This issue ever came into these rooms but were happening in our own neighborhood meeting where we hosted the developer and made that very clear. It was so satisfying in december 11th, to hear the decision specifically what happened is we keep asserting appropriateness which is part of what the planning code requires. We kept trying to assert inappropriateness as the other side asserted appropriateness and the evidence that those before us ever had was pictures that we would bring and try to show our case. What happened on december 11th, is that two members of your board who know this spot had firsthand understanding of this space and not relying on the pictures and indicated very clearly that it was inappropriate. And so, thank you for that and please continue to uphold that. I may run out of time but i do want to say on the issue of Affordable Housing, i cant say. Okay. Thank you. My name is elizabeth zit erin. Im a lawyer and lived on Mission Street for longer than ha architecture has been live. I have been in that area for 34 years. Mr. Fung you asked a question about the requested step down and mediation to hill street, nothing was done on that score. There was no step down, no mediation, none discussed none proposed from this developer. I never practice law in this area but a few things about this process is clear to me. You made a decision in december. The next hearing was for the purpose of determining if their written findings come portd with the decision you made in december. You did nothing to say they didnt and they seem to have come portd as everything seems to think they did and you have a briefing on this one issue and that is all that is here today. The people in the neighborhood are distressingly used to feeling abandoned or betrayed by too many people that are supposed to be representing us. I just want you to know that a lot of people thank and applaud you for having the courage of your convictions and want to encourage you to continue to have the courage to stand up to bullying and pressure that has crossed the line of appropriateness in some cases. Finally i would like to ask the developer and architect for the zero parking transit friendly building which transit lines they erode here this evening are whether in fact as when they come to our neighborhood they drove in their private vehicles. Thank you very much. Ported hello. I think those issues regarding transparent about people who move in knowing would be really important. Im not employed by the marsh, but i assist and teach classes there for adults who want to create word. Its silent. There is a lot of come comedy. There is people that dig deep to tell us stories and they are going to be vulnerable and we try to create a sacred space for them to come and trust us and put their stuff out there and we work with them to develop it through the community in a whole way. I think we are talking about in terms of the marsh, we are just asking to protect the sound with the marsh. We are not asking inform are any changes to the building regarding floors. We are trying to protect the art and artist and children and adults there. Also i work in it and i need to hire a lot of techs and they cant afford to live here. The reason im saying this since its all our problems, i witch the developers would see that since they are moving in we are going to be neighbors, the marsh can draw people to eat in their restaurant and hang out before a show and we need them to work with us. I hope you will support that. Good evening. Im john barbie resident in the adjacent neighborhood for 35 years. I would want to commend your earlier decision unanimous which i thought was very brave and correct. We think that from what we are able to determine at liberty hill neighborhood association. The units proposed are already small and overpriced and not very livable. Its a very strange way to address the housing probable for San Francisco. The affordable units is one or two at the most. Thats pretty negligible. We had someone with his own resident dense residence across the street. That is historical resource. What they are not compliant with residential guidelines and we think its correct and brave of you to finally give us someone better than lip service. It was really wonderful to hear that and to finally hear our code pretty much upheld as it hadnt been before. And we would like to have something that is more compatible with the build scape. Thank you very much. Good evening, ladies and gentlemen. My name is barbara russel. I own property on hill street. I bought it 52 years ago. I think im one of the older residents. I own property on guerrero and an 8unit building on liberty. Im here to protest even the way this building is. It is ugly. I have seen other buildings on valencia that are nice that are built 5 stories. This makes every effort to cover every space. Its not a good building. It doesnt fit anything in the area. The structures on the street are 2unit buildings maybe 3unit here and there. Im speaking from the knowledge that i own property on twin peaks. A 16unit building on twin peaks. I was reading last night about our supervisor wiener saying one bedroom apartment renting for 3,000. I just have four vacancies. I had a two bedroom that i rented for less than 3,000. This is not very realistic. If they are giving the low price, the woman delores and market, the two bedroom is 5,000 and 3 bedroom is 8,000. Even if they cut down in half and made it low income, thats not low income. Its half of that. This is not figuring out the way people are saying that its figuring out. I have been representing apartments for 52 years. So i think im pretty much an expert on it. I am still there. I still take care of my tennants. Thank you for your time. My name is elisa. I live on hill street across from 1050 valencia. Our single most important goal over the past 5 years is to get this development to respect the community. This very small project situated primarily on hill street has attracted a great deal of attention quite out of proportion to its size. There have been many voices to added opinions and applied pressure to this board. Both the Historic Preservation commission and Planning Commission voiced the need to scale down this building. The coalition of San Francisco neighborhoods, a citywide eight neighborhood organizations joins us tonight to urge the commissioners to keep this building at four floors. This historic part of the mission is special and we want to preserve it. This building diminishes neighborhood character. It is incompatible with the historic architecture and now will add more unaffordable condos to a community that is already reeling from this type of development. Over 800 condos are being built within 3 blocks of this site. There is Good Development and there is bad development. The project sponsor could include 10 units. We are not saying 12 if he really believes that Affordable Housing is vital. 