Transcripts For SFGTV Planning Commission 20220730

Speaking, please mute your microphone. To enable public paiks, sf gov tv is broadcasting this hearing live and well receive Public Comment on todays agenda comments and you can call 4156550001 and entering access code 24892534904. We will take Public Comment for those persons in city hall first and open up the Remote Access line. Please speak clearly and slowly and if you care to state your name for the record. Each speaker will be allowed up to three minutes. We have 30 seconds remaining, youll hear a chime indicating your time is almost up. Ill tell you your time is up and take the next person queued to speak. Those calling in to submit your testimony, when we reach the item youre interested in speaking to, press star three to be added to the queue. When you hear your line has been unmuted thats your indication to begin speaking. Best practices are to call from a quiet location and speak clearly and slowly and mute the volume on your television or computer. For those persons attend nothing city hall, please attending in city hall, come forward and line up on the screen side of the room. I ask we silence all mobile devices that may sound off during the proceedings. At this time, i would like to take roll. Commissioner, president tanner . Present. Commissioner vicepresident moore . Here. Commissioner diamond . Here. Commissioner imperial . Here. Commissioner koppel . Here. Commissioner ruiz . Here. We expect commissioner cunning to be absent today. Commissioner, first is consideration of items for continuance. Case number 2021004987drp. [reading item for 1]. Item no. 2. [reading item no. 2] further commissioners, we just received a request from Supervisors Office under your regular calendar for item 15, case number 2020006679 crv, for 1196 columbus avenue and 2568 and 2588 jones street. And adoption of findings for continuance. We did not receive a date but since were going on recess, i would suggest maybe september 1st as a proposed date. I have no items proposed for continuance so we should take Public Comment. Members of the public, you can address the commission on any items being proposed for continuance. You need to come forward, if youre in the chamber and if youre calling in, press star three. Hi, commissioners, good to see you all. My first time back since february 2020 in the room. Im representing the owner for 1196 columbus avenue about the continuance. I sent you all an email yesterday. Im sorry. Mr. Poman, excuse me, if we can have silence so we can hear whats going on. Go ahead. I sent you an email yesterday urging you not to accept the continuance and the request for continuance because we did follow all proper procedures, we did mailings in the preapp stage to every single apartment in the north beach place. We did have the zoom hearing. There were many, all the notification was on the building, on the building site for this hearing and in every single case, my name and my email address and phone number were available to anyone to call me and in the interim, in 2021, we did have conversations with the other neighborhood groups and did speak to other speak to other people about the project so theres no specific reason for a continuance to be granted so i appreciate if you did not take that advice. Thank you very much. Any other members of the public in the chambers . Hi. My name is shari. And i live at north beach place. I live right next door to the building that theyre talking about putting up, okay. Right next door. Literately next door. And its six stories, we live here. This is our community. Im asking that you please give us, im nervous, we found a nice place to live. My family and friends, we have all that stuff you know and you put a building on top of us. Theres no light. Theres no light in my yard. Theres no light on the kids playgrounds. I mean, you didnt ask, they tried to do it last time for four stories, now they come back again with six stories. It opportunity make sense. There are kids in that yard. Theres a playground. Theres a school there. There are old People Living right next door that dont get any light. You know, once you done that, they hardly get it now but when you do that, its going to take it right away. You all have communities, you all have schools, you dont have sixStory Buildings standing over your school and your home. Its not right. So, in order, i ask that you come and check the building place out. Check it because it used to be zoned for commercial, okay. But now they made some kind of loophole where they can do it residential. Thats all well and good for a month but we live here. Were a part of that community, they arent. Theyre bringing stuff in so they can make a profit. Thats not fair. Thats not fair to take that away from us. And not even ask us, nobodys come to my door and said, were going to put a sixfoot Story Building over your house, over your yard. Nobody said that to me. And i live right next to the building. Okay. I wouldnt known if i hadnt seen the darn letter. I was going to throw it away because i thought it was some bs, excuse me language but then i looked and i said wait a minute, yall doing it again . Six stories . Come on. Think about that. Over kids, adults, a tech dorm for people who dont live here arent going to be living here, taking away from our community. You talk about having community. Come on now. Please, reconsider this. Youre going to build it anyway, but just try to think of doing it lower or something, okay. You already have money. We dont. Were old. Im 60 something years old, okay. Where am i going to go . I cant relocate with the touch and the dirt and the constant noise at 6 00 in the morning from the construction guys. Thank you, maam. Please ill remind members of the public were taking comment on the matter of continuance at this time. Im saying what im saying because im nervous so reconsider that. Its nonsense. Okay. If there are no members of the public, in the chambers, well go to the remote callers and when you hear your line has been unmuted, thats your indication to begin speaking. Good afternoon, commissioners, this is tray representing the north Beach Committee and representing the tenants that have been confused about what this project is, what type of housing. Having also heard from them about the height being a various sizes, you know, 55, 62 and then something about another 9 feet in addition and then also another site showed 85 feet height. Again, there had been no outreach directly to the residents adjacent, immediately adjacent to this site. And its very concerning and i would support the continuance because there needs to be actual dialogue with the people who actually live there and this needs to happen as soon as possible. Theyve been very anxious, having only recently heard about this project and again, yes, a notice about a hearing but a hearing in which languages as well as what is the project actually going to be . That dialogue never happened and in my mind, this is the second time ive seen another project where the developer did not reach out directly to those impacted such at 425 broadway back in november which affected 68 very lowincome, primarily mono lin gal chinese. Its not dropping the stream ideal of a building for the developer in the middle of an empty field of some sort. Its about reaching out to those who actually will be impacted and to have a dialogue and a plan about what might happen than or could happen during construction to ensure their health. Again, these are 48 units immediately adjacent, our seniors and people with disabilities so please, i support the continuance. Let that dialogue happen as soon as possible and lets show some real equity in notification, in dialogue and actually reaching out to those most impacted, thank you very much. My name is stephanie. I am 22 years old. I am in support of the continuum of this project and indiscernible . My mother previously spoke to the commission. I was raised in north beach lake property. When i was 19, my mother brought this plan to me and said that this was going to be a three Story Building. I remember those fear in my mothers voice while she told me when i was away at school. Let me know, does the story want to build three stories worth of luxury apartments where they were not needed. This is an area thats already surrounded by Luxurious Hotels and homes. Its unnecessary. Growing up in San Francisco, i spent my adolescent surrounded by empire and Tall Buildings and spent my adolescents fighting for black people and elderlies and i have lived in both of the north beach creek property and i am well aware of who my community is and what they deserve. As a previous person who spoken about the language needs to inform our community. These are elders who dont often speak english. These are people who dont often check their mail. It is disgusting to me that this plan is going to affect again without considering the rights of the people who live here and the elders who keep this community alive. I can its not okay. indiscernible north beach has two buildings and the one i grew up in San Francisco, some sros the one my mother lives is in across the cable cart tracks and for elders or disabilities people. Its peaceful and calm and full of light and they dont have to hear kids running around all day and when they do its because of the Daycare Center in the building. You can hear the children laughing and hear the wind chimes and elders indiscernible six stories looking down on them from a rooftop patio. This building and disgust me if i am being honest. The city is not only doing this again but double the size of the property. If you know the demographic of this building, then you know the people will not fight back, not because they dont disagree with the gentrification taking place next door to them but most of them have lived with the same displacement and disregard their entire life because theyre poor or brown or black or disabled. Maybe all of those things. And excuse me maam. Youre out of order right now. Maam, youre out of order and its difficult to hear the person speaking who has the floor right now. But im right there. Maam, you heard your turn to speak. Were trying to listen to the other callers right now, so take your seat or leave but if you can respect the other callers who are speaking, thank you. Sorry im sorry to interrupt the caller but you have a few more seconds left. Thats okay. Thats my mom and shes upset for a reason. As i was saying, these people are too old to be fighting the city for their right. This building will not only disrupt the neighbors due to construction going on for years, literately right next door to my mother a wall away, a wall. It was compelled, it would block out the sun. It would it would block out all of the light. Thank you maam, thats your time. Okay. And i will remind we we tee serve better we deserve better. Were putting in trash cans because our elder cant take out Water Bottles to take care traffic families. Thank you maam, thats your time. Ill remind the public were talking comments on the continuance and not the item itself. Anybody else want to speak on items continued . Seeing none, Public Comment on the continuance calendar is closed. And it is now you, commissioners. Thank you, commissioners. Thank you to those who called in and spoke publicly. Commissioner imperial and commissioner moore and commissioner imperial tied for ringing their bell at the same time. Commissioner imperial and commissioner moore afterwards. I move to continue items 1 and 2 and 15 but in terms of the comments for number 15, i would like to mention that i think it is very important that there is an outreach that is going to be theres a dialogue between the community, so i would like to respect that especially this is called by the office of supervisors so i move to continue number 15 as noted by the secretary. That would be september 1st. Yes. Thank you. Weve got a second from commissioner koppel. Commissioner moore, thank you have anything else to add . Yeah. I second that motion. People who have been on the commission for an extended period of time have seen a number of projects on this site going from a questionable hotel to all kinds of other mixes and matches and i do understand the anxiety of the community which is the Vulnerability Community and this is an wonderful environment and wonderful designed homes of a central open space. This project is not properly discussed, presented, and responded to, i think we will do well to support this continuance. Again, i heard about other projects and at the were continued and they were approved but did not materialized and the Community Shows anxiety about not enough communication and not enough disclosure. I understand and support that. Thank you, commissioner moore. I dont see any comments from other commissioners. I have a late request for Public Comment. Should we take that caller . Yes, we shall. Thank you. When you hear your line has unmuted, your indication to begin speak and were on the continuance calendar and your comments should be limited to the matter of continuance. Hi, my name is sue anna with indiscernible 1196 columbus avenue. So, on behalf from our parents and children, so we havent received detail information about this project so could you please consider indiscernible of this project and we would like to have detailed meeting with the developer and talk about this project and also reconsider about the lighting for our indiscernible because children, we go out and play everyday and we are concerned about the six stories, it will block our Natural Light to our play area so please consider this project. We would like a detailed discussion and information about this project. Thank you so much. Thank you. Okay. That concludes Public Comment. Theres a motion that has been seconded to continue all matters as proposed including item 15 to september 1st. On that motion, commissioner ruiz . Aye. Commissioner diamond . Aye commissioner imperial . Aye. Commissioner koppel . Aye. Commissioner moore . Aye. Commissioner tanner . Aye. That motion passes unanimously 6 to 0. In places of your consent calendar, all matters listed hereunder constitute a consent calendar, are considered to be routine by the Planning Commission, and may be acted upon by a single roll call vote of the commission. There will be no separate discussion of these items unless a member of the commission, the public, or staff so requests, in which event the matter shall be removed from the consent calendar and considered as a separate item at this or a future hearing and item 3, case number 202100189cua at 98 Mission Street. Case number four, 2022000313cua, 2027 chestnut street. Item five, case number 2022004718cua at 2209 chestnut street. A conditional use authorization. Members of the public, this is your opportunity to request that any of these items be removed from the consent calendar and considered at the end of the hearing today or at a later date. You need to come forward if in the chamber or calling in, press star three. Seeing no request to speak, commissioners, Public Comment on your consent calendar is closed. And they are now or it is now before you. Thank you. Commissioner koppel . Move to approve items 3, 4 and 5. Second. Thank you, commissioners and just for clarity, there was a late submission for an amended resolution for item 3, so accepting those amendments, thank you, commissioners. On that motion then to approve all items under your consent calendars with the amendment for item three, commissioner ruiz . Aye. Commissioner diamond . Aye. Commissioner imperial . Aye. Commissioner koppel . Aye. Commissioner moore . Aye. Commissioner president tanner . Aye. So moved, commissioners, that motion passes unanimously 6 to 0. Well place this under commission matters for item 6, consideration of Adoption Draft minutes for july 14, 2022. Members of the public, this is your opportunity to address the commission on the minutes. If youre in the chambers, you need to come forward. If calling in, you need to press star three. Seeing no request to speak from any member of the public, Public Comment on the minutes is closed and they are now before you commissioners. Commissioner imperial . Move to adopt the minutes. Second. Thank you, commissioners on that motion to adopt the minutes, commissioner ruiz . Aye. Commissioner diamond . Aye. Commissioner imperial . Aye. Commissioner koppel . Aye. Commissioner moore . Aye. Commissioner president tanner . Aye. So moved. That passes 6 to 0 and places us on item 7, commission comments and questions. Thank you, commissioners, ill begin with our land acknowledgement. We acknowledge were on the ancestry homeland of the San Francisco peninsula. As the indigenous stuart of this land and in accordance with tradition, they have never lost or forgot their responsibilities to caretakers of the place. As well as for all people who reside in their territory. We recognize we benefit from live and working on the homeland. We wish to pay respects by acknowledging the ancestors and relatives of the ramashan whunt and hon honoring their first rights as people. Are there questions or comments from commissioners. I pushed the button here. Okay, commissioner moore . Thank you. I have three items and they are questions and the questions may not be available, perhaps, we could bring them back if there are no answers and the first thing is, we indiscernible applications with the Planning Department. Reading the article i was very concerned, not only is it in review but its the trust of being able to electronic file application but its an impediment to the department i would like the department, somebody in the department to update the commission, one on the fact of what happened to those commissioners who have not known about this and give us some idea of how you could be protected against incidents like this in the future. The second item which came to my attention and really concerns me is a new condo building at 55 oak that is sitting empty for a few months because a developer who completed this building they took down payments and has people waiting for eight months or more because all of a sudden figured out she cannot deliver this building. I do not know much of the background but it is very concerning that 109 units are basically finished and cannot be moved in and i dont want to comment on the inconvenience it may cause somebody who bought a condo or what comes with this kind of unusual arrangement and i have never heard about anything like it and i would love the department to give an update on that matter and last but not least, theres another issue which when i first read about an invitation for groundbreaking, i was very hyped about it. However, i read an article in an imagine stein speaking about the construction of one of our Second District tower buildings and thats 30 van ness, exactly opposite street from one oak which we approved a few weeks ago, this particular building is it was approved, i think it is end of 2017 as well at the 600 indiscernible building. It was 151 cars desired for this location. This building is breaking ground for 300 condos and i assume its still 151 cars and i would like to know and i may have missed it as to whether this project in its Current Situation came back to this commission for change of the terms of approval. Thank you, commissioner moore. I dont know if you have some responses or if you need time to look into the items. I can give a quick responses and follow up. On the application, i it hit the Business Times and it is something were looking into to assess how this happened and how we can prevent it moving forward. Our chief of satisfy is taking the lead on that and hes happy to follow up offline with the commissioners, but were working with it staff to dig into that issue, so obviously we want to have a public portal, that makes it easy for real applicants to file their applications and we dont want it burdensome you we realized the problems so were looking around Creative Solutions to prevent it in the future. In terms of 55 oak, we dont have a great response, obviously at this point, theres a point where it transitions from the citys responsibility to the Property Owner so we absolutely hear you and were equally frustrated with the building ready to be occupied not being occupied. Were happy to dig in on the backend to make sure there arent city Agencies Holding up permits you from the Planning Departments perspective, the permits have been years ago at this point and issued but well let you know if we do identify theres any aspect of city permitting holding that one up and lastly on 30 van ness, i have to follow up with you but i believe there were revisions over the years on this project but i believe the commission was made abreast of those revisions but again, happy to follow up. Great, thank you. Commissioner moore, i think well have staff follow you will because i think those are Great Questions and topics you raised. Any other comments by the commissioners . Okay. Thank you. Okay, seeing no additional request to speak from members of the commission. We can move on to item 8 for case number 2021009977 crv, for remote hearings, again, commissioners were asking you adopt a resolution to allow us to continue the citys business in the event that none of you are able to appear in the commission and to hold remote hearings. Members of the public, this is your opportunity to address the commission on this item for a resolution to allow for remote hearings if necessary. If youre in the chambers, come forward. If calling in, press star three. Seeing no request to speak, commissioners, Public Comment on this matter is closed. And it is now before you. Ill take this opportunity to thank the staff again for making these hybrid hearings very seamless and very easy for commission and the public to participate in the event that any of us to have covid or other matters that take us away from the chambers. Commissioner imperial . Move to adopt the resolution. Second. Second. Thank you. Commissioners on that motion to adopt a resolution to allow for remote hearings if necessary, commissioner ruiz . Aye commissioner diamond . Aye. Commissioner imperial . Aye. Commissioner koppel . Aye. Commissioner moore . Aye. And commissioner president tanner . Aye. So moved, commissioners