suguya -- [calling roll] commissioner is reclusied. we have called a public comment on closed items. mr. president, i have one speaker card. >> dan kingsley. >> i have one also. >> i would like to -- commissioners, before i start, i have here a copy to change commissioners and a copy -- my name is bill mohler.

these are copies of the city attorney's opinion regarding what can and cannot be done under proposition k, which i have sent to planning in the past, and i assume you all have seen, but in case you have not, there are a few items on page 5 and 6 the may enter today's discussion. i believe also there is a copy of my comments today. even if i tried to talk fast, i may not cover it. i am sorry, are we starting? ok. all right. commissioners, proposed transbay project can be a boon to the city, or they can be litigation,

depending on how they are addressed. before you vote, please required the amended to reflect the appropriate height to bring it into compliance proposition k and the planning code section 295. unit square has virtually no budget. these are buildings would exceed the shuttle limit in any of those cases. since the limits have been established with regard to the parks and the proposed project would shout out beyond the limit, clearly inappropriate to be studying the proposed approval for project to violate rules. this clearly shows significant shadowing beyond what is permissible, and the prop k. this document must be reflected to show the least environmentally interested.

further, it is permissible to say that it must not say you cannot build a 600 foot building in downtown san francisco. in terms of ceqa, it is clearly significant. the project has proposed it would have the ability to change the shuttle in the future. planning officials are wrong in their decision-making power superior of that of the electorate. the entire proposition was to conclude any such negotiations, and all side of the election debate agreed on that point. then the city attorney issued a clarification for what could it cannot be done, which you now have before you. prior to this, the city could use the did require trade-offs from any develop from a public

park. the result was a slow destruction of the city parks. in essence, the continual modification and privatization of public sunlight was the public right. for all of these reasons, skipping to the chase, the proposed project that will share part should be excluded from the scope of the eir. planning is aware of this. they have set up a committee that has worked over a year on it. yours is the ministerial act to follow. thank you, commissioners. president fong: dan kingsley. >> dan kinsley. as a native san franciscan who still lives and works in san francisco, i would like to

extend my compliments to stop for the diligent work to reduce what is an extraordinary plan. to me, one of the more important aspects of the plan is it literally and the crudely tell san francisco to have to grow up. -- and figuratively tells of san francisco you have to grow up if we're going to reduce the carbon footprint and reduce -- support public transport. i think the family over the past 20 years needs to be complimented for all of their hard work that has led up to this plan, including the now defunct redevelopment agency. president fong: any additional comment? >> my name is rubin santiango. when the world-class design for the transbay terminal was

elected in 2007 over 200 -- over to other designs, it was proclaimed as a project with huge scope and beauty. a tower of 1,200 feet, 80 stories that would soar in the cloud and renewed the entire bill and lackluster high-rise of the san francisco skyline. a few years later, the great plan for sentences go has now changed grammatically, and by many who see san francisco's planning, planners characteristically reducing change its old ways. the tower have shrunken down to 1,070 feet, 61 stories from 1,200 feet 80 stories, which makes it look short and squat in style -- instead of paul. gone are the with germans and the crowd that would make it light up and give it the look of a giant white house. that would be so beautiful to

behold on the skyline. gone are the trams to give you a lift to the park above. gone are the retail all its on the ground floor. gone is the public rest from an observation level on the upper floors of the tower so the public could enjoy the breathtaking views. what has happened to the city that once knew how to impress the world? mr. clarke should revert back to the original plan for the transbay terminal, which was so impressive to begin with. concerning the shadows studies for the tower, but 1,200 foot height is the right height for this power. not only will it look iconic and spectacular on the sideline, but also a situate the rest of a high-rise on the sideline that would look up to the transit tower as the maine central high point. i would highly recommend the san

francisco planning department to allow the extra shadows, which would be visible only for a short time during the day with its one truly iconic landmark tower that it will truly become, and i feel the shorter tower is a field goal, and the taller tower is a touchdown for san francisco. thank you. >>president fong: thank you. >> i want to follow up on supervisor mar's comments. i was involved in the battle when prop k was passed, because there were huge controversies about shadowing union square that played out. i would like to associate myself with his remarks better part of the coalition that was part of getting this ballot measure through. it the planning department

wishes to change prop k, there is a way to do it, and it is the only way to do it. put it on the ballot and let the city vote. the people at the city have already bowed to it. you may not amend it just because of superior design or whatever reason. you must follow the law. the law says you cannot approve the project, and you should not approve certification of this eir for project that is does not comply with the law. you must have a code-confined project before you because that is what the law requires. secondarily, i know this is before information item on

