for continuance inadvertently the yosemite fish patch is continued was left off the calendar it is being continued indefinitely and will be renoticed for the benefit of the public further on your calendars commissioners item 15 for case on rosie after a discretionary review it has been withdrawn and will not be considered on today's agenda i have nothing further you might want to take public comment. >> on public comment no items proposed for continuance. >> seeing none, public comment is closed. thank you. >> commissioners that place us under consideration of the definite minutes for july 16, 2015 i have i have no speaker cards. >> okay. any public comment on draft minutes? seeing none, public comment is closed commissioner moore >> we received an e-mail regarding is an omission on the minutes i didn't receive a copy of draft minutes myself and no notification i hope other commissioners pay attention to the e-mail and just want to bring it to our attention. >> we checked that they're on is july 2nd and 16 that was requested by rose hill. >> commissioner richards move to approve. >> thank you, commissioners on that motion to do you want the minutes commissioner antonini commissioner hillis commissioner moore commissioner richards commissioner wu and commissioner president fong so moved, commissioners, that motion passes unanimously 6 to zero and places you on item 2 commissioner questions or comments. >> commissioner antonini. >> thank you. i'm reading a very interesting book it was published maybe thirty years ago on chiropractor bucking will i the blind boss of san francisco and about the period from the 18 percent 50s to 1890 among the things discussed with the consolidation act of 1956 that was the time when the city and county of san francisco were consolidated into one unit and fortunately part of that san francisco was extended to the line between what is now san mateo county and sacking county was eliminated and the line for san francisco county was established where it currently is and has by a do effects as we now realize we're constricted in our land at that time that was lots of land that is now san francisco and there was a fear that the smaller town for identification what is now san mateo county would be a burden they especially\want to have to deal with instead of having a separate county in a straight decide for efficient to combine the two sometimes efficiency is a great thing but hindsight is always 50/50 but no way of knowing done at a state level and certainly something that what about revisited in the city any unincorporated county part of the san francisco might not be the worst thing to pursue we ask we adjourn today unfortunately jim meekly could i think other commissioners want to make remarks and rosa are a was the leader of a wonderful institution it this i would have the skills in english for pupils and vocal training that was a wonderful thing she was a wonderful san franciscan for the mission district so adjourn in here memory. >> commissioner moore. >> i'd like to ask that we close in memory of jim meekly could today he passed away on the evening of august 3rd and all of us including many of the people in the audience everybody knew jim he spoke passionately in front of that commission on many many issues effecting the community and very recently he spoke on an issue the 5 foot commercial retail space in the fulsome corridor he hope we find a way i don't have the the evidence will then show but to dedicate those 5 feet to the jim meekly could who was 5 feet jim was a tireless community leader in support ever everything south of market and spoke on the entertainment commission it was critical the continuation of ballets by the entertainment users would stay south of market he served on the chip council his hand is very, very visual in the selma western selma community he was a member of the san francisco neighborhood network for about his it was extremely important to collective speaking of the neighborhood in front of us he was a county organizer i personally like the word the chronicle they called him a community hero in 2011 pdr was big on his list the continuation of small businesses and the perpetuation of artists south of market jim was a supporter of the use in the family zone at this point was a quiet voice to help them really stand in front of of us with their support to be heard and i couldn't - i could speak about him in so many ways we all remember him it was recently, i see him being here it is hard for me to know he's not here anymore. >> commissioner richards. >> yeah. i'd like to piggyback on what commissioner moore said for those who want to look at jim it is an page 11 in the reporter and points on how i felt about jim we almost agreed on everything he came from a place it was hard to follow his heart he had the community spirit in mind i'm proud to call him a member of the lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgenders some times that was hard to deal with we spared on the garages on fulsome street and fortunately, we voted to put them on the alley he had a conversation he understood what i we were coming from i think where south of market the western selma a huge part of jim's for not i appreciate adjourning the meeting in his meeting and commissioner antonini is good at drawing parallels from seattle in a good way and a challenging way that san francisco is just a number of cranes in the sky and there's still like us struggling keeping a vibrant struggle and a new vibrant city so i have one related important question for the zoning administrator sanchez it is yesterday maybe even as of latin last night how old were you. >> i was 39. >> how old are you this morning. >> 39 plus one. >> happy birthday. >> (clapping.) oh. >> commissioner moore. >> happy birthday i want to comment on a memo updating us on 620 mission the colleague wrote a very good summary on the status of us trying to monitor the rooftop on those building the addressing of all the issues before checking no complainants and indeed it is operating as planned and as a good thing so thank you colleague grove that is a very good report. >> commissioners, if there's nothing further we can move on to to department matters item 3 directors announcements. >> good afternoon, commissioners sarah jones i'm acting planning directing director awhile john ram racked in italian. >> item 4 past events of the board of appeals and the historic preservation commission. >> good afternoon, commissioners and happy birthday zoning administrator at this weeks land use hearing the assessor dwelling unit in district 3 and 8 we are heard to permit a dwelling units in district 3 and 8 for july 16th and voted 4 to 2 to approve the modification at first land use commission to supervisor kim introduced 3 amendments that apply to both ordinances they prohibit the conduction of adu's while the tenants have been displaced in 10 years it passed and to short-term rentals this amendment passed to supervisor wiener voting against it and prohibited the condominium conversion or fractional ownership to be used as rent-controlled units and reich it for vinyl sales sxh voted against it the third was for your review and consideration in a duplicated file at this week's hearing the ellis act prohibition as the the adu's apply to all the adu's for the retrofitted use they were referred to the xhuks commission supervisor cowen made an amendment to require the department to monitor the adu's and require applicants to indicate in their complications whether or not they intend to use the short-term rentals along with supervisor cowen were recommended to the full board next the land use commission was the seery in the south of market district this was sponsored by supervisor kim the ordinance will allow the accessory use for the live performance in the western south of market be mixed use the planning commission heard the item on july 16th and recommended approval at the lufgs supervisor wiener spoke in favor and doovment the eating and drinking establishments to provide eating and drink no comment by a unanimous vote it was recommended to the full board and the balance report was continued to september 1st at the full board of supervisors the legalization informative secondary dwelling units passed it is second street for dproupg allowing the existing restaurants to open a second location with the conditional use and pass it is second reading the prohibition on the proposed quarter special use passed its second reading a public hearing on the negative declaration for the landfill open landfill in the county was continued until september 29th and a public hearing for the tentative math was heard this appeal last filed based on a chartering of the issues that the planning department should have been brought up during the process after a short hearing the appellant was not here the vote as upheld for the map and finally both the adu ordinance for into districts 3 and 8 passed their first reading there was 3 introductions last week the first one was for new restaurants and bars in the north beach special district supported pie julie christensen and to allow the dialog light displays and sponsored by the mayor and the new citywide transportation sponsored by 3 supervisors that concludes my presentation. thank you. >> before the deserve gets into his summary of the board of appeals those people standing in the room need to find a seat or go to room 416 that is an overflow room you'll view those premiers otherwise you're creating a fire hazard thank you thank you. the board of appeals meet last night first there was two appeals related to the project on 1050 valencia the permits for excavation for the valet that goes go the go sidewalks to power the building and the items were not heard two other items presidio avenue was before you the discretionary review at the beginning of the year the board - the commission didn't take discretionary review it went to the board of appeals and last night it was approved and lastly on b street that was before you a couple of years ago was brought before you browner inform question of at the hearing the commission took doctor and wanted to commission to work with the staff to reduce the awe illustrate the stair penthouses and reduce the railings that was appealed to the board of appeals after this hearing and the board upheld a permit during the addenda review that he came back with the points they increased the height because of the type of mechanic equipment that was required this was something that was i believe dictated by the review of the permit and dbi our staff approved that and there were concerns by neighborhood we suspended the permit for the addenda i request a release the suspension i issued that was appealed bit the neighbors last time it was uphold and for the concerns of the change that was made during the addenda process i'll continue to work with the project manager half a revised to from the 14, 6 now between 11 foot two and 12 foot 8 they've worked as much as they can and ways to further minimize it and mr. pacheco served as the legal assistant has moved ton to increase under and victor has a long history of the board of appeals and many of us may have encountered he's a wonderful guy to work be he left last week. >> commissioners on behalf of the kroerntd that was a brief meeting at the preservation mission on university street the old ladies home was issued for landmarking and commissioners, if there's nothing further we'll move on to to general public comment at this time, members of the public may address the commission to the public that are within the subject matter jurisdiction of the commission except agenda items. with respect to agenda items, your opportunity to address the commission will be afforded when reached in the meeting. each member of the public may address the commission up to three minutes. i do have two speaker cards. >> great, thank you. >> georgia and john. >> good afternoon, commissioners i have been here before talking about the alterations that are demos in noah valley i'll talk about that but i think interest is something that is happening because of that those alterations that are demos a lot of those buildings are doing huge excavations called iceberg calm unfortunately, the area that is taking a hit the mid block open space here's one overhead please this is under construction now you can see all the cement back there because it dug down they have the basement area there the living space the bonus room and this well and upstairs this is all cement this is the close thing to see and the finished one i saw earlier in open house and it is just a patio mates like the easter rabbit grass you get in our easter basket that is kind of what is going on this is the blow back of the excavation we're losing when i and you call the traditional mid block open space in our residential neighborhoods because in part because of the excavations the marketing is where they're making the yard part of the house not a william thing you feel nature but we'll have this sort of extension of the house to charge for this is something i've noticed what i my suggest is the following the 311s needs more details and the plans in the 311s need more detail on the front of the 311 show the square footage of the increase sometimes hidden in the plants but hard to find i think the neighbors and you guys need to see that i think you're doing residential guidelines all those things have an - are sort of should be looked at introduce the residential guideline performance so any incision you somehow put a hold on the alterations until your staff has the residential guidelines before you and before the neighborhood so we can see what the new residential guidelines are thank you. >> good afternoon, commissioners i'm john your consortium i'd like to directing your attention this afternoon to the 2050 bryant project in the mission and in particular the proposed categorical exemption from the battle man review the exemptions are intended for projects that clearly are in substantial compliance with the zoning and overall zoning and continued of the district 2050 bryant is the simple largest parcel in the lou lou it is supposed to be a district intended to promote and vibrant mix of used for the formally industrial zone area tha this is what it says in our planning code when i look at the numbers you're getting a project that demolishes 65 feet of pdr space existing and provide none in a new project and instead would 98 percent residential now no literate human being in that room in the city or any court can look at those numbers and say therefore this project promotes and a a vibrant use and maintains the vibrant uses clearly clearly this project is a complete opposite of the u zoning is supposed to succeed and deliver we are on the table we don't bluff if this categorical exception is approved by this commission and huldz by appeal in by the board we'll take it to court it is claerlz not in substantial compliance we'll take to court we want to set an example that exemptions are not handed 80 out to developers their supposed to mean something the damage is real rule are your 5 m an amendments they're the best parts of e.r.'s but in a month or so clearly there is such a thing some of the pdrs can be are you presently employed and housing built there is objective a mixed use alternative not before you the reason is because there's a categorical exemption that was proposed you turn that project done and make them do it right we'll talk about a real project there thank you. >> any other general public comment that is. >> good afternoon, commissioners my name is holly friedman's on july 23rd you heard from several of my potrero hill neighbors that stood before i and asked to stoop the explosion without the necessity support of infrastructure i'm here today to echo those words and ask once again for you to act now a little bit about me, i'm a public transit riders since i've lived in potrero hill my daily continuity from covet to downtown is 50 minutes from thirty minutes that's because of the increase in the number of people using that route and the partial roadway mta add the new line the 55 bus that serves east and west from mission to mission bay not serving the residents when work in san francisco and ged need to get downtown or need transit for outside of the city to live here in addition that committee the commission reviewed many eirs for housing development in potrero hill most of the eirs included transit studies those transit studies you've read recently that have been presented before you that transit is got a grade of f and failing i'm really trying to understand why the commission finds that acceptable and where intersections are currently at a failing grades of f i'm concerned that this is deteriorating the air quality and the safety of the pedestrians last time i stood before the commission in june, i was here to discuss the eir and provided my comments for 1601 mariposa street is a across from jackson park and surrounds live oak schools many of the commissioners here spoke felt improvements they'd like to see in that development those include the benefits for the potrero hill residents i want to make you windfall aware since you've reviewed the initial eir they've resubmitted their plan the developers have resubmitted their plans without community input i ask you take into consideration when you review the revised plans with the minimal changes you saw overflow room you have those to influence the developments and to really change and put forth the developments that matter the most thank you. >> is there any additional public comment? >> good afternoon, commissioners my name is shawna homeownership on potrero hill i'd like to present a general public comment about the explosive development around potrero hill the theme a past approvals by the commission and planning department have aggregated and now negatively impact our neighborhood 3 things i'd like to talk about the cumulative impacts, traffic gridlock and the eastern neighborhoods plans it is obsolete and voted on by this commission the cumulative impacts have routinely been ignored by city planning and misrepresent the eastern neighborhoods final eir the fact if the city already has more units in the piecemeal for the show place square have anticipated to be built by 2025 we're way over the projections firearm the city failed to find the extra improvements to support this growth the assumption that cumulative impacts have limited impacts is no longer try i along with the neighbors strongly believe now is the time for considering a moratorium on having newly proposed projects before we get the 5 thousand new residents already for housing in the pipeline and for the thousands of new employees and ucsf sxhas the nearby kaiser openly in 2016 and the visitors to be to the medical centers that use the same potholes roads and the unimproved 280 freeway grants second thing traffic gridlock i'd like to share a photograph from this morning. >> if i could pick up that is good. >> this is mariposa approaching 230z on ramp recently with the new ucsf hospital and is launch the new residential building an explosion in vehicle traffic gridlock along mariposa and 7th street between potrero hill as the civic center and the rail 16th street street when the crossing gates come down for the trains passing in conclusion, i ask you read the eastern neighborhood plan adopted in 2008 recognizing the projections for 2025 have been exceeded. >> tony vice president of the neighborhood association and following up on the neighbors for two weeks ago you've been eagerly hearing from the mission about the same issued or issues of the issues in the eastern neighborhoods as a whole especially on infrastructure and affordable housing two weeks ago alison shared a spreadsheet showing more than 6 thousand units approvals in the pipeline and showing showcase i'm going to focus on the projects approvals according to the commissioner cavanes that commission has approved more than 32 hundred hountsz in the showcase square and the dog patch how many of those units are affordable to san franciscans 5 hundred and 27 and one quarter is offsite mitigation in a project in potrero the number is really 12 percent let's do the math very fast you have tons of data about affordable housing and what we need to actually make progress on affordable housing for our city and by any metrics why a bag or your own housing elements or your own eir for the eastern neighborhoods by any metrics the decision of this commission and city hall are over building the potrero and dog patch to the neighborhoods and under delivering on infrastructure and affordable housing every single approval you do every thursday we fall further and further behind and harder to catch we need a cultural shift of the type projects that are worthy of approving it is policy choices that created that rezoning to create a land rush and minimize to bring in developers and the financing started in the eastern neighborhoods were predict a price of infrastructure our only way out to dedicated funding through the budget process inform build the neighborhoods if we get to a hearing he urge you to have your staff make an estimate of the increased operational in the eastern neighborhoods now to 2035 the estimate of that operational and general fund was hundred and $20 million for 15 years two things we were way overbuilding and two prices are a way up that hundred and $20 million is hundred of millions of more far belief what we're claimed for the mitigations in eastern neighborhoods thanks for listening i hope there is more to come from your side. >> good morning, everyone. commissioners i'm diane i have an administrative looking at the agenda and the items many of them have multiple parcels listed on this yet where the public will get up to speak about the project so taking into consideration those are huge some of those are huge projects with multi facets maybe need more time to taxi hope to taking into consideration as the calendar roles thank you. >> any additional general public comment general public comment is closed. >> commissioner richards. >> a couple of points thank you for coming out again another week in the residential guidelines are the rear yards considered with the 10 foot fences with the changes in the guidelines would be forthcoming that fall. >> i don't know about the details but under the county guidelines the massing the building the concerns of fences may not be dealt with as art fully as could and the current guidelines but i'll discuss when a with the current staff. >> perhaps instead of waiting for the residential guidelines by modify them to come out maybe a quick informational before the commission so desires we can get an idea of the changes. >> that is for the planning department staff. >> i am glad ms. jones we've heard about the eir for ooefrmz showcase and potrero hill a full up calling for an x amount of units can you comment how the process works what is covered and the process i'm a little bit unclear on that. >> excuse me. certainly that is a point that we have been hearing in the environmental planning as well just to give a brief explanation for a complex issue the eastern neighborhoods eir contained projections that we used for certain tops for the impact analysis so for some of the topics in the eir we were not looking at the full build out of the area but used a projection of expected growth so we have been running our numbers and checking the growth against what was projects in the eastern neighborhoods plan we do have a lot of development in our pipeline and when you pull it altogether in some of the areas we're approaching those numbers there were projected so not the full build observed but projected in the eir so for that we will be and are unsettling the environmental review to consider the impacts more than projected growth. >> thank you. >> commissioners, if there's nothing further we can move on to your regular calendar and that place us on item 5 the transportation sustainability program an informational presentation. >> good afternoon, commissioners adam from the department staff allison park give a brief introduction to the t fta multi agency to accommodate new growth in the city i'm joined by the department who will be making the presentation as well as victor wise from the mta that effort has been multi agency effort involving the mayor's office and planning and ct a we'll talk about the components of the transportation sustainability program with a focus on the transportation sustainability fee it is aaron star mentioned was introduced at the board of supervisors recently and we'll be back on september 10th to have an action item before you on the c ordinance and other items will come back to you at a future hearing date if i could have the power point presentation please anyone that is on your streets or transit today knows the system is extremely stranger people want to be here but we have we have a long way to go and as many of you may know the city is projected to grow substantially over the next thirty years and a significant amount of growth is in the pipeline this further excuse me. furthers increased the number of transportation system straining our radios roadways fortunately, the city has been working to deliver the improvements to help people continue to move through the city as quickly as possible and wear asking our development community to be partners in helping to achieve the transportation network percentage we need so the cf t keeping people moving in a sustainable way as the city gross the program has 3 convenes the ferries will change outing how the city analyze under ceqa and second will a program to work to help to manage the transportation demand from the new development and the thirds aspect of the program expands our transportation to a residential use so we go ahead get the funding to complete the streets improvements and as i mentioned we'll be back in accepted to talk about the b component of the program with the other aspects to cover later i'm going to turn it over to talk about the first two convenes of the program. >> good afternoon, commissioners my name is wade department staff power point please i'll start by talking about level of service a metric use to measure the transportation impacts of projects subject to the ceqa this reform is happening at the state level as the known as senate bill 743 the senate bill says the metric for transportation analysis under ceqa can't be used and that an alternative metric so be established it is how many seconds a driver waits at the intersection involving the analysis it is inconsistent with other election or protections of the environment it is bias against growth and didn't resolve outcomes for the transportation system including the safety outcomes therefore the state is proposing removing and level of service and replacing that with a vehicle travels i'll begin that by making this change at the state level improves the land use and transportation prongs for land use project the sate is proposing to compare to vehicle miles traveled i'll touch base and what that means for san francisco but the notes on the slide summarizes the outcomes for the transportation projects the state is proposing those promotions the next decrease will not result if significant environmental impact report it is critical that the city can deliver transportation projects quickly as you've heard from general public comment to accommodate the level of service reform makes that happen sooner. >> this slide illustrates the vehicle miles traveled it is measuring the amount and distance that a project might cause people to driving a great dance located with poor access to non-automobile modes of travel the metric provides a better indication of the environmental performance than the level of serves as green house gas and energy. >> so as mentioned previously the state is proposing to compare the vehicle miles traveled to the region average the region is the 9 counties of the san francisco bay area this slide the table compares san francisco with a regional average with the vehicle miles traveled per cappa san francisco is doing quite well compared to the region given the diversity and transit and other factors that effect travel behavior this is a good indication that most land use projects will generate a substantially lower amount of miles traveled how in the city we want to do better than status quo and i'm going to discuss a way we my be able to do that. >> one way to implement transportation demand management measures or onsite management amenities that reduce the driving alone and provide for travel options those are expand what is required simple bicycle and car share parking the goal to shift travel from new development to more sustainable modes awhile creating more predictability during the process so that the city is working on the t d m developing a choices for the developers to implement and quantifying the effectiveness of those measures at different locations in san francisco when is based on the research and the various sites throughout the city and like all good policy efforts a monitoring mechanism this monitoring entails the developers are implementing the measures and the program is effects so this slide indicates t d m programs and or their implementing voluntarily by developers given the mandatory demand for those measures if we're going to ask the developers to implement persons to travel other than the automobile we need to fund that shift in the transportation system so my colleague lisa chang will discuss how to do that. >> good afternoon, commissioners lisa with the planning certification the third component insuring we have the resources to build out your transportation so the city can grow and prosper you're as adams mentioned we have a robust of policies in improving our transportation system to make sure that the people can travel easily, however, those investments carry a high costs the mayors task force said we need to invest $3.7 billion in the funds in the task force identified $3 billion of potential funds from prop a that passed last fall a few licenses fee and state of the art the t f p includes a transportation sustainability fee or t f s introduced by supervisor wiener and sponsored by mayor ed lee and supervisor yee and supervisor christensen development will pay for his fair share of impacts most of the funding identified through the transportation task force earnestly focuses on the transportation system making the capital improvements for the efficiency the t f s to serve the demand by new growth of course we do have an existing transportation fee the transit impact development fee that politics to non-residential projects that replaces that and expands the market rate and individual development smaller institutions that exempt under the process it was oeshl proposed in 2012 we've made a lot of changes including the nexus study both available on the project website the nexus study identifies the justifiable charge based on what it costs the city and the feasibility study helped to determine what fee tomato misses revenues wiring - this could support a new fee that translates to 9 hundred - we find that the fee could support it basically $4 more than what we pay currently