there any public comment on items 8 or 9 seeing none, public comment is closed. and can we have a motion to full board with a positive recommendation. >> made by supervisor president london breed without objection and then one final word which is next tuesday october 18th is the hundredth anniversary celebration of the original move into those chambers and i am using this opportunity to ask the president to see if she can get one of the two pianist to come down and play. >> i'm sorry the 18. >> for both. >> i meant october the 18 no meeting on october tuesday the 11 i'll get in trouble and the city attorney is coming to yell at me okay we're adjourned

>> good afternoon and welcome to the san francisco planning commission this is the regular meeting of the any kind. proceedings. and when speaking before the commission, if you care to, do state your name for the record. i'd like to call roll at this time. commissioner president fong commissioner vice president richards commissioner koppel and commissioner moore. >> we do expect commissioner hillis, commissioner johnson and commissioner melara is arrive

shortly first, the consideration of items for continuance e at market street preliminary negative declaration is proposed until november 3rd item 2 article 7 phase two of code reorganization planning code is proposed until november 17, 2016, and item 3 cap street conditional use authorization is proposed to december 8, 2016, item 4. >> fulsome street large project authorization is proposed until january 5, 2017, item 5 broadly street skrufgs is

proposed indefinite continuance as is case 6 broadway street conditional use authorization commissioners i'm pleased to announce that under our discretionary review calendar item 13 at jackson street discretionary review that dr has been withdrawn. >> i have one speaker card for cap street you're only entitled to speak an matters of continuance at this time any public comment on matters proposed for continuance seeing any, public comment is closed. commissioner moore move to go as proposed including item 13 independently resolved. >> thank you, commissioners to

continue item as proposed commissioner koppel commissioner moore commissioner vice president richards and commissioner president fong so moved, commissioners, that motion passes unlawfully 4 to zero and places us under. >> josie want to make sure the card you handed me was. >> for 854 cap for the continuance calendar you can only speak to items on continuance do you want to speak you can't speak to it - >> sorry come up. commissioners we'll take item 3 off of the continuance calendar >> commissioners we were asking that be considered for the possibility of keeping those two properties joined for the church over one hundred years and asking if this can be part

of labor status because of the church having been. >> sir only to the matters of continuance i'm not sure if - there's a landmark status proposal for the property. >> for the church next door i'm not sure what's happening are you skewing if i'm oscar pistorius the continuance. >> that's all we're considering whether or not to continue it or not continue or continue to a different date. >> you're supporting the continuance; correct? until our study and investigation. >> can i ask have you been in tough with staff on that issue, the staff planner on that on or about. >> i haven't. >> we'll talk afterwards and get our information for staff. >> okay so next item.

>> >> commissioners that places us under our consent calendar the matter constitutes a consent calendar 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 calendar separate item at this or a future hearing. item 7 755 ocean avenue conditional use authorization and planned unit development. >> okay any public comment? is closed. commissioner vice president richards. >> move to approve second. >> second. >> thank you, commissioners on that motion to approve under consent commissioner johnson commissioner koppel

commissioner melara commissioner moore commissioner vice president richards and commissioner president fong so moved, commissioners, that motion passes unanimously 6 to zero and places us under commission matters consideration of draft minutes for 2016. >> any public comment on draft minutes? not seeing any, public comment is closed. and commissioner moore >> move to approve second. >> thank you, commissioners on that motion to adopt the minutes commissioner hillis excuse me. commissioner johnson. >> commissioner johnson. >> say i. >> i. >> (laughter). commissioner koppel commissioner melara commissioner moore commissioner vice president richards and commissioner president fong so moved, commissioners, that motion passes unanimously 6 to zero and places us on item 9 commissioners questions or comments >> commissioner moore.

>> i wanted to thank the mayor for appointing elaine forbes as director of the port elaine an outstanding planner moved to the port quite a few years ago i couldn't be happyier. >> i concur she'll be a great asset to the port. >> commissioners, if there's nothing further, we'll move on to i would like to request to add your 2017 schedule to a future hearing in the near future as opposed to december when we normally consider it your calendars are full through the year and we're into january and staff is curious whether january 5th will be a

