and sales experience to our guys andfrancisco planning commission regular hearing for thursday, september 8, 2016, welcome back commissioners, i trust you enjoyed your recessed i'd like to remind the members of the audience that the commission does not tolerate disruptions of any kind. please silence any devices that may sound off during the 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 hillis commissioner johnson and commissioner moore >> commissioners first is consideration for items proposed for continuance item one1 cashmere street conditional use authorization and is proposed until

september and case no. two at the market street an appeal of a preliminary in relationgo negative declaration and next at the townsend street conditional use authorization is proposed. continuance until november 10, 2016, and item 4 for case underscore two for chair wienerier the discretionary review authorization have been withdrawn the zoning administrator will consider the variance it remains on the agenda during our recess and infuriating under the consent calendar item 5 for case you 2016 at van ness avenue conditional use authorization we've received a request from members of the

public and now from the pertaining to continue to september 29, 2016, and under the discretionary review authorization calendar i'm pleased to announce that item number 21 at he vermont street discretionary review that has been withdrawn i have no other items proposed for continuance and i have no speaker cards. >> any public comment on the items proposed for continuance okay not seeing any, public comment is closed. >> commissioner moore. >> i ask that item 20 and b be turned because of submittal is incomplete for us to properly consider this project for the appellant not following for the commission

to look at no photos or buildings sections no property depiction of juan property and the modification of the project this project fails to meet the standards as so forth in the plans submittal guidelines i ask for you to continue. >> second. >> is that a motion to continue all other items as proposed as well as 20 ab or just 20 ab. >> that's 20 ab i'm obviously supporting the continuance included those as item 25 and asking for adding 20 ab. >> second. >> we will need a date for items 20 ab maybe accepted 29 with the joint meeting with rec and park has been

cancelled and opened up that date and that's fine by me. >> commissioner johnson. >> i'll make a motion to (inaudible) so say proposed continue items 2, 3, 4, 5, 20 ab and 21. >> as proposed. >> thank you 21 is withdrawn. >> sorry not 21. >> thank you, commissioners on that a motion to continue as proposed commissioner bobby wilson commissioner hillis so no not about 20 ab i'll rather hear that item. >> commissioner johnson. >> commissioner moore. >> commissioner vice president richards and commissioner president fong so moved, commissioners, that motion 4 to one with

commissioner hillis voting against commissioners under our cds exceptional or extraordinary all matters listed hereunder constitute a consent calendar, are considered to be routine and may be acted upon by a single roll call vote of the commission. there will be no separate discussion of these items unless a member of the commission, the public, or staff so requests in which event the matter shall be removed from the consent calendar and considered as a separate item at this or a future hearing. you now on have the one item number 6 cu at the beal street conditional use authorization. >> okay. any public comment on the items on the consent calendar. >> not seeing any, public comment public comment is closed. commissioner moore. >> move to approve second. >> thank you, commissioners on that motion to approve item 6 under consent commissioner hillis

commissioner johnson commissioner moore. >> commissioner vice president richards and commissioner president fong so moved, commissioners, that motion unanimously 5 to zero and places us under commission matters item 77 consideration of draft minutes for august 4th and 112016 i received one correction from the member of the public that dully noted on there the minutes for august 4th under the discretionary review authorization calendar item 15 for russel street the action item number 3 so indicate setback the top floor one and a half innovate not inches. >> commissioner moore. >> you move to approve together with the modifications as read into the record. >> second. >> thank you, commissioners then on the motion to adapt

the minutes for august 4th and 11 as corrected commissioner hillis commissioner johnson. >> commissioner moore. >> commissioner vice president richards and commissioner president fong. >> so moved, commissioners, that motion passes unanimously 5 to zero. >> commissioners that places us in under item 8 excuse me - commissioners, comments or questions. >> commissioner vice president richards. >> a couple of things we were gone 4 weeks a welcome break we added the fist thursdays next year's i'd like to have a break if it permits, however, take on the labor day this is in january or december just wanted to say this is my second year on the commission as of this meeting and haven't missed that meeting i'm having too much fun it is 2 years. >> two things a hundred

things i could have brought up i've read in the chronicle on wednesday august 31st there was an article on high rents in the alameda health department and doctor said that hypertension with increased rent associated stress and cost depression and schizophrenia by the health department of old we've talked about with that and the stress of not knowing you'll have a house to live in next month or leave the city is cowgirls u causing health problem and an article in the negotiate time in terms of losing their legacy businesses and loot negotiate stores you can buy in new

york they'll going out of business and struggling so happening all over thanks glad to be back. >> commissioner moore. >> presenter commissioner vice president richards companionship commenting on ts the extension so appreciate that and looking forward to seeing us change the rules in regards to next year i want to speak about the request that is dawning on me i'd like to see the department work with the commission on compiling a list of small institutions their imp and the gross he projections we tweak small institutions and solicitedettled cases but

that particular thought kind of jogsd any mind the cumulative effect of a lot of small things in the ends all amount to a big thing many of the small institutions has 200 plus people gold for a longer than or short tdm and we need to track that relative to the legislation this was introduced by supervisor peskin regarding looking at student housing and imp improvements to address the issues i think this came to me did not i was having a quick coffee with commissioner vice president richards and charged about that and i think this is a perfect opportunity for the department all of us to be prepared to look at the next level of impact i'm very interested to see what is suggested in supervisor peskin in supervisor peskin

legislation to come forward and talked about that has a professional for the imps don't give the department enough the evidence will then show or unnecessary enough guiding force to help make them equal amongst each other for the city to deal with the institutions and that's a positive encouraging comment rather than a negative comment otherwise that's my comment for today. >> commissioners fuminga few weeks ago drourments. >> thank you joan'snas and commissioners hope you had a great break he wanted to take a moment to rewelcome someone into the department peter it has come back to work part time as the manager of transportation plan most of you know peter well in

the city for over 30 years and retired last july (laughter) but couldn't resist us so just byword of some budged peter worked with mta where he was the prierlg the initiatives program and the liaison from sfmta and the office of economic workforce development prior worked on urban design and related issues with bart and before that with the ta but more importantly and early in his a access peter worked with the planning department an architecture assistant in the transportation planning group and the preliminary thorough of the then transportation element that was updated at this time so we are very pleased to have peter back a backward in architecture and

planning from cal poly and san jose state and got in san francisco for 3 2 years pleased to have him help us with the transportation plan we are managing with our ta and mta and i think that peter will be with us foyer 6 or 7 months to make a transition to - 9 months peter welcome back. >> would you like to say your 8 nature months away from retirement. >> again. >> it was easy to find my way back to the microphone i'd like to be back very much a full circle criteria by the way, good afternoon commissioner president fong and commissioner the last big project for the planning department was the update of the transportation - master

plan good afternoon common sense and staff the case is an approved the bus school for bus and marketing and technology through france and expand to other parts of shanghai and san francisco san francisco program an intended as a study abroad discretionary review any student to study for a period if 10 days up to 10 weeks

and it about expose the students to american culture are the toolbox industries and having 6 to 8 sessions between 20 and 80 students parting in each the number of planters is expected to vary within the range and the school didn't own any property and leases 61 square feet of space on the floor within the c-3 their entity e inevitable to file a master plan and high hire additional staff and participation is open to any boulder students and to find their lodging during the stay the department has no public comment and no action required of our the

commission has discretion discretion to hold the imp and this that concludes my presentation. and i'm available to answer any questions. >> okay opening it up for public comment ronald morris i'm sorry project manager. >> iemz'm sorry, i'm sorry are you with the project sponsor come on up sorry. >> commissioner thank you very much for allowing me to speak about the impact of our campus here we set up this campus and started the program in january of 2016 we have had 40 students come for a 10-day project and two sessions of 10 weeks just under thirty students and andrew did a

fine job founded in 1925 and in london and now here they are what we consider to be satellite campuses and students are getting a international dimension and a strong focus is come back r came back with practitioners in the public sector or in the public sector and for students that have emersed session and all i can say that so for the students are absolutely enthusiastic about the experience and leave here and become ambassadors for san francisco all around europe thank you. >> i'll city for any questions. >> stick around and open up for public comment now and

calling ron morris i'm sorry, i got it all (laughter). >> first. >> do it again, i was wording r on one hand. >> any public comment on this item? okay not seeing any, public comment is closed. and commissioner moore. >> i'm of those institutions and saw the students having the ability to dive into an international exposures given the world is one practice and having said that, comment to you my point is reminding the correct that the discussion i asked for is part of a our work list lock conceal at the cumulative number of smaller constitution for a guidance

including mr. albert mentioned earlier thank you au . >> thank you. >> fumingat this time, members of the public may address the commission on items of interest to the public that are within the subject matter jurisdiction of the commission except agenda items. with respect to agenda items, your opportunity to address the commission will be afforded when the item is reached in the meeting. each member of the public may address the commission up to 3 minutes. this section is not supposed to exceed 15 minutes i have seller speaker cards. >> okay. (calling names) >> good afternoon and

welcome back from well deserved vacation this testimony pertains to other neighborhoods on initial comments on august from tthe your own guidelines and the 21st 2016 draft promised neighbors a 5-month period of neighborhood u d g draft subcontractor and the fundamental to those guidelines is the idea this good neighbors make great neighborhood and great neighborhoods make good grades please work from the neighborhoods want our pride month of commentary and

public outreach and the community and the neighborhood organizations must be con ductduktd planning outreach to involve bio last night engagement between the decision makers and the staff and local land use groups additionally they're going to propose the comments needs to be expended as there's been insufficient time to conduct and incorporate public outreach into the n u d c draft brother the planning commission, planning department target gate of october '80 we're asking for the indefinite deferral or extension of final consideration of the u d g's

until the 2017 xenld residential guidelines has bn been property and embedded which should occur communicating curling with the perspective unusual guidelines and not happen without the interval corporation the results is the creation of the january 21st u d g executive summary and the guidelines themselves the neighborhoods can't tell whether they are intended to apply to citywide including the n r zones district or in just mixed use or other places as well and whether

or not there are intended to replace the existing your own guidelines element thank you very much. >> next speaker, please. >> and folks that have called or have speaker cards if you want to line up on this side make use of 15 minutes. >> good afternoon commissioner my name is lisa i'm the president of the liability hill neighborhood association and speaking as a concerned resident since any board has not taken a position on this matter we're concerned that the we only heard about the document draft your own guidelines and by happen stance we were under the envision the

commission will revitalize the guidelines roughly around now in the fall and became aware this entirely new document had been drafted and that caused a serious concern for us particularly because we were promised 5 months in the draft document it talks about public outreach and review from february to june of this past year and none of which occurred the urban design guidelines cantonese language that maybe the over arching review document in all of districts for all buildings and this raise he pretty serious concerns for us in

the low, low density liability hill is a historic district and this really causes some concern so we would ask particularly that you postpone the target date of adoption is october it 22 for the your own design guidelines until the public commentpublic outreach and has to be accomplishments together and not one ahead of the other thank you. common sense and commissioner good afternoon aim matt i a co-founder of the neighborhood counsel and a 34 resident of city last month the noah valley and the telegraph hill submit correspondence to you and

the planning staff advising of the serious concerns with the roll out for the guidelines and two nights ago we hosted a community meeting notifying other organizations to share their concerns they might have one of the things perhaps the most important for the scent that these the adaptation of urban guidelines so be approved the planning department pro tem's promised the community involvement in an external review and the simple fact that has not happened and perhaps the more importantly was the proposed relationship of the urban guidelines and under this proposal it appears that the residential george washington high school will be marginalized subordinate to the other

guidelines and most important tool for the well-being scale will be rented omnipotent i point out to the case report we since then were told the guidelines might i'm quoting more modest projects it assertion was disconcerting the noah valley and the fellow organization replacing urge to move the inner guidelines to next spring that allows for the 5 processed of the external review for the adoption of the urban design guidelines and strengthened residential guidelines ultimately leading to more cohesive public policy thank you. >> a couple of items i'd like to distribute to the commissioners if i could

please thank you very, very much i'm stan the president of the telegraph hill twitters and here to talk about the urban guidelines the most important guidelines to come before you october 20th for adoption over a month from now in january, the as you heard the planning department skeleton a 5-month process and external review, however, here we have with the current draft without any outreach to the communities and organizations i'm joined. q by a number of organizations and colleagues from around the city to make sure that outreach occurs that the results are incorporated under the wise draft about you before you consider their adaptation and one of the reasons some of the their talked about in the letter that are distributed a

couple of initial reasons not only consultation for the community and neighborhood organizations but second the current craft is not resisting the policies third too many of the examples that are in the guiles of the modern highly your honor, in his design not representative of the character and and i thought of residential neighborhoods throughout the city so not suited for design review fourth the design the craft is incomplete and prematurity and not having a full implication with the residential guidelines i understand as much as a year away and fist in the guidelines are written can be there cut by a waiver from the staff so we you, please please, please assure that

the outreach and community organizations occurs revised and recirculated the draft incorporating the elements and bring it back allowing the time for public comment and because that will take longer than october 20th please extend the deadline until it is done i think all of us look forward to working with you on this process to make that very, very important step as discussed we all preserve thank you very much? >> good afternoon and welcome back my name is paul wormer a resident of telegraph hill dweerlz a delegate for tsthe coalition for san francisco neighborhood i want to

amplify one point and i'm referring to the narratives of the executive summary if the january 21st meeting of the commission in that executive summary it is afghanistan big as to the raelreal premisecy or lack of premisecy for the existing design element we have as you may know already urban design and urn destine section to the general plan and an existing residential element in the memorandum there is a reference to the new guidelines being sort of preempting what may be part of general plan it just

ambiguous so others have requested and i'll request the staff tells you specifically where the hierarchy of the general plan those guidelines will fit first of all, are they to be relative to all neighborhoods including our neighborhood capital our neighborhood or only going to be relative to mixed use or transient districts that's an important point and given heart burn to people not sure of the thank you and e cigarette e secondly, where in the hierarchy of elements is this: are those guidelines to be are those mark farrell guidelines of the department which are not part of general plan in which case what kind of of a review case to the

implementation or the cooperation secondly, if they are to be part of general plan where are they to be in the hierarchy and then feinstein where in the hierarchy have - will this plan and the new residential plan be to each other none of that is made clear and those points are important points to be clarified in those hopefully will be clarified soon thank you for your time. >> good afternoon, commissioners well-being from our hiatus i'll request in the sunshine ordinance that one and 50 words have smooths the hierarchy in relation to the general plan and in relation to the prop m an unclear and come format needs to bto be

examined and - relationship to the existing residential guidelines needs to be clarified it is important to get this right those are also included in the article 7 legislation that you will voted on october 13th the waiver provocations to say they don't have to apply begs the question where write them deleted and requests further postponement for all other public members and i submit thank you au. >> my name is marvin and i appear to ask really the commissioners for some information about the status of gil kelly the person that is leaving as planning director of the commission and the nature of my

interest in the status stems if his duties on the sea level rise issues that have been recently the subject of a great deal of of con controversy and interest any interest is that of a private citizen so and i ask basically, i agree that he's taking his job as commissioner in the city of having an cover starting september 15th i'm assuming his status will terminate sometime after that and are you in a position to tell me who will succeed him as planning director and who the deputy pricilla chan director has been and finally the question if as a private simulate i'm interested in the issue of the sea level rise can i look to in the planning department after

commissioner planning director loaves and get information about the sea level rise issue. >> maybe if i could protocol gill was the director of citywide planning and his last day was friday and i didn't say mean to diminish. >> but for the public school record i'm not leaving the department as of yes, but maya angelou gil co-sponsored and his position with the department taerl in the hands of adam but i'll give you the information with the sea level rise. >> thank you very much. >> surely. >> edward mason like to submit for our consideration

an editorial in the newspaper in the park that discussed the facebook expansion and a regional vision and facebook will build 275 office buildings important 9 thousand plus square feet and another hotel for more square feet with the expansion will add 6 thousand 5 hundred employees to the current 7 thousand plus and housing study opportunity by facebook realized that only 18 current facebook employees in bat out of hell heaven and others - it conducted that 65 employees will have impact on the lemon housing market creating demand for one and 75 units of questioning logic and planners are voig alarm

out growth and housing as resulting in upward pressure of low prices and widening gridlock from the campus half of facebook employees drive cars to work and facebook will increase the generation to 4 hundred and 38 in bound commuter vehicles the development will financing benefit the middle eastern low park but worsening the transportation and housing facing the region as standard practice of the permitting jurisdiction to extract cash pamphlets without having communities with significant and uncontained impacts now, one is well severed by major proposals sealed through the

lens looking at for its own interest and city's what move away if the regional problems i came away with this talking takeaway currently are over thirty commuter buses on 24th street and you additional to 26 and van ness about 55 an hour so you have a bus a minute going through 26 and van ness so with this addition doubling any question is what are we are doing on a regional basis between planning, transportation a there nos to be some resolution to this bonding situation and apple spaceship they've awakened the 280 to that plan thank

you au. >> good afternoon, everyone. commissioners pardon me i'll make a general statement is it so relevant to an item on the agendas i can't speak specifically but go to a service a long time finance person and her services in oakland i would suggest that has there are efforts to encourage and make that easier for developers to provide housing for speciality market one of the things they have to be cause about as with work and business services in the early days of grepz to sure to make sure that there is no cheating is really tight and i think there is a tendency to fall on good

intentions and have to make up up the good intentions and we're dealing here in a market environment with every con sizzle creek of the housing development has a profitable incentive as you consider efforts to deal with the housing needs in various ways to create the proposals i'll encourage you to make sure that the city and public has the monitoring in place and the enforcement and the penalties to make sure those good intentions are catered rried out thank you au. >> sue hester the city is

replacing a director the city as a role to play and more than sea level rise we the whole scheme in the planning code from transit fees and housing fees and housing requirements on this side of aisle and coming from the planning commission it came from people giving long a.d. with us testimony on the connection between the expansion of the commercial district and the needs for housing that was in the 70's and be pardon me latest 80s is the planning department doesn't intern lists what the connection at the level of the community does we have dropped down in san francisco to not being a model for the rest of the area there should be affordable

housing requirement all from san francisco marin and b santa clara and the gentleman spoke about in palo alto was true i talked to someone on the east palo alto he's with the state housing and the city council amendment what air struggling with trying to get cities menlo park and palo alto to deal with in terms of housing construction everyone post prop 13 is looking for taxing and san francisco absolutely is no different that is driving what we're dealing the.org pardon me district economy every time we have an opportunity to say come on guys put on a housing

requirement on the on palo alto and san jose and take the burden if san francisco all the legal buses in the world they dumb their projects on the mission and comes back to san francisco that doesn't naturals with with you didn't naturals with the plans so we have all the stresses on housing and a lot of crazy - what is the planning commission what the the planning director and the mayor doing and the board of supervisors doing to say hey guys build housing in your communities because it is an impact in san francisco thank you au. >> next speaker, please.

