through the embarcadero station or montgomery station unless we make investments the infrastructure discussion is a good one and we talked about how to talk about more together the city has been reluctant to invest in bart capacity we have the impact development fees on the development we've had that not a penny to bart for the capacity we used all the capacity when used when we bought the bart system we have to now pay for it and fourth a woo i understand there is runthd user reluctant continues if we did a bridge toll and really investing that p there was a lot

of tunnel and other things but core system bart transit and getting people across the corridors we can work well together so i know the t d i f will come back to you and look at it whether what capacity needs do we need to have in the plans to make sure growth is paying for growth and we're building the infrastructure to sustain the additional trips that's a conversation we should have sooner or later and the number of projects that we up to date this is a great conversation and thinking about it you know not only multi agency but multi jurisdictions what should we be doing and the other thing san francisco does have a seated regional body

sending a clear message to the city about what the city needs to be the economic engine for the region from the region would be helpful it didn't speak in one voice and with circulate in a strategy way this conversation today could be the beginning so how is the city representing itself in those regional overlook foufrmd it is a great conversation and look forward to working with the folks here. >> commissioner richards. >> one question for mr. egging gone i was at the commission and those ideas came up how to fund affordable housing and transportation pawar laying on commissioner hillis commissioner hillis comments one of the things i'm not you've thoughtful about this potentially asking

the state for some sort of prop 13 like has that been considered. >> it's not something identify been aware of commissioner. >> okay. thank you. >> commissioner antonini. >> yeah. thank you, sir and others i know those suggestions are all great ones bond issues in the past a lot of bond issues for affordable housing and even infrastructure have failed i think the compliment is right for a large bond issue or bond issues particularly about housing to provide money for housing as stated market rate housing is only going to provide a percentage towards affordable and does many good things for a growing housing for twitter and other companies that can afford

this and if we remember not building new housing they're here and staying here but as far as dressing e addressing the larger picture for the bridge toll which was braupthd that makes sense instead of building those lines of bart out a someplace where we'll have a small population and they have their own bart station we should be working on enter city bart expectations and a bag are places we had to advocate everybody is happy to have jobs here and happy to help us meet our needs by giving us this fund and not one that votes for hire taxes i'll be under oath of bond issues to address

our needs we courage all our friends to vote in favor of this. >> director ram that's correct i want to thank you, everyone for coming i know while the planning department is seen as having kind of a small piece of this puzzle we can't just focus on the individual buildings and have lived development projects we have 0 broadened our prospective in how we do our work vice versa and how our work effects the city a lot of comments number one the city in my experience is working more regionally and the mayor has established relationship with the mayor of oakland we've been working with the counter partners and there's a much greater sense than in the region

and all the issues obviously infrastructure and transportation is the key whops but affordable housing and so on are much more regional issues and if i could ghetto on my soapbox about the federal government the federal government contribution to local infrastructure projects has gone from 80 percent funding to thirty or 40 the challenges are huge because they're not supporting the city and counties cities and the regions that excludes the affordable housing so we're all for i hear this we're all forced to go it alone in terms of the two pieces of our needs it's apple numerous challenge when you talk about the dollars i will urge us all to think about the kind of

regional consequences of the federal government getting out of the business of sporting the local infrastructure it maybe thinking more critically how to address that. >> okay. thank you very much xhifrgdz we're going to take one more item and take a break very good commissioners that puts us on item 10 market street this is a draft environmental impact report please note that written contempt comments will be accepted until march 22015. >> good afternoon. i'm with the planning staff and the eir coordinator for the market street project joining me is chris and members of the project sponsors team are here this is a

review and comment on market street draft eir case no. 20120087 e with the identical and ground floor uses in the make the and octavia plan area this demolishes 3 buildings to build a hundred and 20 foot pukd u.s. bancorp mixed use building with one hundred and 89 units 28 parking spaces and one hundred and 10 bike parking spaces in a blow grade parking garage the notice of feasibility for the exemption were issued on october 22, 2014, planning department determined that an eir must be prepared for the proposed project identified potential significant environmental effects related to

the structural impacts that were not previously identified other as documented in the community exception that was attached to the notice of preparation the draft eir found a relative in the significant affordable impacts an individual historic resources the draft eir tubed 3 the no project easiest and the no preservation and the market preservation easiest aetsz the oak preservation alternate the no and the full preservation alternative would avoid the project historic resources impact the two reduced impacts on historic resources compared is to the proposed project but not to a lens significant level