3-d p-10 and intuitively dr p at the 35 fulsome and respectfully commissioners you originally heard this matter around march 3rd of this year continued to may 5th of this year where you choose not to take dr and approve the project as proposed

since that time the e r the categorical exemption was not properly before you and hence your profess determination because there is essentially the third hearing on this same project with a new categorical goal exemption the chair has directed me toe limit speaking time for the project sponsor and the dr requesters to a total of 10 minutes each public commenters will be provided one minute and a 2 minute rebuttal to the project sponsors and the dr requesters. >> good afternoon rich department staff the item before you to have a discretionary review for the building application for two single-family residences fulsome street the proposed projects will be located other than two vacant lots measuring 20 by 17 in the

rh1 bernal heights special use district and the height and bulk district those parcels don't have vehicular or direct assess or other assess this part of fulsome is not approved it in new single-family residences are 2 plus stories tall the residences measure approximately 2000 plus gross square feet as jonas mentioned since is last public hearings on march and may the environmental department rescind this donated 2014 and published and new one therefore the commission previous determination for the discretionary review have been rescind and a new hearing is required to date the department receives a number of public comments both for or against since the last hearing the department has one additional

letter outlining their concerns with the project the dr requesters have a number of issues with the proposed project paving of fulsome street and emergency and assess and impacts on the ground pg&e pipeline and vacant lots on the portion of fulsome street and impacts on the residents and on-street parking and with the bernal heights guidelines and size and scale and setback of new residences and off-street parking staurg penthouses and other issues that details that are submitted issues surrounding the pg&e pipeline have not under the purview of the planning department the dpw is the responsible agency for the paving of fulsome street as noted in the previous hearing the commission directed staff and the project sponsor to undertake consultation with other city agencies including

sfpuc the department of health and the building department and the fire department dpw has confirmed that is feasible and the project sponsor has submitted a street improvement permit with the street plan also continued the evolution with dpw and the planning department streetscape advisory team they've revised the north facade in the previous remarks again, the previous opinion in a residential district and reviewed bets rdt they found that the project will not present any exceptional or extraordinary circumstances and don't recommend changes to the proposed project the department finds the massing and scale is appropriate the project is consistent with the surrounding neighborhood and meets the requirement of the planning

bernal heights east slope special use district and the residential design guidelines the project adds new single-family units on a because of the park no direct impacts on the bernal heights or bernal heights park the project sponsor has revised it to avoid a variance for parking assess the project is not seeking variance or special entitlements from the planning code as there appears to be no exceptional or extraordinary the department finds the proposal and the bernal heights special use district and remedies that the commission not take discretionary review i'm available for any questions and that concludes my presentation. >> commissioners if i may i'm recognized the fact the previous facts we are heard and commissioner koppel and commissioner melara were not seated they've been advised to review this and have done so for

the record. >> dr requesters please. >> good afternoon first of all, i have to say a number of people were not here we thought we were number 14 and got move forward up and i asked someone to take over my class my name is kathy i've lived on bank street for 3 two years and represent the bernal heights organization i'm totally overwhelmed by the nine hundred pages of mostly new information that is available to us in the last week and he really doubt that most of us have analyzed it those nine hundred new pages exemplify the complaekt o complexity and each part effects the whole i'm

assuming you know this process is costs us the neighbors tens of thousands of dollars that stretched us here we are again there are newcomers height and bulk and pg&e oversight and impacts of public safety and assess my greatest concern the ceqa identifies the scope of the project to include the infrastructure for all 6 undeveloped lots not just the two under consideration here we firmly believe that new street is a new plan you've not looked at the in the past couple of weeks no question that the whole project has a far greater impact than 0u78d in the ceqa exemption for two lots woult without considering the other 4 lots many of whom have spoken in

favor of that lot and - by piecemealing the project and looking at one small piece never an assessment of the whole impact because the scope and detail and community has been disregarded in the process we urge you to reconsider this project first, this project not be approached piecemeal with no opportunities to study and analysis or consider the possibility development of streets and the 4 additional homes, and, secondly, if you approve the design and the street is rejected being another kind of walking assess required we request the bulk of the building with reduced by one floor since the garage will no longer be needed as our documents and the neighbors attest from street to home creates a dangerous precedent for street construction not the sidewalks you see all over the city the concerns produce

unusual circumstances as a whole without a doubt causes damage to life and property thank you. >> you have any slide please. yes. >> thank you. >> supervisors i mean commissioners sorry good afternoon my name is herb i live on fulsome street myself have lived there over 33 years i'm here before you to talk about the garage going into our house and how the design of this house that is proposed those two proposed houses makes our garage inassessable and on workable. >> before we were able to park my wife's car in the parking area in front of the garage i

was able to use the garage or vice versa now because of the eliminated driveways area and the extreme break over angle it is enforceable for us to get into our garage and will be impossible to get into our garage between a 34 and 37 percent grade on that new street a street we can't back up out of easily maybe not at all the challenge i'll put to you can you tell me how to back my car out of the garage with the new construction put forward i see a mass of uneven tehran we're here not prepared by council because the benefactor was passerby for the lawyer moved out of the neighborhood we are here and

