accurate or not, but even if it was a minimum of four hours, it might be $108 for a valet for an event, which i do not think if there is only a couple of events per month that it would occur on off hours. it is not an extraordinary expense. i would like to have the commission think about this a little bit. i think the neighbor's raised some valid concerns. i know the area very well. i have relatives who live in that area. i know there is a big difference between the traffic parking on weekdays and evenings and weekends, although there are still a considerable number of people who have multi-unit buildings without parking or park on the street. so it is not always the easiest thing, so i would like to see what other commissioners have to say. at this point, i would rather see this motion modified to either require valet any time there is an event of 50 persons

or more -- perhaps, modify it to weakens where you might require if you had over 80 to 100 people, for example. i put that idea out to the maker of the motion as a possible amendment. commissioner olague: i was going to say i do not think there is a need to slow down because we have had two weeks to continue to consider this, and i have heard from a lot of different sides of the equation, and i know the park commissioner came up when we look at the project originally, and we gave a lot of thought to it at that point. i do not believe that this minor revision to that sways at all from our original intent. i do also support the addition of that -- additional language that the staff provided us with. commissioner sugaya: i would like to support commissioner

antonini. i think we are kidding ourselves if we do not think valet parking is going to be required at all time. >> before i call the item, i have to ask commissioner borden, who was absent, if she has reviewed the material and is prepared to participate in this action. commissioner borden: yes, i am. >> thank you. commissioner antonini: let me be clear on the motion. the motion be staff proposes does not include the -- the motion the staff proposes does not include the valet parking on evenings and weekends, am i correct on that? then i ask that we make an amendment. it would be 100, that if in fact there are available parking spaces on evenings and weekends that are not in use, then

perhaps only events that are larger should require valet, so with the maker of the motion be ok with a revision that would require evenings and weekends at events of 100 or more? commissioner olague: i'm happy the way the motion is currently address. i guess we could always -- i do not know if we want to revisit this in a few months, but not convinced the institution has many evening or weekend events. i do not know -- staff? i'm pretty satisfied with the motion in front of us. commissioner borden: i think it is -- we are talking about 28 spaces. this is affordable senior housing. we are asking for affordable senior housing sponsor to provide valet parking? it seems to be at odds with the values we say we uphold. i do not understand it.

there is plenty of parking after 6:00 p.m. during the time when it seems to be most congested. i do not think they are having events with a hundred or more people. in the original motion, they said if it is within two years, they did not have need for all the spaces, then they could do less. they have proven they do not need all the spaces that were required initially, and required the project sponsors to provide them at a cost the sacrifices their ability to provide the houses that is the substance of the proposal, and it seems ridiculous to me. commissioner antonini: regardless of the nature of the housing, and that is part of it, there are also activities in the other part of the building, but these are social or educational events, or whatever purpose is, and they will bring people there who will be coming, and many of them will be driving. what i was sitting with my amendment that does not seem to be accepted is only for the larger event should this be

accepted, and if the sponsor is only having an occasional evening or weekend event, then the cost is so nominal that it really should not make a difference, and if it helps the neighborhood and helps congested and individual people in houses often will have valet parking if they have parties in their houses, and this is not uncommon to do, so that was my thinking on this. >> i would like to ask the project sponsor to respond to this. i believe that it is during the week that the majority of these special events occur. i do not believe that many occur on the weekends or the evenings. >> i think the estimate is up to four events during the month, two during the day and two during the evening. commissioner olague: what was that now? >> there would be approximately

two during the week when we would not provide valet parking and two over the weekend when we would prefer not to. commissioner olague: i think that is right, actually. the people familiar with that area, i believe there is more parking on the weekends and in the evenings. commissioner moore: i believe that the department has made a convincing case of why we should go with the recommendation. i do not believe that it could be managed by providing more parking spaces. i am strongly in favor of the motion as it is proposed. >> commissioners, the motion on the floor is for approval as proposed by staff on that motion. commissioner antonini: no. commissioner borden: aye.

commissioner moore: aye. commissioner sugaya: no. commissioner olague: aye. commissioner miguel: aye. >> that motion passes on a 4-2 vote. you are now starting your regular calendar with item 11, case number 2010.0514c -- commissioner miguel: excuse me, remember we were going to take supervisor maxwell [inaudible] >> [inaudible] commissioner miguel: yes, we have had a request from supervisor maxwell as the sponsor of two pieces of legislation, to be taken out of order, which i have been granted -- which i have granted.

in 18 and then item 16. to the press that are here for another item, i apologize to you for that time change, but this commission has always gone along with supervisors on their particular legislation. >> ok, taking item 18 out of order, 18a and 18b, d ba -- the bayshore boulevard home improvement district. >> thank you for accommodating the calendar in request. i did know that our work was of great importance, but i am surprised a little bit by the level of media attention for this, but we will roll with it. i wanted to briefly laid out some background context for this

item. i think this representation from supervisor campos' office is here as well. i would like to share some comments, and staff will walk through the mechanics of the legislation in front of you. the conversation about the need to focus on and invest in the bayshore corridor has been ongoing for many years. about 10 years ago, with the access site, the conversation intensified. the legislation before you today is really one of the products of that ongoing dialogue. clearly, members of the project area committee have been key voices for a 10-plus years. more recently, a focused effort sponsored jointly between supervisor amiano and supervisor maxwell began, and is now a partnership with supervisor campos' office.