that motion passes unanimously, 6 to 0. In places of some department, under Department Matters for item nine. Directors announcements. Great, we did have one quick announcement for you guy, we received a grant on our, with our Preservation Team and and director can share details. We received a grant for the state office of preservation to focus and produce a native american multiple property documentation form, so basically what this will do is allow us to produce a citywide document to focus on resources and buildings and sites and give an easy way to nominate them for local and federal and state nomination, so this will be a good document for kind of bringing forward a community and giving them kind of just deserve to our city. I heard from staff on the 30 van ness to close the loop on that but the commission did hear ask approve the project at 30 van ness may of 2020 in the state its being built as so it was reviewed and approved by commission. Thank you for the answer and congratulations on the grant. Its exciting and look forward to hearing more about that, thank you. Okay. Item 10, review of past events at the board of supervisors and the board of appeals. There was no Historic Preservation Commission Hearing yesterday. Good afternoon commissioners, aaron, manager of legislative affairs, the Land Community committee took up the landmark resolution for the mores building at the San Francisco zoo sponsored by supervisor mill gar. The mothers going constructed in 1925 for her bert flash to honor their more was dedicated to serve as a resting place for mothers and young children. It was found eligible for local designation for its association with womens history as the only recreation sites of the period focused on the wellbeing of women touring Recreational Activities and it was eligible for its association with the history of the work progress association, art programs of the 1930s for what was the only large scale wpa art project created solely by women. Finally, its the architecturally significant as it embodied characteristics of italian revival architecture and representatives of the work of architective merit george w. During the hearing, there was around half dozen speakers in favor of the designation. The committee voted to recommend the item to the full board. The next landmark designation for the takachi located at 200 rhode island street and the building is eligible for landmark designation for association with the championship needs and culture. From 1965, the venue served as the headquarters for the Trading Company which had home goods from japan from the takachi store and the family acquired the property after their japan shop was demolished and it has hardship with the japanese there were no Public Commenters on this one but supervisor preston and peskin signed on as coresponders and recommended to the board. The Committee Held melgar to sign on two conditional use appeals and commissioners, you heard this last week and recommended approval with the modification and the modification was change from ten days to 20 days and the department has the time to transmit the Planning Commission access to the clerk of the board. During the hearing, supervisor milgar recommended the modifications which passed unanimously. It was one speaker in favor of the proposed ordinance. After Public Comment, the item was forwarded to the full board as a Committee Report with a positive recommendation. At the full board this week, the board voted on whether or not to override the mayors veto of supervisor mandelman. The mayor vetoed this and it passed on a 7 to 4 vote which wasnt enough to sustain the veto. This week the sponsor of the ordinance, they gave forceful defenses traffic ordinance in an attempt to persuade one more supervisor to vote for the bill. Supervisor peskin indiscernible the mayors veto and saying he was frustrated the mayor didnt say what about the ordinance she objected to. Supervisors walton, dorsey and safai spoke against the ordinance. It was the same 7 to 4 in no change how the supervisors voted. Killing the ordinance. The grouping house its dead as it was tied to the four flex ordinance as the sud could be interpreted as a down zoning. And then, im sorry, the mayors electric vehicles charging ordinance passed its first read and supervisor milgard passed its first read and the landmark designation for the mores building passed its first read. The board is on recess until september 5th. Barring covid monkey pox or some tragic weatherrelated to climate change, ill be on vacation for the first few meetings after recess and veronica will present the reports while im away, have a great break and ill see you midseptember. Thank you, mr. Shar and great report and we hope you have a wonderful illnessfree vacation. Good afternoon, president tanner, commissioners, corey, Zoning Administrator. The board of appeals it meet last night and considered two cases of interest to the Planning Commission. But first they acknowledged that ann had stepped down from the commission and thanked her for her years of service and welcomed john as the new commissioner and he has significant and diverse accomplishments but locally hes a former deputy City Attorney and hes also the former dean of the usf school of law so were happy to have him on the board of appeals and they heard at 277 judson street to construct a new adu but it was to prepare existing stairs and replace windows at the front back of the property. And back in 2015 when the permit was first filed, the applicant proposed a rear and side horizontal addition and the appellant filed a dr, siding it was incompatible with the neighborhood and the tr was heard by the commission in october of 2018 but the Planning Commission voted 5 to 0 to dr and require the depth of the extension to be reduced by 7 feet. While the project was approved by the Planning Department in january of 2019, the permit was not issued and then in 2022, it was picked back up and the owner revised the permit to eliminate all exterior expansion of the permit but there was an appeal by the same neighbor who filed the discretionary review and the neighbor expressed concerns about the revised plans but because the project no longer included physical expansion of the building and the adu is permitted under the state adu program, the board voted 3 to 0 to deny the appeal. Similarly, they heard a case for a Building Permit at 706 vermont street and that was to construct a onestory vertical addition and new green roof at the top. And associated stairs. The appellant filed a discretionary review on the permit if 2020 siting the new third story addition with the green roof on top of the third story addition would have light and air and privacy impacts and the dr was heard by the commission in february of 2021 and the planning voted 7 to 0 to take discretionary review and its set five feet. At the appeal hearing last night, the appellant said the guardrails and stairs at the roof be removed or setback an additional five feet. The board determined that the approved green roof and five foot setback for the guardrails were adequate for privacy issues and voted three to zero to deny the appeal, thank you very much. Thank you. There are no questions commissioners, we can move on to general Public Comment. At this time, members of the public may address the commission on items of interest to the public that are within the subject matter jurisdiction of the commission except agenda items. With respect to agenda items, your opportunity to address the commission will be afforded when the item is reached in the meeting. Each member of the public may address the commission for up to three minutes. When the number of speakers exceed the 15minute limit, general Public Comment may be moved to the end of the agenda. Good afternoon, commissioners, gorgia, i sent emails with a link to the two projects, one from 2015 and one was recently, more recently. And the thing i wanted you to see was when you scroll down, to see the original house and you see the condition of the original house and i know that technically you dont deal with the interior. What goes on in the interior except sometimes it comes up and i wanted to illustrate how the interior of these houses that were alterations were very livable and they both, one had two units for sure and the second one, the one on jersey may have had a second unit. I just discovered that recently. You know, i dont know if any of you remember 232 clipper street but that was a demolition, a real demolition and originally though, the project sponsor wanted to do it as an alteration but because it was so in such terrible shape, the neighbors felt it was a Health Hazard so he switched and became a real demolition and you had your cua hearing and i want to emphasize what i wrote in the email and i highlighted in yellow, i dont want to see you have more cus, its not good for the staff, its not good for the commission. But what my point is dealing with the demo is to have a paradigm shift and thats what i said in 21, april 21 when you had the cua hearing on the 28th Street Project which was a very, two livable units and i felt that had such great demo indiscernible that even the project sponsor admitted they were wrong and made a mistake and the thing thats ironic about that one, if you remember, you added a second unit. And it was the second unit there to begin with and it was livable, two units and then the second unit. That project is not done yet. I hope the people live there. I have been thinking about the two and comparing them. Ill show you the original pictures, i did send the demo in the thing. I happened to find the demo to the 2015 project a while ago and i forgotten i found them but they were in the file. Sometimes they arent and are. May i have the overhead quickly. Im sorry. Heres the one on jersey. You can see there could be a passage way to a unit which may or may not have been there and heres the one on 28th and there was a way to get in the back to the unit. And as ive said, please if you have a chance, read the emails, scroll down, look at the interiors of the houses that were there and the other info in the email. Thanks very much, have a wonderful break. Enjoy your month or three weeks or whatever it is. Thanks a lot. Okay. Seeing no other members in of the public in the chambers, well go to our remote callers and press star three and when you hear your line is unmuted, thats your indication to begin speaking. Aileen. In this year poll sponsored by the chamber of commerce, 76 of respondents stated that the city is on the wrong track. How could this apply to the Housing Element . The Housing Element refuses to address carrying capacity but instead focuses on unlimited growth. All 330 million americans live here, all 40 million californians, staff has stated the Housing Element of Affordable Housing cost would be 8 billion but other sources estimate it to be between 15. 4 and 19 billion. The housing e. Identifies the westside as the high resource area. Speed challenges assessment, 54 in the westside is not a job rich area or transient rich area. Immediate mediocre. This is not exceptional exceptional. For almost one hundred years, district four was a working class neighborhood. This cookiecutter row houses and the neighborhood was designed with the police, fire and schools, surfaces for lower density. The Water Infrastructure was for lower density. Like most of the city, the Drinking Water pipes on the westside are one hundred years old and indiscernible from the Spring Valley water company. Theres 1200 miles of Drinking Water pipes in the city but the sfpuc with its 6 billion debt portfolio can afford to replace 15 miles, thats 15 miles per year. That would take 80 years to replace the pipes let alone up grade them. The urban Water Management plan states theres sufficient water to accommodate development. However, other experts disagree. Besides being voluntary indiscernible , the sfpuc filed two lawsuits against the state Water Resources control board. One lawsuit states that the sfpuc has insufficient water to meet its environmental obligations on the that wally river. This begs the question, is the Housing Element of work indiscernible in need of a reality check. Thank you. Okay. Last call for general Public Comment. If youre in chambers, come forward and if calling in, press star three. No request to speak, commissioners, general Public Comment is closed and we can move on to your regular calendar. Items 11a and b and c for 2018015785 map, 200 main street for planning code height and building, excuse me, and bulk map amendment, a general plan amendment and general plan conformity findings. Good afternoon commissioners and im josh with planning staff. Happy to be with you to talk about block four trans bay. Can i get the slides up, thank you. So, we have three actions before you today related to transbay block four. There are general plan amendments related to the project. Conforming stoning map amendment. Both height and bulk plan amendment and then the redevelopment plan amendments themselves which include amendments to the height and bulk limits in the redevelopment plan as they relate to block four and the Planning Commission action on that is the general plan conformity findings for the redevelopment plan so the board of supervisors may consider them. To orient you again, block four is the northern third of the block that formally house the temporary transbay terminal which has been decommissioned since the new terminal Transit Center started operation. This block founded by main and howard and folsom will be divided into three blocks and the central third will be a new park designed and will be under construction. The northern third will be block four were talking about today and the southern block is block two which you may hear about in the future and oci can update you on and it will be the last of the major blocks in zone one of the Redevelopment Area. Block four is the last block that has a significant tower on it. Excuse me. All the remaining blocks with major towers have been built to date. So a little about the program for block four, you heard about this at the initiating hearing, block four contains six hundred units. In the major tower, its composed of con con condo and rental and midrise portion is one hundred affordable with over two hundred units of below market housing and there are a small amount of market rate townhomes facing the park. In addition to the Housing Program and ill note again the Housing Program for this block has extraordinary 45 of the units below market rate. And that is again enabled by the amendments being proposed today. Theres a small ground floor commercial program. Theres a comment both common and open space including shared courtyard thats accessible from the streets. There is below grade parking and the project will be making significant streetscape improvements to all of the abutting streets including building the new extension of the tahams street which will be accepted by the city as a public street. Another image oriented you on the landscape where this sits. Theres, you can see all the existing buildings most have been built in the last decade or so. A few of the buildings that are entitled still to be built on the westside there with ocean wide and then you can make out block two in white just to the south of block four which will be the last of the zone one blocks. So again the purposes of the redevelopment plan are to create this new mixed Income Neighborhood which we largely see mostly built out there today. It alleviated the blight caused by the embarcadero freeway and the construction of the earthquake and this generates funding for the transient Center Program which includes downtown expansion to come. 2200 units built to date in zone one and a third is affordable, so this block four will significantly add to that total. And note that the redevelopment plan as a whole has a state league requirement to deliver 35 of all the units cumulative in the whole project area as below market rate. That includes, that calculation includes not just projects built on the public parcels in zone one but includes calculation includes all private parcels in the Redevelopment Area so thats why this block particularly, the last blocks and these make up more than 35 , so that we can ultimately achieve the 35 total area wide. So the transbay citizen advisory did take the amendments up and did strongly recommend their approval. And its not in your packet but the chair of that committee did send us a support letter reemphasizing the cic endorsement. The commission did recommend these amendments a few weeks ago and the commission on Community Investment and infrastructure did take up all their approval actions since your initiation hearing and made all of their approve actions including the approval of the disposition and Development Agreement and approval of design of the project and so, after the Commission Takes its actions the last step is the board of supervisors. So just to quickly run through the amendments, the stoning map amendment zoning map amendment will change the zoning map from 450 to 113 feet. While the project is in zone one and therefore is not subject to the planning code and zoning maps, this is a conforming amendment to make sure our zoning map accurately reflect what the redevelopment plan calls for. Similarly the general plan, this is the transient Center Height map, also conforming amendment to show to reflect the change so the general plan and redevelopment plan must be consistent. Theres a couple of cleanup items being batched with the amendments including reflecting implementation changes and limitation actions taken in the Redevelopment Area. Theres one reflecting the changes to the bike network that have taken place. And also sorry, there was also a map amendment to show the height approved for the mirror built at one hundred feet although it was shown at 300 feet and the site amendment was changed years ago. The height changes includes bulk changes to the lower floors of the tower. And then to the midrise portion, thats the one hundred percent affordable building. So, lastly, staff recommends that the commission approve all these amendments. Theres three resolutions, motions before you related to the general plan amendments. The zoning map amendments and signing of conformity for the redevelopment planned amendments and with that ill hand it off to the sponsors design team to walk you through some highlights of the design. Thank you. Good afternoon, commissioners. indiscernible , principal with architects. We presented a summary of the design which is refined in collaboration with the architects and ici staff and planning staff over the last six years. At the last hearing, we focused on the overview of the Exterior Design of the project. Today we thought we would take a little bit more detailed look at the open spaces that were creating. You recall the proposed site and block massing closely follow the originally conceived massing of the transbay master plan. The towers at the intersection of howard and main street and the massing steps down towards the park, as the towers on the northside of the block, the height does not impact the open spaces that are created. The bulk is in vertical elements and theyre defined in the inner block. The townhomes are further articulated to read like individual homes with entries. The design includes a publicly accessible elevator courtyard and several resident outdoor spaces. These are positioned to take advantage of solar orientation and to provide a variety of scales thats adjacent to indoor residence areas thats disbursed throughout the buildings and the shape in the building b and opening between it and the townhomes allow more sunlight into the space. Here we see the composition of the block from bill street with the new park in the for ground ask park tower in the background. Building b will form the park. On the right, we see more detailed viewpoint of the tower base from the intersection of main and Howard Street. Next, well take a look at the open spaces. The site plan shows how the courtyard connects between Howard Street and the interaction with the amenity spaces that surround it. indiscernible shows the courtyard is larger than that required by the master plan controls. These courtyard perspectives give a sense of the character of the shape and how it will be shaped into more intimate spaces by seating ems and raised planters and the tree canopy above will provide light and shade. On Howard Street, indiscernible pulled away from the building to create howard plaza which acts as a buffer to Howard Street and activated by the entrance to the apartment building. This also allows additional lights and air into the midblock space. The illustration of building b shows how the building massing is set up to create a variety of outdoor spaces. The park pavilion building is kept as low as possible, again, to allow the light to flood into the elevated central courtyard. The full plan show how the buildings step away to allow light into the courtyard and create additional residence terraces with views over the park. This allows daylight into the circulation spaces of the Affordable Housing building b. And again that level 12, we see how the buildings continue to full back to create a separation between the tower elements and create additional outdoor residence terraces associated with amenity spaces and to provide daylight into the residential corridors. Stepping back, this view from the bay bridge illustrates how the building proposed height fits nicely into the skyline, respecting the intentional cluster and the shape of that skyline. From the embarcadero, we see how the walls inspired by the Transportation System also relate to the brickandmortar part of the waterfront. In these views from the south, we see how the block is harmonious but has expression and how the massing is setup to allow the solar exposure to the open space as possible. And finally, a detailed view that shows the highquality and detail that is evident from the pedestrian realm with the papaville the pavilion on the right. We look forward to questions and ill hand it over to dan, the sponsor. Good afternoon, commissioners, my name is dan. And im a managing director with hines in San Francisco. On