2018. i'm submitting to the record a motion of approval for the current proposal and staff recommends approval of the count project. with that staff recommends approval of the project because it maximizing the underlying density of the zoning district and the project is in similar height of the dwelling units and not obstructing the neighboring projects. that concludes staff's presentation. i'm available for any questions. >> commissioner: thank you, project sponsor. >> i'm on behalf of the project sponsor. we're happy that after hearing very strong input from the neighborhood we were able to work with them and achieve a number of different goals on this very small site, maximizing the density with little impact on the neighbors and i'll leave it to you if have you questions

and thank you for your consideration. >> commissioner: thank you. any public comment on this item? seeing none we'll close public comment. commissioners? we're able to approve the motion to approve with the revised plans which i'd be in supportive of. >> commissioner richards, you're recused? >> no, i sold the property february 22. commissioners you adopted a motion of intent to disapprove from december 21. >> commissioner: the approval motion on the revised plans before us. >> but you should take a vote to

limit the intent to disapprove. you have to because you committed to the motion to disapproval. you have to have -- intent to rescind the motion of innocent in order to act on a motion to approve today. i did not actually ask commissioner johnson to acknowledge that she reviewed the previous hearing and materials for this matter. >> i have. >> thank you. >> commissioner: commissioner koppel. >> a motion to rescind the intent to deny. >> second. >> do you want to make the subsequent motion? >> we should take it separately? >> we're getting very bureaucratic today. >> the clerk: it's important in case it goes further. on the motion to rescind commissioner fong. >> aye. >> the clerk: commissioner koppel. >> aye.

>> the clerk: commissioner richards. >> aye. >> the clerk: it passes 5-0. now we can consider an alternate proposal. >> motion to approve. >> the clerk: on the motion to approval the alternative project. commissioners? so moved. the motion passes unanimously 5-0. >> commissioner: we'll go back to item 13 for the downtown project authorization.

>> good afternoon. the proposed project before you is a request for a downtown project authorization for the demolition of two existing commercial structures with a combined area of 35,625 square feet. the merger of two parcels and the krufconstruction of a new n and 10-story residential building. with up to 144 dwelling units and 840,000 square feet of common space at a rooftop deck and sole -- solarium and a parking space accessed through the mezzanine level. the residential lobby would be on main street and the

development would include streetscape including fruit trees and landscaping. authorization the proposed project is seeking an exception from the planning code requirement for exposure. it's located in the downtown residential zoning district which has experienced significant redevelopment over the past 25 years. the properties include the baycrest development constructed in 1991 to the north and the 11-story, portside development constructed in 1997 to the east and the bridgeview development kruktded constructed in 2002 to the west. south is a cal trans parcel

used as a maintenance facility. the vast majority of other parcels are zoned for rincon hill or transbay residential and there are a few parcels zoned high density -- residential, commercial. including the written comments in the published packets the committee receive 73 letters opposing the project site design stating concerns on the potential impact on air quality for the adjacent residents, impact and accumulative traffic congestion. after analyzing all aspects of the project, department staff finds its unbalanced consistent with the policies of the general plan and rincon hill area plan. project is located in a zoning

district that permits residential use. the project is an appropriate in-fill development to add 144 new dwelling units to the housing stock including 19 affordable rental units in an area zoned for the construction of high-density residential development. the project is compatible with the existing neighborhood character of rincon hill and designed with an appropriate massing and scale nor subject lot. the project will include streetscape improvements consistent with the neighborhood plan and finally the project complies with the first source hiring program. the project will fully utilize the rincon area controls and based on the findings and those described in the draft motion, the department staff recommends

approval and the project sponsor has prepared a presentation but this concludes staff presentation and i'm available for questions. >> commissioner: thank you. project sponsor, welcome. >> good afternoon, commissioners. thank you for the opportunity to present today. i'm craig young. on behalf of tied water capital i'll spend the next six minutes describing how we spent the last four years working to transform a low-density industrial property into mixed income housing. >> we've always found most compelling with the location is it is an opportunity to create a smaller more affordable rental building marketed towards young professionals and families. the cite's location is within

the financial district and sen tral -- central soma. the immediate area is made of new residential tours and development should taper down in height the top of the hill to the embarcadero. the project of 84 feet fits within the intent of the plan and allows for a new runner to the -- renter to the neighborhood. we -- our team set out to learn the neighbors and the neighborhood history.

