>> hearing for thursday, november 5, 2015, disruptions of any kind. please silence any devices that may sound off during the proceedings. if you don't know how please turn them off and when speaking before the commission, if you care to, do state your name for the record. i will repeat what i said earlier we do not have an overflow room roirpgd if you can't find a seat in the room please wait outside if you care to speak submit a speaker card to make sure you're aware your name has been called for a particular item okay. >> as soon as an overflow room is made available i'll let you all know where that is

i'd like to call roll at this time. commissioner president fong commissioner wu commissioner antonini commissioner hillis commissioner johnson commissioner moore and commissioner richards thank you, commissioners commissioners, the first item on your agenda is item for continuance item one the go affordable unit general plan amendment and two affordable housing bonus planning code amendment and next affordable housing and public zoning district are proposed for that continuance until december 3rd, 2015, item 4 at 1126 irving street has been withdrawn i have a number of speakers commissioners. >> okay.

>> opening it up for public comment for continuances katherine howard (calling names) and if you all want to line up on that side of the room pent. >> for those members of the public you're only allowed to speak on the matters of continuance not on the subject itself and okay. i'm katherine requesting a continuance on the items 1, 2, 3 i support in continuance but december 3rd street is too soon to hear that this must be continued to march the planning department has been working on legislation for over

a year without informing the general public comment the only meeting held in the sunset on october 29th i'm astonished by the studies we knew nothing about and now the public is supposed to come up with an intelligent analysis and suggestion in thirty days and during the holidays the city has done better than this in the past a robust process for the recreation and open space and robust process for for the ocean plan why has the city taken the route of the closed-door any wonder the sunset people were upset with the public process i have on the screen some youtube sites of 3 tapes of that hearing he advise you, you watching to watch that the planning

commission second two are the public comment or unhappy public citizens. >> at that meeting supervisor katie tang encouraged her following fell supervisors to introduce the plan and submit public comment on this is an excellent idea those mergers should be held after the holidays the resulting public comment should be worked into the legislation by the planning department staff and the staff should 134i789 the revised legislation to you for your expert review a continuance inform march 2016 is needed so the public can get up to speed on the legislation and the supervisors will hold the meetings and planning department staff and you can incorporate those changes into legislation let's not do this at the board of supervisors but the planning commission you're the guys that know the stuff thanks very much.

>> thank you. next speaker, please. >> good afternoon i'm barbara graham from the coalition for san francisco neighborhoods i sent you a copy of our resolution let's see and there we go. >> c s f n in hopes you'll support our resolution to continue this resolution until march of 2016 we need public input we don't need another - another excuse me. - another draft legislation

passed without getting community input this is the resolution is from the 36 neighborhoods in san francisco that are concerned that the design guidelines that were missing from the amendments to the general plan were in the draft state only released on october 22nd those design guidelines will take precedence over all guidelines that are currently in operation in the city we ask that you take the action to have a continuance for these topics recommended to the affordable housing benefits program

and until march of 2016 to give the public the opportunity to understand what this is all about and as supervisor katie tang supervisor tang said the other day at the open meeting in the library we need to have every meeting in every supervisor district so the people across the city that are effected bill that legislation will be able to participate thank you very much for your consideration. >> thank you. >> thank you. next speaker, please. >> >> i'm eileen with the park side education committee speak supports of continuance of 13 to urge the commission to pass on

this for 6 months the neighborhoods were intellectually excluded in the meetings those were meetings not opened to the public they product large volumes of information the department has recently released take the residents time to analyze a preliminary analysis indicates the programs are a massive rezoning district or r n-3 and 4 and others this is a process not a fast track process speakers for the record has additional information thank you. >> next speaker

>> good afternoon. my name is a geena residents the richmond district and a member of the planner for the district this is the largest organization in san francisco i'm asking you to please continue approving this legislation until march of 2016 that much time is needed in order for all the neighborhoods going to be impacted by the legislation to participate in this process as you've heard before most the discussions about this 15 page change for the planning code has not been done with a public participation the public didn't here about this until a newspaper accomplished published at the end of august it is steam rolled through and the next step about the the board of

supervisors in the richmond district not one single meeting discussing this matter people have been caught off guard and we were flab gaited we didn't know about that everyone is caught by surprise and overwhelmed by a lack of community input the legislation will alternate the very that dna of the richmond district as well as the rest of san francisco please extend the continuance until march of 2016 thank you. >> hello him here to ditto ditto ditto everybody i know you have a long day i'll not keep you but urge you go to e you to do an extension of this okay. when i was reading the draft i

did not see anything about transportation infrastructure, schools, police or fire to say nothing of it so i'll be urging to look at our own neighborhood is this going to effect you across the street the guy next door to me cut his home in half and two families living upstairs and can't wait to get to the backyard and have 6 cars i urge you to all of us to think and have community input everywhere this is for you guys okay. thank you. >> good afternoon commission i'm laura 40 year residents of san francisco living in the inner sunset i urge you to continue this matter until next

spring all 3 items 1, 2, 3 obviously this is a resdoerng the entire city no public input at the last minute learned about the open house on october 26th i was landlord the open house required i speak to a lot of people to collect information i found inconsistent information before the planners one of the common sense responses we're still working think that i read the public relations summary material and found inconsistent what i was told vertically he substantially attend the merging egg go where i heard slightly different information that was a standing room only crowd probably 200 people many outside and couldn't see and barely hear

the presentations obviously a lot of neighborhood concern that had i tried to read the legislation i found consistence with the information this is obviously done in a hurry that appears to bypass residents and small business input i urge to continue this for democratic input into this that effects every neighborhood in the city thank you very much. >> thank you. next speaker, please >> thank you. next speaker, please. >> good afternoon manpower i would like to request that we continue this until march of 2016 i wasn't exactly sure where to bring this up this as public situation that effects everyone

in the city i have here thirty workforce well 29 pages of signatures of citizens around the city requesting a better plan many don't understand the plan many of us don't understand those are going to the mayor and the board of supervisors but i did e-mail digital copies to you today along with a letter i written that concerns any particular issues rather than articulating up all our time i'll hand this signatures i only have one copy not wanting to kill too many trees and aspect again later about any particular concerns thank you. >> thank you. >> hi my name is susan i

started the outer park side association better known as o shall i opened the chronicle about an article about this proposed change and thought that was an interesting meeting for october 29th i got jeff buckley and peter cohen to serve on the panel not knowing we were going to get over 200 people showing up this opens the floodgates a lot of questions and a lot of concern and we know that katie has to katie tang has to work with all the supervisors i'm pretty much will they'll want similar meetings in their district this needs time to hear from everyone people are there's

a lot of misinformation floating around and panic additional angry anger ii think people north need information i myself am remaining neutral i ran the meeting and fell breaking any chaplin hundred and 7 that people and well over 200 people packed into a room that holds 75 because of the turn out i think that would be judicious to delay this somewhat at least people proposes the amendments and full decision i think this will pass much more easily thank you. >> good afternoon, everyone. commissioners i'm cesar chavez coalition for san francisco neighborhoods and with the sunset association for responsible people sharp was not

noticed about this legislation this planning proposal the coalition of san francisco neighborhoods c s f n found reading an article quote planning had a meeting for the government elections committee and the general assembly i read the resolution that we passed in a meeting last month another resolution forwarded in the mail this is about outreach we need input not information and handed down to us okay and like i said c sf n none was notified yet you talk about the planning department talks about stakeholders who are the stakeholders it largely is the developers and the financiers

and everyone associated with that affordable housing density program just briefly perfectly warm to the idea of a continuance but needs to be not december 3rd but march third which is the planning meeting date we need input not information handed down to us thank you for your time. >> thank you. next speaker, please. >> good afternoon, commissioners my name is stan the president of the board of the telegraph hill i think like you and sympathy we understand the importance the affordable crisis in the city we strongly support the efforts to find a solution we all need and want to have but that is a crisis it is taken a while to develop and a while to solve which is why given the

importance of this the sweeping and the defactor rerezoning of the city this is why we're joining the coalition of san francisco neighborhoods and all the people that have spoken this afternoon and sent comments in to support a continuance a continuance until march seems like a good idea the continuance depending on accomplishing certain things to assure the additional public outreach is done that the components that are researched in the legislation are made available for sufficient time for thoughtful review and comment that the residents and owners and neighborhood of the parcels are notified and have an opportunity to weigh in and open public mergers are in all the

spiritually areas with that, i urge you to continue this not just to the 3rd of december but beyond that to complete those alterations. >> my name is bob i owned and operated the laundry. >> parking lot on 25 and mission one block away from the bart station i have an application to develop a condo complex on that site i very strongly support this legislation and i it seems to me a very large crowd i see no reason why not have an informational hearing and if necessary have further informational hearings later i want to remind the crowd that the steep density program is the law of the land this legislation

is simply conform the city's laws to the state law and as encouraged under the state law add allow the city to add a customized program for san francisco so the state density bonus program is already the law so when this is about san francisco tailoring the program foreclose the needs of san francisco i'll urge the planning commission to consider taking the san francisco program and applying to the entire city except it rather than just to certain parts of city for example, i can. >> sir, i'm sorry this is on the matter of the continuance not actual legislation. >> thank you, thank you.

>> commissioner president fong and commissioners i'm kathy a continuance for at least 3 months will be needed for 3 reasons to eliminate the conflicts with the state law in the merry measure and a.m. gis gets as you apply the environmental impact report for the owners that can't be done if 3 months first of all, the proposal conflicts with state law because it didn't use the fair argument standard whether it is sufficient and uses the are erroneous standard of demonstrating to the satisfaction of the environmental review officer the project will not adversely effect the shadows or cause winds ceqa not only requires the fair argument but more impacts to be valued like noise and

traffic and illicitly and sewage and visual impacts, etc. they all have to be looked at and the significant effects that had been elevated in a full eir relates to the policy changes in the policy amendment that changes the policy that protects the neighborhood characterization to say the city recognizes the character while permitting the overall building mass including more rental unit on site they'll be paying lip service to the city is it maintains the neighborhood character while permitting overall building mass that is major and the housing element for the conclusion that inputs the neighborhood is less than sixth you need an eir and the urban sign element will be

weakened to say that you don't have to relate the scale to the prevailing height and bilk in the area but allow the buildings that are several stories taller that requires an eir and also a new policy for the eastern waterfront plan but there was the successful ballot initiative that said that voters must approve the height limits the statement to increase the height it conflicting with the voter initiative and the voters can't be over ridden by the board of supervisors is that my time. >> 25 seconds. >> thank you. >> there are other housing element that require an eir and none has received a planning process and the helmet policies no changes in density without the planning process that requires an eir there are a lot of flaws one of the major ones

no specifications one of units from the. >> thank you, ma'am, your time is up. >> good afternoon, commissioners i'm don lived with the last election in a lot of ways san francisco gave most we'll move forward to create an mixed use city for the rer8d loefrn the developer resources and increasing the public transportation infrastructure and additional office space for more jobs in the city this is create in a sustainable and responsible manner in taking the bayshore line and at least go back to the state law from 1979 statistics we needing need a density program and my

understanding we're out of the experience with that and also two the federal how are you affordable act we need to address as well in the city i want to commend the parklet planning department for the program i urge the commissioners to not continue this but continue with moving forward and starting this process because it is important for our city thank you have a good day. >> good afternoon, commissioners rob pool with the housing initiative we don't need to jump into conclusions was that this program does or does not do we're learning how the program applies to state law

you'll find a modest and thoughtful approach to create more affordable housing for the large range i look forward to seeing that when that happens thank you. >> good afternoon, commissioners my name is george wooding the president the coalition for san francisco neighborhood your organization has begun to take a look at this density bonus program and we have several questions several things we don't like first of all, we never were contacted by the city we had to find out to our own membership and invite the planning members down the first thing i want to ask

for i want to we want to people this discussion by the way, so we have time to go over the eir how this changes density and a sense of the city of zoning this is an enormous change for san francisco the first question someone questioned is this program even necessary i think you have to start there i know that two years ago the state made a change san francisco now is aggressively trying to overpromote this and take this change as a license for basically developers and it looks like the word affordability is something that the city planning department has started to hide behind everywhere you go you hear about

the affordability affordability is exactly what we want but we've favoring the developers giving sdebts and lack of enrollment not obeying our eirs and following the maps and changing them because the developer friendly measure and not so much about affordability we have to be very careful when we think about that and look at this we want at least 3 months to go over this thank you, again. >> thank you. next speaker, please. >> sorry a couple more names

(calling names). >> good afternoon. my name is a patricia a resident of san francisco for the past 44 years lived in the mission district for the past 37 any street in san francisco and ask people what is the affordable bonus program nobody knows. (laughter) it is a quiet they know that is trying to be pushed through basically a good way for developers it sweeps awe second-hand smoke and neighborhood and building guidelines and special use district in addition it does nothing to address people would live here what it looked like to live behind one of the new 6 foot or 7 foot 6 or 7 foot story

building no possibility for that the residents to file a discretionary review >> ma'am, i'm sorry this is on the matter of continuance not on the merits of the legislation. >> okay. i have this i don't want a pony time i want to be voted upon by the citizens of san francisco we voted upon 8 washington and voted on proposition 10 for the pier 70 and we just passed prop d this is a game-changer that is a huge game changeer for this city the voters should have their say if we voted on smaller things it e that didn't effect our city the voters should have their say thank you very much i also urge you if thank you haven't seen it t yet san francisco is losing it's charm

and soul if this program goes through the way it is it will lose it all thank you. >> is there any additional public comment on the items proposed for continuance? >> is is there anyone from the public that wishes to speak on this item please line up on the left-hand side. >> right or you're right. >> hello my name is mini ma a resident of the richmond district i didn't know anything about the affordable housing bonus program until a few days ago people didn't have the chance to find out about that the hearing should be continued for at least 2 months and

possible longer it is a very big program that will change the whole way the city it is and people should be able to weigh in and also it should be a transparent process in this country we have representative government and the government is accountable to the people from the people don't know what is going on they have no chance to voice an opinion this is how the program relates to different laws and how it relates to the environment and the infrastructure i think that you know it needs detailed information and detailed input from the people not that i like it or not last week it in this and that regard it didn't meet the standard even continuing it until december 3rd is not enough maybe 3 or six

months because once these things are done it is very, very, very bad to do it wrong we could ruin our city let's take time and also the people in the city should have a say no time to have an effective say we don't want emotional for this reason and this is not right to do it thoroughly and correctly thank you. >> is there any additional public comment okay public comment is closed. >> commissioner richards. >> yes. want to make that clear absolutely support of concept that public policy it is on i support the public policy goal of increasing the sense indication for the new residents

coming out the city all neighborhood have a share not only east of twin peaks but west of twin peaks having said that, i have one comment one i know we're rein questioning the guidelines we'll get an update in the near future someone raised the question of the design guidelines we sit here week and week after week and so process questions he can't wait to hear what is out the informational i'm not sure what is special about the march date it is 3 months, however, when i asked to continue for the article 2 rewrite we waited a little bit extra time and got to right and people here assessing how wonderful and agreed with what we did mr. hayes has a good point that has taken a long time to so solve and mr. actually

man, i want to hear an informational today i know that when we were here last time we are that hesitant to issue it we initiated it i'm not about end less process i'll say i don't think the issues people are raising are a smoke screen to kill this thing but get it right the first time if we spends more time up front we'll save time in the end it will end up in our laps if something don't go right and people marching on this chamber i want to take the advice of the neighborhood and continue this to march third. >> commissioner moore. >> mrs. download i didn't. >> i'm. >> i'm not deputy city

attorney susan cleveland-knowles can i point out 3 items on the continuance calendar two with the affordable housing bonus and the third one the district rezoning introduced by the legislative staff could speak to that you may be on a 90 daytime limit. >> item 3 is not about the affordable housing bonus a separate item. >> i move to continue items 1250e one and two to march third. >> commissioner antonini. >> i'll spoke against the motion we're having an informational hearing later today and i understand that staff will do a comprehensive presentation about the legislation or the item that is before us and even if it is continued until the third, i favor didn't mean final action will occur on

that day it can occur sooner but occur later in the public is not satisfied or the commissioners are not satisfied the problems and resolve with this proposal have been adequately answered so i will vote against the continuance it didn't mean i did not think there are significant things with this proposal needs to be answered and carefully studied if i don't feel it is ready on the third i'll continue it for a at a later time but it is important to get it moving and address the issue. >> commissioner hillis can i ask staff a question on the level of outreach and community meetings specifically we've heard from a couple of neighborhood groups and others have we had any of the groups or

requested them or planning to when have we done and our plan. >> sure we'll go over this in the informational meeting what we've done today citywide outreach including the studies and information that were in your packet about the late summer and late fall we hosted an online webinar for people who couldn't make it to the open house can watch online a workshop and hosted a community or sorry an open house at city hall and had a few mercy housing with the coalition for san francisco neighborhood and then also o f r a some of them and working with the pair to set up a future meeting and with other

groups. >> johnston. >> certainly commissioners we can do more in the next few weeks ago we've asked supervisors to if they're interested in sponsoring mergers in their district we sent out that e-mail this week and i'll be happy to to go to meetings. >> have they taken you up on that. >> no. >> i fully anticipate some will. >> we should continue to do it feels tight the december 3rd date i'll recommend we convert that to another merging it is important to continue to hear this and get input i don't know the mask magic of march maybe january we are this does respond to some of the voter initiatives that were

passed prop c this is the way to do it no magic solution those are the types of programs along with the affordable housing bond and other things we've discussed in the past this is a tough work of implementing that and being able to build affordable housing we're under some time pressure to actually get this moving you know, i agree with commissioner antonini we can push this to january and have a hearing in december and if not ready in january we've got a great history making sure that people are heard and hope people stay for the presentation and comment on the substance of proposal that informs us i will suggest that date be kicked a little bit earlier given the crisis no january and another hearing in december to take additional entity ignore those not able to

make that hearing or community hearings. >> commissioner wu. >> thank you i would agree we should have the opportunity informational today we should keep december 3rd as an informational the process should continue to work through all of the meetings of supervisors don't take the department on the offer go to those districts and do presentations so i could be poster of the motion as property but i had think that it might be good to put it in january or february and then in needed to be continued again, we have that author commissioner moore. >> i'm supportive of the informational meeting today and in december i'm concerned about the holidays and a few meetings we have in december given the way the holidays fall this year i believe the department should

hold neighborhood specific meetings not just generic how it effects the neighborhoods in particular it is requiring preview moldings for me there is a lot of open-end questions for affordability we still don't have clear answers to some of the things that are effecting affordability or the lack or loss of affordable housing i am interested to see the neighborhood but the neighborhood have been the strings and the participation throughout the years is creating good dialogue and a democratic open-end and transparent planning environment i hope we as an important change upon us as this legislation proposes pursue that process with a lot of attention to detail

commissioner richards. >> i appreciate the efforts of staff what we're hearing more i think that again, i come back to article 2 t to continue we put the neighborhoods on notice we're going to have a hearing on this future date and give you enough time to flush out the issues and give the staff to hold qualified hearings so i'd like to leave the dates march first we'll manage until that date and commissioner moore. >> i want to sound like commissioner antonini but what are other communities doing planning professionals across the state are talking about the speak the legislation relate to two particular places only us carrying the burden or extra

steps everyone else participates in i'll leave that hanging as a question and professionals across the state have. >> commission a motion second to continue items one and two to march 16 and item 3 as proposed to december 3rd, 2015. >> on that motion. >> let's split this motion. >> why not votes on items one and two on the continuance to march third and commissioner antonini no commissioner hillis no commissioner johnson. >> commissioner moore commissioner richards commissioner wu and commissioner president fong no that motion fails three to four. >> commissioner richards.

>> open to the other motion i'd like to make another motion to continue items one and two to february 11th. >> thank you. >> commissioner johnson. >> thank you yeah, so i voted against the motion for march third we need to keep a sense of urgency that we approach the dates that we specify a little bit earlier in the calendar have the opportunity option to do what we did today, we're supposed to hear the action item a month ago we heard it and sound like sound like we're punishing it out further march 24ird is too much time to pass and the question to my mind when we talk about continuance what will relearn in the interim and this particular legislation be better for the

neighborhood and city many of the comments from the public revolve around ancillary work that needs to be done the legislation didn't address design we need to address the design i don't know if this is skenl i'll be supportive of any dates but january to keep it going and have the opportunity option of voting not taking action on those specific dates. >> commissioner antonini. >> yeah. i'll agree with commissioner johnson as i pointed out earlier we can continue but not move it up once it's scheduled for a particular date i think that keeping the discussion going and having turning the december date if this is continued to that date into informational if we come to

the point it is not ready is the most prudent i have definitely concerns about parts of that and how it ends up being first and foremost will determine if i support it or not a lot of that could be done in the next few weeks i'll against the february motion. >> commissioner moore. >> i like to ask the planning commission we either get it right or screw up no in between this is a life or death matter once we have the change or the right action depending on how you look at it i'd like to be sure we have basically turned every stone he agree with the commissioners that the planning department is doing a good job

and doing a lot of ground work the the devil is in the details we've said that many times and plenty of other examples we spend the time and in the end have the opportunity full support by which we needs going forward. >> commissioner richards. >> hearing any fell commissioners i'm amend my motion to continue this to january 2nd all correct. >> commissioner hillis. >> i want to reiterate of the supervisors don't take that up like district 6 not a lot of sites where the supplies but a lot of the district the public we want your input we don't have it right january 28th but keep the momentum we'll that only heard about affordable housing and this is one tool we should

move with the this batch on it. >> let me add a couple of comments i appreciate the thoughts from the commissioners and the public one person used this term a game changer i agree so therefore as commissioner johnson says keeping the date short keeps everyone on a shorter leash and others engage on the topic and gets us through the holiday. >> commissioner moore. >> i'd like to ask the director your department is under tremendous pressure we have an odd schedule we're off on the 17 on do you feel confront by the end of january the work that will be mature

enough. >> we're prepared to do the work necessary commissioner we'll go out and just to be contrary 3 hearings in december if you need on additional informational hearing in a late december or january we'll do what is necessary for the engagement of the community. >> appreciate our clear answer. >> commissioner antonini. >> yeah. i could be poster of this motion but wanting to keeping the third as an informational hearing that is still would be the case for those of wyoming you who came in or not be assured another informational hearing on the third more if necessary and i want to quickly add wale have this informational hearing those of you can stick around watch this later and weed out any misinformation will be a light shed on today's hearing.