concerned citizens and frankly terrified of the safety hazard i'm under and my wife under if anyone visits us is under with the new construction of the garage if i can't get out of my garage i wonder if the property owners at 3526 and 16 can get out of their garage for the first time living in bernal heights i'm terrified the situation that is proposed for us. >> we're having technical difficulties maybe you can stop the clock for some reason. >> if sfgovtv can go to the computer please. it is stopped. >> okay. and can we go to slide - >> back to slide 4 thank you, commissioners

my name is marilyn and my partner and i have a house next to the project site we share my part of this presentation today is point out serious design inadequacy that inform this dr analysis we request accurate data be required before building a building permit is issued the first inadequacy the public use if bernal heights boulevard that involves the mass of top of the house this is this - can i see this slide please. thank you. >> okay. this is a south facing from the bernal heights sidewalk the yellow circles mark the top of the story poles if you - this slide panoramic see the spectacular view the bernal heights valley if you walk or jog are push your stockholder or

ride our bike are around bernal heights park as thousand do each week you know the view now the check list of the dr analysis shows quote does the building protect major public views the box is checked next slide it is absolutely not true the ceqa determination echoes this inadequacy in fact, it states quote the proposed routes of t building sit below the elevation of bernal heights boulevard unquote that is a traption and part of dr report and the ceqa determination it corrupts this report. >> allocate question from the

stair penthouse is visible from the street it is checks a the eliminations of the quote stairwell was to appease the neighbors jetting out and blocking a public view respected with a parapet stairwell they getting into the weeds of the stairwell but it is still a blocked public view an engineer checked the height it is 15 feet above the bernal heights grade i want to point out the experience we feel are legitimate concerns of consistently not been heard the dr analysis points out the following question answers the following question with a quote is the building to enhance and compliment public spaces we say no next slide, please this is

consistently to represent the house in incongruent with the top debris they do that expertly we provide you with a close-up not found in the packet those houses are designed to maximize footage not with the urban design guidelines quote promotes the best architecture solutions that locations of public promise and quote large parks occur at the top of park no views unquote i can gone but we ask the commission to resolve those inadequacy before approving those projects thank you. >> good afternoon, commissioners

i'm tera member of the east slope design board and specifically the commission passed our residential design guidelines for the east slope very specifically about our neighborhood and it's design and our review board has been reviewing projects for the last 20 years using our guidelines and the reason we ask for discretionary review is because we wish that the planning department would use our very specific guidelines to judge the significant entries, the bulk and architecture massing and the facades facing bernal he will you've just seen illustrated. >> sir, your time is up. >> but have a 2 minute

rebuttal. >> okay thanks. >> so jonas help me calling speakers in support of dr requester. >> that's right. >> opposition in the project and in support of dr requester. >> okay. not - >> public commenters in support of dr requesters, in opposition to the project. >> you have been already spoken. >> and who are not dr requesters; right? >> my name is a patricia hugh's i'm opposing the idea of unoccupied buildings there i'd like to ask a question if i may how many of you have been out to see the space to see the - two buildings that are populated to

be built anyone has anyone seen it you ma'am, 4 seconds folded a q and a period only to submit public testimony. >> all right. i think everybody should see that >> next speaker >> good afternoon my name is sarah victor for i moved into the neighborhood i moved from new york city and what i love about san francisco is the natural beauty that surrounds us and all the beautiful parks that is why we choose bernal and this construction horrifies me for a number of reasons one of which it is changing what i love so much about being in the city and a new resident here i appreciate

a couple of things i want to go over some of my neighbors have touched on but quickly through the design list i have to say i don't know what is going on he moved in but i'll say even just on a brief review of the documents put before us inadequacy in the report i believe they misrepresent truthfully misrepresent what the building will do it's size and impact on the neighborhood does. >> ma'am, unfortunately your time is up. >> yes. i live in the neighborhood for 10 years i think the question to ask with the slide of the visa to from brand new natural hill a large number of tourism that happens and tourism is number one

economically if you remove that view from bruno who does those homes benefit is that a community garden or low income housing no it is not okay made for two families that will impact greatly on the hill by the way, the rest of the hill is owned by the city how can that benefit bernal and ask yourselves not only in the front you see the city skyline but in the back taking photos i live on el nino worth and manhattan thank you. >> did you say if i'm the dr

person he can't come up. >> yes. but a 2 minute rebuttal. >> any other public comment any other speakers in support of dr requesters. >> not seeing any, moving on - >> (inaudible) opening up for public comment to project sponsor. >> good afternoon commissioners my name is fab even the project sponsor for those two houses i bought think at fulsome which i plan to build my house and it's been almost 3 years i filed a permit since the hearing on may 5th where the planning commission supported a project with a vote for from 6, zero we've tried to