pdr uses pay what they do now the residential projects will receive a fee reduction offsetting some of the alleged costs here's more detail who it applies to in addition to the non-restricted residential use to market rate development of 21 unions or more it will exempt affordable housing that includes the restricted low income and hundred restrictive projects and small businesses and snail nonprofits and 20 units or fewer nonprofits universities will be subject to the t s f and exempted if the fee until the seismic is mrelthd subject to the board it includes the gathering to provide the reef for the developments in the pipeline they may not have incorporated the fees they have received their entitlements will pay all fees including the existing t d i f for the projects in the pipeline not received their entitlements they have 50 percent or $3.87 we are square feet non-t d f will pair their fee it will raise over $23 billion in 3 years this represents new transportation money or $14 million annually it goes to a variety of transportation improvements the bulk to update the muni fleet to reduce travel time and go to upgrade the busiest bart expenditure plan includes funds for bart and caltrans and street improvements to make biking and walking safer here are the relative amounts of the fee allotment the bulk of the revenues over 90 percent will support the transportation reliability looking forward we've been working to begin the outreach and currently work to support the adoption policy process we anticipate the other to ex officio two components will come forward i should note the timing of the ceqa is do not say issues we expect this winter in collection we welcome our feedback on this proposal thank you. >> any public comment on this item? >> thank you for the opportunity i have some expertise in transportation planning active quite a bit normally one looks at the goods and services intended to be glorified by anticipated by the expert planners that is lacking you have to deal with the people designations that's not part of study you take the plan indeed where people are or will be and service them you're only concern with the mechanics then the best way to deal with an empty seat eliminate the passengers or run dogcarts and put the busses into use as affordable housing that is not expertise you're getting mechanics operations my background is on policy in general with battling and pittsburgh and detroit a few other places and a background at the university of the michigan and pennsylvania this should be enough. >> sue hester this was the first fee that was post prop 13 t d i f came from the labor unions and communities residential committee because we taken a major hit on parkinson one of the driving forces who had a seat on the planning commission because of this job you are going really fast for this and you're cutting out the public public has a lot to say you had people from potrero hill earlier on public comment one of the driving forces for frustration of people dealing with the eastern neighborhoods is a tailor haven't been an increase in transportation transit particularly and muni that was promised that was a promise by not you but the planning commission that was a promise of the planning department that's why we took the eastern neighborhoods off we're being cheated systematically because there has been no improvements pardon me minimal improvements their needs to be a real discussion what the number of square feet for employees since you have the environmental review here they used 2 hundred and 70 square feet equals one employee the tech industry is hundred 10 or 15 so every place that old buildings are converted to tech your packing in twice as many people and every time they do it illegal you're crashing it and not getting the manufacture you need to have a hearing on what the formula is your users and having one of the assumptions you were macon all the plans you development that assumed increased transit 9, 10 is to close it the contemptuous of the public release the documents and have a discussion a month before the discussion and don't say you'll have a discussion over the end of august that is ridiculous planning commission deserves to do plan i won't do it unless you have enough time and public comment on transportation you don't have it schedule it is an insult how long do you have for the 90 days it is not 9, 10 thank you. >> good afternoon jim lazarus chamber of commerce we look forward to working with planning and mta staff on this reform but we have great concerns and the concerns really effects small business if this is not dealt with carefully this will be known as is neighborhood commercial vacancy act because of the costs imposed on small businesses and changes throughout the san francisco neighborhoods much more than downtown we're concerned and look forward to assistance from your staff in coming up with definitions and examples of how this will be applied to particular circumstances with changes of use which could run into the tens of thousands of fees there's a small business exemption in this legislation one, if you're not formula retail illness why an independent person owning a 7-eleven is going to do have more of an impact on muni than someone that has their own name on their store but a 3 thousand 7-eleven they're going to be paying 50 or 60 thousands of transit fees to open that store in the neighborhoods if you have a hardware store on polk street under the small business exemption if you move across the street and that was defined as a change of use i don't know whether or not brownies hardware would be a move but if this was in effect hundred thousand dollars that business iowa's would not have survived we need to look at the small business exemption of the fees and the planning code independence as change of use broadway-sansome apartments on a neighborhood by neighborhood basis that are far different than the c-3 district we look forward to working with you to get this right thank you. >> is there any additional public comment. >> okay public comment is closed. >> commissioner antonini. >> thank you. i have a few comments and questions first is in regards to b m t talks about miles driven those are hard miles or you know soft miles and so there is a factor for example miles in san francisco often are a lot slower miles than would be miles on the freeway for example i drove out to the east bay it was a little bit over one hour as 15 minutes coming back was two hours there is a lot more impact if the traffic is not moving quickly and more emissions cars are state law in traffic another metric that take into account the amount of times for the miles as well as the miles traveled the other thing as far as making transit more desirable i think you have to emphasis as much as possible transit in hits own right-of-way i know this is extensive there isn't a lot of space whether it can travel and not compete with cars that will move a lot quicker and people will intend to ride it if it is safe and criterion and reliable and gets people as fast as they can drive they'll use it but if it takes twice as long they'll not we have to make sure the money is spent wisely and betters to have a few new lines that are in their own right-of-way than to spend a lot of money pitting in new buses that are competing with everyone on the streets that is part of my feeling and also in addition to this fee that is being proposed not a bad idea but i think you've got to do a better job of lobbying if any area gets funding for nationally for funding it is one of the densest someone has to talk to representatives in washington and make them understand the money needs to be spent wisely that is a good thing to do and as far as assessing the street it has to be across the board but very a great impact than other uses the pdrs use has materials drops off and a lot of things that are more dense than a business use there is stuff coming and going on all day along the sloops as people coming into the office and there all day the affordable it is a nice gesture but people live in affordable housing use transit or maybe more so than people that live in market rate housing you have to be realistic and make sure that everybody pays they're part i don't give people free transportation because you like them those are my main feelings and in terms of of what mr. lazarus checkout what is happening with small business and the tax relative how much tax with charged in the cities that are compatible and go to school they have pretty good transit systems there must be a way to tax their businesses or housing. >> commissioner richards. >> i want to thank the public for coming out this is a complicated one i definitely agree request commissioner antonini the loss of services it out lives it's usefulness we have an f that turns into an f how bad is it going to get i agree with commissioner antonini with the reliability of transportation sometimes that is harder to get into the outer sunset to here say hayward in terms of time even though it is a lot more miles to hayward what's the impact of ridership services i couldn't believe how many times i used a ride share services when i got my american express is it a lot more convenience i use it much more frequently. >> good afternoon, commissioners victor excessive of staff of the sfmta thank you for such a great question the nexus study measures the impact of the land use development but you bring up a good point sfmta has been thinking about we understand the ride share effects our transportation and we're trying to figure out that is a well-taken point and we've thank you we've heard from some of the advocates from potrero hill it is fantastic we're finally look at impact on transportation with all the thousands and thousands of units in the units we heard 6 thousand in showcase skwak and dog patch we've felt the impacts of those coming online and not felt the impact of the rest of the development i hope that money can be used quickly by the development i don't know how we'll be able to do that i agree with ms. hester i was a leader and you look at the division between employees we were down on 50 fremont we need to take into account that. >> i guess the question we've heard concerns or issues on outreach staff what was is process i saw the timeline if where we are today can you talk to me about the public outreach that has been happening. >> surety for that question we've done a number of public hearing with the shareholders interested stakeholders groups like the eardrum and the south of market and coalition we have a list and happy to share that with i with the organizations we've outreached i want to mention a couple of others we're going to thesmall business commission and returning to the market octavia to talk about serving the areas as new growths. >> great two ms. hester's point i share the same concerns i'd like to meet with you before 9, 10. >> sxhoshs. >> thank you very much thank you staff great to hear about this topic i'm glad we're looking at 9 and both to get more dollars to increase the transportation and network and use them in the neighborhoods that needs them the most i have a couple of quick things that relate to the planning commission in terms of the plans and how that money that is an sfmta thing they have i hope they'll accelerate their plans for the southeast but i don't want to get people xhufdz such as we want to influence to promote the land use. >> mta does their own work how they do their phasing for transit so whether or not they put a new muni line or method of walking biking and transit in areas their schedule is not outreach unfortunately a couple of high-level questions - level of service is a terrible measures or measure the only way to mediate is pass a law against driving are widened the streets nonetheless you want to go back to the days level of service is not the use but vehicle miles is a fantastic evolution a step forward the only in terms of our work as time goes on as vehicle miles traveled the measurement unfortunately, if allow us to have localized impact measures so you can look at a particular intersection what is the level of service are cars stopped here vehicle miles traveled is how many miles people travel in the city and overall our decreasing the traffic there are cars driving fewer miles not on the street as much but that means more work for us and the mta to make sure that we have other means of looking at localized impact on the streets so it is up to us when we look at new projects to see and ask the hard questions what's ethics circulation pattern and making a note we've actually taken away the eir and being more incumbent on the planning commissioners to look at the localized impacts as we paragraph the developments the second thing staff noted that if we were to pass those fees in addition to the funding that was funding stream that was already coming in 3 hundred or $400 million in fund that is no where near the 3 point plus billion dollars as the unfunded transportation gap in 2030 one thing that is porous as a planning commission giving the message out to the world and mta that guess us and mta to sort of you know really decide where the policy goes we have to think beyond the union incentives the 3 about the $3 billion unfund gap we tried to fell with the current infrastructure we say to get the people around and muni and i think a lot more thinking niece to be done in terms of how to beef the p d m memo and incentivize people with the 2016-2017 that strengthens what we think of and encloses penalties for not meeting that i won't get into that but to been in terms of policy a way to solve the problems we're having with getting people around the city without getting funded and unfunded gaps those are my main gaps and thank you, everyone for coming out today. >> commissioner moore. >> i'd like to add a couple of bullet points to your nexus study i'd like to talk about the somewhat non-understandable tech services uber and lyft are contributing to the congestion and the presence of lack of understanding where the aau shuttle and that is mostly empty but the busses getting larger i would like you to look at the conflicting not clear operation of the criteria between bikes obscurities and skateboards that are decreasing the efficient utilization of our streets to what you're trying to conclude in that study thank you. >> commissioner wu. >> i heard staff is that is a eastern neighborhood cca and metabolic are those open to the larger public to speak or focused on the transit needs of those area plans. >> those are open public meetings so anyone can come to the meeting the focus because the eastern neighborhoods or market octavia are focused on implementing those plan areas and the discussion will be around what we're doing in those planned areas they're open public meetings is and is interest a general public comment meeting plan is that good you're going to particular organizations for their meeting you know where do you think there is a more general ability to get general public comment. >> in this case we've meet with the key impacted stakeholders and using the formal hearing that the commission and public forum. >> i ask you to be vigilant to see if there are more opportunities. >> commissioner richards. >> i guess a question for staff to commissioner johnson spoke about the underfunded gap if you look at the impacts of 5 or 10 years of the projects of the $3.2 million how much would be anyone have any idea. >> i'm looking forward to every project it will have the $7 for the residential covers half to 2/3rd's of impact and have to leverage that to kind of get a yardstick idea we've caused this on our severs. >> that is a complicated question the $3 billion gap identified in the transportation task force it is from under funding the transportation system. >> for . >> not just focused on existing residents but currently residents apples and oranges but a better comparison might be the identified noouks we identified in terms of what does it actually cause to serve new growth. >> so the $7 and change coffers how much of the impact. >> something like 25 or thirty percent. >> wow. >> the reason for that we based it on what we've done in the economic feasibility so not make the projects costly. >> moving forward the underfunded gap continues to widen as development wow. i did not realize that was that much. >> i agree with commissioner johnson i sat on the cca and there was a level of the formation and adoption, however, of the 9 members only two left that really kind of get that we met and all the information we how did it relate to t d i f additional to the commissioner points i hope to go to the established association the potrero boosters and make sure they're aware of this so they tell have this kind of input so we don't hear the public comment how we're disconnected and what level of impact they want to have on this i hope you can do that by september 10th thanks. >> commissioner moore. >> the central waft is part of the eastern neighborhoods planning my question the overall water is the rip why are we not looking that area. >> i'm not sure i totally to be routine by the planning commission, and may be acted upon by a single roll call vote the question the study is citywide it includes the entire city maybe i'm understanding. >> the waterfront and everything in the waterfront is inclusive. >> however if individual project the separate agreement they may negotiate that are specific to that area in addition. >> unfortunately, the waterfront is the final edge of lands is basically the place where everything stops. >> commissioner johnson and thanks. >> just real quick i'm going to get down in t d m i've not seen anything about the pricing is that something we've screwdriver staff? >> good afternoon maefk schwartz at transbay joint powers authority and in 2010 we adapted a feasibility study of doing a core based pricing at this time further study needs to be done looking for pricing and managements so things we have underway and treasure island looking at it to be demanded based pricing as part of their development i'm not sure this commission a aware and how to manage of the freeways that is an ongoing conversation and at this time it is not actively pursued but studied as part of a comprehensive solution and what the developers can control obviously the city needs to understand what we're able to contribute and this is part of fill solution. >> treasure island is easy one way in and out thank you. >> excuse me. i'm going to put mire environmental review hat on clare jones i wanted to address your earlier comment commissioner johnson what we're analyzing and a we will continue to look at the site issues that we look at now safety all forms of transportation there's the one metric of level of service that is going away but, of course we'll continue to look at the other issues i anticipate at the time we'll make the shifts come to the commission to talk about the change. >> just i know that but i think the thing we keep in mind over the course the eirs will be as we've had them; right? the descriptions around the transit impacts i just think because of the level of service is going away we'll not use the impacts to impact you are choice of what ends up think others ground it becomes our work here's the description what do we want to do about it your measuring something that like literally measures the traffic other than the corner. >> commissioners, if there's nothing further we can move on to the next items for item 6 ab park merced overview presentations and -- excuse-me. phase one a-1 and two project. >> we have a planner who is parts of this presentation veronica floorings that joined the department this past march he's been with the city since june 2, 0121, as a student design entertainer and most recently as the junior in the regulatory session for the san francisco public works it is nice to have experience across the city ms. florltz holds a master drive from berkley and san jose states. >> good afternoon josh with planning department staff as you've heard i'm joined by veronica and another colleague for the presentation on park merced if i can get the slides up the dual purposes to provide you a general status update and overview of the phase one of the park merced the last times was in 2011 when the commission approved all the entitlements for the project and the plan and went on to the approved at the board of supervisors a number of years since we're back here not much has happened in the sdrernl but now to provide an update on the project is moving forward with phase one and there are a number of buildings that are also before you today for informational design review hearing and veronica and nancy will take you through those i'll give you a brief overview of the framework for the design approvals and you'll hear about the individuals buildings a brief reminder of the project as a whole the project is adding close to 57 net new units over the term of the years close to 9 thousand there are 32 hundred there today and the project builds the explore program 15 percent of which the developments says 1/3rd has to be onsite and the development one of the primary features the requirements of one-on-one respect on the site in addition to the residential program there is for bus neighborhood to build out and the amenities to the elementary school and the green center every 60 acres of new or roomed public open space the developments agreement contains many exhibits one of them is the community improvements program this is a excerpt of the community it lace out the streetscape and public places and school as well as the non-restricted physical improvements on the sites those are to be built out over the life of the project so where are we at today 2011 is the entitlements now no 2015 fattens is moving the project anticipates starting construction on the first building sometime next year so just so explain the phase application it is not something that is common for the planning commission or planning department to engage in by large redevelopment like mission bay or hunters point shipyard to do those phase applications but when we have those elementary multi phase projects the purpose is to provide a secret look at what the initially building and infrastructure that will be built to all the city agencies can come to some agreement about which community improvements and infrastructure to be built along with the first buildings and to give a sense of where the buildings will come on the site unlike the redevelopment the park merced phasing is open-ended driven by the market and developer there are not specific phases to be built in any order by the way one exemption the development agreement talks about one site that needs to be built first there is no demolition of building a couple of principles that guide the application they primarily relative to the construction of improvements as well as the ceqa go mitigation measures the proportionality and the proximity so that principle basically says a general statement if basically says the project sponsor has to provide the open space improvements that are close to the buildings they'll be building and generally in proportion to the scale of the buildings they're building as well there are triggers specific cumulative triggers in the build out of the project for the communities such as the open space on told her have been met as well as the implementation of various ceqa mitigation measures phase application is processed by the planning department there's no action necessary or required by the planning commission or any other body we do the phase application is lead by the planning department and approved by the planning director but in communication with the relevant agency with sfmta, puc and public works and the mayor's office of housing, the reddish and we went through a couple of rounds of restrictions to make sure that the phase met all the obligations and expectations of the project so the phase application was submitted no last september and went through a number of rounds of comments and submitted the final restoration in april and beginning of june a quick overview of phase one subdivided through a through da is in the northwest corner of the project those green blocks and next slide those are the redevelopment agreements with the early construction sites no buildings on those sites today that's the only required first construction in the project phase 1-b in the southeast corner closer to brotherhood way some modest demolition at presents the project is only proposing to move forward in terms of construction with phase one and b additional provided the framework subsequent to starting the construction on phase one ab and coming back with with an c and d general overview of the phase in total there is to offer 16 hundred unions to be built and a flub of those are replacement unions for that units demolished in the upcoming phases that is the faeng communities improvements plan as you can see the phases will generally be street improvements adjacent to all those buildings as well as some street improvements that extend some distance away from those buildings including some major sgrshgsz in terms of the design review for the community improvements excuse me. >> for the communities improvements that is spelled out in both the development agreements as well as the planning code and last week the phase operation application is a processed by the planning department and spread out from the building they're required to sentiment the design applications for the open spaces and for the streets and the planning department leads the review to the design review to insure the consistency with the guidelines and as well as the transportation plan once the planning department's has done an negotiable review they get circulated to the relevant agency last week public works or sfpuc and circled back to make sure they're not changes in the process and the planning department issues a final approval and fraens one ab and a number of straight improvements a couple of quick images it is important to note that for won those are still under review we started the review some of the street improvements are not the final stage of what those look like it is built in phases some of the phases are built in front of blocks not redeveloped to interim conditions over the course of the project open space that will be built as phase one ab the smaller pocket parks as well as the community gardens and open space around the various towers just before i hand to over to veronica and nancy we want to remind you of the structure there recent a nested regulatory the development agreement the entitles for the project and the special use district the basic i'll leave it at that and framework as well as the process for reviewing the projects and then a number of planned documents the key one is the orange development it is the substitute for the bulk of the plan that is the document by which the open space and streets are reviewed with that i'm going to turn it over to veronica and nancy to take you through the buildings. >> nancy veronica and i will review staff and others are available for questions the submissions to make sure that the design standards and guidelines approved in 2011, the building permits will be submitted that's right for the design center and guidelines the major administrations of greater than 10 percent but is planning commission and major modifications of less than or equal to the 10 percent by the planning director nun of the applications are a modification however, they must be submit to the commission per the planning code they take no action because their presented as informational item for the park designs. >> in preparation for today's meeting there were uploaded into the website and this is for public receive as well the planning information center later on the building block nos were mailed out in according to the planning code that requires a 10 day notice to the planets in actuality more people railroad public hearing as they were mailed out to the occupants in the block to date staff received 6 comments they're available upon request and good afternoon commissioner veronica flores planning department i'm pulling up the map that josh remind i thought buildings for phase one we are call roll looking at those on the northwest and eastern corners of the project one cd in late 2016 this table now provides a general overview of the total number of units and parking spaces for phase one there are currently about 32 hundred units and 33 hundred parking spaces at the tend evens of the fraens b there will be 38 parking spaces for a nets of 9 hundred and 96 units and plus parking spaces no units are proposed for demolition 46 replacement units will be constructed brother any demolition and additional replacements units will be constructed in one c moving forward sub phase 1-b proposed park demolition of two garages and the developers will work with the project workers and working on the relocation we will now move into the designer review applications those are been received with the design standards and guidelines the first proposal for 3 in proposal is for an 8 story building with 89 units with 16 replacement units located in in this building the proposal includes one car share space and 96 bicycle parking spaces that is from the drive looking at west towards san francisco state university and this is towards brotherhood way the next it is for the drive taken on the previous building this proposal is a 5 story building with 64 units in total 40 of the replacement unions are located here the paroled provides one car share space and 69 bike parking spaces that first rendering from alu dell drive and a view from a little bit further south looking northeast the thirds proposal for the drive and 850 gonzales this proposal includes two towers and 11 stories each each tower has 2 hundred and 48 units for the proposal the proposal includes 4 hundred and 45 parking spaces and 3 car share spaces and 2 hundred plus bike parking spaces the first rendering a view from the corner of gonzales looking at northeast and the next rendering is from the interior facade of the proposed towers this proposal is requesting a minor modification from the unit standard the requirement is a maximum of 5 foot elevation change distinct the first floor on the streets and the proposal is a 6 elevation change for one of the 12 units this results in a delineation from 8.3 percent 1188 - is a fourth application and proposed the building that this consistent of a hundred and 74 unit tower with a lobby and connecter for 2 hundred and 66 units an underground garage houses 2 hundred plus parking spaces and 3 hundred plus bike spaces this view from the boulevard this next one is viewing the project looking at it north and the interior area from the northeast from the residential towers the proposal has a minor modifications from the front area the building with the connecter is 29 thousands plus the maximum is 26 to tell us for a delineation of 26 percent the drive is the last application of two sub phases two 14 story towers this is proposed between the boulevards and brotherhood away an underground parking spaces this is a view from the boulevard looking at northwest this is a close-up