commissioner melgar and commissioner moore commissioner vice president richards and commissioner johnson will arrive shortly commissioners, that places you under your is consideration of items proposed for continuance item 1 west portal conditional use authorization to december 16, 2016, items 2 ab at howard street are proposed july january 26, 2017, item 3 ocean off conditional use authorization is proposed to february 2nd, item 4 to february 9, 2017, and item 5 for

case the inclusionary housing planning code to march no to the items proposed and there are no speaker cards. >> any public comment on little items proposed for continuance not seeing any, public comment is closed. . >> move to continue. >> do i hear a second. >> thank you, commissioners as proposed commissioner hillis commissioner koppel commissioner melgar commissioner moore and commissioner president fong so moved, commissioners, that motion passes unanimously 5 to zero and places you from under our consent calendar 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 removed from the consent calendar and considered as a separate item at this or a future hearing. item 6 for case at the 2000 van ness conditional use authorization, item 7 for 2016 at the market street conditional use authorization, and item 8 excuse me - 2016 mission street conditional use authorization i have there are no speaker cards. >> any public comment on the items on the consent calendar. >> not seeing any, public comment is closed. commissioner moore. >> move to approve. >> second. >> commissioner hillis commissioner koppel commissioner melgar commissioner moore

commissioner vice president richards and commissioner president fong so moved, commissioners, that motion passes unanimously 6 to zero and places us mr. commissioner for 2016. >> any public comment on draft minutes not seeing any, public comment is closed. >> commissioner vice president richards. >> >> move to approve second. >> very good, commissioners. commissioner hillis commissioner johnson commissioner koppel commissioner melgar, commissioner moore and commissioner vice president richards and commissioner president fong so moved, commissioners, that motion passes unanimously 7 to zero and places us on item 10 commissioners questions or comments. >> commissioners, i hope you join me in joining this meeting in memory of a public works employee was shot and died while

performing his work doing graffiti work in san francisco and our condolences to his family two kids and let's hope this didn't continue. >> commissioner vice president richards. >> just one item to note in this week's chronicle on monday preservation for the last hearing and the story it told given that the resources were not in the original shape when the story was there it is an article the known article on the preservation in the russian river starting in the 40's and went to the 50s and 60s a famous artist that taught class the buildings were not in good shape it told a story how the site will be historic it is important so the way we define the

historic preservation is a what happened when the story was told. >> seeing nothing further drouchlts. >> thank you jonas good afternoon, commissioners just two announcements related to the courts decision this week the court of appeals made two determinations this week on two key projects the warriors arena the court upheld the environmental impact report they were challenged by the appellants the court found those challenges were in the appropriate and so that project - the project er was upheld and not clear in the appellants going to the supreme court the

second case the appeal and litigation related to the mta's t line the t line is proposed to to loop around 20th i think top of third some trains can go part of the way and turn back that loop had been challenged when the the court of appeals that project can go forward those two decisions that happened this with week. >> thank you. the city attorney's office and the team for their, work on the appeals those litigation procedures require a tremendous amount of time from the staff and the city attorney's office so thank you. >> item he 12. >> commissioner moore. >> would you verify that the t

line loop actually is very much in support of the pier 70 and developments on pier 70 and couldn't do that without it. >> it was always been in the plan for the t line street plan and allows for frequent train service from pier 70 to the north that's why it is important to the whole part. >> commissioners review of past event from the board of appeals in historic preservation commission yesterday good afternoon, commissioners were aaron starr, manager, legislative affairs. at that weeks land use committee heard the height and bulk potrero it was in the height and mass in the rezoning that zoned from o s it was heard on june 2nd and approval with modifications the modification was sdroen to 50 x as overflow

room wanted at the land use the only representative from the property owner it had clarification questions and it was with a positive recommendation also at the land use the proposed mission sponsored by supervisor kim the will first increase the onsite affordable unit and the sud for the floor rash exempting the project from purchase the development of rights and certain portion of usable open space to be offsite one nine hundred feet of the boundary the planning commission heard this october 27th and recommended approval with modifications an additional 3 and a half percent made available for the household

for a total of 25 inclusion that was not incorporated at the hearing no public comment and no questions the item was forwarded the land use committee heard the ordinance for the citywide transportation to demand management program it was initiate and recommended by the planning commission on august 4th since that time supervisor avalos the sponsor of ordinance thank you hearing various members of the public spoke in support and seeking amendments to the program some amendments were proposed by the ordinance by the committee with most significant amendments related to the phasing and the tdm requirements it was continued until next mondays so the proposed amendments can be incorporated at the full board

the student housing will reduce the time that a institution had to have the - that passed the first reading and the appeal for the viral determination for fulsome street was continued and was the conditional use authorization for the project at the 2675 fulsome and finally the determination for south van ness at the hearing supervisor campos indicated the findings didn't represent his intent and the board rescinded therefore supervisor campos proposed amendments we send the approval ask the planning department to have the additional information to the board at which time the clerk will schedule for a second hearing those amendments are

intact but the supervisors change the procedure by keeping the appeal alive the board can reject the appeal depend on what is decided after the additional requested information from planning those amendments are extensive it was continued until next week's hearing there is one introduction this week an ordinance amending the planning code to delete the number of unauthorized units from the lost and delete the legalization of imagined or linld and the demolition of a single-family home is unfound with the conditional use authorization commissioners a duplicated ordinance from the original one and those changes were considered and recommended by the commission therefore this item will not come back to you and that that concludes my presentation. thank you. >> okay. thank you.

