tv Mayors Press Availability SFGTV January 17, 2017 5:30am-6:01am PST
5:30 am
take out of a business but add to the costs i'm wondering in terms of the housing affordability act it seems like a whole floor is retail use. >> is that ground floor required to be retail in that district. >> for one 45 not identified corridor where retail is required but i'll check the zoning table. >> it is not van ness street at that location is for the required to have retails or one 45 - >> are the taking an
5:31 am
additional 5 feet in the retail and they are. >> adding 15 foot ceiling height when their granted the height. >> yeah. maybe that's the problem not the housing i think we need housing might consider but i don't know. i think that the issue with the shadow is both temperature and light i think that i've been to beer gardens where 5:30 when people get out of work and start to have beer the lights go down it is cold so i think this the legitimate and i don't want to lose business and the jobs requester retail uses are
5:32 am
permitted on the ground floor. >> commissioner moore. >> i'd like to ask the city attorney is this somewhat so unusual normally shadows requirement duo deal with open spaces on the dollar prop k a limited number specifically located parks that deal with larger public benefits this is shadows on private business legacy business yes, but legacy is not expressed in shadow a bye product of legacy in the combination of filter light any question to the city attorney from everything extra carefully an idea that we might be able to ask for a different packaging of
5:33 am
rental units if ground floor residential is allowed would we ask for deputy director the retail that would lower the building and retain the unit count; however, it changes are we allowed to consider that. >> they'll increase the unit counts. >> it may or may not i don't know if other ordinances. >> you're asking me if you can consider the ground floor with residential. >> drop the performance the building given the building is considered residential over retail now saying if retail is moved in order to maintain the unit count lower the building at the expense of retail and
5:34 am
maintaining the unit count. >> deputy city attorney mirena burns. i'm defer to the city but in terms of - >> yes. i'm not going to opine on that wanders to the housing affordability act that commissioner johnson referenced earlier about the commission needs to make specific findings from the commission will reduce the density in a unit count that employs as long as the units count is to the reduceed you'll not have to make that decision. >> we're trying to maintain the unit count but green house that less square feet dedicated to retail by lowering the building and keeping the unit count. >> i understand but you have to make the findings for the dr
5:35 am
as usual. >> one thing i'll raise this residential is allowed certain from the ground floor in this location i would simply raise the argument not impossible but challenging to properly dine the residential units at the ground floor you'll have to create a setback or stoop or something. >> including we have the planter for rain waste compliance, etc. the building otherwise is code compliant not asking for any variances it didn't ask for anything that is by reason of a full compliant project how can he build to the shadow and
5:36 am
legacy business without a challenging of code compliant building i don't know how to do that. >> one comment i don't know what a 5 feet reduction will be for the beer garden i don't have no idea i tried to eye ball it and on sunset times for the dates in question the ranges the clock sun sets at the 8:30 an june 21st but only a portion the patio is shaded we need to change the project 5 feet may not have any impact we're looking a continuance if you want to look at it that way.
