questions about viability we need to answer those questions they have and many times w efind ourselves saying, well, you we need to talk to the city. the city needs to give reassurance to people we do business with and those things are actually in front of us right now. i also want to commend the department of public health for issuing rfp's. [speaking off the mic]. >> thank you very much for your comments. and to the public that stayed for this hearing we appreciate you. public comment is closed at this time. all right. may i have a motion to file this? >> yes i make a motion to file this. >> thank you. i will second that motion. mr. clerk will take that without objection. is there any other business before this body. >> that completes the business for today.

>> thank you. this meeting is adjourned. >> if you are interested in our local city government and would like to work with 18 other enthusiastic citizens committed to improving its operations, i encoura

>> please silence any devices that may sound off during the proceedings. commission, if you care to, do state your name for the record. 50ir789 commissioner president hillis commissioner vice president richards commissioner koppel and commissioner moore we do expect commissioner fong and commissioner johnson to arrive shortly and commissioner melgar to be absent commissioners, the first item on your agenda consideration of items proposed for continuance. 2855 filbert street discretionary review april 6th

650 divisadero street conditional use authorization and rear yard modification april 6th 1019-1033 clement avenue conditional use authorization proposed for continuance and 471 24th avenue conditional use authorization proposed for indefinite continuance no other items proposed for continuance and there are no speaker cards. >> thank you jonas any public comment on items 1 through 4 proposed for continuance go ahead line up and speak at the mike this is the time to address the continuance not necessarily the project itself

so. >> i get it. >> whether or not you're in. >> i'm a member of group neighbors united in support of the 2a basically, we as a community in district 5 have been promised a lot when it comes to affordable housing and our supervisor unfortunately has been installing the legislation pro tem a higher amount of it after working with the community to get to a certain point she's stalled it this is frustrating support the continuance the 13.5 percent is slap in the face and under the circumstances is that acceptable a huge gateway give

away. >> what we're considering not the project but the continuance. >> i support continuing the project absolutely unless the legislation is actually proposed it supervisor president breed proposed in her election campaign hopefully she makes good before passing this. >> thank you good afternoon, commissioners my name is testing with d 5 action a resident of district 5 for a long time i support the i was in the chamber when supervisor president london breed said she'll correct the errors with the divisadero and fillmore up

zoning them without increasing the affordability she promised to come back after prop c whether that passed or failed and put forward her legislation with the 24 percent please support the continuance until we get the up zoning rick rectified. >> hi (laughter) clark you've heard the housing detailed is housing denied wait the issue if we allow this to continue to delay and delay and delay there is no amount that will satisfy the community groups we note to expedite those through the process thank you. >> thank you. >> next speaker, please. >> hi, i'm here to speak on the continuance of sdris i've

lived in the ifrp district 5 for 20 years the reason i'm here i saw that flier it has me concerned it is supervisor president breed affordability legislation it was last seen on her desk and not seen again, it was spoken of a great deal during her election we need to stop everything and find it before it dies that's why i support it. >> thank you. >> next speaker, please. >> good morning, commissioners i'm lisa to speak in support of continuance of the project 650 divisadero street a landscape a member of the group on

december 4, 2015, our own supervisor london breed held a press conference in front of the theatre on the block 650 to increase the percentage of required affordable housing in new private developments along divisadero and fillmore and stated quote most of all it will be the highest affordable housing requirement ever, ever in the city and county of san francisco unquote it same legislation is in limbo she continues to make speeches about affordable housing for her constituents the stark realty not enough of the new construction is available for people he earning less than one thousand dollars a year i've reached two developments with the pricing data of available

units the community by the uc extension site from two days ago. >> i'm sorry we're only talking about the turns. >> i understand if by the issue is truly affordable housing it is not the two competitors we're caught between our supervisor and the planning commission and the developer. >> thank you very much thank you we appreciate it. >> hi my name is suzy osborn i'm a third-generation san franciscan my husband and i have a business in district 5 and here to support the continuance of the 650 divisadero i'm an artist and i saw you at the fort mason situation i wanted to say i'm here to support neighbors unit a

member of it supervisor president london breed ran for office on affordable housing and promised this development only officers 13 percent affordable housing not acceptable we need more affordable housing and so i'd like to ask for a continuance of 2a thank you. >> thank you is there any additional public comment on the items being worked out proposed go ahead. >> hello thank you for having me. i'm here and thank you, again my situation is i grew up in a neighborhood of divisadero and been there about since 1990 number one, and number two, the area changed and 3 i see my communities are harmed throughout the city of san francisco the fourth thing i want a continuance of the drits the reason why the following is

that you don't affordable housing for minority you guys put on by different marries by the released the country's again 13.56 will let me ask you a question would you like to live in the 13.5 affordable housing units hey i don't have that much money so you need to increase the volume of housing not only in district 5 in san francisco but the plight of african-american community you can see it an article in the sxhoinl about the divisadero how it changed and other article again, i'm here for a continuance of the 650 divisadero and supervisor president london breed stated affordable housing all her campaign literature everyday i want to help i want to help you but the fact that 13.5 none can

live that way one of my colleagues said $100,000 people are struggling i stand i'm heretofore a continuance of 650 divisadero and again, on the plight 13.5 affordable housing do not work in san francisco and again, thank you for first of all, thank you. >> thank you. >> next speaker, please. >> hi, i'm director heineckeized lived in the page for 28 years a senior on limited income i support the continuance of 650 we need more affordable housing and london breed promised more affordable housing and not following through now she's in office i'd like to see a continuance on that. >> thank you, thank you very

much. >> hi my name is a norman i've been a resident of cool valley for over 20 years and here to support the continuance of divisadero seeing none, public comment is closed. commissioner vice president richards. >> move to continue items 1, 2a and 3 and 4 as specified thank you, commissioner commissioners, if there's nothing further, we'll move on to a there is a motion that has been seconded to continue items proposed commissioner fong commissioner johnson commissioner koppel commissioner melgar excuse me. commissioner moore commissioner vice president richards and commissioner president hillis so moved, commissioners, that motion passes unanimously 6 to zero and from the acting zoning administrator will weigh in on item 2 b.

>> yes. i'll continue 2 b to the date specified as well. >> thank you acting zoning administrator commissioners, that places you under your your consent calendar on item 5 may be acted upon by a single roll call vote of the commission. there will be no separate discussion of these items a member of the commission, the public, or staff so requests removed from the consent calendar and considered as a separate item at this or a future hearing. item 5 case 1946 32nd avenue discretionary review there are no speaker cards. >> any members of the public want to remove this item from the consent calendar seeing none, public comment is closed. commissioner vice president richards. >> move to approve. >> second. >> on that motion to take dr

and approve the project were commissioner fong commissioner johnson commissioner koppel commissioner moore commissioner vice president richards and commissioner president hillis thank you on that motion that motion carries commissioners, that item passes 6 to zero and commissioners, that places you under your under commission matters. 6 consideration of items proposed for continuance. for draft minutes for march 9, 2017. >> any public comment on item the draft minutes seeing none, public comment is closed. oh, georgia. >> sorry good afternoon georgia swedish i want to comment please on the minutes for 15 ab for march 9 the chavez street on the project i don't think what is listed next to my name is what i said to totally accurate i read them

this morning i want have written 00 mr. ionin i think i said decision and affordability that's the point of my statement they hearing he request you, please change to demolition and the affordability. >> seeing none, public comment is closed. commissioner vice president richards i accept the changes from ms. swedish and move to approve on that a motion to adopt the minutes as amended commissioner fong commissioner johnson commissioner koppel commissioner moore commissioner vice president richards and commissioner president hillis commissioners, that item passes unanimously 6 to zero >> commissioners 7 commission comments and questions. >> commissioner vice president richards. >> i guess this comes under the column of data is power i

think this is actually changes the narrative i'll leave that up to you you've been bombard and bombard how we're slow we are and blah, blah we have a long presentation on march 2, 32 page slide on page 27 i'll call people out specifically in the audience the zoning we can entitle one and 40 thousand units one 40, 000 that's a hell of a lot unit the narrative wears blue cross obstructing and none will get anything done the zoning without changes to solve the housing crisis if people get their land entitle and take advantage of the zoning they have i think this is the real question why this is not

happening, and, secondly, since 1985 there have been one hundred thousand dollars unit capacity in up zoning the notion we've down zoned in the 80's and paying for all the stuff the narrative sob fair i ask staff to w450k what happened in the 50's and 70's and potentially in the 70's to get there i want to correct the record a couple of other things this morning and. >> yes. business times a note saying represent have fallen 9 percent in the city it looks like increased supply has help for supply and demand a good narrative, however, in today's chronicle talked about the net out flow of the population the demand is going down to increase the supply and demand so you,

you building that supply and demand are working and one last thing we talked about the sham evictions in the paper on tuesday in the column one in four no-fault evictions is fraudulent no enforcement for rental we have a complaint based system not working so for all the unit those affordable housing units we're creating we are in a housing balance getting rid of of them by renting them out on airbnb something need to be done about that. >> thank you 0 commissioner moore. >> the the 2000 consensus of housing status there's a population of 8 hundred and 50 thousand plus people the total housing units in

needing three hundred and 76 plus out of those units occupied housing units were listed in the needing 2010 and unoccupied were counted i want an update on the data consensus. >> thank you commissioner moore. >> no, i was referring to - >> no public comment is coming next. >> commissioner vice president richards. >> one comment ann as a followup on commissioner moore when i starred on the commission there was a 1r5b9 unit between the apartment and spur a refresher on that would be a

good idea. >> thank you commissioners, if there's nothing further, we'll move on to move on to the next item 8 start time. >> i asked this put on calendar to get to your opinions on the start t to.

>> if we go past dinner we can have dinner in the back. >> i run back there and eat that sandwich and come back here. >> commissioner fong. >> we bounsdz back and forth with the start times at 1 o'clock and i advocate the other way of starting earlier and have a 8:30 start i think we'll be out of here you mention at a descent hour not too many mint runs but i know we'll be sharper in the morning.

give you a little bit of background back in the day maybe not too long ago the commission started at 1:30 and very common that the commission hearing go to 8 o'clock p.m. and commissioner moore as well as 2 would be better to move the start time up to the noon hour so it commission hours will not drag into the evening and midnight hours, however, you seem feel free to take a new start time if you think that will help you keep quorum >> commissioner vice president richards. >> i guess a question for my fellow commissioners to keep a quorum is hard we have people fall off and to commissioner president fong point if we start earlier for folks that have

obligations to attend to. >> commissioner johnson. >> i'll agree with that, i and other commissioners feel they block off their day and get things done in the morning if we start earlier that would be helpful. >> it is a matter for staff and for project sponsor, please. >> and can people make it i mean germany try to go my employer gives me the afternoon free but not necessarily go to my office in the morning and have work obligations it is tough for me to do earlier. >> commissioner moore. >> i could go either way i think the most important things to hit the sweetheart for a maximum amount of time for the dr situation and often situations that some days by

accident we're four and people are asking to attend to their matters that's a fair question they know what times we're in so whatever the sweet spot i'm supportive of those who have families and obligations but it is difficult i can go. >> commissioner koppel. >> yes. considered i'm a i'm flexibility i go into the office at a normal time on thursday more than these and have the freedom to come here whenever he need to so i would say that dock the twitter and facebook to keep the people in the office to bring the food to them this is nice to get outside and take a break and get more stuff done if

we're able to kind of bring the food to us but i still am flexible so none of that - >> commissioner fong. >> may i subject going one month solid a later start and one month at an earlier start and . >> whereon more thing if i may excuse me - commissioner moore one thing i hear from members of the public that we start earlier and that you know their item if they're interested in their preference to have that after work so they can come one more thing for consideration. >> commissioner moore. >> i need to remind the commission we don't have a budget so i've been pac my own food you know. >> commissioner johnson.

>> on the pack your lunch with the commission with multiple hours in the commission ones a month other commissions that don't meet as neither here nor there as long as we meet so i wanted to mention i don't purposing forgot the public in in any comments who can make the hearings i've heard those people really prefer things later so have at a later date work during the day the challenge we have so many things who will care about what we can't have the agenda after a work day we'll be like drs who work the night shift here until 3:00 or 4:00 in the morning i said that knowing that i'm caring about you know the public being able to engage in

the hearing but being worked out realistic what can realistically happen after the workday. >> thank you director rahaim. >> a couple of thoughts for the staff perspective staff can work either way generally a meeting for earlier so the only question i have for jonas do you need time to change the notices for notification purposes. >> no there is no important time it is up to the commission it is an agenda well in advance of what the minimum requirement is and for example, we regularly schedule joint hearings a week in advance not - yeah, the same room and same location additional notification is not required. >> commissioner fong a question for the director and

putting on my responsible business hat if we go late is that over time. >> the way the rules yes, it is overtime in the form of half time. >> okay. >> so commissioner moore. >> i'm sensitive to staff because i asked many by statistical purposes where do you live they are not all living in the city so the commute time the latter it goes the harder it gets one thought here. >> it is good food for thought we often are here and see you know let's get here and see where we go and come up with a

thoughtfully proposal thank you for your input. >> okay commissioners commissioners, if there's nothing further, we'll move on to to departs item 9 director's announcements. >> good evening, commissioners just a thought about the data that was mentioned we'll see if there is data available the consensus is only once per decade do the america community survey that relies that looks at the estimate, if you will, of the data that estimate by the way, is of the population 8 hundred and 37 i don't know if we have the data opted out or non-opted out we'll check on that and we know the unoccupied units that are being worked out rented people have a doubt what the defined as unoccupied we need to look at as well but try

to get that information for you that concludes my presentation. >> item >> item events at the board of supervisors, board of appeals and historic preservation commission. >> at this week's land use committee considered supervisor tang for the in lui for privately owned public space at the intercontinental hotel for light and air and vic victoria manolo draves park the commission recommend approval of the ordinance on november 17th of last year at that time, you recommended two changes that were incorporated by supervisor kim and your requested notifications modification that any impact fees due to the city for as a result of closing the open space will be paid and the tightens up the finding to avoid

south future precedent for others popos requirement at the this week's committee hearing supervisor kim modified the ordinance to increase the in-lieu fee to include mentioning and the committee recommended approval of the approval of the minutes and last was a hearing on the transportation demand management ordinance as long as the tdm program this item was passed unanimously by the board of supervisors in february and become effective this week the hearing its topics was called by supervisor yee and supervisor fewer for the methodology for the tdm memo of options at the hearing no public comment supervisor yee had comments regarding the point assignment with child friendly housing but appreciated the points to be updated over time and supervisor fewer raised the shuttle bus service measure and the focus on