>> any questions okay we have no report from the board of appeals. >> it will place us under general public comment jurisdiction of the commission except agenda items. with respect to agenda items, opportunity to address the commission will be afforded when the item is reached in the meeting. each member of the public may address the commission up to three minutes. i do have two speaker cards. >> okay georgia swedish and francisco da costa. >> good afternoon hi happy december 1st, i'm going to show you pictures can i have the overhead, please? there it is in the circle the

orange house this is the house as it was on delores street before the renovation here it is during the renovation whoops a make it go out wrong way. >> i don't know. >> sorry. >> not very technical you get the idea you can see the house they added a floor on the flat part of delores here's some of the context you see the other hundred dollars another 1 down the street and sitting around the corner i couldn't get the picture here it is just about done with the remodel here's a closer picture i guess my point a couple of things one is that what's the role of the residential design guidelines on this this is what people are upset about around the city this

is what i've heard commissioners talk about the mission bay effect i don't know the other issue this had a complicated staff review two comments they had to merge the comments and make sure no demolition and it said no demolition part that have that i may be wrong they were going to keep this part down there. >> where the garage is but as you can see from the photo i took yesterday that is begun but my big question and issue what about the residential design guidelines what role did that play in this project why did this project regret f that note a historic block but an important block of delores street i read an article in the new

york times that is not a district but lower manhattan talked about the building going to be demolished and couldn't say the thing that strikes me all of these are you create a gap like a gap full of teeth and that's what that does that's why we need to have a good public discussion of residential design guidelines thank you. >> commissioners my name is francisco da costa i'm here to point out a few things to you all commissioners i represent the first people of

this area the muwekma ohlone i have to have an understanding all this land was stolen each of and every square inch i came back from north dakota with only hundred plus thousand miles but as the native-americans are protected from strangers, who have to no manners much like some of the commissioners who have no clue whatsoever about our culture i heard one commissioner speak about some preservation you absolutely have no exclusively about the people in san francisco absolutely no clue this land 200 and restraining order years ago was pristine

this commission has to address the quality of life for human beings so the high sdebts that you all build that people live like massages they had this polluted the water shed that is polluted we don't tap into the water shed but have all sorts of contaminates you don't have data on the contaminated issues i watch you all on tv in this digital world each one of i see what you do rubber stamping so what do you have to say about the millennium tower sinking and 20 hot towers that will come tumbling down with the big one duo what do you have to say to the infants the children to the

over 60 thousand families that left san francisco in the last 5 years what did you have to say and to the mayor who is pushing wheeling and dealing with the commissioners i'm asking what do you have to say? one time on this commission we had some reputable commissioners that do the right thing rubber stamping the will not be tolerated i could have called one thousand people like those union people submitted city hall i will do that thank you very much >> good afternoon commissioner

president fong and fellow commissioners, i have an - a general public comment an article 7 so seeing that article 7 is going to be discussed in the time fix of eating and drinking establishments on general calendar i'm wondering if it is appropriated for me to address you now with that general public comment an article 7? i don't believe article 7 is on the agenda today >> okay. so here we go good day anastasia i reside at the residential end of 24th street neighborhood commercial strip and i'm concerned about how the article 7 will impact our mcd the new ncd control for many districts have a category labeled urban design guidelines

underbuilding and standards and a reference column labeled general commerce destroy table 3 is the summarized column subject to urban design guidelines now my question is subject to urban design guidelines does that mean that existing urban design guidelines found in the commerce industry clause is of the general plan or what governs the ncd or use the new urban design guidelines that is are in the process of being written outreach for article 7 revision has been not adequate or done with a view to truly informing the neighborhoods what is supposed to happen not district and month neighbors a kwunlt unaware of what is done the

changes are substantive and planning department staff has not allowed time for the neighborhood staff and business communities to review and evaluate complex revisions or the impacts of this ordinance so, please allow more time for this and have a more robust outreach so the merging held in september 2nd meetings in september and only a handful of people showed thank you. >> good afternoon commissioner from the nov neighborhood counsel he wanted to follow up what anastasia brought up as well as when georgia swedish brought up our commercial strip in noah

valley i wanted to bring to our attention i don't believe the residential design guidelines that will be governing mid to high-rise buildings and properly south of market are appropriate for the commercial strings on twourtd the scale more appropriate for residential buildings in we, the jury neighborhoods so we just would like to make sure that commercial strips are 24th street are not going to be subject to proposed urban design guidelines that are more appropriate for mid to high-rise programs and following up the residential design guidelines how it is piloted and projects are going through the review

we're working with the folks in noah valley that involves changing type a historic resource to - unfortunately, the project is visual from two streets 1 on jordan street where it is located and on the street next is jersey street we bought up to the attention of the planning department that changing the roof line on a historic resource from gable to square is not appropriate because the project is visual from the site elevation here so they haven't rendered a decision but told the site elevation have not important

so i want to brought to your attention that from the idea is preservation of a particular resource to the point that when the public right-of-way will be impacted under the tier of historic resource that site elevation should matter in the property is visual on the site so that's my only comment thank you. >> is there is there any additional public comment? >> closed. commissioner vice president richards. >> ms. squishing if you can send us the address of that property we'll take a look at that. >> commissioners, if there's nothing further, we'll move on to to our regular calendar item 13 the commerce element

this is a general plan please note on october 6th after public comment is closed. the commission continued to this by the vote of 6 to zero commissioner johnson you were absent. >> yes. i was. >> were you able to review the stellar excellent. thank you. >> good afternoon, commissioners aaron starr, manager, legislative affairs. the item before you is an amendment to the general plan commerce and industry element guidelines for eating and drinking establishment the proposed changes will rehabilitate the general plan by removing initiative like eating and drinking establishment that have a frontage in a single zoning district the percentage calculation for the eating and drinking concentration will be in the planning code that was continued from october 6th and the staff to work with the

telegraph hill folks that meet with stan to discuss the concerns regarding the language all staff and the gentleman couldn't come to an agreement with the plans they modified did ordinance to address the t hd concerns those changes were in the revised ordinance before you today, the planning department supports the amendments they've removed the controls from the general plan and anything similar to the planning code the main policy document from the general plan to focus on general plan statement and the planning code to have the tools for those goals and policies the current language having specific controls in the planning code i'm sorry in the general plan and by having those in the general plan and requires

planners to make two similar distinct calculations staffs recommend approval. >> okay any public comment? okay not seeing any, public comment is closed. >> commissioner johnson. >> thank you very much i was able to review the video from the first time that was up i don't think through would be any issues i have a question on the revised language so - so basically, it says the last sentence those establishments that will be the above having an over concentration shouldn't be permitted and we hope not my- we

shouldn't permit something in san francisco if we find good reason to go against you know what maybe more broad standard is i would hate to be held bye bye language like that i don't see that in the origin drafting this hearing he wanted to ask the question. >> i'm trying to find -

