to the questions like commissioner ow powdered he posed with the fund will it replace money or on top of so the way it is structured it will provide a baseline of funding and the fund will will on top of that maybe we can figure out the best way to share information with the commission. >> commissioner ow. >> did you - >> no comment. >> i just have one announcement and i think we can talk to over director commissioners about the form 700 that is due april 1st am i right. >> correct. >> and talk to our street to give you more information but it is all online i wanted to remind all my commissions you can be

fined for not signing it on time any other public comment? if not can i have a motion to younger >> i'd like to honor jessica's request in yrnd the meeting. >> well, he guess it could be under. it could have been under. if you want to make that under public comment >> we done to before we - we've done it before without having it on agenda. >> why not state.

>> i will suggest we adjourn in memory of two fan and her unfortunate passing. >> i can't hear you. >> i suggest that we go ahead and adjourn this meeting on two fan that died two weeks ago. >> thank you. the meeting is adjourned as wanted thank you

>> for thursday, march 3, disruptions of any kind. proceedings. and when speaking before the commission, if you care to, do state your name for the record. i'd like to call roll at this time. commissioner president fong commissioner vice president richards commissioner antonini commissioner hillis and commissioner moore. >> we expect commissioner wu to be absent and an appearance from commissioner johnson today

commissioners, the first item on your agenda is consideration of items proposed for continuance number one at van ness street conditional use authorization is proposed to march 10, 2016 item 2 at order street conditional use authorization is proposed for continuance until april 7th, 3ri78 item 3 at 440 de harrow a large project authorization is proposed for continuance until june 2nd, 2016, i have no other items proposed for continuance if you want me to check those and opening it up for public comment is any public comment on item the items proposed for continuance come on up.

>> hi ami jessica anderson i live in noah valley and here to talk about the de harrow continues he attend saint greg we're in discussion with the developers we've had meetings with them, however, to we provide them with a sunset study how to affect the light in light building we haven't here any sounds of accommodation or willingly. >> i apologize for interrupting you but at the moment the only matter to discuss is the matter of continuance. >> can i leave the pictures for the planning commission. >> sure of the light we're fine with the continues and look forward to seeing you june 3rdrd. >> thank you very much

any public comment on the items proposed for continuance i don't see any public comment is closed. >> commissioner moore. >> move items as noted. >> second. >> second. >> thank you, commissioners on that motion to continue items 1, 2, 3 as proposed commissioner antonini commissioner hillis commissioner moore commissioner vice president richards and commissioner president fong so moved, commissioners, that motion passes unanimously 5 to zero and places you under commission matters item 4 commissioner questions or comments and commissioner vice president richards. >> just wanted to bring up something i read in the new york times on tuesday more or less it talk about overcrowding in new york city and how it is wrolg and shows the crowded employment on sleep leading to problems that endure throughout

life new york city is experiencing the same thing has run away rents and definition don't kind of get done or not addressed i think society will pay for it throughout the lifetime of children in those crowded conditions you've heard families living in sros that is i think absolutely terrible and wanted to brought to your attention. >> commissioner antonini. >> yeah. a more positive note in studied from the san francisco busy time a prehuman resources you consulting firm found that san francisco has the highest quality of living a survey out i have 200 and thirty cities unfortunately their rating was only number 28 worldwide so there is something about foreign cities that is

lacking in american i'm not sure but the criteria are but encouraging that we we ranked higher than other american cities in 2015 and chicago 43 and new york city 43 place and the consumer goods and natural environment and public services, transportation, banking currency, etc. obviously whoever do the survey thinks this a good place to live. >> commissioners, if there's nothing further, we'll move on to to department matters on 5 drorments. >> thank you good afternoon, commissioners one announcement today, i want to brought to your attention a panel discussion next week on the issue of gentrification displacement the mayor's office of housing and

county development is hosting a panel with the community development and the presenters from the center for community innovation at uc berkley on the urban displacement that is professor karen cpa he will and the urban displacement project a research and action initiative in collaboration with researchers at ucla and community-based organizations, regional planning and the state of california air resources board the project it calls to understand the nature of gentrification the bay area a multi study those are folks that have become interprets the field i'd like encourage the members of the public and the commission to attend it is also includes anthony the organizational director and gore

den chin the founding executive director of the community development center next tuesday the 8 at moufks at the xhaechlz that is one south van ness on the fifth floor next tuesday matrix 8 at the mayor's office of housing and community development one soto van ness on the 5 floor. >> commissioner moore can you send out an e-mail and let us know. >> exactly. >> no other questions move on to the past events of the board of supervisors and the historic preservation commission there is no brotherhoods report. >> good afternoon grirgsz aaron starr manager, legislative affairs first on land use was supervisor wiener's ordinance to allow existing bars to expand to the second floor with the conditional use authorization in

but upper market that was heard on february 4th and recommended approval at that land use hearing the planning staff gave a brief presentation no comments from the members of the public and recommend approval to the full board. >> next on the agenda was the second duplicated file for supervisor avalos ordinance which requires the conditional use authorization for the removal of any unit the city, supervisor avalos and i'm sorry in was continued to the call of the chair supervisor avalos and supervisor wiener will be working on amendments that require back to the planning commission for our review and recommendation also on monday supported by supervisor wiener own student housing several educational institution presented usf and sf state over the several months the supervisor has been working with

the institutions on the need and plans for providing student housing the departments presentation staff discussed the need for student housing currently colleges provide on 9 thousand beds for the 80 thousand students the city and staff provided the historical that is two significant piece of legislation one in 2010 and one in 2012 both encourage the student housing and the protection of existing housing from conversion to student housing. >> staff provided an overview of eastern housing since 2010 and staffs cluksz conclusion we will have a shortfall of approximately 28 thousand beds in the infrastructure are accounted for and staffs presentation was from the following by the - current the four institutions provide to

small institution of beds 14 percent for usf and others to thirty percent for cca and hastings, however, the goal to provide housing for 50 percent of student body and during the public comment the action coalition stayed the city needs to investigate the lack of are interest from the developers and providing for housing the developer the panoramic incorporated developed most of the student housing recommendations a 5 year commitment when building instead of the 10 at the time climax supervisor wiener asked the department to look at the changes to incentivize student housing at the full board this week supervisor avalos ordinance that increases the tdif by $2 passed it is sex offender and the mayor

will veto this. >> supervisor breed ordinance that allows the projected plan the fillmore commercial district pass its first reading and to sdoern the paper also passed it's first reading and supervisor avalos ordinance that requires cu for the removal of for legal unit and unwandered units that applies to all districts as you recall this passed in the c-3 district a minor clerical it passed first reading on a 4 to with two supervisors where r were about the packs to single-family home districts, however, supervisor tang pressed so forth for the intent so she'll looks forward to working with supervisor avalos and supervisor wiener on

duplicated ordinance to address her concerns and finally at the boards hearing supervisor yee's resolution to address maximizing the inclusionary housing requirement at the hearing the resolution was voted for in order to lay the ground work for the june ballot and the amended resolution the board will adopt that by year and has a grandfathering clause and the clause and others city departments to conduct a go feasibility study and allow for middle-income units 100 percent ami for the board to set the maximum affordable units and to approve through the city agreement from the inclusionary housing requirement this resolution then based the board on an unanimous vote that concludes my presentation. >> thank you commissioner vice president richards. >> a quick one mr. star will

you be able to forward the presentation on the student housing. >> yes. a power point kim has it but i'll get it. >> the future when you send us would you attach our presentations that would be fabulous thank you. >> would you do that. >> i'll do it for everyone. >> commissioner antonini. >> in regards to the legislation the trailing legislation you discussed i think that is trailing to an issue which would be on the june ballot if i'm not mistaken; is that correct? >> yes. something on the june ballot the inclusionary housing requirement out of the charter and then allow to be adjusted the future yeah. >> but i guess the question i have is from the trailing legislation so not available until june 1st-800- how will the voters know the trailing

legislation is not actually part of ballot measure but it is supported and kind of works with that. >> ballot initiative sets a 25 percent as a place holder and the board can adjust it the future there is something that the ballot initiate from my understanding the trailing legislation will be based feasibility study to see the appropriate nexus. >> thank you. >> you're welcome. >> i think that's it thank you very much. >> good afternoon, commissioners tim frye department staff to sharing a few forensics or things in the historic preservation commission the hpc met to review the design criteria for a appropriated usf research facilities near san

francisco general hospital the location of the new building will be on an existing parking lot the reason to bring the arc into the mix for design review and comment the collection of the early 20th century building as san francisco general have been identified as a national registered district from 191 to 1938 the arc members reviewed the design criteria proposed o prepared and had limit comments on the overview proposal they feel the design criteria will help guide a future architecture firm in developing a new buildings that fits within the historic district have questions about the massing pea how to relate to the historic building while the current proposal and

massing sued is a low sort of boxy structure the arc members felt the building could be taller and skruptd and better relate to the historic district after the conclusion of the arc two items on the hpc calendar a landmark dedication for van ness street as the half jones building that is significant for the association with the marsh e mortuary circle industry a 30 report the commission felt addresses many - establishes significance of the building with half jones, however, needs a better finding the cultural

significance of the building related to the motorcycle destroy the prudent person property owner is preparing his own information so the commission decided to voted unanimously to tennessee to the april 6th the applicant and the property owner should have additional material on whether or not to initiate the half jones building to article 10 of the code based on the current information 9 staff's recommendation the building appears eligible for the california register not meeting any of the priority areas as part of its landmark designation program and finally rec and park department presented or gave an informational presentation on the condition of the mothers,

recently rec and park was awarded a historic preservation commission grant to hire an outside consultant to conduct a condition ascertainment and schematic faebdz for the building located the san francisco zoo the building is significant and has been on the hpc landmark designate work program since flooifl it is vacant and suffers from a great deal of deferred maintenance the rec and park department showed the report identifies some immediate repairs that need to occur to the building and short term and long term repairs the - at a total of $4.7 million likely the president of the hpc will attend the meeting on march

170 also over the knowing support in seeking grant funding or any other afs to help to rehab the building in a timely fashion that concludes my report unless you have any questions. >> appears no questions thank you very much. >> commissioners, the first item on your agenda general public comment at this time, members of the public may address the commission 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 reached in the meeting. each member of the public may address the commission up to three minutes. there are no speaker cards. >> great, thank you. >> yep. >> hi.

>> good afternoon. i'm july 4th i live in bernal heights you've seen me before i wanted to talk about reflections on engagement of the public recently the number of meetings right now for the public is completely overwhelming i wanted to talk about the need for developers to show some respect for the public who shows up at those meetings and come prepared with information it is useful i you know talked about involvement in the affordable housing bonus program and their

didn't end up being a meeting in district 9 the meeting he respect to in district 10 had materials from one of the coalitions that the developers supported on everyone's chair so i felt like that was a little bit out of bound we're coming to a commission meeting and want the information from the planning department i think also that community forms are basically at risk of being undermined in terms of their integrity and also - (inaudible) i've been reading a little bit some one of those books that talks about the history of planning i have a greater appreciation of how the consultant groups came to being and i want to recall something that happened you know has

colored by remarks from my personal recognize on february 29th a meeting of a community meeting group that prevented the groups like dpw to present their proposals to members he attended hopefully improving the cal station and on jackson park after the presentation the body put the project next to my sons school a vote it was deemed invalid one of the presenter neither fit the criteria for a voting member it was one vote apart and the improper vote would have been decisive it demonstrates a lack of respect for the the time in the processes i call for a code

of conduct for developers. >> and they're in the room. >> okay. thank you. >> is there any additional public comment? >> general public comment not seeing any, general public comment is closed. commissioner vice president richards and at one point i know there is discussions around having certain formats for development meeting so people understand it is part of mayor's office of housing. >> commissioners, if there's nothing further, we'll move on to to your regular calendar item 7 the transportation sustainability program aligned

component. >> okay. >> good afternoon commissioner president fong and members of the board i'm sarah jones environmental review officer and director of planning that was great pride i come before you a exciting milestone not standpoint program effort to keep people moving as the city grows and an important moment for san francisco to step forward as a leader in making the smarter growth policies work as you may know our preliminary purpose the alignment with the ceqa review by replying the level of service with the metric that captures car travel san francisco has been working

towards this since 2003 and been an objective from the start of project in 2013 with the page of senate bill it ellis act was a statewide mandate. >> been with the planning and research in their creation of a statewide program that aligns ceqa the most important environmental law now a system going through another year still of the making process we would like to adopt that metrics in san francisco with the last january 9th substance was we're ceqa allows the agencies to seek their own threshold and no legislation change is necessary why are we coming to you with this today rather than waiting for the state as san francisco's

role and the planning department vision great planning for a great city you'll be here the ellis act reform is for new development that's try but not the reason this is such an important step we're here bus the vision and alignment it is absurd we can't make the students safer that is ludicrous we implement the plans that are years the making moving l o s aligned this as a aide policies promoting infrastructure and streets to move for all before i pass the mike to the senior planners i want to take a brief moment to thank the many, many people that are part of this transformative effort first of all, thank you for john