work on a few items on the project first item was with planning commission asked that we rework the north facade and the south facade which we've done and submitted the proposed redesign to the planning department and it is in the package we tried to add windows and interests on the outward facing uphill and downhill facades which was a request that the east design boards asked for we also have reworked with based on the neighbors comments who commented that the street width and driveway assess were difficult we've row worked in collaboration with the std t advisory team and dpw to improve the design based on the layout of it being approved we were

able to get the approval to enlarge the proposed street from 15 to 19 and a half and widened the curve cuts to allow easier turns into the garage and do a better transition and less of a turn going into the garage we've submitted to dpw and the planning department and updated the proposed plans and hopefully, you will see that we're going in the right direction thank you very much. >> commissioner president fong and members of the commission charles olsen from the law firm i'll be brief as this is indeed the third hearing on that over the last year i wanted to

address two points the ceqa contention that a categorical exemption is not available for the projects because it involves 6 residential units not 3 or less the only applications in front of the city the 2 from my project sponsors that qualify for a categorical exemption the reissue categorical exemption much more robust than the prior with an has a discussion of cumulative impacts but again, the rule in san francisco unless an application for environmental review on file the exemption shouldn't apply no irish circumstances that is covered in the reissued categorical exemption that's the second points on the driveway and the fact there are existing

driveways my client is consistently offered to pay for the design and improvement of the existing driveways it requires the coordination of the neighbors they remain part of final design for the street in may this commission again two other members and not the two new members voted 6, zero no exceptional or extraordinary and since that time the only improvements is the one that the clients mentioned their favorable and request that the staff recommendations be adopted any, any questions i'll available to answer. >> opening up for public comment for speakers in support of project sponsor. >> hi i live on olsen street

and building this project should go forward we need homes in bernal heights as well as the city they have a right to build i understand they're trying to work with the neighbors and should but the neighbors is work with them. >> okay. thank you any other speakers in support of project sponsor. >> okay not seeing any, dr requester you have a 2 minute rebuttal. >> i'm sorry one minute. >> two minute rebuttal. >> two minute rebuttal. >> commissioners i'm terry from the east slope design review board our action on this project over the last couple of years has has to do with the design, and how it can be approved, improved and

we have houses built in bernal constantly with our good advice mostly and think that modifications on these to buildings beyond what you saw on the slides just now will be very worthwhile for the community and end up with very nice buildings this project will be a lot more acceptable all the way around so that's why we're asking specifically for discretionary review and extra design advice from the planning department thank you. >> i want to point out the project sponsor and the lawyer if address the inaccurate information that has exists in this report and we would like

request the commission to require that accurate data be in the report thank you. >> my name is gail i live on fulsome street and i'm not going to say what i was planning to say i want to reject what the neighbors not wanting to meet with the gentleman about my driveway that's not true we've not been given any kind of plan what that would look like we'll have two architects look at in my view was a misrepresented rendering of what that streets looks like and not realistic so we have tried to talk at one point an meeting and none that of that has come to pass thank

you. >> project sponsor a to minute rebuttal. >> fab general project sponsor i'd like to respond we've not be able to meet we've tried to set up meeting with dpw and the neighbors but dpw said they're not ready to meet with anyone we tried many times to meet with the neighbors and discuss what the driveways with them and they've tells the they didn't want to meet individually but with the entire neighborhood we found it is impossible to meet with all the neighbors they were extremely hostile in the meetings and there's no reason in meeting with a group to discuss individual driveways and we've said everything we can

say on those driveways and will continue to work with the neighbors through the dpw process but those are the driveways and not part of the buildings and a spate issue the neighbors will be able to appeal so we are expecting that will happen and go through that process thank you. >> okay. that concluded the public hearing and public comment is closed. opening up to commissioners commissioner hillis. >> thank you all for coming to talk about this project i don't think much is changed in my mind we recognize it is complicate and addresses that the last time we were here not simple other agencies in designing the roadway outside of our purview we asked to work on the design that asking can still happen to say moving in the right

direction but i don't - i encourage people to get involved in the roadway design process also with dpw and whom ever needs to be involved but i don't think there is anything new that would change my vote from the original recommendations to not take discretionary review and approve the project. >> commissioner moore. >> i would echo commissioner hilliss sentiments when we heard this project twice i believe this commission used all caution and technical caution to get staff together with the others departments prepared those were thorough and support of quantum and dpw didn't get involved in the nature of the stage, however, the street is a paper street we have ♪

