To determine. Who manages the academy of art . A corporation with a bomb line of doll bottom line. Who defines the Academic Mission . Ms. Stevens and only ms. Stevens . What is your role regarding the academy . I am very, very glad the City Attorney sued them. I am glad that this fund has had all kinds of negotiations that are private between themselves, but at some point you have got to say what is the role of the public and the Planning Commission . We have to have the ability to read the document every 200 pages of documents. I only get three. I have been working on this issue. Thank you for your courtesy. President melgar thank you. Next speaker, please. Theresa flanders. I cant believe we are at this stage. It has been a long time. In living in north beach i encountered the aau on a regular basis. We lost so much housing, there were so many things missing in terms of oversight, in terms of honesty, transparency. Above all what i hope we learn and that we do actually learn from this long, long period of time with this particular institution is what is needed to be in place that we do not lose any more housing, and i really wish that a lot more housing was going to be returned to our Housing Stock in this particular case. I also, the idea of schools Building Student housing, that would be a really good lesson to learn in this. That is still not part of what im seeing, losing the Da Vinci Hotel for Student Housing doesnt feel right at all. There could be so many Different Things done with that hotel. Furthermore, as we are seeing so many buildings as corporate rentals, vacation rentals, a motor lodge, it is something i know my family of 10 when i was a kid, that is the kind of place we would stay. That eliminates a certain population with less money not staying in the three or five star hotels, there would be a place. Again, its wanting the aau to actually build the Student Housing. That would be on them and not removing housing from our rental stock that we so need so lots of lessons to be learned. I hope we really learn them. Thank you very much. President melgar thank you. Any other Public Comment on this item . Good afternoon, commissione commissioners, test melbourne. I would like to support the comments previously about the loss of controlled Housing Units in rent controlled Housing Stock. 40 million. I have heard the Mayors Office say a Million Dollars a unit to build the Affordable Housing maybe 900,000. 40 units. If it was only 500,000, that would be 80 units. I object to the secrecy around the negotiations and the internal workings of the university there. Again, mcdonalds makes money from actually land leasing. They buy the land and then they get a tenant to be a franchisee. It looks like the aau is in the same boat as the people who own the university on the one hand through various llcs own the sites that in the future they can choose to sell off in different ways. They are not owned by the university. There has to be more scrutiny there. It is not a compact campus. I agree it moves in the right direction, but as long as they are allowed to remain spread all over the map the way they are now and the way things have been going, we are just going to get more of the same so please give a lot more scrutiny. This was not a very good chance for the public to weigh in before your review in october, but the fact about student debt, too, i want to reenforce that. The feds are starting to say if a school is producing a lot of debt and a lot of students who dont get jobs in their field when they graduate maybe they shouldnt guarantee the student loans. Maybe that should also play into our consideration. President melgar thank you. Any other Public Comment on this item . Public comment is closed. Commissioner fung. In the development of the Student Housing metering as indicated by the project sponsor approximately 30 of their enrollment, were statistics provided to staff on the other enrollees in terms, as an example percentage of commuters versus noncommuters . Thank you. That is a question of comparative analysis of the academy to other institutions . No in terms of balance of students. That was part of the discussion was looking at the student body. How many are on site versus how many are Online Students . They have the percentage of the student body that is fulltime but may take one class online. We have that breakdown. Are you also speaking where they reside . Yes. That was a thorough analysis done as part of the e. I. R. And estm in 2016. A lot of that was part of that document. Give us an idea. How many as a generality, how many are commuters . I would refer to the academy for the current figures on that. While he is looking at it, ms. Sanchez, since they have a shuttle system that is fairly extensive, any discussions on electric buses . Excellent question. I do not know if we have had that discussion. That would be with transportation folks with the academy. I think there have been changes if they are biodiesel. I do not know what extent they have considered electrification of the fleet. I can ask the project spons sponsor. Jim abrams, council for the academy of art. In the imp, what we have done is reported all of the enrollment for students who are fulltime and parttime. Then we have broken them out for fulltime one, two and three and more classes online. We have not indicated where the students live with their commuting or not. We have said that the students that are fulltime students who take up to one class online thanks is the universe of students we have to house regardless where they live currently. When i was speaking about the 30 number, i should have clarified that number goes up over time. What the