5:37 am
>> i think is unfair it to ask the project sponsor to change that. >> commissioner johnson. >> thank you just a couple of things yeah. i think that is creative to think about the ground floor residential but will not solve the problem that is a challenge to have ground floor residential we talked about privacy issues with the ground floor residential and less busy areas that is a challenge and the only way to mitigate to have streets and other setbacks that will raise off the ground probably 5 feet that will change the height and the other thing is the housing affordability act you can't change the zoning; right? we can't say lop off the top
5:38 am
floor the developer can build to the zoning height and can add nor unit and can't say anything. >> that's for the commercial we don't need the 5 feet. >> i'm saying in you put residential units on the ground floor you need to raise them off the ground to make them liveable between 3 and 5 feet multiple discussions on you know how you do that and that height is increased 5 feet off the street level you need it height first for ground floor residential. >> because the height requirement is still the same; right? the developer can say i'll have more residential in my building and the housing
5:39 am
affordability can't say you can't build the zones to build. >> 50 - and they, build 55 you couldn't legally do 5 stories of remain that will take you above 50 feet those are the challenges with a place like this. >> ceiling heights and all kinds of things. >> okay. we're getting to your point commissioner vice president richards no idea. >> ceiling heights i mean we've been up here on drs and here we're talking about what will
5:41 am
>> okay. i can't make a motion to only four of you can. >>[inaudible] [off mic] commissioner denmark >> director rahaim but i still put yourself in our position for a moment? >>[laughing] >>[cross-talking] [off mic] this is such a is a lot of sympathy for finding a way to understand the dr request on the other hand, we have never done that. we don't really quite know what it takes to do it. a little bit concerned just technically that the two shadow studies seem to be [inaudible] and not basically built on the same database could different assumptions and there will be 1.2 use as a reason to ask for a continuance. because i have to trust both sort be one or the other which means it's
5:42 am
none. so is it fair, given that two commissioners are not here today, including pres. fong to basically push this out say get together, to a proper shadow analysis based on the database that is the proof backgrounds department uses and work together and come up the same conclusions, whatever it is. i don't care either of you could be correct and use that as a premise for discussing this project again we >> commissioner one thing i will say commissioner phelps does so a lot of shadow work for a lot of projects. my understanding and maybe if we could adam made he could come up. my understanding is that indeed the shadow that he found does exist after 3:30 pm at certain times and after 35 three 3530 after sometimes it and cause occurs off on the valencia street close to the valencia street side of that. i don't know if there is and maybe you can talk about a
5:43 am
little bit about what the duration of that shadow time of year and time of day. that would help. >> normally we see it in a bell shaped curve. totally unable sunlight we have the project on and put a little bit of a slice on top of it could you show for each day with your how long in the duration from what time to work him. we don't have that with time information item if it was 10 min. in the fall or it it's an hour in the fall. i don't see that curve and and >> to be fair if we could do that part we don't typically do it for private open space and the was should we go down about the would help us to understand look at the layout of the beer garden and say that also bike rack not such a big and we don't have that information either. >> well it certainly possible to create a more robust study. if anyone is familiar with the
5:44 am
work that i do for section 295, you know we do a series of calculations and graphics moving throughout the entire year we literally put everything in 15 min. intervals. that calculation methodology was used to arrive at the numbers that i gave earlier with respect to providing backup documentation, etc. good that's all information. i on fort only do not i don't have my laptop but i don't have it here at the podium. but from memory, i recall that the duration of shading was between 90 min. and i think 120 min. at the biggest peak and that's where the mighty one square foot of shadow at the beginning of that stretch into a larger square footage. again, the challenge of dealing with shadows their dynamic overtime. and so saying it there for now and have sometimes leads to the
5:45 am
impression the entire part when tired your garden in this case is shrouded in charlotte for an hour nap. it is dynamic and change over time but certainly more information can be put together >> if i may, for how long of a year does that happen? >> i think in so far as i think it was only about six weeks of the year that there was absolute no shading but over the entire winter, there were periods of time that was like 5 ft.2 of shading during a day. again it gradually grows toward that sort of apex which was big fall in mid spring and that's what i quoted as the sort of 4% on the maximum day and then received a little bit in the summertime. that's just owing towards the location of the sun relative to the part. >> what is 4% name? what does it mean 4% more than i would normally be without the building or is there- >> yes. this is where as a practitioner i could totally going to the lengths of this but basically, the percentage is a comparison between a theoretical amount of sunshine which is if you were to imagine
5:46 am
and no building surrounded and so that's the denominator. if there is 100 ft.2 and an hour that is all son and that was a total and then to square feet which was in shade by the project, and that would be the 2% did so you are comparing it are relative the current shade towards the absolute standard of the total amount of theoretical sunlight which could fall on the open space. >> theoretically that's eight in the morning and are not open, who cares? >> that's why did not conduct the study until after 90 and was one open seven days a week he was i ditto the study alone but to match the business hours which i would normally do it was a public part. >> okay to interview started at nine you didn't account in that denominator, from the time the sun came up until he was until that nine injured >> than 4% is the additional amount of shade that is thrown hypothetically by the building >> the net new shadow from the
