6570 feet deep. Which is typical of what you see in neighborhood shops. One of the things you are developing in my neighborhood is a funeral home. A block away we have successful people entering into becoming a shopkeeper, or service provider, whatever. Weve actually created a small, i dont know, 150 square feet each, weak carved out it into retail spaces now, they share a common bathroom. They dont have all of that extra Square Footage. Would you consider doing Something Like that . I think going back to, commissioner, the discussion about flexible retail. What you are describing is one of the trends. Retail space has become more expensive, obviously retail is changing, and evolving with both the online shopping, but also the idea that co location, of different retail brands, and that is really what you are seeing in flexible retail. You are seeing new retailers, like neighborhood goods, where you might have five different brands, with some food uses in the space, you like share bathrooms. One of the important things to note about that, as a company that has been doing retail for over 30 years here in San Francisco. Our retail portfolio is 97 leased. We intend to keep it that way. We are seeing more and more Small Businesses that are having difficulty taking these larger spaces. The idea of having some flexible space where retailers can come together and co brand. Subject to the same controls as was mentioned earlier of the ncs zoning district. We believe that is actually an option to have that provides local businesses with more opportunity here. I think there is something for me on the retail is, prado group, youre in my neighborhood as well. You own a portfolio of retail spaces. Its up to you to curate Something Interesting that keeps vacancy rates as low as you can. I trust, that you have a very vested interest in not stuffing doctors offices, nail shops, and weirdo menagerie of things that are not going to play off each other, like we see in some neighborhood commercial districts. If i can just comment on that, for a second . I actually sat on the Retail Advisory committee for the upper market, because of the vacancy we saw in the neighborhood. There are a lot of outoftown property owners, up in the district. We do make it rather difficult, as a city coming to get retail approved. Some of the reasons are good. Formula retail. We are proud of the fact that historically, 75 of our tenants have been non formula retail tenants. But, i think it is an opportunity, in this area, to bring some additional retail to the area, that can complement to the retail that is next door. Having that flexibility built into the project, we think is important, as the market evolves. I am a retailer in the Laurel Village shopping center, youre going to come in down the street , should i be afraid . I think, i would tell you that weve met with the Laurel Village merchants over the last four years, and admittedly, there is some fear and concern. There was an allegation early on that we were going to bring whole foods in, and put whole foods in this location. We assured the neighborhood we were doing small shop space. The good news is whole foods is coming into the City Center Development which is about two blocks down the street. Trader joes is located down the street. We have some beloved institutions. I shop at their stores weekly. We have a desire to complement, not compete with the retailers in Laurel Village. I would say a number of the retailers are excited about the idea that we are going to bring additional retail to an area that is currently owned with separate ownerships. One piece of information to know about Laurel Village shopping center, and i think we had it up on site earlier. It has 11 different ownerships. Three of those are actually local property owners. Out of four of the owners, they have banks. 25 of the Square Footage is banks in the Laurel Village center. To curate a mix of things that is missing from the neighborhood, and that is our intent. We are already starting to collaborate with the board of the Merchants Association to do comarketing. We have actually proposed to build a new website that would co brand and co market the whole area for the local neighbors. Thanks. Can we get into some specifics here from the Laurel Heights letter that was handed in asking for modifications. Could you comment on the request to remove 30 feet from the south side of euclid building the preserved green space . I believe you are referring to the elimination of two of the townhomes . That is second on her list. 30 feet on the south side of euclid yielding to preserve green space, i guess. Im sorry, i recall what she was referring to. We actually can put up a slide, do we have a before and after slide looking down from the euclid green . I think that will give a sense to the commissioners about what the proposed project is. If you can just put it up, i want to understand this a little better. That is the euclid side. Yes, this is a current view of the euclid green facing east or downtown. Euclid green will remain part of. Right. This is the after, will go back to the before, and then you can see with our proposed plan, which is the next slide. We are planning on retaining that corridor to downtown, it was something that was referenced by the neighborhood, very early on. We initially started with a different design of that park that had a platform, then actually step down the hill and some of the neighbors, who actually throw footballs out there, play with their dogs out there, said they wanted it to follow the natural grade. These two pictures here, the Square Footage of the euclid green remains the same . You take a some away, and is still the same size area. We are looking at one side of the euclid green right now. As proposed. This is a long euclid, this is the east facing view. There is a section, that i was referring to, that some of the neighbors had referred to that is on the north side of that green, along laurel where we are proposing townhomes, and that is currently green space that we are proposing to eliminate to include a couple of fourbedroom homes. The height of those homes are 40 feet . 