done great preservation. he's been one of the most honest project sponsor developers i met. i asked him this morning, can we change the way the street goes to actually allow us to be more creative around preservation and the programming of the site. does it have to be continue blocking the street grid. there are couple of blocks there that seem very big. anything you can do around that. the last thing, i will submit more detailed comments, we talk about -- i mentioned this, we talk about hydrology, what will happen to the ground water. yet, i bring this up every time, because we're in the middle of having the state cut our water supply. how do we handle population growth in the face of curbing

delivery of water to us. what's the plan so that the people come here can have water to drink and all of us who live here and have water to drink whitwithout rationing. those are my initial comments. >> thank you. just a question for mr. rich, just the process from here, where does this go? there's some competing interest of whether funds are spent or community benefits are spent on preservation or additional open space, affordable housing. it's a puzzle. how do we get to that and timing? >> as you all know, we're working hand in hand with the project sponsor and planning department to develop community

benefits package. we're on track with other large developments. we have a year into negotiation with the sponsor and we will be able to roll out what we see the contours of the benefit package in the next few months. we expect it to be in front of you for approval about 6 to 8 months. we have time. we're not any farther behind than we were with other projects. i think the watch word on this project, more so than ever, is going to be that we're not in a world where we can be all things to all people with the community benefits package. the difference between peer 70 where we're a couple of years back, and this project is somewhat profound even though physically they are similar. that's for two reasons. the cost of building anything

else but housing the key thing here, is dramatically higher than it was when we negotiated the peer 70 deal. probably 20%. secondly there's no public landowner, the port to take some of the pain for a benefits package. when we are done, they are going to people who have a particular constituency and disappointed here. that's going to be a balancing act. that is sort of what's on the top of my mind. we cannot have everything here, not even close. that's something that -- we run numbers. we will present those to you. that's going to be what happens. it gets tougher every time until the economics change. >> just on that, she mentioned

financing which is unlike port project when redevelopment was around. >> the regulatory climate around tax increment is as follows. we don't have the traditional redevelopment which we lost in 2012. it's completely possible to -- if we haven't lost redevelopment, i can see this project included in the redevelopment area. probably meets every criterion they have. we only get to use the share of the taxes that goes from the city and county. we don't have access to the state share. we haven't been able to get an agreement on this project because of that fact more than anything else. the thing that's coming down the line is called redevelopment

2.0. to bring back the new version of redevelopment. the challenging thing is on the cusp. we're trying to think through. can we be creative? can we negotiate community benefits that will come along in the future if we did get access tax increments. i can't promise now that we'll have that tool available >> i.f.d.s are off the table? >> i.f.d.s are allowed by law, not currently part of the discussion >> those are the taxes that you would need to operate muny and police and fire and things like that? i'm going to echo some of the comments commissioner richards made. there were some members of the public that touched on this.

it's a great site for housing and for redevelopment. there's vast areas of this. we tacked about the importance of it historic that are nothing. just wide areas of open space. that should be redeveloped. we're kind of -- we don't think about this site because we don't walk through it or bike through it. it's pretty much hidden back beyond some of these historic buildings. i was able to tour the main historic building. i think it's a great old building. i think the developer thinks the same way. what it could be or how it could be reused is difficult to imagine. it's just a vast open building with not too many windows and no roof. sometimes when it's all new, it

lacks authenticity. this may be a good case for a facade or a partial. keeping a partial portion of the building. it will be good to hear from heritage and others how this can be done. we continually see this passive, sit around open space and not soccer fields and baseball fields. you see this in mission bay where there's some property. some of it passes and others where it's temporary and those are the most used portion of that open space. i encourage you to look beyond the rooftop of the garage. there's a lot of open space here more active fields in recreational uses.