>> good afternoon, commissioners and welcome back to what is as entertaining fall series i have a question slash comment by the way, the timer didn't seem is to be going regarding the proposed reservation of article 7 i asked him it and will be digging more i nodded it appears to be eliminating the proposal that every two 2 years to be a report on what is going on in the neighborhood commercial district that is an interesting piece of code there is one report on what is going on in the neighborhood commercial districts in the 30 years since the legislation was passed so clearly that requirement was not fundamental but how did the planning

department understand and how will you understand what are the trends evolving and plays into the decision with conditional use if you're not aware of changes that are going on of the eventually of busy practices in the neighborhood commercial districts as a interferences to everyone leaping on who one direction and suddenly goes out and the disruption that falls on streets the loss of neighborhood services that have resulted in part because of the trends, because of assumes that the market will miserablyly solve the problems it but how much disruption you'll accept and what is happening with - if there is not some regular analysis of what is happened, where the vacancies and what are the trends accompanying

are those trends go or bad potentially whether or not are the ramifications where is that analysis come from and who is responsible for that thank you. >> any item general public comment okay jemd and director rahaim. >> if the commission would allow me to respond to come up of issues in general public comment first of all, with respect to the guidelines we have 20 hearings to update you but we fully intend to expend that public comment period and two public meeting and skelthd for as question speak to be in touch with the neighborhoods and working with them and continue to work with them on those guidelines and the point is well-taken we need to explain the residential guidelines those are meant to be on ero

arching guidelines not replacing them but be a higher level of project guidelines with right-hand turn to the regional i was surprised to hear the comments we've talked about our work and i daresay san francisco is involved in the region i've personally testified easy counsels and may be seated with efficiently folks that are proposing 3500 units of housing on their campus and strongly urge them and working with arockbach and one of the major issues we've monitored in the planned area the need for abag to seriously have the housing on the parks in this region and certainly not just in san francisco and continue to update you on the regional issues and happy to do so in

the future but assure you the department is hooefl involved and will continue to be and critically in the region and city and commissioner vice president richards. >> a few things wow. a lot of pent-up comments this is interesting a couple of things active more than a couple director rahaim talked about the university guidelines some type of a historical summary and what they apply to in terms of size in districts and relationship two the two sets of guidelines and which one is the residential guidelines it helps everyone understand what the two are for and love to sit down and have a chat over lunch and the one i'm surprised and the regional planning issue hoping it is

interesting to hear that people having want a planning solution it is hard without the control but coordinate and give some level of control that is carryy but how we do that is something we'll have figure out because we're giving up control we've e we'll have people asking for more control i agree with a lot of the commenters is regional solution is neon the comment how people can cheat on things that we put out there with great stipulations but learn something from the technically community and have bonds and systems we should have a hawk fund to find loopts and regards and close those loopts before we pass the legislation will be a few looptsz and loss of

things we have notable intentions but not thinking like the people that want to community-based though the loopts and last what is interesting i was going through any many, many - >> commissioner vice president richards i'm going to interrupt you those issues are not on the agenda but some other time. >> can i comment on the neighborhoods - >> okay. i was going through any paperwork over the last 10 or 15 years and came across the nc 20 i look at the date we're at nc and talk about the last things in the nc controls in the 80s thank you for reminding me not to go off topic secretary. >> director rahaim i'd like to say flashlights drourments you can add having a meeting

and update you guess on current or running issues so the regional issues stay in focus and i appreciate your thorough response to the questions. >> -

>> people hold closer to the dooishs for the shaping of the city and the agency but is future of the city is a positive thing for all involved including the agencies and into this has allowed us to bring hundreds of thousands of people through a traditional workshop format and truly pioneer piece of work undertaken by the your own bank on center it is this is a bright issue for public life and participation throughout the city and highlights the cross relationships for

perspectives and a lot of people to the important topics of what the city should look like in the future and with that, i'm going to turn it over to my partner with the - making sure that thing will come off that hitch with all the actresses involved i'll introduce katie changing thank you very much. >> good afternoon commissioners. >> turn that on. >> need the computer if you want to use the lower mike. >> as neil mentioned this is a really important project and an exciting way to test ideas and new processes and we're doing it again this year this is a picture of what market street was like

in hiss it's had a day and with market street something we can test with the eir bringing back the life to market street looking at history to history will repeat itself in the near future talking about the details of this festival we had hundreds of submissions this is from last year but this year many submissions from people from all over the region and a selection of projects we are being fabricated pretty much as we speak on market street on display for 3 cases the criteria were generally favored things that create engagement accessibility and

exclusion and a prototypes you'll see encouragement and engagement on these this is a map showing where the prototypes will be on the website if you want to dig deeper into that we worked with many partners to pull this off with yerba buena arts is our main partner but county pull this out with the public works and there's the mayor's office of innovation are helping to guide this process as neil mentioned we have lien hooefl on private partners to help us lead the prototypes to companies like autodesk and

psa to help us to combrsh enrich our we have it rated on the tack in this consideration of the festival and our community includes members from the sro collaborative to the community investor program and market street use services and gallery and other places we tried to broaden our outreach including people that may not be prototypes themselves but be a part of the progress as well so talk about a little bit more before that later so it is great and fun to do those things but how to measure the success we have

an expensive report on our website but doing the same thing this year, the colloquy to measure that and if you're murray your successes in our case pedestrian movement and engagement is some prototypes are doing better and measured and do that again, this is a little bit how we have doing the process of evaluation and . >> so it is prototyping our process with outreach and engagement so this is a shot of the open house we did last year and this year we have the artists present a small portion what is great i love about that i'm not behind any tables we have community members open to the public

event coming and talking with people would their own ideas and the conversation are fascinating sort of shifting the ways we engage with each other and talking about the issues and we'll have a series of images to show you the prototypes of last year a lot of them focused on interaction with people in the streets and great to see them in the financial district and embarcadero and to - you know we put it out there and was really able to see what is important to people bringing out joy and interaction is great to see - so in addition to the 3-day festival we are - we have

fund raised to the - the team from last year to come back and talk about their process and have a phase roll out for those will be insulate in october and a few more shots from last year. >> and in addition to the theme of joy and engagement this thinking about how we can bring positive activities as night lifetime and the artistic elements introduced to the sidewalks lastly the shallow stale is the prototype i talked about so those communities people got together and lead them

through a series of experiences to create their design and design they're small tail decided on in the central of market and other prototypes in october and then this is just a shot of youth team we have 14 students from around the cities that are involved in the design and architecture internship their fab r fabricating their ideas and will be installing their prototype along with us in the festival as their suhr their ideas are and getting them engaged in city discourteous how they want their streets to be and so festival from october 6th to 8 we're excited about

and trying to get out the word and having tours we'll innovative you and get a one-on-one tour we'll invite you to speak with artists. >> open up for public comment if there is any okay not seeing any, public comment is closed. scombhoer. >> this sounds fun as we are having our planning commission meeting on october 6th we should take a walk we never do practical things but a way to see how is it works. >> october 6th. >> okay. >> very good idea. >> any other commissioner

comments. >> commissioner johnson. >> yeah. it sounds like really interesting i remembered the last festival is not too to far and yeah excited commissioner moore and i will head out. >> director rahaim. >> thanks i want to thank cia and neil and the whole team and particularly to the partners at the y b c a and the grant members has been funded through a private foundation forgetting the name google and the national for the yards are the leaders and the park place is the leaders foundation that looked at community and grinning e bringing cities together the real success is both in the process how the pieces

are create but how to get people to interact on city streets that is positive and existing last year was a great success we're looking forward to another round and what happens on market street as we go forward and happy to get the commissioners out there a group or individually and figure that out for the actual festival. >> thank you commissioner moore. >> we could start 11 and do a walk through as a group and experience it together that will be really, really nice to see a fresh start and leave it up to you to follow up. >> tu prhank you commissioners, if there's nothing further, we'll move on to on po require a zoning

map amendment good afternoon, commissioners aaron starr, manager, legislative affairs. next item. >> will amend the property on potrero the the truth was rescoped as part of the mc-i to a miblgd residential hits height and bulk was changed the open space was zoned and intended for properties to be used as open space for parks and natural areas this is a developed property that is privately owned and not p as part of the eastern neighborhoods the department believes the height and bulk distinction from 40 to o s was a mistake the project sponsor has requested it be changed and the department

is recommending it be changed to 40 x that of those the height zoning and with the proximity of park next door and the department has several letters if the public and those letters were constituent in your packet and one additional letter is here if you want to review it there was a letter if the rec and park department included in your packet discussing the concerns over any future development on the site that concludes my report. thank you au. >> okay opening up for public comment (calling names) . >> is that who you were

calling hi, i'm a 20 plus residents of district 9 a gardener and i know you've received petitions and received the letters not a large number of us were able to be here but a large number of people that are verified if this from the artist colony under threat by this the this colony and garden spice collectively used to be known as the farm i've been in the space 71 and from august in the city and one of the oldest artist communities in the city the commissioner that is not here spoke

earlier about the importance of preserving the city's last legacy in the changes in the city and this colony is a huge example of the legacys the culture is changing and those are the kind of spaces we need to preserve and the garden is right into - the property is south of the garden we are in the northerly atmosphere without the sun we can't grow if those high-rises go through no more dwarnd it is the second community garden in the city and many people have been gardening for that 20 or 30 years imgone no point ii go through nor my cancer

treatment and it is more importantly for me a huge part of my life people bring their children down and teach them of growing plants and things you have good access to in the city i have a neighbor that do not to st. anthony's it is tremendously important thing you know to raise this hyatt you can build taller buildings all over the city's this this is not an appropriate place for be happening and reiterate from the garden from the community at large like there are a few of us but we are he representing a large opposition to this and yeah - thank you. >> thank you. >> next speaker, please. >> good afternoon,

commissioners my name is carina community gardener at the place gardens borders the property site ordinance change i'd like to just talk about the sites because of the 55 x space in the nation and my objection is on the - i'd like to support of x 40 and refer the commissioners to a presentation to each of you by the garden cooperated and a hard and soft copy if you wanted a reminder and in support of garden a few points to make in relation to the garden and how is it can be threatened by it's borders and this is not a correction of and zoning error but from

the planning department recommended 40 x height and as discussed the community garden is an important resource and affordable resource for their families and friends there are currently 40 plus in the gardens but one and 16 active members that relevancy a large ethic diversity and large age exist and an equal stunt for people to come together and garden this is for fresh food and the ideas it promotes healthy eel and respect the environmentalist s and this would take a whole afternoon to impart of the significance to everyone and a part of rec and park department award from the

unique garden an important city and one of the 17 natural award wishes and in the shadow from 149 two or three he 7 on the edge of the gashd it effects a nuke of property and predicted the building will increase in size this will only get worse and you know gardens such as there are important for zones and particularly at the edge of the freeway and around you know it is important in that respect and if you look at a number of areas around where the garden is not having a garner are fishgsz so the summer in the current height will negatively effect the

garden and i appeal to the commissioners to reject the proposal thank you very much. >> okay is there any additional public comment? >> good afternoon commissioner and jim i'm the representative of the project sponsor and just want to say we support the staffs recommendations to go to a 40 feet height not suggesting to a 55 height we agree with the gentleman that is a the 40-foot height is appropriate in the ooermentz plan and studied in the eir a building on the prophet a 2 story building that building if a two-story building casts a shadow with the building that occupies the property is he we deep respect the shadows on the garden but want to make sure that the

commission thinks there is a building at the property a two-story building not a project proposed but anything in the future has to go through the showed and garden we're really here it was offered to sell the property to rec and park and at the declined is an interest in the property to go to rec and park but we're asking for the zoning to be cleaned you and happy to follow staffs recommendation here for questions thank you. >> next speaker, please. >> hello my name is ivy a 20-year residents of san francisco and a 10-year gardener and i have an artist space in the

property in question like any friend mentioned earlier this proposal to increase the height limit will threaten the garden as far as the shadows that will be cast by increasing that height limit on proposed construction and it is an incredible community asset as both the past speakers mentioned i know that people have lived and worked in this community space foreclose to 30 years so in the face of what we're experience in san francisco now with the basic massive change to the landscape of the city this is an important institution and remember now just about casting a shadow on the garden but talking

about the displacement in the art colony that is located at this space and a question that i don't know what the environmental impact statement but this is a flood zone and capping if we were to lose the community garden space we have be to cafeteria not to cap let you the space especially in this year area we want to commend advocate for the garden and thank you for your time. >> is there any additional public comment? >> okay not seeing any, public comment is closed. commissioner moore. >> thank you to the public and to mr. starr for taking this on with a thoughtful consideration of what is going on i appreciate the representative of the appellant b.c. being a pro-active stand in the garden and looking with big

eyes at director rahaim we do need open space an urban gardens are more than anybody can spell out and perhaps talk with the president of rec and park or whatever i make a motion we approve with modifications as proposed by staff second. >> commissioner hillis. >> just a question for staff on ththis because it is odd we see a parcel zoned open space so before eastern neighborhoods what was the zoning. >> mc-i light and industrial. >> it had a height. >> 40 x. >> so that's what the height was i agree with the motion to the folks that testified

everybody makes valid points they have is parcels that are zoned to open space and generally, we look to the future development to shape the development knowing there are several to be developed knowing there is open space and taken projects and modified them to minimize the impacts to open space just abag because is it so zoned 40 not the entire lot will be 40 analytical a project being built there are other processes this needs to go through i'm supportive standardized adjacent to a large site 40 x. >> okay. >> i think that's all jonas okay. >> very good. >> commissioners that places us on item 14 and i apologize. >> there's a motion that's been there is a motion that has been seconded to adapt a

recommendation with modifications commissioner hillis commissioner johnson. >> commissioner moore. >> commissioner vice president richards and commissioner president fong so moved, commissioners, that motion passes unanimously 5 to zero and commissioners now that places us on item 14 student housing exemption inclusionary housing requirements a planning code amendments. >> good afternoon. i'm criticism i can't and filling in for any colleague the item before you is. >> enough people. >> sponsored by supervisor wiener regarding student housing requirement this planning code amendment will reduce the master lease time requirements if 5 years to 2 years. >> today i'll be recommending approval for

this legislation and my colleague will be joining us to make a comment currently the mandates the secondary institutions are a conceptual agreement with a 5-year term the ordinance reduces from 5 years to 2 years and the costs associated with the elementary lease with the educational institutions don't have the ability to something like that a long term lease and reduces the financial burdens on the education san francisco public utilities commission it allows for an institution to see how the building is run and not tender they're built to develop their own housing and given that the city is facing a storage of student housing this ordinance can encourage production of more student housing lastly i'd like to note that

currently code enforcement cowboys have exempt if the inclusionary requirements upon exclusion of lease term in the owner choose to convert to student housing or group housing the proposed legislation mincedaintains this position that concludes my presentation. and we ask you recommend approval the proposed ordinance and the drafted resolution i'm available to answer any questions and sophie hayward is here if the mayor's office. >> sorry to i had to run upstairs but good afternoon, commissioners and common sense i'm power from supervisor wiener first of all, thank you to monique mohan for drafting the report as staff report highlights

there are short summary on the order off 40 thousand student beds those 40 thousand students extradite so for the housing a few years ago the supervisor wiener asked for more student housing at the same time the general population housing is not permitted student housing is generally exempt from the inclusionary requirements is longer the student housing remains student housing and if the entitlements later decided to convert that at that point the project will cover you'll see inclusionary requirements plus interests and this is no way changes this is provided in two ways would be where the educational students build their own housing or another where one of more

come together and master lease the building that is built by a third party in the latter six we ask for the lease be a minimum of 5 years and as the staffer report pointed out those 5 years with significant barrier for educational institutions for a variety of reasons the recommendation changes the minimum lease duration from 5 years to 2 and as suggested but be various institutions and lulled committee in the year. >> it is important i was going to reiterate the point that raised by some out outside of this building didn't alter the requirements and lease 2 years the legislation will require a master lease end and become giving up and due plus

interest when we came up with the 5 years we had the decision originally no magic to that on this came up from 5 as we've learned people are building and using student housing building that is a barrier for the education of the program so lastly i want to thank california college of the art and the golden gate university and the park and the theatre and the conservatory museum and manufacturing and the california institute of studies this is in your packet sorry i ran from upstairs. >> okay opening it up for public comment doctor peter m (calling names) hello commissioners aim peter's dr. a research we

represent the city and county of san francisco employees but supporting this policy amendment we also have brotherhood supported inclusionary housing in san francisco for some time i'm here to call your attention as a new policy to amend the policy section after reading an article on the policy amendment it calling your attention that the california college is modifying the language if inclusionary and - secondary education institutions we'd like to point out that cca is exempt i have a master plan from april 2015, however, it was submitted and not required for the cca student housing projects prior to the start of this academic year and

the planning code didn't require them to have the requirements for imp but having a volunteery update on this year and the letter was submitted to the planning department the reason they're exempt the planning department for all those years even until the moment in our eyes has determined that cca is not a post secondary school and exempt if the imp rules how are you they're arguing for an exemption they've take advantage of from the section so it is like cca is tunney advantage from the rules and exemptions from the inclusionary housing and they need us to hold cca to the rules to move forward fast

with less public scrutiny and i submit the various documents on this issue thank you for your time. >> i'm waiting for the clock to reset. >> i'll just i'm nationally 0 green here on behalf of of the 1021 we represent the cca i want to elaborate this should be of concern we support what peter cohen was saying earlier that the new addition to be enforceable and if someone is not complying with the code and

taking advantage of the planning code bans they're a vocational school a concern out of the capacity and for cca not a secret i'm about to reveal they'll close their school and it is in their report to the board of trustees and public information but didn't appear as a document that cc as has with the board of supervisors and not in the documents they've submitted for all the projects in the san francisco campus and presuming others impacts that will come up in the purview of the campus explosioncondemnation we believe the process should

be fully trans period of time and glad they're supporting some projects on market street and good not a substitute for the city code thank you au. >> good afternoon. commissioners my name is j p watching and work for one of the largest student housing in the area most recent project on 9 and mission both of osthose are for 5 years and since that project has been a lot of schools interested in housing i believe director rahaim you visited our school and what we founds a lot of positive interest amongst all students organizations in the city and they would love to sign leases with us and but they

can't until after 5 years we've heard this is too much physiquely and you know the time period so we've heard under not only we've heard skills that signed the letter but a lot of folks want if interest is a shorter lease term once we have those we can start new construction in the city since we're here we very much support the term from 5 years to 2 and i'll be happy to answer any questions you may have. >> thank you au. >> sue hester i believe you can solve all the problems

day or give some direction that helps to resolve them i don't object to the lease to this change but the planning department has a big mess on student housing the big mess is complicate by the robert who was zoning administrator cac and that can be resolved you have a requirement to fill a master plan and the imp should have disclosure of this college being closed and open and you have information that is very good summary in your packet the housing gets built at least and you have the letter if 9 institutions saying help build housing i

know the huge expectation that is on the list the second largest institution didn't sign the letter and they run four profit housing not owned by institutions but owned by private investors and about to hit you in 2 weeks i suggest that the planning department seriously look at the student housing issue for hearing 2 weeks from today you have 7 pardon me residential hotels 5 residential hotels and two other housing before you in 2 weeks in the academy of art the academy of art owns zero housing for profit institution doesn't own its own housing the it is

controlled for by profit institutions so there are 4 prove leases you have to insist on role good information we have an institution that has a 20-year exemption from - that's a really nonprofit arts institution and we have a renegade for property that is mushroomed into the city. >> you should resolve things i don't have any objection to this protective being approved but the planning department has to shape up you have ais an outlined imp ruling from forming zoning administrator there's a there's way out-of-date it can be corrected administratively and hey cac has to foil an

institution and correct it thank you au. >> okay. is there additional 9 - >> yes. good afternoon. i'm paul wormer pr i do want to endorse this proposal legislation i think that is very important that academic sdpugsz u institutions be a vocational or otherwise bring in students from out of town do provide adequate and appropriate student housing in particular should be strongly discouraged if taking over residential properties and creating student housing on properties that can be single-family homes or otherwise available to the rental market thank you. >> okay is there any additional public comment? >> okay public comment is closed.

