afternoon, and welcome to the san francisco planning commission regular hearing for thursday, november 12th, 2015. i would like to remind members of the public that the commission does not tolerate any disruption or any outburst of any kind. please silent any mobile devices or anything that would sound off during the proceedings. and when speaking, please state your name. at this time, i would like to take roll. [roll call]. >> commissioners first on your agenda, your items proposed for continuance at the time, we have no items proposed for continuance. since then, the item 8 forcivic

center plan implementations is proposed for continuous of jan 8, 2016 and item 10 for 1395 22nd street and 790 pennsylvania ave, large project authorization. we have received a request from the supervisor to continue the matter for 2 weeks in request for the project's sponsor and requesting a 1 week's continuous. >> okay. any public comment on the 2 items proposed for continuous? commenting only on the continuous, not the project?>> latrell, booster neighborhood association. thank you for considering a continuance on the 22nd street/pennsylvania avenue. i guess my only concern isi don't -- we're happy with expediting the hearing again but let's just look at that recent hearing. we continued this project once from a date to a date certain. during that time, there's been a lot of lobbying happening with you guys and a lot of

discussion with individuals in the community but there's nothing really coming back to the neighborhodd association. so there's a lot of unsolved displacementship going up to this week. that's happening still. i got an e-mail saying hey, let's meet today or time because we want to be here next week. we present to you the controls, the proposals for that. it sounds like they're being taken seriously. we move that and really appreciate your considering of that. we're not kidding when we say we want those controls to be in place before the large project authorizations come in. we even said in the drafts of the controls that we sent to you, we're happy to expedite whatever is on the calendar.it can be the dame same day. we need to make sure it's teeth and they're serious.we urge the

controls to be there because we want that added layer, that added standard that meets that threshold of the ceu because we want to make sure they actually work with the community which developers have not been doing with these l p as. so we just don't want to continue putting the horse before the cart, 1 of the 2. whatever it is. thank you. (laughter) >> so let's have the controls in place before we start calendaring to a project. >> are you supporting the continuance or not? >> actually in support of the continuance but not to the date certain. >> thank you. >> i wish there was continuance frankly about the other as well because i don't know why you would do 1 and not the other. >> we're only seg to this item. additional comments to the continuance. >> steve on behalf of the project sponsor. i understand the supervisor has requested a 2 week continuation continuance and that's thanksgiving day so i don't believe you're meeting that day. the only reason we asked

for the 1 week continuance, if the supervisor would like more time than that, i guess 3 weeks would be the appropriate period of time. we do think we'll be ready to go in 3 weeks. i think we'll be ready to go in 1 week. i do prefer that we do have a short continuance. thank you. >> thank you. >> speak. speak. speak into the mic, please. >> okay. if i can show an overhead. is that on? so it's down there. how do i turn that on? >> yes. >>okay. so the little red got is the 790 pennsylvania project. and all those blue lines are large dot transmissions lines in petrel hills.the part of the challenge with petrel hills is all the infrastructure that we're

working around. you'll notice right at the corner of the project there's a major transmission line so when i looked at the document, it didn't have any transmission of in termsof making sure there's no land movement and safety and stuff and the infrastructure that exists in that area. so i hope with the continuance they'll be able to consider those sorts of things. >> thank you. any additional public comment? okay. not seeing, public comment is closed. commissioner antnyny yeah, i also spoke with superisor cowen and at that particular time, we were talking about a continuance. but if it's your pleasure, we would be willing to do it. but i think without

any certaintity, a 1 week continuance would be appropriate.we can always consider it next week if agreements haven't been reached and the in fact, if the supervisor wants it to be, what will be 3 weeks. as far as design, i think that's a good thing but i'm not necessarily feeling projects have to be subject to controls or anything. it would just -- improving design is always a good thing and you can do it individually or projects as a whole.and certainly earlier is better than later. so i'm going to move to continue it to next week which is the 19th. >> that would be item number 10. 790 pennsylvania. yea. do i hear a second? >> commissioner, there's folks that want to chime in on this. >>

sure. >> commissioner moore. >> it is interesting for us to consider a continuance, particularly on the knowledge without thedetail that the department is strongly working on interim control. i think the department is in support of understanding the issue of this particular part of town with the neighborhoods which are affected by it and allow themselves and ourselves to be better informed.since these projects are tied to large project authorizations and since they are using tools which we are currently considering also for the affordable housing bonus legislation,i feel that we do really need the department's guidance in sorting out the issues which were never addressed in the creation of the eastern neighborhoods. we are all aware,particularly those 2 commissioners who were around that the enormous size did not give us any additional time to reflect on that level of detailfor judging

these particular project requirements. that is site specific and more informed understanding of typography, parcel size, height, and all of those things which come into play here. so i would strongly support the department's on going and already in process efforts to create controls to take care of this commission and jointly looking into future of what these projects do mean, what they bring and what they need in order to be successful. do i stand no support of the department's sit in >> commissioner whoo>> thank you.

