i remember when walking to the press conference walking from embarcadaro all the way to the edge of the site, i didn't realize how long that walk would be in my heels, actually. so, it is a very large site and i think there's a lot we can do with it. i just want to make sure that we create open space that's usable because sometimes we create open space and the public doesn't utilize it. and then it becomes more of an issue and concern than a benefit. and one thing that i -- you know, we talked about that i liked was even more kind of recreational spaces and being that it could be a basketball arena and having outdoor basketball courts is something we would see the neighborhood utilize. basketball courts are popular in all of our neighborhoods. i notice when i pass by them they're used in all hours. it might be a fitting parallel given what's happening. i think a lot of our youth would be excite today play basketball outside by the arena as well. i know wind is a concern, that's come up in the design. i've seen some sheltering. for it to be usable, we want to

ensure that we look at wind. and another issue that i've heard is in how we designate rules for privately owned public spaces pudx. people have brought up to me, can we do there what we do at dolores park? i'm not advocating we do that, but i think a community process with the neighborhood about how we manage that privately owned open space would be very important. * puds so the neighborhood feels they have input in terms of how far we utilize that open space. last, in if -- terms of the retail, i appreciate the warriors said they wanted [speaker not understood]. i think that shows a commitment both to the history and also to supporting small businesses in the neighborhood so they also benefit from this project and aren't pushed aside in order to create the best project for the project sponsor as possible. i think in terms of the access to the retail, we want to make

sure that there is as much access because it seems to be on the second floor and i just want to make sure there is as much interplay with the ground level and the retail as possible so we're creating more pedestrian flow that creates skipping safety in the neighborhood during the daytime. and, so, last, i think i brought this up, i have concerns about public parking in the neighborhood. i'm not sure what would be better, less public parking or more public parking. we want to make sure we're addressing congestion. so, i just hope that we kind of adequately study that as we move forward. whatever we can do to reduce congestion in the neighborhood and not making a parking lot i think would be the number one priority of the neighborhood. the last question that i have is not necessarily for mr. dikers, but actually for the city. this is something that's come up. this is a beautiful design. it's really clear why this would be an iconic location for

the warriors given its proximity to the bay bridge and also proximity both to bart, the new transbay terminal, and caltrain. the one question that comes up often at our neighborhood is how thoroughly do we explore other sites? and, so, i don't know if this is a question for mr. rich or ms. matts. that is something i think has come up a lot in neighborhood discussion. >> ken rich interest again from oewd. the site has been the focus because of the many very key advantages it offers and also as we hope have been devon straighting trying to work on some of the challenges as well to take advantage of those, the advantages of the site. the environmental process, which is just able to start because -- well, the action you will hopefully take at the full board tomorrow, requires us to examine at least one, if not more than one, alternative site required by the ceqa under state law is done.

that alternative site must be something that has fewer impacts than the proposed sites. so, that will have to happen. i think early -- that will be identified and worked into the environmental process. >> and i just want to say, i think this is a great potential site. of course, it comes with its challenges given the density of a residential neighborhood that's been built up over the last ten years. i hope through the eir process we do more than give the alternative locations lip service that we truly explore them so that members of the public feel that we really give that an adequate look. thank you. >> should i respond in any way? i can only just say a few things very quickly. >> sure. >> retail i thought was one of the key ones. if you look at the design, you'll see that each of the modules of the retail is set up like a pier. it's about the same width as one of the finger piers, 28. if you go through pier 28 going

through the central opening, you'll see how big that really s. you can imagine retail on either side of it, just like a pier. it's only about one-third the depth of a pier. so, as you move through the retail, you move through retail on either side and up onto the next terrace. and that terrace above also leads in the same retail. it's like a split level kind of design where there is a tremendous amount of access all along the embarcadaro. that is the proposal right now. so, we're hoping to enliven the embarcadaro with that design. the other thing i wanted to mention very quickly was in terms of climate and outdoor space. we are working with landscape features as well as physical architectural features to diminish the impact of wind on the raised plaza and, of course, the arena itself will create turbulence that we have to study and understand. while this is something we're very much accustomed to and will be part of the process, design process in the future.

