so, same time next week? well, of course. announcer: b dreams and good grades aren't enough to get into college. there are actual steps you need to take. finding someone who can help is the first and most important. for the next steps, go to knowhow2go.org. >> for thursday, january 5, 2017, happy new year everyone

i'd like to call roll at this time. or actually please silence any devices that may sound off during the proceedings. and and when speaking before the commission, if you care to, do state your name for the record. now i'm not commissioner president fong commissioner vice president richards commissioner koppel commissioner melgar and commissioner moore. >> we expect commissioner johnson and commissioner hillis to be absent firefighters is proposed for continuance at leeland avenue discretionary review to january 12, 2017, and item 2 conditional use authorization is proposed until january 26th no other items proposed for continuance there are no speaker cards. >> okay any public comment on

the two items proposed continuance not seeing any, public comment is closed. commissioner moore. >> move to continue as noted. >> second. >> thank you, commissioners on that motion to continue both matters and proposed commissioner koppel commissioner melgar commissioner moore and commissioner vice president richards and commissioner president fong so moved, commissioners, that motion passes unanimously 5 to zero and commissioners that places us under commission matters consideration of draft minutes for december 8th and the december 15th joint meeting with rec and park commission. >> there are no speaker cards. >> okay any public comment? draft minutes not seeing any, public comment is closed. >> scomboer. >> move to approve second. >> thank you on that motion to adopt the minutes for december 8th and 15 and the

joint hearing commissioner koppel commissioner melgar commissioner moore and commissioner vice president richards and commissioner president fong so moved, commissioners, that motion passes unanimously 5 to zero and places us on item 4 commissioners questions or comments. >> commissioner vice president richards. >> we had a 3 week break and a lot of reading and things produced in those three weeks two of them hit me around park in the chronicle inside section don't build passing they'll not be necessary in iowa looking at the parking requirement the article talks about parking standards and what will be effecting those in the future we've been talking about those and the pressure is millennials driving less and the technical

advancements we're going to autonomous vehicles and climatic change and talking about this we've had to on the action list i wanted to bring that up and another recall to the new york times the same thing recommend you read this it talks about the parking rate we approve the sf parking for necessary, desirable, and compatible i look like a timeline what will we do with that space and the last one is after the hearing on thursday the 15 the controller came out with an economic 5 year financial plan for the city a lot of numbers where we are but the takeaway at capacity of housing even if we grow for jobs no place to put people and the

transportation infrastructure is at capacity and we're having a hard time loading it up and the third one our growth is mirrored ratting we'll have and not maybe a recession but shortfalls in the budget progress the big takeaway we have a chance to pause and catch our breath double down on the infrastructure and we know that as boom coming this is the time to do it costs money anyway that was my read over the break. >> skwhoer. >> i have a question and obviously a comment of congratulations the city has reached an agreement with aau and a term sheet in place i'm wondering as to whether or not prior to us looking at the

advanced calendar hearing items regarding augs in february we could have another debrief with the city attorney's office on some of the specifications of the development agreement and as to the term sheets looking at this project fully informed of how to look at that. >> commissioner moore just met with the zoning administrator sanchez and looking at the forward calendar it that will reflect the items on february 2nd are proposed for indefinite continuance and you'll hear the first in the presentation. >> thank you very much. >> commissioners, if there's nothing further, we'll move on to department matters item 5 director's announcements. >> good afternoon and happy new year i hope you have a great holiday i'll mention a few

things of coming attractions let's start off the year commissioner moore mentioned the academy of art we were proposing the first of several hearing to talk about the term sheet to remind you that term sheet it the framework we'll start on february 2nd and this month and in the next few coming months bring a series of planning code proposed changes to the 2020 action plan been working with the community and in a series of chances in small clusters for the pdr used in the mission and be seeing this year the draft eir and later in the year probably the summer on the central soma 9 draft eir was

released at the end of last year and 4 large eirs those will be coming our way and finally you will have at least two hearings perhaps more on proposed changes to inclusionary housing requirements probably at supervisor kim and supervisor peskin contributed to the legislative at the end of last year we were looking at that and proposing a at least one informational hearing in february perhaps another one of the 90 day clock it ticking we have to take action by the end of march so several large projects coming our way in the first quarter we'll keep you up to date thank you. >> commissioners item 6 review of past events point board of appeals and the historic preservation commission i have no reports from any of those.

>> which places us in general public comment general comment not to exceed 15 minutes. at this time, members of the public may address the commission on items of interest to the public that are within the subject matter jurisdiction of the commission except agenda items. with respect to agenda items, your opportunity to address the commission will be afforded when reached in the meeting. each member of the public may address the commission up to three minutes. i have two speaker cards. >> great, thank you. >> thank you good afternoon and andrew yip what is true for the people we have to look at the human has the right to gave me syndrome holy working with several for human by spreading the word of true principle with the leaders with good cultures for the state of peace platform to promote the peace of wellness by true

principle in the solutions for any of the tolerance and having the virtue and energy and justice to maintain the global peace with the protection for our people and close to the people political leaders can endo you the people with motion established the goals for surface and holy management to bring back the integrity of the holy virtues for the unified oneness of the universe. >> georgia swedish. >> hello new year to. >> you'll i want to talk about evacuations

in residential neighborhoods a project in the 311 that repeat e really said to q and a vat the fraikd on the pi m thirty feet of sidewalks the reason i'm bringing up this up after i left here last year, i took the bus home i'm riding and psa 26 street at the same time, a stranger sitting next to me said oh, any are you okay oh, my god looking at the bus window and you know it is rare when you have a communication on the bus with a stranger here's the photo happy new year sfgovtv here's the house on the hill the yellow one x vacation and here's

another one thirty feet at the top of the hill to the bottom but certainly the entire one and 14 feet so why is that important what is my point i think excavations of residential lots have implementation whether or not a project is clarified as a definition any changes to section 317 there the proposed expansion threshold and the residential design guidelines the current proposed revisions i really think this should has been in 311 is the only thing the public i don't know if

someone will care but on the p m is more definition you don't deal with excavation but it is a gray matter where it the site permit and where the excavation begins the whole ceqa this never came before you but came before the staff thanks thank you very much and happy new year to you all. >> i'll pass them around. >> thank you jonas. >> thank you. >> great to see you happy 2017 thank you for your services and reading and writing for our thoughtness of the designing and growing a green and healthy city i've enjoyed