rendering of the towers and this is a view further north on june par looking at it west those are informational items to update the project and design no action for the per units for the planning code comments into the public and commission will be considered by the planning don't work why to approve or disapprove this presentation. >> i'll be happy to answer any questions. >> we'll open up to public comment do you i do have speaker-i do have speaker i do have speaker >> (calling names). >> here i am again, i'm berry i didn't with san francisco tomorrow and also on behalf of the park merced action commission my comments are confined under the life safety actions that must mitigate prior to any further development agreements particularly i'll concerned for example the fire safety washer clarifying is far belief standard has been so way back and must be replaced no totality before any further construction can be approved or facts on the imprudent be established that's one two and i'm sorry that katherine moore is not here regarding the effects of the 1989 earthquake the impact on the buildings was severe needs to be admitted indicated with cap one and two the survivor ability of the residents and will regard the usefulness of the building itself that's a vital fact that needs to be mass aged in the agreement that guarantees by one and certified by this department and the city itself before it is eligible? not to hold up development but show us your guarantees and in terms of your performer and your agreements secondly in the very beginning there are two pg&e thirty gas pipelines that exposed in sgroun the extent was one thousand feet from the x police commission that is a simple guarantee saying we wish to protect the establishment in the future for earthquake maybe a severe earthquake in the next thirty years that's the extent, however, to help the development gain the assistance of a city which it should require i've prepared a vetted exercise on how do i do affordable housing in terms of needs and resources and he submit that for your review there's probably more but thank you. >> thank you. next speaker, please. >> good afternoon, commissioners my name is quentin i'm with the triangle neighborhood associations we're involved that the coalition of neighborhood associations for the surrounding area of park merced and we're very concerned with air and soil samples before and after the construction of the phase one because of the prevailing winds are from west east and effect east of 19th avenue we come toegd together we've had meetings with park merced and other neighborhood groups we lack in definitive language for the city for the protection of everybody involved thank you. >> good afternoon, commissioners i'm mark chilian president of the triangle neighborhood association as quentin said the triangle association along with the coalition of neighborhood groups as well as is it a fair statement, representatives want the mitigation manufacture or measures in place prior to and demolition of park merced regarding the air and soil in the area of park merced and surrounding communities that is important for the health and safety of everyone we believe that the self-public health department will be the leads agency along with the economic development and cal osha as well, we come before you to make sure the mergers continue with the mrarnd and the pusht to insure that all parties know what conditions currently exist about my work begins and on a know manner during the whole thirty year it continues with the air and soil sampling a clear picture where we stands now and then to insure the safety for everyone including the residents of park merced we'd like your approval and your guidance through this process. >> next speaker i have a couple of other cards (calling names). >> i'm dine i don't know if my name was called good afternoon, commissioners essentially three or four years ago i approached supervisor yee's office to find a mit garter for this this is a anyone they literally have two minutes of voice every 5 years so having an appointed mitigator a recognized organization was not existing at this at this point in time and allowing any kind of building to move forward without the voices of the tenants is a failure of the city mayor signed the development on behalf of the san francisco residents north yet failed to have a mediator for all departments john rains is not here there is - i feel there were significant changes to the original eir that was submitted in 2011 and i had e-mail address that to the planning department but they choose to not do the report because it is not you know under their definition they feel there's not been when there is antenna antennas installed issues with the sewer system and it is huge this is not just a house that is or 4 dwelling units that are converted to dwelling units this is giant and none it is mediating for - okay. so then in may residence received a template or a newsletter and with the current proposed application the 1198 lists as 17 story building whereas the information provided the tenants in may was 14 story building and i'm not sure that was there but the buildings there the address this is technical it is a 2125 whereas the exist tower is 50 and moves the numbers move larger as you get closer to brotherhood so is versus 2825 the ownership that would be helpful to the attendance to know who to go to with the rents abatement. >> thank you, ma'am your time is up. >> so again since there are. >> unfortunately, your times is up. >> yeah. okay. thank you. >> thank you. next speaker, please. >> hello, everybody i'm a - i'm jenny scott a resident of park merced for 12 years i've really enjoyed living there when i first heard about this project i thought that was great i've been a supporter ever since i went to various meetings in city hall and given any support and again, i'm telling you again, i've support it and i saw it originally and this way as a housing that meets the needs of the tenants of the people that want to live in san francisco the next i mean for the future we live now, was sufficient for the past but this development is really great because it is going to meet the needs for the future in many, many ways i keep hearing at the time how san francisco needs more housing needs good housing and park merced will supply that i want you to know that i'm a supporter of that and thank you very much. >> i'm or i didn't i live at mrashdz i like this project because that i even heard about it i thought about what i want to happen there and this is about it something with more stores and services available in the neighborhood rather than having to drive i've seen a presentation on the project it seems carefully planned and thought through it is environmentally conscious to a level i've not seen i look forward to this happening my one concern is mentioned before the limiting of dust and noise and disruption of daily life in the neighborhood while the project is going on thank you. >> thank you. >> good afternoon. my name is a j.j. i come do to you as a san francisco native and a san franciscan i wanted to support this project wholeheartedly we need more housing in san francisco and that is a terrifically best plan for san francisco to use space that could much more - could serve many more people and the plan well thought through i want to lend my support and encourage that project to continue as planned thank you. >> good afternoon, commissioners rob pool with the san francisco housing coalition speaking on behalf of the members the previous speakers brought up good points bringing badly needed housing we thought no one neighborhood should take all the burden but you know this doesn't say a great job in meeting demand the current sites was built in the 40's and 50 and expecting people to get to their presentation by car now question realize this is not the best way but came up with a way to get around by biking and walking and shuttles and their cars if they choose that is a well-thought-out plan that went through a community process we were part of that and excited to see this thing going. >> thank you. >> commissioners michael snow building and construction i'll do a ask the people in the audience to stand the carpenters and people please stands a few more in the overflow room this project we're talking about the projects on the west side of town a bit less drama with this project we've heard on the east side of the projects that have come before you and the concerns you've heard from the neighbors are entirely understandable and readily addressed with the contamination and project also the set of architecture renderings you've seen make that obviously that is not going to be the cookie cutter approach in park merced but provides a have a right to the neighborhood that is appreciated as well also, because of particular location of this project far from the trendy center of the city it is entirely liken some speculation on my part that the housing will be priced at points much more assessable to the middle-income in san francisco and for that reason and others we continue to support it we acknowledge there are labor issues out there we're working through those with the developer and we're hoping to come to a resolution thank you. >> good afternoon commissioner president fong and commissioners as a resident of san francisco and work here as well i support this project this is a perfect example how to address the housing crisis with the lack of housing in general this is a wonderful plan that incorporates different levels of residents who make different incomes and it creates a new fabric part of a neighborhood be with its all inclusionary and also have's mixed use perp i want to see more hundred percent affordable housing but this is a great way to create a dent in the housing crisis we've run out of time to come up with solutions thank you. >> is there any additional public comment on that item? >> hello, i'm carol i've lived at park merced for 25 years process entails change change is rarely easier or convenient san francisco is growing we need to increase the housing the park merced vision is in the planning process for 10 years and the public and the effects parties have been involved in the process since is beginning please no more details i can't waiting u wait my longer with my new apartment home with all it's amenities. >> good afternoon joel cop he will i don't know if you've caught that this is my mother i grew up in park merced and took the 17 bus line and rode my bicycle to the public lowell high school my mother was a dental ohio gift in the western and fillmore district my father a professor at same force and the same effect that plays lice park merced that enables families to take part in the san francisco committee we're in support of the project since it's intercepts and in support of project from here on out once again the developer here is doing as much as they can to create labor harm new in the construction of the project they've agreed to a pay all workers the areas standards wages including health care and benefits and have the right career paths into the trades and going to be a completely sustainable and positive impact to san francisco thank you. >> good afternoon, commissioners i'm brooke turner the executive directors for the coalition of housing i stood by you this body at least over or at least close to 10 years ago in support of this development and at that time we had the same things to say san francisco has a housing elevated issue that development in particular is going to set up a great distance into the direction of trying to solve that issue we want to again lends our support to this we understand the concerns that have been voiced by some of the other speakers today, however, we believe those concerns have and will be addressed we weighing do to provoke those issues are addressed again, this is very important to san francisco we we enjoy standing before you with other rental unit and with park merced and labor in supporting this it is time to get building so thank you very much for your consideration. >> come on up. >> good afternoon. my name is a - i'm a counter residents of park merced have lived there over thirty years i want to voice my concern the quality of life for the current residents while this project goes on for thirty years i'm concerned about the air quality about the dust very concerned about all of the traffic problems remember that san francisco state university is right next door with thirty thousand students and the mall is income tax to that 19th avenue not 19th street as indicated before this is 19th avenue goes across the entire city of san francisco to the golden gate bridge so there is already very there's traffic would have only thinkes batted by this additional housing unit and the residents so i calling your attention to the need to make sure that this is monitored and that the folks are held be accountable for what they should in terms of the the building and construction and the people that will be effected by it thank you for your time. >> good afternoon. my name is a jeff i'm a current residents of park merced since 6 months when i moved in and shown around i commented on the townhouses and the agency said, oh, some will be taken uaw nothing was said people we saw the plan showing a 14 story building nobody is talking to anyone about motorbike that is happening there if i was told i have a view that will be taken away but nobody told me i was going to be living in a canyon so this will be taking place 3 hundred feet from my windows i want to make sure that is addressed somehow someway and perks about oh, we want people to drive less over thirty years this will be a wonderful place i've lived here in 16 years and as of mark i've had to drive a car there is nothing i could take muni to work if - they're taking away garage space management is not speaking to the tenants all we're getting it is paperwork four days before i'm for the project but we've spoken with the people and need updates going on thank you. >> is there any additional public comment? okay public comment is closed. >> and openly up to commissioners commissioner antonini. >> thank you for the presentation i've been in favor of this project during its approval process and still am i have some things i'd like to mention as concerns one of the things we're supposed to talk about is design i think the phase present prairie with reference to our follow gonzales and others some of those may need more work with the design they seem to be a little bit boxy and square and need enough articulate to you know make them attractive looking he think the towers at the locations are better you know they seem to have a lot more design qualities that is something i'd like to see as we move forward number two one of the speakers brought up parking i remember during the approval process we mating may end up less than one-on-one o one by one parking but lalz some of the earlier ones not having parking with the new violations on the locations plus gonzales they'll have to walk somewhere to get to they're parking not the case with park merced that might be okay as long as the residence are close enough we want to see people using transit as the one speaker said even with the addition of retail you can reach on site without having to drive our car there will be times like an elementary school but your child main go to that lefrments there are a lot of time when there might be a need to drive a car that is important to look at that and how assessable it is for the various residence and i like the where the towers are located those areas near brotherhood are wide open areas there is an elevation change that mitigates the height of the tower they don't come close to the internal a partners or parts of the existing project i like the transportation changes and brotherhood is difficult turn it works but you have to be patient as time goes on especially with the towers built a lot more traffic at the corners i'm glad you're addressing homeownership with the 3 bedroom unions not the case now in park merced it is one of the great needs that only 1/3rd of the residents own homes that is a good opportunities for an affordable price in terms of affordability we've discussed that when we approved the project that is not going to change. >> the costs are factored in that is established all the rental units are not on the table at this point >> let's see i was going to say yeah the you townhouse mentioned the observing townhouse is a good type of units for families i'm hoping part of the plan calls for not the ones that exists but the replacement should include particularly in ownership when you have a family with two or three children that is really nice to have two or three levels to your house not have everyone on the same level leave people enjoy living in the home sharing but families choose to have their own entrance and one of the benefits of park merced everybody has their eaten front door except for the existing towers those are things to look at as we move forward all and all i think that is positive. >> commissioner wu. >> thank you. i want to ask some questions about oversight and staffing structures does the planning director have the full authority over the developments agreement and on and on is there enough staffing to track all at different agreements. >> actually, this is a good question essentially the planning director ultimately has the authority to enforce the agreement and in the staff report it mentioned an annual sort of report that the director is responsible for publishing provided there is activity no activity to date, no reports yes, sir so may be one in the upcoming year we're working closely with both the office of economic workforce development and the controller's office to fourth the most effective way for the city as a whole to track and monitor all enrollment agreements there are several more europe and the developments agreements require obligations of many agencies like the sfmta and the public works and so on and so forth so yet it is difficult for the planning department necessary i will to track we're working closely with the agencies to fourth the monitoring and the reporting structure and how we can report back once that is anymore fully implemented. >> if i could add to the gentleman's response the planning department has a new position that has recently been filled for monitoring the mitigation and conditions so it is an area wear growing your capacities. >> i think we need to pit attention to this this is the ferries implementation of a da in this era it seems to me that is enough work for a full-time person for park merced when we are thinking about putting the budget together for this year i really think this is important there was so much work put into all the agreements that exist and i hate to see not enough ability to go with them. >> commissioner moore. >> i took the comment by one of the new renters i think we note to is her the monitors there is full disclosure as new tenants or in the interim report we have an issue not full disclosure in the project then entailing as many changes as this would will it is a question of supporting what the that the commission does not tolerate outbursts of any kind is and betters as part of reporting structure that was hiptd on generally speaking i'll appreciative if the architects would give us a short presentation not only for your understanding but also for the public at large that doesn't have any other abilities but watching this on television to make sure those presentation not just this one are being implemented and base their, their being implemented under the conditions not that often it would be probably help everybody to see how it is done and improperly context of those i feel uncomfortable with i would have liked to hear a presentation of the semi circle last year towers i find this somewhat unusual because i don't have a presentation i'll not comment on it positively or negatively but have the staff talk about the selective views how it works to have a more fully presentation perhaps next time. >> commissioner hillis. >> i would second commissioner moore's comments i like the architecture of the buildings but we saw them as a stand alone buildings so it would be great in the future to get that i'm sure your looking at that just a question on the affordable housing prelims the da calls for 1/3rd of them at least onsite but a building level is it selected by the building to do the onsite fees how does that work. >> the da is a little bit vague overall the project has to produce 1/3rd on site that includes the whole phase onsite but each individual building is not required to do one thirds onsite. >> so do we know the first phases if under recent a preference it is tied to the building there is a need for affordable housing. >> by the time each of those buildings moves forward the developer will have to declare what they're doing for those buildings but as an entire phase 1/3rd of them will be obesity maybe the project sponsor can clarify. >> yeah. clarify and sure jim ab iran's rams it requires the application we state our intent in terms of the inclusionary housing obligation we stayed the first phase is the opponent components that is determined as one group taxing our credentials of the plans we've identified the plans and meeting with the malice and we'll have an agreement about which building will contain those buildings and premeditate and deliberate in a fashion specific legal requirements in the building permit. >> and it is controlled at the phase level. >> that's right we within this phase this many onsite and we state what our intent in terms of the location of the unions within the buildings within that phase but the actual mechanism types of to the building and we have to show this on the building permits we're on the sub phase doing 1/3rd on site. >> you have to do that. >> yeah. >> it is a little bit vague there is an argument to defer one to one thirds phase and in that subsequent phase what we're doing is one they told her onsite. >> okay. thank you. >> okay seeing no additional comments. >> i want to thank staff for that presentation and the commission is going to take a short break but it >> disruptions of any kind. please silence any devices that may sound off during the proceedings. if you have friends that come in here we have an overflow room room in room 216 commissioners, we left off on item 7 for case eliminate the rental incentive from the ooerments mixed use district a planning code amendment. >> aaron star with the sore manager the legislative foyers the item is an ordinance that amended the code from the ooerments urban mixed use that permits the project sponsors to lower their housing requirement and call the benefit fees by alleging to maintain their recommend and supervisor kim is here and after here racks i'm continue my presentation. >> supervisor kim. >> thank you mr. star i like you can g still get our title wrong before you today commissioners that an amendment to change a part of planning code that reflection a different housing market in since 2009 an incentive to the project manager in the m zoning area to encourage the rental units instead of ownership when the amendment was pass in 2009 to reduce the explore requirement by 3 to 5 percent there were zero percent of all new units in the eastern neighborhood plan last year 2014 the rental projects represented 84 percent the project the delivery of the reynold's is rather than the the strongest rental market the primary projects i see in the south of market and mission bay are primarily rental housing we are familiar with the fact that the rental rate is highest in the country and many to building the housing several the facts for the change of distributors and come online as rentals i learned of this when two projects came before the land use committee asking for the rental incentive this one reducing they inclusionary affordable requirements on the projects i spoke with both developers and the response is generally in the incentive is there, of course, we'll apply for it in this time we're trying to build a much affordable units it is credibly important you'll be discussing that in an item regarding the mission it is important to ask the developers to contribute what they can onsite so commissioners i'm glad to this see it is recommend for approval. >> thank you for your your consideration i'm i'm available to answer any questions it is why to see the commissioners here i'm glad to see you'll get a break. >> thank you i'm going to turn it over to the staff thank you. >> currently in the eastern neighborhood the projects where 9 applicant has agreed to limit the rebldz for thirty years with a 3 percent in the inclusionary are a 5 percent in the reduction of land to be dedicated this allows the public benefits of one dollar per square feet for having the rental for thirty years the proposed ordinance will remove those incentives when the board adapted it was believes the rental hours reduction was not feasible since that time it has increased in 2004 i'm sorry in 2014 will be 79 percent of housing was rental only some have taken advantage of the inclusionary units for $412000 left to the benefit fee the department supports the eliminations of the rental incentive program it is no longer needed making the loss of inclusionary units and the increase in the rentals have increased without the projects utilizing the rental incentive so the city is struggling to make it's goal of new housing units instead of providing rentals you should be maximize missing the inclusionary housing to meet the 33 percent goal that concludes my presentation. i'll be happy to answer any questions thanks. >> opening it up for public comment seeing no public comment public comment is closed. >> commissioner moore. >> thank you, supervisor for keeping a watchful eye we'll have to be on the ball we have many subtle regulations my only questions in case the tide of that positive rental situation turns the other way would we be able to revert should that become necessary? >> south american the planning department or the planning commission could initiate an ordinance to put that back or southerner a different neighborhood a supervisor to introduce a new ordinance you can do that. >> i appreciate your clarifying that if i read the city attorney's office opining on that that they felt specialist of what is in front of the us today, i'm definitely interested in supporting it it and recommend approval. >> commissioner antonini. >> there are a lot of things i like about this if the city were only 1/3rd of our residents own their own homes we should be directing more overflow room units although both are good things i'm concerned about the fact that you know prop c that was in place in 2009 and prop c basically was passes by the voter and you know in pca it they said every single they were accepting all the inclusionary housing that was in place at that time, with changes that were stabilizing not allowed to be changed that is a coil area not as bad as what wearing to see in mission controls we're seeing a situation someone with a market rate project will have to produce 65 percent affordable to come back challenges in the court successfully, however, this is you're saying it is an option for the particular porn to utilize this and reduce the amount of affordable housing - supervisor do you want to respond. >> we spent time talking with the da about the prop c prop c all developments lowered their affordable housing requirement on all development projects new incentive on top of so even with us removing this c m u it will have the reduction as committed by prop c they're getting a double reduction and in affordable housing inclusionary requirement so that's a but b as piloted an option the developer can go the homeownership or the rental we're seeing not as many homeownership units anyway, we want developers to be able to consider into but you know as well as i do a lot of incentive to build relented housing that's why we're seeing rental housing built even with us removing this incentive we'll continue to see a lot of rental in the mission you've heard through other planning commission there's support in the eastern neighborhood particularly the mission to see as many affordable housing built as possible i appreciate the concerns thank you, commissioner. >> thank you, supervisor that was about what i was getting at the intersection - direct part of prop c additional to prop c. >> additional. >> yeah. this is probably less advance and do pass, consent to be challenged my concern whether this is add visible it is advisable but i want to make sure we're not doing some that is going to get the city into court with a lot of litigation this has only been utilized a couple of times. >> 3 times. >> if you're going to weigh into this is a way to dip your toes in the water rather than diving in headfirst with the mission controls this is a good first step i'm generally supportive although anytime you raise the market rate it raised the prices you're not raising it only lore and there are a few that are turning around number one rincon hill is turning from rental into ownership we're starting to see that. >> that's true that's true. >> we may see more of that in the future. >> thank you, commissioner. >> commissioner hillis yes, so we have similar concerns are experience i think a dog patch project a developer came and the question why their taking advantage of the incentive it was there i'm totally supportive this is smart in expands one question you may not know the answer is this in another plan areas like market octavia or rincon hill. >> this might be a question for staff this is my first time seeing an incentive i have to call a number of folks from the community that were involved in the eastern neighborhood planning actually when this came before the mrufks, of course, it is so interesting how time changes so quickly from year to year in 2009 zero projections that were building projects now over 80 percent and so there clearly some changes in time not that i'm aware of this happening but not in district 6 area plan i don't remember it in market octavia either. >> this is a my only recommendation if so it elsewhere where the rental is being built. >> so the original thing if this is the case that planning department staff of these this incentive we look at amending that as well i also understand this was particular to the united nations zoning in particular we want to encourage some mixed housing in the industrial area they have the higher industrial requirement to build in those areas. >> commissioner wu. >> i'm very supportive i think this is a moving in the right direction looking at the smaller opportunities to respond to the different economic context happy to support and move to approve. >> second. >> commissioner johnson and second. >> got it. >> commissioners, if there's nothing further there's a motion to do you want a recommendation for approval on that motion commissioner antonini commissioner hillis commissioner johnson commissioner moore commissioner wu commissioner president fong so moved, commissioners, that motion passes unanimously 6 to zero and commissioners that place us on items 8 ab and 400 bay