commission so the process for which this process come forward seems clear sir, i have a question for you this has actually never happened before is that possible that the issue for the roadway by itself although environmental office of jones choose to package it because cumulatively we never looked at the projects just the way you look at impact, however, the streets itself could have come forward with the dr requesters having a second presentation or third presentation >> correct so dpw was able to they work with the environmental planning division and so that would have been subject if dpw had chosen to take on the project in this case the sponsor was involved that was considered

part of the original project. >> commissioners you're asking if there was not a proposal for a building dwp would have gone forward. >> yes. >> that's important to us to keep in mind and too long hearings thoroughly looked at literally every detail two are reasonable questions and considerations by the neighbors, however, in totality i think that what is in front of us and unchanged i don't see that any changes to reconsider my position that i held during the last vote and not dr and approving the project. >> commissioner vice president richards. >> i guess a question for one of the dr requesters ma'am, on the inaccurate data please.

so in terms of the inaccurate data that you mentioned what in terms of the inaccurate data would effect the categorical exemption the eir. >> the categorical exemption actually quotes it i mean it states that in terms of public views that the houses neither house go above the grade of bernal heights boulevard a section consistently left in those dr reports despite our objections. >> the question if you read the categorical exemption it talks about the view not degradeable from the park not the boulevard. >> that's park property i want to point out that many - urban design group the park if you go to the park potential most

people enjoy the park by walking around the sidewalk you know there are certainly people that exercise their dogs an bernal heights and run around the hill but for the most part if urban design group you're pushing a stockholder or jogging i mean, we see that all the time tourists come and walk around the hill that's how they enjoy the park. >> thank you. i guess a question for staff the fact that the boulevard is - you know the way to get on and off of the park is that considered to be part of park or is it - >> john. >> i honestly don't know it would be somewhat unusual the boulevard is part of a park but honestly, i don't know. >> in terms of how we typically look at public views

we protect the designated public views in the general plan so even the views out from the park not listed this one is not listed in the general plan not something that is basically regulated per the fire code. >> thank you the other thing i'm glad i saw the cumulative i was concerned about the piecemealing and the hook ups for gas or water or whatever and a portion in the categorical exempt and talked about the impact for the houses and they will be subject to further review i'm satisfied with what i see as well. >> commissioner hillis. >> i move to not take dr and approve the project. >> second. >> thank you on that motion to not take dr commissioner hillis

commissioner johnson commissioner koppel commissioner melara commissioner moore commissioner vice president richards and commissioner president fong sxhauchlt unanimously 7 to zero and commissioners that place us back to the regular calendar on items 12 ab for cases the second to none daily and hope sf master plan informational presentations. >> good afternoon commissioner

i'm theo from the mayor's office the director of hope sf with tremendous joy to come before you on potrero and second to none very vail is i'll do a very, very brief backward and apologizes for the time confusion i'll need to - we have staff to answer questions and first of all, i'll say we have the 4 hope sf sites and part of the reason it give us joy to be in front of you we feel and i speak on behalf of the mayor in public housing no master development more important than hope sf this is quality and adapt with cities across the country are facing and hope sf is about repairing public policys the unacceptable conditions for communities we're

well underway and alice griffith and hunters point and today is a critical moment about potrero hill and sunnyvale i'll do the background on hope sf that is old news but want to make sure for the record folks understand what hope sf is indeed the nation's first public housing transformation initiative to disruptive intergenerational poverties with mixed income communities without displacement massive displacement as a concept of the hope 6 sites we learned our lessons for the vouchers not supporting folks mayor newsom in 2010 over the course of the last 6 years through public and private investments now reaching $600 million city investment

we're well on you our way hope sf is an incredible collection of affordable housing developers, departments, philanthropist and we call it a collective initiative i'll discuss the designs to set the context i stand here on behalf of the dozens and dozens of partners that will make that possible in terms of the community snapshot at a glance 5 thousand residents, 2200 households, incredibly multi ethic and racial you'll see our partners bridge housing and mercy housing that can speak to potrero and sunnydale we're trying to disrupt the public policys for

dedications the housing authority has created with the resilience amazing unbelievable families 73 percent of families that are employed in the city and 14 thousands is the average income and 80 percent of households are single parents and unacceptable outcomes with schools and upward mobility i've given you the results of the fraction it indicates our values and ultimately to transform those communities with the residents it is a mixed income initiative and ultimately to have 90 or 100 percent almost 1 hundred folks to stay and strive with $3 billion investment in hope sf over the next 15 years as i go to i'm going to

