>> i'm afraid your time is up. >> thank you very much. >> public comment? i do have speaker cards. peter lewis, -- starkley. maria -- tim cohen. >> hello commissioners my name is peter lewis, the founding director of the current neighborhood association and past president. we have been in close contact with scott about his and his neighbors concerns on fifteenth street; i live a few blocks away. every time i drive by fifteenth street i regretted; people are doing u-turns now; the idea of this project having a negative impact on the environment ,.

the environment is already user-friendly. i see people put their hands up in the air, turn left on fifteenth street, adds a lot of traffic. rather than to object to the high density of this project, we would ask you to respectfully find a way to reduce the density. we understand that during the hearings the whole idea is to create high-density and it is parking in the market/octavia plan. this lot is unusual. 2100 market has 80 units, and that is a much bigger project. this is a sliver lot on a corner. we would like you to entertain the idea of reducing the density, i put in our position letter is, we would like to have larger,

two-bedroom units in this project. i will explain immolated testimony the rationale in more detail. to give you an idea, i own the building on nob hill, i have eight units the same size; in the 15 years i have had that building i have not had one couple with a child apply for any of the units. the whole idea in the general management plan, and the market/octavia plan for two-bedroom units is to be family-friendly. we have a baby boom going on. 733-sq. ft. units and calling them 2-bedroom is going around the issue. we respectfully ask you to have these units significantly larger, 900-950 sq. ft. wsolely on couples in the area having babies will have a nice place to live.

thank very much. >> my name is maria mejia, a board member from the mission dolores association. i'm here for the 2175 market st. project. i live in the area for about 20 years, in an apartment building with 16 units; three quarters of the units are larger than the largest unit designed by the developers of this building. in the time that i have been here at my apartment, there have been only one or two people that have occupied the one-bedroom units. when an apartment unit is empty, families to come in and view the apartment but they are too small for a thriving family environment.

mdna strongly supportsand encouragesdevelopers to build a more diverse and thriving family oriented housing. we understand there is a housing crisis in the city. there is a baby boom taking lacing our neighborhoodher family unit let's placei hope that you will help us achieve this. i can very much. >> good afternoon commissioners members there was not much to say; we love the project and

what it did to the streetscape, at the ground level. will love the design and we notice the on-site bmrs and the .5% parking ratio and strongly endorsed the project. but that is not the point, is it? here we are in a situation where the city spent a decade developing the market/octavia plan saying these are the rules that we want to follow. if you follow these rules the city will look at it with favor. we are skeptical of the bargain. on the one answeredcertain requirements are placed; on the other there is certainty of development. here we are on an appeal of the pmd which is intensely frustrating; this

appeal defines the words frivolous and spurious. to appeal an aos is the tail wagging the dog. and at an intersection laid out at the nineteenth century. this project fits in with the neighborhood; it is an excellently design project, urbanistic, should be approved and it is frustrating beyond belief to come back again and again for projects that are compliant and do make the design changes, meet the design criteria that the city says it wants and there is still always another opportunity to appeal the project. please deny the appeal and approve the project. thank you. >> marius starky, also board

member of the mdna. b i would like to talk about the density of this buildingthat is going to create more problems of traffic in that area. i am the manager of the building very near this project; i've been in my building for 21 years. the size of our units in our building are around 750 square feet; if you have a two-bedroom unit, you won't get any families in it. y in my building is only been one family that has been in the building in 21 yearsif you approve 750-sq.ftfor two-bedroom apartment you won't

get any families there. with transportation, it's already very intense. i'm hoping you look at this and see that it needs improvement there. and that to get that done before you go ahead with that project, and you let families be in this, make those units a little bit bigger. thank you. >> thank you commissioners. my name is harry o'brien, appeared today on behalf of the project sponsor. i want to reiterate our support of the planning departments recommendationwe think this project is a perfect example of what the legislature had in mind when they created the statutory authority for the community planning exemption process.

in the case of the market/octvia plan the department spent over 10 years in the community planning process; prepared in this commission certified an fer and cumulative impacts, that include background growth in the city; it is not true that impacts would have to result only from development; that includes background growth in that conflict of akron analysis cumulative market analysis. under the community plan exception process, the project is exempt from environmental review except for impact peculiar to the project or where there is substantial new information and the planning department has properly determined that

neither one of those is the case. the concerns are not about the project. it's about the density proposed approved in the market/octavia plan. as noted the fdir specifically identified and inspected this location, and this commission and the board of supervisors specifically determine that there was no mitigation of that impacted was feasible and adopted overriding benefit, determining that the density of this locationfor all the reasons we have heard, the importance of transit oriented development, the development along the corridor, would justify those environmental impacts. we urge the commission to follow the staff's recommendation and reject this appeal. >> is there additional public comment?