street the first of the pivotal plaintiff appeal of a negative declaration and the second a conditional use authorization. >> we have a planner once again that has not presented to this commission before christopher thomas is a planner on my staff he's been here for about 8 months and previously a planner in have you county for 8 years talk about the range of work in this field all part of planning current and advanced planning and ceqa review the county planner and offered to be the lead guy if we find a gold mine in san francisco in his earlier life in the film industry and also in san francisco and new york and south of frankly so welcome mr. thomas. >> good afternoon chris thomas with the planning department staff and with the a street hotel project joining me are sarah jones ero and our senior environmental planner the members of the planning staff is here this is a preliminary negative declaration p m n d for the 400 bay street hotel on the northwest corner by a vacant building that is the ginsburg pub it is the construction of a 4 story 13 year hotel reaching 40 feet that will be two outdoor decks with the best western hotel at the north ends up the second undertook floor deck is 9 hundred and 2 thousand square feet pmd was published in may 2014 with a 20 day period a appeal was filed by mr. wayne representing the best western hotel at issue have noise impacts to the guests that may our with the outdoor decks are used for gathering as noted in your appeal packet that was considered and the gathering think the two decks based on the recommendation of the noise assessment prepared the initial study included two manufacture or measures to might be the impacts i'll go over those quickly as originally written the measure addresses noise from the roof deck by emitting the outdoor noise and second by not louis the amplified sound after midnight and a 6 foot high barrier that limits the noise levels to 8 decimals above ambient on the roof deck deck the side facing the street second roof deck measure did not allow amplified sound at any time and now events after 10:00 p.m. it raise 3 issues first, the pmd lacks the evidence to support it's conclusions and second in determining the b b limit to the amplified sound on the roof decks the pmd uses the wrong threshold to limit it above the ambient and third that the pmd neglected the people talking and laughing and singing and other noise when people get together the response to the appellants issue the lack of the evidence and in conclusion the document and it's mitigation measures are bans represents by the charles sulter associates and the san francisco noise lemons in response to the use of the 8 g threshold the staff relied on section of our noise ordinance section 2909 specification the noise accordingly to the land use and the 2909 limit of above ambient politics to the commercial and the 5 referenced in the appeal is from a residential use we consider the hotel to be a commercial use and meets the standard and finally in response to the appellants thirds issue not accounting for the crowd noise it is discussed in planning code 34 the second paragraph and the recommendation chosen for non-amplified to restrict the second floor deck to 8:00 p.m. and as discussed in exhibit a of the appeal packet staff met with the sponsor and appellant on july 15th and the sponsor will eliminate the noise to 70blast and the sponsor agreed to stop the amplified noise at 9:00 p.m. rather than midnight and it is indicated in the appeal packet on july 27th an additional list of measures was sent by the appellant we didn't exclude many list because it came in after the comment public period is includes a number of actions and manufacture or measures to deal with the construction and noise and traffic those are learning dealt with by the city's regulations related to construction dust and dusts management practices and so forth so staff believes the measures as revised are adequate to might the noise arising from the decks no substantial evidence that a significant effect my occur but the eir is warranted so we recommend the planning commission do you want it to uphold the negative declaration that concludes my presentation. i'll be happy to answer any questions. >> thank you opening it up for public comment one speaker card mary knight. >> good afternoon, commissioners i'm marla knight the co-chair of the tense committee i'm not here. >> i'm sorry, i apologize are you the appellant. >> pardon me. >> are you the appellant. >> we should probably hear from the appellant first and i'm sorry yes. >> is the appellant here? >> thank you jonas. >> sin from the tuesday kin hotel i was here listening and observing i didn't have any comments but commissioners - >> you appealed the negative declaration; is that correct. >> this was from albert wang and okay. he mean you have a 10 minute presentation if you like. >> are you the appellant. >> i represent them and no comments. >> fair enough okay. >> okay. so this was the appellant now opening it up for public comment correct? >> yes. >> okay. thank you sorry about that. >> i'm still marla knight the co-chair the tenants association i'm here to speak to a larger issue that effects our neighborhood in north beach i'd rather see that that property be used for affordable housing north beach has been hard hit with ellis act evictions and foltd and owner move in these and many unions in the entire buildings have been taken off the market for short-term rentals to see this property be used for a four story hotel kind of rankles i'll urge you to consider perhaps i don't know how this will happen buying the property and doing something for affordable housing on this land there's virtually no property left except actually, one plot caesar's restaurants on bay and powell that is going market rate housing you'll see me again, i urge you to consider my proposal thank you very much and commissioners as many of you may know this is unusual i did fail to call up the project sponsor and if the project sponsor is here. >> is the project sponsor here? you also have a 10 minute presentation >> i apologize i'll i'm with the architects on the project and have representation from the owner that is here if you have questions for them i think maybe - >> put it on there it is easier. >> jonas is there confusion. >> this this is the project sponsor for 4 hundred bay. >> they'll call that next. >> they were called together. >> oh. >> they were called together. >> got it, all right. >> thank you. >> thank you. >> not sure you quota it in the package but talk about the u talk about the project this is the perspective from bay street from the corner typically it is a small building with a hotel kind of fits in with the neighborhood and the bay windows and such the base of the ground floor of the building there's a small lobby a little kitchen area and meeting rooms and essentially 3 floors of residential because of the time i didn't want to get into that but you talk about some of the mitigating things since it was filed a few meetings with the neighboring hotels excuse me. the concerns are real i think we meet a lot and the a lot that will make that better with the outline i out lined closing windows so i want to be here if you had any questions and any questions of the ownership they're here as well i don't know if you want me to get too far into the phase of the building. >> you have up to 10 minutes. >> if the owners want to make a few comments about the use. >> i guess we've leave it. >> okay. thank you. >> okay - jonas can you clarify i offered one public comment we were interrupted and brought it back and open up to opening it up for public comment on this item. >> thank you commissioner president fong i want to remind the commission that we have affordable housing problem especially with the seniors so the san francisco towers for example the tenderloin had on 65 units inform offer for affordable housing for seniors guess how many applicants were made for that building the lottery there were 7 thousand seniors that applied for that this on this particular plot this location this is a starbuck's a safe way a troekz and all the other fisherman's wharf the fisherman's wharf area is surrendered by you tons of hotel rooms and hotels this is a particular corner is an ugly corner with the old building but the parcel is not large to accommodate accommodate a useful hotel but perhaps a 5 story affordable units for seniors is for accommodating and appropriate for this paper pa parcel in the nailg neighborhood i'll urge the project sponsor to rethink and the commissioner as well we need senior housing in north beach not more hotel rooms thank you. >> is there any additional public comment on this item? okay public comment is closed. commissioner antonini >> equal thank you and that's why we call it a mitigated negative deck because it was some well mitigated the patent appellant was not here to comment clearly we've learned the project sponsor even though allowed to have a level that is 8 decimals above ambient agreed to what was asked by the appellant to keep it 4 decimals above a.m. binded and put up the wall and activities after 11 o'clock so it is clear there is no reason not to accept the mitigated negative declaration. >> and i guess we'll move these together. >> we're going to separate the two items and act on the negative declaration first and then afford the project sponsor a presentation on the actual project itself. >> sure i'm going to move to uphold the negative declaration. >> second. >> commissioner johnson all thank you, commissioners. >> commissioner johnson. >> thanks rally quick that happened before i want to make sure did we call the appellant and they needed to be here today they're otherwise notified. >> they were notified yes. >> okay. okay that's fair thank you. >> commissioners there's a motion to uphold the negative declaration on that motion commissioner antonini commissioner hillis commissioner johnson commissioner moore commissioner wu commissioner president fong so moved, commissioners, that motion passes unanimously 6 to zero and now we should hear from staff on the case for item 8 b 2013 cu on bay street. >> good afternoon commissioner president fong and members of the board nick planning department staff the item before you is a conditional use authorization to establish a newly cricked this on bay street within the c-2 community district 40 height and bulk district the waterfront district 2 and the fisherman's wharf in northeast waterfront planning areas 3 thousand plus square feet is bounded by bay street and harris to the west north to the north and mason street to the east the project includes the demolition of a 16th street, one hundred percent used forming a restaurant doing business as as a hillary's beggar pub and a tourist hotels doing business as as the rain flower hotel and 40 feet tall approximately square feet building includes 33 hundred gross square feet of hotel space located on the ground and basement it will contain the 13 guest rooms and additional bed space on the fourth floor the second will be setback 22 feet from the northern property line requiring the rear yard and the second floor will contain 89 hundred square feet deck with the particularly janitor properties a larger approximately 2 thousand roof deck is provided before above the fourth floor and the patrons project proposed hotel use it requires the conditional use authorization pursuant to the planning code sections the commission must consider the following career in addition to the 303 c finding when granting a conditional use authorization for tourists hotel those are the conditions number one the impact of the employees on demand in the city for housing public transit and childcare for the part time nature by the property owner project sponsor to employ 0 people and lastly the market demand of the type of the hotel proposed no response first, the proposed project will employ 18 pleasing employees given the small size of the hotel the impact of the hotel employees on demand for housing, public transportation and childcare and others social services is less than significant furthermore this will not have a demands for additional housing in the employment of city growth tech technically month employees are in the fisherman's wharf skilled persons with considerable experience will help the hotel and exists in the area and lastly under is considerable market demand for san francisco as a city regularly places among the world's travel designations it is approaching 85 percent up 4 percent from 2012 and this was in the top 3 of the g s hotel markets on the whole the project necessary and desirable the planning code is meet the project will be itch needed tourists for the hotel stock at capacity and the both technical is not formula retail and would help to diversity the hotel market in the fisherman's wharf and tourists will be able to walk and based on the report the department recommends it for limitations that concludes my presentation. >> we took this out of order but openly up and giving it to the project sponsor if you want to use it. >> thank you sorry for that technical glitch so flip through some of the program issues and talk about some of the design issues for the hotel again, this is a pretty small hotel meant tobacco the type of place you might come and rent out and maybe to a whole celebration that was the intent of the owners for this some of the materials on the building we're looking at cord and steel for the europe level and concrete natural materials that not need to be upgraded the bay window striking out a large bay it addresses the corner the upper just some of the floor plans and the interior of the units on the right is the outdoor kind of area on the second floor and how we're treating that space back there and creating the trellis and such to control the noise and sounds coming out of that area during the day a typical plan 6 rooms per plan on the four-story the space to the rights for the ceremony and on the roof being able to go up on the roof again pretty small building. >> the elevation this is the playfulness for the bay windows. >> the east elevation for mason street the doors are pulled back to open the space and enof the views up to the 6 foot level to mitigate the noise coming from that area. >> and this is the side that is facing the hotel we went head and fixed those no sounds outing u coming out in that direction. >> if you have any questions i'm hear about that and thank you for your time. >> opening it up for public comment is there any additional public comment on the project itself okay. not seeing any public comment is closed. >> commissioner moore. >> question for the architect mr. nailer i present a set of drawings which were to the excluded in the packets were they submitted in time or produced after the fact. >> the floor plans. >> no, i'm looking at the corner view the depiction of the building and rather than the facade. >> i think we had the elevation earlier on but the last minute we never had that we thought weed whacking add it into today's presentation and 3 z are required and it is approval in february and we would like to see those things earlier so we can do more justice you present the project and he had a much betters understanding in the plan flap that was in front of of me which i answered by now the only thing i want to ask you explicit speak about the material light of the building what do you have in mind. >> the because of the building will be placed in concrete and glass and the urban 3 floors the metal panels best type of finish with the combination and light metal details you'll see probably the glass and the concrete base and it is kind of interesting i did not know i would like you to perhaps talking about talk to the architects they proposed core tim and ultimate went away from that in the faulty environment that proved to be not the right material because it did not cover in a way for other parts of san francisco in addition it is here and has a tendency for those who don't know the streaking in a manner that in a form you can never get out so dr. davis if you know them give them a call they were ultimately they moved away from it i think 410 is not really at all which is clapboards at least historically at more waterfront material i'll appreciate if i would with the staff think that that request the research like the. >> okay. you want me to answer that, we want the painted finish on the aluminum it has iron in the paint and when it rusts it has a beautiful feel we look at those if the dripping and all of that it is good advice we can still achieve that. >> it might be a discussion between the colleagues i'll leave it to the department otherwise i'm supportive i know understand your project better than before. >> commissioner antonini and yeah. i'm very happy to see this project it looks like a great one i was walking the other night in that area and think about how dummy it was looking girnz beggar was done for years i'm happy to hear about it staff reinforced that meets all the criteria we have 85 percent occupancy at the hotels and in great need of more hotel rooms it is on this 13 rooms as piloted many times a weddings or someone occupies the entire place 13 more rooms available for use it is well-designed i hope that staff will work with the project sponsor as commissioner moore has mentioned select the material that is attractive and it weather well, we have to - the climate is certain metals are susceptible to the salts air the other thing that staff mentions the fact that the number of employees 18 is not going to have a large impact on supply of housing are other transportation needs so i'm going to move to approve. >> second. >> commissioner johnson. >> yeah. so one the reminders for looking at the forest hotel is the cu the section thirty 9 we have to ask a 3 or 2 of the questions we want to ask the project sponsor i think so only 18 employees but i don't see anything in the project material those employees will be san franciscans i want to know the hiring plan and what other you know kind of though how they plan to accomplish that >> so to see the authorization. >> good afternoon. >> are those trees on your ties. >> i'm chad here to represent the owner to answer your questions we did overviews on the questions and obviously for consideration in this entire hearing about how these 18 employees will come into the area and insure to come from the local area one of the major considerations from the hotel the hotel didn't have an onsite parking we're trying to encourage the guests to use transit and come into the hotel without contributing to the pollution problems and people will use uber e.r. the muni. >> did you hear my question it was about the hiring plan one of the requirements for the tourists hotel not only to look at the employees housing and transit for 18 employees he agree with the of any person(s) responsible for the ringing or use of a that is not a huge moving the needle by part of looking at how those people will san franciscans and how you're going to make those employees san francisco residents. >> the fact we have no planning for parking on the site is meant to target people that live in san francisco and use local transit and not encouraging the commuters to come and get the jobs we planned this area it is rich with hotel and rich with skilled employees in the hotel industry we believe we can draw the majority of employees from san francisco itself. >> right what's the marketing plan. >> i'm sorry, i was with the local hire the reason he asked this i want to hear something about concrete and target san francisco residents what that means you're working with i don't think you're working - working with a labor or a nonprofit that looks to connect san franciscans with jobs and - >> i don't know if those measures have been taken at this point our market feasibility to predict they'll hire from the areas. >> i appreciate the work you've done so far you have not gone far enough but only 18 employees quarry required to look for approving a cu and second question on the thirds thing to look at what is the market for hotels of this type i agree wear at maximum capacity for hotels in the area in the city rather and generally supportive of hotels particularly in the southeast district you know help that population they can make the argument that building hotels might affiliate the problems it is a small hotels next to other hotels and other hotels in the area i'm sure you have a marketing plan why this site and yes over the course you're absolutely right it is full of hotels especially with hotels 38 they come in a variety of size there is a both technical homeless but a demands for a privacy owned luxurious hotel so someone wants to go to a chain hotel they have options if someone wants to visit festers and not stay in a chain hotel can stay at a luxurious hotel and host their wedding or whatever party celebration those are in high demands in the whole city especially in the fisherman's wharf area. >> okay. okay. >> thank you for your responses i think i don't think that i can be supportive because i don't feel like this is required for an authorization i remembered working in the mid block area we had specific requirements about hiring local we can't do that here if we have to look at it threw a lens of authorization i don't see it thank you very much for your - >> thank you. >> let me offer a couple of comments about the fisherman's wharf that is happening of the in a recent survey of the hotels at fisherman's wharf a huge number of hotel employees whether housekeeping or restaurants live in northern san francisco from the mission and excelsior so we specifically done that study to see what parts of city they came from which was good transit is high and the chariot has been moved to fisherman's wharf so at the pickup people during the peak hours and the needs for more hotels rooms and fisherman's wharf is great the fisherman's wharf rate is the highest in the city so if we had a clan the controlling a little bit of the hotel rate is important the gentleman is right about the variety of hotel flags and types of hotels to stay in the both technical is thewhich was good transit is high the gentleman is right about the variety of hotel flags and types of hotels to stay in the both technical is theutique is the smaller this pub has been vacant and dark for decades it would be a good public safety absorb soissue and commissioner antonini and the way i'm reading the requirements number 2 is the measures taken by the project sponsor to employ residence of san francisco in order to minimize the increase for transportation so seems the answer they're not having parking agree have a e available and likely the employees will have to eye transportation and likely they'll be san franciscans because it is difficult to get here if someplace if you're not driving a car they've kind of answered that i don't know what else we need to know. >> for that criteria that commissioner johnson brought up if i'm interrupting that the right way. >> would you like to comment. >> that is the project sponsors response to mixed use that is simply passing along the project sponsors testimony. >> this is criteria for the commission to consider to the commissioners to determine whether or not you believe that has been met i'll note the criteria is in addition to the normal career for the conditional use authorization so that implicit replace it did desirable phase and after that so the commission has the ability to make the decision today to have sufficient information to support it or if you need additional information request that our city agencies that help with the office of economic workforce development and perhaps alexander the commissioner johnson concerns or you have the ability to deny the permit. >> my question was marrow i saw a linkage between the two parts of that particular requirement it was the mirrors taken that the reason they wanted to employ san franciscans to minimize demands for regional transportation i i mean, the transportation issue and the residents issues are tied together so certainly that's how i interpreted it, it is a two-part thing i think we've approved hotels i don't remember asking them to employ san franciscans although they do. >> commissioner johnson. >> no pass. >> okay thank you and you know, i said to finish up and say i wanted to support this project it is a small lot area he think that creating a small hotel will take pressure off the housing units and for the constituency that is seeing problems we don't have to look at all the items on the cu we somehow prioritize but that is an important one so for a small employer i have experience working with small hotel workers it is not only san franciscans but fisherman's wharf and oakland's and outer parts of san francisco and people are buying viagra for employment everywhere we have the tool to require that hotel operators doing everything we can to make sure in their from san francisco i can't support the project base i feel the project sponsor can do more i've seen more in other projects in that area. >> i'd like to offer a couple of words of encouragement to the design you touched on it councilmember glover spoke to the materiality of the design but halt to the design this corner is an important corner of san francisco an important corner for tourism a block away from the fisherman's wharf so you will get hundreds of thousand of people walking and observing this corner it is a gateway into fisherman's wharf and the northern waterfront so i ask the project sponsor spends time with the materials and hopefully design something we're very, very proud of but the entire communities as well. >> call the question, please. >> there is a motion and a second to approve the project commissioner antonini commissioner hillis commissioner johnson no commissioner moore commissioner wu i'm sorry, i wasn't here. >> i. >> commissioner president fong so moved, commissioners, that motion passes 4 to one with commissioner johnson voting against thank you for understanding commissioners you're absolutely - >> commissioners that will place us on item 9 this is a commissioner interim controls for the mission action plan 2020. >> good afternoon, commissioners claudia planning department staff if i may have the projector please the benefit of the public give you a little bit of background on the interim controls you initiate on july 9th with the purpose of the addressing the problems in the mission we drafted the controls that protect the units pdr uses and communities resources and give times for permanent solutions to be developed but also make explicit the dialog of affordability they're an immediate action by the change of development upon adoption and found they're not intended to be the permanent solution this is a grow. of the interim controls and shows 19 projects with the units within the geography and 6 projects with 2 hundred and 33 units are outside of the geography this didn't account whether or not this project will be in front of you in the next 6 months those are the original controls we developed, however, their application to pipeline projects filed after january 1st, 2015, would have captured only two projects with 58 unit we've heard from the commission and the public those controls will have limited impact we went over alternatives bans the discussion and amended them as follows: we changed how some of the conditional unit if a loss of more than one rental unit or one or more units to make it consistent with commissioner avalos legislation that requires the conditional use for one dwelling unit under the regular conditional use of 5 or more dwelling unit we rice it po to meet the the fact of the matter and from recent conversations to revise is 33 percent of unions affordable to low and moderate income households two weeks ago there's a discussion about size about exempting small projects and politically it to - because that places probably place here on behalf of the appellant would be burdensome for some of the smaller projects a discussion of if there was a different thresholds that would have to be meaningful based on your planning code section 329 requires the larger authorization in the eastern neighborhood for the addition of more than 35 hundred square feet we reflected that thresholds that is promotions about 20 or 20 units or more, however it is important to note for this change to be meaningful the grandfathering date this is a to change otherwise, it only captures 42 units epilepsy the proposal if i wanted to choose a different thresholds there's another section of the codes section 415 the inclusionary threshold a what can be changing about that threshold it can make projects they're ten units projects they can remove one units from the project to not be substantial to the interim controls you may have 40 percent or more which is large enough for the - generally speaking not a hard number two weeks ago we discuss if this is a small project we can further rise the interim controls to trigger the controls or the discretionary review if their removing existing tenants and that commercial or residential attendance that will probably capture some of the small projects without reducing a 10 unit project to a 9 unit project we also revised you're the resolution to including exclude projects that are built on a vacated lot or buildings vacant for a anytime of one year in addition the displacement study required for projects 5 units are more we revised that for the basis of the project worked out and included the language to allow the projects to choose their own firm as long as it project is complete and a study it is specific to san francisco and two weeks ago we said that study the controller's office is due to be completed last weekends they're not completed their gathering data and analysis so we question spoke with ted egon he said the study about take oath week and a half to be completed. >> we revised the - under the what triggers the cu the arts and entertainment conditional use february if the public about why this only including those uses and why not including another pdr uses based on what is on the pipeline and others pdr uses we included auto repair and light manufacturing and trade shops. >> and lastly as i mentioned earlier we discussed revisions to which pipeline projects would the controls apply to there was a lot of discussion because the initial proposal only captured two projects they felt it was not meaningful by no board agreement on which dates so we didn't change. >> the dates for this, however the options are that you can apply to all the projects for 6 months instead of the original proposal that was 3 projects and 58 units that captures 8 promotions and apply to the filing after january 2013 that will capture the same 4 projects in the 3 hundred unions plus when we added the provision and exempted the projects below the 25 hundred square feet we're politically to the projects over january 2014 captures the same projects there was a discussion by commissioner antonini that it should apply to projects filed after the initiation date july 2015, however this would basically mean the interim controls apply to the interim projects one question commissioner antonini had when we interim