support it with a look at where it is and what it is. i'm in full support and commend the supervisor for bringing this forward right now and hope we approve it and i make a motion that we do approve it. >> second. >> clerk: seeing no further comment, commissioners, there's a motion that's been seconded to approve this matter. on that motion -- [roll call vote] so moved, commissioners. that motion passes than us will ly -- unanimously, 6-0. this places us on 13a. 13b is not necessary. for 2018-006177map. abolish legislated setbacks on 19th avenue. this is only a zoning map

amendment. >> good afternoon, commissioners, audrey butkus, planning department. before i have a representative from supervisor tang's office come to speak, i have updated packets for you. the content of the executive summary is the same. substantive content is the same. it's just to make sewer that there is a zoning map amendment and not a zoning code amendment. environmental review was completed this morning, so i wanted to be sure that that was included in your packets. the executive summary that you originally received for the july 12 hearing substantive content is the same. representative from supervisor tang's office is here to speak on this item. >> good afternoon, commissioners and president melgar and congratulations to all of you on

your appointments. i'm the legislative aide to katy tang. at the request of the owner, we're rezoning five parcels from rh-2 to rm-2, in the hopes that they will use it to bring affordable housing to the district. site is along a major transit corridor for the city and making it a perfect place for this housing. we're also pleased that the project sponsor has told us that they want to keep the flower shop and provide them with the commercial space with the option to roll up or down the door. we don't agree with the staff recommendation about the setback. the single-familiar

-- i did not find an agreement where caltrans would be allowing sfmta to create a bulb-out. maybe it's a new proposal and hasn't come to our department, but i'm not aware of that.

can you tell us about that and do you have any document asian on that? this m.t.a. report was provided to us from the planning department. we didn't go seek it ourselves. it was provided to us as a mandatory requirement. so i'm not sure that they didn't have it beforehand. >> i think staff is baffled. >> we didn't seek it out. roi >> commissioner richards: i believe you -- i'm of the opinion, if there's a bulb-out, that's an awfully big sidewalk and it's probably not needed. >> it's huge. >> commissioner richards: i agree. staff is not recognizing it. >> i can't explain the discrepancy. i'm sorry. i don't know. >> is the city attorney -- did you have something to say? no. >> sorry, commissioner richards, did you --

>> commissioner richards: we only have the project sponsors and representative and everybody else is -- >> i cannot illuminate why that bulb-out is there. it was the first time i've seen it, too. i do know it's highway 1, so it's up to caltrans, if we can pull a bulb-out there. i just wanted to answer the question about whether or not it's a planning code or zoning map amendment. when you have a zoning map, it's a planning code amendment. to answer the question from the person in the audience, so that's that. but you are not considering the project at this point. so when the project comes forward, there may be requirements to add bulb-outs. we require that sometimes. again, our understanding is that caltran usually doesn't allow that kind of thing. >> thank you. commissioner fong?

>> commissioner fong: i'm not supportive or necessarily opposed to it, but i see staff shaking their heads quite a bit and i think we need more time to clarify this. and maybe when the project makes it back to us that it's a piece of the approval or secondary piece to the approvapproval. >> vice president melgar: commissioner moore. >> commissioner moore: i'm interested in seeing the zoning to rm-2. i think it's a great idea. i think it would probably be in the best interest for us to have an inquiry to caltrans and somebody else to figure out what is happening here. i believe that the staff's position of maintaining the sidewalk is accurate, but given the uncertainty about the bulb-out, it's a different story. so we need that information to

support this in its entirety. >> vice president melgar: commissioner koppel? >> commissioner koppel: i agree. i don't think we have all the information. is there a bus stop there? i'm thinking that maybe it's taking the place of that. and i think a pedestrian was killed on that middle section last year, so maybe they're trying to re-engineer that. >> vice president melgar: ms. hoe hams. msms. ms. mohan, can you said some light on this? >> there is a bulb-out that's been proposed before, but they sped up the work due to the pedestrian fatality that was mentioned. and it's a larger effort for it to be repaved. so sfmta has been working with caltrans and public works on