that's how we first developed the concept we're here to present. a rental apartment building with on site affordable housing and mixed housing to address the city's shortage while removing an eyesore is something neighbors agreed would be a welcome aaddition to the block and 19 on-site b.m.r.s. and the ground floor features a minimal single-lane garage entrance and entrances facing the streets. and we had a focus on non vehicular trans passion provide transportation providing bike cal spaces. it's taken four years from the first application to get to today's hearing. we spent over two and a half years working with cal trans to

develop the adjacent cal trans mapt -- maintenance and while this path was ultimately unsuccessful and added to our project time line, we took it upon ourselves to treat the time to engage in a community effort to develop a community-driven engagement effort. it including monthly meetings and presenting to neighbors h.o.a.s, engaging with neighborhood businesses and holding over 110 meetings with stakeholders. this say -- is a visual of the property. we posted over 20 in-person meetings and over 50 correspondence to the condo owners and had over 200 meetings with community stakeholders

regarding the project. the outreach has informed the project today. in addition to receiving feedback from planning and the committee to study the environmental and impact on the neighborhood, planning and some neighbors asked us to study alternative massings and the north courtyard layout and it caused privacy issues given unit overlook dynamics. the planning department and neighbors agreed this was not a desirable massing for the project and studied a split the we would retire addition height.

furthermore, given the plates of the towers they created more compromised living conditions. the planning department was not supportive of the increased height for the site. we believe it could cause other neighbors currently in support, to oppose the project. after studying the considerations and we came to the conclusion our proposed plan is the only feasible phage path forward for affordable housing and we've resourced over 40 letters of source with neighborhood leaders, local businesses and art organizations. i'm very proud of this diverse group of supporteders and i'd like supporters and like to thank each of those here to speak in favor of the project. i'd like to speak of the 140

jobs and the below market rate rental units and with that all turn it over to our architect. >> when approaching the architectural design we study the context of rincon hill to understand the neighboring businesses in terms of their proportion and rhythm. the context gave us include to materiality and color. in line with the rincon hill plan it aims to add density to an under developed site in a livable way. we worked with staff to design the facade treatment and incorporate feedback from the commissioners. an important active was consistent with the rincon hill plan. by using the walk-up residential units and lobby and minimizing the service elements such as the

garage access and mechanical spaces. despite that we're able to harness the pedestrian experience. in addition we're looking for opportunities to add vegetation and bicycle parking where possible. the site limited our ability and we found the u-shaped proposed to be the only viable option for the site. it's held back five feet from the property line so the neighbors space can be maintained. the neighboring courtyard is open to the street on the injury side. the north courtyard scheme does not impact the space in a meaningful way and in addition

requires the closure of the at-risk lot-line windows. though this configuration seems plausible and planned, when you consider the section of the project you can see the existing courtyard it becomes apparent the height of the neighboring parking podium would compromise the project and would no longer be viable. 27 units would be lost. the north courtyard scheme would require the covering of many of the neighbors lot line windows and create significant privacy issues for the remaining windows to the residential units and courtyard. in contrast the proposed design maintains privacy and allows the neighbors to collaborate on the design facing their courtyard.

lastly, we submitted to the planning department many different studies for the potential treatment of that north facade. including different amounts of the potentially fitted glass or art or vegetation on the facade. and we seriously hope to work with the neighbors collaboratively on the design element going forward. the duration of the process and the extensive community outreach has provided us with good feedback with which to refine the proposed project. this project will add a significant amount of housing in line with the growing city's need. the 250 new residents will surround the businesses. we look forward to your mints and questions. -- we look forward to your comments and questions. >> commissioner: thank you. we will open this up to public

comment. i'll call some names and you can line up on the screen side and approach in any order. says celia lim and norm fong, marlene smith, joe majur and margaret gund. when you're ready. >> good afternoon. i moved 25 years ago. after looking at the presentation on paper it looks interesting but you need to be on site to see what the design really is. first of all, i just wanted to say there's a lot of us here. we are not against building