vehicles miles traveled reduction as opposed to to other city policy goals the committee members voted to file at the full board calle quarto passed the second reading and the last item was the environmental appeal for the project on folsom street the board continued this item again to the april 18, 2017, and as far no new introductions thanks. >> no questions commissioners the board of appeals did meet but no report at the historic preservation commission didn't meet yesterday commissioners that commissioners, that places you under your general comment not to exceed 15 minutes. 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. >> (calling names). >> hi laura clark doing a regular weekly presentation of an article in the literature a question to address the claim that because we have so many available in our current zoning that means it is not necessary to do a lot more i think that is a little bit crazy we need to up zone massive areas of the city we can't continue to allow development to only took place in historically red lined district for minority and low income and not ask the single-family homes to shoulder some of the burden everyone need to be developing across the city equally in every community this article is a review two

actually both do a great review of research about how chronic underbuilding of housing damages our economy but the national economy we have the opportunity to have an impact on people's lives across the country and that if we condition to squandered that we're doing permanent damage to the united states and enough damage is being worked out done that is time to open the gates and speed up this process 18 months of eirs have something you guys can speed up those up we know the planning department is 12 members understaffed and no justification for that i think we know thanks or things that can speed up the process and conditional use things this body can do to speed up and if you allow community to continue to

speak the ideal of a magic mightal project that will pleas everyone will chronically not address the desperate needs rents are only down 9 percent a long, long way to be accountability please speed up this process. >> thank you, ms. clark. >> good afternoon. i'm here to talk about 317 b-7 contrary to our policies and should be eliminated from the code because it causes a loose of housing i don't think you can densify and lose affordable housing here's a project you'll not see the dr

staff approved it is 0 on jersey street can i have the overhead, please? okay too unit there they are the first floor say like two or three bedrooms i don't know that is what it will be leadership and kitchen standard thing going on and here's the second unit upstairs you see the same late and in the new one which is four bedrooms here's where they're putting the unit they're saving there 317 in the crawl space i guess and here's the crawl spates as it is now and here's the new unit right there behind the new garage and i think that makes my point i'm not going to talk about the change it is a

standard ventriclar noah valley unit building without a garage but here it is from the rescinding there it is vernacular and there is it what it will be right there here's the back of it with another issue save that for another day under the 317 b-7 none filed the dr the staff decided this is okay. if you talk about the density rh-2 like last week and you created a units that are basically two bedroom unit your losing this and gaining that i'm not blaming anyone it is a point about 317 b-7 something that has

a reason to be in the code people want to stay in the unit but i don't know that is used that way but to make a big how house and keep the market value unit that didn't hit the market here's the minutes and present the board of directors from last week he missed that director rahaim but attached are two earlier director's report from previous years about the number of units i guess it should go to commissioner vice president richards he made a talk about it today from 14 and foreclosure. >> commissioners it that an alteration. >> an alteration that was supposedly i've not seen the demo cap. >> pardon me. >> the demo. >> right under the cu an alteration here's the first page.

>> okay. thank you. >> commissioners good afternoon mary gallagher to the planning on speaking in public comment so my thoughts are scattered i was picking up on what it commissioner vice president richards said one and 40 thousand units that is a good thing to keep in mind when you look at the different components in which you consider housing and affordable housing it really struck me in our inclusionary housing testimony last week the speaker said we're talking about peanuts very small number of unit relative to the demand olsen lee mentions that there are a large sort of pie that the city has to forward housing and inclusionary housing is one small component of that the project like you'll have on folsom a large component of that very important but those to things are not

alone not enough we have to do more but the other component that none has been talking about in my mind and i know you talk about it but not lead to mo' magic the lose of existing housing if case after case many of them they run have not planning department and you know you've got an affordable 8 hundred square feet unit it turns into a 16 hundred square feet unit or more common 8 thousand square feet unit you're taking away affordable housing and then replace it someplace else i'm not understanding from the city emphasis on affordable housing is should be then why are we taking away so many affordable housing units and not just unit we have tenant in the

building and somebody come forward with a project you know that person will leave one way or another just as a sidebar and the eviction last week, i hope you have an opportunity he did it an his pdf dissertation a different set of circumstances but resonates one of the things he independence evictions that causes someone to leave not judge the perimeters this is happening in san francisco not just the ellis acted or owner move in i have a project what do you think will happen to you matthew desmond said that a lot of people leaving their hours end up leaving every house and

end up homeless sorry scattered remarks but thank you thank you, ms. gallagher leslie. >> hi, i'm leslie with the human rights committee i'm here to talk about the case of carl jensen he was a 93-year-old living in a house in noah valley for 63 years and a separate in town came here to demolish the unit telling you that none lived there and had somebody bang an carlos door he had to be out in 3 days his neighbor called human rights and said this is an illegal eviction we fought to protect him and talked him to come to talk a few days later

found dead in his apartment we see this is as elder abuse they have no where to go and causes problems so we're here to ask one that you don't approve the definition of that housing project and two we need planning to have a policy that protects seniors we're asking you to not approve especially the demolition with renderings and specifically enhabit by seniors and also want to talking about seniors canada her unit at 670 page was leonardo da vinci in

2003 and through - we'll stop the condo conversions of that project and she's in the hospital since her eviction one hundred-year-old we need the city to protect housing. >> is there any additional public comment? >> seeing none, public comment is closed. commissioner vice president richards. >> two points one condo conversion of 5 units or more come to this we'll be here when this happens, and, secondly, the apartment the other side of story paul harry's i met with corey smith and talked about the 46 thousand units and 40 thoughts not constructed and got it down to the 15 thousand units i understand the apartment are asking the development for entitlement why are they not building there is a large story

and not southern california the problem i want to say good work. >> thank you very much jonas move to the first item commissioners, that places you under your you're special discretionary review calendar for item, 2070 folsom street a discretionary review. >> good afternoon, commissioners kimberly planning department staff you have before you a request for discretionary review of the new construction of an 8 story 85 mucked with 100 percent one and 27 housing units over ground floor and childcare community service and cafe services the project will provide housing also to be transitional youths and feature a promenade to the

packer way under construction no auto parking is proposed this project is now affordable housing project authorization in planning code section 317 that allows for administration review similar to a land use and transportation more affordable housing projects under the affordable housing authorization the project is seeking exceptions to planning code requirement for rear yard usable open space for residential dwelling units and exposure and a ground floor and off-street parking and the calculations for maximum height from the curve as part of administrative process the building permit application that is on file with the department is subject to the thirty day neighborhood notification in section 312 the public may request discretionary review a

request was timing filed on february 10th, and part the project entitlement of zoning map was approved by the board of supervisors in november of 2016 the project site was rezoned and height reclassified from a public and 40-x height and bulk district to the urban mixed use and 85 x height and bulk district the planning commission reviewed and approved the zoning map amendment held on january 2016 the issues that the dr requester has cited in the dr application the first issue was lack of off-street parking they find this to be consistent with the planning code and general plan and the transit first policy per the planning code the project didn't require to provide

off-street parking in the urban mixed use zoning district located in a transit rich neighborhood and providing ample bicycle parking spaces by the planning code and the second issue raised is flooding and stormwater run off the project is subject to the san francisco stormwater management requirement and must repair a stormwater plan demonstrating adherence to the performance measures as outlined in the stormwater guidelines including a reduction in total volume and peak flow rate for combined sewer systems or stormwater treatment for areas responsibility for this review and approval of the stormwater control plan lies with the san francisco public utilities commission watering and urban water shed without the public

utilities commission approval for the sdrrment plan a site or building permit a can't be issued the third issue raised was crime the police department and the department of health are the responsible agencies for concerns related to crime and the 10 cities that are located in the subject area the department finds the new development will provide more resident not area with more eyes and ears and helps to create a safer environment in the neighborhood. the fourth issue raised is the height the department finds the property height of 85 feet is consistent with the new designation of height and bulk district as reviewed and reclassified in 2016 as far as the alternatives for the project the department is in support as proposed and found the overall massing and scale to

be appropriate the projected project provides a promenade and in addition the project provides active ground floor and with a high interior material since the application was submitted all over the place issues were brought to the dmdz attention by the dr requester regarding notification of the neighborhood notification for the planning code 312 the dr requester cited concerns not all the floor plans were in the packet the floor plans are node required to be included in the 312 notification materials only basic and elevation and site plans however, samples floor plan was included by the project sponsor a second concern about the mailing as the dr requester

reviewed the dockets that there was significant amount of mail returned staff determined from the one and 50 foot radius of owners and occupant only 8 out of notices were returned constituting 16 percent therefore that was dual noted and a remodification is not required another one the environmental document issued the department has determined that will not result in adverse effects that were more significant in the eastern neighborhoodsville review therefore the environmental review is not - guidelines section - and the california public code 20 one 045 in

summary the proposed project is reviewed under the planning code 317 as 9 and the rear yard usable between and ground floor by off-street parking loading and the maximum allowable height the parking have consistent with the rezoning district and 85 height and bulk district the project didn't provide required to provide off-street parking and the project will include a stormwater control plan as needed for the san francisco public works requirement and this project is providing 100 percent affordable housing and transition at youth housing commissioners the department recommendations you don't take dr and approve as prepared i'm available to answer any

questions >> dr requester a 5 minute presentation. >> my name is - i'm not against the affordable housing at all i'm very much for that i was an artist and young person decided to be an artist you heard the phrase starving artist i was not as savoring starving as i thought i did starve but have a place providing homes for the homeless was actually got you

was put out and homeless i'm not a snub and here for i believe very, very strong reasons very good reasons to on to the building of this particular housing project at this location i support affordable housing i don't think that one and 27 unit building should be built in the middle of a flowed zone so of the rubbish current can't imagine why money wants to bring more people into the environment i'd like to tell you first, i need to correct a little bit of my misunderstanding about the status of property the property was taken over in 1992 it the city owned and i assume that it was sold to the private

developer in 2015 the original owner was john and he had his center village work or center excuse me - his center waterworks i got this from the san francisco planning commission sfgovtv.org so it has a long history particular it is office of management and budget a part of land and the park that the building is now on the - to the north of it is actually a part of john's property originally and still clarified as having a well as a location of a well, we had a little bit more time to do investigation thank you for your continuance i'm concerned because the proposal to build this really at all heavy concrete steel

building on unconsolidated soil no studies the environmental review was bypassed i see no evidence on the record - let me give you the right phrase - of a stormwater plan there's no evidence on the record of a ceqa seismic hazard study as well as no environmental review i'm just not as optimistic as some people are you know i'm concerned i personally experience december 11, 2014, the flood that night was 3 o'clock most people dealt with the aftermath at the 3 o'clock i was in the driving down 16th street to the sfwrshgs of 16th street and

folsom have a jacked up jeep full lip with big tires we were going down 16th street in a little old lady if pasadena we were going to the intersection of 16th street and folsom the waters r were to high i couldn't get into the intersection the water was coming over my hood cars were floating in the water a dumpster to the left 0 heading down folsom towards soma they were rushing and so high i was amazed i didn't have a camera you can only take my word i was in the car with paul and we got to the intersection and we canvassed the neighborhood to see how deep and far it will extend and actually got up to 14

that was better but a situation in that area where it is - this is the worst flood i've seen in the area i've been there for years i'm concerned that none of the studies were done you don't know do you know the state of the area what is the potential? how can you know that isn't safety supposed to be the most important consideration i'm more affordable housing thank you safety first thank you for your time >> thank you very much at this time we take public comment from members of the public who are in support of dr and opposed to the project any public comment. >> we have two. >> now is the time. >> put it down. >> sir leave it there.

>> yes. my name is paul mccarthy live in a studio apartment on folsom i live with two folks over 65 this is not it is a probably a 5 hundred square feet apartment i want to comment on the flooding problem in the area there are four areas in san francisco that have this localize storm sewer local problem on 17 folsom and on an avenue and there are two more at the this is a very local listed problem it seems we're at the bottom of this storm system and when - when there is a heavy rain it overflows in the localized area from 14 to 18 street along folsom and 7th

street to shoot well, two blocks to the east or west you're completely out of flooding zone those localized flooding zones are way less than a percent of san francisco a flooding department is talking about the flooding controls this is a general problem it is a unique problem to this neighborhood and 3 other neighborhoods and this is - diminishes that project from many others the projects will cause problems i think we can avoid putting them in the unique places that will cause more problem the other problem the eliminations of open space was rezoned last year but before that it was public space and clarified as public space in the environmental study from 2004 to 8 once you go down the

road using public space for those projects then eventually result the eliminations of public space it is not necessary to use public space for projects like this there is any number of locations for the project could be a couple of blocks away that can avoid those problems thank you, mr. mccartney. >> additional pshgdz in support of dr. >> hi, i'm sheldon good afternoon a good movie like citizen cane will see this development and during the movie and revisit it towards the end for my presentation i'll use this november 2016 and hillary clinton has 3 million more importantly votes than donald

trump because of procedural roots donald trump wins the election because he has more electrical votes keep this scene in mind this is an analogy towards the end of the presentation i'm not here to block housing development america we have freedom of choice for people affected by decisions i agree that housing in san francisco should be fast tracked but the proposed 00 development on 2070 folsom street with the lack of transparency we did complain the records of fire department i guess that we were told earlier that the floor plans are not required so not a major point but through was a missing 1ri7b9 report in the documents which

should have had a diagram of one and 50 foot radius within that and corner of 16th street and folsom is the star hotel and this is the sro hotel so the residents there are long term resident not a day to day basis like downtown hotels some of the residents there 10 to 20 years i'll refer you to the opening scene the winner is by the candidate getting the electoral votes rather than the popular votes you apply in my proposed opening scene the owners living with the one and 50 foot radius is to the electrical votes in you want to count the number of

residents to the star hotel this is like the popular votes they've been disfranchised so i oppose this project because i believe that 0 you should renotice all the residents of this all-star hotel and resend the notice so i believe this decision of choice is in our hands i hope you make the right choice. >> is there any additional public comment? >> in support of dr. >> seeing none, project sponsor an opportunity for a 5 minute presentation. >> sfgovtv go to the computer please.