the draft eir was blushed in 2015 and the public review closed on march 16 on - the hpc helped held a public hearing fog the draft environmental impact report after that the hpc arrived at the following questions and comments the first thing the hpc is concerned about the loss of two historic resources on the project site historic preservation commission is most censured with the loss of the hope street building that appears to be architecturally expensive of the two historical pieces and the seconds the health commission recommend the f eir include an alternative that exclude a larger scale vertical edition on top of the

building of similar projects the go hpc believes this will provide for the development of a higher number of housing unit than in the draft eir staff is not here to respond to the comments comments will think transcribed and respond to comments and we'll make transmissions the draft eir as permitted this should be directed is to the draft eir for members of the public who are here today please state your name for the record for those who are reader or interested in a letter submit our comments to

the office by march second when the comments are complete copies will be given to the participants we'll return to the commission to with request certifications of the draft eir if certified the commission may offer a approval to the project that concludes my presentation. and i recommend the commission on public hearing on this item. >> any public comment on this item? >> commissioner moore. >> seeing no public comment commissioner moore. >> the eir is interesting in the way it's set up it's clear there are just a number of airs where i believe there are missing pieces parking space information pieces this should be a summary of the 345rg9 octavia finding that are particular with those sites the

market octavia plan for those sites are valuable and we commented on that had lots of discussions in most cases indications of a larger taller buildings and they went much furthermore that this is an important question because what we have is cumulative effects and no discussion all about buildings that are close by the joining parts of other tell you buildings is not being discussed at all in context as a physical simulation of ideas that should have come out of octavia it is something u miss in how we looked at the historic preservation commission alternatives would you e how we need to look at the massing of the buildings and the under side

as well as the change of settings a large part of what will become the vertical side there's a transformation that is not properly addressed when we look at this eir on one building this is not the building to recall a few minutes we talked about the project with the focus on building housing that is noting necessarily in the category of affordable housing that is not part of it what this eir has to get only the second point of what i'm missing there recent no, it usage violations i believe the two lots in north-south direction will will visually an effect i'll be concerned about

together with no adjoining buildings with the eir that visible simulations looking at the east and looking at west with the historic district and the u cu city hall has a mark on the skyline effecting market and van ness and the adjoining building will effect how we look or not look to city hall so the massing what surprised me unfortunately, the intersection of market and van ness is probably from my experience one of the worse intersections along

two very powerful streets one market and one van ness what we have from a traffic point one of the most inefficient and almost non-workable intersections with two many modes public safety and easy of pedestrian movement is absolutely zero and there is nothing which any of those projects are doing to address improvement of that situation but what their rather do is make that worse the access to public transportation and bart foreclose of those buildings is one of the worse places to get into the fire station when i come to the department i walk down van ness and each time i have to do it is horrible

cumulative wind effects each project in the general area of the intersection of market and mission that already in its current state at wind have a lights are unsafe i don't see a discussion about that and that is, i think at this time those are my comments i'll support of the historic preservation and further alternatives that deal with the historic buildings one that which is read into the record it was interesting but i think

there is more commissioner antonini. >> yeah. i would agree with much of what commissioner moore said it looks like alternative 4 would be close to the historic preservation commission was talking about pa partial preservation alternative it seems to reverse 55 okay. and separates the buildings to some degree but there might be further ramifications or alternatives that preservation alternative that might be worth discussing and responses to comments to see what we were actually interested this is an important building and all those new buildings along market p will dominate the area we have districts near that and east

vail and the civic center although this is only the massing study that comes in the eir it is important that be careful articulated and present in some such a way to be as what is existing oftentimes a building can be designed in such a way by the materials that are commentary and make the building less offensive and we have a very good architect on this project i know that is a later stage but as far as the analysis the area that probably needs more attention is the preservation alternative commissioner johnck's. >> i actually left my eir in my

airplane bag but i'll cover the major points and send an e-mail i agree which iowa the commissioners have said i'm looking for this building in context to all the developments that have been mentioned how it will sit. >> what it looks like some type of a 3-d architecture in the pipeline will be helpful i have a question we've mentioned those kinds of comments on 133 golf with the wind effects and the traffic and you'll the elements this is something we've been put on record on another eirs one thing that struck me house conclusions were drawn on the ability of 57 or 68 units i come