5:47 am
project. >> i'm sorry >> i just want to say clear is that i might you are saying, starting at 5:30 am, during those fawlty towers, which is >> during summer. prior to about 5:30 pm over the summertime hours, the shadow is moving towards zeitgeist but is not teaching until about that time. then >> 530 the maximum than? speedo that's what a person reaches. it goes beyond that as the sunsets were in the sky the shadows are cast longer. >> sold by 30 it starts and then it grows in them when it's added maximum effect 4% is that what you are saying? speedo this is where it can get
5:48 am
confusing the 4% is basically the percentage of the square-foot hours of shade throughout that entire day. take it from 9 am-one hour before sunset. that's not a snapshot of what percentage what zeitgeist is covered at that absolute maximum period of time. so again it's an attempt to show throughout the day and this is difficult because you're trying to capture@amicable rate period of time with a single number so this is how- >> the reason for that that's how we do the calculations for the parks. it's looking at the theoretical number of sunshine in a year and then saying how many sunshine hours are affected by that. it's a very complicated >> it's complicated. it's a business owner and my peak business was in the summer and in the fall after 5:30 pm [inaudible] then i would want to know like how it that congregated calculation juxtaposes without. i understand he was all this data can be compared >> so what we had for her-a video that showed the clock was
5:49 am
growing on the bottom and says that the they went on you saw where the sun hits and where it did not get it was really helpful. it had >> is covered but it's only 4% in the total overall. if the peak time so that something would really help us. >> i prepared something similar for transbay block one and for pier 70. >> i don't mean to throw water on this but those studies are quite extensive and expensive. they're done for very big project could be so i'm hearing from the dr requester can, was also i can >>[inaudible] [off mic] i'm wondering, dr requester if you had this which i wish we would've seen it or send it to us. >> well, you have it and i showed one screen >> the video? >> >> no. it's not a video at some slides were showing
5:50 am
>> is only one dale? >> is today's of the europe and also that study was put into the developers in december to bring the thing on the table into explained the different things we can spirit if you would bear with me for minute >> commissioner richards after step in here and make a comment out of turn. i really think it's inappropriate to ask that the project sponsor ask for provide information that's five figured it's not required for producing these videos and all these things for pier 70 and thing were done much larger projects is >> i appreciate the comments. we're outscoring his latest and same we have it for every 50 min. for the year. so to me there's a table somewhere that should draw on the data produces updated. that's right is coming from and i want them to rebut it and say it across 100,000 hours and i would say >> well, this is not transbay block one. i completely get where you're coming from and i appreciate you stopping in.
5:51 am
>> okay. >> is it in the massive undertaking the was is a substantial effort to produce a graphical animation throughout the day versus just having a table of numbers which it is a substantial additional costs. >> so on the screen i'm showing the shadow on september 21 at 4 pm. after this time is when it really matters for a pub. everything happens happens before is not relevant. for us, is the afternoon sumpter at 4 pm it looks like this. at 5 pm and looks like this. it gets dark until sunset. that's for september 21 >> the sunset on that day and what time? >> around 6:30 pm >> okay. trying to understand how long the darkness is. >> well, it's from for >> until sunset >> okay. >> which is what matters
5:52 am
>> so so sunset is between seven and nine on a day. per the official >> three hours. three hours out of 16. store percentage is not so much that it's three hours for the bar. >> >> okay. >> we took the 21st because it represents very well between april-april, may, and august september. those four months of fundamental for our business. we get this shadow takes all of the old garden the peak business hours. that is the whole point for us. and we propose fall our turns. some of them affecting only 10% of the area to mitigate that affect and that's in the last -in this slide show before
5:53 am
greeley only 7% >> thank you burmeister i guess question for my fellow commissioners,. rb entertaining residential on the ground floor to be book that were not? no. anybody else i will make sure that's close off as up path. we don't want to go that path. let's get on with things. there's nobody? okay good toward dealing with the project as is. commissioners? >> just to break the silence to give you an idea >> commissioner antonini is not your >> because there is by the un musters a condition - excuse me - a motion to continue, only a
5:54 am
majority vote would work in that sense for procedural matter to continue it otherwise would need for vote today can admit either take dr or not take your pick you can get for vote or three modes for attitudes the project will be approved. >> commissioner johnson >> someone's got to talk and i've got a nanny that needs to go home. i guess where i'm thinking the first floor residential residential the reason i'm scratching my head in essence the issue with a legacy business which i am sensitive even if i sound not i really am sensitive to that. i don't feel if that were a project that came to us i don't necessarily feel that is something i would be very supportive of over the project that we have right now. so what
5:55 am
i'm trying to get through in my mind is it worth it to have the project sponsor essentially have to go back and redo this entire project to consider ground floor or first floor residential and all the implications that would mean for parking, for everything else. is it worth it to get potentially what could be an minimal impact to the issue that zeitgeist has brought us which are real for the business but i don't know that they are going to get a significant- >> so my thought on that would be a completely get where you are common from instead of them having to the road project i like to shadow study. doesn't have to be animated that goes one for reduction in two 4 foot reduction 5 foot just to see what the impact if there's no impact why bother changing anything. but understanding back and try to figure out if we need to want to change anything. that should be pretty easy. but some numbers in a computer and there we go.
