i'm here representing electric workers local union 6 here in san francisco. i'm here on behalf of to show our support for the warriors. they've agreed to 25 percent local hire and they are implementing the helmet to hat returning veterans to construction jobs. we know the warriors will work with us and are exfoliated to see this project move forward. thank you. >> is there any additional public comment? okay public comment is closed. and opening it up to commissioners. i'm start with a few are the model blocks measured inform fit if the elevator.

i appreciate everyone coming out today. i realize this is focused on design. the 3.0 is scaled down and it's beautiful. it's elegant and genes with open space. i appreciate that. i will say i'm a little bit disappointed awhile it's entitled the lots thirty we won't get that. i think i share some sentiment for us to make a real evaluation on the project itself we need to see both sides of the street. one question i have the retail component in the retail corridor why was it chosen to make that north, south vs. east, west. i bring that up liquor

fisherman's wharf we have this perpendicular direction not allowing more and creating some boyer's i suppose. >> there's an east, west pauthd you can go up in the center. the reason why the ramp moves east, south it gives us a gradual ramp >> too steep? i got it. >> again, i think there's some talented design teams we have some of the questions and even the opposition has the functions immaterial of that. the transit was brought up and i'm looking forward to seeing that. i want to point out that the

wharf wall was great and it goes through all the uses that san francisco has seen from the community fent effort and immigration and i ntsdz this location was the original detention facility for the asians coming in to san francisco. >> commissioner. >> thank you. i have a question i'm not sure for either gentlemen. the questions were asked. i think part of the plan it included the ferry terminal to allow people to come from as they said at&t and is there that possibility to include that as the plan is now being presented >> thank you jessie. the answer is we're contemplating either a water at

the scene of the accident along with a fire boat facility with docketing for it 2 to 3 ferry boats. we had the ferry transportation agencies we've worked with them and were trying to get this actively into dialog. either a water at the scene of the accident - >> correct there was an illness that greg presented of the northwest portion of the site if you look at the north edge of

the waterfront you'll see the fire department two-story station. >> while i have you up there how about the loading question with people and buses maybe dropping off any people to go to games is there a site on embarcadero. >> that's a good question. one of the great things about the site plan is because of the podium essentially that's being built on the rather than with where your park underneath you're still able to do a lot within the podium. so we'll bring zero level site plan in futureometers to show how much circulation there is.

we've got 8 loading docks for trucks during concert and they can be used for tourist buses. one of the advantages is in some place where you have arenas the loading docks where the activities is it's not exactly the best in dynamic here we've masked that by a enlightenment park >> and that will be underneath and a right and vehicular traffic will come from the south. >> correct. >> there's no left-hand turn from the left. >> do we have any you kind of timeframe about the sea walls. >> we'll be back whenever you guys are ready to talk about the seawall lot. w50e6 focused on thirty and 32

that's where the regulatory agencies are but we'll bring it back and i have a couple of comments not necessarily for you but for everyone. in the 20s and 30s and through the 50s san francisco built tunnels and museums and city hall and parks and a stadiums and was known as the city that knows how. unfortunately in some instances we've been the city who knows house to say no. it's not also right to say yes, but when you have something that's done the right way we have a wonderful concept and we time to make sure it happens in the right way. the other thing you that's been brought up and i talked about this with mr. albert but we've

had a lot of growth south of market. as a young boy coming in san francisco i was amazed that the bridge got off a long ways from san francisco because everything from embarcadero was coffee factories but now that entire area has changed even without at&t park there's so many new buildings being built and trans bay terminal there's going to be like it or not a lot of people are going to drive their cars. so i've been discussing this idea of trying to develop some public park facility at main and bryant street flagrant of the

bridge with access off 3wr50i7b9 street. this makes sense because, you know, you can claim you and everyone wants to take part from the east bay but for those who are driving they can pull into the facility and walk a couple of blocks to at&t and they turn around on bryant street back to the bridge again. i'm not sure saying this has to be part of the project this can be done by the 71 next with caltrans and would answer the traffic concerns along embarcadero and it might everyone would come off the bridge and that's the last we'll see of their cars. we need a facility we're losing surface parking lots. so we're exploring that and i