transition over to staff but i'll say just on behalf of the residents and spent a lot of time in communities meetings folks and in way on potrero don't believe we're actually going to do that but a.k.a. is a guidepost so i thank to the commission for the attention and bring the work in front of you it is a citywide gave her to fulfill many old promises thank you very much. >> good afternoon. matt schneider department staff i'll give you a little bit of background of the projects themselves the master site plans and what we hope to see built on the physical side and then i'm going to turn it

over to lee of oewd that will take through the da and talk the design review process we're looking at to institutionalize and skip forward a couple of slides here not working. >> i'll remind you you've seen

those projects several times over the year and in 2017 and july had the impact reports and respectfully in december we did a couple of actions we took adopted ceqa finding for potrero one thing with general plans to be able a portion block x to move forward prior to the rest of the projects we did an informational about a year ago and, of course, last month to initiate the general plan. >> and so we'll be before you next month here's a list of actions you'll take i'll come back to this slide i want to run through some of the general characteristics of those sites and how we love to transform them

again, we're looking to do increase the density those are largely well under developed sites they're under lined zoning to leverage the density to integrate it with the neighborhoods there as they are and improve the connectivity and provide uses not only the predominantly resident along with mixed income in the neighborhood and political this to sunnydale in visitacion valley it is surrounded by amazon playground and character decided by 6 large super block 80 buildings wide low swung buildings constructed for

workforce housing perpendicular to the and don't have easy on the streets and much of the infrastructure it is lacking on the bottom right you'll notice is streets without sidewalks for example. >> and looking to transform them into a regular grid with buildings that align with the streets and setback consistent street walls to define the streets here's the site plan for sunnydale not connected to the neighborhood and then what we plan to transform, of course, regular street blocks around 36 fine-grained blocks replacing the 6 super blocks with 4

additional parks that not only provide the opportunities for residents and local neighbors but ties into the regional open space network so in the end we'll look to again, we're going in terms of levi's stadium we're looking to add retail in other communities facilities to make sure that that is more mixed use and mixed income. >> and here's the project you've seen this graphic many times but this is what the site looks like now and then what hope sf will transform the site into and doing the same for potrero travel up to potrero hill and hope sf commonly referred to as potrero annexation it has all the similar

characteristics but characterized by the slope and separate from the rest of the neighborhood to transform it to typical streets network request an open space network here potrero looks to take advantage of the things that are typical at potrero specifically the specifically the steep slope to use that for the open space and incorporate the open space and the perpendicular parking that is carried forward into the neighborhood here's the potrero and the plans introducing mixed use and mixed income adding additional parks not only are great to have

themselves but help complete the overall area open space network and the same graphics so let's talk about what is going to be before you and what the planning department role will be in that next month before you a general plan amendment that we had presented to you last month inspecting a couple of the maps in the urban design and the open space and recreation elements we are i should back up and say wear modeling what we'll be doing in with a hope sf project similarly to what we did with schlage lock and park merced that's so we'll create a special use district sites forced o for those sites most of controls will refer to a separate

document that will be site specific designed and guidelines document that will be before you that will be a document for this pod to approve only we'll also, of course, be doing map amendments that will adjust the heights right now they're limited to 40 feet we wanted to make this area more urban and take advantage of the low density to binge up the density and finally we'll be here for second to none very vail ceqa - yeah ceqa a motion from the general plans and the 101 plased to none just vail and special use district for each the sites they'll emotionally refer to the

control and guidelines document one for each they're similar no format the way we're organizing this is dental crossed across the sites to make that has simple as possible. >> so the design review will be different from what we typically do at the planning department we're mostly involved with reviewing projects for structures or buildings on private lots here this is much more multi feasibility study with schlage lock and with park merced we'll have it will be - our review in nature will be vertical and horizontal with that, i should mention notifications we typically do a requirement in the development agreement that both project

sponsors be on sort of a continuing to do outreach in the community and making sure that so in one meeting happens prior to an application coming in. >> the phase application is something that the planning department will look at prior to look at plaques for design review for buildings and this is to assure that has they phase their phase their project buildings and blocks are being designed in conjunction with the streets, of course, this give us an opportunity to make sure there is a sufficient amount of infrastructure their public defender at the same time with the building with their structures at the same time we'll building both this process are we'll be reaching out to our implementing agency that will be looking at applications for infrastructure improvements that will give us an heads up to

provide comments to the project sponsors if need be and do a design review vertical this is typical in planning review a of buildings we'll be reviewing against those design standards and guidelines documents and within that will be provisions for being able major modifications and minor jar will come before you for our discretion and the parks and community facilities and designs for streets that will actually be taking care of by the department of public works with planning having a major role they'll be the corridors of that first to review the street designs making sure their consistent with what