40 feet. They are actually 30 feet, they are set back approximately 25 feet. They have a 30foot element, and then there is a 40foot element is set back from the 30foot height. So the total is 40. From the curb is 25 feet. I believe it is the end of the sidewalk, its approximately 25 feet. Maybe you can tell me, laurel street is how wide . In trying to understand the impact of what this request would do. You know the width of laurel street . And then on the other side of the street, the homes have a setback as well . The homes do have a setback. Do you know the average setback . I would guess that the average setback is probably 2530 feet. What is different though is that the homes across the street actually have driveway aprons. We have removed those driveway aprons, consolidated them into one single driveway for all of the townhomes, in order to park them behind. Ours is a continuous garden space and that now has a double row of trees. I will let other commissioners speak, but i do have other further questions. Commissioner fung . [inaudible] turner mike on. Okay. Im not sure whether my fellow commissioners and i need that much discussions on the certification of the e. I. R. In reviewing the e. I. R. , i found some typos, but nothing of significance. I will let the other commissioners bring forth whether they feel similarly. In terms of the special use districts, and the development agreements, some of the initial discussions have related to retail. I think there is a couple of points that if i could use the word opposition, or use the Word Community brought forth, somewhat in agreement with. As an example if i had a choice between larger scale open space versus open space that is in between, much smaller narrower between buildings, at that. , it is not lost on me from the discussions that have been brought forth by the community. The question of whether the flexible retail space should go beyond 11, i would probably agree with, also. There was one other point i was going to bring forth, but i cant remember now. There are some points that i am in disagreement with, and terms of where the community is. One is the usage of flexible retail. Given the challenges that retail has come i think expanding the amount of uses that can occur in a commercial zone, this is probably important to be able to maintain that retail. Secondly i am not as an outward with the sense of architectural, historical significance of the existing building that perhaps some of the others are. The concept of how one lays out these buildings, i think i am more appreciative of the design proposal, trying to reach grade around the entire site. To me that is fairly important, given the nature, the urban design nature of both masonic and pine street area. On that basis, then the imbalance, you know, i am prepared to support the project as it currently is. Commissioner moore . Thank you to my fellow commissioners for their thoughtful comments. It is interesting how we look differently at things that matter to us. What has been a large question for me is the challenge of transforming the suburban site which is an oddity on its own, into something which has meeting. The Historic Preservation is a very important one, but more important is the issue of good adaptive reuse. Someone reminisced to preserving something which has a lot of meaning to the community. How do you do that . Offers to residential is a major challenge, because there are different rules applied in particular to an Office Building that is not like many in San Francisco adapt to our use. This is a typical suburban Office Building, with that are not adaptable to residential i have to believe it is done in a manner that is sensitive solely with a large scale memory of these buildings on the site. But does all of the things to bring it into the context of an urban project as was just mentioned. In a way that is meaningful. The masonic euclid site has always been a problem, no matter how we feel about it. It was always suburban. It was always a substitute substitute freeway, it was something that did not have any scale or reason to have scale. Adding buildings and a manner that they are now lining that part of the site, including the new openings with a real sensitive ad which is great, makes this a very compelling project. I spend quite a bit of time listening to presentations that give me a far larger insight into the quality of the project, than just looking through the documents, or even hearing an abbreviated presentation, giving true creditor to what has been achieved here. I am in full support of the project, and i would like to have mr. Safir speak one more time, to the issue which i ask each time we have large projects , explained to the community your thoughts about phasing . I got a number of pages which were handed to me, based on how you want to explain it. I want the rest of the commission, as well as the public to have the benefit of hearing you, including myself, ask you a couple of questions. Thank you. We do have some slides here that will speak to a couple of issues , around the phasing. One, that i can speak to, is