>> i see you're right you have the creation to permit them should you want to modify the language to remove that sentence or shouldn't be permitted unless the commission finds or unless someone finds it to be appropriate. >> we can eliminate that the eating and drinking establishment, etc., etc. that increases the proposition of total occupied, etc. for the neighborhood uses, etc., etc., etc. and period then points the policy statement in - the

language of over concentration i know we're trying to put the actual calculation in the planning code if we make that change move to approve with that change. >> is there a second. >> second and commissioner moore. >> i have a question about the vagueness of over concentration in the statement of policy for example, there are part of city

where restaurant next to restaurant is basically. >> in my mind after we talk

about the balance of commerce use maybe threatened go with an over occupied of concentration this is the negative impact so the proposals should be reviewed to make sure they're not reduce the variety of neighborhood uses or create noise and parking problems and other things in the surrounding neighborhoods i think that is the piece that qualities the policy one man's over concentration and another man's desert so we'll have to look at each project and is does that reduce the neighborhoods and create noise and parking problems and determine whether or not we should approve the project if we want to approve the projects meaning lots of admitting factors i want that

one change but okay with the offer concentrations language. >> commissioner moore. >> i would like to go from the specific to the general because what we learn in the specification leads to an overriding policy statement joet we're missing the specifics for the general to the specifics i have big questions they're not answered in the current discussion. >> commissioner vice president richards. >> so doesn't each we have a general over concentration percent for generally for an mcds like north beach etc. >> as of right now in neighborhoods has a specific percentage but remove this in the general plan that can happen

so. >> okay. >> if a neighborhood decided that hey we want 80ers that have the neighborhood to be restaurants we consider that over concentration the code allows for that. >> maybe i'm confused so i thought in north beach that was 50 percent we've been approving things at 75 and 76 percent 50 percent was considered over concentrations the cu was over that restraining order percent. >> i don't - that's promulgated in the code at 50 percent. >> striking act out the sentences that commissioner johnson asked for what's the up and down and down side. >> it adds for flexibility to the commission it says what she's asking to be removed those establishments that above should not be permitted your job is to

consider in the just the concentrations of the needs with a lot of vacancies or maybe not in type of restaurants a lot of things but maybe a strong report for that. >> is there an upside for leaving it in that you can see. >> i don't think that adds much. >> okay is there any additional public comment? >> >> commissioners there is a motion that has been seconded. >> sorry commissioner moore. >> can i ask you one more question mr. starr what is has to approach to this issue it is not something we do often i want to hear from various groups different groups small business

councils and merchant are you comfortable to make a decision i know for this approve but maybe of consequence that we myself included couldn't possibly embrace if at that moment. >> minica discussed that last week the small business commission was if not endorsing it was for it in some way at least the office and also the golden gate restaurant association was for it as well we've had extensive talks with north beach they're the ones specifically mentioned in the code 245er7 particularly interested in it and we also went to the coalitions monthly organization meeting and they didn't seem to center a problem with it at the time. >> okay.

>> commissioners, if there's nothing further, there a motion to adopt it presented by commissioner johnson. >> commissioner hillis commissioner johnson commissioner koppel commissioner melgar commissioner moore no. >> commissioner vice president richards and commissioner president fong so moved, commissioners, that motion passes 6 to one with commissioner moore voting against. >> commissioners that places us on item 14 for the coast process this is an informational presentation. >> jennifer. >> good afternoon. i'm maggie in the citywide planning division i'm here with a possible future amendment for the culture program when is the

local version of the california coast act an area plan with the western shoreline this was aimed at additionally coast houses with erosion an issue and sea level rise a new threat to our western shoreline. >> so local programs are between the state and local government a local coast program adapted in 1986 with the coastal commission to protect the coastal resources with natural habitat on the scenic and public assess and recreation and san francisco has a very successful local coastal programs with the beach and golden gate park but it is the standard of review for

the permits that has zoning and part of the public and private projects is compared to the - the reason we're pursuing the amendment and drafting the amendment now is there are some near term erosion on south ocean beach with the oceanside and the public works owns and great highway we want to make sure that the planning department general plan and area plan align with the shoreline so projects come before you your reviewing against a standard that is up to date. >> so we adopt in a local coastal program in 1986 for the city and county of san francisco and not amendment it since this is the map and delineates this is primarily public property in the city of san francisco the golden gate park, the zoo and

the treatment plant very little private domain it captured in this. >> and this images on why we need to do this sooner than later and why we're adding those amendments a picture of south ocean beach parking lots for beach assess their crumbling and we have a single erosion event in needing over a weekend so this is something the public works and public utilities commission are interested in a long process to think through what the appropriate balance is protecting our infrastructure protecting public assess and protecting the natural resources to the highest extent possibly the public utilities commission has a temporary permit from the coastal and doing a stand point

pass the big dump truck from the north end of the beach to the south side that's trying to protect this while they get a bigger plan in place those permit expires in 2017 this permit is to make sure we are ready for the project that will come in we have an ax plan not as urgent but a concern on the western shoreline this amendment will include language how we will evacuate and what our goals to protect the coastal resources to incorporate a few pieces of master plan by spur and 10 and 12 to identify what has to

