reference such as a is it fair to say wood so single-family homes could be maintained in san francisco. we just celebrated our citizen technology in 2012 as a single-family neighborhood in san francisco and those are the types of neighborhood that should be encouraged in san francisco. muni is unequal able to serve our population during the rush hour. normally 20 minutes to downtown, however, during rush hour trains stop and muni can't get the number of cars they need. you sit there in the middle of the tunnel sometimes 5 minutes at a time and my husband hearsay fainted twice.

during the regular days that takes 20 minutes take 40s minutes or longer. we have density and a transportation problem. i used to work in belmount shores and the trip took 20 or thirty minutes now it takes over an hour i quit that just but i was disappointed my commute in the city was not what i expected it to be >> next speaker >> would you pass those out? thank you. i'm bernard i represent san francisco tomorrow. i am also and we are also in support of the continuance in that the range of alternative

have not been formerly he presented as directed by the court and having been a party to the writing of the code you're considering i can say you don't moot the state mandate. i want to talk about one alternative. the rains of cumulative environmental impacts which is and matter of operating policy is go forward as not being significant. it's significant it's a resource los angeles police department. land is in miscarries supply in san francisco i'm sure you're aware of. that means the developer forced to buy over priced in this city has to provide over expensive

buildings for seismic safety. that means you can't in a free market in effect get affordable housing. it also means that prudent developers have to connote with cheap money overseas which connotes for that land and has free reign over the high pricing which is an epidemic in this city > >> thank you. next speaker, please. >> good afternoon. i'm with the coalition of neighborhoods. if you were a teacher i would give the pa planning department an a for their data analysis. very good. however, part two objectives and policies to be politely get an e

for effort but realistically an f. the reason why is all alternatives to provide a feasible plan for all income levels is not there. you know the information and you know what's needed but at the end of the day or the end of the year you have not met our objectives and if you don't reach our objectives any time soon it components the problem. the department should every year keep a tally of how far behind you're getting. oh, we're only 5 hundred units behind but bleeding after 10 years we're 5 thousand unit behind it's a different picture

so you should gusts a tally. in a way it should be like a permit system the the permit system would be whatever the greatest need is the permits are free but if you have a permit in excess then you have a permit is $200,000 for each unit you're in excess that way affordable housing will catch up. there's a major disconnect between muni and planning. planning is turning around fast but murn not so moved so much. they've got to be together >> thank you. >> thank you. next speaker, please. >> i'll call a number of names

(calling names). >> good afternoon. i'm timothy i live in san francisco. i'm also a board member of mri lemon park club and i'm here as a taxpayer to let you know it's time to slow down on this plan and look at all the angles. there doesn't need to be a rush on this i want to talk about things that were done thirty years the double decker freeways and destroying homes in the chinatown area. but now we look back on the ideas we all say what were they thinking to tear down outlining all the homelands and build the double decker freeways. i'm here to ask you to support the continuance of the eir to

give everybody time to make those transparent ideas. i'm concerned about the flight of the families from san francisco. it's hard to raise our families here if you take out r one and two housing we'll be literally getting all the middle-class families to keep it viable out of the city. so muni is also another issue i ride muni everyday and i have to wait for several trains and several buses. thank you very much >> thank you. next speaker, please. >> good afternoon, commissioners. i've lived on hill street for 33

years. i'm also speaking for the liability hill organization that is mixed with people of many perspectives. i know, however, is that we're all investment i was. we want the historic fabric of our community preserved without the larger developments destroying our exultant. val say street what we've seen is a complete onslaught of condominiums developments. residents can't afford to live in the mission. people who want to have businesses are being priced off

of the valencia street and large corporations that are basically front for internet companies are the ones who are renting the stores for eternity e exonerate rent. everyone wants affordable housing. we must improve our transit. in my neighborhood alone since there has been a transit first policy in san francisco our transit has been cut by 3 quarters of a percent. we need to catch with the buildings that have already been built according to san francisco magazine 10 thousand unit already improved are in construction are going on or in san francisco. thank you >> thank you.