a construction timeframe which has been discussed among some of the members of the public, and then also how the phasing will actually work . I was as was discussed earlier, sevenyear construction timeframe with overlapping phases. I would like to note that we have every intent to build this project, as quickly as we can, and we appreciate that the community would like to see it built as quickly as possible. The construction phasing itself, when you look at the phases. It ranges from just under two years for the west portion of the project, which is along laurel, to our longest phase which is three years, along the california street phase. Importantly, i think when you look at the phasing. That three year time frame, which starts at demolition, and excavation actually has the exterior of those buildings being closed up, just slightly over two years. What is positive about that is we will have subterranean garages which will have high bay heights for deliveries, and provide opportunity for to be primarily serviced and staged underneath those buildings. Even though that is a three year timeframe, from a practical standpoint, there is about two years of Exterior Construction on the longest phase. This slide that i will run through demonstrates how the phasing will work, from a site plan perspective. We have the existing parking come along california street. The masonic you euclid phase, it is a 2. 5 year phase. During the construction, and the end of progress, there will be selected demolition of the south portion of the building, and the site access will have contractor staging, on the west side, of the existing building, where there is an existing parking lot. Also, we are planning to retain the existing parking onsite, because that is used by the public currently, we are going to try to maintain that as long as we can, so there is public parking. When the phase is under construction, you can see the outline to the south of the Masonic Building on the euclid building. The contractor staging will move over in front of the jcc building. Retaining public parking, on the california street garage, and that we will also have contractor staging, and likely contractor offices on the existing structure that is currently on the northwest portion of the project. This slide demonstrates when the masonic euclid phase is complete. The center phase is still under construction. This shows the Pedestrian Access way, and also the vehicular access for the masonic and euclid building, under the masonic garage and euclid garage , while the buildings are under construction. It was still be Pedestrian Access, public parking, along california street in surface parking lot. Also, contractor staging will be able to occur on the west portion of the site where there is existing parking. When plaza anb and walnut phase comments, the center, it is assumed to still be in progress. The contractor staging will take place at the west side of the center a and b buildings. While the entire california frontage is under construction. This is our access to the masonic and euclid buildings. And then the center a and b buildings will be completed. This shows the access to both the parking, and the Pedestrian Access for center anb, euclid building, Masonic Building while the california frontage is still under construction. We then, as an interim part of the california street phase would open up the entry into the site, once the underground garage is built, to create that north and south connection, and the walnut building, and the plaza anb building will still be under construction. And then, the mayfair and laurel duplexes would Start Construction. This slide shows both construction access for staging, and completion of the remaining stages, but also pedestrian and vehicular access onto the site. This is with the completion of the plaza a, plaza b and walnut building, and the access that will then be available for those three phases. And then the access of both vehicular and Pedestrian Access, during that timeframe. Thank you for explaining that which basically has four open edges, which is extremely difficult to phase. I want to be very honest here, phasing the california street side first would have been my preference. It is a california Street Project brady want to show the most complete phase to the community, and phase away from what is basically the treasure. I am not sure, as to whether or not consider that, could you spend a moment on explaining why that did not work, so i can at least support your phasing diagram . One of the items that was mentioned, is that this project, and the Affordable Housing is being privately funded, by the project itself. The walnut phase includes the garage, and the retail, and the Affordable Housing building. In order to build up to funding, to Start Construction on that walnut building, we have to have approximately two phases completed in order to escrow sufficient funds to pay for the Gap Financing for the walnut affordable project. We do have the flexibility under the development agreement. To your point, it would be our desire to build a california street, if that is possible. Our goal is the same as the citys goal, to build the Affordable Housing, as we do not currently have a bridge mechanism, in order to build out Affordable Housing. It is something that we are strongly considering how to try to do that. I was not trying to nail you to the early realization of Affordable Housing, knowing that the Financial Issues on the property issues surrounding that are very, very complex. That would be a desire, emotionally, to have it. Im anxious to see that the project chose a