richard >> commissioner richards: i was actually very confident that the project wasn't feasible the way it was presented with the program. i like to see that with these alternatives so we can make an informed decision on which one of these we want to do with the proposed project. >> commissioner koppel: glad to see the project in front of us. it's great to see the east and the southeast materializing. i do see a lot of potential here for this site. some of the buildings are preservable, some of them are not. i took a tour of the site and it's amazing to see what the

current condition of some of these buildings are in. some of them better than others. lot of potential here. this is the first of many hearings to come for this project. we're not going to get too far ahead today. i am seeing lot of potential here and i'm in favor of some of the heights that are proposed and again, let's try to make the most of this parcels while we can. >> commissioner fong: 15 years ago, i was serving on the park commission, and i took the first tour. i got to study the opportunity there and we're watching it for the last 15 years and go through this legal battle and prepared to move forward. i agree with laura clark's comments about the longer, the further it's eroding. i'm excited to get going on it. >> well thank you all for your comments. public comment period ends on

the 19th. you're able to submit written comments by then and hopefully see you back here next year. we're going to take a 10 minute break and come back and take on the next item. >> good evening. welcome back to the regular hearing san francisco planning commission for thursday novembe. i would like to remind members of the public that the commission does not tolerate any disruption or outburst of any kind. please silence your mobile devices that may sound during the hearing. when speaking speak directly to the mic. state your name for the record. also we ask that if you're standing, if you could please find a seat. if you cannot find a seat, we ask that you go to the overflow

room, room 408. we cannot have people standing in the aisle. commissioners you left off on item 14a and b. record number 2016-00378 at 1600 jackson street a conditional use authorization and variance. on april 26, 2018 after hearing and closing public comment you continued the item to july 26, 2018. it would continue to september 27th. on september 27th, without hearing, it was continued to october 4th by a vote of 7-0.

on october 4, after hearing and closing public comment, it was continued to today november 8th with direction from the commission by a vote of 4-1. >> good afternoon president hillis and vice president melgar. i will keep my comments brief. quick overview from the last meeting which is a month ago, you directed project importance to continue to work on staff to adding dwelling units feasible on the second floor. i'm happy to report that project sponsor was able to accomplish that. we have about 11,000 square feet of the second floor which is about 22,000 square feet. four are two bedroom units which does meet the mixed requirement of the code. any dwelling units on any floor because building is 100% laud area it does necessitate a

variance. class 32 exemption has been updated. i believe that covers the basics. one of the notes in the project description, we noted that project sponsor voluntarily reduced it from type 21 to type 20. those are basically the high level overview. thank you. >> thank you mr. foster. this is the third time we've heard this. we're going to limit the project sponsor to three minutes to tell us what's new and we'll limit public testimony to one minute. i think there was a request to organized opposition. are those folks here? it's three folks for three

minutes total. >> i prepared a lot more than three minutes. we'll figure it out. good afternoon president hillis, vice president melgar. i'm jim rubin. we represent owner of the building project sponsor is whole foods. we have been here three times. this is our third time. you know about the project and the support of the neighborhood. i'm going to try to address what's new and what's before you today. i did read the transcript from the last hearing which was october 24th. there were specific suggestions and ask from a number of you which we've been able to fully address at this point. commissioner hillis started the deliberations that day, reiterating the support he's seen for the grocery store and wondering if we can expand the footprint of the residential on

the second floor to the half floor. in the course of the deliberations issues came up like no delivery. there were issues in the use of the building as a fulfillment centre. the project that's before you today has done all of what you suggested in expanding the footprint of the housing on the second floor, we've been able to go from five modest studio units to eight units consisting of one studio. one, two bedroom and one bath unit and three, two bedroom two bath units. real mix of residential that will allow for families. the building physically cannot be a fulfillment centre with the expanding residential and the grocery store. that is isn't going to happen. we're happy with the condition

if that's what the commission like to do. we're comfortable with the condition to prohibit the sale of distilled spirit and on the issue of delivery, i think that was related to the fulfillment centre. we like to reserve the right to deliver groceries from 365. thank you for your patience and continuing to hearing twice and bringing us back. we responded each time on each occasion to all of the issues that we heard about. what we have before you today is a true mix-used project. i like to say that the project that is in front of you, that you're considering is effectivelial collaboration between us and you as commissioners. i hope you like it and will vote for it. >> president hillis: thank you