>> good afternoon, commissioners elaine if the mission development agency thank you for the opportunity to respond to the discretionary review and highlight the benefits meta with the chinatown are sponsors the project property on 2070 folsom street my organization meta has a 40 year history serving the latino and affordable housing as part of our work our partner crnc provides housing for low income adults and seniors in san francisco commissioners may remember our team came before you last july of a zoning to umu and height to 85 feet thank you for your unanimous changes that were approved by the board of supervisors last november 2070

folsom street anchored by apartment most of unit will be family-sized with two or three bedrooms and earmarking for at age and 18 to 24 youth are in danger of homelessness and included the toddler care and preschool and all services will be available to the community largely 2070 folsom street will offer look folsom and in the building planning to include the public restrooms and folsom at the corner of the building facing the park will have a cafe that will compliment the park our architects have created a design that maximize the density and offers opportunities for community we arrived at the design avenue extensive community engagement our team started with the outreach back in fall of 2015

and over the course 2016 we held 3 community workshops with over 100 percent people participating and have held 8 focus discussions with the stakeholders that are listed here in june and july of last year we outreached to neighborhood businesses and rodent over one hundred wrote letters in support of projects in keeping with the city transit 12070 folsom street is devoted to communities the city didn't require parking at the site in fact, of, in fact, we included parking we'll have to eliminate the ground floor uses and building parking will be at the cost of more affordable units this is walker's paradise with bikes on folsom and 7th street this is a truly - and served by the

multiple muni bus lanes on folsom and 16th street we provide car share on folsom street outside the lobby door and further we'll have one and 8 bicycle parking spaces for staff and outdoor 24 spaces to serve the visitors the dr requester rightly pointed out this block didn't feel safe if this project is approved that will change the project will bring more traffic and came out activities to the block a transparent storefront along folsom and shout out well, we everything the easy on the street will deter crime we'll be here looking at the cameras and addressing concerns the difficulty of flooding was in the dr request and the workshops the 2070 folsom street was part

of solution by replacing the impermeable landscaping that will capture thirty percent the stormwater instead of dumping it into the drains the dr requester observe to the proposed height the 85 heat was approved by this commission and the board of supervisors and the building design meets the california building code i'd like to close with a word of a lady i've been organizing for years and at the down weather can't witness this with the 100 percent affordable housing when we have - 2070 folsom street as a local resident and mother i need for me and my two sons the community can't wait no more we've been waiting the project sponsor and i are available for questions

open up for public comment in support of project and opposed to the dr any public comment. >> good morning, commissioners my name is marilyn i'm a community organizer with people organizing for economic rights i was part of many local organizations that have fought for a decade we've organized to get this site for the community we have we believe that public land and community hands and some of the organizations that evolved were myself and delores and a collaborative jamestown who worked with the community and people that really support this project and we're excited to see this there is going to be a park that will hopefully open

up at the end of may that is open space for the community we're working with goes to make sure we have access and one plus units of affordable housing i was part of having different events and conversation at the actual parking lot when we were envisioning what can be possible they invited the community members and parent talk about their excitement and looking forward to this being worked out built and part of engagement team that talks to people and the locations he went to john o'connor school and the mission clinic on shout out well, for community input and received a lot of feedback of excitement for the project and the increase in more affordable housing a lot of folks 90ss norris and are ready to apply an organization i'll be sharing the ground floor

with different organizations providing services i want to see this move forward so the community that we work with that needs access to those can be present and have access and enjoy the open space and the area with us and yeah, really excited thank you. >> thank you very much additional public comment in support of project and opposed to the dr? >> good afternoon, commissioners ramming are i'm a resident of the - they've used did discretionary review all the things that the community has to make the project better i support the process we had the opportunity to speak up about the project i don't understand why they're not precipitating and there was a lot of information about this activity but i supported the community made the project better at this

time after all this community meetings for more than 10 years in the eastern neighborhoods plan we were looking at those affordable housing beyond why they're not at the beginning we need to do more and a lot of families couldn't come i ask the commissioners to the side the pictures about the latino woman about the living conditions affordable for the health department and want to do that and may this project affordable housing development happen as quickly as possible thank you. >> thank you, sir is there any additional public comment? >> seeing none, public comment is closed. dr requester you have the opportunity for a 2 minute

rebuttal. >> i really do appreciate the sentiment of affordable housing truly i was young and probably considered a transition youth none of this program was in place and yeah, it is a from sentiment but i'm still concerned about the location i really believe that we need to solve the stormwater run off sewage problem before we bring more people in there 0 my feeling is that i mean i've spent time doing research i have no education but you see that possible that build a small like a water treatment facility in the area? to at least what the water comes up to the surface

not sum the water stinks we got out of the car and walked down 16th street the consistency is weird the next day the water sits inside everything was covered are slime and when the city came in by the way, they got sued with the reserved lawsuit they paid attention and not cleaned up before when the city came in they cleaned up the roads and sidewalks nothing that is anything but horizontal the people live in this basically, we traveled through that this is not just an issue for only our neighborhood anyone that comes into the neighborhood none that travels through we're all maybe it is diluted sewage

water but still sewage water we need to get this situations there control with the water overflow before we bring more people in. >> property owner an opportunity for a two minute rebuttal. >> thank you in association with the - we've been opportunity to work with chinatown crnc and meta as evidenced by the huffs of letters in support that are included in our package this project a welcomed and needed addition to the mission to provide homes for those franchised families and in our community for individual and families in our community that are often underserved and under supported as this staff report is thorough i'll not present the details but i'll be happy to

answer any questions you may have. >> before you thank you. >> okay open up to commissioners in deliberation. >> commissioner vice president richards. >> so moved. >> we have a discretion process and anyone questions the permit and participated in that process and shouldn't deny any citizen this is 100 percent affordable and put this on the agenda it is that important a stormwater run off issue reminded me of the school on porter street they talked about the fact that was stormwater and flooding and a school there we have a worse problem i read the environmental review i went for if project the exemption from

review and as i read is this section on ohio director nolan cd ev h and ii, apply and i think that even given the situation in the low lying area that has been looked and understand as well as the project sponsor made a good point the project site a a asphalt parking lot and 100 percent of the water rotundas off and 70 percent in the future will run off and it is a better situation than now the other item that i take seriously is there was a suspecting process of implementing a sewer profit a multi dollar an infrastructure to make sure reliable and

seismically safe and included the development in the eastern neighborhoods and their connection to other treatment plants i understand that the 10 c results in the construction of new stormwater drainage facilities or expansion that causes - this projectile i think will help out the situation it is made with this in mind so there will be flooding and with work that the parking lot versus this project and the issue of flooding is being worked out recreated addressing in this project the crime issue that was brought up in the eir when you have a chain-linked fence with nobody looking at on the street more

break ins and crime when more eyes and ears on the street crime goes down that will happen here if it doesn't i'll be surprised the other issue on parking a slew of analysis in the eastern neighborhoods eir on parking and transit and the mitigation factors that is on page sorry - >> 26, 25, 26 and 27 the generation demand for additional trips people living here if we provide parking we'll losing more traffic than not endiscussing within a quarter of a mile several transit including muni and 55 we get up here every week and don't want the people that work in the service industry and other industries

potentially the band of residents can work but the community from all the places for the jobs this is the right place to put people that actually that complete the economic circle in the city all types of workers and income this is low income probably people in the project that will if not here be evicted or commuting this is the right place for projects right on the transit hubs it is anticipated that the vast majority of the residents will be using transit and model cars not commuting out to ann took but i don't see any changes to the project. >> commissioner moore. >> it is the ideal situations

of two components the public park under the supervision and jurisdiction of rec and park together with the housing side that indeed could very well afford an up zoning because of cars on the south side and nothing being worked out shadowed there is a fact that the city is investing into a size arc park is unique and we're able to deliver a housing project 100 percent affordable for potential pros no more win-win situations for all the other aspect two architectural firms that are well-versed in designing affordable housing for a high quality building at this park that was avoided by rec and park and the design of the project the arts commission specific design i was on the specific

design tooth brush the appropriateness of design including how the building responds to the park at the site of exposure of the building that's not one element of this particular design including the technical elements basically, we're trying to talk about commissioner vice president richards that have not been looked at and in page on turn that look at technical feasibility and the reality of building a quality building the up zoning and the work for this the city didn't light heartily and i don't care if it gets flooded requiring a park is an investment we said the work that take are these this california together with a sited that can be developed with the 100 percent affordable housing for us should be taking two minutes

to approve it we had today earlier we were basically continually sitting in the crossfire of what we're not doing here we have the opportunity and with all respect to the dr i don't find the concerns being worked out subsequent no insurance and park nothing that under writes a project that floats particularly not if it is a sewer that's a public health problem and i'm sure that happened in 2014 a number of years ago the department of public works has addressed and continuing will bring it up to this impartial with this investment i'm making a motion to approve not take dr and approve second.

>> commissioners, if there's nothing further, there is a motion that has been seconded no take dr commissioner fong commissioner johnson commissioner koppel commissioner moore commissioner vice president richards and commissioner president hillis so moved, commissioners, that motion passes unanimously 6 to zero and commissioners now we'll go to your regular calendar item 12 pier 70 mised-use district project. >> good afternoon rich the city i'm joined by departments as well as dennis from the mayor's office of economic workforce development the the item before you is a informational presentation on the upcoming mucked that is undergoing the informational

presentation will focus on the pier 70 document which was sent to the commission in 2017 to remind the commission the pier 70 mised-use district project between the port of san francisco and the developer of the city california - it tips to redevelop 28 acres of pier 70 and initiate the standards for a multi phase on a site and two adjacent parcels along illinois street the project will have market-rate and affordable uses and commercial uses and retail like industrial and shoreline and infrastructure and public space the project will include transportation and circulation and new you wanted i upgraded utility and geotechnical public space the pier 70 mucked is located

within the union iron works historic district as part of proximately 3 historic buildings will be rehabbed for new uses the design further document has a characteristic and reminder r reminded for public realm on the 35 pier 70 project site the dodd establishes the design guidelines and the dodd has land use and streets and streetscapes and parking and loading and lighting signage and art to provide additional information for the dodi want to invite forest city and from the urban studios that concludes my presentation. i'm available to answer any questions. >> thank you, mr. sucray. >> commissioners sarah i am actually just going to do a little bit of context setting

thank you so our office the office of economic workforce development the planning department, the port and a number of other agencies have expense working closely on the bay front stainability you've here that a couple of months ago and we wanted to bring it back to the whole everything we're looking at with the pier 70 project is the view we're trying to view other projects with. >> out of those there our 9 projects overall stretching from mission creek to candle stick .4 are approved the wirings arena and the hunters point and the candle stick point add and the executive park of the next 5 we'll be bringing to you those joint agencies over the next pier 70 will be the first, it is a vocal point how we'll be having this and insuring to get

the most we can out of projects coming before us one the key topics we've heard at previous hearings an pier 70 at the commission transportation so we'll talk about that 0 through the presentation it really is the number one, issue we hear when he go out to the community there is a consistent effort on behalf of the city to make sure that whatever we do with the project not only boerlts and supports the plan improvements the city has underway it makes them bigger we are working on negotiation framework those will help us don't more to use their transportation stop signs to booster the neighborhood to look at bus lines to increase the services and week look at key bike and pedestrian structures to competing complete neighborhood we'll get back to pier 70. >> thank you, ms. dennis.

>> good afternoon commissioner commissioner president hillis so i will we've been if you guys are a little bit behind us we've been asked to be expeditious i'll precede with the fishness the context of pier 70 includes areas not part of our site the port divided through the master planning process which you see here this was the plan they came out of a process within 2010 it was all commercial including a short building that is part of plan and for context most of sites is staying as historic buildings maritime use and new streets or parks actually can't read this is the about 25 percent of all pier 70 will have new development on that we've talked about this before but planning process has

been 10 years for pier 70 including the ports 3 year process and our involvement since 2011 we hope to be wrapping up the entitlements this summer and beginning to work on construction hopefully to actually see construction happening next year had an extensive outreach process including the events at the site and thousands of people involved and along the way we went to the ballot in 2014 approving was passed with the authorization for the alignment increased one paired with the improvement of the plan includes the public benefits that are outlined here and continue to talk about we'll be back in may to talk about the development agreement so before we get to the design guidelines (laughter) will talk about that the height

limit are varied on the northern and southern boundary 90 feet max the parcels that are closest to the existing dog patch they didn't get rezoned stayed as 65 feet because of typography it is pretty much from potrero that was something that was obviously a key piece of progress on the ballot measure where we looked at what was the was there an impact views from potrero hill we did simulations we show here you can see it is actually minimal at all if you can see that depending on where you are on the hill the overall of the project mixed use it is centered after active

parks with the feel and the some of the land uses the parcels are designated as a single use so commercial use adjacent to the ship repair certain sites around the parks that what only be residential and along the southern boundary of the site as you might find in south of market has a flexible land use either residential or commercial but being able to respond to what happens on the future on the southern adjacent site the former power plants and the pg&e substation at the corner of illinois in terms of overall program we talk in the eir talks about this as well the 28 acre that forest city has the development opportunity and with the infrastructure and an additional 7 acres adjacent to

illinois street that are core property pg&e property but including the master plan we talked about those plans separately but as you can see both of them have a mix of residential-commercial historic rehabilitation and a category with the your staff we came up with radical retail, arts and industrial a catchall facets not like the industrial center across the street when we looked at the opportunity to build a new waterfront park in san francisco and we looked at what else is happening in the city spaces that exist and are designed we thought there was a unique opportunity both because of history of the site you looked at usage patterns historically you'll find there were not one big open space. >> a series off smaller open

spaces this was functionally related they were adjacent to so our designer landscape designer you may know from the high line in new york city came up with a concept of similar using that same structure to orient the design the scale and the adjacency of the open spaces to the buildings that are next to them and the yellow you see we've through the lowell high school plan about half of the site really is pedestrian it is either pedestrian only assets or pedestrian privatized assess to there is only 1 single street seethe that is yellow which is it will provide opportunity for a dynamic open space and as i said pedestrian friendly

environment in terms of parks one of the ways that we used to describe to folks is it it is like 5 or 6 parks they have their own scale of character - to sort of give a comparison to places that we are aware of here in san francisco like if you took the playground at delores park and the frontage around the embarcadero in front of the the ferry building and replicated that line rincon green the picnic area at the south park if you took all of those and put them on the site that's the character and scale that is 9 acres and the mixture of

industrial grassy areas like south park framed by both buildings one question we've gotten i know that came up in the conversation we had with you in february about recreation and active recreation i think you guys experienced what project on the waterfront they thought that is worst pointing out the majority of the open space a subject to the state regulatory overlay that restricts the types of uses that you can have in that open space like a playground can't be done for reasons beyond our control we found a way to be able to include that in the overall district adjacent to irish hill so with that, i'm going to turn it over to (laughter) from site lab to talk about the dsls we've worked on with our

team oewd and the port we're excited about. >> good afternoon. thank you commissioners so i'm talking about the dodd you have a - this is a great rodent to design the guidelines for this at a key location on the waterfront and as a historic district so when we developed it we thought about what are the key components that make that relationship to the historic district this is much the power of pier 70 thinking about how the site is integrate with the neighborhood the level of architectural quality you don't get in design guidelines and the pedestrian

experience in addition to the mix of uses that jack described and the public benefit it he'll talk about more we think about the design guidelines as an experience driven that is a big part of that really touches on the public realm and architectural and streetscape and so the d-4-d is typical in the categories and really the guiding document for how this vision is implemented the key topic you know first is land use framework jack talked about the overall mix of uses the d-4-d goes further to specify the buildings dedicated to believe 12 and a new building at the waterfront dedicated to the retail and light industrial and locations on the ground that have to focus are required to have another

focus around that marilyn and open space on the waterfront the open space jack talked about and the d-4-d went further to give the density to the spaces the programmatic - the protection to the remnant of irish hill the presentation of a playground all the components. >> how many more minutes do you need. >> he probably need 5 minutes. >> okay we'll go as fast as we can let's see you know this to us what is important to have a variety of different street conditions at the pedestrian focus pedestrian and bicycle focus i'll be happy to answer any questions you may have. >> particularly we're trying