very positive site, positive face on california as early as possible, does not have a construction phase on that particular part of the project. That is the longest facade, at the address. Whatever could be done to get that phase of the project, a positive site, i think is an object and should be thought about. We very much appreciate the comment, commissioner. Commissioner johnson . First i want to take just a minute to celebrate. I think it has been really heartening, and wonderful that we are all united, by the notion that we need by housing. Every Community Needs to, and wants to do its part to address the housing crisis. I think its important to celebrate occasionally. I agree on the fact that we name more housing. The conversation is how we get there. In a neighborhood we all deeply care about, we disagree on how to be get there. I live in this neighborhood, i shop at brians, once a member of the jcc, and i love this corridor. I have lived there for ten years. Ive also seen the brick wall, and the foreboding this of this space. I have ventured inside, ive seen my neighbors and friends, do the best that we can with this space. It is not, in my man imagination, what i want for our shared neighborhood. I think we can do better. That was my initial thought when i heard development was coming to this property. Every week, we hear from our neighbors on the east side of the city, mission, chinatown, soma, they say yes to housing. They ask us for equity. They ask, where is the housing going in the rest of the city . How are the other neighborhoods doing their fair share, so we can all have a vibrant, affordable city . That is the goal, of what we balance up here every week. Thinking about all of the places where we can build housing. We have a few goals related to that. We want to to cmx of Housing Stock that can really accommodate all types of people throughout their entire life cycle. We want open space, and community connectedness. We want vibrant commercial corridors that are supported by density, and serve the people who live there. I just want to say come on i want to make sure everybody here understands that we hear you. We hear your concerns about the flexible retail, and whether is a necessity. We hear your concerns about open space. I understand deeply, the impact that this will have on your neighborhoods. Yet, we also, you know, ask every single district to take on those changes, those impacts so that we can build a better San Francisco. We had our neighbor out in support of a project that would take 15 years to build, because it is a creative, adaptive reuse that will bring more vibrancy to their neighborhood. They are willing to support a project that will go 415 years. I have to say, you know, one of the first questions i had his are we going to get the community benefit. If we are changing this, are we going to get them . I feel confident that the team, that is working on that, has put all of the causes, agreements and things together that will make sure that we get the Senior Housing that we so desperately need. We have combed the e. I. R. With a fine toothed comb, including finding typos. Its a pretty big document. You know, ultimately when i, you know, i go to brians, and i go to artists, and, ive gone to the jcc and gotten out for a long workout. Theres no where to eat, everywhere is closed and its a ghost town. For one, i welcome our new neighbors. I welcome the vibrancy that this development will bring. I think, you know, because we see retail all of the time come here and, we also see that we need creativity, as far as retail to make sure that our commercial corridors stay vibrant. After talking about, and exploring that with the staff, i also support the flexible retail. So, again, i want to thank you all for coming out, braving the heat, sharing your passion and your concerns. I just want to say that we are holding them, too. I think this is a great project, and i support it. Thank you. I would just comment before i pass it on to you. I am also in support of this project. I think i actually like this building. Im kind of attached to it. And, you know, i see the change in the building with a little bit of sadness. However, i do agree with all of the comments my fellow commissioners have made. I think the tradeoff, what we are getting, for the redevelopment of this site is really great. I also want to commend the developer, for the Community Process which was expensive, and for the creativity in adapting, and reusing this building, and this site, to make it more open and connected to the rest of the grid. You know, allowing for pedestrian pathways, and for it to be a usable space. For the folks who are going to live there, and also for the neighborhood. I appreciate the thoughts, and care in putting together green spaces and open spaces where people can sit, and just hang out. I really appreciate that. I do have a couple of questions. Um, the first is travertine, um, this was talked about during the presentation, afterwards we talked about the developer was going to be responsible for the building. I want to know exactly what the relationship is, and what um the rule is of mercy housing . Barbara is here from mercy housing. They are our Affordable Housing partner who will be developing, and operating the Senior Housing project. We had a long relationship with the folks at mercy housing, going back a very long time. Before doug actually got into the business. We are excited to have him on the project area we will be collaborating with them on the overall project, to make sure that the design stays consistent with what we have brought forward, and also