i'm not sure what the timeline for the design controls are. so maybe the director can comment on that. i was going to say that i think december 3rd works but i want to ask staff because how long would it take to get either new drawings or a new staff report? that seems difficult for 1 week. >> correct. a 1 week continuation, we wouldn't be able to produce a new staff report or analyze any new drawings that would be analyzed by the project sponsor. >> okay. i was going to echo what bruce just said but also with respect to the interim controls, the interim controls can be put in place by the supervisor fairly quickly if she wants to introduce interim controlsi think there's a bit of confusion between controls that are fairly modest versus the design controls that require a little bit more discussion.

it will allow us to at least have those discussions with petrel hills in the next few months until the full blown guidelines are adopted. having said that, i think the 3 week period will allow us todiscuss the terms of the project. as said, i don't think we can do that in 1 week because the drug and such would be difficult to do. >> commissioner richards. >> i move to schedule this item so december 3. >> commissioner johnson. commission atinyny. >> i was going to do the same thing. >> commissioner johnson. okay. can we add the civic center realm to january 28th on that motion? >> yes. >> okay. thank you commissioners. so on that motion to continue item 8 to january 28th and item 10 to december 3. on that motion, [taking roll].

that motion is passed unanimous 6 to 0. under your consent calendar, all matters list here under the constitute of the consent calendar are listed to the routine and may be acted upon by the single roll callof the commission. there will be no vate discussion of these items unless the commission or the public requests. in which, it will be removed as a separate item on a future hearing. item 1 francisco street condo minute yum conversion subdivision and item 2, 359 walled street. i have no speaker cards. >>

any public comment on the two items on the consent form? not seeing any. public comment is closed. commissioner richards. >> move to approve the items 1 and 2. >> motion. >> second. >> thank you commissioners. on that motion, then to approve items 1 and 2 under consent. [taking roll]. >> so commissioners, that item is moved unanimous 6 to 0. items 3, commissioners comments and questions >> commissioner mayor. >> i want mayor. >> i want toed to bring the commissioners in particular, the attention to the fact that a pro housing council was voted in mountain view which changed its position on building on the office park and office

park expansions but set aside a 5,000 acre site in mountain view for 91 housing units.that's a major shift in the previous add we discussed in talking about the support this leadership department can give to the agencies.i hope the department was experienced in density housing place making including governs and program implementation will lend its advice and helping hand to mountain view and apeck in doing it the right way. it's not just building density in suburbia but red light bringing an element including shared region and responsibility to this particular site.and i ask the director to please take this on and i have a copy of the article. i think it's a great opportunity for us to really look and shine as

leaders. >> commissioner antnyny. >> yea, 25 to 30 years ago, the area immediately north of the bay bridge about a mile or 2 to the south was composed of a few remaining industrial uses,a lot of warehousing, parking lots, and in the case of mission bay, railroad tracks there were not longer being used. there went a lot of residents in the area and very few businesses with employees.when you drove into the bay area, people would take the sky walk into other parts of the city or cross market street into the area north of market because that area didn't havevy many residents and no entertainment usage. it has changed drastically as we all know. now it's probably upwards of 10,000 new residents and a lot more on the way and lots of business uses and lots of

entertainment. and unfortunately, our transportation plans, particularly those in plans of marking are kind of mirrored in the 1950's. the nearest parking garage to the bridge is fifth and mission, public city parking garage. and a lot of people coming from the east bay today and while we encourage them to take public transportation, realistically, many of them are going to drive. many of them are coming to do business or find entertainment or visit friends this that area described which is fairly close to the bay bridge. so what i'm proposing and i've mentioned this to a number of transportation leaders if we can get the rendering up there