current agreement requires is that at the time of the signing of the Development Agreement we have to house 32 of the fulltime. By 2026, 36 . Then we have to get 45 and above. As i indicated that is greater than any other private university in the city. Now we house 36 of the fulltime. It is above the 32 requirement in the da. There is a provision that requires we have to exceed 90 occupancy rate on the beds for the triggers to occur. In order for the rate at 36 we have to show we are exceeding 90 occupancy on the beds. The other question. Did you folks ever consider going electric on your shuttle system . The shuttles, currently, i believe, they are clean energy vehicles. Your report indicates they are going from diesel to gasoline. Correct the diesel engines are being phased out. I am not sure about electric vehicles whether or not we would do that. I want to say the shuttles are not being provided for the sake of providing the shuttles. The school is adjusting the shuttles on the basis of demand for the students. The t dm Program Gives points for the program. Notwithstanding the fact there is a muni system. Thank you. President melgar commissione r koppel. Vice president joel koppel g was talking about. I was asking about sustainability within the buildings and transportation. This is a small city you dont need a gas tank of 300 miles to shuttle students from believes to buildings that are very close together. You know, it is simple to install solar panels on one of the many buildings and feed into batteries charges up small shuttles and eliminate the noise to the neighbors. As i mentioned last week mayor breed is intending to take the Ground Transportation to 100 full electric vehicles. That is the way we are going as the city and we should follow suit as the university, too. President melgar can i share more . The Gold Standard for master plans in the city is very high. This is the first time the aau is submitting an imp. We have golden gate university, California College of art, hastings, university of San Francisco. Many of the commissioners have been in these things and the document twice to emulate the form mat of those imps, the critical comment. It stea still reads as a doct responding to the specific legal challenges the aau has recently gone to. That is probably editorial more than anything else. I have a substantive question in what form you are quantifying the student body. I heard you quote minimum of one class taken on campus. I think that is what this document says. That standing in contrast to the typical metrics where the student body is quantified in fulltime equivalent for both on campus and offcampus student. How are you accounting for the students you actually have . It is harder to understand when it comes to speaking about your buildings in other typical institutional master plans, Square Footage is counted by an accurate utilization of space for the actual count of how many students are in each class with an actual number of teaching hours. Somewhere along the line while you believe your metrics are accurate, i would like to see an equivalency accounting of how you have both do the same thing as other institutional master plans to. Mathematics simplifies the tabulations but i think we need to have some apples and apples here in order to bring this imp just into the same level of documenting the operation of this institution. That is i think perhaps a matter of clarification on your part. I have heard frequent mention of clustering the campus, and while i am very interested in seeing that you are consolidating operations in more specific concentrated locations of the Real Estate Holdings of the academy, i am still wondering when i look at page 55 of your document as to whether or not the way your curriculum lays itself over your real estate that is really fully an expression of clustering. I see, for example, the discipline of photography spread over three buildings which are quite far away from each other. I see the teaching of fashion doing the same thing. One would expect for all of us having gone to universities that related curriculum in proximity to each other architecture, interior and landscape in divergent places. I would like to perhaps have that explained better. One does not want to think you would be duplicating resources, including making it difficult for students and teachers who operate in similar environments to move back and forth which reflects on the Shuttle Service. When you cereal lecluster the purpose really cluster. The purpose is to make the turnover a short minimum walking distance. The university of california davis modeled in the 1970s is the most desirable model of campus operations. In an urban environment that would be equally desirable including public transportation. Also the use of public bicycles which cities are offering in abundance with the use of e scooters. Speaking about clustering, it is classroom utilization and the overlay of transportation strategy which really speak to a campus model that you are expressing as a goal but not fully realized. I have a question that is more suggestion. I had a difficult time for you to start utilizing 1946 vanness as an auto exhibit andy sign center and the Design Center behind on 1849 washington you seem to have a Similar Program that could perhaps be a little bit more detail how the auto museum manifests itself into vanness corridor because it spreads out and it seems to be using a rather large amount of Square Footage. It is not quite clear what that program is. I think a little extra detail on other programs would be desirable, where they are located, how the existing Square Footage interact how the teaching and resources