know the team warriors and teams are working on that and i don't know if mr. albert has anything to add >> peter albert. there's two ways i've working with the waterfront transportation network. one we're developing the waterfront assessment. that's looking at all the modes of transportation. so we're making sure we're looking at the big picture. the second capacity is more warriors specific. on the transportation resource board for the subcommittee the warriors as they develop transportation recommendations they're trying to get ahead of the review so if there's a measure they can get the agencies involved and the second is to recommend development

agreements or improvements that did warriors might entertain as part of the project. you've seen some of the transportation strategies they've shown in the design leaving room for bicyclists not having to cross traffic. you're looking at this parking facility not coming in into warriors arena. the site you mentioned the one at beal that's being happened in conversation by o e w d and caltrans. i'm interested in parking farther away using commercial garages that are closed after 6 o'clock and 6:30 and the same conversations with the giants. i've heard from the community

rather than build a lot of new garages can we use the garages that are empty after 6:30 at night. my representation is to keep that even farther that than a quarter of a mile and use the facilities near the freeway ramps >> commissioner wu. >> thank you. so on the question of transportation i think that on the site itself the improved i think the slide is called improvement open traffic but how the question is how to get to the site you know is to be developed. mr. albert where is the waterfront timeline and a peter again mta. the waterfront assessment is

going through one more round to the subcommittee. i can tell you the assessors came up with one all the things from the agencies that are issues and concerns. the intirpt is massive we've got it on our website. we've been tracking conditions there's a lot of transportation investment that will be happening in the next 3 to 5 to 10 years. it's important to take stock of where's the electric indication of embarcadero being faster and are they meeting the opening day. we're going to line up the recreational partners. the third realm of the waterfront assessment are what

new ideas above and beyond those should be considered as well speaker that's where we're focused. we expect one more public exhibition conversation with the subcommittee that's in december it's well ahead of when victor wise and the planning department need to have this as a litigation measure. we want to proceed that eir in enough time so the transit agencies can voucher for. we're going to come up on a close i don't want to steal the thunder of the other allocations. >> are there any talk about the vehicular parking it looks much more like the willie mays we're

also pastoring a basketball game. yes. i should mention that the basically premise of that assess point it's 3 lanes in addition to walk space on either side. the lanes are reversible. their protected from bicyclist traffic to keep bicycles away from the absolute entrance so bend around it. and finally the loading dock have remained in the same location with the kind of green wall facing the north. it's the same it's the that same height and cleaners and so forth. i'm not sure we showed you drawings but there are those

that are available >> commissioner moore. >> i wanted to respond to the progress report. i'm positively surprised by the process you're using and the resilience of change our project was able to respond to. i do look forward to expand the discussion to look simultaneously from between the two projects where the rubber it's the road. it needs to work in tandem on all projects traffic and the height and open space on the other side. i look forward to hearing you and mr. albert talking about the challenge opposed to each other. that will ultimately show what you're able to do integrations to where we are

and i look forward to the next meeting and a commissioner hillis >> thank you for this update. we've got a lot of discussion we're broadening that discussion to look at different spaces along the waterfront. i think of the ferry building and the giant ballpark where it works well, that the open space in access to the water. the question i have is kind of the retail space. i have a good sense of how much space that it is that similar to at&t park a restaurants and i story or a ferry building how much detail >> currently we've got 90 square feet of retail so in relation to the ferry we've got

more in the ferry building. as greg mentioned we took it under one hundred and 5 down to 90. we broke it apart if you look at the version 2.0 chunks of retail and now by creating that suggestion pathway we've broken up the scale and it's more manageable there are are smaller restaurants and retailer and a small businesses. >> do you think it's primarily food services or a mix. >> we're premierly looking at food and resourcefully 80 percent probably with the 80 percent being a mix of sit down restaurants or grab and go restaurants. >> and the retail are open at

all times. >> in fact, one of the goals of the project we looked at around the country and when you have a fully operating arena it tends to be preemptly focused on the events and the open space is to create as much geared towards san franciscans and the neighborhood as a person coming to the concert or baseball game. the goal is to access this site 3 hundred and 65 days a year we we feel that will provide a draw for the whole city. >> the 5 hundred car endanger i like it being in the south. whose parking there.