>> thank you, mr. dikers. >> i like how everything builds around that red java house on the northwestern corner. >> they have great breakfast sandwiches. >> and i like the bicycle routes around the structure. that sounds wonderful. i was going to say i agree with supervisor kim on making sure that open space is accessible for the public. i'm just wondering, is there any consideration of play grounds or family type space? i know there is a kayak area but i'm wondering kind of in consideration of families that live in the area if there is any building of the open space for that kind of recreational use. and then my last question is you mentioned four union squares in size. that's for the total 7 acres of open space. >> yes. >> not the full project. >> the four union squares is the size of the pier. and we have about two acres, a little over two acres of open

space -- sorry, four union squares is the size of the pier and two union squares are the amount of open space. >> okay. >> i probably made an error when i spoke. >> and, mr. dikers, what about consideration of family use for the open space? >> yes, it's an interesting question because for many years, certainly in the '70s and '80s it was considered important to specifically design social functions into space. so, you'd go to a courtyard and you'd see like a little amphitheater and that was for a certain kind of thing. we found over the years making design specific doesn't promote use. instead, what you do is you provide a variation of spaces that can be used and occupied in different ways by different people at different times. so, our proposal currently shows a very wide range of types in space. some have steps that lead to them. some are soft, some are hard, some are high, some are low, some are narrow. each of those little places can be occupied in a different way.

we haven't put in any sand pits or anything like that if that's what you're asking. >> one would be petco park in san diego that has a children's playground area with direct access to view the padres playing, i guess. >> right. >> there is no consideration of those kinds of things. >> along the south edge as i mentioned earlier, there is a lower -- all of the south edge connects directly to brandon street wharf project which has soft scape related to t. so, in fact, we're designing a park-like access there i suppose you could say is softer than concrete or some other kind of surface that you could play in or gather in if you're younger. >> thank you very much for your time. >> thank you. * >> supervisors, noe we've been running late. i want to give a quick minute to representatives from the [speaker not understood] and office of disanalyst to speak briefly on their involvement in the project with your permission. >> thank you.

good afternoon, supervisors. i had it all prepared but i'll keep it brief. i'm assistant deputy chief ken lombardy [speaker not understood]. along with that i'm in charge of our earthquake safety emergency response bond which the voters of san francisco passed in 2010, recognizing that the fire department had many aging buildings and facilities that were not seismically safe. and, so, over the past two years the fire department has identified several properties and one of those properties is pier 22-1/2 where we currently have our station 35 which also mans two fire boats which is basically a block away from this facility. we have had this facility on our radar to redo and we're planning on redoing it. and along with doing that, we would be redoing the piers out the back to accommodate also not only our two fire boats but a third fire boat that we have coming this fall.

while doing this research we were approached about the i warriors and been asked if we would want to be part of this other project here at 30-32. there's many benefits to this. easily, 30-32 is a bigger project. could easily house the three fire boats. so, we would not have to rebuild the piers out the back. we could remove those piers. it would be better for the community. we would create more open space. give more views behind pier 22-1/2. the historic fire building would stay there. but those piers in the water would be removed and it would move the three fire boats that we will have when this project is completed down to piers 30-32 which can easily accommodate the fire boats, it would be a great maritime use down there and would be a great facility for the fire department. >> just a quick question. does this match the timing needs for the fire department? >> actually, as you're well aware, supervisor kim, we've met with you and we've been producing this project. right now currently, if we went our own road at pier 22-1/2,

we'd be getting done around the end of 2017 which is basically the same time as this project. >> thank you. >> that would be perfect. any other questions? >> none. >> thank you. >> thank you. >> good afternoon, supervisors. i also will keep my comments brief and out of respect for your time. but i'm carla johnson, the interim director with the mayor's office on disability. and as you understand, we are the city's overall a-d-a coordinator here to make sure that all of our city programs and services and facilities comply with americans with disabilities act. and part of our role is actually to perform an architectural access plan review of important city projects as they come forward. we prefer to be involved with the city projects at the earliest possible stage and understanding that and [speaker not understood] the office of economic and work force development called a meeting that i was involved with about ten days ago in order to introduce me to the important