jonas is trying to work withical trans to put together a parking garage on the slope of the bay bridge between beale and bryant on the southern slope there. there already is an off ramp thanks to jeff whothey put together this mock-up of a garage. there's already an off ramp and it's beneath the street into fair most. it would /se tend all the way down to bryant street. people would exit on the bottom and some would go on to beale and other parts of the city. but the vast margin of the visitors will go on to beale and take the turn ramp on to what already exist. particularly, go to at&t lot and fairly park in that lot that's close to there because they like the quick return to the bridge. it would help us a lot in san francisco because most of the congestion is people trying to make their way from bay bridge to whatever area they're trying to get to in the city and so many of them are in walkable distance or public transit from where they are, it would

make sense to work with the state of california and others to build some sort of intercepting parking facility to try to maximize the impact of parking on our city streets.>> commissioner richards. >> a couple of things first, somebody had the foresight to ask me some advice on public comment. i was thinking we've had a range of issues at least since i've been on the commission, we've had people get up here and combat us, lecture us, and call us racist and everything else on the sun. my advice to that person, stick to the facts and give us your opinion on why the threshold of facts meets the threshold for approval. please don't be lecturing. when you're like that, the message you're trying to convey doesn't get in the way of the tone when

you're trying to convey it. we're human as well and i would like to remind the public we would like to stick to the facts and try to get other things out. the second thing is in communicating with the commission, i try to read everything that comes my way in terms of social media but everything we get on thursday morning is almost impossible to get. i got about 30 e-mails alone and about 40 notification on twitter. if you have anything 4 us to hear your position on a product, please get it us to early in the us time to digest it. some of the e-mails we got were really long and i would like to remind the staff that we're human too and we only have so much time to the number of off street parking spaces it could provide. lastly, a /raoeurpt was. they already started

looking at satellite parking conclusion commissioner bay and the warden's arena. i'm working how that practice given the parking structure we were recently approved the development on is knocking that down is lightly moved right now. i wonder if moving it over a few blocks would up that usage, but sentence an interesting /tkpr-d. >> commissioner mayor. >> to commissioner /reufrpdz thing. anybody who wants to communicate with the planning party, please remember to cc the commissioners secretary. that is the pipeline to getting e-mails and the ideas to staff without just seeing them. they are basically comments which disappear into a pile of

non-received e-mails. i make the effort as often as i can to forward him e-mails but it's like a chore for any commissioner to do that. so please cc the commissioner /stebgt secretary on your communication. >> thank you commissioner moore. just to know if they've been sent just to the president, i forward that to jonas. >> i cc him on there but we're not responsible. >> thank you. that's correct. okay. >> thank you commissioners. if there's nothing further, we can move on to dent matters, item 4, director's announcements. >> thank you /kpheursz. just to that point about regional discussions and cooperations. i do think it's interesting that some of the smaller communities are changing their positions a bit on housing. i've said for a long time and i will recent it that i think some of the

smaller communities have not done their fair share of providing housing in the region and that's 1 of the /saoulgsz to our regional transportation problems solve that problem. i'm happy to hear that mountain view may be moving in that direction. just so you know, as part of the call, when kelly submitted the work plan for regional discussions and work plan, in part, 1 of the 5 key elements we talked about and myself and emily and rogers have been heavily involved in our establishing relationships with our counter parts and establishing parts in that region really in a very, very long time. so i'm hopeful and i also will say that we are getting the same from them. our other regional agencies are reaching out to us, other agencies and other cities in the region are reaching out to us as well. so there's a spirit of cooperation that i haven't

seen in the region in a long time. i hope that grows in the coming years. that completes my presentation >> thank you. for those standing in the doorway, you're creating a fire hazard. i see plenty of seats, you can take those seats. and hopefully if you'll still stand -- well, /tphufpb over you will have to stand. i see plenty of seats available. if you will make your way to the other side of the room, that will be fantastic. all right commissioners, we can move on then to item 5, review of past events to the board of supervisors, the board of appeals and the historic commission did not meet yesterday. >> good afternoon commissioners, lodgeers, plan reform and staff. here to give you the plan on activities. there was no meeting on tuesday

but there was a meeting on monday and there are a least so couple of items that may interest you. 1 is an ordinance that deals with /prefpbs preferences and affordable housing programs. they made amendment that deals with your request. they removed tenants ordinance acknowledging it will be put in a separate ordinance and they also passed your amendment to increase the neighboring substance to 40 personality. because they made those subsidies, it was continued and reheard against in week. this week, there was about an hour of public testimony. some groups were very supportive of the 40 percent preference. other community groups asked tore a continuance so it could be increased to 100 percent. after hearing public comment, unanimously approved the vote of 40 percent. after i mentioned, the current legislation is expected to be heard by the full board next