behalf of hines and the sponsor team, i wanted to underscore our ex our excite to be here to create and hone the division for this oneofakind development. Block four is an amazing project that will deliver 700 units of housing across the income spectrum including over three hundred units of Affordable Housing and making it the large evident Affordable Housing project in downtown. All unit was critical to addressing the on going housing crisis were facing as a city. The project will provide a valuable indiscernible to downtown San Francisco including 1600 temporary and permanent jobs, 6400 square feet of Community Serving retail and significant new open space and public amenities. Were proud to be contributing to the ambitious and addition to downtown where we have been an active Community Member for four years and thank you for your consideration and let me introduce our partners at mercy housing. I dont know if the chair wants to provide additional time but thats their five minutes. I think we can ask questions, if thats all right. Yep. In that case, commissioners, we should open up Public Comment and members of the public, this is your opportunity to address the commission on the matter. If youre in the chamber, come up and line up on the screen side of the room. If youre calling in, press star three. Well go to our remote callers. Hello everyone. My name is alice, director of State Government relations for the Bay Area Council. Were a public sponsor dedicated to solving our challenging issues and improving the qualityoflife. On behalf of our 300 members, we wanted to state our support the proposed transbay block by hines. With california housing shortage, every county and city do its part to produce housing at all levels and development is a great opportunity to transform this temporarily open space to build 681 units of housing. The prime location for mixeduse development has the potential to be a catalyst for the revitalization of San Francisco. The city indiscernible and likely with the work from home option and it will be challenging indiscernible and the city needs to recover. We need more people in downtown and this project accomplishes that. We want to echo support for the increase in height and density for the project as it builds a larger number of Affordable Housing and this is consistent with the indiscernible sustainable and thank you again. We encourage you to indiscernible . Hello commissioner, my name is mike. Im the Deputy Director of the benefits district of which the subject development is within. As well as a member of the transbay citizen advisory committee. And im commenting today on behalf of the cbd as well as in my capacity as a member of the cac. The housing being built is for the neighborhood and the city of San Francisco and the bay area as a whole. The cbd looks forward to seeing this project move forward and working with the developer and future residents to build a pleasant, walkable and safe and vibrant neighborhood. In addition to that, the streetscape improvements and Public Open Spaces for the parking project provide amenities available to current residents and the general public. Cbd supports the additional housing density and we ask the Commission Vote to approve the proposal. indiscernible Citizens Advisory Committee unanimously approve the project. Thank you. Good afternoon, commissioners. Corey smith on behalf of the Housing Action coalition in strong support of the proposal here today. Our committee got to review this proposal a couple of months ago and its a fantastic opportunity for the city as a whole and for the neighborhood to improve in significant ways and mentioned by a couple of earlier speakers, the increase height and density means well get a little mindblowing amount of sizeable Affordable Housing in this community. With different income levels, we think its fantastic and something the project team should be applauded for. Our commission was impressed by the urban design, the amenities, decks and open space and indiscernible and similar to the comments from the Bay Area Council speaker earlier, this is a really, really big piece to provide a lot downtown. Speaking logically, you know, we certainly want to attract people to come downtown, but the best ways to do that is actually having residents and people shopping and people that will be working and people that will take their dogs to the park in the neighborhood. All those pieces are part of San Franciscos recovery strategy. This building, this proposal, these homes are part of San Franciscos recovery strategy and in the current economic climate, these projects do not come easy and frankly, they do not come cheap, so doing everything that you can to move this project forward today ensures that this is actually reality and improvement for San Francisco Going Forward. So, i stand in strong support and ask you approve the item today and continue to move it forward. Thank you very much. Hi, i wanted to commend the urban design of this development and i hope it gets approved very quickly. Im also a very big fan of the amount of Public Open Space that this project has incorporated and i hope to be able to enjoy the park that is adjacent to the development. Thank you. Hello, commissioners, my name is al graham, 338 also known as indiscernible . Also im founder of grant park and Planning Commission in the city of indiscernible . Commissioners, i appreciate the Architecture Team for providing indiscernible . I would like to highly indiscernible at this moment of the housing crisis and make the most of this. The Program Provides indiscernible and Building Design is in harmony with the neighboring building. It ensures the Architect Team indiscernible . I think the public and open space this is a gathering location at the moment. Consider indiscernible and provide more space or Public Open Space. indiscernible . Provide access for all those with income. indiscernible and a rooftop bar or barbecue. indiscernible . Thank you so much and good luck. Okay. Last call for Public Comment on this matter. If youre in the chambers, come come forward and calling in, press star three. No speakers and Public Comment is closed and this item is now before you. Thank you, questions or comments from questions . Commissioner koppel . So interestingly enough, i attended the tear down ceremony for the original Transit Center and im used to seeing this temporary Transit Center there, im looking forward to seeing this building to add to our great skyline and 700 units and 300 bmrs, thats incredible. Im glad to see ocii is onboard and pushed it through as well and i really like how context actually designed this was for the area. I made a lot of comments in support of this project last time we heard it but still want to echo the fact this is going to add a lot of temporary construction jobs and supporting our apprentice centers and a lot of city built graduates working on this project and its going to really help out the Construction Industry as a whole which isnt as busy as it has been in the past so definitely in support. Thank you, commissioner koppel. I see we have commissioner moore and then commissioner diamond. I have expressed my support for this project including the modification which is in front of us. I will take this opportunity to thank mr. Swiski and mr. Snyder who have been working on this project during their career. The individuals has made the delivery of a complicated project understandable for our commissioners and i want to comment them on their incredibly thorough work and im in support of what is in front of us today, thank you. Thank you. Commissioner diamond yes, indiscernible the opportunity to speak a few minutes ago so i would like him to come forward and deliver whatever comments they intended to. Thank you. All right. Thank you. Commissioner die monday, im doug shoemaker. I wasnt going to say much so i wont say much now. Were happy to be a part of this project. Mercy housing is a nonprofit Housing Provider and service enriched property manager. Were excited to bring Family Housing to this location, i think thats the part were most excited about is to bring this many family sized unit into this part of town so so many fantastic amenities and well be working with hines and the broader team to make sure we have a fantastic ground floor Retail Experience that beats the needs of not just the residents of this building but the other market rate and affordable buildings in the neighborhood of which we own and manage a couple already, so thank you and happy to answer any questions if it comes up. Thank you. Commissioner diamond thank you. May i continue for a moment . Yes, go ahead. The focus floor is around mercy housing and i wanted an opportunity to hear about mercys role in this project. I havent been on the board for several years and i dont believe that causes me to recuse myself from voting. Im extremely supportive of this project for all of the reasons that have been mentioned. And i like to make a motion to approve. Second. Do you want to make comments, commissioner imperial . Make a motion and a little comment okay. Im in supportive of this project especially that there are different kinds of amis that is in Affordable Housing which we rarely see so im in support of that in terms of how it contributes to the skyline, i think its a perfect project so thank you very much. Ill add my voice to the chorus. Really excited to approve this today and hopefully sue it come to fruition very soon. With that, i think were ready to vote. Very good. Commissioners, theres a motion seconded to approve the planning code height and bulk map amendment in and approve the general plan amendment and adopt commissioner ruiz . Aye. Commissioner diamond . Aye frm commissioner imperial . Aye frm commissioner koppel . Aye. Commissioner moore . Aye. Commissioner president tanner . Aye. That motion passes unanimously, 6 to 0. Item 12a and b for 2017. [reading item 12] 420 23rd potrero street. Youre making changes to the phasing plan. Good afternoon, commissioners. Monica, Department Staff. The applications before you today are a request for Office Allocation from the Office Development annual limitation programs 2021 to 2022 large cap limit authorizing 3,426 square feet of office use at block 15. Term change to the phasing plan of the potrero station Development Agreement to remove a requirement to require life science uses of 3,000 square feet on one commercial block. The potrero mixeduse project consist of a comprehensive master plan for a 28 acre Industrial Site which has numerous Public Benefits and community amenities. January 30, 2020, the Planning Commission certified the project eir and adopting findings under the Environmental Quality ability and approved planning code map amendments and the project Development Agreement including the potrero power station for development. On april 21, 2020, the board of supervisors approved the project master plan and the Development Agreement. The Office Allocation before you today would convey a small amount of Office Square footage to block 15 located between humboldt and 23rd street on the went side of the potrero power site. This Commission Approved an allocation of 4,350 square feet for block 145 on october 22, 2020. At the time of that hearing theyll be more numbers, i apologize. However, proposition e which was approved earlier in that same month, october of 2020, linked Office Development with the citys progress towards certain Affordable Housing goals as detailed in your staff report today. Pursuant to prop e the 875,000 square feet added to the large cap in october of 2020 was reduced by the same percentage by which the city did not meet its Affordable Housing goals set forth in the Regional Housing arena. Updated Affordable Housing totals finalized earlier this year show that while 552,574 square feet was believed to exist in the large cap at the time of the october 22nd 2020 hearing for block 15 Office Allocation, in fact only 400,324 square feet was available. In short the commission authorized 3,402 of square feet of office use that technically was not available for allocation at that time. The Office Allocation before you today would confer those 3,400 office space from the 2021 to the 2022 gap and the project sponsor is not requesting anymore office use than the 403,300 square feet requested two years ago. In a digs to the Office Allocation before you, theres a change to the phasing plan of the Development Agreement which the planning director determined is a Material Change to the phasing plan. The proposed change would remove section 3. 6 of the phasing plan which requires the sponsor to restrict one of the five commercial blocks to life science uses at a minimum of 130,000 square feet. Removing this requirement will change the land uses permitted at the project site. It will only remove an obligation to deliver of life science uses and the Commission Must approve this Material Change but to be clear this is not a Material Change to the Development Agreement itself. Just the phasing plan. At the time your packet were published, the department didnt receive correspondence from members of the public regarding the project, however, i did receive three letters of support from Community Groups including potrero boosters and friends of jackson park. The commenters said they the proposals before you today would activate the local economy and support current and future local businesses. Based on the findings included in the case report, the Department Recommends approval of the Office Allocation with conditions and approval of a resolution adopting findings to allow removal of section 3. 6 of the phasing plan. This concludes my presentation. The project sponsor team is here and well follow with a presentation as well. And were here to answer any questions you may have. Thank you. Thank you so much and forgive the fumbling around. It has been a while since we had to do this in person. [laughter] good afternoon, president tanner, commissioners, tina chang with power station and im delighted to share progress on our site. Since we were approved in april of 2020, weve been before this commission a number of times, each time advancing different aspects of project. Including housing and ample Affordable Housing, the commercial aspects which include historic adaptive reuse of historic structures. And then in 2021, we immediately proceeded to start construction. We started with the stabilization of station a which is a large brick building you see before you, much beloved by the community and has captured the imagination of many. And then we quickly moved to remove miles of obsolete infrastructure that supported industrial uses including a foreign power station and Sugar Refinery and together with the partners in the building trades, were literately in the process of recycling mountains of concrete for reuse later on our site to support a 21st century all electric mixeduse project. Im happy to report that with the strong support of board supervisor walton and the board of supervisor on tuesday approved our final map and we can proceed with our streetscape improvements and providing infrastructure for people. That means streets, sidewalks, bike lanes and most importantly access to our waterfront. It has opinion such a privilege to be a former planner and now developer and watch the progress of this site and take part in opening this part of San Francisco. Now for those who have been to the power station and those who havent, we welcome you. You can see from this image how much has changed. Weve removed a lot, but we still remain a power station, a project booked by two power stations. As monica mentioned, we have two small items before you today. The first is a request for roughly 3,400 square feet for allocation that this commission granted in rhna calculations, it needs to be allocated so you can see from this image and as monica really specifically summarized, theres month net new Office Allocation being requested for station a. The next is a change to our saving plan amendment. Theres no Material Change to our Land Use Plan much theres no change at all. Life science and office are still allowed on all of the five commercial blocks which are showing in blue. The request is simply to remove the requirement to provide life science which will make our project more flexible to respond to changing Market Conditions which were experiencing now. And this commission may recall that you approved a similar request from our neighbors to the north at pier 70 earlier this year. Ultimately though, were really excited to provide and bring into life a vibrant picked use community that will provide thousands of units including Affordable Housing, a really exciting, at least we think, place to work and collaborate amongst 7 acres of park and open spaces. And realizing a vision that was created with our community partners, the Planning Department, many other leaders in the city family and we thank you all so much for all your continued help and support. Im joined by managing partner ricky and council jim and were available for questions, thank you so much. Okay. That concludes presentations, we should open up Public Comment. Members of the public, this is your opportunity to address the commission on this item. If youre in the chambers, come forward. If youre calling in, press star three. When you hear your line has been unmuted, thats your indication to begin speaking. Good afternoon, commissioners. This is jr, president of Potrero District association and i apologize for not being in person and i apologize for the tardiness of our messages. We think this is a nobrainer, and the other is to bring this development into the same ecosystem and market please as the development further along the northside of the central waterfront. So, we think these are very easy, and apparent and necessary changes you should approve but were here and i think that speaks to the partnership that we have been able to afford with the developers of this side. Those who have a history this site, you know through the entitlements, we were able to come to a indiscernible and move Forward Together for this project and even for something as, you know, as easy as this approval is, the project sponsors to reach out to the community, they do communicate about it, they do address needs and its part of the communication and part of the indiscernible between the community and the developer thats going to make this a vibrant and really wonderful part of the city. So, i do encourage you to please approve these two changes and thank you very much for your time and consideration today. Okay. Last call for comments on this item. You need to come forward or press star three. Seeing no additional request to speak, commissioners, Public Comment is closed and its before you. Thank you. I want to recognize commissioner moore. Mr. Eprod couldnt have said it better. Yes, and potrero and dog patch and all those people indiscernible project. Im in support of whats in front of us. Theres a few developers who comes back and consistently report progress and consistently shapes the plan with full disclosure to all of us. I move to approve this condition. Second. Thank you, commissioner moore and commissioner koppel and i see commissioner diamond would like to speak as well. Im in full support of the project but i do have a question for the project sponsor with respect to an update. One of the features of the project i was intrigued when you came for was a potential for a dock for the Ferry Service and where is the discussion on that project . Commissioner diamond, thank you for that thank you for the question. It can be suitable ask adapted for future water service. Theres others in the city working on this, both mta, weda and the port and its exciting we have water transit with treasure transit and we hope to be a part of this network. As part of its transportation funds set aside for water funds from we look forward to engaging that in the future and this is an exciting potential for us to open and use our waterfront much more than we do so its something we look forward to working with staff and other interested parties in the community. Thank you for the update much theres exciting parts of this project that we look forward to and thats one of them and i hope it comes to fruition. Thank you. Commissioner koppel . Yeah. I think, only maybe commissioner moore and i will kind of be able to relate of how unique of a project this and how many times we have been in this hearing room figuring it out. I mean, we rarely replace a power station first of all. We rarely developed 29 acres in our city. This also boarded by water and then also has not only Historic Buildings but some that are in jeopardy of being structurally okay to stay, so thanks for your patience. I dont know how many hearings this has been but it has been quite a few. [laughter] but as unique of a project it is, i think its going to be that much of a transformational project. Seeing the Johns Development going up and the eastside of the town is definitely advancing which is a great thing to see. Again, all the temporary construction jobs that are going to be, not just temporary, theyre going to be going on for quite a bit but it will be for construction and all people that are going to be employed here, you know, to follow when everything is complete is going to add to the neighborhood, add to the local businesses, keep more residents with jobs and spending their money here in the city and again supporting our apprenticeship programs and putting the gaj graduates to work which is a big deal so in favor of both items. I want to add my support and thank you for coming before us. I was curious in terms of Going Forward with the reallocation of the rhna numbers, do we expect it to happen at the similar time every year . Might we see more of this where we allocate but we have to reallocate later . I dont know who on staff can answer that question but sure, maybe ill ask scott Zoning Administrator. Sure, thanks for the question, president tanner and good afternoon, commissioner. To my understanding, the short answer is no. There was, this wasnt really specific to prop m and prop e this time. It was specific more to how we track and accumulate our housing data which is a bigger issue and there was a lot of