something on the loss. we welcome something new in the neighborhood. we want housing. we know that we are in a part of the city that is dense. that's why i moved there. i knew that would be the little manhattan of san francisco. we all want that. i saw the whole neighborhood grow around us and there are beautiful places, beautiful towers with spaces in between. i mean, it just sounds astonishing to me that a block -- because that building is a block that goes from beale to main from side to side, 10,000 square feet of open space, no, mostly private decks. it's not a building that's friendly to anybody. if you walk to the south and look north, what do you see today? you see three beautiful courtyards, mature trees that exchange carbon dioxide into

oxygen it's one of the few spaces in the city. who today has three large courtyards and it's not good for us only but for the neighbors, for everyone. it's pleasant to walk from bryant to beale and to the east. that's what you see. now pulling a building that's a block, and i emphasize i want to see something built there this is not the design. i'm asking for to you send it back to planning and build something that has synergies that allows this neighborhood to enjoy the courtyards and two buildings that compliment each other. i know they're asking fire variance and you can grant the variances because we're asking 43% variance which is large. i understand you guys do give those variances when the project

is of extraordinary design. that is not the case. the trees will die and no one will be able to use that anymore. plus, all 80% of the units face the courtyard. it's not about views. we face the courtyards. the court yard, we don't have central air. the only air we got is from the courtyards. the pollution as others will talk about is going to increase. there is a 15% increase on one of our courtyards. >> commissioner: your time is up. next speaker, please. >> good afternoon. i'm cecelia lim and the hoa president. i'm speaking on behalf of our

owners and residents to oppose the proposed project as currently designed. the project a reg -- rectangular block will form a barrier and block sunlight and air flow causing harmful solutions to collect there and build up. the project would increase [indiscernible] concentrations in our courtyard in an air pollution exposure zone we're already exposed to air that poses a health risk and this will no doubt have further adverse consequences for our health. of particular concern are the units facing the center courtyard which will be boxed in by the project. these units get the fresh air

from the courtyard. we do not have forced ventilation. with the project blocking out the wind, the units will have stale air further degraded by the addition of harmful p.m. 2.5. the only source of sunlight for the units is the courtyard. so these residents will also suffer loss of light. it is possible to build the project without walling off our open space. we asked for a two-tower design which the developer said there were problems with but there are other ways to modify the building so that our center courtyard is not completely blocked off. the environment shapes our well being and health. in dense urban settings like

ours, new developments must be sensitive to and respond to existing properties adjacent to them and this project fails to do this. so we respectfully request that you send this project back for modification. thank you. >> commissioner: thank you. next speaker, please. >> good afternoon. i'm cynthia montez. 430 main is the same design structure that was rejected in 2009. as you're aware a two-tower design was suggested then. i hope the planning department will again discourage a two-tower design. as a resident an owner of bay crest since 1993, 24 years with

the unit that faces the courtyard, i am extremely concerned about the current design architecture of this project. an 84 story building blocks sun thor the plants and trees in the open space courtyards home to birds, insects, bugs and probably other animals. and sunlight to these individual units. a block building would block air flow of dangerous p.m.2.5 and carbon monoxide exhaust and other toxic air contaminants allowing them to enter living spaces entering fresh air intake vents. the only fresh air i get is from the units and vents casing the

courtyard which can become contaminates. i have a history of pulmonary embolism that required me to be on oxygen several times over recent years. with consideration to the latest environmental impact report it concluded particulate matter will adversely affect my health. this was concluded in 2009 causing that project to not be approved by the planning department and supervisors. nothing has changed since 2009 with concerns to the level of toxins or design to make this a more viable project and should be rejected as it was in 2009. your consideration is greatly appreciated. thank you. >> commissioner: thank you, ms. montez. next speaker, please. >> good afternoon, members of

the planning commission and public. i'm reed colna and grateful for the opportunity to speak about my personal and professional interpretation of the design. to begin, i have a doctor in pharmacology and epidemiology and advanced practice pharmacist and certified specialty pharmacist and assistant clinical professor at ucsf and five-year resident and owner at bay crest. air pollution say serious health concern. one manner toxicologist and ep deem -- epidemiologists did studies on the mortality rate even adjusted for other health risk factors was associated with the level of air pollution. this study and many others

clearly demonstrates statistically significant unfavorable health affects correlated with the particulate matter 2.5. the affects include lung cancer, infant mortality, asthma and other respiratory system diseases and has been shown to decrease your life span. this is death by air pollution. is they have presented the environmental findings and have concerns on the research and the bias in the presentation both of which have been unaddressed and after having no previous respiratory conditions in my life i'm concerned for myself and others vulnerable.

