be able to review projects to make sure that those of the case before moving forward. supervisor mar: meaning that instead of coming to the board of supervisors for the minor issues that they would agree on, it gives more authority to the department of public works, consulting with other agencies as needed. correct? >> yes, thank you. supervisor wiener: thank you. >> staff and the department of public works is here as well, if you would like to hear from them. supervisor mar: yes, thank you. >> department of public works here. i would like to emphasize that upon adoption of the street plan, we have seen more and more

projects coming through for minor sidewalk changes, with individual projects. they do not exceed one linear block. this would expedite and make the process much more efficient. we recommend -- our director has recommended in approval of this item. supervisor mar: thank you. it is there anyone from the public who would like to speak? >> two minutes? three minutes? supervisor mar: 3 minutes. you may be only one at this time. >> when i raise these issues about agenda items and so forth, this seems like a good example of what the public is more and more precluded from participating in.

decisions are turned over to planning, planning agrees with dpw, and it is all well and good that the people who work for the city who have no vested interest, as they do not live in the community, all agreed that it is an important process. what happens when there is a project on which they are given no input and the only chance that they have is the one here, which is pretty much in one person's mind, a done deal. you already approved it, the planning department has approved its. all of you, basically, the government had approved it. i think that we saw this in the last agenda item. how many of those people said that they came down near because they heard about it today. it may be well and good for the

public to keep track of city hall, but i do this every day of the week and i have a hard time following it. let me show you something. that is my american mensa card. i say that not just to brag, but to show that i have a modicum of intelligence. i read through this stuff and i look at the attachments that you put on your web site. i cannot tell what the heck this is. it says -- making various changes. what are the changes going to be? you get up here and you have the people do a report and they talk about ball bounce. you may understand this because it comes before you all the time, but do the members of the public? that last item was about a medical clinic, i know that.

where was that? why was it? anything else? i do not know. basically, these things are put on the agenda -- you could say, are they properly agendaized? you waltzed on the sunshine ordinance. president chu was found to be in violation of the sunshine ordinance. the members of the public that are most affected by these issues, to have them come before you, present their pockets and give you ideas -- one of the people just remarked to me that that is the way it is amended. supervisor mar: is there anyone else that would like to speak? seeing no one, public comment is closed. supervisor wiener: i would like to forward this to the full board with a positive recommendation. this would be a significant

improvement in making it safer for pedestrians, improving the vibrancy of our commercial district and creating more public spaces that are not for cars, for people who have a very important step forward in that process. supervisor mar: can remove this forward without objection? thank you. let's call item no. 4. >> would you like to call four, five, and six together? supervisor mar: yes, please. >> item #4. ordinance amending the san francisco planning code by: 1) adding and amending various sections to implement the glen park area plan, bounded generally by chenery street to the north, roanoke street to the east, san jose avenue and bosworth street to the south, and elk street to the west; 2) creating a new section 738.1, establishing zoning controls for code section 101.1. item number 5. ordinance amending the city and

county of san francisco zoning map sheets zn11 and ht11 to: 1) create a new zoning district, and amend height and bulk districts within the glen park area plan, as proposed in the glen park community plan; and 2) making environmental findings and findings of consistency with the general plan and the priority policies of planning code section 101.1. item no. 6. francisco general plan by adding the glen park area plan; and making findings, including environmental findings and findings of consistency with the general plan and the priority policies of planning code section 101.1. supervisor wiener: this neighborhood began a lengthy process, that i have to say i have been involved in a number of labor brought that this and this is the most thorough and inclusive neighborhood process i have seen. there was a high level of anticipation in terms of public meetings, breakouts, brainstorming, not just people listening to what is going on, but people putting their ideas in, back in 2003. there was a lot of clamoring over the years about when it