project at an early stage. i had an opportunity to review the conceptual drawings and also to ask some fairly detailed questions about the universal design concept which was all entries are accessible entries. all paths have an accessible path collated right next to it and so forth. i have to say i was very impressed with design. often our office has to take on an educational role along with our regulatory role and try to teach designers about access compliance. that wasn't really the case here. i felt that the developer had done their homework and the designers [speaker not understood], it includes accessible site features and the surrounding open spaces and the park areas and the boat launch and also the approach to the [speaker not understood] entries. we discussed program access for special outdoor events that might take place out in the open spaces, and we also discuss accessible boat docks. as we move into the inside of the stadium, you know, under

plans yet to be developed, we also come across issues about obtaining accessible line of sight. [speaker not understood]. this office is a lot more detailed review as this goes on as the concept evolves into fund r finished design. i also do have the commitment from oewd to be part of those discussions and be to be able to be certain that the access is built in from the very beginning. and that's something that we had to show horn in at the very end. thank you. >> thank you. there are no questions. at this time through the chair, maybe we can open for public comment. >> we're limiting it to two minutes per person. supervisor wiener? >> i have a question for oewd. [speaker not understood].

i wanted to raise an issue you and i have talked about privately relating to the stadium and night life. >> yes. >> that in many ways, even though it's going to be a great venue for the warriors, it's going to be used for entertainment -- i shouldn't say entertainment because it could be [speaker not understood]. an awful lot, that is going to be a real key purpose of the stadium. i know when the cac was put together there was no one from the entertainment industry on the cac which i thought was -- i know was a complete oversight, it wasn't intentional. i know you assured me that [speaker not understood] in the community would be involved in the planning process. i want to make sure we're continuing to really take into account the fact this is an entertainment venue. i think that community can have a huge contribution in making sure that it is successful both in terms of design, working with the surrounding neighborhood. i want to see if we can get a little update on that. >> thank you.

supervisor wiener, we very much take seriously your questions and the need to integrate the entertainment and night life community into the design and programming and thoughts around this arena are critical to its success. the warriors have reached out to event promoters in the area in order to start talking to them about some of the specifics around the design. it is their intention not to have this facility be designated to one particular promoter, but it had to be an open house that all promoters could book actsv and shows into. in addition, we have reached out to the entertainment commission to start working with them and through them to talk to folks that are interested in using the facility, not just the main [speaker not understood] of the a rectionverctiontion a but also the smaller multi-purpose room and the outdoor space on a year round basis. as you'll see in the attachment

to the conceptual framework as part of the feasibility report where it talks about that number of events over the course of a year, the vision is really a variety of events of different sizes. the intention is to design an arena that can really be collapsed to host shows and events that are -- that attract a wide range of audience and different size audiences. so, that means really reaching out to the full breadth of the entertainment and night life community. in addition we're working very closely with sf travel to ensure that this venue is complementary to the convention -- the convention industry and the tourism industry and making sure that those types of uses are also fully addressed. and i believe we also had alex rosenthal who represents the night life music consortium here at budget and finance talking about her organization's ongoing support

and commitment to working with the warriors as the proposal moves forward. >> thank you. >> okay, thank you. so, at this time we'll open up for public comment. >> supervisor kim, can i just ask, ms. matts, can i just ask if you could summarize the public benefits? i know we mentioned the benefits of the port. [speaker not understood] went over those. i think from the budget committee's discussion, i think it was last week, 5,000 full-time jobs, about 2800 -- 5,000 temporary jobs and 2800 permitted jobs and about $80 million annually from visitor spending to the city. * permanent also mentioned by the fire department, fire boat station and 7 acres of public open space. was there anything else that's left out of those public benefits from the development? >> i do think it's important about the 7 acres of open space, for commitment of the warriors to maintain all of