again, this stems more immediately from board of supervisors' action from about a year ago the call for the development of a more specific revitalization strategy for the area. that action and vision, a process that could result in a number of products, one which is before you today, clarifying the land use controls instead of design guidelines for the area, economic action plan among other implementation documents. to produce those items, we have been working in close collaboration between city agencies, including the mayor's office of economic workforce development and the redevelopment agency, of course, as this area is in the redevelopment agency. and support as well when we needed it from the dpw, so the large brush stroke is that it has been an act of collaboration between communities across the

hall and supervisors' offices involving multiple agencies. and one last point, if i could -- there will be in communications coming directly from the supervisor's office regarding several properties within the study area that are owned by -- under single ownership by elements of the goodman family, and the letter will acknowledge that there is certainly an opportunity to look at those sites for and support a potential catalyst development of some of the commercial activity that could involve some vacant pdr properties that are adjacent across from lumos street. the supervisor does not feel at this time that it is appropriate to modify the district because the concept has not been part of the community dialogue over the past year, but she is supportive of further community vetting of that idea, and she would be happy to have a conversation

about that moving forward. i would be happy to answer questions after your staff presentation. commissioner miguel: thank you. >> good afternoon, commissioners. i'm here representing supervisor david campos. our office and supervisor maxwell's office have been working for well over a year on this bayshore corridor project to develop a plan to revitalize the corridor. while we have at times had different approaches, even talk about different thresholds are brown square footage, what we have come away with after the yearlong process is a shared set of goals arawn supporting some of the existing businesses on bayshore boulevards, minimizing the environmental impact, especially around traffic congestion, and bringing in businesses that create new jobs for the residents of bayview/hunters point and neighboring communities. the plan, while it is not before you today, it is important we

work on land use and physical condition business retraction, safety and cleanliness, and parking street traffic and transportation. i also want to point out that staff will be talking with you a little bit about some suggested changes to the draft ordinance that will greater reflect an emphasis that most of the supervisors' offices have had on local hiring. as you know, it has been a robust discussion among members of the board of supervisors to increase local hiring, and in this bayshore corridor, we want to make sure that any projects that are significant are also at hearing to the bayview/hunters point employment and contracting policy. i want to end my remarks by thanking the various departments that have been part of this process and also supervisor maxwell's office. in particular, i would like to thank the planning department's

staff who have gone above and beyond to help us out in this process. thank you. >> good afternoon, commissioners. i just wanted to very briefly go over the two actions before you today. the first one is a combined zone ordinance introduced by supervisor maxwell. the second one is the adoption of the design guidelines. you should have received updates to both of those documents. if i could have the overhead, please. that is right there. this is just generally to orient you. highway 101. bernal hill, and bernal heights

and the rest of the bay view area. the project area covers some very distinct areas. the majority of this is along bay shore boulevard, and a very small selection of parcels right on cortland. just for clarity say, i will talk about the parcels right away. there is a total of eight of them. they are zonedcm, -- they are sound cm, any proposal is simply to clean up and rezone them to pdr 1g. we have worked with supervisor campos' office to make sure this zoning will fit their needs in the future. perhaps a simple continuing of the industrial cleanup that has been going agee indiana cove

cleanup that has been going on for a few years now. the larger area is a long bayshore boulevards -- along bayshore boulevard, which is a very permissive zoning district. it also has the protection zone overlay on it. the proposals there is to rezone the old m1's to pdr 2 which is the prevailing zoning in the industrial area to the east, and to adjust that that would just extend along the stretch of bayshore. i will provide some of the descriptions of the fud. the best way to think of it is that right now the zoning there is a combination of m1

underlying sony, industrial protection zoning, and interim controls on top of that. it is a three-layer cake there, and what we're proposing to do is essentially just tweak that by changing the underlying zoning to pdr 2 and creating this sud. what it will generally do, and this is again in very broad terms -- first of all, it will permit most retail. that retail threshold will go up to 50,000 square feet, which is the city wide threshold. under 50,000 square feet of retail will be permitted with several exceptions. just one of those is the the formula of retail above 10,000 square feet would 000a cu. again, the -- would require a cu. together, there are synergies

around the green home- improvement that we have been talking about for a very long time as a city. there are some other very minor adjustments, and then, there is a few things centered around the traffic and congestion concerns that were mainly expressed by neighboring communities, and we are dealing with that by requiring cu for automotive uses. that includes drive-in facilities. we are also proposing to remove the required parking so there would not be any parking minimums. we are not imposing new parking maximums. whatever pertains now will continue to pertain. that is a brief description of the proposed zoning. the design guidelines -- again, there are 30 of them.

i will not describe each one. there is generally a few things we are trying to achieve with the design guidelines. they are first of all meant to regulate how buildings address the streets. right now, they are either blank facades on most buildings or blank facades on the streets or hiding behind an old building. we also have guidelines of where to locate parking on a parcel and manage curb costs and things like that. finally, we are looking at what buildings look like, particularly at their grain attributes because we would like to have the place served also as a demonstration ground for the technologies that will be sold and developed there. that concludes my presentation, and i can take any questions. commissioner miguel: thank you.

i will come -- public comment on this. [reading names] all right. [reading names] there are a lot of people outside. commissioner olague: they are probably not prepared to be here. commissioner miguel: [ -- [reading names] let me call these names again.

