About back here about 7 45, please. Thank you we are ready. Okay. Please be seated. Welcome back to the november 6, 2019 meeting of the San Francisco board of appealing. We are now on item number 7. This is appeal number 19085. Our mission no eviction versus the Planning Commission subject property is 344 shortstop 14th street, appealing the issuance to mm stevenson llc of planning code section 329 large project authorization. Adopting findings relating to a large project authorization for the project proposing new construction of a sevenstory, 78 feet at all mixed use residential building measuring 84,630 square feet with 5,890 square feet of ground floor retail use and 606 dwelling units consisting of four studio units, 25 twobedroom, two bathroom units which would utilize the code section 6591565918 and invoke waivers from the Development Standards for rear yard pursuant to section 134 usable open space 135 and height, planning code 268. Record number 2014. 0948. I need to make a di
Clear, i mean, this is like eight affordable units out of 60. Okay . So its not 18 percent. And even 18 percent is way lower than the mission needs. These large state projects that come under state law you heard about oh we cant do anything about adus because the state says we cant. We cant do anything about this because the state says you cant. Youre widening authority is being constantly narrowed by these state projects that are, these state laws that are one size fits all. And that one size does not fit San Francisco. Youve got to find a way to push back on some of this stuff and particularly in the mission we cant have, you know projects that are done with such low affordability and false data. This project assumes their Traffic Studies or whatever 7 deliveries per day. Seven deliveries per day for 60 units. I get at least one a day myself. You know. Seven deliveries a day. And having adequate accommodation for that . Thats just false data. And its wrong. And it should be reexamine
Are more compact for folks to use in a variety of ways. I certainly understand the desire to make sure that theres continued Community Space for meetings for the community and i think the unique nature of this building means the common space needs to be used for residents and so over all, an unbalanced this is a good project and i support it and i make a motion to approve. I second. Thank you, commissioners. To adopt findings for requested waivers. Commissioner fung. Aye. Commissioner johnson. Aye. Moore. Aye. Richards. No. President melgar. Aye. So moved. The motion passes 41 with commissioner richards voting against. Case number 2019014525pca. Parking requirements planning code amendments. We could take item 10 out of order. Very good, taking 10 out of order. Pca for the full ton Street Grocery store special use district this is a planning code amendment. Good afternoon, commissioners. The item before you is proposed legislation regarding the flton greece respecial use. Its by advise
Entirely. Its been several years since the new season deal has fallen through and the Grocery Store still does not have a full service Grocery Store. Now, theres light at the end of the tunnel. We have an interested tenant, trader joes. This is not a done deal. Theyre still in the process of doing their Due Diligence and exploring the viability of opening a store in the neighbourhood. Hayes valley has a formative retail ban. We have to make a special exemption to allow former retail Grocery Stores. The exemption only applies to the potentially Grocery Store and the retailer still has to go through a conditional use authorization which will include time to discuss community concerns. It is not an open door. It does not repeal the entire form of retail ban in hayes valley. That will remain intact. The legislation does not allow certain uses such as medical cannabis dispensaries, hospitals, nonprofit or office space and it does allow for general Retail Services and sales, pharmacies, and
And do some vital programming for the programs and families that are going to be moving into the area. We support this project and the market octavia amendment. Thank you. Next speaker, please. I am a hays valley resident and a longterm supporter of market and octavia. When this was coming up and talking about 400foot towers, they would say you support this . Yes, i do. This is the transit hub. So to much criticism from some people, i was an aggressive supporter of all of this. I think some of what concerns me about this in addition to some technical points and the points raised by the other speakers about the adequacy of muni and other things like that for services, when the proposal to raise some of the 400foot towers was first voiced, it was look at the esthetic of this tower with 400foot towers. We can do thinner, elegant, beautiful, very tight and its going to really look gorgeous. Well get some extra housing out of it. Isnt that good . Yeah, that sounds good. However, as its deve