>> commissioners, if there's nothing further there is a motion that's been second to continue items one and two to january commissioner antonini. >> commissioner hillis commissioner johnson commissioner moore commissioner richards commissioner wu and commissioner president fong so moved, commissioners, that motion passes unanimously 7 to zero we do have item 3 left on the matter of continuance. >> commissioner antonini. >> i'll move to continue that to december 3rd and second. >> was - and second. >> thank you on the motion to continue item 3 to december 3rd. >> commissioner antonini and commissioner hillis commissioner johnson commissioner moore commissioner richards commissioner wu and commissioner president fong so moved, commissioners, that motion passes unanimously - commissioners item 4 has been

quantum under commission matters for the draft minutes for october 1st and 22, 2015. >> commissioner moore. >> are we allowed to ask why urban street was restored. >> the project sponsor withdraw it i don't know the reason the pending question whether or not it was going before affordable housing that was a challenge as the commission opposed to the applicant and interesting for us to hear why it was withdrawn. >> we can certainly request that from the planner at this time but we've moved beyond that agenda item. >> their rising the project as well so it no longer required a cu. >> again commissioners item 5 adoption of draft minutes for october 22nd and 1, 2015.

>> thank you jonas will public comment on the draft minutes. >> seeing none, public comment is closed. and commissioner antonini and move to approve the draft minutes of october 15th and 22 >> second. >> thank you, commissioners on that motion to adopt the minutes commissioner antonini commissioner hillis commissioner johnson commissioner moore commissioner richards commissioner wu and commissioner president fong so moved, commissioners, that motion passes unanimously 7 to zero and places you on commissioners questions or comments. >> commissioner antonini. >> sir if you could bring up the image for me i'd like to ask you to help me welcome a new granddaughter isabel was born on sunday october 25th at the cal pacific hospital we're happy and

siblings overjoyed (clapping.) congratulations. >> thank you. >> you have someone help to moe the lawn now (laughter). >> that might be a couple of years but. >> commissioner richards. >> a couple of points first commissioner hillis and i attend the boosters meeting it was an informative two hours that was put on the california college of arts and stanley was the narrative and the fatality our give us ideas a lot of stuff i felt like emotionally he put into words one of the ones that stuck with me the fact that a lot of the buildings we're getting to see in the city are a result of individualism an image of a building every material

known to man in the facade of that building and look at it it really crystallized the fact that we are creating wrapping paper building we have a box and wrap that with material and everything is clusters and looks at the same he showed us some good paroles ho how to use the texture to make someone fit ♪ the historic context of this of to that grateful and geography i'll ask staff i said this it is a lot easy if on the discretionary review if their abbreviated or not to have the awe breftsdz architecture it is hard to understand as the project relates to the neighboring building i know it is to urge the project sponsor but it helps to see the 3-d

render i know we mentioned the design guideline any thoughts >> we're final to be where little cable cars climb halfway to the stars those are not the rights designs for the small-scale we're working on the larger scale project looirgz like the potrero those are nearly readies for the public comment and to bring in discussion so we'll try to get those out in the next few weeks. >> thank you. >> commissioners, if there's nothing further we can move on to depended matters directors announcements. >> commissioners i want to reiterate for your benefit and the benefit of the public particularly the members of the public in the mission district we are continuing and will continue to work with the communities on the mission 2020 plan those monthly meetings are

continuing the subcommittee work been going on is continuing and i just want to reiterate for the members of the community that work will continue as proposed we will schedule an informational hearing probably in the early part of new year to give you an update thank you. >> thank you. >> item 8 review the past incidents for the board of appeals and the historic preservation commission. >> good afternoon emry rogers for the planning department staff giving two weeks ago of land use matters a couple weeks ago the landmark the university and is historic preservation commission initiated this in may and in august took a site visit and unanimously recommended the designation this building has distinct a work of two master

arithmetic at the land use commission for the middle east 200 and 22 petitionsers thanking supervisor campos and with a positive recommendation and the spaces for non-complying structures in the zoning this is how the height is of non-conforming building and create a process to authorize certain types of in file in the downtowns this commission recommended approval with administrations in july and the proposed modification what to have the zoning administrator review the two size this amendment was not include in the ordinance by the sponsor at the committee there were a few speakers on this item and supervisor kim end up asking for a continuance to have her office

brief and the staff has briefed. this will be held on the 16 several items passed on the second reading including the jewish home and all related orientals as well the corrections and the board did adopt the housing balance report new introductions included establishing the filipino culture heritage district by supervisor kim and move on to this week the ordinance that will increase the informs no for the dwelling unit merger or demolition this requires the notice for those unauthorized unit prior to the removal it was heard and you voted to approve with modifications including adding language it highlights the new remits modifying the

ordinance to bring in the existing procedures and all your recommendation were included at the land use commission supervisor wiener presented the ordinance minimal. and then the committee unanimously recommended to move the ordinances to the board of supervisors. >> also was an interim controls for the new signs in the district planning area as interim controls those were not considered by the practicing those those controls will restrict the height of the sign within 200 feet of the parks and visible for privately opposed open space spaces new signs need to be dimable and turned off from 11:00 p.m. to 6:00 a.m. there was some debate about the hours their turned off and introduced to be turned off at 9:00 p.m.

but it is back to 10:00 p.m. and board of supervisors hearing on tuesday they moved it back they're required to be turn off after 11:00 p.m. >> those controls will be in place for 18 months or until permit controls are established also at the committee an ordnance regarding the preferences and affordable housing programs this commission voted unanimously to remedy the approval in october and our substantive modifications are removing the proposal to expand the displaced tenant beyond the existing preferences so the existing preferences the ellis act and this commission requested the trailing issue and be brought back to the commission for review and recommended the approval for the supervisorial and a half-mile buffer around

the selected project the board consider the geographyic boundary smaller the supervisorial this is an item that gardened a lot of public comment there were 2 hours of public comment the majority of speakers asked to add to the percentage and make the geographical boundary smaller that was discussed rusz reducing the size they voted to amend the ordinance for the preference from the ordinance and acknowledging it will be heard in trailing ordinance and the committee passed an ordinance to increase the neighborhoods preference to 40 percent because this was a substantive amendment continues and heard next week supervisor wiener did duplicate the file and made it a further amendment it codifies for people living and working in the city

and county of san francisco those people and this will be - >> almost getting through there a few more the new transportation sustainability fee was heard by the full board on tuesday this impact fee will replace and expand to residential and medical service uses the first reading the supervisors continued to deliberate on the sea levels and whether it it should be applied to in the hospitals the fee rates were amended an october 5th and further there will be no grandfathering for folks who submitted their application after the date of the introduction of the ordinance so as we've been continuing in the weeks ago since there then as a result, the hospitals and medical services providers supervisor

cowen proposed a new calculation for those uses and the supervisor proposed amendment passed unanimously and goes back to the land use commission and the facts on the new fees the dipped file included an amendment that sxoolz direct the planning department and the controller's office to develop a studies on the feasibility of charging a variable fee based upon the geography within the city and to return to the board with the results of the study one of months the boards voted to approve the ordinance on first reading and the duplicated file will be accepted o sent back to the land use commission that concludes the boards committee any questions. >> if i can make one comment on the last item the translation stein sustainability fee we're

very, very excited the board pass many of our recommendations and in one form or another i wanted to thank the staff and other agency for moving forward. >> and the board of appeals met two items of interest the appeal of the variance letters i've issued for 530 and others discretionary review they were legalizing dwelling unit that had been cut off the building so the appeal the appellant didn't show up at the hearing last night but remember the issues were about the legitimate thought possible ongoing violation of the work units in the building as a condition of approve i included a months plan to demonstrate the compliance with the work units in the building unfortunately as part of appeal that has the windows

ones the letter is finally at the board of appeals decision they've you would it in the absence of the appellant and they have 3 months to demonstrate compliance. >> is historic preservation commission did meet yesterday two items of interest would be the report with a recommendation for approval to designate the boards building at through 92 to the board of supervisors as a landmark staff provided a really, really good presentation i'll strongly recommend 52 it an amazing fires presentation how the earthquake effected this building it actually survived that earthquake the commission heard informational presentation about a pilot plaque program for the

landmark buildings thought san francisco. >> commissioners, if there's nothing further we can more often - and commissioner moore. >> zoning secretary forward us the link to the presentation where the historic preservation commission. >> of course from sfgovtv but i can forward it. >> commissioners, that places you under your on case 9 at 448 grove street an informational update. >> good afternoon commissioner president fong and mbes planning department staff the item before you is an update the grove street approved as a restaurant following a public discretionary review in september of the 2014 and the project sponsor originally requested a change of use from retail to restaurant the neighborhood notification and the discretionary review and

expressed the concerns of the bona fide eating place for the place at the rear at the dr hearing they took the doctor review all doors that assess the rear yard should remain closed and locked during the operation and provide the planning department with an operation review and the planning commission shall not hear any application until the restaurant is in operation for 6 months and the owners have provided the information and the project sponsor should appoint a liaison for the property the project sponsor has filed with each the conditions during the dr hearing since is dr hearing the department heard two complaints and one letter of know from the neighborhood and others letters

in support 4 complaints have been opened since it owned and operated opened in april of this year and two remain under investigation the first complaint the operator was not keeping the backdoor located during the business hours the second was that the operates expanded the storage area from the restaurants into an adjacent garage this constituted an user authorize use and the staff investigated the owner and found in violation it is not operating as a bona fide eating place upon the receipt the department said that 35 percent of gross sales are not to be considered a bona fide eating place and the bottles in the open patio that

creates enjoys the department about work with the restaurant operator for the violation before reviewing any conditional use authorization to operate an outdoor activity the operator may wish to change the use to a bar the operate also must find a place inside for the trash the project sponsor is available for questions i'm available to answer any questions. >> we'll open for public comment any public comment on that item? >> yeah. please come up. >> did i start spec i'm a resident on grove street the residential building adjacent to the grove that is operating in the short time they've been operating my partner and i have numerous ordinances of noise

under the patrons we hear throughout the apartment and garbage in the trash bin noise and employees clean power avenue openly it frequently remains open after hours and closing as late as 1115 or leona helmsley it only began to comply with the rear door being closed after we filed a complaint the liaison is dubious we understand the brvrn acts as the community liaison wherever we tried to speak 120 her she's rescued by her attorney never to speak to us or contact her attorney and refused

to discuss ordinances that is a bona fides eating place under the section of the planning code from the day h they opened it is clear the majority of customers go through to drink not eat we raised the issue at the time they said that 35 to 40 percent of her customers drink the planning department said she's not a bona fide eating place it is important inform note in the 6 months that have lapsed with that issue nothing has changed we believe there is more they can do to avoid disrupting the residents we ask the front door and windows be closed during open hours and move the garbage and recycling bins into the garage so the neighbors are not

sdushdz we ask that the planning commission agree not to hear any place for discretionary review until it is demonstrated they can act as a eating place and ask the planning commission propose the beer and wine license until they've demonstrated they can operate as a restaurant thank you. >> thank you. next speaker. >> good afternoon with reuben, junius & rose representing the project sponsor for i'll keep my comments brief and first and foremost i'm going to i have a stack of 15 support letters i'll reads read about a line or two

from the letters to give you a sense of how the people live and work and visit this neighborhood did opinion about the restaurants the first one line the openly of the beer and wine bar has been a great addition a spot for what grove street needs a great addition to the neighborhood aging i didn't say a top restaurant providing the neighborhood with qualify food and a low key and responsible environment for professionals to connect we've truly enjoyed this gem i personally witnessed aging annie to make the area better for everyone and know she's a great partner in hayes valley and next one i find any acquisitions she's causing nuns

nuisance to be highly inadequate attracts a lot of good people next one the clients hilda he would say is not the parties animal crowd their respect fellowship full and reacted the environment is reacting and conducive to an one group and the planners are respectful of us who live in the immediate neighborhood next one a sense of community like the neighborhood that make that strong lastly i like i can come here they are a family place so egg in addition to some of the letters we have 4 hundred and 50 snitches in support of project when this project came you to there were a lot of concerns voiced since

being open for operations in april 1st the opponents have not realized you know - in exchange this update we're providing they're working and under a my case scope the adjacent for example, have a camera pointed out at the rear portion the property i don't know if this is working on a 24 basis but everything annie side will be reported back to the planning department unfortunately - >> thank you. >> that's my times available to answer any questions. >> is there any additional public comment. >> seeing none, public comment is closed commissioner antonini. >> well, thank you i think this very informative i'm happy to hear the owner and restaurants are continuing to work with staff to mitigate any

of the parts of operation that are not in compliance i realize the 50 percent rule is, in fact, how we determine things through in recent years it becomes for did the that was a time when the price ever wine was relating low when compared to the cost of the food which remember that with but the wine as improved considerably is the easy to have people having a fuel meal with wine and is alcohol will compose the majority of costs this is just a difficult item to monitor i'm glad their moving in that direction. >> okay. thank you. >> commissioners, if there's nothing further we can move on to general public comment at this time, members of the

public may address the commission on items of interest to the public that are within the subject matter jurisdiction of the commission except agenda items. with respect to agenda items, your opportunity to address the commission will be afforded when the item is reached in the meeting. each member of the public may address the commission up to three minutes. and we do have a large number of speakers for yuma they do include several speakers that explicit indicate an item number i don't know if you want to speak to this or another item but 15 minutes limits 5 speakers weeping we'll be asking people up in the orders they're received. >> thank you. i will read the first 5 cards (calling names). >> utilized to remember the

members of the public there is a second public comment at the end of the agenda although we don't know when that will occur. >> good afternoon, everyone. georgia i usually talk about the alternative alteration but today, i want to talk about something else in june 2013 you had a staff initiated discretionary review when i saw this i thought wow. what is that it is on a street for a project and the staff wanted setbacks on the rear they want the rdt wanted did residential design guidelines to be compiled and felt the project didn't and couldn't get the project sponsor to change them so they initiated a staff initialed dr the way it turned out if you don't go along

with the staff some of you we're here and some weren't the balcony is still in the fronts of this $4.2 million project anyway that was one of the conditions it didn't happen but the big issue the rational for not the setbacks on the rear of the project was that they need to have family housing 3 bedrooms upstairs i thought who bought this does he have kids no, it do not if he has children 2 children or hundred children what matters the residential design team said this needs to comply with the guidelines i faced that with a project that happened 8 years the project sponsor said i needed 3 bedrooms i understand that i have kids i

have two boys i was lucky they were on the same floor in the same room any point is this when you approve those things what happened to the staff input and since then the residential design team has not really pushed any setbacks or anything that the neighbors wanted the neighbors feel beseeding people are asking for setbacks and their rear yard open space to be preserved i don't think that matters what someone who come up here and says we need all the bedrooms on one level what matters it the residential design guidelines hopefully, this project the staff wanted you to have comply with the residents residential design you didn't put the staff in a box and not afraid to come to they

know they'll be rejected the thing has a balcony and sold for $2.4 million it is not quite in noah valley but south that's my comment thank you very much. >> thank you. >> mr. miguel you might be leaning up against the ada assessable bottom if those people for these the door leave them alone they'll close on their own. >> next speaker. >> mr. lombardi. >> leave the doors alone. >> mr. miguel. >> we'll switch our order. >> good morning, everyone. commissioners i'm jay the presidentth potrero hill boosters organization over the last several months we've spoken

about our plan the ludicrously fell to plan for the infrastructure necessary to accompany and increase the density you've been helpful to address those deficiency and for that we thank you today, however, my neighbors and i want to race one issue that is design whale the eastern neighborhoods plan address the issues for the envelope and the allowable use of parcels tougher guidelines in the existing neighborhood while providing the built neighborhoods conducive to scale we understand the design guidelines with important as the director explained the department is working on the design guidelines was we speak unfortunately with several multiple acres towards the commission those guidelines will be too late this where why we're

asking for interim controls we see the built in these have help to inspire the design as a neighborhood association we saw how the lack residential design some have designed and others filed through years of projects that failed benefits and, in fact, one of the project one of the failed process will be before you before approval this next week it is this timing we reach out to you, we know that good design can be achieved we've hoped over own efforts would be enough but it is not we need help to make sure that the destine design is not articulated at the time of the commission and help to level the

playing field amongst the developers that seek only to maximize the areas we hoped to levels the playing field and those are coming out in the future when the planning department have an opportunity and make sure that our neighbors have housing and remain the human scale that made your neighborhood so popular and needs the residential design guidelines kelly will describe what we need. >> thank you. >> hello commissioners. i'm happy it was a one no show you 101 from the boosters we'll send you our draft of the interim controls while your concerned with other matters we do have

two projects heading our way next week one in particular is first and worst amongst this from the designer stand point the choices to be designed from the pronounced or can we have design standards in place the resolve of what we're trying to propose interim controls is really saying that large thorax should be grand upon a of course, that an application has demonstrated 4 things not primitive but entire better design from the buildings we're not doing this to you know cause other things to happen only better building demonstrating four things demonstrates an awareness of the urban patterns and the vocational relationships between the buildings and streets and open spaces and view

corresponds and openness and two demonstrates an awareness of neighborhood scale and texture and debt 3 demonstrate a mod illustration of building horizontally and vertically from facade from multiple vague points and demonstrate the community engagement and support the reason we're trying to do this kind of controls they're not primitive we're trying to get better design and make sure that the designs are good what we've been showing you it is series of very monotonous mind numbing building that doesn't shot standards we it is really your choice as as commission do we struggle with that are move

productively forward for good designs thank you and you'll hear from miguel next. >> thank you. >> commissioners, i guess i'm bat clean up as mentioned the forum last night we have land use attorneys in the room and developers we had contractor, people from the finance community, architect neighborhood organizations represented in the citizens of the potrero hill and dog patch neighborhoods as well as 3 commissioners that was greatly appreciated this is not a provocation it not density was not mentioned last night that was fantastic and heights were mentioned and discussed we expelled 35 people got 75 of the 75 at least 35 actually spoke

gave their opinions some of them in opposition to each other the conversation when design has started and it is important to the neighborhoods the idea of the wrapping paper project stanley described them become apparent with the video he showed we - this is simple we're saying on awareness that's all we're asking for an actual awareness until such time at director ram said the draft is coming along and we know that is difficult to get this together but we have too much stuff in the pipeline and if the draft is available it is still pardon me if i'm and that he is

medic san francisco will take another year through the neighborhoods and commission and through the board of supervisors and their land use commission and the full board and there's too much in the pipeline and too much coming in the pipeline the answer to it i hate the concept the answer to do something in the interim a short-term concept like tony outlined will be available not that p pro scrip not that objectionable i've had calls from a number of developers they're not fighting over this they're really not so we need your help thank you. >> thank you. >> so we'll move to the regular calendar further general

public comment on item g. >> thank you commissioners. >> question. >> commissioner richards. >> so we have some members of the public saying they were looking for some type of interim guidelines maybe continue the conversation. >> equal not on the agenda we'll not have conversation you adapt our own interim controls in the mission or the supervisor proposed either one is possible. >> okay. this is a mechanism. >> or adopt your own policy amendments to the staff a number of different ways. >> perhaps in anticipation of what is coming maybe scheduled something go an action from this body. >> two large projects next week that are coming. >> yes. >> i'd like to have some considerable to talk about that. >> it is changing for staff to

prepare something but have a forum at this commission. >> great, thank you. >> commissioners, if there's nothing further move on to our regular calendar item 10 the golden state warriors mixed use development a design developments of the office space. >> good afternoon david department staff architect i'd like to make the following corrections and clarification to the staff report the executive summary old 5 hundred plus office space it is 5 hundred and 77 we're asked for today and there is language in the executive summer memorize is the ocii this was a future event at the time that was published

the language should be conditional. >> and then a note staff an e.r. root those provisions were adopted by ocii inclination that safeguards the final eir and copies are available to the public there was also a mta resolution number 15144 that was there their adoption of the ceqa findings that will be administrative code the draft motion we've gotten to date 2 letters of support and one opposed. >> if i could turn this on. >> it is on face up.