controls and projects are did understand they can come back within a year before the compilation >> and lastly there's you know based on what your heard in the e-mails and written comments and heard from the commission a question about whether this was a appropriate interim controls some members of the community said they have sxach very few units i don't want to speak for the communities they want to focus on permanent solution all on the ballots measure we've heard from the project sponsors they don't want the requirements changed when they've been in the pipeline so it would be an alternative to impose but another alternative to wait for the plastic bottle initiative and last week we tabdz adopting a policy whether a policy had high teeth you could do i want bio if we wish to wait for the controllers study so they can enforce each other primarily because of all of this the public comment as well as the fact we don't have the study and we are crafting a piece of a resolution using the finding of a study we've not seen we drafted an interim policy statement for you that acknowledges the extent of the affordable housing country's and makes the dialog about affordability and displacement when projects come forward it makes explicit the commission has the retention the community services and supports the allocation and mitigation of negative impacts this policy could apply tattoos entire mission neighborhoods two weeks ago there was a discussion whether the sgmz should include the entire neighborhood it could be without trig a new notification and lastly the commission applies that there the conditional use and others discretionary approvals that come before you and mirena burns is here to provide clarification can pride with you clarification that i have questions on that. >> fellowship to continue the interim controls until we have the controllers study and do you want the interim colonel today as i said you have concerns but have both in place if you choose to adapt them later concludes my presentation. i'll be happy to answer any questions and opening it up for public comment. >> let's see affidavit carlos. >> just for the benefit of the public public comment is two minutes. >> hello, i'm david one of the proponents of the proposition ii want to give you a report if the field and i've been out there debating proposition i with the realtors and the residential bar-and-grills association and others developers one of the things their pulling out the interim controls from their tip bag and saying basically we don't meet proportion we have interim controls so if the direction of this commission is to basically create a political situation where passing proposition i is much more difficult then the interim controls are going to help do that i think though what should be of interest to you folks the feedback overwhelm getting after those meetings we're debating those issues at great depth with a lot of questions from the audience you can get a lot of information by the feedback i'm getting from some of the neighborhood groups especially is you know what's happening at the planning commission it the planning commission trying to do on end run around a citizens initiative that has real teeth to allow the divorced or voters of san francisco to speak to you what they want and you know their sense of the crisis is so i think the prospective of the commission a damdz by the interim controls and i think you should consider that carefully before you pass the interim controls thank you. >> okay. he apologize those are difficult to read apologize those are difficult to read difficult to readi apologize those are difficult to read (calling names). >> it's actually mike no mason street i should have been a doctor. >> go for it. >> we need a moment of descend about this because i feel like this agency this commission is in a bit of a historical feedback we had the same conversation thirty years ago about office space this time thirty years ago the department again tries to put through an interim measure to mollify people that were angry about office development and 3 years later prop m and i'm sure people will august with what i'm going to say prop m in publish that much actual controls didn't have any standing on the pipeline until the early 2000s during that time we got ourselves no need for office space so we have more jobs and less housing now people want to stop housing you want to throttle housing we need more housing we should make housing easier to build not harder please snap out of it. >> hi, i'm gabriel i'm actually here to talk to you from save the commission committee i applaud that commissions efforts to do a policy resolution i think that we need to make a statement about you know things that have been going on and all the voices on the issues i think also the public is looking for you know those studies i know having worked at meta there's a lot of different you know data analyzed we've proutsd on the flabdz that you know really the public looks about for to produce to tell us how things are being impacts this interim controls measure as many people have stayed privacy and pubically didn't go far it is confusing to people about how thousands coming on at the same time an incentive is coming out as well it is also does it have the same impact it doesn't it's unfortunate those promissory notes proposals are a day late and there's short people need to know if they have an impact in a neighborhood planning they're not unequal partners in creating something they want to be able to come to their planning commission their city leaders and equal partners in planning so that's what i think should be a consideration for the interim controls measure if you can answer your question photograph active if this helps to stem the crisis and looking at a small geography and 58 units versus a planning process that actually has some strong enforcement with a lot of coordination from muni that's the kwfks to make your vote thank you. >> good afternoon, commissioners laura guzman director of the mission resource center and representing the coalition we want to support our policy statement and again yerba buena discourages the interim controls we feel it didn't go far enough we're having incredible communities support and the community is i think their confused when they see you guys are embracing they thought it was equal to an moratorium so we want you guys to review and finish the report and draw every brother to make if crisis didn't keep accommodating under the chair the boards i wanted to look at the lastly point in count we've seen a increase of latinos that are homeless going from 16 percent to 9 percent look at that analysis mission recent study saw the double of homeless in the mission this that be a consideration the people in the neighborhoods have lost their housing in the mission so we supports your policy statement we say it the interim controls are are not good enough and waiting for the reports thank you very much. >> is there any additional public comment? >> hi good afternoon commissioners i'm the president's of the agency i live in the mix the bottom line here is this we in this mess today because the past thirty odd years has been a lack of major construction in housing and also not after that, the fact that the high limits of the city have been problematic so put those two problems together we have a major shortage we have the population continuing to grow so prices are going up and people are displaced so the only question to build more and look at the issue of higher limits we got here the notion and now the cable is in the rear so any interim controls any more turn to limit you know limit housing will only make problems worse not betters it is a feeling good notion that one solution to a problem won't get us anywhere that's my $0.02 on the issue thank you. >> thank you whoever is next i'll call a capture more names john (calling names). >> hi, i'm john along with the san francisco bay area fed raisins we've had discussions in the community about the moratorium all to talk about the background and kwhaepd in terms of the affordable housing being launched even though we have a threat of a ballot measure for more turn because the affordable housing advocates asked the planning department for interim controls at the board of supervisors we have this process go through if you're a landlord in a the mission and thinking about selling our gas station at the corner of van ness and 16th street i could get the city to pay you 18 millions for 72 unit zoned gas station that means that $285,000 with land costs with two moratoriums hanging over our ahead ahead was the best it will lead to a cost of h hundred and 85 thousand dollars i appreciate the earnest appeals we need we need to think if this is getting in the way like cash over housing this strategy has pretty sure failed we can put the money to better use in more neighborhoods and adding the interim controls in stopping housing will not help thank you. >> thank you. next speaker, please. >> if you compare my name is mary i'm from quart are if you compare in moratorium to a baby that is tooekt it might have one teeth i'm talking about a 3-year-old this moratorium didn't go near far enough for the protections it in the mission the mission is ground zero for what they call well luxury housing let's call it what it is affordable housing is housing that people that live in the mission can't afford we need to be able to control or have a say in what come into the mission the sell space is they're fighting back the monster in the mission where's the sxhmz from the residents this moratorium will not even address any of that what we need is a more thorough discussion on what the needs of the people in the mission are and we need to have that discussion like yesterday thank you. >> i did not support the moratorium. >> excuse me. excuse me. and good afternoon commissioners i first want to say wear appreciative of the policy statement that was made and appreciate the commissioner the planning department has been doing the interim controls their what is happening if the mission district is inprecedent we need to look at some go that is actually attacking the issues this is not going far enough to what we need to the neighborhoods it is important for the neighborhoods to have a voice in the 0 process they're the ones that live there day to day and the ones that see their relatives leave so the community has to be involved and the mission 2020 plastic bag will do that for us and engage all people's from the mission and from the city also to produce a plan that is going to address the stwreem nature of what is happening in the mission those interim controls don't go far enough we need more thank you. >> hello commissioners. i'm lou with the accentuating introduce in the mission i want to reiterate we're appreciative that you're taking this problem seriously and it is beginning some action and movement i also want to thank the staff planning commission staff they've been working with us and other groups and pitting in their time to deal with this problem we think that is a positive step you'll be seeing a lot of of us many times over the next if i most we're glad that process started i support of the policy statement he think that is a good step in the right direction and it puts the commission on record of many of the things we're concerned with i share the concerns that the interim controls don't go far enough and cover enough buildings but it does as i say get the process started i support of moratorium i think you know, we want the moratorium not - it doesn't go forever the community needs time to work with you and staff, to work with all groups to come up with some solutions for the affordable housing crisis in the mission so we're asking for minded we're ready to work with you and we hope to be able to do that thank you. >> one more card susan. >> good afternoon ladies and gentlemen, first, i have to say that as someone that lived here over a decade it's news we're not crux all sorts of high ends housing i constantly reads of projects and constantly reasonable person constantly see the buildings going up in my opinion i appreciate the commissioners concern and it's effort and the fact it will study this and issuing a decent policy i is that the interim controls are are simply not a dollar short but like a thousand dollars short requiring some 58 units of housing to be accountable is not going to side anything to combat the situations 3 thousand households living on over the years it simply won't work i want to urge you to let our study process and the electoral progress work and sixth district those interim controls thank you. >> good evening commissioner i'm depends on the wanting of san francisco i want to first of all, say i'm happy to see the communities here today and, secondly, two years is don't long we have professional staff at the planning commission that can plan this out appropriately and adequately to meet the project i am confidence they can get in done more efficient and tallied ordinary we're in a housing crisis we don't have more time to delay or block any more projects especially the ones in the pipeline sure we need the studies we can do it in a short period of time regardless the outcome of the proposition he encourage the commission to continue your best foot forward with the interim controls and not delay thank you you. >> hello commissioners. i'm sophomore definitely in support of interim controls i'm praufbt you've listened to the community concerns about xandz the boundary and changing the dates i find it disgenius for interim controls that don't deal with the buildings it and go far enough we'll build large amounts of new buildings but your affordable what types of project are drauchl out of balance with the type of housing in san francisco unless we focus on meeting the bare avenue in construction we're not getting towards the numbers those are the sorts of things we should look at it and the mission is ground zero the buildings are lost we'll hear that in 2016-2017 at least half of the block is torn down we need to build more housing but the right type of housing we're failing the people of san francisco so thank you for paying attention and starting with this i hope the new proposition will pass it goes farther than this and real solutions that's what our communities need thank you for your time and i've read all the speaker cards that appears we have people to speak we have very full day so if you want to speak please come on up. >> good afternoon i won't take much of our time i'm with the is community services born and raised many folks said it i'll say it again, i said a few weeks ago which this was introduced this didn't go far enough a lot of the people in the community view is as a way to placate a lot of the work we've been doing in the communities as a community organizer people are wanting thought moratorium and demanding that is why it is going stone the ballot and something else to take some of the folks may not vote it is not going to work a clear attempt a facade mass rating around a demand from the communities and it is not going to fool us the communities are clear about the first meeting with the planning department we didn't want this your demands are clear since we took over city hall on may 8th and 8 hundred people giving comments at the board of supervisors we want the moratorium and you want to being sure it will pass. >> thank you. next speaker, please. >> good afternoon. i'm naomi stone from ace and i want to thank claudia for listening and to you on the commission for really taking in the community needs like people said it doesn't go far enough anything short of i doesn't really cut it i did not basically connective supply and demand let me tell you supply and demand i have seen major constructed and - but this hadn't been the people that i know with this construction sky like and the money grab continues if question do not supply and demand who will demand and who will supply from silicon valley who is supplying are greedy developers and greedy real estate people as i wanted to really look at your heart and i want you to direct the question to do you care more about people or care more about profits. >> just rimdz that you we asked for more applause or outburst of any kind if you want to do that - >> good afternoon, commissioners mission and working for the mission and redevelopment agency i want to appreciate our honest concern about the prices in the mission and the city base all over the city we're seeing the displacement and the impact of the luxury housing in the city i want to appreciate the work with the staff we're meeting more or less every month with the planning department's and other agencies working the plan to make the solution for the crisis and most people repeated it we have seen the interim controls we know what we want and some people in the communities this is not the solution and we're interested in work hard to pass the moratorium proposition ii love the mission and then we'll have the time 18 months to plan and get the lands we need to be affordable housing i continue to encourage the commissioners to scrutinize we can't see everything in the mission because the communities will be here to oppose every single project that i know providing the solution for the communities and we know what is the process we can appeal and go the board of supervisors and apply for affordable housing so people in san francisco low income having and people that made this city diverse thank you. >> hello my name is patricia i've been a residence of the mission for about thirty years what i've been seeing happening in the mission in the last thirty years has been if in incredible and heartbreaking i've seen any long term residents and families being thrown out and seniors over 80 years old lou gehrig's disease their homes having no everywhere to go interim the regulation i want to make or whatever just didn't deal with the issues it sort of like the band aid on a broken leg not going to work one of the things i festival in love with in san francisco were the people the people standing behind me and coming to all those committee meetings and supervisors meetings they're the covet people that really want democracy to work that's why we're here if you want to know what is going on in the mission take a walk after the sun starts to go down you'll see all the tents cities springing up on fulsome and 19th street and many others and more and more and more every time he go for a walk i see more people living on the streets those people had homes so i just don't think this goes far enough you need to reconsider thank you. >> is there any additional public comment? >> okay public comment is closed. arrest opening up to commissioner antonini. >> comment a little bit on the housing one speaker said how much housing is being betsy carmichael this is a lot statewide but in the mission only 75 units were approved one the problems is not enough housing being built but what wear considering as far as policies i totally agree with staff we're very close to getting the report from the controller's office that will give us a basis to which we make your decision because we we go ahead and pass the controls without the statistics of the controllers information it is important challengeable i mentioned the last time we discuss this this is a real chance that anything we might infect can be challenges abused prop c has stayed the divorce have stated not to increase the affordability so that's the level you'll have a hard time with protective that makes affordability over 60 percent in a market rate project 60 percent of which it affordable housing and the same thing can be said a lot of people have invested money into the properties their properties are taken if you pass laws that make that impossible for them to realize anything off the lots of investment they could going to court and often win and finally in basil_hawkins rule 34 if you require the rental units to be replaced that's in vision until a density bonus in return for replacing rental units so i'm not against some controls possible in a fewq weeks in we craft them properly but pca policies make sense we can read the controllers report and learn from that and carefully crafts something that is defenseable but i think staffs comments are really good what you have to do is gives preference to project particularly those over 20 unions that have higher affordability than required have no loss of rent-controlled units and the pdrs arts use that is fine a statement along those lines make sense and make it for a large area like the mission that is okay too especially with the policy as far as time that this is effective since it is only a policy it is less important than the date it should be closer to the time we first began considering this because while this was talk about a possibly more turn earlier in the year none heard about the controls until around july 9th when we first brought it up one could make an arrangements they spent a lot in trying to develop it and all of a sudden it was tleen and the game was changed midstream if it is a july 9th at least mark first of this year for any further controls that are passed but as far as policies are concerned not anything legal that didn't allow us we can approve the projects even though those things are not done recommended in the policy but certainly give preference especially to larger projects that do involve the things we're putting forth as being desirable so that would be my feeling to go with policies for new and condition the consideration for controls until september 10th or 17. >> commissioner wu. >> thank you i want to thank you claudia especially for all the work it's been good for the commission to have a policy conversation and try to tackle initials from the communities in a heads on ways it is a right move to support the policy today but this conversation looks at how we can protect written rental units and encourage or save pdrs space i think the long term game is really to get to the mission action plan 2020 that is where we should have stiff focus their time and supporting the policy allows that to happen but want to be encouraging of this kind work and this covet work is doing the planning from a needs point of view from what a what is needed to the neighborhood and hope to move that way towards outline neighborhoods. >> sxhifbs. >> i want to thank claude i can't it is fantastic when i come ca. on the commission last year i was frustrated the commission was an approval and not getting their hands dirty the policy is appropriate i had an out-of-body i have seen the community get up and not support it it is a finish somewhere i don't want to do an end run on prop i say voters should vote on it a couple of points on affordable housing i'm not really dloouft myself a macro sidewalks but market rate hoosiers generates more needs for housing than is riders your nexus study study says the affordable housing from mandatory over 14 percent so market rate housing is a portion of the solution the holistic 2020 action plan not only from the zoning point of view but a holistic all around point of view is a good way to go the the commensurate's has spoken the study is not out i was hoping to look at that we do a policy down the policy road overlay the mission 2020 less not kill ourselves let's talk about the action plan and make the boundaries the same one other data point i read 73 percent of homeless population were san francisco residents on the january 29th study so for folks that be this economic is not putting people out in the streets their kidding themselves two other points the new york times study in last year's pole the further people live away if their jacobs the furthers - i'm a beautifies e businessman to punish people further and further away from their homes i need them to nurse you when you're sick and fix your car when it is broken let's not kids ourselves we push people further and further away on 9, 10 if question pump this item we have to make sure we take into account through the lens he support a policy statement here and commissioner moore and just to tag an what was said i'm in support of what commissioner richards the interim statement it is where we are in support i believe that we can consider interim policy that at that point when a time to do so it is not right now. >> commissioner hillis. >> so thanks i mean, i support the intent i tell have the same reaction of sxhefksz i think your responses from a difference side i wouldn't except in the policy afoot from let's not gets our interim controls will be are stronger than the policy of interim controls say the same thing their even a date that is today or january 1st or today will have an impact we've seen with the projects people are out looking at soft sites and clearing buildings it doesn't happen overnight anyone gets the building and gets the tenants where interim controls realtors and investigators have to report so i get there sounds like more consensus for a policy let's not fool ourselves we have more impact than a policy i don't know it is a step step in the right direction for me, i'm concerned about displacement i think yeah. we've seen projects under the mission all are created equal the 40 unites with inclusionary heirs on a former gas station sites i don't of the the same as someone that is tearing down a building that highway existing residential so you know that's i want to make sure that whatever policy interim controls are nuances they get are a displacements issue not let's stop everything in the mix that doesn't make sense anywhere i was in the wrmg western edition and not a lot of development but certainly displacement and gents indication of the same things people are facing in the mix i hope with we're not getting completely short siethdz i believe we have a little bit you you know we're all focused there are other issues we've brought up in the past i want to see the 2020 the ownership whether there nonprofits that is ultimately the way wale control the housing and art space and recessional spaes and nonprofits the owners and controllers if their subject to the private market and we see that in projects so hopefully, this gets broadened i supports the concepts we want to be clear interim controls where a stronger version of the same thing and have a better impact. >> commissioner johnson. >> thank you very much commissioner hillis hit the nail on the head we talked about this in the last hearing you were on vacation that the interim controls actually allows us to essentially make changes to a project if we can overlay a policy on the consideration decision making but nostril change anything on alexander conditions on a project not the authority given to us in the discretionary policies so i supports buoy would say i'm actually i know this the interim controls schizophrenia a lot of nuances this this and that is exempt i'd like to simplify it at the end of the day it is about us giving us ourselves the authority essentially to look at projects and encourage them to have the affordable housing and the other types of chances that question want to see i think interim controls whatever their useless about gut getting us to that the end of game at the end of the day the mission area plan 2020 are this prop or whatever will come out of that i think part of problem we're seeing we're trying to work within the confines of the regulatory of the zoning we've set up there is only so many things we can condition and require whether certain rules around affordable housing levels and development sea levels and other things the legislation that kielts of on action plan that makes a system wide changes makes our lives easier rather than focusing on the outlines of what is in and out for interim controls so i'm supportive of into definitely hope we'll pass a policy statement and in supportive of interim controls and hopefully not fighting over the details at the end of the day the interim plan 2020 to look at the projects that are wholesale different in the future right we're playing on the edge. >> commissioner antonini. >> yeah. i'd like to ask staff if we went ahead and passes the policies when it is good time for the controls it depends on which that study is finished. >> it is up to you on our calendar to make sure we have the report and be able to take a look at it and put it in our case reports suggest a better date and is 10 or 17. >> yeah. he think so ted egon said he'll have it this will give you time to review it. >> the 17 is the by itself i'm going to go ahead and commissioner september 17th is quite full if you like the next available is september. >> i assume the 10. >> the 10 is closed. >> we may have to do september 24th so i'll make a motion to approve the policies with staff language basically you know says that we will give preference to projects especially larger projects that have more affordability and don't lose units and try to help with the relocation of displaced pdrs eyes essentially and i'm okay with the wider board reporter as part of my motion and continue any consideration of controls still to september 24th. >> do i hear a second. >> thank you. >> commissioner richards and pass. >> commissioner hillis you mentioned (inaudible). >> doing both. >> because and i think you can in essence take the policies that's what i want to see take the policies and turn them into controls and bring them back there is issues about the date but it could be where we've got a policy that may capture nor projects and promotions that have been in the pipeline where we might also have a control that effects less projects that takes effect in january but has an impact on the market i want to see that when it accustoms back. >> commissioner richards. >> with an of my concerns again think 9 slashing 10 we hear the second biggest project on bryant street upcoming if we kind of make sure we understand how to move forward we're here interim controls and have this big project i don't feel comfortable with that date. >> you want to - >> what. >> you want it before the thirds. >> i don't think we can it's going to be hard to vote on bryant after the controls are heard and commissioner antonini. >> i can answer that question the policies are giving you the lens to evaluate that project the policies are saying the things that are probably going to be put into the crossed the good thing about the policies we can shape those controls once we pass them to be sensitive to legal challenges and sensitive to announces about x but as far as big projects last week the one you brought up we'll expect if they come forget they should be passed and if they don't they won't get passed especially for bigger projects and at 16th street and mission the ability to assess those based on the policies we're talking about today. >> commissioner johnson. >> yeah. he just agree with commissioner richards i was looking at the calendar to see what about september thirds of it says closed but controls in place before we look at the larger projects frankly not having the policies with the interim controls for 2 thousand introoirnt a different definition on interim controls we shouldn't here on behalf of the appellant - we should look at the interim controls on september 