>> hi. item is mike -- i own property on -- street, intersecting the property on 15th street. i don't understand all the legal discussions here; i wanted to voice my opinion is a concern neighbor traffic situation is a significant problem. i am not sure if this belongs in the discussion or in the next two sessions but i thought i would say that here;

i used to drive up fifteenth street and wanted to take that last bit on many occasions i went to the opposing lane and drove up the lane and took a left on sharon street, it is very dangerous but you get frustrated sitting in the traffic after blocks of traffic, especially if you drove an hour to get home from another commute. that's my opinion. thank you. >> good afternoon members, peter cohen -- neighborhood association. we support the project and endorsed it but i feel compelled to talk about this because of some of the comments that have been made. we are not parties up to the appeal. i wanted to share with you thoughts on market octavia plan and the problematic eir, and

some of the issues brought on this appeal should be given any merit at all. it is not a simplistic to assume that a program eir is a slam dunk, and there is no legitimacy to drilling in deeper. does not mean you have to appeal the mitigated neck deck. the sort of response is that there is no legitimacy, it begs the question, what is really happening? we know those big six-point intersections are serious problem; we have been complaining to the mda and the city's planning department. we operate on a wish and a prayer that the impact fees and attention via the market/octavia plan will improve those intersections but it is not happening at the knots and bolts level. there is a lot of legitimacy

to the concerns of my brothers and sisters have brought forth; i don't support the appeal on a neck-deck but erisa the conversation about that's the real about what the city can do to address these intersections while approving a development that we happen to endorse. i wanted to share that with you. unlike a housing action coalition, we are on the ground and we don't just take these things at face level; folks have to live and breathe and walk in this environment. is it don't belong in the neck-deck they still belong front of you for consideration. and how to deal with this in a constructive way. >> thank you. additional public comment? >> good afternoon commissioners. my name is -- a member of the

castro/eureka neighborhood association, but speaking solely as an individual. our organization is not loaded to either endorse or oppose this project. or the appeal of the pmnd. i do want to echo some of the things that people have said. there are a number of six-point intersections in the upper market area that deserve a lot of attention we encourage the city to work with david associations to improve thosefor pedestrian and bicycle safety. the market/octavia has analyzed the traffic impact; i don't support the appeal of the pmnd; it is important not to punish individual projects it have

limited ability to fix the traffic problem. i personally support this project. aside from that i do encourage the city to work with the neighborhood associations to improve those intersections. we are ready to do that. thank you. >> any additional public comment? seeing none the public comment portion is closed. commissioner -- >> mr. cohen's comments are well taken in that traffic concerns are ongoing, preceding the plan and growing in time. i live five blocks on the site. and the crazy intersections that you have in that area.

the project is not the reason for the problem and the project will obviously have a small impact, but that in fact was contemplated in the larger plan project. the more appropriate area to discuss this, when looking at the project and egress and revisions, is to make sure it is not impact negatively the neighborhood. the problems exist today. they existed before the project, and they will exist after the project. we looked at the eir there, and the pmnd, each project has mitigations and thinks that it is to respond to this issue areas. we are not going to see any reduction -- any increases in the level of service on any of our intersections ever. i would be very surprised, unless we can get to the goal where 50 percent of people don't drive. our hope in the plan with

market/octavia is that people will take the train or bicycle. if people would not go up fifteenth, it happens a lot of times; people pull-up there and want to make a left, blocking cars. part is a larger issue around traffic mitigation . may be preventing left turns allowed along the corridor. that would've been another discussion that would've been perfect in an earlier discussion. those concerns are valid; they are not valid for this appeal. those dishes up and addressed in a number of waysconcernsi