we have young and elderly here. for the disease exacerbation and the implementation of the proposed design in its current form. this say public health environmental concern. to end, i encourage the planning commission to not only take our testimony to heart and understand we support the principles and public safety obligations and feel we still both want the same thing. we want responsible planning that results in an improved san francisco that doesn't jeopardize the health of the count community. thank you for your consideration. >> commissioner: thank you. next speaker, please. >> hi. i'm a resident at bay crest. been there about 18 years. i'm very concerned about

building being proposed. i'm not against the building. i think something should be there. it's good for the neighborhood but what is being proposed doesn't make sense. it will impact the health of many people that live there. just come and be in our streets from say 2:00 p.m. to 8:00 p.m. you see what a traffic mess is the and with all the wind blowing all the exhaust will go into the bay and it's gone. with the brick in front of us it has nowhere to go other than me sitting in my room breathing it in. so i know there's been a lot of talk about outreach but the outreach after nine years of outreach they come with the same design. none of the proposals we have made and we asked to do it

differently and none of that has been incorporate. the design seems to be in my opinion, a solution to the problem. yes, it may impact the profit margin of the developer but i think it will overall improve the whole neighborhood if they do it in a different design. i'm against the current proposal not against having a building there in the future. thank you. >> commissioner: thank you. next speaker, please. >> good afternoon, commission. i'm debbie gould. i'm a home owner at bay crest. to show you how important this is to all of us, my friends and residents were kind enough to let me go in front of them because i have to get to holy thursday service. at any rate, i'm in agreement with everybody else. we're not opposed to the

building going up at 430 main. we especially encourage low-income housing, however, the air quality is extremely important to us. we live at the base of the bay bridge. we're already experiencing a lot of heavy congestion with idling cars during rush hour at any time of the day. sometimes into the evening. we're also dealing with toxins that are coming in off the bridge. and i don't think anybody's taken into consideration the fact that in addition to all the buildings that are surrounding 430 main, we're not even thinking about the people who are going to potentially be living at 4030 -- 430 main so they'll be inhaling the toxins. i'm a 65-year-old woman who is healthy. i'd like to remain healthy.

everybody here wants to remain healthy or as healthy as possible. we're asking the design and plans be just altered so that we can all live in healthy environments. thank you so much for your time. [stand by for captioner switch] .

. >> i want to have decent housing in my neighborhood. i'm proud of the housing that we have approved of and i'm seeing going up around me. it has really brought great things to my neighborhood, but i don't want it to come at the risk of myself, my neighbors, the people i care about, and also those future residents that debbie gould just

mentioned. and as things are now, i haven't seen those types of impacts really studied. this is the second time i've made this statement. we deserve better than a wall. thank you. >> good afternoon commissioners. my name is norm fung. i'm a property owner, and i want to echo everyone's sentiments. i totally agree with that, and i have concerns about the project from tidewater. i actually own one of the lower four units, they inherently have less light, so any light that does come into the unit will be blocked by that 84-foot building right in the middle of the courtyard, and basically render one of the features of my property useless, which is a patio, essentially. but talking about health

effects, also being a ground floor unit, i think all the toxins will wash down and eventually settle into the lower areas at a higher concentration. and on top of that, i have patio doors which gives increased exposure to that potentially dirtier air, as well. so i want to urge the commission to send this back for additional consideration. thank you very much. >> president hillis: thank you, mr. fung. next speaker, please. >> commissioners. thank you. my name is connolly reed. i'm a resident at baycrest. i'm a supporter of housing in the city, affordable housing, and despite that, i find myself to be surprised at the current plan at 430 main. i find it's a front to the community that's there, simply putting profits over health. the proposal, it's a brick or a

wall as some others have mentioned, and it just, i think is intended to initially fill all the air space that it possibly can. if you look at it from the harrison street side, it will simply look like a prison wall. you know, in its history, the project project ignored the department's request for a two story design and has ignored the statements that you've heard here today. there are many other two tower concepts that pay respect to the community as they've developed. but most concerningly, i read the development report and saw that 430 main has been required to install merv-13 level filtration.

interestingly, our home at bayview is 13 years old and home to many elderly and families, and it doesn't have merv level 13 filtration, so there's an undue financial burden if because of the effect of this building, we were required to install it. in closing, i'd just hope that you all will help to ensure the health and safety of our building and its residents, and the residents of the buildings in the community, and i can only hope that the developers will be encouraged to follow the planning department's requirements and request -- deny the variance that is requested, core conditions for our future neighbors, since they're not here to defend themselves. and finally, in closing, the developers should work with their neighbors on a healthy compromise. thank you very much. >> president hillis: thank you. next speaker, please.

