Clear, i mean, this is like eight affordable units out of 60. Okay . So its not 18 percent. And even 18 percent is way lower than the mission needs. These large state projects that come under state law you heard about oh we cant do anything about adus because the state says we cant. We cant do anything about this because the state says you cant. Youre widening authority is being constantly narrowed by these state projects that are, these state laws that are one size fits all. And that one size does not fit San Francisco. Youve got to find a way to push back on some of this stuff and particularly in the mission we cant have, you know projects that are done with such low affordability and false data. This project assumes their Traffic Studies or whatever 7 deliveries per day. Seven deliveries per day for 60 units. I get at least one a day myself. You know. Seven deliveries a day. And having adequate accommodation for that . Thats just false data. And its wrong. And it should be reexamine
The city not the project sponsor how section 802, 810a work relative to the replacement the types of trees and what is significant and is that a 36inch box . I had very specific questions. None of which mr. Rich even remotely touched on. So and i mean this is your problem but that was not what i originally asked. And none of that has been responded to at all, which is why i nicely said that mr. Richs comments were not wholly satisfactory. But proceed. Ill touch on a couple of things. As mr. Rich did say supervisor peskin, we are not at a level of plans yet. So i couldnt tell you the exact size of the boxes that will be put back in. But the street trees, as you mentioned, there are 15 existing street trees along california street that were referenced earlier. They are new Zealand Christmas trees. Those trees will be removed and replaced around the site perimeter with 88 new street trees. The street trees along california that were referenced are going to match the street trees that were
They do not work. Thank you mr. Miguel. We have a shared concern over parking. In lieu. Thank you, supervisors. Im here to im excited to be here today because it sounds like we have a couple of things in common we all want our housing, we all love trees. That is some place start from. Where some of us differ, i live down the street at california and arguello, im wholeheartedly supportive of this development. Every weekend i have a choice of my 2yearold daughter, do i go down to the commercial corridor on clement street, or do i go down to Laurel Heights . Every single weekend i choose the clement Street Commercial corridor or because Laurel Heights does not offer the commercial diversity, or the vibrancy, that is needed to make Laurel Heights even better. I would love to see this Development Gets built so that once i have more than one child and i have two have other apartments in my neighborhood, where i could stay. Whereas there is a low amount of apartments in our neighborhood. I wh
Replace any removed trees with were going to go for an evergreen species that opens the canopy and allows for more visibility while maintaining the ficus trees and maintaining visibility. Here is a diagram of how we expect to work. I hope its readable. It maps out on hyde and grove street the Maintenance Area for taking care of the existing grove and the several areas that the library is committed to start right away building new planting areas on fulton street and right over the entrance to brooks hall. Then we want to explore together with public works and bars, there are triangles of land that we may be able to cultivate with sheet mulching. We also are showing areas where the trees will be replaced. The sixthfloor patio is a very good candidate for more greening as well. So in terms of demonstrating commitment by setting up the these okay. 30 seconds. 30 seconds. Okay. I further outline the steps in more detail, but basically what were asking tonight is that we modify this permit t
Presentation again. Its confusing. I read this and i was appalled. Because what i see, because i have a background a little bit in commercial real estate sure. I see upper plaza looking to enhance the value of their property selfishly, and i say that again, selfishly. This one has the value of the building because they can bring customers to upper plaza while people are charging their cars, they can sell more condos or rent more apartments or have more people come to the movies or retail or whatever. So i see that. And then i see tesla having a convenient location, im not doubting your points of view, to sell more cars. And then i see the citizens of the city of San Francisco compromised because they lose more trees in an already overly deforested canopy. I dont get it. I dont get it at all. And then you didnt answer the question or the question that i heard. Did you look at other sites in San Francisco that would not deforest San Francisco, that would not result in compromising the ur