san francisco. >> any public comment? not seeing any, public comment is closed. >> commissioner vice president richards. >> i think when we do look at the section 317 for the, etc. when the public brings those kinds of things those are the ones we can reverse and cover how will it be covered, etc. that might be so keep those for that exercise. >> commissioners, if there's nothing further, we'll move on to your regular calendar item 7 the alameda creek a draft environmental impact report please note that written comments are accepted until january 17, 2017, a good afternoon common sense and members of the commission

planning department staff and coordinator for the the alameda creek environmental impact report or eir joining me is chris and the sf project team the deputy assistant manager the water enterprise who will provide you with a brief overview the item before you was on the alameda creek recapture eir case 2015 the proposed project in alameda county on water shed land and managed by the spuks will talk about the by passing the creek by the sfpuc as part of a multi agency for the extra coast in alameda creek the draft eir found the proposed

project will in the have an unavoidable impact for the resources and air quality and the energy resources could be mitigated to a less than significant level the draft eir was published in 2016 and the public review period close in 2017 a period of 48 days to date with an comment letter from the alameda creek alliance with two concerns within the surface water and grafting and the recatch project the alameda creek letter requests an extension of the comment period beyond 2015 and requests a presentation on the project be held in the sonoma valley the administrative code provides the ero to extend the comment period staff reviewed this request with

the acting ero and building not warranted the comment period had 38 days is longer than ceqa and we believe that the draft eir for this project including the hydrologic novels neither ceqa or the administrative code addresses the requirement for a single meeting on a draft eir we believe the 4 eight day comment period are adequate for the public to review and the staff does for the support an additional hearing we should note the sfpuc made a presentation regarding the proposed project on november 11, 2016, staff will receive and record comments but not respond comments received during the comment period will be contributed in writing in the

response to the document which includes the draft eir as appropriate comments should be directed toward the accuracy and adequacy of the draft eir and for public please state your name for the record for those who don't wish to speak we have comment cards that maybe filled out and given to staff. >> for those interested in commenting on the draft eir in writing by mail or e-mail they may submit their comments to 1650 mission street by 5:00 p.m. on january 17th when the response to the comments is complete the department will provide copies we'll return to the commission to request the certification of the eir with the eir is certified the planning commission may consider

i'll hand off the presentation to provide a brief presentation and after the presentation we recommend the commission on the public hearing on this unless you have questions we can use the screen. >> sfgovtv if we get the computer please. good afternoon, commissioners i'm ellen the deputy manager the sfpuc water enterprise and here to give you an overview of the project the alameda is part of a sfpuc water system improvement

program this commission certified the environmental impact report in october of 2008 the project was initially created to recapture water from the calaveras damn with the memorandum of understanding they were revised through the calaveras and resulted in a recatch the key objective have to capture the in flows from calaveras that are required under the permit to operate the calaveras dam the alameda creek i'll show you a picture of that that depicts the location a facility that is used to divert water into the calaveras from

the creek and bypasses allowing us to move water around that facility so the water stays in the creek the bypasses are intended to provide the habitat of stream capture and the compliance location with that. >> as i said the alameda creek depended on the calaveras in flow schedules that be implemented as part of calaveras reservoir so releases from the reservoir together with the bypasses are estimateed the range is 82 to 26 thousand per acre per year and the recapture volume is estimated to be 72 acres feet on average with the range of 48 hundred to 92 acre feet per year you'll note the recapture volume is less than

half of the amount of water released in the bypass the water recaptured with the infiltration it is used by the acquire operators on the - where is that project located the project is located in the east bay near the town of synol that is queer operation the dictate it pond the water is recaptured in this i imagine at the bottom right of the picture you see calaveras reservoir i'm sorry for the audience in the it is a difficult image but the bottom right the calaveras reservoir a dark solid line that's where the alameda creek is the blue arrows

indicates the flow of alameda creek and the red triangle at the top with the location of the recapture project i want to note that the project is not involving construction or facility in alameda creek our the banks of the creek so the project component there will be 4 vertical mounts depicted in the incidental the system before flexible discharge pipes from each pipe that will be located on the shoreline of the pond and from the manifold one foot 36 diaphragm pipeline that connects to the pump station pipeline the components includes one thousand flow motor and an electricalful building the trees provide shade and the

electrical transforms and power facilities and battery power in terms of the project operation we'll operate the pond as all reservoirs fill in in the wintertime and drop down in december this image here depicts the annual operation of the pond it raise in the winter and start to be drown down in april and note the pond is never drawn down completely in dry years. >> generally, we plan to operate the pond within 90 foot range one and 50 to two hundred and 40 feet above sea level and pumps water san francisco uses

60 million gallons per person per day and the pumped water will be spent to the pump station pipeline the water system via our treatment planted in san antonio reservoir the anticipated schedule has started in the fall of this year and lasts 18 months to the spring of 2019 if you have any questions about the project i'll be happy to answer them thank you for having me. >> any all over the place from staff okay. >> opening up for public comment then. (calling names) >> good afternoon. i'm leonard ash with the alameda

county water district affordable units and congratulations the sfpuc on its acknowledgements and progress on the ambitious water treatment program over the past decade as a customer of the sfpuc ac w d relies on this for 20 percent of the water the regional system provides ac w did with high quality water that is the most reliable and resilient water in regards to a customer they work with the sfpuc on the interests in the alameda water shed and our agencies are reputations being progressive water agencies in california, in fact, our agencies work cooperate since 1997 through the fish group to reestablish a head fishery in

the central coast ac w d provided a comment letter on the notice of preparation on the i went for the alameda creek recapture project the eir with appendixes we appreciate the the subject property to speak today and look forward to many years of future collaboration with the sfpuc thank you. >> thank you is there any additional public comment? >> okay not seeing any, public comment is closed. >> commissioners comments. >> commissioner moore. >> this is technically very challenging for us, however, over the many years this commission has been briefed and debriefed on the many stages of

the improvements of the water system i'm confident the same amount of fairness is in the document in front of us in addition in the previous discussion regarding the reinstatement of that area we were very thoroughly debriefed about the challenges so i assume i'm in full support this draft eir has addressed those issues so many people have spent technical expertise i'm in support at this stage. >> okay. thank you. >> anything further from commissioners. >> okay not seeing any, next item. >> and commissioner on number 8 market street as long as 1 oak street a draft environmental impact report please note to written comments are accepted

until january 2015 a i'm michael with the planning department staff this to those to take the comments for the proposed project on 1500 market street as long as the one oak project no commission action is required it is locate at intersection of oak and van ness avenue in the south west of the neighborhoods as subscribed the proposal is the definition of a surface parking lot and the definition of the market street building with the retail use as long as all-star doughnuts and the market street space - it is a construction of a 40 residential turn over where ground floor commercial space and resident and a subterranean

garage and sfgh loading and immediately adjacent to the site what an oak street the project has an assessable plaza with the installation of wind companion to reduce the wind during the site commissioners the planning department determined whether the project will result in the effects on the environment based on the studies the planning department has the topics of traffic and circulation wind and cumulous impacts it is has cumulative traffic with the mitigates measures with the construction pleas the planning department product a construed with a review period that end in

2015 for those interested comments to the review officer and sent to 1650 mission street state your name for the record and address - approval of its entitlements all comments been contributed and respond to in the response documents this is that the planning department will provide documents for the draft eir we will return to the commission to - the commissioner that that concludes my presentation. opening up for public comment a number of speaker cards.