mr. rubin. you've got two other folks joining you? i need three for opposition. you can myt smith split. the time. >> there's one other person. i need three of you. these are technical rules. we have another person there? jim, thank you. organized opposition by

volunteering -- [laughter]. you can keep your minute. >> good afternoon commissioners. i'm the chair of the neighborhood association. i want to start by bringing your attention to the letter submitted to the planning commission. over two years ago we stated our case housing over a grocery store. in that time, the site was originally slated over 60 units of housing. the project did not need a variance. we showed willingness to compromise with housing over retail or a grocery store. the project sponsor has shown very to no interest in the proposed compromise. instead we're stuck with the current proposal of eight units of market rate housing over the world's largest retailer and bring unfair competition to small businesses. it's a slap to the face to housing needs. they are not added to benefit the community. i say we're stuck with them,

these units will be here for the next 60 years. the city is giving away this benefit to amazon. they will always are the best credit and as the city changes a new multistory project goes up all around it. on the last meeting the question was brought up. who loses and who benefits? first thing, amazon stockholders will benefit. neighbors will have another grocery store in the area. the important question to ask for the neighborhood group, what do you have against more housing on polk street. the city loses. it's a perfect location for density housing. the city loses with on site affordable housing. small businesses lose and local workforce loses by forming a retail over high fair paying workforce. people that want to live in this

great neighborhood also lose. i want to urge you, we've been advocating for a win-win solution. the city is in a housing crisis. we had interest from developers that want to put housing here. we had interest in installer grocers. we have a project -- we can approve a project with a grocer in housing. please deny this project and let's move forward with a project that's win-win for everyone. >> i will echo what chris said. i think that -- i know whole foods was acquired by amazon for a reason. they are linked and that is inarguable. we have an opportunity to build some housing here and we like to

do so. talk. >> ditto. >> president hillis: thank you. i have scores of speaker cards here. i'll call some name. you can line up on the room. you'll have a minute. sorry in the shortened time. we've all been here before talking about this project. [speaker names announced] >> good afternoon. i lived four and a half projects from the project site. over the last few years, you've heard all the arguments for and against this project. there's only one question left, do you commissioners think there's a housing crisis in san

francisco? if you do, you can't vote for a project that is only going to provide eight units of housing when you can build a project of 50 or more units of housing on this site including below market rate. this site has a plus 90 store for walking and transit and 80 score for bike traffic. i ask you to do the right thing for the city and deny this project and demand that any project at this site provide the dense housing that this city desperately needs.

>> commissioners. we spoke protection of this project. we spoke about the high eviction rate in the zip code for 94109. highest in the city. we spoke about the eight homes when 50 plus can be built. we spoke about there's another amazon, another whole foods six blocks away. we resolved that the coalition opposing the amazon whole foods current in its current form and oppose conditional use authorization in support of

housing with ground-floor retail at the site to curb pressure on the evictions in the neighborhood. thank you. >> this developer has visions of creating a flag ship whole foods store partial of land that can accommodate a grocery store for the community as well as 62 units of housing which will include a good number of sorely needed below market rate dwelling units. all without displacing residents. commissioners, i ask you to deny the proposed project. i'm concerned that the neighborhood businesses would suffer and contribute to the loss of economic vitality of the unique mix of business in this

community. the negative impacts of this proposed project on business, labor and availability of housing for our city outweigh the positive benefits. >> thank you very much. next speaker please. >> good evening commissioners. my name stephanie p. i'm a resident of the richmond district. i'm here to urge you to vote no on the authorization of this project. ground floor retail with no housing element is suffering from housing crisis doesn't make any sense. i have no opinion about whole foods or an amazon air white house. i do have an opinion about wasting 20,000 square foot city lot. let not waste it. the developers claim it can't be further from the truth.