>> thank you, commissioners. my name is evan horrigan. i'm a member and resident of the community at 403 main street. i have several objections to the proposed project. my first is a significant adverse affect to the air quality, for which there's been no study to this project. this project will cause significant undue financial burden in order to reform our current system. furthermore, this project is not respecting the planning process or community, they ignored the recommendation of the planning department for a two tower concept. next, for a proposal that includes a relatively considerable percentage of entry level and below market rate apartments. why are they being placed in the most polluted space in the city? and finally, this building site is inadequate. instead, the site could be combined with a cal transsite to build a transit site. as a member of the port side,

we want responsible planning. thank you. >> president hillis: thank you. next speaker, please. >> hello. my name is dane entz. i'm a member of bay crest, and i'm also a member of the committee for healthy housing. at one time, it was thought the highest and best use of the land was to build a canal for shipping, and they did that. and it was a profitable canal until there was a recession, and then, when there was a recession, they couldn't get shipping on the canal anymore, so they decided that the highest and best use for the lapd at th land at that point was to fill it in and use it as a land dump. then at some other time in history it was decided that the best use for that land was residential use, so they built houses. then the people that lived there got sick, got -- died. i hope that we're not going to allow our planning process to

create our very own love canal right in our neighborhood. so there's a couple of things i want to turn to. we had a study of the rambo report done by alternative consultants, and they mentioned a couple of things that were problematic about it. it was 1-19-2018. it was a technical report from ramble dated october 19, 2018. the pm 2 concentrations in the neighboring court regard is already above the threshold. any additional impacts will deteriorate the air quality further and deteriorate the air hazards for the local residents. as displayed in table 13 and summarized in table one, there

was an increase in pm 2.5 concentrations in the center courtyard, and an increase about 14.5 to 15% in the inner courtyard. t [ inaudible ] -- however, the cumulative 3-2.5 levels are higher than considered reasonable for residential projects. going on further, there was no review of the construction impacts and according to trinity, that makes this incomplete. so i just want to just, if i could just show you quickly -- does this turn on? >> john. >> what -- what this picture shows is from the ramble report, and this is with the

building, and you'll notice that there's a lot of yellow and stuff, and that indicates increase in pm 2.5. here is the -- before. there's a lot less. >> clerk: thank you, sir. your time is up. >> one last thing -- >> president hillis: that's all, sir. unfortunately, we only have -- >> all right. >> president hillis: three minutes perspeaker. next speaker, please. >> good afternoon. cathy turnquist. 201 harrison. eight years ago, a different developer presented a plan for 430 main. it was turned down by the city. now, a similar plan with the same flaws is being presented for behind baycrest. one suggestion to tidewater was to design a two tower building

so that baycrest would not be put in a dark, cave like environment, with tidewater's large flat back wall causing us to lose light and air. a 100 foot tall building would block air flow, push exhaust from the bridge to our units from our air vents coming from the outside. our units and our gardening will be buried in darkness. tidewater didn't really change anything from that original plan. i urge you to turn down this project and to advise tidewater please go back to the drawer board. thank you. >> president hillis: thank you. next speaker, please. >> good afternoon, commissioners. my name is kayla espinoza, and i'm a neighbor at 430 main. i live at 300 beale street. i'm here today, and that's a sentiment to tidewater's engagement in our community. they've reached out to us,

they've talked with. i'm excited about the project. i feel that the design is shriek and pleasant to look at. because i am at 300 beale street, i understand the concerns around loss of views, as i had something built in front of my view. but i have to say the pros absolutely without weigh the cons. i -- outweigh the cons. i think it will bring a greet feel to the neighborhood. somebody mentioned the h manhattan of san francisco. i'd love that. currently that space is dirty, rundown, a horrible eye sore, and i think this project would definitely bring some vibrancy to our neighborhood. >> president hillis: thank you. next speaker, please. >> good afternoon, commissioners. my name is margaret gunn, and