>> (calling names). >> hi, my name is gail i'll presidentth hal's neighborhood association i'm one of the several speakers i'm desolate any time to the below-market-rate housing in the draft eir to reaffirm our letter this project is not include in the bmr units to octavia boulevard without the language that the bmr unit will be built in addition on octavia boulevard that includes the transitional yet the bmr may not be in kind as per the housing required by the market octavia plan or family housing as well as go single persons kindly consider to require the bmr units or the one oak site no guarantee that the similar bmr units that be

included in other development 38 delores promised to be onsite only to pay the fee after the project was entitled so far no affordable housing has been built as a result of the in lui fee payment note the developers are selling the properties to other developers we've experienced those new developers changing without community engagement 5 fulsome street and the development that was solid that close retail and we're waiting other retail on oak at octavia in the successful development and campus on 55 laguna we devoted years with different developers for the new apartment complex that as onsite bmrs and

community gardens and the haight street - the participation in this eir process in the future entitlements for the oak street development to embrace this with the bmr onsite with the outcome that provides a liveable neighborhood with the pressure did you residents for those who live and work and pass through the area. >> i'll take the opportunity to remind the public comment this public comment period is for the adequacy and accuracy of the environmental impact report not the project itself. >> noted tom with livable city this project is in an area called the hub the intersection of van ness and market in you look at the proposed project under construction proposed for that building the amount of

development in this area increases several fold many more residents and office there that is very important place in the transportation network market street perhaps the most important street certainly noting if for the one of the most important pedestrian and van ness an important street in the live and work you'll know not a lot of room on the streets for more cars as we look at the developing this area add net zero one it is two congested and to make the area safer for walking and currently and move transit vehicles accommodating the large people we might end up with less road space market street reduce the vehicle capacity on van ness the bmr project reduces the automobile traffic on van ness avenue you

have tool in the tool box. >> having, use the research this department has done to make that a smart place to put development that development can't destroy the assets that transportation richness that is the reason for developing in area in the are in the first place one of the takeaway from the tdm research adding - the most important tool in the tool box for managing transportation according to our research is reduce the parking this eir eis should have a reduced zero parking alternative two things one will reduce the number of automobile trips and the second thing that reduces a number of conflicts for automobile circulation car in and out of a parking garage all the

right-hand turns so all the movement have an impact on walking and cycling and transit this project asks for a .5 double the number as of right they should get more than the zero parking alternative should be studied we say that in areas no parking is desirable you need to study if alternative in our eir it is not adequate otherwise and say which one is best for walking and transit if you only analysis one and so those alternatives need to be added as of right for it to be complete thank you. >> i'm at hayes valley

association and my comments that redundant as of confirmation if you don't have the article i have a copy to reference and mr. dulavich statements that make many of the argument as to the adequacy of the eir i intended to make not exploring zero parking makes this inadequate especially this is the flagship development of the hub where 16 hundred and 82 additional parking spaces have estimated to be in this general area as you may know one of the most traffic choked areas in the city and not exploring that option is - faulty in the eir let's say not to challenge the .5 request we know reasons to justify

doubling from the 2.5 is an error in the eir that needs to be rectified and that basically covers most of any points this is the density most transit rich hub in the city the hub should evaluate the entire development this eir is one of the worst possible examples requesting .5 and enforcing the .25 as much right and not considering the zero option a famous saying if not here where we should be looking zero very, very seriously it is interesting there was a very interesting broadcast by

the sponsored of park merced talking about their sneflz to people to not own cars and over 90 percent of people offered the incentives took them if that can work in park merced given the transit area and we should be certainly looking at it very, very aggressively here thank you, again commissioner vice president richards and i appreciate all of your considerations on this. >> afternoon commissioner happy new year with the middle polk neighborhood association we've submitted a letter last night standing with hayes valley open this issue the fellow association you know in interest of your long agenda i essentially agree

with the comments commenters and we think an easy fix by the project sponsor like addition mitigation foreshadows like additional affordable housing some other types of community benefits and we think that is really the high road to take i think the department did a great job what was presented by the sponsor so perhaps changing what is presented can fix all of this i think this is an easy way rather than having long details and forcing them to do you'll this additional work and need the communities where the communities is and we're not trying to you know stop the entire project still saying a great idea but here's some is small tweaks to make that even

better so with that, i submit and thank you. >> any other public comment? >> hi, my name is bob with the hayes valley association i also am a residence of 77 van ness which is right about 50 yards from the development and right in the middle of the hub of market and van ness i have letters to give to commissioners to have an understanding of what we are talking about i'm here to talk about something that was omitted by the eir the study of bicycles i have questions not addressed in the either basically what is the effect of wind on bicycles an estimate 14

hundred bicyclists that traffic at the peek hours mondays through friday what happens when people have going to the intersection where's the way to go when it bounces off the building none of it is studied and market street a major lane is the wind going to hit the bicyclists coming through market and van ness is one of the windiest places in the city and the goal the city to increase the san francisco by making it for safe for residents the market octavia and the better market street plan and the sfmta strategic vision to increase cycling in san francisco especially on market street the

eir has noting no mitigation for cyclists so in my estimation a mission from the eir itself which is adequate in that area and in california cyclists were ignored when the eir was challenged a decision to direct 4 bicyclists to be included in the plan i ask that be true for this area as well myself as a resident in the area and cyclist i have been in the city for over 20 years and done a lot of cross country trips i know what wind can do to people can stop them from wanting to do it and it is dangerous given the amount of traffic and the congestion as a person that lives on van ness it is congested constantly thank you

