thank you all so much for coming. i'm very excited about today's programming and i'm so grateful that you all came out for this important event despite the much needed rain. i am deeply honored to be here. my name is jeffery tumlin and i'm the executive director to have the san francisco municipal transportation agency. before we begin, it's also important to acknowledge where we've come from. the geary corridor was muni's first transit line. the b. geary electric streetcar ran down here in 1912 and has long been one of the highest ridership service transit lines

in north america. this neighborhood has also long been one of the most and interesting neighborhoods anywhere in the world and home to very strong populations of japanese and african americans. this is also a place where japanese americans were expelled from, were sent forcibly to internment camps during world war ii. also the area where post war era the redevelopment agency demolished of blocks displacing thousands of residents and businesses in the name of urban renewal. geary street used to be one lane in each direction lined with businesses owned by japanese and african americans and all of that was destroyed to make way for the eight-lane geary expressway. and so though we're so proud of this project, we also must acknowledge the project area's history and to acknowledge that

this is a very small token of appreciation for what these neighborhoods have suffered and a start of healing. the geary expressway was intentionally designed to exclude, to separate these neighborhoods from one another. and so this project and working with the community and understanding the historic suffering, this project is designed in a small way to help with the healing and help restore the connectivity between japan town and the filmore. we're partly cloudy of the work that all of our teams have done, listening to community members to understand their stories and also to acknowledge the past and to also begin the healing. we've also learned a lot from past projects and delivery of this project. unlike certain other projects that have continued to drag on for year after year, we built this project very differently. we broke the work up into many

different contract segments allowing for more and more diverse contractors to be able to do the work. we collaborated with half a dozen city agencies skillfully in order to get all kinds of work done while we were here including utility replacement and paving and pedestrian safety projects and, of course, the transit priority treatment. we also did much of the work in what we call quick build style allowing us to move more quickly and efficiently minimizing negative impacts on the community and its businesses. it's also meant that although is this project has moved incredibly quickly, we're already delivering a 20% improvement in speed and reliability to the 38 geary bus line. [ applause ] and i'm so proud of my team for just fine tuning all the details that allow for safer passenger loading and

unloading and speedier departure, the changes to the traffic signals to allow the buses to be delayed at red lights, but particularly to these pedestrian crosswalks which were the first out here in five decades that allows peds could walk across the street into the square. simple changes, the changes that mean so much to community. so i am so thankful as well to the way my teams worked together with each other. i really want to thank liz bryson who led this project. dan pricen.

michael carlin from the sfpuc. public works who is here and all of their construction management and design team who work together. i'm grateful to the sfcta who helped us fund and get this project through the environmental review. i'm grateful as well to our contractors who work together seamlessly together and with the project teams to deliver all of this work on time and on budget. who helped us figure out how to deliver this project for minimum disruption. and so a special to the benefit

districts, the japantown task force. the filmore merchants and neighborhood collaborative. st. francis square cooperative. rosa parks elementary school. the tenderloin district. the union square alliance. the geary community advisory district and so many others. there are way too many people that i need to thank. thank you to all of you and thank you for showing up here today. and i would like to introduce our mayor london breed. please come up, mayor london breed. >> when i think about this project and what it's actually going to do to bring the western district and the

japantown community together in a different kind of way, it really fills my heart with so much joy because i can tell you as someone who grew up here. i have some witnesses here because i know jada, pia, you toeia, you remember what it was like when we would come from this area of buchanan. we would stop at every park. we'd hop the fence and hang out in the playgrounds there and then we'd cross this very dangerous street. this is not anything i would advise anybody to do or any kid to do, but this is why this was so important to me. this crossing right here was so important to me because i wanted people to be safe. i wanted to make sure kids who are at the ymca, rosa parks who are in the square. who are apart of this community and who want to be apart of

j-town and all the great activities and things to do here that they felt safe. so the field trip. i'm sure they probably just used the crossing here today to come over. so we're glad to have them and we're glad to see geary improve for pedestrian safety to meet our vision 0 goals to keep our people safe and to ensure that our transit system is working more efficiently. i see my folks from j-town, the folks who have been involved for so many years including sandy moory, ben nakasho. these are extraordinary leaders in j-town. and whenever there's a problem that they want fixed, you know, usually i get the phone call from sandy. so when this bridge was being threatened through this project of being torn down on on

webster. to and what it meant for safety and the community and so many of the kids and families from rosa parks elementary school fought to keep that bridge there and so i'm so glad that the city listened to the community and that bridge is still there along with making the crossways a lot more safe. but as jeff tumlin talked about before geary boulevard, this was a community of mostly african americans who live in harmony. i used to wonder when i hung out no matter how badly we behalved we were responsible for one another. we took care one another and we

built relationships and there was a real divide. and so what we are trying to do and correcting the mistakes of the past and build those bridges and make them stronger both with the people, but also with the infrastructure. and this project along with so many of the other improvements that are happening around geary boulevard to improve the ability for people to move around the city safely and also using public transportation and making it more efficient so that people use public transportation is critical to really also addressing climate change because 50% of the emissions, the green house gas emissions that go into the air and impacting our environment comes from private vehicles and so getting people to use public transit to continue to be an environmental leader. making muni more efficient. making our streets more safe,

building bridges, this project did it all and did it did it all while working with so many people in the tenderloin, in the richmond, the avenues and out there in that area in the western addition filmore connecting the city like never observer r before and i want to thank all of you all, the contractors, the kids, everyone that had a role to play in making this project. i see you having a role to play and making this a great project for san franciscans and starting to move our city forward. we have so many challenges and so much work to do. it is always nice to be somewhere where something incredible happened for the people of san francisco that puts a smile on your face. so thank you all so much for being here. congratulations on this wonderful project. [ applause ] . >> thank you, mayor breed for your strong support.

i'd also now like to introduce our state senator scott weaner who is also providing very strong support for us at the state level senator scott wiener. >> these are community that is need more transit and this is a great step forward. you know, as san francisco continues to wake up from our covid cacoon, we need to make sure people can get around. people want to be in cities, people want to be in san francisco and we need to make sure that the city is able to accept the people who want to live here because this is the

best city in the world and people do want to live here. and part of that means great world class public transportation. and -- [ applause ] -- and 38 geary is just one example of what we need to do. we need faster bus service. we need bus route transit and when i was on the board of supervisors and on our transportation authority, we went down to mexico city to look at their bus rapid transit systems which they deliver in three years from concept to cutting the ribbon and we need to be continually moving in that direction. more bus rapid transit, faster deliveries. sometimes we struggle with that. this was fast, but we need to make all of our transit projects happen quickly. we need to deliver these projects quickly for our community and i know m.t.a. and our transportation authority are working hard on that. at the state level, we actually

were able to pass a law last year to dramatically speed up delivery of bus rapid transit projects and we're looking to expand that law next year. so i see good things in the future for our city and for our

transit system. but, today, let's celebrate this huge win for the community, transit riders, pedestrians, and everyone else who needs to get around this city. thank you. >> thank you, senator wiener. next up, we have kelly chang. the transportation authority agency our sister agency. >> congratulations to you for leading this fantastic project in partnership with the other agencies. good morning everyone. on behalf of our board including chair rafael man delman. i want to say thanks to the folks who labored to build this project and the next generation of kids who's going to benefit from all the safety reliance. as we all know, geary is really a microcausem of our city. particularly now during the pandemic. it's such an important and critical service. now, this corridor does pass through five different districts from the bay to the beach reflecting all the diversity of our city and that's what you see on the bus. it's really true. where transit goes, community grows. so i really want to take this opportunity to congratulate the sfmta, sf public works and p.u.c. because these projects are not easy. this one really had full

features. we had bus liens, traffic signal upgrades and the sidewalk extensions. these are all features that make buses more reliable and the street safer for people walking and traveling. the transportation authority was proud to have provided over $13 million and sales tax funds as well as prop aa vehicle funds. so thank you to the voter who is have approved these sources and we hope to come back to you to do more in the coming years. thank you, of course, to japantown, filmore. and all the community members who remained involved in the planning station and of course in design and construction. this project, of course, will not only improve safety and reliability, but help support economic revitalization and jobs. maintaining and creating jobs

for our city. i want to thank you, mayor breed. you saw this project come before us at the t.a. and thank you to the citizens advisory committee. community advisory committee. and really just want to appreciate everybody's continued support. please keep asking for projects like this. please keep demanding safety and bus transit reliability and rapid transit projects. it's our pleasure to support the city and we hope to keep it going to benefit generations to come. thank you. [ applause ] >> thank you, director chang. we have three members of the sfmta board here. sharon lai, steve hemminger, and our final speaker, mta board member amanda eacon. >> good afternoon, san francisco. on behalf of the entire mta

board of directors i'm exciteded about the completion of the rapid geary project which is so important in accomplishing some of our key goals improving transit service and also improving traffic safety as mayor breed mentioned. it was noted my colleagues director lai and hemminger are here today and i want to thank them for their services. the geary bus lines are not just among the busiest in san francisco, they are among the busiest in the entire country where 56,000 and there's been a comprehensive suite of tools installed by this project to improve transit speed and reliability. of course, the red transit lanes bus stop optimization. as jeff mentioned, the quick builds alone improve transit service by 20% and i will tell you i experienced that this morning coming here on the 38r, that bus was flying down the street and it got here 13 minutes faster than google maps

predicted. thank you to the geary rapid project. it's so nice to be able to be early thanks to transit. that's just with the quick build improvements. so i cannot wait for the valuation of this project to be done once all of the measurements are done and see how much more even than 20% we are actually getting to. along with the full sfmta board, i am also deeply personally committed to san francisco's vision geary boulevard shows up prominently in what we call the height injury network. that's 13% of streets in our industry where 35% of fatalities occur because geary as a disproportionate share of traffic collisions. you're eight times more likely to be hit by a car when

crossing geary than the average city street. so just a couple numbers. 304 new pedestrian bulb outs. 74 new upgrade the crosswalks. 9 intersections with improvements as well as new pedestrian count down signals, longer crosswalk timing and also a reduction in the number of to just point, the number of total travel lanes from four to two and, of course, one bus lane in each direction. that's a lot of impressive numbers and i also wanted to share a story today about one geary corridor resident whose life has already been improved by this project. lou grosso is here with us today. maybe you can stand up or wave. [ applause ] thank you so much for being here. lou is a member of the geary advisory committee that advises the project team and provides

input on project issues from the community. lou is blind and lives just across the street from where we are gathered now in st. francis square and he is enthusiastic about the new crosswalk installed just down the street at buchanan street that connects st. francis square to japantown. thank you. [ applause ] lou recently told us that he completed his orientation and mobility training for the newly upgraded geary. today, he can now successfully walk from his home to his husband's work at calvary presbyterian church on philmore and jackson streets. [ applause ] lou told us this has been his goal ever since he moved to st. francis square in 2017. his mobility instructor had previously told him he was forbidden from crossing geary

because it was just too unsafe and the webster bridge was not an option for him. but because of all the safety improvements and with excellent training, lou can now cross geary on his own and make it all the way to the calvary church. [ applause ] thank you so much, lou, for your service on the committee. and thank you for letting us share your story today. we are so happy that your neighborhood is now more accessible to you. and thank you for working so closely with the project staff to make sure all of our pedestrian signals are loud enough so that they can be heard. thank you to everyone who helped to make this project a reality and thank you so much all of you for coming out today despite the rain to celebrate this milestone with us. thank you. [ applause ] >> all right. thank you everyone for joining us. now it would not be a project kickoff without a ribbon and a

giant pair of scissors. so i would like to invite back up the mayor, our key project sponsors, sandy moory who will be holding the scissors for us. and i would also like to invite all of you to please stick around after the ribbon cutting ceremony for some delightful performances by local groups in japantown and st. francis square. thank you all for coming out. [ applause ]

>> you need to be very careful. okay. are we ready? five, four, three, two, one. we almost had it. >> they are giant scissors.

valencia has been a constantly evolving roadway. the first bike lanes were striped in 1999, and today is the major north and south bike route from the mission neighborhood extending from market to mission street. >> it is difficult to navigate lindsay on a daily basis, and more specifically, during the morning and evening commute hours. >> from 2012 to 2016, there were 260 collisions on valencia and 46 of those were between vehicles and bikes. the mayor shows great leadership and she knew of the long history of collisions and the real necessity for safety improvements on the streets, so

she actually directed m.t.a. to put a pilot of protected bike lanes from market to 15th on valencia street within four months time. [♪♪♪] >> valencia is one of the most used north south bike routes in san francisco. it has over 2100 cyclists on an average weekday. we promote bicycles for everyday transportation of the coalition. valencia is our mission -- fits our mission perfectly. our members fall 20 years ago to get the first bike lane stripes. whether you are going there for restaurants, nightlife, you know , people are commuting up and down every single day. >> i have been biking down the valencia street corridor for about a decade. during that time, i have seen the emergence of ridesharing companies.