to balance creating a good residential neighborhood and commercial you know mixed use with a lot of attendance to how you design the vegetation and things like that that's what did d-4-d has done great work with the port and planning and preservation experts to get to a place everybody is happy hopefully and transportation that is a big topic the team can talk about that more in terms of scomboirldz make sure that really the pedestrian priority and state of is a safety for creating a path for muni to serve this site from the architectural framework a big part of d-4-d and so a lot of emphasis on the ground floor transparent and character and uses on the ground floor but building variety for this

document it is not a one-size-fits-all requirement it is about building site buildings with the conditions and the adjacent at the water is it across from the historic building a large commercial building or a smaller residential so there is a whole array of requirement there are specific to that with overall an emphasis on materiality and things like there has to be quality in the shadows we did a lot of research different a examples to understand how to create a great place out of this i'm not going to go through all of those but the renderings to give examples of the different conditions that are required in the d-4-d so everything from the detecting the sea level rise and maintaining the historic building to you know where streets can go the public plaza and the streetscape and

references the historic buildings and also i'm sure jack will answer questions but all the public benefits that are part of making this place transportation and support for local hire and things like that at the waterfront a couple of examples we spent a lot of time both internally and working with really dedicated representatives in the neighborhood to get to a place that i think the vision is fulfilled from the uses and the transparency to the use of arts and artifacts this is an operation that is designed to reflect the scale and the industrial quality of the district and, of course, just the fact that making this waterfront available to the public again preservation and the ability to get out there in the water so just to summarize it does connect all the pieces coming together and it is a been a

really in depth process we're proud how this carries this project forward in the future. >> so since we're short on time we'll skip straight to the projects approval to give the commission the key documents coming forward as part of project we'll be obviously the commission will see side environmental impact report and the design for document there will be a development agreement infrastructure and this position and development agreement will be reviewed by the because of the board of supervisors in terms of new construction the basic from the using documents like the d-4-d the eir, the sud and the planning code the developer will submit the permit application to the city and basically forwarded to the

planning department for projects fully compliant with the d-4-d controls that are requiring minor modification this will the - a major modification something will be leasehold for the d-4-d that will be forwarded to the planning commission in terms of historic rehabilitation the port had been handling basically the rehab processed for the 3 historic buildings on the site and the port will be handling the open space and the schematic design and once they've got - the project team a available for questions that the commission may have we've reserved an additional hearing on may 11th if there are tops you want to explore we'll bring that before it is anticipated review basically in july of this year thank you. >> great, thank you mr.

secrest. >> open up for public comment if others want to speak you're more than welcome to please line up on the screen side of the room. >> i'm marty one thought about 40 artists at the newman building and we're a group that has many of us been there 15 or 20 years or more mid criteria and professional artists new people from the schools and what have you anyway forest city has given the artists at the newman building a presentation on the design while we're stealing upset we're losing our newman building will be that diminished we're excited about the design and analyzed about the design but pleased will be the agreement with forest city that protects us we've been lucky

enough to in our negotiations with the port, in fact, commissioner fong was a commissioner when this happened a variance that kept our rent another below-market rate and the agreement with the port for forest city as we move into the future and new location a similar rent scheme will be in place a lot of us are old will be in place into so i'm here to speak in support of project. >> thank >> next speaker, please. >> good afternoon corey smith on behalf of the housing coalition. i think this is the second time i had the opportunity to speak about this project we're very much in support and ask you whatever you can do to keep this

moving forward and built that as quickly as possible would be fantastic thank you very much. >> thank you, mr. is there any additional public comment? >> seeing none, public comment is closed. and open up to commission comments and questions. >> commissioner johnson. >> thank you very much thank you to the forest city team and staff for coming today we've heard multiple hearings on the pier 70 it is from to see side forward momentum on the project and this project is a fabulous use of this site having that the proposition to allow it to go up past and we'll be looking forward to seeing the design for documents in the future the one noted i'll make at this date about the project that always been part of strategy shown today to have a strong pedestrian network by having lots of alleyways and other ways of getting pedestrians on the street and

what that trade off - means is that a lot of vehicle circulation not necessarily going to be in the center of the project that is a good thing for the walkability for the neighborhood and ultimately it's success with that said, needs to be work on how the site is connected to transit and how the bus lines are part of mta plans as this development continues are integrated into the philosophy of having a pedestrian strong network and the reason i say that third street is on a map not to far away if you're in that neighborhood is a hike and have more pursue as the eastern neighborhoods develops and hunters point and india basin wants to make sure it is thoughtful of as you have the

have are streets and alleys ♪ project prioritizing pedestrians to make sure there is - great project and looking forward to seeing more. >> thank you to a the gentleman can a i ask you a question first congratulations you all have done a great job in working with the local neighbors and the communities there and putting forward a project we all like and think is great and particularly like the dodi think that is one of the better ones we've seen as far as the design and architectural i don't know if forest city intend to keep this project or develop that as you move forward i'll ask the staff i think you know your sense of how this should be you know designed is great but you know if you sell all those

parcels to different developers will they still have that same commitment to the project and only so much you can do in the d-4-d to insure the quality materials and the open spaces are built the their rendered and sdous how can we be assured you and i grappled with tdr we've not seen if it works but how can we be sure. >> one i appreciate the positive comments about the design guidelines and i think that because it is a historic district it requires being worked out more per scripture we're pushed there and for cd to create value as not individual

buildings but a quality district we're willing to live with those more stringent guidelines to to make sure they exist on buildings we a don't build condominium or affordable housing buildings we've not build we're interested in having guidelines that we felt will as much as possible prohibit people from doing things and provided for future designers to work within a framework to create something that honored the site and didn't overly box them in it's one piece of it your question is about this forest city is it committed to the project you know we became - we've been a pubically trading company we

became a read real estate trust about a year ago and the purpose of a real estate investment trust to own buildings and so the project didn't actually accomplish for us what we hoped to have it accomplish without us owning the buildings and there's been a shift in the focus of the company we got a lot of property and development in the east coast and a desire to be more invested in san francisco so their resources both staff and capital have already been shifted to san francisco i can't guarantee you that you know there is no guarantee that who knows what can happen but the agreements with the property owner and port will insure they have the right to select someone

for whatever reason we'll not perform and i think the design guidelines will withstand that we've no intention of doing anything but completing this from the commissioners are in washed we have a project that hesitate similarity we're building out a good example why we're so invested in pier 70. >> that's great we see projects we've approved where we all like the design and here we're not approving a specific designs but more guidelines so you know their value or the materials change and not quite what we expected so you know, i hope that is the cats if i can ask josh. >> good afternoon josh with staff i'll add that so the gentleman said the documents that you have before you the design for documents in the back

of it a very comprehensive set of controls and standards and guidelines that relate to the architectureal quality more in detail than in the past rather than the urban design guidelines and some of the past like treasure island with the historic character of the district as well as the 1r0ish9 to grapple with the building quality we work closely with the lab and other folks on the team and looked at the precedence and tested those to create a system that hopefully allows the architects to set a high bar important things like materiality and texture and agreeing the building and so forth that is a step forward and initiative that is complex but we're optimistic it can produce a high quality design. >> thanks

you, you know i didn't comment on the open space the open space should be what they want it to be it gets goofy this is a state land interpretation you can't put a playground didn't serve the region or that is just wrong you know, i think we should push on it from need be didn't say that in the interpretation of it i think we shouldn't degrade the openness if they want to have something if that's the case that works. >> so commissioner moore. >> you're talking politics (laughter) this is a state land i think the problem with some of the port open spaces it is passive not playground or basketball court but weird state land interpretation thing so i don't think necessarily generates great open space.

>> commissioner moore. >> let me say i think acknowledging this project definitely is an additional of the world-class quality of san francisco port i think that project deserves to be acknowledged that way it is a thorough thoughtful and detail d-4-d property one that i've seen in a long time and believe it or not from the beginning to end i read it thoroughly and it is amazing the structure of the documents normally i say why not give more ruktz their obviously here it gives us a background on the history of the regulatory overview and the guidelines couldn't be better laid to be a much needed document and on a slightly lighter note i saw the name of evan reminded me how

long we've seen the effort on its own i think the document lays out really, really exciting strategies - about a followup i'd like to ask a detailed question i don't think i'll use this but the question i'd like to ask as a overarching question love for you to discuss the phasing of this project in terms of do you move from the waterfront inland or the land side out an extremely interesting question a project hang around for 10 or 15 years have a physical reality how they have the feeling of a permanent place and quality in the buildings two district are the

two districts faced with each other and faced individually i'd like to hear the story and the other story i'd like to see more detail our discussion with our neighbors it is pg&e and that is indeed any plans or ideas that the department is pushing on the formal potrero plans are like larger envisioning ideas for the city and if you have any lever of discussions i'd like to have you sketch out ideas about the speeding to come common terminals and on and on and on as far as the open space design is concerned it is very much in what supports the port in the nexus referrals and the entire waterfront open space design i myself was involved for years and years doing the roifrlg park

i couldn't be more delighted to see this as you've brought to this i'll leave it at that any more commissioners commission comments and questions. >> thank you for the presentation we'll see you in may. >> that's a place holder if there are sometime before then specific issues the commission not us to bring up in may or you don't feel you need the hearing it is schedule for action in just like if you specifically want us to followup we'll do that. >> let's keep that as a whole commissioner moore seeing this

is an interesting topic affordable housing we wanted to dig into a little bit more. >> commissioners, if there's nothing further, we'll move on to move on to item 13 sea level rise action plan presentation. >> good afternoon, commissioners my name is diana patching thank you for the opportunity for hearing about the proclamations of the city's sea level rise action plan i was here about a year ago today and wanted to come back and talk about implementations what we've done to move forward and some of the partners we're working with right now this is the the members of the

sea level corresponding committee the co-chairs the port and the director of planning at the port will talk about some of the work that the port is doing as well as later on in the presentation and all the city departments that touched sea level rise are involved in the planning and represent on the coalition of folks collaboratively and working closely on this important problem again we published the sea level rise action plan about a year ago this map on the right hand shows a 1r50u7b9 zone the area that could be covered by sea level rise with hundred and 8 inches of sea level rise this is 66 inches of sea level rise plus storm seizures and king tides a reminder the cost of doing

nothing that is when you get to one and 8 inches the total exposure to the city is up to $75 billion an important figure to know that if we do nothing that is the replacement costs of buildings that will be possibly damaged electrical, etc. it didn't include loss of prosperity or eco system or other things that happen when you experience a slow moving disaster but a general understanding what we're talking about this is the action plan implementation right now we are in the process of advertenting all the assets close to sea level rise looking at very levels of sea level rise all the way through 21 hundred

and beyond and developing an expensive geocoded database all the city departments can understand what assets are exposed and who is imposed exposes in the assets are commodity and interrelated private and public land that information will be studied for a risk assessment that looks at the values in the city what do we value and how much money are we willing to spend and ultimately going to be developing an adoption plan with different scenarios for sea level rise protection along the shoreline all 3 borderlines of the shoreline that could consist of near term and long term action and policy and code assessments and design guidelines and potential fudging strategies many are permanent in the long term.

>> this give us a sense of some of the scenarios different scales of adoption where asset scales in terms of the muni tunnel or treatment plant or street or highway when the neighborhood level perhaps some of the developments maybe considered along those lines of sea level and across the region we're looking at levers are whether adoption scenarios that could be helpful advance sea level rise technology at different scales across the city i wanted to mention you know as we're part of the large bay it is important we recognize that we're part avenue region we have regional assets recognized as important not just for

economical reasons but environmental reasons and social reasons we're looking at shared network infrastructure our muni tunnel and airport we definitely want to work across boundary and city boundary and look at their regionally significant areas is in line with a what is proposed around the bay to that end one of the programs we helped to spearhead in san francisco the resilient challenge so this is one of the main ways to develop really initiative and implementable adoption solution for the challenge of sea level rise around the bay to unite the best mind in the region and all over the world we hope to inspire the collaborative

framework for the future of bay and, of course, bringing incredible talent and resources to the bay area to have tangible solutions and uniting philanthropy and governments and think tanks a credible coalition of folks hoping to launch this spring we're fund and about a yearlong process i'll talk about that later and to capture the imagination of public and push forward to look at a comprehensive and collaborative and forward thinking way that developing really bold urban solutions for those kinds of problems i'm going to turn it over to byron with the port will talk about some of the work the port is doing.

>> commissioners byron planning developer for the port thank you for the opportunity to be here i want to start off by thanking director rahaim for the - so the support we've being able to get to compartment of sea level rise coordinating committee chairing that's been important i want to talk about why and also want to thank the folks who have been leading the work of the action plan that is important for a couple of reasons you see an example of that in the slide in front of you this is flooding and the seawall flooding we're dealing with flooding already and the seawall because it presents an

opportunity to partner with your staff and what the city family to address sea level rise so as you can see from this slide that with only lovingly into 12 inches of sea level rise you begin to see the impact of the embarcadero it increases the flooding that already exists when you combine that with for the one hundred year storm the next slide shows 66 inches as you can see that flooding potentially impacts the entire financial district as well as mission bay and other parts of waterfront the significance of that for us is we're beginning to deal with solutions now and we think that

only in partnering with the other city departments and partnering with 9 and working with the sea level rise team will we'll be able to get a our development partners like for the city the development you heard before the discussion to come up with solutions we thought since in the case of development and some of the other projects we're working on we're working with leading district attorney the transportation authority to rebuild the expanded the downtown ferry terminal and addressing those issues a key element we can bring to the coordinating committee and the overall work that the city is doing i think the other area that is important for us we think presents an opportunity to deal with sea level rise solution is the work we're beginning to do

on the seawall the port manages 7 and a half mile of waterfront from the india basin and 3 miles of that is an extensive seawall that is preliminary in light you northern waterfront if fisherman's wharf to the chinatown basin to the ball park when it was built from this the original shoreline so this is a project that we are embarking on bringing on a team to come up with a design with the hope of going to the voters in 2018 for $350 million general obligation bond to fund a first project this included this slide as you can see the creation of the original seawall as you can see

the water at the right turn cornerstone cornering back to montgomery and then filled in and eventually created the financial district just a slide to show what a seawall is it is a rock dike under partially the pier one under the ferry building and lastly we've been working with the folks in seattle on the seawall their rebuilding go in the bay this is an example of what we could develop and as part of that we could increase the height of the existing wall to address sea level rise and there are other solutions related to building the seawall

that would be key in the work of your staff and the work of sea level rise coordinating committee again, we appreciate the port of director and our staff adding the port to as co-chairs of the committee we look forward to continue to work with staff on some of the challenges and we're hoping that if we're able to move forward with the rebuild of the seawall that will be opportunities to address sea level rise as part of that. >> that's all we have to present to you i'll be happy to answer any questions you may have. >> we may let you after public comment first any public comment on this item?