from the upper market there are projects all the time being built so how and where difficult financial conclusion and how financing will not be available this concerns me i said where those comments came from i mentioned this on 1455 or other addresses on pine we mention the block structures i have no context if i go to support a project i don't understand how many there are left you talked in the eir about the 1 on pine street being concocted down ross the last two left in the city i don't know i really want to understand if there's any date available how

many structures are left with many multiples. >> i support an additional preservation alternative agency the fcc asked for the way things in my mind leading i'm leaning towards a preservationists on the project thank you. >> commissioner moore. >> i'd like to oppose one additional challenge it goes hand in hand with one alternative i'd like to see a project that functions without agreeing gating parcels your basically only maximizing what is in the most extreme potential development on the land two tying two that independent structures is setting a precedent you're setting a

north-south wall effect and the clumsy massing on serves the person that builds the building and it creates a lot of problems i want to see a clear jurisdiction in the eir why for this particular project; right why the aggregate. >> commissioner johnson. >> thank you very much i think the other commissioners have talked about the building alternatives prosecute pretty well i'll focus on the transportation and the market aortic that plan that called for the open space improvement to make oak street two ways it is currently depicted as one way in the eir and i think that this seriously impacts the calibration issues that were mentioned before because it means that in order to get to the parking you have to come in

avenue off of van ness and in many cases alleviates the calibration impacts i want a discussion why that is not included as part of the interpretation assessment and great to see that updated in the final hearing. >> commissioner richards. >> one last question pawar laying on commissioner moore on the plan again, i don't have my material business owner but one of the things we worked on with the planning department comp to discourage the combination of lots we have 20 lots combined with more than 10 thousand square feet we didn't want to have in the market octavia plan so i'm trying to understand why in the spirit of everything we

tried try to do in the plan. >> commissioners that concludes in item i believe you'll be taking a break. >> we'll take a lunch break thank you. >> good afternoon and week to the planning commission regular meeting for february 26, 2015 that the commission does not tolerate disruptions of any kind please silence all electronic devices that may sound off commissioners we left off in your regular calendar on item 11 pca off-street parking this is a planning code amendment and i'm going to present an ordinance to

provide additional flexibility to the off-street parking but before i do that i'd like to allow time for supervisor breed office to present. >> thank you mr. brown elective aid to the president board of supervisors supervisor breed i was saying my presentation was 6 or 7 minutes go long longer than than i hoped there are a lot of pieces i want to go through one one-on-one quickly this is a small set of planning code changes kwh when is for a long time the city had minimum parking requirement they were required to provide parking this lead to a lot of destruction of the barbara garcia or parking garages as well as park pads in

the use of building first stories for retailer parking in the past decade a request are for more green space the city has asked for more tandem and lifts and staircases are permitted and minimum parking requirement for the walkable neighborhoods is racked it is effective and important to point out they don't limit the ability to park it gives people nor option so builders and homeowners can have a say of parking on their property the legislation allows conversion of the street in front and the conversion of free space to other uses and minimize the bike lanes and helps to restore front

yard and backyard and the g f a limitations 0 how much square footage people can build yet currently outside of rh3 so there is limits on housing space or other spurs but not parks you may convert those spaces to other uses other city policies courage ground floor activity but g f a force people to use ground floors as parking why force it to be used as parking do we want to prioritize jobs ero parking this makes above ground parking towards a gross square feet area but underground

will be exempt this can you remember people to put parking 200 underground and existing buildings will convert unused spaces for parking second the legislation gives for flexibility in the r m district but allowing the spaces if you're following along on mr. sanchez report it is the same so third, the legislation gives the zoning administrator the short administratively remove an off-street parking requirement as well as the reservations are being followed the city has lowered or addressed permanent exemption equip rfp so it is easier to shed the requirements last year, it exempt the

regulations if their sole street frontage is on a bike path it only gives people the option not to build so on the district 57 for example, can turn their homes into more homes and this provision reduce the provision on the transit los angeles and conceiving the safety for bicyclists and this refrigerates the minimum parking spades important the rear yard or backyard this is before the backyard so many owners paid for the off-street parking if bias or prejudice people want to keep those this legislation will help them to restore part find their backyards and