>> okay. had h that will be very helpful. >> okay. it's the slide right before that one. >> the first bullet point we've cello we think is of critical importance for us we know we're going to be vaement a number of proposals that propose to change the definitions of retail. and the ones that people seemed to generally agree on after that there's bone that looks like the

fourth one down the additional chairtion that combetsz to the square footage and the concentration and dictionary how big of a cheap is that. the one next employment impact formula vs. extinct retail to the extent we're able to and we'll do our best. the next last night it was interest for the real estate market resources has convulsed ann all the factors. that would give us four we think we can afford four >> thank you that's very helpful we've been hearing about the mc

ds that's overwhelming and can be done after looking at those issue areas. it really is too bad we can only do a chance to highlight this in focus groups or do some kind of surveying i don't know what would give us data but i think that my phase if literature review is not high >> if we annoyance the studies and interviewing the people like the realtor and see the study that's released to see the sort of data we have access to. there is a point where everybody has to come together >> thank you.

ann marie >> i was going to suggest we partner with other city agencies like the best neighborhoods work to do a survey of employment by the neighborhood strips and try to get a survey back from the merchant and more data then we can get on our own. >> thank you. commissioner moore >> would it be possible to circulate the study of 2007. aside that the investigation is slightly leaguer the ways of study speaks that's extremely informative. it makes some recommendations which at that time, hemmed e held the housing in 2007 and

revisiting those summary points i find the study expressive. i have it in digital form >> we have it in digital form, too, and we're in the process of putting up a new website and the dates for the upcoming hearings for people to stay informed. >> okay at the. commissioners we'll take a break for the court reporter to get set up for 20 minutes. >> welcome everyone back to san francisco planning commission regular hearing for thursday, january 23, 2014. i'd like to remind members of the public and audience to please silence all electronic devices. that may sound off during the

proceedings and when speaking before the commission if you care to state your name for the record >> commissioners we left off under your regular calendar case 1565 e for the housing element public hearing outlines on the revised environmental impact report. written comments will be accepted until february 3rd, 2014. like to advise members of the public to limit your comments to only the revised sections of the draft environmental report. that is what the before you today or before the commission. also the commission chair as determined that each member of the public will be afforded 2 anybody's of pub any public comment? >> good afternoon. i'm steven

smith from the planning department. this is for case 2007.175 e for 2004 and 2004 housing element it is for the 2004 and 2009 elements the element itself is a policy document consisting of goals and policies to guide the city's for private and a public developers to meet even though housing demand and it's part of the housing plan 10 east which is administered by the california housing department. in 2004 and 2009 they were prepared consistent with state law. this includes the city's ability to meet the housing allocation which has the housing fair share

and it is determined by the bay area government's in connection with the h cd. on march 4, 201133 they had the environmental report. on june 21st the board of supervisors selected and be adapted the 2004 general department plan, however, because of the eir the planning department has particularly revised the alternatives and this is for public review. the primary revisions to the chapter includes the following. number one a new subsection which provides generally types of new hours. number two revisions to the

environmental analyze of each all of the evidence this provides clarification for sub extension for the impact conclusions. no changes have been made. neuronumber 3 the changes for the in fact, and four provides anna analysis as compared to the 2004 and 2009 houlgz elements. they make minor adjusts and lastly the department made changes in the executive summary. consistent with the guiles comments should be only focused on the chapter 7 alternatives and the con men or women changes in the executive summary. it should be focused on the

revised changes in the eir. staff a not here and the comments will be transcribed that will address all the oral and written comments to the written part of the example i r. the hearing low follow the certification. commenters are asked to speak slowly and clearly for an accurate trip and speakers should be giving their addresses. we'll take any comments from the planning folks. the public comment period began on december last year and at the scene of the accident to monday

january 2014 i suggest the public hearing be opened >> i have a number of speaker cards. if you could line up on the screen side of the room (calling names) first speaker >> first speaker please. >> i'm leonard gregory scott i reside at the 2434 jackson street in san francisco. we would like to ask for a continuance we dpnd he we could comment on corporate section to please give us more time to