very much. >> next public comment speaker. >> i'm sorry come on up there is speaker card. >> hello, i'm testing wellborn and a belated welcome to the new commissioners, thank you for being with us i'm with the hayes valley association and wish to follow up and when the market octavia plan was produced many years ago many of us were around and participated in that the idea was that we were allowing many new market-rate housing unit to be built in the market octavia area with lower and mirrored income housing we feel strongly the below-market-rate housing must be attached to this

project and the consideration must be included in this dedraft eir no guarantee that any affordable housing will be built ♪ planned area in current draft eir and they plan to put in 72 units on 3 tiny papers parcels where the freeway was didn't guarantee - guarantee any units but didn't guarantee the units will be of comparable size and conditioned to the one oak project besides that - so obviously a fuel discussion of any below-market-rate housing discussion should be included in the eir this also did not include discussion about the gentrification and displacement

any discussions where the enernex study what nexus study when percentage 12 onsite and 20 offsite or the prop c 25 percent onsite or 33 percent offsite these have to be fixed to get this eir to be comprehensive we need to know what size the bmr unit will be compatible and also reflect the market octavia unit sizes and mix please take those comments and get and request that the eir be

fixed thank you >> good afternoon, commissioners my name is getting i'm speaking on behalf of the myself i'm concerned about the eir and the impact the windblasts on single-track vehicle primarily bicyclists, however, scooters and bicyclists as you may know riding a bicycle pushed to the side you'll veer and could lead to a crash i think that is not particularly contemplated in the eir and i'm concerned about the loading zone west of van ness that area where the main bike lane for people

riding if downtown the western part of city and, of course, with vision zero the intent to decrease the number of injuries and fatality and with the increase of the auctions emanating from that building and using it for a loading zone as tmc there will be significantly more traffic interactions with bicyclists to get to vision zero we need changes decreasing the parking will be an idea. >> thank you. >> good afternoon, commissioners and thank you for taking our comments i'll speak to the inadequatecy my name is jason from the hayes valley neighborhood association first of all, on the transportation

impacts we believe that there needs to be a keeper and thorough analysis of - you've selected a metrics that allows you under the threshold the first location is a high direction that you should dive deeper into even if the car trips are 3 miles per capita per day if you looked at the transportation study you're generating hundreds of car trips at a constraint intersection even if those trips are short their causing problems and interacting with the bicyclists this is a glaring omission we are a city that encourages a higher split 9 percent by 2018 with the longer-term goal of 20 percent at some point you're not

going to get is that your not discussing the hazard conditions towards cyclists on two points the wind study that was thorough on pedestrian and the impacted bus stops didn't mention bicycling at all you are to understand the physics and how the turbulent wind the loading zone is mischaracterized we're talking about the 1 on market street if the existing conditions the reality a physical change it bhts 10 years not used your own transportation report no trucks observed user that loading zone in the meanwhile you've seen the cyclist will have vehicles crossing that bike lane a change to the physical environment a significant change the eir enforces it off we'll make it

easier four delivery vehicles that is insane so we have the bicycle impacts and the wind and loading on bicycles the below-market-rate housing is also something important that speaks to ceqa, ceqa can speak to that a precedent in the city about the relationship between market-rate housing what the demands on bmrs and how that effects the open environment how people will commute longer distances and so on this needs a second look not but the project itself but the adequacy of the environmental study we hope you agree and i'll be happy to talk about those further developments thank you and have a good afternoon. >> good afternoon,

commissioners jeremy legislative aide to board president london breed. to supervisor avalos supervisor avalos asked me to pass on a few comments reiterating that was said already there is serious concerns about the parking ♪ project i think this is such a crucial hub for the transportation system i think we need to be careful in analyzing every new parking that is in this area and the fact this eir didn't study zero parking alternative is not adequate and needs to be reanalyzed and i think that supervisor avalos agrees with the concerns of wind analysis i think that anyone who biked around from city hall to market street on a summer afternoon knows the wind is disturbing in the afternoon coming down polk street and market street looking at the cumulative impacts of the projected from all the developments going on is

concerning the wind common places are encouraging to be considered but the bike lane is not analyzed in the either needs to be considered and looking at the cumulative bicycle impacts in take into consideration the the better streets plan and separated along the length of market street we should see a significant increase in bicycle traffic during rush hours as you may know that is a crowded bike lane and in a separated raised bicycle track with significant wind impacts that has a potential to create hazardous conditions and the eir didn't address this i think that's all any points thank you

>> is there any additional public comment? >> hello my name is judith i haven't had a chance to review the eir by have a few comments on previous studies of other documents one of the things the construction because this is such a congested area i guess yeah my clock can start now - this is such a congested area and because i use transit and drive in many area regularly and have noticed there is a lot of encroachment by construction projects on public right-of-ways

so many depending on limit the construction to the lot line and not allow them to push pedestrians into streets to push bike lanes into car lanes and things like that a strict adherence to the lot lines not been adhered to an van ness or 9 there is too much encroachment on public right-of-way and also loading zones you you know regardless of parking number loading are critical to maintain in terms of safety so many loading double space and just illegal loading and unloading that impedes the bicycles and normal transit and cars which van ness, of course, will have the bus lanes special bus lanes

and i would move the loading zone off market maybe oak and make sure there is a loading zones they're entitled by white zones are taken away for the parking for revenue is to attempting for the relevant agency i'll suggest that you have the developer add city bike in lui of parking to encourage the bike share and if it is subsidized by the developer by providing free being able membership to they're residents that that would be great and also love to see some public bathrooms if no bmr onsite this

is a great place and building to have public bathrooms that transit people can use we're not putting bathrooms underground anymore and that really makes that area not that great for families to use it would really - we know the city is doing temporary bathrooms that's an ongoing cost that would be great to have public bathrooms available and provided by the building a lot of churches in the city now thanks. >> is there any additional public comment? >> okay not seeing any, public comment is closed. and commissioner moore. >> i'm very grateful to the hayes valley association to do such a thorough overview of the issues that comes to mind of the

observations shared and mr. dulavich posed out of capacity reduction and a number of traffic related issues the one issue that was not mentioned by the h v n a the concern foreshadows on the green and partisan park i felt i'm concerned that as we're not increasing the number of neighborhoods parks in those congested neighborhoods that the overlay of the hub which came much later on the hayes valley market octavia plan creates additional pressure on this park which is really the one for the most part gathering space so i'll support a partial examine

