the incoming agreement. his it is designed to include a play area, and of running, and landscaping. with that, i conclude my presentation. staff recommends approval with recommendations. president olague: project sponsor? >> i am the partner representative. the last time we were in front of the was back in april of 2009

when the commission certified unanimously our eir. after the city approved area plan, primarily urban makes use with a height limit. since then, constrained capital markets have delayed our request for a large project authorization. they gave me the green light to take the project into implementation, provided that i do so using resources other than their own. so we decided to partner of and have worked collaborative lead with your staff in finalizing the design. i simply want to urge the commission to grant the authorization and to do so today, if appropriate. as indicated, this site has been in design since 2004.

i have participated in a hundred community meetings, planning meetings, public presentations over the course of the last seven years. i am proud of the project, our team, and your staff that have all worked hard to bring you a great project on the strategic plans site the i believe will ignite the implementation of the area plan. i will turn it over to the vice- president of development. >> we are both excited and thankful to be here. we have a great project a share and we're thankful because it took a lot of hard work by city staff to get us here.

they are a developer and operator of the accused community. we are long-term holders of our assets. wheat on the two communities in san francisco. both of those were communities that we purchased after they were up and running. since 2007, we have been working with the task force at the golden gate bus parking yard. we have attended a hundreds of meetings with them, and it has been a very slow process to come to a meeting of minds about what it is that makes a good development for community while making sense for a project sponsored. that is the reason why we got involved in this project. i was tracking his efforts to get the project of this point, and we are excited to be part of it going forward. as you know, the sight which

changed in 2008 -- site was changed in 2008 to allow mixed use housing and a height of 68 feet. this doesn't happen by accident. it has taken seven years, hundreds of meetings, over 30 iterations, and since we got involved, we have changed in the color palette to accommodate feedback that we have gone from the community. that is why we encourage you to approve the application before you tonight and allow this project go forward because we think it is time. our goal was to employment the area plan to the best of our ability. we paid particular attention to

land use policy that encourages development of making income housing along sixteenth street. as you will see, the project includes the construction of 467 units, and average unit square foot of 765 square feet. and the inclusion of the affordable housing requirements totaling 55% of san francisco median income. there were presentations with the various community groups, individuals with the community designed its. those efforts have resulted in endorsements from various groups and individual community members. while david will talk to you about how the site relates to context, i want to highlight a

couple of things that are amenities for future residents. we find that residents want amenities within the project and very close to the project. this is away for them to accommodate what they need inside their homes. the need for secure parking on the level in which people live. community gardens, there are stations that allow for things to be done outside of the home. david will take over from here and walk you through the site plan and product design. we will finish with where we are on the process can be available for any comments that you might have. >> i am the architect. his knife cannot be here at 10:00 at night. sorry.

[laughter] this is a gateway site which is a combination of three neighborhoods. as we said, it sounds like an extinct species, but it is a mixed use housing. zoning is in place, and we have in a buffer zone. the height limit which is great to have that done. we are in walking distance. it is 31,000 jobs here. it is a great place to do

housing and in terms of linkages, it is located at a couple of major bike paths. it gets relocated to stop in front and is about a mile to the west and to the east. you can go to the train station and about 15 minutes. here is the site plan. it is a very funny piece of land. the right of way was originally a giant boulevard. it will go all the way to the bay only a part of this got built. it divides the site into two sections. we're calling it the flatiron

building in the north building. part of this plan was breaking these blocks. there is a pedestrian public muse. you'll see a 32 foot strip of land that is the 18-foot high buildings with an open space on top of the faces the restaurant. at that corner is a little point for will have some seating and community garden next. this shows the retail areas set up for restaurants. we have a 17 foot floor so that you see the major areas for retail. in between those, we are doing a

flexible yet so you can set up a more industrial partisan units. this shows the space with 7400 square feet of that. the notion will be that this will be a fairly small space. there is a bike station, and there is a viper room on the flatiron building. there is room on each floor so that you take your bike up and park it on your floor that is more secure and makes more sense. this shows the parking spaces. the spaces are not on a list, but everything else is.

the time we get all of these activities is in, they're not a lot of ground level left. it is a 0.65 parking ratio. this shows the active edges. the runaround the entire site. there is some service within that period it shows the exposure that is 110 feet long. 6% of the perimeter. we have an idea that will make it an interesting exposure. iran water garden and you see the lift going up and down behind. this shows where the lobby and trees are.

it is a large building that is not a high rise. we have three major lobbies and related injuries are spread all over the site. one reason we are asking to do the street loading on st. in three locations we think makes more sense to residential people and makes more sense. it makes use for more productive uses. it is 42,000 square feet, 10% more than the requirement. and the light green is on the second level and private. there is the roof deck as well.

this is a dwelling in exposure, it is one of the exemptions we are asking for. there are seven units at 1.5% of the macau that don't quite meet the courtyard exposure requirements. there are located in that area. cahow a sidewalk would have set the ground floor of the building back about a wider public right of way. so from the face of the building, it is 15 feet. and we are proposing being willing to do sidewalk extensions. it would be an additional 7 feet.

this is a challenging building because it is large. live been thinking about the colors and this is our diagram. we have the kind of colorful colors. it was sticking out, and so we sampled the san francisco skyline. we came up with this palin which we will apply unbacked. here is the site from missouri, and we of the building next. the show's the flatiron building proposing metal building with cut ends. it has the high ceiling commercial on the ground floor and next.

as you walk to the park, this is the second floor and you would look in. and then to the left, you see the lobby covered by a green screen and the community room that overlooks the park. it is a screen with plants growing out of its. looking back to the building. you've seen what we have done their working with the planning department. there were concerns about this building. so we may get better. this is a look down town, so they don't look directly at the freeway. this is the grudge. this is the exposure at the bottom and you see the corridors. [chime]

president olague: how much more time? >> i will talk very fast. this is the county restaurant looking back below, the public space. the building above. this shows how that works. you see how high the ceiling is. this is looking through the building, that public way. 20 feet wide. 40 at the top. there are patios and decks, there is the public open all the time. this shows the bike station and people are using it right now. this is the view from the corner

of connecticut. there are some outdoor seating that his restaurant space. you see what the code calls for. what we have done is put a bunch of little notches all along and we think we have articulated a more 5 way. finally, here is a picture of the park. president olague: close out, i think we arand we may have quesf course. there are several speaker cards.