making sure that the building, and its uses are well integrated in the community. [please stand by] [please stand by] what is that going to look like . I direct the real estate work formers see housing. No, we are not running the child care. We would be the owneroperator for the Senior Housing. Okay. The child care would be owned separately. Who would own the child care . Would that still be . The child care will be part of the base of the building, along with the retail. We will own that space but lease it to a child care operator. We currently have an operator on the site that is serving the community that is actually moving over to the City Center Development, but given the extensive wait list for i believe as many as 800 families in this area on the wait list, we are confident in our discussions with them and with other providers we will have Child Care Provider as soon as we are able to deliver the space. Thank you very much. This idea of having an intergenerational space is very exciting. It is done in other places, not in San Francisco to have, you know, some intentional senior childrens space. Thank you. My other question, im sorry, it is for you. You know, we heard during Public Comment from several folks in the community about the parking impact. I actually dont want as much parking here. And i understand you have negotiated with the community and folks dont want to, you know, be even more stressed. As we have talked here, you know, over the last few years that i have been on this commission, seeing the future, the rate of car ownership in San Francisco has plummeted, especially for younger folks. It is very low. My kids dont, you know. My fear is that, you know, we are e excavating and putting in the parking 30 years that will be there but not so many cars. My question is in the future how would we readapt that space . You are developing in San Francisco for the long run, how are we thinking about that parking . I think it is a very good question in terms of the future use of underground parking versus above ground parking. The great irony as we look at buildings today and parking structures today, we are actually thinking about issues around the future reduction of parking garages how they are designed for future mobility. It is harder with underground parking. Part of the reason we were able to get over 50 of the 10acre site as open area is by putting all of the parking and services below grade. There have been concerns about excavation on his site. We have taken those seriously. We have been working on our plans, and we are putting a very High Percentage of the Parking Spaces in either stackers or tandems, and i would estimateted based on the plans we would be further to reduce excavation from what was in the plan by 50,000 square feet, over an acre, more in cubic yards. We are looking at when we think about parking for this project very compact parking solutions. How those are adapted in the future is open. You have mechanical systems that can be used for storage, they can potentially be used for other uses that are currently dont require windows so it is not habitable spaces. The other thing i would just note, and i think you touched on this. We have spent over four years working with the community, and really made a commitment to the community we would push for onetoone parking, not above onetoone, but onetoone parking. While we have done, and i think commissioner richard knows well, we have done projects with less parking along transit corridors. We feel strong lethere is a commitment to the Community Grants the Senior Housing is a new element. We think there could be flexibility in the amount of parking for Senior Housing. We are committed to doing close to 70 , 75 of the total parking spacials, residential in either stackers or tandem spaces. I think, you know, there is the community element, the reuse is a harder question that i am not sure that i can add today, but i will say that on a couple of those points that i mentioned, and we had this discussion also with mercy. We have a. M. I. S in the Senior Housing that will average 59 . They will go 30 to 80 a. M. I. We will likely have seniors that do have cars. That is something we want to take into consideration on the project. Needless to say, we have always been, i think, facing forward when it comes to building sustainable transit oriented developments. We understand the concern. Thank you. Commissioner hillis. Commissioner hillis i want to share that concern about parking. So you have talked about, you know, a more efish end layout efficient parking. Is that effective in the Square Footage before us now . These are actually studies we have been working on since the package was submitted, and the number of stackers in there is not in the current plan. We have a High Percentage stacker in some buildings. The masonic and euclid grade there are only 13 surface, the remainder are 97 stackers. The other thing i can take off on a tangent for a second, the one thing that i think is important to note about the project as we think about parking ratios is that the typical zoning is 40 two bedrooms or greater. Most of the projects you see before you are 40 two bedrooms. Our project has 58 , two, three and four bedrooms. When you think about the parking ratio. If you take a typical zone project at a 40 two bedroom requirement, we would be at point 88 spaces per bedroom. Our project today at onetoone is. 72. There is something that i think is relevant for this commission to take into account on that and i want to make sure i answer the rest of your question. Commissioner hillis that is fair. We grapple with this, but