[reading names] if you are here. >> good afternoon. i am the program coordinator from the bernal heights center. we also serve a lot of youth from different areas. one thing that i know for sure that i have been observing while we are doing our development work is that a lot of the students are very excited to go into the work force. when it comes to planning, i believe that it is an important priority to have local hiring happening and also for local businesses, so i wanted to speak for them and make sure that that is being understood because we

are very excited. right now, we are extensively working with them. it is very important that there is something there for them as well. thank you. >> good afternoon, commissioners, and thank you for listening to us. my name is rachel. i'm the director of community engagement with bernal heights neighborhood center, and as such, i know how important it is to engage all parts of the equation. at times, it has been a contentious effort, but i think as a whole, there -- this has been a really great effort between all of the department's necessary to make this happen as well as the two districts supervisors' offices who really put together a plan that is unified. one of the things i do want to

commend as well as the planning department's staff who really approached this with thoughtfulness and really within a lot of the needs and concerns that many of our community members have. what you will see in the plan as mentioned earlier is a result of that, which is a focus on local hiring, support for and consideration for local businesses, both the present and future local businesses, as well as consideration for the environmental impact of the plan for the development along bayshore boulevards, so we urge you to support this plan and to thank the efforts of all the parties involved in putting together a really inclusive proposal before you. thank you. >> commissioners, bernal heights neighborhood center. bayshore boulevards has

tremendous importance to both bayview and bernal heights communities. consider the tenacity of businesses that have thrived during the decades-long vacancies that has now been filled by the lowe's retail store. there are restaurants, auto repair resources, and construction material suppliers. and so many others. it is kind of a unique district we have. with lowe's moving in, we need controls to ensure that future uses support the destiny and needs of our two neighborhoods, of the southeast sector of the city and the city as a whole. it has taken a few rounds of facilitated meetings that over a number of years, but we have come to understand the commonality of purpose that we have between our neighborhoods to support existing businesses, to prioritize local hiring, and to prioritize local loan

businesses, and retain a broad diversity of the types of businesses we have. the zoning ever before you, when you strip away the technical language, represents communities working together and the constituents from our neighborhoods. the youth, seniors, and families who rely on bernal heights center did not just come from bernal heights or the excelsior where our services are located. they come from the entire area. they rely on us. this zoning proves that boundaries can be opportunities for breaking down barriers so we can work together towards a just and equitable community for all. i want to remind you that when the home depot proposal came before this body -- five years ago i believe it was -- the home depot what have move forward without any public hearings because all that was before the

planning staff was a buy-right proposal. the reason he came before the commission was because we appeal. we want to really do community- based planning. i want to applaud the efforts of supervisor campos and amiano before him, and maxwell has seen us through. everybody has pulled us through, and the fact that we are coming to you with support tonight -- this afternoon speaks volumes to their work. thank you very much. commissioner miguel: are there additional speakers on this item? >> i'm a 37-year resident of the bernal heights area, and i would urge disapproval at this time. there's a couple of errors in

the text, and i think we should get this worked out first. thank you. commissioner miguel: are there additional speakers? >> good afternoon again. i would ask you to pass on this because the most important things that we have been waiting -- the most important thing is that we have been waiting a long time. when it comes to the final date, we always want to have another hearing because we do not know enough. we have been talking about this a long time, especially the pac committee. i'm not a member, but i attend all those meetings. with your support, and with avalos making sure that there is local hiring from the community, we are seeing people from bayview-hunters point getting jobs that we have never seen before because we are

getting rid of that good faith effort because we have always had the faith, but there was not ever an effort. thank you very much. commissioner miguel: further public comment on this item? >> before i start, if i could pass the secretary a brief. i have 10 copies, so it looks more than it is. good afternoon. representing the goodman family who owns a large number of areas subject to this rezoning, including almost 50% of the area identified as opportunity sites as well as the property where ibm lowe's recently opened. -- as well as the property where lowe's recently opened. it is a key actor to bay shore boulevard, but the surrounding area is underutilized and needs a coordinated development plan.

we met with supervisor maxwell earlier this week, and we appreciate them first of all proposing this reasoning, but also hearing and working with us and we look forward to continuing that dialogue. i would like to go over some of our suggested provisions, -- suggested revisions, which are in the letter i submitted, and i apologize for the late said middle of that letter. -- the late submittal of that letter. the red line is some of the ordinances we would like to see. first, we would like to see some revisions on case street at the top. we would like to see it read that while green home- improvement uses are desirable, they are not the only practices that will be permitted, so we do not necessarily limit the retail type in the district that jeopardize the success of