i'm enthusiastically supportive i've come to say that is a positive thing we need to improve and increase the density to accommodate people and doing it it in a one smart way by increasing the density on the corridors is u the way to do it you'll hear people say we're not here for that but the housing crisis is a crisis people people say no, i say yes, in our backyard i'm disappointed to hear the density is not increased i don't know why not have taller buildings on the divisadero at concerns about the parking i find self-serving i've lived here 26 years without a

car and raised a couple of kids it can be done i do it every single day and mental illness are moving into the city and memoriams have not ownership cars our generation here tyler preferring to walk that's why they're moving to a transit rich area they're using shared vehicles their using public transit and biking the wiggle improvements certainly improve the situation my on comments i know it is outside of that purview the sidewalks along vera did care are crowded with people it is odd for me to be jammed into a sidewalk single file while they're ten cars on a block and personal property parked there it is not democratic but for

cabs and for car sharing and curve sighed and lift and uber drop-offs and picks up that's the only way to get around in the city of this density unless we want to say no let the housing crisis go up and drive people out of the city and all the negative consequences so wholeheartedly i support this and urge you to accept it thank you. >> thank you>> thank you. next speaker, please. >> if you've called your name it you line up on that side of the room we'll get through the speakers. >> good afternoon michelle i've lived near scott for 22 years my concerns about height the shape and shadows that cast on this it

is less a concern it allows for the high buildings this is one of san francisco gwen acceptable victorians this is for our elderly square neighborhood it feels like building a high-rise corridor along the victorian neighborhood that going to delet you that feeling and we're going to end up with something like the redevelopment of the mcallister park and geary that created a high-rise building character feeling but again my concern is height and the initiative didn't modify the height restrictions than i have no further opposition to it. >> thank you. next speaker.

>> good afternoon. my name is a owen mcdonald i've got in the neighborhood for 40 years within a block of divisadero he wholeheartedly support that san francisco has no vacant land and no additional property therefore the only way it can grow is by increasing height and density the population in 1980 was 6 hundred and 78 thousand it is currently in estimated in 2013 to be 8 hundred and 37 thousand that's an average increase inform 42 thousand you've just heard that is doubled currently it is projected to double between 2010 and 2030

u.s. sense us estimate 2.3 one percent per housing units the number of units needed since 1980 is 55 thousand by my estimate the number needed from now until 2030 will be 75 thousand the san francisco has built between a thousand and 15 hundred units a year over the last 33 years that's probably optimistic we have a shortfall of 20 thousand units currently and we're going to have a shortfall of 55 thousand units basically, what this is done is it has destroyed the deceptive in race ethnic income interest and activities that is lost

forever i believe this proposal should be approved and also building utilizing u ultimately you should triple the density along the transit corridors that commission has had there's a major responsibility for the current housing crisis in san francisco it is time to make awe mends and create enough housing so other than the rich no one else can live here thank you. >> in any order thank you. >> are you in an order okay i'm ed a property owner in the fillmore street area and also a formally land use professor at

the golden state school of law and practice in the bay area i want to remind i i'm sure you're aware of that fillmore street area is a literal disaster development throughout the united states in our textbooks we use in law school and also planners use in the 40s and 50s and 60s december mantled the african-american community and what were the goals we've heard them here again, today nor immensity in order to address the housing dammed and eliminate single-family dwellings and in this scenario with the change of the zoning we're going to allow nor density to allow developers to subdivide the unit to make

one bedroom units is that go-go to be middle-income or african-american that will be young people that work at google or other tech companies that's the reality there's no plan or discussion in the staff report regarding hasn't is eventually no discussion for low income housing or provide for people that live there in any context one the reasons is this is happening all over the bay area m t c is decede you can only get transit money from the federal government if you establish those corridors and p da priority development areas all over the bay area that is happening and people are rebelling it is enhanced a flawed plan to give money to

cities it provide more density first then transit improvement at a much later if auto all your commissioner is not informed of the fall backs for the process which i mentioned so one other item i wanted to also mention the north he had e end of this area previously referred to as the upper fillmore right now people refer it as lower heights it indicates to me the lack of thought that went into the redesignation and finally the finding are not adequate for the general plan it is for the ceqa determination thank you. >> good afternoon,

commissioners and thank you my name is david i live on turk and also hearing representing my parent who live on bush and steinerer my mom with the past president of the association i'm going to ask for the record you folks can do the same the first issue is parking the fillmore parking is simply not adequate as it stand the street are accredited with delivery trucks and the google buses trying to get through an a single one way direction and parking is going to increase folks don't have cars folks do have cars and needs a place to park them if they park in a neighborhood all day they have a parking permit they're allowed to park there except for street cleaning but