it is profitable to build 50 plus homes including at least 10b.m.r. units at 1600 jackson. i urge to vote no on this c.u. thank you. >> president hillis: next speaker please. >> good afternoon. we submitted comment letter earlier this morning, if anyone has any questions, i'm happy to answer that. given the short time, i want to highlight one issue. that's the board of supervisors ordinance from last october. they changed the use sides -- size limit in this amino acid district. it is not i--neighborhood distr. it's in the 121.21b which is

4000 square feet. you cannot exceed that with use permit. that ordinance, which is 20517 also provided that. this location has been vacant since 2014. it's not clear that it's legal to approve a 20,000 square foot store this spot. thank you. >> president hillis: next speaker please. >> commissioners. i'm here today in opposition to the whole foods at 1600 jackson. as a san francisco legacy business, the placement of a competitor owned by a retail killer directly across the street does not sound liable preservatiopresbyterian -- like preservation to me. commissioner richards pointed out the negative impacts that new whole foods can have on

existing pizes. whole foods offer to forego hard alcohol sales but compete ton beer and wine is not enough. beer and wine sales make up 70% of our revenue while spirits onlying for 20%. my employees families livelihood along with my opener are at stake here versus convenience or loss of a view. the plan should be denied on traffic impact alone. this site can be so much more than eight units inside a whole foods 365. we need more housing with retail below. >> good afternoon, i'm a union representative with the united commercial workers union local 648. we're a labor union that represent 4000 members in san

francisco. we are opposition to the whole foods coming to this location. we have a small family business that is signatory with us that has been in operation since 1965 that will be heavily impacted if whole foods is allowed in this location. we have a drugstore who's members we represent that will be impacted potential layoffs could result. it will be better for the other small businesses in the neighborhood that would benefit from the smaller store footprint that pay good wages to workers both full time and part time. this location is ideal for housing and we believe that this use would benefit the neighborhood and san francisco. thank you. >> president hillis: next speaker please. >> good evening. i currently live in an apartment building on the corner of leavenworth. i don't have a car. i walk to get my groceries. i'm currently walking all the

way over to hyde and call to trader''s joe. i can walk a way. it's getting harder to walk back. it would really help in the russian hill neighborhood had another grocery store. all we currently have is real foods, which is more of a health foods store. that's why i'm in support of adding this grocery store and i think it's a shame leave it so many years. thank you. >> thank you. my name is judith. i live at the corner of jackson and polk for 18 years. i think you heard it all before, you read our emails. i love our neighborhood and our neighborhood has problems. empty storefronts, lack of sig

vitality. our neighborhood is dense and it's getting denser. its density requires service. we do not have a full service from i--grocery store in our neighborhood. as you hear all the comments, please listen to those of us who live in the neighborhood and desperately the whole foods 365 market as it's presented today. thank you. >> i live at 1650 jackson street street. i'm in support of this project.

please see the drawing that i'm showing you there. people talking about housing in the area. this is a 5-block north and south and only one block on either side. there have been 21 high-rise buildings built there since i've been in that building. how many units there are but you people will know better than that. it's hundreds and hundreds of units. the area has been working hard over the last years. we love having specialty stores. that's exactly what they are and i will continue to use them and support them when i need high-priced special foods. i love them they are great. it is not the kind of shopping that people go to for their daily back and forth. it's getting little bit harder. plan

[please stand by protect ][plea.

use, and they have gone so far

to prohibit one city from a particular use of property. that is brisbon. they tried to hurt us and other cities in the state with a transit center project. we don't want this activity to be supporting special legislation. thank you. >> thank you. did you go clubbing here? >> i'm cooler than that, no. >> that is from the last hearing those who weren't here. >> i am going to start. lisa asked me to speak on her behalf. it is now 5:30 p.m. these hearings have gone on past any logical hour. she says that she is eye neighbor. she lives close to the project and she had to be live. oowen could not stay any longer.

