issues with view that we have to address with that design as well. this is what the code zoning allows which is fairly low, 105-foot high buildings. we didn't see this as a appropriate design and brought us to this scheme. this view is hard to see and back towards the water mark and another view -- oops, there it is, from the water mark out towards the pier itself, and there's a feature on the building which is a ramp that allows you to sort of scour the edge of the building and get new perspectives of the harbor nearby and there will be glazing so you can see out to the area. we are doing this as much as possible. we know that vegetation is needed to make it comfortable for people and

allow different functions during the year. this is a festival and shops along the pier. different types of vegetation and maritime use provided along the edges and i will finish now and get to the last slide right here. it's uniquely located so it has direct access to the new trans bay terminal, bart stations, muni, and possible ferry connections in the future connecting people to the site and we are providing bike access and different capacities for people to enter and exit the building during different times of the day. on the left is at&t park. what is interesting there a lot of people feel that the new arena will have pedestrian over flow on to the street and often use the at&t park as an example. please recognize that at&t park is pushed up against

the embarcadero and the two primary exits are within 50 feet of the street curb. our project by placing the arena to the east places it 500 feet from the street itself and provides a plaza for people to gather before they get to the street itself so it's a very different scenario and different way of making so we suspect we can manage crowds and people in an efficient way with this pier configuration. today as it has been in the past, although not currently, can park up to 1500 parks there. there is a proposal to park 630 cars on the site. we find that people find this challenging too so that is an area that has to be addressed. the final thing i wanted to point out there is proposed to be one vehicular access point. we don't break the curb cuts and use the

existing ones and no change to that and that allows direct access to bryant street which we believe is the most efficient location for the infrastructure and parking access point to the building. there's places for people to move from main street across the existing crosswalks up to the edges and top, platforms and bicycle crossings in this election. it's clear this is the most complex site and everything crosses and we have to address transportation of vehicles and people here, so that's been called to our attention and we feel it's something that is important to address, and i believe that is the ends of the presentation. thank you very much. >> i might i am sorry joy -- i just wanted to chime in here briefly before public comment and commissioner comments. as

david pointed out we have been working closely with the team and the warrior's team on this and we're at the stage they're asking for things on the commission and they will go into a second phase of design where they're looking at many of the comments and incorporating them into the round of revisions so we are looking forward to the commission comments to incorporate them into the design. they said that and i wanted to reinforce that and how the should evolve over the next few weeks. thanks. >> opening up to public comment. (calling speaker names). >> >> good afternoon. i am on the board of directors of port side. we are one of the closest

residential developments to piers 30-32. the devil is in the details. you guys aren't here to vote on this. you are here to hear the voaks and i wish i had as much time to explain the pitfalls. what i seen today is the same presentation they have taken around the city and showed the cac and the port. there smoke and mirrors and we know this is a choke point in the embarcadero. we know there is a lot to overcome. we have no facts, no details to work with. the cac was trying to get off the ground and get public comment to get the project moving forward so those that live in the neighborhood can coexist with something of this size and magnitude. we are subjected to 40,000 fans 88 days a year with at&t park. now you want to add 19,000 additional fans coming

into the city from who knows where and subject our neighborhood to that. one of the pieces of legislation they mentioned earlier today has wishy washy language in it. things like configured as nothing to accommodate the use by, is not to, cost constraints. we don't know what they're going to build here and how are you going to control that? you think about these things and these elements. okay. they're asking for input. we want to know about height, bulk, transportation and uses and we don't want another pier 39 and that is what the legislation in sacramento introduces to the neighborhood. the uses are accepted on this pier are the same as pier 39 as far as retail goes. is that what you want? is that what you want to turn this neighborhood into? hundreds of millions of dollars have been invested in this neighborhood in the last 25 years. some of you live there

and some of your friends live there and those people deserve nrn this. we can't even get decent transportation and we pay a lion's share of the taxes in the city. we're new, prop 13. we pay today's value on taxes. do we have transportation? do we have parity? we don't. are we going to get it? we're not. thank you. >> good afternoon president fong and commissioners. i am kevin call and executive director of the hotel council in san francisco and serve on the board of sf travel. we are supportive of the arena and the work being done. bringing the arena in along with the entertainment portion of it will help the economics of the city. it obviously would help with

hotels and people staying in hotels but remember when people stay in a hotel they spend more outside than inside so the benefits would be enormous for the city. definitely we support this put together with it. we do think it would benefit the city hopefully for those live and work in san francisco and appreciate your consideration. >> thank you. next speaker please. >> good afternoon. i am rebecca [inaudible]. i'm a citizen of the city here and i wanted to say i'm in support of the arena on the community bay side. i think it brings the community today and we pride ourselves as active residents and the arena would add another element to be active and provide jobs and activities for all the residents. thank you. >> hello. my name is sarah .

i live in san francisco. i am supportive of the project. i think it will be thousands of jobs and businesses and fans. warrior's fans will have increased opportunity to come to games due to new accessibility. right now to have to go on the bart and there is access on the piers 30-32. the bart and embarcadero station is close by. cal train is close by. this is the ways to get to the embarcadero. if i can do it everybody can do it easily and this is a good plan for the city. it brings new businesses, new bars and restaurants will be new by and retail space so it's good for the economy and the people of san francisco. thank you. >> thank you.