exposure. >> director rahaim to my recollection not aware of the past ruling what can when i seen the cacs institutional master plan i comments on it being the more thorough plans and if indeed something that needs to be corrected let's bring cac who are in need of a responsible institution into the folds that whatever it linking if the past can be corrected i have a hard time accepting is comments made by the public in the absent i've witnessed for the last 10 years the institution is responsible and doing project which were done ahead and when people were not thinking of building pdr and joint have you ever seen with sfmade, etc. if you could

help you in commenting that would be helpful i'm in supportive of this legislation i had a couple of questions about the, 2-year reduction timeframe and raise questions of pintspenalties we don't have a at the monitoring system that gets to thing that are caused when things have happened and their difficult to rectify i have to make that has a comment we are not deciding on this particular legislation but i hope the board will be able to put additional teeth teeth into this so that indeed the intent of what we're trying to support will be executed to the letter of the words

we're approving thank you. >> commissioner hillis. >> director rahaim. >> actually, i was not aware of that ruling - pardon me from sometime ago in the west from the previous zoning administrator basically says that cac is a vocational school not a post school and not to submit a municipal transportation agency plan but two things they've done so voluntarily in the same manner, and, secondly, if they move their operations or practices from oakland they'll be technically required to submit a plan we'll get more information but that's my understanding and we have an imp on file from cac like point other institution. >> thank you sniffles

commissioner bobby wilson. >> we've heard a bunch of issues from imps and grappled how they've worked so we'll have that discussion eventually and agree with the xhrmths you you know cac kind of seems like an constitution that should file an imp and they didn't file an update with changes because what we've seen as cac being a pretty good artistctor and taking steps to rebuild and looking at steps from projects that are done and contemplated their cac relatively small or moderate sized institutions in the landscape out there

providing for housing for the students i think is great so anything we can do to encourage for institutions to build housing it is stripping they didn't do it in 5 years but there's no harm and should encourage the change to happen as far as the enforcements we should make sure that the students in the projects should be relatively simple to enforce given the student housing projects being built i encourage this and recommend approval. >> commissioner vice president richards. >> i'm very supportive of need for student housing and taking things out of the way for - two questions that come up that struck me as i read this unfortunately, if they lease were not to be

renutd the housing became general public comment housing what requirement in the percentage or fees are applicable the time the leases started or evident and ms. hayward a question for you, too. >> so tail be subject to the inclusionary requirements not exactly sure the time - >> so like no 25 percent requirements we have to report to the feds if we recommend if something happens in the future with the percentage when a which one will apply. >> it will happen when it no longer is used as student housing but at that moment in

time. >> a question for ms. hayward we heard someone speak and the mortars enforcement is only good as the integrity of the process hidden it can you tell us what that process looks like i saw what was written how would you talk about that. >> so remind the housing and development mohcd is about responsible for the monitoring i want to make sure there a clear line. >> code enforcement with planning. >> right. >> and the housing units on an annual basis just the reverse if a project were to convert to i assume market-rate housing or any non-student housing they'll have to report on a monitoring form and they'll initiate the enforcement

procure or the fee collection procure and owe the inclusionary fee plus interest and still disclose they'll initiate because there the violation a. >> we trusting the institutions to see this is no longer the property owner is no longer - >> as we do with many cases i mean at the time of approval all student housing their notices of special restrictions and their condition of approval calls out any changes regardless of student housing requires the floifks i'll say curable two projects subject to this monitors if not we certainly will scale as appropriated it will be great do have other institutions to provide student housing from 5 years

to 2 years doesn't impact our nutrition saw so you still go out and locate the institutions or call and say the student housing lease is up. >> i'll be honest we have two right now is it so easy to pick up but technically if it were a larger portfolio they'll say 0 cotton us and i hope we can be active with it i'm supportive of this i think that is a good idea. >> commissioner johnson. >> a quick question to understand this this is for if there's a building; right? and then a post secondary institution wants to use that housing tail sign a lease that says there are conditions that says this is for student

housing and convert to other status. >> hold it i don't want to go into the mr. larkin world but one point of clarification student housing has to start as student housing not convert from another form of ourselves to student housing. >> that's a thought all right. so my question is around the 2-year t so thank you for clarifying that i thought wait a second i thought it student housing where does that number come if if you're a post secondary institution and your part of the growth strategy having 5-year master plans and pay those costs while you developing the student housing so what we know in

san francisco sometimes things take a awhile what's the rational i agree with it but want to know what we're recommending. >> that will be a question to ask the institutions they'll testified at the land use committee for particularly for the mid to smaller institutions that will let you know what their cash situations will be that is challenging for them and having a shorter tomorrow that will be giving them more flexibility as what will happen i'll point out for example the master lease for a building student housing institution a at the end of the lease term institution b can come in and not like

after 2 years they'll have to sequester to student housing but basically, the ability to basically plan and have money available to lock up the 5-year lease. >> okay. thank you. >> commissioner moore. >> i'd like to make a comment that goes back to an exercise month universities and institutions have students stay at the student housing for the predicament lengths off their times of studies i want to see as to whether or not this is a tool by which student housing what is intend do be gets turned over to an appropriate average study that a student spends the monitoring element as ms. hayward between the institutions and the housing felt that housing remains

available to upcoming students rather than students that choose to study as at least has the benefits of staying in housing for students that are active in studies i think also see that institutions would you mind coming up participate in the monitoring so ultimately the proof of enrollment this creates a timeframe for students have to move on or get out of there would you comment on that. >> sophie hayward from the mayor's office of housing i'll point out the lease is with the post secondary institution and not the individual students so it was the onerous is on the school to assure that students are

active enrolled not providing housing for people not students that's part of monitoring. >> we need to find someone that is able to spell it outs to a level we feel the report we're giving to the legislation on the other hand, has an objection to operate and why'd conceiving concluding the studies to move on i appreciate that gets brought forward as this moves on 0 the board of supervisors ultimately create the teeth this is legislation needs to have thank you. >> thank you. >> commissioners, if there's nothing further, we'll move on to there is a motion that has been seconded to adopt the recommendation for approval sxhiflz commissioner johnson. >> commissioner moore. >> and all appreciate that

some of the commissioners comments could be added and forward to the board. >> thank you. >> commissioner vice president richards. >> and commissioner president fong so moved, commissioners, that motion passes unanimously 5 to zero. >> okay jonas the commission will take a break be back in approximately 245 >> commissioner if you conceding for the record >> commissioners would left off on the regular calendar. december 2015 009 815. >>[reading ordinance]

>> good afternoon commissioners. david sanchez with planning department staff. presenting a ordinance initiated june 26 and it goes into man the planning code officer parking code and control. this is chief objective to update these controls to conform to the changes enacted by phase 1 of the planning code with organization project. this project began in 2014 to make the planning code easier to use and resulted in changes to about 30% of the planning code. the propose updating of aussie parking phase is about the best example of running the code from the changes from the organization project. these tables are used to determine parking requirements based on user activity. these tables are currently out of date and when his references that are not found in articles 1 and two. this audio cd discretion. the ordinance also proposes clerical and typographical corrections. these include directing proper essences and the like. commissioners, this forms the bulk of the changes proposed in the ordinance. however, lastly the ordinance does propose certain minors of two southern changes to the

today. these are better to align these fiddles with the cities transit first policy as well as with the general direction the cities are controls taken in recent years. one example would be the bolstering of conditional use findings for requests for parking above recently permitted [inaudible] besides require their quest to demonstrate additional parking does not unnecessarily burden pedestrian or bicycle travel as a result of poorly designed parking facilities. i like to take a moment and provide you with a copy of the signed ordinance. the copy in your packets is not signed by the attorney city attorney, as a matter of procedure have to provide this to you. that concludes my presentation. well before that my recommendation is to adopt the ordiances propose. i conclude my presentation i'm available for questions. thank you. >> thank you. i'm open up to public comment. not seen any, public comment is closed.. perhaps commissioner stuart mr.

hillis >> i moved to recommend approval >> moved and seconded. >> get commissioners on emotion than to adopt recommendation for approval, commissioner hillis aye johns and aye moore aye fung aye so moved that motion passes unanimously 4-0. commissioners the places also on item items 16 a what about cases 2014 >>[reading ordinance]. >> good afternoon commissioners. by the planning department staff. the project before you is about the project authorization and office devoted authorization located at 63 fulton st. under the downtown project authorization budget request exceptions perception 148, when current

section 152.1 aussie loading requirements of section 270 and 272 would exceed the limitations within 200 identical district. under the office bauman authorize the project requires authorization of up to 89,000 nine and 79 ft.2 of office from the annual limit of office development. the propose project is located on southeast corner of the intersection of wholesome and hawthorne street within downtown commercial support zoning district. the 200 height and bulk this. the site is also located within downtown plan area and the filipino cultural heritage district. the site is occupied by seven-story one 74,693 ft.2 office building that contains 1100 ft.2 the ground floor retail. the project will construct four-story 92,002 and 44 ft.2 addition to the existing build.

in addition the proposal would read glad the existing façade with eight new metal and glass curtain system we can think of the ground floor to move and expand retail space at construct a new corner lobby entrance. the result will be an 11 story 160 foot tall building with two inner-city 4000 six or seven to square free of office space and 5000 ft.2 of ground floor retail space. the department has received correspondence in opposition to the project from both individual residents and homeowners associations with two buildings located immediately adjacent 631. street and 77 dow place. the letter success concerns related to loss of light and air as well as impacts related to construction and increased traffic. it is staff's

attention was not a sufficient shadow analysis at the plaza located at 601 fulsome st. in response steps that request a supplemental shadow analysis memo 461 fulsome st. that is revise the finding way to section 147 shading on public open spaces to include an analysis of this open space. and you have been provided with a copy of that. should the project be approved, commotion would reflect the revision. points of clarification and a couple of errors in the executive summary. the staff report the addition diagonal to his 190 feet. to clarify, the maximum permitted diagonal is when 90 feet and edition will have a diagonal dimension of 242 feet. additionally, the office allocation is not to 89,000 square feet. also, the batteries for the central [inaudible] were easily changed and project is no longer within the propose central limit area plan. at the time, the packet was published that had not been addressed yet. after analyzing all aspects of the project, department staff recommends approval with conditions. specifically, aside from the

aggressive exceptions budget complies with the applicable requirements the planning code. the project is consistent with the objectives and policies of the general plan including the downtown area plan. the project would've reoriented the ground floor to create retail along fulsome street thereby creating a more vibrant pedestrian realm. the project is in a zoning district that's permits office use. the project will construct 89,900 ft.2 of office that currently has office uses in this without committing a compact downtown core. the project represents an outpatient approximately 20.3% of the large-cap office space coming available for allocation. this concludes my presentation good i'm available for any questions. project sponsor is present and has prepared a presentation. beatniks thank you. >> project sponsor, please. >> good afternoon commissioners. my name is when a show with gansler. i will

pull up this presentation. >> you might want to use the other microphone? >> thank you.thank you for the opportunity this afternoon to share this exciting project at 633 fulsome st. today, i have with me. weingarten gensler, john kaplan with william julius and debra blair with swig company the owner of the site. when we came to this project -there we go-would begin to this project a couple years ago we had some major project objectives we wanted to try to achieve. this unique opportunity here in 2018 where

cmpc who currently occupies the building is fully vacating the project. the building needs major infrastructure upgrades, mechanical seismic and elevator and in this unique opportunity to provide all those upgrades to this existing building. we wanted to revitalize the project and make it more attractive to current office tenants within the market. so there was a lot of attention paid to making sure the asset provided that value. we also-you know, we are really trying to this a modest project and were really trying to aim high and achieve a high level of sustainability for the project will see some unique features in the façade and infrastructure upgrades for the project as well. the greatest of which is really wheezing and existing buildings and would try to maximize the use of the existing building at 603 fulsome st. in doing so, these

projects upgrades we are trying to fit the community and the public realm along fulsome street and hawthorne street with major pedestrian movement [inaudible]. i think you are all aware of the site here at the corner of opera and fulsome. it's important to note, this is an important and changing downtown district of san francisco. it's got 5 min. access to major public transit in the neighborhood and 10 min. away from the and transbay terminer. makes an ideal location for office tenants in the neighborhood. when coming to the existing building, it's important to understand his acids and attributes. this way company could originally developed this company and 19 six and they've had a long-term commitment as an owner to the neighborhood and to the quality of the district. you know, when

looking at this building in 1968, it had it has it's original claimant in terms of infrastructure and were looking to improve all of that. the building is an exterior concrete frame structure, so that creates unique challenges with dark recessed windows the performance of which are sort of substandard by today's high-performance envelope requirements. create a dark resource-sorry, recessed entry portal along fulsome street. there's retail that exist in that location in the façade is stepped back many feet that creates a dark recessed portal upon entry into the building. when we can to the project, we really look at how this one provide for the 90,000 ft.2. try to add to the building? at important to note we are not

doing with a new ground of development that we are really trying to best utilize the asset of the existing building and first and foremost, is the core location is expanding the court to add new elevators required for the high-rise. the clemens for the building. and in doing so we need to center the office floor plates of the addition around that mass of the court. in provide usable expands around that space for the office tenants. so when looking at a compliant sort of zoning massing, we centered the-that option run this quarter and it's important to note that it doesn't fit well in terms of these is the building structure. that structure built in 1968 hazard limitations in terms the amount of load it can carry including the columns and foundations. so, it goes those restrictions drove us primarily to asking for this exception today. using

the assets we have the existing building is beneficial to distribute download in additional weight because of the more horizontally across the site. in doing so, we also are able to reduce the overall height of the building by reducing it to stories from six stories in a combined massing to four stories in the proposed massing. thus, reducing the height of the building from 192 feet to 160 feet. so, while it's the right thing to do with existing building we also think it provides less impact on the neighboring buildings and to size outside of that of providing the shadow impact and wind impact in this proposed massing. you can see here that the proposed massing that we have provides reasonable setbacks from two adjacent properties. some of which if you look at the blue condo property, the new addition is at its least 45 feet in terms

of separation. [inaudible] street itself is 50 feet wide. were providing an nearly full story city state separation from the conduct of the north sea and 36'10" towards the 77th doubt please property as well. respecting the existing easement and access the link to the parking garage that exist in that location it we are also beginning the 15 foot setback that's required by the planning code against both of those properties as well. not violating those. i think clubbing noted some of the key dimensions that the diagonal were requesting his 242 feet. and the building length on hawthorne is another exception we are looking for at 222 feet. again, these both comply with a setbacks required and help us

reduce the overall height and mass of the building. that mass at 160 feet high, we really feel fits well into the local urban context in soma. if you look at the netscape of buildings currently exist within the neighborhood, the 160 feet height is within that no one and in terms of building length and building with, this also number buildings in the neighborhood that have more if not equal building length and dimensions. when you look at the future landscape of the neighborhood, you can see significant mass even being put into this neighborhood five. 655 fulsome st., 684 fulsome a major renovation, is a much bigger building profile and 95

hawthorne, which is directly across the street is proposed to be 320 feet tall. so when you take the futility of his neighbor this is really a modest addition to the existing building.. if we start with that as the premise and amassing, but we really wanted to do was approach the project to unify the building. we did not want this to feel like two small buildings attached to each other or round ovation floated onto. we want to stitch together a building that at holistic perspective anesthetic. we started by connecting the new addition and a lower addition on hawthorne street. to create a more unified expression providing moments of relief or multi- source expansion at the corners that also helps to minimize perception of mass on both primary façades. here, you can see what that looks like in its final form. you will also note there are some nice solar elements we have on the building to bring down the building mass and scale which all go into in a minute. weight

we really used a pretty traditional motion intensive solar shading which is to reduce the amount of opening from the façade, but expanded that by providing some of three dimensionality to an architectural element that provides scale and mass. this allows itself, allows solar shading element to really provide more solar shading while allowing for increased transparency in the façade. it great something that's pretty dynamic for the neighborhood while achieving sustainability sustainability goals for the project. 32nd? you can see that modifies itself may see the building façade as it has a deeper dimension as required at the highest elevation of the building defines itself as it goes to the towards the ground. let's solar shading is required. in terms of the ground floor, the providing a number of lumens on hawthorne street including new street trees and a significant sidewalk widening is part of the project. we are

also repositioning the projects lobby towards the corner of hawthorne and fulsome good which we think is a great benefit to the project by removing the dark recess that occurs along that street frontage and by pulling the retail frontage out towards fulsome street to provide a more dynamic street façade. >> thank you, sir your time is up with the commissioners may have additional questions. >> europe hobbies of the diagram you presented? they are not in a packet. do you have the height diagram involve the things you just showed us >> we can give you copies of that. >> i do not have printed copies of those good copies of those good >> s >> to the theater was organized opposite your opportunity to speak with being out of three speakers and you would have 10 min. >>my name is michael dunner on

with hands and bridget and i represent the organized opposition to homeowners association san francisco blue and hawthorne place. i'm joined here today and if you could, rise by some very concerned homeowners as well as my colleague, melissa and him who we splitting time at the podium today. given the time limits i will abbreviate my comments that i direct your attention to are very competent civil letter brief that was sent to the

commission. this project is life with a number of very strange oddities. the developer wants to plunk down an oversize shear wall four-story box on top of an existing seven-story structure. the box does not architecturally correlate to the rest of the building. the existing seven-story seven normal 10 foot slab to slab separation. but the new four stories are different. they have large windows and 16 foot slab to slab separations, giving rise to about and 18-20 foot ceiling on the interior. this is odd because it artificially increases height without providing increased square footage. now, one of the questions that we raised in our brief is whether or not that they are was propped coolly calculate. there's a possibility that it was not. the project sponsor acknowledges that they are right up to the limit and therefore, an accurate count is fundamentally essential.

planning staff told us just yesterday, they were not entirely sure. by stuart because they had not gotten details of the basement, which may or may not even count toward the sar link. that's not the only thing that was missing. we pointed out that there was a shadow study that was missing regarding public sidewalks and pogo in the neighborhood and suddenly, just an hour ago, a shadow study appeared. we have not had time to review that. there's no traffic study regarding impact regarding the back easement and there is almost 16 foot penthouse that appears at the very top of the project, 16 feet, 3000 ft.2, with two sets of double doors and one schematic with women. one needs to ask, why double doors, a window, 3000 ft.2 and a 16 foot

high penthouse needs to appear? now, the developer is coming here today to ask you for a favor. that's a sweet what it boils down to. it says, it wants april exception to have floor plates of 24,000 ft.2 even though the code only allows 17. that is 28,000 ft.2 more that it's entitled to. it says command exchanges going to give you serious concessions, but let's look at what those are. it has a side setback against-overhead, please. aside setback against sf bloop that is required by code. they have to do it. there is another side notch facing fulsome street that they have to have in order to make their sar. therefore,

the only concession they get is a little postage stamp, 300 square-foot notch in the back. other than that, they are going full floor plates on the existing structure. i point out, by the way, without the exception, in red here, you will see what they would be allowed to build. here. he went up an extra story, here. because it would go from 17,000 ft.2 to 12,000 ft.2 given the height. in gray, is what they are proposing to do. the developer cannot build higher. this is something we just learned on the project architect. the reason that the developer can't do it-well, it can but it cost prohibitive given the weight. so, it's not a concession to tell the homeowners, gosh, we could build higher but we gave you that one and were not doing

that. the homeowners understand that they live in a dense urban environment but with a didn't bargain for was the fact that there will be office workers 35-45 feet away from their bedroom windows, and that they would be shrouded in darkness all the time. both homeowners associations. there was no wind study at elevation which is critical, especially given the fact that the building has operable windows. and there will be a virtual wind tunnel created at that height. we have several alternative solutions to this problem. we've reached out to the project developer and we've heard silence in return. i now leave the remaining period of time to my colleague. melissa [inaudible] >> hello my name is melissa bank from [sp?] i'm also here representing sf blue and

hawthorne place. i think really the key. insufficient information to make an approval today. as michael mentioned, there are some details missing to be able to determine sar including both and house the basement and retail the entire 5000 ft.2 has been eliminated from far even though there's certain types of retail that are restricted. the shadow studies only recently been provided. the window analysis has not been complete the environmental review was only provided at the end of last week. there's many details missing in the application that are needed in order for the commission to make certain findings. plus, there's also many conflicting figures. in the project sponsors materials. as far as for areas that are important to know what precisely is being built in what is being approved and if it's appropriate. we are asking that if you do approved today

that you consider that they are asking for some significant concessions, and getting little in return. but we would ask is that those exceptions be reduced get and set a 40% of a reduction in floor area, that we look at a different option of a smaller amount of exception provided. in addition, the slab to slab could be reduced we don't have 16 foot ceilings but 10 foot ceilings and then the project sponsor could get another floor in within that 160 feet. thereby, getting to the maximum floor area that they can get with pdr which is what they are aiming for. we also asked to be certain conditions of approval placed on any approval which is that the will of the penthouse, and the setback not be used except for maintenance purposes. as

michael mentioned, the 27 and square-foot penthouse is concerning to the neighbors along with the setbacks and office parties would be a problem. the 5000 ft.2 retail space should be restricted to those particular uses that are allowed to be excluded from far and also to exclude uses that would be seriously conflicting with the next-door neighbor retail or residential use. such as late-night bar activity. we also asked whether the landscaping plan for the roof and the setbacks, so that they are treated appropriately and we listed certain construction conduction conditions in a brief is whether we think would be very helpful could we have a additional speaker. >> matt calls. >> money was matthew coulter, resident at 631 fulsome. i want to endorse everything in mr. donner's brief and just say on behalf of people who live in the building, we are worried about what life will be doing this construction project if it was approved. mr. donner

suggests a number of ameliorative conditions, mute of steps that particular construction is going on. i'm simply here to ask you on behalf of the people living in the two buildings are thinking about life during the construction that when and if you approve this at any point, that you make those a mood of suggestions conditions come up upon approval. thank you. >> is there available for questions? >> thank you very much. will open up to public comment. >>[calling public comment cards]

>> commissioners, ahmed thompson. i live in hawthorne place. am happy to be here today i know as neighbors we will get heard today. our attorneys summarize the issues it really well. we want to be good neighbors with the developer. our major concern is that we losing our like an air to go into darkness. hawthorne place is a residential condo building is 130 feet high. the edition goes up to 170 feet so it towers over us. there is hotel proposed. this is the proposed office building. 631 folsom. this is us, 77 dow plaisted hotels are going up right.