that the eir is very cognizant and at this moment the park is not a protected park under the prop m - prop k actually and appreciate there would be additional studies on what that really planes to the growing neighborhoods and another point although not as much eir related the hub is an abstract commencement i'd like to see studied in a pragmatic eir together with over riding principles that look at the transformation this important point of city that's not occurred i've raised the same question recently we've used 1500 mission street a project that will be part of hub and others projects to the west

of shared vision on what that means reducing automobile capacity and reconfiguring the dimensions on van ness and market is a missed opportunity to really have a hub that deals with existing building forms but makes the street itself more important than the investment at the intersections i'm so not very clear about pedestrian circulation increased safety for people that are using transit that are crossing on bicycle and slower modes with the sidewalks in front of the the projects in question today are to accommodate to increase the pedestrian movement particularly

in loading not being moved to oak street and particularly we continue to not constructively address how we deal with the unregulated patterns of allotting regarding pickup and delivery of passengers all of that will have a direct impact particularly crossing over the dedicated bike lanes this is something enough of - not been put forward as the traffic measure by which we're bringing it into the discussion of eir and protecting pedestrians, bicyclists, etc. those are any comments at the moment thank you. >> commissioner vice president richards. >> so some of the commenters raised issues i had to go into the eir to see what the project sponsors goals for the project the last goal to provide vehicle

access to serve the needs for visitors i i get that make sense when you're looking at through the lens of what we're doing here understand the study it says the eir and the adequate objective and not be exhausted but the eir needs to be reviewed in light of what we need it is reasonable feasible no parking alternative a conforming parking alternative as well as the opinions 25 i don't think that it is objective some other things that came to mind as well i've had the occasion to be at that intersection several times and i do understand that loading zone is not used so it is in existing condition but not being used we need to understand to

reactivate it you the doughnut shop didn't unload who will reactivate that who will be the cyclists i was at planning department and had to drive any car unfortunately, that was great i could park in front of my house i tried to make a turn from van ness and i have to tell you at night the bicyclists are coming down van ness and you're trying to understand how to make a turn i project this intersection without loading zone not far from that corner on a rainy night i see the same thing happening i think we need to help the bicyclists on the loading zone on the impact of

the cyclists i think we need to understand the changes in the retail landscape yesterday morning i had to go to a meeting that was in my driveway an amazon car for the next door neighbor i thought they delivered by truck so many things are happening that are overtaking our ability to understand the on demand wheels and have some food delivered to my house will take uber home i'm sure we're getting a real understanding this many units and people and this demand i'm having a stretch to understand how to accommodate it the other issue i think 390 first street the loading and unloading are people moving in and out needs

to be considered for the project specifically although i don't live here without the ability for people to drive a u-haul and have them on the street carrying stuff in lamps and stuff and trying to get though the lobby this is doesn't make sense i know there is a big loading area i'm considering that is for bigger trucks that's an issue we need to be creative around all the things i've mentioned about where the world is going as it pertains to this project and other projects in the neighborhood to be creative maybe the delivery is happening at our sites p.o. box has boxes you have to go and get them and shadow on brady park in the market octavia that should be

looked at with the impact they'll have if that becomes a park i agree with commissioner moore we acted 15 mission street last meeting in december before that the power car wash site the honda site will be coming the store an mission when you put this together what does that look like a central soma eir i'm reading like we need a hobby when you put this together i want to make decisions in silo this honda .5 parking is coming together i want to see how this all fits together and commissioner moore. >> i have one other question and comment that maybe something you can answer but like to put that in the project moving forward trithd by a comment in the public speaking the

interference of construction the question the mitigation we're hearing about wind as wind detractors those particularly wind foils extend into the public realm i'm wondering how much the public realm is served by the need for public about necessity wind mitigation i'm looking at the wind foils particularly in san francisco we like to walk on sunny sidewalks when the sun is there i suppose that's a question i want that to go forward on consideration regarding wind mitigation for this project. >> commissioner melgar. >> thank you i'm not going to belabor the points that commissioner vice president richards and

commissioner moore have said so well i also i'm would like a more thorough analysis the ways on bicycles and also the affordable housing component i'm really interested in getting more thorough application of the bmt as a measurement tool not justice a project but commissioner vice president richards in general, i think it could be a really great tool for us on the local level to apply and come up with our own methodologies and benchmarks when it comes to transit hub i think because we've been getting a lot of currencies about the balboa reservoir this is a tool we can use you know as - this is really interesting

but i'd like a little bit deeper analysis. >> commissioner vice president richards. >> just two trailing points we have a plan for market octavia we could use when you're looking at increasing the heights around the hub you're changing things that's why the accuracy of the eir may not cover those projects when our making changes midstream that's why i'm happy birthday to you u human immunodeficiency virus what a what are other things what will it look like maybe the project it will help us understand the viability of what the parking

issues look like. >> okay jonas that is commissioner comments. >> very good, commissioners. item 9 case new hotels and ophthalmologists. >> diego sanchez i'll be presenting the planning to require new hotel and motel to engage in an outreach process with the twaefks i want to provide coner johnston of supervisor president london breed to present to you. >> thank you plans coner johnston staff to london breed i realized this is the first time i've had the opportunity to present to commissioner koppel and my best to commissioner

melgar integrations i was happy to play a role in our commission commissioner melgar in 2015 this commission unanimously support and the board of supervisors unanimously passed supervisor president london breed night life presentation that is protecting music venues and preventing conflicts with the neighbors fundamentally i like to think a a three-legged stool second requires launder and be realtor to disclose to new residents there is a venue nearby and the third the law empowers the entertainment commission to hold the hearing with the music venue whenever a music development is proposed one three hundred feet of a venue and requires our commission to consider any

recommendations this the entertainment commission provides ougs how those uses what co-exist that last one is fundamentally important part of law we created those land used for the descends mixed use neighbors by moving towards each other when people are unhappy and change is more difficult the law is the first of its kind thank you for your support supervisor president london breed amendments strengthen that allow we established the entertainment commission authority to work on resident development but releasing the commission should be engaged in the hotel entertainment how we're looking at the cam ton space and the night life venue likewise there be issues with the hoffman ton an jessie street