10unit would kickoff the Affordable Housing mandate. At 5 stories this development is a detriment to this community. At 4 stories, it becomes an asset. I urge you to uphold your december 11th findings. Thank you. Good afternoon. Im with the neighborhood association. I grew up on 27 valencia from 1963 to 1974 and currently live on New Hampshire street. I just want to say that each neighborhood as you know is very different and unique and in the mission we have micro neighborhood that are blocks apart very unique that way. I think the city plan is too cookie cutter. One plan does not fit all. I think the eastern neighborhood plans talks about not just density, but it also talks about the sensitivity, nature of the neighborhood. We have to remember to look at all the other chapters and not just transit quarter piece. So i feel that 4 stories and truly afford able units is what best fits this neighborhood. What i mean by truly affordable units is that immigrant families can purchase or rent or any other low income folks in the neighborhood. We have seen a lot of affordable inclusionary units that are not affordable to people in the neighborhood. There is restaurants that have come into the mission are not here anymore. They are investors and not traditional mom and pops. Most of the neighborhood cant afford to eat there. I hope you can uphold your decision made in december. Thank you. First i want to confirm some email that i maybe able to speak although its not evidence. Thats correct. Ms. Gamez is in the matter as a member to speak with respect to the public. Her testimony should not be given any evidentiary weight. Thank you. I speak again to ask you to uphold your decision reached in decision and speak to some of the statements that have been made in the press and here tonight that indicate that holding this fitting this built would sign the death trap in San Francisco and i would ask you to walk castro and valencia street to show there is building after building in construction. Its not as though they are projects that are constantly given insurmountable road blocks. When you arrive at this location a portion of the eastern neighborhoods plan that invite you to apply consideration of the characteristics and the surroundings is an appropriate politics application here. The marsh is a valuable resource in a historic district. The decision you made in december is a brave one. The amount of attention it has gotten since then has been surprising special fully context with reality where there is so much construction happening and still we have an affordability crisis. I hope today we expect to have a floor building with 1012 units with onsite Affordable Housing because we do need to retain Economic DiversityCultural Diversity and art particular cohesion and neighborhood characteristics. Thank you. Hi. My name is mike mayor. Im treasure of the liberty Hill Association and want to make a statement about Affordable Housing. Lha supports Affordable Housing in the neighborhood. We made a Public Statement stating this includes onsite Affordable Housing and Mission District development. Ha does not support mission displacement of residents. Along with everybody else thank you for all that you have done until now. Is there any additional Public Comment . Seeing none, Public Comment is closed. Commissioners, the matter is yourself. Question for mr. Sanchez . Would you explain a little bit about the lack of applicability regarding the Design Guidelines and i guess instead there was an urban Design Advisory Team with you . Yes, the residential Design Guidelines are accompanied you need planning code section 311 and flied Zoning Districts that are hr, rm or rto and not applicable to commercial districts. Separately we use the urban design element as the general plan and the urban design team referenced to the project and they consist of Department Staff and they provide comments on the project and we forward those to the project sponsor. Thats the review. Would some of the comments i was referencing earlier come from that review potentially . Our review of the design was quite lengthy. The process they had gone through the hpc and to appeal the Environmental Review back in 2010. So i think the Planning Commission commission didnt hear this until 2012 and there was some time there in between where we were working with the project sponsor and the architects to get a design the department could support. Thank you. I would like to make one observation and if you disagree with me of course jump in. It seems to me that the issue we are really focused on is letter an in our determinations which has to do with the 5th story. The first determination as drafted. Is it fair to say that we are all comfortable with the rest of the determinations that were in there which i think largely had to do with the marsh . I think so, yes. Yeah. I feel compelled to make a statement. This particular case has been extremely difficult and during the course of it i found myself doing what i didnt wish to and found upon myself in general that when you look at a particular project and gauge it in terms of what is appropriate, there are quite a few factors that go into that. I found that i got stuck into one and that side predominantly the physical