[inaudible] is 200 feet high. so what's happening this building goes up to 170 feet we are really in the dark. so, [inaudible] not so pleasant. by purchasing transferable developing rights for sale in the marketplace of this buildings value will go up. but they're asking for exceptions. so, what are we doing this. what is the lawyer same spirit in exchange we want some setbacks. they have not offered any. our request-that is us. this concrete this is a shot from our root. 77 dow plaisted

this is 633 fulsome. office building with. that's the existing elevator and has. this is blue 631. you any setback as you can see the buildings are pretty close. this is not a photoshop. this is a true picture. so, by providing setbacks here on the roof, this opens up the back units of blue looking this way. so, it also provides some that we are asking for 25 setback here for hawthorne place in the setback the lawyer asked for the 60 foot back here. this opens up the units looking west. also, it does on other thing. if you move this new addition back this way, it helps the shadowing that now exists on the public space on the second street. so,

commissioners, there's no rush. his two years on the lease. so, i submit to this to your attention. thank you. >> thank you. next speaker, please. >> good afternoon. i'm gina--i love with it as of blue 631 folsom. i endorse everything that mr. donner has put together on our behalf. i just want to say one of the city planner said to me once you meet people opposed to building towers other people who live in towers. i just want to put a face on some of the people live in our tower. after seven years here at the blue were your 75% owner occupied. we are young professionals. we are retired professionals and ashley young families, two. we live and work and go to school in san francisco. our children have play dates with each other. we get together for barbecues. just like any other san

francisco neighborhood. each of our 114 household pays its share of san francisco taxes. we are not asking for special consideration. which is asking for equal consideration in regards to this project. thank you. >> next speaker, please. >> good afternoon. my name is nora hurley. i am also a resident of sf blue. i moved to the original owners who've been in 2009 and i to speak to some of the quality of life issues living in blue during this proposed construction and already a long fulsome street week spirits extreme traffic congestion from anywhere midafternoon to early evening. we would like to think it's a five-minute access to the bridge but i think anyone has ever done that commute you know you're sitting on fulsome street on a good day for maybe about 20 min.-40 min. from fulsome and hawthorne to any of

the access areas. we are also concerned about access to our garage space on hawthorne during this construction. when you look at the size of the lot and how narrow the sidewalk and streets are around 633, it seems to be nearly impossible that they're going to be able to carry off this construction without at times and perhaps long exciton blocking our access to our garage. as the retirees in blue by husband and i will be accessing the garage in and out during the day not just during 8 am where 6 pm commuter hours. so i'd like to thank you for allowing me to express my concern. thanks. >> good afternoon. my name is thomas maddy know that hawthorne place. i appreciate the opportunity to be able to

be on record that as a resident, for five years at hawthorne place, i appreciate the work that our console is unterberg there you did i, too, encouraged the consideration of the appropriate setback for this particular building. in a unit facing directly into where this will be i have experienced floor renovation, but sometimes the renovations have gone until one in the morning and gone down in my pajamas to chat with people. never a fun think about it very courteous and appropriate in those situations. so i ask that you consider what we might need to do to have the appropriate setback for this particular property and is filed. thank you very much. >> good afternoon. thank you

for the opportunity to speak today. i'm also a resident of ligand binding is margarita >> speak into the microphone, please >> i'm sorry >> i'm also a resident of blue and i strongly oppose the approval of the development of 633 fulsome in its current form. i'm any concerns with regards to the condition of given limited time only going to address three of them. bulk air quality and sunlight and i've spent an e-mail to the planning commission with my concerns. personally i believe that all assumption exception is unwanted. the close edition [inaudible] of the existing building already billed to the property line. if billed as proposed it would be a shiny presence on the street [inaudible] we don't need another [inaudible] please, require the developers to build

[inaudible] i'm second on concern about the air quality in the. fulsome is a very busy street. there's a lot of traffic and it got worse in the last few years. in regard to properties cannot make it into the air pollutant exposure zone map was buildings that surround us as well as [inaudible] i must've been very measuring high 2.5 numbers in october and should approve the development of those likely to request that you require exhaust measures be put in place during the project construction the safety of future i also require, please, that the project sponsoring ventilation please request project sponsor installing a green roof in scott weiner's legislation. last but not least, the neighbor on concern about the proposed addition would produce in many cases limited access to the direct sunlight for many units in my building. two thirds of value west directly into 633 fold with you most of light in the afternoon. this edition of 5176 feet from current 91 woodlock

was about light. privacy is also a huge concern as many as only [inaudible] 30 feet separate about. the downtown plan encourages residential development. as such of their responsibility to provide [inaudible] for those of us that have downtown homes. that includes access to air, like maintaining our privacy as well as protection from uncomfortable wins. please require additional setbacks between two buildings as well as required [inaudible] 10-20. i strongly urge you to deny the request perceptions and to required the addition [inaudible] downtown area plan. thank you very much. >> hi. i so live at 631. should

sorry i don't know the procedures. i said to all an e-mail. i'm the person keeps calculating those angles of elevation. i would not be here today if this plan was already going to fit. wolves are rules. our building designers would love to make a building 400 feet tall or whatever. i assume they were denied because that's what zoning and rules are for. i have no problem with them proposing will develop you i'm sorry about their foundation prompted zero building, i guess. but we are here because were going to go from year-round light, whining, both on the sixth floor was a person prohibited because the timing on the 10th floor. then from year-round to 6-8 months out of your no direct sunlight. we are surrounded and are people who designed the building in 2007 were awake whenever they get it they had a fully built out at maximum far plan for this

building. if there is no reason to have rules why would we not be taking this into account? similarly, it seems that the strange trade. this can add 90,000 ft.2 of office space when were awash in office space could is millions of square feet in the backlog and twitter just put one 80,000 back on the market out of that matters to you guys but to trade for me personally, of course the vice president of the building is very much that we don't necessarily need 90,000 ft.2 of extra office space and it's not extra. so, personally, the trade of walking home to a nice light filled apartment, it's a nice thing. but, i don't see why this demands exceptional circumstances. it is just a pile is two blocks on top of each other. i respect that you got more costly. i don't want them to have to do that, but rules are rules. thank you. >>sue has severe this case is

absolutely not ready to move today. this is a downtown plan case. ultimately. because downtown plan [inaudible] came out of it. there's all kinds of manipulations being done to make it not a new project because they get cheaper fees as well. can they get more money from the entire we build. the last-minute documents are the environmental exception the topic study, the shadow study just updated today and the plans you have very little

solid information that people have time to absorb. what i note when i read the traffic surveys was the only traffic analysis done from four-6 pm. anyone who thinks that 4-6 is a rush-hour and second and. needs to have her head examined were in the planning department. that is a bad time span for understanding what goes on on the bainbridge on the everyday monday through friday. secondarily, the residential development was an impetus out of the downtown plan. they're trying to makes office space and housing and these people who i never met before today really have issues . the planning department doesn't know how to do the analysis. when you do all the documents at the last minute, you don't have a good thought

process. the public can have a good thought process. the fact that you're asking for guidance and are not available from you have not had them in your packets should be [inaudible] to the planning commissioners. when i went through-not only went through the downtown plan, but the eastern plan and western plan. there was a unanimity from the committee sat. that said there has to be a two-way bus down fulsome street. we are is that in the reality spewing that was in 2006-2007 when we are at the height of the eastern neighborhoods. there is no impetus to construct the muni line down there because the developers don't [inaudible] there's not a pressure group from this developer suite company which is pretty powerful, or anyone else. so, we don't have a good transit

system. we don't have real information on and-on help shadow effect of residents which [inaudible] and you have manipulation of the office of development allocation. no office development should go on a document that is being updated at the hearing. which is your policy on exemptions. thank you. >>any additional public comment? seeing none, public comment is closed. commissioner moore >> this is an interesting discussion. i think it's really great to see a building trying to use adaptive reuse techniques to upgrade. relative to 19 65 billion the question is how do you do it. i think that is where we immediately start to raise questions that those rules which determine how

we build buildings and intensified court should really happen the first guided by those rules which are in place rather than trying to make the best use of assets of the existing building by asking for exceptions. that in itself is a serious contradiction particularly when developers like hines went on the street is 75 hawthorne, in the event of an entire tall building for queen performance with people being in the building and not asking for any exceptions or redo in order to make more money. in order to maintain the building is a class e were a+ performance for this kind of a no-brainer but i do not believe i can concur at the expense of the other issues which have intensified since 1965. i look

on this particular case is what should drive our thinking is the policy of protecting housing and the ability of adjoining housing those people who are in the 90s built the building by which many residents spoke because they were at the frontier. so all of a sudden you come up and would protect assets were increase acids for you that you are asking for exceptions on those rules which i believe are absolutely important to observe when were talking about intensified within instrument and livability for those who aren't so close to you. for me, i believe that the request for additional information within critical for more objectively what it is you are trying to do and there is indeed a large amount of information missing together with a set [inaudible] which gives a slightly more comrades of description of your project. i have many drawings here that are missing in my package together with information about the shadow study, a landscape plan, the purpose of your penthouse and a

number of other things not last and least the shadow start. i'm at this moment, and not inclined to look at this project in its current configuration and ask that there be more disclosure and further consideration for the rules recommend this project. >> commissioner richards >> i will open this in the kind. in light of today's vision for the neighborhood replicating the state made in 1968, this year does not make any sense. i think that's what this project is. i agree with commissioner moore. people live in this neighborhood we talked about what wasn't so hot and now experiencing a bait and switch in your creating situation that's not liberal for the residents honestly i believe. i did in tokyo. i been in office those extra residential builds

that's not pretty. you can look and see people are doing. being that far away from people that jones is just completely not appropriate. would love to of seen in the packet again and we got the standard was actually had to ask for it as you're on the screen was trying to follow and put it. the just so much this project takes so much and gives so little. so this project as his is absolutely unsupportable by me that he needs to come back in a vastly we configured scope. >> commissioner johnson >> thank you very much. i actually is a perfect person who lives in arresting the building across a small street from a office building i understood where the residents are coming from. i think commissioner richards made that point. i just focus on a couple questions i have. in the staff report it says-let me go back to her my note is. that's granting the exception to the limit would not result in a building with a greater those floor area than what has been permitted if the book limits

were met. so, how is that possible? >> because this is not a 200 district so the building could be constructed of two 200 feet in height. with a smaller-so it's basically their trading off floor area. that would have been higher elevation >> that schedule, we heard the project sponsor made communicated it again, it's hearsay so i can't say that for sure that's exactly what they said but they did not want to build taller because of the cost. let me ask the project sponsor that question. the question for the company were >> thanks. john kaplan on behalf of the project sponsor. or talk about this now because

this is a decision made about two years ago the beginning of this process. when really putting the building configuration into its general shape we have today and as we tinker with it as it goes through the design development prospect was really kind of a to part question. one, in which we got an existing building with a large court and trying to fit a vertical addition within the scope limits without court makes for very poor floor plates so very small with a big huge chunk in the middle of it. so it was a combination of that alongside the fact that we knew we were adjacent to two residential buildings and at that height considering the fact we got the best 345 and 75 feet on one side and 75 feet on the other we thought of the more sensitive not to go higher with the height but rather meeting with the existing setback is were included in the

case of blue. it was there's a number of considerations that went into the original passing of this building and the decision to go wider rather than talk. >> got it. thank you. so, just a couple of things. that makes sense to me. i think that attitudes have not to say they shifted but they change over time on hype versus lock will when they talk about projects i did not surprise on the discussion you mention here. i think it sounds like there is some energy here to look at the building block design and sort of look at it a little bit more closely could just focus on my remaining concerned, which is this project is taking 20% of large-cap remaining large cap allocation is that correct? >> yes. 20% this about 500,000 ft.2 right now. we got a 35 and

october >> 20% of what is there now and october it will react with another eight 75,000 >> that's right. the project has been in the office for a couple years we know it's in the queue >> right we have that table a couple months ago that i thought. i question is this more the staff-where are we with that are upcoming discussion on the table and with our process around proposition m. but i think it was in may or june i saw the table with the large-cap and small-cap office space project. it was my father was going to be some sort of follow-up in the fall to continue consider talking about like what policy we may or may not want to have about how to consider space >> i think we were figured we would bring that to you when the two things happened. one is when the new allocation comes in and when essential soma plant comes forward which

obviously would authorize a lot of new office visit we want to have that conversation in the context of that and given the projects there. so yes we were to bring that to you rate this file were early next year. >> okay. >> i would just say this but the project it's a relatively small amount of space given the cap. that's why we felt this was a 4-5000 square-foot project and the movie and discussion. because the actual allocation here is 90,000 ft.2. >> i see. okay. so, when i went into this i thought that's the coming out of the large-cap allocation was more than that 80-90,000 ft.2. what i was going with this is i thought that special was happening involves essential soma definitely parties able to hearing about it in and proposition m i thought we would have a hearing about that. where i was going to know about is not in the essential soma plan areas by why should not be part of the same discussion of or talk about 20%

of becoming allocation? >> is only can the i guess because of the size of the project and because we have 500,000 ft.2. we went back big a concern about this particular allocation just in terms of that issue of the allocation. >> okay. i would like to hear from other commission should i could be supportive of a continuance on this but i will say that personally, i'm not hearing the direction that we be giving the project sponsor just yet in a little bit lost on it as well could only other commissioners have some better ideas will try to come up with some myself >> commissioner hillis six could i ask the architect of couple questions if you would come up to the microphone? i think we have some handout i believe from the representative of the homeowners association these are not yours? >> correct >> but did you have a slide that shows what you can build

without the bulk, because i think for me, getting more information on the bulk exception is come i think critical. i think with the issue i'm hearing is you are going to be with the bulk exception you are building is good to be closer to the folks in the adjacent buildings and set of higher. it's going to be closer but not as high. and trying to understand that, i think would be helpful in where this would go. >> sure. i have that up on the screen. see you can see them on the left side is the compliant massing that is the 160 foot building length and needs is a little less of 190 foot diagonal. it's less than the allowable square footage for florida as well. pardon me. you can see that to get the roughly 90,000 ft.2 of additional building area we are seeking difficult to sick stories to

meet that. so the impact is roughly 30 feet higher in the compliant massing to the neighboring buildings and as john had mentioned, when we look at this analysis initially on the project we got be more sensitive to the neighborhood we stayed low with the building. so, we got a four stories in the proposed massing and that generates to get to the 90,000 ft.2 it generates a sort of request for the exception exception for building mass. >> right. on this, non-bulk exception version, at the closest point to the neighboring buildings on fulsome, how far are you away? under your proposal,- >> the still maintains a 15 set for that. the distance between the fulsome street condominium is the same. the tween both the proposed massing

and the compliant massing at the differences there's a setback on fulsome st., hawthorne street of 12 feet and that so the floor plate is centered around the core but we don't want to have happened is an offset of that floor plan run the core that's existing. because then you've got speed wingspans that are unusable of 1215 feet. so we've center that up and by doing so were making interesting separation but going higher. >> how far off are you on hawthorne, for instance? i get -let's discuss this without the limitations of the court because i think that's driving some of this but if you didn't get in center that and put it closer to hawthorne and fulsome, how much additional space do you get on the as a blue side dispute >> that's a 48 foot that that were sewing this dimension to give you a sense of scale. so

from the existing current edge of existing building to the compliant massing it have an additional 40 feet. is that- >> yes. it sounds like were going to-this is going to be continued but i think that would be helpful. the proponents of attorneys provided some diagrams and kind of a compromise position with the massing could be under code compliance. you know in showing some additional separation between your proposed addition and sf blue. as well as 77 hawthorne place that i think it would be good to understand more and what it could compliant project gets you and how much additional separation that gets so we can better evaluate the trade-off between

height and building separation yet because, i think some people at as a blue may be happy if you end up going farther away but higher but it may bring a couple of additional neighbors worn-out upon upper floors who are going to have spear [inaudible] albeit fatherly decision also, it would be hopeful for me to know it seems like the 77 doubt pl. windows are somewhat secondary. they are on kind of a façade of the building but clearly is not the primary façade but i have some understanding of what is well is kind of the closest portion of the sf blue yukon of get that same concrete structure in the smaller windows there. so having some understanding of what is behind. i'm sure there's floor plans at as a blue and 77 doubt pl. that we can understand. but even there, his position kind of alluded to that because they push more of the massing toward 77 doubt

than as simply because i think those are secondary windows. >> can i make a suggestion zero this point in the conversation? we honestly understand were hearing out of the about project approval, continuance right now. i met with a design that works. were in a little bit of a difficult position because we can come back here the taller building next time but a shrunk building because were basically restarting environmentally. i was a restarted with a three-run number of the studies scope them have been reviewed by staff. we've heard before that it's an awkward point in the process for the commission to hear the first time because were at the finish line having done all the studies over two years. and now you're seeing it for the first time and i recognize the awkward position that puts you in. they put us in an awkward position, to because we've done all the background on a. i fear just

continuing this and coming back without being able to come back with something that he would even be allowed to support because we don't have environmental review covered. i just want to put out there, i know we just got through this process. on another project over the summer where we took more intensive look at this. i think the project sponsor may be a bit hesitant to go to all of the environment overview necessary for another design we don't know that we actually have buy-in from the community were from the commission. so i would just ask the commission consider that and think through what might be useful process hereto get us to the finish line so that were not running in circles in. >> doesn't necessarily have to be additional. i think the folks neighboring condo owners put forth a proposal that was somewhat in between. we are taking some additional setbacks in exchange but still seemingly beyond words allowed. he was so

made an exception for that. so i don't know. i do want to tail wagging the that. we should come up with a project that works and that the approval process fall where it goes. but, i just think we need that understand can i get the concept. you're asking for about exception greenock a girl out farther. were just trying to understand what that impact is to neighbors in the trade-off. it's hard to do that with the information we have in front of us. >> it would be useful to you from commissioners if simply, more setback building would be something that would be supportable? >> i would consider that >> the actual layout and how we make it with the court >> is that something you should explore. the diagrams we got albeit not from the

architect but from the representative, showed a massing that could work that could compliant that's 10 feet away from the current massing on the sf blue side. which starts to get you 54 feet from sf blue in the smallest plan that goes up as you get toward fulsome street. so, yes, i am open to any of those options. >> commissioner moore >> i am actually interested in the train of thought that commissioner hillis just developed. the question that lingers with me is that i sense would get a feeling that the increase of 90+ thousand square feet is the right you assume we have to grant. there is, indeed adaptive reuse. there is indeed building performance within the existing building. if i understood the neighbors

correctly, by your increasing floor to floor height you're losing the ability to gain additional square footage that is what i'm interested in. i can fully understand that you are trying to find, to optimize the asset as a shell within you can use to certain kinds of things are starting to have problems is that you are, by increasing, starting to great problems, which fall into the particular mr. cabin is very sensitive to that the policies about protecting and maintaining with ability of residential in that densified city. so, my question to you is, how can we both were creatively on floor to floor height, gave a certain amount of square footage in i'm not stuck were support that we point length support your 92,000 square feet but the opportunity to create creatively address staying within the required setback apartments and staying within

the envelope gets finding a way to maximize the square footage. those would be the objectives and i believe that commissioner hillis teed off the question by asking for additional creativity within the constraints that i think this commission feels quite unanimously and strongly about. that would be my interpretation of what he just said. >> commissioner richards >> commissioner moore what would that look like? what you just said? >> is a re-examination the existing building with the provision that it be reimagined for an effective use of a redesigned court were adjusted core with not necessarily increasing the ceiling heights but maximizing available office space within the volume could >> oh come back with some analysis on this could be given to various limitations. >> and discuss