in those particular centers come together. I couldnt quite understand the utilization of the concordia club. There seems to be an indication it is being used an expansion of the fashion program. I could see it being a historic rated building, not resource but rated building that was originally, i think, a social club. It has a Swimming Pool in the bottom and probably has presentation and meeting rooms. How a building like that adapts to school is not fully clear. I see the same question with the bakery how that would adapt. I would like to see a little more detail on that building as well. Those are my comments. President melgar any other comments . Okay. I just i want to first of all, thank our legal team, and particularly ms. Watty for your hard work over the years, and director ram and the Mayors Office of housing for all of the work they put into this issue, and also members of the public, particularly, ms. Hester, who have stayed on the problem to help us make progress towards a resolution. I want to thank the academy of art. To commissioner moores comments, this is not the first submittal of the institutional master plan. There have been others that we have turned down. I think this is the first real institutional master plan that has been submitted and not something that reads like a pr document so i am grateful for that because, you know, it is being taken seriously. I think, you know, it is important to plan for the future and for how you use land in the city. I will say that i am glad that we are working towards the resolution. Is it perfect . No, there are a lot of things we would all like to see in it, but i think on the whole, i am appreciative that we are making progress towards resolving a whole host of issues that have to do with land use and compliance,anticly the loss of land controlled housing which is important. Director ram, did you want to Say Something . Well to reiterate thanks to everyone, the Attorneys Office and scott and liz and andrew perry was very much involved in this. The question before you today, before the commission is whether to close the public hearing is the point where you accent the master plan to start the 90 day clock for approvals. In the past you have not taken action on that but through informal agreement by the commissioners they agreed to close it or you can vote to continue it and not close the public hearing if you feel additional notice is needed. It is not notice of an action item but we can vote to close it . I would recommend as the chair you ask if there is objection from the commissioners to close the public hearing or if there is Additional Information they would like to have included in the imp then you could continue the matter. President melgar i think what we should do is see if there are objections. If there is a majority of commissioners who object we continue. Commissioner richards. If you could go 304. 5 how you feel this imp meets that section of the planning code i could be swayed to close this hearing. The main points in 304. 5 as i stated in the initial presentation would be that it addresses the nature of the institution, it is history and growth. I think this document as well as the numerous documents we prepared over the years, the previous imp, i think we have a better understanding of that. Physical changes that have occur understand the neighborhoods as a result of the growth. I think we have documented that through this as well. Services provided and service populations. We have analysis there with the changes that have happened over the years. Employment characteristics are covered, the fiscal plant in San Francisco. We have a clear concise appendix there. The parking means we have a discussion on the Transportation Development plans of the institution for the next decade. We outlined that. In addition the Background Information provided by the term sheet as well. Maybe to the transportation issues raised at Public Comment. I note the original term sheets including requirement the Academy Provide muni passes to students and faculty. That was in the original settlement in 2016. We worked to ensure the they an compliance with bike requirements of the planning code. They have a large number of bike parking to add to address the transit issues. Through the Environmental Review there is a dramatic change in the shoalings system and rationalization of the shuttle system. They didnt have a program before. They have a more systematic approach to the Transit System now. Not to say things chant change in the future cant change in the future. We have made a lot of improvements. The transit passes and bike parking we have made strong progress on there in addition to physical changes to consolidate the facilities. President melgar commission. Commissioner moore i would ask to ask the shuttle system the public clearly said was the introduction of Rapid Transit and all lines basically connecting to the other campus locations. Let me look one more time at the concentration of the university on vanness and perhaps not needing as intense of a Shuttle Service as the document still indicates. I believe i would like, i could support letting the imp go out today. I still would like to see it to account for the student body by fulltime equivalent. That makes it compare annual to other Institution Master plans that can be done without us stopping the clock. I would like to see a couple other adjustments which came through my previous comments. Look at shuttle regarding vanness, look at fulltime student equivalent, look at Teaching Centers clustered on vanness rather than the scattered pattern which the university actually originally indicated to us was their preferred mode