rahaim and particularly want to call out the environmental planning staff who poured caliber victor and greg that moved open to sfmta and rachel and others who are here and also especially like to recognize the efforts of bill former over and over that was the brains and wouldn't have been possible we wouldn't be here now thank you sarah. >> good afternoon commissioner president fong and commissioner vice president richards and members of the board i'm honored to talk about something that numerous people in the crowd and elsewhere have been working on for over a decade about making

sure we measure in environmental review actually regrets what the city cares in transportation that he and salesforce that's safety in providing a variety of opposition for people moving around and this, of course, is the reform before i talk and dive into the details i want to provide context in terms of environmental review the planning department generally processes 3 different types of environmental review documents on the left hand is the majority of asia casing those are exemptions awhile negative declaration and irrelevance get for notoriety they represent a few projects the process this process would not change as part of the reform we're talking about today but the public will continue to have

opportunity to weigh in on the environmental review process including the appeal process when we look at environmental impacts we're looking at 18 different tops and a transportation and circulation is one of the topics that again will not change as part of reform we're talking about today within transportation and circulation we look at a bunch of sub topics i'll focus on level of service and automobile delay and debbie from the planning department will talk about some of the other tongs later so on the level of service what it is it it was created in the 1950s by the traffic engineers to elevate evaluate the highway capacity not to measure the environmental

effects like today how this plays out is there is a letter grade that is assigned like during grade school from a to f a is good and f is bad this is a picture of a downtown with little no activity going on with a transfer engineer will look at this and say that is fantastic cars can move without no delay i'm going to give this an a from an urban life precipitation it is not a place people want to live or stay this is an f this is a picture of market street traffic engineer will say how are cars going to move there are people walking and on transit and people bicycling how can a car move freely through the intersection this is an f from an urban life it is a sign of a vibrant

economic place people want to stay and go to this is an a so look through this lens it is creates numerous problems for ceqa and first and foremost is didn't protect environmental quality the foundation of ceqa the reason for that is a common solution to improving or reducing automobile delay is roadways for people walking and increase speeds to unsafe levels on city streets and second it didn't fix the problem that was intended to fix and this is because of the concept of induced demand you widened a roadway people are more attracted and it leads to important congestion or the

commemorating the beginning except now important cars and pollution in addition it encourages scrawl because on the urban areas there is little to no congestion there so any vehicle travel you'll look at the level of service lens there are not going to have impacts and bad grades even though there are adding 3 three to four times as vehicle travel compared to develop in places like san francisco it conflicts with the ooej open regional and state policies intended to actually improve the environment walk reducing emissions and providing for mobility option for people to get around. >> so for those last year limited number of projects or projects that reduce the automobile display we had a analysis on the city is often

left with rejecting the alternatives to reduce automobile display by the way, e delay because of the space constraint we don't have the room to wild the roadways without door-to-door buildings therefore we spend time and effort counting cars at intersections without doing anything to try to reduce the vehicles the intersection the first place so acknowledging those problems significance legislation that sarah alluded to was passed in 2013 and that was california 743-d two things first, it said automobile delay should no longer be considered an environmental effect upon adoption of new ceqa guidelines and an alternative matrix should

be applied this is a long process the city was working on a level of service and part of transportation sustainability program more recently the state office of planning and research is responsible for updating ceqa guidelines at the start a robust outreach program like outreach from the matrix and released 3 documents between the two and three the city are we looking at the transportation sustainability program to break down the 3 1ri8d component and at that time, the city adopted it recently and the state released their proposal in january when the public comment ended so the resolution green before i today is really an

implementing and - change the state we feel confident the state will propose a alternative for the travel and voounl automobile delay will be removed from ceqa we want to move ahead of the state we don't know how long this process took longer we anticipated once the bill was passed an maybe another year. >> so just to remind you on the travel this manufacture measures the distance that people might drive it in private automobiles or taking corrections, changes, deletions, taxis and an indicator of the environmental effects here the city we'll rely on the colleagues of the transportation authority to conduct a model run for some maps i'll show you. >> so what this change means

impractical first for transportation projects it splits the framework on its head projects that are inducing automobile travel will have impacts to analysis the alternatives and mitigation for conversely projects that will not have significant impacts are things that the city is implementing in terms of improving safety and providing for mobility options so plus a huge positive change on the transportation. >> on the land use end the state is proposing you compare a project miles traufd to the region the region means the 9 county bay area and many factors that effect the travel behavior and vehicle miles you go as much as density and diversities and frequency of transit and based

on those factors the city is doing quite well expanded to the region the next 3 slides you'll show you a map and a table comparing the city hall to the neighborhood for illustration purposes that doesn't show well on the screen the whites are the belief average and below the thresholds the regional average is $17.2 million per capital per day the states set a told her 1 percent below that average they're not satisfied with the status quo they want to meet the green house gas goals and here at city hall this neighborhood is one, 7 of the threshold

the only red areas that show up on the map are treasure island which is pretty obvious to see and hptd the lower right-hand side corner and most likely those areas will not show up red if you take into account the land use and transportation the future. >> for office a similar picture will emerge the vast majority of city is below the threshold and here at city hall we're half that threshold. >> and then i'll delay a similar picture the areas that show up red are slightly lee above the threshold a variety of land uses we analyze but generally stay within the same types of framework and analysis i've described and although rare

other unique and substantially large projects that effect those might do new model runs to calculate the projects but for the vast majority we'll rely on the map to have less than significance finding. if a project exceeds the vehicles miles traveled then mitigation measures that will apply is transportation transportation demand management which was the project of our informational hearing and shifts would apply citywide but we're more concerned about mobility overall in the city than looking at a project by project threshold basis so in recap that

reform is a very positive exciting change for the city and environmental review and it will not effect the public's ability to weigh in on the review process or change the analysis and other topics including the others sub topics in transportation and jane will talk about >> good work commissioner i'm planning staff to follow up on reed's presentation in addition to the level of service to the new vehicles miles traveled the planning department is the process of updating it's impact analysis to see the shift in miles matrix and align in our environmental documents

as before we'll continue to analyze the project transportation related impacts on riding transit and people walking and biking and other assess as well as construction impacts all the remaining ceqa environmental impact report that we touched on will continue to be analyzed with the transportation impact analysis updated we plan on making the environmental review and analysis for relevant to the different ways people use the transportation network accordingly the transportation analysis is on bike and mobility and safety issues for all travel the site circulation will evaluate the transportation and as needed it are are will have explored measures to address any transportation and circulation

dollars that arises we're not giving up on the analysis only shifting a 34e6ks from the level of service the pipeline since 2013 as before we will continue to evaluate the project if payable city and policies like we did before and most importantly the environmental analysis will seek public input at key parts of environmental analysis people can comment on the scope of what we did the environmental analysis and we'll respond to those issues in response to common documents the eirs the resolution from level to the service metrics is one analysis that was conducted to evaluate aside from the ceqa and transportation it will not

effect others analysis or gentle environmental review and we strongly urge you to approve that resolution that will go a logan long way to the environmental impact for the cities policies that we've adopted for good transportation and land use planning thank you very much i'll be happy to answer any questions you may have. >> i know this very large project has involved a lot of agencies and departments and some are here so i said to provide that opportunity for those who want to speak i know that ed reiskin is here with mta and tilly chang from the i'll let you folks organize yourselves. >> good afternoon commissioner president fong and commissioners it is my great pleasure to be

here on behalf of the transportation authority tilly chang like to express our strong support for the change in city's policy and pagers and similar sound-producing electronic devices are prohibited at this meeting. practice regarding the impact analysis 1962 ongoing acholic beverage effort of city departments and going back to 2003 our agency worked on the first study looking at alternatives to what has been 50 years of practice embedded the concept at a point we found to examine and the staff report to better align our city's practices and policies to styling h style the review practices and to achieve more fiscal 0 focus groups for the city in multi stages thank you for your strong supports for the tsp today's aforementioned will

be followed by a tdm ordinances we hope you'll be support our aim to bring this forward not only of the practice for the city to achieve our goals and aims but model the jurisdictions when the states are trying to do to have more sustainable community and thank you to the city team those particularly generations of staff that the planning department and the transportation authority and mta, mayor's office and sf environment i'll not name them all they're here and continue to other endeavors but want to recognize the deep and acholic beverage efforts based and strong technical analysis and strong under pooinz to move forward to serve and partner in particular, the office of planning and research and they deserve our prediction for

they're leadership and implementing this guideline at the state level thank you, again i look forward to any questions you have. >> president fong and members of the commission ed reiskin director of transportation i want to thank you for giving us the opportunity to speak and considering this landmark step forward in terms of how we evaluate the projects in san francisco my job as your director of transportation and working with the planning department, the transportation authority and others is to make sure that people have good choices in terms of how they get around the city and when i say good choices good is defined by a number of city policies that are at play as much as the transportation element of general plan, the transit first policy which is insilenced and

the city's compliment change and policies for affordability and accessibility and as we have a city that is growing we have anymore people who want to timely and work and visit here we need to make sure with we can accommodate to growth in smarter ways ways reflective of those what we love about san francisco, california remain so this change that here for your consideration today would allow us to better do that and allow us to think about the impacts of transportation projects and building projects in a way that aliens better with that list of city policies and that's why this is so important and why i would strongly urge you to support this change i believe this which was about

result in better analysis that will result in a better informed public and better public discussion and ultimately in better projects that will support the transportation system that will support the best possible way this is a great effort i'll join with tilly in commending the staff and the mta and ta and autumn the agencies a lot of thoughtful work and analysis and it is fully appropriate if san francisco takes a leadership role after the 743 was passed and ahead of the state so thank you very much for your considers and it was an excellent staff presentation when they're talking about the traffic engineering prospective they're talking about 1950s how traffic jerseys not the traffic

engineers at sfmta who are just as if not more safety conscious but have a much more modern and evolved thinking your traffic engineers will look at those fs and call them a's. >> thank you. >> i know that cheryl brinkman sfmta board chair that here. >> thank you good afternoon commissioner president fong and commissioners my name is cheryl brinkman i serve as is vice chair of the sfmta droeshgz first thank you for service this is a labor of love and is a lot hard work i'm here to speak in favor of this change it it is step in the

right direction it is our important goal a lion shift this is how the transportation sustainability program will will help us to meet the demand and this is key we have more people and more demands on the transportation network than before and at the same time our streets are not growing wider we need to make smarter decisions new to it san francisco ideas might not appear popular but are beneficial to the transportation system and increase safety for the citizens you have an opportunity to keep our people moving and over streets safe for the millions of people so people will be more successful i ask you to adopt this thank you. >> thank you.

>> hi good afternoon i'm from the to transportation program we promote the use of sustainable modes to align with the transit first policy in san francisco with the goal of reducing green house gas emissions and primarily did it through a behavorial change and education and outreach program to promote the use of sustainable transportation mode i'm here to also support the l o s reform the item before you today, this supports projects that promotes the behavorial which was that encourages land use and option and density it will reduce the green house gas emissions since b m t

reflected the miles traveled and that is one indicator of air quality and safety in l association s i encourage you to consider psa this resolution thank you. >> thank you. >> good afternoon, commissioners thank you for the opportunity to speak i'm an epidemiologist the sustainability in the health a branch i'm exist to be here to support the early adoption of the transportation impact environmental review a change this has advocated for and participation the city working groups on the l o s reform this is due to the fact we consider blt to be a better measure than l o s we believe this policy change will have population

health strategic plan and health and safety over the years we've duplicated the negative effects of l o s the use of that and he environmental review supports the transportation system that helps not to capture the impacts of vehicle use with the diverse noise and transportation safety further l o s creates roadblocks with liveability like blocking bikes lanes and other things it will positively impact with the city agencies like vision zero and allow for faster and more effective implementation of implementation of life saving opportunities and the long term the use of m t will encourage the transit and active

transportation throb reducing the air emissions in conclusion we believe that city transportation metrics with the prioritization of human well-being and air quality and activity transportation we support the the department change that will advance the health of people that live and work in san francisco thank you for your consideration of this important policy change. >> thank you. >> good afternoon commissioner president fong and members of the commission victor wise from sfmta commissioners as you very will know transportation and land use are connected and the state of california, of course, recognizes this connection through senator bill through the sustainable climate act the

resolution is a key step in promoting this the demonstration of multi transportation and encouraging dpicht of diversity of ludicrously so the switch the level of service to million dollars traveled will bring bart implementation for the transit pedestrian and bicycle projects the urban environment having better choices for us all it allows sfmta to better focus on the resources our workers and visitors need and have been asking for more high impact transportation and want those projects delivered as quickly as possible it allows us to deliver more and better and faster it will recognize that active transportation and transit

promotions like better bike ways and transit ways and those are not increases in the city rather those projects will support our citizens and have the kind of development we want in the city i ask you to adopt the resolution and align with the existing policies in the city like transit first thank you. >> thank you. >> commissioner president fong and fellow members the commission i'm manager the regulatory for public works my colleagues from other aide departments have presented a convincing argument from l o s to the bmt we're in full support of the policy with the aligned city policies like vision zero