3rd and pass it if we're going to pass it and look at the rest of the calendar in regards to the projects in the area. >> commissioner moore. >> i'd rather be practical and move the project up and have the discussion on the reports and hear the project after we have laktd the numbers. >> i do want to note that on 2000 to bryant street the project manager put a notice in their invoking the act within 60 days of that notice the planning commission does need to act other than the project or it is approved i think mirena burns can answer any questions or clarification around that issue for you. >> would you please. or just give further explanation. >> deputy city attorney mirena burns do i have any questions about that i think john described it pretty adequately and would you gym give me the 60 dates. >> if the notice was on friday that was jill authenticating the 60 days will run on september 30th if the commission explicit act by september 30th than it is deemed approvals under the styling act. >> would a continuance be considered acting. >> no based on the merits of the project and under the streamlining act you can't deny it because of the invocation it has to think on the act. >> commissioner antonini. >> there's confusion as now foot forward the chronicles we're now considering or were considering before we considered anthropologies would exempt projects in the pipeline and include the project on bryant street that preeblt e probably wouldn't come undergo the acts but under the policy to try to have everything in place didn't really you can certainly analysis the pools with great certainty and apply those against the projects but many of the ones you're talking about wouldn't come under the controls so i think that is important to keep on conceals i'm not against trying to make a decision on controls on the thirds ensue you have to keep the date certain for bryant street for the reasons that have been stated already. >> commissioner johnson. >> thank you i mean i think it is amenable to the motion maker change the date to september thirds. >> probably so if we can get the ted's egon reports on times a calendars that is all right readers for another item you can speak. >> - >> yes. on supervisors you'll be coming out of your break and holding a hearing with the rec and park commission can we have those filings please on the 2016-2017 project that is going before you later this afternoon and you've continued 75 housing street to that date as well we expect that to be a huge hearing our completely entitled to continue whatever you want. >> if question can't come to an agreement that is what happens but we need to try we'll be here until 10 o'clock at night as a maker of a motion i'm going to decline and try to add this onto that that will be difficult to concentrate you have your policies in place staff told us what they expect us and you'll know whether to supports them or not we'll not need the final versions we'll one way or another we're less advance and do pass, consent to have challengers i'll stick with my motion to the 24th if that helps the supervisors but the 1617 is full. >> but still after the bryant street project on the twelfth. >> so continue it to the tenth. >> the twelfth go fine with me. >> city attorney and the same day. >> again, the thirds is closed with rec and park joint hearing; right? and . >> the5 m we believe will be heavy. >> keep the ball rolling if we ends up continuing because the report is not available we didn't have enough time to study it but keep is sooner here we are with with two large projects. >> make that the thirds if it sonata ready on the third quietly bump it i seem to building the ted egon report it is to continue the past approve the policies as state and continue the controls until september 3rdrd. >> is that and i memorable. >> commissioner johnck's autopsy a question for the city attorney ms. burns ms. burns a question for you if he were to hear the two 27 we needed changes on the twelfth we need to continue it normally thirty days does that constitute a violation of the expedited permit up and down between the 60 - >> wow. >> deputy city attorney mirena burns yes. you need to vote on before september to 30th approving or disapproving and september authority is not a thursday so september 24th. >> i definitely support the 23rd. >> one other clarification what makes that project how can they apply for that. >> deputy city attorney mirena burns any project that receives a final environmental determination and has an application could invoke the act to trigger there is timelines depends upon which the application is complete nothing you meet for the project to invoke the streamlining permit act just has not been done very much. >> thank you commissioner richards. >> it if you invoke those and allow a continuance does that violate - and i'm sorry. >> if the project sponsor thinkss we are sort of through the stuff and wants to continue his project does this wave that styling act. >> deputy city attorney mirena burns i believe you know i don't have the styling act i don't want to give you a definite action but i'm not sure that's the case. >> it is incredibly risky we approve much smaller prongs based on all the difference activities. >> deputy city attorney mirena burns i'd like to say to stop the discussion i think we're getting into the details not before the commission i'll i object to answer streamlining questions. >> appreciate it. >> commissioner hillis. >> one general question on the streamlining if the project sponsor has invoked it he could have continued it i think that was - >> that was my question. >> i don't have the act in front of me i'd like to get back to you. >> appreciate that. >> thank you. >> commissioners there is a motion and a second to continue the interim controls to september thirds on that motion. >> commissioner antonini commissioner hillis commissioner johnson commissioner moore commissioner richards commissioner wu and commissioner president fong so moved, commissioners, that motion passes unanimously 7 to zero. >> and i guess a quick break or keep going. >> a quick break it seems. >> any kind. please silence any devices that may sound off during the proceedings. and when speaking before the commission, if you care to, do state your name for the record. those people that are standing in the audience need to find a seat or an overflow room in room 416 okay sxhefs under your regular calendar on item 10 for case at mit that the 5 m project you'll first hear an presentation and then look at the planned amendments. >> good evening commissioner president fong and members of the commission i'm convene we were last with a presentation on july 22nd the focus of that hearing was the design for developments and the documents associated with the 5 m project that we heard extensive comments if the public and the commission we thought it was important to come back with the discussions on the urban forms the winds shadow and circulation and i'm sure there will be other tops can i have the overhead. >> a little bit out of focus the project sites on the west side of 6th street within mission and housing measuring 4 acres occupied by 8 buildings with a variety of use and parking lots so for a brief overview demolish 3 existing buildings and construct 3 new this reasoning from 2 hundred and 4 hundred and 50 feet we want to discuss the urban form as a broad overview the majority is in the c-3 the locations for more dense commercial development but they're very location and nature are very walkable and have an abandons of retail and transit this particular site it unique for downtown 2030 site again, the majority of sienna last year property under siren ownership underutilized by lower buildings and surface parking lots therefore this project site is an precipitate site for taller buildings. >> so i should note it city staff w the sponsor to arrive with the mask design those take into account the key corridors and site mr. larkin opportunities and the urban skyline in relationship to its surroundings i put-down this up to illustrate by focusing a few key portions more the site to be preferred for open space and retention of existing building are that currently or historically important for a quick walk around the site i know the imagine is washed out that this the existing chronicle and the dempster buildings in terms of new development as part of project that is a 2 hundred roof height residential building and the taut tallest is facing 5 at 4 hundred plus square feet and a two part a massing get off the ground going up to 3 hundred and 50 feet the building height is not only the issue but the key in how the buildings engage with their surrendered that has treatments for that the base of buildings that relates to the pedestrian scale p hss r those are setbacks and storefronts it requires the height of the towers to present the beige type of across the projects and distinct towers will be distinguished the combination with the mother distinct perimeters are support by staff i wanted to touch on the shadow the project will cast shadows in the inner area i'll focus on the 3 largest spaces the park and the tenderloin under the jurisdiction of the rec and park department and therefore subject to review under the voter planning code 295 yerba buena gardens stretches from mission to third and fourth and yerba buena south is a children's background those yerba buena are not under the jurisdiction of rec and park department so the shadow conditions varies throughout the time of jr. and time of day i'll i object to dive to into the specifics the increase in shadow is well below one percent arrest now i want to touch upon the upon the wind effects that elevated the post projects and wind conditions under the existing conditions areas that exceed what we have in the code as a pedestrian comfortable level of 11 miles per hour if 12 miles per hour and one mile over a a code from 12 to telephone .8 mile-per-hour and would add several locations that exceed the comfortable area the hours of code respect to wind and establishes a wind hazard level of 6 mile-per-hour that is in the vicinity without the project do exceed this level the construction of the project will dramatically you reduce the hazard if 79 hours to 4 hours and then finally as i mentioned it includes an action item for the amendments to the project so those amendments will amended several kwbts exhibits in the downtown and the urban and south of market area within the general plan and specifically those will adjust the boundaries between the downtown and south of market plans to reflect the project and add references to the special use district associated with the project in order to direct the reader to more regulations and design guidelines so i object to discuss any thoughts proposed amendments and staff is recommending the commission initiate those of you should i see to initiate it didn't mean approval of the amendments they will be considered with the entitlement hearing this concludes any portion and peter up to discuss the events and kate howard with the mayor's office of housing is here he in terms of we have city staff and consultants that are here to answer the questions that may develop throughout the hearing and charles chase to discuss the historic resources thank you very much. >> good afternoon peter albert from sfmta if i could have the slides with the computer screen so i came to you a couple wagon we were talking about the transportation promissory note program i want to represent the kind of work we've done with mta especially the modeal staff not just the engineering but the priority improvements for safety and bicycle access are loading, parking all of those considerations diagram i see on the screen what you don't see is an important spart or starting point the extraordinary nature of the projects that i got do work with the others where in the downtown with the muni lines in a short walking dance the eir that went into this shows the modes we start with the most important challenge with this project so understand how most people move and we accommodate that in a safeway to make that project more sustainable i can talk about that a little bit. >> the different modes i've talked about loading and parking bicycle and pedestrian and traffic assess it hard to see on the screen with loading we needed to make sure we were not kcmo the movement of transit the project is in a middle of the 14 mission all the bus lines need to be managed for their flow for their reliability as you can see the loading and entries to the garages of the project themselves that internal tied especially on mission street bicycle assess a host the project include the basically to secure bike parking and the bicycle showers for people that choose to use wiekz but making sure we're locating a bike share station the residents population should feel that car share and bike share are a fairway to use the network to get around i want to spend more time in the pedestrian network that's one of the transportation challenges in the project to widen the sidewalks and make sure the safe crosswalks crossing the big streets requires trade offs widening the sidewalks means you have to change. >> what happens been the curves i've heard comments and points made again 5th street but some of the important commemoration when you take something like this - the image on the left it is hard to see this notorious pork chop at the corner of admission so cars going northbound on fifth kept moving not controlled by the signal pedestrians try to cross know this intersection one of the outcomes of the design and engineering was to that pork chop so pedestrians have they have a visibility not the free right movement that jeopardizes public safety it was consistent about the vision zero and all the pedestrians priority planning so i wanted to see if this helps clarify what people were surging the concerns of the loss of the turning movement or how we addressing pedestrian safety that represents the modes we want to support and make more safe pedestrian circulation but in the realm of transit because we start off with a trait mode that is where the programs needed to be important so we looked at the programs that were recommended as part of project we used the environmental review to make sure we look at the mitigation measures that rounded out or made more robust i can highlight some of the programs that makes sure that people that work or live at the site are a incentivizing and make that transit a more convenient safe there is a pdr manager that helps and subsidies for commuters who use transcript to get there the way finding and realtime that is put if strategic locations can make up to the last men decisions it is absorb you only get to say it in the bus station the riderships will be high is the system so crowded putting this kind of deviations from this schedule will be announced. detriment on top of the part of network may not be a greater challenge not only the environmental review fees but the transportation sustainability fee if this project is paying it allows sfmta to look at the big picture she have a host of market street subway to increase the capacity this helps us as the most crowded sites we're looking at longer trains this project is a partner in helping fund those chonlz challenges otherwise they're big for muni but help with the pedestrian improvements scrolling down to the sidewalks widening and the elements that make it work better the sidewalk crossing at mission into the old mint we were worried about in you put another sidewalk you'll impede the flow of admission so that situation is institutionalized with the priority to make sure that the pedestrians know when the buses are come on and have a safe crossing so those images are is again example of what you're seen a range of safety and sxapt in the project right point because i have a hard schedule i have to be somewhere at 7 o'clock that is a good opportunities to answer questions we want to make sure there is so much more that went into the project but it it's a pleasure >> thank you, mr. robert any additional questions we might come back to you commissioner antonini and mr. albert the mid block the co-sponsors on mission or fifth or two different mid block. >> the mid block was connecting this goes to the south side of admission to the mint like an extension of mary; right? >> that will be very helpful. >> one of the concerns from the transit flagrance it might made it harder for the muni line to be the mission district. >> someone showed us a simulation and a big project with the number of cars coming in and out and the circulation is that something you might show us i'm having a hard time grasping all the pieces. >> just the movement through the cars. >> to the different streets i'd like to meet with you offline. >> we've proochldz that planner and so i think maybe since we've done it. >> i'd like to meet him thank you. >> okay i object to sit here in the front for that other questions and sorry commissioner johnson. >> you thought you were trying to go for the day (laughter). >> commissioner moore. >> mr. albert the only thing i'm concerned about the distance to the crossing is not mid block but in the beginning probably hundred and 20 feet in a bus comes or then what do you do. >> that's a color location then we last week to put a motion and a second crossing that's correct that's within of the things that's why the signal priority speaks to the signals that changes that the possibility of jaywalking is always real without the signaled krouk that would harder to manage because the alley connects if you watch what we did there are people jaywalking there all the time. >> the thing other cars following the bus and riding on the wings and getting stuck because the bus takes up the space between the change. >> of flight and the next intersection that's a big concern unless and find other ways of endorsing not crossing on changing lights >> to make sure i understand your point the important partner will be of theenforcement. >> okay. thank you. >> good evening, commissioners kate hartley the mayor's office of housing and community development we strongly support this project because it bring significant resources for affordable housing to the city it brings it in a varieties of forms, and it addresses a variety of needs and very important needs so first i believe you know there are onsite affordable housing to very low income 0 household and love inclusionary housing and support this component strongly secondly it create a new parcel of affordable housing housing for seniors or special niece hourly and it provides the land and the funding so we're very excited to move forward with that quickly also it provides a significant amount of funding for a great project that has been installed stalled for sometime due to costs the project at eddy and taylor that project with the addition of $18 million in fund from 5 m will serve homeless families developerly disabled and ground floor in the tenderloin and we think this development is great so we've been trying to provide the financing for quite sometime this will let the project gets over the hump i'm really can be brief we think that is a great project as you may know housing affordability is a crisis that was an excellence in your opinion use of errors to have an immediate impact and provide housing right in the neighborhood where the principle projects is development so we urge your support and also it is a busy time of year like peter i have another meeting to attend so i'll be happy to answer any questions and hopefully i'll be able to answer many sooner or later. >> commissioner antonini. >> i want you to go over the details of the 3 parts that add up to the 3 percent maybe before you leave it is easy enough to understand the 50 onsite by the second part is the very close 83 for the senior hours for the land and the funding so i believe we have a credit on the arbitrarily eddy project of the 18 and workouts to 71 units. >> right that's correct; right? so how we got there i'm not sure of your question. >> i want to clarify first of all, how close those two others sites are to the project themselves and how we got to the 71 units on the taylor and eddy. >> sure let me answer the question on taylor and eddy the 71 units is merely $18 million divided by $250,000 that's the standard gave him museum we use in all your feasibility analysis sometimes, we do better and sometimes this project and eddy and taylor has an opportunity to react that up what the contribution offered because of additional states funds coming to the project they got a great award of cap & trade refunds we are exciting sometimes, we do better and sometimes worse depending on lots of thick sub grade conditions they have been more projects than we last week to count that have required for subsidize than we thought 2 hundred and 50 thousand pedicab united u unit is a conservative number. >> as a followup the pardon is absolutely locked into the commitment for this number of convenient of affordable units regardless of the funds it come in this is have to provide it if it doesn't come in and i'll let you do that. >> oewd project sponsor can't receive a building permit until the check is written and the lands is transferred it is clear they kaunt can't receive a building permit. >> commissioner wu. >> thank you i just want to confirm that the project is paying jobs housing linkage and offsite fee for the non-onsite inclusionary correct. >> right. >> so those monies are applied to both the 83 and 71 units. >> that's right. >> so maybe the distinction been would it be fair to say they were able to allocate those funds to both eddy and taylor and the 967 edition project they have had to pay the funds generally into the pot. >> that's right this is a good use of funds it supports prop k we are district to find the funding stwraejz for quick and affordable housing benefits it creates the housing benefits in the middle of the principle projects and has an immediate mitigation aspect we think this is a good use of funds. >> do you think that is a strategy that missouri city wants to look at or specific to this project. >> i think we want to work closely with the developers who have the ability that are building projects that has a additional resource generation and work with them to maximum miss the affordable units that can be financed with those ours resources and make sure the impact is immediate and in the which the principle is built and if we do that overall that's a great policy strategy. >> okay. thank you. >> commissioner antonini and quick faup u follow-up because the funds have to be paid up front you can bond them so that gives them more value. >> in this project we'll be leveraging all those funds. >> unlike all the projects the money is there at the beginning and yes as soon as the funds come in quickly we've been able to leverage those. >> thank you. >> next up. >> schong and commissioners staff members of the public i'm charles with the architecture ar g was commissions to assist i'll change the slide quickly to assist in looking at the historic resources in the project area resource evaluation report we developed for the fifth and mission was to help the sponsor evaluate the treatment options all to briefly identify the resources and indicate the status and provide you how to treat the hectic resource on the site i apologize. i think i'll losing my voice site as you may know you've seen other slices this evening within the 2030 sdrrp where a modern building and architecture character reside adjacent to one another provide a contrast within the urban setting one can point to the program of the 1970s that help to initiate within the 2030 district this mechanism of engaging historic buildings with more than or large and dense building this is not to say this project uses tdrs those are a couple of example that reside in some respects comforting and adjacent to part of what we see visibly everyday and part of characterization of our city notion of the hectic resources and i'll go through 3 of them they were the only 3 identified in our research ar g saudi the site and look at the documents within the project area within the 5 m project boundaries 3 identified resources which the project proposes to rehabilitate to the secretary of standards or maintain ar g research as identified naigs to the dempster building i'll leave that one up for reference the dempster building alters the street is already an article 11 designated resource two additional building the chronicle building on mission street are the two, that position two historic sufficient historic significance and integrity to the considered historic resources while the alterations made to the chronicle building in the 1960s disqualify it as a historic resource the building retains sufficient integrity of location setting to be considered a historic resource for its long term association with the san francisco chronicle newspaper none of the other buildings within the project area appear to vest the significance to quality as a historic resource this is menstruate just to give you a visual representation of the spelling the last name stare building is an article 11 building this is to be rehabilitated and the new home of cast the community arts stabilization trust known as the camp line building not an open property the project sponsor will support it's designation i'd like to note within the documents there exists the notice of restrictions on this special restrictions on this property that was limiting it's height and bulk to its current height and shape 901 on mission street the fact it is so iconic to fifth student is that the height bulk and the relationship of this building in particular helps anchor that corner and representative of a later addition to the straight but to measure it with the kind of understanding to the old u.s. mint while i indicated earlier it was not a historic resource for its architecture but you certainly with the newspaper industry is one the notion there is always been a need in the landmarking process it was brought up earlier potentially landmarking it there needs to be physical integrity and in this case we suggest the property has gone through so many alterations from the 1964 it reechld it's interior it's been so dramatically alternated it is not recognizable in that sense the project has stayed the it the existing chronicle of continental line shall be retained and shall conform to the existing height and bulk the fear that was brought up at the last hearing was one well, you know you could distinguish the chronicle building and put a bigger building and that's innovate true it is not what the documents provide to you indicate in clean energy the relationship of those 3 buildings to the new development or the new development to those 3 believes is one i think it worthy of note the location of the public open space is right-of-way and in the park system that's been create by this project has helped to keep the larger vertical height and mass of proposed towers away from those buildings thus recommending them sixth to the lower scale buildings to the inadequate of the site and as a result i'm going to i'm going to turn it over to laura who will give you for details about the public open spaces if you have any questions i object to entertain them now or at any time the commission choose thank you very much. >> thank you very much. >> good evening. i'm from ford city we'll have laura step up shortly if site lab to go over the site rational by the wanted to briefly clarify some concerns understanding about the project that will be helpful to pit on the record there's a document to that and being distributed the concern the project is rezoning to 4 hundred 70 feet i think charles went over some of this i want to say 4 t 40 percent of the site is up zoned and 11 percent will be 4 leonardo da vinci and 50 feet it is all towards that rational of having open space and in the cultural building trying to be by the home sharing buildings and concern that the project will receive auto trucks we're about half that at 35 hundred vehicle trips with 4 hundred and 5 ourg during the peak hours there's a concern we're closing a traffic lane i hope that was clarified in peter's presentation we're preempting the better streets plan, of course, is citywide and winding e widening the sidewalk there is a concern we're going to create a wind tunnel the open spaces that be unusual i wanted to clarify overhead the project reduces the hours by 95 percent and a concern in front of the milling mid building we're increase the confront hours the project reduces the comfortable hours compared to where we are today and less that the project supports the affordable housing on site the 2/3rd's is how much of the affordable housing package is provided both the land dedication and the structure onsite there's a concern we are quote/unquote spot zoning the planning code provides for the creation of the special use district there are 50 of for the developments that promotes the goals if the planning code this in fact, it the oppose of spot zoning well into the zoning specifically intended to direct the goals of the planning code in the larger powerful goals of the city and lastly there's a concern that the open space will feel privy want to be taking a step back and is i think the big idea we know create a great civic realm and add the density you are absolute goal to make those public spaces not feel private we are adding to our plan and respecting language in order to insure that happens he want to make sure we understood that laura will go through and kind of go through the planning remarkably we've worked on since 2008 thanks so much. >> commissioners i'm laura with site urban we've worked on the urban guidelines for 5 m for a number of years in coordination with the planning department and so somethings maybe a little bit of a repeat but i wanted to expand other than the design rational if the backgrounds how we got to the design we have today as mentioned before at the heart of the project is fulfilling the city's goal for density at transit we started to work on the site it was really about how we create that liveable place open up the ground floor and preserve those older buildings with the density so we look at both sides it is a unique condition in the zone near the power bart. >> so as he spoke last time we looked at the context and the rhythm in the city with the open spaces to branch off it with the historic buildings and we drew open that context and thinking about this space is a network of open spaces and then within our study having a network of open spaces that reinforce the historic buildings that are there as i mentioned we started in the relationship of the mint and the chronicle this and preserving the chronicle building and embracing the alleyways 24 was one the first drivers to putting that to bring people in and make more pedestrian that alley experience as i mentioned other ways to connect the mint from the last recommendations we're looking at what improvements can happen along fifth street in addition to what was proposed looking at that then we step back to the inspection how to create that density and what's ethics rational if we start from the base artist