>> hello my name is rob graham. i have been a resident in san francisco in the bay area for 30 years. last year my partner and i purchased a resident in the brandon condo complex. one of the principal reasons was the proximity to the piers 30-32 and the warrior project. i have been a season ticket holder for many years and the thought of being able to walk one block to the games has got my heart racing. now, do i have a view of the site from my unit? i don't. i wish that i did because it promises to be a architecture marvel. the city of san francisco has benefited tremendously for decades economically and community pride from the giants and the 49ers and now the 49ers are going bye

bye to san jose so i think it's incumbent upon us to help bring this warriors to this very special site and maintain our reputation as a world class city that knows how. thank you. >> thank you. (calling speakers). >> hi dale rhine hart. the one thing i wanted to mention today is the dynamic dialogue going on is their story is continually changing. whenever something comes up it moves in another direction. we don't hear the same thing each time. to jeffrey's point this is the same dog and pony show and i am tired much sitting through it today. if the embarcadero deserves a

visual interest the bay is spectacular and you pay for views and that's the best one going. transportation is a issue. tell me where you guys live and we have an arena built three blocks from you. this is for more games and you have spending a billion dollars to do because you need something to hold it. something else in the city can hold the smaller events so we're looking at another design today. as jeffrey mentioned what happened here? who got to him? who does he owe to somebody? to get this through is not up front and honest. i am for the jobs. i am for the benefit it brings

to the city. build it somewhere else. that's where it needs to go. the view that we have there and the view that means to the city since the freeway is torn down is lost. it will never come down. as far as the model -- actually we never seen a model to scale so that when they take the pictures everything is a top down view. you don't see it. put it on the ground and show me how big it is and the view from the little tube and i don't care where you sit the view corridor if you stand or here or here and i don't stand on my balcony and look in one particular direction, so my best advice would be to think about it really hard and see how much

it destroys the waterfront in san francisco and whether you want to look at something you can't see through or something you can. >> thank you. >> good afternoon commissioners. danny campbell with the sheet union workers. i am here to support this project. it's a wonderful project. i am so excited we will have basketball back in san francisco again. it's a wonderful design. the warriors committed to putting local residents to work on this project and they're going to create career opportunities for young men and women in the city in the trades and we look for your support. thank you. >> good afternoon commissioners. anthony [inaudible]. i am with the sheet metal union here in

san francisco and we strongly support this project. we believe it's a rare opportunity to have this world class of arena here and it's going to provide -- start so much economic growth. the sheet metal workers were affiliated with the council and the san francisco labor council. all of these entities have thousands of members that will reap the benefit and awards from this project. from the beginning from construction process to the whole life of the arena our members in some way shape or form through the entities will reap the benefits. the project is going to generate high amounts of economic activities, dozen of jobs for san francisco and local hire which we endorse and approve of, for the restaurants and hotels and other businesses in the city so we are encouraging you support this

arena project. thank you. >> thank you. next speaker please. >> good afternoon commissioners. jim larrous san francisco chamber of commerce and jobs and sustainable growth. the chamber has supported the project from day one and i thought back during the testimony as a deputy city attorney here in city hall when the warriors played across the street with 7,000 seats but we lost the ball when we didn't develop a arena to keep the team want now we have the opportunity to develop a world class arena on a site that the city and port has tried to find a use for for decades since when dianne feinstein was mayor and the pier is a parking lot and much is unusable. this project is feasible. where the office

buildings were previously approved or not and during the depth of the recession we were urged to look at that site because maybe lower construction cost a few years ago might have made them fees i will. didn't happen. this is the right project at the right site. on a recent poll that we did of likely voters of san francisco show that over 60% of san franciscans support the arena and not just on the west side of the town, both assembly districts. east side 57%, west side 64% support. supported by labor and households and men and women. we have the opportunity to rebuild that pier to create open space, to create retail life, to create a facility that

we can be proud of and that will be used by san franciscans like the ballpark because again i was around during that fight and when people in the neighborhood and up in portoro hill didn't think life would be the same. we know that is not true and if you look at the "new york times" last week you would have been seen an article of the review of the neighbors on the barkly convention center in brooklyn. neighbors predicted chaos and now just annoyed and since then it's not stirred up by rowdy fans or hip hop but teenager girls milling around to see justin bieber. i mean five, six years ago this type of article will be in the chronicle how the neighborhood benefits, the city benefited and the sky didn't fall when we opened the arena

