they were going through the process with the design review team and the neighbor cooperation and i just wanted to speak to that process a bit. this project really started with the design guidelines for corner property. the landmark status of a corner property and developed over two years working directly from the very beginning, from the conceptual stages right here, with both the planning department, the neighbors and the rdt, and you can see how the scale of the building really started to shift over that process and the architects took both the comments of the rdt and the neighbors into account and in that process were able to get of the de facto demolition by keeping the floor plates, were

able to squeak out a little bit more air space above the building to lower it in the process, and were able to really create a prominent two-story volume at the street level that worked with the stepping down of this part of the block. all of the -- the rdt gave provisional approval to this project and all the comments were addressed during this long process, as well as many of the neighbor comments, and i guess that's what i have to say. what we came -- what came up with at the end was a very strong modern statement that fits with the context that has warm neutral character of materials, that becomes part of

this mixed neighborhood of old and new buildings. thank you. >> thank you. any further speakers? okay, seeing none, the dr requester has a two-minute rebuttal. >> is the light on? this is very simple issue. it's really about the topography of 19th street. this is what we currently enjoy right now on 19th street, an uninterrupted pattern of descending roof tops that go down and follow the grade of the street. this house is going to pop out of that topography. many of the other people who have spoken just now are taking pictures from the rear of the building. that's an alleyway that people go to for the garages and so forth, it's not 19th street. 19th street is the public part that people are going to see. i have not heard the sponsor

counter how this is going to not disrupt the topography and that's really a very crucial issue for us, it's going to really change the profile of 19th street forever. also they are taking, they are using, they are trying to qualify, this is a corner lot to give them license to build a gigantic structure that's deserving of a corner lot. lampson lane is not castro street. lampson lane is an extremely narrow alley and i don't think it justifies putting such a large structure there and qualifying as a corner lot to do that. i'm going to leave the remaining time for ken, another dr requester. >> i'm ken calstein, i live at 4565 19th street across from lampson lane and i want to do two things. one, i want to show you the front of the canadian consulate now, this is how it was before. same

height, same width. also when they talk about a habitable space of 2600 square feet, this building in reality is 5,000 square feet. there is 570 feet of garage, 470 square feet of garage, rather, 350 feet for a workshop, two storage units of 660 square feet, so what started out as an absolutely huge building is now 5,000 square feet. thank you. >> thank you. project sponsor, you have a two-minute rebuttal. >> thank you, vice president wu, commissioners. michael smith from the planning staff and his residential design teamworked pretty hard with this project architect and the owner to come up with the best possible house for this setting. and i think they have done a really good job with it. they have created a house that

is both responsible and respectful of the character of the block. it follows the contour of the topography. the setback at the top is very respectful of pedestrian experience along 19th street. but what it also does, it presents gifts to the block just as the corner block -- corner houses on the other corners of the block do. the front setback area gives us an open notched courtyard with the terrace above so light will come through. it is not a maxed-out property by any stretch of the imagination. there are opportunities to create living space where architectural details were placed and placed carefully. the rear building wall was sculpted very specifically to address view issues that were of real concern with the

canadian consulate. we met with them several times before the application was filed and discussed exactly what their view quarters were. it is important to them because they view them as being an important reception area for their governmental duties so we are being very respectful of that and we did not extend beyond the point at which their building wall ends, despite the fact that our lot extends considerably further. this is a well designed project, it's a project that needs to happen to this house, it's not habitable in its current sense and it does not meet the level of exceptional extraordinary circumstances required for you to take dr today. thank you. >> thank you. the public hearing portion is closed. commissioner hillis. >> so first cunningham, it was a fairly civil dr from what we normally hear. you can all get along after this process.

what's more to the -- i mean, it is a big addition and a big remodel to the home, but i think it kind of works with what we see as very different size of homes uphill in smaller homes, downhill, it has a set back on the side and a decent set back in the front. so i am generally supportive. i mean i think i could look at kind of addition of a setback, additional setback in the front along 19th street, that's the only thing giving me a little trouble, but generally i don't think there are exceptional or extraordinary circumstances here, i think it's generally well designed and kind of responds to the homes around. certainly have been major changes to the housing stock, especially to the uphill side of the building. i'm generally satisfied.