>> we have people on bikes, we have people on bike share, scooters, we have people delivering food and we have uber taking folks to concerts at night. one of the main goals of the project was to improve the overall safety of the corridor, will also looking for opportunities to upgrade the bikeway. >> the most common collision that happens on valencia is actually due to double parking in the bike lane, specifically during, which is where a driver opens the door unexpectedly. >> we kept all the passengers -- the passenger levels out, which is the white crib that we see, we double the amount of commercial curbs that you see out here. >> most people aren't actually perking on valencia, they just need to get dropped off or pick something up. >> half of the commercial loading zones are actually after 6:00 p.m., so could be used for five-minute loading later into the evening to provide more opportunities or passenger and

commercial loading. >> the five minute loading zone may help in this situation, but they are not along the corridor where we need them to be. >> one of the most unique aspects of the valencia pilot is on the block between 14th street. >> we worked with a pretty big mix of people on valencia. >> on this lot, there are a few schools. all these different groups had concerns about the safety of students crossing the protected bikeway whether they are being dropped off or picked up in the morning or afternoon. to address those concerns, we installed concrete loading islands with railings -- railings that channel -- channeled a designated crossing plane. >> we had a lot of conversations around how do you load and unload kids in the mornings and the afternoons? >> i do like the visibility of some of the design, the safety aspects of the boarding pilot for the school. >> we have painted continental

crosswalks, as well as a yield piece which indicates a cyclist to give the right-of-way so they can cross the roadway. this is probably one of the most unique features. >> during the planning phase, the m.t.a. came out with three alternatives for the long term project. one is parking protected, which we see with the pilot, they also imagined a valencia street where we have two bike lanes next to one another against one side of the street. a two-way bikeway. the third option is a center running two-way bikeway, c. would have the two bike lanes running down the center with protection on either side. >> earlier, there weren't any enter lane designs in san francisco, but i think it will be a great opportunity for san francisco to take the lead on that do so the innovative and different, something that doesn't exist already. >> with all three concepts for

valencia's long-term improvement , there's a number of trade-offs ranging from parking, or what needs to be done at the intersection for signal infrastructure. when he think about extending this pilot or this still -- this design, there's a lot of different design challenges, as well as challenges when it comes to doing outreach and making sure that you are reaching out to everyone in the community. >> the pilot is great. it is a no-brainer. it is also a teaser for us. once a pilot ends, we have thrown back into the chaos of valencia street. >> what we're trying to do is incremental improvement along the corridor door. the pilot project is one of our first major improvements. we will do an initial valuation in the spring just to get a glimpse of what is happening out here on the roadway, and to make any adjustments to the pilot as needed. this fall, we will do a more robust evaluation. by spring of 2020, we will have recommendations about long-term improvements. >> i appreciate the pilot and how quickly it went in and was built, especially with the community workshops associated

with it, i really appreciated that opportunity to give input. >> we want to see valencia become a really welcoming and comfortable neighborhood street for everyone, all ages and abilities. there's a lot of benefits to protected bike lanes on valencia , it is not just for cyclists. we will see way more people biking, more people walking, we are just going to create a really friendly neighborhood street. [♪♪♪]. >> neighborhood in san francisco are also diverse and fascist as

the people that inhabitable them we're in north beach about supervisor peskin will give us a tour and introduce is to what think of i i his favorite district 5 e 3 is in the northwest surrounded by the san francisco bay the district is the boosting chinatown oar embarcadero financial district fisherman's wharf exhibit no. north beach telegraph hill and part of union square. >> all of san francisco districts are remarkable i'm honored and delighted to represent really whereas with an the most intact district got chinatown, north beach fisherman's wharf russian hill and knob hill and the northwest waterfront some of

the most wealthier and inning e impoverished people in san francisco obgyn siding it is ethically exists a bunch of tight-knit neighborhoods people know he each other by name a wonderful placed physically and socially to be all of the neighborhoods north beach and chinatown the i try to be out in the community as much as and i think, being a the cafe eating at the neighborhood lunch place people come up and talk to you, you never have time alone but really it is fun hi, i'm one the owners and is ceo of cafe trespassing in north beach many people refer to cafe trees as a the living room of north beach most of the clients are local and living up the hill come and meet with each other

just the way the united states been since 1956 opposed by the grandfather a big people person people had people coming since the day we opened. >> it is of is first place on the west that that exposito 6 years ago but anyone was doing that starbuck's exists and it created a really welcoming pot. it is truly a legacy business but more importantly it really at the take care of their community my father from it was formally italy a fisherman and that town very rich in culture and music was a big part of it guitars and sank and combart in the evening that tradition they brought this to the cafe so many characters around here everything has

incredible stories by famous folks last week the cafe that paul carr tennessee take care from the jefferson starship hung out the cafe are the famous poet lawrence william getty and jack herb man go hung out. >> they work worked at a play with the god fathers and photos he had his typewriter i wish i were here back there it there's a lot of moving parts the meeting spot rich in culture and artists and musicians epic people would talk with you and you'd getetetetetetetetetett

>> you're watching quick bites,

the show that is san francisco. and today you're in for a real treat. oh, my! food inspired by the mediterranean and middle east with a twist so unique you can only find it in one place in san francisco. we're at the 55th annual armenian festival and bizarre. this is extra special not only because i happen to be armenian, but there is so much delicious food here. and i can't wait to share it with all of you. let's go. armenia, culture and cusine has had much cultural exchanges with its neighbors. today armenian food infuses he flavor from the mediterranean, middle east, and eastern europe. >> this is our 55th year and in san francisco we're the largest armenian food festival and widely recognized as one of the best food festivals in the area. we have vendors that come up

from fresno, from los angeles showing off their craft. we really feel like we have something for everyone in the neighborhood and that's really what it is, is drawing people to see a little bit of our culture and experience what we experience weekend in and weekend out. >> we are behind the scenes now watching the chef at work preparing some delicious armenian kabob. this is a staple in armenian cooking, is that right? >> absolutely, since the beginning of time. our soldiers used to skewer it on the swords. we have a combination of beef and lam and parsley. and every september over 2000 pounds of meat being cooked in three days. >> after all that savory protein, i was ready to check out the fresh veggie options. >> this is armenian cheat sheet. it's tomatos and mint and olive oil. that makes summer food.

and what i'm doing is i'm putting some nutmeg. it is kind of like cream cheese. in armenia when they offer you food, you have to eat it. they would welcome you and food is very important for them. >> in every armenian community we feel like we're a "smallville"age and they come together to put on something like this. what i find really interesting about san francisco is the blends of armenia that come together. once they are here, the way people work together at any age, including our grandmothers, our grandfathers, skewering the meat, it's fun to see. fun to see everybody get together. >> we call it subarek. it's a cheese turn over if you want. we make the dough from scratch. we boil it like you do for la san i can't. >> the amount of love and karin fused in these foods is tremendous. they come in every day to prepare, cook and bake bread,

all in preparation for this big festival. >> nobody says no. when you come them, they have to come tomorrow for the feast. >> what a treat it is to taste a delicious recipe, all made from scratch and passed down through generations. it really makes you appreciate the little things. >> it's one of the best festivals. it's outstanding, a marvelous occasion. >> we're outside checking some of the food to go options. i grabbed myself a ka bob sandwich, all kinds of herbs and spices. i'm going to taste this. looking fantastic. one of the best i've had in a long time. you know it's delicious b i have just enough room for dessert, my favorite part. we're behind the scenes right now watching how all the pastries get made. and we've got a whole array of pastries here. honey and nuts and cinnamon, all kinds of great ingredients. this is amazing.

here's another yummy pastry made with filo dough. oh, my god. really sweet and similar, it's lighter. this is what i like. we have a lovely row here. looks like a very delicious and exciting surprise. i'm going to bite into it. here we go. um. this is great with armenian coffee. now we're making some incredible armenian coffee. >> we buy our coffee, they have the best coffee. they come from armenia, specially made. and would you like to try it? >> i would like to try. >> would you like sugar or no sugar? >> no sugar today.

i'm so excited. really earthy. you can really taste the grain. i think that's what makes it so special. really comes out. i hope you try it. we're having a great time at the armenian festival. we ate, we saw, and we definitely conquered. i don't know about you, but i have to go down to the food. check out our blog for so much more at sf bites at tums abler.com. until next time, may the force be with you. ♪♪ ♪♪ >> first of all, everybody is welcome and we ask two things when they get here. one, that they try something they've never tried before. be it food or be it dancing or doing something. and if they feel like it was worth their while to tell one person and bring that person,

that family member, that friend down the street to come with them. >> we're going to have to do a lot of eating so get ready. >> get ready. >> shop and dine in the 49 promotes local businesses and challenges residents to do their business in the 49 square files of san francisco. we help san francisco remain unique, successful and right vi. so where will you shop and dine in the 49? >> i'm one of three owners here in san francisco and we provide mostly live music entertainment and we have food, the type of food that we have a mexican food and it's not a big menu, but we did it with love. like ribeye tacos and

quesadillas and fries. for latinos, it brings families together and if we can bring that family to your business, you're gold. tonight we have russelling for e community. >> we have a ten-person limb elimination match. we have a full-size ring with barside food and drink. we ended up getting wrestling here with puoillo del mar. we're hope og get families to join us. we've done a drag queen bingo and we're trying to be a diverse kind of club, trying different things. this is a great part of town and there's a bunch of shops, a variety of stores and ethnic restaurants.

there's a popular little shop that all of the kids like to hang out at. we have a great breakfast spot call brick fast at tiffanies. some of the older businesses are refurbished and newer businesses are coming in and it's exciting. >> we even have our own brewery for fdr, ferment, drink repeat. it's in the san francisco garden district and four beautiful murals. >> it's important to shop local because it's kind of like a circle of life, if you will. we hire local people. local people spend their money at our businesses and those local people will spend their money as well. i hope people shop locally. [ ♪♪♪ ]

>> i went through a lot of struggles in my life, and i am blessed to be part of this. i am familiar with what people are going through to relate and empathy and compassion to their struggle so they can see i came out of the struggle, it gives them hope to come up and do something positive. ♪ ♪ i am a community ambassador.

we work a lot with homeless, visitors, a lot of people in the area. >> what i like doing is posting up at hotspots to let people see visibility. they ask you questions, ask you directions, they might have a question about what services are available. checking in, you guys. >> wellness check. we walk by to see any individual, you know may be sitting on the sidewalk, we make sure they are okay, alive. you never know. somebody might walk by and they are laying there for hours. you never know if they are

alive. we let them know we are in the area and we are here to promote safety, and if they have somebody that is, you know, hanging around that they don't want to call the police on, they don't have to call the police. they can call us. we can direct them to the services they might need. >> we do the three one one to keep the city neighborhoods clean. there are people dumping, waste on the ground and needles on the ground. it is unsafe for children and adults to commute through the streets. when we see them we take a picture dispatch to 311. they give us a tracking number and they come later on to pick it up. we take pride. when we come back later in the day and we see the loose trash or debris is picked up it makes you feel good about what you are doing. >> it makes you feel did about

escorting kids and having them feel safe walking to the play area and back. the stuff we do as ambassadors makes us feel proud to help keep the city clean, helping the residents. >> you can see the community ambassadors. i used to be on the streets. i didn't think i could become a community ambassador. it was too far out there for me to grab, you know. doing this job makes me feel good. because i came from where a lot of them are, homeless and on the street, i feel like i can give them hope because i was once there. i am not afraid to tell them i used to be here. i used to be like this, you know. i have compassion for people that are on the streets like the

homeless and people that are caught up with their addiction because now, i feel like i can give them hope. it reminds you every day of where i used to be and where i am at now. >> right before the game starts, if i'm still on the field, i look around, and i just take a deep breath because it is so exciting and magical, not knowing what the season holds is very, very exciting. it was fast-paced, stressful, but the good kind of stressful,

high energy. there was a crowd to entertain, it was overwhelming in a good way, and i really, really enjoyed it. i continued working for the grizzlies for the 2012-2013 season, and out of happenstance, the same job opened up for the san francisco giants. i applied, not knowing if i would get it, but i would kick myself if i didn't apply. i was so nervous, i never lived anywhere outside of fridays fridays -- fresno, and i got an interview. and then, i got a second interview, and i got more nervous because know the thought of leaving fresno and my family and friends was scary, but this opportunity was on the other side. but i had to try, and lo and behold, i got the job, and my first day was january 14, 2014. every game day was a puzzle, and i have to figure out how to put the pieces together.

i have two features that are 30 seconds long or a minute and a 30 feature. it's fun to put that al together and then lay that out in a way that is entertaining for the fans. a lucky seat there and there, and then, some lucky games that include players. and then i'll talk to lucille, can you take the shirt gun to the bleachers. i just organize it from top to bottom, and it's just fun for me. something, we don't know how it's going to go, and it can be a huge hit, but you've got to try it. or if it fails, you just won't do it again. or you tweak it. when that all pans out, you go oh, we did that. we did that as a team. i have a great team. we all gel well together.

it keeps the show going. the fans are here to see the teams, but also to be entertained, and that's our job. i have wonderful female role models that i look up to here at the giants, and they've been great mentors for me, so i aspire to be like them one day. renelle is the best. she's all about women in the workforce, she's always in our corner. [applause] >> i enjoy how progressive the giants are. we have had the longer running until they secure day. we've been doing lgbt night longer than most teams. i enjoy that i work for an organization who supports that and is all inclusive.

that means a lot to me, and i wouldn't have it any other way. i wasn't sure i was going to get this job, but i went for it, and i got it, and my first season, we won a world series even if we hadn't have won or gone all the way, i still would have learned. i've grown more in the past four years professionally than i think i've grown in my entire adult life, so it's been eye opening and a wonderful learning>> good afternoon.welco

planning commission remote hearing for october 21, 2021. to enable public participation we are broad casting and streaming this meeting live. comments or opportunities to speak are available by calling (415)655-0001 and entering access code. when we reach the item you are interested in speaking to, please press star three to be added to the queue. when you hear your line has been unmuted that is your queue to

begin speaking. when your allotted time is reached, i will announce your time is reached and take the next speaker in the queue. speak clearly and slowly and mute the volume on your develop vision or commuter. at this time i will take roll. (roll call). we do expect commissioner chan to be absent today. first on the agenda are items proposed for continuance. items 2a and b.