and transit first at this point, i'll strongly urge to adopt this proposal thank you. >> hello july 4th from bernal heights and i'm so pleased everyone in the room that can make a decision to put a white loading zone and 22 caltrans station is here so, please all you stakeholders to make transit work we need loading zones at the 22 caltrain station no loading zone and generally think about loading zones for bart and caltrain in general moving to the bmt is great and i would just is that as you look at

developers proposals please make sure to add additional car sharing spaces and chavrg i think didn't count against brt and developers can provide bike membership and encourages the transportation and also projects really need to provide off-street loading one of the criteria the delivery and passenger loading for safety i live near mission and we now have put the red lane for the busses and it has been you know an adjustment this first week or so what i'm a little bit afraid of is that the red lanes are encouraging speeding that maybe

dangerous given the sidewalks are not compliant with the we are not streets so i think projects need to is it correct a little bit from their property line to allow for these sorts of red lanes i did already see a double lane but go through the red light on presidio they're moving fast and mission street has a lot of pedestrians and people still have to park and so it is a little bit challenging you only have one line of traffic open now making sure you enhance safety is a safety when you mutt u put in a bike lane or red zone is important addition on valencia street a lot of ubers basically use it as a loading zone and the bikes have to go into the ongoing traffic so,

please implement 3 mind fully i think there are long processes and short implementation like you didn't repave mission thank you put down a plastic thing the rain is, you know, the thinking inflation is absent worse please take your time and do it right the first time. >> thank you. is there any additional public comment (calling names). >> good afternoon, commissioners my name is nourishing the executive director of walk sf and very excited to be here today to share our organizations strong support for that policy change this policy will for the first time address really the serious issues with the current ceqa l o s analysis that is developed in 1969 when ceqa was adopted in

our great state we know understand the impacts l o s would have on the environment the new also o s policy will have an impact and connect the dots between this policy and the policy you guys adopted the vision zero policy along with the mayor and about 9 other city departments and already this year 5 people have lost their lives while walking in our city improvements currently under l o s improvement that save lives not only they cost our city years in terms of doing environmental impact reports we pay consultants millions in taxpayer dollars as you recall this vision zero policy was to

end all traffic death by 2024 in order to do that we have under 8 years we need to start transforming the way our streets look and feel and educate cyclists and others where they should be how to operate safely we need to transformer our streets in other words, to do that i urge you to adopt this policy today to take steps today towards a safer street and save lives thank you. >> i'll be using the overhead i'm ilene a resident the park side district to recap the process ceqa began with the governors over as a proposal and the overhead is the recent

proposal the second stage from the california rule making the current los is not for sprawl development the mta will assess those impacts and the professor anton from uc berkley has recommended using both los and bmt my neighborhood organization speaks and made comments to the o p r along with the comments spank documents on this commission item as a background sp 7043 is about baseball the kings were threatening to leave sacramento dearly steinberg with the - represented sacramento sp 73 or 4, 43 was designed to be

the springboard for downtown savings time from los to a different metrics and part of design to facilitate this project dearly is not works for lobbying firm and the arena is being constructed at a generous taxpayer subsidy as the rule making is not in place i'll urge the commission to continue this until a final rule making is in place thank you. >> good afternoon commissioner president fong and commissioners i'm the transportation policy director at spur spur strongly supports this long overdue to the transportation impacts we commend the planning department, sfmta and ct and working together on those efforts to reform ceqa you've

heard the problems and the number of projects the city and across the student los complicates that process that leads to us 234089 having some of the projects we need implemented transportation projects that drives up the cost of those projects we thank you for moving forward with implementing the measure to the los the bmt that aligns transit first and vision zero and environmental policies rather than working at cross purposes this is one of the most important and common sense transportation reforms we could ask for we're grateful you're doing this today thank you for your support. >> next speaker >> please.

yeah. thank you. >> hello commissioners commissioner president fong my name is janice i am the advocacy director at the san francisco bicycle coalition and a outer sunset recipient i've attended some meetings and lucky to have options how i get around the city i live. >> the way 8 miles from here when i'm lazy i put my bike away and stay in we're grateful to have a city to be multi transportational you've heard if the folks san francisco needs to be a leader in that respect on behalf of over 10 thousand members of the bicycle coalition urge the commission to adopt a reform from los to bmt today, the mission of the bicycle for transportation and also

transmitted into the actions from all 3 corals to protected bike lanes and almost all of these requires a level of environmental review we recognize the important need for the impact when they're not competed and painfully aware that happens with the jewelry box no bike parking or anything could go ♪ formal years with that said, this is the most common sense thing that can be done and so we hope you pass this today and express our gratitude to really a coordinated city effort and the staff doing the work to bring this before you today thank you >> sir. >> good afternoon, commissioners andy district one recipient you've already had lots and lots

of testimony i hope you support that i have told you as a neighbor and in a series of capacitates trying to develop equitable streets in san francisco for everyone's sake and spent hours and hour of my life getting our ceqa with the policies this is a great moments honestly wanted to be here today when the question came to you, you are the lead agencies for the practices of ceqa first and foremost but the folks and the body that decides what the environmental effects are that we care about as a city you as the the threshold of significance here we are at that moment you've heard from the members of the public that and your staff that the state o p r still getting through the ruling process it takes time but under

ceqa it is up to the locality to decide what matters we shouldn't wait for the state and can as should as a aide this was we care about and here's a threshold we're going to set to the decree question to you, we don't center to wait for the state and not wait we've wait a a long time and just thrilled i lived long enough that the question has comment could or come to you today, i hope. >> resolve to practice ceqa and make it for supportive of the goals of the city of san francisco thank you. >> commissioners andy reuben, junius & rose i'm pile on here for a minute too wow. a long ride i went with bill rolled this out in 2003 it look longer than congratulations to the planning department and the city family and all the hard work

this is really is it sounds like - it is huge this entitlements a huge chunk of the ceqa and the los nest it should not have been adopted the first place thank god i urge you to please pass this thank you. >> thank you, thank you. >> good afternoon. my name is a scott with the consumption director for a liveable city i join the past, present, and future plus agencies and all of the fellow recognizes and impose our strong support for that resolution it will reform san francisco's environmental impact process the mta is a better impact than los it co-related with the environmental impact with the green house gas emissions and air pollution and noise and barriers to sustainable mobility by using

the bmt as a measure the commission can help to facilitate critical safety and accessibility and transit performance for wilder sidewalks and ballistic lanes and accessibility projects, transit lanes and others priority measures, walking and cycling and public transportation are more space efficient than automobiles in order to move for people in san francisco as we well know we need and do to sustainably we need to have the space for walking and cycling and trafficking it often creates diverse feedback for projects that move for people and do so at at benign way they create the

los it only looks at the cars and not the people san francisco must do it's part for the global threat of climatic change los reform advances those important goals we urge you to support the resolution and take an important step towards a more sustainable future thank you. >> thank you. >> okay is there any additional public comment? >> on this item you can fill that out later if you want. >> hi my name is john i'm here with the bay area renters federation we want to support the change away from los we think this is a bad tool that gets used to hamper development through ceqa squatting where people actually squat on ceqa land to stop development in

their areas we want to see it used thank you. >> is there any additional public comment? >> okay not seeing any, public comment is closed. and commissioner antonini. >> yeah. i think that is a wonderful legislation we see the ill effects of los type of thinking that have prevailed the bay area and the last 50 to 60 years we see another bore the tunnel that moves the traffic faster but encourages people to live beyond they're very, get there faster and it is same thing proliferation and businesses and prior farmlands and agricultural lands and far away from almost anything else so in suburban areas that is rare that anyone lives and works

and shops in these 3 things don't occur close to each other this will discourage sexual the only thing it what about said of los there are incidents traffic is backed up on the bay bridge and inhale for pollution as you walk along there with them hardly moving and id egging if you moved quicker but i think the solution to that is the solution of decreasing sprawl and moving people closer to where they work and live and shop that is the goal i'm a little bit confused about how this is go - evaluated because i would assume you took surveys of people and came up with answers as to how far do

you drive per day and you asked residents and businesses how far their employees drive maybe you can tell you how you got those numbers. >> yeah. commissioner antonini i think i know but i'll defer to my colleague at the transportation authority because they're the keepers more this. >> drew cooper. >> good afternoon, commissioners so the way we prepared overseeing maps that are the basis for the evaluation we hold a traffic to demand model this is a series of mathematical models r with people's behavior the foundational material is the statewide survey we sent out or we didn't but the state sent out

rather travel surveys to households across the state they reported their trips and the places they traveled to we passed this data and used it to form a model that we used to predict how people will travel bans the land use patterns anticipate and travel options available to them so we put into our model bay area land use and bay area people, bay area transportation options and what comes out are travel patterns and so from that, we obvious the m t created by people. >> i'll assume you do it both ways interview or take surveys of residents and take surveys of businesses because you have different models based on

actually 3 and retail also. >> so the actresses the model are people like in real life people the surveys that we used report where they go to work and shop, and we correlate those things with the type of land use there so if i'm filing out a survey and report i go to work underneath the civic center and others pulling out their map and use that in determining how people choose to come here so all we've done in preparing the maps observed the job locations and observed the people that travel to and from and the bmt they generate in those trips similar for retail and for

housing. >> so a multi question survey you found out where they work and shop and live and put together a matrix bans that. >> yes. >> one thing that's weird the whole thing maybe your preaching to the choir a little bit about firewater use we use the smallest share per capital in san francisco than anywhere the bay area and the survey looks like the average travel from using the phone model around 7 miles per day per paternity i assume driving is what you're looking at other than walking half of what it is the rest of the bay area but when you're asking for improving you're making us approve to an even same percentage of improvements as the other people that or

really the bad guys polluting only (1) 500-0000 per person. >> go ahead. >> good afternoon, commissioners correct me if i have your question wrong but in terms of how the state is directing us to look at this under ceqa we're looking at the expected vehicle million dollars traveled per capita and comparing it to the regional average plus or minus 15 percent so sooushl we're not expecting that most projects in san francisco are really going to need to improve at all because that measure their engaged if is much higher than expected for san francisco

projects san francisco is to the subject to you know having to capitol hill to the same degree as a project in say walnut creek. >> it was a little bit confusing i looked at did maps you had the western and southern part of san francisco the red if they had a project have to be better than 15 percent of our ami and above. >> there are similar situations in san francisco prior to a number of changes there are some locations in san francisco that are a little bit above that threshold and those are projects where they would need to make sure that their were some reductions pieces in place similar to actually as we discussed under the p d m

ordinance pretty much all have to be actively about the trip reductions so we'll expect all locations will comply with that. >> and in terms of housing and businesses i think you have to be very careful to evaluate what that project broingz to the table and where the residents were before and the shoppers were before and the employees were before because you build a new project for housing and have a one unit of one to one parking cars get used to one civil right when people lived in newark an example you have to really compare the impact the positive impact of those projects will have against the situation when same number of people were in a

sprawl location and see how many people are moved from that area into a project. >> exactly that's why bmt aligns with other policies in development. >> yeah. >> and then the tms thinking about building transit and it's right away and enables for people to use public transportation. >> there are a lot of transportation improvements that are underway or planned the tsp the fee associated with that has been passed it is helping to contribute to that effort. >> it has to be a priority and doing everything we can because people are will never tank public transit takes twice as long to get to one place to another we all live busy lives

and in a daze time can't spend all the time traveling. >> commissioner johnson. >> welcome back. >> so thank you nice to the back it is exciting i have a couple of quick questions i worry about i had been more of the process i learned about this in 2013 one of the public candle stick park mentioned because of the arena in sacramento that was the redevelopment project in sacramento and heard the advocacy talking about being signed by the governor now we're here today so this is exciting i have a couple of really quick questions so it is really more for the mta so one of the things that was mentioned the documents was the

level of services is continued to be used in some cases in the projects and the documentation i want to get a quick overview of how the level ever services for the transit projects or what the mta is black man on doing with that measure and a couple of questions. >> confirmations thank you victor the level of services is an important thing in measuring things so our transportations engineers will use the level of services for projects or we have maybe substantial - the difference the division they'll no longer be used under ceqa but not a totally useless tool bans count types of project the future. >> okay. great. and then there are a couple of questions on the mta i suspended that was

the answer so i don't agree with this but the metrics for sustainability wider roads and get there quicker and areas that are more assessable by cars what other measures or metrics of site circulation and accessibility are going to be commonly used for example one of the k34r789s said they come from the sunset $8 million out and the level of service will typically be a proxy for how long from the sunset to here if we're not toougz anymore for ceqa there sort of not a avoid but people will use that what replaces that as metric or a way to getting a proxy how acceptable and how free the circulation is it the projects for new projects. >> i think the planning

department and the sfmta really when we talk about saeblts focuses on safety and how safe to get somewhere but we often rely and get a transit and reliable and travel time for example, how long it takes someone to get from a it b and service all an 9 transformation to help people to minimize the time and monitor congestion the city and take into account where there is some specific engineering solutions we can make safety improvements for the use of road by the cost for bikes and everybody. >> excellent. thank you. >> i think the next person is for sarah john's a quick comment it is interesting us as a planning commission we look at the ceqa reviews for large projects where ceqa and environmental review is