review those hundreds of pages. the middle class in the city should have some areas in the neighborhood. and it's not been given sufficient attention if the city and we have a crisis not having houses for the middle-class. they will be sent out of the city a again, we think the housing element as it stand it totally inadequate. >> my name is a dave i'm address is 120 grant avenue in san francisco. i'm president of west highlands association. i grew up here and went to school here and work here and

now my grand kids are here. as you know, in the 1994 our neighborhood coalition brought this to court. then planning received the 2009 planning element this time with an eir didn't address transportation. right now the busses on gary and stockton are already packed. i've rind public straight downtown and finally, just recently started driving and that particular eir didn't offer the alternatives now the public didn't know about this our neighborhoods have had three weeks since christmas to look at

it. glancing at it the transportation system still stuck out but one huge alternative is housing that's a middle-class with children what almost for the record. that starter housing with a little backyard and a endanger. this housing project didn't have this there's no family housing for sale. without families this city dies or morris into a winn and diane for adults like venice italy >> thank you, sir your time is up. >> my name is a michael i'm with the park merry kidney

coalition. i'm concerned this houshz element didn't taking into consideration the need for transit before development. i've been very frustrated by what is coming from park merced i understand the plans call for an increase in something like 84 units and the cumulative impact of the environmental impacts is not being considered. my children have taken public transportation and continuing been frustrated by the muni to get into bart from where you live you have to take a shuttle and that lines wines around the san francisco buildings and 85 new cars will be added to park

merced. tdr there isn't any southern for transit before development. i know the need for affordable housing but in getting rid of the affordable housing in san francisco sate and putting rent control at peril even denying has said you can't guarantee that rent control will be here so your driving first names out of the city. there's all kinds of lip service by the city to create affordable housing but in the end with developer money and all the power that developers have the whole process of planning here seems with the city attorney and the planning department and the commission all seems to be a homicide just dud i didn't peanut gallery. i want you to seriously consider

the plans for increasing the dense a indication in the face of inadequate transportation and the potential of pollution coming up. there are many places in san francisco where you can too righteous deny indication and park merced is not one of the places >> let me call a couple more names (calling names). >> my name is charles i live on washington street i'm a director of the housing association for neighborhoods. i'm a family man a disappearing brood in this city. i live at home with my wife and children. more pertinent to today's event

i think with did you respect to my fellow supporters here it was my neighborhood and me personally who sphere heated the lawsuit that brings us here today. i provided the ideas and have supported this so far. contrary to the agenda preliminary action no one required i'm going to ask you to put on you're thinking caps and think about opening up the record implicit and bet the people tell you what they want. i served as district two representative that helped the staff develop what we presented to you as a group on february 10, 2010, which was the

2009 housing element. we had our last meeting on that we we spent hours i spent 8 months and many hours working on that. yet the product disappeared from the record and was changed before the vote you take on june 10th. we never had an opportunity to come back and tell you about your proposed changes. you should open the record and let us tell you to take care of that. thank you. >> thank you. >> commissioners i'm kathy representing san franciscans for liveable neighborhood. they must correct the revision of the corrected notice for 45 days or an alternative grant the

notice erroneously states that the agency need only to respond to comments to the part of the e i railroad it refers to numerous other discussions of the impact analysis and on january 15th the interpretation clarified that the comments maybe made as to the revisions and those reference sections as they proton - pertain to the alternatives. today, the secretary and the staff repeated the incorrect reductions the writ issued by the court said you must consider all comments as to revisions to the eir and consider all comments to the revisions. so your notice it inadequate and

you must recirculate. the court held that you must see that the eir discussions was not inclusionary you have the opportunity to recommend to the board the policies that will be better. we'll submit written comments but essential you should eliminate the sees to instead of the income target for the period. the pipeline units anticipated are 25 thousand more and more - >> thank you, madam your time is up. >> i'd like to continue. >> you can submit our comments in writing. thank you