change and the ways to maintain the functions we love about ocean beach make it a great place for had been at that time and protect movement we want to address the sea level rise was not on the radar in 1986 not in our local program and the biggest immediate move this policy amendment will manage the - in the ocean beach master plan and a lot of public outreach the idea over time parking lots and restroom and the great highway will be removed so that the beach is a migrate eastward beaches adapt themselves we have to get out of the way so this has been 6 years of public outreach through efforts first to the ocean beach

master the planning department and others participated in stephen but had a large public component during the effort started last year with the council and coastal commission through grant an interagency committee with the golden gate and have the army corp. of engineers and an citizens advisory and two public open houses on the scope of the amendment and on the draft language everybody o everything is on the wednesday night and we're here now next year we'll come back and introduce the language and pending the approval to the board of supervisors if it is approved at the local level submitted to the coastal commission next year a long process of certification. but for a sense of the timeline it is started at the planning department when we received a grant from the coastal commission and spent a few

months on the data collection a lot of studies on ocean beach from coastal engineers and the master plan bringing together what we know will happen and likely to see for future projects and future pressures here in the spring a lot of scope definition with the interagency and community groups and public open houses and several around the reviews and there is draft language on the planning department website right now we are entering the local process and after that to the coastal commission for review and possible certification the coastal commission if they certify the amendment and submitted a coastal program in effect if they have changes we'll come back to you and back to the board of supervisors we have to get to one version we agree on

that happens next year >> i want to note this is one of the many sort of sea level rise and climatic change and this one is farther ahead the e vocation issue we thinking about that sour sea level rise don't stop at ocean beach and make a cohesive strategy over time thank you i'll be happy to answer any questions you may have. >> great yeah any public comment come on up. >> as the director of viral justice advocacy i visited last loose 6 months ago to see exactly what is happening in alaska having said that, we need to pay attention to our infrastructure while the lady was talking in a general term

the san francisco public utilities commission really has to address a lot of the infrastructure on the highway the great highway from cliff house all around the world to the zoo and we're talking about it and we talk about it but where's the money to make it happen and what i'm looking here is we do have a budget of over $9 billion and we have all those people building skyscrapers how much of that money into a pot to address infrastructure and when i talk about the infrastructure i'm talking about clean water pipes and sewer pipes that are 85 years old we while the san francisco public

utilities commission says insurance doing something goldstein the duty of planning department to ask the san francisco public utilities commission for some imperial data as a replacement of the pipes the infrastructure this is going to be an issue so deep that will adversely effect us and more dramatic than an earthquake we talk about spur but we need to get the united states geological survey and work with ohio drafts and work with to find out when is happening we have remains of the first people that the planning

department has not met or do they want to understand that but maybe only to take a - to berkley or a tack a course linked to the native-american act to understand more again, this land was not given to anybody to contaminate and abuse we need to look at sea level rise that is a result of contamination from twolegged mammals decided to contaminate that impacts the entire world thank you very much. >> handsome commissioners i'm dennis here to speak against managed retreat at the ocean beach the sea level rise and no talk of managed retreat the

filled land an east side of san francisco we're talking about giant levies to protect mission bay million dollars to protect the seawall going ahead with in developments at hunters point and treasure island which will require higher and higher levies as the sea sea level rise the planning department wants to adapt a plan to spend millions to accelerate the loss of our natural shoreline there is natural bluffer in front of the of the wastewater plant and they want to let that wash away the erosion that was referred to in 2009 didn't happen in a weekend the department became aware of it it 45e7d over several months i tried to alert our city to the

loss of habitat they said we're working on a plan the plan they've been working so to surround our 23458 shoreline to the ocean would go a little bit of protection that they've spent 4 hundred plus thousand dollars on a study to come up with management retreat that's the plan right from the beginning managed retreat if we need another study at the fraction of that cost to see what can be done to preserve our natural shoreline the master beach master plan is the robust outreach but few people in the community know about the plan when i tell them about ocean beach they think that is stupid so some of the people that do

support the plan of which i've only met a few said that highway is built on fill the shoreline of san francisco is pushed out 200 feet of the great highway and existing crops visual today, i sent a picture of that to supervisor kern's but no response i like to know why we shouldn't spend a little bit of money to preserve the shoreline and not wash away thank you. >> is there any additional public comment? >> - any questions. >> commissioner moore.

>> did you still have the exhibits their three or four-year-old they're available and who. >> spur. >> yes. the natural plan is linked on our website on the coastal program amendment and on the spur website. >> this is a great piece of work they had a long exhibit for the entire building and could get into the subject matter. >> if i might add thank you to maggie you'll see the for your action in a couple of months the actual local coastal program the first study you was part of multi team and oversee that and looked at it a number of options one was more north you recall the proposal for the managed

retreat is south where the erosion the costs of maintaining the shoreline was extraordinary in the hundreds of thousand of dollars because of the erosion if that shoreline there was a broad contention a hybrid an option for example, managed retreat two or three blocks from the great highway was, of course not acceptable but south of slope the feeling the natural conditions were actually for a more erosive atmosphere the natural part of that shoreline that's why the managed retreat proposal was put forward and the coastal commission is vocal in their concern to us about updating the coastal program it

is way out-of-date. >> thank you very much and commissioners on item 15 for the commerce and industry inventory