work done in the last year although i wasnt directly involved in that to update that work and make it more accurate and my understanding thats done so that would be, that level of accuracy is, should play out Going Forward and so theoretically there shouldnt need to be any future amendments to kind of the annual allotments we get in prop m. Thank you very much. Im enthusiastic support and after some gloom about what our future holds, its good to see projects like this and block four, and theres potential in our city and looking forward to it coming to fruition. With that, were ready to vote on the motion. Very good, commissioners, theres a motion thats been seconded to approve the Office Allocation and adopt raise resolution from a change to the phasing plan on that motion, commissioner ruiz . Aye. Commissioner diamond . Aye. Commissioner imperial . Aye frm commissioner koppel . Aye. Commissioner moore . Aye commissioner president tanner . Aye. Moved. The motion passes passes unanimously, six to zero. This places us on item no. 13. This is a use authorization on 2976 Mission Street. Sorry about that. Monica, Planning Department staff. The item before you is a request for conditional use authorization pursuant to planning code section 303 and 317 to demolish a mixeduse building containing one residential unit, two unauthorized dwelling units or udus and two commercial units and to construct a sixStory Building with eight residential units and one commercial unit. Located on a through lot within the Mission Street neighborhood commercial transit Zoning District and split between the 65b and 45 bulk district. In more detail the proposal would demolish the twoStory Building containing one four bedroom residential unit which has been vacant since 2015. Over the course of Planning Department review, the records shows tenants within leading the department to identify two udus, one udu located at the rear of a ground floor commercial unit and address 2976 Mission Street. It has been vacant since 2019 and the second addresses it has been vacant since 1997. The buildings two ground floor commercial spaces are vacant. The proposed project would retain the buildings front facade and construct new six story, 65 foot tall mixed building with eight dwelling units and one one bedroom and the project includes a 1600 square feet ground floor commercial space and provides a significant amount of common open space in a digs to three private terraces. The project would provide eight class i and two class ii parking bicycle spaces. No off streetcar parking is proposed and the project was submitted to the department on january 1, 2020. The project is not required to replace demolished units and the project sponsor team has outreach efforts with mission and Community Groups. Although the project is not located within the strict boundaries of the latino cultural district, the project sponsor team worked with members throughout the development and design phases of the project since it was first submitted in 2017. The design of the building has been revised based on Community Feedback to have a traditional ascetics that relates to the building facade as well at the larger street wall and the sponsor dedicated a large portion of the Southern Building wall to a future mural at the request of condre. The project sponsor has not provided the financial feasibility and code compliance analysis that accompany request for removal of unauthorized dwelling unit and the sponsor is not arguing its financially feasibility and the feasibility of the project is contingent on demolishing the building to i want to read one clarification into the record on pages 17 and 18 of the staff report document or pages 13 and 14 on the draft motion for those reviewing hardcopies. The word con testifying has been changed to the word arguing to avoid a confusing double negative. I sent you a corrected pdf earlier this week and i have hardcopies i can distribute after. I also want to correct my math on the land use table on page 70 of your packets, if i was good at math, i might not be here today but unfortunately. The net new residential gross square feet should be 8,176 square feet and not 9,776 listed and the not 10,977. And i also have copies of that revised land use table that ill handout when im finished speaking and the project is consistent with the area plan and objective and poll seize of the general plan. The project would demolish one unit and two udu, it will provide eight residential units and are family sized and all which will be constructed to current life and safety codes. The Department Recommends approval with conditions as provided in the staff report. This concludes my presentation. The project sponsor will follow with a presentation as well and we are here and available to answer any questions you have. Thank you. Is it a three minute presentation . Five minutes, okay. Good afternoon again commissioners it is good to see you. Is it up . Can we put up the screen. Okay. This is the project unfortunately you cant see it, on Mission Street 296 2976 Mission Street. Its its a through lot and existing existing building on the site and the old jerusalem restaurant used to be there but they have since left and as monica mentioned, there have been no tenants in the residential spaces for quite a long time. So this is images of the site. Most of you know the area, it was the subject of the laundromat project a number of years ago, it was down the block. So, one of the things that was important to us on the project was to retain the context of the building by retaining the facade of the existing building. Unfortunately, the building is not in good shape so for instance, the udu spaces are, i think uninhabitable because theres no windows and no space and it was the back of a commercial space so were providing 7, two bedroom units, one, one bedroom unit and at the request of the Community Group, they were asking about the restaurant space, we had originally had a unit at the back on the first floor with a much smaller commercial space at the front and they saw there were a lot of loss of restaurant spaces and cafe spaces, so we it agree to make that change. This is the south elevation. It is broken up. We have this unique zoning where the front half of the building is at 65 feet, the back half of the building is at 45 feet. It does break up on the south side so we dont have a big monolithic wall with the staircase tower and the elevator tower on this side and we are reserving the space there for a mural which can be seen from Mission Street but certainly from Bernal Heights as you look down, as youre coming town Mission Towards the down mission toward the city, he would be able to see that. We have two major outdoor spaces. One is at the rear of the second floor. We have the commercial space completely on the first floor and then at the rear of the second floor, we have an outdoor space there as well as at the stepped floor at the fifth floor, top of the fourth floor, we have a large outdoor common open space there as well. So this is the site plan. You can see it goes through on osage street and an alley in the back. This is the First Floor Plan that shows the commercial space and all the building utilities and staircases and circulation. This is the second floor with the commercial space, i mean, the common open space in the back, a one bedroom unit, thats the only one bedroom unit on the second floor and two bedroom at the front thats within the historic facade. And at the third floor through the sixth floor, we have stepped back from the historic facade so we dont have a monolithic front on the street and that creates a small private space for the unit on the third floor in the front and then the units are the same as we go up on the third and forth floor. And then the fifth and sixth floor is where the zoning steps back so we have one unit, two bedroom unit on the front. Theres the common open space on the fifth floor and the sixth floor has a ball balcony over that. We have a good product and the units are not huge. They are a reasonable size. We have 88 two bedroom units, not huge but certainly in that location, a good location for that scale of unit and we are trying to be contextual and provide a well designed product to fit within the context of Mission Street and the quadro district area. Thank you. Okay. If that concludes project presentation, we should take Public Comment. Members of the public, this is your opportunity to address the commission on this item. If youre in the chambers, come forward. If youre calling in, you need to press star three. Hi, my name is richard becker. I work at 2969 Mission Street. The answer coalition and end racist. We share an office there. You know, i move to San Francisco 41 years ago from rochester new york and 41 years ago the pricing of living was the same and it isnt now. What happened and what is the role and what is the responsibility of the Planning Commission . We see the reports and the plans that proclaim a commitment to many progressive and equitable ideas. Yet developers continue to get approval for more and more luxury and unAffordable Housing that only really contributes to the gentrification of our communities. For example, according to your report, as the Planning Commission action plan in 2020, the missions population was 50 latino in 2000. Which fallen to 39 in 2018 unless 35 in 2020. By the way, i have lived in the mission since i worked in it since i moved here. And this decrease in the population, its an elect result of gentrification and the loss of Affordable Housing units. So now we have a situation where were seeing condofication on that block on steroids as i call it. The tillman project as it used to be referred to was torn down, something is going to be built there. And june 7th, you approved a 2955 development. Now, were here for a 2976 development and i know that theres another one in the works. Its going to take the place of a small barbershop, the one at 26 and mission at guadalupe. Doesnt the Planning Commission, it seems to rubberstamp all projects that come in. Maybe im wrong about that but it sure seems like a lot of them. But doesnt the Planning Commission has a responsibilities to the overall impact that just approving one after another, after another. This latest one, no parking. No Affordable Housing. Is it really a crying need for more unAffordable Housing in San Francisco as the whole tone of this hearing, meeting has been, no, it doesnt. As a matter of fact, it makes the situation worse. It raises the rent. Not lowering them. It creates less Affordable Housing. And it doesnt it doesnt really help to just keep building. So, ill close by saying this, we call for no more developments at one hundred real Affordable Housing. Thank you sir, but thats your time. Ill say one other thing quickly and that is, you know, there should be an elected Planning Commission. Thank you. You all are all you have a certain sir, thats your time. Take the next speaker, please. Hi, my name is ann, anne, gamobani, im a long time San Francisco resident. Im parttime High School Teacher and i have to team part time because i want to afford to live in San Francisco so i wont stay here in retirement. San francisco wasnt like that when i moved here. So, more to this point, im speaking against this Housing Project. Oh, i also want to say that im a volunteer organizer with the party for socialism and live liverism and i share an office across the street from this project so this will affect my personally. In the Planning Commission, 2008, San Francisco needs and trends report, you reveal that nine percent of house nothing this city is indeed affordable and rents in the mission have gone up 40 between 2010 and 2017. High density, small market rate units will continue to erode the community, according to the San Francisco Planning Commissioners own report. More Affordable Housing is necessary to protect the mission. So then why does the Planning Commission continue to approve projects in the mission without mandating any real Affordable Housing . San francisco Planning Commission must acknowledge its own Research Findings and stop approving permits for high density market rate housing without any real affordable units. So, we are demanding that an end to this massive gentrification that goes, continues unabated so we demand only developments with one hundred percent real Affordable Housing be granted permits and that a moratorium for permits for market rate construction in the mission much we approved well over one thousand units today, we dont need more and at the San Francisco Planning Commissions should be elected with representings from tenants and Public Housing residents and underserved communities, thank you. Thank you. Last call for Public Comment here this the chambers, feel free to come forward and if calling in, you need to press star three. Seeing no additional request to speak, commissioners, Public Comment is closed and this matter is before you. Thank you. Thank you to the members of the public who came to speak today. I want to recognize commissioner moore . Yes, speaking with City Attorney, he asked, she asked me to disclose that 2020 and 2021, i worked with architects puama and as a board of the hoa, we were involved in the design of the east facing walls which she was engaged as an architecture. That particular involvement does not put me in a position of compromise and whats in front of us today. Thank you, commissioner moore. I dont see any other commissioners light on. Are you thinking about it, commissioner imperial . Commissioner koppel, im sorry, commissioner ruiz and koppel . A clarification, existing residential units are they subject to rent control . Thanks for the question, monica, Department Staff. The existing unit has been vacant to my knowledge since 2015. So although it was constructed before 1979 and it would be subject to rent control with no tenancy and because of the project was submitted in 2017 before sp330, thats not really answering your question but the building would not be subject to rent control. The existing building is subject to rent control if it remains in place and the same would go for the two unauthorized dwelling units if they were to remain. Okay. I heard you mention no requirement to replace demolished units, would that mown no requirement to replace the units with rent control so to have three of the units in this project with rent control . Yes. I answered the second part of your question first. I apologize for that. Because the project was submitted prior to the Effective Date of sb330, which locked in sort of those replacement controls both around units themselves but also rent restrictions related to those units, its not subject to replacement or rent control for replaced units thank you so much. I will add that i feel very torn. I hear the concerns the folks raised in Public Comment about gentrification of the mission, seeing a difference in population because of the increased prices in rent but also hearing the desires of the city to produce more housing in our rhna goals because i am also very concerned about gentrification in the Mission District and feeling like were approving housing thats not affordable for how lowest income folks so i really hear that and i also want to acknowledge the Community Outreach of the project that the project sponsor did and the willingness to the commercial space and adding of a mural because our culture is important in the Mission District. So, thats all for me. Thank you. Commissioner koppel . Yeah. Good job on the project sponsors part again for meeting with the community. I cant think of a Community Group in this city thats more active, so good job for that and also your incredibly densifying the project which is what were here to did. Thank you, commissioner imperial . I want to comment in terms of the, again, in this particular project, this is within the bounds of the zoning. However, i do hear about the issue of gentrification. These are the discussions weve been having when were talking about the Housing Element as we are required in terms of the rhna goals as well and in terms of the sb330 that puts San Francisco to be preemptive in terms of what the state would require us to do, so there is this kind of balancing act that we all need to dance around with. Like, for me, this is more of a sensible project and of course i would like to see onsite Affordable Housing but at the same time, this is not a ten dwelling unit. In order to have one hundred percent Affordable Housing fronting should have been identified before hand and it would require a different kind of legislation to zone a particular neighborhood for all one hundred percent Affordable Housing and so, for me, im also torn but i also hear about the biggest issues that weve been having here as well. So, i am, for today, im in support of this. Thanks, commissioner imperial. Commissioner moore . What strikes me about this project acknowledging that commissioner ruiz expressed. This project delivers units of a size that are appropriate for the context in addition to that, its not as other buildings in this general area before indiscernible thats inappropriate for what is it built. indiscernible the units reflect more a size and circumstance of existing residences and market rate projects. It has a place and i am in support of it. Thank you, commissioner moore. Ill add my comments, i just appreciate, the comments and outreach to the community that the project sponsor has done and i look forward to seeing that mural and i like seeing it as you come closer to the the city and mission. It has done a good job in reconfiguration of the building but it provides amenities for residents and in sculpting that helps it fit into the neighborhood and i want to acknowledge the concern was replacement and gentrification. This is a small project which is why it doesnt have affordable units and i think a line myself with you, commissioner, and i would like to see it but its not what we require in our code and its a fairly modestly sized project with well sized but not large units. So im able to support this project today and look forward to again seeing it come to fruition here in the city. Commissioner koppel . Move to approve. Second. Very good. Commissioners, seeing no addition request to speak for members of the commissions, theres a motion seconded to approve this matter with conditions on that motion, commissioner ruiz . Aye. Commissioner diamond . Aye. Commissioner imperial . Aye. Commissioner koppel . Aye. Commissioner moore . Aye. Commissioner president tanner . Aye. So moved, the motion passes unanimously, six to zero. Commissioners, it will place us on item 14 for case number 20210053432enx for the pro property at 925 pry ant street for a large bryant street for a large project authorization and just to advise members of the public who may not have opinion here in the building, item 15 on columbus and jones street has been continued to september 1st and will not be considered today. Good afternoon, commissioners. Clarify, Planning Department staff. The item before you is an eastern neighborhood project authorization pursuant to planning code section 206. 