i've been a part of the south beach community and a bay crest homeowner since 1995, and so i'm aware of what it means to live in a densely populated urban neighborhood and know the growth of south beach that continued development is necessary. i'm also aware of the need for more housing in san francisco and applaud any effort to create more affordable and viable housing in our city. i'm my best testimo i'm memory a member of the -- i'm a member of the committee for better housing. we concur that most bay crest homeowners and homeowners and residents in nearby buildings believe that the current brick design is not the right one for this parcel. we believe that the current -- we believe there will be dire environmental conditions to the already existing affordable housing that baycrest provides. i know that some of the

neighbors would like a pretty building to look at, and we would like that, too, but we would like the right development to go in there, and a building that will not cause harm. this is a singular situation because it's very unusual and alarming that 430 main is actually so close to the bay bridge, but also is attempting to fill this small parcel with so many units, and it will completely block baycrest courtyards. we're not talking about views, we're just talking about our health and environmental concerns. so please know that baycrest is looking for a win-win situation. we believe a two-tower design will allow lite and air flow to our current courtyard, which would solve or environmental issues. we vehemently oppose the current design because it will create unhealthy air quality for residents, and that it's already challenged because of its location very close to the

bay bridge. and we're 300,000 cars travel across it daily, so that's a little different than another neighborhood that we even heard about in this hearing today. so my hope is the planning commission will send this design back to the planning department to create a design that mitigates the worst case scenario of creating more and more pollution for baycrest homeowners because very simply, our lives depend on it. we invite the planning commission to come and visit baycrest so you can see the effect the tidewater building will have on your community. >> president hillis: thank you. next speaker, please. >> good afternoon. my name is adam masry. i live at bay crest. i have since 1995. i have a written statement from our general manager. is it okay if i give that to the commission? >> president hillis: sure. you can leave that right there. >> leave that right here? okay. and i have a statement from --

from marlene smith, who is a resident of bay crest that had to leave a little while ago. she gave me her statement to make for her. she has an apartment on beale street. this will force my windows and vents to be sealed. sealing the windows will create stagnant air in my unit because we have no central air in our units. stagnant air is hazardous to our health. it will also create mold issues in my unit as there would be no way moisture created from showers, laundry and cooking could reap wait. i already have health issues. this project will only enhance my health issues. she wrote a second letter to the commission, as well. thank you very much. >> president hillis: thank you. next speaker. i'll call some other names: gary winters, hue mclaughlin, cathy turnquist, rihanna

miranda, cameron noburg, george with a z, darcy kovak. >> good afternoon, commissioners. my name is kristin hall. i feel very lucky to are a resident and worker? san francisco. i agree with the residents that this area has a lot of crazy bridge traffic but at the scene ae a transit rich neighborhood with the unit right there and b.a.r.t. right there. i'm really happy that they've done a big outreach effort in the neighborhood, including neighboring buildings beyond those immediately adjacent but also including my office building and other residential buildings around. they've been incredibly thoughtful and engaged, and they're a very sensitive development group, and i

believe they've really give their best to make a project that would be sensitive to the context. our main concern as workers in the neighborhood is that retail is really starting to come on-line but there's not enough people to support it, so we're seeing some of these retail establishments close. it's sort of a food desert. as a woman who often works very late, i can say i'm really excited to see some ground floor units, some ground floor activity and some other things happening in this building as we haven't seen in a lot of building in this area. i think it's quite an elegant design, and i'd love to see that it's really fulfilling the intention of the rincon hall plan, to create the lively district, active street frontages that create a residential rhythm and scale in this neighborhood.

it's no surprise to you we need more housing, and i think this is a great place to do it. thank you. >> president hillis: thank you. next speaker, please. >> good afternoon, commissioners. i am a san francisco resident. i also have a professional relationship with tidewater from working as a structural engineer here in the city. as a resident in san francisco over the last ten years, i'm well aware of the need for affordable housing, and housing in general in the city of san francisco. not to mention as a structural engineer i'm aware of the issues in the city of the accommodation of residential units that are now becoming deteriorated and dilapidated, it's important to have modern construction that's going to be resilient for the future. construction of this project will not only create newhouses but it's also going to create new jobs, both in construction and the operation and maintenance and the lifestyle of the building. once again, i have the utmost