week on the 17th. so the other item that was there was related to 1 project, 5 m. as you know that's around 5th, 6th, mission, and howard street. we campaigned about 700 new /tkwelgs. 800,000 conveyor feet of offices and acre and public open space. you heard this item and and all the related approvals on september 17th. at that time, you made 16 separate approval actions and 3 of those actions were considered by the landing planning commission this week. adopt the developmental agreement. commissioners, you had asked for a number of changes to the project of their special use all of which were adopted by the board. these were regarding ground floor uses and s m.d. controls throughout the project except for restaurants on the ground floor, restaurants at all. also

adding the use for retail and the market view plan. those were all incorporated. when it came to the development agreement, it was mixed incorporation. the board did acknowledge your request that the board pay to fund the filipino heritage district. the board did not grant your request to the ongoing planning commission regarding the displacement of the any that project. the staff has provided that we provide updates so we move forward. finally, the board did not update your request to establish funds for acquisition positions nor did the fund have child care. there were 3 additional changes by by the committee. firstly, the program of the affordable housing program was changed to

restrict the units from 33 to 40 percent with the heavier emphasis on affordable housing. second, the number of parking spaces it could provide, 341 /stpaed of 173. also, the road way be extended by the board of supervisors. so after 3 hours of public comment, the committee advanced the full board this coming tuesday. they did so without recommendation. ordering to the s e qa appeal. office allocations all associated with the project. so since there was no tuesday hearing, that concludes my report unless there's any questions. >> commissioner /reufrpdz. yes,

question for ms. rogers. the difference between the 33 and the 40 percent given that it's a higher a m i, et cetera, in the public domain, is that higher? i've had people ask me how much that worth. we got a ledger when we were approving what things were /worpgt. if we can get an updated version of that, that will be fantastic. >> we'll look into that, thank you. >> commissioner moore. >> off the top of your head, commissioner /ropblgs, do you know to what ratio the parking number was lowered? >> no, i just have the number provided over total spaces. but i don't know the ratio unit. if i had a calculator, i could figure that out. well, okay. we can look into

that as well. >> commissioners if there's nothing further, we can move on to general public comment not to /stkpaoed a period of 15 minutes. at this time, the members of general public may address the commissioners on the subject matter of the jurisdiction acceptance of the items with respect to the agenda items, you will be able to address a member of the commission for up to 3 minutes. i did sieve several speaker cards. >> john, earnest, and nina. >> if your name has been called, feel free to approach the podium. >> hi, my name is nina soltmin. i know this is a petrel hills /paoegt today but i'm coming from know we valley organization called protect nowi

charm. we have about more than 200 members. and we had a meeting at the library a couple weeks ago and i wanted to come and let everyone know how dissatisfied people are in nowi about the changes that are taking place in the neighborhood and the overwhelming number of super-sized buildings that are being built now. and it is definitely affecting the neighborhood and it's affecting the way that it looks. and it's affecting the way that people feel about the neighborhood. so i wanted to say /thafpltd plaintiff and i also wanted to talk a little bit about the directionry reviews and that people have been -- people in nowi valley in particular have not been happy with the way the d rs have gone through. we have a preapplication meeting with a sponsor. we go to those meetings and express our dissatisfaction with certain aspects of the project and we don't hear anything else until we get the 311. it's like

this just happened to me. it was like nothing. i heard 0. you know, i didn't know if any of the things we had raised objections to had been incorporated into the project. and then we get 30 days to like scramble around and take pictures and make our objections and find out what it is that we can do that would be acceptable to the planners. so the public is sort of kept in the dark about what happens between the pre-app meeting and the 311. we were wondering if there's some way the planning commission can address that. at 1 point, i heard there was a move to reform the d r process. and i have a question to all of you as to what happened with that. was there going to be some legislation that changed that? so that was 1 item that i wanted to talk about. and then i wanted to generally say that

consider the guidelines for height and depth of a new project are set forth in the building code and in the planning commission but there are residential design guidelines that i think super seed those in terms of an overall -- oops. in terms of an event guideline in terms of roof lines and density in the area. so these are the sorts of things that nowi valley residents are most concerned w and i think there's also a disparity between those of us that have lived there for a long time and those that are moving in new. i've been in nowi valley for 27 years and i've definitely seen the changes taking place on my block. and i know the new people are just waiting for my husband to die so they can like move into our house and super size it. >> thank you, ma'am, your time is up. >> all right. thank you.. >> next speaker, please. did you want to offer some things in