>> with the commission and the neighbors to understand what it's going to how we would impact them. what would tempe do? what with 45 feet do you in the one picture was very telling as he looked out his window. i imagine what that must look like these big buildings looking right at him. >> we did that creatively on 91st st. and while there were minor changes [inaudible] make a more neighborly friendly building. that's what we are looking for >> this to donna, giovanni comments on where were going with sp1? this? >> [inaudible] >> can you talk into the microphone, please >> the overhead, if you might, please. i believe commissioner hillis as the architect for

some information on what it might look like if there was no exception, which, by the weight was plantings, ppa's response comments. they do not want that. that sort of went right over. this document, which are believe we've given you a copy of, provides you with a schematic showing what it would look like if there was no exception. you can see that there is a considerable setback and this particular box here would be the additional floor that would be treated, of course, a smaller square footage. commissioner moore put her finger right on it. which was the fundamental question why do need 20 foot ceilings

on the fourth floor additions. why do you need a 16 foot slab to slab separation, which doesn't really do anything for you. in other words, if you brought it up to standard 10 foot slab to slab, you get yourself another floor. i've never heard of a developer who voluntarily waives the right to make money with an extra floor just because he wanted larger ceilings. so that is one item that we can address through this process in order to reduce the height. >> figure director rahaim >> on clarify one hearing. first, i don't believe the

ceiling height of 20 feet. could somebody clarify with us tonight are by latency is not as much lower than any other office. office buildings are typically 12-14 feet in ceiling height with you clear fight with the suicides are spewing bedecked with 16 foot floor to floor will sit still easy between 10-11 feet because will you speak louder? fix was to ignite 10-11 feet >> so your ceiling height- >> this is for floor to floor deck to deck you were including structural slab steel structure, ducks and the lighting in the drop ceiling. roughly 5-6 foot assembly you will end up with 10-11 feet for too soon. >> with the current building? b dick's >> sorry i don't have that on the top of my head here. >> that's fine. >> we believe it is 12 feet. >> silly of ceiling height in the range of normal front office to get him into, just clarify, there was an issue raised by the mechanical word about the penthouse. is the mechanical penthouse? >> is a mechanical pen us. it's fully built to house the stairs of later and mechanical equipment >> then, what was my last question? i think the staff as we could be doing a pca letter

we sent with the code requirements are and then there's a lot more detail could i mean, i think what it hear from the commissioners and just another point i want to make was simply that the existing building does not-is not built to the maximum floor area and height permitted in the code. i mean we all know that i just want to confirm that for the record. neither the commissioners say is fundamentally setback father from the two residential buildings. so the question that i would just put to the commissioners, that of your able to answer us today, would you consider additional height in order to allow for that? because the building does not meet the current height limits. >> if we could see that trade. >> sure. >> sure what i'm hearing is a trainer. as mr. kleven said what does that mean in terms of the environment to review and will have to have that discussion. none of us can answer that question sitting that here today. >> okay. >> i want to be clear about that. because the higher it might reopen some of the

environmental studies. we just have to figure that out >> of move to continue the item indefinitely waiting for this to come out >> it really does mean a different environment to review >> how much time do you think stephanie's? >> staff needs >> >> no. jonas helvey audit. maybe the calendar will answer the question force >> the earliest they would be september 29. >> september 29 >> i don't think we can be ready by then, guys sorry. >> october 20, jonas? >> are full through november but if you like to squeeze in on the 20th week certainly could. >> that's mr. weingartner to make comments >> i'm principle with gansler and oversee this project. i guess, i just want to make the comment is been a lot of

description made about the project. there's been some sketchers are. i think the validity of the sketches it's hard to determine the right get we spent two years looking at all the complexities associate with putting in addition to putting the project altogether including four, seismic mechanical. it's not just a matter of the footprint of the addition. i think we all respect the wisdom and judgment of those present there's more to it than that. so, and i really appreciate commissioner johnson's request to be a little bit more definitive as you send this back to come with further refinement. given our study, and believe me, we went into this one to be sensitive as we possibly could. especially to the housing next door. again we thought that

going with a lower project would be better than building a taller project could be more sensitive to the building that exists now in the community. so, if we were to look at things like reducing some of the floor to floor height, maybe incrementally adding some additional setback but to a degree that is informed by our study of the project, would that be acceptable as refinement as opposed to going in with an entirely new project? >> i like to see alternatives. not just a floor to ceiling height but different setbacks and what else can be done >> i'm just trying to narrow the scope >> i think the commissioners are saying my sense is they say more setback from the adjacent residential building are needed. whether it needs to have no boat exception i don't think they're necessarily saying that but i think they want to look at what the trade-offs are.

>> my sense and i can speak for the environmental review 70 we could avoid going higher you can probably avoid the opening departmental review. but that means fundamentally less square footage. >> the classic was 75 howard when they came up to us and said with a master exception. here's what we are allowed to do initial 4-5 various different options was really really really clear to us even though we were renting them exceptions this was the better part. that's not what i'm seeing here. but stuff up on the screen. i squinted to try to see with the project wasn't. that's all i have to go on. if you want to pick up in my opinion just by one opinion 75 howard look what they submitted and see we helped us. that's improving about one of the work on the design because we knew what we were trade-offs were even though the design was complete. >> i understand. thank you. >> so i moved to continue to

the 20th >> jonas, what are you thinking your? >> there was a suggestion for october 20. >> let's set it for the 20th. >> october 20. motion to continue to october 20. >> moved and seconded. >> commissioner moore >> this building would occur on a vacant site. there be a different set of rules is that correct? >> no not the current of rules. i mean the addition >> of the downtown whirls rules woul start at the bottom of the top aye which govern downtown office buildings. in the absence of that, i can only see us take a modulated position on the building being designed to be completely compliant or explore alternatives by which it supposed to be added berries as it goes up. that might result in fewer square footage but i

do not want to start this exercise would basically saying that 92,244 ft.2 has to be delivered to this commission. i want to see better building and what the consequences of that are are not numerical but in the quality of [inaudible]. >> commissioner hillis >> i mean it may not be very as he goes up. in maybe berries as it goes back. i think we want to respond to the adjacent property owners. you got a generous 75 foot setback in the front of the building but as sf blue steps towards that service alley you get closer. that may be okay in places what's in there as well as it doesn't seem like the impact is as much on gal on the dell place building because they seem like secondary but i think that's what we want to just understand more.

>> if there's nothing further and commissioners there's a motion that's been seconded to continue this matter october 20 with the direction from the commission on a motion commissioner hillis aye jan johnson aye moore aye richards got follansbee i so moved that motion passes unanimously 5-0. commissioners that places us on items 17 per case number 2015-00904c >>[reading ordinance] conditional use authorization. >>pres. fung members of the commission, and staff, todd kennedy the san francisco planning department staff here to discuss this item in the item before you is a request for conditional water use authorization to correct a violation and legally establish a 3788 ft.2 real estate office located on the ground floor of

the existing building. the use has been operating at the site since 2014 without the issuance of a conditional use authorization. under the zoning code a conditional use authorization is required this used to operate at this location. a zoning violation case was opened in the project sponsor applied in response. the subject site is also under review for a building permit and variance to demolish and reconstruct the site into a new residential building. but that is separate from this case. to date the department has received six letters of support for this project, four of those letters received by staff after the staff report was turned in. that may provide you a copy of those.the department records

disapproval of this request and believes the project is unnecessary and/or undesirable for the following reasons. but it has been operating without a conditional use authorization since 2014 and brought to staff's attention by zoning violation. the use is not recognized as a neighborhood serving use in a form of the detail was proposed at this location 2011 per case number 2011 point 1.0 4c but this approved by commission. the subject site is under review for the demolition reconstruction of a new project. that concludes my presentation it on here happy to answer questions you may have today. >> project sponsor, please

>> good afternoon the president fung on commission did alexis pelosi plessy on behalf of the property owner. as paul kennedy mentioned were seeking a conditional use authorization to utilize the existing busy service on the property that the is only temporary as the property owner donald [inaudible], san francisco resident and vietnam veteran is completing for 14 unit building bottom of that entitlement is been in the works of two years. originally hoped the new developments would be processed quickly by the unfortunate that is not been the case has now been two years since applications were first filed. project has been heard by zoning administrator building permits have been submitted and were now anticipating final approval by the end of the year and so construction starts early next year. because of how long it's taken for the project to move forward don decided to rent the existing building activism significant vacancy graffiti and windows among the site. because the pending development and short-term nature of the lease were fugitives interested.

as a result done budgeted to guitar real estate local firm and masons sublease space to five other small local businesses including two nonprofits. the time don entered tivoli seems unaware that tenant requires a conditional use authorization. once was notified one was required he entered the process and we immediately began work with planning department staff to hear it. initially with the entitlement for the new building would be granted immediately or imminently taking the violation moved but obviously that has not happened. now unfortunately when this clear position of being. the violation to her about the entitlement to be completed and the issue of how we do that and the impact it has to the building at the tenets of the neighborhood. is what is the forget planning is recommended denial of the spell of the client on to evict all five tenants including two nonprofits. we are recommending long without castro persons associated capital upper market cbd to see you be approved throughout the existing uses to continue until construction starts on the new project.

construction is likely to start in early 2017 and all the local small businesses on site including the nonprofits know this and date with her occupancy and planning the relocation efforts around it. if visio is not granted existing users need to vacate the space will sit empty for the next 5-6 month. there's no way to get another tenant in the for construction of the new building stock. the term leases too short and you cannot attack we took tenant two years ago there's certainly no way he'll attract one that it was were done with income sensibly waiting permit issuance and resolution of dr five. the jars scheduled to be heard before this body on november 10. the building is vacant very concerned out vandalism graffiti like crying vacancy, etc. those issues putting vacant storefronts up and down marketing an exact reason why don entered into the lease with

conservatives do we understand the need for active use aftermarket entity the existing businesses do cater to local residents they do generate some traffic and provide activity on site what these long-term use is been on the division of the upper market entity on a temporary basis such as what we are proposing they work. in closing we join the thank todd kennedy auto clinic is staffed all their hard work on this project. we been trying to resolve this issue with the violation for quite some time and we appreciate the time to work with them to try to get the other project approved so we do not have to come before you today see you but at this point we are in a position where we cannot have the variance issued under the violation is cured as were doing this dance try to figure out the bath past path. grading the cu you help ensure the existing tenants which are local small businesses and nonprofits they in the building and the three corner is active in so to reduce crime and vagrancy and graffiti if you have any questions these let me know >> thank you. open up to public comment. >> good afternoon. my name is lori the stack in i-m business owner of guitar out real estate. i'm here today to

express to you trying to say in the state stay in the state composer they can clarify this up. in the community if i could just go over some notes of what we witnessed in the past. i originally purchased approach don in regards to occupying the space because i've seen the space empty for several years and the dilapidation and graffiti was all over the place. but as a small business owner i thought it might be a great opportunity for our company to start. she allowed us to occupy the plate space clean it up provide a service to the community. we provide not only seminars and educational seminars, but festivals and involve the community in regards to really providing a service to those that occupy the neighborhood and surrounding areas. anyway,

the daily task of being at 2201 market st., there's a tremendous amount of homeless individuals that occupy almost a daily. we are constantly working with the police department and with surrounding merchants to keep them away from the premises with drug infested and graffiti going on constantly. we feel it's the pros outweigh the negatives in regards to handling these types of situations and by having this business that's going that's ongoing in the community, and being there when certain things arrives prevents more detriment to the neighborhood. so, i hope you'll consider this and if you have any questions or be happy to answer them. >> thank you any additional

public comment? seeing none, public comment is closed. open up to commission could i do a one question for staff. that is, is there such a thing as a temporary see you or see you that is this type of use forever as it might change. >> commissioner president fong through you let me take a shot at that since i've been that with the city i've not heard of this, however, a temporary use authorization but i think with this - my colleague should answer that question. >> divine if so commission feels compelled to have a condition of such have a return for reevaluation. >> okay. is that amenable to the project sponsors okay. >> city attorney. >> she's not sitting there.

>> you'll have to city hall revoke the conditional use authorization so that will be - essential be another - you contact for reauthorization of review and revoke - >> in a year times or 9 months. >> whatever dates the attorneys. >> clarity thank you. >> were you able to hear that walked question. >> deputy city attorney mirena burns. sorry in the back of hearing room repeat. >> a authorizing temporary conditional use permitted or one that sunsets on a particular date and general we're advised not - you'll need to say have another process to revoke the issue but you certainly could issue the continental with the

condition it be reviewed and - >> in a year or 2 years, 3 years maybe the project that is currently proposed not move forward. >> a year would be good. >> okay. thank you. >> commissioner johnson. >> thank you very much i understand the project sponsor there's a pickle you guys are in but ask a different question in terms of - i'm not a little bit concerned about having the fees that are issued with the intent they'll be reviewed by a future commission intending the future commissioner commission low take another action to revoke or retract the fee in place for some amount of time i'm not sure i'm comfortable with that with the - so my question is is that possible to revise the cu but delay the action for 6 months (laughter) i know it needs a variance i

understand but i feel like that is easier than tying the hands of a future commission to go back and take - >> commissioner that be would challenging because it is a conquest in the enforcement so for your first point you could certainly - make a vblt that basically sends a message to the further commission if we approve this this is in place for a sincerity period of time and you can send that message to a future commission. >> let me tell you what will happen 2 years from now, 1 year from now well, it is actually until there is a poimentd it will come back to us and then have someone in the public for whatever reason telling me us the discussion we had a year ago i've sxernd hearings the

intent that a future commission will follow-up in the fortune and it didn't happen but if so it the easiest that's why i asked the question for january 2017 a scombhoer. >> it is ultimately the last name it issue there is a pending proposal for the sites by the project use for the current building and the current utilization of the site could, basically be superseded by a new application that is for housing that the ground floor use will not be able to be used as a states office this is counter to the ideas of upper market ncd and having said that, there is a possibility to basically support the cu based on the current utilization of the site but not have the use

basically automatically of the repeatable new building. >> new more tennis building. >> deputy city attorney mirena burns. that approval will completely super he'd what is on the sites my understanding the proposed project preps that may come before you in the future may depiction. >> that's if i'm correct the use is to the side even if the site infinitives the ground floor use will be - >> not with the new building. >> divine clarify the project commissioners, on that motion before the commission. >> the project is not a conditional use it is actually a straight building permit it is the discretionary review file and variance will have to come before the commission. >> i'm not even certain

there is enough ground level commercial on the building there maybe residential i'm sorry i don't have that information but this use is essentially once this building is demolished and the new building. >> can we get clarity. >> project sponsor any clarity. >> yes. to clarify empowering retail and we've think working with the d t n a 0 specifically breaking it up with one large space or a number of smaller spaces and it is a variance this is required for backyard or rear yard that's not been issued because of the enforcement action so the building permit at 312 went out and that's what is coming back before you. >> so does not come to the commission as a conditional use but we'll see it because of the dr.

>> i'm unclear about our ability to not have a reality office in the state that shows describing as intended to be dividendable and the real estate office location will be highly inappropriate >> and it is retail use so if there were on those it needs an entirely new building. >> deputy city attorney mirena burns. that's correct whatever entitlements for the prior construction okay. >> commissioner vice president richards. >> i move to approve unfortunately commissioner vice president richards motion in front of you is for denial. >> the motion and a continuance to september 29th maybe not need that long. >> we could put this on the consent calendar so maybe

september 22nd the 22 would be - au >> commissioner johnson. >> thank you so i appreciate the clarification it is my understanding they're going to a building permit a cu saying office buildinguse is available and look at that and okay. you can put office use in the project and you'll never see that. >> right if we approve the cu and they vote for the project and - >> now projects. >> okay. >> so doesn't run with the land it runs with the building. >> that's what i'm hearing in the in the building. >> but a below market rate building a fresh start reset. >> on the same land okay. >> can we community-based from the 15. >> do you have -

>> i was suggesting the 22. >> of september. >> september okay. >> that way the packets the staff has a week to prepare. >> that would be great. >> that's my motion. >> agreeable to the seconder. >> none seconded it. >> on that motion - >> hi oh, (laughter) okay. i saw another name on that motion toto the motion of intent and continue to september 22nd consent calendar commissioner hillis commissioner johnson commissioner moore commissioner vice president richards and commissioner president fong so moved, commissioners, that motion passes unanimously 5 to zero and commissioners item 18 was a variance zoning administrator was going to consider separately during

recess, however, a noticing problem the parties have been notified commissioners that places you in our discretionary review calendar for grand avenue and if there is anyone that is interested in items 20 ab those matters are being continued this is the last item today. >> good evening planning commission divine southwest team leader the the subject property is on brand view avenue the proposal is inclusive vertically to an existing residents that includes a basement level two roof decks on the top level without alterations with one thousand plus square feet to an

existing 2000 plus square feet the subject property is located on the east side of grand avenue between marina in the rh2 zoning district and two family story building occupies the property that slopes from the front to the rear with the rakers is abutting property facing into the street discretionary review is filed by a neighbor two residents north of the the subject property the residents rtd reviewed it and determined the proposal meets the standards of residential guidelines this proposal is appropriately scaled and the third floor addition is one story taller than the context and setback 15 feet and not alternatively the two scales consistent with the expansion at the

rear is pulled feet from the side property line and the property is on a disregard sloping lot and the massing is shaped to respond to the size project it didn't contain or create anything that be exceptional or extraordinary and the planning department shouldn't take the discretionary review p i want to bring one issue to the commission attention demolition concerns were raised by another resident not the dr filer but they wish they could take discretionary review and to gaud against the possibility of demolition with the commission they feel this is an better option they can choose to do that and craft the department crafts it one to provide regular updates with the planning department

via e-mail for the broken state to the subject planner and any revisions to the application covering the calculations should be recorded to the planner and this is over-the-counter that concludes my presentation. >> dr requester you have a 5-minute presentation. >> hello my name is cynthia weaver i submitted the discretionary review application but it was on behalf of the neighborhood not just myself i live on grand view avenue live and own there and want to say before i get into the details i want to thank the commissioners for staying awake this paushgs.

>> this is not late it is early. >> that's what i've heard i thought it - i was told it could go later thank you to the commissioner and the staff for their you assistance and coaching me and letting e let me know how to maneuver a lot of the neighborhoods go lined up behind me and pdsaid figure it out thank to everyone the problem as statistics the scale of the proposed development an grandview avenue i'm going to go through 3

it is out of scale with proportion to everything that is in the neighborhood. implications of this is that because it is so significantly larger than other single-family homes that a couple of things happen. one is that the hillside had the mazed approached as opposed to a stairstep approach. the top floor has a visual design of the art deco style homes so this would be like a the last of the painted ladies in a row with the stories higher than the painted ladies. >>[timer dings] >>ma'am, ma'am your time is up but you do have a two-minute rebuttal and the commissioners will ask you questions.you have five minutes.