would move forward. well, it is finally moving forward. this plan would allow for some very positive changes to the zoning. to allow for smarter development patterns and a more transitive focus for the neighborhood. funding permitted, monday assisting some of the transit problems in the area, around the bart stations at the diamond in the bas worth, etc. i look forward to the presentation today. going forward, i ask for your support. the planning department, i cannot even count the number of community meetings that i have attended with them. they have the patience of job and an uncanny patients with the

community. i believe that this is his last public meeting, before early retirement. after more than 20 years with the city, i wanted to thank you for your service and the products they will be presenting today. gentleman? >> good afternoon, supervisors. in the planning manager for the park community planning department. i am one half of the john and john team. the plan was unanimously approved by the commission back in november. we are happy to bring it before you today. today i would like to start with a background history on the plan, then give you the description of the proposal contained within.

as the supervisor mentioned, this is a process that has been going on for a number of years. we have been out in the community wholeheartedly, without partner incident. we have had a series of public workshops and have met with individual neighbors and hundreds of residents to craft a vision for when park. -- glenn park. as i am sure the you are aware, it is located in south-central san francisco and is well connected to the city and the region by the bart system and the freeway. really, what is special about the neighborhood is that small- town feel, which is unique in a big city like san francisco. residents refer to the

commercial district there as the bart village. there is also the nearby canyon park with its dramatic outcrops and hills. just a quick review of the history, this area was once ranch land back in the 1800's. it also became known as little as determined, because of the number of dairies and alpine conditions. in 1892, the city's first electric streetcar was built in the ferry building, in downtown san francisco. this was in hopes of bringing people out to the neighborhood to buy real estate. but it was 1996, the earthquake, which brought most people into the neighborhood as it became a refugee camp at that time. these were the refugee shelters at the time. many of the residents are

staying and buying up cheap lots. the commercial district of the village was well established. you can see that this time, the streets are empty. the streets were paved in the mid-1920's. the planning area is quite small, compared to the ones that have come before you. this is 12 blocks or 13 blocks, stretching from the park to santa fe ave. the main focus is the six blocks around the bart station, encompassing the commercial district and streets that are nearby. another feature of this area is that it is a highly transit and pedestrian area. we have about 9000 writers succumbed to the area each day that ride shuttle buses. what is amazing is that over half of them arrive by walking through the area.

the key issues that glen park faces our transportation in circulation issues every morning. we have have minibuses and thous of pedestrians and there is conflict and concerns about pedestrian safety. and boarding. the scale of some of a large infrastructure that has come into the area over the last 50 years has increased accessibility of the area but impacted some of the livability. here's a picture of 1948. it can see the diamond and bonds worth intersection. it is mostly built out. it was transformed by the freeway development of the southern freeway in san jose avenue. -- and san jose area. -- avenue. you can see how the streets brought traffic into the area and created barriers between

neighborhoods. san jose avenue and of course started as a train line and was widened over the years into an auto route. as part of the freeway building plan in the 1960's that was an entrance to the larger freeway call the mission freeway which would have extended through the mission district but was halted. we're left today with the san jose expressway which the plan addresses. the third issue is growth and change. while glen park is a pretty built-out area, there are fewer development sites and there's a lot of strong interest among residents about what will happen in those areas. i wish to make it -- they wish to make it compatible with existing area. to the general policy recommendations are to protect and enhance the character of the village, its workability. to resolve the challenges posed by the infrastructure projects.

for example, san jose. to prioritize transit and pedestrian movement in this corridor area and establish connection to glen canyon park and look for opportunities for open space in this busy area. there is a number of community improvements that the plan proposes. these are short-term and long- term. some of the more near-term products we're looking at our improvements near the bart station area. this is an aerial photo showing that. we're looking at creating pedestrian improvements around the diamond and bosworth area. we would like to install new pedestrian crossings were possible and redesigned the bart plaza to make it function better for pedestrians and transit. san jose as i mentioned, the idec here is to do some fixes that can slow the as speeds and the freeway-like nature of san jose avenue and a larger effort

that would do of planning and redesign of the street. this could be -- open up connections across the different neighborhoods that the street is a barrier between. and possibly increase access to the church. open space improvements, the plan identifies the bart placer redesign. looking for ways to create open space in the neighborhood area. one of the great ideas about creating this glen park greenway which would connect the commercial district to glen canyon park. and of course, another unique feature in the neighborhood is the creek runs under the park and the only remaining remnant is the free-flowing peace within glen canyon park. the plan proposes conducting a study to see if there is opportunity for daylighting or raising the creek.

