husband as he woke in the night. family members are a vital part of the care time. modern hospital provide comfortable spaces for them. we can t do that in our outdated buildings. we certainly could in new facilities. patients at the st. luke s and other campuses are hospitalized in vulnerable buildings when they themselves are at their most vulnerable. i would like to advocate for a city and its unemployed workers as well as for our patients, portions of the van ess corridor are moribund. the buildings would provide jobs and would serve to revitalize this area. for the sake of our patients, our workers and our city, please approve this plan, thank you. president fong: thank you. next speaker, please. my name is barbara savitz. i would like to leave you with this thought. commissioners, you are dealing with a corporation whose c.e.o. alone made $4 million last year, yet he can t agree to a community benefits package which would enable the new hospital to be built with more
we will hear about another development on that street. my only concern with this project is the number of parking spaces allocated. at 0.65, this is a walkable city but we can get it right. people are walking and parking in other neighborhoods. i urge the committee to think about a one-to-one ratio in retail parking. it is not above consideration. it is a request to consider it and to think about the people who believe in this neighborhood and have been living in it for a while and wanted to change. thank you. and want it to change. thank you. commissioners, i am david meckel. i have taught architecture and urban science for 25 years. our campus as you saw on the maps is separated from this project by one city block. the project sponsors have worked closely with us in our neighboring community. demonstrating an impressive level over rage over five years. unlike anything i have seen in the neighborhood. i am here to support the approval and draft motion adopting the ceqa
force to blocks away. we will hear about another development on that street. my only concern with this project is the number of parking spaces allocated. at 0.65, this is a walkable city but we can get it right. people are walking and parking in other neighborhoods. i urge the committee to think about a one-to-one ratio in retail parking. it is not above consideration. it is a request to consider it and to think about the people who believe in this neighborhood and have been living in it for a while and wanted to change. thank you. and want it to change. thank you. commissioners, i am david meckel. i have taught architecture and urban science for 25 years. our campus as you saw on the maps is separated from this project by one city block. the project sponsors have worked closely with us in our neighboring community. demonstrating an impressive level over rage over five years. unlike anything i have seen in the neighborhood. i am here to support the approval and draft mot
areas. with those ordinances which were endorsed by the planning department staff and the commission, they said we will give exceptions for active use under narrow circumstances. one would be a historic building. you cannot alter the facade. the other would be a building where you have a very steeply sloping site. the only place to put required parking would be towards the front of the building. none of those conditions prevail here. the project sponsor is asking you to grant an exception for a not for a good reason. there is no criteria for this exception but we think this apartment should look to the ordinances that prevail elsewhere in the city. here is the narrow circumstances under which we would consider this. none of the parking that would be pushed up is required. no parking is required. there are not in the seismic conditions or a historic building. we ask that you it is fine if you want to do the other exceptions. this use requirement under 329 we do not think is
shaft. those did not show up on drawings we had seen. we are wondering if the community groups that did sign on for this project are aware of the horrendous height. this is 72 feet to 84 feet. something may be familiar with that we did in 2006 was our balloon test. this is where we flew balloons at an 85-foot height. we extrapolated where the existing zoning was and where the new zoning would be and we ended up with 68 feet. it is very large. even if the colors to go toward the color of the background, the high rises, you see how it overwhelms everything that is there. this is not mission bay. this is the other side of the freeway. this is not mission square. we have the height of the brick buildings. this is porterville potrero hill. we want to meet with the developer and get a project we can all be proud of. president olague: thank you. good afternoon, commissioners. executive director of global city. there s a lot to like about this project. some of the open space st