- and the entertainment commission is having to manage all the problems and testing to make sure the venues are in compliance with our venues and working with the management of the hotel but forced after the fact supervisor president london breed amendment empowers the entertainment commission to address co-existing conditioners is night life and proposed hotel uses before those hotels are approved this is a pressing issue a planning department staff reports shows 26 motel and hotel projects pending 17 of which within three hundred feet of an entertainment and two near the temple night club and two hotels have 3 venues within three

hundred feet of that, in fact, month hotels have night life their because hotels by nature want to be near the action that is understandable according to recent reports austin, texas the haven for live music has a situation the west end built the hotels near the amiably theatre and susan the hotel for the music plans report says we exempt the planning entitlement after the legislation was introduced october 4, 2016, this was my 35 birthday and estimated currently two or three pipeline projects that have entitlement and we understand staffs logic and fine with the change fundamentally we have to make sure hotels and venues are both good neighbors night life and

live music not only bring one billion dollars into the local economy and support hundreds of jobs they chaplain us ted the co-chair the cultural association which advocates for night life in san francisco was a big part of 2015 legislation this legislation entered the in-laws of night life legislation no single legislation has helped night life more in decades that was a landmark so i hope you'll join us in making it stronger the legislation is supported by sftravel and with the management of the association and been support by the small business commission and the entertainment commission thank you to sdefrz and little director the entertainment commission both

behind me and an supervisor president london breed behavior ask for your support i'm available to answer any questions. >> we may have questions for you thank you. >> commissioner the department is in overall support with the comparability of landmarks outreach to stakeholders can help to improve project design and have a smooth entitlement process not one recommended modification as mentioned to the exempt hotel and motel approval by october 4, 2016, that's an introduction date of the ordinance the department buildings this is important because the entitlement for 6 or seven months are far enough making changes design changes can prove over bumper to bumper one line i'd like to correct a typo on page 5 under the basis of recommendation one should

read the inclusion of hotel has an approval on october 4th it says one year prior to date it should be approval by october 4 october 4th that concludes my presentation. i'll be happy to answer any questions you may have. >> opening up for public comment okay not seeing any, public comment is closed. >> commissioner vice president richards. >> having many nights bad sleeps in hotels where i used to work in private industry because of my neighborhood down the street i see this a real problem common sense you go to a motel or hotel and if someone builds a hotel like knott's berry farm cited the venue that will be lost will stay not the hotel going out of business this is a

balance between hospitality as plans said an extension of people work i move to approve. >> second. >> we'll adopt with the modifications read into the record by staff on that motion commissioner koppel commissioner melgar commissioner moore commissioner vice president richards and commissioner president fong so moved, commissioners, that motion passes unanimously 5 toe zero and places us on item 10 this is a large project authorization

authorization. >> good afternoon commissioner fong and members of the commission jonathan planning department staff the item before you is a request for a large project authorization pursuant to planning code section 329 to allow a exception in off-street parking to diminish 3 buildings and allow 4 and 6 story buildings mixed use building located on fulsome street and 723 to 725 please note the clarification to a error the project is seeking two exemption for rear yard to planning code section and

off-street parking pursuant to section the agenda sites 4 exceptions sought that is in correct the reason the project is located within the fulton mcd the project is requesting a requirement per instruction as proposed the protruding windows don't conform by the planning code section for widow projections that will be held on january 25, 2015, the proposal includes the construction of a 4 and 6 mixed use building murray 29 thousand plus gross square feet with 24 dwelling units one one thousand square feet ground floor retail use and 15 below

grade and class 1 bike parking spaces and class 2 bike parking spaces the project includes a mix of one bedroom and 10 two bedrooms and 13 other units to date 4 general inquires regarding the project the department has not comments in support of opposition of the project the department buildings this bronze is approvable the project complies with the planning code and is consistent with the policies the general plan the project is located in district residential and ground floor commercial uses are principally permitted a plaza mixed use with ground floor retail and significant updates including landscaping and private and open space the project is consistent with and respects the neighborhood character and provides massing and scale with

the program the project will add 3 affordable dwelling units and to the housing stock and one bedroom and two bedrooms and 13 three bedrooms and pays the impact fees that concludes my presentation. i'll be happy to answer any questions you may have. >> the project sponsor is present and prepared a presentation for the project. >> great project sponsor, please. >> good afternoon. my name is robin i'm here. >> speak into the microphone. >> sorry. >> there are 6 of us that own the proposed project and amongst us we make up that two construction companies and a

plumbing contractor go as well all of us work within the city for all the projects my sister my partners in this project and in the general construction grew up in the city and we're here with our children and spouses and operated as a general contractor for 14 years we're a small outfit it is important as natives we view those as an investment this is part of city we have completed work and our office is located and in the foreseeable future at fulsome will be a be a positive one for the neighborhood thank you. i'll introduce the project sponsor with the architecture good afternoon, commissioners thank you with r g architecture

if i could use the screen. >> so i'll briefly describe the project in more detail the main item about this project we are basically creating two types of buildings we're straddling zoning that provides complexity to accommodate the zoning requirement essentially two separate buildings by combining them as one development lots and basically, their combined through the sub transparence portion through the garage we create a lot of building efficiency and we creative street wall along fulsome. keeping in mind the fulsome street corridor we have a little project support on fulsome street the only non-active use an clemente the project runs through our driveway the project on fulsome has

because it like two buildings with to approaches with some relationship in materials to tie the project together the fulton side has horizontal delineation and has a facade with walls that express the movement horizontal of fulsome street on clemente street similar palate of materials i'll describe in more detail in this presentation a slightly different treatment we have residential ground floor unit no residential space on clemente street an articulation of lemons to bring the scale further in line with the residential character it is described as two

buildings above our grade we've created an internal court that is 41 feet 3 inches from building facade to facade it is an active court we've created a buffer what is 25 percent rear yard for either building and? middle of this court we're creating the planter that will be assessable through the as part of private open space and also created a private buffer between the two buildings. >> sdoem into more detail into the facade treatments i mentioned the actual street facade and the image on the left is clemente street and i think what is most notable we've

respond and created a depth in the facade, however, we've also created what is essentially recycle a townhome unit with an entry off of clemente and a private screen that is landscaped that is setback 6 feet to create a patio or stoop speaks for itself the residential entry so for the remainder of the unit is setback slightly 3 feet to avoid encroachment on the site looking it xheshl /* contextual here the two buildings type of approach that is notable we have a open space to the court of two different levels on the roof and a setback as the building grows taller in conformance and to

further illustrate that discussion here's the building construction on the left the clemente side with a different height limit and we're on an alley we're richmond we have a 45 degree setback from our adjacent property line across clemente and, of course, the fulton side has a higher zoning and as you can see the garage that ties the whole project together there's where most of building utilities are located keeping an active facade as possible just looking at some straight on elevation the fulsome facade the articulation of the residential floors how they basically alternative from floor to floor with a slightly more traditional take with the bulk head and some

