fair-minded clear look since 1998 and even there was no project alternative resisted so the choice to build is at this location or not at all this is not how sequa works there's the federal grant tied to this didn't excuse us to close our eyes to the environmental review and look at a provider that will give us a 4 point plus million dollars bans a 16 years old environmental review impact report i doubt the city would bite nor would i be legally commit to do so. none of the environmental review deals with the current centers and at least 2 of the buildings

on 18 street were not in existence which the environmental review studies were done in 1998 there's no noise study there's no vanilla traffic analysis that shows the already existing traffic that's changed in that area in which is unlikely not going to get better. the suggestion that we should go ahead and rush and install the permanent rail line and hope we can prude the warriors to accept that is backwards. it's an expensive piece of infrastructure and wherever it going the city should be convinced it's in the best place and is the most environmentally sensitive sequa self-is it will

cost more to move it to the transit line cost deferral is not an alternative in which site has the best environmental impact if there's less used streets streets that seniors have less impact to - those need to be considered before we commit to completing this project that's a good question i think you've asked excellent questions of the staff i don't think in their hearts they can say they've got a proposed location weighed against other locations the fact that the federal money is tied to this location based on decisions in 1998 shouldn't guide our

decisions otherwise we'll be looking at the embarcadero freeway it's imincumbent upon the staff to acknowledge the correct environmental analysis ideally this would be been done green before 2012 they didn't update the environmental impact again, it's cart about the horse i appreciate you giving us a chance to raise those issue >> thank you for your thoughtful comments. >> i'm joel dean a resident of the dog patch area and a rider of the t line. i think it's an effort that are occurring throughout the system most of us understand as well as the sdiesh ability of the turn

around loop the issue is the location of that loop. the reaction of the eastern neighborhoods most effected by this current proposal is universally negative for well over a year there are numerous arguments against the proposal individual residents, businesses owns and the dog patch association and homeowners association have provided comments in opposition. those organizations and individual have put forth when i think is a logical argument for using metro east facility as a turn around. this facility already has in the ground two sets of tracks they're in place and unlike the proposal that only turns around to the north those tracks are both north and south. there's a repair facility for disabled trains and an area for

driver relief and it is only 6 blocks south from the present proposed loop. muni metro east landlord exists that's a far superior option and using this existing facility would solve almost all the issues that have been articulated against the current loop proposal. the mta has responded to all written comments in form but we don't feel they've responded appropriately in substance they've mind e made up their mind and don't appear to seriously consider the eastern neighborhoods. if they have given serious consideration for the metro east facility for the turn around

atheism not disclosed that information for public scrutiny we ask for a serious considerable public study be done for the muni metro east as the turn around facility thank you very much >> thank you. >> mr. reiskin i have a few comes. in the picture that bill and mike referenced they've talked about the cars on the track for illinois student i was wondering is this going to change or will there be cars on at grade on the tracks? >> so the loop. >> yeah. >> the loop goes over to illinois and it will be a muni right-of-way like any other muni right-of-way is your question can cars still access

that portions. >> i want to know if you're going to be pitting in an obstruction so cars can't drive on the tracks. >> no, i building it's a shared trait automobile way. >> so like when you think about third streets there are certain parts of the t line that has a designated part of the track then the track goes at grade where cars can cross in front of the trains that causes a delay in service is there a preventive measure something at this particular corner to prohibit cars to drive on the rail it sounds like after there is some kind of activity it will be will congestion. i can on imagine it trains and

cars colliding at some parts in third and 11 we have a lot of we've had several collisions for cars trying to make a left hand turn i'm concerned about the cars and rails operating in the same space >> so generally speaking from our trains prospective to provide a dedicated right-of-way for muni light rails in the urban environment it's not also possible there's not space on the illinois right-of-way for a dedicated muni facility because i think there is only room for one lane that prohibits all traffic from southbound illinois if i'm remembering the design correct. so the vehicles if that's the case the vehicles will have to

share as many parts of the city. in terms of special events lib we do today there's traffic controls we put in place to general traffic controls in front of or front of the ball park we shut down the street to prioritize the traffic movements whether or not the loop or warriors we have a management system in place like we do today so it could be a traffic control officer on illinois for example, we'll percentage that the way we do today >> all right. thank you very much we're going to go into public comment madam chair mr. mr. chair if you don't mind. >> okay. we've opening open

this up for public comment we have 5 public comment cards (calling names) richard weiner that's my father's name as well (calling names). >> thank you. the committee for letting me voice my opinion imi will want to talk about the technical presentations i can the t line from mariposa to embarcadero and this proposed line you've brought up are disconcerting i appreciate the intent to increase ridership i go from 10 authorize in the morning i board at mariposa so