frame to preserve the open space and preserve the lower scale at the center and group the height afternoon it that make sense from basic planning principles we built the largest building on the largest to fair to the perimeter and then the tall itself building to fifth and howard so this is how it comes together as you can see at the center how there is this pocket of the low rise as well as the vantage point on top of the chronicle building last presentation i focused on the details this time a little bit more a background and the visual sense the new construction for the residential buildings there are two one on mission and one on fifth streets other examples around the city and the country how it makes a domestic feel to home sharing so high-rise there was a lot of time spent with with the planning department and kevin mental illness this how to configure office and the nature of the have you had occasion of san francisco in that context san francisco has always been evolving and we look at the history of the commercial office building one of the things we did early on we wanted to know what we can learner the office as changed and located in different locations each of the typography exists looking at the history a number of building on market street that has a certain type of civic presence larger buildings highly adoptable and have a ground floor it is anymore engaged taller and more embracing to the public as we went through the generations the public buildings we moved arresting away from that and moved back towards that the downtown place within a generation 3 the center one there started to be requirement around the open spaces in office spaces and retail think the ground floor and generation 4 we proposed generation 5 we see at 5 m that is bracing the ground floor civic qualities will same date allowing a flexible as office floor plate we see the many tenants driven towards we see the you know filling up the warehouses and conversion of other conduct construction so it delivers that as a skyline and the civic presence on the ground the floor play evolution tracks that exterior evolution creating more of the flexibility floor plate at the same time more engaged ground floor so as i spoke last time the d for d how we can shape both how we see them near and far the ground floor obviously is a critical part of that there's 3 components to how we feel about the public realm how the buildings meet the ground and the streets connect to the fabric and how the open space functions i'll go through briefly each one of that on the greater a lot of time how the retail mix works and how we create the lobbies are orientated or ordinary we worked on how to get the people through the perimeter to the interior to create that this for the community and tenants we set standards around the how private lobbies they can be requiring the private zones be pulled bay area back so the lobbys are more serving to the people those are in the examples how to create a more creativity in the expedition of the buildings on the ground the students you've heard about that we've spent a fair enough of times in the parking garage circulations to pedestrian news them and connect the large fabric those are works of what we see around santa fe san francisco that indicate the kind of improvements that will be there two key public spaces are a the open space point marriott court this is an amazing space located from the major thoroughfares you still where a vantage point above the chronicle building we created the spaces to invite the spaces a.d. adding interactive but signage for people to get up to it. >> and then part of this is also how we build into the project both physically and operationally so the operation functions and their inviting so the most clear putting cut piece the dem sincere building is serving the public space and that that will be dedicated to sierra club nonprofit stabilization for arts that will also be a home to intersections for the arts essentially and intersection is an partner since 2010 and example of early idea they began to implement the installations in the surrounding neighborhoods as an ongoing program to think about what this site medians to be a larger part of neighborhood us that isn't something we added on top of the design it is part of design it is important for this to be successful not from the top down and one designer it is actually could creative and ongoing opportunities for other voices and other designers and artists to come in and make their mark as part of the that the project team heard the suggestion and a begun the language together such it participatory nature can be embedded in the planning and the idea to create a virusy group to oversee the design for the parliamentary in how it is created but also ongoing a part of the project from the beginning i've been going to community meeting in 2008 as the project team to try to engage with residents and business owners and local artists and community organizations to understand how we can bridge all those together and created a phenomenal place thank you. >> commissioners good evening dan with staff. >> just a last if you thoughts to conclude our presentation we want to emphasis some of the particular points that kevin as well as the made tonight with respect to the height and bulk and mass of the project in relation to the neighborhood surrounding that there is a few points that bare repeating we as professional planners we do feel that this is the right site for the height and density of activity that the project will bring not only is it sitting on top of on amazing resource but most of it? the doufrnt sdroern district downtown has been thought of for sometime now same can't be said i don't think for the areas south and to the west of the project site in addition not being in the are c-3 district they're richer is seeing a project to the south or west is highly unlikely and also to mention the mechanisms associated that with this project the da and s cd those mechanisms frame with the basket of physical improvements that i wouldn't otherwise see the site unified approach to the developments on the site and has public open spaces we couldn't see and frankly a level of urban design is all two rare in our city the project is going to preserve the corridors and does hang 0 on the not only the historical of horrifying by the chronicle buildings and minimized the shadow impact and keeps the wind down shifts the mass closer to fifth street as a contributional one distinct downtown and the local areas to the west and south supervisors what's before you today is the prototype initiation of general apparently amendments that are in connection with the project the initiation is kind of an odd thing akin to an application to the action tonight is not an approval action only one you can be uniform for the project if you will, those action themselves the overhead entitlements at this point, i'm schedule to be heard on the thirds of september which is obviously a full calendars is i'm here to answer any questions and the project team and we look forward to any discussion and i object to answer questions. >> if nothing further - you have a question. >> commissioner johnson. >> sorry i'll make that quick i apologize you have to leave commissioner moore asked the question about the proximity of the crosswalks married to mission street but i want to say i appreciate our delineation on the articulate and the transit fee we'll be getting from the agencies so i don't know if it impacts but i want to say that before i have comments and you covered it really well. >> i'll stay until 10 to make my 7 o'clock meeting. >> yeah. we can use you guys so here on behalf of the appellant and soak if nothing further we'll open up for public comment and we're limiting sxhm to two minutes per speaker (calling names) go for it. >> not seeing any on the folks terry with the building and construction trades council this is a project that is where it should be from the park a block from the moscone for central subway and convenient walking assess and a lot of employment and the fact it has is going to cut down on hazard i didn't say widens i appreciate bicycle is my mode of transit developer has been doing consistent outreach for quite a while one of the city's attributes and attended a meeting on this project that was very public in february of 2013 i know i turned down numerous invitations to go to anothers we're enthusiastic about this project and continue to support it. >> thank you good evening rob pool with the san francisco housing action speaking on behalf of the members i'll commends you, you have a lot of endurance forest city came to us we saw the project 25 affordable with two building and two medias later more affordable and a thought fell creative plan the affordability package it speaks for itself but it is expressive and the 80 deal and the offsite program additional to see more projects and hope to work on policies moving forward in terms of the sud it allows this project to look a little bit more interesting rather than buildings all the same height manages to be pubically essential open space and you'll see a much better pedestrian experience wider sidewalks and much more pleasant activity place to be in transit and shops and jobs everything we enjoy in san francisco in terms of transportations they've made in a multi modal project and it is tremendous a low parking ratio it will be bicable a well-thought-out indents next to jobs where people with all income levels we can't think of things like this sud we want to see it go forward thank you. >> hi good evening commissioners i'm representing spur here to voice the as for the for this project i don't think i need to resident rob and the city's remarks about this project i want to say we lived that this project is going to contribute a lot of things that the city and it's residents are asking for it creates affordable housing for people at 50 percent below the medium income close to transit and the public art and community organizations and preserves the buildings fort city has worked tirelessly with the community and with the city staff to mitigate shadow concerns pedestrian safety concerns and traffic concerns this is a fantastic project you can't ask for that much more a robust and fantastic community benefits package that 5 m has put on the table and we support this project thank you. >> thank you. next speaker. >> just to keep it rolling we have a lot of cards if i've called your name line up on this side of the room. >> good evening my name is bill i'm an architect and the founding principle of urban for the consulting and communication we live and work why the plazas i live with my partner in a condo and dogs i was on the task force and have the municipal green i'm an activist member of the neighborhoods i've worked in the western selma and this neighborhoods diverse as it gets from my perspective the 5 m project is an intelligent approach to the design not only in this but the impact of the thought neighborhoods the open space by establishing 50 thousand square feet of new open public space to host programming and helping the life in western selma i squall those waftsdz public spaces lake in front of the the federal building when i left to come here there was a hawaii band playing that is what's happening in the spaces of 5 m that's why i'm help happy to be here to support this project addresses wider sidewalks the fifth sidewalk about widened by 10 feat it is important and as many of you may know is the density not parking that makes urban neighborhoods drive outreaching i've not owned a car this is what makes that financially make we work my building has 50 spaces why you live in the hearts of san francisco you realize you don't need a car and leave people that will move in there realize the same thing we need that and that is what 5 m is proposing i urge you too port that. >> thank you. next speaker, please. >> good evening planning commission members and planning department staff that executive director of the stabilization trusts you've heard cast works with the artistic and communicated leadership to preserve and promote san francisco's rich and unique art eco system we're dedicated to saving and preserving and creating affordable space for arts and cultural organizations within the community in pursuit of our goals cast considers the partnership with the local communities as a way of achieving our mission 5 m approached the cast the project sponsor to be in the building as a center for community activity 5 m plans to generously contribute to the meeting if they get the funds for the project we want to make sure the arts and cultural are included in 5 m we grounded that arts drive diverse and strong communities we envision that 447 minutes can be a thriving communities in the downtown region of san francisco serving every walk of life 447 can act as a community hub cast favored the san francisco rich cultural and continues the development of the eco system thank you. >> good evening, commissioners my name is can i coney the arts stabilization trust the women audio mission has been here i'll be reading their letters michelle wrote with the daytime after facing a hike in rent with the help of the interim space on market street as well as a 10 year lease both at less than half the market rate without the help of cast we might have not had a home cast is a positive change for visiony leadership they're supporting the arts and organizations in contributing to the rich cultural unquote the next quote the executive director and founder the women's audio having a stable homes in the art's mission is important for future success and sustainability skaifr out the properties for nonprofit will be key solutions for the daytime problem those are areas where cast is clearly think the for the most part and when i speak he have to say cast totally rocks i work with the cast explicit stop being at the table with every electrical dine it is a mummification and need for our new home and san francisco's permanent cast has provided the advancing the project and including a decision michael it is her that the organization knows how to operate it in this way cast is devote to helping the future homes sherry the vital of the community thank you. >> nuts and bolts i'll- - >> next speaker. >> i'll call more names (calling names). >> good evening commissioner and commissioner president fong thank you for your time i'm jordan i live 4 blocks away from the 5 m i own 3 brick and mortgage establishments within 5 blocks of the project i'm here in total support of 5 m i know that 5 m is the hot bottom at the mr. haney hearing i'd like to directing your attention to small business for a minimum i'm the owner of a project on 25 market street in the simplest of terms it is paramount first time business owners a working opportunity to create their dream along with other the low cost sdpri that allows the small business owners guidance excuse me. as well as financial so for the to start off they're first business most folks have a roommate with city support we've been able to create a roommate scenario i we know that scenario will be successful for years to come in san francisco the prototype proposal for 5 m i'm concerned that san francisco will be not only small business friendly in a city it is harder and harder to start our own business forest city is helping to help with programs this leads to more business and jobs in summary small business and jobs are a good thing for san francisco therefore amongst another thing 5 m is a good thing for san francisco thank you for your time. >> good evening ladies and gentlemen my name is stefani i live in just is suggestion to the proposed project of the 5 m i an organization that mints residents assembly in the building and it building has one hundred 6 units now i'm here for a simple language i cannot explain dwooch of my time i know you'll run out of time you know here we have the request from the i wrote a letter i'll please give this to them i have a letter from me unquestionable the mayor's office to the supervisor jane kim and the planning commission i said to have a copy so you have to know that i say a simple word that i am in support of this project 5 m why there are so many reasons we have to talk about but this our request for the senior citizens i've never heard since never too much for seniors housing what i heard is affordable housing where it is different if seniors now seniors if you have loan if you want to be old seniors later on and you feel how i feel obviously i'm a self-interest i've been working so much in san francisco. >> ma'am thank you very much yourself time is up. >> thank you but simply only that i am urging you to think of what is going on here in san francisco. >> thank you very much ma'am. >> thank you. >> thank you. >> thank you very much. >> thank you. next speaker, please. >> ms. hester i think i called if you want. >> sue hester this is meeting basically has had a lot of issues that are dealing with this project i'm asking you to not hear the next hearing on september thirds because we will all go crazy and you won't be present more we you're going ton vacation 20 days before then 21 days at least the eir i don't know if you'll get anything else to read the only way the public participates is to read the staff report it will be probably a thousand packages as well as the eir and submit written comments so the 9 slashing 3 hearing please don't do it you have had issues come up today which you should be looking at the park merced is. >> next speaker. >> another sud what you heard today you don't have power more the public because you are give the power quasi in an sud you'll be voting on an sud it goes to the planning director so we have the experience of park merced it should be therapeutic you also are considering changing the eir or the requirements for development fees that was a transportation sustainability you have been considering fablt on mission and on jane kims report you need to take a deep breathe i fled to take a deep breath we need time to give you our input what is before you whether you have this left those are planning commission maps they show the this project is not c-3 despite can they say in their papers in the zoning those are the planning commission and good evening, commissioners and staff randy executive director of intersection for the arts 5 m is a new model for how the arts fit into the communities 5 m will create and center for the arts woolen into the fabric by donating space in a downtown urban core for artists although through building the affordable units it will be connecting seniors in the open space and celebrate a past and present of selma 5 m will is sustainable arts for everybody to enjoy 5 m is going above and beyond to make the arts in our community assessable instead of using the one percent fee for some skurnt in the model it will have long term community investments artists that work to empower the local communities we don't need to motivate the developers to beautify their art the addition contribution of the dempster building and the open space allows this to happen we need to accelerate this new model and do it now so we can see it replicated across san francisco to make your communities great before they get pushed out thank you. >> thank you. next speaker, please >> hello, everyone i'm san francisco street artists worked with intersection for the arts they've a fiscal sponsor and through painting mills i've worked with different communities all the time and get their feedback i give them work and this is something that is very important to me and something that i know is very important to intersection for the art and 5 m has given to intersection. the art new cast being think board as well as shows that project as well is paying attention that makes me want to support as you've heard from the speakers all the details all this is coming together that makes this a domesticate project not just one developer or just a community but everybody working together that is a program that we have been should get behind and support >> thank you. next speaker. >> good evening, commissioners i'm passport i'm speaking on behalf of the rob of the senior direct off the grid services he was here early earlier supervisors because of the breaking and entering community together to shared food experience i'm happy for to speak on forest cities behavior on a weekly basis we organize 50 food trucks throughout the bay area four years ago would he ever partnered with forest city to persona textbook under severed through the partnership at 5 m hundred of small businesses have had the opportunity to serve at fifth and mena 50 percent of the businesses are first time small business owners their owned by minorities and 33 percent of those small businesses are owned by women thousand of local residents have had the opportunity to experience the space that is created a seismic vital by giving local residents to connect with food and family from my perspectives forest city is building the community in the 5 m area we have no doubt they support those through the projects we strongly support thank you. >> thank you. next speaker. >> my name is sal i'm the residents of selma arrest i want to talk about traffic traffic in the area of the 5 m project is bad himself it was acknowledged by the planning commission staff and acknowledged by the developer and column i thought nets hearst paper the 5 m and the planning department staff seem indifferent to the existing f level is serves they struggling shrug it off their traffic studies are up to date and the plan changes on market street and the flow from market into the selma area in fact the developers in the city assembly to try to move into a that f to an f minus packing a picking a lane out of the west side of fifth street make the traffic worse by removing the dictated right-hand turn lane if howard that is getting to the parking lot of office building to illustrate this the lane they want to eliminate would be used for the same commercial loading limousines it the streets now permit by taking a lane if a public street for including pedestrian safety then taking it back because the sidewalk extension will be cut by 3, 50 foot commercial zones and adding street trees there will be less sidewalk than currently exists and the lane that is being taken out can handle buses and bikes and on top of the prototype changes make the 3 lanes into 2 lanes of traffic including buses and bikes and losing the dedicated turn lanes that is for only one block. >> thank you. >> how crazy is that. >> thank you, sir your time is up. >> as the next speaker comes up i'll call nor names (calling names). >> hello commissioners i was going to say good afternoon but now good evening. i'm barbara a thirty year residents of san francisco and a 7 year residents of selma i'm here to ask you to please do not initiate the special amendments to the plan i think there recent a conflict between what the city says what it wants and developer is proposing the downtown plan transportation policy prioritize walking and bicycling and public transit and discourage commuting by private car the eir has a negative and unmitigated impact on walking and cycling the planning code states the at zone within walking dance on market street and on third street and fulsome, however the developers is proposing to build a 3 hundred and 50 car garage where nun it required therefore will not the employees bring more cars but other changes to central selma that are not vaelthd relative to the project that adds impacts to the city in addition distinct 85 and one hundred thousand cars traveling there selma pedestrian accidents are the highest in the city itself eir says those many trips through central selma are unhave been able, however, those impacts will not occur we urge you to vote no to nishtd the general plan amendment on a amendments to the general plan i also have jane one of the names calls i have a letter she was unable to stay i want to have put into the record and a number of letters we want distributed and put entered into a record thank you. >> thank you, thank you very much. >> thank you. next speaker. >> good evening commissioner i'm a selma residents the tenants that i know that the 5 m for the city has burn an ongoing dialog with the members that the residents assembly the fifth and 6 months i believe that 5 m to have a dialog with the communities that the concerns especially from the mid mall and the residents i support the continuance of this project and provide the benefits from some residents i know that the 5 m has included the affordable housing and 5 m has an address during the measures and a negative impact with the mall and residence with the seniors and programming often displaced and access to employment as well insure those project will be realized thank you. >> thank you. next speaker. >> good evening, commissioners i'm andrew i'm with m j m management group we manage public spaces in the south of market including the yerba buena gardens and the yerba buena district and the central market district i wanted to tell you that forest city reached out for the managements of the open space they're proposing that question are incredibly impressed with the thoughtfulness to build this project and we really like the project we've been in this neighborhood for 20 years with the yerba buena gardens we appreciate another opportunity to have speak up that serves the community we like the thoughtful connection between the buildings the alleys and the opinion and happy to have something near transit on market street open space that is being proposed the opportunity to bring the community together and a particular concern to m j m it brings place for seniors i have those the former president of the childcare in the area and with todco i'm excited about the meeting of needs in the communities the 5 m project is a willing partner want to create and lively diversifies program and a says that a way it galvanize the neighborhood for a place for seniors to come together i'd like to help them do that for the community as many of you may know district 6 is one of the most underserved in terms of open space this space will add to what is there just this week we meeting meet about the united playaz a group that provides communities outreach in the neighborhoods we want to work with them as in other districts to provide the you security model away and more of a host model in the projects to be managed i'm supportive of project and hopefully, you'll support it. >> as the next speaker comes up i'll call more cards (calling names). >> also the people that maybe viewing in the overflow room you may want to make your way over to this chamber. >> good evening, commissioners i'm nicole i'm with m j m management group as my colleague mentioned we're excited about the prospect of working with the united playaz they're align accessible field trip and unfortunately couldn't have a representative at the meeting i have a letter of support from their executive director to read into the record. >> dear commissioner president fong on behalf of united playaz please accept this in lieu of our testimony on forest city 5 m project unfortunately, neither myself more any of the members are able to attend the mbe meeting we're on an educational field trip he submitted and letter for the july with 23rd but after watching i did testimony i should impress on the commission forest is gone above and beyond and my full support united playaz is is a leadership development organization dedicated to providing youth with positive role models as a alternative to voochlt with gangs and drugs and other high reflex behaviors and support 5 m from the beginning forest has worked with the neighborhoods on the 5 m through 80 publicized meeting the forest has listened to the project about the 5 m and revised the design to the current alternative and increased the community benefit of the project i believe that forest city as begun above and beyond to reach out to the members with diverse project and integrating 5 m into the sxhunts forest city worked with the united playaz in a thoughtful approach and in selma an area. >> thank you submit the letter. >> if you like. >> good evening, commissioners my name is carolyn i work for the veterans quality center i'm speaking i believe you should reject the amendments for the 5 m project although this project seems that is it smooelz it is consistent with the zoning of the neighborhood the proposal is an attempt at spot zoning the carve out from the central selma plan as well as the de facto of the spot zoning and downtown set a dangerous precedence the eastern neighborhoods we're not transbay not the financial district if you initiate this amendment our basically saying if you have money you can build wherever neighborhoods you want it it doesn't matter people with disabilities living in this neighborhood don't let the community benefits that are being proposed that is being used to divide our communities just as forest city the in brooklyn don't let those kinds of benefits blind you from the false of this whole process this kwhoel entire process that is fast tracks our community is not against development i want to make that clear but you know everyone keeps talking about how you know how beautiful those alleys will look and how lively but in my opinion that's the type ofgenics of gentrification to make a deray heart for san francisco open government neighborhood to raise the value of the property i have letters from over 50 san franciscans and workers. >> thank you. >> thank you. >> >> next speaker. >> good evening commissioners my name is tennessee i can't i'm with the organization gabriel a women's organizations concerned with the women and families i'm a volunteer in the south of market neighborhoods working with immigrant filipinos i'm raising the concern on the public-private partnering you have this city hall has the power to be on the see of the people and in partnering with this 5 m project historically we've seen development project tell not prioritizing the development for people but rather the development that prioritize the profit for corporations historically we've seen displacement here in san francisco back which i can bring up manila town the financial district was in development manila town was actually 10 block area it was a actually, the neighborhood was displaced and they moved to the selma neighborhood then the excelsior and all over the bay area we don't want the same thing to happen in the south of market neighborhood what all seeing the use of community benefits in the development of affordable housing is actually used to dangle in front of communities nonprofit organizations and reliance in the area that divides our communities and dangling this community benefits actually is hurting the neighborhood and actually is guaranteeing to some people and not all the people in the neighborhood right now in terms of the project i'm ease up the zoning of entire area we want to respect the youth and family zone and really not to have this be like a project that actually turns around in a short number of times. >> but slow down and listen to the sxhunts union thank you. >> i'll call more names as the next speaker comes