>> commissioners the the item before you this afternoon is design review of two office buildings for 200 and 77 thousand square feet as part of golden state warriors event center the site mission bay blocks 21 and 31 have previously been allocated 6 hundred plus thousand office space the placing planning commission that asked to adopt the finding under the california environmental quality act including the considerations and the modification and monitoring and reporting program and approve the design of two office buildings pursuant to the resolution 14702 and motion 17709. >> with resolution 14702 the planning commission determined the mission bay plans for a

tight location of development that is consistent with the overall goals objects and policies and the policies in section 101.1-b of the planning code. >> with motion number 17709 the commission allocated one .35 million square feet of office use for blocks 26, 27 and 33 through 34 and on the subject to the design review and approval by the planning commission for the specific building proposals the planning commission saw a productive of the schematic review the golden state warriors project on may 28, 2015, and the major phase an september 2014. >> i'd like to just -

>> have this the golden gate event center is an important site for a multiple use facility the two office buildings that will be presented in detail by the project sponsor but allow me to talk about the golden state warriors the site is broken down into the following components 18 little south street office building and the 16th street office building the food haul on terrace boulevard and the gatehouse and the podium and the pub acceptable space in the plaza the planning department along with ocii, sfmta, oewd has worked with the project team for the past 18 months to create the

buildings and open space with the urban design goals one create a public space, a public place with the site that is unfailing and pub welcoming a open space that will welcome whether the facilities are in use or not and with public space that serves the immediate neighborhood of the city and region and with public space that provides a connection on third street to the waterfront goal number two designed for walking and bill clinton and transit with a design for that and possible ferry service for automobile reliance and is need for parking like all good streets the streets are aligned with tuff uses and ground floor

transparency and other goals goal 3 for the design architecture that is memorable and contemporary that dwaejz it's dramatic settings and it takes place in the city with the scale of the adjacent neighborhood the city and bay many motorbike setting the design is for the development since the regulations for blocks 29 through 32 it focuses on the event center and the mission bay south has been amended by the ocii for the golden state warriors project a summary the amendment is included in our executive summary principally the number of towers and street and corner conditions this will not steady

one plus hundred feet the redevelopment plan. >> the golden gate complies with the motorbike design for the guidelines as amended specifically the obviously comply to the separation and massing and height standards of the mission bay and additionally the design of the ground floor is the exhibit scale and interests in combination with the public spaces with the design development stages and guidelines that is understood the complexity of the parts of construction is challenging the most challenge is the parts fit together to cooperate the individual building and landscape will be necessary for a successful design at this point i'd like to turn it over to the project sponsor

and the architect david but first like to thank the staff from ocii, sfmta and oewd for their hard work and planning along with them and myself to answer any questions thank you. >> thank you and good afternoon commissioner president fong and commissioners i'm rick president ceo the nabbing champion i'm not said that since last in front of you it is an honor to be here an amazing journey over the last 3 and a half years we couldn't have predicted this route obviously the most dramatic change shifting if pier 30/32 to a private property lands base

sites in mission bay where we are today, i want to not a couple of developments in the past few weeks culminations of months and months and months an agreement between the city the warriors and usf this resulted in addressing all the concerns he expressed by usf and usf coming out in full support of warriors project special thanks to chancellor and barb i'd like to have them negotiating for me they did an excellent job the agreement was fair and really improved the project in many ways second the relatives of 11 meetings on our project with the motorbike advisory committee cac

ruled in a 9 vote supporting the project that was also gratifying after a long process and then the life science communities in mission bay all 11 of the largest companies have enforced in a letter the warriors project expressing their support and welcoming the further project to mission bay along the way i've met a lot of new friends i wouldn't have milked like cox and others who were not excited you've heard the events of the we can by the ocii commissioners to certify the cac and the mta's endorsement of our project and the funding was a critical component in the agreement with usf really thank you today to an

extraordinarily effort by so many members, staff so many city departments starting with planning, the mayor's office, city attorney's office, ocii, of course, it's been an amazing process to watch from the project sponsors prospective how many dedicated and diligent people are there are that come to work every day guess what the project works it has improved pedestrian access and vehicular assess and bike assess but at the center obviously your asking is design and i think the design has benefited tremendously from the community outreach from all the input from every stakeholders

we've listened with that, my pleasure to i'm going to turn it over to for your consideration we'll be looking at today david our project architect thank you very much. >> all right. nice to see all the commissioners the problem with third in line our thunder depreciates stolen a little bit so david did a fantastic job explaining the project summary some of the things i'll not repeat and rick said something the due process is working thank you to david from planning and his staff ocii, the mta group and the mission bay cac for challenging us to make the design better as we worked through the process and the project is it is what it is from the collaborative efforts on the

project i want to do a couple of things first can i get the power point started i thought - (inaudible). >> absen a little bit okay i want to say this one yeah. >> today is the first for me as an architect i'm very comfortable talking about my designs and presenting them i've never done is presented someone else's design so when i was here in january, the last time i lead the master stand point today, i'm speaking on behalf of other architects that transcribed to the project and want to be sure to most humbly the design we're talking about were executed and

by our architect and partners for the office buildings and s w a two the landscape i've remained involved inform pasture that is co-he has and netted together so their functioning the way the master plan was con south side of those are not in my designs and i'm excited for the chance to present them when we get to after i'm done i'll invite you to ask me questions to follow along great and the last thing commissioner richards championed us specifically on the office buildings to be very careful with the spear the project and the spear of the buildings and the design as it relates to mission bay to elevate the quality and the spirit of that design the team does a fantastic job you'll see

the same thing as a i really through the presentation all right. this is a repeat i want to explain why the site plan came together in mission bay a history and a precedence for very strong grid very hard corners that come down at the corners and lead to long blocks of buildings we intentionally fractured that approach to the site of this 4 blocks 29 through 32 create an important reduce site easily assessable to pedestrians pass through that was a enjoy and a positive experience for all the users 365 a year and maintained 32 acres of open space that was the goal and a challenge the residential design team and that has

maintained been maintained the project i'm presenting was consistent with the requirements of the sites one hundred 60 footed towers and e i'll be instead of talking about the articulation of those buildings unlike wrapping paper and the local team did a fantastic job with the lights and reflection and transparency and massing in a way that will bring a new standards or certainly positive experience to anyone that arrives on site i'll not read that and david did a good job have been presenting we're talking about the western side of the site and the two office buildings at the corners on third and south and 16th street and in some ways you'll see with pedestrian and vehicular assess those diagrams are the way

people circulating nine out of ten of the site that is one of the most important concepts we understand where the people will be retrofit in the northwest corner but providing for alternate ways to circulating in and around through the buildings you'll notice in the model and in the renderings the way the building were ordinary creates a strong outdoor room as the front porch of the arena but the porch the two office buildings we've envisioned are working towards making that an urban space for the neighborhood. >> these diagrams here walk through around the building to understand the massing and the materials being used it is a balance of glass some steel and also some more sustainable oh, my god - that happened the last

time i'll remind you we've continued to work on the landscaping to create the landscape neighborhoods and being careful about the parking and how we allocate the parking and now i'm going very fast the aerial photograph you see green spaces occupyable spaces at the roof i'll walk you through around the entrance on third, the way the building reached out provides protection for spectators and as you pass into the flexible plaza space and it could host a wide variety of ice skating in the winter and telegraph hill the podium and

spaces all year round he did a wonderful way of articulating the mass it is dunn done well and honestly about every corner and assess want i'm sorry i don't have as much time to walk you through there but you're welcome to ask any questions about the design thank you very much. >> thank you. >> okay opening it up for public comment

(calling names). >> don't i'm sorry due to the large number of speaker we'll limit public comment to 2 minutes those persons might be in the south light court downstairs would be a good way time to come up to room 411. >> good afternoon. i'm mark i'm not a paid consulate i don't work for the warriors although i wear a t-shirt i come before you i'm a born and raised in the bay area my father was a pilot for the bay i've raised any family and spent 3 two years in the fire service and work for fuming from any experience with fuming i'm a corresponding officer by

the place of entertainment to manage disasters there is thirty in the country that do what i do i'll tell you my job is schamgd by the fact there are governs and city mayors all types of interests that have they're ten california's into, if you will, the disaster relief fund as well every federal department trying to get interest taking care of during a disaster the warriors have correlated a group of people that have been extremely successful not what happened on the floor they've made ether baseball small ball is something they never talked about before you can't win a championship or bring projects like this and have staff approve that unless a tremendous amount of harm new

time and time again they've won a championship to the santa cruz and executive of the year i don't know most of those folks that's been positive if you can correlate a group to be able to favorable move a project like this you've got to - realize that in the end those folks are always going to be be able to meet the interests and take care of the proposals t and i'm going to go ahead and ask the names to line up on that side of room. >> hello, i'm henry a 27 year residents on potrero hill since year 2000 a vice president of the vermont street association i want to take a moment to commend the warriors team and the design

team and i really want to mention the outreach in the communities i've been a member of the a lot of the meetings and people like gail hunter and others been instrumental in reaching out to neighbors and giving us an opportunity to hear our voices and answer the questions about the design function and speaking to the design i think that is a fabulous work i like the curvature the south west corner the height is to scale in the neighborhood particularly in favor of the 360 decree assess from a lot of a areas the bay front will be masters and the mixed use and excited for the whole myriad of used for the

event center such a much needed element for the neighborhood to have something that has so many uses just wanted to state my word and that support thank you very much. >> thank you. >> commissioners michael san francisco building and construction i'll noted presume to speak on behalf of the project i recall this may not suit her preparation for the fine-grain development it does precluding in the office building it provides for a day round use the arena is a day use that allows the restaurants to be viable at a variety of times of day and so you know we remain excited we'll do our drama and ask the carpenters and other folks behind me to stand up if

you would i'll be happy to to build this for you and the city and the warriors thank you. >> good afternoon, everyone. i'm ester stern's my wife and i live in mission bay lived in the neighborhood for b years we have obviously welcome the warriors and owe baseball team and so forth the kids are excited but i'm excited about the open spaces, the plazas the bike assess where we're bicyclists we welcome that kind of development maybe prior to the openly of 1184 our teenagers were the only ones in mission bay i must tell you san francisco is not an easy place to be a teenager not that

many things for kids and motorbike lacks entertainment and things like that for children 0 i think the warriors arena really pose a possibility to make the neighborhood exist for young people and the warriors themselves as a organization really don't great things for the kids i think we'll make the whole city a better place for young people tluld how excited the young people in mission bay are to have the warriors come my family and i support the design and thank you. >> hello commissioners i'm christi this in los alters on the environmental council for of years i know you have many more members of the public in our meetings than we had i have or

want to thank you for your hard work i'm a driver for your own and lyft i'm not here to represent either of those companies as with the giants and any properties throughout san francisco wonderful prosper properties does additional good business for me and aids in the parking space issues and things like that i want to say as said the worries are a world-class organization not just within the professional sports community but throughout any pack of our community they are collaborative looking to do interesting and amazing things this property is clearly an example lastly angle a personal note i have 4 daughters we connect with them and watch the warriors games and take them

to new places as a father of 4 girls raising kid is about creating family memories and bringing them to this site and so those open spaces i hope adds matt haney to any life and to the lives of my children. >> good afternoon commissioners i'm urging you to support this project because it fits well handsomely along the she or he and has a 3.3 open space to enjoy for joggers and runners and place to walk our dog in the evening if you ever backyard in the mission bay neighborhood is a quiet there after dust and it is a ghost town this arena activates the area in the

evening an tuesday night for dog patch dog owns to lease their floors and active the plaza and also the arena and most importantly it adds $14 million of tax revenue to the city's funds and also the developers are paying $18 million and infrastructure fees for this project and wear the only city around that didn't have an arena in it i would lee love to go see taylor swift so there will be plenty of soundproofing and the parking is an issue, however, the study one half of mile we can have to have assessable 9 thousand parking spaces that would help out with mitigate that and as well as their contributing $14 million to

improve the transportation for the public to ride to this arena please support this project. >> i'll call a few more names come on up (calling names). >> hi commissioners thanks for allowing us to be here and david wong 40 years san franciscan retired deputy sheriff in san francisco and currently executive director for bay area deputy sheriff foundation we work with youth and many times we are asked coach be a mentor for the kids and it works so it is time to bring the warriors home in san francisco so talk about home i appreciate the zany focus on bringing the

human scale to the project by focusing on the retail and open space lemons i especially love the pedestrian street that widens its way around the second part of arena san francisco is a world-class city and let's bring the world-class organization and world-class rather than to san francisco and it is going to be reviewed decided and approved by a world-class commission (laughter). >> my name is adidas i live in three hundred and 66 condo units in mission bay right north of the future warriors arraign we're excited specific because the open space

and plaza that will bring vibrancy to a place thank you. >> hello, i'm my name is a lloyd i'm a long time warriors warrior i'm actually a 5 year survivor i think this warriors will be good for the city i'm going to keep is short i run a triple double sports i on the warriors will be supported to the fullest i'm just a guy that supports the warriors and on the warriors will be good for the area. >> thank you. >> thank you. >> good morning, everyone. commissioner president fong and commissioners i'm kevin carol the executive director of the hotel council of san francisco i have the privilege of working

for 200 and 1 hotels that employee 24 thousand people and there are 34 hotels in san francisco i want to thank the golden state warriors their persistence without on arena we miss out on conventions coming to san francisco when an convention or a events or concert it brings more business but helps our employees when our numbers are up we hire more employees and employees get more hours and people that stay in the hotels spends more money inside the hotels than outside so that helps what we do and spent many our neighborhoods whether in taxis or restaurants that is a multi i purchase venue ore city deserves a venue like this in san francisco when hotels are busy definitely helps

with the expansion of more jobs this project is expected to bring in other jobs especially temporary and permanent permanence and the warriors worked with our communities and city with the neighborhoods to make sure all the questions that are bring up are mitigated we encourage you to approve the recommendation in front of you today and thank you for your time. >> thank you. >> commissioner president fong and commissioners my name is howard i'm the executive vice president of the san francisco travel and san francisco travel is very committed to this project it will create thousands of job and millions of dollars and travel and tourism alu is one of the major economic drivers last year, we welcomed over 18 million visitors that spent $10 billion in the city

that sports 80 thousand jobs and million dollars to the general fund. >> while those numbers are impressive we've heard them before we leaving a lot of dollars on the table because of opportunities we need to meet first was moscone center there was an opportunity there to expand moscone center change the footprint of that a little bit you can that project is well underway but our major customers like the convention planners there a tremendous need noted city for inside meeting centers to hold laying day long and political conventions when we don't do in a fashion this project will get san francisco spectacular venue to host those kinds of events the design will make it a center earlier to

assessable and the crowd movement so for all those reasons san francisco travel is convinced the new facilities will attract the visitors from around the united states and world and make the investment in the moscone center pay off more we're very much in favor of the project and thank you for your time and consideration this afternoon. >> when you come up i'll call a few more names (calling names). >> i'm sorry. >> good afternoon, everyone 50i89 the program coordinator for the academy which is an academic enrichment program in

the bay area area serving over 200 and 50 folks of color that transforms young boys into eager learners and a great group of wonderful volunteers from organizations that come out to support our boys through their activities and our programs which brings me to talk about the mba warriors the warriors will attract over 4 thousand jokes permanent and construction seeing that bay area has the highest unemployment rate we're excited about the opportunity to the city the warriors have demonstrated a terrific amount of support providing tickets for the families to attend the professional games and awarding several bay area grants refinishing in our neighborhoods and showing on overall commitment to health and education the warriors moving to

san francisco means so much more and more than baseball but triggers brand new 5.5 i'm sorry acres public waterfront along the terry a france way that sets the tone for better access to the waterfront and eventually add a connection point to other waterfronts points like hunters point and candle stick we know it is in spite need it will generate $40 million to pay for the transit improvements for the neighborhood the extended family services this benefits the community and san franciscans deserve the world-class entertainment it is time thank

you. >> good afternoon commissioner president fong and commissioners i'm a fields representative with carpenters local 22 and we fully port this project that will bring thousands of construction job that whole project will bring thousands of construction jobs to residents of san francisco and provide a lot of work the warriors have done an esteeming good job to laborers and we support everything aboveboard and time to bring the warriors back to san francisco please give us your support thank you. >> good afternoon ladies and gentlemen, i thank you turning your attention or thank you for your time i'm sheila living in noah

valley since 197 i love the city and learned to love of the warriors too i design clothing not arraigns but arena - i would love to see the warriors in noah valley but that won't happen (laughter). >> so i'll take a ride and come to your side i hope you come to ours. >> good morning, everyone. commissioners good afternoon, board my name is donny burk i represent freeman i am one of the major sales managers that produces 80 percent of major events if moscone and right now planning the super bowl 50

i have also have checked out the design and lay out of the warrior arena i support this simply on a scale of events and process that it will create it will make as far as receiving some of the city aspect of corporate events that arena will generates millions and millions of tax dollars and thousands of more workers we could use in producing those major corporate events i'm here to support them 100 percent and every general krashthd is here to support them 100 percent i ask you give your stamp of approval for the warriors arena thank you.

>> good morning, everyone. commissioners and thanks for giving us time to speak not only a die-hard warriors fan i. a selma homeowners and up to a few years ago bernal height i wanted to be a pioneer i love who was coming down the pike wanted to see everything happen we don't say a infrastructure infrastructure that allows us to have fun outside at night and during the day i heard about the warriors project i saw they were ooefg open space i walk my dogs and niece and envelope come this stadium will bring fun it is blighted at night but having this arena here having something to do more than hoping something speaking to do would be great i'm really, really excited and

love living in selma and south of market thank you. >> good afternoon commissioners commissioner president fong nominees a dj the deputy director of a nonprofit organization based on in the bay area and residents of district 10 i briefly want to speak about the economic impact the warriors will be bringing to san francisco but the social responsibility and the fact they get it alone within the 3 seasons we've been able to employ several folks probation officer work at the stadium in oakland and can do you believe that i think the building trade secretary meekly did an excelling good job of presenting

folks that will be sustainable living in san francisco with the guys behind us so a residents of bayview hunters point and the developers we're in full support that have this building and bringing the warriors back to san francisco thank you. >> good afternoon commissioners commissioner president fong joel cop he will a couple of permanent comments i played baseball at the lowell high school and back then i remember the guy. back then he couldn't imagine being at a place i speak in favor of the project professionally i'm here speaking for our tricks and journeymen and apprentices and over contractors association because labor will be here don't

forgot that also the local contractors that pay their payroll taxed employ those construction workers are in supportive of that and looking forward so, please we're here to support the project and attending the meetings with the neighborhood for about two years and feel their voices have been heard they've helped to mold the project the combination of the commercial and the retail and the open space and arena i think is absolutely ideal for this location we urge you approve that today thank you. >> (calling names). >> and jonas might be a couple of more cards. >> good afternoon, commissioners i'm jackie i'm a

director the imply green to open up the southeast waterfront in the form of open space parks and playgrounds i'm here today in support of warriors who have been wholeheartedly supportive of the idea of blue greenway and within their project plans for parks and open space and ways for people to connect with the southeast waterfront i'd like to point out that the health benefits of people being able to as individuals walk their dogs or play or run or ride tare bibles is well documented i urge you to support their project thank you. >> hi commissioners i'm scott a resident of dog patch and practical live next door to the promoted site i can see it if my deck i'm here today in supportive support of the warriors project that will be a

great improvement for the mission bay and areas the design is well, the curved elements and open space and the abilities overall design are going to be a welcome change to the monotony of the buildings in the area he appreciate the rdt on reducing the height and bulk and having a lot of open space in that it is the overall design is really incredible it norms so much open space much needed retail and restaurants we don't have in the area the improvements to the transportation and especially to new bay front park hope you'll support the project so we can move forward and get the arena built and enjoy the areas and he hopefully have the warriors bring another championship to

san francisco thank you. >> good afternoon my brother's keeper i'm tom, i represent the mission bay alliance that possessed the approval of this project i want to talk about the legitimacy of the prop m allocation for office space any colleague e-mailed a whatever i have 10 copies of that and hard copies i'd like to turn in for the record if you have a change chance to look at topic 2 section 2 in particular talks about the allocation of office space under prop m and your motion that was passed in 2008, now, when i look at the staff report it's calls an executive summary there's a longer recorded somewhere by the

package available has not a report only the achieve summary macro an assertion that the motion 1702 allocated 6 hundred plus square feet of the lots of where this project will be located but i can found no evidence of that assertion when i compare that motion to you're a prop m spreadsheet you keep on the website there is no way to come up with that number that is explained in any document i see that and can't discover 4 different interpretations my letter goes through how much office space is allocated to lots 29 and 31 where the office towers will be none of them covers the square footage which is 5 hundred and 77 square feet

the office towers and add the 25 thousand square feet in the arena and look at all 4 digit over 4 thousand square feet of office space and not enough space thank you, sir, your time is up. >> good afternoon. i'm pta i'm the president the south beach mission bay business association as long as the merchants association we're here in support of warriors arena it is a welcome change as many of the folks mentioned for mission bay it creates an incredible sense of place and brings others non-venue servicing merchants to the neighborhoods other folks talked about the value of the open space think about that events it will add high value to the neighborhoods i want to talk about who is supporting this

project you sat through probably almost an hour of comments and a good variety of people if small business, local residents, residents from the city and also here they are whole lives and residents from the region quite a few of labor and youth groups the life science communities and usf a whole variety of folks from the co-pathe folks that ta about articulating about this design and how it fillmore's fits into the neighborhood and how it helps to do our eastern waterfront and how to fits in well versus paid attorneys that is important po to step back and see who is here in support and

how it fits in well with the urban setting and whau what is going on no south beach and mission bay and dog patch and pier 70 against the pons that come here and through misinformation at you guys thank you for your time. >> hello commissioners and commissioner president fong i'm bryan i'm with the san francisco bicycle coalition their here to speak in favor the bike assess and design the bicycle coalition is pleased to work with the warriors and the sfmta and oewd and we're pleased with the proposed bicycle and transportation improvements present northbound in design along with significant infrastructure improvements along 16th street and terry

francis way boulevard and the encouragement programs for people bicycling this will be a great place for people to bicycle in addition the project proposed a valet beacon parking space facility accommodating three hundred bicycles we know that around at&t park this is an important sites all told all things i don't know this think as a exaggeration the most best facility in the united states we're looking forward to continuing to work with the warriors in the city as the demands for biking at the site rose again, we're fully in support to accommodate people bicycling to this site thank you. >> thank you. >> good afternoon,

commissioners henry the president thought south of market association we believe this is an excellent venue for not only the warriors but the bicycle but also for entertainment things happening at the arena but more anything was it electricities to the success and also the growth of small business and not only south of market but down to dog patch and the bayview so i think that is an excellent project that will be happening and i am proud and late, of course, a daughter and boyfriend huge fans of the warriors she will have a words for support for the warriors thank you very much. >> good afternoon, everyone. i'm david a resident of san francisco and live in the mission i'm one other people

with a lot of interest i studied this city for a long time additional one of the folks that play sin city i love the warriors but looking at san francisco from a purely ann willfully point of view this potential has been tapped at&t park was the beginning now we have our next challenge in mission bay and this project right here is a perfect fit for that neighborhood that is really the one place holder that can spur great development further along the waterfront and further counsel is a ton of potential that is the best weather and sunshine and freeway assess it is a shame a city as beautiful as san francisco has not utilities those areas i think is