changes that may have occurred. we have heard all kinds of rumors about deals that have been negotiated, modifications. that is inappropriate. you have to explain that those in writing before this kind of testimony is allowed. having people testify without knowing what we are about to hear and cover what is about to be said in a comment is not rational and is not legal. i have to objections. -- two objections. i cannot comment on them, because i do not know what they are. they are not in the staff report. more than that, you have to reject the cir. you have a staff that is out of

control with regard to prop k. it is the law of the city. it is not something that is subject to further interpretation. it was passed by the voters. you cannot approve an eir that does not comply with the information. thank you. president fong: any additional speakers? >> thank you. seeing none, i would suggest we move on to the regular calendar. item number two, 2012.0706x 4 up informational presentation on 101 first-rate. you>> you all ask that we put this on the agenda as a

precursor to the action items. this is an informational hearing. we're not taking any action. this is public comment on this item, just like on any item in the agenda. it is important for us to realize that the project that is embedded in this half the titular item is one piece of an overall plan, but the centerpiece is part of an ensemble bout was created and proposed as part of the larger creation of the transit terminal five years ago. what is before you today is the design for that ensemble, with the terminal having already started construction. we have been working with the architects, landscape architects for quite some time. you have raised a number of concerns and comments about what has been proposed. i am happy to report we have made serious progress.

they have been working in close collaboration with the department to make sure your concerns have been addressed. what i have for you today are the presentations by peter walker, the landscape architect, and by fred clark who will present the proposals for the ground plane of the district, if you will. the ensemble of buildings that is greeted by the transit tower, terminal, and mission square plaza. i would also point out, and i am here with the developer on this. i would point out this is the same team that did proposed five years ago for the competition, so the tame -- same team has been working on this project from the early stages. with that, i will turn it over to peter walker who will start the presentation. >> good morning, commissioners.

i am peter walker, the landscape architect. we are delighted to be here, because we have been working on the park for a long time now. finally, the other part of the other competition comments are coming up. it has been a while, but we are here. >> [inaudible] >> it is a long time to remember, but five years ago part of the presentation was the relationship between mission square and the park above. it was not so much that mission square was going to be a problem in terms of access and people would know about it obviously, but it is the connection between them, which we emphasized in the competition here than what we are bringing to you today is some of the ideas that we're

working with on mission square, and i will try to show you how they relate to the park and making them one as much as possible. we're working with redwood trees. you have another plaza that uses redwood trees, but we're working with them in quite a different way from that one. that one is a little reckless and moving away from the busyness of the city. we are the front door of the busyness of the city. we want to be out there. the thing about this is it is quite different. if you think about oaks like in the 9/11 at memorial, they form a canopy and a series of lakes that holds the canopy up.

redwood's form a series of spires, and they are closed, not solidly, across, but closed along the stem of the column. you can see on the left-hand aside what a group of trees it does. it essentially takes your eyes up here yet you know the phenomenon where you go in and taken up by the columns. the other thing i want to point out is this happens irregularly up. so even though we are placing the trees and a fairly regular fashion, we are going to get what i think is interesting weight and your regular results from that. that results will affect people on the ground, in the park, and within the building, because they will look out into these various conditions. on the right-hand side you can see the park behind trans america.

one of the things that i wanted to point out is these trees have the possibility of being trimmed up, so that you can keep the plaza opened, at the same time you have the volume. next slide, please. here is the plaza. it is made up essentially of three parts. there is the building. the wonderful sculpture that will be on the corner, and then there is this little woulods tht would remain. we have held them back to let the building have a presence on the street. you will see the tower coming down. it will not be lost in the trees. the sculpture will be able to use the woods as a doctor o bac. these trees growing in the air will be a nice contrast to that.

the trees are planted in a series of soil, a technique we used on the 9/11 memorial, and it gives the trees and many more cubic feet of dirt to grow in, and many more cubic feet to distribute water through. redwood's really need water. they are a very fast rate if it gets water, but they are very sturdy. this kind of technology, we hope that this one will also last 90-100 years, maybe more. the other thing i would point out is we are displaying their furniture in two ways. the first it's a series of benches, which i will describe in more detail, which are for use for people that are waiting, and also people that are out in

the plaza having a good time. the second part is we have a series of tables and chairs that are spread out throughout the plaza, and you can imagine a coffee shop and that retail. the retail is on both sides. the only part that does not have retail is the park along mission street where the lobbies are. these retail things we think will be copy shops and small restaurants, and those will spill out so we will have an informal and slightly more formal seating. you can see the funicular coming up behind the colones, starting low towards mission and rising up to the park. next slide, please. here is the system we hope to use. we have about 5 feet between the top of the garage and the surface of the plaza. what we are trying to do is use these on long slots of a church