>> is anyone here in support of the dr. not you, but the general public? >>no, they >>no, theyare working. >> let me start off with the mapping of the building. we feel this was appropriate with the staff report. this building, the front of it is existentially no different than the other buildings on the street including at the mapping

of the front of the building. if you look at the photograph, it is no different than any of the other buildings. it has a step down. so it has a vertical plane when you are looking up at it. you have two adjacent neighbors as well as a neighbor in the back. they do not approach the project including the [inaudible]. are other request was to make this a historical restore. this is the most commonly designed home

in the city. there is nothing in particular that is historic about this building except for the design and the structure[inaudible] and this was attached to the case report and she agreed with the board's decision which i feel is correct. the size of the building is referred to as this building being very big and the existing building being lovable. i'm aware the fact that the mission is concerned with the fact that this is in fact a minority to district. when design was introduced to the neighborhood

it was a multiunit building. but, the neighborhood once a unit buildingin the home. if the commission wants to make this into a double unit building that is fine but currently it is a single family home at their request. and, i just asked the chew it in support of us. >>thank you miss berkeley. any supportfor the project sponsor? >>good afternoon commissioners,

in the interest of time it doesn't seem like there is a whole lot to talk about here. in the interest of time, the second unit would be a two bedroom one bath unit if the commission desired we could also set the front deck back 5 feet for additional privacy for people in the front if that was a concern. i have some interesting photos if you feel that view is an issue. i don't think that view is an issue but if you read the application, you could be an issue. we verify that our roofline is still below everybody's top floor from their top floor the views will be pure. thank you. >>thank you. any additional support one part of the project sponsor? okay, you have a two-minute rebuttal. two minutes. >>thank you. >>speak into the microphone

please. >>sorry, it is taller than i am. in the implication section of this the decision that you are making in this area does set a precedence and it will allow the second story to be available for the homes in the area if people choose to do that. and, it would be more difficult for people to deny that going forward because they would already have an additional floor. other considerations, just because the code says that you can build to a certain height does not mean you get approved for that certain height. we also want to consider the historic implications for the neighborhoods. if we make this change from an affordable neighborhood to a non-affordable neighborhood that will have lasting implications in that

neighborhood's minds. one final statement is that your decision has major impact on the community and do not approve this just because you can approve this. thank you very much and i will be open for any questions also. >>thank you. project sponsor, you have two minutes for a rebuttal. >> i just want to show than this photograph is also in the commissions and you will see that this is a prettydojo style home and this would be at the

request now as her house. >>thank you, this portion of the hearing is closed. commissioner more. >>i appreciate the --of people thinking about this project and i the think that the change in any building has particular implications in this particular case,i believe this project has done what it was designed to do. in an rh2 encouraged to increase units with an addition that is an extensive as this one. with the plan we would like to see a unit that is equitable to the project. not just a basementunit. that is not acceptable we are not willing to entertain that. i think the idea is that while

bringing up is the positive comment that i embrace that you said the front tier on the back floor and the front streets do not have tiers at the street side and taking into the architecture is a smart mode. i am in favor in support of the project and i would like to see what you are suggesting in types of units, and the style units and where it is. >>so you're suggesting dr? >>correct. that would be the proper direction of the commissionright now. >>this is essentially what was

presented originally to what the neighborhood. >>can you pull the mic down really quick? there is a lot of feedback. >>this was what was presented to the commission initially and the commission wanted two units most certainly and the type of units that it lodges and what is presented we can most certainly instruct staff to come up with two units that what you would call a more equal and that is to say that we could have the ground floor be part of the second floor and then have two top floors. similarly, the design of the step which the building is already set back and that is the kind of design we normally

have any way. >>can you go into detail what kind of units you will be using for the second units? just a rough idea. >>basically, if you look at the proportions, one of the bedrooms in the rear could be incorporated into[inaudible] so we can incorporate that into it. >>can you give us like 1000 ft.2 what we're trying to avoid 900 ft.2 and 1600 ft.2.

>> what we are presenting is 850 ft.2. >>850 ft.2? >>850 ft.2, yeah. i am just trying to give you a comparison of what it is which is a very standard two-bedroom size. if we are talking about-- it would be more affordable than larger units. but if we are talking about and the commission would like to see than most certainly we can incorporate at least another-- >>let me comment that 800 ft.2 is basically so minimal that i am not really comfortablewith sitting here without a drawing to look at the qualities of what we are getting. >>this is the reason that i was saying that we would be

incorporating portions of the ground floor into it so become more like 1100 ft.2 or 1200 ft.2. >>so you are telling me that the new second unit would be larger than 900 ft.2. >>that is correct. >>okay. i hear you but i am a visual person. i like to see things. >>and, it will be in two floors. >>i am curiouswhat other commissioners have to say because i don't like to talk architecture and building plans withoutactually seeing them. >>commissioner? >>i am in agreement i like the second unit. it does not trouble me in this case that the second unit is smaller than the first unit in the home. my mother has one and that's how we have her unit. this lays out and steps down to a hill

which lays out something in the lower unit. a piece in the upper unit i think would be awkward here. i think you still have a fairly modest 850 ft.2 above and 1200 ft.2 home below. kind of as far as diverse housing types go and if they work, i think this one works. >>commissioner, one of these units would be providing a four-bedroom unit which is very hard to find in the city. >>i don't think that taking a unit from the first floor and adding it to the basement unit

is not necessary. i am comfortable with what you have presented in a smaller-- you are right. i mean granted we have seen smaller single-family homes. we could move to take dr with the modification shown with a unit on the ground floor and stepping back that top deck in the front. >>yeah, on the top. >>by 5 feet was it? >>yeah. >>commissioner? >>that was my motion >>second >>i'm good. >>commissioner? >>thank you that is something that the commissioner asked for in previous projects. i want

to make things easy so i am in support of the motion but i would like to say that i would be in support of suspending the basement unit into the second floor. it looks like f you go above the proposed basement floor plan there is space in the proposed first floor plan and an extra room or bedroom or something. but, if we are okay with the unit as is, i will be okay with it as well. the only thing that i will ask is that oh nevermind, the back deck is only 700 ft.2. nevermind, i am good. >>if nothing further commissioners, there has been a motion and a second to approve this matter with this modification of adding an additional 5 feet and that second unit. with that we can take the roll.

>>[roll call vote] >>so moved commissioners the motion passes 5:0. commissioners that leaves us with general public comment and i have the general public comment speaker cards. >>anyone for general public comment? ? not seeing any so the meeting is adjourned p . >>[gavel] >> self-planning works to preserve and enhance the city what kind hispanic the environment in a variety of ways

overhead plans to fwied other departments to open space and land use an urban design and a variety of other matters related to the physical urban environment planning projects include implementing code change or designing plaza or parks projects can be broad as proipd on overhead neighborhood planning effort typically include public involvement depending on the subject a new lot or effect or be active in the final process lots of people are troubled by they're moving loss of they're of what we preserve to be they're moving mid block or rear yard open space. >> one way to be involved attend a meeting to go it gives

us and the neighbors to learn and participate dribble in future improvements meetings often take the form of open houses or focus groups or other stinks that allows you or your neighbors to provide feedback and ask questions the best way to insure you'll be alerted the community meetings sign up for the notification on the website by signing up using you'll receive the notifications of existing request the specific neighborhood or project type if you're language is a disability accomodation please call us 72 hours before the event over the events staff will receive the input and publish the results on the website the notifications bans feedback from the public for example, the feedback you

provide may change how a street corridors looks at or the web policy the get started in planning for our neighborhood or learner more mr. the upcoming visit the plans and programs package of our we are talking about with our feedback and participation that is important to us not everyone takes this so be proud of taking anned and director hsu,

present. director nolan. director rib key. you have a quorum. >> the ringing of and use of cell phones, pagers and similar sound-producing electronic devices are prohibited at this meeting. please be advised that the chairman may order the removal from the meeting room of any person responsible for the ringing or use of a cell phone, pager or other similar sound-producing electronic devices. sell phones set on vibrate cause interference so

request they turned off. motion approval of the minutes from august 16. >> motion to approve. >> aye >> item 5, communication director yz have none. item 6, introduction of new or unfinished business mpt >> i want bring up my favorite topics, elevators we have on the consent calendar a item for improving improvement on the escalators and elevators which provide access to our station. in light of the fact that currently civic center i believe is out right now and i know in the disability community there was a little-a lot of concern about the lack of notice and there was some notice but not enough notice and think where people are demanding on escalators and

elevator, it is important to overknhunicate communicate so when we do the upgrade to infrastructure over communicate when the outages take place and do everything we can to minimize the impact on the riders. that's it. >> director rib key, i think we did everything to coordinate with bart. thank you. >> at our last meeting which was long we had a gentlemen stand up in general public comment and he called attention to the stockton street discussions go around and think his call if i remember was to make sure we continue on the public process as we always do and know we will but he waited a long time to make the comment and want today bring it up. we have got a lot of e-mails about stockton street and look forward to the public process

on that. >> item 7, directors report. >> director riscon, and good afternoon member thofz chair and board and staff. i want to start out my report by recognizing a couple of ow moust outstaning employees. first i like to ask [inaudible] our chief ficial officer who is director of finance and information technology division to come forward to recognize one of her employees. >> it is pleasure to introduce naomi steinway who has been with us 35 years. before i was born she started. she demonstrated deep commitment to womeen owned businesses and as we rely on diligence and making sure we fulfill obligations to the stakeholders mpt she is a

go to staff member regarding the db program and vauchbed in a large variety of other areas such as procurement of [inaudible] and third street light-rail extension to make sure we are fulfilling our obligations there to the communities. she is also been instrumental being lias ons with the auditors and said naomi is terrific gathering, analyzing and reporting the participation. she is thoughtful i hard working and has a dry whit that really positively impacts a lot of the unit. she is looking for challenges and way to enhance the community. the last comment i make, she is a big contributor of healthy snacks for our meetings and she a key member of the contract

compliance office. many of her fanerize here. thank you tr 84 work for throw fiver years, it is a incredible achievement and congratulations. >> thank you very much and the commissioners, thank you. i hardly expected this at all. hoping to quitely retire with caucasian male majority. hope i can hang on another year. thank you. >> on behalf of the board and city thank you for your work, wish you all the best. [applause] >> next i want to ask john hailey the transit director to come forward and recognize one of his employees.

>> good afternoon mr. hailey. >> good afternoon mr. chairman. i just it is my pleasure this afternoon to recognize gentlemen to my left, leroy wilson who is one of our longstanding transit supervisors. you may have noticed recently in the controllers report that over the last 5 years the average driving speed in san francisco dropped some 25 percent. at the same time our evening rush hour has lengthened as new industries have come to change the commute patterns. one of the things that at the same time we have been able to improve our on time performance incremental but not where we would like us to be, and one of

the reasons we are able to do that is because of people like mr. wilson. mr. wilson works in the most difficult locations, south of market street, during the most difcult times. he has the opportunity to make adjustments to lines like the 27, which are frequently backed up because of bay bridge commute and also in many respects is a very sod after figure at the transbay terminal as operators will go and have issues that mr. wilson has resolved. he is a outstaning representative for all of us in terms of getting our service and making adjustments to the invariable situations so the supervisor would encounter but also is highly regarded and well respected by our operators. my

apologies but i should say to the right is brent jones and [inaudible] in charge of our service management. so, it is my pleasure to introduce you to mr. wilson for his recognition. [applause] >> on behalf of the board and whole city thank you for the important work you do and do it so well for so many years. thank you. >> thank you. i just don't know how to responds after mr. hailey says all that but want to thank god first of all for giving me all the tools that i need and placing me in the department with managers that you have just met and making sure i have everything i need to get the job done. also, like to thank my wife who's

sitting right there. [applause] a lot of this work i take home and she helps me out with it and my phone stays on all the time for my other co-workers out there and she says, honey, we are out to dinner and you are still taking calls. and that is just the dedication i center to my co-workers because without them i could not get that job done. i could not do this job without my co-workers and want to thank all of them even though i don't see any here. my daughter, my niece and ist iser in law who comes over my house and bugs me all the time. my cousin sean who ran for district supervisor last year and he lost to malia,

sorry about that. again, thank all of you for being here and this is-this caught me by surprise right here. with that being said, i have more work to do. thank you. >> thank you. [applause] >> thank you mr. chair. vision zero update for the month. mayors executive director on vision zero included we report regularly to boards and commissions and primarily to this board. two update said today. first one very exciting we broke ground last week on 9th and division. probably one of the first in the country.

this is a area on the high injury network and anyone who is troyed to pass through there on a bike or in a car very rarely do people pass on foot but it is a hairy place to try to get through and made a number of improvements on division street in recent years but this particular intersection is one we thought was a good place to try this very innovative design based on a dutch intersection design. protected bike laneatize is clear, you ride along a curb on one side and protection whether it is parked cars or delineators or barriers on the side but that works while you are in the block but when you get a intersection it is much harder to protect because intersections are open for allow of the flow of vehicles. this design coming from europe puts concrete islands at all 4

of the corners and raises the cros walk s and changes the approach and turn geometry so cars have to slow and so that the visibility between people on bike and foot and people in cars is much better. so, we are really excited to try it out here. we are also coupling with improvements on ajaistant streets on 9th and division, but very exciting to see what will be-we posted when we started this and put photo's up when it is done and we'll evaluate and watching it carefully to see how well it performs and the potential applicable may be else where in the city. exciting stuff there in the ground for the engineering e on vision zero. on the education e of vision zero, a aspect of the executive directorive is directing us the sfmta to implement a

comprehensive vision zero awareness campaign within 30 days of the exectev directive. i reported at the last meeting we initiated radio ads in english and spanning to raise awareness of vision zero. we followed windup a second round we laurned yesterday. this is 6 speeds sf and just like the engineering work on the education work we use data driven or research driven process to conform the work we are doing. in this case we got feedback from focus groups as well as community wide research polling and interesting results. what we found is that, people do see speeding as a bad thing and in san francisco we are focusing on speed because it is the leading

primary collision factor of serious and fating collisions. wheel people say it as a problem, people don't necessarily think of it as a problem in san francisco. they see it as a freeway thing or open road problem. there is a perception to recognize unsafe speed happen in the city and urban virems as well. more interesting, most drivers consider themselves above average ijskill and not at need to adhere to posted speed limits. like many other things we think the problem isn't with us, it is with other people. it was with that in mind that we developed this adand it is essentially meant to inform people that the speed limit in san francisco is 25 miles a hour unless otherwise posted and that small increases in speed correspond to less control in stopping, less

reaction time in terms of seeing people and that traffic deaths are problem in our city so raising awareness but targeting at the perceptions. i will ask lorie to play the spot so people can hear what people hear on the radio. playing on drive time and pandora and running english, spanish and chinese then last month. >> if i drive 10 miles over the speed limit it takes [inaudible] yfs going to fast. [inaudible] i have to live with that. speeding can lead to traffic deaths on san francisco streets. the speed limit is 25 for a reason. stick to the

limit. know more at vision zero sf.org. >> if you haven't heard those already, you and thousands of others will be hearing it as they make their way to work this week and the rest of the month. moving on, another campaign addressing another safety issue that is of great importance and this deals with the safety of our employees. as we discussed and heard periodically over time, we have employees be transit operators or parking control officers, inspectors and custodeian and station agents subject to attacks by memberoffs the public. there were 58 reported last year or just on muni operators and that compares to 24 in 2014. so, it is unacceptable thing happening and very disturbing trend including a couple very public incident you may have read

about in the past couple weeks. we have been work wg folks internally as well as unions that represent the groups, primarily twu and sciu on a number of things to address the issue and reverse that trend. one aspect of that collaboration is new adcampaign that was launched last week, which is just one part of a comprehensive approach. the theme is keep them safe and these will be in the form of ads placed on buses and featureed throughout the transportation system and i will ask lorie and sfgovtv go to the screen to show the ads so you can get a sense of what they look like. so, we have these you see from the perspective of the employee and family and others. so, you'll

be seeing those if you haven't already on muni buses. that is one part and this came from our employ ease they thought it st. important to raise aware ness to the public of the difficult work they do and there are people like the rest of us that want toget home safely like the rest of us. we'll continue working on that campaign but happy to see that come forward. couple of other muni items. on the heals of the news we were announcing recipients of $45 million of state, cap and trade funds toward the light-rail vehicle expabz program. chair nolan and i traveled to sacramento this last week along with mayor lee, board president london breed and assembly member david chiu

to visit the sea mans factory. it was great to be able to go there to celebrate the recent news. this is 45 million on top of the 21 million so more than 80 million in support. first vehicle should be here about theened of the year and start seeing them in service in 2017. by the end of 2018 we will have 20 new vehicles hitting the street. that was great news. in the mean time to address crowding and to focus our resources where the demand is the highest, this morning we launched a shuttle that will shuttle cars between coal valley and embarcadero during rush hours. we have

basically 4 trains, or 2 trains doing two loops runic between the points which are the inner part of the [inaudible] which anyone who ride at that time of day once you get to that portion the cars are usually full so the folks often can't board the train, so we are inserting capacity during the rush hour to try to insure the folks who want to take the injudah to get to work or to the city it k do so. we started it this morning, worked well. there are logistical issues we worked out when we tested this a few years back and hope to keep this in service and will be the first of such efforts we roll out over the next few years. meanwhile, down at balboa park, there is a a lot of various

construction work going on. one of the more significant aspects is we have largest or oldest railyard there and have been in the process in the last couple years of preplacing all the rails, many switches and overhead wires and infrastructure in that facility. it is generally not public work but very important to get our system in the state of good repair. we have largeby be able to do this work without impacting the public but starting part the project today that takes the part of the revenue loop, the j and k normally travel on out of service to replace those rails. so, as a result, there are different patterns for people to board and offboard for the j and k at balboa park. the k is boarding on ocean avenue. we have done a lout of outreach

and trying to make the public aware of where they need togo to catch their train or once they get off the train to get to where they are going safely. we understand it is inconvenient for folks but have done everything we can to minimize the inconvenience but excited to see this work donefelt the entire project should be done mid-2017. a very large state of good repair project you provided funding and support for in previous capital budgets. the last thing, i mentioned last time the votes for the muni art program were opened till last week and the vote are in and have the 5 winners. you can see on the screen-there is the new multimedia presentation for the directors report. we had 5

winners that were-came from the votes. the top winner is monica and her exhibit is called teens of sf. followed by lillian shan hann with bit by bit and a 3 way tie for third place which is [inaudible] counter point studio which is peter tomen son and lisa luvene for city walks and todd [inaudible] for sight seeing. these will go up. each of the artists our groups will have their work featureed on muni buses and artist receiving the most votes gelt a $2 thousand cash prize and [inaudible] get $1250 and this is a partnership between sfmta and san francisco beautiful. a win, win for artist and muni

riders. that concludes my report. >> just to go back to the $45 million of money we got for more lrv in the future. it is probably confusing we state our need without having identified all the funding and i know we have seen the same with the buses as we have more funding become available we place a order for more buses and i don't find that unusual for large infrastructure purposes or projects. is that standard we identify the need and know what we want and as the money becomes available we place those orders? >> in most cases we identified the funding and just not secured the funding. we identified for the lightrail vehicles this as the main

source for this part of the expansion. the procurement for lightrail is 151 to replace the ones we have and that is funded with federal and local sales tax and that we identified and secured. there is expansion of the first 24 vehiclechise is something we committed to as part of the grant agreement for the federal government for the central subway grant. we wroifed the revenues and secured revenues for those. then we had exercised an option on the lightrail vehicle for additional 40 car squz for that we identified main source orphfunding being state cap and trade funds and now secured in subsequent years the first pieces of that. yes, that is typical and most cases we have identified the funds, we just don't have them secured commitment from whatever the funding partner is. >> thank you for clearing that up. i think that can be

confusing for people that dont understand how the procurement process works. >> thank you very much. congratuless on the end shuttle surfbs. that is great. as you know since you have been in the chair i pestered you about shuttle service and sure it wasn't my pestering that did it but glad you and mr. hailey got around to this one. as we procure lrv and stuff coming on stock you will look at way tooz expand this. i assume the ways to expand this don't just include shuttle service but reintroducing-i urge the switch back in west portal to acamidate that. for me this is great news and something that is of great policy interest to me, so with the permission of chair nolan and vice chair bringman, i support that we-when you have the data and you and mr. hailey are ready,

report how the shuttle service is working. maybe also a update how it works comparison with the bus shuttle service and other options we throw at that line and plans for expansion for shuttle service whether plans for west portal or castro. >> happy. >> i do want to cu-mind john hailey and staff for putting this together. it may seem simple t is a lot of work that goes into making this happen and they absolutely started thinking about what are the next as the rail fleet grows the most critical needs whether it is shuttles or expanding from one to 2 car or 2 to 3 car trains. >> how this integrates with the existing system is obviously important. you can have more cars but if they get jammed

ativan ness you haven't solved the problem. i want to know if the service is causes delays on the interchange or worked through seemlessly. >> mr. chairman you have one person who indicated a iftrust in addressing you and only matters discussed by mr. riscon. herben wineer followed by michael putralis. >> michael putralis. >> mr. wineer is first. >> herben wineerment one question about the new lrvs. i notice there is no railing at the end of the seats or sideways. if there is a sudden stop, if there is no railing a person can just spill over and possible injure themselves or other passengers. i noticed in the picture on the san

francisco examiner so can you clarify about the safety of that because i just noticed it in the picture and something that seems to be missing. >> the picture in the paper was of the- >> mr. riscon let's let him finish. >> the vehicle that we were able to visit in the newspaper was had first production vehicle and not complete so there were many things that will be on the car that were not on the car shown in the picture. what i say generally from ever aspect of operation from accessibility to safety to performance, energy efficiency the new cars are significant improvement over what we have today so the rule jz requirements just generally for safety on rail vehicleerize very stringent. what we do is above and beyond and won't put anything to service that puts people at risk. >> thank you for the