want to move to deny the appeal. >> i agree with almost everyone else who has spoken; we need to look at the entire area as the city to do the things that we can do to make it safer for pedestrians, bicyclists and even traffic going through. it's only going to get worse; i think thatwhat we need to look at is the type of signaling changes that have occurred downtown; you go through intersections in a much denser area in the downtown area, they have walking times where walkers can come from all directions, traffic is not moving, then traffic making

right and left turns and no walkers. intersections are huge; when there is a green light, it takes most of the time for walkers to get by; traffic has little time to get through. i forget which street, church crosses market, there is a right turn, green arrow only for that; makes a lot more sensethe traffic goes in the pendant of the traffic going up on marketfinally, the people there may be the least impact. always good to be that way.

we need to look at that. in terms of this particular pd &a it is adequate but i will have comments on the project itself. >> commissioners there is a motion on the floor for upholding the preliminary mitigated negative declaration denying the appeal. (voting) the motion passes unanimously. commissioners you are now item 11 a and b. case 2012.0110c and b, 2175 market st., commissioners considering the request for use authorization. considering the request with a variance. >> good afternoon michael smith

planning department staff. you have before you the project that 2175 market street. 44 off-street parking spaces. a portion of which would be occupied by a yet to be determined restaurant use. the project requires conditional use authorization to develop a lot exceeding 9,999 sq.ft. as well as authorization for a restaurant use. project also requires variances, 144 for rear yard, 145 for ground floor ceiling height less than 14ft. and 140--

the department is recommending approval of the project with conditions because it would create 88 new 1 and 2 units and 6300 sq. ft. of commercial space. the project provides needed rental housing including 13 new affordable units. project complies with design guidelines, with the tower development on market street and shorter townhouse on octavia street. the project will provide 44 offstreet parking spaces, half space per unit and consistent with the code. received letters from mda and

mdta. should have a copy of those letters, in summary mdna is in support of have concerns; mdta is supportive. the first concern is the size of the unit, they feel the two-bedroom units should be made larger even if it results in less than city; they would like to see a driveway entrance on market street frontage to alleviate traffic on fifteenth street; respond to that quickly this is a transit preferential street as well as apedestrian preferential street. policies includeprohibiting new curb cuts on market street. they don't want to see in

exceptions for the open space on the parcel and the revised project in front of you, there are no longer seeking a variance for exposure to the open space, relocated to the-- in full compliance with the open space requirement. this concludes my presentation. i am available for any comments you might have. >> thank you. >> project sponsor please. >> good afternoon commissioners. thank you for your time and for reviewing this project. i think as mentioned previously the market/octavia plan is a tender process -- katie o'brien, project sponsor -- is a 10 year process, 65-ft. high

on market st., 70-ft. depth. (audio cutting in and out) also providing active commercial and mitchell uses along market street design for small local businesses; we are providing streetscape and landscape improvements including -- along 15th street, and landscape in compliance with the better street plant. we are providing .5 parking in compliance with the code; 45 spaces for bicycle parking in a secured area; also complies

with the -- and we will provide affordable housing units on-site, and 20% of the units to be affordable for the project. the project also provides community impact fees for the benefits of the market/octavia plan and funding for the housing fees. we have done extensive community outreach starting in july 2011; we had over 30 meetings with various community organizations, individual neighbors, and different civic leaders. the project is located at the intersection of many never hurts, eureka valleyand others. in response to community feedback, and planning staff feedback

we alter the planning project in many ways; we reduced the size of the retail spaces and broke them up in smaller segments and make them more palatable since it was an issue in the neighborhood; we redefine the façade along the market street; in addition we change to detailing along 15th street building, improving landscaping to relate to lower scale residential neighborhoods. we had it open space to the roof to be compliant with the open space code, and also redesigned the entire floor plan of the building and also some you to design to provide more two-bedroom units to the project as desired by the neighborhood i have letters of support if you have not received them,

from neighborhood groups that have officially endorsed and, to include the debose triangle association, castro community benefit district, san francisco bicycle coalition and others. i will turn it over to the architect fred pollock to talk about the project. >> the afternoon commissioners. i am fred pollock, we are the architects of the developer. some of the graphics from your packet on the overhead, is it possible to get whole thing? there were go. in the site plan, what we have is the frontage along market street here, and 15th st. to the south.