2015 informational presentation. >> all right. good afternoon commissioner i'm with the citywide division analysis group and today i'll give you some background and highlights in the commerce and industry vicinity and i'm available to answer any questions just some backward for the newer commissioners this is produced annually the reason i'm presenting the 2015 numbers one from 2015 is that the full year of 2015 employment numbers are

not released until the fall it it takes time to put together but essentially the range of the connective indicators and gathered from different sources so in addition to come piling an unanimous snapshot the data we put together every year should serve as long term goal to serve as background information for updating the commerce industry element of the general plan so just as an example you heard the item about restaurant concentration that's in the c and ion page 51 of this report as you can see the east and drinking places may that half of the retail jobs in the city not only a huge chunk of retail jobs in the city but grown by 41 percent since 2006 so they're not only growing but around increasing share of the retail

jobs isn't city this is the kind of information this report has one of the main things it covers employment the third year in a row that i'm standing here telling you that jobs radio growing by 5 percent over the previous year now over 6 hundred and 75 thousand jobs in the city an all the way down time high the city added over 25 jobs in seven hundred over the past decade one and 40 thousand jobs unemployment continues to fall in the city 3.6 pertsz at the end 2015 employment has grown across all the sectors but a

rapid rise in office jobs so new office jobs made up over 80 percent of jobs in 2015 many of these jobs and science generally office jobs with with or are higher wage so as you can see the average wage of citywide for 2015 is $97,000 that is grown pretty consistently over the decade and grows almost every year in an economic expansion but citywide averages discrepancy between office jobs with averaging almost one and $46,000 a year so average wage is not the perfect medic but the best with the data from the state the inventory also tracks the

numbers of construction values in building permits so we saw 6 percent growth in permits filed in 2015 so we're that was 29 thousand plus permits that is as far as i know are our all-time high and the construction value grew to $5.7 billion. >> so bringing you a little bit of remain news just wanted to share the latest state of california estimates which show that unemployment is essentially holding steady at 3.4 percent as of last month so you can full employment is about 4 or 5 percent we're below that. >> there was the report and the data in all the tables are

available in the planning department website and sf and with that, i'll be happy to answer any questions you may have. >> take any comments after public comment. >> opening up for public comment on the commerce industry element update - sir. >> i'd like the gentleman to give some imperial data we have should much development of generation of carbon sites to include the carbon footprints mostly to understand the concrete and the building is generates the carbon footprint the other thing we have large areas that are very poor

landfill generally maintain gas for you commissioners who have no idea of gas one ton of methane gas is 2200 carbons of carbon monoxide this is important when we address pollution in the southeast sector many women thriving dlooifrz their babies the san francisco departments know about that that is incumbent on the planning department to working closely with barbara garcia on this issue the planning department now is pushing to build 20 or thirty thousand units on contaminate ground in the southeast sector you, you can't look at it as though those unite will serve

some purpose when people are going to slowly die from the contamination most of planning commissioner do know that uranium was cast on treasure island we need to pay attention even though $600 million was put into the clean up we find that that whatnot done properly as was filed by nbc investigation so i know we are a fairly distant director who wants to do the right thing but i'm asking you commissioners especially the ones that came on board i met some of you all that you all work with the director to push for those good things that stood

san franciscans appreciate. >> thank you. >> is there any additional public comment on this item seeing none, public comment is closed. any commissioner have any comments before i go no. >> commissioner melgar. >> so i had a couple of questions for staff in looking at the share of jobs by land use. >> speak up is that better. >> so in looking at the numbers at the decrease of jobs you know compared to land use. >> uh-huh. >> for the hotel industry that still one of the largest industry what do you think. >> why is that happening. >> better efficiency or actually a decrease overall in the economic footprint of the industry and that's interesting i noticed that two i think the hotel industry for tourism is

under appreciated drivers of our economy i don't know exactly what is happening we have a lot of hotels in the pipeline we've not been building a lot of hotels in the past decade maybe less kind of that housekeeping staff serves the same amount of room with less staff but we'll definitely look at this. >> the other thing that i noticed is interesting was retail we've been talking about the demise of retail because of amazon but. >> this shifts to or maybe not a shift but really a tremendous increase in eating and drinking establishments so if in fact, retail your traditional buying i don't know with the hardware

store is diminishing that is replaced by eating and drinking establishment and commissioner that's the issue what we're seeing that a lot of the traditional retail says that a taken over by restaurants for more divided retail 9 big question we're looking for the next couple of foe years a down turned economy what a lot happen to the space i'm not sure we know at this point but in terms of sheer employment a huge percentage increase as mentioned in the percentage of retail jobs in the restaurant industry and that's where the growth is he happening through the industry. >> thank you. >> a question. >> sure. >> so the number of jobs we've added since 2014 was 25 to 5

were those from new residents i mean, we're down to 3 points probability rock bottom but discouraged workers in the workforce we've added jobs how much housing. >> i believe we added under 3 thousand in 2017 i don't know exactly but generally around 3 thousand in a good year. >> a rhetorical question where do all the people live. >> we grow by 10 thousand residents per year in the past few years you know bart and caltrain in my downtown - so the region in general staff anecdotal did they see the same types of job growth and we're growing faster than the region as far as jobs grow

there is a regional page i don't have the numbers off the top of my head i do have those we grow 3 percent there are tables in chart show split into south bay and i believe the city is growing jobs faster south bay on a percentage. >> with the same kind of ratio if it is cut in half for job is still. >> worse at the regional level. >> the regional has the worst 10 to one. >> any guesses on where those people live. >> it is a big question not totally clear some are commuting

you outside of bay area. >> people are doubling and tripling up with friends we see that on a hawker place for multiply rooms with bunk beds in the same buildings. >> one of the things that interests me what the director said take this is a - put it with the housing element update where we have overcrowding and the data points plus the whole commuting you you know people that work inside of san francisco and tie that with a big red bow this is what we see those data are interesting but we need real information to help. >> funny you should say that we're coming back in january or

february with that conversations. >> any other commissioners comments. >> commissioner johnson. >> thank you. i presenter the additional information i have the same questions of jobs linkage i have another question more general comment from you how does this impact what land use decision we should make for particular projects we see a huge uptick in employment like the restaurant industry but yet we had an article in the chronicle a couple of days ago assessing that routine raunt that are renting out the larger footprint are closing at crazy rates restaurants have hundred or 200 people are closing because the business is not there in those growing