>> commissioner moore. >> i would say i'm generally supportive, i just have one question and that ultimately goes more to the area of the jurisdiction of the zoning administrator. i'd like to ask the architect, as you were observing the neighborhood, the adjoining buildings up and down the street, is there rear yard open space on grade? >> there's a mix. uphill there are one or two that have a portion of rear yard grade, but by and large the newer developments have a stepped-down yard that steps down to the garage. >> appreciate you having observed that. question i like to ask the zoning administrator, as we are identifying the city it is very difficult for me and i think also for some other members of

the commission to give up that open spaces as required are on grade. we just took the 1601 larkin to mention the second time today, a major redesign in order for that to occur. my question, is it a fact that this particular project by choice is larger than perhaps an addition would allow that would provide the required open space on grade not to inflict a difficulty by which it might be a little more difficult to step away from a variance? >> thank you for the question. so first, just a couple of things on usable open space. the code does not require that usable open space be located at grade, it can be located in numerous ways, either by a roof deck, a balcony, at grade. in this case these open spaces are

being provided by the garage, on top of the garage, they are developing that as usable open space and also an underground connection or near connection from the main living level of the building to the rear garage. in reviewing this and reviewing the variance request i'm actually quite supportive of the proposal and think it's a clever way of dealing with usable open space issues here for this lot and if we were to have usable open space at a lower level, in fact it's actually at the main living level here at least for the unit that's being added so i think that it's a reasonable solution. additionally it's been noted by the neighbors that the rear most portion of the lot, and it is a large lot, a longer lot, is dedicated as an easement for access to adjacent properties so that's an at-grade area that could otherwise be developed for usable open space except it can't because it's dedicated

for access. so they are taking the roof, dedicating it for usable open space and i see this as a fine way of satisfying the requirements of the code. certainly i would be supportive of the proposal. >> if i may engage for another minute in a conversation, i think the joint agreement for not having land locked lots which do not have rear access is a discussion between three neighbors who i don't believe that the turn around itself is de facto open space any more, it is an agreed-upon circulation space by which all people together reduce their lot widths in order to have the garage with rear access. the only question i would ask, that's not only looking at this property but looking at other properties and similar circumstances again reflecting on what we had on larkin where in the larkin case the adjoining neighbors were

seriously impacted by the lack of open space on grade and do you see that possibly in other circumstances to be an issue? >> depending on the project, certainly having usable open space at grade may be preferable to having it located elsewhere. i think this project that's before you now the location of usable open space is appropriate and satisfies the intents and requirements of the code. >> i am in support of this project for all of the reasons but i like to send a message to the department that we're starting to look more carefully on the larger patterns of sun and light and collective open spaces including the wall effect on narrow properties it creates to either side. in this one case we have an alley which was green which makes it

greener on the alley side but generally i am concerned about that becoming a standard way of doing things. thank you. >> would anyone like to make a motion. >> i'd make a motion to approve the project. >> second. >> not take it up. >> second. >> commissioners, there a motion to not take dr and approve the project as proposed. roll called. that motion passes unanimously 5-0. >> on the variance, the public hearing (inaudible) grant the requested variance. >> commissioners, that will place you under your last

angendized item, public comment. i have no speaker cards. >> is there any general public comment? seeing none, public comment is closed. meeting adjourned. (meeting adjourned). okay good everyone. thank you very much for coming happy new year i'm ed reiskin i'm the director of transportation and happy to kickoff the new year. san francisco has been a dynamic city during the break i was

reading the history of muni how things have changed and required the city to view. we're in a lot of change including in our transportation system a lot of change is good but it needs to be managed and it's safe and a consistent with the transit first policy. we're here to talk about that. we've got a lot of great partners partners if commercial transportation from the private be sector and companies that they service and our participates in the city. i think you'll hear from the mayor and other speakers we're chronically this issue head on and really going to address something that's are bringing benefits to san francisco and we'll continue to realize those benefits while addressing any

issues that this corporate employee shuttle are bringing. without further ado happy to bring up our mayor mayor ed lee >> thank you (clapping.) well happy new year i want to thank supervisor weiner and supervisor chiu they're for better and improved transportation tom nolan is here as well as his assumes a fact not in evidence i want to thank them and tilly. i want to thank the bay area council jim has been a great contribute to us here in the bay area as we should tell our transportation issues in the city. it's better to start up the conversation with the

corporations that are employees and resident are going to figure it out better and working with the commuter shuttle companies as well as the companies that are hiring our residents. it's a great opportunity to talk about this because guess what our transportation needs are great and we reflected that i think in a serious document we recently rolled the transportation documented that ed reiskin 2rikd so much to envisioning our needs. today, we're talking about a challenge something that is a recent phenomena but been in the eyes of the folks it's the commuter shuttle that have been taking our resident and others to their jobs and be it a

silicon valley company or medical compass or university the shuttles are here and they've been helpful in that but for them possibly we could see 45 thousand additional vehicle millions on our roadways or some 11 thousand tons of cashing emissions on our streets. they've become an invariable source and i support the fact s that employees are figuring out ways to get their employees safely to work. up to this point the city was uncoordinated it was within our muni zones or on certain busy streets of our city. having said that we wanted to make a coordinated effort to capture for information to work

with the companies who's employees are on those buses and work with the shuttle companies themselves why with them at a higher level coordination but happenstance b will get you into dallas and having conflicts in those muni zones and causing problems for bicyclists or causing buses to stop if the transport lanes without coordination. i know the more recent voices have been identifying those for the purposes of political agenda and rhetoric the buses are symbolic of other things i know our transportation experts and people in the city see this as a contribution to