that project overall. so that is indeed happening. >> vice president melgar: thank you. director? >> that's helpful information. we've didn't know that. i was going to say, if the commission is supportive of the rezoning, you could move that part of it forward. because i think what i hear is broad support for the rezoning itself, which would give them assurances about that. and then if you wanted to separate it or given the new information, may want to move forward with both pieces, but you could separate the two items. >> vice president melgar: i had a question about that. if there is going to be a bulb-out, please correct me, but you would want -- the necessity for that 9-foot setback is less, not more. >> right. we agree with that. >> vice president melgar: so i would be -- i would be open to approving that today, both things, but i don't know how the rest of the commission would

feel about that. >> commissioner richards: can we conditional our approval and if there's a bulb-out we could not need the 9-foot setback? and if there is not, then we recommend that we take staff's recommendation and i move to do just that. >> second. >> clerk: if there is nothing further, there's a motion that's been seconded to approve this matter as amended, recommending that with the bulb-out, no setback is required. and if there is no bulb-out, they retain the 9-foot legislative setback. [roll call vote] so moved, that motion passes

unanimously 6-0. commissioners this places us on item 14, 2016-004946enx, 280 7th street, large project authorizization. >> good afternoon, i'm ellis samonsky. the request is for large project authorizization to construct a 65-foot residential and 51-foot mixed-use in the western soma mixed use and 65x height and bulk district, pursuant to 65915-65918. project sponsor has selected to use the density law. it proposes departure and

fronting on 7th street and 5-story residential con towning 20 dwelling units of which two would be on-site affordable units and approximately 851 of ground floor commercial street. the project would include 1,400 of private open space. 21 class 1 bicycle spaces and class 2 bicycle spaces and interior courtyard at grade. the project massing is on 7th street and the building on lankton is decreased by height and mass. it's separated by a courtyard connected to the open space. it is pedestrian-friendly and a lobby on lankton. as part of the large project

authorization and it will obtain waivers to the development standards for rear yard, planning code 134. and dwelling unit exposure 140. and it's also requesting a concession or incentive from the usable open space 135. compliance with the design criteria and request for exception is in draft section 329 in your motion and in your packets. staff believes that the request in modification is warranted due to the quality of the street frontages and ground floor layout. in summary, the department supports the project because it meets the goals and objectives of the plan and western soma mixed use to develop housing at a scale and density compatible with the mixed-use neighborhood. it meets all the applicable

requirements of the code noting the exceptions with the large project authorization and waivers on state density bonus law. sip of publication of the report, the department has received correspondent from and resident in support of the project. this concludes the staff report. i'm available for questions. thank you. >> vice president melgar: thank you. >> good afternoon, commissioners. will millard, workshop one, project sponsor, on behalf of the property owner, dragonfly investment group. i will walk you through the proposal for mixed use development at 280 7th street. it involves demolition of a vacant two-story nightclub and construction of five -- two new five- and six-story buildings measuring 25,850 square feet

with 20 residential units and 827 square feet of ground floor commercial space. it's located on the block bounded by 7th, langford, howard and folsom, three blacks from the muni and bart station. the parcel is an l-shaped, through lot measuring 6,250 square feet with 50-foot frontage on 7th and 20-foot frontage on lankton. here's the bird's eye view of the property. subject property is adjacent to a two-story commercial building on 7th street. on lankton, four-story, 51-foot tall live-work building and 30-foot-tall triplex.

the nightclub was previously club hide. and here's the proposed replacement building. like previous projects, we've drawn on historic and industrial character, massing, and modern interpretations. specifically, it reflects that of many other buildings in western soma and light industrial and historic district. the building has a strong pace and top. on the length inside, we have tried to take a different approach, reflecting its narrow ali. this is the back of the nightclub in red.