necessary we often use the level of services at looking at okay. what will the the accessibility a and and the planning department we don't know what are the impacts for the areas so any way to get the metrics as part of case reports that would be helpful not in the eir we're not looking at the level of service we need other measures that is helpful to us so ms. jones. >> one of the things that is interesting i love the fact we're doing this before the state finalize is that they have things that don't apply the significant of looking at the percentage above and below we're below the threshold of many areas that did ply to us i was wondering will we be looking at

those structural sort of creating our own benchmark for our legislation that will be separate from the state i know we are but will we be below what he on the state will do. >> that's not what we're intending something we talked about when we thought about at the planning department the mta when we first saw where it was we felt like say you said feel like measuring against the regional average and rule out a lot of development in san francisco and we don't want to lose the tool of being able to improve the projects but we feel like the - we feel like there are better ways to get towards improving projects that is really what the tdm ordinance is

about even though compared 20th century to when you're talking about a statewide metric your you know san francisco is great but looking more at the city the status quo is not going to work for us indefinitely we need to improve things to keep moving around with all the growth that is expected so that's why we are - we wanted projects that wouldn't have exceeded significance levels under the los to make active improvements in their trip generations. >> just a general, i want to see accident significance we don't want a benchmark that is to high but lowering it will help us in decision making

processed. >> a check saying okay now the starter is set where they are do we want to default to the state or you know move on our own course at this point so that is what we'll intend to do and intend to continue to be part of the process. >> okay awesome and that that would be helpful to say a real life example hopefully not too broad of a question like the second street improvement process when we reviewed the eir process and filed the matrix it the future would have been bmt is there a project where what would have changed we're using

the ta as a measure as you're going this as a level of service or automobile trips. >> some of the projects we know of that will we're expecting will be affected the 6th street improvement project that is meant to provide for major safety improvements on that very corridor we are not at this point anticipating that will need a environmental impact report 2 would a under a level of threshold that would be one also the second street project is one that we expect the analysis will change if we make this conversion to stockton street making a winter walk permit i'm thinking about the project but glad you brought up second street that was interesting we found a level of service impact

and a moving impact i have an interesting conversation with something another sfmta that said if we were not doing an eir on second street for apple los we would have made that project a low impact that raises one of the factors it los brings about which is if you're doing an eir anyway 24 deincentives other projects if you can get an eir why have other impacts so that is one of the less tangible benefits we hope to see it as better project. >> thank you very much then finally i know that kim mentioned a couple of times i'm not sure this will help with candle stick point was designed with regional retailed next to the tony wanted to make that

comment it is a little bit different. >> there will be projects in san francisco that have impacts that have significant bmt impacts and that is okay and that's something that decision making should understand on a regional level. >> commissioner vice president richards. >> it was a pile on i appreciate everyone other than one speaker supporting this i do and the liveable city is reform and definitely time for reforming that is more relevant measure today it actually, i think measures the impact on the environment rather than the level of service this is where the world will go not only a more complete look at the environment but hold true i say

over and over the more parking spaces we get more big bmt the fact there is a connection and i look forward to the presentation on the shift of the invest portion of the program and great work. >> commissioner hillis. >> yes. thank you all for that i know that making changes to second is not always easy we've experienced that on other items and even kind of smart common sense measures are good with a decade plus thank you 44 for all that advocated and it makes your job easier and trying to make sense of why good policies sometimes didn't make a second document and the los measures that are a head scratcher we looked at those documents it

makes our job a lot easier i supportive in order to get the widespread impact regional or in san francisco that had adopt this and raise this i'm glad we're leading on the charge and other counties and cities the region do we think their embracing it like we are like having everyone think about this or going to be more difficult than some of the - in other parts of region. >> i'll say we're certainly others one end the spectrum in terms of embracing it and the state process has taken longer even though has we'll have 43 mandated moving away from the level of service in terms of the cities to readiness to switch

over and in terms of you know how they stack up against a ripening metric so i think there are some communities that are going to be rushing into that i know there are a number of cities that are positioning themselves to take to be able to take the change right away and some are holding out tooth and nails one of the drafts of the guidelines the state is giving cities a you know essentially a transition period to move into it i hope that as the movement picks up steam and more and more places see this can work and that we can still capture and disclose all the impacts that people care about there will be more and more movement to embrace it. >> director rahaim. >> a note and add my thanks to

sarah that has been championing and to mta and ta for the staff and their work it is important to note this is beneficial to a lot of public projects as well as private especially the transportation project there is a certain irony to look at the level of service impacts and making transit quibble i think this reform has as huge benefit to the publics projects so i'm very supportive and encourage us to moved on this today. >> commissioner moore. >> congratulations to all you had everybody's support in february but today tops it and today is a streamlined cooperated effort people often

extraneous that the city is doing the opposite but we're the first city and it make common sense as far as transportation reform goes obviously it is much in line with california ceqa goal if day one on the los sounds like old-fashioned when you looked it now i'm happy to support it and move to approve. >> second. >> and recommend approval or adopt. >> adopt. >> okay. that's what we do. >> second. >> if no other discussion to adopt the proposed reform. >> commissioner antonini. >> commissioner hillis commissioner paskin-jordan commissioner moore commissioner vice president richards and commissioner president fong so moved, commissioners, that motion passes unanimously 6 to

zero. >> okay jonas i believe the next item will be a fairly long item does the commission want good aftern back to the san francisco planning commission regular i'd like to remind the members of the audience that the commission does not tolerate 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 under our regular calendar on item 8 for case 2015 plus the candle stick point development amendments. >> good afternoon president fong and members of the commission i'm matthew snyder of the department staff the amendment to the candle stick point for the sdiensz document we refer to

as d-4-d we were here with lennar and staff and provided you with an informational presentation and where the project is in status in their moving forward we mentioned at this point we will be back before you for the development documents and here as you may know this project received the master approvals about 6 and a half years ago included ceqa approvals, approvals for amendments to the general plan in creating specific sub area plan for candle stick .5 and the rezoning district our the bayview hunters point and agreement been planning and occ or redevelopments along with your approval the design for redevelopment document and with your you prevail any establishment of the amendments will be back before you

09 approvals at this point of which was not an approving body do disposition and agreements various landlord exchanges and financing approvals along with other amendment to other city codes which are not under the jurisdiction the planning department candle stick point is within an active redevelopments project area therefore approvals most of approvals that allow construction and cornerstones of implementation happens through our sister agency ocii, however, planning staff is culminated with the coordination agreement with key stages and the other thing for which we maintain the authority with the design for the document before you today. >> lennar urban the master

developer for the proposal has applied to ocii for a sub application for the retail center the used to be the hub of candle stick point developments along with some surrendering surrounding blocks it is understandable the size of this long term development changes to the project descriptions they're seeking and so doing so we have to go back and relook at some of the implements including the d-4-d occ with xhoumsz from planning has prepared an environmental amounted to the documents the addendum establishes that with a couple of minor changes to the mitigation measures no impacts as otherwise described the final environmental acknowledging the document and it's conclusions

are documented before you the actual d-4-d the amendments for the to the d-4-d are- provided you with a staff report and with an all of what those changes are i'll describe it generally and let the master urban designer the author for the d-4-d glow those changes in detail their essentially fall under 3 categories substantive changes height and along some of the main streets that is appropriate in terms of the urban design and the possibilities of additional housing the movement of 3 of the towers one of which i'll be back to describe a little bit later and some changes to the configuration of some of the streets including the candle stick point retail center. >> we working closely with occ

instead of lennar urban in looking at these changes and the ends up we believe that the changes are in keeping with the original spirit of original proposal we believe that they did changes still reflect good urban design as proposed and consistent with the general plan we're recommending approval of the amendments as before you as i mentioned one of the substantive changes the moving of the 3 of the 12 towers that are proposed for candle stick point two of the towers we think clearly really make a minimal difference to the inner design character of the development and he did third tower tore g was proposed in the retail center has been property to move to the outskirts of retail center we some cornerstones between state parks and managed through

the park that surrounds it it which is fast food yesterday, i want to touch on that state parks is unhappy with the change to the tower i want to for the record talk about the prospective is on that we do not share state parks concerns we understood that is a part of character of the area uptown been changing much more urban and ouch be look forward to the interaction between the state park and a more cereal defined urban edge this one change the one tower is not significant and so we'll recommending it stay as it is lennar and it's boring some ways can shorten that tower provided us with shorter towers quite frankly we thought were

unsuccessful and it may have minute missed the adventure state parks is concerned it at other aesthetics that detrimental effects to the overall project undercover officer with planning and occ staff and lennar building the best recommendation to move forward as it is proposed in the development design for development but now that concludes my presentation. several folks are here to talk about it david tom, i mentioned in o b i say author of the d-4-d originally proposed some years and walk us through some of the changes and also here willing la from ocii staff if you have questions from them, sue and terra from lennar urban are here from the hunters point shipyard

c for c advisory committee and dr. honeycutt and linda's is here to provide concludes my presentation. i'll be happy to answer any questions you may have. >> thank you. >> thank you. >> good afternoon commissioner president fong and planning commissioners miami i'm available to answer any questions you may have my name is david tom the master plan and coordinator for the candle stick point and hunters point shipyard projects as matthew mentioned i was the original author for the d-4-d and all walk us through through the compromised changes. >> can you is it possible to - thank you very much. >> those 3 parts to this

presentation the first is a fairly high-level overview of the changes being made to the d-4-d and a bit more focus on the building heights and feinstein the tower locations the approval progress we're here to seek approval for the d-4-d changes and then from there we go to ocii for the same thing and some companion documents that are sync in his and before occ and the sub phase of candle stick there are 3 tiers of its been examined in 3 tiers all the packets 17 by 13 sheets numbing to look at and but the tier one have what are considered the substantial

changes and tier two what refer to as refinements and clarifications those are mostly tightening up in way the guidelines will be applied to provide and tighter control more consistent active the needing and then tier one is editorial updates the kind of take the language ailing out of that and replaces that was the tier that was basically tier 3. >> tier one 3 towers i'll come to those and explain in detail and height increases within the phase one a corner location and along the perimeter streets.

>> the tier two changes advantages i'll go through those quickly signage the main change in addition to the signage that talks about new technology as a signage more around and leading up to 23450d when the d-4-ds were put together and messenger separate guidelines that separated residential and commercial because the project is mixed use and clarifications to the height and massing the some - minor changes to the street cross sections we'll align them more with san francisco standards for example an mid block lanes sometimes pedestrians use but sometimes fire access when the d-4-ds in 2010 didn't meet the minimum

standards for fire access and we've increased the block point as i said on the diagram the phasing of the first phase and the minor ones tier 3 when this project was conceived in 2010 a stadium and non-stadium that was cleaned up and james town that was incorporated that was covered by the market-rate developer reasonable person and a separate set of guidelines and smaller editorial the dotted the i's and crossed the t's and now the other way around. >> the candle stick point major phase one a reminder the scope and scale the project and a lot of the refinement in the d-4-ds document have come but

linking the design of this initiative with the d-4-d document the this is a major land use phase and what i'll point out the perimeter red line and this project refers to the red part of the railway center the coming together of the home plate and the third baseline one of the changes at home plate that's been envisioned as a home arts center the guidelines reflect the ability to have a bit more height to really give that corner prominence and what is first and third baseline the line the phasing line is moved out and makes that bigger there

was a thin line across the street we always wanted to be betsy carmichael amongst the center but now a substantial happening across the street with the block site and increase in size there are other related important related initiatives that go longs with this the extend the landscaping the extension of the urban design on gilmore think linked the community through the candle stick for the lands and the alice griffith and in addition to the community quarantined and the initial wedge park a major bus mall as well as the park space the building height i don't expect you to read the guidelines on this clouded area in red shows the area in which

the building height changes are being contemplated and this the performing arts building at the corner some additional design development so far that and we are looking to increase the height to one and 20 feet and provide for flexibility to accommodate the types of uses in there this is xhventh with a significant building at a significant public building at that corner the heights along ingress son and kearney this is moving from 55 feet to feet part of that has to do with with the height of the retail because the minimum height of the base the 2010 guidelines 12 feet is raised to 20 a portion is a taken up by trying to sure there is a

prominent retail face along the streets and it also allows the ability to have variation in height and flexibility in height one of the intents of the guidelines is allows the ability to have increased height on retail the ideas still to have a variety and character along both of the streets and here's another example where the flexibility to go to 85 feet allows for a higher unit and allows for an upper level to roof gardener and created a rich experience but has the notion of the face of the important streets the proposed tower relocation there are 3 that i'll refer to as specifically

tower g is the one that has drawn the most attention tower g was originally con accepted within the retail center the phasing the retail center and the phasing of the tower are not in sync the nature the prioritization of that to get vehicle assess to the tower the idea to move to the edge of walker and combine it the same location as the hotel that allows the and there is still that tower is not yes, he did. designed but allows flexibility to go after different market and lennar has conversations with the seniors the development having been approximately the

hotel and other marketed we feel that is a good move a good pragmatic move and a good move for phasing i'll talk about the implementation the other two towers are moving across that pedestrian view outside of the first phase some jumping across the pedestrian mid block break. >> the distance - the one tower this shows the distances 9. >> thank you, sir, your time is up. >> >> am i cut off. >> that's fine how many more slides do you have. >> i have r more slides and i'm sorry, i forgot about the 10 minute cut off. >> why not stop and bring up the public comment and commissioners may have

questions. >> you know what i - let's give jonas another three or four minutes. >> okay. my apologizes thank you you. >> can i go back to my screen. >> yes. >> thank you. >> so the 3 towers in question this is where they were in the 2010 document this is where they are in the 2016 document document today this and this puts all the towers into context that one tower is 5 hundred and some odd feet from the state park line the distances from 6 hundred to increase 6 or 40 feet if the park line it puts it into context of the other towers that

is an analysis looking at the impact and the middle one moving it and right hand shows if you change the orientation how to use the architecture all the guidelines encourage it kind of initiative to make sure that the interface between the park and buildings are appropriate and finally one view there is a panorama, of course, across the entire site this is the imperial acceptable from the south from the move to the tower there is this impact and the same thing from across from hunters point it is very minor in terms of it's impact virtually nothing and this shows there was one main view from the hill and from bayview hill that move significantly improves the view to the ocean

i won't go into the shadow comparisons the december shadows i won't go into that the state park was to be part of the area that is transformed to have an urban edge to this is some of the words from the policy document florida state parks and these are examples of areas where the interfacing a large park that continues to have a quiet or the proportion but part of an animated city where i'm from and that concludes my presentation. apologizes for the offer run. >> i forgot. >> thank you very much. >> that is something else from staff opening it up for public comme comment>> next speaker. >>