conditional use authorization expected to be continued. members of the public this is your opportunity to speak to any of the items being offered for continuance. i don't see anyone wishing to speak. public comment is closed.

those items are before you commissioners. >> move to continue items as proposed. >> second. >> thank you. roll call on items to continue as proposed. (roll call). so moved commissioners. that motion passes unanimously. >> i would move to continue variance on del mar as proposed. >> thank you. item three draft minutes. members of the public if you would like to speak to the minutes, now is your opportunity to do so.

seeing no participants to speak. public comment is closed. commissioners, adoption of the minutes is now before you. >> move to adopt the minutes. >> second. >> (roll call). so moved. that motion passes unanimously. placing us on item four. commission comments and questions. >> yes. i want to bring up something quickly. i see we have an item dealing with a rail yard study. i know we've spoken in the past having a joint hearing with its mta that might be in the works

in the next couple months. i was hoping when that does happen we can take up informationally the pricing. interested in what the commissioners might have to say. i have also been hearing some questions from the public as to what to expect. definitely i'd like to see that included at a later date. >> assuming you're saying that just yesterday people read that particularly folks on treasure island is being picked up makes me think a general update is quite timely. many people on the board don't have a fullback ground how that

issue came up. it's really a far bigger issue than that. >> i want to bring up about first i want to thank you for inviting the commission for the equity commission. i attended with the task force with freedom west. in the future to extend that invitation to the commission as well if there's more equity in series conversation. i really find that kind of conversation actually enlightening in terms of the direct response from the community and how it also in terms of what is also being highlighted in terms of the recommendations or the housing element. yes, i would suggest in the future to extend that kind of ip

invitation to the commission as well. in terms of the budget for the planning department for the next year is really to look into the connection the planning department with the rep board. i believe this commissioner has suggested a position between the planning department and the rep board, that was never materialize. that's something we need to look into. i think we need to keep that as a priority for the next year budget and also perhaps under the community equity division. i would request the planning department start having training regarding rent board laws, what buildings are being protected. the planning department needs to

be informed under whether city or current division so that when we have this kind of projects coming in front of us that that is part of the cua findings. i would like to see that in the future. that's my -- what i would like to see in the budget for the next year. thank you. >> i just have a couple comments in response. one, we will make sure that you all are on the invite list for the equity and access series. this has been tremendously valuable in hearing directly from the community and in dialogue with them.

we'll hear on those invites. we have steadily ramped up our work with the rent board. kate conner has been our liaison and getting that information to planners as they need it for projects because we know these issues are going to come up and you should have all the facts about tenant issue projects. we've made tremendous strides in that, we're not there yet. if we need more resource nz thee budget, we'll bring that to you. we'll have new leadership to develop with at the rent board as well. doug johnson is here. if you want to say a few words

on that congestion pricing. that came up earlier in october. we can definitely accommodate -- >> this is a non agendized item. >> yeah. just some facts. >> facts are all right. thank you for the question though. we did reach out to the sf it tca staff, they indicated the study is currently paused and would look forward to a presentation to all in the next calendar year. we can leave it at that. i think it would be a good fit on that joint agenda. we can work onsetling that up.

>> i'd like to expand on commissioner imperial's request on information on tenant's to include updating us on sro protections. we're hearing about that but many of us are quite unfamiliar what rules are applying, what protections are there. both buildings occupied by sro tenants or individuals. if that can be part of the expand on discussion on tenants i would discuss it. >> i would only remind members that regarding the equity series, we do have a cap of three commissioners per session. maybe we can attend those on a

rotational basis. not everyone will be able to attend every event. if there's nothing -- >> they are recorded and we'll send you the link to the recording as well. >> if there's nothing further we can move onto department matters. item five. >> that's all i have. >> item six. board of supervisors, board of appeals, and preservation commission. >> manager of legislative affairs. the planning code and zoning map change sponsored by supervisor walton. you heard this item on june 22 this year with proposed

modification. special use district and include a grandparenting clause. the supervisor did not include the representations but did plan to include a second ord >> ordinance toinclude that. forward the item to the full board with recommendation. the ordinance on adu's which would enhance protections on tenants through the rent board. housing services located where the adu's are proposed and whether it will result and sever

severance reductions. it does change planning department process, we must wait for declaration before we can approve the adu. currently rely on the screening from by the owner. supervisor added to be a cosponsor. this was added to the full board with positive recommendation. at the full board this week. the landmark designation passed second read. the small business zoning controls in china town and north beach passed its first read.

the canada sun set dates sponsored by supervisor mannedle man passed its first read. the appeal continued to novembe. the parties are ever so close to reaching an agreement.

those against the project spoke harshly regarding gentrification

which it felt this project would exacerbate. the contractor to determine whether or not the bedrooms were within compliance. a lot of questions regarding the applicability of sb330. at the end of the hearing a statement was read into the record regarding findings to overturn. overall project was not necessary or desirable. the vote to overturn the commission's action was

unanimous. the project at 1525 pine street. the construction of a 18 story building. planning commission rejected the preliminary negative declaration appeal and approved the project on july 22 of this year. the appellant's issues were inadequate. it did not private interior spaces. the analysis of transportation impacts were inadequate. wind impacts did not improve the adjacent building. in support of the project about the same number in support of the after peel.

appeal. the private residents at the existing building an historic significance and desire to preserve the grub steak restaurant. all the appeal concerns raised were adequately responded to by the planning response in c.e.q.a. documents. they decided to uphold the c.e.q.a. findings and uphold the appeal. >> thank you. through the chair, i failed to recognize a member of the public who requested to speak under commission matters. we'll take that caller now. >> apologies we would like to speak about issue number ten if that's possible.

>> item ten, you'll have to wait until we get there. press star three again when that matter comes up. the board of appeals did meet yesterday and considered two items that may be of interest to the planning commission. the board heard an appeal of a building permit to construct a new single family dwelling at the front of a lot with a non compliant unit at the rear. the planning commission heard this matter as a dr in july and unanimously approved this project. the board denied the appeal and approved the project. four appeals on the project at

530 samson street. granting of variances. 218 mixed use tower that features reconstruction of the fire department station number 13. the appellant argued that the planning department abused their power and did not make appropriate variance findings. the housing element update to the eir. neither were action items, both were informational. strong consensus that the preservation alternatives and

the track the staff is on related to the draft eir is the appropriate course. if there are no questions or comments from members of the public -- or excuse me. there is a member of the public wishing to speak. >> is this the time to speak on the board of supervisors report. >> if you'd like to comment on the board of supervisors report. you have two minutes. >> i really have to comment on this because what happened on the appeal of the pine street project essentially was all pay to play and politics. it's a shame to see this happen with the planning commission process.

the entire planning process has gone down the tubes with that. the incompetence with that is beyond belief. this is going to result in litigation in all directions obviously. if the project isn't stopped there is going to be construction litigation by the hoa which hasn't even entered into it yet. for the the sake of the mental health who live in that poor building, i referred them to consult with two construction reinfect specialist firms.

eventually the hoa would have to do the lawsuit against the project, against their own developer who got the waiver that's causing this problem. against the city of course, the builder of the other that's causing the problem. this is what is happening because whose proposal did you take? if you can resolve this problem by putting lights down into the light well. you would have dead bodies being brought out when the electricity failed and there's no air conditioning and so forth. >> thank you. okay, commissioners. if there's no questions related

to the board of supervisors, board of appeals, we can move onto general public comment. at this time members of the public may comment on items within the subject matter of the commission. you may address the commission for up to three minutes. if it exceeds to 15 minutes, public comment may pe moved to may be moved tothe end. >> hi. good afternoon commissioners and staff. i've just encourage everybody, i just watched it this morning, the texas street hearing. i think it's important.

i sent you an e-mail on the 17th and i hope you got it, it included photos showing a project and included the demo and how it looked before the work began, the interior. this photo referenced the house on the right. like the photos i sent on the 14, this also had a extreme alteration next door, back in 2014. the one for today on the 21, that also includes a demo in the sales history. both projects had similar dem democalces.

i hope you read it. that's all. be well. be safe. >> san francisco for sale by new owners. the san francisco i knew and loved have been safe lifted, chromed, polished, colonized as a cultural innovative force. the transformation is accomplished in a smooth seamless manner by money and power. san francisco is too expense pif and wealthy. how has san francisco been colonized. it may not be as obvious here

but it is obvious in sacramento. the bay area council, silicon valley leadership, facebook to name a few. these bills are trickle down housing. this is economics as a matter of convenience. >> good afternoon, commissioners. i would like to thank teresa for her suggestion that the department put in some resources for training on rent board issues. this comes up time and time again as commissioner moore said she needs more information in making decisions.

it seems like director hillis has been hesitant to this session when it worked so beautifully. you got from the administrator how the rules work. you understood it and unanimously approved the legislation. there was no confusion. it got cleared up. things that have been festering for years and years with tenants not being able to have their housing services. i think you should reconsider having more staff training on rent board issues and that kate

conner is not a substitute. she could use the training too. thank you. >> good afternoon. san francisco land use coalition. i would like to continue on the appeal of texas street at the board of supervisors. the board revoked your a approval placing two rent controlled units with one unit which is less desirable. clearly, local and state laws applicable to this project. commissioners are supposed to do their own research and review

the packet before making their own decisions. this time texas street didn't even make their own own requires or rent control requirements or the deed restriction requirement. the default shall be to restricting the deed to low income tenants. these are all stated in bullet in number seven under kate conner's name the expert on the law. she claim the unit was not a rental unit because it was a room rental with the owner living there. if there are more than one

tenant renting rooms at a time that would constitute a rooming house subject to rent control. that's why the staff needs to be educated about our represent control ordinance. we look to you commissioner imperial to continue pushing for it. >> i live in corporate heights. i wanted to briefly revisit your meeting last week when you were scheduled to talk about 3714. a late continuance. it was so unusual.

the commission decided to bypass it's own rules and the brown act. we had 20 people lined up ready to testify. these are normal people opposed to the development. these people waited for hours. they didn't know because it had been truncated with no notice. i would like to better notice how that continuance was submitted? was it in writing or by a phone call? this is completely inappropriate. thank you.

p. .>> i would like to offer a rebuke of last week's findings on the deliberations. commissioner moore turned racial and equity to deny monetary sized resources. commissioner tanner said please deck out with a full kitchen. she cared more about the community room after all. commissioner imperial complained that group housing should only be allowed for people of victims

of substance abuse. many sro's are rented out at market rate whenever there's a vacancy. these were phony concerns. they don't holdup to the slightest scrutiny. deputy attorney doesn't advise the commission on the responsibility on the h aa an the density bonus.

thank you. >> my name is jeff. i live at 22 street which i believe is on agenda today. is now the right time to make comment? >> if it's on today's agenda now is not the right time. if you said 22 street that's

under the discretionary review calendar. i'm going to ask you to hold on. thank you. >> members of the public. last call for general public comment. you need to press star three to be added to the queue. >> several people have talked about process. the adequacy or lack there of. i was really impressed with the process regarding the signs. the store signs that came up. that seemed to go exactly right.

there were commissioners that had strong opinions that might not have been changed. there was a lot of controversy about it. you had staff go back and get more information and slow down the process. that is exactly what didn't happen with the case that i brought up to you. it would have had a huge impact across the city. the case of the pine street project had technical things. you had had a technical job is staff that came before you. there must be some way to control for that. if a particular staff member does a really bad job shouldn't it be reviewed and chaifnged chd rather than we'll just throw it

forward. the idea of the lights on the roof. we want $40,000 since there's so much controversy about this. where in the united states is there a precedent for that. what are the technical responsibilities for doing this. it would be utterly impossible to begin with. it vial lates all the requirements for health and safety. the bmr unit that project is go to go produce would be condemned by the housing inspectors. it will never be rented.