there are concerned about what this might do or not do but that is the idea of conducting a story -- study to see about feasibility. in terms of the land use aspects, it is a pretty low-key plan in terms of development compared to the other plans. this is a page from the city's general plan that talks about the different plan areas and how many units are expected. in glen park we're projecting 100 units. this is a big development plan. the existing zoning in the area is nc2 in the core village neighborhood district. neighborhood commercial, small scale. surrounded by residential rh1 and rh2 zoning and public parcels. the plan addresses the neighborhood commercial zoning and focuses on that. that is 80 parcels. it is a small area we're doing. the plan proposes creating a glen park neighborhood

commercial transit district to support the walk ability and transit orientation of the area. this would introduce transit oriented zoning standards such as for moving the density limits and parking requirements. this new glenn parker neighborhood commercial transit district would give glen park its own name and special zoning district and expand the district slightly by incorporating nine additional parcels, two of these are commercial properties that function as part of the commercial district but are notd formally included so we bring them back into the fold. there is a row of buildings across from the board's statement that -- station that would be rezoned. allow flexibility for future commercial uses. and the bart parking lot. bart has indicated they are interested in pursuing development on their parking lot. it is a 54-based parking lot across from the bart station.

they have not come forward with any proposal at this time. the time does not proposed rezoning that parcel at this time. it is p for public use and would require rezoning for mixed use development. the plan supports infill. that may make sense given its proximity to the bart station and the commercial district. bart has indicated they are interested in conducting a community process specific to the lot that a rezoning of the parcel would need to come out of that. and building height. this is a photo down diamond street. as you can see, a lot of the buildings here, it has a continuous street wall of 30 feet. this is -- there's a portion of the glen park neighborhood district that has a small scale. we heard it is important to

residents as an indicator of this village atmosphere. as we looked at this, the small street in the scale of the buildings, we identified this as a more sensitive area in the district. there is some views that these heights allowed to the surrounding canyon. and the current high districts in the area, everything is a 40 foot-- district. it would create a 30-foot district. throughout the glen park district we would allow a five- foot height bonus for larger ground floors and that would allow potential heights up to 35 and 40 feet within the district. the implementation program. we want to make sure all these great projects are moving forward as identified. we have a piece, the end talks

about implementation actions the city should make but coordination with regional agencies. supervisor mar: can i back you up and ask for the rationale for the 15 foot ground height increase? what is the reason for planning support in those in different neighborhoods? >> we have found they are the traditional pattern of transit- oriented neighborhoods throughout the city. they allow a more gracious storefront, more pedestrian activity, and culmore ramiya experience inside and we find the districts tend to be more successful in terms of the place we want to create with transit and walking areas. supervisor mar: thank you. >> so the final actions were asking -- we're asking of you and referring to the full board are approving the ordinance and adopting the general plan

amendments which would at the committee park plant as its own plan within the city's general plan and formalize city policy. a vision for glen park for the first time and an ordinance adopting the planning code amendments. this would be introducing the glen park neighborhood commercial transit district into the city's planning code. and also approving the ordinance adopting this outing at the met -- map amendments which would mean mapping on the glen park ntc district. this is our plan. that ends my presentation. supervisor wiener: thank you and thank you for all the incredible work on this plan over the years. as we get to the hearing and is a brief presentation, it does not reflect the amount of work that went into bringing us to this point so thank you for all the work. i am very supportive of this