>> i live in north beach. >> you are speaking on the project. we are on 1600 jackson. >> can we restart. i am speaking on this. >> you take 30 seconds. go ahead. i'm sorry. i hate this. project by project advocacy. 1600 jackson is the whole foods. i think that for once i have a nuance. you are accusing me of never having a nuance this. is a project the developer is looking at d.b.i. is looking at the thing that it would require to get the housing built and is deciding not to. you guys can use the stick of the condition use and force them to try to figure out how to build housings. so long as it is project by

project decision making why not, i would support building housing on his site. you should think through why they made that decision. what can due to make sure we are not doing the same rodeo over and over. the economics and policies make sure they are choosing housing every time. sure, it is a condition use. squash whole foods, i don't really care. >> thank you. next speaker, please. >> good evening, commissioners, research analyst. i want to concur with the neighbors on this being inappropriate for the neighborhood and concur with

union brothers and sisters, this is an inappropriate employer to bring to this town. 50 units versus eight units of housing seems easy in terms of comparison, we are talking about a company known for opposition to collective bargaining to a pro-union town. hopefully everyone in you the town news. marriott are on day 35 of the strike. one issue is the role of automation in not enhancing the lives of workers but in destroying lives and bodies. i want to think what it means to invite amazon and i want to urge you to object to bringing them in. thank you. >> overhead, please.

did you put something up there? >> i sure did. >> there it is. >> i am jerry dratler. this is better than the earlier proposal. however, the current proposal will be the largest whole foods 365 location in the united states. bigger than the two whole foods 365 locations in texas that is not good. the existing vacant for is 34,000. 14,000 square feet is available for housing. an additional 8,000 square feet of housing could be made available by shrinking the parking. this would be a triple win. grocery store, you parking, and additional housing. 1600 lombard is a simple

project. the planning department's support for this and the earlier proposal with 3400 square feet of housing is troublesome. there is a critical need for additional housing in san francisco. if the planning department did not focus on the housing department, the department is faming. >> next -- is failing. >> next speaker, please. >> i am karen dol. i live right next door to the proposed 365 site at jackson street. i support the project. between the six blocks there are empty stores and one held the big apple market the full-service store until five years ago. the other is formerly lombardis, since closing big apple we have

no big stores. the cheese store was before that and they were all fine. i see the addition of 365 as a compliment to the small shops. the neighborhood has been changed. the apartment buildings were more dense. we need an anchor store and full-service store to replace what is lost. whole foods will bring more people and help us to thrive. >> thank you very much. next speaker, please. >> my name is greg karr. we live a half-mile north of the store. i am speaking in support of this project. we need a grocery store, a general grocery store in this neighborhood. you asked for housing component to be added. the sponsor has done what you

asked, added as many units as can be put into the building on the second floor. we have the possibility of a grocery store which we are so anxious for and needed housing. reuse of 1908 structure that fits well on the block. it would be nice to see new life on the street and in windows above the store. it would be terribly disappointing to those of us in the neighborhood if this is rejected. thank you very much for the work you are all doing for us. >> next speaker. i will call additional names. >> president and commissioners and acting administrator. i am richard car deli lived here for 36 years.

>> he is the official zoning administrator. >> congratulations. i didn't know. >> we will add that time back. >> thank you. i have lived here for 36 years. i am in favor of the whole foods project. you well know the long process history of proposed whole foods at 1500 jackson. you also know how much the area residents want this neighborhood serving market. at your last hearing you challenged the project sponsors to provide house on the second floor of the existing building. they have complied. their re-- complied. i believe you must approved the ce and the variances. please continue your long service to san francisco by doing what the area resents want. thank you. >> next speaker, please. >> thomas madeline on polk

street nearby. the amazon bashes is bother some. if you remember the history when whole foods was in big trouble, they couldn't do anything with that. until amazon took over and reignited the project. there are many other grocery stores that would have been fine to have there, that being said i don't think any of them the locals would have the staying power. we need a full-service grocery store in that neighborhood. please consider the neighbors' needs. >> thank you very much. next speaker, please. >> hi. i am andrea baker i live on leaven worth. my family has been on russian