(calling names). >> game-changer commissioners my name is steve i'm the manager of the planning and design for california state park forces northern california and i'm here i appreciate the opportunity to speak today on behalf of the california state parks regarding the tower relocation within the candle stick point project california state parks didn't oppose the location of towers j and k and the inner park will be influences by large urban structures to an stent regarding the relocation of tower g we oppose this to the final eir for the following reasons first, the

relocation of tower g will is an adverse impact on the area of candle stick point state recreation as last port and the visitors this changes our location 0 will be consistent with the goals and guidelines of the 2012 plan that was approved by the california state parks and recession commission secondly, the 2015 tower g scenario is 8 towers higher than the standards that analysis was addressed earlier and has significantly more mass we're not obviously from the stadium redevelopment only location of the tower and lastly this location impacts the park visitors experience has as the space is a transition that began with the general plan

for the candle stick point recession area so to summarize the state parks objects to the relocations, however, optimistic about the enhanced parks and collaboration have been very positive we understand that being good neighbors it needed for the next 20 years to accomplish an experience for all of california can enjoy we looking forward to enhancing this relationship thank you for the opportunity those concerns if california stat parks i'm available to answer any questions. >> thank you very much. >> good afternoon commissioner president fong, commissioners and director rahaim my name is linda richmond long time bayview hunters point recipient and also the former chair of planning and

transportation for the committee under the san francisco redevelopment agency we spent decades working with lennar and the communities and my fellow colleagues will be speaking after me and trying to help to forefront the concept of that area earlier you were having over meeting ones the tsp the transportation be sustainability plan and one thing i was sitting there the lennar project at candle stick took all the matters of tsp indoctrination we kn - really looking at the plan you have right now given the fact it

started in 2010 all the opportunities to rise the area this is a mixed use project that is going to maximize transportation abilities, jobs just about everything housing that all of you are talking about here this is a minor project that has including the open space we are urging you because everyone is listening over commission is actually meeting instead of california the tsp as commissioner moore mentioned before you are the first one to be leading that and first one to be leading affordable housing in california even after the dissolution of the california development agrees you're on record of the leader not only in transportation in rail and major

vehement i hope all the misinformation you can be more aggressive i know what you're doing and part of the solution the state of california that is no other city comes close and they all have meeting the challenges that we have i want to give you the encouragement that is a minor project you have the community support we have the time plan and all others are yes, ma'am latin please pass this now and move on with the next phase thank you for your time. >> thank you. >> commissioner president fong i'm my company has the blessing of managing the construction of the assistance project with the shipyard in phase one and phase

two there's been a traumatic impact on minority and women and veteran owned businesses participate on the projects that are going on out there we would like to see this project continue to move forward because of all of the economic impact it is creating in the community and will continue to create in the community having said that, is important to understand that you have not yielded few by hundreds of local businesses from the area that are currently working and participating and supplying supplies and various services to this project and with this moving forward that can continue and grow by building capacity and experience 230s for those companies to continue to work in their community but citywide thank

you. >> good afternoon excuse me. commissioners, i had throat surgery but commissioner president fong and all the commissioners how can i say it i've been in hunters point since i was the younger stare in my 60s this project a lot of ambivalence about that candle stick point the advisory committee we've been there from the inception we've seen the process that has gone on in this study improvement and communication i want to just commend lennar and ocii for how you've allowed us input i see many changes the drawings many changes we have pushed for i

applaud lennar they had plans before and cock with them we remember not pleased with the way they were going and came back with a tremendous amount of input and very pleased to see the changes that have been made in terms of of the state park comment as i say i've been there i was there before we didn't care about state parks at all in the bayview and now all of a sudden with the progress and jobs everything that is created everybody is coming unfwlud and talking about the people from other parts of states coming in and having at beauty of looking at the state parkland there where were you 20 years ago when we were talking about state park

improvements and things like that let's move forward with that project and i understand that everybody has to have input in this issue, however, i think that is crucial this project moves forward and that the jobs the opportunity for small business and the overall improvement for this area continues to got rid of thank you very much and i urge to pass this resolution and let's continue to work thank you, commissioners. >> good afternoon commissioner president fong and commissioners i'm dr. veronica honeycutt from the shipyard you have heard from my colleague ms. bell the housing committee person and we've put in a lot of

time you know that in looking at this project that is the second time you've seen me in terms of this particular matter i also hope you are many receipt of my letter from the cca that indicated we have reviewed the information which has been presented by ocii, by lennar urban, and by the other individuals with whom we subcontract and looking at this from the subcommittee level at the at full session and understand the ramifications of the changes that have been - being proposed through this amendment in terms of the state park issue with the towers we understand that the state parks folks have been conciliatory partners and sure been examination of their

possessing of positioning of this tower you'll be able to come to some agreement in fact, we're insisting the state parks continue the conciliatory fashion i'll be clear about that we want forward movement we've done our job for the cca at the shipyard for 20 years making sure that that land was relavishing not continue to los angeles wish and people have an opportunity to remain we want to welcome the new people that had been in that area the city which will end up being a aide within the city and expect you to do whatever is moving forward we obviously approve the amendments and we seller and strongly urge you to do likewise thank you very much. >> is there any additional

public comment? >> on this item. >> okay not seeing any, public comment is closed. and commissioner moore. >> the plan is a strong plan has been a strong plan i think that the reiterate active qualify what we looking is a strong plan not falling apart when changes occur but itself over 7, 8, 9 to some changes and conditions i think that the level of detail by which it has been reproclaimed the firm i d i tom continues to lead the charge that is money the bank with credibility i think the move of two of the towers i think highly noticeable and most of across one question i like it mr. tom to - mr. tom

to speak a little bit more to what challenges state parks have present to you state parks is angle extremely important partner the composition of the stewardship and riveng the shoreline is powerful and gives the project credibility and a permanent edge i'm delighted about having the shoreline and parks not under the gentrificational support tom talk about some of the challenges which were property by the state and respond how proximity of the tower to the state parks edge the prospective of people wanting to be in the nature and taller buildings how have design guidelines shaping the tower been adopted in our change document i'd like to hear

a little bit more i understand we have both sides and really hear a convincing argument from you. >> sure the from a broad prospective the relationship with state parks has been very positive i know there is a recognition that the context is changing and becoming an urban policy and inner setting there was a lot of discussions of both the edges how the interface between the urn development and the park and the detail how that will be pedestrian focused and assessable and how the people living across the street from the park will contribute to the safety of the park eyes on the street a lot of detailed design the building to make sure that happens and the relationship from the broadest sense of the

urban design the extension of some of the aspect the urban design elements into the park and conversely back the wedge the meshing not just a hardline there is a softer line in terms of the bored and the tower design there is no difference the treatment and the consideration with respect to state parks and visitors as there is for someone walking through the development or lives the development a good design is good design is important it is pervasive through all aspects of the guidelines and the d-4-d from the broadest sense of the skyline and how it is into the detail of the towers and in particular, the because of the towers this particular tower in question is a series of towers

approximate distances the 6 hundred range this is nine hundred feet away but some unfortunate 6 hundred and a ban of two hundred and 3 that are within 70 or 80 feet of the elm all of those are deferring impacts the ones that have the most impacts are the closet and the impact is not the viewing of the tower but what happens with with the architecture of the base with the shaping those are the ones with the biggest impacts the ones away no absolutely no difference on tower g from the other towers that form that ring within that 4 to 6 hundred feet range away

from the park no impact whatsoever and quite frankly i really don't understand the siblths of this particular one relative to the other ones no question the view is different we tried to illustrate in the views the people look into a panoramic semis not a view that isolates one building you're looking from side to side so the impact the virtual impact of that tower is really- there's not a negative aspect part of shaping part the backdrop of that park and that backdrop when you try to look at other preferences of urban parks i think that is going to be a dramatic backdrop but it operationally is very different different from the examples we

tried to find the ones that showed urban interface and this one is actually unique the dominant interface is not to the towers but other parts showing significance towers those are strategical placed relative to views from the distances, the context with the bayview hill, the context how you see it from affair from the skyline of the city all those are important elements 90 none have been compromised and when i look at the changes from the original intent none of the full name principles have changed and so and in answer to our question i don't understand why this one particular tower is of significance it is part of a family of 12 that together form a composition that has many,

many layers and the towers are designed in one illustration you think the reaffirmed slightly change the orientation that reduces the impact of the views and change the architecture or the top thought how the tower is shaped and all the guidelines are all in under to encourage that to happen in fact, more than encourage they've tightened up easily to make it clear that is what the required and that level of design refinement is extremely important we're not there yet the guidelines will - >> i think for you to continue to keep in mind that the massing with the tower is how the groups with the others have not yielded changed and, in fact, it is better all towers individual towers with lower full grounds you'll not see the tower on its

own i'm comfortable with our explanation and gastrograd glad how you bring that sensitivity how you shape the appearance we're kr09 beyond the z of the project and harey way always another for ground 50 or 60 feet i'm glad you went through that that is a bigger level of confront indeed not a significant change maybe other reasons the state is concerned i don't believe has an direct impact on the park because we operate a completely different cone than looking at up to see the top of the building our eyes are at 5 he 6 floor level when we look at what is around us i'm

not concerned that's my personal aspirations you have a view from bayview park down across the way i regret that my thought towers shows j the outline the bridge line the far distances i always hoped that it was the planning ideal of the 60 and san jose and early 80s the surrounding hills that crowded the skyline with a 60 degree view whenever you stand you're breaking it with the tier with tower j that's my on personal feeling otherwise i'm very comfortable with our explanation of the plan and the one last question i have is are you seeing more the film and

arts centers it as been agree analog is a lower building are you using the metronome for that. >> quite frankly i'll have to let terra. >> quite honestly we expect the film to be much much more than a - there will be film festivals and talking to the commission about establishing an office truly an opportunity interest first-rate films it truly will be an arts center much, much more than a simple a movie theatre. >> i liked this it was not just about extending the city in

its most uncomprehensive way it is a great plan i support it. >> thank you. >> commissioner hillis. >> thank you a question i mean, i think i agree with in the folks from the state park the big change from a state park that rings a parking lot and stadium and ringing the neighborhood the change 2, 3, 4 height is imperial acceptable later on the design will not have angle impact i hope you all can kind of get beyond the issue and get issues that matter finer grain level how to assess the park and things like that this is much more important than a tower you see the distances in our presentation i don't think you touched when you talked about the 10 thousand square root versus the

alternative of lowering the heights because tightening up the building. >> that is one of the items an approach that was discussed and ultimately rejected certainly were not not encouraging it the planning department and they looked at the a slender building was more appropriate than a bigger building. >> i agree i'm glad that is where that landed and on the height and the smaller height increases like the ada the 65 feet to feet what we're used to seeing a 1 feet retail height sorry 45 foot building that has 5 story above a retail my concern when i saw that squeezing the retail but you

explained facts going the other way so to basically add one floor and get a more gracious not adding a floor but additional height to enable the retail to be at 20 feet you can still do 5 floors of residential the idea not to ann add an additional floor but have the ability to have the increase in height for retail i know with our discussion that was a more appropriate height if you look at the retailers in more detail is more predicament and anymore flexibility in terms of store design and creates a better streetscape and having that zone allows for the various to have a various of the - at the upper levels. >> okay. all right. i agree with commissioner moore i'm supportive of the changes and appreciate the discussion thank you. >> thank you.

