of the district. we have been working with the meyers family who owned the building at 161 natoma. we provided clarification that was requested at our most recent planning commission hearing. we also have been working with management and the ownership of the w hotel to address how we can work with them not only during construction but after construction. and as described by mr. updike, the existing condition of the hunt plan, we believe our design will improve this condition because the firefighters, the cars from the firefighters will no longer be there. we are extremely appreciative of the support we have received today. we're also extremely excited. this is a big moment. for the city as a whole.

supervisor mar: this fisher collection is the reason for the expansion but there are other pieces and collections that are included that will benefit from the expansion? >> that is correct. supervisor mar: it sounds like a w hotel was using the lane for loading and valet services but you think the vacation of the street and other improvements will improve the situation for the hotel? >> today, the current situation is if you look at the photographs that were put up before, you see a series of cars along hunt street. the access is across our property. without the cars, we would be cleaning up that area. supervisor mar: thank you. >> thank you.

this diagram here, this is sfmoma. this is the existing building. the firehouse. this shows how a number of cars are parked. >> and the college building is owned by the museum of modern art? >> that is correct. you can see the vehicles traveling down natoma will have to cross the natoma parking pad then -- rather than across hunt street. because of the vehicles that are there. in the proposed condition, you can see that the footprint of the building cuts across a portion of hunt street but the rest of the cars are gone. and clearing up the area in terms of access and turn around and so forth. i also have a variety of letters of support which i will provide you. no further questions? supervisor mar: i was going to see the website has a good video

and also a lot of good information. it seems like a transparent process and december 1 is when the design will be unveiled by the architect. >> there will be something later this week. on december 1. thank you. >> that concludes our presentation. we're happy to answer any questions at any time. supervisor mar: supervisor wiener? supervisor wiener: i do not know if you would be the appropriate person. i know we have -- the w has raised concerns. i think there was a last-minute request to continue the hearing. if you could maybe respond to those concerns and also -- have been going on for some time. >> the key point is in the additional land disposition and

acquisition agreement. that the board approved last year. contingent upon these approvals. there is a clause that says the swap between the museum and the city does not close until the city is satisfied for access for the w. access it is being -- access is being provided. between that clause which we control and the fact the museum building is built to continue to allow that access, we feel like we have a comfortable situation. the museum is talking to the w now and by the time the clauses which is -- we have to be satisfied as a city that the

access was a program. even though you approve the vacation by your action, it does not go into effect until lancelot closes. -- land swap closes. the vacation would not occur. we are protected their and we would recommend moving forward. supervisor mar: i wanted to ask, the letter from the w hotel is saying the vacation of hunt street will be to the detriment of the killer and pedestrian circulation. if you could go over that again, just why this is an improvement for their access. >> i am not sure if i am the appropriate person to go into the details. i do not know if john, do you have the diagram?

i'm going to need someone with the diagram. supervisor mar: that would be helpful to what is through -- what is through -- walk us through. they are citing a provision that provides the city must maintain a strong presumption against the giving up of st. areas for private ownership for use in the relief shelby recommended which will result in detriment to vehicular or -- [unintelligible] other items as well. >> i may need help on the details. just to make sure i explain it clearly. can i have the overhead? currently, if i am not mistaken, this is howard street. this is where -- cars will continue. they will continue to access,

the w has its portico. they drive through the middle of the block and go to the parking garage. the museum is designed so that movement can continue. i believe if i am not mistaken you are looking at a cut away. the museum straddles this area and it would be driving underneath the building. that has been designed so that the w maintains its assets -- its axis. we will not close until we are satisfied that museum is providing the w appropriate access into the future so that activity which is getting out into the brush -- parking garage will happen. it will be clear for this purpose and no one else will be able to get in. supervisor mar: it is for valet and loading?

>> the rep may be able to clarify. that is how if you have a car if you are staying at the hotel, you have a car that you bring your car in that way. supervisor mar: let's open this up for public comment. is there anyone from the public who would like to speak? please come forward. it is three minutes maximum but we urge people to keep it shorter if possible. it could be first. i will have the names i have on cards. christine ruef's, barbara miers'yers. >> i own the building that is on folsom street that will be the proposed fire department. my concern is i read the

environmental impact that they brought out. they came back with saying that there would be soil underneath there. what i now is -- i ended up having to drill down to 45 feet. what i found with the -- what the soil engineer found is there is a stream running through that area. i end up driving piles, there is a different you can do your foundation. my piles, you drive them until you get the friction of the soil to hold. i had to drive 45 feet before i could -- it would hold the ground floor with three stories above it. my concern is they did not address that in the environmental impact and the cost, one might cost him about it was 25% of my building. that would be similar to what