other rhythm on many facade that helps with directed degree by working with the planning department here's the clemente street facade again, the difference in scale some separate in scale and some symmetry symmetrical garage and egress surrounded by the podium structure and then the residential between in the middle and the residential entry to the rest of the units on the right. >> this is looking at the north and south elevations respectfully and here again, just further illustrating what i keep referring to as a two building type of approach with the central court and the relative

side and finally want to point out the materiality we want to explore with that building the bulk on fulsome street a zinc coded co-combated metal that lends itself to the dynamic moechlz we're trying to create surrounding by a trim of break metal steel and the surrounded in the whiteer color is a lap siding the floor above transition to standing metal that is the coating oh, sorry that's my last slide and clemente similar materials slightly different use a juliette balcony over the bay 0

so some metal railing and it transitioned all materials convenient last year with south of market with an industrial type of treatment and also the base of the building a podium style construction we are expressing the concrete a board form concrete that creates the first floor on both sides of the building and the first floor is a tall first floor that concludes my presentation. >> thank you opening up for public comment a few speaker cards. >> (calling names). >> thank you very much my name is james i really appreciate the earth that was

done to this building it really makes that nice by having the courtyard in the back and addressing the way they set up the building to reflect the neighborhood i only live two doors 1 small section street and our only main concern has been the additional flow of traffic into our street our street has a mix the residents and businesses i came up with a suggestion that will help i'm hoping the project engineering will be willing to pay for this the city has done this on the park behind any store and pearl they created a situation where the entrance to the street on my picture here make that look like a driveway so that it keeps cars running through the street as a quick

thoroughfare from the and 8 a 1-way street i hope the city can get if done immediately following the project any additional traffic that runs through there can be minimized i've seen it work on pearl and the park and it was created this which makes it look like more of a promenade with bricks the city did this and significantly reduced the traffic flowing through the streets people wanting to go from this street to that and with the additional park a they're allowing i'm fine with that but this i hope will unable to to negate additional traffic someone pays for something like that is that will

help to mitigate the traffic any other comment i plan to bring up i hope people are addressing this i know the city is trying to have zero parking and projects appearing on the small streets are zero parking, however, this particular project i'm hoping is actually addressed at 1228 fulsome and has no address an clemente street if any address on clemente street the residents can apply and get a residential parking permit that will allow cars to be used this is something i've seen elsewhere on projects with the zero parking and either on one of the residential streets and if you don't eliminate this possibility some new projects need a way they does not have ways to apply for residential

parking permits i'm hoping this project is addressed at 1228 fulsome. >> sir, your time is up. >> thank you. >> hello. >> hi my name is han i can't a resident of this block i own the building on clemente which is just a couple of doors down from this as well so first compliment the owners on creating a beautiful design everything impacts on fulsome but my primary concern is traffic all of the traffic for these new residents will be funneled you down clemente we asked them at the meeting in february of 2015 to create an assess through fulsome to the parking garage

they said not part of design and part of future so instead all the cars will be coming down our block and to commissioner vice president richards point earlier that means all the uber's and other traffic that took place there i'm a parent with a 3-year-old daughter and other babies born on the block that is not just a building a bunch of startups but families that live there and use this as pedestrian area so the safety and liveability of our block is important i want to support the comment by james who has been active and comes up with great ideas to support this support brick style and pattern in our block so that cars that are considering maybe taking a

shortcut down clemente entering the corners and racing down stop and slow down and consider there are a number of pedestrians and the general noise of listening to that on our block i brought this up in the meeting in 2015 to the architect and developer asked them to consider traffic calming devices my comment was to create a walk that is full of lights that will light up instead of having a flood light as well as the normal siren that goes off wherever a garage door is lift their offensive

suggestions towards the liveability of our block so if something more attractive that will increase the value and the aesthetic and the joy ability like this brick feature that james mentioned would certainly be in support by all the residents on our block thank you very much. >> i'm reminded he persons to please silence our mobile devices if you don't know how turn them off. >> (calling names) good afternoon. i'm bryan and i've been involved with the seven hundred block of clemente street since 1989 for those of you who don't know clemente is one of the nicest block in the western soma a one-way streets heading east between 8 and 9

street a mix of smaller scale buildings that are commercial and residential got a real single - clemente is with only one block long and clemente stops at both ended it has a london feel to that it was the original affirmative alley south of market in the 80s and it has a real community in a block sense of place and i'm concerned about having high quality projects it is a nice project justice the amount of traffic coming down clemente street one of the neighbors said you can't bring assess to the garage and the architecture design and

can't bring the parking controls that's correct anything you can do to mitigate the amount of traffic an interesting idea not allowing more residential parking permits for this clemente street address because it is quite tight parking only parking on one side of the alley and your consideration take into consideration that's a very special block and thank you for your time and for your civic involvement. >> thank you. is there any additional public comment okay not seeing any, public comment is closed. >> commissioner moore. >> the building itself and how to conforms to rules and regulations and the other one of the question about the dialogue on ongoing dialogue the attention to alleys and the

circulation something we've brought up in a number of projects where alleys are not just serving cars that are allowed by code but also serving the larger circulation patterns for people taking shortcuts and now burdening with deliveries and increase in previously not customary ways that aside not what the commission will decide or discuss we are in continued dialogue with the department itself to look at the permission of the city including protecting the residential alleys as the next streets i want to say that note effect the public today and with you living in a successful way staying in dial and talk about how we change the rules over time not today having said

that, i'm in go full support and sensitive that is exceptional we're seeing similar or light buildings this one sits apart on its own and makes a nice and well-designed suggestion to a very already careful designed neighborhood your streets is exceptional and i'm happy you live there and wonderful appreciation of the neighborhood i think the building does a lot of things it does all the setback on an alley which i continued to be very strongly interested as it followed the rules it exist for this and the property mid block courtyard and it does everything that a variety yet not trying to be too loud of a building so i'm in

full support and move to approve. >> second. >> can i ask one other thing for the planner i only received in my page 8 and a half by 11 drawings it is difficult for those of us that take a full printout 11 by 17 by which it would have been much easier to approve the project i'm asking. >> commissioner koppel. >> i'm generally in support of project that is as kate hartley republican moore i appreciate you're a contractor and looking here at the local hiring document this is upwaris upward

with question 4 waits the estimate number of local residents and filled out with no non-applicable. >> all of our current employees are local and we anticipate continuing that our crews have been with us 20 people 10 or 12 people been with us for 14 years don't anticipate that changing they're all local does that answer your question appropriately and commissioner vice president richards. >> i guess to the members of the public that came to express the issues for the property tax i echo commissioner moore's