neighborhoods i use that as an example to highlight what did the commerce industry report what tools does that gives us when we should be looking at projects what does that tells you. >> larger trends for example, the restaurant numbers i've mentioned earlier the trend is that restaurant jobs are growing and growing as other retail drops shrinkage i think you were to put myself in the commissioners shoes keep in mind with the projects are coming the trend is towards retail you know there's a limit to what we have control over as you know, land use planners we added one and 40 thousand jobs over the last 10 years and not that much office space with basically the same or

more office space we still added one and employ thousand jobs they happen outside something you think we have control over and keeping in mind the trends when we go to - >> i think commissioner if i may it is also not - it is hard to translate this data into directly how it influenced our decision on a project but your policies to the general plan or planning code like the restaurant thing you know it is hard to know - the recent closings that ever not in the newspaper maybe a trend we're maxed out i'm guessing what we require retail or not require retail and maybe over the next few years we're seeing we

require too much retail end up with closed stores that's the kind of policy input we need. >> i'll agree with that i don't know i'm asking the question i'm wondering if it makes sense to take it a step further for example, not whether or not we should have street level retail requirements higher or lower in other district but requirements on flexible of those spaces i remember we talked about a building on van ness and 19 and commissioner moore had specific questions how the building should be laid out so that space could be one space or 3 spaces and i feel like trend of the conversation report can help us the winds of change saying that restaurant and service sector

employment going up but we don't need more than 8 hundred square feet that should inform our design strategy for the buildings once they're there they're there; right? and even office yes, we need to do something about a prop m but even if we don't do that i'm wondering where the data where their trending in certain types of offices like. >> reason why we had issues of pdr space that's the kind of space they want to be in does it manuals for 15 foot ceilings i'm wondering if there are trends we should look to inform what types of land use patterns we should be accommodating. >> we're interested as well and making this a useful as

possible document so one place maybe look at lacking on you know on the neighborhood commercial corridors i know you do a lot of our work and looking at the actual permits and projects approved and bhaetsdz happening on the ground this is higher-up but that might one we welcome any suggestions that you might have. >> we have people sorry so you have tables in here that show uses by land use uses table; right? it be might be useful to add size size is of the actual uses let me pull it up i was looking at that yesterday that is a perfect use of data to use man here we

go. >> so, yes so you have like i won't talk about the page but tables say distribution of types of uses by districts so you'll have service center and pdr and distribution by land use characters so a number of establishments so if there is any way another table that looks at establishment by size or something like that that might give us that retail establishments like 5 thousand square feet smaller 5 thousand square feet a permit will tell us how much activity for the uses i mean, i know we don't often get like broker you know informing our plant case reports we see them but that type of

information can help us know whether a project can be successful that's part of our job; right? >> excellent. >> commissioner moore. >> i was out of room for a moment and if i somebody mentioned what i'm going to say stop me i'm very happy to hear the positive message you're talking about here they are amazing particularly when their compared to the growth over the last two years including how it compares to the bay area and california and the rest of the country on the darker side one question the job growth of 6 hundred and 75 thousand jobs the city only has a number of inhabit in the lower one and 20s that's the correct judgment means many of the jobs are filed by people that come

from other than living in the city it is of concern to me that the average wage sets a high point given the growth in those sectors where the wages with significantly lower we know what that means in reality a sustainable city created e creates a more basil balanced of things together that is clear for the people that look at those numbers in a more comprehensive way to see what the message are but thank you. this is very expressive work. >> wrap up comments to commissioner moore's pointed point it is interesting in january to come and tells you if you can whose doing the commuting is it low wage people that are pushed out of the city to live in fairfield to drive

not to dispager but for the service industry that is the kind of city we want to make the folks that make one hundred thousand dollars i like commissioner johnson comments the size of space i come back to the example market and 16th street a huge for play would have been a dead space at night but 3 spaces an noah street there were 5 thousand square feet it was just right for a business to open up the other issue around retail use we have a project at church and market we had retail use and i was read the right act nobody can lease 5

and 8 thousand square feet space that's a real issue around retail use the other point i want to make i drove by a building on 17th street and hoff the retail use are vacant i asked the developers the retail rent are not in the performa they can sit there empty for 2 decades that's something we need to look at and lastly i was cleaning out my garage i come to a neighborhood book for 2020 i think that is time to do an nc thirty are those neighborhoods commercial relevant in all the changes in the last 10 years is

something that maybe we can tuck that in and put on the action item list as commissioners need their heads and secretary looking those nc thirty. >> that's a great idea. >> all that staff coming in. >> any 09 commissioner comments thank you. >> very good work thank you. >> okay commissioners members of the public if i can have your attention for one moment we've exceeded our capacity for the room, however, ♪ an overtime room for those persons standing in front of the

door you'll need to find a seat or make our way to room 416 there guess a translator on their way and when this person comes we will ask that person's need translation be afforded that as soon as the translator arrives i believe she just riveted so again i'll say those persons standing you need to find a seat or go to room 416 >> everybody who is going to room 416 you'll obviously have a chance to speak if you fill out a speaker card and anyone that didn't fill out a speaker card we'll ask for anyone that didn't

fill out a speaker card to come at the end to speak those persons standing in front of the doorway find a seat or make your way to room 416 you'll be afforded your chance to submit our public testimony that that time comes. >> okay. >> commissioners we're on item 16 for case shot well street this is an christie moved to the bay area before joining the department served as a planner for the park municipal and lead

long-range planning and saw oversee draft provisions for the affordable housing policy and reviewed major applications like the one you see here prior to her time worked as a planner in into salt lake city and seattle holds her bs from the university of the utah and from the university of washington. >> i'm chris thank you planning department staff and the item before you is an affordable housing bonus authorization to the code to allow for the demolition of an existing first story and the construction of a new 9100 percent residential building for seniors and formally homeless seniors the project requests the

bonuses for one increased height that is permitted by the zoning and reduce the between pursuant to the planning code and requests an exemption for the rear yard pursuant to the planning code 134 this project is within the mission street zoning district and the 65 height and bulk the existing 20 foot tall building on the lot was constructed in 1948 and is currently in the auto repair shop the proposed 85 multi unit senior building has 24 studios and one bedroom and one bedroom management and 14 of the one bedroom will be allocated to the formally homeless seniors at or below the area medium income and 18 of the studios and 55 of the

units will be allocated for seniors at or below the 55 percent ami and has office space for onsite managed and case management and indoor spaces for the laundry rooms and etc. the project includes common outdoor useful spaces the second story and 9 floor roof terraces and no off-street parking and no curve cuts equip shot well street and 28 bicycle spaces and on-street parking is one car share space public comment signed by 200 and