clarification. >> michael putrelis. ime arace bisticalest and concerned during your preezen taig about the vision zero work going on, there was no mention about long standing issue of mine and that is on bicyclist riding on sidewalks. i looked over your materials available on the sfmta website and can't find information about whatever sfmta may be doing to encourage bisicalest to stay off the sidewalks. in particular, i'm very concerned about the south side of market street from van ness to valencia. bicyclist are frequently riding past that um, union office and riding

past quickly by the mu cros key mattress shop and it is really dangerous for pedestrians, for other bisicalests and people in cars. there needs to be a stenciling on sfmts saying it is against the law to ride your bicycle on the sidewalks and if you want to also put carat in front of bisicalest, it should also remind all bicyclist that especially on market street, we have bike lanes. bicyclists need to use the bike lanes. thank you. >> movering on, item h, advisory counsel report. i do not see chairman weaver here. public comment this is a

opportunity formaters within the sfmta but not on todays agenda. we'll start with eileen boken followed by albert chow. >> good afternoon. >> eileen boken. district 4 resident. i'm here regarding the rapid project which is on the [inaudible] i believe final approval the project is premature. in light of the ongoing issues on mission street the consensus and merchants of taraval is move forward with a pilot project which involved no structural changesism this is the taraval plan or community based plan. this pilot project involves the entire taraval corridor and not just the 5 locations included in the proposed mta plan. the

community is recommending the tarival project be for at least 6 months. the tarival community is seeking to avoid negative impacts the 14 mission rapid project had. the tarival neighborhood sees the community based plan as a potential win, win for mta and community at large. thank you. >> the next speaker please. >> next speaker is albert chow followed by tom lee. >> good afternoon mr. chow. >> albert chair from great wall hard weir. we have a great street the way it is now, but you are planning to take away a lot of parking and give a red lane in the left lan and put boarding island and traffic lights and bull bouts and [inaudible] because of the

perpendicular parking and this for saving 2 or 3 minutes. just like that you plan to upset the dynamic of the street and discourage driving in a area where driving is really necessary. have you tried to run errands in the sun set? people drive and come to the businesses that way. i like to have some flashing lights and painted rowdways in lieu of the boarding island for safety but at the same time keep our parking. i just want to remind you that the small businesserize the backbone of the city and create the character of the neighborhood. target and macey, do they make san francisco unique? no. they leave as soon as the boom goes bust but we have stayed because we lover our city. sean [inaudible] told me that if all sides are mad we are doing

something right and think this is the wrong approach. let that go for 6 months and it be a half and half sfmta and community based design everyone can be happy with. thank you very much. >> tony lee followed by aaron star and herbert wineer. >> good afternoon mr. lee. >> good evening. good afternoon mr. chairman and [inaudible] i am a full time [inaudible] 27 years. mailed me a letter saying that if i dont pay for the $179 for the disputes [inaudible] she will not let me renew my card and i cannot drive the cab so get fired. [inaudible] make a

living and pay the bills. $179 [inaudible] today that i make. this not fair. [inaudible] everybody know a lot of kick backs and [inaudible] you can get it, a lot of rumor and never bring that before you because it isn't my interest but now they are clearly against me like this way so i hope that you are going to lay off your unprofessional and air gnt staff because you will make a lot of drivers lose their jobs. if you are going to fine me for this money, i will do it in a legal way and make you

[inaudible] i tell people don't park. only one car you couldn't get towed, you lost 600 bucks and i find the [inaudible] they move their car and you will lose a million dollar for your tow money rev enues as well. i have a right to do that. >> aaron star, followed by herbt wineer and edward mason. >> good afternoon board. aaron star and work for the san francisco planning department. by my caurmts are my own and not paid right now. i'm here to spress concern over there bike and pedestrian on the market street. i have written the board with my concerns and received coms back from staff, however, the responses are

inadequate and never addressed my point. the plan proposes painted buffers for bike lane jz upper market. this improvement wilt do nuth toog improve the safety and move the city closer to vision zero goal. i ride my bike on upper market. what i experience on a daily basis are double parked cars and delivery trucks. this forces me and fellow rider tooz move into the bike lane while travelling at 35 to 40 miles a hour. i experience cars drifting into the bike lane. proposed painted buffers will do nothing to stop the safety risks. this board adopted vision zero which seeks to eliminate traffic death. this is based on the fact we are

human and make mistake. the road system needs to keep us moving but also protect at every turn. we know people continue to double park in the bike lanes and continue to drift into had bike lane because they are easily distracted and know people to not use their turn signal or check their shoulder when they cross to the bike lane to make a right hand turn or park. the road needs to be designed to encounter that. i urge you to look into protected bike lanes up to upper market to castro. >> herbert wineer followed by edward mason. >> parking spaces, bus stops and bus runs braung to the public and taxi medallions belonged to the taxi drivers.

the municipal transportation agency contrary to great inconvenience to public interest. it simply declared the medallions its property and took them from taxi drivers charging state fees. this is a public agency-the mta is pirate aijs that regard parking spaces as obzeckts and sources of budy and plunder. despite the parks spaces and bus stops mta has done the right thing. it shows barbary coast to advertise and promote muni forward to 1.5 million over a 3 year period. the barb burry coast harbors

pierants and mta conducted itself in the same tradition by fuming resources from the public. a government agency designated to represent the public is robbing the public of its resources. the public is walk agplank with removal and consolidation of bus stops. mta seizure and termination of parking spaces and forcing passengers seniors and the disabled to walk a quarter mile to the bus stop. after all, we are walking the plank. >> thank you. >> edward mason, michael putrelis. >> edward mason i like to present a editorial from the almanac which is a newspaper

for menlo park. facebook is expanding by 6500 employees to the current 7500 employees. a housing study revealed 15 live in bell haven. created dependent for 175 units a finding of questionb logic at best. from a broader regional perspective planner voice concern. job growth and resulting upward pressure on home prices and wide spread transportation grid lock. all employ ease livering long distances from the campus about half of facebook employees drive cars to work. facebook is proposing to limit increase

in trip generation relating to expansion to 438 inbound commuter vehicles. the development will benefit menlo park but result in worsening of transportation and housing facing the region. it is standard practice to abstract mitigation measures including cash payments and levering neighborhood communities for sig cnlt and uncompensated impact. no one is well served by major proposals evaluated by a single city looking out forilities own interest. cities can move away from isolated decision making. the conclusion i came from this is, there will be more corporate commuter buses unless you get together with mtr, a bag and resolve the issue because we already have 35 commuter buses

on 24th street. >> michael putrelisfollowed by deneez louis and [inaudible] >> go ahead. please do. don't worry. if the folks at sf gv tv it show my. show that for 20 seconds. this is the bus shelter at 16th stroot and missionism . i made a video of

sfmta property that is caked with pigeon poop. you can am back to me, please. i have been filing a number of complaints with sf 311 to have this pigeon poop removed. i'm a person with aids and have a compromised immune system and this pigeon poop is unhealthy. it also just not conducive to using public transit. there needs to be better contract compliance and monering of the sfmta has. after two weeks of observing this area there is not regular cleaning taking place of the bus shelters and sfmta street signs. this is really not good in any sense, okay. now, in terms why there

is so much pigeon poop on the bus shelters, it is because the overhead electrical cables do not have ant pigeon jell on them. that is pg and e property. however, i think that sfmta needs to look into bird sensitive sound repellent machines. there is latest device to stop birds landing on this property and roosting there. i'm in touch with barbara garcia from department of public health to declare this a public health emergency. you need to get on regular cleaning of the bus shelters. >> denise louis followed by [inaudible] >> good afternoon. glad to see

mr. hsu here from the west portal association and want to say i really appreciate muni. it gets me where i want to go. for years i have been saying thank you to the bus drivers and for the past yearo so i have been hearing other people do the same. i'm here to ask you about landscaping in san jose at bal bowy park station. the last i heard mt deciding on a mediterranean pallet. prior to that asked that native plants be planted where possible in dpw project along ocean avenue. since the area i'm referring to has not been planted, and dpw is assisting mta with landscaping planning here, and since the landscapers

must yield to your desession on the pallet i ask you to reconsider. i ask you to [inaudible] environmental correct and what neighboring stakeholders have asked for. is there a particular person with mta i can talk to about this? >> we'll make sure to have somebody follow up. >> thank you. next speaker, please. >> marry aliza followed by car lumetser and paula katz. >> good afternoon. speaking on behalf of the tar vel. the tarival project [inaudible] delivering 87 comments and ask that you scanned a e-mail to the board members along with

the statement. 70 of these comments oppose the elimination of tarival stop. the staff will not forward these so like to make sure you get them another way. before you next meetding we urge you to read the public comments and listen to the audio of the public hearing. other 50 people took time off to attend the hearing that was triple the number usually ateneding. when you read the staff report before you next meeting we urge you to keep in mind the vast majority the written and verbal comments supporting keeping the tarival stops. there are many [inaudible] about the various hardships their family members inclulding elderly parent and parent face if they lose these stops. many opposed the loss of parking on tarival and proposed transit only lanes and perpendicular parking on san tiaugo. a large number also

support what the community calls, the tarival plan which calls for establishment of a 6 month pilot program of early implementation followed by community input before approval. the merchant will explain this furlther and want to add and believe this will be a universal cry throughout the merchants of the city. this thereis a real problem and also you also mention it isn't just in the mission. the parking and transportation concerns are keeping people from going san francisco merchants. >> good afternoon.

>> okay, hi. carla metsler with save or el tarival stops. microphone. thank you. the el tarival project is scheduled for next meetings agenda. proposal for 9 stops at 6 locations. in the transit effectiveness project final environmental impact report that you approved in 2014 states on pages 2-26 one of the factors to be considered when selecting stop locations removal is valium of boardings and lighting of the transit stop. excuse me. now, this -okay. the kentucky fried

chicken, pub lb library, library, post office and safeway, the stops surrounding 19 lth and tarival which is the busiest stop we are adding a thousand people by closing the stops before and after 19th. a thousand more people every day on 19th and tarival. i think this is dangerous and should be looked at again and it is not what we voted for. we dont want our tax dollars being used to make things more dangerous. thank you. >> thank you. next speaker, please. >> paula katz followed by tom gill burty and those are the last people. >> what do i do to get this-- there it is. paula katz. i

want to make a correction to what carla said t is 2-26 of the final environmental impact report where it states that one of the factors to be considered removing stopicize boarding and lighting at the transit stop. we will give you the average weekly boarding and alignment at tarival for inbound and outbound stops. one thing we hope you can see is this data was collected november 2007 from january 2009 and so the decision to remove stopicize based on data that is 7 to 9 years olds and completely out of date. sean kennedy agreed

the usage probable increased but believes the proportions stay the same. sfmta has no identity if this is true and told we can't do more head counts until next your and maybe when the new lrvs come in. in the areas whereplore housing is build or stores open usage will increase than other stops. in addition the staff said because the study is so old they can't access it and have no way of finding out when the study was done over what day or hours and doesn't include weekend. when the new lightrail vehicles we can track use r usage we urge you to put them on the tarival line as soon as possible and obtain up to date and accurate findings. this is incorporated as part of the pilot program that the

merchants propose at part of the plan. i like to give you these documents. >> tom gillbirty. >> tom gillbirty. i was going-i remarked about the elevator ativan ness and thinking while we were gone that it was going to be the definition of rank. when you say something is truly rank was a slang word and that-i can't say that now because i used it and it shown the effort of being maintained a little better. i would love to have it steam cleaned and love the carpet to come up and take a look underneath. i hope probably it dirt is holding it together and triing to get rid of that sooner that later because of property changes. i

also want to applaud the mechanics on the old buses. i have been very good for long time. the mechanics on the light-rail very very good and i am using my standard of when the doors open there is a floor expansion that comes up. [inaudible] tipping my hat to mechanics. next we got a number of seats we are losing, the standees we are getting. we are always losey seats with the new cars and looking like we are doing herds into subways and into the early 1950's and 60's of new york city and don't like the way the new light-rail are going. corridors are now a big word. a couple years ago cumulative was the big word.

cumulative amount of traf ic. third street in the rails are going to restrict the amount of people we can allow to live there. your voices have to come up aletal higher on that. we have to slow down for the bridle on uncontenses growth. last week i call ded [inaudible] for cleaning too. >> mr. chairman that is the last person to address matters in the jurisdiction of mta and not on todays agenda. move toog consent calendar. all items considered [inaudible] member of had board wishes to have aiteal severered and considered separately. i have not heard you like to have a item severed but the public asked item 10.3 be severed. >> is there a motion on the

consent calendar minus 10.3? all in favor say aye. 10.3. >> cristina varner followed by edward mason. >> good afternoon. my name is cristina vrner. i strongly urge you not to establish a week day morning shuttle done on san jose between valley and 9th street. my family lives on this block and va3 your old son. we already live on one of the dirtiest and busiest streets in san francisco where we witness accidents involves vehicles, cyclist and pedestrians. the pollution levels are high. the shuttle buses are nysy and enormous and block views. the exhaust

creates unbreveth air and trophic congestion. the residents-the full loan tree that helps create breatheable air for residents on this block will be damaged by the buses pulling to the curb. i understand it is proposed to be trimmed but need the whole tree t. is a shame that to see that dpw exempted this from environmental review because it effects our environment. i want to draw your teengz to page 3 of staff report. the shuttle bus stop takes away the use of 5 to 6, not 4 parking spots which are especially permitted for residents. the city should refund the cost of the parking permit through may 31, 2017 because the point is park in the spots all day and now it is impossible to do so. there is a existing commuter

shuttle spot on valencia and 26th street and additional stop doesn't need to be created in front of our house. the worker of companies catered to can walk a few blocks to caf a bus. the plan decreases safety by increasing exhaust and nysand tafic. please don't [inaudible] by approving san jose avenue. >> next speaker, please. >> edward mason and mr. chairman that is the last person. >> edward mason. stop removes the residential parking permitinant which is a form of de facto imminent domain. it is a gift of public space for private use and broken contract with no reimbursement for the people. you have a stop about 2 thousand feet away at

valencia and cesar chavez. you eliminate stops by lengthening the walking distances while making these particular stops more veents. convenient. the stop is unnecessary. this is unnecessarily stop and impacts the environment because for every cycle of a bus you have pollution from the break pads and break dust and upon acceleration you have pollution caused by the engine and also the noise. this is got a environmental impact that could be-is unnecessarily if you can walk an extra 2 thousand feet. operation after 10 a.m. for bus operations i have observe buses. there is a bus at 1015 and 1010 and 1035 stopping at the current location. this is going to create unsafe

situations if the automobiles are parked after 10 a.m. this will be cause a safety issue with double parking on san jose avenue. in summary, i would recommend that you take a good look at this station as to why these individuals cannot walk a extra 2 thousand feet to the new stop-to is a existing stop at the salvation army that you approved several months ago. thank you very much. >> thank you, sir. questions or comments? mr. migire you want to talk about this? >> good afternoon. tom mcguire. joined by [inaudible] who has detailed answers to your questions.

>> good afternoon. so, the purpose is primarily to place a stop that is at san jose is deloris is that is being removed where they are widening the itisland so this is replacing existing stop where we have 57 vehicles stopping during the a.m. period and just serving the a.m. period. >> thank you. thank you mrs. [inaudible] i know when mrs. pain brought the commuter shuttle program she made a point of saying this is a changeable program and it is a living stop thing and we are moving it around and have seen these stops at all most every meeting we had for the past few months. i will go ahead and support this stop and thank the people who came to give feedback and completely understand how much of a change

it for your block face to have a commuter shuttle stop and also want to make request that we take a look at dolores street because i understand dolores street is limited away from it stop. what we have seen in that we hear from the people around dolores park that have a hole in the shuttle program where they are walking for 15 minutes to get to a stop. i think we need to take a look at dolores street and see if the weight limit can be restricted and share the pain on the shuttle stops because nobody wants them and we need them. i make a motion to approve them. >> second that >> the residential parking space is only not available in the shuttle hours but available during the other hours. >> yes. >> thank you mr. chairman. i just want to thank the public for being engaged in this work t. is important to achieve the best possible program for us to

continue to monitor how things work and accommodate accordingly looking at dolores street or what have you. this is a thing that that we hope will have a positive net effect on the community as a whole and certainly sensitive to the concerns that are brought upism namely, the pollution of diesel or what have you. those concerns are very real. i appreciate the fact the shuttles do take away a lot of otherwise car traffic t. is important that we are sensitive but look ought for the entire community so i'll support for this measure but i want to thank the public for being vigilant and encourage more individual laens as the project is implemented. >> director

>> we are taking people out of cars and increasing transit use even in this private form. sorry i'm not familiar with the map out there but is there a commercial space within relative proximity to this area such that we have the stops not in 41 front of a 3 year old home or in front of a business not open and appreciate the fath they bring a lot of people to their block? >> so this is a primarily residential portion of san jose. we looked at numerous locations, mitchells is there primarily commercial use in that area and we did reach out and spoke with them early in the planning process. their concerns were around the fact that this would block their

driveway used for loading during the a.m. period. so we shifted the stop a bit to not block their driveway and also be partially in front of a house and partially in front of empty garden lot to try to minimize the impact but it is challenging given it is primarily residential. >> motion and second to approve. all in favor say aye. opposed? ayes have it. >> regular agenda mr. chairman. item 11, approve parking and traffic modifications along folsom street between hawthorn and embarcadero involved in the folsom street streetscape project.

>> good afternoon director. greg leaseen and sustainable streets and here to presents the folsom streetscape projeth. exciting project. been working on this my 8 year career. the project goes back further than that and touch on the history. the project sponsored by the office of ocii formally known as the redevelopment agency. it is there project but i'm the mta lead and mta and planning department are active in the streetscape design of it. public workicize construction manager and project planjure on behalf of ocii so big team effort. also have a consultant team, cmg architects and [inaudible] big team and

excited to be hoor. here. 8 years of work so thank you for coming out. sharing the exassignment with me. this is the project site. it is folsom street downtown, between second street and embarcadero. this is a old aerial of the old folsom street under the freeway terminal separator structure. so, everybody knows the old embarcadero free bp way torn down after the earthquake. not everybody remembers the terminal separator which connected to the bay bridge which is the equally structure in the air. i have scoured all over to find more historic

photo's of structures and i really can't find any. it is like people want to forget it existed. i called the cal trans department and had nothing. i did just-couldn't include in the presentation. if you watch the 1958 san francisco cop drama, the line up, you will see-i highly recommend it. the climax at the end takes place on the under construction terminal separator structures so please take a look and get excited about that. there are no other photo's i can find accept there is one i like to share. my friend gave me a great book when i moved to san francisco and a favorite of my kids now. don't know if you can see this. leer sat the bottom you can cineld kind of see. there is the old structure and this book

remarks san franciscans dispice the monstrosity and it was torn down. i'll talk more about the history in a moment but sorry i don't have more photo's of the old folsom street. i do of the new folsom street. this is a rendering and qu walk you through the details. we will convert the street into two way traffic operation with one lane each way. there will be big widened sidewalks with corner bull bout which you can see here. the bull bouts have rain gardens and bench seating and looking into having native plants for the rain gardens because they request is made. this photodoes not show the bike lanes there also which i'll show in a moment. it is really a long history how we got to this point. i'll walk

you through the cross section. this is folsom street, new folsom street looking east bound and i'll walk you through left to right. on the left on the north side, the existing 10 foot sidewalk remains at 10 feet but the high rise and ground floor retail have a 15 book setback mandated so results in a 25 foot sidewalk on the north side of instreet with double row of trees and one block is already built with phil's coffee. there is a 6 foot wide west bound protected bike lane and south of that there is a buffer and south of that there is a parking and loading strip for vehicles to stop where they won't interact with the bikes. similar design as other protected bike ways we have implemented. south of that thral is the west bound lane

and east bound lane and on the south side of the street there is parking and loading and buffer and east bound protected bike lane and sidewalk will be widened to 15 feet. that is the new street, really exciting and this is implemented after the new transit center opens in 2018. ac transit will come out and move into the new elevated bus facility that will enable one lane of traffic each way without impacting ac transit. there is a map of the extents. important note is between second street and spear street is the ocii project which includes the sidewalk widening and all that lovely stuff. mta we are going to restripe the last block between spear and embarcadero to have protected

bike lanes to create the connection between second street to the embarcadero and folsom street is the link. we are build agnetwork of protected boo bike ways with this project and enhancing transit and cars by make tg a 2 way street making it better for local circulation. here is the timeline. this is a abbreviated timeline rel toov the streetscape project and parking and traffic changes seeking your approval. the history of this project goes back a long way. i think when the elevated free way was built people called to have it torn down. it is worth noting there is a big effort in the late 70's and early 80's to tear

down the embarcadero freways. people wanted to tear that down. the board of supervisors approved it in 1985 and the voters overturned that and that was a huge blow to the freeway removal idea. two years later there is a earthquake and the embarcadero didn't fall dow it was damaged and so was the terminal structure so at a very contenses vote the board approved 6 to 5 to tear down the freeway in 91. the people-the advocates try today tear town other freeways. as soon as the freeway was shut down all the traffic materialized. terminal separator structure and removed

in the mid-90's and laid the ground for the rest of my slide which is redevelopment agency known as ocii created redevelopment area in the zone and the removal of the freeway parcels created new lands sold to developers to fund the transit center and fun this project which is $15 million project. it is a long time coming. we are here today with legislation and final approval and then we hope to break ground next year. should take about a year to build so hopefully enjoy the street and riding our bikes and walking along in 2018. here is a overview of the design. i will not walk you through this. again t is from second street to the embarcadero so the slide is from second to fremont and the bottom is from fremont to

embarcadero. i'll zoom in to a example. this is typical of the design. you see-you can't see on this screen but one lane of traffic in each way and protected bike lanes and also install transit boarding islands. muni has a plan to [inaudible] bus route extension at the moment. there is work on there [inaudible] it will happen here so we are building boarding islands so the buses will not conflict with bikes. that's it. that is my presentation. >> excellent presentation. members the board? >> great presentation thank you very much. it was nice to be reminded of the history of that freeway. when i worked at