points i don't want you to feel that is a waste of time can you help me out the coal were redone with market octavia planned monies there money available to do alleyways under the eastern neighborhoods a section under the packet how many freeze and eastern neighborhood advisory committee that will we prioritize the money i suggest - it's okay if you work with the supervisors office on how to navigate that or the planning department staff to you might be able to see those improvements that's my suggestion. >> those could be great solutions acknowledging what you say. >> i heard a motion did i hear a second there is a motion that has been seconded and if nothing further on that motion to

approve that with conditions. >> commissioner koppel commissioner melgar commissioner moore commissioner vice president richards and commissioner president fong so moved, commissioners, that motion passes unanimously 5 to zero. >> okay jonas the commission will take a break and be back in about minutes. >> we have accommodate on overflow room in 46 to view and listen to those procedures when our item reached and wish to anytime public comment you'll be allowed to reenter the room i know a good number are here for item 13 for medical cannabis dispensary on san bruno avenue i've asked an organizer in order to save time one person speak to

the concerns of your neighborhood and then the rest of you who wish to can stand in support of those comments so we don't have to listen to everybody say the same thing over and over the commissioners get it they see the number of people they've seen the comment letters submitted and the petitions signed so but right now especially those of you who are here for item 13 overflow room 416 you will not be permitted to stay in this room we can't get started until the room is cleared with exemption if you can find a seat you're welcome to stay. >> yes. please. (inaudible)

(inaudible). >> thank you, thank you appreciate that very much.

>> (speaking foreign language.) >> okay. good afternoon and welcome back to the san francisco planning commission regular hearing for thursday, january 5, 2017, i will remind members of the public that the proceedings. and when speaking before the commission, if you care to, do state your name for the record. commissioners, we left off under the regular calendar for case 2015 on fulsome and one 20 haurth street a large project authorization good afternoon commissioner president fong and members of the commission doug with department staff the item before you that the request for a large

project authorization to allow for the demolition of an existing 17 thousand square feet office building on fulsome street and an existing 81 hundred square feet industrial building the merger with the building and the construction of a one and 92 thousand that plus square feet one hundred thirty foot 13 at all mixed use building that fronts on fulsome and haurwthorne and two hundred and thirty dwelling units with sros sros and 91 two bedrooms and 8 three bedrooms twmz it includes speak up on the first through 9 floors as well as 9

and class 1 bike parking spaces bicycles and 1 class 2 bike parking spaces will be proposed as part of project required streetscape plan no vehicular parking proposed for this development there the provision for a large project authorization the project is seeking modifications to the planning requirements to a rear yard exposure sfgh loading and other requirements as a correction to the report that was published last week the project is not seeking a modification to the open space requirement the project is located in the eastern fabricate by light industrial and commercial uses the immediate neighborhood along fulsome one or two story

property and 13 story office building a 9 story residential context is the smaller industrial properties mixed with heights from one to 8 stories the adjacent properties to the west and south linked to the downtown office district but are improved with a mixed use development as long as the soma square development one and 11 unit and ground floor neighborhood serving restaurants and dry cleaners and small groceries and shoe repair stores the adjacent properties to the east is located in downtown support zones and a 9 story apartment building that received a downtown project authorization for a building height increase

to one and 76 feet locate two blocks to the project and market street to the north and the moscone conference center to the west in addition the transbay terminal is 5 blocks to the east there are 13 muni bus routes negation to golden gate rapid transit and golden gate lines. >> since the packet was published the department has one letter of support from the san francisco housing action coalition and in addition no other additional public correspondence has been received for the project. >> after naval all aspects the

department staff finds that is in guidance with the priority policies in the plan and located in the zoning district where residential use is permitted an appropriate in fill development that adds one plus dwelling units and over 8 thousand plus retail use in an area that has high density housing and has empowering frontage with pedestrian activities the project is comparable with the neighborhood character and provides appropriate massing and scale the project design is of high quality and will help the location between the moscone center and the terminal that will contribute approximately 21 plus million dollar for the affordable housing units offsite in relation that - i'm sorry

the project willfully utilize the eastern neighborhoods area control plan and pay an additional $2.1 million in impact fees the project will convert in underutilized site into mixed use development that will help activate the neighborhood and finally the project complies with the hiring program based on those feels and in the draft motion the staff recommends approval for the large project authorization the project sponsor is presented and has prepared a presentation that concludes my presentation. i'm available to answer any questions. >> project sponsor, please. >> >> can i have at projector please. >> computer. >> good afternoon, commissioners my name is drew with the project sponsor quality residential we're pleased to

present the hawthorne project for your consideration we want to 82 thank the of any person(s) responsible for the ringing or use of a for those of you who don't know entity has added residential to the market over the 18 months and will add additional unit a total of 26 apartment homes operated in the city we love the city new and old and committed to be responsible community members when completed hawthorne will add one hundred plus in fill housing where contemplated by the downtown jobs and without adding any new parking and the project will contribute over $21 million towards the construction and the added jobs and tax revenue we partnered with the architecture we

collaborated on fremont turn over that is one of the finest new buildings in the city here it my colleague to talk about how it is integrated into the neighborhood and good afternoon, commissioners and happy new year nice to be back with the interesting about this project is two told fold it an in fill project but completes a master plan given the fact the project sponsor is owner of soma square this project abuts to that development and what we are trying to do with the design the project and the outside space and the integrity felt spates to complete with a master plan of the entire block area as you can see from the map an l-shaped site butts up against the square

and what is architecturally i'll talk about that later we had a developer and wanted to develop a character that works with fulsome street and character that works with hawthorne and a character that works with the interior court of the square an interesting challenge to carve this building that works with all 3 of them. >> as you can see from that massing plan we establishment with the l shape and worked towards creating an area that will respect the different heights and the volumes of the other buildings again given the fact that soma square is there we're working with a yerba buena and the improvement program and central soma that hat not been adopted but we're working with the planning department and considered some of the aspects of this this plan within our

design here's a picture of just how that intercourt works i don't know if you've been up there that is nice a lot of landscape and foundations we wanted to do with one 20 is integrate that as you can see we started to carve the building to get breathing room although a property line a imaginary property line that is open than the property line indicates as shown here. >> here's a i simple reflex how that integrates into the space and again, this is an indication of hawthorne we did a sargent that is again not required bus the central soma plan is not in place but anticipating that and again working with the planning departme