these are clearly the hope is families will live in these spaces, and i dont think we can assume if i was home today i would be driving to pick up kids and you need a car at some point in the city. I get that kind of tension on the parking question here. It is not in some of the neighborhoods we have seen. It sounds like there could be some reduction from efficiency the fact that we have got, you know, senior living, there could be some even with that amount. It seems like there could be some reduction in the parking. I will see what others have to say, too. I want to talk about open space. I recognize that corner open space is getting reduced, but i point to 55 lagoonna. I was skeptical if that would connect the neighborhood. It has the samis issues here. It is wonderful. I encourage those skeptical about the smaller spaces to walk around that development. It is great. It really works well. It is inciting. People use it. You have some of the same designers on this that you had there so i think it is worth it to i am excited about the smaller open spaces and steps and how you can get through this. I just wanted to say that. On the community variance, and we met about this in, you know, i think it was a Community Alternative you are now proposing. I am a little unclear which one it is. It is closer to where the Development Proposal is. I think it is the biggest shift is the number of units. Can you get the same number of units. Your proposal is to remove the Masonic Building that Square Footage would be somewhere and the intent is california street. Some folks on california street dont want three or four story taller buildings on california street, which i agree with. I dont know what you would get from lopping off the Masonic Building. I agree with commissioner moore, having that street frontage active is key. This space now is just walled off on all sides whether by steep grades or walls, and this is going to be a vast transformation of that and you are adding the housing. Even if you got the Community Alternative to put more units on california this is a much better plan with much better open space. I am still skeptical you can get the same number of units on the other side. I wanted to mention that. Commissioner hillis, if i can mention one of the things. We can understand and appreciate there are a couple alternative proposals that have been put forward. We took the time to look at all of those. One of the points that wasnt necessarily made or didnt come across in the earlier commentary is that while the proposal, community variance proposes to cut through the existing building at grade where the entry is and then it shows a connection out to masonic, and that is how it is stated in the letter proposed. That is physically impossible. The entry to the existing building is elevation 275. When you get to the plaza on the south side of that building, you are 13 to 14 feet higher, and then as you actually go to masonic, it is another 19 feet below grade. Commissioner hillis i interact more with the site on that masonic side. It is not a great feeling for anybody around there whether you are walking or driving or what you are doing. This is a vast improvement in building on that street wall is the right thing to do. Thank you. Commissioner richards. Commissioner richards most of the commissioners asked the questions i have. One remaining question. We have 72000 Housing Units in the pipeline approved. 40,000 are not part of major developments like we saw today, 30,000 are not getting built. Can you build this project if we approve it . Well, i think the commissioner knows that we have had the wherewithal to build all of our projects including starting projects during the recession so we can build the project. It does require financing. It is a large project. We are in a good financing parket at this point in time. Who knows what that will be in the future. Our plan is to prepare for Building Permits and build the projects as soon as we can. I move to approve. Second. Commissioners we called up the final Environmental Impact report. We should clarify the motion. Please clarify the motion. The reason i am stating this is because we should take up the matter of the environmental report separately from the authorization. Can i read a correction to the record. For the c. U. A. Motion approval 24 the parking maximum allowed should be reduced to 857 from 1219. By the way laurel street is 54 feet wide. Commissioner richards. Commissioner richards i make a motion to certify the e. I. R. Second. On that motion. roll call . So moved. That motion passes unanimously. Now you can take up the matter of project authorizations. Commissioner hillis. Commissioner hillis i move to approve 12 a, b, c. Second. And 12d. As amended. Could we have overriding considerations as a separate vote . 12a will be taken up first. Which is the statement of overriding considerations. Is there a second . I second the whole package. I second the other one. On the motion to adopt findings and statement of overriding considerations. roll call . So moved. That motion passes 61 with commissioner richards voting against. Commissioner hillis i move to approve 12b planning code and zoning map agreements and 12c and 12d. Second. As amended by staff. On that motion. roll call . So moved that motion passes unanimously 70. So we are now adjourned. [gavel] good morning. The meeting will come to order. This is september 4, 2019, regular meeting of the budgets and finance committee. I am sandra lee fewer, chair of the budget and finance committee. Im joined by supervisors Katherine Stefani and rafael manldsleman is on his way