6, 329 and 843 to allow demolition of an existing 32 foot tall warehouse and parking lot and construction of a 735foot tall residential building. The project is utilizing the individually requested state Density Bonus Program to achieve a 50 density bonus and maximizing residential density on the site pursuant to california code sections 659 65915 to 95918 as revised under Assembly Bill number 2245ab2245. The project request 1 incentive for street frontages and seven waivers and rear setback and height limit, narrow street and mass reduction. The project is construction of a 7 story residential building with two hundred 18 Group Housing units including 35 units provided as onsite Affordable House and the existing warehouse and surface parking lot will be demolished to clear the lot. The building will include 31 square feet of ground floor commercial space, 218 class i and 8 class ii bike Parking Spaces and under ground garage with 26 spaces two are designated as car shared spaces and access to 7600 square feet of Community Amenity spaces and 7200 square feet of useable common open space split between a basement level patio and roof deck. 24 units will have private decks. As a state bonus rental project, it will designate 18 lowincome at 55 six at 110 ami. Four lowincome units at 50 ami will provided to qualify for the 50 bonus under state density law. To date department has receive 120 letters of support. And 12 letters of opposition to the project. Supporters referenced the housing shortage and the needs for Affordable Housing in particular, the benefits of activating a vacant property and the array of amenity spaces for residences and the transient accessibility for the project site. The Green Alliance endorsed the project. All letters of opposition came from neighboring tenants on lincoln street next pressed opposition to the project, the reasons including shadows on their homes, increased traffic on uninstreet especially against existing delivery trucks, over supply of housing with vacant rates in the area and construction and Environmental Impacts. For public reference, the project was reviewed by stat which is public works for traffic and street planning and there are not protected rights to light and air. Since january, the project sfon sore had meetings with the filipino and cultural district in the lgbtq cultural district and had meetings and regular correspondence with the neighbors across the street. There was a preapplication meeting april 28th and 8 people came. And the concerns were Building Height and increased homelessness in the area and traffic impacts and the project site is located within the filipino cultural district, created in 2016, the cultural district is focused on cultivated and enriching ask activating and activating equity cultural stability, vibrancy for the Filipino Community and the district does not have land use designation applying to the project. The project is not subject to the recently enacted Group Housing regulations, the application was accepted on july 30, 2021, and the preliminary Housing Development sb3030 application was submitted with the application in february of 2021. Its exempt from ordinance 5022, and its subsequent planning code amendments and it doesnt have to comply with cooking facilities and individual Group Housing units and the requirement for minimum common space and requirements for communal kitchens and the new operational regulations. Suns publication of the initial staff packet on july 21st, Department Staff received clarification the project does meet Group Housing units within eastern neighborhood mixeduse district identified in section 2 the project is providing 8 thousand 400,000 feet of living space which exceeds 5,800 square feet. The rear yard request is a waiver and not concession incentive and staff report updated the changes and updated for the Community Engagement summary to account for letters received as of yesterday afternoon and to include a requested condition of approval for combination microwave within each unit. The Department Finds the project is on balance. Consistent with the shell place potrero plan. It will be an underutilized lot and have a within close proximity with public transportation, Public Open Space, commercial corridor and jobs. Additionally the project will increase the citys Housing Stock and providing 218 new Group Housing units, 35 of which will be designated onsite rental dwelling units and San Francisco is experiencing housing shortage at it is exceptional options for young professional are or single people and people moved into the city. Furthermore, the project will provide a land use compatible with the Zoning District in a building attractively designed and includes Community Space for residents to enjoy. This concludes staff presentation and the project sponsor is here and provided a presentation and were happy to answer any questions you have, thank you. Can you please bring up the presentation on the screen . Good afternoon, commissioners. My name is fwreg, with carmel partners, were a San Francisco based housing developer that developed built and operated market rate, affordable student and Group Housing across the nation. San francisco has a big problem. Theres lots of data on this slide. The short version is surprising you, most housing is not affordable for those who work here. The top ten of San Francisco wage earners can afford new and highquality market rate housing and theres a lot of unmet demand for quality housing thats affordable to the workforce. San franciscans spend way too much of their salary on rent. Based on our Student Housing and urban experience, carmel has been developing a workforce targeted Group Housing platform for five years in cities like seattle, denver, washington, d. C. And now San Francisco. The focus is on great location near jobs and transit and footprint buildings and small apartments, lots of amenities and services and the goal of this platform is create professionally managed and highquality housing that is better than renting a room on craigslist but cost less than nearby market rate studio. Seattle has built over 6,000 units of this kind of small group house nothing the last decade. There are small sites and great neighborhoods with small units served by robust amenities and a great neighborhood. People can live with the space because they want to be in the neighborhood and city. And seattle Group Housing rents for 20 to 30 less than the cost of a comparable new studio apartment in the same neighborhood. 19 bryant is perfect for this workforce housing, small site and housing and residents dont need a car. Its a its a part of the affordable component. We have deed restricted units and the market rate is affordable to those making 80 to 120 of area medium. I have friends and two older aunts who are single and love city live and now i have a financially, i saw the house next to me go from being a family with kids to three roommates and three incomes displaced that family. In . Group housing at 925 bryant its a market rate strategy to provide housing for working people of all ages who want to spend less on housing and want an option better than a room and three bedroom family room they might find on craigslist. The citys policy of limiting refrigerator is a challenge and those physically limited and i think that relates to a conversation i had with one of the commissioners about ovens, with that, ill hand it over to william from bar. Good afternoon, commissioners. My name is william, im principal of the bar architects and happy to be here sharing details about this project. Next. Our site, 925 bryant is at the corner of bryant and lanton and this has Great Potential for mixeduse housing and our building is 75 feet fall and 7 stories and 218 homes and amenities and commercial space, we have frontage on two streets and designing and appropriate response for each of these street is our main goal. The wide thoroughfare of bryant street, the brew ant street frontage is on the right. This express corner turns down lang ton and becomes restrain to the pedestrian scale. It has a base, middle and top pattern with two story base exhibiting high material and tafshg program. Our ground floor design, next slide, our ground floor design is setback from the Property Line. This affords us to enhance the pedestrian experience from existing condition and have paving and plant materials at grade. Next. The dwelling unit was individually livable ask they are all complete unit was kitchenets and the unit benefit from common spaces that will be appointed, a variety of use cases. And one of the main components of our amenity is the roof deck. It exceeds the open space requires for this density building. And lastly in addition to the roof deck, there are a number of interior, exterior spaces useful for ten and working and tenant and working and exercising and more. I want to thank our planner claire for clarifying open space because its important for this. She has pushed this project to include more open space including adding the balconies and extra terrace on the ground floor and expanding the rooftop at the basement level terraces and final slide. Regarding density bonus, the waivers are typical, Affordable Housing is a city priority and the project provides more lowincome units than required. 50 density and requires more space and were aware of the greater scrutiny that staff and the staff have been applying to concessions to make sure that you are consistent with bonus law. It will reduce Construction Cost by eliminating the need to build additional stairs and elevator access to the communal space that will undermine the operation on the main communal space by reducing size. You have taken your time is up. We do too so thank you. Thank you, sir. Thats your time. Thank you. Okay. We should open up Public Comment to members of the public. This is your opportunity to address the commission on this matter but pressing star three to be in the queue. If youre in the chambers, please come forward. Come far, maam. Were going to take the people in the chambers first and go to the remote callers. I dont think do you want to connect to the screen . Would that be better . Okay. I dont think it disconnects. Sfgov, were going to use the overhead. We can do the overhead. Thank you. For the past 18 years, i have worked from home since 2011 so thats the life i have. Ive seen lots of changes. We have seen that theres already five hundred units of Affordable Housing. 25 miles of where i live and exciting projects that commissioner diamond, a part of mercy would have noted, 6 it was not mentioned in the assessment. In principle, i totally can see theres a housing problem in San Francisco and im supportive of more housing. I believe that we is this take in some of the safety and Health Hazards in consideration of what it makes it particular for this particular street and i wanted to highlight that to you. The safety in the context of a narrow private street, so what the assessment fails to mention is really that impact of when half of the street is private, so when half i a street is private, theres no street cleaning, right. Ive requested that for 18 years and never had a street cleaning so with 218 additional units, retail space coming in, well have more trash on the street. I mean, ive you know, swept the streets but thats a problem, Health Hazard for my dog and myself and others who have pets, not just for lanton dwellers but 925 bryant residents and the half block thats private means theres rights for that, for trucks to be parked there. Lincoln is a single street. And single lane thoroughfare and without that private, without, when cars park there, you cant its unsafe. Cars have to be forced to back out on to bryant creating an unsafe condition and 218 and i saw the pictures and its excited. 218 units as they move in and out and order deliveries, that congest a very, narrow street. Lincoln right now is, my units are three stories tall. The proposed is seven story. You just approved a sixStory Building but the scale doesnt match what we have in that particular neighborhood. So i wanted to point that out to you. And then the last here is the conclusion, i think code, San Francisco planning code exist to ensure safety for the citizens and the residents of San Francisco. What we and i appreciate the work that clara and others have done to put this assessment together but it doesnt consider that narrow and private impact with traffic in consideration. Thank you maam, thats your time. I know we have that extra situation with the laptop. You got extra time because i didnt reset the clock. Include the chair, we were going to provide two minutes for Public Comment on this matter. Well, thank you very much. I just hope you consider the traffic and some of the Health Considerations and you guys have seen probably my documents i have sent in earlier so i really appreciate it. Thank you. Okay. Any other member in the chambers . Please come forward. Seeing none, well go to our remote callers and through the chair, well go to two minutes and when your line has been unmuted, thats your indication to begin speaking. Good afternoon, Planning Commissioners, my name is jake price and im speaking on behalf of the Housing Action coalition in strong support of 925 bryant. We reviewed this project back in march of 202 and were extremely impressed with the project density and strong commitment to affordability. The project exceeds the affordability requirement and 24 inclusionary rate with affordability by design for the market rate homes which are projected to rent 20 of the 30 less than pro additional studio apartments in the area. Our Committee Also commended the projects team to alternative transportation and walkability and urban design with bike park and communal space and accessibility improvements along lincoln street. Our committee believes the project will help transform a vacant lot and activate the street level while having sustainability transportation. We have worked along the Green Belt Alliance to generate over 110 letters of support for this project and we hope you consider their voices voices during their vote and ask that you approve 925 bryant street. Thank you. My name is andrew day. District five resident. I just wanted to call and say that im in support of this project. As mentioned previously, due to afford ability crisis and the project will provide muchneeded housing to the city, its in a great location, so you know, proximity to Public Transit and park and muni and cal trains, that area also is bikeable indiscernible . [audio is broken up] so, its Affordable Housing, great. And i strongly support the project and i hope you approve it. Thank you. Hello, my name is matt. Im calling in support of this project. I actually live a couple of blocks from it and im comfortable with it being brought in my neighborhood and comfortable with the affordable levels and minor impacts that it has in the neighborhood. Definitely in support, thank you. Hi. My name is brandon powell. I live in Bernal Heights and calling to encourage the the commission to support this project. And approve it. The conversion of the vacant space and surface parking lots into homes is urgently needed in the city. We, the inclusion of a diverse range of housing types to suit the needs of the people in San Francisco, its very important and i hope we can see more projects like this. Particularly ones that have such an environmentally sensitive and appropriate response to the conditions thats not Getting Better in the state of california in terms of water and green house gassy emission gas emissions so i hope the planner will approve this. Hi, i live across the street an empty warehouse. Im calling in, not in favor of the construction and i wanted to remind residents are not against construction of housing, its just a concession so they have adds which isnt taken into consideration by people that dont live nearby. Just to start off, theyre doing for 56 height increase from 48 feet to about 75 feet. And we live on a narrow street. Thats one of the waivers they asked for and the parking would be on lincoln street where all the garages where housing is, lincoln street is where all the huge trucks pass by everyday. And lincoln street is all private. In addition, the board the density bonus has been approved in accordance with giving Affordable Housing so theyre offering 35 affordable units out of the 218. That improves 38 indiscernible per floor. In all honesty, if it was Affordable Housing, if they add one more floor they get the additional 35 unit buzz theyre asking for two additional floors that deeply impact the waiver theyre asking for and the height limits theyre asking for and other concessions theyre asking for such as the rear yard and the horizontal map and im for getting the technical terms, sorry about that. All im trying to say, theres a need for housing and theyre saying, in and what will make this building livable and not so congested where people dont want to live in this area where theres a bike or truck or deliverable truck blocking the area to enter from. Thats all i have to say. Hi. I dont see how this promotes Affordable Housing for families. Are there any two or more bedroom apartments available . I dont remember hearing that in the presentation. I worry that these the units will be used by wealthy out of towners who want cheaper small homes when they visit the city or plan to rent it out to shortterm vacationers and we dont need housing for people who can afford other housing but more family oriented two or more bedroom Unit Properties that service our working class families and our most needed. Thank you. Hi, my name is daniel, i live in 221 lincoln right across from the development and i have been there for over a decade. The development is across the street from me. No offense for the people who support this project but you dont live on our small street and you dont know the struggles we face with a building like this. If you want Something Like this, maybe you should have the building built on your street instead. The proposed development is hundreds of units with 20 indiscernible . Theres no Street Parking available as it is with the housing. The current people that live on the street have to park in front of the driveway. The trucks that come into our alley due to the when i say alley, lincoln is an alley and its a designated street. We dont have street cleaning and you can imagine how we have trucks that block our alley and it starts at ungodly hours and trucks are hitting our cars that are parked on the alley way. So imagine having another 200 plus units with the cars with our little alley and theyll have cars no matter how much we wish people will take public transportation, they wont. Can you imagine the additional trash in our alley. The developer hasnt addressed it. I think the building is higher than the building thats there now. More than double. That wont be indiscernible . So, now we wont get any into my unit and thats the only indiscernible . You build a building like that, my unit is dark with no light at all. On top of that, theres zero privacy. They can look directly into my windows which are 24 foot tall windows. On top of that, its the only way we get air into our unit so youre going to suffocate us, right. If youre going to build a building like that, we have no air and its getting hotter due to Global Warming so youre going to suffocate us for the greed of having these many units and height. I think theres a ton of issues with the traffic thank you, sir. Thats your time. Hi, my name is laura. Im an attorney representative is it advocate for residents in neighborhood and of pacific wholesales and draw your attention to design criteria which we believe this project does not add here. We want to talk about the mass and scale asset. The board needs to determine the mass and scale are appropriate for the surrounding context and i want to hone in on the word appropriate. The court finds its appropriate because it compares with it existing high rise, the word appropriate doesnt mean similar but what you have heard and will hear from other neighbors, theres been a massive influx in this neighborhood and many are sitting here empty and unused. So when you talk about neighborhoods that have been injected with new housing, and whats appropriate is not i think you will hear people arent opposed, but theyre concerned about the doubling in height that really is going to be another massive injection into the neighborhood. On top of that, i would like to pivot to the factor of planning 101. B which is concession of shadows on open space and access to sunlight and i want to be clear here, a lot of businesses are concerned about shadows on their private spaces and its not within the boards purview but whats to be assessed by the board is casting shadows on public park or open space and this report talk was acceptable open space but thats not what the code says. Theres no accessibility factor. That might be a misreading because theres green space that does appear on the Northwest Side of the bryant street and lincoln and the report concludes theres not enough information with regard to the height of the building in order to figure out whether or not theres significant and unavoidable shadow impact so i was concerned this report stops short of the either this space is not acceptable and therefore doesnt need to be thank you, thats your time. Thank you. Hi, my name is Michelle Hunter and a resident at 309 lincoln street across the alley from the proposed site street development. My husband mark and i oppose the height of this development for the reasons outlined in the email sent to all of you. Commissioners, if you can reference the documents i emailed yesterday. Highlights include construction and Environmental Impact on residences only and the street is narrow and with the demolition phase of the project, they can create Health Hazards and potential damage to our building. Our only means ever light and air are windows on lincoln street. Building height will limit our Natural Light and reference the photo of the front in the back of our building from my last common, all windows face lincoln and having a seven Story Building will eliminate Natural Light. Lincoln street is a huge issue. Reference the indiscernible and lincoln street public and private. Lincoln street is half private and public and having a garage entrance will cause Traffic Congestion and using lincoln street for all deliveries and it causes backups and it will exacerbate that Affordable Housing in our neighborhood indiscernible . With a Large Businesses moving out of San Francisco, theres a large residences indiscernible . As a realtor, i have seen this. In the addition on 7th street and brandon, well have one thousand units in a two block radius. The lack of housing in our neighborhood and the market rents why do we need more. My husband and i hope you consider the points made indiscernible and documents from the developer and recommendation documents. Thank you, thats your time. Hi. indiscernible . I want to say i approve this project and i like how the units on both sides indiscernible . I think this will help the city for the housing crisis and the affordability crisis and indiscernible . Thank you so much for your time. Hi name is adam. I live at 311 lincoln street across the street from the proposed development and the proposed and opposed to the project in as a gay man, i live with my husband and as you know the project is indiscernible density bonus constructions afforded by california Government Code Section 65915. The density bonuses the developer is seeking is a height to raise it to 75 feet and the tallest buildings at 50. Lincoln and bryant is a narrow alley and defined by 62. 1 and it runs east to west and half private and public and the private section near bryant is owned by the warehouse. Contrary to what was said earlier in planning code 621. 1, the rules are clear and buildings like ours excuse me. That face south like ours that might that my neighbors live in. For a street running 45 degrees like lincoln, you have to provide no less than 45 degrees access plain for the building across the street through which light and air must travel to the other side. Because the warehouses and Light Industrial businesses at the brandon end, through how the weekdays from 7 00 a. M. To 4 00 p. M. Have trucks lined up unloading. And trucks are up and down our streets and moving cars out of Parking Spaces and garages and we have to keep our windows close because of the diesel. It will trap more fume asks create an environment of more toxic air indiscernible . We choose to live where we live because of the relative affordability and location and learned to live with the issues. Thank you, sir. Thats your time. We ask for your consideration. Hi, yes, good afternoon, this is ms. indiscernible calling with project San Francisco and i want to say that i am in favor of the 925 bryant Street Project. I think it will provide access to safe and Affordable Homes for residents. However, i think it needs to be maybe reexamined to also take into consideration the concerns of the residents that are already living there and i appreciate your time. Thank you very much. Hello, my name is louie. 