that open space. in addition, the three sides of the pier that would be active for maritime use really not only forward the port's goals of having continued maritime access, but really do provide some pretty wonderful water-based amenities for residents and visitors. whether it's the water taxi or the ferry or the excursion boats including the boat launch and the potential of a deep water berth on the eastern edge of the pier. another sort of ongoing public amenity is just the walkway around the edge of this pier and the spiral going up to the top. you can really envision becoming a destination unto itself. and being a place that people want to go and experience on a regular basis. the varieties of open santa fetion and the ways they are -- have the potential to be both programmed and unprogrammed, i think it would be a real neighborhood amenity as well as being a gathering spot.

and the multi-purpose room or the space that is really the size of a full professional-sized basketball court is envisioned to be a community space that can be accessed and used by the community in a myriad of ways. having a space on that northeast corner that is envisioned to be glassed in, open to the advice taz, something to be used is really an amenity that is lacking. * vistas the south beach is a beautiful room. it is used all the time. but to have this type of space on the edge of the pier we think would be really enhancing. >> thank you. >> thank you. so, at this time we will open up for public comment. [speaker not understood]. i have a meeting scheduled. i'll try and push it back as much as i can. i'll call the first five speaker cards. jamie whitaker, glenn da leanhart, [speaker not

understood], barbara, and david hartzell. good afternoon, my name is jamie whitaker -- >> sorry. please feel free to line up on this side of the chamber if i called your name. thank you. good afternoon, my name is jamie whitaker. thank you very much. -- for having this hearing. i took a break, went to the rest room and i overheard some conversation that was basically i'm just looking to get a piece of the pie. that's fine. we all need to make a living. but my fear is that while a lot of folks are pursuing a piece of the pie, whether it be building trades unions, members, hotel union, lawyers, political lobbyists, they're creating a dichotomy. what is getting lost in the process is the speed which this is going through, environmental and impact review in nine months instead of the typical

year and a half is the health impacts that could be made worse by increased traffic congestion and other issues. the department of public health created a healthy development measurement tool to help evaluate projects in regards to does it increase the cancer-causing particulate matter in the air from traffic congestion? does it increase pedestrian dangers? $15 million spent in the trauma ward at san francisco general because of pedestrian injuries in san francisco. with the embarcadaro being -- i consider downtown san francisco's roads have already had their heart attack and they're already a loss come out in some ways in traveling. service to all parts of the city suffer from that. whether it be the 38 geary or the 14 mission. the embarcadaro i think there is a lot of sensitivity about that particular location. that is sort of the bypass right now.

the heart attack has happened. the bypass is the embarcadaro. that's how you get up to the marina, north beach, down to the highway. if you could show my overhead one more time. the air quality in south of market is already really bad. the probability of getting cancer for south of market is 20%. i don't want to have to wear one of these masks just to sleep at night. >> thank you. thank you, mr. whitaker. whoever is next of the five names that i've called. my name is paula [speaker not understood]. i believe brenda already had to leave. good afternoon and thank you for letting me speak today. i live at 2 19brannon, which is within a block and a half of the proposed arena and i'd like to express my concerns about the rapid * pace at which this process for the warriors project has been moving. it's

very disturbing and i know it's disturbing to my neighbors as well, to the people that i've spoken to. the neighbors in my area told me they haven't had a chance to look at it. they haven't heard about it. i'm hearing all kinds of different things. and i think that it's very important that we're involved with this because truly it will affect our quality of life. our ability to work, our ability to live, our ability to enjoy our homes will be compromised by the traffic and the changes that will happen potentially. i'm respectfully requesting that we slow this process down so that people have the ability to put in the input that needs to be done. thank you very much. >> thank you. my name is dave hartzell, i live on one of the beautiful