public comment?. >> i'm myla and i've been the discretionary review applicant for 2720 lion street. you've heard our case twice in the past few weeks and the action memo has now been issued. i have 2 concerns with the action memo that was issued. the first 1 is that the elevator /p*epbt house is discussed in it but there's no specific piece that talks about why the elevator pent house was allowed. it was allowed because there was someone who was going to live in the house with disability. and so that piece has been left out of the letter. my concern with future cases that come from our neighborhood, this letter will be used in reference for houses that do not have somebody with a disability living in

them. so i think that's really important to include. another piece that's requested is that 2 sides of the elevator pent house be transparent. and in this letter, it says that those sides are /tkphraeuzed. and so i would like tomportant to include. another piece that's requested is that 2 sides of the elevator pent house be transparent. and in this letter, it says that those sides are /tkphraeuzed. and so i would like to request that that be changed as well >> thank you. so any additional general public comment? okay. not seeing any, public comment is closed. commissioner richards. >> i'm about to start a conversation but i've been hearing a lot of things from nowi valley as well as all the e-mails i get and run into people on the street. so there would be an approval point that leads you to the point of filing a d r. so the time from when the neighboring

happens and the time that's concrete, i think that's something we can maybe discuss a good neighboring policy to share the final design a little earlier than the 311 so there can be at least a conversation. anyways, i'm just throwing that out there. i've been contacted by many, many people in nowi valley. >> thank you, commissioner. if there's nothing further, we can move on to the regular calendar. item 6, certification of the final environmental impact report. please note the public's hearing on the d r is closed. public comment ended on february 17th, 2015, public comment will be received at this time. however, comments may not be included in the final eir. we will also be calling items 7, a and b with the certification for case numbers

2012.1398 adoption of s e qa findings and large project authorizations. >> good afternoon president and members of the commission. i am shellsy from the environmental section of the planning department. i'm joined here today by debbie, senior environmental planner and transport planner, krista also from environmental planning. the item before you is certification of the environmental report or eir for the property 1601 mariposa project a copy of the draft eir is bra you the draft eir was pushed on december 17,

2014, the public hearing on january 22, 2015, and the public comment closed on february 17, 2015, the comments and response come a time was published on depress 15, 2015 the response of the comments planning determined a comment letter during the draft eir was inadvertently omitted from the document it raise issues in regards to the landline comparability those were responds to in the rdt and not raised points addresses you have before you an errata memorandum to address this i have another copies at the table for the members of the public since publication of draft eir a number of project updates and

revisions are being pursued as the preferred project the preference project will be unsustainable similar to the draft eir and the environmental effects result in the same or slightly reduced environmental effect in the draft eir for all environmental topics the preferred topic about not avoid the two cumulative significant and unavoidableable transportation impacts therefore the commission will need to adopt the overriding consideration pursuant to ceqa should the commission need the preferred project since rtc and to the environmental officer including caltrans and a comment letter from the castro boosters

rebelling live oaks school and friends of jackson playground the letter has before provided to you because on the job letters were received in the last week and a half we were unable to approve them in the rtc that he over support their comments on the merits and will be addressed to the hearing in addition some of the concerns raised in the e-mail is similar to comments already address in the rtc the eastern neighborhood the gross projects o projection and the methodologies and the remediation of material specifically points raised in the letter in regards to the rtc construction wise and the emotion of hazardous material live oaks school the check list

ace the draft eir that were respond and identified the emotion measures to lessen the impacts and the rtc the excavation and removal of the soil b will occur over one month and the removal of contaminated soil and the emotion miles an hour prepare a health and save and air quality and emissions control and soil management plan to will this the oversight workers and residents and the additional comments about the concerns are address in the c pa and the draft eir emotion measures outlined in the ct e to address the construction noise additionally if feasible the sponsor has attempted to schedule did obligation soil and the noise of the construction activities like demolition

during the summer of 2016 when the offsetting population is reduced timing of the substance control with the professional the approval the response plan is a separate action from certification of the final eir the public comment will be by the d c s c, however, it describes 3 emotion measures before the building permits those mediations and regulatory are the preliminary components that will be approved by dp s considers those regulatory requirements in the draft eir and the rtc insures that the hazardous materials will not cause a hazard to the public