310 indiscernible . I think i have indiscernible . So here we are indiscernible of lincoln street. I really urge everybody to take into consideration the narrowing of the street and the fact indiscernible . During the construction phase, we know we wont be able to live or work in our indiscernible . I cant figure out how the traffic on the street will be indiscernible . The height is another issue and i wont repeat what my neighbors stated and i agree with them and it will be limited to light for everybody. Im in favor indiscernible for more housing but we should really think of the layout of the design and indiscernible , so thank you for listening to the residents of my neighborhood, thank you. Hi, im calling in support of this project. Primarily because of the fact it includes so much affordability. I would like to interrogate the talking point from the opposition, theres a massive influx of Affordable Housing in the neighborhood thats empty and use. Im not aware of any Affordable Housing in selma has empty for any of the reasons other than finding new tenants because of a brandnew building built. I think that its very indiscernible that the opposition is using Affordable Housing as a reason to oppose this project and the unit sizes, indiscernible . When i first moved here, i had to cripple up in an affordable room, so yeah. The units are really important for people younger who may not be able to afford because they dont have a family. Those people, im one of those people, so anyway. Thank you for listening to both sides and i hope youll take this into consideration for this project, thank you. Hi, good afternoon, my name is mark, San Francisco resident. Nothing against this project for per se. The problem is put going on lincoln street. I dont know if you have seen how narrow the street is. Its private and not a through street. And put the main garage to the project on lincoln instead of bryant, frankly is crazy. And a recipe for disaster from a disaster. Cars arent do a 3 point turn on that street and have to often back out into bryant street traffic. I fail to say why the entrance to go on lincoln, a narrow half private street rather than on bryant which is a long major widening thoroughfare. I would urge the commissioners today to direct your today to consult with the applicant and work to reconfigure a project at the very least, to face the entrance, using bryant street other than lincoln street. The project, i dont have a problem with, thank you very much. This is sylvester. I would ask the Planning Department staff to please take into account the measurement of the height of the rooftop open space on this place and the freeway. The freeway to the west and freeway to the north. What is the height of the freeway . What is the height of the freeway to the west . And what is the air quality impacts for people on the roof . We are still at an area of cars that are thats not elect friday cal vehicle so theres leave a traffic on bryant street on the ground and not on the top. They have more exposure to freeway fumes. So, please give us the information, give the commission the information about the relative height of the freeway and the rooftop open space, thank you. Good afternoon, commissioners, my name is john, im a resident of district two. Im calling in to support the 925 bryant street. Its a great example for development which we need much more indiscernible in San Francisco and in the light of the area because every home built in San Francisco is a home thats not in a Central Valley exert. Especially if were talking about affordable project. This project is small units and subsidized Affordable Housing. This is an amazing project and i think it has 216 bike spots for one per unit. It cant get much better than this and gives us 82 parks compared to the average. Fantastic project and i hope you support it. Thank you. Go ahead, caller. Hi name is ely, im actually a neighbor of the proposed project. Although im fond of having a place for Affordable Housing there, the volume of the building that is proposed is against all San Francisco city regulations for this size of street and i request the proposed developer to reduce the height and provide setback, a part of the San Francisco code to get this project approved and endorse indiscernible , currently the developer is kind of planning on the code that allows him to override the San Francisco city plan code and in doing so, he really hes affecting our livelihood in this area, the neighbors around and the volume of the project is inproportionate for the street its on and the parking and all of that. So thank you so much. Okay. Last call for Public Comment. If youre in the chambers and have not spoken yet, please come forward. If youre calling in remotely, you need to press star three. When you hear your line has been unmuted, thats your indication to begin speaking. Good afternoon, staff and commissioners. Excuse me. Sorry. Good afternoon, staff and commissioners, my name is jordan grimes and resilient manager with greenbelt alliance. For those not familiar with us, were an environmental nonprofit dedicated to building Climate Resilience in sustainability communities and after careful review, greenbelt support the 925 bryant project. From housing supply and affordability standpoint, the 218 new homes are so badly needed in the city. Greenbelt is ex salted to see the builder to provide affordable units and were happy to see a mix of low, very low and workforce units. Additionally the proposed development will prioritize sustainability to efficiently reusing existing land and infrastructure of a higher use and having onsite generation and high efficiency water systems. Plans to green the street indiscernible we ped friendly street experience or benefits, were supportive of. The proposal will have close walkability to transit and large bike room and sidewalk improvement this and this will help the city of San Francisco for a cleaner community for all resident. Uc berkeley climate calculator shows its the most effective strategy the city can employ to ultimately this is a strong badly needed project. And we at greenbelt urge your support today. Thank you so much. Hi there, my name is carl. Im a renter in San Francisco and i just want to say that the housing shortage resulting in high rent for me and all my friends who live in the city and a project that will turn a vacant lot to 200 housing lots with 24 being affordable is a nobrainer to me and i support the project and hope you move it forward, thank you. Okay. Final last call for Public Comment. Seeing no addition request to speak, commissioners, Public Comment is closed. And this matter is before you. Thank you to everyone who called in or for those who are hear and to the project sponsor and staff for a great report. I did have a few questions, if i can start for the project sponsor. I know one of the waivers, i believe thats being requested is from off street loading and i thought i saw on sheet 800, theres a moving space labeled in, is that from moving in, moving out, maybe you can explain your other projects similar to this and how do folks month and out and do they need a vehicle even if they dont own or use a vehicle regularly . Thank you, commissioner, tanner. We worked with sf dot to look at different ways to lotted this. In our experience with housing like this, people dont show up with a huge beacon moving back. Its a back of a truck or small trunk of a car. In the garage, one space is designating for move in, move out. At the direction of city departments have put all of the loading for daily drop off and pickup and also for the movein, move out to bryant street. Okay, great, thank you. Maybe ms. Seeny, we had a question, a lot of comment around the challenges of landon being a narrow street and defined as a narrow street and i live on a narrow street and i can attest to the challenges of people sitting and accommodating everybody on a street. I think maybe correct me if im wrong, one of the questions you heard, why is the parking entrance there . Part of that would be keeping it off the main street to not have conflict with transit and bike lanes so maybe you can speak to that a little bit. Yes, thank you for that question. Bryant street has a number of restrictions for vehicle access. Under the planning code, it is a vision zero high and Injury Network and transient preferencible street and truck route. No curb cuts are allowed so creating a creating new driveways would actually be prohibited. Yes, thats why landon is the accessible frontage for vehicles. Thank you very much. While we have you here, i understand a lot of the, request for waivers, could you talk about the exposure waiver . Is that because the units are facing on to, because you need to face 20 feet open space or rear yard, so maybe if you can talk about the units that dont meet the exposure requirement and how they are getting their exposure . Yes. The units that do not meet exposure are on the rear of the building, so not facing langton and some of them will be on the lower floors that will be facing, theres a ten foot rear yard which they have requested a waiver for so theyll be facing this ten foot rear yard, for the lower floors, theres currently a three story warehouse on the side of that. They still do not meet the rear yard rules because in theory, something could come later but at the moment on the higher floors on the rear, there is more air than technically on the property at the time. Thats what the dwell thats what the dwell being unit is there for. One of the things about how the housing is used and how it can add to the citys kind of, i guess, dimensions of kind of properties we have. Maybe you can talk more about what you have seen in other cities in this type of housing and in particular with the amenity space, one thing you have noticed what we talk about as the commission, how the amenity spaces are distributed or you is a large communal space and theres three other Community Spaces throughout. So we have talked about the debate, is it larger for larger spaces or smaller and distribute and share your experience with how people use the spaces. Thank you for the question, commissioner. We have various types, and completed 12 in the bay area were operating today. We have done research into Group Housing both through the Group Housing we have built. We have built a 2400 bed Group Housing property at uc davis that was primarily student oriented. So we pay a lot of attention to how our residents use the spaces but in the research, we went to seattle to see the six thousand units of Group Housing they built toward a dozen of these projects and met with the Community Manager and the developer and designers and what we heard is that a lot of these spaces dont get used during the daytime and they dont get used, maybe a little sunday night but not monday, tuesday, wednesday, its thursday night, friday night, saturday night and then people are choosing, if they want to stay in and have a quiet meal, theyre not going there. Theyre choosing to go to the spaces because they want to be around other people. And so, in thinking about kind of how to spread these Community Spaces throughout the building, we thought it was really important to have a really, exceptional large, does lots of things and active throughout the day and coworking in the day and game rooms and various uses that people can use thats all together so anytime of day when you want to be around people, the basement is there to serve you and we have other floor space on the top floor on seven. We added smaller ones on three and five because were aware of the comments you all made in make being revisions to Group Housing. We think they will get used some by people looking for small private events but within the larger spaces have designated areas that can be closed off, rented, so when residents want to have a Birthday Party for eight friends, they have options at all times. Great, thank you very much. Im going to call on commissioner ruiz. Thank you. I have one question for ms. Seeny, i dont believe i saw in the staff packet but in the slides provided where its describing the typical unit, it shows an image with 390 square feet, are all 218 units, 390 square feet . No. They are all very close in size. There is a slight difference with, yeah. The units facing langton are 30 by 13 ask theres one floor where theres units slightly narrow but in general theyre almost exactly the same size. Would you be able to provide the Square Footage of the units . There we go. Yeah. There is a, yeah, theres a portion of units on the second floor that are smaller size. Im going to get my calculator out here. Did i read somewhere about 11 units . Maybe it was a different case, 11 units less than 350. Yes, its the 1 is units its the 11 units down there. Those ones are 344 square feet. And then all of the rest of the units are 35, 13 and a half. Okay. Its just the level 2 facing langton street. Thank you. Ill trying to understand umu because i though this project is located in umu. When i look at the table, i see that Group Housing is permitted but i see sro units saying not permitted. And then when i click on 890. 88 and read the definition, a single room occupancy units, it explains that sros can be both dwelling and Group Housing, so as long as it doesnt exceed, in the case of sfro Group Housing, it cant exceed 350 square feet. You said 11 units less than 350, how is that allowed in this project . Im going to commissioner, im happy to address that. In most cases, we look at like sro buildings and sro units, so it ends up being for the planning code, sro becomes like a size determent. So, in most cases, the units might be allowed or a smaller unit but its about the building itself. And whether or not we would allow like an sro building within the Zoning District verses the specific unit. In short, it gets treated like a studio more or less, so. Okay. Im not reading that in umu. Youre correct, corey, Zoning Administrator. Im happy to take this. In a short answer, its a typo. That gets to what commissioner sucr was saying, we limit sro buildings and theres a distinction. Umu we prevent Group Housing which can be sro and the intent was to say, was to prohibit sro buildings. And that is where, to be an sro building, every residential unit in the building has to be an sro because the planning code gives certain benefits and kind of reductions in requirements for sro buildings that it doesnt necessarily give for individual sros units so this issue was raised a number of years ago and was brought to the Zoning Administrator at that point in time was my predecessor and there was work done with the staff. We reviewed all materials and it was clear the intent was to prevent sro where the building was nothing but sro. That wouldnt make sense to because most Group Housing bedrooms are not more than 350 square feet, right. So long story short, there was an interpretation made that was a typo and the intent and the way we influence for this project and other similar projects in umu, the intent of that code language is pro vent sro buildings and not individual sro units. Okay. That makes more sense. Umu, its supposed to say sro buildings and not sru units. Im curious as to whether weve had discussions about Group Housing in general and for the clarification, what the Zoning Administration provides and im curious, are there types of Group Housing and buildings within this area that has sro type of units and it would give me more of an overview of, like, the Group Housing in general, the diversity of it. However, my i have a question in terms thats more of a policy question for this building, i have a question about the commercial spaces and the loading docks, it looks like the loading will be on to bryant and not will be in langton, correct . For ordinary daily mail deliveries, it will be bryant but loading that will serve the commercial spaces or that would serve, move in, move out, theres a designated loading space in the parking garage that is in the basement below the retail spaces. And i find it weird, i hope in terms and i understand and thats great. In terms of the commercial spaces where were where its added because it is in the alley way and we know the alley ways are small and more a walkable area actually, what are you envisioning in what commercial spaces . Are these like coffee shops. Thank you, commissioner imperial. Thats a great question. We found that, you know, this is not going to be big destination retail. Its not what we think is going to work here. Bryant street is a little harsh street and we thought that to have more kind of neighborhood serving small, these are not huge retail spaces to be off of bryant street would make them more appealing for the uses thats going to serve the neighborhood, so the last couple of projects i have done where we had retail spaces like this, weve had a hair salon, we had a womens kick boxing fitness, we had a small cafe, we had a wine bar focused on minority produced and owned wineries so those are the kinds of Retail Businesses that we have recently worked with and we find in the current times as were seeing the bigger and chain retailer struggle to survive. I dont think they want to be out on bryant street where yes, theres better visibility but its a little harsher environment. I appreciate that response and its not my project but thats what i envision in the alley way because some alley ways are beautiful and walkable and best for walkable spaces so, yeah. If hopefully hopefully youll get a Community Serving type retail spacing here. I think thats mainly my issue because all of the comments by the residents nearby are about the traffic on the alley ways and i understand that because alley ways are really narrow and understanding also the parking entry, where at the same time bryant street is also a busy street too. So, in terms of, as sensibility, i find this project approvable but those are my questions, thank you. Thank you. Well go to commissioner koppel and then commissioner diamond. Is this going to be a modular Housing Project . We have not built modular in the past. This could be but its not our intention at this time. Okay. Do you have any other questions . Commissioner diamond . Thank you. The project sponsor talked a little bit about the profile of the kind of people they see living in these units, the age range, why somebody would pick Group Housing . Thank you, commissioner. Ill admit i was pretty surprised when i toured Group Housing properties in new york and in seattle and we hired a National Research firm to do research on other markets like chicago and tampa where there is sort of more Group Housing than we expected and what i was surprised while walking through these, developers in seattle said i expected this was going to be young workforce and it isnt. We have people who sold a big house because they want to spend time in the city going to galleries and restaurants ask choosing to live here a few years and we have a lot of people sometimes we forget about housing people in their 30s and 40s 50s and 60s sing and live a similar life and thats a lot of population of who lives in the seattle properties. They said its much more diverse than you think. It serves people who are relocating for one reason or another. We cannot lease these shortterm. The city has strict and clear regulations around shortterm, corporate rentals, things like that but some people want to settle for a year and get a way for the land or maybe theyre renovating or trying a new neighborhood so it serves different people at different points in their life who dont want to spend as much money in housing and rather spend that money to pay off student debt or saving for retirement or they cant afford to pay more. Thank you. So, related question for mr. Tee, i know our interpretation for the appliances that can go in the units limit refrigerators to under counter refrigerators, are we concerned about the location of the frig or the size of the frig. Thank you for that question, corey, Zoning Administration. It doesnt provide that distinct. Its focusing on the location and size. Its more about the size that were talking about because the intent is to allow, the Group Housing definition talks about no cooking facilities and interpretation is about allowing a limited set of cooking facilities and its all about providing just some amount of facilities for these types ever bedrooms without going all the way to the point of being indiscernible to their individual dwelling unit so to your point, if someone had, you know, what you might consider like a dorm frig, the under counter refrigerator but they put it on the table or counter, i dont think there will be a problem with that at all. I dont know we have observed or been asked to weigh in on that specifically in the past. I would comment, based upon the profile, not just being young people who live in these buildings but older people, i would hope we would be open to conversations with the project proponent about whether or not the client would like a frig and whether it should be low down or more comfortably placed for people in different locations and sounds like youre open to that conversation as they work with the design details, correct . Sure. I really dont think the location of the smaller frig is really germane to the issue of whether it has the refrigerator in the first place and how large it is, what its capacity is. Great, thank you very much sure, no problem. Thank you. Commissioner moore . Commissioner moore, you may be muted. Yes and im sorry. Have any previsions been made to deal with transportation and network companies, particularly given the narrow rightofway of langdon . Is there any has there been thoughts about how to manage that . Commissioner moore, the project is going to be applying for a white zone on bryant street for active passenger loading, so in concept, tnc such as uber and lyft isnt on be langdon street. People are parking illegal and impeding fire access in terms of an emergency. Thank you for explaining that. I have another question for the applicant. I was trying to find at least labeled on your draws indiscernible and small previsions for tenant storage with units being small and nobuild and furniture being provided, are there storage rooms. I couldnt find them. Thank you, commissioner. Each unit will have a washer dryer so theres no common washer dryer and theyre in the unit floor plans thats located in the kitchen with plumbing. Every unit has a closet. Were