as you can see, we've taken a modern form. we've reduced the height of the residential entry and provided a 10-foot setback at the 5th floor. in terms of building materials, cement plaster, with integrated color from white, gray, black. on 7th, using a charcoal-colored terra cotta tile. looking at plan view, how you can see where the buildings are oriented, with the mid block, open space between them. on the ground level in red are your mechanical spaces, lobbies, bike parking. this is car-free, transit-oriented development. accordingly, we have bike parking easily accessible to both lobbies. residential areas are facing the mid-block courtyard and

commercial space oriented to 7th street. 7th street. it has a ceiling height of 13 feet. on the second level, the pattern and 7th street building, three or four units of floor. we've got two 1-bedroom units. 7th street side, another two 1-bedroom units, but with nested bedrooms or a den. on 7th street, we have a townhouse unit with three bedrooms, connected to the ground floor. we've set back the lankton street building, 7 feet away from the neighboring live-work building and we did that to provide light on to a number of units that faced that deck. also pulling the building back

as far as we could do the commons there. as you go up to the 5th floor, you have a deck facing lanxton street. no development on the 6th floor on the lankton street side and 7th street side and our roof is our common decks. that said, to summarize, 280 7th street is a 6-story building and high--- >> vice president melgar: thank you. we may have more questions. >> the thank you. sorry to go over my time. thanks very much. >> vice president melgar: with that, do we have any public comment on this item?

>> any time there's no opposition, it's like, hooray. central soma is coming. please approve this project post-haste. thanks. >> vice president melgar: seeing no other public comment, public comment is closed. commissioner moore. >> commissioner moore: i think it's an interesting building in how the two sides are used. on the 7th street side, i'm wondering, the commission's position regarding penthouses for roof decks, the roof decks propose two private roof decks each with their own penthouse. i'm looking for my fellow commissioners' position on that subject matter.

i prefer they're treated like everybody else, particularly in an area that is transforming. private penthouses at this point in time do not reflect the industrial character of the area. on the lankton street side, with a four-story building, while i realize out are pointing out an unoccupied roof, i think the fire department still requires access to the roof. i would like to see there's a restriction in the conditions by which the roof can never be used for roof deck, particularly because it does not indicate that roof access will be required. very settle point, but those things slip quickly when later on, the fire department adds access to the roof. it's in the interest of the

small-scale alley character that there is no roof deck on the langton part. otherwise, it would speak to a new generation of residents in the area, but it is what it is. >> with respect to the penthouses on the roof, dedicated to the common area, that we have two stairs and elevator going to the roof deck. what we've done with the orientation of the internal stairs for the private roof decks, is try to connect them and minimize them and their projection above the roof. you can see here for the back, you can bring up the slide that we've brought up, you can see the stair in the back is nested

up against the common stair and again the two front stairs have been connected to that common stair. in terms of overall mapping with the additional penthouse we believe it's minimal. we also want to just point out that the project is actually cut back an enormous amount of square footage from where we started in accommodation to a neighbor for a number of live-work units that have no open space and have a 15-foot wide side yard for their exposure for eight units. we have a 1,400 square foot midblock court plus we've sculpted 7 feet back from there, as well as 20 feet, losing an area 20x7, so trying to add to the value of the unit that we do

have. and we felt like -- >> commissioner moore: i'm not questioning their presence. i'm questioning how they're accessed. since we in the majority of cases along van ness and everywhere else, basically look for hatches, i would support a hatch with no reduction in the size of the open spaces. just following that we want to avoid excessive rooftop that makes the building more private than it is. it is just basically ultimately the amount of stuff that we have on the roof. >> we're glad to work with staff to reduce the amount of that stair, whether it could be reduced in size, reduced possibly by half. would that be workable? >> commissioner moore: i'm suggesting for the two privately accessible parts of the roof you

provide hatches instead of separate stairs. that's what i'm asking. that's what we're asking everybody else to do. it's a consistent question. my fellow commissioners may have different opinions. >> i'm not familiar with the hatch concept. >> commissioner moore: it's very common. >> commissioner richards: i support the project. i do like the idea of the private penthouses becoming hatches and staff knows it's something we've been doing quite a bit, at least since i've been on the commission. if there is access to the roof on the langdon side, no roof deck can be included up there. move to approve with those conditions. >> commissioner moore: second.

