. just look at the pictures and see the consistency. these buildings were all built within roughly 15 or 20 years of each other after the 1906 earthquake and fire. that is why there is a particularly unique character in the block between sixth and

seventh street. note the building on the right. that building is used to be the old house of blue jeans and fascination. both of which were stripped about 15 or 20 years ago and were major contributors. the owner of this building has combined the two. this is an example of what could be done with the old saint francis given the political will now we're down looking east of sixth street, there is the department store. across the street is the architectural consistency. [bell] okay. president chiu: next speaker, please.

>> i work and am here as a 20- plus year member of the community at sixth and market. i ride my bike every day to get to the office, and i have noticed an improvement with the prohibition on traffic. i have also noticed a lot of cars that ignore that and barrel through. i see quite a few cars turning back on the market street from sixth street. this major -- this area is majorly congested, not just morning and afternoon rush hour. many people walk with assistance, they have walkers or disabilities of some type, and to see people trying to get

through the gridlock traffic that crosses market, it is heartbreaking. i think that the addition of new parking is going to be a major traffic and user to a community that already has too much traffic. there are too many cars that are not contributing to the well- being of this neighborhood. while it does provide economic incentive and brings a new kind of people to the area and makes it a more comfortable pedestrian space, all the good will be washed away with the addition of thousands of cars in and out of the area at seeking the parking garage that is here in a area that is already rich with parking. there are other parking garages and other facilities around. it is the heart of the city with

every transit line in the city. thank you. >> good afternoon, supervisors. i am an observer of the urban fabric of market street. i have done documentary's about areas close by. this is flawed in that it neglects to provide analysis of the impact of traffic, a double number of parking spaces that have been up from 70 cars to 140. stephenson st. is a potential

destination. they neglected inventory and historical values. the parking was -- in the event that the target store would go into this space, much of the discussion at the planning hearing centered around this. it was reported that the target was interested in going into the space that has no parking. they said they had new models to deal with this that they use in other cities. thank you. president chiu: next speaker. >> i am here partly to introduce myself. i am the new executive director

as of about a week and a half ago. i just wanted to add to what has already been said, the area where it is being proposed is an area that has three of the most dangerous intersections in san francisco. as currently proposed, the plan does not have adequate mitigation for the impact of the many cars it will be attracting to the area. i urge the supervisors to ensure that this plan includes adequate mitigation to make it more safe instead of more dangerous. one thing i should add, the department of public health has a pedestrian and injury forecasting model. the department of public health

has a more accurate way to assess the impact on people walking then perhaps we have seen a in the eir. the idea is to bring more life to mid market. not more death. thank you. president chi>> i have had expen integrating a retail centers with historic resources. in a city district, it is extremely advantageous to create a unique identity, especially nationally or internationally renowned. the neighborhood does have a rich historical lineage. as a theatrical district with its own architectural texture and quality, it is an

advertising agency. it is the architectural equivalent of a rock star, famed for the master plan of the university of california berkeley campus. it included the greek theater. like all great architects, it has had a ripple effect on history. his employees included henry gutterson and appleton warford. they went to great architects, and early shaped a lot of the area architecture. san francisco has lost a great

marketing opportunity in the past, but today, we can incrementally planned new and old to create the strongest foundation for economic success and good urban design. thank you. >> walter paulson. ♪ city place photographs covered with lines and creases tickets torn in half of all market street i close my eyes and i say a prayer that you will find a good building there ♪ ♪ and we hope you fix it with

all the things and places that used to be there hope you care and always be be there ♪ i close my eyes and say a prayer that in your heart you find a new building still there ♪ president chiu: are there any other members of the public that wish to speak on behalf of the appellant? we can now go to a presentation by planning. >> the evening, president chiu and members of the board, i'm from the major environmental analysis planning department.

the department prepared an eir which was certified on july 8 by the planning commission. the project for which the report was prepared would involve the demolition of some existing structures that were determined not to be historic resources. it would involve the construction of a five-story 90- foot tall retailer with approximately 264,000 square feet including three below grade levels. the parking garage access would be from stevenson street. an alternative was considered. the analysis provided included consideration of the transportation impact from varying amounts of parking.

you have received an hour appeal response and we have heard from the appellants. i would just to briefly summarize what our responses are. with respect to historic resources, existing structures on the project site were properly evaluated by this proposal. therefore, it is not the historic resources consistent with ceqa. there are other individual resources. this was described and included in the eir.

response documents. the appellant has asserted that this is flawed because basing this on square footage of the land use and not on supply, the potential trips generator not accurately calculated. the methodology is a nationally recognized standard. this would result in the same sized structure and the same number of trips realized in the transportation analysis but this is not the same analysis for all

of the alternatives. this is based on likely visitor and patient choices given the availability of transit choices in the area. the appellants assert that we did not adequately address pedestrian bicycle safety. these issues were responded to it in the comments. this includes pedestrian and bicycle council. in addition, the perspective protect tenants are supposed to be value-based retailer's.

of the general plan objectives and policies, in general we discourage the placement of parking in the downtown core. the documents acknowledge certain circumstances for which the parking might be warranted. for example, the policy of the transportation element says that the automobiles should be accommodated for those where transit is not well suited to. the downtown plan calls for limitations to downtown parking which does not prohibit the provision of parking. with respect to short-term parking, for some shoppers transit is not a realistic alternative and some level of parking recently closed may be provided. the parking provided would not

meet the demand anticipated for the project nor would it be provided free of charge. the project would be consistent with some policies and inconsistent with others. the plans and policies were considered as part of the deliberations on whether to approve or disapprove the project. the environmental impact report is not designed to preempt the decision of the commission or an appeal for entitlement action. in summary, the question in hand is the accuracy of the documents according to ceqa.

we believe that the eor -- eir fully discloses the impact as well as the no grudge alternative. the commission and the public have the information needed to make an informed decision. this identifies appropriate information and the potential impact. there is no claims regarding the significance of impact. this concludes my presentation, as the board members have questions. -- unless the board members have questions. >> colleagues. >> can you quickly summarize what the significant transportation impact is? >> the project as proposed would have a significant traffic impact.

we had a loading impact that was mitigating the voting plan. >> you talk about your trip generation methodology that you are using as a nationally excepted methodology. when you talk to the appellants, they make a pretty convincing argument that while this methodology might be national accepted, this might not be the most accurate told that we could come up with.

is there any work happening to take a look at this tool? i am wondering if we can do better than adequate and actually see if we can come up with a better way. there will be more trips certainly to and from that spot that is a novelist. it might need more troops and

generally speaking which is not what this produces as a result. >> i think the distinction is not so much stripped generation but auto trips. >> these are based on some kind of space. that is what we use. this is not just based on national information, this is based on surveys in downtown. the surveys for downtown for making judgments as to how many of the strips are based but automobile are based on different retail sites, many of which do not have parking. macy's does not have on-site parking, these are two public garages on either side.

if you're asking people if they parked on site, they would say no. this area is surrounded by 4500 spaces that the public has billed at the public's expense that is within ready walking distance. our feeling is aside from a few days and a few hours in the holiday season which the sponsor believes is critical, there is a lot of parking. if someone would like to drive, they can find parking. the way that we deal with this is not on the generation side but what is the impact. the project does what you would expect when you build a garage,

this concentrates the impact. the project has impacted fifth and mission. you don't concentrate cars at the site. this might be easier to manage in that location which is fifth and mission. the areas that have one level of parking is somewhere in between. >> i in your example, i think that this is intuitive and not based on data