exploring some modular furniture options but not at this point ready to commit to them but exploring modular furniture options that provide additional storage opportunities outside of the unit. We are not intending to provide store an. We have done that in so many cities that mandate storage outside of the units and so much is empty. So, we from our experience and i can think of eat least three jurisdictions i have worked in and we have the empty rooms. Thank you, commissioner moore, was that all your questions . I want to make sure. I did have a couple other questions, just one of the things we have talked about and heard from the neighbors a lot is around height and this is seeking to be washed from our standards seeking to be waived from our standards and they have different heights to the provide and provide more access to light and air. Did the sponsor did the project sponsor had conversations with the neighbors and can you talk about the heights facing the narrowing street and how you engaged with the neighbors on that topic . Beginning with the first meeting we held which was a preapplication meeting in may of 2021, the neighbors from the outset, you know, were very clear, they said we dont like the height of this. We would like a three story condo building. We dont want apartments or affordable units. We did, i thought make some progress in that conversation that they said, one of the mitigations for height could be more setback from the Property Line or improving the rightofway. If there were more greenery. If you look at the plans, we have pulled the Building Back from the Property Line and have not only the required planting along the curb but actually on both sides of the sidewalk so the building does pull back from the sidewalk to give a little room. I understand its not much but economically this project does not work if its less than less than seven stories tall. One question about the loading zone in the garage, whats the clearance height . What streaks can have clearance to go through the garage . Vans. Basically typical vans but not a truck or boxed truck. No, but vans and again these units being small, people are not arriving with large couches and so forth, generally. Certainly. I think one suggestion not to you but others listening, that may not be for this project and the this is not a daytime parking space. Whether its a preference to have designated commercial loading but limited parking space. Those are the questions i have and i dont know if commissioners on he owe commissioner commissioner tanner, the objectionable question to height was raised, at staff request we had them move their mechanical tower to be further out and to be less likely to cast shadows relative to neighbors. Without losing height, there was a Design Change to those that can be they can be 16 feet tall. We had a way of adjusting height. Great, thank you. Commissioner ruiz. Thank you, i have one more question i forgot to ask if regard to umu. Through my work as a community planner, i have heard from many other focuses who track land use that umu was an effort to encourage family size units and traditionally in a pdr area. So i read and heard that housing is permitted in umu but subject to height requirements so does that apply to this project . Thank you for the question, again, corey. Zoning administrator. Sorry to keep having nuance answer and the answer is yes and no. When each neighborhood was adopted, the citywide rate for onsite insolution natury was 12 . The rate was 19 , so when it was adopted, youre correct. It was designed to have a higher rate of affordability required and we have the land dedication for umu that doesnt apply for other communities. Since then, weve had numerous changes and increases to our Affordable Housing requirements across the board. Such that that 19 has been superseded for projects of a size, so when it was adopted, yes. There was a higher standard than citywide as it is now. The citywide standard for units, 25 or more projects is higher than the original 19 . Okay. Thank you so much. Sure. Thank you. Commissioner diamond . Unless commissioners have any other questions, i would move to approve. Second. Okay. Commissioners theres a motion that has been seconded. Jonis, can you give me a second. A question to the motion maker. If she would be amenable to putting a condition not allowing Modular Construction and please, i dont want any of this to revolve around me. We have a project in front of us thats here but if you look at the residential plan that pretty much not saying i know what the developer is going to be doing here and i asked my question and i gave me an answer but if you look at that plan, it kind of speaks to me saying something could be in the works and that shouldnt dictator may not dictate how anyone else will vote but it will dictate how ill vote. Commissioner koppel, if i can make a suggestion, if you want to amend the motion, we include that as a finding that the project sponsored indicated they would not be using thats enough, yeah. Commissioner tie mond, did you want diamond did you want to respond . Can i hear from the project sponsor on your thoughts on that request for a finding . Its unique and i understand the intent. Its not our intent to build the modular and it lays out efficiently and whether thats a modular built or traditional building, its meant to be efficient and i think i would, you know, at a minimum ask were more clear about modular because cabinets can be modular and we built walls offsite. So i get nervous about this even though i can say to you with all truth and honesty its not our intention to build it modular today. I know this economy is really hard to build anything right now. Its challenging so i would appreciate the flexibility but certainly not at risk of the project being opposed. Its not our intention to build it modular, i assure you. Commissioner koppel, i think im not comfortable with that at this point without there being a lot more discussion about it and i would rather stick to the motion with the way it was made. Okay. Then, commissioner theres a motion seconded to approve this matter with conditions on that motion, commissioner ruiz . Aye. Commissioner diamond . Aye. Commissioner imperial . Aye. Commissioner koppel . No. Commissioner moore . Great, thank you. Welcome back to the San Francisco Planning Commission meeting hybrid meeting for july 28, 2022. Brief announcement b we move on to item 16 on the previous matter on item 14, at 925 bryant street, i wanted to enter into the record that commissioner moore at the very last moment basically, during the vote experienced technical difficulties where she was not audible but she did vote affirmatively in favor of the project and so that will be reflected in the minutes. Commissioners, that will place us on item 16 for case number 2020010283 dr. Ua. 2306 through 2310 and 2312 through 2316 vincente street and this is a conditional use authorization. I think your microphone jeff, im sorry. None of the remote people could hear that statement. I did not i didnt unmute the microphone so im going to repeat that for commissioner moores benefit. So before jeff starts his presentation, i wanted to, on the record state that commissioner moore for the previous item at 925 bryant street had some technical difficulties and right when the vote was being taken, she was not audible but she has confirmed she voted affirmatively for the project and that will be recognized in the minutes. Thank you for bearing with me, jeff, go ahead. Thank you. Good afternoon, president tanner. Members of the commission, jeff, planning staff. The item before you is a request for conditional use authorization for planning code 155 to allow new curb cuts on a projected cuts with class ii bicycle lanes. Or lane. The project site is in the park side neighborhood of supervisorial district four. Its clusters of commercial retail. The project site is a four thoifb 87. 5 square foot lot with approximately 54 feet a frontage along vicente street and located one lot of the 34th avenue. The project site contains 303,200, oneStory Building containing three separate commercial retail spaces and two are vacant and one occupied by religious Institution Use and the westbound lane is a class ii bicycle lane located between the vehicular lane and the curbside offstreet Parking Spaces. A the building to the east are within the nc1 stoning district and remainder subject block extending west is located within an rh2 district and the lots are developed with one and multifamily dwelling buildings that are, that contain ground floor garages accessing vicente street and theres 15 curb cuts and the project is the demolition of the existing oneStory Building and new construction of two four story, 40 foot tall, three family dwelling, each to be located on a new lot created through a subdivision of the existing lot. Each building would consist of three car parking garage with three bicycle Parking Spaces at the ground floor, a three bedroom flat unit at the second floor and a third and fourth floor would contain townhomes with one fronting fully on to vincet street and the second one fronting on to the cocompliant rear yard. Useable open space for buildings will be provided through their own code compliant rear yard and 142 square foot common roof deck on each of the buildings. And each of the lots proposed is a new ten food wide curb cut. As mentioned, the item is before the commission to allow for two new curb cuts on vicent street and the curb cuts were not a major concern with the context of the five existing curb cuts that exist on the remainder of the block. The low vehicle and low bike volume of the street and the bike lane that occur on vicente street. The staff did talk about the onStreet Parking. In response to that, the sponsor revised the design that proposed the two curb cuts located in the middle of the two proposed lot to a concentrated and consolidated location with the intent of minimizing the area dedicated to the curb cuts and the space in between, resulting a loss of off street, onStreet Parking and sponsor, provide be of exhibit b for one loss of offStreet Parking. The project sponsor had a preapplication meeting september 8th, 2020, and at this time, the department havent received correspondence related to the project. Staff would like to read connection into the motion which will be the response to finding 7b number three. Related to indiscernible and offensive omissions located on page six of the draft motion. The correct finding would read the project proposes two new four story three unit residential buildings, the proposed uses are not expected to generate indiscernible offensive omissions and noise, glare or odor and it will apply for all applications for noise and touch and will not include permanent uses that will generate obnoxious offenses such as excessive noise and dust and odor. That last part was redundant. Overall, on balance the departments find the project is consistent with the objectives and policies of the general plan. The project is necessary is desirable because it will replace vacant commercial building with two New Buildings that maximize the allowed density of the proposed lots. The project would provide two new curb cuts on the street with unprotected bike lane but located on a block with five existing curb cuts in a quiet neighborhood and low usage and the project is proposing to increase the number of units to the citys Housing Stock. And as a result its necessary and compatible with the city at large, thank you. Okay. Project sponsor, you have five minutes. All right. Good afternoon, president tanner, vicepresident moore. And my name is shawn with shawn architects with the project sponsor. I want to thank jeff for shepherding us through the project. The project site is 4087. 5 square foot lot in the park side neighborhood. Theres an existing commercial building built in 1950. Over the year, it has been home to a liquor store, realestate office and now a church which is on monthtomonth lease. The proposed project is construct two new four story triplexs for six units. Buildings would be four stories tall, ground floor providing one parring. This is a dangeral use for the curb cuts jeff mentions and its code compliant. Project site is located on the northside vicente west of 34th avenue. It is surrounded by residentialuses. It features an unprotected bike lane and 16 neighbors on the two blocks have curb cuts. The bike lane is in a sad state. I went out yesterday and found two cyclists along. Utility work indiscernible and the area is not scheduled to be repaved for several years and the most protected float bike lane is two blocks south with more cyclists observed and more level grade. Ocean avenue three blocks of the south has a bike lane. On to the proposed project itself. This image shows our building and context along with the exposure to the midblock open space. The site design maximizes the density onsite while respecting neighborhood character. The three, two driveways will remove 1 onStreet Parking space for a net gain of five Parking Spaces. We will now have a code complying rear yard and matching light wall. The ground floor features three car Parking Spaces, three bicycle Parking Spaces, and common open space. For street trees four street trees planting on the sidewalk. The second floor, each features a three bedroom, two bed flat of 1100 square feet, each dwelling will have in unit laundry. The slide shows the third and floor town house units with the building b an image of this. The front units is three bed, three bath and 300 square feet and the units are 1180. The roof features the required fire tent roof access and the small common deck and theres a solar area to help power the building. The front facade design breaks up the mass into distinct volumes and each building has a front entry with recessed garage door and secondary entry building. Theres siding and stucco. The rear and side facades will have cement and trim with Energy Efficient windows and you can see the modest roof deck. And the intersection shows the unit over the garage and both common open spaces. Last year the rendering of the building shows the building masses in context from the street level. Jeff mentioned, we held our preapril plucks during the zoom era in 2020 with no neighbor in attendance. During the planning analysis, we worked with the team to refine the garage locations and screen them. The vehicle parking was pushed beyond the 25 foot line to keep an active frontage and modified the bay windows and parapet appearances and the project has new housing for families in San Francisco within an established neighborhood. Existing housing is not affected and adding a contextually appropriate and new full building. The project has been reviewed multiple times at planning and fdot and complies with the guidelines and we ask you to approve the a project and the owner is with me if you have questions for him. Very good. If that concludes project sponsors presentation, we should open up Public Comment. Members of the public, this is your opportunity to address the commission. By pressing star three if youre calling in remotely, if youre in the chambers, please come forward. When you hear your line has been unmuted, thats your indication to begin speaking. indiscernible . Three minutes. Aileen with the park side education and committee known as speak. Speak the proposed project is 40 foot height in bulk as well as standard architecture. However, it is questionable that both the interior and exterior were painted earlier this year. There are concerns related to the parallel between this project and one at the former 2350 19th avenue site. It was originally dpw property and then was transferred to the Fire Department. The 2350 19th site was property own sold at auction rather than being longterm lease and the property was then subdivided and the Fire Department buildings on the property sat vacant for years and were the target of graffiti and litter. The buildings were demolished and the site remained a vacant lot. Eyesore and target of litter for many more years. The llc ownership changed hands multiple times. Market rate condos were a densely built which sat vacant and unsold for a number of years and in district four, theres a lot of market rate condos. So, what is the Business Model for this project . Will it become a part of the estimated 48,000 vacant indiscernible in the city and estimated 1. 2 million vacant unit in the state . Since the mortgage meltdown in 2008, housing increased and become a part of an investment portfolio for Institutional Investors and global capital. Will these condos actually be built . If they are actually built, will they be occupied or sit vacant as part of investment portfolio . Is there a demonstrated financing plan for the project . Will the project cause more gentrification in the neighborhoods . The commission to consider the broader issues related to this project, thank you. Hi. My name is kelly. And i live on 34th avenue, the first family home family home around the corner from this location and i prepared something i wanted to say to you based on the letter i received and it was talking about converting our nc1 neighborhood location into apartments. But then when i heard them talking at the beginning of the presentation, theyre talking about curb cuts which seems like theyre relatively minor issues, if they want to take out our nc1 cluster building, so i believe the proposed conditional use authorization is neither necessary nor desirable for the neighborhood. One of the major improvement projects the mta is doing is creating neighbor ways, both 34th avenue and vincenet street are proposed neighbor ways so this building sits at the intersection of 34th and vincente so as a result, any business or any traffic that is going down the neighbor ways might actually want businesses to visit. The purpose of the neighbor ways is to make neighborhood streets friendlier for walking and biking and to connect families to important Neighborhood Services and this building takes away an opportunity to have have businesses located at the intersection of vincente and 34th avenue. The building of six units of market value condos does not constitute any change at all in the shortage of Affordable Housing in the city and to be clear, the only people that benefit from this project are the people who are building it and they stand to make a profit on the units they sell so im absolutely against this. I think our nc1 realestate is very limited in the city. Once you get it up, its gone. So, like i said, if the Property Owner wants to build residential units on that space, it should be on top of nc1 serving location. Thank you. Okay. Last call for Public Comment. If youre calling in remotely, you need to press star three. If youre in the chambers, come forward. No addition request to speak, commissioners, Public Comment is closed. And this matter is now before you. Thank you. I wonder, mr. Horn, if you can speak to some of the comments the last caller raised, how the project overall on that side of the curb cut it receive, where it falls regarding where it falls in proximity to other commercial uses or how we look at our nc uses and whats allowed there . In regard to, so this is in an nc1 cluster so its mostly the corner of the intersection that have the designation. Nc1 does allow for commercial uses at the ground floor but residential is permitted ground floor use. Thats not whats under the request for conditional use authorization. Ground floor residential is a permitted use within the nc1 district. Theres no controls related to the removal of the existing commercial at the site or the demolition of that commercial building. Great, thank you. It sounds like from the project sponsor, this has, its serving a church use now, it has had a couple of commercial uses but not i would not say a church is more a Community Serving but not commercial and its not a commercial use at this time. Those were my questions. Other than prapsz the comment to hopefully than perhaps the comment to get the bike lanes repaved to see where the bike lanes are to be. Theres good visibility for the folks coming in and out of the garage. The one comment, are there mechanisms within the garage in case can you imagine the folks would back out or do a 3 point turn in the garage and come out front weissmanward front front ward on the street. We imagine they would be backing out unless they have a vestibule. Because its curb cuts and instead of your 8 or 10 foot width, its a 20 foot width of visibility to see bikes coming down the way. Great. Maybe consider most cars these days have the backup camera, so thats nice. Commissioner koppel . Motion to approve. Second. Very good. Commissioners, on that motion to approve with conditions, commissioner ruiz . Commissioner diamond . Aye. Commissioner imperial . Aye. Commissioner koppel . Aye. Commissioner moore . Aye. And commissioner president tanner . Aye. So moved. Commissioners, the motion passes unanimously, six to zero. Thank you. Well place this on your final item on todays agenda under your discretionary review calendar, number 17. Case number 2021002487drp02, for the property at 3624 scotts street. This is a discretionary review. Good evening, president tanner, vicepresident moore, david, staff architect. The item before you is a public request for discretionary review of Building Permit application 2021, net 2205353 to construct a rear addition to an existing two story two unit building. The existing building is a category a, Historic Resource due to its location within the eligibility Marina Corporation Residential District and it was built in 1926. There are two dr request. The first David Johnson and ashton, sorry, Winston Ashley of 275 avla to the adjacent neighbors east of the proposed project who are concerned it conflicts with several objectives in the urban design element and to ensure com compatibility with the character. They say it will cause loss of light, privacy and air. They want to remove the roof deck and fourth story does allow decks on the second story only. Provide a 15 foot setback at the third story, presumably at the front and setback to four story additional five feet from the front if the Commission Finds the fourth story acceptable and setback five