33 receipts and nearby businesses and 33 support letters from 33 residents and organization and the department has received 21 letters of support for the project, 4 letters in opposition have been received by to the department to date the concerns of those neighbors are the height of the project exceeding the environmental concerns regarding the shadows and air quality and parking with that said the department is necessary and desirable and comparability with the surrounding neighborhood and recommends you approve the project with conditions for the following 3 reasons one of the project will not displace any housing and provides 94, 100 percent that results in the

housing stock it relates to the scale and form of the surrounding neighborhood by providing relationships to the residential and commercial property for those reasons it protects and preserves the economic diversity of the neighborhood and meets all applicable projects with the required finding stipulated in the planning code 328 that concludes my presentation. i have hard copies of the civil right of the determination and we have had sheila from the supervisor campos office with - who would like to speak and the project sponsor has a presentation thank you >> ms. chung welcome.

>> good afternoon, commissioners sheila on behalf of the supervisor campos i don't have to tell you that the mission is ground zero for our affordability crisis here in san francisco the difference between the could say o cost of a rental unit and new construction is huge we've had a loss of over 9 thousand low and middle-income latinos from the last decade and compared to that with a homeless crisis in the city the homelessness population that is aging one of the shocking statistics i saw if a report from the adult protective services is that our homelessness services are not equipped to deal with an aging population over 50 percent of the folks in our homeless

shelters are over the age of 5020 percent over the age of 60 the targeted population that that new development will help to provide services and a housing for we think supervisor is 12r50er8d supportive of this development and hopes you all will be in support of it as well we want to thank all of the community advocates the seniors here to speak on behalf of this project, we absolutely think this is necessary if we head off new affordability crisis in san francisco. >> thank you, ms. chung has nothing to do with especially. >> opening up sorry for project sponsor.

>> i'm the meta one of the project sponsors on shot well senior housing the mayor's office of housing and community development selected meta in the chinatown center to the developers and future owners of the persons for this project meta throughout the years has been advocating now developing in the mission district is expected to manage over 3 thousand we want to develop more construction of - so that longer residents can call san francisco their home we selected herman with the architect with experience of senior affordable housing as the architect meta and cdc create housing to be age in place with dignity to

support and connect them to the surrounding resources chinatown will be the project manager and provide the services organized after the programs meta will pursuant to connect the residents the community room on shot well has classes and programs that serve the residents and neighbors such onsite r programming both chinatown cdc and meta have invitations to the community to use their community they have self-help for the elder to run the nutrition classes a senior housing building which serve the i hotel residents and the public and at the tenderloin property where the international

citizenship classes are open to the resident and the community meta allows the community to use the conference rooms at the plaza and in line with the city transit first policy no. onsite packing is occurred and they've been conducting the outreach for the community we held two community meetings in february and april since thin e then brought the project to 20 neighborhood groups and responded to their application process on november 10th we submitted three hundred and 49 letters of support from neighborhood businesses and resident and online petitions and since then received 14 letters of support and 64 online petitions at the november 29th date they've worked on a design

to meet the urban design guidelines and adhere to the city's guidelines and working closely with the planning department and it's u dot team to fine-tune a design that my colleague will share whitney and i can answer any questions you have for the project sponsors thank you. >> thank you very much. >> good afternoon, commissioners i'm suzy presenting this offender on behalf of any partner bob herman and the team at architecture as described the project site faces shot well street - are we not - okay. thank you. >> occupies a small 11 thousand

square feet parcel with single-family homes it is across the street from a large 4 story multi family at that particular time building it is sliced slated to be built to the north and commercial uses make up the remainder of the block it has outdoor says that a morning court facing east on the second story and roof gardens facing south and east on the 8 and 9 floors the specific design the front elevation was from a close reading from the residential design guidelines and fine-tuned in response to the community input and constructive dialogue from the planning department 0 interior materials are panels

and exposed concrete at the pilars and painted railings and sunshade the main entry is here - oh, didn't work. >> okay. >> all right. >> the main entry is in the middle. (laughter) a private stoop leading to the managers apartment - you'll see the proposed development on 115 south van ness goes to the right regardless of how this site is developed we can build out to the max height and depth in the following slides it is 6 stories are nearly as stall at all as

the 9 story and being master their unit have greater floor to floor heights the roof will be only a few feet below our own here you'll see the south elevation facing board of trustees with this adequately got out to the right and east of our narrow facade portions of 8 and 9 floors are setback providing roof guardian a pattern created by 5 panels animate that facade as a 5 deep recess allowing for the inclusion of windows 4e8d away from the property line it is by a series of dock active screeec-

it is internal internal to the site on the ground floor you'll note one enters through an outdoor guardian the adjacent residential services and management offices have been over constructive view of the court and sidewalk shared bicycle rankings racks are mirrored in the lobby signaling the seniors heath lifestyle that the the community room available to the surrounding neighborhood for classes open to the public as well to the residents both the small lounge area and the managers unit with its own front porch is eyes on the street tare

a their two one bedroom apartments that will be for diane and the like it >> joins the 1515 south van ness development increasing the access to light and air for both properties in addition to the 11 living units the second story is the common laundry room off the porch that oversee the morning sunshine for residents to participate in the community beyond this 9 floor plan indicates how the building setbacks and accommodates roof garden sheltered from the wind on the 8 and 9 floors a solar array covers the roof of the 9 floor in response to the concerns expressed we've developed