warriors will give the city a privately fined opportunity to see the natural beauty in san francisco i urge you to approve that project thanks. >> good afternoon, commissioners my name is tony i'm a residence of district 10 the southeast sector this warriors design is the best of the best the family's will have a place to walk to and bike to you know have family oustedings together close to home that is a very critical just to the state of i know families matters so i ask you guys and encourage you guys to vote yes all of you to vote yes to bring the warriors to san

francisco this is beautiful that whole waterfront thing you you know you get a little bit exist but with this warriors camp oh, my god you smile about it forever and forever i didn't know you were still here with the city i want to give a shout out but you guys vote yes, thank you. >> okay laughter is there any additional public comment i'm sorry do you - >> (calling names) good afternoon good afternoon dee dee workingman about the chemotherapy i'm a huge fan and raised my son we're big fans of the warriors personally two we love the design of the events center it is very interesting to see the evolution of that since the proposed site we loved that

design on the waterfront it was we were very curious to see how to design evolves in the new location in mission bay and it looks like it is going do fit perfectly and not just into moab but because of the multiple uses of complex and the open spaces and the restaurants and retail and office space and so on will activate the area with a connector between mission bay the island that island in the middle of that urban area and connect mission bay with the rest of that neighborhood with the waterfront and with the rest of the city we're very much in favor and love the design and urge you to support it. >> is there any additional public comment there we go. >> thank you commissioner

president fong and commissioners i'm dennis around the education he teach in the san francisco public schools i wholeheartedly support this design review and the ceqa could have the entire warriors arena and my time purchase purpose center a long time overdue center that creates a facility that will present positive eventss for the baseball games also please review the proposal update i've shared with you today i've been asking the warriors to create a classroom inside of the arena and looiltd this open space that is located between the two office buildings as a concealed

classroom that allows hundreds of youth and families watching the events inside the arena broadcasted from this inside component inside the arena just to mention one main purpose long term proposal to promote the view that the baseball arenas and especially the warriors arena conserve enheeler a model and educational career classroom in and of itself thank you very much for all your work. >> good afternoon, commissioners i'm jose field represent from the local 261 i'm here to voice-over 5 thousand members support for the project

and for time sake i'm sure i'm to echo all the positive comments and urge you to support this project thank you. >> next speaker >> good afternoon to the commission i'm army morgan with the operating engineers love 3 strong supports for the mission bay give you a little bit of background my gather was a construction worker came looking for work and worked on the golden gate bridge and the bay bridge i urge you to approve this i haven't heard much opposition if there is

opposition they must be clipper fans (laughter) anyway yeah vote yes, thank you. >> thank you. >> okay is there any additional public comment on that item an not seeing any, public comment is closed. >> commissioner antonini. >> thank you to all it represents the culmination of a 50-year dream of mine and many san franciscans when we realized in the 60s the cow palace whatnot good for all conventions but held there prior to that time and this is a beautiful design, but more importantly than just the design is creates an entire neighborhoods hsa as people pointed out not only inside but outdoor it creates a neighborhood that is active on

the days when no events and this is something that the area the mission bay socializing needs it will be a new center of activities in san francisco. >> a totally high compliance project project that will allow us to join the if i did the math right the top 25 cities not united states all of whom have arenas of this capacitate many with less populations and most of these have those aaron's in areas that are more dense and anymore compact in mission bay if you're concerned about the density surely other cities do it with denser conditions i want to ask a question mr. license plate i didn't spoke of the allocation it seems to me he read the repo

one million three hundred and 50 square feet for blocks 29 to 32 i don't think so why there is confusion about our ability to allocate the office space to this project. >> maybe i can address that there shouldn't be a question about the motion that clear it established the alexandra district by which this should be implemented it was low monitored we get regular reports about the space and no base to the question of whether or not enough space part of project and

seeking alternative 4 hundred and 77 thousand square feet it is greater more office space than seeking to develop. >> i think we're clear the motion says 6 hundred and 77020 square feet of office i'm not sure what that is. >> this mass 6 hundred and 67 square feet through the alexandra motion the project is seeking nine hundred and 77 thousand square feet so a relinquishing the one thousand square feet. >> thank you very much that answers that question i want to comment on a few things one tinge in addition to allocating the office space so adopt

finding under ceqa and i noticed that things have come out of the dedication of dedicated lines or lanes be including officers to direct the traffic and new policeman's that allow muni trains to disbark people and the tracks that who live farther down the tiny on third street to be able to bypass the arena during activities maybe under albert can talk about a little bit more of what i'm the subject i brought up. >> peter if the mta good afternoon commissioner president fong and members of the commission commissioner antonini summed it up i appreciate you followed the

details one of the main points to make sure that we have no impact on the baseline service for the city in an event of a major events that includes the streetcars and the program and the bayer to continue to have service when the trains are supporting the arena. >> it is important there recent streets going to be dedicated specific to usf hospital or for the residents to allow them to get in and out they're working their patients and they will be more or less dedicated to games so the crowds going to games can't impact their abilities to the site. >> this features a designation of streets that are not

essential to getting to the parking spaces we were able to distinguish and use the parking control officers that are poster of other revenues to direct traffic that needs go to the arena and allow the nurses that needs to arrive at 7:00 p.m. the same thing they have access and the residents to owen street that is to the essential to the arena but moab and dog patch residents to go flet and south and the cooperation by the parking control officers who can help in the events of an emergency make sure the people having an emergency situation can get close to the hospital. >> thank you one the speakers awe lutsdz to the amount of available parking spaces a certain number the warriors will have onsite and in the garage

across south street but more in the evenings that is unused for the port commission will be working on the traffic camtc from the north and south the idea allowing people by any modes but in the vicinities the parking space is part of that what is nice the hours that it had been used take advantage off peak availability and a bunch of parking spaces in the area. >> thank you, mr. albert happy to hear the revenues generated will be able to make all the improvements it goes without saying on a project no revenue so that sounds good. >> the mta's is happy to presents that as well. >> commissioner richards. >> i guess a question for mr.

lippy first time i'm seeing this is now imagine besides the two points before we vote. >> he appreciate that opportunity the 13 or one million plus that's been used if not all inspiring used if you look at the motion 17709 those projects were built and completed and you have to go through the motion carefully 4 tables that lay that out it takes time i'm not he expecting you to digest is in 3 minutes but this is on fast track for 10 or 12 days ago the eir we had minutes to read that and turn our attention didn't provide the evidence to support your decision other points in

any letter i don't want to talk about them right now. >> mr. sanchez any other additional thoughts. >> i think there was a miss reading of the tables what they are and not the entire square footage not all of that is office space you have to have a better understanding of the project to make that evaluation we get reporting and know they're not using more office space than authorized. >> thank you. >> commissioner hillis. >> so thank you for all the work we had more opposition for the 8 thousand square feet restaurant of a hayes valley (laughter) in that was i've been not the case that's a testament to the city department and all the

opposition at the beginning you've addressed many of the concerns the traffic but you know of interest to us the site plan how this arena works and hue it is interact into the mission bay south he greatly appreciate all united states thoughts and how it really dwaejz on outline sides of the block we don't often see that there is a lot of dead space and only projects around the country i appreciate that i think you know what we're looking at the office design and the office component that is critical to the project in making this kind of service center e service center to mission bay it adds to the active uses especially, when not games with other uses i appreciate all the work that has gone into it to make sure

that it is tuff especially along third street so i'm very much in port of project and thank you. >> commissioner moore. >> wanted to express my sports for the project despite the size has present a nimble project that has risen to the occasion of the challenge an all levels for me it is an "x" police station point that is not the fault of everyone but a difficult project over time and the first large project the city took on when it came to commissioning the obsolete language having said that, i think is project is a place making something that was socializing missing in the expensive same looking office

buildings and add potential to the transformation and keep on coming to the neighborhood even when office is only age 27 or whatever goes i don't understand a twenty-four hour place because it will be attractive in this case. >> i have one question for mr. albert we've received an amending that spoke to the social east bay equality of maintaining the access to bayview hunters point at a level not impacted by the use of t line during the events could you respond to that i'm par freaking it in a way but the issue is equality and peter from mta he building commissioner moore you're talking about the construction of the expanded platform with an that platform is complete no interrupted service market the cross over

tracks allows the service beyond the events so the construction is the idea one of the variances of the project to have a widened central platform sooeps to 2 across the street that includes widening the platform that requires reunited airlines the streetcar it is during the duration the platform itself. >> i might have been misleading the future capacity during an events the frequency was getting people to their home designates and they'll be prepared too many people given the frequency of the tiny can't get on. >> i have a completely diversity response the baseline we're suing using to design is it acknowledging where we are

today or when the arena opens we designed it above and beyond but this is beyond the service the central subway you'll with t car trains and the lines end setting the arena and dog patch there will be increased frequency capacity but that will northern california not be enough to handle the surgery to make sure that we don't have that impact and then also through the project we procure four additional streetcars so i feel captivity you can tampering of the extra services their regular muni services of you're not going to the arena you have more

two-way capacity on a non-event night. >> you're allowing for the flexibility inform respond to problems currently than your anticipating. >> my colleague from oewd can talk about this the revenue we build in a cushion for warriors and giants night we allow the cushion to accommodate the needs we worked our best to anticipate those needs but there will help to procure extra drivers and run for shuttles that is calls what i conveniently call the lockbox but will allow us to do things it unique it gives us the funding. >> appreciate the clarity. >> commissioner antonini and yeah. i would like to also note

we're in receipt of a memorandum for a e.r. root for responses that will be part of any motion we're making which can i actually will make now and he will move we adopt findings under ceqa as well as overriding considerations we allocate 5 hundred and 77 thousand square feet of office space to this project and we support it's design. >> second. >> commissioner richards. >> i just wanted to acknowledge the architect and thank you for rising to the challenge well done. >> commissioner johnson. >> thank you very much i'm supportive but i know you were up for a while i have a photocopy question my for example, on that office tower and real quick can you talk about the sxeefkz that were presented that does get into the

detail of what other curving or anything that will be tun done to accommodate the bart up third street and cabs and everything can you talk about the straight and how that flow happens. >> thank you it was part of the people to make sure the design responds to the exception we need to make that project work from the transportations stand up it the the volumes of pedestrians trying to get over the streetcars or on 16th street when you saw david's walk through the open space and david's those were making sure we didn't under design the open space that allows people to safely go from corner to corner to make the platform connections and folks obvious use that open

space to not have xhflts and curve space to make sure the cabs are here and valet parking to making sure there is easy assess the shorts answer i'm not give there is so many multi modal aspects you don't appreciate that until you breakdown the logistics we understand that arena is used for multi reasons and not over design so as commissioner moore said there is look like nimbleness. >> thank you. >> commissioner wu. >> i'm also happy to support especially the site been assessable from both sides and the open space will be good for the neighborhood i want to ask a question to staff of third street previously i heard the plan for third street for mission bay was not necessarily to have retail but clearly

bringing in a lot of retail does that change the way you're thinking about third street overall or about this site more. >> >> david staff architect no, i believe that the mission bay plan did account for a certain amount of the retail along third is as plan grown up i understand that the emphasis providing retail i know on fourth street was ever intentions to have frontage along/13 given the frontage of the infrastructure improvements. >> commissioners, if there's nothing further there is a motion that's been seconded to adopt the second finding and approve the design of the office space. >> on - >> and office space allocation. >> commissioner antonini. >> commissioner hillis commissioner johnson

commissioner moore commissioner richards commissioner wu and commissioner president fong so moved, commissioners, that motion passes unanimously 7 to zero. >> (clapping). >> okay. the commission will take a lunch break. >> good morning and welcome back to the san francisco planning commission regularly hearing for thursday, november 5, 2015, disruptions of any kind. proceedings. and when speaking before the commission, if you care to, do state your name for the record.

>> commissioners, we left off regular calendar item eleven. >> the affordable housing bonus this is an informational presentation. >> good afternoon, commissioners i'm start with it introduction and ems to kifrs it on the manager of this program as you may know in september the mayor and supervisor tang introduced the draft legislation to create this program the goal to create incentives for projects to provide more onsite affordable housing then they provide today and to reflect the requirements that have been in state law since the late 70s to priority the density bonuses to develop projects that priority onsite affordable and on the most important thing i'll say about this project it is an important tool in the

multi faceted tool in the toolbox to produce more affordable housing to the styrofoam would the program that will solve it program and not one in and of itself to provide the affordable housing we need to look at any programs one we can implement without public subsidy so as you recall several weeks ago kezar 10 and sophie from the mayor's office of housing provided a high-level of every that largely is out of the marries tsf from last year and those programs looked at a range from low toe deplored and low income housing that is provided by the city and below-market-rate so this program offers o offices incentives up to thirty percent obesity affordable housing as you recall the city's current requirements are for 12

percentage by prop c at the october 15th hearings there were a lot of comments and comments about the process happy to are those discussions and the commission had a lot of questions how the program was development the basis for the program is the basis for the recommendation so we have a presentation for you today on the kind of coagulating back to back to square one and helped up a lengthy presentation we it structured to that we'll take a pause in the middle of the presentation so take questions from you all that is a lengthy presentation the program is fairly extensive we want to make sure we have get the information out there and on the respond and important to note one the goals to correct a lot of miss position that is out there what this program does and does not

do a lot of processes we talked about i think that i want to emphasize again that is one element of a multi faceted structure inform address do affordable housing program and weer very excited we think that is an important one we think that is a program that will be able to be used in frankly areas of it h city not much developments and important for us to consider this tool in the toolbox i'll ask skirs ton to come up and give you the overview. >> changes john and good afternoon kristen department staff as john said we have somewhat longer presentation to answer a lot of the questions you raised especially around houses developed we handicapped

out new materialsal outline what materials in the first or second half and copies of the presentations and then also some small changes to the case report a full copy on the left a minor edits and finally comments we've received from the public directly submitted to staff i don't know but that you u you but my in box is full of requests and continuance so to start, huh? okay to start i'm learning how to use the technology why are we are doing this program this is just one basically two pieces of information we're implementing the density bonus law and achieving the affordable housing goals so i even we talked about

this a few weeks ago but the state and city bonus law affords or allows the projects that provide affordable units to provide a greater number under the existing controls that tool a helping us reach our local goals it it didn't come out - i'll talk about where it came from and how the idea individuals as john thufldz that is one of the many tolls and it is achieving goals that have been identified in a number of planning first, the mayors working group our 2004 and 9 and talking to some of the people that were involved all of those calls affordable housing was to encourage higher levels mixing income and the way to encourage

in case and prop k this slide i even really miser how we thought about the program before we knew how to approach the state law so on the left you say our articulation of how the stating reads we emphasised this a couple of times the state law is a board first of all, depending on how many affordable units you get a density unit not a lot of room to haeng that then the state law says in addition you can get one to 3 concessions from the planning code not defined on called out to offset the costs of providing this affordable units and then

the state law sayou get to fit e infrastructure extra 35 percent of units are that the reason wear showing the arrows we're saying the state law if put boundaries on any discretion other than it can't have a ceqa impact on the communities up we talked about this in the case report any project that provides the delegation housing units will be really complicated for the city of san francisco to entitle all the projects most of projects over 90 percent of the units are in buildings with 10 units or more that means most projects will is a reason to ask for a density bonus we wanted to put perimeters how

this program are working not only what entitlements but what those building should look like and david and others are here to talk about the design process but this is really our approach to developing the program analysis a bunch of sites and say over understanding how to implement the stale in no and make a building in san francisco with the context that's the program we call the state analysis i's program sure you can get a rear yard exemption or an exposure exemption only to a limited amount through the legislation sheila get into the detail how we drew those lines whether we did our project we were a city providing 33 or thirty percent affordable

housing or producing thirty or 33 percent as you can see the state practice writing program we found only encouraged projects to 13 or 20 percent so we kind of took the analysis we created for the state program and changed that around and said what would it look like if we provided thirty percent affordability on site first can we make that work financially and if we can can we make a building that works in our neighborhood context that's how we created accident local program. >> goals were established through the planning efforts i mentioned through the housing element addressed the mayor's working group and some of our investment neighborhoods on smaller neighborhoods corridor how we can incentivizes better

levels of housing onsite getting above the base 12 percent and creating incentives for people to provide the units onsite rather than pay the fee which i think is a policy direction that is pretty consistent and approve the feasibility on the underserved sites we're finding that a lot of our districts are zoning controls that don't match the height or the building context and kate supervisor katie tang we the blueprint and working in other corridor 13 or 20 corridors in the investment plan and david barker and others will walk through the clash in the zone so we want to work on that. >> establishing a moifrment

program we'll talk about what programs we do currently have to provide affordable housing and the gap airbnb madam clerk, any announcements? >> without public subsidy creates the public housing and finally we have a number of 100 percent affordable housing in the may i have pipeline some of them can benefit from the program and seek entitlements slightly in a more focused way and get a lot of the benefits they'll otherwise get through the sud profits. >> so spend a minute explaining how we develop the program once we realized we wanted to set the boundaries around what the state law offers to people we put together a team to help

us answer the question that's the mayor's office staff and hired consultants that do physical molding modeling to help us what would those buildings look like posed the questions for the architect if you knew 35 percent or over and over 26rz more how to design a building what waivers that was a back and forth distinct david barkers team and our current planning department staff that is familiar with the outcomes of the buildings we hired libby to look at you know does this program work have we created a program that will hit the policy goals where people choose to do it and the inverse question not giving away too much or xauvent the affordable housing i'll talk about that in a second section

but the mar convened thirty or i don't know how many key stakeholders created a subsidy group that included the avenue developers and affordable housing advocates and maufsht developers are a lot of people in the architecture and building firm industry were the stewart's to fine-tune our analysis are we better late than never the right questions and the right inputs on the financial analysis and the right prototypes. >> all of that work put together led by our team many will be preventing to you and introduce individually but that is how we created our first program and i think that was kind of really slowly to the public starting in august and officially through legislation

in september we're here before you as well. >> i even we had a longer conversation about the publoutr i think the main thing in this is a program that implements la jolla plans with the community process we agree a need for public input working hard to gather that again almost e-mails as you might have we have a lot of engagement from the public to push this forward and asking for more time to understand this is a xakd nuance program so i took our team a long time to develop our language i understand we spent a lot of times building tools to help get that information out and other media

really we also have developed mailing lists and developed in public forum in the middle of the process of gathering public input a few of them in the last couple of weeks as john said we'll host more and finally, the most important place for public engagement is the draft legislation that was introduced in sent by the mayor and supervisor that certainly benefit from input through the communities commission planning proposals and the board process we'll feel the most communities input. >> and so, now i'd like to introduce powell that will be presenting the program and outcomes. >> good afternoon, commissioners i'm powell planner

on the team and i've lit uppermost of analysis data work and so today i'll describe some of the program area itself and the potential impacts we might see in terms of how many units we expect it to produce. >> so sajsz in the presentation that applies to parcels in building districts that allow the rental unit it didn't apply to areas that are rezoned in the area plan, which notedly control height and bulk and a minimum of two bedroom requirement the program contains thirty thousand 5 hundred parcels and nc and r.c. and others district