corridors that was on the pretty picture. the person before me was more articulate than i, but i would also like to emphasize the process is going much quicker than any other project of its kind. and that when you go in a hurry, no matter what you do, you make mistakes. and i think the people of the city of san francisco and the county of san francisco are deserving of the same respect that you ask of us. and i think one of the thing that we should be asking is that you slow down and with ask for good governance. we ask that you take your positions responsibly, and you give this the time that it needs in order to have adequate review and adequate public input. thank you very much. >> thank you, mr. harte sell. and i'm going to call up five more speaker cards. * peter picandez, walter marchua, henry [speaker not understood],

dennis mc kenzie, and lucia sanchez. i was calling the five names before the last speaker of the five. good afternoon. my name is barbara [speaker not understood] and i am in district [speaker not understood]. thank you for voicing your concerns that you've heard from the citizens in our district. i have resided across the street from pier 30-32 since 1994 -- i mean, 1993. so, i've been there port side for almost 20 years and i wanted to move to another area like the potrero, but [speaker not understood] move from a one bedroom to a two-bedroom. i've been there 20 years of my life. i spent a lot of time in the neighborhood. things are coming into the neighborhood and i've seen the growth. i've seen the dot-com come and go. it's now real vibrant. all the people that invested

their livelihood making it a real good neighborhood now it's too good of a good thing. and everybody wants to come to our neighborhood. the giants came, they improved, the giants did a first class development. i warriors, i can understand how the port and city want to develop this pier because they've been trying to develop it. they voted in 1990 to develop the waterfront until there was a comprehensive waterfront [speaker not understood] to try to get the international [speaker not understood] cruise terminal built. [speaker not understood] the economy and the cost of updating the pier now the fiscal feasibility study which you supervisors have actually approved would cost the tax payers $120 million. there's also another thing that is really critical is the congestion. the super congestion in the area. luckily i live in this area because i wanted the multi ple transportation bay area options to me and i walk to bart every day. i don't have to drive a car. but there is a lot of small

businesses that are in the live-work units, commuters, people who come and go. and i understand how this plan to have 600 additional parking spaces and 200 on the other lot will fit into the city's adopted congestion management program. that affects all the funding and so forth, so, thank you. >> thank you. good afternoon, supervisors. my name is peter. i'm a resident of rincon hill. i'm certainly in favor of san francisco having an arena facility. i submit to you that pier 30-32 is the absolutely wrong location for this project. it took 50 years and a major earthquake to get rid of a monstrosity of the embarcadaro freeway. let's not build another monstrosity on the waterfront. the artist's rendering show the most favorable use of the arena. if you do some simple geography, pick any point on the embarcadaro and see what is going to be blocked out, you'll see anywhere from 24 to 68

degrees of the horizon is going to be completely blocked. likewise, despite mr. wells' protest -- protestations being transparent, telemundo be enclosed. you might as well build it underground. the height will be 140 feet all the way around, completely opposite of the giants ballpark, descends 140 feet. people already talked about the traffic. up to 300 days of the year, events they'll have, even though you say 205 now. you know, i submit to you either force them to make nice with the giants and build it as part of the development that they're doing down there where they already said they had considered having an arena type development, or put it down at hunters point since there is not going to be a football stadium down there. seriously we'd be better off letting the piers rot and fall into the water at this point just because someone built

something doesn't mean that you should. this notion of his there's 14,000 parking spaces within 20-minute walk, we all know what the behavior of people who are going to get off at fremont and harrison, circle close and expand out from there. those people are coming in just as everybody else is trying to get out. it's going to create complete chaos. [speaker not understood]. the behavior is going to be different than giants fans who can be trained to take transit. i'll submit the rest of my comments to you. speaker kim. >> thank you. thank you, mr. [speaker not understood]. good afternoon, walter [speaker not understood] with the carpenters. through the city, you see a lot of work going on, you see the sky cranes. there are still a lot of people not working. these people are ready to go to work. we have a [speaker not understood] right now ready to go to work with all trades. san francisco needs the arena, san francisco