>> final last call for general public comment. i don't see any callers in the queue. i take it back. >> good afternoon panelists. i am interested in the 22 street commentary as well. i'm a homeowner and tax pair. i don't see a agenda listed anywhere? how do i know where our --

>> it's on our planning department website. >> okay. commissioners. now we can get into your regular calendar for item seven. case number 2018cwp for the rail alignment and benefit study for informational presentation. are you prepared to make your presentation? >> yes. thank you. i'll just share my screen. >> good afternoon commissioners. planning manager. good to see you again. this presentation follows on the presentation two weeks ago in the general plan transportation benefit. the rail yards benefit study set

out to make sure coming to the city heavy rail network delivered the critical service needed and all the necessary improvementses.ments. is critical to providing housing and access to service. transportation that is integrated with our communities and with the environmental justice guidelines we've also heard about in the last two weeks. planning and cal train staff will update you on possible development at the rail yards. i'd like to go ahead and introduce mr. harshy who will

take it yevment. next. >> good afternoon commissioners. i'd like to give a brief overview of the rail line and benefits study. it started in 2014 and finished in 2018. the five major components as well as on the right the current implementation efforts that we'll be updating you on today. in the first row the transit center is is being continued through work led by sftca to enter environmental clearance. that work is likely to be completed towards the end of this year and final report issued. the south east rail station suddeny.

the rail yard relocation as well as urban form and land use considerations is continued through a robust interrelations study. they are being considered by other major projects or currently on hold. i'd like to discuss the efforts we've made to center this work around racial and social equity. the study was lacking in racial and social equity the air an noise pollution disproportionately effected black and indigenous communities. staff had had taken three major steps to correct this. we review the rab implementation

record, staff will release as an additional appendix before the year. we amenned the scope of what was previously known to address the potential redesign or relocation of the train station. the study was renamed to account for this change. we advocated strongly in the regional pilot project for the discounts to be greater. at the conclusion of the rab, the planned town down expengs extension railyard.

this will turn the pennsylvania extension achieve the goal of a achieving high speed rail passenger rail service. immense benefits by ensuring automobile would be spared from conflicts with treans at mission bay drive. dpenting on the link it could require the relocation pep studies. the station at or near 22 street station as well as in the bay view.

fifty-eight weekday trains. placing the station among the top ten busiest in the system. there are no ramps elevators or escalators to reach the station. talking about the future of 22 street station. we conducted engineering studies to identify all station options should it need to be redesigned or relobinged in the event of a pax build. the distance between the

stations. six possible locations in the station area. three options in the bay view. i'm going to talk more about why we're looking at the bay view. this seeks to restore access that was lost in 2005 due to low ridership. a planning study studied feasibility and ridership with the potential site at oak dale. investment strategy included a new bay view station as a priority. recommended a station priority at eight meamgor policy

recommendations. acknowledging these changes we want to include new options for the public's consideration. screening based on a variety of factors, station connectivity, physical constraints, transportation needs, existing land uses, and plans for future change. this slide and the next are the exhibits that we developed for overlay and their surroundings for alternate evaluation.

as mentioned we'll have our second round of public out reach coming up. our first round was conducted in early october. workshops on the complex infrastructure projects taking place. along with an introduction to this work. the next round will focus on the pros and cons and gather public input on the ideas. we've maintained a strong focus on equity and reaching members of the community that have not been able to provide input

before. we've recorded the workshops in cantonese and vietnamese. we'll be happy to take questions on both projects at the end. >> among the several transportation analysis, we also explored preliminary cost an benefits of developing the rail yard site. the benefits can be further analyzed. the transportation needs must be solved. storage and maintenance as well as separations at 16th street and mission bay drive. redesigning operations at fourth and king will support service

vision and essential to the downtown extension and high speed rail projects. developing above fourth and king to support the bonding potential. the timing of these rail projects make this moment a unique opportunity.

california high speed rail is planning on four trains per peak hour. among these perspective. the site is over 19-acres and as an active storage and maintenance facility. it creates a significant barrier. at a time when central soma planning for 8,000 jobs within walking distance. today's station is vulnerable to earthquakes and flood inundation. the decision making on this site is also complex. cal train has a permanent easement for operating services. the city of san francisco has

land use authority of the site. the planning department took the lead in convening the relevant agencies and took the commitment to work together. the planning department, oewd and the mayor's office on behalf of the city, the trans bay joint powers authority. the group meetings regularly and acts as a clearing house. the transportation needs of the city are foundation to any development on the site.

>> thank you for that presentation. if there are no immediate comments from the commission we should open to public comment.

>> the same storage capacity and we're able to transition. the transition is shown on the caesar chavez slide. this is is what goes to the seventh street station an transit center. the other tunnel is the existing tunnel that go it 22 street and

rail yard. once the transition is achieved, we'll be abandoned and used for train storage. that's my comments for now. thank you. >> thank you. last call for public comment on this informational presentation. seeing no additional requests to speak. commissioners public comment on this item is is closed and it is now before you. >> great presentation. interesting to see all the developments in this project. in years past we've approved a considerable amount of projects, housing, commercial, all up and down the eastern side of the city. very pleasantly surprised at the good work the department is

doing. >> i have a question for staff. in the analysis of stations, are you folks looking at other joint uses that may be appropriate with station locations? >> the answer is is definitely, yes. there's a lot of opportunity depending what final form the stations take. the 22 street station is underneath the freeway there may be opportunity if we figure out how to move it into the tunnel

entirely or partially and work that out with cal trans. making sure we anchor any future station within the community context in which it currently occupies. surrounding residential commercial stake holiers how we might see. >> my second question would be on one of the places you show the land uses within the context of the six potential sites. i'm pretty sure you folks must have looked at it. to the east of all those land uses that you presented are

fairly significant large projects that are in the process of development and i'm just curious as to how proximity to those made impact station location or selection? >> thank you for that question, absolutely, one of our evaluation criteria is looking at jobs and housing in areas adjacent to the station. pier 70 and others go into our considerations for pros and cons for various station alternatives. >> thank you.

>> great work. very interesting. lots of complexity and many years of development. many years go into the future. just curious, what if at all is is our department able to do in thinking about the land uses nearby to these stations. one area i'm interested and this may be down the road thinking about potential for capturing any value created through new stations and channeling that into more affordable housing. whether it's a higher inclusionary rate that can be sustained or make sure the valley that's generated doesn't go for higher profits for for profit developers but go into

our investments being made. whether that be later on in the process? >> i'll take the first response to that an hand it over. we have leaned heavily to the community equity division an taken into account that we want to bring more transportation access to the city and anti displacement and stabilization need to lead. a great phrase is is yes and. yes we want more rail access and we want more okay success to

these sites. we're learning p it and learning about it from our colleagues. >> thank you. yes, in the rab study speaking to just of the rail yards, it was a early conceptual look in determining where that value should go. it's hard to say where that value would be -- what it would contribute to. it under mines around the rail yards area. with the increase around some of the stations commissioner funning mentions would bring more affordable housing an impact fees in the eastern

neighborhoods. certainly a topic we'll continue to be looking at and analyzing. >> thank you very much. just curious with the out reach you've been able to have. i'm assuming those have been virtual. preliminary or anecdotal feedback have that go withing what the sense is the out reach is is yielding for you? >> absolutely, we very much hoped when we were planning these in the summer we would hold them in person, that didn't prove to be probable. we held two workshops with language support. the first had approximately 50 attendees. the second had a few more than 20 attendees. there was a fair even split of

participation with regard to the bay view site. the first round focused on providing the complex background of projects that brought about this station's work. we want to make sure we catch everybody up especially those who have not been part of the conversation before before we dive into the location stations. we have preliminary heard from people who attended these that a lot of people are interested in 22 staying where it is. they are interested in seeing it move to mariposa with major transit lines there. in the bay view there's questions about when additional

infrastructure improvements may have. great conversation so far and we're looking forward to continuing it in november. >> thank you so much. i'll look forward to hearing it as the work continues. >> thank you. excellent work. fascinating in the second decade talking about transportation improvements. i have one question. it may be only my interest. is it at all possible to use maps that show projected planned approved project as an overlay or under lay in order to put these rail stations more into context of approved projects. we've been approving projects in this particular corridor for a

very long time. it may be helpful for people to not just hear the name of the a station but see the project. >> funny you should ask, we prepared that specific map. it will be at our second round of workshops.

>> if there's nothing further from you all, we can move onto the next item. senate bill's nine and ten. informational presentation. >> thank you. good afternoon commissioners. planning department staff. we are going to talk to you about sb9 and sb ten. sb9 is more complicated and then

we'll move you on. to start sb10 we'll give you the big overview summary and delve into the details of this. it allows duplexes in rh1 and prohibits objective zoning provisions that include 800 square feet per cars he will. the sun set park side and outer, mission, visitation valley and

hunter's point. it has to be located in rh1. it has to be owner occupied or vacate for three years. i want to cover what parcels are not eligible. housing that's subject to rent control. housing that's been subject to ellis act. historic districts or listed historic resources. you can't sb9 a parcel and sb9 it again. this is meant to prevent developers from buying up a whole series of parcels and sb9ing them in a row.

our total number of parcels in hr1 which includes rh1, rh1s. single family homes about 71,000 in san francisco. we want to take out our estimate based on our data of single family homes. left our historic resources. we're left with about 51,000 parcels. i mention these lot split scenarios. first you have to meet those eligibility criteria. you have two options. you can either demolish or you

can reconstruction. variation of adu's can be added as well. with the lot slit. same eligibility criteria. you do your lot split. in most san francisco lots we've been envisioning as one twenty five feet wide and one twenty feet deep. you have your original structure. you can keep that and turn it into a duplex. or you can demolish it and make

it into a duplex. and with both options there are a number of options for adu's as well. you have a two story building garage on the ground floor. you would demolish your finningle family home. you have a new building in the back and a new building in the front. here. you would demolish your single family dwelling and build a new duplex in the front and a adu in the rear. another option where can you do a vertical addition with a new adu replacing the garage at the ground floor. this would also yield three units. this one is an even lot split.

keep your existing single family dwelling in the front. and lot split in the rear. this is three units as well.

it prohibits the correction of non conforming buildings under the lot split. that covers all of our eligibility. eligibility and feasibility are different. when thinking about some of the considerations that moves something into the feasible categories these are the buckets we want to think about. particularly with fire codes. with underground utility connection it the street. you have to have fire safe to get through the rear property. depending how many units you are doing, you might need sprinkler

requirements as well. the 35-foot height limits still a applies. sdu's can be designed in the rear. rear access construction might be complicated and expensive. we're still figuring out what that would look like. it does require owner occupancy for three years. if you split a lot it requires the owner to sign an affidavit that you'll stay put in your lot for three years. it may be a disincentive for somebody who want it stay in their place or it may not be. we're hiring a consultant that

will help us do more detailed analysis. there's a high market value for single family homes. we don't know if a duplex would be more valuable than a single family homes. if they are considering adding a unit. likely higher construction costs than a typical lot. property tax reassessments with any of these scenarios. i want to turn towards racial an equity assessments. the tenant okay pried housing is inject. if there's an owner occupancy requirement for three years after the lot split. we want to make sure that it's

not just an affidavit but we have ways to verify if there has been a tenant and has been owner occupied. existing tools we can use. new tools we can use to verify we recognize it's very important to understand what the occupancy has been of these units. this is is a snap shot of our sb9 eligible neighborhoods. i want to point out the first three neighborhoods on the list. those three neighborhoods surprise fifty three percent of our sb9 parcels in those spaces. there's a huge range of who lives in this zoning.

both in terms of household income and racial demographics. the percentage of single family homes is fairly high. the lowest percentage is in visitation valley. it may or may not be higher than a single family value. financing and risk for low income homeowners. we hope to overcome this with

technical assistance grants and oarming things. we may want it provide housing in areas that previously were red lined. if coupled with down payment assistance, rental assistance et cetera. specifically the equitable sb9 implementation would be developing financial product to access equity. creating wealth building programs for black, indian and people of color. both access in their homes and take advantage of new properties developed through sb9. we may want to create assistance with the permitting process. permitting can be complicated and difficult. we're still analyzing the

picture of homeownership and race in the city. administrative approval. no conditional use authorization needed for demolition. no noticing under section 311. in addition, no c.e.q.a. is needed. there is local discretion to tailor a sb9. lots smaller than 1200 square feet are possible under local ordinance. adu's total units can be taxed at two for the lot slit. the jurisdiction can elect to prohibit adu's. rear an side set backs up to four feet.

it is possible that if did you a duplex, you could create a very large one unit and small unit. what those would look like under an sb9 project. our next steps is is i mentioned we'll have a financial analysis by the end of this month. there's a tremendous amount of interagency coordination that will be needed for that. we want protocols in place and websites to support all this. there may be a desire for code enforcement to a way that sb9 is

is implemented and the city may want to see. we'll update you on the process and procedures. reminder, january first is the time all of this goes into effect. sd10 allows a local ordinance to increase housing density by up to ten units per parcel. all of the rest of that is determined by local control. that is it. i'm available to answer questions. kate copper is also here. >> thank you for that presentation. if there are no immediate questions by the commission at this time we should take public comment.

>> i'm speaking on my own behalf. both sb9 and sb10 were not consensus bills. both passed by narrow margins. the massive carve outs in major rural areas. the majority of california voters are opposed to sb9 and ten. the authors and willingness to testify in committees on behalf of her own bill but sending a surrogate instead. no data to support it will be accepted because there is no data. no coverage in the media how it will offer partner, business, consultant. it shows the eligible parcels

focused in districts four, seven, and 11. densify the west side with a narrative. let narrative was amplified with the former housing action coalition. the spirit has been fully enbraced by the planning department for convenience. thank you. >> this is zach with young development. we must support low income bipoc

homeowners within the city. in tandem with sb9 the city must include support and assistance with navigating complex permitting. target the protection and uplifting of the communities many homeowners of color will leave san francisco. the rent and sales price needed -- will not benefit moderate or

extremely low households in any way. sb9 is an upzoning of white communities where we'll see a bulk of activities. stronger and more robust communities. protections for current low income bipoc homeowners. we can't continue to ignore the displacement of communities of color. exacerbate the racial disparities in the city. thank you for your time. >> i thank him for his commentary on racial and social

equity as it applies to sb9. i attended a san francisco housing coalition meeting where kate conner came an spoke about this briefly. she mentioned that homeowners that wanted to do sb9 had to make sure their mortgage was fully paid off before they could apply for the program. this was not brought out today in the presentation. another thing she said, it's really hard to put the units onto a lot. a given city lot. the lawmakers are trying to pass a law that won't really -- it's not feasible.

one further thing is a person can't buy up a number of lots but somebody else can buy the lot next door. let's see what's going to come of this. it's really puzzling. thank you. >> hi. i wrote an e-mail to mrs. conner. thank you for your presentation. it's hard to digest all that but thank you. i don't know if the property tax bills are going out already. i think they are going out soon. i think it's important to put notice in our bills telling

homeowners that, hey, this bill is out there. it may not help you, it may help you. but it may not help you. don't sell off your property just because somebody makes it sound like it's really good. contact someone who can give you good advice whether that's the planning department or the tenant's department. it was mentioned in the staff report, there needs to be protection for vulnerable long time homeowners especially elders. a lot of them in the city. that needs to be in there sooner rather than later. if you're worried about those neighborhoods, you could adjust the demo cuts. 25% or more at the local level. it's pretty high now, i think i pretty well made the case the

last seven years. please consider that, if you're not going to c it sooner rather than later for the city. do talk tock the supervisors about pitting some notice in the property tax bills. january first is right around the corner. thank you. take care. be well. be safe. goodbye. >> i'm a planner. [indiscernible]. i want to thank planning for their work in providing informational work. the racial and social equity analysis. we're concerned that bipoc will

be left with displacement. properties will be less expensive. neighborhoods with a concentration with a high interest -- [indiscernible]. when it come it the protections for families at risk of displacement. we want to ensure an adequate way to enforce this. any parcel with a tenant three years prior to displacement. we don't believe we have accurate data tracking this. this leaves us very concerned in order to protect renters from being displaced. we need to consider this as soon as possible. in addition while sb # is9 is

believed to increase housing choice, it does nothing for moderate, low, or extremely low households. we believe if we want to -- [indiscernible]. we need to act quickly in implea ming programs that prioritize households of color before we see another protection bill, cause harm, or force displaced communities. thank you.