hill since before 19096. i am the fourth -- 1906. i am the fourth generation. for 1550 evans avenue you spoke to us all about wants to listen to what the neighbors wanted. what the neighborhood wanted. you talked about the power station and you talked about the development with the grocery store. our neighbors want this grocery store. i am 72 years old. i would like it before the coffin. i would appreciate that greatly. thank you. >> thank you very much. next speaker, please. >> good evening, commissioners, i am carol and rogers, president of russian hill neighbors speaking in support of this project. as you know, our organization's

support has been motivated by the overwhelming need for a full-service affordable grocery store in our neighborhood. we know there are many factors to be taken into account in making your decision. we are grateful for the patience and time you have devoted to considered the opinions and concerns at the hearings. we want to thank the project sponsors for the willingness to accommodate the additional requests made of them to find a win-win situation for the city and our neighborhood. as a result, we today have before us a project that provides both a full-service grocery store and a viable housing option that we strongly believe willen life venan area of our neighborhood that has been negatively impacted. >> next speaker, please.

>> good evening, commissioners, and zoning administrator. i have spoken to you before. i am sarah tabor. i live in the neighborhood. i walk past the jackson street site at least three times a week. i walk further down polk street where there are empty stores everywhere. i would like when i am coming back to stop and get groceries. i can't walk that far either. i am only 70. i would like to see a grocery store there before i am in the coffin, too. >> next speaker. i will call additional names. >> good evening.

joyce. i live on russian hill, too. as i listen to the speakers, i hear a similar theme for people in the neighborhood and outside or the merchant that are afraid of come peus. i live in the neighborhood. i would like to see a super market. 365 has done a lot every configuring with adding additional units and do things you ask them to do. i hope you vote yes and think about our quality of life. >> thank you very much. next speaker, please. >> good evening, commissioners, i am a 23 year-old san francisco native. i live on pacific and larkin. i am in opposition of turning the lombardi sports into amazon whole foods. our neighborhood has enough shops. we need affordable housing.

living in san francisco and growing up here i have had family members and friends pushed out due to lack of affordable housing in san francisco. please consider denying the request. thank you. >> next speaker, please. >> melissa. i live and work in the neighborhood. i am in opposition of this amazon whole foods store. i hope for more housing here. as i was looking too long ago. i couldn't find anything. there is a lot of food options in our neighborhood. thank you. >> next speaker, please. >> thanks for letting me speak. i am ray, aimer comment on polk street. i am here on my behalf and a number of community members asked me to speak on their behalf.

this shouldn't be as controversial as it has become. commissioner you said that. this should be a community building opportunity. unfortunately, amazon does not have the best interest of the community at heart. housing is what we need. 60 units originally would serve our community well for years to come. also if you are going to grant a company as big as amazon, the privilege as it is a privilege to be on polk streets, we should get something back in return. the city should get something major back for let's go such a big organization be there. the 8 units are not significant in my mind. don't grant the cup you will have zero chance of getting housing there. you will never get it back there. take the time to develop there and let us work with the sponsor for something the community could really use. >> next speaker, please.

>> sandra fish. i live two blocks away from the site. the decision to let amazon whole foods into the lombardi sports location will result in the very disease that is plaguing san francisco today, the death of quality neighborhoods by two two mean. much needed diversion and affordable housing unit in the neighborhood. second the death of small businesses who help support a living and thriving community. as an architect i can tell through is a sorry lack of affordable housing. it is a failure of a city not to allow opportunities for diverse living in the neighborhoods. the site of lombardi sports would be better served as much needed housing units. thank you very much. >> thank you very much.

next speaker, please. >> good evening, commissioners. i am a small business owner on polk street and reside in the area for 28 years. we are here discussing the whole foods opening a location in our small business corridor. i oppose this. i am a voice for myself and our community. this will be detrimental for smaller businesses. this is why the cup was formed. if this is approved be prepared for empty store fronts. this will impact our neighborhood. the proposal of eight units is a bandaid. there is a shortage of affordable housing. we do not need another grocery store.