22 percent of parcels it is composed in the multi family housing around them almost the whole area within a quarter mile walking distance that carries 70 percent of sfmta that has identified for major frequent sit in the future this insures the new housing will be within walk of goods and services while affording the residents assess to the transit services while the program will apply throughout the program area the vast majority of parcels within the area are healthy and mixed use building and schools and churches the program doesn't reduce the rigorous controls on demolishing the rental units as

my colleague will discuss in the second half the presentation so staff estimates is that only under developed commercial sites and surface parking lots will be developed under the next few development cycles we identified 200 and 40 sites scattered throughout the program they're generally less than 5 percent of the zoned capacity and considered the most likely to take advantage of the program this methodology to estimate the dpak impact consistent with the other planning processes like in the area plans. >> so if all the sites i mention would develop under the current interim controls that had been seven hundred plus units and

many will choose to have their inclusionary unites by providing onsite they're not financially feasible under the current and not all projects will choose to have the inclusionary on site but better understand the ceqa program if all the same sites all so you get the maximum bonus the city would gain 10 thousand new unite for low income and moderate under the proposed local ava total number of unit a generated could be 16 to us including 2 thousand inclusionary units and others for affordable protecting this more than doubled the

inclusionary units under the exist zone and adds on top of a 3 thousand units for the next 20 years. >> sophie from the mayors will be talking about what type of houfrldz that will be served by the affordability many factors influence the developer decisions including the cost of land and real estate and sales and rents size and ownership patterns of parcels and neighborhood and community opposition because those conditions have a across the city it is difficult to see whether the developers will choose which program some projects under the state bonus program some will choose the local and some elect not to

use the program at all the total overall veeldz will be between the 10 and 16 thousand this shows the share on the estimated 16 thousand total that is the maximum potential we've estimated each neighborhood in san francisco could be expected to take on. >> the neighborhoods with higher existing controls and ones with larger parcels will likely see more affordable units than other neighborhood and the highest permanent affordable units. >> if each site develops the maximum potential 16 thousand the full effect represents 4 percent increase for the city's three hundred and 80 thousand

unions some neighborhoods might receive more but the impact is still small less than a 6 percent increase in month most. >> compare this to zoning market octavia and central selma both have or plan to increase the housing development in a much spaurl geography. >> so our consultant team is here to present their design study is it looking at looks at the sites representing the most common conditions and model that is an prelims with the federal, state, and local affordable programs this the diverse set of circumstances we look at the thirty thousand 56 hundred parcel study area and divided been the 40 seeing none, districts 6 density limits and

thirty height districts from 40 to hundred plus and found the combination of the 3 controls it hundred and 17 combinations the zone and height and density let me count it to find the the most occurring ones and then the staff and the consultant team picked 11 sites across the city meeting the combinations a variety of different parcel sites to get the spectrum of what is actually on the ground sites are attracted to developers and sites with larger lots with the scale the development but a handful of smaller lots were to show the impact and the sites are available in the study on the

website so, now i'd like to too david and amanda from the david barker architect to present their study. >> david will sit in the front row behind me and smile and you guys ask hard questions thanks for setting me up. >> we did this work in tandem with the consulting for the final analysis and this is one page of about 90 or so pages that look like this of the loving sites we've studied dozens and dozens of iterations and a 3-d program exact like a developer came to us and said what will it look like so the model of the program but also accuracy enough understood the

massing and retail and services spaces and when we looked 11 of those cases the density in the city is constrained by one we're most familiar the physical envelope how high you can build rear yard and things like that actually most of sites if this program area are constrained by density limits and the factor that assess you have one one units or 4 hundred or 6 hundred that means if we get 60 thousand we can build one large units or the limit is high we can do 25 units larger units or allowed for density you can do smaller units and get more

david has a good analogy this is like shares of something we're talking about the volume depending on how you cut it up one thing or another those two constraints railing relate this is a site in the western selma the height limit the m c-3 with the city limit on this particular site only 60 limits because of the density cap that means if you take advantage thoughtful height you'll get units more 3 thousand square footage more not realistic so we thought what if we take something like if you were to build 60 units at a one square feet stories less than 4 feet

tall so this is why unions are not built that way now one of the conclusions we should get rid of the limits the city thought hard how high and pasture we didn't have shadows and design guidelines and feel there is a density cap that is why theed we looked at the case and studied the mass under the state law this is a density to at this on this site there would be opportunities for homes that wouldn't be full and talking with libby we realized that thirty percent affordable housing that kezar 10 members that possible but on some sites it is not possible

we asked with the hocking percent onsite affordability be possible on many sites girard the density limits by that means up 12 stories of height that was actually exciting it means we don't have to bump up height acknowledge at least half the sites but the removal of the density cap and height would be feasible on some of the sites that are maybe closer downtown maybe some additional height would be what is neetsz for the thirty percent affordable and libby looked at the thirty or 40 percent that was the bedroom units and then we started to looking we realized this is an overwhelmingly building stock that exceeds the existing

heights and part-time building on california the red line it the zoning height and blew it the madam at 2 stories we're talking about somewhere in california across the street we love so well have a brother to they're right and this is an in fill you see a lot of those apartment building they're a fair amount of in fill and started to learn about why are roe those i believe so or buildings fte in we did a deeper dive and not belabor our from an urban design point how those designs work on 3 sites under the zoning on terryville your loud the 1 homes and a 50 foot

building that means you build for 2 thousand square feet if you take the density cap away from the site get up to 27 homes with 13 square feet those are good bedrooms so if a developer take advantage of the sites you could do smaller homes with 75 feet nob hill is closer to downtown and 47 homes in 55 square feet buildings with a smaller site it is approximately downtown and under full programs homes and 85 feet this is a site on geary do 8 homes and 40 feet that is 15 hundred square feet average size

under the full program 13 homes under 65 feet i if do another example this is 15 hundred square feet so if you said to do one thousand square feet get more density within the height limits i think my colleague will cover that but we know from our professional experience our work on all the sites and talked about to figure out what kind of would the project sponsor to make 24 density possible so we long with the planning department came up with the levels the planning department will articulate how that is allocated and so we feel passionately if the ground floor is great the density will be great if you think about your

farther coffee shop maybe i can tell me but your coffee shop on the ground floor so we feel that is paramount not only fetish the buildings in all over the city with ground floor that is flexibility with ceiling heights and active and transparent but bank of america a residential application room for planting and people thank you. >> thank you. >> we're still going so good afternoon, commissioners my name is ms. mohan i've been leading to implement this program we working closely with the city attorney's susan cleveland-knowles and audry to make sure we develop the program that meets the retirements of the state law but incentivizes the local goals and thirty

percent is affordable housing for local and low income a considerable amount of the analysis for the legislation including the model by david barker architects the case report has an information about the draft ordinance today i'll present the program at the high level and, of course, staff is vertebral to answer questions. >> the property legislation outlines four pathways the local affordable units the 100 percent bonus preamble the state and individually requested generally they all work the same thing depending on the affordable housing provided the developer will have increased density and sometimes increased height and other incentives from the memo that was establishes interest the d b.a. i'll talk

about the incentives after i describe each program. >> the local program will offer incentives to thirty percent 12 percent mob available to low income and moderate next door and from the project has 9 or fewer units it is not subject to the inclusionary has to have thirty percent affordable to the madam clerk, any announcements? >> those thirty percent for the households will be able to build two additional stories of height and up to 3 modifications off the memo the number of rental unit will be height and

size where 100 percent affordable a designed as follows: project that will be allowed 3 serious stories of height and govern by the bulk and the height of the building and entitlements extend up to 10 years the affordable program a excluding the rh1 and rh2 so sophie from the mayor's office will be talking about how this program will work from the city's pipeline. >> the state analyzed program was to implement the state bonus law and heights the project might request based on the analysis of the san francisco sites under this program projects couldn't exceed the thirty percent and the density increases are based on the percentage of affordable units provided on site and in san francisco that means the total

affordability is 13 percent 20 percent if so it owner project the number of incentives based on the affordable provided additional heights for the program only available when it is necessary to accommodate the density on the other hand, sgents and based on the envelope allowed under the existing the formula in the legislation and in the codes so project sponsors and others can minded from the project is likable for two heights under the project importantly the states analyzed program will not be available for under 2 stories height and finally in order to come into inclines the state law the project sponsors are to pursue a density bonus not in a state

analyzed are local program to compete an additional pro forma for any incentives and additional design review to determine what additional height it necessary it is available to make sure the access the full assess under the stalling, however, the city has not provided adjustments including an explanation why our state or local program didn't meet the needs of project. >> incentives and concessions for each program with in consulting with david bark and every members of the hack for the 100 percent available program staff wanted to understand what types of incentives for affordability and

two commonly granted modifications through the variance and the administrative review and most importantly the types of factors not upcoming healthy to san francisco the state density law provides the i'm that those units and working with david barker how many modifications to make a project feasible and not harm the health and safety of the city and researched the up front zoning modifications provides clarity for the developers and the public notice the incentives are on page 16 of the case report and we also did not take all the modifications listed by david barker we said to insure those incentives don't harm the health

and safety of san franciscans and the local affordable units the property owners partnerships can choose up to the exposure loading and common open space and parking. >> and the 100 percent program projects may choose to use all 5 incentives listed. >> and if projects use the state analyzed program they'll granltd incentives based on the percentage of affordable units divided with a maximum of 3 incentives from the developer wishes to choose a modification that is not on the memo that the department has studied the developer must submit the explanation why the following program doesn't meet their need. >> in the draft laxative projects needs to use the

affordable housing bonus bonus must be subject to the ceqa and others provisions it is a slightly modified project. >> projects using the local program will have a newly entitlements process memorial day over the authorization in eastern neighborhoods known as section 328 the idea recognizes the design of those bonus buildings will be important to the context of the building and it offers the public and commission the opportunity to comment on the design and provided other permissions i like to say the analyzed program will be according to the code notice all projects that are doing on affordable housing bonus are subject to the bonus guidelines we know there is a lot of information the affordable housing bonus program is full of

percentages and acronyms and several males or females parts it is xakd by solving the crisis is noting not easy the mayor asked those to be built to low income and moderate income this accomplishes this goal and distributes it to part of the city we have been talking about the program at the end of the day the city looks at for housing 80 teachers and policemen and nurses and countless others will it offer market rate housing yes, but the state and federal resources san francisco is the leaders and this program speaks to the innovation and leadership it has goals to incentivize great levels and prove the feasibility of under served sites and have a

entitlement of 100 percent we want to thank the commission and public and asking several questions about the affordable housing program. >> so i want to touch on one point this is the ends up of part one i want to emphasize something in our packet internally the draft guidelines i want to explain a little bit how they were created and make sure we have great conversation about them so basically, we worked with our design team and consumption to think what is unique of buildings that my take advantage of this program's and have 4 guidelines in our case packet and amanda talked about them but creating a ground floor assuring the tops of building

with quality and articulate the sidewalks if you're believes is a little bit taller than than the neighbor treat the sidewalk well and finally compliment will i architecture behavior they're in 9 packet in those colors those are the four that is unique to this kind of building and in addition, we identified a number of exist design guidelines we have in some parts of the city that are important 0 those buildings neighborhoods commercial corridor didn't have the opportunity guidelines we want to make sure those buildings were participation to the ground floor and all the things we've learned john can talk about that we're working as a department to update the guidelines and look alter more fashion and pieces are a place

holder until that upgrade is move forward and added controls that kind of talk about how these buildings will be created in an historic district anyway that is the ends of the first part of our presentation we are anticipate discussion and conversation before we go to the second part and public comment thank you. >> commissioners at this point any comments commissioner antonini. >> yeah. comments and questions if we have zone we miss have a purpose for the zoning i mean it maybe arrest before i but a certain eethd height with an commercial 40 feet for example, you know why is that there and okay to be above it you pointed out a few apartment buildings and sings are things from the

twooz we what is the remarkably for a person the present height and i think i mention that guess a little bit before i've been reading about the hefty the planning code and the first project was market octavia we were thinking about transit authority and now looking at other neighborhoods that have's zone not changed since the 40 years singles the late 70s and 80s and generally what is happening at that time, there was a loss of population and we were seeing a concern we were not going to be able to keep biz downtown we have found a lot of energy not moving the heart of the downtown and didn't do a lot of thinking about the lsd he

established height and density limits we thought were representative the existing context as a way to share to those neighborhoods downtown will not be contiguous; right? what we have energy kind of spread to the neighborhoods i think the observations that david barkers team made on the 20s were different point to one of the questions about whether we did that right and really thought about sort of the long term violation visions for those neighborhoods a quick move mayor ed lee we wanted to spend more time the increase in population i don't think is just a san francisco united nations and trying to figure out creative was to make more room for people

in your case packet a map shows how many buildings with currently above mile-an-hour density limit i don't have that at any for purposes but quest buildings are of that density to me it evidence that the density limits we have staernd in the 70s and 80s were not that accurate audience he went backward we allowed three or four floors on transit corridor they have streetcars through the corridors and adopt and 50s and 60s with the surgeontion buildings that were of that type taken down and built surface parking lots with banks or saves

and loans. there streets for the earlier example was probably a better than one i can understand how that came to be but the first i'm not against the plan i'm saying the first with an should be encourage whether heights are below what is not existing at least up to that height many places there are zoned for 40 feats and a way to encourage builders with affordable it it is a fine line if you have you know too many affordability the cost becomes two great to build it i know your giving additional height but vtdz the swoot if. >> increase density at the

expense of multi single-family units or the same amount of square footage go to single bedroom or studios we don't want to encourage we have to have restricts on what is built along with the bulls we want at least 2 bedroom maybe 3 or more than in my opinion every project should have ever not a cu but something like a large project authorization i think for you if don't want to see the rubber stamping or 40 percent it gets approved without question if a building is inappropriate too tall or two dense or blocks too much light it should be voted done or done the environmental impact is the same whether or not affordable or market-rate and so those are any main

comments so far but the program has a lot of potential if it is crafted carefully and make sure not one-size-fits-all but work carefully with each particular project. >> commissioner wu. >> thanks i want to clarify something i thought i heard commissioner antonini said we've determined not for existing building; right? not will adrc into a one-story building. >> correct. >> but the possibility of demolition and new building. >> correct. >> we'll get to that in part two so there is a map so honored i think paula went over this how the size is determined empty parking lots, etc. or the one-story building. >> so the methodology the department yourselves uses it

looking at the existing building and how many square feet of floor plate and a supervisor mar that to the maximum potential and determining what the ratio is if the ratio is favorable or shows a developer miter be able to achieve a much larger building it is a 5 percent developed or less and the certifies in the analysis spent a lot of time removing sites that are incentive we know wouldn't allow the building on a or whatever resources we wanted to realistic number. >> that will be helpful thank you. >> my additional questions are on the entitlement so just to make sure i understand currently all of those sites have their

own scoping so they either would or wouldn't trigger something to come to the commission; right? >> correct. >> with that program everything will come to the commission but under something like that an lc a. >> yes and no under the state analyzed whatever process if they trigger the fees they have a young what other things there are modifications whatever special triggers that apply our effort was try to incentivize people to choose the local program so so we tried to create a new process that of really focus and kind of centralized i split that those are projects that or thirty percent affordable or 100 percent affordable under the local program for 100 percent

affordable those projects as drafted come to tplanning commin and have a focused process. >> for example, if today i'm not sure this is well, let's try it if today you needed a cu but opted into the local program come cerebrothe section 328 and like an l ta. >> correct unless a formula retail you'll have to do do cu otherwise make the same vnthdz under the new case type. >> other conceived by formula retail we'll need to see on the ground floor? >> so it applies to those authorizations that are by voter mandated and the formula retail. >> only the voter mandated. >> yeah. i can't think of any

other voter mandated. >> however, make the same finding as you would i do not know for a land use cu make those in your motion to strike it didn't meet a threshold. >> okay. >> i'm still figuring out that is new information for me, the 100 percent affordable should be in an different category other than the thirty percent it the subsidized mohcd project like the new thing we're creating. >> great. >> commissioner hillis. >> on the in other plan areas we got rid of and market octavia we did a couple of other mtc

where we are revisiting as part of this if you did that got rid of density limits where does that get us does that get us to a level we can require 20 percent affordable housing or 25 affordable housing? yeah, he want to understand the extra >> well, i don't think we looked at that particular thing we can do that quickly but the question we populated can we get to thirty percent and get it in a way we're not offering more incentives than we are comfortable with from a urban prospective and looked at it a lot of the conversation with the ami is take into account and too much madam clerk, any announcements? >> but a layer cake of inclusionary affordable housing and less than 18 percent it was hard to make that work so i

think what i'm concluding without those to stories that will be really hard to hit the thirty percent without further deileitis - >> did you asia say in the state program you might be able to hit the affordable level without the extra stories a maximum not the necessary those extra stories and correct the case that and i manned showed the building is zoned to height if you sit those extra unions in the building the height is loudly we don't give you a health there is a formula in the planning code but 14 percent affordable. >> will we be doing the same thing for the city and local program. >> in the theory under the city and local program is absent

different thirty percent affordability and here is the perimeters whether you make that work please don't it it doesn't have the opportunity sort of maybe it was because we spent so much time looking the infinity number of options one clear alternative that was a trade off in reaching the prop k goals. >> so projects to 22 percent not just enough extra density to get to thirty as some go do the state program or the 12. >> the state program. >> the option of getting win the 12 to thirty it is 12 or thirty with the state option. >> in the state the options are infinity 18 or 9 percent or 13 percent choose the state project programming that is a

never ending ladder depending on what ami and the local program only has one option. >> the segue choose to look at them getting to thirty percent with the local option. >> no some of the sites choose the state program they'll meet the height to have thirty percent more of units and didn't want to go belief the 20 percent so also once you go above 2 stories you change destruction rather than getting more of value you get less and not get a higher level of affordability with the market-rate if that makes sense. >> you said over the existing is that true often the height size also. >> i think that might be lessen the height size we'll bring that analysis to you.

>> there are places you looked at that you said you know what even with an additional thirty percent the additional height didn't work is it the crack july did you think that worked everywhere. >> in all the urban designers they can we are is it so not vertebral in rh1 or rh2 a lot of the blocks we are imagining where a single-family is not included. >> yeah. okay. >> i'm interested in commissioner antonini's question he mentioned that historically if we have all the buildings especially the 19 or 20 that exceeds the height limit exceeds the density how we got there a little bit more history on this you know it seems odd to me the

current zion you can't get to the height and bulk limits and lease e lease in the cases. >> that makes me start to see the zoning to turn the levers and move towards the city so that explains why people are working group their zoning controls la was talking about how to rewrite all their zion controls and looks like sacramento and john will commitment. >> if we didn't change our sdoern we wouldn't have it not until 1921 and before that individual a major rezoning is 1960 and again, if 1978 we are not part of planning code

requirements los angeles the building code requirements those were phased in 60s and 70s it has changed over time and numerous buildings that steady the height limits as well as density just depends on the neighborhood alamo squad c alamo square as well as the height 40 feet. >> and you know, i think those studies the one that you all showed specific i wouldn't mind those getting more details to show you i think that may help address concerns people have on this seat an iving and what that looks like and illustration and more context on this block and here's what that would look like

i think those they kind of lift the density it has been done in planned areas and other projects that work with more affordable housing and people have concerned over the 2 stories what that means coupled with the density we can take an honest look it and those kind of bubble diagrams with that looks like. >> they're kind of the first patch not an architecture endeavor i'm confident with the sensitivity of context you can make the building work with all the buildings not just the 22. >> or and all i agree i think their bubbled with the architecture effort.

>> the architectural effort we've seen projects they come to us and corners lopped off what happens to the affordability do we have to make compromises on the affordability levels if this thing went through the process the developers negotiated or you got the planning department or the commission kind of taking a half a floor off or demanding 15 floor - >> we talked about this in the common and design review because of the buildings they gave out context kind of to look at ways to serve the larger notches or corners might be adjusts and the design guidelines are a smaller fine green kind of sculpting we wouldn't get to the planning of

setbacks about but the character the scales they window that kind of sculpting and looking for the side wall as hoping there could be adjustment of the side walls and adjustments on the edges but pulled in a little bit sculpting and i think we specifically time to look at the design review to avoid the loss of square footage that is certainly the intent to provider that not take units and make them smaller or lose units because the program is intentional and yeah. yeah. is that realistic. >> if we see the guidelines yeah. >> again going back to the specific examples to look at a couple of these and in the design review process in other parts of the cities with large

zoning in the eastern neighborhoods we're really looking to have our things coming in to smaller and been carefully what is happening with the size of the buildings and all the ends we might see for a long term. >> we have had it and is vice president recommended a sblt you start to lose units. >> we'll try to avoid that and most of time to get probation officer into the 2 to 6 foot scale of adjustment and not have a loss of units. >> thanks. >> commissioner moore. >> this is an interesting step to examine we considering the density caps we're at a point the city has the affordability the issue i'm concerned about is the memo of waivers and that's the seat dimensional

but adjacent to the issue we are already granting waivers exemptions to develop exposure and usable open space to anything that comes along because of the justification is not affordability but the justification is making a project pencil out and i think we need to take into account the specific look at what menu of labor not defied liveability in a codified way as in upper europe the notion of light and air and profess is non-exonerate in our discussion of rental units and as we are dense first degree i think we need to carefully find ways by

which we're using waivers in a way that targets the intent but is not just one other band aid for what we're doing this is a dangerous kind of doubled ekg's sword we want to encourage gentrification and if affordability or integrated affordability is the major objection why we're going this way but create nuances of how and use waivers that is a broader he issue i'm generally in support of xaem this further what is missing for me we have talked about this for years we don't have a combination of an enforceable rule for families sized units occupied for families it really is creating two bedroom units and anyone

else moves in we're not meeting what a core of our concerns and like us to fast track the ability to find a way of putting lose broader extinctions around what meets family and single-family residences into this consideration otherwise we're building more housing that what about occupied by who ever evening you have is an answer. >> okay. >> i would be interested to hearing about that and would agree with what commissioner hillis said i'll be interested to follow in some of your detailed information the ability that some of us know the sites and neighborhoods in which the sites occur to ask additional questions to further that conversation i see three or four sites a neighborhood i live

close to and like to see relative to the surrounding to the comments by which i open any consideration. >> commissioner richards and a couple of questions first with the stealing are we ought of experience if i'm a developer if i come into the door would i get something today. >> i can answer that deputy city attorney susan cleveland-knowles we have compiled with all the applications so generally introduce a special district mechanism but historically not having had many applications before. >> we could do it if we needed to but market octavia. >> yes. >> on market octavia density

elements were lifted in mosaic but you thought one unit to 4 hundred. >> heave or i've heard commissioner antonini talking about the single-family residences we're ring with the harmonies of liberty; 40 percent 2 bedrooms and put in a followup 40 percent 2 bedroom or greater people are not building the 3 bedroom units we've adams something to try to incentivizes it is complicated 40 percent 2 bedroom or 50 there is of the bedrooms in units that are two bedroom or greater which means you can do a trade offs through that works better about aid 6, 2 bedrooms or 3, 3

bedrooms i don't know. i can't do the math pub but divide the fewer number of the 3 bedrooms than the larger number of the 2 bedrooms. >> let's say market octavia i've been around one the things we requested the requirement i think that is essential to anything we're doing here he guess the other question we took out of density but how do the market respond nevertheless of what was being built. >> i don't know we've approved a cu that we've got two bedroom requirements. >> this past year 40 or 20. >> i see the people macroed out. >> you were marketing the push

back but it seems to be working with market octavia where we're marching on city hall so it has worked. >> (multiple voices). >> a couple of thing some of the design guidelines should be requirements absolutely what tells you what that needs to be if, if you doesn't have to have 50 but if one or two not a promise or good luck we've seen squishy guidelines someone says it's this and that and the dr thing but this is good i don't want to seeing a 6 unit conversion with a rubber stamp and approval let's make sure we're doing something with the

times and effort we put if a lot of the commissioner points i want to see k examples they're a great start to ease the fear factor in the neighborhoods neighborhoods we've heard those kinds of real life buildings something people can see really will help hey this is what it looks like in our neighborhood this might backfire but not to pull a fast one and in terms of historical examples historical districts a couple of things we've had with the designs coming up again and again we've talked with the department and this is a terrible design and it is still a bad design it comes away because it has 5 recession but not looks at terrible so,