plan and i will say that the strong support in the community, i have a letter here which will -- we will provide the director, it is very short period the glen park association of's board of directors has followed and participated in the plan process. the community plan has received substantial input from members of the glen park community and the planning commission unanimously approved it in the november 2011 -- in november 2011. we appreciate the approval that will be considered by the land use and economic development committee on monday. we support planning and general plan amendments necessary to move the plan ahead. we look favorable to vote favorable action and your continued engagement with city agencies, boards, and others to design and implement the important transportation that is

anticipated. i want to touch on two specific issues. one is transportation approve -- improvements. that is the most important thing that can come out of this plan. glen park, decades ago, was greatly impacted by the bernal cut, the partial insertion of a freeway through san jose avenue. and the neighborhood has been paying the price ever since from the ingestion to local streets being used as cut-throughs, easy access to people committing robberies. they can commit robbery and jump back on. the neighborhood is long overdue for changes to the periphery of the art -- bart station. better intersection at diamond and bosworth. tom lantos was able to secure a

land -- and earmark for transit improvement in this area. there has been a lot of frustration in the community about the lack of progress there and i know that part of it was waiting for this plan to be complete and i want to impress not just on planning but on the mta and -- how critically important is to move forward in a tangible way, to start making the transit improvements in this area and to show the community this is not just the plan, that we will implement it and make a trend -- tangible improvements. the other point i want to make, there is not a rezoning of that lot. the possible of a future -- possible future development is controversial and there is a lot of viewpoints on all sides and i know that bart, david decides

will go through an extensive committee process to insure that everyone has the opportunity for input and whatever happens, that site and set being something that is beneficial to the community. some people were concerned this plan would somehow secretly rezone the lot and make bart immediately available to redevelop it and that is not the case. i do not know if you have anything you'd like to add about the transit improvements but if not, i will make a motion. >> could i ask about the bart parking lot? there is flexibility that you could -- it could be mixed use but the community will have a say. >> it is zoned as p so it cannot be developed and bart would have

to go through a process before legislation would come back to the planning commission to rezone it. >> it looks like it is rh3, three units per lot. that is the proposed zoning? >> there is no proposed change. we're keeping at sp so there would have to be a future process for any requested change or development at this site. >> it is our intention and hope to move forward with implementation with this plan as soon as possible. or adoption actions will allow us to have an adopted plan and we can pursue grants and work with our sister agencies on moving this project forward. >> thank you. >> local government affairs at mta. we do not have anything to add. kim walton is here to answer

questions if you have any. supervisor wiener: my question is to repeat what i said, many times mta -- it is important to move ford with transportation and improvements to this area into hughes, the landmark money to improve traffic and access in the area. >> thank you. supervisor mar: let's open this up for public comment. is there anyone from the public would like to speak? >> thank you, supervisors, good afternoon. in the chair of the zoning and planning commission. supervisor wiener read the letter we sent in. i would like to say how very

ecclesiastic we're about the plan. how very grateful we are to the planning department to the way they handled engagement with our community. they did a very active job and we were able to develop a dialogue. there was a real acknowledgment that what we said showed up in the plan. supervisor wiener: do you have paper copies? it wanted to make sure your letter is in the record. >> i have one copy, i can leave it. the mta came through with an interesting survey of parking needs at a crucial time and that was a very well timed, strategic thing to do and i am grateful to them for doing that. i was shocked to hear that -- this is his last public meeting. i am pleased was here for that. he has done a great job. the last thing i want to say is

to follow up on what you have been talking about on the transportation issue. these are the hot topics that do need a lot of attention. we're going to be actively engaged in the community on this. it sounds like you will be, too and i will be glad to see it. thank you. supervisor mar: anything -- anyone else who would like to speak? seeing none public comment is closed. i want to say thank you for walking me through the history but for engaging in that community in such a great process. thank you so much for your work with the city. supervisor wiener: i would like to move that we forward items four through six to the full board with positive recommendations. supervisor mar: can we do this without objection? is there any other business before us? >> we have further note --