feet from the side if the Commission Finds the fourth story acceptable. As well as requiring light wells to be to adjacent light wells. The second request are ashton and aileen of 3626, scott street, the adjacent neighbors to the north of the proposed projects who are concerned it doesnt conform to objectives in the guidelines and related to scale and character of the neighboring buildings at the street and scale and form at the rear and sides. There not articulated to light and air and privacy. They want to incorporate original planning recommendations from august 19th, 2021, submittal. The project sponsor should perform Work Associated with the removal of two Property Line windows of theirs and install fourbyfour skylights on the scott street to mitigation for the loss of their Property Line windows and provide open trash enclosure at the ground level to maintain the openness of the existing light well and to ensure the pg and e line does not come into their yard as well as maintaining a three Story Building by eliminating the fourth story. To date the tent has received no letter in opposition and five letters of support of the project. Planning Department Review of this confirms general support as this conforms to the planning code and residential Design Guidelines with the following exceptions, but first the context enables a three Story Building to sit with the existing predominant scale at the street. Where there are three Story Buildings, the fourth story is setback 15 feet to render its visibility minimally visible. Project matches 70 of the length of the light well of the neighbor to the left with a five foot deep well and the step to massing at the rear extends to the allowable building area at the first floor only and does no encroach further into the adjacent building leaving 60 feet between the rear wall and the neighbors to the rear. The dr request at avila and as such does not pose burden with respect to light to any of the dr requesters property. Facade materials and proportion in detailing is compatible with the character of the surrounding buildings. However, the proximity of the lower rear deck 236 scotts street, it has therefore staff recommends taking the dr and approving with the following modifications, first, setback the second floor deck and forward rail and pair fit five feet from the Property Line and this concludes my presentation, thank you. Thank you. We should hear from the first dr requester. You have five minutes. Good evening commissioners, my name is and my wife aileen and myself are in the three unit building to the north of the five level proposed development in the historic marina area. I have a bachelors degree in architecture and can you pause the time. Can you speak more closely into the microphone so we can hear and commissioners online, thank you. Ive been practice being architecture since 1976 in San Francisco. In 1984 my wife and myself set up our own practice, ashton and associates. A majority of our work did consist of renovation of historic projects. And my credentials allow me to have a perspective on this project. Today i would like to discuss two issues and the first issue is concern of the bulk and mass of the proposed five level structure in a block of two and three Story Buildings and the planning staff directed to this developer and his team and the project is visible from the street. It has no physical definition and it could be one feet, two feet or ten feet. The developer the Developers Architect prepared three dimensional images of the site. But these images show you the definition of minimally visible for the developer. It is from two fixed locations but the building is a three dimensional object and has to be viewed in three dimensional. 3a shows the mass of the building. It towers over the neighbors. indiscernible allowed the neighbors, planners and this commission to through the reality of this mass and bulk of the proposed five levels is to have the developer build the proposed structure with indiscernible . This is done to story poles. Its an inexpensive way to outline the proposed project addition and allow all parties to see reality of what is minimally visible. A request for the solution have been ignored and this confirms for a good reason. I want to ask for this commission is require the developer to build the story poles up to five levels prior to your considering a decision on this project as currently designed. The second issue that i would like to bring up is the citys directive to support more housing. This project will create none. Instead, it potentially take one unit away from the existing two units. The existing ground floor garden level apartment has the living room, a dining room and open kitchen and then it has a bedroom and a full bath and storage area on the ground floor. In the proposed remodel, the building goes out another ten feet and theres a huge entertaining area with a bar and a storage area and then a laundry room and at the request of the Planning Department, these rooms indiscernible so that the storage area became a bedroom and the bar became a full kitchen by putting in the appropriate appliances so all subsequent drawings they have submitted are labeled that way. I would submit to you that it has never been the intent of the street model to retain the two units but instead to build a massive 4,887 singlefamily residence and this is zoned rh3. If the city as mandate for remodel is create more housing then it should encourage this developer to build three units on the lot instead of one massive 4,887foot structure. Thank you. Second dr requester yes, please. Okay. Sfgov, were going to the projector. Im sorry. Im speaking to sfgov, your slides are up. Im David Johnson and homeowner of the adjacent property. Good afternoon, commissioners, im here to oppose the construction of this large oversized out of scale home in this historic residential block. This historical residential block is protected by the master plan and Design Guidelines as an older area of established character. So how did we get here . The Developers Team submitted plans to city planning, city planning staff reviewed those plans and found that this Development Site is located in a distinctive older area of established character and subject to Design Guidelines. This would allow the developer to increase the Building Size to approximately four thousand square feet but additionally had 16 requirements that needed to be full fulfilled and the 4th story and 5th level deck are incompatible with the neighborhood character and scale and the developer it not want to comply with the requirements. So he sought to get an exemption from those design requirements and engage the Consulting Firm of page turnbull. With the issues with page turnbull report aimed at getting the exemptions and one of the problem is it deals with the question, is this site of enormous perspective. The site is not. And completely ignores the more important request of, is this in an area of distinctive older character that should be maintained . Objective two of the general building says past development as represented both by the distinctive buildings and areas of established character must be preserved. I think if you look at this block, most people would agree, distinctive area that should be preserved. Objective four states to conserve design character in historic or distinctive older areas, some uniformity of scale is necessary frm you can see we have the row of twostory homes here and three Story Building beside and the proposed four story five level structure sticking above it. Policy 1. 3. Only an exceptional circumstances where the presence of Important Community facilities should a building stand out prominently. I think for most people walking along scotts street along the row of twostory homes, this five stories, four structure will stick up prominently. The scale of each objective, the scale of each new building must be related to the prevailing height in both bulk and area. Heres the entire joining city block. You can see all are two and three story structures. The only four story structure is the classic historic part building providing 12 dwelling units on the corner on oversized large lot. There is no other such thing in the entire box plat. This is completely out of scale for this particular area and destroys structure. It identified this three story structure here as a four story structure. It actually is a three story structure with stairs to a fourth level roof deck as it is in the City Building department. Youve heard about the rental. The rental thing, you know, everyone would like to see housing in San Francisco but its difficult. These new designs have come in with internal doors. You open the internal doors and the building is the same as singlefamily house or you could choose to close the internal doors and we have no idea what this developer will do. He may rent the premise or sell the premise or use it as one, i have no idea but we come down to the final line. Establishing a new precedent. I have looked through the marina for another area where it has opinion permitted to build a four level home next to a row of go level homes and i couldnt find one where i would like to bring a picture. You find them between a four and three story but the developer says neighbors lots have a 40 foot height limit and neighbors have the right to build to that limit. Ultimately, that will affect the longterm character of the neighborhood. Well, yes. We are helping to create a consistency to the neighborhood. Thats our point. That is why the design protections are written in there. We love the marina the way it is. We like to see people improve, expand the property within guidelines. Thats your time. We who like to see the commission uphold the guidelines and not allow this exception. Sir, you was the first tr requester. Okay. Dave already made their presentation. I was under the impression that [mic is off] you can have as many people you would like to speak but contained within the minute. Theres a two minute rebuttal you can speak to. Im a member of the public. Youre not a member of the public. Youll speak under the rebuttal. Okay. You can leave the mic there. Right now were going to go to the project [mic is off] fine thank you, sir. Were going to move to the project sponsors. Project sponsor, you have ten minutes. Good evening, commissioners. If you can speak into the microphone, thats helpful. Good evening, commissioners. Thank you so much for having us here. I believe mr. Kevlin is remote. Yes, im here, can you hear me. The first time were doing this hybrid. Here we go. [laughter] bring up the slide, please. Good evening, commissioners, john, representing the indiscernible is proposing two story addition to their home in the marina to provide for their growing family to stay in the city to come. The project renovate garden Apartment Unit on the ground floor. The project is one hundred percent code compliant with the surrounding neighborhood. Next slide, please. Ill start at the front. We have three stories at the street, matching the north neighbor. It provides transition to twostory homes in the middle of the block and the barely acceptable here. Next slide, please. Yeah. When looking from, towards the north, youll see that fourth floor is setback far enough, it doesnt indiscernible at the street when you can see it. Next slide. If you look at this view from across the street, its barely visible from across the street and again, it doesnt predominant when further down the street. Next slide, please. As we move to the rear, the project does not max out the redevelopment. We reduced the two story pop out to onestory pop out based on neighbor input and the fourth story has a five foot setback. Next slide. With respect to the roof deck, the roof deck is pulled off the light well. We incorporated roof hatch so theres no enclosure. Its at 300 square feet and setback from the front and rear and it will have transparent guardrails. Next slide, please. The project will not stand out in the marina neighborhood. We have done Extensive Research here. What youre looking at is an outline of the marina neighborhood and the red buildings are four Story Buildings so this wouldnt be out of place in the neighborhood including in the immediate vicinity if you look at the project site thats circled near the center. Theres a number of four stories near there. Next slide. Even within a two block distance from the property, there are six four Story Buildings moving at the top story setback. This is theres more four Story Buildings but theres six four Story Buildings with a four story setback as we have proposed. So this isnt out of character in any way. Next slide. With respect to light air and privacy issue toward your requester, there isnt an issue here. Theres over 50 feet of space that separates the rear wall of each building. If you can see as you can see in the left image, theres major landscaping separating the homes and thats not permanent but thats intended to be continued by syria and marissa. On the right, we have opportune shadow diagrams and the top one is without the landscaping, the bottom one is with landscaping. Both of these are when there are two hours prior to sunset so this is the max shading scenario. Without landscaping, its pretty limited and again, this is only for the last two hours of the day. And then with the landscaping, its really minimal at that point. Because of the existing development, theres not major significant shadow lessening their impact. Next slide, please. So per the staff report, we have incorporated the opec glass into the railing at the third story rear deck. And then what this slide is speaking to is the second floor rear deck side setback. Our original proposal including indiscernible to create separation and privacy with the north neighbor. Next slide, please. Now it has been requested is a five foot setback on the guardrail and this illustrates what that would be. Next slide, please. What were proposing is a fourfoot three inch deep planter at this location. Four feet three inches because that matches where the edge of the window slash doors are on the ground floor and the second floor. So it has got ascetic purpose to it as well as, inhibit the operation of indoor and outdoor space. We think this is we think this is superior for privacy and theyll be a planter in there. Next slide. Cyrus and melissa have support of their five neighbors and with the history of living in this building. The proposed project is consistent with the neighborhood, sensitive to its neighbors and appropriately sized to allow the family to grow in the city for many years to come, thank you. Thank you. Okay. At this time we should open up Public Comment. Members of the public, if you wish to address the commission on this matter, youll have two minutes. If youre in the chambers, come forward. If youre calling in remotely, press star three. Hi commissioners. Nice to see some young faces up here. Hopefully, theyll be new thinking. I live at 3606 scott street. My name is i know its dead on arrival in the process but i think you had good presentations so i ask you to listen carefully. I have one of those twostory homes and i think commissioner moore was on the commission at the time and talked about monster homes in San Francisco and talked about moderate housing pricing. The other day in the paper, we saw the mayor was declining the elimination of middleclass moderate type families leaving San Francisco. I noticed that the Property Owner did not show you the big building across the way that used to be wayne walkers house, it was a twoStory Building and they put a fivestory thing on it. A few weeks ago, some people from texas were going running or the marathon and my wife was sweeping in front and they said how did that get built over there. San francisco is supposed to be sensitive to change and here are people from texas telling San Francisco that has so little taste, that monolithic giant went to a twoStory Building to a five Story Building. The whole block is supported seismically by whats on the corner. If you put more bulk into the center of the block, seismic architects will tell thank you will fail just as it failed in the last earthquake. Please preserve what we have, take off at least one floor, get rid 350 deck. What is he trying to do . Its so foggy down there and so cold. Its ridiculous. Thank you very much for your time. Okay. Seeing no addition members of the public in the chambers, we will go to our remote callers, again, when you hear your line has been unmuted, thats your indication to begin speaking. Hi, this is laura bar. I live just a few blocks away from the family that is proposing this expansion to keep their family here in the city. And we have muchneeded housing in San Francisco and we can agree on that. This isnt out of character anyway. Im a huge architecture nerd and i have an urban planning background and the family followed neighborhood character respectfully and beyond the letter of the code. Im due with my first baby any take now and my family and i want to stay in San Francisco and its hard to do and just to see another blockade to that would be disappointing. Especially attempt to do so that has been done with such care. Lastly, if you havent walked this block, please do. The house is the most up kept in the neighborhood than any family that takes this level of care on details we dont need to, i trust to build well within what they have proposed and do it respectfully to the neighborhood. Thank you. Good afternoon, commissioners and the guests. Thank you for the opportunity to speak with you today. Im here today to voice my support of the applicant and the project and the proposed design thats before us today. My name is matthew and ive been a resident of San Francisco for over 15 years and local Small Business owner and i live with my fouryearold son at 3416 scott street and we live directly across scott street. When i lookout my second floor bay area, i look into the living room of the project. When i look at my wifi home connection, iy their wifi network so you can say were close neighbors. From the beginning, they have been engaging with their plans and sharing with neighbors and listening to feedback and comments. As i understand it, hes made reasonable changes to the design. And made adjustments to satisfy those other interested parties, so i ask for your support in approving the project. One point i want to make that may not have come through with the forms in the paperwork, i have known them for many years and indiscernible when they take something on, they to it the right way and get it done. And since i know theyre the types to count their own achievements, ill do that for them. Cyrus has been involved with numerous construction and Development Projects and a she integrate art. I cant think of a better team to get this project right and integrated within the ascetics of the neighborhood. In closing, the buildings in our neighborhood are not new. They need tender loving care and need upkeep. They need renovation. If the owner is willing to invest their capital, we should be grateful for that. Its unfair for thirdparties to feel the need to put their fingerprint on the design when improvements are indiscernible and works tirelessly to get them right. Thank you, sir. Thats your time. Hi, good afternoon, commissioners and my name is chris and im almost 20 years in San Francisco and homeowner in the city. indiscernible projects like this opposed by couple of neighbors that dont want to be inconvenienced. Theres a number of homes on scott street that conforms to the height density throughout the marina. The project is clearly within the character of the neighborhood. I know weve seen residents leaving the city in droves over the last two plus years. In here, you have an owner with a grower family that has spent two plus years trying to accommodate his neighbors demands so he can stay in San Francisco. Its a rear thing. I keep hearing developers this is an owner and someone who lives here, not a developer. I wish there were more owners who were concerned with improving their neighborhoods than trying to keep things arbitrary indiscernible . Thank you. Hello, my name is noah. Were a neighbor in the marina. And this is my first time attending the meeting you watching how this is going along. This is a great project and indiscernible . And im excited to see it supported. Nothing more frustrating than neighbors having problems and frankly its unquestionable unin. Please let marissa build the property they want to build and and live in the city, thank you. Hi, my name is cassidy. Good afternoon, commissioners. Im grateful to have the opportunity to speak this evening. Im a neighbor and friend to this growing family who has lived and worked in San Francisco for many years for simply making adjustments to their current home and invest their hard earned dollars into that home into their community and into their neighborhood. Its disappointing to see the opposition of this project. I know it has caused them great distress over the pregnancy, birth and infant life of their first son and through whats now a second pregnancy along the way. The opposition of this project seems to be driven by indiscernible at its finest and driven by the partys personal interest to protect an existing structure thats no more architecturally significant than it is historically significant. The design that they have set forth is clearly in good consistency with the neighborhood and its good taste as well and i hope you vote to approve the project today. Hi, thanks for fwifshing me the time to speak in support and my name is alex and i live in the marina at 224 bay street and born and raised in the bay area and lived in the marina for four years and im in support of this applicant. I think this project is attractive and good keeping with the neighborhood. It adds a muchneeded unit of housing to the city and increases living space thats going to keep a family thats staying in San Francisco and permanently provide a family size dwelling to San Francisco. It can be lived in for generations and keep the family in San Francisco, participating in our community and in our schools. And also, invest significantly in the infrastructure of this building with indiscernible and other seismic