parking is a very big issue going to the way i understand this proposal it is increasing the occupancy by removing controls and with no disrespect anyone that knows or thinks that will not create micro units their flat out wrong someone can the previous speaker mentioned and take a 3 bedroom unit split it down to one bedroom units it is going to happen plain and simple regarding the existing structures way it was now police department that you are no height limits i still want to know more about height limitations and architecture limits victorians will they be torn down and something in a in their

place and the same look and feel in the fillmore street area that's it i'm going to give up the rest of my time thanks very much. >> i'm not really a proficient speaker i apologize for that but i'm passionate about all of this inch lived in the neighborhood for thirty years i'm on waller i'm a little bit surprised any fellow white haired neighbors don't walk i walk and take the public transportation if you're coming from downtown to come home to 51 or accident buses not the underground all you hear people talk about what foreign accent where is the hate where is the hate they're coming to our neighborhood.

>> trying to find the hate hate ashbury it's a tourist attraction your neighborhood has diversity for so many years i've lived there thirty years i've watched did diversity increase i don't know. i hate to say it i totally a white rich neighborhood i love my neighborhood i bought my 0 house from a 90-year-old woman and people were working class people everyone on the street have a car but people with walk are walking their dogs so parking will be an issue i'm so revved when i heard the young man say we're not going to have height or whatever isle i've seen buildings being built

next to the victorians we have no control over that any kind of beauty in the neighborhood they've pulled down something old and about how far and put up a box it's sad most major cities you have to get permits to build in ma lawn you can only paint the buildings certain colors our neighborhood is i'm sorry as i say i'm not a good speaker i apologize but basically, i'm trying to say keep the diversity, please don't allow those box buildings to go up and tourism is still a big industry they come into our neighborhood all right. we love living there >> thank you, commissioners i'm

claude district attorney a resident on bush off fillmore street i'm very concerned about this and very opposed to it as a resident of the neighborhood if you've enjoyed the restaurant and shops on fillmore street in the last 5 years it is dramatic how the foot traffic and the vehicular traffic a dramatically increased bush street a parking lot most morning of the day most morning of the away week so if today it is incredibly dense is to sit here saying we want more density i don't know how it managed as one the residents said you have double parking of the commercial vehicles with the deliveries our concern is

density bring for people and people living there creates greater traffic problems we're on a dense area of the city additionally when with you walk down those side streets with when your immediately off of fillmore you see the beauty of the residential homes it's charming and what sets san francisco apart if 9 and neighborhood are these apart from other neighborhoods when we tear them down and add bigger structures or condo unit behind them we become a home against city that is no different what is happening on mission street i encourage you to spend time on our street and see why they make santa fe san francisco special and why it tourists come here and wanted to spend 7, 8, 9 and

dollars here helping our economy thank you. >> my name is donna i'm ill prepared not notes i'm not going to be oath eagle speaker the density it incredible i've moved to mccan recall street 22 years ago i like the diversity and the look of the neighborhood i liked the density of the neighborhood i also want to say a 6 unit apartment building has a former radiator shop i talked with the people that want to building build a building that is cutting off all sunlight and cutting off the sunset views that my tenants

currently have they said it will take 2 years to build it's difficult on the tenant and maybe your lucky in a rent control building your tenants will leave and you'll have higher rents if that's the type of neighbors that are coming in the neighborhood please find another place parking is a big issue i've spent $110,000 to build a garage on my 2 unit building but an issue for my tenants on my block not on grove street as an example two spots came back from evacuates to find 3 spots removed parking spots removed because the muni decided they want to put more buses an mc can recall street for years

the city dumps group homes into our city with adults with eagle and mental handicaps and for housing i feel like we're being put upon all the time and need to stand up and say something we've lost scores of parking spaces on oak and south street we're now louis more parking spaces on broderick because of the bike lanes i can barely walk i can't ride a bicycle i think the city has to think about everybody besides bicyclists and builders the other issue in case you explicit see the news we're in the 5th year of drought

where's the water going to come from for the building density everyone can't live in san francisco why on earth do we talk about building the city bigger and bigger beyond that oh and supervisor breed just lost my vote. >> is there any additional public comment okay public comment is closed. >> commissioner antonini. >> thank you a few of my reflections and some questions in terms of you know the growth of san francisco it is not a question of whether it is going to grow people are coming here they'll compete with the housing stock unless we figure out a way to build more they'll come and pay more for a o for what exists the idea of increasing density it a good idea if done carefully