at piers 30-32. thank you very much. >> is there any additional public comment? >> good afternoon commissioners. my name is gail kayhill. i have been here to speak once before about this project of i beg of you -- i live on king street which is two blocks from the project. i really beg of you because i have been on the cac meetings and subcommittee meetings and other meetings about the project and the neighbors have been begging the warriors to provide 3d modeling and renderings and how it fits in. they propose to build a billion dollar project there but for some reant they can't show what the neighbors are coming. i think it's only fair that happens. i am amazed at the project here. the warriors have

gone to the public and with feedback and do they come to the people? no. they come back with the same design that we have seen before. would you issue a directive that has them shares with neighbors what it will look like from the street and from the neighborhoods and from the bay and one thing with the renderings the perspective gets skewed. there is a view -- say scape that has one and one has another and they're put together which isn't realistic. with respect to what mr. lazarus said that poll was 500 san franciscans and i don't think you can get about -- the project with 500 people until you have seen what it looks like. thank you. >> any additional public

comment? >> i have a handout. >> go ahead. i will get it. >> leave it there. >> my handout is part of the overhead, so sue hester. i listened for a couple words. i didn't hear the words moon night and the bay bridge. that's one word and the second one i didn't hear is sea level drive and both of them are reasons this project has to be looked at carefully. there is no application in the planning department right now on this project. there is an application for environmental review that doesn't have any renderings what the project description which is the starting point for every single

environmental review. they have no renderings. nobody has seen any rendering and how it's like and the past couple of weeks are nice because there hasn't been rain. the dominant feature on the waterfront is the bay bridge lights and this is going to be a light source that is going to knock out the views of the bay bridge. why can't we have illuminated projections of what this project is going to look like in light of the bay bridge? and it's possible they don't want anyone to see it. the second thing is i have submitted a map. this is historically bay -- this is a

real map. this is a map that was done by the federal government and uc. it's where the sea level rises. i'm not comfortable that a person from san francisco is a climate change denier because we're used to that from republicans who don't live in the area near water. i think there was a lot more climate change before the storm hit in last october. we have a sea level problem and it's knocked out of the box by the same legislation. they are grappling with sea level rise and if you're going to become

climate change deniers say so openly. let's have a real hearing on it. i'm not so i look at where the bay used to be, which includes all these sites, and where we're going to have -- thank you. >> hello. my name is david [inaudible] mitchell and here on behalf of property owners near peoria and sea wall. while i think it's important that the planning commission has this hearing and on design issues i think it's important that the public is involved in this process as well, and right now the process with regard to the environmental review on this project is seriously deficient.

there is not adequate preparation or scoping hearing. we wrote a letter saying there are no details for the sea wall and what rooms and hotel is it going to be? what kind of apartments? what kind of retail? there are a number of things missing in the description. since then we noticed in the newspaper last week there is now going to be a cruise ship terminal at the end. there was nng -- nothing about that mentioned today and i understand that the warriors presented to the citizens advisory committee on their february 15 meeting that there was going to be a cruise ship terminal there. again it's not in this. such a use would change the use so

dramatically and it would require has own eir and scoping hearing. what needs to happen for the project to be done properly and keep moving have a new notice and scoping hearing so the public can adequately address and tell the city what needs to be studied. some of the points were made by the people about the views but there are many, many more. there is hazardous waste from a cruise ship terminal. there is the biology issues, air quality issues and traffic and we're not talking about 41 events a year. the original description talks about over 200 events a year and that's before the cruise ships that might stop there. we don't know that and the details need to be in the

description and environmental review and have a new scoping. i'm going to give you a copy of the letter that i just recently sent on february 22 to mr. waco asking that further environmental review occur with the notice of preparation and the scoping meeting. thank you. >> thank you. >> commissioners this land, san francisco, -- >> excuse me. i'm sorry to interrupt you. could you state your name for the record? you don't have to -- >> i don't have to? >> you don't have to if you don't want to. >> yes, according to the brown act. so if you know that that's okay man. give me my time because you -- this land, all of it that you see commissioners belongs to the first people,

and the zoning czar -- [inaudible]. i came to you sir and i told you because i felt very strongly that you would do the right thing. now, some asconstitute people, the development have spoken about [inaudible], have spoken about climate change and you planners think it's a joke. it's not a joke. let me take you back 300 years -- not that you can go back, but for thousands of years before that this land was pristine so in about 250 years you built this

concrete jungle and when we come here with this huge developments whether it's pier 70, whether it's hunter's point, whether it's whatever is going to go and by the ferry building, and when the public expresses themselves you look in a nonchalant manner. i don't come here anymore. i watch on the tv and look how you all react, so if someone fills your pockets or the pockets of others, and you all may look at me in a suspicious way, or you're appointed by mayor ed lee and do the biddings of say the consultants. that's on you.