ridership coming from south of mariposa is dramatically increased in the last 3 years and similarly on the return trip it intermitted out for riders and now it's full to mariposa and south beyond that i know the proposed will increase the number of the railcars that will accommodate the growing ridership south of the given turn around. secondly, since 2002 there are 0 over one hundred and thirty residents directly from where it is proposed and none were there so those are developments off illinois that's been referred to and a new project with over one hundred units this will inject

the egress from the garages one is on 18 street effecting over one hundred and 20 unit and this is all right. difficult finally, the noise and vibration as it crows over 18 is important it's life in a growing city but the trade off is one of peace and quiet so with the windows closed its sometimes hard to hear the television or talk on the phone it proposed a less of an impact on businesses in the neighborhood >> thank you. next speaker. >> richard weiner i'm a dog patch resident. i urge you to put the loop in the right place by ending the loop at mariposa your denying

increased services to all the businesses on 23rd and 22nd street pier 70 hopefully will be use there no service there people have to walk to 22nd or mariposa the station on 22nd and pennsylvania nothing happening now its very, very busy and again those folks have to walk all the way back to 22nd and 23rd street instead of having the t line loop at 22nd or meeting metro east. there's another thousand unit being planned and lastly the block between illinois and 18 and 19 has heavy trucks and cars and two bike lanes you're going to add a big muni strtd streetcar you've begging for

bikes to get hit and all kinds of things. there's no stop plan for this loop not at 19 and illinois or 19 and third so in conclusion i urge you to please put the loop in the right place it's the right thing to do >> is there any further public comment yes, please come down. >> the mission bay loop project was comboild a decade ago because of the rapid growth new condos and dog patch as well as the combination of dmu new condominiums and higher observecy and the shipyard project the bayview is not efficient. the existing levels of muni

service has not kept up with bayview so the residents face long waits and you're thinking about/arthur a turn around will help to parking meter with the limited trains and operators. we've been told this will mitigate the harm of the turn around we're aware of the ebb and flow of the muni's budget this is a permanent infrastructure but the additional trains and operator that are required may come and go. forcing for this reason he think that any turn around around caesar chavez that will guarantee the targeted level services to the trains at the end of the line will be filled first and the trains added optional whether the loop trains are provided

>> thank you. next speaker. >> thank you. i'm andrea i'm a resident and homeowner in the bayview my stop a close to the he is not talking about of the line. he know how frustrating it is to wait for muni but accountabilities face getting 2ku78d off the train before they're half way home i have been dumped off at the dog patch before my end and i want to see a guarantee that whether happens that trains that go to the end of the lines are increased and i ask as you consider transit related decisions in the southeast sector you don't sacrifice the trains that go to

the end of the line >> thank you - actually since you presented. >> you've been patient i wanted to ask i submitted a letter for review be part of the record. >> yes. we'll make sure that happens. is there any additional public comment seeing none, public comment is closed supervisor cohen >> we have the letter it's not record i just confirmed that mr. bean. >> all right. supervisor kim and supervisor wiener do you have any questions for anyone i think what we can do is table this hearing as heard >> mr. reiskin did you want to say anything in response to the public comment. >> thank you mr. chair, i guess a few things to the later two

comments i've mentioned supervisor cohen has made it clear with the concerns at the end of the line i want to emphasize with or without this loop the two cars will double the capacity of the two lines before it will be creating a significant service over the length of the t line with regard to a guarantee we did adapt a policy this year my board adapted a policy by which which we looked at the different neighborhoods to make sure they're getting muni service this looked at the bayview for example, relative to the system average and making scombrauchlts and capital improvements or service management accordingly

so in effect this provides that guarantee. in terms of the balance of the comments they seem to understand the need for a turn around to question this location. i think to call this a rush decision would be completing a capital project 18 years after it's been approved i wouldn't call that rushing into anything. most of the basically assumptions hold today it was because of the anticipation of the growth that we're seeing today that much of the t third project was approved and started to be built all those many years ago. what we did i believe all the proper state and federal environmental work and got those approvals between 2012 and 2013. and we the continue as an agency outside of this project but under the agency of the

transportation to look at all the investments only the waterfront including the 3 proposed big developments and make sure that the mitigations are in place or the developer commitments or agent ways to augment the system to make it work as part of the waterfront transportation assessment of i believe this project will provide benefit for all riders of the t line. and i think it is serving where the great bulk of the ridership is and will enable us to service more folks. i appreciate that folks have different ideas about the turn around locations with will be but we've addressed and responded to those concerns and are ready to move forward >> folks this is a hearing

we're not going to be taking a vote but make a motion to file this to the call of the chair and thank you. the neighborhoods they're written and oral presentation i think that's important your voice continues to be heard in this process. so i'd like to make a motion to file this item to the call of the chair >> is there a continuance. >> to continue item 2 to the chovrl we'll take that without objection. that will be the order. >> thank you. madam clerk please call items three and four together. >> item 3 is an ordinance inspecting herpes as a landmark and the zoning controls for office and landmark buildings and pedestrian distribution repair and general district.