preventing for congestion on our streets. so today, we're here to announce an agreement with the city with the participation of the company's and the bay area council and want to thank them and the corporate leaders announce an agreement for the next 18 months we will have an agreed upon approach to the use of our muni zones with a shared use of those commuter shuttles in those zones. and we're going to focus on about 2 hundred of those zones out of the 2 thousand 5 hundred muni zones in the city. those are the ones we have studied for the past year and a half as to where the bulk of the picks up are had and we're going

to coordinate this and have the cost recovery. it will be an agreement that reflects about $100,000 a year for the use of those muni zones but it will signal an identification of the people using that. they'll have to have permission to use those zones and it will have rules that reiskin will go into but respecting the minnesota lines and a making sure that certain rules their abated but for the commuter shuttle so that they're not in the way of our muni lines and also causing any further congestion or shock to the emergency e 1906. we wanted to signal an agreement on a approach that has a set of

rules and has signage to let people know they're there and also a set of rules that suggest their b be there in a times and places where they'll respect the other modes of transportation that we want to have in the city. we think that with this coordinated approach we'll receive better data for our sfmta to consider for future improvements and have a ground function to talk with the commuter shuttle services and we'll have some good data to share with our companies with the practices of the employees and where the best pickup times and how they'll add value to a more efficient and safe transportation system. this is the purpose of today's announcement. as to begin this coordination

but to get a cost recovery open that with the agreement but to signal we want to do that well, and right with better coordination with the muni zones for picking up their employees. i think this will lead to even better situations where if it would get literally out of hand if we didn't have the dialyses that we should be having. this is a signal to everybody i think shuttles are here to stay but they've obligate to be better coordinated and aligned with our municipal system. we've studied it i know there of the a strategic study done and we're building upon that but there's been a provision in the last 2 and a half years we have

some 4 hundred shuttle companies that exit in the city. we didn't know up until now where the roulettes are and the safety practices they can be boyd by. this is a start of a coordinating body. i want to thank the sfmta as we start in coordination it may not be fast enough for everybody but we need to do this in a solid way with good conversations we expect to have like microsoft so google to xbox and all the other companies we're working with whether their employees are going south and come back and to coordinate the schedules and time framed.

there are a number of companies it's not just the ones we've announced there's hospital xhupsz and orange county other campuses. we want them to make sure they're talking with us about that information we need to improve the symptom for everyone. you mean the goal should be the same. we're trying to get people to work that's the practical part trying to make sure there isn't cross purposes on issues of safety for our muni system. i think we're going to be better at it and i think with this newly found few minutes ago and good collaboration we'll get better and i know there's a lot of questions about this and we'll be glad to answer them but we'll be glad to talk about this

(clapping.) thank you, mr. mayor. i didn't mention this but you're in the muni line management system. the he men and women who work here are charged with making sure the muni vehicles can get through the students of san francisco as efficiently as possible that's part of what we need to do to advance the policy this was adapted by the board of supervisors back in 1973 that transit policy is placed in the a charter and it's the charge of the sfmta and it's board of supervisors to implement that policy. the framework we're talking about is a permanent system is something that's subject to the approval by sfmta board of supervisors. we've been working on this idea with the private sector for the last couple of years after the

good work done by the transportation authority in 2011. we have a proposal final list we'll bring to the board on january 21st. we've been keeping them updated we went to our policy and governs committee to provide opportunity for any public comment? and ultimately that will be the board of supervisors that will adapt this to make sure we're vance the transit first policy. i'll note that while muni is by far the largest transit provider our ridership is equal to all agencies combined. if you look at the collective ridership their equality to a big part of bringing transit to

the bay area in a way that compliments what the bay agency it doing. it will be the feet of the board of supervisors i'm pleased to bring up tom nolan >> i have a good feeling about the vote on the 21st president norwegian. we want to shift the modes of transportation in san francisco to get more and more people on bikes and walking and this is an important step forward. we're pleased to be part of this and working with those fine companies and continuing to work with the bay companies. this is huge 45 thousand is not insignificant and this is a big step forward for the entire city. thank you (clapping) my so the people who are elected

by the people of san francisco to represent them have been on the frontline of the concerns about the shuttles and their impacts on the neighborhoods and transit system we're fortunate to have great leadership on city hall on the board of supervisors and the transportation commission who have been sharing their feedback and giving us their input and bringing leadership to you'll of the transportation in san francisco not the least of this issue. i'm pleased to be with david chiu >> i want to thank you and all the men and women that behind me who have addressed a series of headaches i know within councilmember kersey district. in recent years we've seen a

wild, wild west open our streets this is a way to bring order to our city and asking companies to pay a fair share. the fact is the men and women behind us have been thinking intellectually and based on facts what rules we need to make sure we're minimizing congestion on our streets and folks not to have to travel in private cars or be in vehicles where a multiple people are and our roads are are properly maintained. i want to thank all the companies with working with our sfmta and the mayor to get it right. we're going to get it right and that work will help