the people that talked about parking it is a good point a reality and we have lost parklets are novice and bike lanes are important and muni is important we've been losing and losing more street parking spaces over the last few years in addition to this density it will be wise to also look to see if increase an opportunity for some sort of parking garage in the area that services all the people not only not so that that live here to they my utilize it but more and more visitors coming all the time i'm glad to see they're coming they turned divisadero into a designation but they'll have to find somewhere for their cars to park i may have a question for staff

regarding the density bonuses and it sort of says well, if there are a future density bonuses then you'll get more density because of the those bonuses i mean, i little that's the case anyway way we're sort of voting on something for establishing a density limit based on some of the perimeters of nc ts so i don't really understand why we're also going to let them have more density if there's bulgdz for affordability that's above and beyond what we're approving in the issuance and department staff wear asking you to recommend they've set up the density limit up so when we develop the affordable housing and the bonuses program if we

want it to apply it will be available that will be separate legislation process the legislation it regulating spent by form so height and bulk is e in some ways setting up a board density does that make sense. >> there were many people in the public worried about controlling the density and the units with two and three bedrooms and but then if we pass this which i think it good legislation on top of it after giving them this bulgdz or the ability to have more density then on top of if they put affordable units there will be more than bargained for in this legislation. >> the intent no to enable more but any future coordination between the two programs the way this program is structured the

nc t is allowing - i guess the advantage of future cooperation the possibility of require the unit to be affordable we courage them to the affordable open site. >> with the same density so those are two different issues there's been legislation passed if you make affordable units that is all have more density but it is sort of we have to decide what is appropriate for the neighborhood it is crowded and uncomfortable whether people r people are earning low or high in case the fefrngs effects are the same but i'm fine with this for new you're saying that i don't know whether the language is necessary if they do something we'll consider it all the time what you're talking

about the density i'm not sure i'm in favor of the conditions hass as proposed i have a couple of comments i'm concerned about the n nc t rules they say a couple of things it is important their 5 or more unit thirty percent have 20th century to be 3 bedrooms that helps although there is no restriction on the square footage so while you have a lot of bedrooms you can have some really small units with small bedrooms or minimum sizes about that doesn't address the family needs if they make them micro bedrooms and the other talking about they're being 2 thousand square feet with 2 or more bedrooms and merger that to not merger or make two bedrooms but

two bedrooms for 2 hundred and 50 minimum that means you used to have a 3 possibility a 3 bedroom unit or now you end up with 1 2 bedroom and 1 bedroom units so i'm not i guess that helps a little bit but i think that there should be some consideration and this is legislation for another day that is more on the r n t c legislation that governs this is we have to look at situations like does it apply to less than 5 unit and should we have a minimum number of bedrooms that you know a little bit more than what is required now in some of the merged unit for the multiple unit but generally i'm in favor

of that but the language that speaks to the unrelated unaffordable unit in the future we'll take that up and see what is other commissioners have to say i'm in favor with refresh my recollection we don't chop those up into little unit that are not less affordable for those who see this legislation smaller unit are generally more affordable that will not has nothing to do with you know with affordability area it may make that more affordable i'm concerned about making sure we have multiple bedroom units. >> sorry public comment is closed. correct. >> thank you. >> mr. sanchez. >> so commissioner antonini my may i respond to the questions about the division and the concerned raised about the

public with a 3 bedroom unit into 3 separate one bedroom units there is a planning code section that prohibit that and the standards state that in order to even divide under the code the existing unit must exceed 2 thousand square feet and contain more than 2 bedrooms and no less than 2 hundred and 50 square feet in size and meet all the requirements for the exposure for open space there are many other factors that requisite the size of the number of unit in a building so exposure and rear yard requirements and other envelope requirements so i think we've got experience with that over the seven years since the market octavia and the eastern neighborhood plan allowed those types of unit to be created and

this planning code revisions are been successful i believe and in regards to the kind of the unit mix requirement that is something we have been successful in implementing between the planning code and building code that result in the bedrooms that are fundamental bedrooms there are certainly minimum 70 square feet for one bedroom but we evaluated those and tried to have bedrooms that are, in fact fundamental and from last week there's only the one request to have a higher or you know number of unit that don't meet that unit mix requirement there is only one application we heard on the market street that h that has been implemented. >> commissioner richards. >> market octavia was referenced both in the packet as well as the zoning administrator

i'm very supportive of this type of dissension indication in upper market it worked very well we don't have many issues at all and it works in other nc t eastern neighborhood among those there are two questions i have mr. johnson and mr. star we have carbohydrates in the upper market to alleviate concerns two of those being the cu four lock combinations to prevent large development by someone buying two or three parcels is that going to be covered in this nc t? lock combinations >> he might get on his laptop there are locates for 10 thousand square feet. >> one of the recommendations we put a cu