sketches if surrounded streets from the main facade bernal heights and here's at the shot well and 1515 south van ness development here's the view today, if one were walking south on the block of shot well to the north of the site here's the same view over van ness is built and here's the project from the same spot we studied the shadow patterns i think i'll not take time but the between between this feet is negotiable and two telling slides the actual pedestrian experience along the block walking south on shot well towards the common place the 15 foot wide sidewalk is along the

building edge with - okay. >> it's okay keep going. >> finally the now famous mail slot slide is for the neighborhoods and strangers whether walking or riding along shot well. >> thank you. >> commissioners maybe calling you up after public comment. >> opening up for public comment (calling names). >> commissioner chair richards we had a request for translation if we can get it out of the way for the translator. >> my name is connie weber i've lived in that neighborhood for 85 years we have enough buildings and one on shot well

and 26 and shot well we we have one on harrison also and i think this building should be at least 6 instead of 9 floors but we have - we don't have enough parking the parking is terrible around there so i sure appreciate if you vote against 9 floors and just 6 would be enough and thank you very much and i hope you do that. >> thank you, ms. weber. >> okay. at this time, we'll take those persons in need of translation if those persons in need of translation happen to be in room 416 line up on the

screen side of room. >> (speaking foreign language.) >> each members of the public will be provided 2 minutes for public comment. >> why not go ahead and stand on the side for the microphone. >> okay. so - i can come right up please.

>> (speaking foreign language.) >> good afternoon from the organization and today, i'm here to support the affordable housing project. >> (speaking foreign language.) >> because of high living costs of rent in san francisco it is hard for families they need a place to live especially for seniors. >> (speaking spanish.) >> please support the project more affordable housing on 1296 shot well street thank you. >> thank you. >> next speaker, please. >> >> (speaking spanish.)

>> hello commissioners - the women's collective we want to support the meeting for the elderly. >> (speaking spanish.) >> this is just a small project to support the dignity of the seniors they're the most vulnerable and not have a place for shelter in the city.

>> (speaking spanish.) >> i ask you support this project will be helpful for the senior community thank you. >> thank you. >> next speaker, please. >> hi my name is antonio morales i'm going to - >> (speaking spanish.) >> so i've been homeless for 10 years and have applied tens of times more affordable housing but i can't afford i still can't

afford. >> (speaking spanish.) >> the process of finding housing is stressfully and i'm sick and i'm currently living on the streets. >> (speaking spanish.) >> i'm going to turn 67 soon. >> (speaking spanish.) >> i really hope affordable means affordable to pay three or four hundred dollars a month and not wait 10 or 15 years to get in one of the places.

>> thank you. >> (speaking spanish.) >> i hope my words licensed to and the wind didn't take them away. >> they are. >> next speaker, please. >> >> (speaking spanish.) >> my name is elaine i have a great need because i have a problem with my landlord currently. >> (speaking spanish.) >> i got an eviction notice and thank god the lawyers from the city helped me to remain ♪

place >> (speaking spanish.) >> but the hollers said they can increase th >> (speaking spanish.) >> i'm sick and where i live no elevator. >> (speaking spanish.) >> please approve that project we really need this space we

seniors don't have many places where we're welcomed and such they pay part of my rent but still a burden to me. >> (speaking spanish.) >> and like myself i know that respond like my landlord has mistreated me like they have. >> (speaking spanish.) >> i ask in the name of lord in project gets approved and thank you and god bless you. >> thank you and. >> next speaker, please. >> >> (speaking spanish.)

>> i live on van ness and 26 a member of the church. >> (speaking spanish.) >> san antonio. >> (speaking spanish.) >> as a leader of this church i've seen the necessity for building this project. >> (speaking spanish.) >> there's a lot of people in any church but neighborhood that really need this project especially the seniors. >> (speaking spanish.) >> this is why i'm supporting in project and hope you not only

approve but many other projects that will help this community. >> thank you. >> next speaker, please. >> >> (speaking spanish.) >> i come from the senior

center at the cap street and i really want this project to happen we have a place in the city but a lot of people live on the streets with the cold and rain. >> (speaking spanish.) >> i really support this project because san francisco would be a beautiful city if all the people have a place to live and affordable places to live. >> thanks for your attention. >> thank you.

>> next speaker, please. >> >> (speaking spanish.) >> my name is maria i live in san francisco but have no place to live. >> (speaking spanish.) >> i'm moving my oldest son i sleep in the living room.

>> (speaking spanish.) >> i feel like i'm in the way because any son and his wife want to watch a movie the kids are asleep i feel like i'm in the way.

>> (speaking spanish.) >> i'm currently with the women's collective thank god i have a jew job but can only afford a living. >> (speaking spanish.) >> then he goes to work. >> (speaking spanish.) >> housing has increased from 2000 if you're lucky 19 hundred.

>> (speaking spanish.) >> someone from meta called me they supported me that's why i'm here we need housing and i can work i'm 63-year-old i can work and need affordable housing >> (speaking spanish.) >> i want to thank you, commissioners i know you want to help us that's why i'm here i have faith. >> (speaking spanish.) >> and it is not only me but

other people that z does have a place to stay even if they can stay with family at first, it is fine but not anymore. >> thank you. >> next speaker, please. >> good afternoon, commissioners. >> sir, can you have him speak into the microphone. >> okay.

>> (speaking spanish.) >> i'm here because i have a disability and have been looking for housing for a year and been politically i want to find a room or study but not afford one thousand dollars base.

>> (speaking spanish.) >> they've opened a building in alu gone the manager offended me and said that was no room. >> (speaking spanish.) >> i have diabetes and sincerely rose i have to go to a hospital and to usf to they have to operate on my on my liver.

>> (speaking spanish.) >> i used to be a carpenter for local 21 i am 12k5ibd. >> what the government gives me is not enough to pay a one thousand dollars apartment they offer a room in -

>