And we reinforce our support of the adoption of the guidelines in march and any guidelines that provide clarity to our stakeholders and their clients and help alleviate some of the administrative cumbersome activitieses that you guys all have to face. And as well as in the planning department. Clearly illustrated examples of the actual rules associated with planning in the city will immensely help our ark tex as well as those living and work and playing in San Francisco, be able to continue to call this home. Thank you very much. Thank you. Next speaker, please. Thank you. Hello. My name is luco and im a architect practicing in San Francisco and Merry Christmas of the a. I. A. Im here to speak for myself as an architect. This version of the urban Design Guidelines is strong in arctic lating things that every good architect considers. Context, scale, texture and programme. These core issues give architects, project sponsors and planning a common language as we build the story about the buildings we are proposing. This could be a step toward a more consistent project review coming from the planning staff and a more consistent process, which we would all welcome. In particular, i appreciate that the urban Design Guidelines acknowledges that a building can and should express a clear organizing architectural idea. A driving spatial concept that consistentsly informs its sighting, organization, expression and details. The guidelines require that proposed projects have architectural integrity not just in terms of design but high production values as well. These are laudsable goals that we share as architects. Good afternoon. Excuse me. Good afternoon. Im karen pacon, im an architect and member of the a. I. A. And practice here in San Francisco and id like to reiterate everything that luke just said that i really appreciate as a design professional, the intent and the clear description in the Design Guidelines, the intents to promote good design and architectural integrity. Through an understanding of context. And in the context of this vision of San Francisco, the more presimentive requirements in the u. D. G. S seem a little bit out of place. Sort of vestigial uses. For example, to avoid the use of dark materials on page 38 seems odd given the cultural and racial diversity San Francisco rightfully celebrates in all other aspects of civic life. As architects practicing in 2018, we aim to respect the past but also to reflect our present moment. We agree with the goal of new projects being compatible with their context and takes a lot of rigorous thinking to understand what context means. Its not prescriptive, per se. And so by that we dont agree that naive matching is the best way to achieve this. I wanted to add a word about the special area guidelines and with respect to david and the hard work that david is take on. And i know there are a lot of pulling and interests and i wonder if theyre necessary and i just heard a number of people say we absolutely have to have them. We dont need u. D. G. S. But the draft in its current form seems to me like an overlay, which could potentially devolve into Prescriptive Solutions and that is not really a good way to promote design that has its own internal integrity. So, im hoping that the urban Design Guidelines can speak for themselves with their emphasis on rigorous understanding of context. Thank you. Thank you. Next speaker, please. Good afternoon, commission. Im an architect, member of the a. I. A. , speaking for myself. Ive been a practicing ark nekt San Francisco for over 26 years. And generally speaking, myself and the a. I. A. Are in support of the guidelineses. Anything that can help provide clarity is beneficial to my profession and my clients. I think i support anything that simplifies the process and i would implore the staff to keep that in mind when they apply these guidelines that they are guidelines and theyre there to improve the built environment. In my experience, the guidelines often force bad buildings to stay bad buildings and that there has to be an allowance for creativesty of architects and improvement of the built environment over time and not just allow it to continue the way it has always been. We have to have progress and we have to allow creativity of good architects. For me, primarily, anything that will simplify this process, having worked here for a long time, it progressively gets more difficult and i would not support anything that adds to that complexity and difficulty of process. And i think that within the spirit of mayor lees directive to the departmentses to try to simplify and streamline the process, that we should keep in mind that this change and any future changes to the r. D. G. S should keep in mind that it should be to help simplify and provide clarity. Thank you. Thank you. Next speaker, please. My name is jack edwards. Good afternoon. I work with montgomery partners, owners of a number of mediumtolarge rent controlled apartment buildings in San Francisco. I spoke before you at the last hearing of the urban Design Guidelines on the topic of light wells. I pointed out that there were no guidelines requiring light wells, even though many of the areas in which u. S d. G. S would apply not only have light wells, but that those areas are characterized by large light wells often in lieu of code complied [inaudible]. This graphic here is the block of bush street near pine where we own a building. This block is typical of dozens and dozens of blocks in the market rc4 districts. Many of these buildings, including ours, have a studio and onebedroom units whose only windows are on a light well. Often these units are occupied by low and moderate income te nranlsz. I was happy to hear that you