>> clerk: a motion has been seconded to approve this matter with amendment to restrict roof decks on langdon street sides as well as require roof hatches instead of penthouses for the private decks. [roll call vote] so moved, commissioners. that motion passes unanimously. it will place us on 15a, b, c, d, e, f and g for case numbers 2014-002541prj, env, shd, gpa, pca, map and cwp-02 for india basin mixed use project for an

informational hearing, final environmental impact report, ceqa findings, findings under planning code 295, general plan amendment, code and zoning maps and guidelines document, respectively. note that the public hearing on the draft e.i.r. is closed. public comment period for draft e.i.r. ended on october, 2017. comments resubmitted may not be included in the final e.i.r. members of the public will have 3 minutes to comment on these items. >> vice president melgar: there seem to be a lot of folks. do we have an overflow room? >> clerk: i will see if i can find one.

>> vice president melgar: you cannot stay by the door. you need to find a seat or stay out until we call you in. thank you. >> vice president melgar: folks, you cannot stand in front of the door. >> clerk: for anyone standing, you will have to find a seat, or you will have to stay outside. i apologize. we're trying to accommodate you with an overflow room.

>> vice president melgar: folks, this item will take a little bit and the commission will take a small break after this set of items. if you are here for an item on the agenda not related to india basin, you may want to take a walk and give your seat to someone who is here for india basin. thank you. >> good afternoon, commissioners. matt snyder, department staff. we have several actions before you today, regarding the india basin mixed use project. we will start off our presentation. i will describe some of the properties of the project and then i will hand it off to

michael lee, who will take care of the first action, which is the environmental impact report. we've been before you several times on this project. it encompasses 38 acres on the shoreline and bayview hunters point. it's immediately north and west of the hunters point shipyard. the project has two major components, one is 900 innis, along with india basin park. these are items owned by recreation and parks department. they would be the sponsor. the other half, 700 innis, along with open space. this would be implemented or developed by build, the official name for the sake of the

approvals. there are several actions before you, but i will immediately turn it over to michael lee, who will walk through for you. >> vice president melgar, members of the commission, michael lee, planning department staff. first action item is the certification of the final e.i.r. the draft e.i.r. was published on september 13, 2017. the public hearing on draft e.i.r. was october 19, 2017, and comment ended october 30, 2017. r.t.c. document was published and distributed on july 11, 2018. since the publication of the r.t.c. document, the department has not received any additional comments related to the project's environmental review.

after publication of the draft e.i.r., build changed their portion of the project by eliminating the proposed school and 66,000 square feet of commercial space. the land uses would be replaced by 335 dwelling units, so the revised project would consist of retail units and draft open space would not change. the environmental impacts of the proposed changes were analyzed in chapter 2 of the r.t.c. document. the proposed changes would not result in any new impacts that were not already identified in the draft e.i.r., nor would they result in any impacts that would be more severe as what was identified in the draft e.i.r. the e.i.r. found out the implementation of the project would result insignificant,

unavoidable project-level or accumulative impacts on historic resources, transportation, noise, air quality and wind. these impacts could not be mitigated to less than significant levels. as part of the planning commission's approval of the project, they must adopt ceqa findings for mitigation measures and statement of overriding considerations. we request that the commission adopt the motion to certify the final e.i.r. thank you. >> vice president melgar: thank you. is there a project sponsor? i understand that supervisor cohen will be here shortly. when we see her, i will introduce her and stand aside.