>> thank you. next speaker, please. >> good afternoon. my name is sherry i'm president of the liability hill neighborhood association. i want to let the members of the commission know our organization has the board open our organization has vote to support the continuance and to express our concern about the inadequatecy of the eir of the information that's being circulated and to get bart to anymore in the city to downtown if you're not in a rush. the transportation system as it

stand so far has been inadequate for many years but as my colleague has explained our buses have been cut by several run lines and the remainder are often full or they don't stop or have any space. i believe that the commission needs to consider all those things and therefore i am in - invoicing my support of continuance. thank you >> thank you. >> good afternoon commissioners, thank you for hearing us today. moore from the coalition of san francisco neighborhoods. i just had a couple of questions i wanted to raise here that haven't been address. where do all those folks coming

from. there are a huge number of buildings that are being built but the major question that concerned us today is one of water shorthand. we're in the middle of a drought so where's the water going to come from for those new people and those new developments. seems like it would make sense to develop some solar plant if you're going to have those people come in where is the water going to come from. i have one other thing i'll mention a lot of us feel the commission and the city owes they're first loyalty to the san franciscans not new residents. thank you very much >> thank you.

>> commissioners i'm kathleen i'm chair of housing and zoning nor the russia hill association. i'd like to build on the comment that was made. we're your constituents we rely on you to look out for our city and our best interest. we recognize that's a heavy responsibility but you raised our hand and volunteered to be on the planning commission. and we ask you to fulfill our responsibility here. the russian hill community association look forward to reviewing the documents. we generally have meeting and a discuss the points and are respectful of our time. we generally appear before you with data in hand and we've been unable to be noticed on december 18th for a hearing today to present our ideas in

the midst of the holiday period is a ridiculous a ridiculous statement, a ridiculous protocol. we're on the bring of a discussion making process that does not review all of the data and take into account fully our responsibility to the people of san francisco and our responsibility to you to provide you with the information. as many of my colleagues have said i respectfully request that you continue this issue for a minimum of 50 days so we can come before you with well-thought-out ideas about how to address those issues.

thank you very much >> thank you. >> good afternoon commissioners kathy republican open space coalition for the san francisco neighborhoods and various advocate groups. i've acknowledged or lived in san francisco for 40 years. i live in the occurred sunset to say there's muni incapacity in our neighborhood is an understatement. we have one line that goes downtown when it breaks down you can see the line of streetcars lined up to the ocean and we're stick. in addition i'm concerned about the impact of tall dense building on our parks and open space. you've heard a presentation on eco district. vegetation don't grow in the dark. i hope this commission will give serious consideration to the

policies of alternative a to better mitigate the impacts of development. i support the continuance. yoipdz from the notice i could comment on the incorporated sections. please give us more time to review and submit comments. thank you >> thank you. let me call a few more names as our next speaker comes up (calling names) >> hello, i'm chris shaving i live on terrace and have been a resident of san francisco for over 40 years. i'm a member of the university terrace association. i believe that neighborhood would be an example of our future based on this design.

and i think that i'll give you an example we live already with very tall, large, dense, micro living units they're called dormitories and there are thousands even if people who live near our neighborhood our neighborhood is rh one and two. to give you an example i live in a dui perplex the change in rh two would significantly reduce the quality of life for us. if there were more people than the four people below us there is no way to have somebody who is ill in a situation like that or the cost of having nor density where we bear the cost is over $400. so i'm trying to provide you

with some realistic view. today, i took muni to get here. i was on a bus with two different who cares. there would not enough room for people standing. last night when i came on muni, of course, i'm disabled i can't see my feet because of this mechanism. but i'm disallowed to come from the front of the bus and a hang on with one armenian arm and i'm city-state i sitting next to two people the lady next to me has two replaced knees - >> thank you, madam our time is up. >> all right. >> good afternoon. i'm robert gi live in san francisco.