both projections of the eir and accumulative impact this issue was addressed in a presentation to the commission on october 11th and in subsequent sdumgsz the mariposa project within the frontalss of the eir if there are further questions about this the environmental review officer is here to respond and lastly the transportation methodology and the use of 2025 for the cumulative it was used because of the draft eir is consistent and sets within the identification of the eir for the cumulative conditions additionally questions have been raised with regards to the level of environmental effects in the proposed count is changes to include the 3 bedroom unit after certification of the eir this change will have to be to

determine the impacts of the change, however, the increase in 3 bedroom units are are will result in a minor there, however, the preferred project presented in the rtc unit will be i identified in the draft eir therefore the transportation analysis that would be required for this proposed change will likely show transportation impacts of those with that will be similar to the preferred project in the draft eir staff recommends the motion be approved it is accurate and adequate and the procedures through the the final eir comply with the provisions of ceqa and chapter 34 of the administrative code that concludes my presentation. i'm available to answer any

questions. >> thank you project sponsor please. i'm sorry staff. >> staff report for the project. >> good afternoon planning commission chris are planning department staff that is a large project authorization requiring the ceqa findings for the eir for the mixed use on mariposa street under the lp a the modifications from the planning code for planning code requirements for rear yard ground floor non-residential ceiling height off-street loading prior to the entitle it

must adapt it with parcels for 3 acres mariposa to the noting and carolyn to the west and arkansas to the east within the castro hill it covers the city block with the exceptions of the if he northeast and the southeast corners the northeast corner is the live oak school with the education to approximately 200 and 90 students and includes the office and the other by commercial buildings and retail and design office and other features the block is around the site with including the commercial and residential and institutional and recreational as described in the staff report most notable the breweries across carolyn street to the

left and jackson argued that to the north and the international academy to the south across arkansas street to the east is the character the project will demolish 3 officers buildings associated with the parking lot and construction two 4 stories up to 40 foot tassels mixed use as the ante and west believes in the project plan totaling approximately three hundred and thirty thousand square feet the project proposes 200 and 99 dwelling units with 69 studios, one, one bedrooms and one hundred 112 bedrooms and 3 bedrooms the project include 56 hundred sheet square foot of ground floor retail and double space of pdr with the perimeter

of the site the project includes 200 and 49 parking spaces and off-street parking that is tucked into the southeast corner this includes 6 car share and 4 hundred and 44 biking space their commodity 43 square feet pub assessable as well as common private open space the pub assessable is 40 feet north-south mid block aefl additional to mariposa that intersects with the pedestrians assess from arkansas street the common private open space is two enter courtyards and a someway roof deck with the former of balconies the first throughout the project the project has inclusionary housing

for 20 percent outside of affordability for this allocation bond financing in total the project provides 60 affordable units onsite at the time of the mailing the department has two letters of concerns and 24 of support the letters of concern with the accuracy and the adequacy and overall compact of the project the letter of support is the projects density it, it's affordable an urban design and compatibility the department got 11 letters i've handed out prior to the presentation those express concerns with the project mapping the density and loss of pdr space and lack of pdr continuum space and the

impact of the neighborhood and the structure such as transportation and circulation one recipe has requested a continuance for quality the staff is in agreement with the modifications given the overall projects and the comparable design the staff recommends the approval subject to the conditions in the staff report however, at this time staff want to read in a replacement to one condition in the x motion pertaining to the materials under the design compliance plan stage this is on page 36 of the x motion so the replacement language will, the project will also be reviewed against interim controls and anticipated to be brought for the record to the bernal height board of

supervisors in the future. >> in addition 80 staff has amended the motion for red lines preamble this is handed out the department spaces for the recommends as follows: it is the applicable planning code and consistent with the general plan and the showcase square and potrero hill and it the in the retail spaces are permitted and the project has the residential with the streetscape improvements developed with the better streets plan the project is architecturally comparable with the character provides a map and scale for the block sloping along the frontages and has the design in accordance with the guidelines the project

exceeds the guidelines with the activity by including the north south and east west in the move forward and the project has the hiring program and the project adds 200 and 99 horticulturalist 20 percent is affordable onsite a total of 60 lastly the project will fulfill fully utilities the area plan and approximately $3 million in impact fees that concludes my presentation. if you have any questions, please let me know. >> thank you. >> project sponsor. >> our architect gets