we have in the design guidelines and documents. >> okay with that, i'm going to turn it over to - of oewd that can talk about the available agreements. >> thank you matt hello commissioners. i'm leah with the office of economic workforce development so the last piece of package before you next month is the development agreement and as you know a development architecture is a conceptual tool to achieve public benefits over and above what could be desired by the normal practices and give of the developer a vested right over a specified term so the da is an essential tool for hope sf second to none sunnyvale that the hope sf can be implemented

with clear up front exceptions and responsibility for every party in addition the city will remain long term control to assure an appropriate roll out of the phases and we know you're familiar with the development but hope sf das are unique they more like lists the developers mature commitment to the ambitious goals of hope sf and the city in addition to the traditional roll in in this case is a true partner in the project the city will be providing capital funding the city will be playing angle active roll in coordinating with the infrastructure department to realize this master plan and the city with the leadership of the mayor's office of housing be working with our state and

federal housing partners and the final piece the developers in their role is a unique as a reminder bridge housing is the development of the potrero site and the partnership of mercy housing leading the sunnyvale sites those are mission driven developers unlike some of the folks that come before you these developers truly share the goal of the city in housing the vulnerable resident throughout this project. >> so the package the set of public benefits and the set of this will achieve revolves around the important benefit to rehouse the existing over 13 hundreds households living in the sites new clean households to live in and additionally

those neighborhoods will be mikdz the developers will provide additional low income available tax credit united on the site and opportunities for a new market-rate again to create that mixed income community and as you've heard from matt both projects include inkind benefits with new neighborhood that a a number of open spaces across the sites there will be programmed such their space for the residents to use not something like today and include new roadways and connects and transit improvements all of which will greatly enhance the residents and the new residents connectivity to the neighborhood related to their broader district and finally the benefits of those projects will provide a much needed neighborhood service so retail,

streets activities they'll be community and childcare centers and social service outlets i'm just quickly go through the last slide the project phasing will be done over 10 to 20 years those da are these will include flexibility in the timing and the order of phasing and that is in order to be responsive to allow the city and the developers to work together to go after funding opportunities and grants so the phasing is flexible to allow for that and, of course, to be respectful the residents so they don't need to be relocated i have a list of funding resources we can talk about that in close we'll be back none november 17th to talk about the approval of the package and be visiting other commissioners for approval of the da and hope to be before the

board of supervisors early 2017 thank you. >> thank you. >> okay. that concluded staffs regulation not seeing any, public comment is closed. >> commissioner johnson. >> sure thank you very much everyone for being here today really looking forward to we've had many discussions on the eir a couple of conversations on that and really looking forward to actually seeing approvals and coming before us this is a very exciting project for a lot of reasons there were a lot of inkwikts how putting the cart before the horse was sited this is going to help to really to change that dynamic so it is exciting to be a part of that one thing that i wanted to ask

staff and then make sure we get it into the record the developments agreements are different from other major projects 5 m project the most recent those das don't include the community benefits we've seen in other projects a different reasons can you talk a little bit about a little bit. >> absolutely i think traditionally what a development agreement does it speaks to well entitling a developer to build more and in return get a significant public benefits financial contributions are included in impact fees and creating a whole host of benefits for the public in this case as you may know the city is fichd those projects there is sort of a cycle loop we're clearly not exacting in terms of

extra impact fees or payments or things like that but we're using this agreement to actually sort of lay all the candidates on the table and make sure we're going to implement this plan because what the da will have a specified facing plan that talks about how this funding agreement will come together to make each phase move forward and controls of matt went over what types of community involvement and this is a tool to i think kind of put on paper a real and binding commitment that the city and developers are coming together to realize the project and a could coordination for the city the city is involved in the project touches many, many departments so actually assembling this has caused all the departments to sit at the

table and fatally this is a good tool and will continue to help us frame the implementation. >> i'll add one other comment as you move forward for the approval coming before the commission one of the major issues that we're seeing in some of our really developments you think about the eastern neighborhoods where sort of piecemeal but it is a large area and you know many different work changes that are happening in the neighborhood and i think of hope sf as a micro cooperative we're redoing neighbors and doubling or tripling and i want to make sure we avoid that 10 years from now, when mr. of us are still on the commission we are not getting the public comment about how the streets are there but no buses

or the buses are coming but you know the parks are not there so that will be really great i think know that is challenging we see citywide and the public-private partnerships to be aware of what that phasing agreement will be i know that will be in the debut make sure that is highlighted with along with every piece of the approval so we do the design and development documents to make sure the phasing it highlighted so there was an overall picture when things will happen and have a holistic view and really work number one for the housing residents we plan to be able to return and live there and also the assistant residents. >> commissioner melara. >> i had a question i think - i'm so happy to see this