context of the situation. After giving it a lot of thought, i need to change my position and do two things i would recommend to my fellow commissioners that we do two things to the findings. One is to add to Additional Findings and modify one. The finding is that we add the ground floor commercial space needs to be neighborhood serving. The modification to finding a although i believe my comments made in the previous hearing i still feel they were relevant they are not total in terms of my Decision Making process should have been. So i would say if i was to look at an issue that was brought up in the Planning Commission findings that related to the ability of the Building Design to settle into its immediate neighborhood, i believe that what they were thinking of and im now leaning toward is that its now some type of setback to the building. Therefore i would probably ask my fellow commissioners to consider whether they would be in support of modifying condition a as i stated and the adding of an additional finding on neighborhoods being used and the balance of conditions and findings be maintained. I mean, im prepared to support that position. You know, i do also feel compelled to make a statement about the deliberations here and i think the very careful consideration that this commission has taken about a variety of competing issues here and weve heard a lot from a lot of Community Members and i can guarantee that this Commission Takes very seriously all of these issues, the marshs concerns, the Affordable Housing concerns, the gentrification thats npg our city, the character of the neighborhood, the aesthetics, all of those things i have personally struggled with because they are complicated issues and everybody in the city is really struggling with. For me and what i do feel is that we are constrained by what our authority is. In my opinion, i have read all the cases, we did continue to hear whether we have the authority to impose finding a under the housing accountability act and i have read all the cases and i have to say they are no the that instructive or enlightening and not exactly on point. What i do feel is that if we do go in that direction and we maybe wrong. It maybe that the act doesnt apply, but in my reading, i think we are constrained by it to a certain extent and if we are wrong the courts will let us know that we are. But at this point my opinion is that we are constrained by the law in this regard and we could not impose condition a. I would be supportive of commissioner fungs modification to the findings based on that and not based on any lack of concern for any of the other issues weve heard about from the community and i really do commend the community for remaining invested in this project because it is i think its microcosm of a lot of other projects that are going up in our city and thats why i love San Francisco because citizens like all of you are here and care about these issues and thats why we serve on this commission because we care about these issues as well. Im prepared to support commissioner fungs idea of looking into a setback. I just want to make sure that the Affordable Housing aspect stays as a certain number. The other concern i would have is that we would get some, since there is two separate definition in regarding the commercial aspect of the property that maybe we can get some further definition from the state in regards to the word store and what would be Community Service and commissioner fung suggested and how we would suggest or implement that into findings. I totally agree with the statement that our vicepresident made and those are mine as well. Some days you are here and you dont like what you are doing but you have to do what you have to do. I really appreciate the fact that all of folks have come out so many times so determined and again, this is just, all the other findings are going to remain the same. We are just talking about a at this point. I guess i would just add that it has been quite a process and i felt that the issues were somewhat separable and i think we did address the protections for the marsh and i dont think those will ever really been in doubt and i think a little bit like you commissioner fung was a bit up comfortable with what we attempted to do which for me really i thought the design was not compatible with the neighborhood. It seems like an approach but we were taken back by the affordable units and that was not an intent to eradicate though the. Its ironic to try to get to a building that fits you are going to limit the affordable component which i dont want to do. So on all those basis, i too would be prepared to support your alternative findings and your additional finding. Just to be perfectly clear, we never touched upon the density. Im not changing the density with any of my recommendations at this point. Commissioners if you are interested in moving forward with a proposal we would just need more specificity for both of those things for what the ground floor commercial space what limitations or parameters to put on there or what definitions to use for neighborhood serving use and that is on issues of debate and in terms of a setback there would need to be something very specific which i think is probably a bit of a challenge at this point tonight because you have not seen any plans to give you the opportunity to articulate what that setback would look like. Well then i have a question for the architect. At the first hearing you indicated that you had produced a design that had a setback solution. I would like to see it. Okay. I dont have it with me. No i meant that we are not going to finalize everything tonight. That relates to an earlier question that you asked the project sponsor. Can i answer that now . That version was the building that required a variance step into yard to get the variance or to initiate requiring the variance and then stepped back. I see. It involved the variance. It wasnt just stepping back from the rear yard line. The regard is that its not a very nice rear yard. It is surrounded by walls and that was not good. Okay. Thank