>> of the afternoon, president and members of the planning department. we are not opposed to development of this area and will afford to removing the blight. who have some concerns regarding the large number of units as well as just for the size of the property. we do believe that these exceptions should not be granted. i have a list that i will quickly go through. the planning cut section, and the project does not comply with this section and several areas not limited to the requirement of 25% rear yard the death -- depth. we're not sure it will be a public park. it looks like it will be used to

allow for this exception. we are concerned about that. we're concerned that it will be the appropriate 25% rear yard. these will be included but not limited to the requirement facing the street. >> the purpose of this cut is to foster healthy community of advantages. and we believe that the disadvantage will be exploited in this case. additionally, the lack -- there

are minorities and other economic disadvantages. we believe that allowing this is a family friendly. this is included but not limited to the requirements for active use there is nothing to improve local businesses available and service companies, thereby we believe it will increase the crime rate. we believe that the planning section cut is in compliance with -- it is included but not limited to the requirements of

all to the living spaces for residential use and the mixed views in the urban district. when the area between 200,500 thousand square feet. -- 200,000 and 500,000 square feet -- [chime] president olague: thank you. >> afternoon, commissioners. president olague. i'm the co-founder of the neighborhood coalition and i know that many of you have seen us here before.

over the years, we have met with the architect of this project and a couple of times with dan murphy, but not for three or four years. this is how we were notified of this budget. we have been trying to work with these folks to mitigate some of our issues which have to do with the building and blow. it is too high and too big. we would like to see heights up to -- that do not exceed 55 feet. there is -- we said the same thing. there is a solar water array on the roof. there is a pair pat -- parapet and popups with the elevator

shaft. those did not show up on drawings we had seen. we are wondering if the community groups that did sign on for this project are aware of the horrendous height. this is 72 feet to 84 feet. something may be familiar with that we did in 2006 was our balloon test. this is where we flew balloons at an 85-foot height. we extrapolated where the existing zoning was and where the new zoning would be and we ended up with 68 feet. it is very large. even if the colors to go toward the color of the background, the high rises, you see how it

overwhelms everything that is there. this is not mission bay. this is the other side of the freeway. this is not mission square. we have the height of the brick buildings. this is porterville -- potrero hill. we want to meet with the developer and get a project we can all be proud of. >> president olague: thank you. >> good afternoon, commissioners. executive director of global city. there's a lot to like about this project. some of the open space stuff is clever. some thought has gone into the architectural design. we're interested in this project because it will in live in the corner of two very important streets in the city. seventh, we envision this as a

gateway street that would lead from the muni station down to downtown western soma and down to 16th street. seventh is an important street. it is the street. -- that has the potential to connect north of market to mission bay. it is the important we get the street frontage is right. we're here to object to the proposed exception under section 329 from the active use requirements. we have been before this commission twice this year. to strengthen the active use requirements and extend them to every district. we have been to the mixed use areas. with those ordinances which were endorsed by the planning department staff and the commission, they said we will give exceptions for active use under narrow circumstances. one would be a historic

building. you cannot alter the facade. the other would be a building where you have a very steeply sloping site. the only place to put required parking would be towards the front of the building. none of those conditions prevail here. the project sponsor is asking you to grant an exception for a not for a good reason. there is no criteria for this exception but we think this apartment should look to the ordinances that prevail elsewhere in the city. here is the narrow circumstances under which we would consider this. none of the parking that would be pushed up is required. no parking is required. there are not in the seismic conditions or a historic building. we ask that you -- it is fine if you want to do the other exceptions. this use requirement under 329 we do not think is warranted and it is a dangerous precedent.

every project sponsor comes to staff and says, we want to stick some extra non-required parking. we want an exception from active use. is the department going to grant it in every case? this is one of the first 329 projects to come through. we think it makes sense for this project to have active use but we do not have -- create a big loophole where this provision which is important to the livability, walk ability, public safety of our city, gets the run around over and over again. thank you. >> president olague: thank you. our next speakers. >> good afternoon. i am a member of the neighborhood coalition and i live on lower potrero hill, a

couple of blocks from the proposed project. i have on my house there for 20 years. our group has met with the developer of the project and a developer's -- the developer's architect to share concerns. as well as to discuss some possible changes. unfortunately, we were never formally notified of the pending application before the planning commission so our discussion comes late in the game. i commend the developer and architect for making time to meet with our group at the 11th hour. i urge the commission to grant a continuance to allow additional term to -- time to work with the developer to resolve some key differences. our disagreement stems from the heights and the bulk of the project. this is a massive fortresslike development that in our opinion, models and the braces every sized building unleased on mission bay.

it does not go far enough in complimenting the existing uniqueness and scale and character of our neighborhood. we would like to see the massive walllining broken up and lowered to 55 feet. our last minute discussions have resulted in the developer making some cosmetic tweet sprader we think those cosmetic changes do not go far enough so we would like the commission to grant a continuance to work out these differences. i would urge the commission to disapprove as proposed unless major changes and reducing the scale and height and bulk. >> president olague: if i called your name, please come to the microphone. >> a live that -- i live across from the proposed project. earlier today, we heard that san francisco was receiving its third better str