ms. hester. >> sue hester i appreciate the comments about things along the waterfront that's very easy for people to figure out we have problems along the embarcadero parking lots get floated and seawall lots i'm aware of that but the thing that is often missing in the discussion is the projects on phil and the south of market and in the mission we had a wake-up call with millennium tower tilted people didn't understand that the entire area of the transit center was filed.

many loma prieta people died but the attention about the bay area and the bridge in oakland low income people died in the south of market the land is saturated water back in the 90s the commission dealt with that because it came up on the construction of the project but you have two items on the calendar here and i actually went through the eir for your office building at 15 hundred and the fill comes up close to the 15 hundred mission it comes up because there was an inlet in the mission in the year

2070 mission district land failures collapsed people and the planning department and the planning commission and the staff have got to turn on the light bulb on the areas they're not along the embarcadero because land saturation is part of a sea level rise when the waters push in from the bay on the land which is traditionally filled it destabilize the buildings that are built there what you're going to go through in central soma romans an area 8 percent is fill i haven't seen the planning commission grappling with how what the trade offs are building will frame housing as

opposed to steal framework high-rises in terms of both the housing it can produce and who is served sea level rise and saturated sources those are complicated issues but as the planning commission didn't grapple with them and the planning department puts on projects without saying hey this is landfill and every project you have in the south of market you should basically be having put a blinker on you've got to pay attention to this how are you going to deal with that and the next item >> literally the next item what is the relationship to is in fill on 1500 mission street think about that when you take a bacteria and come back there is needing to be more discipline on

the complexities of sea level rise and the embarcadero and i welcome that discussion and that thought progress quite frankly from you all and you all i lived through loma prieta and know where the land failures are. >> comment? >> seeing none, public comment is closed. can i you couldn't ask sir, you brought up i know did heart of that kind of where you are at $350 million figure to give you a sense of scale and scope what will that do $350 million. >> the - to deal with the entire $3 million of seawall is more than like three or four million dollars the three hundred and 50 to

$500 million will be sort of a demonstration project an initial project around the ferry building if you look at the low lying areas now that are of concern might be in and around the cruise terminal and the flooding in the fists that pier 4 south of the ferry building might be enough to repair a stretch of the seawall in and around the ferry building and demonstrate the certain teaches solutions basically the solutions or the concepts we're dealing with are 3 areas either you strengthen the soil under the embarcadero, and you stop that soil from liquor phil ginsberg as the last speaker mentioned and putting pressure

on the seawall from the land side, you strengthen the seawall itself, get underneath the mud underneath the seawall it is on mud and strengthen that maybe to stop the seawall from moving or build a new seawall that is more what you saw in the alley in the example you build a new seawall east of the existing seawall in likely build did conformation of solution depending on where you are different solution makes sense in the rincon park you're not impacting the roadway but that $350 million or $500 million project will only do. >> less than a block that is an eye opener.

>> thank you commissioner vice president richards. >> i guess so the last speaker referred to understand a possibility important liquidation as far as the planning department building what will that do from a sea level rise point of view. >> what should we do anything i'm having a hard time understanding i know that the liquidation happens is it gnaws of water underneath the land. >> it is fill and that will liquor if i in an earthquake and the structure that is sitting on top of them will cause the seawall to break and maybe the building above it

sea level rise is more from the stand point if you're in the ground making those improvements and you have to build a new seawall if it is an opportunity to build a higher wall as one of the examples if you're building out into the bay when you build that new seawall and that area can create more public space but build it higher what we're doing in the southern waterfront at mac and the city developments we're raising the level of the land forest city will be 55 feet higher but we have land to do that like in the areas of seawall embarcadero is there and the financial district is beyond that we don't have the land we'll have to raise the seawall

itself so spend $500 million to build a stretch of the seawall should be working with your staff on what sea level rise improvements are the city is basketball to be added in the future. >> so with the $4 billion problem and the three hundred 50 platform solution in 2018 hopefully, we'll vote on it and it passes and implement and the water is rising do you have a plan to come back for more money before the water - you can't build a wall and have the water come around the side a we're working with the army corp of engineers and other ways of in fact, a committee that made up of different members of the city family that is looking at all of the other ways other possible ways of bringing fund to the

separate and i think that will have a list of 24 possible funding sources that are working with elaine forbes and others at the port going through that while we're focusing the initial project on the resources that the city can bring and it will take a lot more resources than the city has we're trying to do that in tandem we're seeing this is as an emergency project as sea level rise whenever the next earthquake you hits the seawall will be damaged and have those bulk buildings will likely fail so we feel we can't wait until we have the whole $500 billion in place we should be moving forward so the do you see this

person in court team we'll bring in will help us look at an approach to the entire $3 million - this will allow us to incorporate the seawall improvements to the future developed so that we do pier 19 and pier 33 and 31 to be developed and could include if we come up with a solution could include those in a public-private partnership that mix of approaches to solve the problem. >> sounds like you're thinking about is one other question i want to know if anyone in the region not participating. >> i mean this is a reasonable

problem i'll turn to diane ca a to speak about what the rest of regional is doing as part of work of the sea level rise coordinating committee. >> i think the answer is no everyone, everyone is participating it is an incredible effort there are many organizations that are part of all of the different regional efforts going on and, of course, the bay area an umbrella organization that brings in other agencies to make sure they're participating representatives the conservatism and air quality management district and crnc he, etc. so all the agencies that need to participate are generally participating some are more reluctant than others in the in the city and statewide so also

looking for leadership from the faith and sea level rise projections to make sure we have the tools and information to move forward and so it is - you know there are - it's not for lack of participation. >> i'll draw a preacher between this crisis and housing crisis a racially effort the housing crisis can't seem to get it together to do this kind of effort from a multi agency. >> so here the differences are incredible amount of cooperation and people sitting at the table and wanting to move forward what we're ultimately suffering from is a lack of funding i know that is where we'll going to go ultimately so the design challenge for instance, is an ability for this regional to attract national and

international funding for development for a coalition in the bay area. >> with the budget that was released from the federal government a week ago is there any concerns about losing the money we thought we'd be getting. >> not for those programs but could be ripple effects in the future yeah. >> commissioner moore. >> actually my question was for yourself or director rahaim we don't have a voice to understand climatic change and the consequences would be sea level rise it will be difficult to look at the hispanic of this country where we have two very long coasts over one thousand miles but see the sea level rise and reasons to wake up and work

on a strategy where we move financially to california for the bay is difficult for example, across the city the suburban community right at the border within three or four feet to get into the water those will be the ones having a hard time see significant investments on the bay from menlo park and sunnydale are they have large tech campuses sitting on top of the former michael, etc., etc. and i know all of them as you said need to colonel together to speak because the problem it does as a city hits us the

hardest with the much primary buildings together with the historic structures, etc. the problem and i appreciate the authoritativeness through the entire thing so hopefully create the federal government wake up that the train or the water is moving we need to figure to remain on the land otherwise we'll be impacting not just bits and part like the west coast of san francisco but basically effecting the entire viability of rest of the country. >> thank you director rahaim. >> first thank you diane and byron this work is productive collaboration between the port and the planning department and with the other departments with the port and planning department co-chairing the effort a positive collaboration the thing that is important to note about the actual plan and

the vulnerability analysis we're now entering into it looks like public facilities what is important to remember that large development like mission rock they've all be islands unless we deal with the public infrastructure around them we have to what we're trying to do with this effort is actually deal what the public infrastructure the streets obviously mta and b.c. and all the factors that serve the entire city that is this 1r50u7b9 analysis is really crucial part of city understanding what its own facilities will how they will be effected with the cost of inaction as diane a pointed out and how to have a multiple

process to address this so i wanted to emphasize the distinction between the public and private facilities their depending on anticipating but the city's facilities are important and thank the port and the department and the staff for this really, really productive collaboration. >> commissioner vice president richards. >> one quick point to commissioner moore's about the u.s. i read something in commissioner comments and questions. the first place in the u.s. vacated the land the land was underwater in ireland they had to evacuate everyone it is happening. >> yeah. >> great. thank you very much for the presentation we appreciate it and the commission will take a lunch break

around 3:15 thank you. >> proceedings. and when speaking before the commission, if you care to, do state your name for the record. commissioners, we left off under regular calendar on items 14, 15 a there e 1500 mission street project case numbers 2014 e and reservation enhancing and puc a and the certification of the environmental impact report adoption of sentencing finding general plan amendment and planning code amendment downtown project authorization and shadow determination respectfully. >> commissioners before we start i want to reintroduce you to a planner that come back to

the planning michael lee are not only for the eir he was with the department from march of 97 until 2007 he started with us when he was 10-year-old (laughter) and contact in debt of 2014 awhile with the department he worked on major property washington and the north america a building a private sector working with a number of substantial projects like park merced and michael has been with us for about 2 1/2 years and back with the environmental planning group welcome. >> welcome. >> commissioner vice president richards and members of the commission michael lee planning department staff this agenda item the final certification of

eir for 1500 mission street project the department published the draft eir on november 9th and the draft eir public housing public hearings the public comment period evident in 2017 and the department published the responses to comments document on march 9, 2017 during public comment on the previous agenda items the sea level rise action plan sue hester commented how much satisfies are affect the ground water levels and the liquor if i believe soils this is the same comment she submitted on the draft eir and the responses document addresses that on page 26 and 27 since the rdt document was

published not received any additional comments and our draft motion certifies you additional that i'll be happy to answer any questions you may have. >> thank you public comment. >> oh, we should hear the project they were called up tonight and tilly chang planning department staff i am joined by folks from the department of real estate and the director of real estate john updyke is here to make remarks i'll pick up where he leaves off. >> thank you very much tina john updyke director of real estate. and the zoning administrator was going to have this role but

couldn't do that i'll do my best this project is a culmination of a decade research for one time consolidate city services so for the efficient deliveries inform our constituents in the san francisco it is a rare opportunity a 2 mrs. acre walking distance of city hall will be our society of government we needed something close to city hall that gives us a scale primarily the footprints of this building at almost an acre in size and sufficient to how the 3 collar density bonus program the public utilities commission and planning and rec and park joining public works and dbi with those departments

and all the permitting functions with the development and other permitting activities a one time center is achievable we're existed to bring this forward particularly as a public-private partnership with our partners on this vulnerable related california so this relationship was related follows two amuse approvals by the board of supervisors that are contractual and look forward to this moving forward to return to the board and ballet our conceptual obligations that are related i'll be happy to answer any questions you may have. >> but that gives us many context why this is important to the city thank you. >> thank you >> taking care of again planning department staff this item has been before you a couple of times as a informational presentation and again as a public hearing for

the chris and is ordinances i'll keep my remarks brief the the item before you is 1500 mission street project as long as goodwill will definition and definition a warehouse building for two buildings a 16, 7 footing 70 foot tall and the second a 39 attire at all central tower that includes 5 hundred and 50 dwelling units of which 20 percent will be affordable up to 38 thousand square feet of retail with mission street and van ness and 11 wells the block alley the vehicular and bicycle parking spaces is requested by

the members of the board during the project sponsors are the blasphemy parking can be shared between the office buildings and the residents the project sponsor will talk about the design but first a few regulatory issues it needs several action by the commission first, the adoption of ceqa findings with the project and staff made a few minor changes to the m m rp and specifically the management plan and the location falls on the planning department and mp a and not project sponsor second as mentioned during the previous hearing the tax zoning map are associated with the project accordingly the commission must adapt a recommendation go for the general plan amendment and the planning code zoning map please

note one addition to the legislation initiation on december 15th this is is with respect to the 11 street to insure the vehicular is assessable and the few and far between will allow a double parking an 11 street rather than what the code permit to the extent feasible the shared nlgz for the office use will be provided in the report please note the ordinances are under review by the city attorney legislative team that may have minor comments and request the resolution reflect authorization of non-substantive editorial and formatting from the city attorney's office prior to the commission to the board of supervisors third, the commission must grant

downtown project authorization for the action for the wind current and on-street parking loading and compliance is described in the case report in short the department buildings the exceptions are wander and meetings meets the criteria i have a couple of edits for the introduction of paragraph the one/200 and 40 height and bulk district too this has been added back in and additionally the findings of section 45 i mentioned regarding the vehicular on 11 street and finally the project has shadow determination that with the representation the general manager the rec and park the net new shadow and the property open 11 street made for the acquisitions the shadow motion has been revised that is not a

part that has been designated acquisition and subject to the review to date one letter of support for spur and one member of the public that expressed employment opportunity and no other public comment has been related to the entitlement but the staff hazard received public comment not draft eir we support and recommend approval that concludes my presentation. but myself and other colleagues are here. >> thank you open this up to public comment oh, i'm sorry please. >> hi, thank you john and tiny i'm mark and on behalf of greg hartman and michael and the rest

of my colleagues i'm happy to share that project can we get the screen please that project is unique and fantastic collaboration with the department of real estate, dbi, public works and our client related california versus the planning department and think the project has gotten better each step of the collaboration the project start with the real estate concept that john described and moved to 3 city departments most responsible for the built with the homes in the heart of city the project site is about 2 and a half acres on van ness on the west and the north side is defined by other one and thirty foot party wall in the mta so an early principle was the specific office building that has assess an south van ness and