>> i just had a question regarding sb9. you know, they talk a lot about parcels of existing homes. how about parcels with no homes. empty rh1 lots. the scenario of proposing a new duplex on it. i'm just trying to see how that will play out. thank you. >> good afternoon commissioners. with the development agency. we certainly concur with a number of the thoughts raised by some of the prior speakers just recently regarding racial and

social equity. as well as a number of points that planning staff raised in the report. those have been highlighted. i want to focus on a couple of key issues here. this needs to be tailored locally. going with some of those suggestions. two, we believe that we're going to really need to see additional local legislation in the form of an affordability overlay and particularly in sensitive communities. you can look at the mapping at sensitive communities dot org. we think this will be a critical step in upzoning and those that follow. this was in a sense an opportunity for value capture.

whatever wealth is created is shared among the community as well as the property owner, the developer. things such as additional affordable housing in those units most principally. we have some concerns about the framework overriding the voters. whatever is implemented we want to see that option taken under racial equity and social lens framework as it goes towards implementation. thank you. >> okay. members of the public, last call

for public comment on this item. you need to press star three. >> i want to issue my support of sb9 and ten. they are upzoning and allowing more housing to be build. lot sizes are routinely in the five thousand foot range and above. it only effects a couple thousand lots. it is a good opportunity. for people who are concerned about the homeowners being examed out of their home, i think that is something that we -- the planning department and the city can create programs to ensure that the homeowner retain

equity in the development and be the developer that oafns the goes forward.fee did he everraln ownership going forward. capture the value and make them lottery units so you can't really use them for your relatives. that's the other option you can go. thank you. >> good afternoon.

i would like to thatching staff for their excellent analysis. i have one question i hope can be address at some point. tailor implementation has any dates or deadlines or sun set provisions associated with it. a time san francisco would have to act to implement some of the measures for reasonable implementation of this bill. thank you very much. >> okay. commissioners. that will conclude public comment on this item. the item is before you. >> thank you so much. i actually just wanted to

correct a little bit of the public comment. the assertion that was made was by first speaker at that meeting. we have not looked at what the financing would be by the lot slit. that was an assertion that was made by the speaker before me. thank you. >> any other commissioners. >> thank you. thank you for the presentation. i really appreciate the comments that are here in our memo an the consideration that the city

needs to think about in terms of sb9 and ten. i'm particularly worried about sb9. sb ten is another decision. i want to just a scenario here. i've seen this before in terms of the single family homes. i recognize that the single family homes are not something that are subjected under sb9. perhaps there's a reason why the planning department is looking to the single family homes. i would like to the staff to have training in regards to the just cause. single family homes may not be sunt to control of the rental price but there's just cause

eviction. there are cases i've seen where the homeowner has tenants living within the building. this has been happening for the last how many years now? where the owner will end up selling the home and the tenants are subject to leave without proper notices and harassment. a banker will take over or a new owner will take over. this is something that i am very -- this is very concerning to me. this bill and how it will effect. the cosine of displacement that will happen is nothing something that will be trackable, i think. i believe we have the housing

inventory. if they will look into that an look into occupancy for particular project that may be under the single sb9. is someone respond to me about the housing inventory in the process and will that be captured in the tenant occupancy for single family homes? >> are you asking about a rental registry. >> yes. >> it won't be up and running for another year. since sb9 goes into effect

january first. we developed a list of lengthy ways we wanted to be able to confirm to make sure there have been no tenants. looking at rent board records, voter rolls other ways of looking at owner occupancy. there's a pretty robust paper trail. we can look at property tax records and the mailing address on that. it should have the 7,000-dollar homeowner reduction on that. if they've been reporting any cosine of income from rental properties. utility bills and vehicle registrations. we can request documentation to see who has been in those units.

that's our initial list and we'll look at other ways. we want to make sure there's no tenants and that it was owner occupied. >> thank you for that. i guess that's something we'll have to look in terms of the process of checking on the tenant occupancy. another question or more of a challenge of interpretation of the single family homes. they are in housing or many single family homes are rent controlled. does this bill consider the single pham ri home as part of the rent control. >> that's an excellent question. you have price controls and

eviction controls. there are limited circumstances where a single family home may be subject to price controls. if there's continued tennancey since 1996, multiple single family homes on a single lot. these are few and far between. we're looking at price control. we're not looking at just cause eviction. >> okay. thank you for that clarification. i think that's something that we have to look into as many comments are saying in terms of the robust protections. how do we prevent the cosine of

low income homeowners from preventing and displacing. these are the things that the planning department and board of supervisors are considering in terms of tax cut protection in terms of demolition. these are very important, that i do worry about the indirect effect. even if we look at the rent board, we will not capture. it will capture the kind of information that will cause just cause evictions. another question that i have is about our local adu program. our local adu program has rent control protection, with this it

will not have local rent control protection. >> thinking about accessory dwelling units. you have to meet all the code requirements. you're getting wafers from density and development standards. the adu's that are assumed in the state legislation are considering the minute stair y'all afforded by the state program. we're not considering local adu's because you need some sort of code release. these need to comply with all of our code requirements. >> thank you for this presentation and i would like to hear what other commissioners have to say too. thank you.

displacement. being able to add units for generate more wealth an value for themselves and families.

i want to be clear had

. >> has the development given thought to how this happens. any note -- would the neighbors be notified with any type of notice or is that something we have to include as a city for enabling local noticing regulations. >> currently right now how we look at permits is they are not subject to our standard 311 process. that's something we can definitely look into especially with our notification with

tenant occupation. that's definitely something we can look into. >> it wouldn't be the follow-up, we have to figure out what that notification is for. there isn't a hearing to come to or that response they can have. it seems funnily to me, i happen to know this and that happen that we could raise a flag. another way if there is something amiss for it to be brought to the city's attention. the other thing i want to ask that i heard from public commenters. could you bring back up the chart you have that shows the different neighborhoods and spread across those neighborhoods. it's really important to understand that where we're talking about in the city, where it shows it was feasible and where it applied and the diversity of the homeowners.

a low of 70% which out paces by far the median homeownership rates. you see a wide diversity of race. asian and varying in the african american community. not evenly distributed across the city.

i think really working with oawc and financial institutions for what that would look like. do we need a public bank. doing these things that have financial component but also have a public policy component that we want to achieve. lastly, my other big concern is the objective design standard. we have two months and a week. we have a couple holidays in there too. on january one, someone comes to the door and submitting an application. are we having staff go through

and look at anything with an objective standard and apply it. what tools do we have for staff to review those compare today what we might need in the future. >> we have two months. if we wanted to potentially come up with additional standards. as far as making sure the units created are similar in size. when you look at the lot split provision. there's that sixty/40% split. having something similar for units. as of january one if nothing

else changes between now an then, they'll have to meet our code requirements which are objective. if we wanted to come up with something additional

>> we can have it maintained even as we adapt to state laws we didn't necessarily write. i'd like to hear from other commissioner what's they're thinking about and again, thank you, staff for the great analysis and appreciate your work and presentation. >> commissioner moore. >> i see commissioner diamond's name before me. >> you're right. that's my oversight. go ahead, commissioner diamond.

>> i want to sign on for the comments made and add my voice to the concerns they raised. i don't want to repeat those in the interest of time but maybe raise a couple of other issues for discussion. commissioner tanner mentioned the need for high level of enforcement and i agree with that and a want to draw particular attention to the requirement there's a three-year occupancy retired after it's bit and i want to ask how we think we enforce and what the penalty is given the building will already have been constructed. >> that's able excellent question, commissioner diamond. that's something we're struggling to figure out if we have an enforcement mechanism.

the state law, what it actually says if you have to submit an affidavit your intent to occupy for three years and have to look into and that see if there's any possible way we can apply our own enforcement procedures. you're right it's kind of a catch 22. how are we going do that to abate that type of violation would be very difficult but that is something we're looking into i think it would also have to be done by ordinance. we're looking into that but yes, that pose as a challenge, for sure. >> strikes me as incredibly important we figure out what the penalty is for non-compliance to deter this. the goal of the ordinance is to increase housing and that's incredibly important but we have

to build in safeguards to make sure people aren't being taken advantage of and curious how we'll enforce the three-year requirement and what penalties come into affect if there is non-compliance. that's an excellent issue. the second is an issue i haven't heard much discussion on which is surprising given how much time commissioners is spent on this issue and the development of the year lot might affect access to light, air, privacy, open space and rear yards, etcetera. in going through the process and neighbors show up and express significant concerns about those issues.

so i would like to understand given our historical attachment to mid block open space and the need to mary that for the need with increased density we'll reconcile that by option 3 and you presented three diagrams. one is an enlargement of the structure which doesn't strike me as problematic in the issue. where there's an development in the low rise in the back or more so with the two or three-story building that goes right within four feet of the real property line, we could have a situation where we have complete elimination of mid block open space if done by numerous properties within the same block. if i understand you correctly, we can't require more than a

four-rear yard set back is that correct? >> we can. we can require to be fully code compliant. where the four-foot setback comes in is if you imagine building on a lot and it was built up to the entire area, height, rear yard, etcetera, and our objective standards physically preclude the development of a second home, we can reduce our standards. and a local jurisdiction is always allowed to enforce the four-foot side yard or rear yard but when we look at the lot split we don't foresee a situation you'd be reincluded to -- precluded to build this on the lot and still enforce the year regard the 30% requirement and still retain the mid block open space and i don't know if

you can share the screen and where we see it from a design perspective is where do we want to kind of provide that open space? i agree, we have a historical connection to mid block open space but from a design perspective would it be better to consolidate the open space if it's going to be minimal at the year and between the buildings? that's something we can consider in terms of objective standards where we are determining where a building can be located on the lot but as it's written the rear yard still preserved and you're looking at a 30% requirement. >> so still preserved year yards. -- rear yards. we have spent a lot of time at the commission in the last two years during covid talking about the importance of access to open space and if we are in a situation where in order to build the minimum sized unit we

need to get small setbacks. does that instead it means we'll require open space on roofs because it's the last area for open space. >> i think providing open space on the roof is on the table and meeting the code retirement and required it meets the dimensions. even with the reduced rear yard i think you're able to meet, i think 50 feet, still meet the dimensions and probably satisfy the open space for the unit at the rear and you're right we'll probably see different scenarios for the open space and roof blocks. >> i think commissioner tanner's

wanting to get the standards done as soon as possible if not by january 1, shortly thereafter. it will be critically important in ensuring that we get the density desired by sb 9 but in a way that fits best it can into our neighborhood so we don't end up having houses add in the rear yards in ways that could be shaped through setbacks and stepbacks or location on the lock not subject to objective standards and therefore ignored by project sponsors because we haven't met requirements necessary for to us do the heavy lifting up front in order to ensure this. i have one other philosophical

question, this applies to rh1 lots, correct? >> correct. >> have we considered other approaches for accomplishing the same goals of increasing density? maybe it's a question for director hills. >> interestingly you'll hear supervisor mandelman's legislation or two pieces of legislation within the next two months because that allows his fourplex city wide legislation not wait for i.r. to be done and those will be before you and they're certainly options and for instance and it's done

through a waiver so it's more complex so if it change the underlying r.h.1 zoning, sb 9 wouldn't apply but build four units on the lot subject to our control encouraging project to build in the manner we see building happening in the city. strong presence in the street, generally covering the whole width of the lot open space in the rear, which you can do and get four units on. it's an option we'll hear that before sb 9 takes effect and a potential path for the city this would densify and still allow for our design standards in typical ways we've seen development happen in the city to apply.

>> it will accomplish the same density goals if i understand correctly you can get four units where there's currently a lot and under sb 9 you could end up with four units on a property where there's currently one? >> that's correct. and a local jurisdiction to do adus. >> would the result of density be any different under the scheme you just described, director hillis? >> assuming it passes there'll be arguments that that process wouldn't be ministerial where sb

9 is and is not subject to ceqa for 317 so so which gets you there at the end and that's something we can explore but it can get you to the same place in more in line with how the city is developed and doing it in a rear yard. >> i look forward to the discussion around supervisor mandelman's ordinance in terms of how we think about what that legislation might accomplish. anyways, i'll just close with saying again making a request to whatever else we do to make sure we convert as many of our design review guidelines subjective to objective standards at the earliest possible moment. thank you.