organized i'll introduce myself in the project i'm bill the ceo of related california the project sponsor with me is yes duffey from the architect david barker and associates i think you know that the site currently. >>was in warehouses and storage uses the main users of the site seeking greater space has moved to 6000 third street within the city of san francisco as the plans developed over the last 3 years of community meetings eir analysis we focused on a couple of key points first is trying to adjust our original scale and context and second to increasing the open space especially that is available to the public third is diverseing the exterior

elevation by block to respond to the preexisting conditions and lastly adding but community benefits that steady those required in the code where we stand today, you've heard from mr. towns is the project that is lower in height that is required 31 to 40 in height to the buildings and 2 and a half times the open space under the eastern neighborhoods plan with a public amuse northwest and south and creating the 1ub89sd to accommodate the needs of school and in agreement which we expect to sign today with the friends of jackson park to contribute $2 million with the approval by the supply store the improvements in jackson park it is the money is in escrow under

the auspices of the park alliance had a corruptive meeting with the jackson park and i'm optimistic that progress is achieved in that direction lastly you've heard through not in this proposal tend to submit a report from the presentation all of which will be on or adjacent to the amuse closer to the open space and finally we have been committed to provide 25 percent of the units 50 with medium income availability with that, i'm going to turn it over to i'm yes duffey with david barker >> in ground water mall right now perhaperhaps

this is the site 4.34 acres with 4 unique edges i'll address from the design stand point in a moment first, i wanted to mention a couple of things bill said a couple of points in terms of the zoning we have 3 times as much car share on site and twice bike storage onsite and the big thing 200 and 64 percent of open space on site the unit mix we've discussed initiating 10 units in the package now doubled to 20 the site plan currently the entire block no

public space now this breakdown the scale of the block and the massing for a better fit introducing 3 new ungated public assess ways the 3 areas on mariposa and 18 street a few other things in the plan the corner retail activates the two opposing prashgd on jackson playground and mariposa on 18 and arkansas the amenities are in original and you know one idea came up in the community outreach to incorporate a flex room for neighborhood use and that's a thousand square feet in the middle of the public use the blue that is residential with active ground zero with patios and the garage is tuckered away

out-of-sight all you see are two garage entries the black areas to reduce the traffic one on arkansas and 18 street. >> so first walk through the project we'll start on arkansas street and go 18 street and down carolyn those have different characterize arkansas we look at the context castro hill it is a 25 block increments and we study that and respond to something that speaks the same common language activate ground floor stoops and materials at the ground a lot of planning we set the building back 5 feet from the property line to allow for the public realm now we're looking down arkansas

street that's the site - that's the proposed building. >> sdoem into the corner retail retail only the corner and two stories above. >> now we'll look at 18 street a loft industrial loft you know a different feel we responded with a building we think also is much in character with the character the broken massing for courtyard and public courtyard with the retail steps down the hill all the way to the left the entry to the muse here down 18 street the same corner retail on the left hand that is difficult to see that building is 31 feet tall and removed a story part of 4 year process and

sybil shorter than building across the street. >> carr kar /* /- carolina and this is broken in the massing at the pedestrian entries the key thing the change over time improved the empowering is pdr space full board to be in the neighborhood scale and uses here's an example of the corner rail with 3 bulb outs and mariposa and we'll walk through the muse live oak on the left 40 feet high buildings and entries to the mid block muse in the middle at all gracious

commercial ground floor here's the sgri to the muse 40 foot widest that is an quantitative public space. >> the design the muse david fletcher studio did it, it is about interpretative play with the natural elements throughout friendly and here we are many the middle of the muse plaza to the left is the residential lobby is the residential lobby and the flex room a key element to the left if you take a left in the photo the biggest improvement is the east west public passageway it is 35 feet wide nearly the size of a public streets as i mentioned it is unincubated and open 200 and 60

feet long and 40 feet at the plaza there is it at the groaning blown-up up to arkansas street and you get a sense of 25 feet wide in terms of the public walkable and the parks on the right 35 feet. >> there are a couple of more slides bill will speak to design requirements since it is in front of the you the process is ongoing we wanted to show you thank you. >> so thank you we tried to take advantage look at feedback in improvements to make to the existing design with a particular focus on the popping and passages we mentioned doubling the 3 bedroom count all the existing 10 on the muse as townhomes and the other that will not be townhomes