however, i want to figure out the design against the timely ability or the that's a losing position for us. >> mr. barker. >> i can take it so when we're working on this sort of thing pier 70 and the interesting they know a lot of guidelines and they started mission bay the only building that failed the basil guidelines was the s m better building but it fit the guidelines that's the problem with you make that a requirement but you know it is a human factor rights we are not a dictator and he's not living for

every. >> last ti last night 2, 3, 4 neighborhood is an example we'll not talk about that i look at this and love it this kind of towards side walls and the this is amazing that is get my juices flowing (laughter). >> a just to make the point i don't want to pit affordability against design it is a losing situation it if pencil out you try to get it to work all in harmony and the other question the combinations the mortgage mortgage and the combinations so what are our how did in my neighborhood coup on the 8

thousand square feet house those are the things i want to prevent liveability as commissioner moore said we need to look at the list 15 feat rear yard that's a concern but absolutely support of the concept and a lot of details. >> okay. >> i'm done thank you. >> commissioner hillis. >> us one comment i want to get to part 2 the project an grove i think was a much smaller project until we lifted the density limits it became a large project they were able to get more units i think that works across the street one of the 1920s buildings so it linebacker might be a good one to look like it is

designed and you know it was designed under the prior one units or whatever square feet and designed again in the mix coming back to us with no density limits they remember able to build a bigger building 92 but not allowed to do a bigger building. >> that's correct. >> maybe a good one to look at. >> great. >> a lot of great questions i think if we didn't answer them we'll get back on an informational i want to show - >> commissioner antonini. >> oh, sorry. >> i could wait maybe something to do what with your presenting as i understand your plan to basically have a certain

amount oust affordable thirty or 20 percent a range. >> analysis that. >> depending on whether it is rental or ownership and the higher amount that middle-income that is typical one plus percentage a market way if you normally have a 40, 4 floor 40 foot building the owner will rent this as a market-rate of 35 hundred if you give them an infrastructure supra floor incarnate costa-hawkins you can't rent it for more than 3 thousand and 4 floors drop it down in terms of the price control it on the income people the way you prioritize it you give the public safety people the first which i see choice and

teachers and others that work in san francisco but in terms of you make that more a free market the incentive to get this extra bonus but then your obligated because of the price your dwoogd do on for sale situations and we'll look at sounds like rent control but it might work. >> you're giving them something. >> part two jumping jacks okay. he wanted to say jonas not around just to - >> oh, wow. >> jonas. >> i wanted to point out this is the map that shows the square any exist building that is over the density limit in over case

packet it is pretty blurry their 5 unions or less over the density limit by the circles their over the density requirement to help us understand the density limits are sort of a tool we use to kind of move things back and forth and so part two the first thing we'll be talking about is public benefits and transportation i think we've had a a little bit of conversation about how this program compares to market octavia or other area plans we did reuse the projects of density and in some cases provided height with the recent passage of the proposal for the childcare fees we're actually seeing those projects are providing 13, 20 maybe thirty

percent affordability on site and also paying nearly the same infrastructure fees for their development so your benefits passage by way of is absent higher for this density release and additional heights we're able to negotiate in our communities plans i think that is a result of two different things one the zone in those areas is absent lower we can afford to do that with the change in the existing envelope and two the market is different using 2008 numbers and 2015 for this one. >> in our case packet a full demonstration of the psychoanalysis 3 sites that represent a small, medium and large project we analyzed with david barker we want to

understand how this program performs as state law the incentives to make the straight program feasible one or 1, 2, 3 concessions if it helps to make our project feasible we were testing for that and testing to make sure that the local program really works we did this analysis a little bit different than seen in our area plans we were testing zoning in this case we assumed the lands value remands snapshot with an reason to recapture any value to the lands by in the form of affordable housing from the lands is worth $10 million then we assume that they can provide more units paying the

same for the lands but all the extra revenue that was generated from the additional units burglary be returned to the city in the form of subsidize units this illustration shows you the hard are in whether you and remain constant that program explicit change construction they go down a tiny bit because of the scale the soft costs the same thing, your architect and engineers and project sponsor they're doing the same amount of work spread is it ousted same economy scale the real savings wearable to achieve the affordability is the landlord costs per unit goes down if you assume you're paying the same price the costs that each home bear the los angeles

administrative code cost is much lower and there's been conversation about dry land costs up i don't know that anything won't drive land cost up this model the way we're trying to recapture every dollar we add to the project in the form of affordable housing. >> another topic we've heard a lot about how to protect our inquisitive tenants and businesses this is an image i borrowed from any colleagues in investing in neighborhoods it speaks well 0 new residents or new communities in the area we brought this legislation to supervisor tang and because of her work on investment in neighborhoods that's one of the first questions she was discrete

but she wanted to know how to protect them and help the tenants our team work hard with oewd to figure out what we can do in our case packet a number of services currently available to i think for the set of services and a larger set for projects on invest in neighborhood corridors we leaders that projects and businesses are not finding out they need to relocation until late older businesses especially don't have a business plan what moving is last week and not having their finances together so we've added supervisor tang's request a requirement that project sponsors innovative all tenants residential and commercial before they file

their e application that gives me super bowl 50 o small business owners to work with nonprofits that help people to put the financing together to work out so if in the bullet prove a tricky question not rent control for immoral spaces that this program does primarily focus on krortdz for commercial uses are courageous or required we do thing this is a net gain in commercial square feet for the city and recognize that the affordability question is just as true in the commercial corridor as the housing corridors so without further ado, i'm going to turn it over to my colleague to talk about the protecting rent-controlled

units. >> i'm back again mann can and addressing the allows of rent-controlled units in those cases the housing benefits program will in the incentivizes the affordability requirement in our local program the local program is not available for additions the current demolition is not sportsd by city policy and this commission seen several pieces of legislation with the loss of any dwelling unit requires the mandatory discretionary review and in certain districts the catch-22 is for the loss of one unit or more in december the commission will hear the legislation supported by commissioner avalos that

requires the cu of any units whether lost or not the city has laws in place for protection the ellis act the policy was initialed inform 2014 and tarnts the tenants under the ellis act this is 2010 given the pretty sure for the city program and 36 acts in bmr and bmr rental and 15 in multi family in relocation payments they're required for the ellis act owner or demolition of a unit ranges from 5 thousand to increase $17,000 depending on the number of units and the tenants in the units a newly supported policy that talks about the added tenants for any more than what the tenants is paying to reduce

the evictions in the neighborhoods preference program which was heard on the 24 of the accepts for the legislation had it's first hearing in the board of supervisors ab 22 is the stale that applies to any project using the bonus law in this law requires all rent control and affordable units are replied by like affordable housing and must be greater than the rent-controlled units and it is permanently affordable for the affordability requirements for the density

the need for a clear city policy around balancing the maintenance the rent-controlled unit for the affordable units is there the recent proposals in this context and others policies last week the mix 2020 as identified this as a central issue the staff will work with the policy marks to work on the robust requirements driven by the proposal this should be limited to the ground than the project the project that demo should be replaced and . >> replacement units been affordable for bmr's and not replace rent control and the rent-controlled units will be afforded different benefits the right of refusal to return to the apartment and in considering the decision-makers will allow

the tenants to return awhile movement and others families live in san francisco the department is working with the decision makers to make sure that the loss of any rent-controlled units is replied with affordable units. >> we've heard a lot from your decision makers and this commission how to incentivize the local programs as amanda showed and kristen deemed under the ceqa program maybe the same height as the locals program it requires thirty percent onsite programming. >> so that's why we go through 0 this entitlement process. >> and see we've heard this -

at the same time we've heard the process could be two owners for some antidepressant developers and written may require one that may not are heard before to improve the process for example, projects that provide thirty percent onsite affordable housing or 100 percent could be approved any of usly a pta and a notification staff approves the project with the zoning administrator and appeals subject to the board of appeals this could save the project sponsors on you will all projec we've mentions sophie she'll be

talking about more programs and reviewing the amis in detail. >> good morning, everyone. commissioners sophie from the mayor's office of housing and community development i want to talk about area meanwhile income and the programs serve and the households did proposed can serve and spend time into projects affordable projects we hope to benefit from this program. >> as you may know mohcd determined the liquidity based on area madam clerk, any announcements? >> under one hundred and $2,000 for a family of 4. >> and medium income is around

$102,000 households earning up to one hundred 42 thousands plus for the family are four are struggling in the local housing market if you're looking at the previous slides and think you've seen it before we've been here before and used those slices any conversation about area income needs this conversation. >> who do those numbers read to and 50 percent ami is about $41,000 for a family of four many of the rental housing are targeted around those people and below to 90 percent i'm that is 82 to

$84,000 for a family of for a number of our existing ownership programs are currently targeted to those households. >> households that are harder to reach typically the mooechlt one 20 percent ami is one plus thousand a year for a team of 4 and one 40 percent ami is about one hundred $43,000 for a family of four i put together again, you've seen that before a quick summary of households that are serdz by the mohcd the republicans are tact and 60 percent and blow about 19 thousand units in our existing portfolio our ownership units are targeted to families

at 90 percent ami and anything above that is harder for us to not reach the tax credits lefrndz funds 60 percent ami and the inclusionary didn't go above 50 percent we daylight savings time i wanted to note our process there the affordable housing bonus is on the 100 percent affordable projects it does provide a significant opportunity to reach the madam clerk, any announcements? >> and this is also very challenging that program provides significant numbers numbers of units up to one hundred 40 percent of e-mail

those are privately funded projects. >> but we are very excited about the potential for 100 percent affordable projects not appearing clearly on the screen we have a hardcopy and provides for the public that offers four mohcd pipeline projects that benefits from this. >> sent maps for the commissioners and to the public the first is 490 south van ness through the program the project will benefit with one additional story, 10 extra unions an upper yards in santa fe and geneva

anticipate two additional stories through the program or thirty extra units and two is a senior building about benefit if two extra stories or if 21 units and fulsome if we could benefit from the full story addition 62 bonus unions all told this is additional 1 hundred and 75 additional affordable units morning of our usual side their 50 feats in height and 75 units that's a broad generaltion those projects and talking about the benefits we could add one and 75 units beyond we we can provide today that's and quick sort of at some point of the way we hope

to use the program as 100 percent portfolio i'm joined by the director teresa she and i are available for questions if you have some. >> so thanks that sorts of concludes the second half of our presentation green before we go to public comment i want to emphasize how for the bodies of work and acknowledge staff that is ready to answer questions and anymore importantly jeff buckley if the mayor's office that's my partner in crime dow doing the public outreach one of the things we see as your primary task perhaps at the december thirds hearing is refining and advancing the work and protecting over tenants and

monica talked about the state law gave us a requirement that we make sure those units are replaced and something that came out in the last hearing and our conversation with the supervisors and community members we wanted to see that as an added requirement you meet the thirty percent affordability and replace those unions we're working very hard with the city attorney and pulling together the people that think about rent-controlled units and the tenants issues will right to return to offer you a robust program we development to have fully drafted by december 3rd, that will include both the tenant protection piece around right to return and that regional housing summit at many ratio one to one and in the audience in addition to jeff is lisa and michael that have been

working with the environmental planning team and our new guy we're learning a lot with that, thank you. >> thank you. >> we'll open up for public comment the first person is george. >> we're limiting the public comment to two minutes per person. >> thank you, commissioners i'm george again president of the coalition for san francisco neighborhoods i think commissioner richards

says it very well, he's talking about weighing the costs of visibility weighing the design and cash kirsten was talking about wear adrc 6 thousand affordable units over the state mandate and again, the question has to be asked do we even need what the city's about to do. >> katie tang told us she'll have a meeting in every district eirs have to take into account when and shadowy think one misunderstood thing the you're talking about affordability when you talk about one hundred 20

percent your tenaciously madam clerk, any announcements? >> that is not affordability any longer than and needs to be called something else whatever you're doing not doing it for affordable so i think setbacks are gone and the size of units which was a huge, huge deal is two bedroom house seven hundred and 50 square feet is one thousand definition needs to be tightened especially here so that program can work and and last r m-1 and two require a lower density and i'd like to know how they fit into this thank you. >> thank you. i'll call a

number of names if i call your name line up on the screen side of the room (calling names). >> first person podium are come to the podium please. my name is eileen i am going to read something from a lady that had to leave he can i have extra copies the jurist is about a petition called citizens report about a project or a plan called san francisco needs a better plan and she is pope e proposing that density bonus i can read the last forgave i'm concerned about the inclusionary housing to break down the neighborhoods in

selma and residents affordable units in the richmond, etc. you will kill the communities by dispetersburg the ethics groups that tied to the safety net that is especially on the elderly and disabilities and families with strong communities ties the way the sfmta is making travel for did the by increasing the needs of more transfers and will further impact the lives i have copies for the commissions and she apologized she's very ill. >> thank you. next speaker, please. >> if your name has been called, come forward or i'll call more names. >> good afternoon. my name is a laura thank you for continuing

this matter until january 2016 and exploring the merging first, i support the goal of more inclusionary housing by i'm not convinced the extent of those give a ways to the developers with needed developers support for the proposal suggests there profit margins are protected at the extension of small businesses and affordability or in the cutters link going eventually their comfortable that program pencils out their lobbyists are treat as a stakeholder and it is time for the transparent under the developer process mime concerns with not limited to any neighborhoods i'm deeply sdishd disturbs by the displacements of families in community in areas of the city over developed and

overwhelmsed those have been speeding of the approval or reducing the amount of opposition is sdrish i have concerns for the most part it depends on more displacement of current residents and small businesses you'll not need displacement if you were not demolishing the housing those are tipped to offset the affordability country's will exasperate it the right of return is essential ensue take more than if you have to leave our apartment in san francisco you'll not find interim housing until the right of return and if the replacement for residential housing that may not result in much additional affordable housing don't adopt in that has

your honor, intended collateral damage. >> as the next speaker comes up i'll call the next speakers (calling names). >> >> yeah. i'm john i want to say a couple i have thing i like about this program one a very, very large percentage of the housing that's been built in the city as far as in the last decade has been built in the eastern neighborhoods in selma in the mission and not in the other district of eastern neighborhoods i think this is great when you look at the map you see the north of market is significantly covered in the area you'll still see a lot of eastern neighborhoods and if you look at the map i was doing a count had the percentages of soft sites in any neighborhood that is in the south west quadrant of the south

of the park and west of twin peaks only 10 percent 4 hundred sites 10 percent is 24 buildings if we round it off and said of the 50 square miles we had one fourth basically 5 buildings per square mile for the sunset so you know a lot of the offer reaction we're seeing about 5 building per square mile but tune down the rhetoric in the the sunsets i'll leave it at that thanks. >> thank you. next speaker, please. >> hi my name is lauren clark i'm here with grow sf welds to know in general endorse this project step in the right direction we need density that

was brought you up been the planning commission what's the cost of density and infrequently discussion u discuses what is the coast of scrawl and what's the the cost not moving and creating enough housing for all the people moving here every day the cost is displacement and higher rents and the cost the crisis we're in i beg you to move quickly i understand this commission a used to moving very slowly foe we're in a crisis i ask you guys to spends more time learning and scoring those questions and educating yourselves not much time wasted in those meetings this is upsetting those are oh, wait it is 12 o'clock and 4 o'clock and 5 o'clock is impossible do

engage where our city is going i think that is upsetting why only one planning commission i know that really we need a more effect process i appreciate that you guys spent a lot of time and effort we need to move a lot faster on this issue thank you for your time. >> next speaker >> good evening. i'm marcus with the area federation we support that as people said more outreach meeting one meeting that was on the west side and there should be more we come at that from two anltz the first is transportation a little bit shameful two-story building next to bart station one of the streets on the 0 outline was in the outer mission and shops that

are buildings and empty lots and heavy transit corridor that could benefit an additional 2 stories and the second issue is that using this program to control the types of buildings this is an insulins an single-family homes but they're not restricted to 2 bedrooms we should mandate that developers use is 18 percent of affordable for the 2 bedrooms why we're allowing them the freedom to making maybe make buildings with one bedroom or 3 bedrooms that is the option for families so come at this grew up eir represent of findings for options. >> thank you. >> thank you. next speaker, please. >> my name is bob tillman a long

time property owner and business owner in the mission this coming wednesday i'll be smichlt to the planning department a cu application for a 55 unit building on any property i'll be applying for the state density bonus whether this legislation passes or not i am strongly poster of that legislation, however, i think that is an physiologically good step for the city increasing the affordability i have two questions number one i request that interest be a very clear process priority for applying for the state density bonus, and, secondly, i ask the commission why are you not applying the local program to the entire city why would i not choose the local program in the

mission when i am building a housing on a property that has not housing one block away from the bart station why not allow me to take advantage of the local program thank you very much i appreciate you're hearing me and congratulate you on your work thank you. >> thank you i'll call more names as the next speaker comes up (calling names). >> good evening commissioners ami laura i'm a noah valley residents lived in so for for a decade i have a bachelors degree in architecture and dedicated my time and work on a committee in

the mission it is my professional opinion this for san francisco is is an excellent example of exactly the kind of they know the city needs to address the affordability crisis i'm protected if the worse crisis i own my home homeowners are tired of watching friends arrived a little bit later and made that choices to leave the city we need more housing and one the stock arguments it threatens the neighborhood character i think my background deems owe love san francisco but when our loved ones want live nearby if you're interpretation it not - many prelims my farther is virtually character is not pormsal to the height of building and needless the term

character is independence we wanted to or not growth will happen the question where the overwhelmingly agreement we have environmental responsibility to channel that growth into urban areas particularly along the corridors failing to have more housing forces the generations to move out the city until we make it so by not evolving this is a smallest solution for our residents and help the neighborhoods in adjusting their housing please pass that legislation thank you. >> next speaker. okay more names (calling names)

if you're in line please step forward. >> good afternoon good evening, commissioners i'm jean i've lived in the richmond's district over 20 years a child in high school and one in college i've worked in government and nonprofit work my entire life this is the first time i've testified before the planning commission i am here i feel xanax about the idea to build more avenue, i urge you to move forward the affordable housing bonus program now don't delay you've decided to delay this for 3 months my neighbors and friends not living in this community it is 3 more months of people having no outlet options you need to move faster on this upgrade issue by the voters pga

the affordable housing bond that only adds a few more housing this is upgrade for the people in the communities in addition tattoos visible signs the people living in our streets and parks we have i think visibility consequences who many of the nonprofit friends and colleagues are leaving san francisco can't afford to represent housing it is nearly impossible to replace them the cost of housing makes it difficult to recruit people into jobs other people think are high paying what will happen when my children want to return from college and live in san francisco the size of the buildings didn't make san francisco wonderful but we welcomed or used to an incredible diverse of people if

rich and poor from around the country and world assaults of the having so much prices around the housing we've shut the doors on weighty people please pass this now. >> thank you. next speaker, please. >> good afternoon, commissioners ami i'm a residence of san francisco my question is how can we incentiveize onsite affordable housing how can we increase the visibility and how w, we make room for future jaywalkers and modernize 1950s zoning laws that don't meet the modern residents 40 percent of affordable units are two bedroom size that accommodate easily a young family i thank the team that are teaching e searching for the

complexity of the bonus hillary clinton in 2013 spoke of the housing crisis to protect the working-class more than ever this is a appropriate adjustment to accommodate the working-class the affordable housing bonus program does that simply by increasing the four story height with little pressure to the neighborhood and the sightlines the sky and ocean ben the working middle-income and hiv disability with liveability benefits in the neighborhoods i urge the commission to posted with that wonderful thoughtful process thank you. >> thank you. next speaker.

>> my name is annie a renter in the city a young designer and activist i want to point out the logic that is streak to me stalling may not stalling but continuing to night pick at the details of the cost of homelessness and students bulking under the cost of living and other evictions to carry out this to the interest of the middle-income homeowners we know there is something inlogical in discussing the policy of affordable housing we need to see an emergency to address that quickly i'd like to see a conversation around the neighborhood schashg around the inclusive and welcoming character and a forwards thinking and creative character and attitude towards how our

city about change and grow like many said the character is not in the building but the people and communities roadway we're blowing them off i want probation officer points out no existing robust program far the middle-income this addresses the problem we're getting more and more dysfunctional as frmdz can't afford to live here this is the start of a robust program just for that thank you. >> thank you. next speaker, please. >> hello, i'm stan the president of the board of telegraph hill we support the efforts of housing for affordable and assessable especially those who need our help awhile safeguarding what makes the city

special which is why we make sure we don't to the character of our neighborhoods we don't undermine the sklgdz or bypass the public notice and protects that are embedded in our law today, we're going to need more information i strongly urge to publish the revised and guidelines you attached today guidelines a couple of comments many of the things in the guidelines you said ought to be requirement you need to make sure they're there you need better definition this terms are given to different interpretation make them precise to articulate underlying principles and overriding principles that is a signpost

for judgeing the interpretation spent a lot of times talking about materials not enough times about that massing and heights there's novelist enough information about historic districts fwlz and guidelines that are in it they're now are barely less a page and on a guidelines for us to look at it and i want to say as i class i ever impressed by what commissioner moore said earlier how important to view the communication of that information in a neighborhood specific way each of the applications you've seen and there's a lot of hundreds plus all different and need to be treated and a 3-d law. >> thank you very much thank

you, sir, your time is up. >> good afternoon, commissioners katherine howard concerned about the loss of open space part of having a liveable city as commissioner moore said when you live if a city having nature in the backyard projects will be betsy carmichael up and out what happens when a project backed up on a rh1 people will have shadows how much cast and for people crowded into the new buildings less open space for them the backyards will be tiny and dark and the new residents and i believe that the way san francisco is built and the buildings are very important part of character of the city and a lot wonderful interesting people living here that appreciate that we want to preservers the diversities here, and, secondly, the district he meeting of rh1 and rh2 are not

subject to the legislation but the elective digest said the density bonus program applies to all district of 5 unions or more rh1 and rh2 are not 5 units yet what happens with demolition a prompt gutted and rebuilt with more units this kind of things has been known to happen in san francisco all of a sudden having larger rh1 and rh2 buildings that will be like pushing over a stack of dominos we need clarifications and we need to protect our open space it is part of the character the city thank you. >> next speaker

and. >> good evening. i'm paul weber thank you to the staff getting in far on the bonus proposal but i am listening to the questions and this answers given by staff this seems last week, a work in process and i'm concerned even with the january 28th deadline unless there's a substantial amount of intervention with the staff and neighborhoods in a regular working sessions that will not get mrifshd by that date and i'll ask two specific questions based on the discussion today, the dead on arrival can comply with state law statements i heard made we're in compliance with state law i'm hearing in the developer wants to do the

state law bonus project if i'm wrong tell me secondly, no mention the prospects of more rent-controlled building evicts this is bound to run up the price of reaping real property that statement can't be true anymore incentives it seems to me for property owners to do ellis act evictions a thereby kill the whole opportunities for rent control so i hope you given consideration to that one other thing i'll mention that is a major, major program that really belongs to the citizens of the san francisco and shouldn't they be given the opportunities to vote onion the program thank you very much.