>> commissioner moore. >> thank you. i agree with all questions raised. i'd like to add a few in the essence of time. i'd like to jump forward to talk about physical suitability and diagramming out a second story as a possibility and the desire and unit doesn't necessarily mean it works particularly older construction, sometimes when you start tampering with the flaws it doesn't allow it to make it possible but at least to sometimes de facto or demolition

depending on what you found. second point, and just go apply and mostly very subjective because in r.h.1 single family buildings place more randomly on sites by which objective standards need to be subjectively applied based on context and while i believe there are objective standards like parity and building separation and equitable access to privacy, light and air, it all depends on the context in which these situations occur. the last diagram showed were being built between the units or and what's on the other side of the lot because though you may

be pushing the building to the rear property line you may be sitting on top of somebody else's house and you did not anticipate it and the rights and objective standards apply are based on specific circumstances and not sure in the city that has as much diversity you can fine tune you are still falling under the application of objective standards when the judgment needs to be used subjectively for sites specifically. i see you nod and i think you know i'm right. there's physical suitability and objective standards which i think require more disclaimers than just creating a standard and hoping it will work across

the way. i wish we had more time and ability to hear your design discussions. one of the things i would like the director to consider is the urban design assistance problems for communities that don't have the horsepower so to speak to design architectural plans and advisories to see under our program we could ask the a.i.a. to ask with sketch design of what is possible and what not. and ask for the help of some

structural engineers because the structures are low enough to be evaluate order worked on by civil engineers but may require a more equity driven outreach to engages less of the professional community. and this is the urban design program for many many years for the a.i.a. and strongly call on you to reach out and ask for that. >> you're point is a good one if you read through our residential design standards it's not easy to convert them.

>> we're talking about the suitability of adding the volume and mass actual physical units on top and the rear and the side of wherever. >> if i may, with regard to the subjective application or objective design guidelines. >> it's difficult to do in the few weeks.

the residential design standards have addressed building types to address specific neighborhoods which are not rh1 but high density neighborhoods and would be hard to use what have you and retrofit it for rh1. >> thank you. >> if there's nothing for you we're move on to item 9. 9. 2017-011878ofa-02 (m. giacomucci: (628) 652-7414) 420 23rd street (potrero power station mixed-use development) - north side of 23rd street west of illinois street; lots 002 and 017 in assessor's block 4175 and lots 001 the project sponsor will have 10 minutes. monica, the floor is yours. >> thank you. good afternoon, president coppel

and commissioners -- koppel. the application is a request for office allocation to authorize up to office use to be developed across the potrero space over the 30 year term of the existing development agreement. the overall potrero power space is a comprehensive plan for a former industrial sites and will transform the central water front. on january 30, 2020 the planning commission certified the eir and adopted findings and recommended approval of general plan amendments, planning code map amendments and the project development agreement including the design for development. on april 21, 2020 the board of supervisors approved the project master plan and development

agreement. the commission approved a previous office allocation october 22, 2020 just about a year ago for 403,750 square feet of spot known as vision a and it's not part of the proposal before you today. san francisco voters passed proposition e in march 2020 which amended city wide limits on office development to link the new office space to be approved annually in san francisco to the city's performance in constructing new units in affordable housing and created affordable housing and grant allocations to projects that meet specific criteria. a project may access the incentive reserve if it includes the number of affordable housing units either provided on site or a community of concern

proportional to the space request and 50% of any affordable housing fee triggered by market rate housing within the project. any office space allocated from the office jobs affordable housing balance incentive reserve is accounted for in the large cap over the course of the following 10 years. in the case of projects developed under an approved development agreement or d.a., the commission may consider the overall of units over the term of the d.a. to satisfy the housing obligation created by an office allocation. and the 896,323 square feet would generate a requirement at least 725 affordable housing units or affordable housing credits permitted by prop e be produced over the 30-year term of the d.a. no amendments are proposed to

the existing d.a. part of the prophyl. the sponsor will be required to submit design review changes for review by staff and approval by the planning director including those that propose to establish office use. i'd like to know the proposed motion includes conditions of approval unique to the project. i won't detail each now but the following conditions are important to reference. first because the allocation would be i am -- i am lemented and -- implemented and the condition manner that recognizes the 30-year term of the d.a. and the variables that may impact activity over that period. third, the condition related to transfers and tracking allows allocated office space to be transferred over time between lots within the larger project

site while also requiring the recordation of nfrs and written notices to allow for proper atoing of the office space and annual reporting to the project director to report to the development of the d.a. including specific information to the approved office development and required affordable housing. the planning direct may call informational steering to address any issues raised by such an annual record. the third requested allocation is approved today and the square feet will be deducted from the large path over the course of the next 10 years with 10% of allocation being deducted each year. while the commission has granted several allocations using a similar reserve, this is the first to request it from the

office job affordable balance in reserve and after 10% of theal kaying -- allocations the large cap has 182,856 square feet available for allocation. however, the department is working to finalize an audit of the affordable housing production between 2015 and 2019 using the specific parameters of prop e and it's likely the large cap will be adjusted downward once that audit is completed in the near future. you'll note we left a place holder for the final number in the staff report and will update that number in the final motion. finally, planning staff continued to work the city attorney's office since it was published. i sent the revised motion earlier this week with red lines and the edits were intended to

provide clarification and no substantive changes. to date the project sponsor has had engagement with resident of dog patch and potrero hill and there's additional well attended virtual community meetings about the proposed land use of the blocks and proposed open spaces after power station part and louisiana, paseo and we received a letter of support and he expressed he was glad to see the goals of prop e being put into action and we just received a second letter of support a few minutes ago from a dog patch

resident who i think was on the line but had to leave and couldn't make the call. the resident believes the allocation before you will allow the project sponsor to deliver essential community benefits and compliments the project team on their consistent open communication with the community over the course of the project. department finds the project is on balance consistent with the objectives and policies of the city's general plan and meets the intent of the development agreement and potrero special use district and planning code. the proposal will allow the project sponsor to use revenue generated through office development to continue providing substantial community benefits including affordable housing units and will ensure these affordable housing units are provided continuously and in proportion to other land uses over the 30-year term of the development agreement. based on the findings based on the case report the department

recommendation is approval and we have the zoning administrator and city attorney and staff. >> ms. chang, are you with us? >> can you hear me >> we can. have you 10 minutes. >> thank you. it's our pleasure to be before you. to talk about our small portion of the san francisco water front. commissioners we've been before you a number of times since january of last year so we approved the truly mixed use

project and want to contribute to the already vibrant community at the dog patch. since approval we've collaborated with the designers to help ensure we make the most of the site we have. an opportunity we don't take lightly. last october we were before you for an allocation for station a. we understand station a and it's eastern wall is something special to be treated with minimal intervention yet with maximum impact to create a space that draws you in. s -- and invites you to stay. we shared the work we've been doing and this includes a 100%

affordable building and it's designed by architects and ensure the design compliments one another. and we worked on it concurrently. together we made sure louisiana paseo and the those related to the building were programmed appropriately.

yet also allowing one to be more immersed which is sometimes hard to come by in the environment. hopefully not here at power station. and we prevented the water front community to be opened at power station and it's place where people can approach the water. and have nothing more than welcoming landscape in their way. we all know the commission is quite familiar with design. we've also immediately followed office allocation and design approval with the linear feet over three-quarters of a mile of view.

and we proceeded to prepare the site for delivery over the next 18 to 24 months. the next few images we've been working from the early morning into the late afternoon. and we made sure to recycle as much as we can. while making room for community benefits and this was one offense the northern facade of station a. we're absolutely thrilled and feel incredibly fortunate to make so much progress today and in keeping with the forward momentum we've developed office

allocation for the office allocation. this should be noted this is not addition to what you approved last january. it will be balanced with 725 affordable units in addition to other community benefits. the benefit is historic preservation, infrastructure, open space, public transit including water transit, childcare and a 25,000 square foot development with the ymca. to make sure our work remains with community needs we continued to work closely wedge the community meeting regularly and and i'll now pass it on to

jen for the project development agreement. >> to put it con civil the grant is for prop m allocation regardless of the amount of large cap available so long as an office project meets the balance requirement. prop e allows the commission to allocate 1,236 of office space for every one housing space and affordable housing will be constructed over the course of all project spaces. property requires 809 affordable units for every 1 million square feet of office space and our request is for about 900,000

square feet of office allocation, the power station will be required to produce more units over the course of the project. the project was designed with the jobs housing balance in mind. power station and prop e has

half the credit and cret itted as 129 units under prop e. i believe my screen may be delayed. we understand the commission may be concerned the allocation may prevent other office projects from proceeding. it's worth consideration which projects are not affected by this allocation. first, the allocation would not affect projects in ocii jurisdiction or property such as pier 70 or mission rock not subject to the large cap and not affect the projects with their own requirements under prop e or

that can achieve the required affordable housing balance. which research projects could it affect? assuming the city does not meet its goals and we've seen the negative and large-cap pool, the only projects that will be affected are those outside of central soma not mission rock and the project do not proved the ratio of affordable housing units required by prop e. thank you and that concludes our presentation. >> now have the time for the public to speak and press star 3 to be added to the queue, when you hear your line has been

unmuted, that's your indication to begin speaking. >> commissioners, my name is francisco decosta. i've known this site for over 40 years. in the presentation, no mention is made about a million tons of gold tar which is linked to the power plant. it hasn't been abated por mitigated. no mention has been made of two hot spots, ammonia spills which no mention has ever been made. anyone can have so-called

affordable housing over here. we have to make sure the location is abated and mitigated to the highest standards. and i'm not talking about capping. capping is not the solution. and it's been exposed to lead, mercury. no mention has been made of this. this land is not paradise. so i can go ahead and authorize so-called affordable housing by the people who live there, if they have health problems or adversely impacted it will be on you. you did the same with hunter's

point and you kept doing such things without paying attention to liquefaction, flooding and i'm the director of environmental justice advocacy and i have the empirical data. thank you very much. >> good afternoon, commissioners. this is president of the potrero association. i'm calling in to request you approve the office development authorization and we helped create what we think is a best in class mixed use development and part of that and have excellent jobs ratio and in

bringing this thing forward we need to make sure we get both components so we have a fully functioning part and we don't have to wait to do what we've done in other parts if we do the jobs and housing at the same time. and their office development and authorization application. thank you very much. >> good afternoon, commissions. i'm a native of san francisco and long time resident of the great city. early in my career i have been a real estate developer as well as

experiences and i turned to where i was president and ceo for nearly two decades. during ta time paid particular attention to district 01 and our mission is for a sustainable commitment to the community. for longer than a decade and dozens of district 10 residents and organizers. we work collaboratively to influence the community and paying particular attention to the historic impact of legacy disproportionately affected parts of this vital community. and this is so because the developer power station 60

accessing prop m allocation and build the office space that was approved by the planning commission board of supervisors in 2020. power station is designed and beginning to comply with the targets set out by prop e to allow compliant projects and there's prop b inclined for the housing development agreement. the affordable housing are compliant with prop e and palace station development agreement. this allows the project to deliver benefits. thank you.

>> last call for public comment. you need to press star 3 to be added to the queue. seeing no other speakers, public comment is closed and it's now before you, commissioners. >> we did have a lot of previously entitled projects up and down in the city and glad it's moving forward and in favor of the office allocation. commissioner diamond. >> i want to thank staff and mr. abrams and wonder if you can put up the chart and i want to

make sure i understand a couple of the statistics on there. if i'm understanding this correctly, if you look at the combined impacts of both the d.a. and they are required to provide physical dmrs that amount to 596. am i correct? am i reading this correctly? >> i apologize. >> i couldn't hear that. could you say that again, please? >> this is the project sponsor team. that's correct, commissioner

diamond. it would be required to produce 956 physical units. >> okay. of that, do they all need to be on site or do you have the ability under the d.a. or prop d to fill them off site and if so, what are the requirements around the off site construction. where can they be built and how many? >> some would be on site. that would be to maximize the d.a. requirements and the project is incentivized to do that. we all now how expensive construction is these days and want to minimize the cost. >> can you speak more slowly. i'm having trouble understanding. >> sure, is this volume okay? >> the volume is fine it's the speed at which you're speaking.