>> commissioner johnson. >> thank you i appreciate it i think we've covered the mitts tick park and super in support of effort and moving forward but real quick the first one i noticed that some of the tower movement in this plan was - to improve access to the knowledge and one of the the proceeding d-4-d one of the issues because of the tower locations was street wide names to have access or fire, etc. to some of the fwoerz that were a little bit more inside of walker so my question is do those streets configurations have to remain now for the towers closer to the outer edge for better says no only one

tower project g it provides does provide assess which under the current design of the retail center makes it very challenging to do and also the phasing is out of sync with the phasing not resolved a separate project than the retail center so moving to the other side instead of the middle to get on with the initial phase. >> so the street dmrgsz will be remain as they were okay. >> and then real quick the second quell again, this is are still considered redevelopment so it is ant different than what we see i noticed one of the changes in tier one so add a health increase for ground floor to have ground level to be 20 feet high instead of 15 feet high with the planning

commission we go with that more than i care to admit and in soma they're saying they're putting that into residential rather than the intended ground level increases maybe staff from later than did you guys can you guys match the language in this d-4-d for what we have in other areas to preclude that is an issue and anticipate that. >> i think i can only answer it here we'll be specific for some cases planning code maybe i'm not entirely fume but how to interpret when was previously said but here's the how it is. >> commissioner antonini. >> yeah. he agree with the other commissioner, i on the

reciting of tower makes a lot of sense removing it by the 50 yard line to the middle of the stadium and up against the hill or jamestown so i think that is a less obtaining truthful if you were looking it from somewhere around the park land seeing this tower standing up by itself now blending in with the hill from a visual stand point it malice and even more stable groustable gro malice it is still one and 50 feet away it is negligibnegligi

there's plus rapid transit that will go along kearney and the continuation and jimbo bob jog to cross the bridge and appears on crisp pen and dead-ends into hunters point shipyard but this should be a continuous loop back out through cargo and all the streets and connected up with the third street rail you have a situation where you're not allowing car traffic over the bridge so everybody will be general obligation bond to take the bus to get there and reach the dead end so small business from san francisco by the t line goes all the way down and has to

make a circle to harding not a good plan as far as transit it is better to cut the corner and have a loop that allows people from the north and in a more x dish way it is easily to plan ahead of time than being built that way. >> commissioner vice president richards. >> a question for the gentleman from the state parks. >> so as i look at the visual and option one you're looking at head on into the bigger tower that would have been set back and you may not be able to see that from this point on page 18

the sliver of the park. >> i can defer to it a little bit but slightly to the left in that image and that's where this photo was taken that was part of the from the final eir visual analysis in 2010. >> the transition between urban and the park; correct? >> if you look at 3 image the fact that in 2010 that the original tower location was at or below that line of those towers and the existing condominiums and then with that moving forward and higher in elevation because it is moving up the hill much more of a visual effect. >> so the question this portion of park this smaller portion what is at programming

there and that's a good question that is a development the quiet areas one of the quiet areas of the park called last court not an impacted recessional area but only for a quiet respite for people that live the new development and the condominiums across the street and to be able to get over to a quiet area and separated and get you away from the intensity of an urban design and get out by the water. >> sure last question the option 2 we see here with the orientation and may be different kind of design and architecture that looks at a lot better what is our view on this option here. >> our impression of that it made a very minor change the mass but again, the whole effect was this is taller that is closer

and you'll have the impact of visual and the big difference not so much it is - this is a major change the original plan that was intended wherewith the towers were developed 24 was done after we figured where the towers were located. >> this is for staff at ocii the reason why we heard this we need the taller location changes we'll be couple of the retail from the building of the tweezer that is the reality of today versus when what the plan was in 2020 mr. 13450igd. >> the nature of the circulation of the interior of the retail center has changed we had vehicular assess on the

surface and now only pedestrian. >> i certainly understand the state parks concern when i saw the photo i thought it was not as calming as before and hit the experience of the park versus getting off the ground i'm vote yes when another motion it made i trust that mr. tom what work on option 2 maybe dial is back a little bit i wish that were the case to ask for the change of locations but we're working with reality i appreciate your comments and put my trust that the urban designer to get this better. >> commissioner moore and move to approve. >> second. >> commissioner antonini. >> yeah. he agree. >> commissioners, if there's

nothing further, we'll move on to there there is a motion and a second to approve that matter on that motion. >> commissioner antonini commissioner hillis per commissioner johnson commissioner moore commissioner vice president richards and commissioner president fong so moved, commissioners, that motion passes unanimously 6 to zero as place you on item 9 the mid block alley and roof deck legislation this is a planning amendment.

>> game-changer commission tina changing planning staff the the item before you our planning code amendment sections despite the multitude of planning code the ordinance only addressing two issues one mid block alley control and roof deck screens and closures one the alley controls only to the mixed use. >> downtown district and they require the mid block alley and the mixed use be at least 60 percent open to the sky in 2010 the board extend to the all mixed use and south of market free zoning district court the

60 percent qualification was not to the added building district and consistent with the mid block alley requirements this all the times where applicable mid block alley will be 50 percent open to the sky the amendment extend the mid block to 3 district the south of market transit district and the fulsome and the regional transit district because they control all the zoning district i'll pull ulcer up the mapcer up thu >> so what's showing no orange

where the existing and the zoning district that were adding to the controls to so on this page it is fulsome street a little bit difficult to read but the - the strip that runs east west is fulsome and the strip north-south is soma additional dp this the origin commercial district as well as the will fulsome and c p p the continuation of that. >> and then the final map is elsewhere where the controls currently apply but not alleged zoning district we're adding those controls to the section piece of legislation is roof deck screens and grocery store

may not screen mechanic equipment when encounter the urban design goals their controlled by the volumes of a maximum feet of 20 feet 20 feet can only cover 75 percent of the area as shown in the figure to enclosures 100 percent percent the height of the screen needs to be reduces by 20 feet and some are 60 feet that nate may not screen the mechanical equipment are not in with this design this covers the full area needs to be reduced in height the proposal this planning code amendment addresses to allow the roof deck screen to cover 100 percent of the rooftop this is only viable to the two design

review and it will have to meet other criteria in order to meat the planning code and general planning designs goal and objectives to accordinglyly that will not be castlely permitted the light and air for the and plains. >> the proposed amendment not change the mechanical permit on the roof only the screening and enclosure controls more change the permitted height and finally that includes other striking the zoning district that doesn't exist and references incorrect the department ask you adopt the resolution to consider proposal on or after march 2016 that concludes my presentation. i'm available to answer any questions and my staff architect is here to answer your questions

if you have any opening it up for public comment. >> not seeing any, public comment is closed. and commissioner vice president richards. >> move to approve. >> second. >> or initiate maybe and oh, sorry to initiate. >> thank you, commissioners commissioner antonini commissioner hillis commissioner johnson commissioner moore commissioner vice president richards and commissioner president fong so moved, commissioners, that motion passes unanimously 6 to zero and commissioners that places us on items 10 ab for the hyde street a conditional use authorization and the zoning administrator will consider a request for a variance commissioners you heard this at our regular meeting on

january 14, 2016, at a point after hearing and close public comment you continued by a vote of 6 to 1 commissioner president fong were up absent to you have to acknowledge you've seen the video. >> i've seen it. >> thank you very much commissioner. >> good afternoon excuse me. commissioner president fong and honorable members of the planning department department staff it is this question for a conditional use authorization to steady 50 feet in height in a down slopping lot hyde street by- and sutter street to the south and is located within an

rc by district the ada height and bulk district the project site was occupied by the 4 story building in 1914 and the contributing resource to the nob hill historic district the building was destroyed by fire and other structures were excuse me. resulting vacant lot notary republic not a non-contributor it involves the construction of that 45 penthouse and 5 story over basement 12 thousand gross square foot and provides 8 studio unit and one two bedroom fount for a total of 14 unit to 9 feet below grade to accommodate the basement level no off-street parking is available for this project is

requires conditional use authorization pursuant to the planning code to allow for a structure to exceed 50 feet even though the height and bulk allows for a taller structure with the subject property planning code nonetheless requires the conditional use authorization project includes a request are for a variance pursuant to the planning code requires active street frontals including residential uses they're considered tuff for more than 50 percent the from at the ground level features walk up ground unit for pedestrian assess at the sidewalk level it is only 25 tweet wide with residential unit on the ground floor but don't provide direct pedestrian assess january 14, 2016, the planning commission reviewed it and referred the item to the march

16 and the commission asked to the preliminary building to allow to the building to interact with the complex thought and asked the project sponsor to work with the planning department to lightwells on hyde street and the project sponsor has made the following changes and the project sponsor has done it by the following modifying the windows to a traditional style a new arrangement 100 percent code compliant and remove the bracket or knee brace and extend the parapet along the south side introduces the wood double hung windows for bay protections and on the rear yard facing the

projection and adding solid ceilings to the windows and open space on the roof deck and increasing the commonality by 33 percent and a 3 by 6 foot match lightwell upon hyde and merge the two studio units into a two bedroom, two bathroom from 14 and 15 since the hearings the department receives one letter of opposition that was in your packet and one additional letter from the same person was received by the department and that was distributed to you now the department finds it necessary and desirable as the community will do the following at 14 units for the housing stock and satisfactory the requirement of the affordable housing at a rate equal to 20

percent within a transit rich area and not provide onsite parking and a building inspection that compliments and not compete with the hotel and lastly to there the frontage with 1 no street tree and one bicycle space the department recommends approval due to the change the between and the eliminatioone o department recommends approval and it meets all the planning codes i'm happy to answer any questions project sponsor is here as well thank you. >> good afternoon commissioner

president fong and mr. sanchez and director rahaim i'm eileen as the gentleman said we were here in january and received comments we believe we've respond as best to the comments that the commissioners made and the gentleman is here to quam walk you through and per commissioner vice president richards request we have title samples and materials to show you, get a better sensed we did our best to respond if you're not satisfied approve that and not use your valuable time and let us come up with a better design if it is possible if that's the wish of the commission but 14 units important to add to the housing stock and improve the conditional use and ask mr. sanchez to please grant the variance for the tuff street

frontage thank you. >> hi mr. vice president mr. president, and mr. sanchez i'm scombrov the design architect for this project on the screen where's the screen. >> grateful on the screen you see our last submittal which we thought everyone was happy with after negotiating with the historic resource staff you found otherwise and sort of gave his a shopping list of things to change so the previous is on the left and the current on the right and stat at the top anyway starting at the top we've removed the

bracket we have extended the con in his seward we're limit to the property line the bays have been which was from square to the traditional base. >> and each the bays has a double-paned windows and fixed window in the middle with solid panels below the windows where we had glass before. >> i don't know if anybody is able to follow it the screen is smaller than i hoped the backward materials remain as before only with a slightly darker palate it is porcelain tile cut into stipulate with the wonderful brick believes in the neighborhood over there and then

at the bottom we have boy you can't even see this on the screen unfortunately, we uses a saline tile a around the oscar pistorius we have a special i'd like to frame to emphasize the frame this is more or less what the building will look like from across the street upwards next slide and down from the corner by sutter street next slide this is a panorama of the whole block showing you the diversity but the whole historic district they're not all the same on the left you see - the building on the left is red brick with triangle base and the next building a magnificent

building and our adjacent neighbor with stucco traditional bays and to the south another traditional building and our building picks up a lot of those materials next slide. >> this i wanted to show you the rear of the building we changed the windows to double hunks and the same palate and the panels below the this so it will be the same all the way around and go ahead go ahead one more slide on the fifth floor we added lightwells this is made a change the front two stereos so a two bedroom two bath units because of the location of those lightwells and with that, i'll stop right now

and look forward to answering our questions. >> opening it up for public comment bill quan. >> good afternoon, commissioners i'm bill quan the manager of light quan property, llc that owned the building at this point like to go over some of the main points in my marked second comments first, i appreciate point planning staff has recommended mentioning the lightwell and the project sponsor with hyde street has revised their plans accordingly as for the property windows there is 16 memo in the planning staff that as the windows were

destroyed the fire and replaced with in kind windows they can't be considered historic actually, i building that anything destroyed can't be made whole this should not be used a reason to protect the windows i find it trouble that someone can loss this to a site it orbited but property windows were allowed up into the 1980s when the board requires the lot line agreements that lot line is one years and made concrete we believe for various reasons the windows were put in there at the time of correction therefore we believe the windows should be protected and in summary i ask for the conditional use authorization be

deny as informing for the variance it is not required as the plans were revised still the proposed hyde street looks like the historic block with mediterranean or mission slash could not only design that concludes my remarks thank you. >> okay is there any additional public comment? >> okay not seeing any, public comment is closed. >> commissioner moore. >> i'm glad the commission sent this project back for it is coming back indeed in context the right building i believe that the back long building the intent of the street not trying to be nevertheless, but confronting size necks next to other buildings i'll ask the zoning administrator sanchez to

explain the issues about the south facing windows is there anything we need to know. >> thanks nothing in the planning code that would require that those windows be protected i think this is a design consideration that obviously as discretionary and the staff has made the recommendation a lightwell matching the lightwell but the other windows not with any planning code requirement for the windows to be maintained. >> thank you. your instruction we need to understand i need to understand the concern and the lightwell was overlooked and the switching of the large units for the front and smaller to the back it is how the base worked i present extending the cornice but that's the nature how that works i'm comfortable 2, 3, 4 supportive

of what is in front of us. >> i can move to approve but i i'm confused what the other fellow commissioners have to. >> go commissioner antonini. >> if that's a motion i'll second i think this is creatively redesigned to fit into the context in a much better way and shows new buildings what about contextual for st. francis hospital that was 3r0eb8 built 15 years ago and connecting contextual and i'm looking forward to this project being 34re9d and commissioner vice president richards one question for the gentlemen from 8:30 hyde i have it here he

apologize one second sorry. >> showing the existing condition pursue excuse me. i put a yellow sticker on it. >> a bear with me. >> so our building to the left as we're looking at it head on. >> that's correct that's correct. >> i saw from one of the existing conditions you have a series of several windows in a row on the it up floors. >> that's correct. >> how many windows are those human resources

1, 2, 3, 4, 5 maybe 6 windows. >> yes. >> and that's on the top floor. >> yes. >> so they'll have a lightwell the biggest one. >> they're two lightwells. >> two lightwells. >> okay. and these small windows are what rooms the bathrooms. >> the bathrooms yes. >> i'm unclear on the issue of over saying about them being historic is this building a contributor to the district. >> well, i building that they were constructed at the time the building was first constructed in 1916 or when we were constructed in 1916, of course, it got destroyed by the fire and - >> deserve i want to make sure i take into consideration that's not a character defining feature the building on the side.