11 will be potential connected to one south van ness but be assessable from mission street this led to the l shaped parcel in blue and in the east side of the site with the southern side given to the residential program and new public spaces between the two spaces those open spaces connect south van ness so 11 street and the building assessable from mission street as well and this creates a new public circulation network for those buildings around that the building massing is arranged in a series of height from two stories at the corner of 11 and mission up to 9 stories on downtown van ness and 39 stories for the residential tower interestingly that composition representatives

three hundred thousand square feet than the height and bulk we're calling this the forum that runs from east a west and connecting the streets through and past the lobby directly visibly aligned a stack of atriums we're cob u calling the collaborative the first connects the lobby as john mentioned their setback significantly that creates an open space for a childcare facility on the third floor the residential building at mission and south van ness starts with a four and 10 story street frontage podium the podium on the seasons are both setback from south van ness by 15 feet that allows a significant wind companion for strong winds on the site and

then the residential tower is placed above that has a dramatic open corner 2, 3, 4 which a series of steps to the terrace are revealed a have you from otis street this is a simple sloping open corner is the hub and creates a gateway to the specifically further up the block the view into the forum and collaborative scene we're comp the to divide the office buildings so we think that project most important contribution to the neighborhood at the ground in the neighborhood that are suffering from lack of on the ground and at the corner that mission and 11 the project starts that dialogue with the retention of the existing clock tower of the

building as well as the first couple of structural along mission street frontage in addition 3 more bay of the facade and the building transitioned to scale but more transparent which are more appropriate to inside of them and secondary entrance to the building the lower scales step to the office tower and then looking at the 11 street elevation at the desirability the goal to balance the character that is provided by the cboc colonel building with the similar scales more appropriate to the civic buildings to activate the industry we walk around the project to the west on mission street the corner is marked by a series of flexible retail bases and coming around to evaporates you see at

the third floor the large wind companion it comes out from the building and creates a very unusual public space close to thirty feet high with a sidewalk and defined on the east side by the rail and residential building and on the west we a syria's series of element with the street trees and other things the companion is tied up to be very light and luminous layers and perforated metal to balance the light and shadows on the space below that at the forum the entrance is marked by an element we're calling a civic - and also the departments

the stewards of that the forum is lined by right side on a series of opening glass doors that led into the facility many people i think will enter there this from the forum and the 11 street so some will drive and arrive to the validity drop off and tina mentioned those at the grove the open spaces are equated on both sides leading to the stack of atriums with the office building lobby that led up to the permit center it takes 43 square feet of the entire second floor and the open simple design connected through the

atrium with service benches and other things lynn the perimeter that typical office space with the childcare facility that opens to the roof garden and the typical workspace of the building is are reilly to draw on the transparent and the informal collaboration and connecting departments finally the office tower is clad in a eloquent glass bottom with the penetration and balconies the building structural grid is expressed in a frame of ceramic frame and it is vertical proportions are by transitioned finances those finances will catch the light from dentist

directions and give it a soft luminous flow by contrast it is slightly rougher materials the majority of building is clad in a multiple colored cushion wall and the structure frame is expressed but the nature the residential use is a varying partner of darker panels and footprints at the top of the residential building a perforated metal screen coming back from the curtain wall a subtle presence and in the open corner of residential tower so when we start this project our client coined the nickname a chess because of pieces needed to be move forward around on the site i think from the

collaboration with so many people in the city this project is essentially going to be more than those pieces thank you for your time and we're i'll be happy to answer any questions you may have. >> thank you. >> opening to public comment on this item. >> there are no speaker cards. >> ms. hester oh. >> one speaker card. >> pauley green. >> okay. we'll have ms. hester coming up she might make that there first oh. >> thank you commissioner vice president richards and planning

commission members i'm mr. green and i operate a small business called the green reports a construction analyst and i'm here about the 1500 mission street project otherwise known as goodwill i've been denied by related california contractual commitment and that is what my complaint is about not about the project the project as a whole i think it phenomenal and i think should be done as soon as possible, however, i don't think i should be run over by it i think i'm a native san franciscan i was born and raised here it is part of my legacy as a

long time contractor before my stroke and medical health issues was a contractor here in san francisco i worked on many projects fillmore center i was a contractor on that project i helped to built that and other projects in japantown going back decades unfortunately, a stroke sidelined me i can't work so, now i'm doing construction analyst work for example, what ms. hester brought up sub surface drainage well, that is illustrate by the project down the street about a block away one 50 van ness building a project but construction the

same contractor is doing one 50 van ness i'm sure you're aware of that it is a beautiful project and when you have time go to youtube and that's where all of my work is showcased i guess i have to stop. >> you have time. >> just to be brief go to youtube and see i've videoed one 50 van ness, the new wirings eastern four documentaries and got a lot of views getting back to ms. hester's about the sub surface drainage at the one 50 van ness one the major subcontractor johnson came in

and do a sub surface drainage system now your your time is up. >> i do a lot of videoing we're trying to keep the community involved but i can't. >> sir, your time is up. >> thank you. >> okay. >> sue hester i had a view of city hall coming out of south van ness the afternoon and i'm saying a view of the doom from the south forever but apart from that i

think this is the first project not a first - that is a series of projects that you have the opportunity to report back on because a city project is one you should do that you need to monitor the wind, monitor the impacts on bicycles, 10 years ago and 5 years ago the city didn't have the emphasis on bike transport it does today and the thing i know from just keeping my eyes open the hayes hill and the confluence of wind at the van ness, mission and market that whole area is going to be - is really

dangerous and we're embarking on that plan of companions 15 hundred mission and 1500 market street and you - one of the things the planning commission should be and the planning department should evaluate is a funding mechanism out of these projects a for keeping up the wind model, the wind model should be owned by the planning department and by the environmental review not a tool of developers not s o m or someone else the planning department should keep it up and funded by every project that comes through and the data kept up by the planning department

but also you need to put on requirement that within 6 months of completion of those some phasing level you go back and look at this seriously at the wind condition and the bicycle impacts if you are creating a situation where there is no measurement after the building is approved on the impacts of bicyclists you're under cutting your own eir and your own rhetorical how to change people getting around i'm not sure you need to have report back condition on this project this city project thank you. >> thank you >> next speaker, please. >> thank you

andy townsend commissioners and mr. brown i'm here to talk about 15 hundred briefly you heard i've expressed concerns of workforce and activities there i have that same concern and walk through so don't related california and they've engaged our company and firm of our consultants, llc to work on the project in regards to workforce to see to it that community members have full opportunity to work and train on this project as well as working with the local subcontractor and in fact, we're already working with them only two other projects that's why this was a natural for the two rad projects and in fact, one of the our local contractors is here he's wearing white a

paternity worked think a responding b pits plaza and doing the interior painting and did that job when we moved to west side they wanted him to take the exterior and interior and on those jobs he'll in about the mix of trying to get work we've excited about that opportunity i have a long time even thought that what workforce looks like should be part of eir one of the things that disturbs my environment i see people in the community not working and living the kind of life they should be entitled to live this is extremely important you saw the article in the chronicle that talked about the disparity in employment within white san

franciscans and african-american san franciscans it is disgraph full 84 of the whites in the city are employed and 57 percent of african-americans are employed in excuse we're not doing the job so we're excited about this project really recommend that you approve that and we look forward to what will happen here thank you very much. >> thank you. is there any additional public comment on this item this portion of the hearing is closed commissioner moore. >> would you mind explaining to commission for the drawing the changes that ms. tilly chang mentioned a combining of the two right ways. >> clear cuts. >> switch to the screen

f if you can see it on the top right of plan a two-way ramp up and down to the northern half of the garage toward further down 11 street the opportunity for a second ramp here the project was originally designed with a two-way ramp one for the office building and the other building the planning department staff and others raised the question whether or not other project will work less ramps on 11 street and clubbed that was a possibility an alternative that the residential ramp further south ramp so all cars will come in as well as office toledo the ramp at the

top of the page on the 11 street side the residential cars will exit through this so that is subject to the ability of operators and owners of the building to make that work not an earthquakeal issue but the building is designed with a two ramp or one way ram. >> the suggestion to combine the two ramps. >> no, no proposal to further combine sorry no proposal that i'm aware have to further combine the ramps but two ramps each two-way or one be one way ramp i'm surprised the ramps near market street at the veteran of 11 is very close to the corner unless i didn't reading drawing

properly and on today's rules not do that one effects the way you perspective the corners and 11 street being worked out a major street rather than the driveway to a suburban office building not in consideration to move the ram away from the corner. >> no it is not. >> an operational issue more than anything else. >> yes. >> thank you. >> i guess question i have i guess for staff in terms of ms. hester's comments that is the first large building the height limit we knew that was aaron a center of an additional height that was formulated and went have not approval process what is the process on consulting a body of knowledge around the buildings constructed or planned to be constructed and ho how

they relate to the future eirs and a future project approval. >> michael planning department staff for the hub we are going to do comprehensive wind tunnel testing for all of the projects that will be part of that plan we have a previous wind tunnel telephones from other projects within this area and we often consultant those results to make sure that the understanding for any particular project. >> will be built. >> right. >> is there any look back we thought that was going to happen once they're built to see if it is true to ms. hester's point i'm asking i'm learning as well is there a look back hey we're on the money or weren't. >> historically this

intersection has been windy to the results. >> are not stripping. >> to the comfort level. >> pardon me. >> there's a comfort level established just you're under or over it. >> for wind comfortable a standard and the planning code under section 309 allows a project sponsor to seek exceptions there are instances of the comfort standard for hazardous wind no exception. >> okay. go ahead please. lisa acting environmental review officer if any post construction modeling that is not a mitigation measure for samples for this project the project will not have a significant wind impact heart of hub analysis we're cal works there because a large number of projects over

time in the area we're looking at how we might have a phase gathering of information about wind conditions because of the fact that as we assess wind impacts for a structure their dependent what the environment and the surrounding so the wind impact methodology is limited in the facilities to forecast the exact conditions had a build out we're looking at that like the pier 70 over time there will be post construction monitoring for successful projects. >> sure so is they've been a situation we thought we were within a comfort level but in the end we per seated it you, however, missed the mark. >> that's a good question don't know the answer. >> the 706 mixed was one of

the situations that building underwent a series of redesign they went into the wind tunnel 6 or 7 times to test the design modifications to look at the wind conditions. >> in the end were they right. >> frankly with respect to wind not done post construction. >> we've done it with other things but. >> would that be valuable. >> the point that lisa was making that because there is so many other stuff coming from the district my makes sense for the plan for the whole area rather than could that just for this building that will change as well as it will change again. >> okay. >> that's my recommendation. >> great commissioner moore.

>> we need to look at the history of winds velocity it was started in california in berkley in a very kind of manual way a long time in the architectural department and developed through the san jose and 80s hsa as that became more computer and other tools all the way down to where we are today their modeled in the same type of laboratory where be airport wings, etc. are not a model the one thing that changed changing compliment the wind velocity in san francisco has increased that is more imperial that scientifically noted but early wind tunnel measuring what we do today is fine-tuned to measure what the

results of multiple- it is interesting to create policy and really put it into this particular body to say that impermissible data and comparison district by district will help us to have a better presentation with better judgment how they look at increasing or decreasing buildings that have indeed building features that diminish wind a great idea and can work with the director and environmental planning about indeed creating policy by which it originates here. >> would you support that. >> the last part. >> yes. >> basically the policy and doing it generates right here not necessarily will tell us how to do that.

>> i would suggest if we do any follow-up monitoring it will not be in the development but the city. >> right. >> shouldn't be a condition of approval for a developer really on the city for the wind conditions at certain points out mou how we do that i don't know. >> i was going to make the point that we don't always keep a database of you know existing conditions because every new project has testing of existing conditions on the ground by the time the environmental review begins and plus the projects and plus existing conditions and all the cumulative projects so what we're testing changes for over

and over development that come forward we use those continuing wind studies to confirm and use them to look at adjacent projects but you know to keep a database the data and the wind conditions i think exists will be completely different as things are build out in two years every time we start an analysis we take the conditions. >> i mean, if the commission wants to direct staff to look at that we'll need to scope it out. >> we can certainly think about that and see what it takes to monitor overflow room makes sense this is an incredible project in terms of chess terms you have a checkmate as for mr. greens issue i will suggest you talk

with the project sponsor or the project sponsor agent about an appointment and hopefully connect with him and workout something not something in institution can do i'm entertaining a motion commissioner moore. >> i want to comment on the responses to the draft eir i think that they're complete and illuminating the questions i had in particular to the presentation of hearing about the building and the photos make that much bigger to move on to say why are they doing that i appreciate it and in full support to - did you make a motion. >> i i cannot. >> sir we should talk up the certification separately. >> we should take up the action of certification of the

final environmental impact report. >> item 14. >> a motion to certificate. >> second. >> thank you there is a motion that has been seconded to certificate the finally environmental impact report commissioner koppel. >> just want to make another couple of just comments on the top really impressed with the teamwork displayed by the staff related to the department of property mr. updyke impressed with the design of the building and want to make some general comments interested in seeing the features of the building not just the you know expressway shells that allows light during the cindy but on the ground level give those buildings a little bit more via the lead and

sustainable fvlz for those as well so indefinite in favor of the project thank you for all you do. >> i agree with the discussion and had many comments on this glad to see many moving long looks like it was positive on tuesday and helps the project that is great hopefully, you know i'm hearing the decision with the commissioners about ways for the city to take in house some of the analyze we've often looked at the ceqa analysis and the development approvals for example, the wind studies that's a great idea and hopefully the mr. larkin building will be together building so collaborate all the things this great i'm going to make a couple of motions so we can move forward so i'd like to make a motion to

adopt the ceqa finding excuse me - that motion was made. >> she didn't make that but we haven't certified the environmental impact report. >> oh, we've not voted. >> i'm sorry, i got lost. >> one last comment i was talking with the building inspection about the teamwork results when the planning is together again us and the general public and the staff will move on that perfect. >> call the question. >> one last comment commissioner johnson this has a childcare center. >> i'm via existed, however, it is on the roof of the second floor can't take care of the infant and toddlers but that's fantastic i'm exist thank you to the project sponsor. >> call the question. >> on the matter of item 14 to

certificate the environmental impact report commissioner fong commissioner johnson commissioner koppel commissioner moore and commissioner vice president richards installment unanimously 5 to zero now you may take up the matter of project. >> commissioner johnson. >> now i stole commissioner moore's thunder like to make a combined motion to adopt the ceqa afterwards shadow findings, adapt planning code amendment and approve the downtown project authorization. >> is that covered it all. >> secretary ionin. >> you said the shadow determination. >> i did and the planning code amendment okay. all right. then do i hear a second. >> ms. chang to make sure the commission adopt includes comments and minutes made by

staff. >> and the downtown project authorization. >> yeah. >> yeah. >> great i accept the modification did you catch the general plan amendment i think she did. >> yes. >> okay. we'll make sure the motion r a through e. >> commissioners, if there's nothing further, there is a motion that has been seconded to approve the project entitlements a through e adopting the ceqa and the planning code amendment and the downtown project authorization and shadow determination as amended by staff commissioner fong commissioner johnson commissioner koppel commissioner moore and commissioner vice president richards so moved, commissioners, that motion passes unanimously 5 to zero and great

item 8b - philip achilles vs. the zoning administrator at 819 ellis street. an office development allocation. >> good afternoon planning department staff the the item before you seeks an office development allocation authors 17 thousand plus in the office development allocation the project is located on a 15 thousand three hundred square feet on the southeast corner of intersection of samson with the 65 height and bulk district the site is located in the bases of telegraph hill of the northeast area plan and the waterfront special use district the site has a 3 story over-basement industrial building the building constructed in 1906 known as is venus bag building a historic landmark under the planning code as a compatible and with a -

within the northeast waterfront a mouth full converts 58 thousand plus vacant manufacturing space into retail at the ground floor and 48 thousand plus of office use and duo to date one inquiry from the public requesting information how the department will insure the project is under the 50 thousand office allocation the floor area that illustrates an amount of office use as part of restriction on the property after naval all aspects of the project the staff recommend approval with conditions that complies with the planning code the project is continent with the objectives and policies computing the northeast waterfront plan and the nob hill

and in the zoning district that permits office use the project will construct 49 thousand plus in a former warehouse facilitating the contribution from industrial use to commercial use as conditioned in the northeast waterfront plan the authorization of the office use will attribute to the activity in the neighborhood and impartial is residential and others uses and it has an innovation of 4 percent of capped office use the project sponsor is present and has prepared a presentation. >> thank you project sponsor. >> thank you, commissioners tom of reuben, junius & rose on behalf of the project sponsor just have a few comments oxening

staff report thank you to the staff for all the work into this proposal and helping us shape the proposal before you today the project provides much needed office use in a location that strongly supported by the general plan amendment in the northeast waterfront plan called for office use in the transition of waterfront to downtown where adjacent to downtown and close to levies plaza and other offices negotiate a busy retail district the .