>> as the chart shows we'd be required to create 596 physical units. under prop d we're allowed to deliver some in the quote, unquote, community of concern which could be off and it's in the best interest to develop as many of those units on site to meet our development agreement requirements. is there a minimum number that nedz to be physically build on site under the two requirement the d.a. or prop d? >>s it our intent to build the majority on site. >> i just want to make sure i am

clear. >> this column would need to be entirely on site for the requirement. we are not permitted to do those units. under prop e we are allowed to build in communities of concern. that's not been defined yet but anticipate it will be include the bay view and surrounding community. we could theoretically obtain it under prop e by building off site affordable housing but would -- it wouldn't be to our benefit to build it off site. >> so we should expect to see

522 b.m.r.s on site. >> correct. >> and the remainder may be off site or off site and there's a possible to have some fee out. thank you. that was helpful. >> this is a fantastic project and provides enormous community benefits and we've gone three that you in the prior hearings on this particular project. they were asking for a number of square feet and that makes sense in order to keep them competitive. and what tools do you have to ensure they don't take that

890,000 and sit on it for a decade. how do our conditions of approval work as a commission we have some ability to insist at some point or do we have the ability, i guess i won't put words in your mouth. what ability do we have to ensure performance at some point later than right at the end of the 30-year hearing? -- period. >> good afternoon, commissioners. i'm the zoning administrator. first i'll describe what's proposed. which right now the motion is very much designed to think about the allocation over the 30-year period and monitoring and recording component is housed within the annual reporting to the planning director and the condition of

approval includes an extra information that must be in the annual reporting specific to the allocation. how is the office development progressing, how is the associated affordable housing with the office development progressing? the planning director would have the ability and it could be brought to the commission to have a hearing to talk about the status of the development. the planning commission has the ability to calendar any informational hearing they want to have as well but to your point, the idea is we structured this to try to understand the over 30 year period there's going to be cycles and time for more activity and less activity and be responsive to that but if there are long unreasonable delays that there is an outlet

there to come back to the planning commission and have that conversation and the planning commission would be able to take the appropriate action that the point in time if you felt the project was not moving forward appropriate flip now that's in the motion now. the commission has the authority to adopt a different ordinance with the construct how the planning commission is kept up to date to monitor the progress of the development overall. >> so it seems like you're saying to the director gets the annual report or we could have an informational hearings and in the context of the 30-year project if we feel there is isn't a good reason for starting construction we can hold a

hearing for what the reasons are and if too much time has gone by we retain replication authority. we need to think about it in the context of a 30-year project and the amount of infrastructure and if we saw 15 years go by, for example, we do retain some tool at the end of the day to take action if need be understanding it's a 30-year project. >> and that's the balance we tried to strike with the motion which is if prop n require legislation be required to completion there's a recognition it's a 30-year time period with typical cycles and variables and how do you balance that and to your point, yes, if in some point during that 30-year period an informational hearings is provided and the commission feels it's not being diligently pursued even given the 30-year

time period they'd have the ability at that point to hold a hearing for revocation and revoke unused portions that the time if they felt that was appropriate. >> one final question, what's the meaning of the 18 month time period in performance in condition 1 given they're already started on station a not subject to the proper m tradition what do we expect to see in the context of this office allocation. >> the 18 month provision was established in prop m and that creates a whole program and modified the program. so as we talked about before, one of the provision the 18 months in the initial language and the voter initiative and

that can't be amended. but the planning commission has in years prior adopted resolutions and policies that basically state we're not going to activity call for ref vasion -- revocation for projects and the reason we have that in there as a condition of approval is because legally, technically it is and i was a prop adopted toy voter and gives the planning commission grounds for revocation. it doesn't require the planning commission consider revocation after the 18-month period. for station a it's not part of this and that's it's own thing so to speak and not subject to any of the provisions of this motion. >> it as it it's own standard language. thank you very much. that was very helpful.

and i believe it has enormous community benefits and would move for approval. >> i second that motion. i wanted to express my strong support for the project. the project is active on all levels of looking forward. the project is one of the few projects which immediately tries to create a community and define fine language where you don't have individual buildings standing around with partially open spaces and half roads it's a complete community from the get go. since it has gone so long i think the project has proveden itself over and over again to be

exemplary and i'm in strong support. >> commissioner imperial. >> one question to the project sponsor, how are you defining the concern? is that based on communication with the community group. >> that's something we'd have to define. we were exploring that with the context of geographies you saw. we may have to define that but

what we were contemplating. >> that's good to know and discussion around that issue. i'm also in support of this and . >> commissioner tanner. >> i'm also in support and what i have that relates to the housing discussion last week, it's exciting to see the project come in this neighborhood. one of the things we heard through the planning process is that often times communities even adjacent next door and outside these projects are not able to see members of their community secure the affordable units and that's not necessarily what was before us today but i want us to keep thinking how we ensure that we're not just

providing the units but the process and the way we work with our affordable housing fighters and police and approval process is accessible to the people it's intended to serve and the community doesn't feel left out once the units are online. very excite ford the -- excited for this project and make sure it's accessible to the folks already in the city and want to stay in the neighborhood. thank you very much. >> thank you. that concludes commissioners' deliberation. there's a motion that's been seconded and we're approving with conditions as submitted to you by staff. on that motion, commissioner tanner. >> aye. >> commissioner diamond. >> aye. >> commissioner fung. >> aye. >> commissioner imperial. >> aye. >> commissioner moore.

>> aye. >> and commission president koppel. >> aye. >> that passes 6-0 and places us on item 10 for case 10. 2019-019698ahb (l. hoagland: (628) 652-7320) 4512 23rd street - >> thank you. i'm with planning department staff. before you today is a project authorization pursuant to planning code section 206.3 at 328 located at 4512 23rd stress and includes the project of the five-story, 13 dwelling unit building on a vacant lot. the project would include approximately 1,782 square feet

of usable open space with a shared rear yard and bicycle spaces will be provided at the basement level. the project will include three studios, four one-bedroom, five two-bedroom and one three-bedroom unit. no off street vehicle parking is proposed as part much this project. the project site is located on a through lot on an unimproved section between corbett avenue and provides a pedestrian connection between market street and corbett avenue. the project sponsor will be required to obtain a major encroachment permit from the department of public works for all improvements within the 23rd

street right of way to provide access to the site. using the program, the project will receive project bonus for more density and the additional of one additional story of height in exchange for providing 25% on site affordable dwelling units. the project is also receiving building modifications from the rear yard and dwelling unit exposure development of planning code secs, 134 and 140. the department has received 87 letters and 42 letters in opposition expressing concern about the proved height, density, parking, loss of light and air, underlying the foundation on adjacent property and wildlife habitat. the project is consistent with the general plan and meets applicable requirements of the planning code.

the project will maximize the use of a vacant lot and 13 dwelling units. additionally it will provide a total of 13 new units, three of which will be designated as onsite affordable dwelling units. i would now like to introduce the project sponsor who's prepared a presentation for the commission. this concludes my presentation and i am here to answer any questions. i'd also ask following the sponsor's presentation if you could share the share button with chan. thank you.

>> thank you. i'm the project sponsor and the project requires no exceptions, variants or special consideration throughout the approval process. the units are efficient in design in nature and then we also are proposing family units. the entire proposal when we designed it and envisioned it was designed to be friendly housing in mind and we provided three studios and five

two-bedroom units between 800 to about 1,000 square feet and one three-bedroom unit over 1100 square feet. and this project represents a unique opportunity to represent our commit total inclusiveness and equity and housing and in this site has traditionally been a bit of an affluent neighborhood that could use more diversity. this is an opportunity to bring affordable housing opportunity to the location. i also want to emphasize this is being built on a vacant lot and no demolition of any existing unit. this would be a net contributor to the re-allocation.

all the units are family oriented and by providing extra open space as part of the project. the required space is about 1642 square feet and we're able to provide 1782 square feet. that will give us extra recreational opportunities and space for family activity. the units are all affordable by design and transit first and have 13 bike parking on site zero vehicular space.

in tems of outreach we held four neighborhood meetings. throughout the entire process we met with all the neighbors on corporate avenue and some of the design changes and we heard everybody's concern in terms of massing and described in the presentation and the changes with the 25-foot top floor setback that reduced the height of the overall building. and we also reduced the height of the elevator penthouse to maximize more light and air access to our immediate neighbors and opened up a certain amount of corridors for the corbett avenue neighbors and reduced the height of the fourth and fifth floor and opened with

windows and facade changes to address privacy issues. also this particular project presents a unique amount of community benefits. as part of this extensions on 21st street, we are building a retaining wall currently on 21st street. that will bring in a certain amount of stability to the entire site. as part of the development we're doing an a.d.a. pedestrian pathway between market and corbett avenue and we'll be modernizing the aging infrastructure mainly power, sewer and water and broadband access and we'll be replacing one dying, hazardous aging tree.

>> good afternoon, president koppel. this is the project attorney. this project qualifies under ceqa for exception. project proponents have made unsubstantiated claims it's a site for endangered species including a badger and we have someone here for questions found the site with no evidence of badger habitat and opponents made the same argument in a tree appeal and this is a highly disturbed lot and does not present habitat value. by operation of law, the project

was deemed code compliant development project and governed by the housing accountability act. the housing accountability act requires the project be approved as the density proposed and no conditions can be imposed that would have a substantial adverse affect on the affordability for low-income households. this is exactly the kind of project we want to encourage as a city. it meets or exceeds all the planning code requirements and provide the unique opportunity for affordable housing and units for working families in a neighborhood that lacks affordable options and massing us reduced to respond to neighbors' concerns. the project has received more than 100 letters of support from neighbors and the broader community and we're happy to answer any questions. thank you.

>> thank you for the project sponsor presentation. members of the public this is your opportunity to address the commission by pressing star 3 you'll hear you've been unmuted and that's your opportunity to begin speaking. >> i'm cheryl travis. i've lived here for 37 years. and while generally in favor of home s.f. and more housing in s.f., this is more suburban and i have to drive to 17th street to get a quart of milk. there's nothing around here at all. this not an urban neighborhood.

secondly, there's [indiscernible] this will tower over existing housing and will strain parking. if there's no parking, i know 13 bikes but that eliminates and seniors and anybody disabled at all from living there because they'll have to walk. i'm not in favor of this thing at all. so i hope you don't approve it. bye. >> hello. >> yes, sir, go ahead. >> thank you. my name is ralph peters. i live next door to the project

proposed. i've lived here for 52 years. i was also at your commission meeting in 1969, i was 28 at the time when you had us change our address from 4508 23rd street. market street wasn't developed before these address were put in. i would like to the project to have it moved to argin alley like you had me to do those years ago. the planning commission needs you to help us get safety and and to get argin, alley, first of all the nearest fire hydrant is at the bottom of argin alley, not 23rd street. your commission required us to do this for safety and we'd like

to have the address moved to argin alley rather than 23rd street, by the way, the house they're taking the address from was destroyed 70 years ago, i think. we straightened market street out, 50 years ago -- no, 60 and why they made us change our address to argin alley for safety reasons you were quite explicit on it over 50 years ago and i'm concerned about the one subterranean unit. i'd like to have the address changed to argin alley because you with the skate ramp he talks about i'm afraid skateboarders will wind up on market street and we'll have a fatality -- i mean a death.

thank you very much. >> hi, my name is jennifer lee and a property owner on corbett avenue over 30 years. we all know the city needs housing but this not the right size for a property this size. we're a diverse neighborhood supportive of more housing in san francisco but planning and development has to be fair. the 30-year project is out of context for the project site. under home s.f. the units amend to provide more family-friendly housing to low, middle and moderate income families. some of the units are 309 square feet. that's the size of a bedroom. the developers are clearly trying to take advantage of the

home s.f. program to get extra height for the development and will absolutely encroach many neighbors homes. many homes including mine on the corbett side we'll be facing a huge wall up to 70 feet in height and looking down into our home. not only that, we have very little light and you're blocking in many residents and turning our only natural sunlight into blocked window. as a city, we're trying to reduce energy consumption and the access to natural light is so important. blocking in residents that turn sunlight into long shadows would be turning on more lights and heaters and wasting more money. the project should not be allowed to use home s.f. as a loophole. this site is not suitable for

home s.f. and should stay within 40 feet. please consider the well being of our neighborhood. the proposal is out of character in size and depth to this neighborhood. thank you for your kind consideration. thank you. >> i want to thank the planning commission for your time. my name is phillip and i'm a resident of corbin. you'll hear and will continue to hear caring and concerned neighborhood who despite what has just been said has diversity and we care about each other. we've lived here for decades and if you look at our neighborhood it define what's san francisco's all our concern not just for us and our current neighbors but for our future neighbors who want to join the community and live in a building that just fits in our neighborhood and now we know a little bit about the

developer standing across the table from us. a man who poured sums of money into political position and well placed development effort and who has at a previous meeting posted about the pittance he paid for the plot of land and the fortune he stands to make and a commissioner to vote against low-income housing when it was proposed in his own backyard and took credit for being on a commission that approved low-income housing. when you argue you're not displaying placing tenants and proposing a building that would block our natural light would destroy our physical and mental health for so many in the neighborhood. i'll reiterate the point made time and time again, we support low-income housing. we support the soul of s.f. homes but not when it's used as

a loophole to build extra height. at the end of the day we know we're a small group fighting an uphill battle. we don't have person connects with anyone on the building or have funding to hire and collude or think we'll win at any cost but we knows it's san francisco where we welcome our neighbors and hear all voices and we have one question, in our system of checks and balances with interpretation is separate from legislation, is this project this exploitive construction project as proposed which has steamrolled all input remain to be built? >> i've come to speak about the project and the brazen actions and hypocrisy and expect i've

witnessed myself and i don't think the name of the group needs any introduction for those who follow the news. you can look at documents dated 2017 to 2009, you'll see a pattern of repeated comments about a lack of meaningful communication with the homes he flips. that's until administrative threats and reviews and personal challenges come up. it's on the record and part of public record and out for everybody to see.

and solicited money from a developer and engaged in a friv loss lawsuit and that was slapped with a violation over campaign finance and non disclosure. that involvement is an assigned legal affidavit on the record and his wife wrote a letter using a sunset district zip code. are those the actions of somebody above board. and now he wants to blund their decision in. look at the letters of support and see how many are valid. he is a man of rules for thee but not for me and a former commissioner should act like this. care about your neighbor. i've been asked by neighbor of community to speak for them

being my familiarity with the situation and he is on the record with no affordable housing. i rest my case. >> hi, this is alen dorsingsly and i'm a few blocks away so not quite so directly impact ed the project and i feel so lucky to have the money and resource to live in eureka valley, a very affluent neighborhood and over the 30 years in the neighborhood seeing how it's gotten more and more affluent as we disallow any kind of density or add an apartment unit. i very much support this project. i know so many young people who tell me gee, i'd love to be able

to live in this neighborhood but i can't afford it. anyway, alen dorringsly again and i support this project. >> my name is raul maldonaddo and calling about the homes at 23rd street and the location of the prime high opportunity in affluent area to keep more s.f. residents that can't have access to this location to be in s.f. and specifically in this neighborhood and make it become more diverse without environmental impact. a background about me, i've been in the central valley, modesto, california and i've seen the departure of low-income citizens

and others and now i understand why the impact of the housing crisis we're in s.f. right now with people preventing housing projects and make arguments like natural light, parking, height and fear mongering tactics and i'm like whoa there, yikes. now i want to help speak on behalf of the people that i want to be in s.f. and bring citizens back or neighbors settling now and be in a location sustainably driven and not where they would have to drive places and rely on transportation. they're not in a community that's like s.f.

and low-income families shouldn't be forced out and did you hear the one part about replacing the tree. now, that's sustainable. there's so many more examples of sustainability and i fully support it and i hope you all have a great day. cheers. >> hi, i'm representing the housing ac coalition at today's meeting and here to echo the same the last speaker just stated. i'm also in strong support of this project. we organized a letter writing campaign to which we should have received voters of support from residents and contingents and i

hear good things with the project and we're in the middle of a dire housing shortage and need housing where ever including in all pockets of san francisco. this is a fantastic project desperately, desperately needed thank you, commissioners for your time and i hope you support. [please stand by] . .