asked for light well protection at the last hearing but disappointed that the department responded with a guideline that requires, quote, matching light wells to at least 75 of the length of existing ones and similar depth, unquote. The Zoning Administrator has testified before you on many occasions that proposals tend to push proposed envelopes right up to the minimum requirements of the code. And so with a guideline that quanitifies 75 , we are sure to see new light wells, 25 smaller than existing adjacent light wells. Light in the air will be severely decreeds. In some cases it will result in 100 blockage of light and air. So, while these people are low and moderate income in rentcontrolled apartments and theyre not able to pick up and move to a new home when they lose their light and air, i would like to suggest this rephrasing, and ill change that quote, new light wells should match existing adjacent ones in length and depth. Or by also adding accept where at least less than 10 reduction of the proposed light wells size have no impasse on the light or air to any adjacent residential units. I think it is reasonable to require matching, but the staff insists there needs to be more flexibility [coughing] [inaudible] and our tenants will really suffer if they lose their light and air, which is going to happen when the new project goes up next door. Thank you. Thank you, mr. Edwards. Next speaker, please. Ms. Hester. Two quick observations. I want to refer you to what the presentation was by the staff. And sitting in the audience, when you have a white on colored, its [inaudible]. Right now, on the its a tv shows black screen and white letters, legible. The guy before me had a presentation that was put up there and it is black letters on white. People that are really concerned about design should look to the documents that theyre friending. White on pastel colours doesnt read. It doesnt read to the audience. Its really hard to follow it. Really hard to follow it sitting in the audience. So, if you are going to be focusing on design, look to thyself, staff. You design products that come out to the commission are really hard to read. Secondarily, about an hour before i came here, i got an email from a person who had no idea about, but i knew the project. And she was freaking out that the project was proposed and then mraiing Department Staff had gone through the 311 and was going to cut off the light to her rooms. And there was no attention paid to it because the staff did a 311. She said what do i do . What do i do . This is a valid consideration. There is existing housing on most of the lots and a new housing or new building hases to be looked at in terms of, a, are there existing tenants that are going to be displaced, that one that i talked about was also shadows and removal of existing tenants. The staff has to do a more thorough job. And not just dump it all on, oh, we can go and have a Design Consultation with the staff. Im seeing a lot of deficiencies in the communications. Whoever is doing your graphics should go back to school and learn how to communicate to people. You dont have white on pastel and you [bell ringing] and you really have to Pay Attention to tenants and shadows. Thank you. Thank you. Next speaker, please, ms. Gallagher. Commissioners, good afternoon and happy new year. For your record, mary gallagher. In some prior administrations, there was a general rule that if the commission wanted something done in between the regular budget cycle that wasnt already in the approved Work Programme, and it was going to take a threshhold of certain amount of dollars, then that item would come back to the commission for discussion. On its Work Programme. This is because the commission is charged in the charter with responsibility of the budget and a budget is meaningless, unless every dollar is tied to a Work Programme, goals and timelines. So, you asked for guidelines, Design Guidelines in the petrero and one other areas. Have the staff bring a proposed Work Programme to the commission and said, well, you know instead of producing finetuned Design Guidelines for any specific neighbourhood, instead were going to produce broadside of design statements for the entire city. Well pull some of the properties out of the r. D. G. S, well introduce some conflicts like light rails between the r. D. G. S and u. D. G. S and allow developers to get out of the guidelines if they produce something we like better at the moment. By the way, we wont let any neighbourhood groups in to be involved with the initial design of the guidelines. That proposal would have gone over like a lead brick. Yet toot u. D. G. Proposals were conceived in kind of the same format. And its proposed for adoption today with overlay of new neighbourhood guidelines that, unfortunately, arent more specific than the u. D. G. S themselves. Its still pulling six unit or more buildings out of the r. D. G. S. Its still covers, korkts the maps anyway, Historic Districts even though it is not presentationrelate and covers areas like the upper market that already have really good fine grain Design Guidelines and also still lacks enough detail to help you actually review projects in the petrero and elsewhere. The general naurltsz of these policies opens the door to actually what polls developers and neighbourhoods alike dont want and that is vagueness. And these policies also tend to focus on what is going on within the lot as opposed to and at the expense of whats going on around it. I was like one of the other speakers, happy to see a couple of specific Design Guidelines added since last time. Like light wells and then aghast to see the new minimum standard, which is the most the only standard the developers