Shame and more than that harmful to lose that open space. Its understanding open green space and hard scaped. It has an impact again on how people con agre con gra gate ane space and the heat related increases as people are more and more concerned about global warming. And water run off. So again, were in favor of housing and keeping the grown gn space. Thank you. Supervisor yee next speaker. Good afternoon. My name is barbra brener. I am here as a neighbor of the 3333 california project. Im in favor of over turning the Planning Commissions approval of the Developers Plan as currently submitted. I speak in support of building 700 plus units on the site but with the strategy that is less didisruptive. Theres been a pattern of impropriety with the proposal before you. The site would have caused modifications in the design. In addition, flexible retail was never discussed nor was it mentioned in the Environmental Impact report so neighbors had no ability to consider it and respond. The e.
Statement overriding sequa findings and that was not unanimous. The omission of an analysis in sequa is an emission so the measure analysis is legal issue. Its was incorrect any use of the design guidelines. Is that it . Yes. Ok, i want to say these pub pubc hearings for 22, 26 and 30 have been held and closed. We are now reconvened as the board of supervisors. We will take up the items related to the exemption from Environmental Review first and that would be items 23, 24 and 25 and we will be making an analysis of the adequacy, act accuracy and completeness of the environmental report, certified by the Planning Commission for the project at 3333 california street. Again, this requires six votes of the board of supervisors. Do we have a motion on items 23, 24 and 25 . Supervisor stephanie . Thank you, president yi. First of all, i would like to start by thanking everyone who came out today to give Public Comment. I do take these appeals very seriously. Here at the board of supervisors
Landmark. Laurel hill gardens cemetery. As well as the cemetery, for San Francisco pioneers u. S. Senators and civil war heroes, its a treefilled park for San Francisco residents. Since i noticed the Historic Cemetery plaque missing from the red brick wall a few years ago, i wondered why would anyone want to erase this history. It made me sad. Well, as a result, it seems that the job of marking and memorializing this important San Francisco landmark has been left to its survivors, the trees. Some of these large, old growth trees are monument to this lost history. In addition to the history, many studies have reported that the loss of large, old trees leads to an over all loss of urban biodiversity. They are critical ecological structures because relative to their size, they are disproportionate providers of resources crucial to wildlife. Its times of Necessary Development and help preserve the landmarks that define your cities rich history. Concern neighborhoods are not anti developmen
Reduce loading impacts as dwell times for trucks and loading times would be reduced so they could get in and out of the building. This is not sequa issue. The appellant fails to meet the burden that the record supports reversal of the Planning Commission and dpw. It did not and cannot provide evidence in support of its evidence. The records supporting the determinations is thorough consisting of multiple years of study and analysis and based on facts and evidence rather than argument and infect allegation. Speculation. This project will transform and underutilized wallofftioff tens sites with 744 new homes. , 185 affordable units for seniors, childcare uses and neighborhood serving retail and commercial uses. We ask you reject these appeals and move forward today. Thank you, supervisors. Thank you. Any questions . I have a question of the proje project, is there a reason why it was infeasible to make a family unit affordable . So this project through the Development Agreement, it was d
So, this was another new aspect. The e. I. R. Response to comments states the project will comply with the provision to the planning code as to Affordable Housing but thats inaccurate because the Development Agreement would wave those and have no moderate Income Housing and have its own plan. The e. I. R. Failed to analyze the projects potentially Significant Impact on shadows on publicly accessible open space. This is the Developers Site plan and shadows are shown in blue. This shows frequent shadows on the lower walnut walk and the square which the developer proposes to use as Community Benefits and open space. These proposed areas would be shaded mostly by the proposed buildings for much of the day or year. The city procedures provide that shadows must be studied if the use of open space could be adversely effected. And it doesnt matter whether the open use controls. The city failed to conduct a cityrun planning process. And the developer described his proposed project to the commun