>> caller: i like the three-bedroom idea. the only thing is i wish there could be another large unit for families. thank you very much for listening to me and i appreciate it very much. >> caller: hi. my name is tim. and i live walking distance from this development. i'm excited to see new housing being contributed to the neighborhood. i'm also see responsible code compliance has been going to this development so far and the community benefit [inaudible] . just on this call, it's kind of

disappointing to hear fellow neighbors talk about how they follow support in the neighborhood and not just in the back yard. and i truly believe affordable housing in san francisco should start in your back yard and it's a great opportunity to be the agents of change here. as a homeowner in the area and resident of san francisco for over ten years, i am in high support of the 13 units at 4512 23rd street. thank you. >> caller: good afternoon, commissioners. i'm a student and i also work in the city. i've been living in san francisco for the past ten years and i still love living in the city. so many people are as fortunate to live in the city due to the lack of housing and high rental cost. i'm supporting the. we are defending the calls of

leaving san francisco. why we need more housing to be built like this one. and more importantly it provides affordable housing units in this project. this is actually a great loss for the city and the people housing crisis has been one of the major crisis in the city. it's not seen many projects built under this program. it's an action to truly contribute to what is needed. i'm hoping the successfully and quickly and finally fulfill its promises to it is people. and, of course, everyone. and looking at how much the project sponsor has made throughout. addressing the concern. i'm hoping the opponent to the project can finally show some

merit in support of this project [inaudible] i truly wish to see more people living under a roof and not under the bridge. i highly urge to the commissioners, please take the reasons the city needs to approve the project and utilize the project to serve its people rather than debating over the context. thank you for your time. >> caller: hi. my name is carina, and i was born and raised in san francisco. we've cared for each other especially throughout the pandemic. first, i want to say in the past two years, we've tried to make a number of design concessions with the developer and project sponsor and as a consulting firm, but they have not been willing to work with

us. than the good of the developer. we've asked for a fair design in planning that is more appropriate in twin peaks. the developer is using the home sf program to curve a few tiny 300 square feet apartment to call it a low that would have provided housing more spacious than the building he's proposing here. he refused to support a low income housing project in his

own back yard. i would repeat again that this project was not for the good of all but for the good of [inaudible] i'd also surface that s.i.a. was also involved in a permit scandal where the building inspector was accused of taking bribes. to the planning commission, i think on behalf of a diverse life long group of residents who deeply care for the neighborhood and our city. we lacked questionable influence, funding and experience of the offices and we're really depending on you to hear our voices and understand that we do welcome low-income housing in our neighborhood but we need to create a design that benefits all, not just one. thank you so much for your

time. >> caller: hi, everybody. i'd really like to thank and echo the opinion of we need more housing there were plans that were one foot higher than our building. now the lot itself and all the buildings butting the lot are four units or less. he wants to put two hundred three units check where they are. they're underground and they -- that is for identification for building this huge building. i'd ask that the commission put the renderings that i had developed on display to give a better view of what the actual

construction will look like. again, i appreciate all the home advocate inputs, but it sounds like none of them live here and we as a that the president of the appeals board had to step down because he's being paid. he had to step down from the tree hearing board because he was being paid by the developer. that i can't understand. but i do understand how the fishiness and development in city happens. we urge housing, we want housing, we welcome housing. if you look at the plans, i urge everybody on the call please look into it and all of his fundraising to look into the actual plans because they

are not what they appear to be and, three, that we have been waiting for development on the spots forever, forever. and all we really want is for the address change to be argon alley which is not a real street and it's a paper street -- >> secretary: speaker's time has elapsed. >> caller: hi. as a next door resident on corbett street, i just want to add my voice to the chorus of those who will be adversely affected by this project. we currently have a beautiful view from downtown san francisco on our left to hunter's point on the right. putting the east bay behind them. our whole residence is oriented to derive with a bright and open main living space occupying the whole eastern side with wall to wall french

doors and ceilings running its length. it was the reason we chose to live here. the proposed development next door was a top floor penthouse and would effectively wall off the rest of our balcony at a distance of a few feet. it would completely and unambiguously neutralize our main source of enjoyment. i realize i'm just one person speaking to what my family personally stands to lose from this project. i realize there are more reasons to build housing in our state, but i want the commission to hear this unambiguous down side who unfortunately will live in the shadow of this. we've heard support from those unfamiliar with the local conditions seemingly unaware of

the that would light the small corner of the city and ultimately drive us from this residence. thank you for your time. >> caller: hi. i'm a san francisco resident and property owner. in reviewing this development proposal, i'm listening to all the speakers today, i can't stop thinking how this project and family oriented is really important especially in a city where affordability is hard to come by. so i think it's really important that we approve more of this type of housing and it's really a way to fulfill the projects of san francisco and we've found the policies to

increase affordable housing. in addition, the housing projects are protected under the housing accountability act. recently, the city of san mateo lost a court appeal and paid almost half a million to settle a lawsuit and forced the developer to set back this 10-unit residential development on el camino. so i really want to avoid that as taxpayers we do not want to see our tax dollars wasted. i strongly urge the commissioners to approve this project today. thank you. >> caller: hi. i live here on corbett next to this new development and i feel home sf is being miss applied

to this development here where walking and biking can't be used for daily trips. i noticed on the commission's policy we talked about the board of affordable housing. the near stores all over a mile away and no one here in our area can walk to any of the stores. and biking is difficult with being on the hill and there's one bus line here. additionally, at least everyone here, every unit has one car, sometimes two or three. so having 13 unit will add 13 to 26 cars. and so what i wonder about those affordable units, which ones are they going to be. of the are those units going to be the underground two-bedroom because you talk about

supporting families, but families do not live in a 400 square-foot apartment. and so if the building kept to the similar buildings here and still had affordable housing, that would be great. it doesn't look like that at all definitely feels like a loophole definitely to get a much larger building with a more expensive top building there. so i don't feel like this is helping very much based on those units there. thank you. >> caller: hi everyone. my name is tiffany and i am a resident by the property. [inaudible] how these roles interact in our city. one of my biggest concerns was

that the 13-unit building will create more overflow of parking on corbett avenue. parking is already incredibly competitive and we don't have monthly garages like in many other urban parts of the city. i also want to share with you that you rarely see any bicycles commuting in our neighborhood because we're surrounded by extremely steep hills. you have to go half a mile down a really steep hill. so the sidewalk is actually stairs. also, the developers noticed in the plans that the building is located within one half mile of the nearest transit stop. i live on corbett street and during my commute to and from work, the buses are extremely packed. so adding 13 this does not make

up for the back that it will be impacted so many other homes and families in our neighborhood. we're not against affordable housing, but we are against a project that's proposed because of its massive structure. so i really will hope you guys will consider it. thank you. >> caller: good evening. >> secretary: go ahead. >> caller: hi. good evening, mr. chair, vice chair, and commissioners. i am a property owner in san francisco and also a concerned

neighbor. i'm in support of the project on 23rd avenue because not only it rwill it create new homes to solve the housing crisis, but also it will create more afford am homes in a city that has largely become affordable. after 13 units, three of units are designated as below market rate homes for low-income families. it offers as much as 25% b.m.r. units. this means more affordable homes for more families and a reason to support this project is future benefit of project improvement to 23rd street. the project will upgrade new ground and utility lines and improve public access for neighbors for years to come. last but not least, the project will deliver green the design and all homes will be built with energy efficiency. there are some speakers who

live on corbett avenue and argon alley who spoke against this development because it takes away their parking space that's currently being occupied on 23rd street. commissioners, please consider that we are having a housing crisis in san francisco. we do not have a parking crisis in san francisco. given those reasons, i strongly urge all commissions will take into consideration of the community benefits which we'll bring forth by this project and approve the development to move forward. thank you. >> caller: hi, my name is

carmen. my parents were finally able to own a house. i actually welcome the idea of providing affordable housing in this neighborhood. as a kid, i've always thought the neighborhood is too affluent and attainable for immigrants, but now i offer this development with open arms since it allows people who will otherwise afford this area to live in. so i strongly support this development. thank you. >> caller: [inaudible] >> secretary: yes. go ahead. >> caller: it's very hard for

me, for my family to find affordable house. it's very hard. the reason i choose noe valley as my home because they're a model of public transportation and the public transportation. when i heard about this project, i'm very happy that they would like to build more affordable houses in this area and there will be more options for people. in addition, the sproepzed permit and upgrades will not only benefit the project, but also benefit the entire community. so that's a reason i would like

to recognize this project. thank you. >> caller: hello. i live in noe valley not too far away and -- sorry. [inaudible] so first of all, i want to make clear that i support this project 100%. -- like a perfect fit. the board of supervisors specifically legislated for this kind of proposal and now here we have it it's the past and the future for san francisco and kind of the area in terms of no parking, added

density. however, and, yeah all the way. there are some curiosities i'd like to point out. one is the view. why not add windows on the western wall also, the address is a little bit weird. it looks like it's hard to find on the map. it looks like it should be the same as its neighbor. and, finally, i do hope that this experience for the applicant who is a public official himself on the peninsula and in a position to shape policy encourages him to apply the same principles of this proposal which is high density, no parking access to bus lines. i hope the bus lines get better, fast i think in five years or ten years i see a different transportation

landscape. and the faster we work towards the futurer, the better for everybody. so it's no displacement. it's a vacant lot. so, yeah, i urge you to approve this proposal. thank you. >> caller: hello. my name is tom nelson. i'm a 46-year ready at 884 corbett avenue. i'm a long-time supporter of found housing development in san francisco. the rash name of the home sf is a good one when properly applied. unfortunately, in the case of this project development, it's been used by the developer to deflect any and all concerns

that the local neighborhood residents to simplify the issue this project is the wrong one for this particular lot and this lot is the wrong one for this particular project. perhaps it would be okay somewhere akin to an area like the geary street corridor anger appropriate for this development would be one that is the height and footprint of the building which is situated right beside the lot in question and is identical in size. it is easy for people to support projects like this. when they are not affected by the project. please give more weight to those of us who oppose it based on its effect of our quality of life. this is what it does to me personally. my home has only windows to the east. as a result, it is on the dark side once the sun moves west.

however, i'm darked with the mid block open space that provides me with a pleasant scene to start my day. i will lose my the decks will look directly down into my bedroom, bathroom, and living room. please reject this project and come up with a developing plan that will be suitable for the location. thank you for seriously considering my concerns. thank you. >> caller: hey everybody. my name is phillip. i'm a noe valley resident. i'm also a climate activist

which is my day job. i wanted to say, actually, one other thing too is i live in an adu that's behind a fourth floor building. i live in the back yard of a talkinger building, but i wanted to make it clear that i support this project. just a quick personal about me. so i just got married this summer and my wife and i would love to move into a house where we can start a family and it's also a dream of mine to have a house because that's what i'm trying to do and that's what this project is doing which is a great thing to have, but we're not millionaires, so we can't afford to buy a house in our neighborhood. right now in san francisco, you can't do both. like this is a real thing that people are having to deal with

in san francisco right now. so these houses are for people like me. so i really encourage you to please support this project. it will help real people even people in the neighborhood right now like myself. please support this project. thank you. >> hello everybody. my name is margarita wahlberg. i identify as an immigrant. i moved to the united states just a few years ago and i live right by the project on corbett street. many people mentioned today we are for development and good development, but this development jeopardizes not only because it obstructs our view, but because it's going to be a complete nuisance to have such a big building in the lot. just let me give you a little

background on the neighborhood. i moved here just recently because i couldn't afford to have a car, and here you really have to have a car otherwise you can't get groceries or go to work. the grocery store is not walking distance. there's huge hills surrounding the area. so i don't think affordable housing in the basement will solve that problem because those families cannot afford having cars so i see this project as a total fake that jeopardizes residents and trying to enrich developers and they're trying to build their huge penthouse on the top. so i'm sorry for not very educated language because i'm just an immigrant who doesn't have much education. thank you.

>> caller: good afternoon, commissioners. my name's connor. my brother and i have lived at 725 corbett for about a dozen years now and i just wanted to tell you what you probably already know which is that they like to act like they speak on behalf of the entire neighborhood, but they don't. there are many a few doors down who fully support this project and honestly, this is getting tragically economical with all of the repetition of the same talking points every time someone has the audacity. i think what the planning commission needs is a whammy button. and every time neighborhood

character, everybody needs to have a car or we support housing, just not this housing near us or that we have to see in our neighborhood. that should be a whammy button and then that person gets bounced and they're not allowed to talk anymore. because those repeated lines are total b.s. and we are in a housing crisis. we need it all over the place. from my back window of corbett, i look out at a building of about 50 units. the building i live in is about 20 units. this is a high density neighborhood and apparently some of my neighbors can't accept that. they're wrong and you shouldn't listen to them. whammy