i would expect to an adaptive reuse, which up with support. i think we're putting too much reuse into this building, which is really not quite sized properly, located properly in this neighborhood. when we look at adaptive reuse, for example, error building's south of market in industrial- zoned lots. there's an easier way of making it, so to speak. in this location, i don't believe it does. i'm not here to get into 16 spaces or 17 spaces. i do acknowledge that the existing uses beneficial to the neighborhood. i do not want to see additional buildings applying for added parking in ground floors. what is the balance? i don't know. i believe, as commissioner antonini said, the expansion of the new floor is much too much on the union street's apartments. for me, it is not even the discussion item, to talk about tilted planes. me, myself, living in an apartment building where stepping to the building -- window and participating in light is the issue, not staying way back in the center of the room, you will not see the intrusion of much. the impact

2000 would be affordable with new retail space, a to 100,000 square feet of new retail space, adaptive reuse 11 dozen square feet for commercial and of approximately 500 hotel rooms, upgraded utilities, about 300 acres of parks, play field, and new and upgraded streets and public ways, but pedestrian facilities, a sailing center, services for a marina, and more. the buildup of the project would be phased to occur over approximately a 15 to 20 year period. a range of building heights is proposed on treasure island. about half will be in low-rise buildings up to 7 feet with a range of mid rise and high rise buildings up to 240 feet. the maximum height buildings would be located on the southern part of treasure island, 315 feet in three areas and a maximum height limit of 450 feet at the site of the main tower. the other would be built similarly, with a small amount of neighborhood space. officers' quarters and buildings would be adapted for uses such as a hotel, and wellness center, and possibly a restaurant. it would manage and improved plant and wildlife habitat in the and developed portion

kitchen, grablgs and things like that require creative adaptive reuse. if properly designed, most homes could benefit from having a garage. there are some homes that there is no tasteful way to do. i think those homes should forget having a garage. >> i went along the row of painted ladies and they all have a row of garages. those are the icons of san francisco. they all have garages. let's talk about the other interior and hardware issues. go back and talk about doors. here's inn exterior door set. how does one retain and maintain hardware like this. you don't want to replace should go like that. if you do it will be expensive. vsx+or?3vy÷voa;lñr you can rep parts. you buy a house and there's no key. you take this out -- >> have that replaced. you get it all rekeyed. there's one there. >> you don't have to replace the hardware. >> you don't have to replace it. i'm working on a large house now where we have taken every singet piece of hardware off. hings. the lock sets and having them all replated and going to a company that will come in and they will r

there is no need for adaptive reuse. we called your attention that the community has concerns about this project. we ask you to exercise the broad discretion that is given to you. if you are not going to retain the facility, direct the project sponsor to really investigate and look at the two pklulus -- two plus two solution we have given to you. president olague: thank you. >> good afternoon, commission. my name is scott and i'm resident of russell street, across from the 1945 garage. i am here as an independent planner. i have been planning for 25 years. i would like to amplify a couple of the points that are contained in detail in the report that we submitted as part of your packet and that you have heard here today already. i think you have a tricky situation here. the crux of it is whether compliance with the planning code as it has been proposed is sufficient for this project or whether there are extraordinary circumstances around this particular time, the particular building, that really empower you to go beyond t

we had been talking about a possible adaptive reuse project at pier 23, which i think is beyond staff to handle when we have so much going on right now. not something we are actively pursuing. network of parks and open space, primarily prompted by the 2008 neighborhood parks bond. we identified a range of options up and down port property. we have run and piles at pier 64. looking at how to remove those blighted areas from the waterfront was another issue that prompted this. i am going to go over the major findings at a pretty high level. we are going to drill into these issues in further detail as we go into next steps, but we talked with the participants about how they would like to see the agency's approach planning on the waterfront. what has been done in the past is really to look at the entire stretch of waterfront. it took seven years for the land use plan and three years to approve a special area plan, so i think we walked in thinking we have that base of information, and planning could be more site- specific. that view was not necessarily shared by our stakeholders. there are

since adaptive reuse and green technology is a desirable concepts for many, i think we need to be proactive and green and all that we do. i appreciate mr. rubin that showing us the cyclical nature of the completed buildings. extending entitlements, particular to those developers to have a proven record of having delivered buildings even after they have asked for a temporary delay. i think of that is a transparent way of dealing with the sometimes difficult issues. president olague: thank you. secretary avery: thank you, commissioners. we can move forward on the calendar. case no. 7, 201 1.0506b. >> commissioners, good afternoon. dan snyder with the commission staff. 48 tehama street is a service parking lot, with an plummet to construct a new building containing 49,300 square feet of office space, along with three full-floor residential units on the top three floors of the building. at the office allocation and other approvals were granted in 2001, and the 18 month construction project timeline expired in march of 2003. commissioners, no building permits were ever sought to execute this pro