ever made the minimum standards. At 75 matching. In other words, they arent going to be matching. This, i thought, was more evidence that the policies do not emphasize or fully address the existing environment. If knollsing comes out of this hearing, i hope youll at least ask the department to produce a Design Review checklist from the u. S d. G. S and then start sending them to you with each subsequent petrero project. This is the only way youll know if these work for you or not. Theres been nothing from standing in the way of departments from doing that on a trial basis for the last two years. If you like how it works, then adopt it for the petrero. [bell ringing] thank you very much. Thank you. Next speaker, please. Is the overhead on . It can be. Once you place something down, sfgov tv will go to it. Ok. Thanks. Good afternoon. And happy new year. Lisa fromer, liberty hill. After two years, its gratifying to see that the u. D. G. Is not the overarching citywide guideline. And all waivers have been deleted. But its vague generalities and modern bent still wont guide development that in any way complements our older residential or historic neighbourhoods. Many eastern and downtown districts and other neighbourhoods already have their own very granularspecific guidelines. An appendix in the first version of the u. D. G. S listed 33 of them. The latest draft now applis to the neighbourhood commercial corridors. Thats the Residential Commercial interface that has always been part of the residential fabric. The r. D. G. Has the detail and granularity to inform design here and includes Historic Preservation but not u. D. G. There is nothing in the u. D. G. That speaks to light air privacy. And now there is a little more on light wells. The reason its up to neighbourhoods to write their own special area guidelines for their n. C. D. S is neither necessary or advisable. Worst of all tu. D. G. Is being applied to Historic District. Our recent request for exemption was turned down. Liberty hill, like the other 12 landmark districts, has its own guidelines in article 10 and all the Historic Districts have the Historic Preservation guidelines using the secretary of the interior standards. Sensitivity and real specifics are required to preserve our historic neighbourhoods. Heres an example from the western soma Design Guidelines. Overhead, please. It addresses development around historic and potentially Historic Buildings to preserve the overall historic character of the neighbourhood. [bell ringing] nothing in the u. D. G. Even comes close. Thats why Historic Districts must be exempt. I cant say that strongly enough. The time tested r. D. G. S, article 10, Historic Preservation guidelines and existing specific guidelines all work well for our neighbourhoods and Historic Districts. They address preservation, not modernization. But for areas like petrero that apparently need Design Guidelines, the u. D. G. Is a nice fit. [bell ringing] thank you. Thank you. Next speaker, please. Good afternoon. My name is reesa titlebalm. I remember in 1981 when a small group of people got together to develop a committee to research our neighbourhood and in 1984 i became president of what is now called the liberty hill Historic District. Over the last 37 years, ive been a neighbourhood activist and ives been very, very strongly working towards preservation as we modernize for this time. We have seen many different plans come and go. I have been in this room many times. And i dont think that there is anything more valuable than people who are living in the neighbourhood who know whats going on. Right now, we have valencia street that is called a transit corridor and there is no transit on valencia street. All the buses have been eliminated. In addition, its very, very important to understand that in our neighbourhood, the commercial areas are largely residential. And according to a realtor, recently, he is saying that all the residential neighbourhoods are really part of this commercial district. The commercial districts do have to reinvent themselves for the modern reality. [coughing] amazon, google and we can see on valencia street that there are a great number of vacancies. Guidelines need to be responsible and responsive to each neighbourhoods identity. In liberty hill, we have a responsibility to preserve our significant architecture and our streetscapes. The u. D. G. Should not be applied in our Historic District. They simply do not relate to our specific concerns for preservation as we work towards the future. We hope youll exempt the Historic Districts from this plan which really has no specifics and is very vague on the details. [bell ringing] i find that many of the qualities that are mentioned are so subject to interpretation that they cannot be considered. Thank you. [please stand by] [please stand by] and its a risky proposition. The last quote over time and theres layers that uphold San Franciscos unique neighborhoods and support their evolution. I ask you whose to decide just what appropriate design is and wed like Historic Districts have the urban Design Guidelines. Commissioner thank you, next speaker, please. Good afternoon, commissioners. Earlier when the department unveiled the first draft of the documented public at large and i told you the issues with the guidelines chief among them was the over arching aspect to apply to San Francisco. Why . We found the focus was mostly on highdensity areas with high rise buildings. We also found a waiver unacceptable. It was compounded by the fact the guidelines in the document was ambiguous and left a lot of room for interpretation. And it doesnt show the clarity such as the r. D. G. Standards and they finally did away with waivers a