>> no, i don't know if so this a historic argument in terms of preservation concerns as stating it is historic and originally constructed as part of this and equally should be maintained but we're saying we're not aware of legal requirement that require those windows to be maintained we looked at on a case by case basis but you look at what those windows face is it the only source of light for a bedroom or leadership and in this case a bathroom. >> i completely agree with the zoning administrator i apologize to you but i've had a property line window covered up in the last couple of years on my own property that leads to a bathroom this is two lightwells to preserve light for the bigger windows that were there before so i'm sorry that is kind of how it is going to be. >> thank you. >> thank you.

>> jonas we're ready for the question. >> second to approve that commissioner antonini. >> commissioner hillis commissioner johnson commissioner moore commissioner vice president richards and commissioner president fong so moved, commissioners, that motion passes unanimously zoning administrator, what say you? >> discovers and noting that is the variance for the ground floor active use. >> thank you, commissioners commissioner moore. >> it is understood that we are approving the project with the bay because two alternatives are - we're approving the one with the bay. >> the most recent simulation. >> submission there is the

same criteria and the bay. >> is that the seconder okay with the seconder. >> yeah. >> now it is clear it is one for one with the chandelier base. >> okay. that's clear. >> thank you, commissioners moving to items 11 ab at arkansas street a question for a documentation of finding and a large project authorization. >> good afternoon congresswoman and members of the commission kate planning staff you have before you a large project authorization for one hundred plus units with the ground floor cafe and 98 parking spaces and one plus bike parking

spaces their loebtd at the north inadequate corner arkansas dribble north of the jackson playground it is two existing industrial chairs buildings on the subject lot they were occupied by a fabric company the lafths includes four exceptions for rear yard and off-street loading compliance with the section is 5 the motion the package with regard to the rear yard it is a compatible amount of open space with the rear yard and not please be advised light and air for the adjacent proposals, however, seeking a expectation for the unions in addition the prong is the provpd off-street loading but a 45 feet loading zone on arkansas and the mix

all 41 of the two bedrooms are considered two bedrooms by the building code, however, an interpretation of the planning code that requires the bedrooms that are meeting the mixed use within the eastern neighborhoods plan to have exterior windows i'm available to talk about this if you have any conversation those are meeting the criteria the code that meets the open space that satisfied the accommodation of two ground floor courtyard and patios and artificial turf area and roof deck the project has elected to participate in the program and has committed to 20 percent of the units there are as condition of powerful 25 of the units will

remain as affordable units in addition the project is subject to the intrrmdz for additionally design standards the showcase square and potrero hill and several waterfront area plans it addresses the criteria and earth treatment the design and materials include exposed concrete, esteem, aluminum and glass that is the industrial character of the neighborhood the project was heard at the entertainment commission this occurred on march first, 2016 and additionally conditions i have a copy of the condition and the department ask they be added to the conditions of the project the department has 7 pieces of correspondence in opposition and 9 letters in support the majority of opposition is centered around the mixed use expectation and the loss of pdr the planning commission has adopted the findings pursuant to

the planning code section regarding the shadow on jackson playground on january 2016 the reply receptionist recommend that did planning commission find that the shadows cast by the proposed project on jackson plagued will not be adverse to the use of placard or park it meets the goals and objectives the plan to take the affordable housing with access within a walkable context the project is necessary and desirable and compatible with the surrounding neighborhood and meets the awe permissible code staff recommends that the commission make the required shadow findings with conditions and i have also the executed costa-hawkins for rental inclusionary housing and conditions for your review that

concludes my presentation. i'm available to answer any questions. >> thank you project sponsor please. >> good afternoon commissioner president and director rahaim and zoning administrator i would like to submit i have 23 more signatures and letters of support specifically addressing the bedroom configuration 8 copies and briefly i want to talk about martin building company to talk about their work in san francisco we're a local company i've been in san francisco for 25 years dedicated to high quality and highly designed projects on site

affordability and a strong integration with the immediate neighborhoods a couple of quick example of the plaza the closure of jessie street and the public place the renovation of the four historic buildings immediately abutting the plaza including the national register in the historic district those are some of the project we've performed these are before and after shots on mid plaza another interior this is a project we completed at the t at clearance and townsend we this was an active use at 78 townsend residential unit constructed within above an old envelope we had some of the interior shotsdz and we have a roof deck

and good outside spaces for the occupant and all the projects have good quality roof deck this is the potrero with interiors on tenth and mission that is the one minute overview and i turn this over to the architect to talk about the specifics. >> game-changer commissioners i'm chris i'm with b a r architects. >> so i'll walk us through through the sites some of the our thinking and the back alley disdain design it is located at the corner arkansas and 17th street on potrero hill neighborhood and i wanted to point out the sgrmdz that were recently passed a few items the way it was described the projects were to demonstrate an awareness of urban patterns and an awareness of neighborhood scale and

materials and a mod laugs large project of the knows those we strongly support and take into consideration on all the with work we do if you look at the map and we walked around the neighborhood that is an interesting shift in patterns along 17th street the areas in gray 17th street and some pieces to the west of jackson playground are characterized by large buildings simple building more stroilt whatever buildings and to the south it operationally is smaller scale potrero hill neighborhood it become important we thought about the design of our building here some of the neighbors especially to the north of the site a lot of one and two story simple warehouses the upper chiropractor and a series of three and four story building and taking the accuse not to try

to look at we're a hundred year-old building their simple and sing last year and bold and upper athletic napologic in a w >> north of the playground that is not often in san francisco we can design a project that looks like open space that is also a consideration the neighborhood as you can see looking back to the south west towards jack playground the site to the right as mentioned two existing building one story and two story a pretty large storage parking to the south along arkansas as you can see to the site to the right an interesting

building if you take note of the streetscape like large sycamore trees and parking this is looking to the north downtown you see the site right in the center so here's the design of our project so as i mentioned earlier thinking about the context we really our goal to create a building that is simple, san singular and contemporary, timeless not trendy and continually the park and the park views the building is a 5 story building a concrete building with a lot of glass as you can see the upper 3 floors the majority of floors are balconies with sliding doors so it slides open and trying to engage the park and outdoor and bring that inside outdoor connects into the units along the ground floor we looked

at the retail there is a retail tenant restaurant tenant all along arkansas and approximately 90 feet with the wood canopies and channel glass as well materials are the project the concrete frame is concrete exposed columns and concrete slab and glass and shadow glass and some courts in metal panels this is a view along arkansas so the view i mentioned you can see the head in parking so foe we've changed that to parallel parking looking at staff and pushing the bottom two floors three or four feet and introducing the landscaping and so the glass on the left as you can see a plan we've taken the head in parking and domineered it to

parallel parking taking over the parking space to get a landscape so we're incorporating the sycamore trees into a large place of stoops here you can see the views along the stoops and a section with the higher setback and a configuration walking there the building plan one below grade 40 parking spaces and other bike parking spaces the building plan with restaurant along 17th street to the private courtyards and a rooftop with solar panels and a rooftop with a play area and outdoor seating area. >> we want to spend a couple of minutes addressing this issue. >> you want to start or must

this is a bedroom that becomes one of the tops i can say the bedrooms are in our republic war for the last year's we've produced a basic design obviously their extremely appealing and you can help mitigate external noise e noise the bedroom area but the way we design it with large windows and living space into the bedrooms and they turned out to be appealing to all options if not options so this is a key component of that design and it is an multiple projects you've seen through the years. >> so show you a quick plan that on the rights another typical two bedroom unit so the

module is 20 feet wide and 40 feet deep this is one of the potrero launch a footprint and what you get i mean, we're not trying to get away with anything those are unit one thousand square feet a typical two bedrooms and two baths and 25 foot living and dining room space in this case floor to ceiling glass so we think that provide a far aspire living says that the bedrooms are intifshl and glazing and screening or sliding doors like an air to the units as mentioned it pushed a quieter atmosphere for the residents so alfaro i think those are really great unit we recently completed 45 laguna you

see the living space with the bedrooms pushed back it is liveable units i'll be happy to answer any questions you may have. >> thank you. >> opening it up for public comment. >> >> (calling names). >> hi t-boning my name is terry i'm here to support martin building family-friendly unit my partner and i have been living in the development on plaza that has a bedroom for the last

year's i want to convey it in ward bedrooms are part of comfortable urban life we love them the bedrooms provide us with noise sfrags the street noise with the perpetual sirens on the 5th of market we have a peaceful be brown bedroom and have a nice leap we're expecting a baby in july and will convert the bedroom into a nursery because of the peaceful environment it in bound bedrooms provide the windows that separates the bedroom from the living room allows us to control the amount of light into the bedroom without interfering with the natural light the living

space this will be crucial for us our lives our napping baby and happy with the verse tilt i support the bedrooms they are beautifully designed and properly designed and vital for our growing family thank you. >> thank you. next speaker. >> good afternoon, commissioners i'm president of the potrero boosters association i urge you to deny the minimum mixed use requested by the arkansas folks it is important to know what question is before you not whether or not the bedrooms satisfactory the eastern neighborhoods requirement to 40 percent of the units are two bedrooms or more the zoning administrator determined the eastern neighborhoods plan intend for a certain minimfraction to be - t

question is not whether it is by the urban design or outside the eastern neighborhoods plan or whatever jurisdictions think and spitting despite what you hear the yes not whether the department or you or i like the nested bedrooms but if they satisfy the ceding that makes clear all 5 criteria must be met first there must be exceptional or extraordinary circumstances that generally don't apply to other properties the 88 a arkansas is exceptional not it is perhaps the notice primitive property the eastern neighborhoods plan it fails to meet the first criteria second the code compliant in

light of the kickers must be a hardship we can't accurately analysis that requires the bedrooms created an unnecessary hardship in the floor plates make use of exterior wall space in this case the developer choose not to the expectation maybe to satisfy other proposals the eastern neighborhoods well, every other property we've looked has met or exceeded the requirements without nested bedrooms no right held by other properties to be preserved sin 88 arkansas fails the criteria the commission has no grounds to grant the exception and two others policy concerns and the public welfare and general harmony of the code we can have a discussion but grant american people expectation without the

first criteria being in place without an exceptional taste is not granting an exception in general and for policy reasons the code should be different that's a lotta's fountain earthquake option if their informing to be counted did legislative process to change the eastern neighborhoods plan than a public honest hearing since they don't meet the requirement please deny the expectation. >> thank you. next speaker. (calling names). >> good afternoon and thank you for your time i'm the executive directors of a nonprofit local nonprofit here in san francisco and we are work with single mothers to help move in their families out of poverty i'm here in support of 88 arkansas development for two main reasons one is that the

company that the supporter so including 20 percent bmr units we know that homelessness is a problem in our city not only for the people on the streets but for the families are actually homeless or living with other family members and having important affordable housing will allow those fathers and mothers although they have to win the lottery to get into housing, and, secondly, the nested bedrooms are the design of the nested bedrooms are very smart as a young mother and working with i don't know not mother to the help them and schedule in the bedrooms allow a family to put their child to bed and go back into the living room and allow the child to have a nice restful sleep which is so important for the adults and the

child so in sum we support the companies that have a social vein in our city because so many don't so thank you. >> thank you. next speaker, please. >> good afternoon commissioner president fong and commissioners my name is adrian fields represent with local 22 but stand fully in support of 88 arkansas the project sponsor has secured a signatory general contractors putting a lot of local carpenters to work the bottom line is it is going to provide housing for san franciscans we were lucky enough to actually, we took a tour this week of the launch we found out the nested bedroom do make sense it is not a problem and providing housing for san

franciscans we do need a place to live and do want good jobs we think this project merits that that is a good idea and we ask you support it also thank you. >> hi my name is austin hunter we're also in support of 88 arkansas the reality this project will move one and 27 units 20 percent are affordable that's the main goal this commission some support you've heard the developer speak those nested bedrooms work for the families and work for the neighborhoods the main goal right now to build for housing that's what we should be doing so move in favor of 88 arkansas.