>> commissioners on item 171964 union street this is a conditional use authorization commissioners before the item starts i was going to have the director read this this is a new planner david that works on my team originally from new jersey from usc and worked for a firm

in los angeles before joining our team in november. >> thank you good afternoon, members of planning commission the the item before you is a request for a conditional use authorization to establish a formula retail use men's clothing doing business as on 1964 union street in a vacate one thousand you plus ground floor retail use by a non-formal don't be so as the artisans within the union 40-x height and bulk district the proposal involves interior improvement there are approximately 0 thirty existing locations all in the united states and this is the second on the location in san francisco with the other location on 55 grant avenue the formula retail is fined in the draft motion for your consideration to data letter of support from

the union street and two petitions in support of request signed by 17 and feinstein community members the planning department has no letters or e-mails in opposition to the project the planning department represents to approve the request with conditions that concludes my presentation. >> thank you thank you very much project sponsor. >> hi thank you for having us. i'm the general manager for the location. >> i'm the general manager for the location on grant so our overall concept we're an e-commerce storefronts in thirty location on a one by one basic experience we get them if i did in order for the items to be shipped directly to the consumer

any questions. >> thank you thank you, very much. >> any additional - okay. >> brought some collateral. >> opening up for public comment in support of project (calling names) no comments is there any additional public comment? >> seeing none, public comment is closed. this portion of the hearing is closed i'll start i'm a customer my size keeps on changing i'll give you a lot of busy interesting bog this is a neat way for a future in retail we've been struggling with that you search warrant having are brick-and-mortar location and a back office with functioning i gita good way for the future a quality project and the two

locates not a big deal. >> commissioner johnson. >> thank you very much manifesting. >> second. >> thank you, commissioners commissioners, if there's nothing further, we'll move on to go there is a motion that has been seconded to approve this with conditions commissioner fong commissioner johnson commissioner koppel and commissioner vice president richards so moved, commissioners, that motion passes unanimously 4 to zero and commissioners that places us on item 18, 2213 fillmore street conditional use authorizati authorization. >> hello into good afternoon david once again planning department staff the the item before you is is another request for conditional use authorization to establish a

formula retail limited restaurant doing business as as joe in the juice on 2213 fillmore street two thousand square feet with 1325 often the ground floor and one plus in the basement within the upper fillmore commercial district ate height and bulk district the space was occupied by another formula retail known as bagels not requiring a conditional use authorization when it started the operation, however, one change from formula retail use to another is a intense indication under the planning code section there are a new conditional use authorization is required the building envelope will not be expanded approximately, one and 76 existing jumping by a juice with 14 in development around the world the third

location 1 other market street and 301 howard street the formula retail use can be found for your consideration to date one letter of support from the fillmore merchants association and no phone calls or e-mails in opposition to approve with conditions this that concludes my presentation. >> thank you project sponsor. >> hello thank you for your time i won't use which of that i come from copenhagen and had a jumping by a ohio we have 10 or 11 stores in the u.s. and this will be the first neighborhood store we're exciting about coming here and we think that

san francisco is something we need puts our brand and connect to from copenhagen we're hoping for you to - >> if you have any questions. >> if we do after public comment we'll call you back up thank you. >> opening it up for public comment there are no speaker cards any speakers on this item. >> seeing none, this portion of the hearing is closed. >> commissioner paskin-jordan. >> this project it seems to me a like for a like in terms of change in proprietorship i manifesting. >> second. >> second. >> commissioner moore. >> second a great addition to the part of fillmore street and happy to see them open up. >> commissioners, if there's nothing further, there is a motion that has been seconded to approve that with conditions on that a motion commissioner fong commissioner johnson commissioner koppel

commissioner moore and commissioner vice president richards so moved, commissioners, that motion passes unanimously 5 to zero and commissioners that places under our request for discretionary review for item 19, 578 44th avenue discretionary review. >> good afternoon david lindsey department staff enough time a one story vertical edition and to the rear of a two-story single-family that was analyzed by the department staff not a expansion under the planning code 317 the second property on the east side near anza in the outer richmond the deep lot is developed with a second story constructed in 1915 the lot is a key lot as it is

outside lot line abuts the lot lines on anza one owned by the dr requester the the subject property in the immediate neighborhoods are zoned rh-1 and characterized by two-story single-family homes constructed from the 1980s through the 1940s slopes from geary lfld in governed to anza in the south south of the the subject property are two duplexes one and corner of 44 and anza the department has received 29 letters in opposition to the project that were submitted and included in the packet since the packet were about sent out one additional letter of opposition has been received i'll submit to the planning commission secretary for the record.

>> the dr requester is fred who owns 5232 anza the rear property line abuts the southern lot line of the the subject property his concerns are as follows: that the project negatively effects his light and privacy that boxes in the industrial properties and cut them off in the mid block open space and this the project is inconsistent with the visible character in terms of scale and architecture following this residential design team reviewed the project and requested that the project manager address the dr requesters concerns related to scale and loss of access to the mid block open space including the elimination of a

project 9 foot one story horizontal addition and that a 5 and a half foot setback to grade along the south side of the the subject property the project sponsor revised it and the revised plans are what the commission has under front you the residential design team determined the project didn't contain a exceptional or extraordinary circumstances and the dr requesters issues regarding the loss of light and air and profess are never necessary and desirable as the project setback provides a buffer from the dr requesters rear building wall and the eliminations of the projects original one story horizontal extension maintenance maintains a reasonable assess awhile allowing a large tree in the project sponsors backyard the

participating represents not take discretionary review and approve the project as revised okay dr requester please. >> my name is freddie want to thank the commissioner for hearing our case we requested the photos for the existing conditions of interior be submitted in the dr packet they didn't make that i've included those for your review and then one photo we can put on the slide as those are going in. >> and from the staff can show that. >> the building has been mr. kelly remodeled and is many move in condition as shown by the photos you're looking at

the building is although not meet the definition of tantamount to definition essentially a tear down of the existing building we have the demolition calculation and they're close to that and additionally i'll say the foundation er sunnydale part of foundation will be removed ♪ project but we're really here to discuss and make our point that does that building is that designed to minimize the impacts of air quality and privacy to the neighborhood and the question really is no, it is not what we would like to see a reduction in the air and light being worked out put up unfortunate the west side view from google earthquake earth is

obscured we brought this to aid in the discussion the dr requester has to parallels we've note to cases before the commission the first one being worked out 567 are 47th avenue which was revolting the neighborhood setback that again is 3 blocks from us we're asking is for the setbacks that the original may 16 rdt hearing was i'm in complete agreement in the dr that i just mentioned then addressed to be implemented on this project and the second project we think that is cross to say in terms of it's key lot

feature at the address of 20, 1 street and 19th street we have additional photos for this as well this is a picture of a rendering of model and as david lindsey so eloquently the saving of the tree is of primer portions it is part of strong block presence as you can see from the photo, however, the position of tree relative to the condition will interact into the building okay other site photos if so a 3-d model of that - i have for the

commission the lot view of photos i'd like to handout and to you guys to look at the 3-d model in perspective okay as you can see in the perspective view the light and air dam that will result on our neighbors lot 25 as you can see in the picture victor lou that sent in a picture his backyard had been in a courtyard so hard to mingle what he'll be looking at what we brought up in the second dr requester your attention to exhibit b from the checklist setback rear should have 5 feet depth on the second story this building does not have i have

slides for that as well there are a number of xhifkt at the preplanning meeting but in the drawings in your packet and the model that will have documentation and finally i've also brought models to show what we believe would be helpful to reduce the air quality effects thank you, sir, your time is up. >> you have a two minute rebuttal. >> project sponsor we should take public comment. >> i'm sorry in support of dr. >> public support for the dr and in opposition to the project. >> seeing none, oh, one please step up ma'am.

>> hello, i'm sue i live down the street from this project i really enjoy living in the outer richmond that is possibly the most suburban area of san francisco feature backyards, shrubberies everyone and small houses that go with that those homes will be larger and take some of the ambiance of the small houses and plus probably leave out trees and bidders much larger than we currently enjoy that's all thank you for your attention. >> any other public speakers aim seeing none, project sponsor 5 minutes.

>> good afternoon, commissioners thank you for your time i am the architect of the project my name is grant lee in response to the dr requesters comments on setbacks we've after dr requester residential design team had additional comments for us which we agreed to all the comments we put the setback back to 5 foot 6 to rehabilitate the conditions and setback from third story for the remainder of the project the neighborhood pattern is mixed from this google area view that is the case they're other houses shown with the red arrows

that go beyond what our addition it proposing in addition as you can see that with the blue arrows there is a number of properties that have a 3 foot setback a combination of 5 and 3 feet on our side of our property it is south and in terms of the subject at the part of our revisions was in response to the dr requester and the neighbors desire to keep that tree that is something that a very important to them and we want to be supportive of that as you can see from this google overhead from our property the expansion of the property will cut off you know approximately an eighth of tree the intent to keep the tree as well as a little bit of pruning will be necessary and we are obviously

for it otherwise we continually been working with the planners and in good faith we feel that what we designed is within the context of neighborhoods and whereas it is large most of homes in this area are under developed from the early 19 hundreds as the original planner supported no surprisingly in comparison we're larger thank you any speakers in support of project manager next year against the dr requester for the project and against the dr requester. >> seeing none, dr requester two minute rebuttal. >> the tree is not shown correctly on the massing study

that you have i have photos of that as well as shade analysis of building i'd like to pass out. >> on the building including the front facade. >> speak into the micro please. the front facade shows absence 19 not to the third story and want to go drawing your attention to the area shown if i can show the drawing the noted area is an area where the existing building didn't have a 5 foot set back nor the third story have a setback of 5 feet this will significantly impact lot number 25 victor lous i have another 11 letters from

concerned letters supporting our position from the commissioners are interested we have alternative plans and modifications there the light and still leave the house substantially larger than what it is now we're not opposed to the building but are opposed to a housing that is double the size and didn't fit into the neighborhood under the our conditions. >> project sponsor a two minute rebuttal. >> the renderings which dr requester 0 showing was something that he and maybe folks that know programs might be showing i'm showing the view

from guaranteeing maps aerial it is showing what is reflected on our drawings i personally went out to survey the tree i feel comfortable how we've depicted the location of trees one of the properties i don't know the lot number the dr requester referenced but i know that the - the first lot 5244 and i don't know that lot 25 or what have they had a horizontal addition in 1987 between 12 and 15 feet from the rear yard it is hard to game but had a horizontal development on all

stories and we're looking for similar opportunities to render our property thank you. >> thank you this portion of the hearing is closed commissioner moore. >> mr. lindsey is that a code compliant project. >> yes. commissioner. >> does the package it is thin given the commissions submittal requirement the 3-d elevation and penetration are an important part to understand the project it is a description on the typical window section and the reality no information either more are they really other than google things that go makes us more appreciative of the street and the street from which the dr requester is complaining about the question we need to ask

ourselves in a smaller scale neighborhood tries to double from - to 3000 square feet what does that do it creates issues that is reflective of the issued and what we consider reasonable densification in an urban environment we're rh-1 the houses are smaller and sensitive on all sides the first one i'll ask mr. lindsey i'm surprised the rdt didn't push the third story 15 feet away from the front as we last week sat here with great emphasis on that a decision for the one thing the house is large enough the third floor didn't need an extra

family room that is the third floor is redesigned around the 15 foot setback on the street has this commission has put up strongly again and again and again as far as the applicant i permanent be do not see the boxing in because 5 block patterns again, we have key lots the project setting back from the property line bans what the rdt is asking for leaves enough breathing room but information missing to understand the expression as well as on that side i think that makes that harder for the commission to be fair both to the dr requester and the applicant because these things express themselves predimensionally not 2 feet,

etc. but including the quality of garden or the separation of planting and fences between the property give us a better idea with that property being worked out on the south side of things 0 i don't think there is a real effect of shadow or light and air because on the south side you don't see overshadows you have cast a shadow but not getting shadows i'm not sure commissioners but to take this particular thing certain questions i'd like to see answered in education to strongly advising us for a 15 foot setback that would require the dr i'll see what my fellow commissioners have to say. >> i mean 15 foot setback a reasonable something we've established and wanted to see

talking with schong and we sxhard notes that is another dr we asked to be continued because of the way the lots are arranged it creates a box affect on potrero hill and it has an impact most notably to these houses closet to the big building boxed them in and not a lot ft the reach. >> if i may i find it i'm not sure i'm reading the drawings correctly it still seems on the north side of addition i'd like to see that note back as well, because south side of adjoining building to the north has windows on this wall and for addition to sit on the property line it is encroaching on the

wrooekt room the obtain to give this pop out the setback bodies can benefit from a 5 foot plus calculation >> commissioner moore david lindsey department staff there's a 3 foot setback on the ground story that the addition beyond the adjacent building not. >> that's not- it seems to me with the double line a parapet line in the drawings no line at all if it comes to the ground. >> which drawing. >> i'm looking at the diaphragm no date it is the second drawings in the set that was submitted as being worked out the one we're looking at for today. >> the proposed site plausibleness dash looks like a

opponent on the second floor and that should go to the ground not go all the way to the ground. >> to the ground yes. >> on both sides no popping up of the property line. >> okay. >> i think i looked at the both floor plans that occurs no reason that the amount of square footage in this building already twice the size of what it is no room to adjust the floor plans to feel confronting with the reduction in the believes. >> commissioner koppel. >> my house is in the is that the i'm the third house off of

alienation my tyrannies to the north doesn't have a full length backyard a shallow backyard and literally laboratory the side wall of the house my house gets half of the back of the house and half of the backyard but i mean, the location on the corner sometimes not much you can do about you know what you're seeing in your backyard and i have a question for staff no demo count sheets or did i miss them. >> they were - i have them here. >> can i take a look.