i've been a resident for over 50 years and currently the president of the mri limb club. the eir didn't address the middle-class. there's no dispute that there's a hallowing out of our middle-class. it's not meeting its target for moderate housing. you should incorporate policies that will be effective in producing middle-class housing. and one of the 0 policies should be revised and one - the 2009 housing needs to have some single-family neighborhood. i support of the stuns requesting additional time for comments. the revised discussion refers to

other sections of the eir that weren't circulated. so therefore i respectfully ask for more time to look at the number one circulated areas. thank you for your time >> thank you. >> thank you. next speaker, please. >> good afternoon. my name is a jean i'm a long time resident of the richmond district. i'm here to add my voice to the many requests to please grant a continuance for the review of this process. as you already heard many of us didn't understand the notice we could comment on other seconds of the eir as and pertain to the alternative section. in the interest of fairness and

due process a grant of a continuance would be appropriate. this is much too important a document the issues are far too critical to the future of san francisco. as well as to present and future residents of san francisco to ram this process through without giving everyone in the city a change to comment. please grant us a continuance. thank you >> thank you. >> good afternoon, commissioners. i'm john this hearing is a hearing that is called to comply with a court order. it was appreciated if in non-compliance complying with the court order through would

have an a constructive notice the notice was sent out december during the holiday for the public to review and to come here on the 23rd of january for the organizations of time of of the city to develop and study the documents and make appropriate comment to the eir and materials that have been recirculated but worse than that the notice was - it said the hearing will be limited to only a certain section that's contrary to what the court requested. it's essential in order to comply with the courts decisions to have this process go on so

this hearing can be continued so we can properly be noticed. organizations in the city can study the documents and be able to give complete and meaningful response to what the documents are being present. so i urge the commission to continue the hearing until march the third. thank you >> thank you (calling names). >> good afternoon, commissioners. judy coalition with san francisco neighborhood compliesz of 48 neighborhood organizations. i live in the mission. the eir states the pipeline unit

totaled 25 thousand more than the 31 thousand plus units sought by the housing needs allocation for the 2345078 to the current period and it would allow the additional capacity of more units. the city is over producing market rates and failing to produce middle-class housing. for the prior 1999 did market rate was over product of one hundred and 53 percent of the market rate production for the 52 of the low income father are target was met. the work on this document and

the previous housing eir and element itself since 20005 and this one since nodding. she brought this flawed document to this point. i strongly support and urge you to grant another month for consideration of the documents and actually at least march third and at most april 3rd due to inadequate notice. thank you >> thank you. any further any public comment? okay. seeing none, public comment is closed. commissioner sugaya >> yeah. i start with one comment. that a question actually to

staff. has this been scheduled before the historic presentation commission >> i can't speak to the previous circulated eir but this one has not. >> i know the staff should give consideration to having a hearing before the historic preservation commission under charter under the referral of duties in which the matter that pertain to the historic resources and in effects to those resources must be circulated and i find such a statement is contained in the collective summary that the eir could result in a potentially impact to resource etc. so my contention is you need to

a circulate this through the historic preservation commission at some point. and, secondly, there's been allocation this the notice for this has been inadequate that's a legal issue without going through a long protracted discussion between attorneys i can only accept what is before us as being adequate. i am open, however, to extending the comment period not this particular hearing but a comment hearing it's for another three weeks. i don't know how the other commissioners will feel we can get to that in a motion if there is some agreement >> commissioner moore. >> i believe that all argument which for further clarification

have been brought forward respectfully and without having all the sections of the document in front of me to which the comments pertain i feel there's a consensus between a lost people extending the timeframe would be beneficial. i don't think we note to artificially need to extend it further. i ask we consider 45 days many issues are complex i heard thirty, 45 and 60 i think 60 mike might be two long i could settle for 45 but i will be supportive that the composition recommends thirty and the comment period is 45 days from

the release so the question is whether how far beyond the foy days our proposing to go >> your commenting open february not the third but 45 days from that particular date to hold it. >> excuse me. sarah jones. i want to raise what chapter 31 of the administrative code around the eir period thatdz up to the discretion. but what sequa says about a comment period open an eir is the period of 45 days the maximum period appropriate under sequa is 60 days under complex

circumstances so that's what is stated under state law that's the guidelines on comment period >> commissioner borden. >> yeah. i think, however, you get to 60 days make sense prps i think we've seen this document the recirculation of the 2009 document i understand it and this may go to the pc to provide another forum but people want to be able to provide comments and i don't think we need to hear it again. >> so can i confirm with the city attorney than whatever we can make a motion to