>> good afternoon i'm irving governing an architect income san francisco and also the current board wanting of the charter on the institute of architects in the city i'll be brief i wanted to add our support of and by our i mean personally passing this legislation been if this practice for over thirty years i have been in san francisco request wards to the work in affordable housing and multi single families in the city one of the approaches the city is getting a chance to tackle the shrj and the low and medium middle-income of people and having seen and been in the city is it goes a long way to

maintaining the character of the city. >> what really makes that trophy to most people and is diversity of the people that work here and live here and continue to do so that carries obviously across many ranges of people whether or not families or workers that come in as well as individuals that are coming out the city i think this legislation does so in the manner that will be equitable to the entire city and not just certain neighborhoods i hope you consider passing this legislation thank you. >> thank you. next speaker, please. >> hello, i'm glen rogers landscape architect as an architect i'm alarmed by the reduction or removal of setbacks on the designs of those forgives

forgive me, i'm coffee shops are nice but is setback eliminations with this solution is coffee really better in the shade than the sun provided by a four story building so many coffee shops in san francisco support the planned removal of a backyard space for new development is alarming san franciscans maintain their mlk in a city whether front and backyards are members of the commission by the compromise nature has been preserved and lastly how is that possible for the affordable housing bonus plan to be approved in 3 months other plans like the eastern neighborhoods plan or is math took 5 to 10 years to be approved we request

city government so have a dialogue with the individual organizations about their ytdz and concerns regarding the affordable housing bonus plan. >> thank you. >> mary ann miller architect and graduate of this planning department i worked here in the 1980s i learned about the planning code i was an architect and design person but i found the code fascinating i thought was on a assurance there were no limits limits cause there to be good architecture i'm afraid that some of what i see in the name of affordability is traded.

good design i thank our commissioner richards very much for what we said and commissioner moore the law of ine unintended consequences david barker i want to give them a compliment he need to represent cat himself 80 times in the city he is the only person we know that has not cut back an qualify and his designs a stellar i've been through his building their magazine sent i would through the 80's and 90s i don't want to mention his name the residential builder of note of that time would never have screwdriver hiring an architect so they've got building designers and assistants they'll

looked our inclusions and incentives and a prostitute that will be the cheapest thing on earth how to avoid that i beg you not impose those legislation when you i'm sure you'll productive that but a 3 year sunshine evaluate the results make the staff bring you the results and definitely losing something in gaining something thank you very much >> hi, i'm mike a 25 year residents of north beach items. >> i'm appointed i have the liquidity of being a little bit hash inch concerned about the

level of entitlements and la jolla thinking in the face of a real affordability crisis friends of mine had to move to oakland and contra costa county they can't finds another apartment they can afford in the city we need to restore this plan are restore affordability if this policy is not gummed up by politics and a big part of that but have to present it in a way for the greater public not to pressure groups and tell them the urgency and benefits we'll have a lot of dialogue like the neighborhood character and people are talking about land banking or affordability from a point of view from the mentality and worried about their piece of pie

one thing if we able to implement that program it will be a lot more pie we shouldn't worry about pieces we need this, please make that work thanks. >> thank you. >> (calling names). >> hello, i'm omar i'm a residence but every time i'm there i see that there is so many on mission street like one and two story building ousted to have more housing this is a extreme crisis and renters are having a hard tiaffording third

degree anything this project has the ability to make a dents on the housing market. >> with respect to neighborhood character lake the as seen from the members of congress ups this presentation didn't entail the total destruction of neighborhoods character as the articulation of the side walls you could get his juices going not an immediate the project as it stance does not appear to directly threaten the character alcohol, tobacco & firearms neighborhoods and ends up on a note the people are saying things again housing against not housing but i think i index this particular project

how it might ruin backyards and things like that to me the cost of having a backyard is going far beyond the realm of reality (clapping.) that's ludicrous that is the way to cbos like the standards by which we approve or deny housing projects i do want to step on those rights or needs. >> take into account those of us who can't afford to own a multi bedroom home in the sunsets thanks. >> if you stay here long enough you start to laugh thank you for having me. we've been tracking this legislation a lot of members have been tracking this i want to commends them on the job

brings up the intentions that apply to state law what was meant in california a couple of things i like about that ellis acted housing right the market rate housing results more affordable housing if you're stuck in the middle make too much to quality he you cannot get rent control you are out of luck our pictures and police officers 24 helps to fill the gap and other addressing the terms density appellate court i've heard 80 percent of the development is on 20 percent of land market octavia and bayview this program helps to incentivize hopefully, some

housing along geary and terryville and n judah the this is a much we are not use of lands i can talk about the process no, he community outreach every day when i'm putting together a news letter i read about people getting kicked out of the city some that is part of our thing anymore affordability for middle-income residents why hold this up and delay that it is a good policy for san francisco let's get this going thank you. >> commissioners larry form department staff. >> sitting here long enough

you laugh or cry we all know we need additional affordable housing and middle-income and a state mandatory not doing anything didn't mean the city bonus didn't happen only rules increased density will not ruin our neighborhoods increased density didn't necessarily mean increased height in some cases maybe in other cases something else i sat here with two commissioners the institute on aging on geary is going to ruin the neighborhood it didn't ruin the neighborhood it is actually pretty good. >> specified depths on specified sites scattered along

geary and other high density corridors will help the neighborhood kristen did a great job i urge you to approve that as soon as possible without delay. >> thank you (calling names). >> go ahead. >> can i have the opportunity offend several things notification kristen said c s f

m was part of progress at the meeting no reports and in meeting today provided a lot more information than that than we got at the other meeting it has piano notification also in regards thirty thousand parcels ♪ plan and humane of those people have been notified i would vuj to say perhaps 200 so this really needs to be improved upon and the drs you get 3, 10 or 11 notices well those people under the thirty thousand parcels should be notified by written notice they don't know what is going to happen to them this is

poor planning you know that's pro-active and let people know what is happening the residents and doorstop a notice this is a disgrace and other they know in regards to the members of the committee i'll sends you a tape of the sunset library and their you saw some people that will living in the neighborhoods but not here today but i'll say i'll get you a copy in regards to the type of people that watches this the next door for example, a oblige a lot of people that are concerned about this the oldest folks like me established anticipate have families and people in concerned about that are the people you hear tonight the young people and renters they don't care

about the neighborhoods >> thank you, sir, your time is up. >> hi, i'm tommy i'm with the human rights committee we have some concerns obviously about the rent-controlled units and what exactly will happen that the rer8dz what i'm hearing so far from the city and planning about the rent-controlled units didn't make me feel really good i'm hearing people will get preferences we've been that route before and sometimes, people wait decades decades to get people some people have died before they ghetto the units that didn't assure me people will get preferences okay money $5,500 per adult and a little

bit more than 16 to us households if you have an elderly arrest disabled $167,000 will not get you far in the city especially from a rent-controlled units paying way blow market rent neighborhood preferences yeah. i've been reading and hearing being it this ain't going to do it chance of gettings into a unit that p is going to be at the same level you can afford i don't know. i don't have much confidence and the costa-hawkins problems we know the city needs to figure out how to get around that why not say no demolitions of housing unit no demolition of rent-controlled units it is very simple why not have that as a policy and say that you can't

demolish a rent-controlled unit period why can't say we do that? >> good evening. i'm with the council of couldn't housing organizations kristen was with the planning department's over this and peter and i my colleague will be speaking in a moment compensating how to present the many questions by this and many questions how to make a program that works well, i think what tommy raised was perhaps the key in the kroouks e kroouks if you reads libby's record or report there is bans a lands value most of sites include existing buildings with existing businesses and existing residents so most of the sites this applies incentivizes the

demolition of residential housing if you want to create net new unions either we don't destroy the rermdz housing or provide one by one housing for a rights for people to return to the rent-controlled unit we're doing some of this because the state law says xyz our local program mostly on the slices was talked about an entirely elective program a has nothing to do with since an elective program you can say as a developer if you elect to do this you'll provide over and above the thirty percent one for one replacement of the units that are lost what about what the businesses you'll help to

provide permanently affordable spaces for them we don't have commercial rent control this is an elective program the developer choose those incentives all the things they can deal with it you have the opportunity ability to solve this thank you. >> thank you my name is zach brown a young renter in the mission and a tech working i'm here those issues are important and my colleagues that spent the four hours they can't be here he live in a dense housing units a very in the mission and live with any people artists and students filipino families that emigrates from peru and mexico i'm lucky and unique i live in a

place with so many varying personalities and incomes i really think that the people deserve an opportunity as well holding those things back and making that harder to proliferate in san francisco is hard for the communities and placing backyards over community and growing that is sad for me and many others people should benefit and have the opportunity luck i'd be able to have a greater basis thank you. >> hi i'm available to answer any questions you may have morton lived in the mission district for 5 years i grew up think a military i never had a hometown i love being a member of the vibrant city and neighborhoods i wouldn't want to

deny this experience to anyone i think we need to build the housing to accommodate us i'm a member the millennial generation not affording a backyard in the city don't own a car i bike and business everywhere i count be able to walk home on with my groceries i don't think i'm unique and there's more and more people my age and young than me moving into the city we need to build a multi housing to accommodate people last week me if we don't act those services whether not be there in the future and get were those i support this proposal and more affordable housing we need them in all the neighborhoods thank you. >> good evening peter kohl

with the council housing fernando my colleague adu's allowed to several questions we've talked about with staff and it is good actually to see today, the presentation has begun to address some of the questions i think that they're thinking is of the result of that so hopefully our constructive critique is useful i want to focus ton two things one the basics how to do really due diligence whether in the good deal and libby was krujd to do this but when our thinking about the amount of value being conferred to the staffs point we're not offering more incentives and trying to recapture every dollar we had there's needs to be a third or second party to deal with we'll

dig about those numbers we encourage you as commissioners and the staff to make sure, in fact, we're not leaving money that on the table this is not a neighborhood character but recapturing the value it is very important to get all of it, and, secondly, what is recaptured in the middle-income housing you hear staff talk about the the middle-income if i could have the opportunity overhead to point. >> the microfilm is not one point but a matter of policy can i have the opportunity overhead some go that is deemed if 50 to one hundred and 50 medium income that is from singles to four person households the question peg all the units between one 40

and 20 who's the michlts the teachers and try to get it right. >> thank you. >> hello, i'm ms. johnson the affordable housing some as the rents goes higher as a law in that affordable housing at any bones rents goes higher and higher and the this rents should go higher and higher on more convenient housing and we need to write those laws as the issues you raised making that easier and our housing and that we should also have any kind of

any kind of bad talk that should be another dollars on their rent this is very serious your affordable housing not just taking for the convenience is to make sure everybody gets their benefits not to take and say oh, yeah. let's attack it that's not - this is affordable housing to me any kind of bad talk rents goes higher this is way that our building housing a way is about those hardass work we had to do

to make the - on the commission and more i 24 had to work for looking at the housing to do it thank you. >> good evening. i'm diane of the south of market community action network the fact that displacement of the existing receipt is an afterthought not presents at the open house last week is completely irresponsible but we heard today basically a calling together of a version of things that exist we're just passed or could pass and this is completely insufficient considering the possible ramifications of this program if i look at the lots that are identified how many of those

have rent-controlled units where is the analysis of that how many of the thirty thousand identified lots are occupied by local businesses you know what will be the notification process for those thirty thousand properties where how will the existing residents know and the existing businesses know where is the breakdown of the 6 thousand unions that you know the $6,000 affordable that would be create with the local program how many are rent-controlled units where's the breakdown of that where's the 90 pages of case examples what will happen to a local brvrn how they'll tale with they're building is sold you know the fact that this is completely an afterthought and he you know something that is prioritized into begin because supervisor tang did bring that up it is you know

completely responsible i would urge to think of a comprehensive plan in the next 3 months i agree with tonys suggestion no destruction of rent-controlled units in the city thank you. >> commissioners joseph commissioner president dwight richmond can you see rights center i want to list in addition to what tommy spoke number one i'm looking at the doing a full eir on this program especially in the new transportation sustainability program and transportation sustainability fees that was approves by the board what's the impact the nexus and the area plans that have adopted eirs what effects these especially an

additional capacity for new housing and the next one is the affordability restriction as a minimum of 55 years it seems like the affordability restricts should be in the life of the building that is approved with being more units and next is local businesses many people talked about that a lot of maul and local businesses in our communities displaced by the program are the life blood for the community next is the palmer ruling i'm not sure if there is discussion with the developers be able to see out because of the possible conflict the palm building and then the last is priority rights to return tom touched on a bit and making sure that if people are displaced they have priority

rights to return with the same rents and with lifetime similar think similar projects thank you. >> is there any additional public comment? >> good evening, commissioners are that my name is jody with the housing action coalition i don't usually speak but i keep hearing the affordable housing bonus is for the middle-income i like to say i'm a middle-income in a nonprofit employee for 12 years working other than advocacy and been a san francisco resident for that 20 years and proud to say i'm leaving the city i bought a house now oakland i can afford

one he search warrant have look at the housing for middle-income if we don't focus on demographics wear a gated community with i met women in the richmond and that resonated with me something the housing action coalition we look at middle-income housing this program is well it out out the planning department has give me is it a lot of consideration it is honestly been working on that for 18 as part of mayor's office working group it is examined and the planning department's has done an amazing job and i think we need to look at moving things along versus stalling i ask you to pass the affordable housing program this

we understand thank you. >> thank you kathy i would like. >> have you not arrested spoken. >> only the continuance. >> okay. thank you mr. president. >> i'd like staff to answer why they think this program incentive cvs the one and 20 to 40 bracket to live in the affordable housing without graders we have a member the housing cognizance who bought a house in oakland how to keep the folks here in the kind of housing people are fleeing because they want yards and schools i want to say i'm graph for today's very detailed

presentation we were included in the mayor's office working group they talked about the details we're behind in the learning curb and appreciate the two week continuance but if we ask you for more you know we may need more and have staff explain next time how the amendments relate to the area plans that are all right approved thank you very much. >> okay is there any public comment public comment is closed. >> commissioner wu. >> okay. so thank you to staff for a detailed presentation is the south side available. >> so the map maintains back of our packet shows by neighborhoods both the number of sort of the percentage of parcels in each district and

shows what that percent increase is. >> it is agree gated on a neighborhood scale. >> that's correct. >> is the sites available. >> this the the map we're providing in terms of where they are i want to clarify a couple of questions i think you're interested generally, the - specific the 200 and 40 soft sites doesn't include whether their rent-controlled or not rent-controlled units any residents was not soft because the city is having this conversation about wanting to protect those units. >> that's great for me my goal to push this more towards i guess the south side you've identified we need to have protection for the case in which it might be use for a demolition rebuild somewhere but i'm he

heaping the goal towards the parking lot and the m t lots so i am going to problems a couple of things on the rent-controlled units ferns it should be a minority situation but i'll propose a number of things okay. so i think that there we should consider whether or not to demolition allowing this on rent-controlled units what that does to the program be an analysis of that if queer going to allow the existing rer8dz to be demolished unit should be replaced one for one with a bmr unit and the thirty percent of units affordable in the proposal should be on top of that one for one replacement and thirty percent on top of that and remaining units can be

market rate the program should be developed we seem those tenants whether move back into the units once they're built those tenants should pay their existing recommend once and move to another location which this is going to be constitutional and payment for the moving costs and again have the first right of refusal to assume they're coming back to live business is more challenging the city has less experience a federal uniform location at the program that mass formulas by which you decide how much money to give to businesses that are displaced not the same because businesses don't want to move and come back

they want to set up their businesses whatever so financial give so they can set up in the new place doyle in a location remain their customer basis and at a similar rent not as clear how to guarantee those things but this is very difficult but i think we need to dig deeper and think about what we have done in investing in neighborhoods. >> commissioner antonini. >> thank you a few thousand yeah, the last speaker made a good point it is not always a cost factor the schools and space are important for families with children that is a good plan not going to address all the needs in in conjunction with incentives for developers to develop areas particularly on

the west side owned by the city for super single-family homes it was addressed people don't want to live in multiply unit buildings with their children but it does go things and zoning administrator made a good point about the isn't on amp a in my looking building i was looking at out from a window i it out that was nice it came out nice it went through love process many maergz neighborhoods inputs and we changed and refined the architecture with the help of staff it was administratively approved that would have been an ugly building the neighborhood would not be talking that way the point is i don't think there is a place for i administrative

approve i like the idea of moving but having the commission make a decision at a lower bar to approve those coffees projects is important because the impact on just a few minutes properties was just the same whether affordable units or market-rate if it is too much shadows or imagining appropriate it is i think predicament no matter so that ends 490 south van ness was mentioned as a project made layering we worked very good to craft that with the help of common core so set it to be respectful of the building to the north illness saying not to do that it was important when it was a market-rate unit than have the same height and bulk even if you now it is affordable so those are some of my thoughts

also one speaker brought up the point why not require higher affordability with developers unfortunately, our you know prop c sets a certain affordability level and the states says you know you can only do bonus ask for more if you give bonuss that's the answer to one point that was raised good points that scrawl and the fact that environmentally it is surrounder to put more housing inform density in y where people have recreation and you know most of their lives are spent rather than having them living 50 or 60 miles away anger previous farmlands or open spaces limited

and spending hours on the roads every day it needs more work in terms of displacement issues i mean, i think there should be protects i'm agree with commissioner wu but if you build a new building it a lot better and you can build offset where the tenants to be close by you're probably wen both ways it didn't mean the tenant necessarily has to go back to the seam units they're better off in the new ones because the the unions are substandard and dangerous you see fires attempt so this is a good service to replace those buildings that

meet the plan and also other hours that will take care of those who had been in the buildings before commissioner richards and. >> i guess to the folks that says hurry, hurry, hurry i'm hearing we do have time to redo this later i don't agree with that, i hear hey, the train left the station but for about a rent-controlled unit and i don't know what the percentage on right to return i guess my building is demolished if i come back how people return so i support what commissioner wu said got to be a right to return so cost so respond is facing more money for rents they'll be able to stay the point to stay

to kick someone off the train to make room for someone new make sense makes no sense if i recapture we're powdering housing is a biz business i get it there has to be a true incentive increase has to be a good incentive i want to see the 2/3rd's recatch that is a good thing to understand also to some people that said on the unit mixed use requirement i support of the public policy i let's see two tinker he we want to have affordable housing let's see do both i think on the soft sites you know i've asked for

the map commissioner wu's asked for the map and someone get the map let's make that public seriously i mean honestly, i think that that will be helpful for folks to understand i'm not trying to put you on the spot but having the map out there will be good. >> commissioner hillis. >> can i following up on the soft aspects what were the criteria for the soft sites you

and then our second brush to look at had a is realistic for getting that redeveloped so we looked at the recent projects and is reason for that and generally parking lots and gas stations so basically 5 percent or less which is what we consider the soft sites so those are the things we focused on and again, because of the issue with the exist

residential units. >> so none of the south side. >> no. >> so tell me all right. this didn't apply to rh1 or rh2 you repeat that how does that work with r x-3 not controlled by square feet how it the city program how does that work in what controls the building envelope or. >> the readying someone can had had thirty percent inclusion at the inclusionary ami and 18 percent at middle-income and do the basic controls for the 2 stories and what is allowed you did in the rh3 maybe districts

that allow based on their zoning participate in the local program without the inclusionary units and middle-income and the rest at market-rate that works. >> that's projects less than 10 unions autopsy yes less than 10 units in a 93 units is a low income but once you get the 10 units your participating in the market all on market octavia what did we do rh3 remains rh3. >> i'm turn to the expert. >> in market octavia i believe that rh3 was rto a combination with rh3 but some in the rh3 is generally 3 units per lot. >> also a per lot size for the