up (calling names). >> good evening, commissioners my name is vivian the executive director of well-being filipino multi center the filipino-americans immigrants and families that go to the center live in the area of the proposed project now supervisors recent reports say the bay area for one the largest filipino communities is now the center of equality in the country the san francisco is of the philippines commissioner for this reason the residents of south of market many of them filipino is speaking before you they believe the proposed project will effect their quality of life if they are even able to stay in the neighborhood if at any point the filipino population and under served population are being pushed out by evictions and affordability issues given the growth income equality it is incumbent on you to listen to the problems of the most vulnerable population are bringing to you today no harm in seeking additional time and studies on the impact of this project on the under served families in the south of market like traffic shadows that have been addressed in a more detailed fashion tonight on a harm in addressing those initials failure to do so would be to contribute to the income of south of market san francisco and the bay area commissioner our decisions have the domino effects on the area so upcoming we love the arts we love cultural and open spaces but what's the use if our youth and families can't afford to live here please address that thank you. >> thank you. >> hello my name is teresa internal of veterans equality center i'll go pretty much to the specific events include the 5 m in the central selma plan please require the developer to have the alternative it respect the filipino heritage district and the family zones require the developer to have a development project alternative consistent with existing and future needs including the major traffic changes with the characterization of the neighborhood and not the 5 m development with that said back in the 1980s san francisco voters passed prop m we served to regulate the amount of office space to building build it limits the allocation to 9 hundred and 50 thousand square feet for the city project the project proposed 8 hundred plus square feet of the office space if those projects welcome back was developed in existing zoning a huge increase of jobs at this large site the current zion it for larger building like the mint maul mall but that amount of the office space, however, if approved nearly 85 percent of the city's larger office allocation goods to the single project this is a second financial district it is clear this development is not downtown support but is more a downtown plan reaches for the area are around transbay but not for this section of selma did you see the movie up imagine shaved ma'am your time is up. >> thank you very much and. >> do i press the bum. >> no sfgov will put it up. >> i'm chris, i basically am here to urge you to reject the staff recommendation for the general plans for the 5 m prestige as your heard this is a c-3 we're aware the prototype amendment will create a second financial district not the tint of the city general plan that is currently zip codes and 2030 s zoning which on the map as you can see the spot right here per this it is centering this is not spot this is saying we're going to all the time the 2030 s zoning and sequesterer the heights and bulks this opens it up i don't know why we're doing this this should be a zoning process the areas we're looking at are here and this area in the central selma area this should not be something that is adapted to effect the values and not a give away of 4 hundred and 70 feet that might not be heard in public as a result not something that sets a precedence to change what we actually went through with all of you for 10 years about the eastern neighborhood zoning we had the selma task force i understand you're not parts of this plan - the selma youths and family zone was part of this plan because this should contribute and connect to the scale we're trying to briefer and for you too deny this because it is not counting is this is something that should be brought up to all neighborhoods in the city not trust the planning process at this scale can change the zoning overnight to the zoning here on behalf of the appellant. >> thank you thank you. >> thank you. >> good evening, commissioners residents of 95 mint building admitting mission street if the construction for this how sure that the seniors in mint building neighbors can live in this housing because a because it the lottery. >> (speaking foreign language.) >> how are we're going to make sure that the seniors living in those buildings are going to live in the senior property. >> (speaking foreign language.) >> so that the seniors can actually live in the building list their names have their names listed in the senior housing. >> (speaking foreign language.) >> and it also needed to have protection plans for about the construction starts. >> (speaking foreign language.) >> and question also need to see the development keeper for the mints mall uestion also need to see the development keeper for the mints mall estion also need to see the development keeper for the mints mall stion also need to see the development keeper for the mints mall tion also need to see the development keeper for the mints mall ion also need to see the development keeper for the mints mall on also need to see the development keeper for the mints mall n also need to see the development keeper for the mints mall also need to see the development keeper for the mints mall w also need to see the development keeper for the mints mall e also need to see the development keeper for the mints mall residents. >> (speaking foreign language.) >> we need to see the design for this the rooms for the seniors. >> (speaking foreign language.) >> and we also need to see the black and white agreement between the residents and from the developer. >> thank you. sir, your time is up. >> thank you very much. >> thank you. >> thank you. next speaker, please. >> i'll call a few more names (calling names) loophole i'm teresa a residence of district of i urge you, please want to require the developer to present the code compliant project alternative that respect the filipino heritage district and the youth and family zones i'm really concerned because being a resident i'm seeing what their don't go for our community pull here and there their divided us in order to get what we want and i don't like that with all the impact studies right now only the impact studies only consider the office team of the residential scheme we need a revised eir that considers the rice plans based on on the preservation scheme including the overall building they're actually doing with this in they're just like 23rd 2015 memo please forgive me most of you may not understand this do you realize who lives in the neighborhoods, do you realize there's a great divide between 5 and 6th street is a huge diversification or distinction there's gentrification how about the open spaces yes, no language actually in the internal revenue even under memo everybody is actually included none will be able to afford the food trucks are reexpensive all the spaces i'm really angry because why i know some of you are not going to listen. i'm not impressed with the flubs i hope you'll not be bought and manipulated by this developer. >> thank you, ma'am your time is up. >> thank you. next speaker, please. >> good evening i'm margo i was living in mint mall i'm near in chronicle building i'm really - affordable housing. >> i know there is small business that sets up the affordable housing area. >> affordable housing - one time i was double housing - >> somebody would be setting up affordable housing for the seniors. >> many mission street. >> in mission street near the chronicle building. >> (speaking foreign language.) >> thank you. >> good evening, commissioners thank you for having us i'm lauren the communities organizer with tndc we had a small business and helped to organize the residents assembly a community of over a hundred residents i want to express our support to the prototype 5 m project we believe that this project will be a positive edition to the selma communities and agreeing to build 83 units f that benefit seniors in selma this was a proposal from the assembly since january 5th m has been in a continuing dialog with the assembly to hear our concerns and suggests i think they have at least 5 - the effort to reach out to other communities and hold a dialog with the mid residents is a responsible developer in future mint neighbor wear happy that 5 m will addresses our concerns around the concussion for the reliance that live on the side adjacent to the 5 m that maybe negatively impacted and we're happy about the examination of health and wellness in the open spaces for the seniors and access to the job opportunities and expressed in your 5 m it will provide a total of 2 hundred affordable homes that helps with the housing crisis in the city as part of commitment to provide affordable housing. >> thank you. sir, your time is up. >> thank you very much. >> i'm sure you're tired i'm tired of hearing words i'm here because i'm in solidarity with the filipino communities i myself am filipino he would add that the preparation to be if you don't know what that is when people were physically avoid of their place of living this is what happening all over the city 5 m will be exactly what you the oh yes. the rest of us get to watch where are the african-americans we want to know you pits the arts against people of color that is not right i i am an artist and writer stop, stop stop stop i want art, i want cultural and diversities this is okay. you're not allowed to be emotional well hell this is emotional because this is about people life and stop making it about the - about money, money, money money. >> lair guzman the gentleman couldn't testify on chinatown and the struggles we're here to support the south of market filipino communities and we're asking you not to begin any discussions or amend the general plan we i want to echo what the filipino residents have talked about in particular that even if it is not spotting bringing 6 hundred luxury units to the south of market will not benefit the children and elders as african-americans are an item of the parts latinos are coming next we don't want this project to actually eliminate the filipino communities from the city so we're in solidarity to not make any all the times tattoos general plan and make sure that project is approved it encompasses the poe people look at the numbers of homeless in district 6 do we need oath 6 hundred units of luxury housing in the city thank you. >> good evening planning commission. >> my name is t doug a collaborative i'm asking you no point to initiate the 5 m development i myself we're ♪ solidarity with the people of selma i've spent a lot of times a alumni of betsey carmichael elementary school before it looks as nice as it is i was there when it had bungalows and asbestos this is spot zoning downtown office special development is proposing to retain instead of the 2030 zoning that is the prevailing zion for this section of the city for many years this is bad city planning to carves and the de facto spot zoning disincurs this to look at the largeness the height and bulk that are proposed are not coon grunt with the support zone by the property remains it consistency quarry innovate fooled by this regardless of tax tick being thrilled this is a classic case of spot zoning initiating the project zone sets a dangerous precedence in its blatant exclusion from city planning >> it's on, sir. >> can you talk into the mike please. >> speak into the my case please. >> you don't need to hear me on this see that i'm andy blue representing the plaza 16 coalition we are here in solidarity with the selma community i want to challenge a couple of things i've heard in the recommendation from the planning dependent on why you should amend the general plan it states that the project will adds office and retail uses that contribute to the employment and booster the viability of the downtown core as the commerce of the city not a justification for general plan amendments the current zoning lose for office and retail there will be loads of retail with the current zoning no need to alternate the zoning in support from the planning department states that the project will add housing opportunities in a walkable urban context but again, the current zoning allows this no reason to amend at jennifer plan to development the housing on the large-scale sites the 16 coalition we are concerned about the monster in the mission which you take a building that is mostly luxury hooufrz and place it in a working-class neighborhoods this as gentrification written on it they want to give money to the arts, however, not going to mitigate the impact that this mostly luxury building with luxury building onsite will have an this neighborhood a lasting impact that causes displacement and changes the neighborhood forever please don't amend the general plan thank you. >> good evening commissioner i'm eric with the latino cultural district and the last point i think there is going to set a dangerous precedence for us in the future i know the selma community for years worked on the filipino heritage and the family and youth district that needs to be respected there's a plan in place to protect their community, their culture and arts and by amending the general plan will not respect that i think that will displace a lot of folks he know those folks that are supporting this project needs to look at this closely we've experienced in the mission displacement with the businesses because the rents go up we become victims of the support we've gone through that and look at it closely and also just making sure that the affordability of rates are affordable for people living in the neighborhood are tell me onsite or giving money to another site we need to make sure those affordable units are affordability we've heard in the past they're not in the building they're said to be thank you very much and please don't pass this. >> okay. let me call a couple of more cards (calling names). >> i'm sorry marie and (calling names). >> good evening commissioner thank you for having me here tonight, tonight i want to talk about you know a lot of people forgot with new construction on a dead block not displacing tenants actually create there's liveability enhancements to the surrounding neighborhood how does 5 m make that it it impact it has neighborhoods severing businesses 5 m provided a mix of neighborhood serving shops and services it is diversifies 5 m offers housing choices to all housing income and provides services and supports the diverse local businesses on fifth ben the filipino communities public school inhabitant 5 m supports the heartache promoting social inclusion telegraph hill the dead block and the alleyways to the site it is green 5 m is served by parks and playgrounds trees are integrated into the street design to provide impact garners for the terrace assessable they're well-connected suspicions by sustainable transportation modes sustainability 5 m used natural resources efficiently to have little waste and 5 m is near the city skyline near the marque he urge the commission to continue tests progress and momentum thank you. >> hi, i'm back i'm marie sorenson with the quart introduce is this part of agreement plan then that project is falling down on its duty according to the eastern neighborhoods plan transit hubs and quarters are maids for housing made for frrnd teachers and firemen and policewoman another give away to luxury condominiums oh, yeah, the arts education that was a great ride having them come in and support the project because their promised something let's see if it follows through but really 4 hundred parking spaces i ride the 27 that's a hard enough bus to ride which the traffic is not hard you'll get rid of a lane of traffic and a or not there is yet again another nightmare in the mission south of market where you pend all the time on the bus and get streets with that nobody walks on they widens them this is a bad fit and shouldn't be here we need more truly affordable housing and not the kind of kwhu make the hundred and $50,000 we need avenue that make under hundred and $50,000 and we don't needs any more luxury housing my god we have enough of that wait until the crash happens i hope we get a good earthquake that knocks down big buildings don't change it you don't i did not know you could come to town and buy housing maybe it is good may not maybe not. >> this shouldn't be news hello allison park scott and this is tough i'm a neighborhood neighbor of the promotions they've done a lot of tremendous outreach and many of the benefits they're great within of the few projects that can helping out the arts it is unfortunate we're looking at communities pitted against each i'll not support them approaching and meeting the niece and concerns that was brought up it is not to decide i'm giving feedback there tech shop this is an essential creative hub for a lot of building inspections and makers a fantastic resource i hope the provided sacrificing space and most of the elements are good you're changing the zone they're not playing by the rules why do we change those this is a huge thing and went into the site i would be supportive but only setting precedence we need to rethink the eastern neighborhood plan it sets that a sloping by creating open space and opportunities for art spaces let's get a bulletproof please look at the initials and preempt to make sure we don't experience oogs problems and left with a giant creator under san francisco so thanks i believe this should moved it is a good development contributing to the creative class thank you for your time. >> good evening, commissioners i live half a block away for the project i'm concerned with the project including how to affect in 5 to 10 years in passed from the traffic to the wing to shadow how the city is prioritizing this over mine and my family and other families health and livelihood in 2008, it was established as part of ooefrment and it was to have the character of selma's low income seniors and family the selma youth and future development to maintain the low to mid scale from the seat and provides the footprint that adapted neighbors serving the organic violations vision it was removed if the family zone in other words, to maintain at sensitive character the proposed project gridlock keys the height limits of the selma youth and the downtown cf zoning district the developer can have something to have less impact they're choosing not to and using the agreements they said in a meeting they can't provides the developments we don't want the heights it is in this expensive health and livelihoods that's why i urge the planning commission to turn down this general plan all the time and instead require the developer to have a code compliant alternative respectful the filipino zone and subsidy this the planning has undertaken for the last year's for the selma plan thank you. >> good evening. i'm gabriel i'm speaking behavior of the latino democratic club with the filipino brothers and sisters we know quarry allies with the former worker strikes we have a strong solidarity and sandra fewer with displacement this project you know, i can see this project goofrd in some issue but the most important speakers this commission and our sfoog should hear from the local sxhunts i'm hoping that commission shows in good faith it puts at the heist form and precedent the members and their pieces of wear asking for something that is you know we'll be compliant with the youth we know in the mission about the displacements of children and families they're telling you the same stairs we know those higher income units are not family friendly we want to see respect to the historical district and culture is something queer lucas we're lucas diversity we really want this commission to help this project going come into compliance we support upcoming forest city is doing to port the city is great you'll see for this project and arts i think if tell me have financial interest i might want to take that with a grain of salt back to the drawing board and we want to see this go forward but something that is code compliant the neighborhoods are working ntsdz admission or mission mayor u make sure under is not spot and innovate be spot zoning and stabilize this neighborhood and take their reads into account thank you, commissioners. >> good work supervisors my name is kimberly busting i'm a current residents of the selma on mission street just on the other side of mary street where the side of project it to say placed i was looking at this; right? right when had i got off work at a glance it seems like the families and seniors will be served open spaces for the family and children all of that but 33 percent of affordable housing 58 affordable units and 58 families but t are they going to the families that live in the community and on a displacement this is not true many of the families and children have been displaced as i said before all of this seams to be gentrification high-rise towers and money for the city and money for you know people that don't live in this community itself what you really need to look at the community your driving away everything is going away filipino and betsey carmichael has many first generation students and immigrants those are the people you're pushing away what community are you trying to serve thank you. >> thank you. >> thank you for your times commissioners i'm bryan a small business owner person a communities organizer work with the labor and i live on o farrell street a little sro next to macy's a couple of brooks if the 5 m project i'm a founding member of the hub and do a lot of organization for the tech communities there's a lot of great aspects to this project you know, i should be you know all for it you know there's a lot of innovation and green there's a lot of you know labors hidden that it seems but i know i just i think it could be better i'm not sure this is spot zoning or de facto spot zoning it needs to be slow down a little bit and will take seats sue hester's and move that from september thirds to something that's more manageable my name is concern i'm not against i know density or tall buildings you know i'm not against rich people and luxury but we as citizens and people that serve the citizenry need to figure out a long term sustainable way to harness all of this energy fwt richest and most powerful elements of society and direct it to serve the least powerful and the poor elements of society it would be a shame if we have a green initiative creative 5 m project you know and no filipino community no black communities so i would just urge you to slow down thank you. sir, your time is up. >> good evening, commissioners i'm with the south of market community action network we are part of selma action committee a coalition of residence and community bans small businesses in the area that comes together to talk about the impacts the new development south of market we're here to demands that we ask you to vote no to the initiation of the general plan the planning department staff says it is you think balanced consistent with the goals policies and objectives the general plan but don't you have to ask yourself that that in the plan fits the plan why would planning need to amend it in the it first place you'll have changes for more than this project has been under review if you're sgroern the whole area this should be considered as part of same process the central selma environmental impact report must include the 5 m report and that respect the philippines no reason to include it from the 2017 project we submitted a believer this is an updated one i want to give a copy for you guys. >> the 5 m project is content with the city's general plan it is ironic at the same time seeking a general plan amendment to make the general plan get the proposed project we urge the commission to reject this to initiate the general plan amendment and instead require the developer to study a code compliant thank you. >> any other public comment? okay public comment is closed. >> and opening up to commissioner antonini. >> thank you all for your comments a few responses first of all to those who feel we should delay that project was in process for seven years evolved into a very good project now and just because it is occurring over the period of time we don't have planning commission hearings didn't median wear on vacation the whole time at least as far as i am concerned i'll quarterback work many my office and time to read the material which i can concentrate on one project rather than dealing with many promotions you can sit down ma'am if you want to stand up you can fine i'll go on so i think that is an excellent time to concentrate and faster those who asked for a code compliance project this is land is owned by one individual an entity so code compliant means likely everything every single everything is commercial no housing and even if housing it would be 12 percent affordable more winds impacts and fewer hectic buildings saved and little or no open space especially, if this was parcels out to a number of different builders if a special use the purchase to allow all the benefits that are brought forward and in return for density in some parts as pointed out 42 percent of the lands is zoned lower and 58 zoned looir higher it is a good plan to produce an excellent project there are cars that are connected and best 19 to have them to park with their scars and not expedite for exist yargz with the shadow issue we'll talk about that at the prevail hearing by the effects are minimal especially it appears a small amount bra the park is opened we'll deal with i don't understand a lot of the opposition automotive got a lot of empty parking lot and no reason to create more jobs and housing and various things especially affordable housing with not negative impacts on those who are living there and maybe provide jobs for people living there we've spending billions of on a subway that makes this a perfect place for more commercial space and hoosiers that mr. tie-in booifl with the rest of the city and the bay so, anyway i've noticed they've reduced the wind impacts into hazardous the 26 from 74 so this is a big improvements on the hallwaysus winds conditions and as far as those who comments on the loss of one lane i think the pardon are not doing that but getting rid of a little area where people turn a curve there is a right tun or turn but have to make a 90 degree turn that is safer for those getting across the states kwaef talked about the dempster and the cast for the art so those are the main things and addresses the goals of the planning code and a lot of public spaces i'm impressed with the open space ms. dialog it means if you go back to the fooundz of the golden gate park the way they've made the trees 45 dresses to the westerly kwindz the larger buildings are acting as barriers and letting lights to the last year opinions to mary court could be very wonderful area to sit in a lot of light if the south and a lot of kwindz blokdz by some of the buildings it covet reminds me of some of the betters developments in san francisco one of them mixed use is hills plaza one of my favorite and levies plaza and the embarcadero center is the sign of things that's a big success it promises to do all those things but ever more we'll have lots for open space and ground level and a lot for affordable housing and money on the arts and preservation of historic buildings than what was case at embarcadero center i'm prepared to initiate i'll see what my fellow commissioners have to say but i think that is a wonderful project. >> commissioner hillis. >> so thank you, everybody for the pregnancy and the. a couple of questions for staff we've heard about code compliance project can with you talk about or tells you what that may look like i mean this is a parcel it is not one parcel respectfully i imagine it is a bunch an public streets >> a crystal ball someone develops this as a project you know what are the possible uses what did that look like. >> thank you kevin guy with the planning department staff in terms of the allowable uses the vast generator within the 2030 district as mentioned a 2030 f however, the c-3 allows all those office uses and likewise depreciates be residential use and is ground floor retail and the artists the fact it is a c-3 f does not distinguish it from a c district the c-3 as restricts but otherwise the c-3 districts and intense residential recognizing it's center of all public transit improvements. >> so parcels where we kind of developed individual in the streets are public streets the various streets that are now we're not proposing to vacate any of them. >> right some of the - there's nuances some of them are fee lots apple combams it is closed to vehicular traffic but a promenade with the wralt all the streets within could currently walk through you'll condition to walk there with moral amenities and craven xhoofts of being a pedestrian. >> the affordable housing requirements are what. >> they'll default to the standard to any development in the city that provides 12 percent onsite or 20 percent unify reasonable person the equivalent of an in use. >> the open space i mean, there's fees associated with offense and maybe residential but requirements there is - certain lots size public open space and there are fee requirements in the downtowns core open space those political here there are requirement for residential projects to provide open space but for the roirnl reliance only that is for private balconies or roof deck and commercial in the downtowns are to provide open space as well can co-come under those circumstances in the form of lobby open space speaker i think in a lot of quantify measures a lot of the open space that's preeptd serves the residents and surrounding visitors is sort of agree gated and orgdz in a much successful and inviting way to the general public. >> how parking is the parkin

Related Keywords

Fremont , California , United States , Chad , Valencia , Carabobo , Venezuela , Washington , District Of Columbia , San Francisco , Manila , Philippines , Iowa , San Francisco Bay , San Francisco County , North Beach , San Mateo County , Telegraph Hill , Mission District , New York , Yerba Buena , Green Center , Oakland , Mission Bay , Ford City , Hills Plaza , Georgia , Rincon Hill , Michigan , Jordan , Tennessee , Allison Park , Pennsylvania , Detroit , San Francisco State University , Saudi Arabia , Embarcadero Center , Ohio , Jackson Park , Italy , Hawaii , Park Merced , Italian , Americans , Filipino , Saudi , Filipinos , American , Christopher Thomas , Nancy Veronica , Mary Knight , John Ram , Laura Guzman , Clare Jones , Kate Hartley , Marie Sorenson , Jane Kim , Betsy Carmichael , Julie Christensen , Veronica Flores , Chris Thomas , Jose States , Marla Knight , Jenny Scott , Katherine Moore , Lisa Chang , Kate Howard , Jane Kims , Albert Wang , Betsey Carmichael , Brooke Turner , Lou Gehrig , Councilmember Glover , Jim Lazarus , Peter Albert , Sarah Jones ,