they've fired apartment building would do. there will go and find it is not as sandeep. i bought a piece of land south of market. it happened to be a piece of swampland. that is what it is. i have driven piles in that area. >> is rebuilding on folsom street? >> is on shipley -- is on shipley -- it is on shipley. they did a floatation. one of my concerns is how they will address this problem. it will move in the confession if there is never an earthquake. that is my main concern. also on this note, i saw this,

they have beautiful pictures of the different areas. there is a one story house. it has been my experience, these people -- the tendency is to bring out what looks good. they do not bring it forth. the backside, last time it wanted to bring eight stories, there was a concern. my concern was the fire zone and the number of cars that go down that area. ron supervisor mar: thank you. next speaker. >> if dinagood afternoon. i am representing the owners and of thew -- of the w hotel. there are three separate issues and a lot of issues to cover.

you have are written correspondence -- correspondents. with regarding to the items on the agenda. you are relying on the environmental report. we have objected to that. we believe the eir even with the final eir is inadequate. specifically i wanted to talk about this. i wanted to make sure it is clear that everyone understand my clients do not expand the expansion. we understand the value that will bring to the neighborhood. they do have some legitimate concerns and just because the project is popular does not mean that the city is not equally obligated to meet its requirements. it is under ceqa. and under streets and highways.

talking about the vacation of hunt street, i also have a diagram that perhaps would clarify some of the issues. can i get the overhead? this is the area out of hunt street that you are considering today. this is the one that moma referred to. this is under an easement for the benefit of the public. that means that legally it is the public street. this idea that hunt street is somehow disconnected from the rest of the street grid is legally incorrect. this is a public street. this is a public street and it connects. this is a public right-of-way as well. it does connect all the way through the block. this is a pedestrian but it is not a public right away. the idea that hunt street is

this isolated section is not legally true. what that means in addition is the city cannot simply vacate. they must also take action and make findings. and that has not been done either. in addressing some of the issues that were brought up for the first time in discussion, the findings that the board makes in support of the vacation of the street has to be true if you make the findings, not true when the transaction closes. the strait is necessary and it will be currently in use. supervisor wiener: if you would just finish. i am giving you more time. that means i am giving you more time. >> thank you. i appreciated very much.

the environmental review as well as not examined the impact of vacating all this. it does not look at all the circulation and traffic impacts that will be caused by it. it assumes because evan improvement measure that is adopted and was not suggested that the access is going to stay the same or get better. there's nothing that causes that to happen. the w. hotel was designed and approved and built and operated on reliance of having a floating dock located right here. the only reasonable way to access that loading dock to pick up garbage is through the public streets that access it. it was not for the belief and the understanding at the time that that was a permanent access, that was a public street, the hotel would have been designed in another way. questions? >> i wanted to ask you to respond to the response that

there are improvements in the access for the w hotel and they are focusing on improvement measures which minimizes potential for conflicts within the natoma loading area, insuring that deliveries are adequately accommodated and he gives the list of a number of other improvements. i am wondering how you would respond to the different improvements that appeared to be made by the museum. >> that improvement measure is voluntary at this point. it is not a mitigation measure you might note but was not part of the ceqa findings. it is not imposed under anything that has yet to be adopted. it is basically a voluntary measure that appears in the final eir. what my clients are looking for is some certainty going into the future. what we have asked moma to give us is an easement that would

take us across the property to our road -- loading dock. that would be equivalent to when you get with a public street. the problem with what you have here is my clients have no way to enforce that. the city, the planning department is not going to have the time or the energy to be monitoring and enforcing the measure themselves. my clients want something that is legally defensible, legally permanent, and they can force themselves. not some sort of voluntary thing from the hotel. the biggest problem is it does not satisfy you on the findings for the streets and highways code, that is the biggest problem from the city's perspective. supervisor mar: can you explain why hunt street is necessary for public use as well? >> my client are members of the public. that is one reason. also, it is -- there " i am wondering --

supervisor mar: i am wondering. grex there is a lot going on. all the vendors that access the w and moma use that area but it is a thruway to this block for pedestrians. i am not on the overhead. the area between the w and moma is pedestrian access. apac -- connects to natoma. that pedestrian access way is part of what moma is relying on when they see their opening -- they are opening up that area. that is one of the areas the would be available to the public for access to the museum. supervisor mar: can i follow up

with what is being opened up. it seems like a hotel's loading and valet loading requirements seem to be accommodated. where they're not being accommodated? >> the reason they're not accommodated is there is no requirement. there is no commitment, nothing we can enforce. the idea, the notion of it is fine. legally, it is not enforceable on our part. we need to be able to have that going forward and not just voluntarily. supervisor wiener: a couple of things. in terms of the changes that will impact the w when we do development or improve anything, there are impacts on surrounding property owners. and the goal is to mitigate those impacts. but if we did not allow impacts,

we would never be able to change or improve anything. in terms of the eir that is not before us, it is not what we are considering today. i am terms of the legal points you made and the report today, i am interested in hearing your response, whether it is from planning or whoever can speak to those things. i would like a response. were there other points -- >? >> so me of those items rely on the eir. supervisor wiener: thank you. supervisor mar: next speaker. >> i am barbara meyers. i represent the meyers family.