>> thank you. >> exposure. >> i say we continue on the setback on the third story and not change the building on the north side all the way down to the ground by whatever feet that is probably 30 not 5 to match the one story addition in the building pop out. >> motion to continue or take dr with the modifications. >> i can't make a motion. >> well commissioners certainly if you give the districts to take dr and approve those with the dwithsdz you'll

not need come back. >> i make that motion to take dr with the modifications so we'll make that easier on all of us. >> very good. >> second commissioners there is a motion that has been seconded to take dr and approve the project with the following moifktdz requiring the 15 set back for the top floor and the notching to go to the ground. >> commissioner fong commissioner johnson no commissioner koppel commissioner moore and is commissioner vice president richards so moved, commissioners, that motion passes 4 to one with commissioner johnson voting against. >> commissioners that places us on item 20 3009 california street discretionary review. >> excuse me - >> mr. lindsey can i ask a question, please as to your behaving guiding our staff to bring forward the dr can we see a compliance to

commissioner wu so it is easier for us not to do we we did but came up with results to hear including the documents where we're looking at apples to apples to be fair to both parties of strum. >> of course. >> thank you good afternoon david lindsey department staff before i begin the presentation i'm going to distribute a plan set that is been rise by the architect to address an error that is on the plans that are in your packets the error is the depth of the 4 story at the rear since the project rear yard is determined by averaging adjacent building the planning code limit the height of 10 feet for the buildable area to 10 feet it

incorrectly shows the fourth floor into the area limited to thirty feet in height the plans i'm san bruno or distributing will reduce the for you by one to comply with the planning code a complete set that replaces the one in your packets the project is a two vertical and one story horizontal at the single-family homes the project includes the alterations and the garage widening to 10 feet and analyzed by the department staff and not 0 demolition under the planning code 317 the the subject property is on the south side of california street between lyon and baker in the western edition the property is a slightly down

standard-sized lot 25 by one hundred feet deep that was constructed in 1887 alterations are stripped away the architectural detailing and it was ultimately determined to be car share exempt under ceqa the building on the the subject property - they're generally three and four story building the building immediately west of the the subject property is a 3 and a half two unit building as a 2 unit two-story building 6 neighbors on the subject block one adjacent neighbor have express support for the project since the packets were sent out last week to additional e-mails have been received in supported i'll submit those to the

secretary for the record the dr requester is matthew an owner of 2 thousand 7 to the kelly whitcraft of the the subject property mr. kline's concerns are as follows: the proximately negatively effects his building the upper floating flat with air and privacy and out of scale with the other buildings the residential design team reviewed that prior to neighborhood notification and requested various revisions to the front facade which the revisions were substantially done and reflected in the plans following the submittal the residential design team reviewed did project in light of the dr and requested it to address the concerns related to privacy that obscure in the bathroom windows and earn lightwell the project sponsor revised it a and with the change

they determined that is xheshg and has appropriate lightwells and not create an exceptional or extraordinary circumstances the planning department recommends the commission not take dr and approve as revised. >> thank you dr requester you have 5 minutes. >> we're having a long day and hoping that san francisco will make a nice path forward i have to distinguish reasons i suggest you take dr for this project a typical. >> speak into the mike please. get the projector. >> a typical corner neighborhood street corner around my neighborhood not a three or four story building another corner here not three or four stories another residential

corner this is principally a large unit so the corner lot in this particular block of the western edition are smaller lots one hundred by 25 and to the east you'll see that the first floor building on the corner are 20 by 100 percent this doesn't say a site for privacy and this is a view any immediate lot line the exterior of the side wall an baker street the sponsors didn't have there she's rh-2 i'm rh-2 and my immediate neighborhood to the left is rh-2 this the right their rh-3 which 37 percent large lot size this the box we're talking about and i'm also to the east of the project sponsor and with the shadow it is take place i assert

no four story buildings within the blocks of this project where you have wood-framed construction on rh-2 and nothing complaining to tell me i'm disconnect and that's my assertion this is a precedent than i think the on us to establishment the sponsor - okay. the second issue which i want to talk about that is independent of the first issue the location of the third floor blockage of this project sponsor for the first to stories no lightwell in the front of me the issue is on the third floor i have a small private stair one kitchen and one living room my bedroom windows face towards the sponsors property a small lightwell okay. if you're

looking at the roof line they're proposing to go up with a wall right where my hand is now and above that a fourth floor it is setback away from the property line the issue the side setback of the third floor which matches my only bedroom window against my bred windows not just one bathroom not a guest bath but a laundry facility the idea of matching lightwells cerebroneighbors can share the light to their valencia and i've built my lightwell and you can - we multiply the loft for both participant in this case the victorian lightwell their matching a substandard with mile substandard lightwell we don't in general have lightwells less

than 5 we see them 10 feet and not an interesting situation in my opinion the third story lightwell is short but for a above that is setback if we take off approximately, one hundred and 20 square feet of third floor we have a coordinate of light for the three or four floors that approximately two or three percent of build out hence hence i will probably not be living in this building my family situation may change but another couple will be living in the upper flat my windows should be for toilets and exhaust fans and hearing bathtubs running and laundry machines and hair driers by taking small memorable mitigation for those

particularly utilities like the uppers we can mitigate and have a win-win situation i think that is a small price to pay for the city of san francisco granting this is in most cases an excellent project the ability to build 97 green projects, if you will, sharing the lightwell to a larger lightwell on the third story. >> in my time is benefits the future residents of the upper market flat and this couple can have to egress. >> anyone in support of dr requester and against the 0 project seeing none, project sponsor 5 minutes. >> hello and thank you this is my husband david mark farrell we bought the house in 2009 about the intentions of remodeling it

is a smaller house on the block we've lived in the immediate neighborhood for many years and including me living on the block next door in the house next door this is our family home it fits our growing family needs a baby on the way this summer. >> plan to have a second he work from home full-time a home office my husband worked from home part time and have elderly parents will come and stay with us and potentially live with us your project has overwhelming support including the dr requester co-owner that has an equal interest in the property and manages the property so those two letters that david lindsey alluded to one from the co-owner from the deferring dr

and the tenant the main unit the requester is referring to say vacant i was not doing anything that would harm that our neighbors to the immediate west are in support we met with the immediate neighbors on march third, analyzing and the dr requester and offered a compromise to pay for skylights that were rejected we pulled back the top floor of the house by 3 feet away from his property the portion of his property the dr requester is concerned about receiving light was overgrown by thick vines you have photos in your packet we've tried repeatedly with the requester we offered i take it compromises cannot get him to meet with us

to pull back the lightwell an additional 2 feet frosting the bathroom windows and the plumbing will be done to code that was rejected by the dr requester that's why we're here today and hope you help us have a home that fits our needs i have it photos you can see what we're referring to. >> sfgov go to the overhead and that was his backyard and this is the top from our roof so until we start doing plans and he started complaining that long overgrowth that is thick vine been there for years if he's concerned about light he could have mitigated that again, the neighbors to the west who were

building up to next - the main tenant and the co-owner have equal interests are in full support we urge you to support our project as well thank you. >> dr requester you have a two minute rebuttal. >> i don't think that is about people that is about who is going to be living in the building and what we're leaving for the future of san francisco i've not talked with my neighbors people are different feelings i think the project will be beautiful that will add value to the neighborhood the main objection i have is an unprecedented 4 stories with an rh-2 boxes me ♪ planning wants to show me the address i've lived here 26 years and anxious to identify any four story build outs on the corner

from the planning rules otherwise please speak up yes. i have vines on the roof didn't mean i'm an overview person the location of bathroom is their choice but locating two bathrooms directly adjacent to my only window you'll hear laundry machines and lack of sunshine and not setback properly will obtain experiencing the use of bathrooms i can't stop that but small mitigation that's building code you can't use a carton for a laundry machine has to be per planning code but not allowing you to put that 3 feet 9 inches away from my bedroom i'll have laundry where approximately my hand is not right for san

francisco should be a lightwell as their personal became exhausted corridor two ventilation fans and laundry drops and possibly duck from the kitchen below it is good adjacent to my bedroom you think you can mitigate it cheaply from home depot it is $12 minor things for future residents for the building thank you very much >> william the project architect 5 second comment did a 5 story building my clients met me 3083 california center beautiful victorian 6 or 7 houses on the same block and substantially large houses on that block.

>> month no, no thanks thank you okay. that concludes this portion. >> the project sponsor has a minute and a half if you want rebuttal. >> so i want to comment on the ventilation of the bombards when we talked about the code our understanding of the code we have to vent it up and away from his unit not just out to the side i think that if our offer to him we've covered that we'll take care of all that ventilation up instead of out so - we're happy to agree to that if that's in the code that's our understanding of the code. >> i also forgot to include not only the co-owner of dr property to have equal interests

he manages the day to day operations of the property so and she's in complete couldn't make that today that's why i sent the other letter thank you. >> that concludes this portion of the hearing commissioner johnson. >> thank you very much so i it is interesting i have no comment on the dr requesters concerns as in their presented in the packet normally i don't think any of the facility issues are exceptional or extraordinary but have an issue with a 60 percent increase in squeamish negative impact an rh-2 district we don't have planning code or special adopted policy that says we are requiring projects to maximize their zoning but it has been a trend of strong trend of the commission over the past

year or too so i don't know where the commission will go with the merits of project but i'm having issues i'm not sure what the dr requester is talking about and actually in our planning code but she wants to make note i have a strong issue with that other than everything is fine. >> commissioner moore. >> i'll share commissioner johnson's concern we need to see what is the reasonable expansion i believe that adding a fourth floor we're over sizings the building in which that occurs when you look at the elevation drawing left and right it looks unusual given the architectural treatment of the alteration like i said earlier mr. lindsey in this project of the for you

there is enough there's enough to create the type of unit what the family is aspiring to a fourth floor particularly in light of what we're seeing those expansions of the rh-2 we have a problem we identified a few weeks since is balcony is held between the parapet the portion that is roof should be labeled as unoccupied roof with

a parapet you can expand that blatantly with a small railing to the building edge those teaches details matter when our trying to create consistency thought how to create the balcony, etc., etc. in summary i never understood the second set of drawings this is different from the original packet and we - >> of course the second set that was distributed today was mark farrell to correct the one error at the fourth floor. >> i'm personally not prepared given all the missing parts including did over sizings the building in some areas that relates to share lightwells to support this project and i'm

curious what other commissioners have to say. >> commissioner moore. >> a question for the project architect how possible would it be to leave the project as proposed changing it to two unit and o implying the kerri with the lightwell. >> that's i i cannot answer that i don't own the property - but i think that i've been here in the summer and arranged something you're proposing on trader street at the bottom floor added a substantial in-law unit quite frankly i had that in the back of my head that will be something i can't - it would be very feasible they have a lot of square footage and get all the areas that commissioner moore brought up some of the top decks

with the planning that in order to get my client here to respond 0 to that question thank you. >> it is something we can do but to clarify commissioner moore's and commissioner johnson about face our house is a small footprint on the block and as i said, i work from home that's my office and my husband works from homes home that's another office we're expecting a baby on july 2nd hope to have another baby my dad has alzheimer's they'll probably live with us hence the elevator and presented that's why we have every element an answer can there be an in-law unit yes, we have another piece of property we've been holding off the hours

market we can't wait to move into our house to be putting something into rental stock in san francisco so there you have it. >> so thank you very much it is interesting we had a meeting with the executives officers this past week ms. jocelyn and talked about creating a policy on residential design because for dr projects sometimes roof deck were mentioned and sometimes not but focused on the overall if we took dr establish a policy so everybody is treated the same you'll wonder about the rules you get caught in the good job let - i support having a second unit you'll be able to use rent

it but such a large expansion it calls for i think an rh-2 an additional unit even if african-american an in-law unit could be small our policies has been we want to focus on digestion and happy you're having a family someone in hayes valley took the dr and cut off the fourth floor i'd rather than have the additional square footage and have it continued to come back with a revised project commissioner koppel. >> with all the comments and consideration i'll move to continue. >> to what date? >> along or 0 how long will the architect need i need about three weeks. >> any time after that i

assumed we want a 3-d for that. >> yes. >> i don't do the 3/we have to go back and forth and get them correct it takes a week and a half it is an awful good idea if you need to get a complete packet i wanted to include the lightwell combinations commissioner can we get specification on the lightwell do you want it is not the third floor setback the same depth as the first floor or. >> okay. >> i thought we offered that to the dr requester the additional two feet he turned it down but, yes absolutely take that into the conversation. >> one second in the revised project so show where the impacts are in the wall or straight up versus.

>> we'll have to bring a plumber. >> that's the intention i took the square footage out of my bathroom they didn't center to smell my drier. >> commissioner moore. >> clarify the question of lightwells is there an issue of lightwells would like to know exactly where the location of window the windows on the adjoining property in some cases what is behind the windows i believe that the large existing lightwell needs to be matched in kind we know what the rules for matching in kind means but an exact location of windows opening in the adjoining building. >> commissioner that is shown on the slide. >> i see a basically a skapt notch. >> i colored coded that it is crystal clear it is confusing

the elevation one east and one west but boy i think i don't a 3rgd job i show more than the doted line and tried to color code so planning can understand we're happy to work on that. >> the drawings i'm looking to be indicate in our proposed plans which at that moment only show a single line a hinlt of what the window opens but we're clear i don't want to go to the reduced tiny small buildings and have to reach across to the building plans. >> i was trying them on elevation you want them on the plans. >> commissioner johnson. >> i'd like to congratulate project sponsor for having a child that is hilarious you're saying you want number two, that

is a crazy thought crazy talk. >> that's the new conversation in the planning commission. >> anyways i acknowledge your given us your family history the only reason i didn't verbally state it before as part of my deliberation we often have project sponsors who will themselves or always be brought up what they plan to do with the property or the family circumstances that is a little bit using that because sometimes the project sponsor wants us to consider that i tried hard to be obviously i appreciate but at the same time, i wanted to hold firm to a policy we have stepped in consistent on discussing in the last couple of years here and i think that is really important and i personally i know the architect can go and

look at the projects the commissioners may not agree with me i think that if you want to maintain the use of that headline up for the property you want to find a way to do that even if it requires not having as many setbacks and getting two units the assumption you'll need more space to have two units so be fair to our neighbors by the way, take into consideration that we understand there is trade offs one of the reasons we like to ask for density or maximize missing the zoning. >> commissioner koppel. >> so you're clear on the two units we're looking in spirit for you know square footage equity not 90 percent of house 20 percent and a tiny little closet for the second unit we're trying as much as you can to make the quote second unit

liveable as opposed to the large percentage of square footage. >> one thing before we go on i was talking with a developer over lunch monday and he was saying you know, i have this big house in a certain certain neighborhood an rh-2 i want to expand and planning says i need to put in a second united we're up here saying we want to see that this is admirable if you can do that and in code but another populated bucket list item. >> this particular project hospital hsa been in the department before - >> and commissioner moore was there a direction. >> i have no problem with the high parapet i want to see a note on the drawings that the movement that is unoccupied the

ventriclar dein violation to all of a sudden use the entire roof the urban opted out roof can't be used as a back up. >> thank you the other question i'd like to ask you've been sharing our family stories will be you have a dialogue where the colors i'll appreciate that. >> thank you commissioners the date april 13th i don't hear a second. >> second. >> thank you commissioners to continue this matter to april 13th for revisions with direction commissioner fong commissioner johnson commissioner koppel commissioner moore and commissioner vice president richards so moved, commissioners, that motion passes unanimously 5 to zero and places us in public comment there are no speaker cards.

>> any general public comment seeing none, the the meeting is adjourned afternoon. >> morning everyone. >> morning thank you for coming to the people's palace of san francisco. >> (clapping.) >> let me begin by thanking all of