15 hundred square feet - >> rent-controlled units i agree kind of with some of the statements that have been we should come up with what the control is going to i mean, i don't think there is exist residential believes that would take advantage of that i don't think there is a lot of harm in limiting the ability to do that where there is existing housing maybe that is 3 unions or more you know you can't take advantage there is not a local incentive layer in the building if if so ellis acted you can't do it but existing residential properties we should look at some of them but looked at the

more you know where there are residential and see if under those an incentive if not, you can't do it on residential where there is existing reversal my einstein not where the incentive to do this the commercial properties are a little bit more, more resistant to put on a one story commercial building you'll demolish it or diversify over attendance thirty day notice and build up to the code so i don't know if laying in more remits on that because we want more housing is the rights way to go we may end up not

getting the housing people go to the existing controls not ignore for the commercial properties good to look at that we put if additional requirements for the commercial properties how will people may react to that and you'll have not to do that under the state controls what they'll do so just some thoughts i think we should come up with a firm kind of statement what doing with existing properties. >> sort of add on first of all, thank you to the staff collective you've done a great job and responded to the questions we've done our job having this informational session in two different parts

it is more clarity and focuses on the soft sites and curious all of us trying to visualize that one mattress store on geary street with the opportunity of mel's diner so i'm getting a better picture what that could be and about the single-family homes on 32 avenue. >> a couple of thoughts based on what i said if this currently avoids the majority residential rent-controlled units that it didn't involve that that could be folded i'll entertain the idea of avoiding the demolition of rent-controlled units and not to say i'll not be in favor but look at that and see

the woman brought up the sunset clause i don't have i don't any idea but looked at so thank you for that but again, thank you to everybody you've done a good job of this and that is not the ends we'll ends up here another times or two but commissioner moore. >> i like to skirj the pilot program softer sides and soft sides whatever the word there's an a.m. guts of softer sits down it is a unanimous concern of getting into george washington the housing we or so far behind the eight ball to further demolition affordable housing

and then have to palace capture the skaukt up is harder and harder those will be the program should be tested to respond and possible products for which give neighbors open their own ability to work with the program and see look at success that will be number one the second on or about which i don't understand on page 19 of the presentation ab 22, 22 there was not really for me an understandable explanation as to whether or not the demolition of housing a one to one replacement or be replacement accomplice additional thirty percent that was not clearly described. >> so ab 22 is recently passed

state law it attached to the city bonus law that says in no case to use the state bonus law and not at least permitted the number of rental units or rent-controlled units or oovnz and the conversation we've been having today it is that enough or should it be both the percentage of availability and the replacement i'm hearing a clear contain. >> this says you have to replace them but what you're getting to the bonus what we're assessing we need a replacement plus then the units. >> since we're carrying and higher burden i think we need to

go for the full replacement plus thirty percent is very clear the one question about the small businesses small businesses often the public statistics is in support of communities in affordable units as a they provide services and that is supportive of all right constrained economic conditions but not falling into the phase of legacy businesses and in response to commissioner president fong mentioned which is probably a legacy business based on the provision only one example. >> i think we need to be careful how we look at that. >> i want to add one other thing look the merging of the

multi parcels. >> i don't know what ratio you can't double the size of a smallest one but to look at this further and give thought into that. >> yes. staff is looking at the request of supervisor tang and lot mergers are governed in the prado and they apply to europe and outer and a small fraction of balboa and not for over 10 thousand square feet to know why tare happening and cancer the program when we come back on december thirds for the informational wee bit we'll have more. >> commissioner richards. >> i support what commissioner antonini said about this approve

versus what admin approval. >> is that a wrap. >> very good. >> commissioners shall we move on to the discretionary review calendar. >> you want a quick break and very good own item 122290 that is a discretionary review and i bed-and-breakfast discretionary review there was a request for interpreter i believe she's here. >> who was the person that requested the interpreter. >> very good staff will make the presentation and is she a member of the

public or dr requester. >> or is project sponsor. >> so she's not the project sponsor. >> she's not the project sponsor or is dr requester. >> she's the requester. >> okay. the dr requester very good so then if i can explain staff will make a brief presentation and after the 5 men's any supporters for her can speak and is project sponsor a two minute rebuttal at the end. >> good evening southwest team leaders a one story horizontal

building depth is 32 feet 6 inches and will increase by 19 inches the existing building is set back 24 feet 6 inches from the rear prilsz the overall height will in the increase and around the corner from the subject property tare line property line is out of scale and the rear yard open space within 15 feet of an adjacent lightwell and they feel the proposed addition feel the dr requester found no

exceptional or extraordinary circumstances the board dr requesters concern pose one story doesn't effect the mid block open space more has an effect no new building volume is proposed against the neighbors lightwell consist consistent with the good luck therefore the commission feels that therefore our recommendation to not take discretionary review mr. chairs. >> dr requester please. all right. i apologize a little bit of confusion are you the dr requester. >> yes. >> nominees a alex from the design group in san francisco

i'm representing allen quan the owner at 3138 san diego we want to show you basically can we hand this over to him. >> yeah. >> see what we're looking at the project site is the one that is shown in orange and the our property is the one in green we have four properties pretty much butt ting into the property 47 feet and what that does it by

extending the addition closer will be wind travels 15 feet of the sideline of the property our property all the existing buildings right now match 32 feet and you know the proposes extension basically exceeds what about there per the neighborhood the actual residential desi residential design we're afraid of bring the addition 10 feet we'll be over landmarking into the neighborhoods property an issue of privacy and lighting and we're not completely against them doing what we wanted to do adding square footage but prefer

to see a vertical addition that way you can gain space they are allowed 40 feet to go up to 40 feet ♪ an rh we want to see rather than them going horizontally but vertically >> speakers in support of dr requester. >> in support of the kerri not seeing any, project sponsor. >> good evening. i'm peter katie tang the owner in san francisco i'm here to respond to the review of my rear yard

neighborhood mr. quan on santiago my apartment is rear of the exist building my father and mother is here to request your help and support my house is two small for them to live with my wife 94-year-old mother and children within attends link high school the house is 8 hundred square feet with erroneous inform mr. quan privacy i'm willing to build a higher fence or wall two-story addition at the rear of his exist building 24 feet patio. >> he did this several years ago, i wanted to build within

story that will only be 96 inches i've been in san francisco since 1980 and been living here since 1987 my family and i enjoy living here we love our neighborhood building there quans extension he was willow to walk with him by taking things offer now he has bought us here today, i urge the commission to not take dr and to approve the project as proposal thank you very much. >> thank you. >> thank you. >> okay. any speakers in support of the project sponsor? >> hello i'm ms. johnson the

project sponsor as 36 foot it means more square feet and areas across they should go to each foot where 12 you know more percent on this areas. >> and where housing should be a little bit smaller because they have you know very little room in their place so this should go the same he and has an vantage to be put into more

projects we consider this as - all around conveniences we're going do have in our cu because there will be jobs and there will be you know more able to process their minds and more convenie conveniently from picking themselves up and it will be a better example if that i don't think a lot of people know with the housing we'll be a more measurements more 40 percent from crossing and 50 percent i know from lands outside use this

is more convenient in management progress and forgive more me stuttering i have a stuttering problem that will be better this is where we should - areas you know housing more jobs new hires and going back to percent job and communities community more jobs it should go higher it needs to be level all vantages

there was a request are for an interpreter is there a cantonese interpreter? is the cantonese interpreter here? >> well, i think we got it mixed up this item 12 we needed the cantonese telephone and 13 the vietnamese can you announce you're here and vertebral for who ever needed the interpreter. >> okay. >> . >> (speaking foreign language.) >> are you the person that requested the interpreter okay.

>> (speaking foreign language.) >> hello, i'm ellen quantum i lived in - live in san diego with 33. >> i live in 3138 san diego street the owner of the house so that's why i need translator i

have lightwell. >> we understand lightwell. >> the lightwell almost near is 2231 no 40 feet after the you know and that house the owner want to extension - extend the property on the - you know, i feel i hope you understand what i'm saying okay maybe if you used the interpreter you'll explain it to

her. >> the dr requester said that

he has a lightwell but that lightwell is just in the center of the backyard of the subject properties center backyard and then it is a really near the subject property and effecting to my dr requesters property it is really near to any clients property he feels so effecting especially, when they are i mean deliver our space every time they speak in the house it effecting and since - it blocks

their rivaprivacy. >> (speaking foreign language.) >> and he concerned about the security of any properties because of the extension of the subjects property it makes i just assumed that some something hidden in my property and makes my rear property ounsecured.

>> europe you'll have a two minute rebuttal at the end. >> explain to him his times is up he'll have two minutes tends. >> just to be clear that's the dr. >> i'm not aware that was the dr requester. >> to catch we've heard from the dr requester and the speakers amend the project sponsor we've called for support for the project sponsor and now the dr requester has two minute rebuttal. >> schizophren you've spoken >> thank you. >> any additional speakers in support of project manager.

>> okay now he has a two minute rebuttal. >> hi i think the message that my dad is trying to get across the extension we're not opposed about they want additional square footage for their family, however, the owner is that when they do the extension the lot size is really, really small that extension potentially as they were saying it butts into our home but the issue the biggest issue there is a lightwell which has a window and if they had is extension basically from their home he feel they can peer into our property and with that, just

limited space left between our his or her house if we were to ever have a private conversation would, heard by the members of their households and in addition, we do have an unstable grandmother living in the home who's rooms is adjacent to the window their extension about cause extreme emotion distress she used the com mod and wearing light clothing and in addition, i feel that with the security issue the extension basically allow come out where were there used to be a clear view so if someone comes into the property they can hide behind their

extension until you know either the night time reasonable person no one is walking cross trying to green break both our neighbors or our home those are the biggest issues we felt will hinder - >> thank you sorry to reiterate we're not opted to the addition of the square footage if he were to. >> thank you your time is up. >> project sponsor you have a two minute rebuttal. >> thank you. i think 3138 the rental property and then they have a two-story and i think you you know where we can have a higher fence and that yard they have tare to the

second floor i only have more house mr. withdrawn has more than one house he used to live somewhere else i feel like me only have one place i need a place for my family to live thank you very much. >> thank you. >> okay public hearing is close commissioner moore. >> i've looked in project given the drs were filed only 42 i would give this more consideration but a compliant project although a small lot i believe that the over laptop a modest extension for a small bedroom that is being added and leaving a 15 foot clear backyard with the third of the property

over lapsing so that is nothing exceptional or extraordinary circumstances and it is way, way within zebras ferguson within the city particularly the house that is to be enlarged is a small house i think that is difficult to not see that while enlarging the homes on 43 are assuring the condition doesn't prevent exceptional or extraordinary circumstances but the dr use the frost glass in the bathroom that has clear glass. >> in addition to require a guarantee the psychological well-being of the residents that is in the means of any residents

that feel this addition to existing properties i move to approve the project as i don't see anything exceptional or extraordinary circumstances just to clarify take the dir to impose the frost glossary no only a suggestion basically no dr and approving the project as property and a residential design team has found a in compliance. >> i agree with commissioner moore that is 4 feet and still 15 foot separation that is a large separation and privacy can be dealt what i'm looking at the floor plan the addition didn't a

maintenance project sponsor plan explaining what is going on in the room okay. you've taken up the garage space and created two barrooms i'm not sure why and a play room and a stoorj that is spread out what are all the rooms for . >> no light in case no light if sometimes you you know my mother not feeling well, it might be by her age if i got extra room any mother can say rest in the play room or bedroom my daughter has small space. >> yeah. >> somewhere to do homework so not bothering my mother in the same room.

>> alu your molt mom will be living in one and the other room for studying and i have three children one is going soon so college. >> maybe the terms maybe a den more than a play room play room for young children. >> no, no my daughter 21 and 19 and another one 16. >> why too barrooms there is a full. >> because my mother she has to go often everyone get up at the same time so like the children go to school and stay in lincoln we close home so sometime the assembly close at 8 o'clock if everything get up at the same time and it's good to have a lot of bathrooms you boxed in the storage room.

>> because no light our house has inform i like to fix car so sometimes because i don't have much money i have a used car so - and it's like a shop. >> yeah. yeah. yeah. >> you decided to put a wall in there to keep out the noise and well, that explains it you know is there a single-family homes it sounds like you have an expended family that make sense. >> i like this for the longtime and my mom and i we live together. >> okay. >> thank you. >> i think i get it. >> call the question, please. >> the question motions not take dr. >> commissioner antonini commissioner hillis commissioner moore commissioner richards

commissioner wu. and commissioner president fong so moved, commissioners, that motion passes unanimously and place us think item 13 >> at 28 a request. discretionary review and abbreviated >> good evening devon the proposal to endanger the existing two-story over the two family residence by the addition and remodel the interior the building wall will be to towards the boundaries and adding one thousand square feet the property line will be closed off at theer dr requesters residence the house incorporates a matching light just a few

minutes to the same residence of the dr requesters residence the dr requesters concerned about the projects impact of the life enrichment committee and the neighbor states the plans don't accurately show a match for the lightwell she states the addition will be built up against ore or her basement window and stared shared property line the project sponsor prepared the lightwell and the solar two on the dr requesters property contemplate for the light, however, the plans were modified to minimize the impact on the lightwell by creating a shared lightwell as the residential design guidelines, however, the side property line will be blokdz the

residential design team looked it and determined the concerns are not exceptional or extraordinary circumstances and for the following rebates the light access is provided a shared lightwell and matching wicket along the projects south side and the property line windows are not protected under the planning code therefore the planning department is recommending the extension not take discretionary review and approve the permit that concludes my presentation. >> dr requester. >> good evening, commissioners she resides at 1343 avenue and she is concerned about this project it will block the natural light and not accurately showing here lightwell and she

lives with - she's 53 and lives with her husband in his 70s she's afraid during the day not been able to see because of the reduction of light. >> she thinks she has the rights in the sfoefks laws were made from preventing a neighborhood that rob her of natural light that shines into my home that's basically what she's concerns with. >> you'll have a two minute

rebuttal. >> thank you. >> okay. any speakers in support of dr requester? >> okay not seeing anynot seeing any - not seeing any, - >> sarah johnson i support this addition to her house because a number 12 times inform to a place higher rent and joined - >> any other speakers in support of dr requester not seeing any, project sponsor.

>> good evening commissioners i'm an architect and this is my client i think the primary thing i want to suppress we working closely with the planning department's on this project to make sure we compiled with all the requirements that were laid down out in the residential design guidelines as well as we maids sure that there was no impact on the adjacent property the property in question with the dr requester is actually on the south side and will actually cast shadows on our property rather than the other way around we prepared a shadow study to demonstrate that fact it was not required we want to make sure we are not cpac anything and the lightwell in question is i'll call is a

ventilation shaft because the much narrower not a three or four foot wide area but 2 feet more than that and see development pipes next to our property it really was not as much importance we thought even considering that lightwell neshl we said it really didn't impact it but since the neighbor didn't agree to completely eliminating that lightwell we decided to move forward with a corresponding lightwell on our side if you have any questions i can show you pictures can you have the overhead please. just put it down thank you. >> this is along the on the 20th avenue in front of of the

house and this is the neighbor over here the neighbors lightwell and the cooperating lightwell on this side. >> this is the back view of the building and again as you can see last week all i'm trying to demonstrate is that the lightwell in question will not cast your building will not cast any kind of shadow are impact the light situation in that area. >> here's another view i think we working closely as part of progress wanted to make sure that we don't impact the neighbors as such to so we wanted to encourage that covet communication with the neighbor and i think my client wants to

add to the overall - >> good evening. i'm corey that's our primary residence our attempts to discuss this with the dr requester is well documented in the are dr packet in short we tried to speak to them my wife speaks cantonese and they do they respond by filing a complaint and said don't contact us in september of the 2014 we received a strongly worded letter if in their lawyer basically accusing us of harassment we respond to the attorneys letter through the emotion broadly the recommend step from 9 planning department

neither the attorney more the dr requester respond as a family we're trying to be the next generation of san francisco all the talk about where are the middle-income san franciscans and the next generations they come from neither myself are you are from here i'm from northwest and she's in rhode island she works inform wells fargo both our boys were born at cpmc we want to enroll them in public schools and too many families have left the city we're doing our best to stay for those reasons we ask you approve you are application for our permit thank you. >> thank you. >> any other speakers in support of project sponsor?

>> ma'am, you spoke in support of dr requester already. >> my name is silva johnson no lighting should be put in the areas that as i said is for category in ways they can see where the existence of a purpose and the windows because put on more further they can see more of things about light and buildings and stuff. >> to where they could be enjoying their severs instead of

that has nothing to do with the back buildings and shame and the way the windows are at and should be more category in that. >> thank you. >> okay are there any speakers sorry the dr requester a two minute rebuttal. >> after that commissioners she would last week to point out that - those are the 3 windows you, you need to speak into the

microphone and the 3 lightwells and those are the pictures during the daytime already and it is already dark and i believe go ahead. >> so it is - she closes the doors that will be completely dark. >> and also she wanted to point out with that map that is the lightwell her lightwell and this is the other clients building and this is where we wants to build another two-story that will block the natural light. >> basically she said she

doesn't care how it is built as long as the natural light in here house didn't get blocked. >> and she didn't want her house to be dark in the natural daytime. >> thank you. >> okay. thank you. >> project sponsor you have a two minute rebuttal. >> i think the primary thing we want to stress the light those windows their pointing out and phasing each other in a way the actual opening in there will not block anything we're not going to be blocking and casting no shadow into the lightwell thank you.

>> okay. the public comment is closed. commissioner moore. >> i to a point mention my comments the depiction of the matching lightwell will not impact the light on the property radio accurate particularly the piecemeal pipes i'm not sure why they're there including the trellis and i think that the addition is well-designed code compliant and all support the residential residential design team finds nothing exceptional or extraordinary circumstances but it is an expansion that this commission should full support it is in line with all the requirements that we normally

use to just a project i move to approve. >> second. >> commissioner antonini. >> yeah. we want to verify with staff, in fact, the lightwell is a matching lightwell and the size is the case for the dr requester. >> mr. washington it is a lightwell not deep as the neighboring parcel but a matching lightwell with windows on the top floor of the addition of the subject property. >> right so in our opinion that will not impair the light. >> yes. my and the residential design team felt the let that was provided was accurate and with the intention of the meeting the residential design

and provide the predicament prototype between two neighboring parcels the issues there is a trellis and already board member things those things are possible removed better served the dr filers some of the things were removed flood more lighting into her residence. >> the lack of matching depth/not have a negative impact. >> having studies enough in some instance that is appropriate their slightly off in dimensions they provide light through the sun angles and the relationship that has with the neighboring structure. >> thank you. >> commissioners a motion not take dr. >> commissioner antonini. >> commissioner hillis

commissioner moore commissioner richards commissioner wu and commissioner president fong so moved, commissioners, that motion passes unanimously 6 to zero. >> expirations that places us on item 14 balboa street it is an awe besides discretionary review. >> good evening david's lindsay from department staff that is a discretionary review for a project located on balboa streets on the south side street between 19th street and 20th avenues it excludes a horizon addition a 19153 story building the vertical will be setback 15 inches plus the components of

the rear addition replaces an two-story the components of the rear addition has a deck it is a 25 foot lot and no eerily of 3 residential 0 loss on the block that front on balboa street the dr is owning 19th avenue the rear property lines that abutting the project her concerns as described in the dr operation are federal, state, and local it will negatively focus effect the eliminate and negatively effect her mid block open space the residential design team reviewed the project and the dr question and included no exceptional or extraordinary

circumstances related to the project or is drern concerns the drern 50 foot rear yard will expertise the dr requesters assess that will maintenance and maintain her mid block space they recommend not take dr and recommend the project proved as proposed. >> dr requester. >> i have copies of knows i'm make reference to you can all see but i'm teresa is i'm going to represent my family in challenging the plans on balboa citing the scale exceeds what about reasonably reasonable our

properties are perpendicular it looks deregulation into the project sites and have made a replacement of orientation and the addition has a rooftop patio and will basically put our house in the shadows earlier than before the 4 years we've reetdz and earlier on any other house on 19th avenue you can see the proposed spur exposed the silhouette with the completed building will look like from the vantage point but not unfortunately include the staircase penthouse the widened of the property it it didn't

take into consideration for the residential design it is swakd with an apartment building and oh, so we have a 3 story wall serving as a northern property line slash fence this wall occupies about 2/3rd's of this length of your yard this calls for addition vertical fourth floor into the yard and widening the structure right up to our propelling i've imposed the footprint and blocks the open space it didn't meet the residential guidelines but

redesigns the scale of the building to be compatible with the height and depth of the surround building no four story building on our block no buildings that expend into the award that obstructs the light and light to the open space a residential guideline that is perceiving the neighborhood scale at street level i fully support that i ask the commission. the same consideration of the mid block space we have support from the neighborhood with 32 signatures of people that can't make that here they are opposed of the building as currently designed the neighborhoods e neighbors district attorney want to see a vertical or horizontal

building someone mentions if this is dark we have the possibility of mold and additional wear concerned about the parking impact 9 build calls for 14 hundred square feet bigger some of the homes and with that one of the unit called for a four unit apartment add a door and make that a 5 unit apartment that attracts people with multi tenant renters or families this is for cars and add to an already xejd situation in the neighborhood i have photos if you want to see how congested with the cars if you want to preserve the mid block open space the design guidelines calls that a significant may not we don't want to open up

pandora's box everyone feel their entitled to a large build and distresses the mid block open spaces in the neighborhood currently >> thank you within thick we're not opposed to moving the build only a point we can actually get something done xhofrnt inform both i talked to the neighbor and he said the owner didn't want to talk the build is not worth it to him and any speakers in support of dr requester. >> hello commissioners. i'm julie ann i'm a neighbor and i'm opposed to the addition

of i agree with mr. allowing said i'll moot repeat he wanted to make a point that doing this addition is going to take away two affordable units and even on the appellants operation they said that the income is $4,600 and the addition the income will be 8 thousand per month those are taking away two affordable units making two luxurious units the rent goes up for affordable unit is a lot and people won't be able to stay in the city it was on the applicants application for that the rents

will - the income per month is 46 hundred and with the addition unit that will be 8 thousand and also there was a neighbor with us johnson and he couldn't stay he was here since 1 o'clock he's kitty-corner to the property project and concerned that reduces the green space and that he said please could a not approve that project as it is presents please take dr and see if we can improve on that thank you. >> thank you. >> additional speakers in support of dr requester? >> hello, i'm silva jovks in

supports of affordable housing and a lot of things that were assembled and presented this should be marked and this has been you know totally out of advantages we're for building housing we haven't no amount and we're challenged of our subjects to even moving any distance we haven't even thought of our capacity and how we do our job

and take different advantages to we're higher and lower our leveling of the martin luther king through the businesses and making more money in that instead of you know par taking the public with money it is i think when i money is the root of all evil and you shounl gain more money as advantage of our progressing and a lot of people didn't realize that a lot of this stuff that we're over in schooling in arts and crafts and i've made a lot of movies