>> okay supervisor cohen is the author of both items three and four. supervisor >> great. thank you very much. okay. colleagues so today, i want to thank you again your your patience you loud myself and the project manager additional time to work on it i articulated several concerns with the displacement of the tenants in the 2 henry adams and the loss of the pdr space and since our last hearing isle i've hapt to meet with one hundred tenants and residents with the henry adams areas i know that the project manager has reached to the folks i believe there is a significant mulch of confusion and the lack of clarity what's being proposed for this building

i'm hopefully, this discussion will help to answer some questions and i want to hear from the individual that here today, i then ask we'll move to. so first, i think we should hear from our project sponsor. thank you. >> and just to be clear we've called the landmarking and the controls together and that's correct thank you. >> hello. >> good afternoon, supervisors shawn murray from bay west with martha thomas we've got two prospers on henry adams. glad to have an opportunity to talk about the process we've made since three years ago. i want to emphasize i personally

with the bay west care about this we helped to create that we've been stewards of the industry and hope to continue for the interior designers for years to come we understand this is about the future of henry adams has not also been perfect but in the past three weeks we've tried to reach out to every tenant to henry adams and talk about our plans for the building, we've offered to locate a number of tenants into 101 henry adams and ask if they're interested in doing that. and for those tenants we've not been able to identify spaegs space in henry adams we've offering a passage including

hiring the brokerage to support this to seek to leased other space in the neighborhood and committed to covering their relocation costs for relocating tenants from show place into the gallery. we've gone one step further to support the design district are going to fund two months of rent for residents in this district. happy to answer any and all questions to the progress since we've late met and great, thank you. well, maybe we can begin to talk about how many tenants are in the building and how many have you reached out to and there are one hundred and 27 tenants and i've attempted to reach out

>> sometimes, i e-mails them it was a holiday week i couldn't reach everyone. there were 3 tenants that were not home so i didn't get to them i think we've given you a contact log you have a record of conversations and e-mails meetings >> so my notes show there are 19 lease extensions that were extended. >> month to month tenants we're extending yes, we're in conversation i've confirmed 16 of the 19. >> okay. >> for sure that are - >> and that's in the past roughly week since the initial hearing and the three weeks

we've met with supervisor cohen specifically outlining exactly the plans for the relocation and kind of reach out and attach the attendance martha has made process in a week we've met with them a week unlawfully and we made a lot of traction you have uh-huh up to 16 of those tenants we'll be moving forward with the month to month leases. >> so how many if i'm not mistaken i think it was a one hundred and 71 businesses that are on a month to month lease. >> no there are hundreds and 17 leases and 19th street and 27 tenants and 50 tenants in the gallery building several tenants have several leases that's where

you get the hundreds 17. >> so in the showcase square we've got 77 tenants and in the show place building but only 16 are confirmed so what have - >> now with w no, we of 77 tenants on a month to month leases some are on long leases extending to 2017. >> so how many are on long leases? >> okay in the shaw show place last year 77 tenants 42 tenants are on most to month leases for a variety of reasons. >> okay. so out of the 42, 19 have confirmed. >> 19 have expressed an

interest i've confirmed 16 amendments had are being drafted. >> that's still a lot to be intiefrdz for the rest of the balance do you need more time. >> showing some of those people won't be reopened they're only paying expenses so people have expressed interests to stay on a month to month term. >> so this reduced rent schedule is this something that you suggested for the tenant or did the tenant come to you and ask for this. >> did tenant requested it, yes. >> those were all efforts we made after the recession during that recession to keep those tenants in place. >> have i looked at again, after the recession the tenants i've spoken to they said their

businesses were coming back and their businesses were booming is there an interest in renegotiate. >> in terms of further vavnz we're sooepg tenant that are contracting so for example, a number of tenants that were able to extend leases to there will be some we'll not be able to but part to 0 pay and hire a broker so they can stay here he understand the vitality of the district. >> all right. mr. chair if you guys don't have questions we can go to public comment. >> the relocation