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.
That integrating your business into the community. But overall, i would say i think the move to open up the space to the public to create a restaurant in this space that can truly be serving of all different interests and members of the community is actually a step in the right direction. And so i would move to not take dr and approve the project. Thank you. So i will also be not supportive of this dr. Let me just add to your wise words, commissioner johnson. You are always so on point. That i think, you know, we have seen all kinds of changes in our neighborhoods. Resulting from income disparity. And, you know, its hard to see sort of the effects in terms of displacement, loss of cultural space and accessibility. I dont believe this project does any of these things. I also think that theres been a real shift in the last ten years in terms of whats viable for restaurants and retail. I think theres been a sort of seismic shift. I wish we lived in a world where having pinball machines an
Will remind you that in addition to considering the project the inkind agreement regardless of whether or not it gets approved or otherwise needs to be continued. And we would propose december 12. Ill accept the motion for the inkind agreement going to december 12. We can handle that with other you dont have to take that up separately. We can combine that with the project. Theres no other speakers here. I just wanted to be sure to what pushed me over the edge on this one was the prioritizing of the spanish emerging childcare. I witnessed two speakers up here with translators speaking as employees in favor of this project. I also heard some of the opposition saying that this group was displaced. So that kind of put me over the edge on this one. Commissioner fung. Starting perhaps with the things that are in my mind a little easier, there were a few points brought up regarding the design, regarding conforming to codes and i didnt see anything in there in looking at that reflects a challe
About back here about 7 45, please. Thank you we are ready. Okay. Please be seated. Welcome back to the november 6, 2019 meeting of the San Francisco board of appealing. We are now on item number 7. This is appeal number 19085. Our mission no eviction versus the Planning Commission subject property is 344 shortstop 14th street, appealing the issuance to mm stevenson llc of planning code section 329 large project authorization. Adopting findings relating to a large project authorization for the project proposing new construction of a sevenstory, 78 feet at all mixed use residential building measuring 84,630 square feet with 5,890 square feet of ground floor retail use and 606 dwelling units consisting of four studio units, 25 twobedroom, two bathroom units which would utilize the code section 6591565918 and invoke waivers from the Development Standards for rear yard pursuant to section 134 usable open space 135 and height, planning code 268. Record number 2014. 0948. I need to make a di
The inkind agreement regardless of whether or not it gets approved or otherwise needs to be continued. And we would propose december 12. Ill accept the motion for the inkind agreement going to december 12. We can handle that with other you dont have to take that up separately. We can combine that with the project. Theres no other speakers here. I just wanted to be sure to what pushed me over the edge on this one was the prioritizing of the spanish emerging childcare. I witnessed two speakers up here with translators speaking as employees in favor of this project. I also heard some of the opposition saying that this group was displaced. So that kind of put me over the edge on this one. Commissioner fung. Starting perhaps with the things that are in my mind a little easier, there were a few points brought up regarding the design, regarding conforming to codes and i didnt see anything in there in looking at that reflects a challenge to the overall project. In terms of how this project res