i am asking you to make the right decision for our neighborhood. thank you. >> next speaker. >> roy chen. we oppose this plan. the planning department didn't require an impact study. we believe the impact is brodie 364 reside in the ecosystem bringing in unprecedented scale a rapid pace in the neighborhoods. these stores are distribution depots for amazon prime members. we view the retail development not as just a grocery store but a threat to retail. a quick poll and is from 250 senior low income residents in notre dame afters two blocks

away indicated they wouldn't be welcome in the supermarket whose pricing favors amazon prime members. they are concerned by the impact of the traffic. we need a complimentary neighborhood. >> thank you very much. next speaker, please. i am sorry for the short time there is a chime of 30 seconds left. >> i am lessly van dyke. i frequent the neighborhood. i love did you selection of local realtors. the property into house you go. as much housing as possible 60, not eight. big all -- big amazon will put other businesses out of business. i am against the development.

>> next speaker, please. >> hello, i am kevin gleason. thank you for making us feel like we are being heard. focusing on the whole foods in san francisco versus addressing the housing crisis that is forcing people outs is the discussion people are having here. considering the 40,000 square feet into a grocery store with one four blocks away is a waste of time. we have a whole foods eight minutes walk and four to five blocks away. delivery of groceries was created for this problem. it is seems we are getting closer to starbucks on every block problem. no longer a question what the community needs as the community does not need a whole foods within eyesight of another. it does need housing.

i ask this not for the committee but everyone does san francisco have a need for grocery stores or housing? >> thank you. next speaker, please. >> nick matheson. i think it would be short sighted to move forward with this project. not a day goes by that i am not look on the news to see something about the housing crisis in san francisco. i wili will end there and say yu would be short sighted to move ahead with this project. >> thank you. i will call more names. you. >> good evening, commissioners, i am patrick hop.

i urge you to vote no, because it is counter to the dentification policy of the planning defendant. the developer can provide 60 units, allocate some to below market units and make a profit. another developer is doing just that. this is a project that meets all criteria for model development. no tenant displacement and no encroachment of privacy. why are we wasting 20,000 square feet and under ground parking on grocery store and warehouse. please vote no. thank you. >> thank you. >> good evening, commissioners, i am a member of the alliance coalition. i am here like most of my colleagues urging you to oppose the condition use authorization because this is a great

opportunity to provide housing. i am talking about large project house you go and consequently they built the 60 units you will get 10 to 12 below market rate units that is handy. that is a drop in the bucket but it is better than nothing. i know some of the folks might recent someone who doesn't live in russian hill to speak about this. we are city residents. if the city has affordability crisis. i urge you to vote for the project to bring affordable units in housing. what is good for the goose should be good for the gander at 1600 jackson. thank you very much. >> next speaker, please. >> i am ann marie. i am in opposition of whole foods 365 at 1600 jackson.

i work in the neighborhood. we need more house us. do not approve the units. >> next speaker. >> i am richard. i live next door to 1600 jackson. like my neighbors i strongly support whole foods at this location. ours is a densely populated and rapidly growing neighborhood wand whole foods here would be within walking distance to thousands of residents. it would also almost certainly be very good for the retail environment of the neighborhood. >> thank you very much. >>.>> commissioners, overhead, please. >> thank you for your time.

housing, housing, housing. people have been asking us eight units is great, a compromise, why not. you got your housing. i want a brief visual to show you why we say this is not enough. that is 1600 jackson, whole foods, eight units no buy low market housing. one block away 50 units then if you have 1600 jackson with the project we are open to special use for a grocery store, you can see the significant value to the housing -- it won't make a huge dent. it will make it more significant dent than eight units that will never go away without a struggle. thank you very much for your diligence on this. >> next speaker, please. >> thank you, commissioners, i am