i will talk about the approvals that are before you, along with the e.i.r. certification, you will adopt ceqa findings for the r.p.d. component and build component. we'll ask you to approve general plan amendments, mostly related to the build component, the 700 project. we are also doing a -- several zoning amendments, including creation of special use, design, standards, guidelines, and finally, adopt of shadow impact findings for the project. so before i go on describe the build project, i will hand it over to stacy bradley of rec and park, so they can describe that

portion of the projects. >> vice president melgar: thank you. hello, ms. bradley. >> good afternoon, commissioners. stacy bradley, deputy director of planning at rec and park. we're excited to be here at this milestone phase and are really proud of the project and all of the work we've didn't with our partners. we consider this to be one of the most important undertakings of the park world in san francisco in our modern history. we have the opportunity to partner with build to clean up the site and create an enhanced parks through our development projects. i want to re-emphasize the partnerships. that we've had as part of the project. we work with the supervisor and mayor lee to create the india basin waterfront task force with all of the partners that you see listed here. in particular with build oewd,

pg & e, hunters point, parks 941-124 and everyone else that was integral to providing feedback and input on our design. to give you -- to continue on with the spatial imagery. the project is an area where the whole is greater than the sum of its parts. 900 innis and india basin, we have an opportunity to create 1.5 miles of connected waterfront open space that will bridge this critical gap and gets up to 1.7 when we include northside with hunters point.

the big green and india basin open space. since you've seen the concept design a few times, i won't go into the details, but our talented team has developed a thoughtful design that incorporated input from our numerous stake holders from over two dozen focus groups and meetings. we've received great feedback to refine the design to really connect people that live here today and who we expect to live here in the future. we think that our neighborhood outreach organizations make sure we have great representation from across the bayview and we think that the design is significantly better from all of the input.

to give you a bit of exciting images, this is the india basin short line park, connection to the neighborhoods. we believe this park will have positive impact on san francisco for generations to come. by the way, we're shaping how people recreate, participate in active play, enjoy nature, access the bay and most importantly build community. thank you very much. and we're here if you have any questions. >> vice president melgar: thank you. i see supervisor cohen -- president cohen, is here. >> president cohen: i understand there are some community members that will take issue with some portion of the project and i want to be clear that it's a

small, but vocal minority. i come to emphasize my support, my support for 900 innis at india basin it's important to note -- you may hear this in public comment. you remember when mayor breed and i championed the local -- what's the -- the local preference legislation. thank you. that's a very important piece of information. that will be used to incorp race and ensure that the folks in the effective area of this unit will get 40% opportunity or ownership or rentership for the units that will be built in this project. as you are aware, the city had acquired 900 innes at india

basin in 2014 and it was a very difficult feat. i was able to partner with mayor lee at that time as well as work with phil ginsburg to use accusation dollars to make that purchase. this particular project is in district 10 or else i wouldn't be here. it includes scenic views, waterfront access and, of course, impeccable, beautiful, natural resources. the -- what's unique about this development and many more to come is that it will transform what is a post-industrial brown field into a 21st century park. some people call it a legacy park. it will be a beautiful -- another jewel in the chain of open space that will connect the central and southern waterfront into one contiguous body of open

space of clean land that is clean and you all know the history of the southeast part of san francisco when it comes to clean land. it's a premium. there's a unique opportunity to design the properties so india basin becomes a seamless waterfront experience. if you can just imagine from crissy field riding down the embarcadero and south of market, through the mission bay area, through dog patch, down to india basin and bayview. that's the vision that i've been working with for the last five, almost six years. when i think about this project as well as other projects that are happening along the central and southern waterfront. and i think that this becomes -- this will be an experience ju e

unparalleled, with open space and parks. and i cannot overemphasize the need and desire for affordable housing as well as comprehensive amenities that come with such a development. so without doubt, we all know that the city's incredibly desperate for the need of housing. you hear it all the time. i'm enthusiastic. and i wanted to communicate that to you personally, not through an aide or a letter. i wanted to take the opportunity to look you all in the eye. i'm enthusiastic to bring an array of units to what will be a beautifully restored shoreline. i hope that you will join me in supporting the items here today. you will hear wonderful, thoughtful questions and possibly challenges from the neighborhood. it's been an ongoing process and there's a point of discrepancy