>> good afternoon commissioners i'm guaranteeing from friends of jackson park this is directly across the street from this development and nested bedrooms seems to be the topic of the afternoon i went to open house on tuesday to refamiliarize myself and as a representative of the friends of jackson we can't support the nested bedroom expect not because of the factors we've heard to last year a last week but no egress for kids if you put your families to the outside in the case of fires or emergencies one door but not outside and that's the developer knows we feel this way that being said we want to figure out townhouse how to pack

jackson park a wonderful new spaces for everyone i'm happy to report we're moving with that and i feel confidence they will follow the remediation requests and hope to pack that one, the contingencies they've asked for and we're pursuing an in kind with them and that to be a condition upon approval thank you. >> good afternoon, commissioners and members of the board niechz a natalie i'm a residence owner for the past 8 nature years at plaza one of the martin builders projects i'm here to express my complete so forth for 88

arkansas street and for the well-designed nested bedrooms for over 2 1/2 years we served for the modern dwellings and found it with martin unlike many of the cookie cutter we toured braupd we find the layout of the project to be stunning, thoughtful and most fundamental for city living we were sold on the aesthetics and layist the nested in bound bedroom first our bedroom and then our guest bedroom and doubling as a baby nursery because it is setback from the exterior walls it is a peaceful interpreted noise there is constant noise on the streets so having a quiet nested bedroom

is a huge asset for city living it has two oversized doors on the front that has stained glass panels and allow plenty of light to enter the bedroom r bedroom we installed black curtains for the babies nap time we got plenty of enlightenment since the quality of the windows in the condo units by the martin building company allows the living room and kitchen hears to be situated in a present and invite space and tampering the natural daytime and allows a spacial plan we entertain often and greatly enjoy the life-threatening and kitchen when guests enter our home they

fall in love with our homes i strongly support martin 88 arkansas and nested in bound homes and supportive them cycling thank you for your time thank you. >> hi laura clark i had the privilege of living in an agreement with a nested bedroom previously he lived in a converted what i shall in brooklyn for a while that was only semi converted a fantastic time we have wonderful the bedrooms with windows that look at other apartments and was a fun fantastic place to live and far better than not having a place to live i think when you

are considering those things that is a fun and wonderful place to live this is not necessarily our job to make the judgment about whether or not this is someplace that someone would want to live i can verify i wanted to live there this was a wonderful place it was available to me when i was a young person in need of housing in an expensive city with the experience of other yoipg people have as well as families and all the people that needs to live the city it provides 20 percent favorable and should continue to demand projects with this level of affordability it adds one and 26 units of vitally needed housing to the city that is a fantastic project and as someone that enjoyed every once in a while to say hey guy is dinner

ready thank you very much. >> good afternoon my name is john i'm in supplemental support of the project i'm the owner of a restaurant i look forward to opening any second restaurant others 88 arkansas and martin asked for any participation and i'm excit i'm excited a frabl can't understand the resistance i don't live in a space but seems like i can see the argument against it but the martin track record as a believed is price teen and it is aesthetically mr. teague's and creates living spaces for everyone the two building there now are

contributing and anything that stands the way of those believes is short sided and missing the point i'm looking forward to that. >> good-looking food truck by way of. >> next speakerf. >> next speaker. >> next speaker. >> next speaker (calling names). >> good afternoon, commissioners rob pool speaking on the three hundred businesses organizations of members thank you for your time and this project pretty much hits home with our guidelines the eastern neighborhoods plans and underutilized plans with ground floor retail and 6th street it operationally is a major corridor with high density housing with 20 percent onsite bmr's with the tax credits everyone the room can support

the car parking radio is less we want to see one bike parking space per bedroom this is not two common for projects the city and work well the community and talking about what they're doing in question the ground floor is terrific particularly along 12r50er9 with the generous wide open sidewalks that everyone in the neighborhood enjoys our members agree with the roll call and the size has a good chances to complete or the nested bedroom is you know built all over the city we have done tours and work fine and have good density we have no objection to it they're very liveable if they're well designed their liveable and this is what

matters we hope you support this project today thank you for your time. >> excuse me. can we get the level device turned off please. >> good afternoon. i'm a consultant in san francisco and worked on several the martin company building projects and earlier this week we came out to do a noise level analysis versus the bedroom as trucks went by basically the bedrooms are 15 decimals quieter than the neighborhood i will in the castro a bunch the rooms you use them we have a living room with a pocket to the par last year, i live in a nested bedroom it is great we close the pocket doors

if i'm sick or my wife is sick or ii sleep on the couch those work very, very well. >> good afternoon, commissioners mary elias i sent you the letters earlier i'm read into the record we oppose the 88 arkansas project that is currently configured and request a continuous please send this back to the developer to fix the flaw design please from potrero hill and the next door jobs those spaces hold in one of the most stable places in town it has many uses like residents and single-family to multi units and

major distribution centers and art and design studios media producers and wholesale and high value entertainment i'm sorry venues community centers and gardens and educational institutions there is has been the turnover the neighborhood making that one of the most stable in the city if necrexecutive summer is a statement on page 10 the proposed project will have unavailable impasse on land use some may consider losing 25 thousand plus square feet of existing presidio is significant but we do not we're urge this commission to require the preservation of the existing pdr square footage on the ground floor level potrero has a successful community that

should be preserved in the 17th street coordinator is part of the neighborhood this plan needs for work please does not pass this one as it is now i'm going to also add that to my experience that seems like a lot of retail that is entry in the city and the approves or disapproves we're using and the pdr is where the demand is right now so it will really appreciate over consideration for not allowing any more loss of pdr and in this case it looks you can add square footage of pdrs since you have a larger ground floor than right now it is part of the parking lot if you keep pdr on the ground floor or some pdr on the ground floor and not turn it all into retail that will make a lot of people happy

i want to thank the department for doing a great job we complained the website was impossible to read and roadway that is work very well our department did a great job and i'm suggesting to the mta they do a job like to make it more that useful for everyone's thank yo bye. >> alison we concerned as the city prioritized housing you do it at the expense of affirmatives neighborhood we've maxed auto with the showcase

square potrero hill area plan in addition, we're looking at hundreds more the terrace rebuild thais hours over 10 thousand new residence doubling the population in our neighborhoods with thousand coming to dog patch and pier 70 i think that is safe to is we're doing more than argue fair share to house the population the agreements was to insure the development mets the affordability and unit size and number of bedrooms and community services and neighborhood amenities to create a high quality of life for individuals and families because it is right across the street from jackson park and close to several schools 88 arkansas officer a unique opportunity for families friendly housing unfortunately, this to count bedrooms without exterior windows is 10 percent of the windows will be designed with families in mind and in a

city with the lowest percentage of children the country in a neighborhood that has massive levels of development shouldn't we be doing ever to stop that now you're asking to encourage them to stay not only will this be amiss opportunity for family-friendly hours at 88 arkansas it set a precedent foreign developers who want to maximize profits secondly, this project will displace 25 thousand plus square feet of commercial space and rap replace that with the development 97 percent residential how can this be seriously considered mixed use and building this project will require the removal of 16 feet

of highly contaminated soil with the heath of children residents and workers the area we ask you include those special conditions of approval to assure the safe removal of toxic materials thank you. >> okay. any on t other gene public comment. >> sorry shawn and alison spoke. >> good afternoon commissioners i'm shawn i'm a potrero recipient on arkansas street i ask you to reject this on 88 arkansas street municipality i've come in with my neighbors asking you to

halt housing due to the cumulative negative impacts to potrero hill we pleaded you with over and over to please focus on appropriate developments in the promised benefits of open space and parks and recession and transportation before cloning more and more residents nothing will i boxy over built housing development luxury priced recipient in our fragile neighborhood i want to amplify our concerns your planning commission that continuing to ignore the eastern neighborhoods neighborhood plan adopted in 2008, i understand what the planners routing ignore the potrero hill major concerns and favor of the big money developers that are destabilizing and ruining our

neighborhood we ask you to reject first, the cumulative impacts we are ground floor for massive over development occurring all at once over the past year the commission has accelerated it's approval and the years of divestment and continuation the city is crying they don't have the open space now an obsolete from that can't report more residents at the time second traffic gridlock one year after the sfgh hospital the march 11 this place is huge and this brings up mission bay we have at explosion of vehicle traffic to unacceptable gridlock open mariposa and 17th street and 7th street between coastline

and the service center and the existing combats we are existing has a huge impact they're closing the streets almost all the time ami i'd like to express the concerns of the toxic soil and have a much time to speak but also displacement of pdr industrial businesses this project will replace and will be blocked public from the park if downtown and shadow objection i urge the commission to halt the portfolio of this and all new developments until we have time to understand the impacts of cumulative development. >> hi there i'm drew a neighbor i've lived on the two

hundred and three hundred block arkansas for 15 years so consider myself one of the new neighbors a wonderful neighborhood i have two daughters 9 and 5 and it is really an ideal neighborhood i'm a heavy users of jackson park and love the fabric of the neighborhood i like to see the density and the project at that location i think that will be first of all, beautifully built concrete structure i think that as part of neighborhood i'm much feel like our neighbors we need more transportation but feel like we probably need to do our part and add density where that belongs to walkable places i have to ride my bike more but i feel

like this is the place you you know adding for density around the park plenty of parking make sense but want to talk about looked a couple of projects that the martin building company has built i think that the unit themselves i've looked at a couple we live many a somewhat bedroom and two bath those units i think that is wonderful he's pulled the bedrooms off the window line at least one of the bedroom like that and makes that wide open liveable unit and then that second bedroom is absent quieter that's what i want in the bedrooms the evening i don't understand the issues around the unit mix that looks like a neat mix of two bedrooms and one bedrooms i looked what he built

befo before i wanted to be look at after a in that area it is sketchy at night walking through there so there is a segment of the neighborhood that are existed about the density by looking forward to more open space and transportation as well so in any event, i wanted to voice the neighbors that couldn't be here to support it. >> thank you. >> thank you. next speaker, please. >> hello, i'm judith from bernal heights i have a letter from an actual neighbor taylor who lives on arkansas and i actually our dates are friends

we harangue out in jackson playgrounds i didn't know how she felt about the project but fortunately she has a wonderful son goes to a public in potrero hill and she has to go and pick up her daughter a middle school eerie want to talk about her letter which basically focused on the developer basically taking for his project use things that are now enjoyed by the public like parking spaces and i as she does feel - very stronger about the importance of having off-street great loading zones it is critical for safety

i think all of you recognize when you drive around the city that there are cars which are blocking bike paths and people then have to go around on that bike path and 17th street is slated to be a bike path suppose to connect to the blue way trail to undermine the viability of the bic path is really a pity and i think that she obviously needs parking on arkansas street to remain to get her kid up the hill that would be a long walk by her daughter and transportation she's interested the area of toxics that is critical this project deal with tropics and interested in (inaudible) if i don't go to jackson playground

this is the playground that is the other play fields the neighborhood right next to the homeless village all people living in caesar chavez the basketball that was used last night to ball games going on 9:30 we need play space and the parks to be honored. >> the other thing is this morning i basically was promoted by the conduct of this developer to call for a 0 voluntary code of conduct how they conduct themselves in community meetings thank you. >> hello commissioner 101 kelly vice president of the

boosters i'm backing up some of the comments by the president of the association earlier commissioners i had a difficult childhood i grew up in bedrooms with windows the windows didn't make my childhood miserable as other folks talked about exterior bedrooms were fine with a great time there is no relevant of this conversation we're not here to discuss the abstract exteriors of the bedrooms but certainly on four or five people in the room were here during the creation of eastern neighborhoods plan and two of them were commissioners but the code was written for the eastern neighborhoods code for a reason a lot of family housing would be and the dine for families friendly housing we wanted to make sure we had family-friendly

housing and we had this the same details very few got into this code but this did meeting the minimal project and if you want to amend that how the eastern neighborhoods plan has been clear about 40 percent two bedroom requirements and what those two bedrooms are about an exception to the code that expectation had a 5 bars in order to grant this expectation this is a new project you can't create and variance on the vacant site so it is - it is hard to justifies the way you have to grants an exception for the site if you do that think about the precedence you're setting if that's the case other projects want to do this kind of thing

and what damage to the family-friendly housing if you establish this this is the first expectation and not the last if you want to reopen the eastern neighborhoods plan please let us know the boosters we have 7 plans and had them for seven years and the one thing about the design standards in place until permanent design standards are permitted we had to the go to the board of supervisors so this developer and other developers want to reopen that conversation how to handle bedrooms the eastern neighborhoods neighborhood plans through legislation you also have a problem you know conspires no surprise that the neighborhoods mistrust the agency and this commission they think they do things for developers and not for the neighborhoods please don't make that mistake by granting

expectation you don't have the authority to grant thank you. >> is there any additional public comment? >> not seeing any, public comment is closed. >> commissioner antonini this on a excellent project and it's amazing there is resistance first of all, a corner lot 20 percent affordable onsite and next the issue about the pdrs well the owner of that land who was a pdrs company sold the project property and relocating to another part of san francisco still in san francisco a business decision and this was available for a brown but before a rush for a pdr use they probably would have s