Insufficient or inadequate. They believe the circumstance eirs were not enough as well as a different project to be approved. Sequa requires study of a reasonable range of potentially feasible alternatives, promoting informed decisionmaking and public participation. Here, the eir presented circumstance alternatives including two full preservation and too preservation alternatives. Lhias position is that ten alternatives should have been study. This is unnecessary and not required by sers qua. Sequa. This contains the legally required reasonable range and provides ample information for analysis and consideration by you, the decision makers. And for an additional alternative not in the eir to be legally ar required, it must be different from those presented in the eir and must clearly lessen the projects significant impacts. On the last day of the Public Comment period, lhia submitted narratives and sketches for two projects and followed up with two more after the final er was published
Reduce loading impacts as dwell times for trucks and loading times would be reduced so they could get in and out of the building. This is not sequa issue. The appellant fails to meet the burden that the record supports reversal of the Planning Commission and dpw. It did not and cannot provide evidence in support of its evidence. The records supporting the determinations is thorough consisting of multiple years of study and analysis and based on facts and evidence rather than argument and infect allegation. Speculation. This project will transform and underutilized wallofftioff tens sites with 744 new homes. , 185 affordable units for seniors, childcare uses and neighborhood serving retail and commercial uses. We ask you reject these appeals and move forward today. Thank you, supervisors. Thank you. Any questions . I have a question of the proje project, is there a reason why it was infeasible to make a family unit affordable . So this project through the Development Agreement, it was d
Consistent with the policies and objectives of the citys general plan. The appeal also demands specific modifications to the project including the following. Limiting the height and modifications to the reuse Center Buildings and a reduction of the new building near laurel and euclid to preserve more open space and further limits on the types of nonresidential uses proposed. Related to the height of the Center Buildings, the Planning Commission supported the overall scale including the height because their placement in the center of the site set back from the public rights of way was a project objective. The project would place shorter buildings along the perimeter between 40 and 65 feet to serve the transition to the taller buildings in the center. A reduction in height of the Center Building would result in a reduction in dwelling unit count or to keep the unit count consistent, 744, and increase to other proposed New Buildings along the perimeter and compromising the compatibility.
Approving this project. You could not be looking at a more appropriate project. The site is currently occupied by a genuinely on pre, sit and significance suburban office of his building which should have never been constructed in a residential neighborhood. It is a great place to put housing. You also have an excellent sponsor. I am personally and professionally up acquainted with the sponsor. He and i worked together, many years ago, when he was starting his career. We worked for a Company Whose job was to invest on behalf of pension funds, including the pension fund and the city and county of San Francisco. Due to their enlightened leadership in our hard work, we made a lot of money for that pension fund. Your retirees are more financially secure, as a result of our efforts. I am very proud of that. I am aware of his work, i am aware of i have watched it throughout their growth growth. They are a group, they have a significant axis two resources to complete this project on time, wit
Were required to go for lead goal on this project and meet as many features as possible in the budget. This is an emergency staging site right now. That combined with the fact that we are serving youth is driving us to go for a more robust, seismic performance standard. This shows the landscape. We worked with the trust for public land along side the studio. Playground here. Its anticipated that the ground floor multipurpose room would be largely youth serving. So theres visibility between the multipurpose room as well as the Basketball Court out to the playground. The idea was that the outdoor Basketball Court could also serve as a platform for festivals. There are a lot of festivals at this site currently. There could be movie nights and other things in the future. Here are some precedent images. There are some concrete steps above the court, again allowing for viewing and an informal hanging out space for the older youth. Some benches and we anticipate a mix of some playground struc