where i depart from some of my constituents, and that's concern to the tower height level and i want you to know i've deliberated it and poured over the plans and have had many meetings and i'm to a point where i'm comfortable with where the height limits are and i'm not nervous or have any anxiety around a slippery slope or creating a standard when it comes to housing, but understand that if we're going to be dealing with -- if we're going to be dealing with a crisis, it goes hand in hand with density. and that some neighborhoods need to speak up and be an example and southeast has been an example when it comes to our approach to development growth, controlled growth, and development. so i wanted to take a moment of your time. thank you for allowing me a few moments to share and express

myself. this has been an unhill battle. any project before it gets here goes through a lot of vetting and discussion. i want to recognize my staff from assisting me. it's been three staff members, but britney is the one that helps me to carry it over the finish line, but yoyo chan had a significant amount of time and energy, as well as andrea rust, former staff member. i don't know if you have any questions or anything that you want me to specific address. i hope my remarks were helpful. thank you for your time. and thank you to the community that's been with us advocating and changing and shaping this proje project to what it is today. >> vice president melgar: thank you, president cohen. >> the rest of the presentation, i will first describe the

actions. i will then turn it over to oewd to describe the development agreements. we'll hear from the project sponsor at build and s.o.m., who are the authors of the d.s.g. document. i wanted to bring to your attention the memo that i put in front of you just now is what this is. it's a description of the changes that we with like you to make in your approvals. it includes substitution ordinance for the zoning and the special use districts. if you don't have any copies, i have some additional.

>> very quickly, all right, i will just describe the build portion of the project. it is being contemplated in the context of the strategy. it's how we're looking to look at these large scale projects in a coherent, comprehensive, compatible way. the bill development project would include mixed use, predominantly residential. it would include 1,575 units. 209,000 square feet of nonresidential use, including retail, some community facilities. the project includes the big -- big gift to the city is open

space component, including the improvements of the basin open space, which an exciting city park would be rehabilitated. a gifting of another of the project, that would be under the jurisdiction and managed and operated by the park and several oth other. i will discuss the general plan amendments. there are commerce maps that will identify the site, the 700 innes site for industrial. we're looking to develop it for mixed use. similarly, within the urban

design, it's contemplated at 40 feet, because of a lot of the area being set aside for open space. the buildings will range between 20 feet to 80 feet with a couple of the buildings reaching 160 feet. there are small changes and rec and park elements that mention previous plan that was not officially adopted. within the resolution, we made planning code 101 consistency findings. we have these findings refer to all of the other actions. at this hearing, we'd like to add language to clarify that it will be relied upon by other actions by the city that are consistent with this project.

for the underlying zonings, what we'd be doing is making sure they're particularly zoned. it is indicating it's essentially park use. we'd maintain the underlying zoning nc-2, but for the majority, looking to rezone from m-1, to mixed use general. and, of course, we're also establishing a special use district that would do the work for developments to come. as noted, we delivered a substitute ordinance to consider as far as the draft ordinance that we sent to you last week. on a high level, there's clarifications clarifying that

the publicly accessible privately owned allow for entertainment uses, but some of the parcels being set aside for landscaping and such would not allow such uses. under interim uses, there's a provision that enables the housing for construction workers. usable open space, we have indicated an agreement that we could waive some of the usable open space requirements for the portions of the site, referred to as code, because it's adjacent to an open space. and dwelling unit exposure. we're changing some of the language to make sure that it meets up with the d.s.g. we've agreed to allow -- recommending that we allow some

higherly parking ratios specifically for grocery stores, with the cap established -- we don't go over that cap. and that we allow parking for the public park on behalf of the public on top of the ratios established, again, not enabling anything to go over the top for parking for the entire site. this is a comprehensive vision document for the whole project. it includes developmental controls for buildings and vertical development, but a comprehensive set of standards and guidelines for streets, right-of-way and for the open spaces as well. the final action we'll a