5:56 am
commissioner moore >> director rahaim are we allowed to consider the tale of a lower height than 15 feet in this area? i am just asking that because ground floor retail i think is not an issue. because we wanted to do other problems for light and air including that we have a garage and the requirements for the [inaudible] but having said that, what would happen if we lower the building taking the retail across her lower height >> there's minimum height is 14 feet >> correct. 14 feet. >> the code requirement? >> per 145 >> yes. a code requirement the was >>[cross-talking] [off mic] >> can you make an exception to that? >> you need a variance could. now were getting into design issues. i mean, commissioners,
5:57 am
look, i don't want to prejudge this but i would suggest to you that 5 feet is not going to make one hell of a lot of difference. >> happy to hear some insights from you? >> thank you. i agree with what dir. rahaim just a bit unnerving five egos can make much of a difference but i think asking us to go back to the beginning to a sickly redesign this just to accommodate what we again are where of the shadow back without doing an intensity that the analysis is one of your long process that extensive. the retail has been baked in. valencia corridor is all about ground floor retail and housing above and is very much fits that conception of what was in the market ontario cohen ncd
5:58 am
zombie i ask you to reconsider that. i again i think what you are saying is we do a little shadow analysis i don't know is can show all that much at the end of the day. cost money and time. i would much prefer the project be if you're inclined to do so if the vote to approve the project as is. thank you. commissioner johnson commissioner moore were you going to say think mr. johnson >> thank you good i will bite the bullet. i'm going to move to not take-take dr and approve the project with the changes suggested by the project sponsor the planters on the east -west side of the project. >> do i hear a second? >> do i hear a motion to continue? if we can get a second one that will need a motion >> motion to continue >> second
5:59 am
>> to what day? >> i guess it might be good to figure out why we are continuing it. the purpose of the continuance. >> to get it would give the project sponsor time to give us 54321 analysis and say there's a big impact. >> i would also like to point out the dr request or number to request the continuance because the drawings were not with us did i know it's a legality at this point because it's in the public record but i would allow us to just take care of that. >> the other two commissioners would give it a bit of a chance for [inaudible] it's a very difficult as i think everyone is trying to be fair to everybody and we don't have much expense in that kind of questioning
6:00 am
>> so then is akin to once we want a better shadow study? >> with increments 025 feet we can actually get rid of. >> just to clarify were looking for increments quantitative increments in terms of showing x number of square feet at this time, etc.? quantitative data? >> just like we saw was easy for us to see, they were the shadows it and for how long. >> okay. i guess there's two different-there's the quantitative data and then there's the graphical >> i think were much more graphically inclined. i can sit there and look at a table of numbers and get the full picture. we showed up there when he kind of went through was really helped get in other words the dr request or number two showed >> but that style of graphic >> yes. >> insofar as the intervals, i mean it's difficult to do hourly intervals for section 295 reporting but it sounds like what you're wanting is something of a more granular. during time just obviously many times it would either one hour would be already passed
34 Views
IN COLLECTIONS
SFGTV: San Francisco Government Television Television Archive Television Archive News Search ServiceUploaded by TV Archive on