with a pervious cover on top so that the water can come off of this stone up part, and the water will come off of the stone and pour in and water the trees. that water will then be collected down below after it has gone through the trees. second to the center part, maybe you could point that out, which will become tanks. that water can be held until july and august and used for irrigation. we would reduce not only the amount of portable water off the city system, but also not discharge as much waste water. we would use it at least one season, maybe if the water quality is good enough, several seasons before we let it go. the benches are a form of the bench that have been presented

to you as part of the park. these try to take the vocabulary from the park, the trees and the pavement and the benches, down so they are seen as two different things, but placed together. one series of public open spaces. these are purposely made not too long. if you sit on them, they are wide enough if you are sitting with a friend to sit on the bench. or sitting with a close friend. on the other hand, if you do not want someone sitting there, use it in the middle and there is not enough room for anyone to join you. if you are going to read a book or born to take a snooze, then that's bench will be yours for the time you are there. these are double benches each way.

also, in such a way that they have a turning apart. here is an elevation that shows what we're trying to do. the trees are on the lower portion. you can see the funicular going up between. the you can see the trees on the top. it happens that the redwoods with ferns and that sort of culmination of plants will be right at that eds. you enter in through this group of redwood trees. you will go up the funicular and come out into a much more regular form of the same thing. we think these trees would be planted 40 feet high. they can grow 200 feet high. we're definitely going to get 100 feet. eventually those groups of trees

will blend. as you come into the plaza, you will be allowed to look all the way up and see the trees. up above in the park, and we're very interested in the relationship of the building and the plaza to the park. we try to make those things move smoothly together. this is just the middle section of the park where the plaza and copy shop is and where one of the major entries is from inside the station. but between the building in the park, there is this kind of bridge, but it is a very wide bridge, more like a porch. in part, it is an extension of the plaza in the park, but also a place for table and chairs, and the area in board of that will be commercial or retail, which is related to park users.

it would be available to park users, and you would have access across from the park and into the fifth floor of the building at that point. >>this is what we're trying to get everyone up to. next, please. this is what joins them together. the redwood go up and merge it with the redwoods behind. what people are going to know is there is a car that goes up and points at the park. one of the main concerns is that access to the park. we have a lot of good access, particularly from inside the station, but we need access from the outside as well. i am not so concerned how many people go up. i am concerned that it keeps running so you're constantly --

when you're in the plaza, you're constantly aware this is going up and coming down. in the people are in and going up and coming down. here is the section where you can see the park on the far left. the funicular coming down. it is at the bottom. we think it will be wonderful to be in that funicular and go through those trees. it is just going to beat up terrific ride. i think every kid will want to do it at least once. this is a wonderful way to enter the park and enjoy the entrance experience along with the park itself. here are some perspectives. you can see the sculpture that is really big. these trees are the lower level. one of the things that when you look at something in elevation, these things do not look so long. we put these in in the 9/11

memorial at 30 feet, but because you are down lower, 5 feet were your eyes are in looking up, they look much more formidable. this is the way they will look on opening day. you can see there are a series of channels that are formed for ways that are formed. two of them go to the major entries of the station. people will be walking in there. the next one is given over to the funicular. the one on the far right is given over to the commercial area, the retail area spilling out. each has their own zone within the overall parks. this is what it will look like. the last one was like being across the street. this is what it will be like. i feel that this square in the

sense that it is remarkable and have these trees. it is also going to have a majestic equality. standing next to the tower, you need something in the park you can remember. it should not look like union square and the other major space is in town. it should be its own thing. most importantly, we think it should be part of the park. thank you. president fong: thank you. my nam>> my name is fred clark. we are the designers of the transit center and the tower. i echo the comments about how fortunate we are to be at the place we are in the project today. i have some visuals as well.

we have just crossed mission street, gone through the grove of redwoods into the front door of the transit center, and in the transit center itself you are greeted by a very beautiful light-filled environment. you are very aware of your surroundings and transparent, open room. you see the park above in the grove of redwoods to the left of this, and on the floor is an extraordinary art piece. at the outside, if you pass through the transit center lobby, you will see the glass exterior wall of the transit center and have a sense of the park above. it will have a two levels of extraordinary food-based detail of very lively public realm. the point i am making here is that this entire complex is comprised of several parts. clearly mission square and the

tower are very important. this is at the heart of the complex and the revitalization of most all of the streets around the transit center. it is really conceive as one integrated design, multi-part design with the intention of creating an extraordinary urban attraction and sense of light in the heart of san francisco. >>if you look from adjacent buildings down into the city part, you see how lovely it will be and inviting and accessible it will be. if you are in the park itself, it is a lively, multiple environment designed with the ability to learn about landscape and ecology, read a book, play with your children and play in the pound, a sculpture that is activated by the movement of buses. it is a lively, animated light- filled and garment.