respect for tidewater and their attention to detail and care in the projects they do. thank you for the opportunity to speak, and i strongly urge you to support the 430 main project. thank you. >> president hillis: thank you. next speaker, please. >> good afternoon, commissioners. my name is richard leiter. i live at 1235 baker street. i serve on the board of directors of the union square business improvement district, mercy housing, and the american cancer society. i am a cofunder and ceo of anvil builders. they're a general engineering construction company and it has been involved with tidewater capital for a number of years. we are a members of the laborer's operators, and a carpenters, and i'm also a member of the ew you. that's the kind of guys these

are. the other codeveloper, war horse cities is actually based in baltimore. my daughter lives in baltimore, and i met war horse and took a door of their properties. they just opened a couple of new buildings in downtown baltimore, some of the roughest neighborhoods in the united states, and they're great neighbors, they look out, they went and did a lot of reports and talked to neighbors, and i just feel they're a responsible builder, responsible developer, we are concerned with a lot of the issues that were brought by the residents. i don't live in that building next door, but i get their concerns. but i just want you to consider these guys on the basis that things that they've done in the past, cities of baltimore, they are great guys and i'm sure they'll address and compromise on whatever issues you bring up. thank you for the opportunity to speak to you this afternoon. >> president hillis: thank you so much. next speaker, please.

>> my name is cam ran nogard. i'm a san francisco resident. grew up in the mission and lived in the soma for about 13, 14 years. i ran a rack center for kids for about 15 of those years down on 6th street, and over the years, i've seen developers come in, and being that we were a nonprofit, they would constantly come in, and they have to do their due diligence and stuff like that. so i became kind of wary of people over the years. i got to know tidewater and the people there. i didn't feel that way with them. i've worked with them on a number of projects. now i'm a full-time artist that still lives in san francisco, and that is partly because they support me, and they've been there. and i see them work on a number of projects, and they're smart people, and they do care about the community. and so when i hear the things being brought up, i don't think

it's something that they just took in one ear and let go out the other. i do believe they listen, i do believe they hire smart people that try to work on solutions. so i believe they have character, outstanding character, and i support this. i've seen a number of my friends have to leave the city, especially artists, and so knowing that there is a more affordable housing coming in, that speaks volumes to me, and just housing in general. this place is bursting at the seams, so we need more of it. so i support the project on 430 main. thank you. >> president hillis: thank you. next speaker, please. >> good afternoon. my name is killian mcgowan. i'm a resident of bay crest. if tidewater are such great fellows, how come they're going to build a 100 foot building right next to my building, as well as my neighbors, and knock off the light and free flow of air. these guys say they're interested in community.

they're not interested in the community. they're interested in their name which is capital and money. they can't make as much money with a two tower design. so if you want to pass their proposal to make more money, it will be on the backs of our lungs. here is my ventilator. >> president hillis: you've got to speak into the mmic. >> here is a regular ventilator that comes out of my apartment, and i by these filters, and replace them every 90 days. here's one here. it's nice and white, it's nice and clean, and here, you can see what it looks like after # 0 days. this is before -- this -- afte. this is before this project. the air quality down there is disgraceful, and just look at

it. that's after 90 days, and we need that air. so when you go downtown, you see the millenium towers, and you see the infinity, and you see all the light and air around them, and they share them. we are interested in sharing. we have told them we will share our light and our air, and we will support a two tower design. but they don't want that design because they want more money. there's 200 and something apartments in my building, and those people including me are suffering as well. there's a young man that's been here four years -- here's my asthma medicine, here's my inhalers. i need to keep them in the car, keep them in my work, keep them in my home. i need to take this one when -- daily, i need to take this one when i have an issue, and i also have tablets, as well.

it's inconceivable that so called good doers in the community want to build a great big 100 foot wall right up against my air flow, and this is my air flow at present. and what's more, they are fools because what my colleague was trying to show you and ran out of time, also showed they're increasing the particulate matter in their own space. there you have it, ladies and gentlemen. >> president hillis: thank you. >> this is how it stands, and that's how it should be. thank you. >> president hillis: thank you. next speaker, please. >> hello. my name is gary winter approxima. i am a resident of the bay crest building, long-term owner and resident, and i oppose the

430 main project as proposed. you know i -- i tell my friends that there's going to