i think you said a lot of the activity of the ground floor activity is underneath the park. will there be conflict during the game days or for people who are coming during the day. do you know how many cars park on the giant ballpark area of the - >> i'm not sure how many people park north on giant game day. this site has been used piers thirty and 32 the park for giants games and it handled 15 hundred cars we're proposing 5 hundred. we believe the use of the parking will be both for event night but to support the retail

when there's not enough activity at the building. we have a prosecution against using it for residential parking or hotel parking or things are aren't open to the public. this was part of our negotiation around the trust and consistent of this project it's not for consumer parking. and of course, personnel in the area or rather than the workers. >> i guess how will this space feel during a non-game day. i think the retail is great it obey active but i think that's one area where the giant ball park failed you're not lured out

to the waterfront or maybe the retail is not as active there but can you give us a sense of how it will feel what will draw you out to the i understand of the pier >> we'll have on the southern area of the pier it is the most sunlight. so the park is like delores park people lying might picnic there. there's a play area for families that are protected and a little bit further away from embarcadero and on urban field there's a pier like quality in the piers areas. and along the embarcadero side there's a feeling like a place you can go to enjoy a cup of coffee. the scale is low and its

relatively small. increase a space for different types of gathering. there is retail on both sides. it's one story at all it has outdoor seating and it accommodates a wide open view we suspect that people will go there. we've raised the door 10 feet up so you don't have a building that has a side wall. and finally, as you move up the ramp itself, you know, there's that ramp i suspect a lot of people are going to go up there. the northwest corner is not flat we could have done that but we raised it up a couple of steps. and 34i789 there's a couple of

steps i imagine people take photos there. >> in one picture it showed kayak. >> there's use for the fire department along the north evidently. there's no specific you kayak launching pad >> this may be the wrong way to point it about before i get existed i want to have staff run through the jurisdiction because in terms of approvals i think we have less than some people think we have. we have approvals for the entirely impact report and i

believe we have jurisdiction over the seawall lots. i'm not sure how that

>> the sea wall lot are with you? >> it's different -- the two sides of the street are different. >> even though it's port property? >> yes. the sea wall lots have a different jurisdiction

essentially what is over water. >> and would the port commission make recommendation. >> yes because they own the property. >> commissioner moore. >> jurisdiction falls within the east side and the west side of the embarcadero which means the west side of the embarcadero is within the commission's jurisdiction. all sea walls fall within that and with a positive side these two projects are strongly interlinked and i don't think -- >> no. >> i see this forum and the ability for the public to speak is a great opportunity to bring this project to everybody interested and this is the place where people can make the public comments, where people can view all of the exhibits. not everything can come to the cac or port meetings in order to participate. >> and just to reinforce you will have to review zoning changes for both side of the

street and make recommendations on the planning code changes to the board. >> thank you. thank you. >> i would also add i believe over the pier property you have the granting body for conditional use changes theorizations. >> okay. >> commissioner hillis. >> i don't know if this was mentioned but timing now what is the latest on the timing as far as when these actions will be before us? i know it's early to predict that. >> sure. we are hoping to bring it back for certification by the end of 2014. >> anything else? okay. so i mean i think -- you mentioned when we're ready to hear more on the sea wall lot. i think we're ready when you're ready, so we have been hearing from the community loud and clear we

want to advance so they want advanced notice of design and what the program is going to be and i think we feel the same way. congratulations. and look forward to seeing you again. >> thank you. >> commissioners that will place you on item 14 for 2012.0759dv. at 2526 california street/33 perine place dw discretionary review. please note that variation for the case was heard by the zoning administrator on june 26, 2013. the zoning administrator has taken the variance under advisement and a decision is pending the commission's action on the discretionary review request. if those persons exiting the room could do so quietly we would appreciate it as we do have additional proceedings under way.

>> jonas let's take a two minute 20 minutes. >> i'd like to welcome everyone back to san francisco's planning commission for thursday november 14, 2013. i'll to remind the public that the commission does not permit any disruption and when speaking before the commission if you care to please state your name for the record. commissioners you left off