[inaudible] after the earthquake we would walk and have our lunch. very fun. i love this project and think the widened sidewalks will be great. if anybody has not tried to go downtown in the last 2 years try it. a lot of the sidewalkerize so narrow you can't walk. i think the wide sidewalkerize fabulous. the parking buffered bike lanes is what everyone is look frg as we heard from mr. star about upper market street. there is such a sense of frustration among cyclist. there is a huge sense of frustration so pleased to see these are going because i know a [inaudible] crowded urban environment you can't expect 100 percent separation all the time but if we

engineering it so we can prevent the [inaudible] i'm so excited about the project, it will be a fantastic addition. no questions. motion to approve. >> veckd. second. >> the buffer like a raised pavement? >> a lot of people asked that. this design isn't raised. the design is for a painted buffer. it is similar to jfk drive or bay street. it is important to know the difference from the second street which will have raised bike ways. the short answer for why we were not able to consider that is because wree have corner bull bouts with rain gardens and it is designed so the rain water rains into the rain garden so looked how that will work with

a raised bike way and it basically wouldn't. we are excited. the corner bull bouts and rain gardens shorten the crossing distance between for pedestrians and also if we do find-i'm hopeful that car drivers will figure it out to not pull all the bay to the curb and putting thought into the striping and painting to make it clear but if we have issues we can ret row fit qu treatments. >> the things that youthey are like little magnet things you run up against. not a curb, but it sticks to the ground and you can-something that is like a lot of times people if they are parking and not paying attention they pull too far and if there is something like on the freeway and go to the wrong lane all is a different sound. that type of thing.

>> we'll be watching closely how it functions and have it opportunity to install treatments like that. >> i think in a situation like this because this project the parking is outside the bike lane, correct? that make as huge difference because as lang asia see one or two cars parked correctly most people figure it out they are supposed to park out of the bike lanes so i think in golden gate park you see cars parked correctly and one parks incorrectly. i have high hopes this will be working. >> one traffic question and trying . is there a stretch to bridge access? >> yes. >> yes. we are going from 1 late to 2 lanes

>> accept between second and essex street. that isn't changed. >> okay. and so-great. northbound traffic on second will make the right and curl up that way and there is lelft turn restriction. let me cut to the chase, you addressed this and not anticipating this will exacerbate that existed line up? >> correct. >> i think this is very exciting and looking forward to see it played out. the one question is the stretch from spear to embarcadero. was it determined there was enough [inaudible] the only change is the bike lanes? >> yes, it is really just that is the project boundary for the redevelopment area so thereat is where ocii can spend the money to widen sidewalks. mta

or public works can come back and do more sidewalk widening on the south side. the good news there is the gap building on the north side so have the 15 foot set back so the 25 foot wide set back is preserved from the embarcadero to essexs street. we can come back later for the bull bouts and widen the sidewalks. >> i'm supportive of the bike lanes. there is minority andimably a vocal minority in the disability community that pestered me that they need curb back squz there are protected bike lane jz want safety for cyclist but want to be able to access in our vehicles. the

concern is where the buffer basically on jfk as you probably know when you have a blew ue space you can use the buffer to unload and connect to the sidewalk. there are concerns in the community about these going in more and when the buffer is not continuous to the place where you can access the sidewalk. that a complicated thing but wonder if this addresses that or it is a continuous buffer and if we will make a extra to put in blue zones where we can. i don't drive and [inaudible] i know some people in the community are very concerned about the protected bike lanes. >> we put a lot of thought into ark sesable access work wg mta and public works. all most each block face north and south

there will be a new-it isn't a white curb zone but there were be fully accessible loading zone there for everybody and we are installing new blue zone parking spaces as well. both accessible loading and parking. >> great. >> yes, just very quickly. i notice with the jfk parking like the vice chair said, usually the problem starts when one person parks the wrong way and there is a fall though leader sort of mentality of not wanting to disrupt whatever pattern is established. i often wondered if you folks had considered establishing like some kind of signage or stenciling in the buffer that indicates no parking so that people might see pulling up

like where to park or not to park and there is a better understanding of how to dpoo do it. i know that it would be labeerous and maybe ugly to see a bunch of no parking signs at every space but maybe the ones at the top of the block face just wondering if you have thought about that and particularly with respect to when you are going install this one if there is think toog that and what led you to not do it. >> the blue zone spaces we springled the blue zone at the beginning of the street east and west bound because anticipate those being parks with a vehicle. when car is doing it it is obvious for others how to do it. installing signage in the

painted buffer that will be tough because we can't use the street sweeper. >> like painted on the [inaudible] you have stencils and imagine a p with no parking or something to that effect. >> we can go back to the slide and walk you through. so, you can't-so, this shows a spot reserving for bike share stations. this is what the wide zone will look like and still a work in praun progrtss what the striping will be. the idea is this will be a white stripes and shown on black on the paper but are white stripes. this is a white passenger zone. i hate saying that. here are the yellow spaces which are for

truck loading and this is the painted buffer. we are planning as of this moment to use our traditional parking t's to make it clear thris is a metered parking space. these are for trucks. up here where it is a white zone, there is no t's because you don't park there t is just for louding. we have put thought how this work squz we are doing other protected bikeways as we innovate this. the bottom line is we have a idea and watch it very closely and if we need to install rubber curb segments or better signage we haven't done the sign plan yet and will be mounted on the street lights just the typical no parking. we need to develop a sign if it says this is floating loading zone, which is brand new. work in progress. >> what i'm implying with this where you have the slash,

diagonal white buffer zone, that is what i suggest considering putting in like a stencil that says no parking in there because for whatever reason sometimes some people do park on that-on top of it in golden gate park on the jfk lanes and creates this sort of line of parking that i suppose is-it becomes a problem i think because that buffer zone is gone and then it is less safe bike lane. i guess what i suggest is consider how you enforce it or not and see if there are lesson to be learned from maybe putting down a stencil that says no parking in the white diagonal slash because people do it all the time, well not all the time-if is interesting to see if there is a way to get better enforcement there before maybe

doing something like that here. >> i do think on jfk there are stencils and say no parking. maybe we need bigger ones and p where a cross out. >> something like that i think will be warranted there. >> thank you very much. excellent presentation. motion and second? >> josey aaron followed by charles defargs. those are the only people who turned in speaker cards. good afternoon. >> good afternoon directors. josey aaron and the new neighborhood organizer with walk san francisco. on behalf of walk sf i would like to express our strong support for this exciting project. i will make the segment more pleasant and safe for everyone. we are excited to see a project that prioritizes pedestrians and includes features like bull bouts which increase pedestrian visibility, decrease the

distance to cross and slow turning vehicles, wider sidewalks which act as a barrier between pedestrians and traffic with landscape. the conversion of folsom to two way traffic which calm traffic. a street that connects people to parks and open space. we are thrilled to see the city building out green connections like folsom with rain garden squz other feature. we love to see the rest of folsom when the folsom howard project is implement to be designed comprehensively with green and traffic calming features as this project. we look forward to many more projects like folsom streetscape breaking ground soon.

>> charles defargs and he is the last person to address you today. >> good afternoon. my name is defarj and campaign coordinator at the san francisco bike coalition. this is a project we are excited about specifically the protected bike lanes from second to embarcadero. souckt of market is one the most heavily bike trafficked areas in san francisco despite being one the most dangerous. the projects sets to transform folsom into a bikeable street something it is not today. the improvements open up the east end of folsom lowing two way bike traffic and providing important north/south connection to howard on main, beel and fremont. the result

is more accessible ceblthed and vibrant for people walk{biking. thank you guys and thank you to greg at mta. this is a great project. >> we have motion and veckd second? >> aye. >> item twevlg, discussion whether to conduct a closed session. motion to conduct a closed session. >> second? all in favor say aye. we will go in closed ession. >> discuss city attorney voted to settle the cases. 14, appropriate for motion to disclose or not disclose the information discussed >> motion to not disclose. >> all favor say aye. we are adjourned. thank you very much.

i'd like to thank everyone for being here. i'm naomi kelly. today we are here to top off the new san francisco office of chief medical examiner. we are here to mark a construction milestone, completion the the steel frame. in a few minutes the final beam will be

placed-put into place and hoisted up on top and we will be wul on our way to complete the first voter funded project earthquake safety emergency response fund. myophilus oversees the general service agency which compenalizing 20 different departments [inaudible] chief medical ex578ner and department 06 public works rchlt also chair of cities capital planning commit which recommend thd bond and work to prioritize essential capital projects we are celebrating today chblt it is very near and dear to be a mart of the celebration and join in the significance of the san francisco medical examiners office protecting health and safety. it looks there is a lot of work left to be done there is a lut of work that went into getting us here today. you will hear more about the construction project

as we go on but let's start with who made this project ininstrumental making this project a priority and that is edwin lee. we made sure we partner would the community in the bayview and job frz the neighborhood residents and not this important public safety project moving forward. intrestment in capical project to support the 21 century needs. with the mayors guidance projects like this are beginning to benefit the neighborhood throughout san francisco, we are creating jobs, strengthening communities and building a stronger safer city. with that, mayor ed lee. >> thank you naomi and thank you for breeing a great city administrator. i love that

job. love politics. this is a political year but let me begin by saying thank you to the voters of san francisco. little more than 2 years ago i listed to us and a number of department who got together, all our first responder departments including fire, police, those that are in charge of water system. all of us got together and continue to do identify our 10iary capital plan and [inaudible] and can talk all day long about the 10 year capital plan but taking care och business. we are making sure the building [inaudible] chief medical examiners office is in a challenged building at the hall of justice and when we welcomeed him to the sit a we talked about the need to have a modern facility that could respond and be there whenever there might be a earthquake,

there for a epidemic and certainly in need of a more modern laboratory facility and forensic facility and all the staff at the medical examiners for years have said the condition and broken down conditions at the hall of justice require them to have this type of facility so put that in a $400 million as naomi said earthquake safety and emergency response bond and voted in into overwellmly so say thank you thmpt other way we thank the voters it get it done on time. we have park construction working with department of public works to make sure the largesh projects under the bond is done quickly and well and it is doing both as we can see. just in two years we are topping off the

first of four major projects, maybe five major projects under the earthquake safety bond and proud doing this because not only are they doing it only time and doing it will, but we also see that there is a tremendously positive impact in the way they are building because they worked closely with the city build program that is part the communities and response to make sure not thonl project whether housing or senior housing or community centers u fire, police station or medical examiner offices, we wpt those jobs in the community as much as we can. they worked closely and in fact, because the work public work has done and city build, 1/3 of all

hours are performed by city residents and half from the bayview so shat positive impact. in addition to that, there ask all most 34 different local enterprise business, locum businesses that are half of them are from the bayview that are also participating tin biltding and completion of the project so today i'm proud to sign my name on the last steel beam that will get on there and mohammed, i hope you got your signature on there as well doctor hunter i'm sure you have a signature and naomi and staff and agencies working collaboratively together with fire chief and her staff to make sure the beam gets up there because that is a milestone and means we are more than half way done and means the promise of having

earthquake safe buildings for our first respond ers is going wem and that was the promise made to the voters when they voted over 79 percent to get the bond passed. this is how we honor the vote is get the projects done on time in which all values in san francisco, with locing jobs and making sure we give people the opportunity to work here is all done in the right way. i am very proud of literally every aspect of this work and of course everybody is being safe on this job as well so we want that to continue w. that, i want to say again to city build, thank you very much and one the graduates that i get to introduce next, she herself has been not just a graduate of city build, i know she will forever remember her training but has gone to exactly what

wewant her to go on and completed a number of hours on a new sf [inaudible]. she is proud to be part of the team that brought us one of the most modern museums in the world and now gets to have her hand in helping build one of the most modern chief medical examiner buildings that we will have and that will be a important function for the community from which she came and i want to introduce you to city build graduate but also worker exextraordinary, joan moore. >> thank you mayor lee. i'm so grateful for this opportunity to be up here today and represent the work of everyone on this project. and my neighborhood. my name is joan moore. m i was born here in san

francisco. i'm a bayview residents, live here all my life. went through the city build job training program in 2013 to pursue a career in the construction industry. since then i work many different types of construction jobs including the san francisco [inaudible] where i was at that [inaudible] going through city build program has been good for me because i went through the training and took class to advance and every employer look at me differently. as i increased my knowledge, things opened up for me. as i educate myself i find more chance tooz advance. i'm not settling for anything. right now i'm a general labor and safety monitor. everyone i'm involved in say i see you as a safety person, you should pursue this. that is my encouragement. everyone gives me that advice and that motivates me. that is

my encouragement. for future city build participants i tell you this, never stop thinking you can't advance in your career. never stop pursuing your career. there is something out there for everyone. thank you to [inaudible] construction. thank you to the city of san francisco. thank you for abu. thank you all for letting me share my gratitude. [applause] >> thank you mrs. moore-thank you for sharing your story and see members of the abu and want to give a shout out to them. this is a organization that nob they have done a great job reaching out to women. nob nub on the project, $65 million is

how much we spent on the bond funded project. 35 percent is local hire, half from the bayview as mentioned. 450 jobs in san francisco as a result och this project. 46,000 square feet is the size oof the new facility. 375 tons of steel and 2500 cubic yards will be in the building. 345 tons of rebar mpt 145 miles of wiring. 50 years is how old the seismically [inaudible] in 2017 in the fall is when the new medical examiners office will relocate in the state of the art biltding. public works department is responsible for putting this tonight and manage the building design and construction and at the helm and leader of public works is mohammed nuru and he will be up next to speak about this

project. [applause] >> thank you mayor lee and thank you [inaudible] for all the work that you are doing. i think you know, we can all say that under mayor lee's leadership so many of the city projecterize delivered on time and budget. we rently finished the bayview opera house and finish thd library program and have a new library and all those projects were delivered on time and budget. more porntsly importantly is what we talk about is can the commune tay get jobs on the projects and on the bayview opera house and library we did very well and doing very well on the project. it is the only way we will be able and-only way the resident will be able to learn skill squz be here for

the future of san francisco and through our bond programs many projects awhether it is transbay or general hospital or our new police station we are able to meet the numbers set forth and achieve those numbers so the city family is working very very hard and the voters of san francisco trust the leadership of our maying to vote and pastz the project and have many more projects coming down the pipeline. the public works department, the role is work very closely with the community. we work with engineer and architects. we all get down and try to figure how to deliver the project the best way we can and today is the example of the medical examiners building. we are part of a [inaudible] team and so not just the city, but also

our contractor. [inaudible] construction, partnership with city build and abu and partnership with many local businesses. we set goal squz avenue one of the projects we exceed those goals. this building and this projict is a commitment that we are committed to put all san franciscans to work and have the workforce to build anything that you bring to us. i think the mayor deserves a very big hand for his leadership. [applause] on the projects we are building, they are not jush for now but many generations to come so excited. i want to quickly thank a few of the team that i work with from public works who work day in and out to [inaudible] start by thanking city architect [inaudible] he is here.

[applause] [inaudible] if you don't know him you should meet him he is in charge of the [inaudible] project manager [inaudible] is here. [inaudible] are on the staff here who made sure that we are moving on time and on schedule. [applause] there are also many or key consultant that make a project happen, it isn't just one or two people with we have a few consultant and like to thank from [inaudible] that is the team that actually designed the building. james mueller, [inaudible] thank them. [applause] and on the construction management side, we have [inaudible] construction management. [inaudible] from public works

involved in over 4 billion dollars of construction projects in san francisco and very luckily because we are busy and able to build the workforce to dlinch the projects. like all projects today is a milestone and will put the final steel beam up and make sure the project is completed on budget and on time. thank you very much. [applause] >> thank you mohammed. this modern facility provides structural, operation resiliency and efficiency. the new aufs moves us as city in the direction and strengthens our resiliency. here to speak next is chief medical examiner, dr. michael hunter. [applause]

>> i want to thank two people today. i want to certain mayor ed lee and city administrator, naomi kelly. i want to thank them for their vision. if not for their commitment we wouldn't be here today. they understood early on the need to have this facility so want to thank these people very much. [applause] i'm also impressed with the amount of dedication and hard work that mohammed's team with public works has done to get this job to where it is today. the progress is imprivess and this will allow san francisco to maintain our own sense of preparedness and resiliency. the new center will enable the city to be at

the forfront of [inaudible] lastly, i want to thank the residents of the city and county of san francisco for making this possible. thank you. [applause] >> thank you dr. hunter. another partnership that we value with our relationship with the general contractor. welcome from the primary contractor for this project, senior vice president of park construction group, [inaudible] [applause] >> good afternoon everybody ft first, thank you mayor lee for your leadership and your support throughout the city. thank you naomi and mohammed and dr. hunter for your support and leadership in the project. marks relationship with the city is a fantastic partnership z also want to recognize the great leadership by edgar lopez [inaudible] to make this a realty and be a great partner

with us through the juny. we are honored to be a active community partner with inbayview neighborhood and community and have on going relations [inaudible] with pub lrk works are continuing to reach out and involve and make the xhounty every much a part of as we are during the construction phase. we are proud of what we accomplished to date, but still have approximately a year left so there is tremendous amount of opportunity we intend to maximize. so far we trained and graduated 9 bayview small businesses as part of clark small business training program we call the clark strategic program. we worked with rebuild ing together and abu to assist with renovations at the double rock church, which we felt was a great success. we collaborated with abu and

mohammed nuru to provide winter coats, thanks giving turkeys. we preely do appreciate and thank the abu and this great community for your support [inaudible] [applause] teamwork is a haulwer hark what makes clarks construction project successful and not only do we have a great team leading the design we also think is a great teak associate would the construction of the design but that also involves the community. i do want to make kmd, [inaudible] we have a great group orsubcontractors to make this a aif project and want to thank the clark team for their dedication to the

project and community and everything we achieved thus far. we look forward to future collaborations and the grand opening of the facility next summer so thank you, everybody. [applause] >> okay. as we wrap up there are a new more people who i like to thank. first i like to tharng depy city administrator [inaudible] work would the medical examiner and pub lrk works to make sure we are on budget and meets the operational needs to best services the public. want to thank contract monitoring division [inaudible] we have local business participation and thank you for that. and the san francisco arts commission. there are two permanent art works commissioned. one at the entrance of the office and [inaudible] which fs built at

hunters point shipyard in 1891. there will be another sculpture in the visitors center [inaudible] thousands of pieces of fabric which depict the salt marshes of indian basin. with that, let's raise

>> [gavel] okay i call this meeting of the transbay joint powers authority board of directorses for order for -- what is today? the eighth, september 8. i am still on summer mode. >> director gee. >> here. >> director kim. >> here. >> director reiskin. >> here. >> director sartipi. >> present. >> vice chair nuru. >> present. >> and mr. chair you do have a