the building on the corner of the diagram they showed. it is a point of interest. thanks to the lobbying efforts of my uncle that resulted in the preservation of hunt slain between being w and the museum. my family fully supports the museum. that is our bottom line. we're here to remind the board to take note of our interest in maintaining the integrity and usability of our property as the project was forward. we're pleased to have received a letter confirming the museum's intention to work with us as the designs the interface between our property and the museum. their letter appears to indicate they plan to preserve our fire escape windows and door which opened onto hot streak. we do hope that substantive

portion of that dialogue takes place before the final approval of the construction plan by the planning commission. we do anticipate a significant loss of natural light and we realize we have no legal right to that but wanted to mention that is a loss and also for the record we wanted to submit the letter we presented to the planning commission which outlined our concerns. supervisor mar: thank you. next speaker. >> good afternoon. i am the director of arts and culture marketing. my role is to ensure that visitors are aware of their rich cultural offerings to the city and use this offerings to entice travel to san francisco.

research tells us the cultural traveler spends more money into these long a period of improving assets will add to the economic health and add to quality. the travel industry is incredibly competitive and improving our assets insurers we remain competitive for the billions spent by travelers to san francisco. after a 17-year run as the favorite city, a san francisco is no. 2 to charleston, south carolina. the expansion will attract media and -- attract media and help us retain our edge with other great cultural destinations. we expect it will garner much media and coverage for san francisco. this will be great news for our hotels and other cultural institutions, restaurants, and

the tax base. thank you for supporting the expansion. supervisor mar: thank you. next speaker? >> ♪ moma, how i love yo, my dear old moma ♪ ♪ captioned by the national captioning institute --www.ncicap.org-- ♪ iw ould give the world to see you again ♪ ♪ moma, how i love you ♪ ♪ the districts north, east, west, and south will see you some more is decline ♪ when you relocate ♪ ♪ you are the moma i always

dreamed of musicaf ♪ ♪ you moved and that's the last i've seen aof my art heart ♪ ♪ it is the way you look like he smite are located there. ♪ you are the art work right brand of musical and -- artwork i have dreamed of ♪ supervisor mar: thank you. is there anyone else from the public who would like to speak? please come for. >> thank you.

on behalf of the w and sf moma. her concerns are about private use. the design does include alternative pedestrian access and a substitute for the excess weight. the public pedestrian ways preserved and it is undisputed the vacation of hunt street is in the public interest because it is impossible to build without it. the w's need for access will be accommodated. this does not occur until 2013. after the new fire station is built. we have plenty of time between now and then to resolve the issue of private access. the eir indicates that sfmoma must do so and we're more than willing to do that.

it suggests imposing a measure as a condition of the street vacation. you're within your rights to impose than as a condition. as greg should do, we are designing to accommodate the hotel's private needs and there is no reason we would have designed the museum in that way if we did not intend to provide the w with access to these provisions. that condition of approval or license agreement will accommodate the w's needs. for these reasons, the w's claim of damage is inconsistent and

premature. there is an extensive general plan including findings related to the urban design element as quoted in their water. we do feel that there is more than adequate means of accommodating their needs without delaying the street vacation or without requiring a private easement. i'm glad to answer any questions. supervisor wiener: in terms of you touched on this, the concern about it would not have anything to enforce, only the city could enforce it. there would be stuck at the planning department did not have the bandwidth or the desire to monitor the access. can you respond to that? >> what i suggested is where more than willing to negotiate a license agreement that would be parallel to the condition of approval that would be enforceable by the hotel.

supervisor wiener: when will that happen? >> we are in discussion with them now. i hope we could resolve that in the next several months. supervisor wienesupervisor mar:e to help the hotel feel it is enforceable and it is a priority of the development. thank you. >> thank you. supervisor mar: we have mike from the building trades. i am pleased this project is relatively non-controversial. it sounds like the issues can be dealt with fairly readily. i want to express my personal pride on working on the original museum and i think this extension will provide an opportunity for those of us in t