>> my name is a steven white. on beaumont avenue. i support the continuance. i'm worried about major changes in the quality of our neighborhood. and also worried about transportation issues. thank you >> thank you. >> may i have the overhead, please. okay. so those are several bullet points i have n with respect to the information. and talk about the incorporated document. i'm totally convulsed i got a

lot of it down. the e ii r will be used for the development for the elements. this eir can be tape recorder. the moderate protect unit they're not enough and housing unit are being done. r-22 is the middle-class and we'll allow for the information that is going to be presented it's basically a whole city within 25 feet of a muni line and then you have less or no open space. i'm been riding the the buses for a long time and taking one hour to get from disable to hunter's point is no fun. and it's not fun it's incapacity

and it's not going to work by 20 thirty. there are billions of dollars of general obligation bond from and are you going to pay for them. it's going to there property tax go 9 to 10 percent. original san franciscans on pensions and disability it goes ongoing and you don't think about the inflow from the grbl golden gate bridge. >> call a few more names (calling names). >> i support the continuance. i did not understand from the

notice that i was agriculture to comment on the sections of the eir. i'm happy to come here today and stand before you and tell you that i'm a resident of francisco heights and i've been after a an officer of that organization for over thirty years. i spent 8 years on the education fund and i just want to point out our big concern with the ed if you happened their folks are fleeing the city it's not dissatisfaction with the public skull but a lack of family friendly zones. i want you to think about destroying the character of those neighborhoods is going to

have an impact on our schools >> thank you. >> alex. i also support of the continuance because i didn't thinks that i could comment on the eir as far as the alternative. i'm concerned with the offer crowding and a transportation issues. thank you. >> i'm a resident. i'm asking for the continuance because i wasn't noticed period. i find out about this hearing two days ago. and number two i didn't get to read all of it by the way, i read a lack of affordability and

a lack of treating the low and middle income like humans. i think this needs to be relooked at and i think the plan it looks like it was planned by someone who tried to do this in 76 and it caused prop m. i really building that you need to continue that and i would like to have the right to do adequate response to the revised sections. thank you >> thank you. next speaker, please. >> hello. >> can you speak into the microphone. >> yeah. thank you. hello, i'm diane at 24 lauren

court. i'm a member of the fireman sister could heights association and i'm here to represent our neighbors who couldn't make it. i'm a third generation san franciscan. i replacement going back many years and seeing the city grow and we had control the city had control over the annoyances of the beauty of it. i know we have to worry about this contingency and i want you to take into account. my father and grandfather and husband helped on the penya project and my son worked at city hall bif it and i'd like to see it stay like that friendly and warm and room to spread

around and our children to grow. i'm lucky to have 2 in the city who can afford to stay but when i see new families coming here to live they need a chance. they want the education, they want the museums, they want all those things, please give it to them and consider all the things above >> thank you. >> good afternoon, commissioners aim kathleen roland's. i have not only lived in san francisco for many years but i started as a renter and now a homeowner i work here.

i want to let you know i'm concerned about the feed wishes document. i support the continuance. i'm concerned about the lack of transportation, consideration. i have taken muni many years i know what it feels like to have 8 buses to pass you bye. i know that there is situations for the middle-class and we do need to flrts our housing for those people. we need to keep the rh one and two neighborhoods for all our citizens. i'm very concerned about the increased density and the towers that are proposed 24 will decrease life with shadows and

fog blowing through that. i like the city the way it is and i want to ask you to continue this so we can review the documents pr i want to state for the record i'm a member of the boardwalk improvement program >> next speaker. >> >> good afternoon commissioner. my name is danny live in san francisco. i am a director of the mri lemon improvement club. mri lemon park one of our primary concerns a protecting financially single-family zoning that were lately it's been wonderful to see many families with children moving into the