The appropriate plantings there and encourage the project sponsor to eliminate the stair penthouse. Second. Commissioner fung . Commissioner moore . Mr. Lum, could you explain why the unit that is on the top, which now gets the roof deck, and i agree with the shaping of the roof deck and the possible elimination of the penthouse, why does it also need to have a deck the lower level . The main level . That is correct. It accentuates we had to do a setback for that because of the 30foot, 10 foot rule that says if you are doing in averaging of the rear, the building cannot be any taller than 30 feet. It has to be setback 10 feet to the 40foot height. The only other choice would be that would be a roof. It doesnt seem like a very nice thing for the living room to look upon. Or the walkable part of the roof would be smaller than bringing the deck all the way to the edge, because i do believe that the utilization of that roof, by a balcony all the way to the edge does not look much more mass
Nice job assessing the project against the citys residential design guidelines, which is the framework that should be assessed. And the other thing i would observe is the abutting neighbors on the east and west seem to support the project. It seems the Planning Department was constructive in terms of bringing people together in an inherently process that we have. I just want to say that intend no disrespect to my neighbors who have concerns and issues about it. Its a small neighborhood and we pass each other so i want to acknowledge to disrespect against their viewpoints and the comments and concerns that they have. So personally, i believe its appropriate to approve the project. Thank you. Next speaker, please. Im in support of this project. We need a lot more housing in the city. This doesnt consolidate lots so it should be approved right away. And right now, in the excelsior homes are selling over a Million Dollars because theres not enough housing for places like the marina. So to
We are serving a population where it wasnt 80 80 are either employed or looking for paid jobs. They are parttime students. Really they are just taking a full close look course load and working parttime. We know theres 26 who to work 26 plus hours. That was a survey that was done in 2019. Having disabilities, being of color, being trans, they are probably the ones working these jobs. If you are giving away access, multiple access to education, they would have to transport themselves to the college and we probably will not have any enrolment. Students will not have access to educations. Is that something we are ready to take away from people . From a population that is already marginalized . I am all for Affordable Housing i grew up living there. This is not aggressive enough. Im sorry, it is public land pick 100 of it should go to Affordable Housing. We know that the cost of land in San Francisco is incredibly high. Why would we privatize it . We should be asking for a more aggressive p
Committee and on the association and im speaking for the board today. I want to address a particular aspect of the environmental report and that is alternative c. Thats opening to vehicular traffic. You want you to urge the Planning Department to support this alternative. As currently planned, there are two openings for vehicular traffic in and out of the reservoir site and a third access point would be provided. Mitigating some of the lockedin nature of the suit. When it was concluded that thisd reduce bottlenecks into the neighborhood and this would extend site traffic and can be acom datad withouaccommodated ig neighborhood. The draft states that opening this would redistribute traffic from ocean avenue and fredda calloway resulting in transit delay and this would provide emergency vehicles better access. Further, it would result project generated Traffic Volume at lee avenue which is identified in the draft report as a troublesome intersection with a lot of projected congestion. In
The project sponsor . Seeing none, Public Comment is closed. I just wanted to say im sorry. Dr requester, you have a twominute rebuttal. I am friends with my neighbor and just now friends with the developer who will never lou here and just to clarify, a lot has been raised about the two neighbors. 25 capra is owned by a Large Institution and some are controversial and so as such, it decided it cannot oppose a developer or project regardless of the merits of the case and 39 capra who has tol told us its waiting to follow precedent and in their case, they look at future development and that makes it all the more important of whats happening to 33 capra because it will be followed next door. My presence here today is not about the impacts but affecting everything in the neighborhood and just happening to be carrying that forward today. Thank you. Dr requester number two. I would like to just make two comments. This is about a lot of people who calm here in support of the project. These ar