and that is you know far along it is wonderful i am wondering you know development agreements are complicated things i'm wondering with the process with the residents to understand what is in there and particularly the phasing transportation, schools there is - those are neighborhoods that have some of the highest concentrations of kids so i'll worpdz what the process has been. >> that's a great question so was mentioned the mission driven component of our affordable housing developers so those affordable housing developers are on site you know potrero their co-located there they host community meetings monthly with the residents any construction documents and design documents

and phasing documents are made available to the residents so i would say the da has been passed out to the residents if they want to read those but a mechanism in place so all the key items and key terms with phasing is done washer and dryers and buses all the hot bottom items and say question have a leadership counsel that i'll be taking the legal documents and get a deeper dive to those. >> commissioner hillis. >> so thank you all for your work on this project and is presentation he know how important it is to rehab those units and build housing units and correct some of the planning mistakes that were made in developing the original process just a general some general

questions think is da i know we'll get into it later but the underlying housing authority what happens to that in the future a shift to the - the various nonprofits. >> yes. the current landowner housing authority we are kruger working on sort of associated agreement with the housing authority and that will be called a master amendment that document has two main purposes one is to really specify specific relocation details the other to really online the land transfers that will happen to make that possible ultimately what will happen at the end of the day the final picture will be all the streets and public right-of-ways will be dedicated and the city will own all the

streets and the affordable parcels that will remain the housing authority underlying ownership and ground through the developers the developers will only improve those buildings on behalf of the authority and the third piece notice market-rate parcels created those parcels will be actually sold to independent third party developers and the part of the funding, of course, especially from the sale will help to fund that will say patchwork. >> in the market-rate parcels they'll be sold not necessarily by the housing authority but the market-rate developers. >> that's right. >> is there a term to the da i mean what happens the underlying saying that affordable parcels remain pubically owned.

>> yes. >> similarly what happens now. >> the zoning controls and the ownership will last beyond the term of da. >> okay. thank you very much. >> commissioner moore. >> i think this is a special day it is before the eir was approved that some of us already sat in the many years of reviewing this very, very cafeteria development of the master plan the basis for the eir a lot of creative and powerful work in which the commission in the past reviewed those plans and kind of tweaked them and asked questions, etc. and have a depth by which i'm very, very happy to support how we are roll the dice this its been a long time coming and mr. snigd has been holding the torch high. >> thank you to all of you, you

should be proud of being part of this i'm proud to be allowed to work through comments and tweak and some comments at least what happened here and couldn't are more appreciative this is happening right now i think the city is sing a song full of the hope that the present has brought us; a beacon to others that are struggling as said earlier with the impossibility of addressing housing and needs more affordable housing that is not just the national but a international problem having said that, i'll remind myself i was taken by what commissioner johnson's said we were always concerned by on behalf of the mta that public transportation and the increase and variety of public transportation stay

abbreviate with offering the variance from what has been an island and has more of a common island over the past decade this particular project needs to be fully reintegrated into the overall functioning fabric of the city that's making all and every transportation mode available from beacon ways to whatever it is and i'm not trying to find pie in the sky but this needs very, very strong and up front commitment in that infrastructure by which it ties this back we had the same discussions with park merced serving an increased density on the visitacion valley slide and others strengthening the light rail in that director we don't have a lot of that kind of stuff

out here for us to fellow the phasing and be focused on high priorities and infrastructure it would be nice to have director rahaim in some brief way to perhaps mr. schneider that commission could go over the phasing part because a lot thought has gone into it and spoken on and on and on and on to talk about those maturity plans i'm happy for you. >> okay. he think that concludes commissioners, comments or questions and jonas on to the next item and only other item is general public comment. >> that's what i'm hoping to hear any general public comment today

>> hello, my name is silvia johnson. my general public comment is before stems for the light rail before the tracking motions and my tracking with- your - visible number is different than you know like on a different sketches which - i wrote for this you know - re - in

tracking is the wheels that has steam - that does put out consensus not to have light rail in damages as far as that number's that you have on - this you know high rolling for package that go into railing and tracking as i you know i'm going to school for it and math that one of the important things about you know these high - of railroad and tracking that has

to be done with like some thing like others might be heavy i've been different ways that we put on the steam that is newer and might cost a lot of money to do this process but this also goes along with doing regular mathematical shuns - on different perspectives to a more designed part of - more easier railing and tracking and which is done here with different perspectives of which

is not safety and not really in this design to you know make that for public that's what i'm trying know to establish, of course, this has to do with with schooling i'm trying to. >> thank you silva is up. >> public comment? >> not seeing any, public comment is closed. and the meeting is adjourned