With respect to other units, so thats something we can continue to legislate on in the future. Vice president koppel commissioner richards . Commissioner richards thats a great thing, but i dont think we have anything written legislatively that says when you demolish a rent controlled unit that youve got to replace one. Commissioner hillis but weve still got that discretion. Right. And sb 330 requires a replacement unit in that place, and we can back that up or do it a different way. Commissioner richards i thought it had to be law. Thanks. Vice president koppel just a couple comments on my side. These arent addressed to anybody, but if skinners looking for certainty, whos the certainty for . Is this good certainty or bad certainty . And i dont know how these can get so confusing and so crossed over each other. I think that these updates thank you again for the great report. If you can answer every one of dennis questions, ill give it up to you. Thank you for answering our questions. I am we have a lot of questions up here, and im sure the people in the public are getting a lot of their questions answered. It does seem like the goal posts are moving on a daily basis. We can hear one thing on monday and the opposite on tuesday, so just keeping the public abreast of whats going on i think is very important. Commissioner richards commissioner, just to repeat the thanks to jacob. He does excellent work. Just to put it out there, im increasingly concerned about the amount of time that were spending on the analysis of these bills. And i get the state doesnt do this level of analysis and almost no jurisdiction does, but i am increasingly concerned about how much time were having to put into this, so i would like to meet with the president of the commission and Vice President and talk about this in a holistic sense just to keep track of it because im very concerned about how this is diverting attention from other work. I just wanted to put that out there because its taking up a hell of a lot of time right now. Clerk okay, commissioners, if theres nothing further, we can move on to item number. Case 2014948 e. N. X. This is a large project authorization. Please note, commissioners, on april 4, 2019 after hearing and closing Public Comment, you continued this matter to june 6, 2019 by a vote of 60. Commissioner fung, you were not yet seated on the Planning Commission, and in order to participate, you would need to acknowledge that youve reviewed the previous hearing and materials. Commissioner fung i have. Clerk thank you. Then on june 6, 2019, without hearing, you continued the matter to june 27, 2019, by a vote of 60. Mr. Chair, how much time should we afford the chair . Three and one . Vice president koppel yep. Clerk okay. Good afternoon, commissioners. This is to permit construction of a new sevenstory 78foottall residential building within the rh1 zoning district. The project includes construction of a new sevenstory, 78foottall residential building with ground floor commercial approximately measuring 86,630 square feet with 60 dwelling units, and 61 class 1 bicycle Parking Spaces and six class 2 bicycle Parking Spaces. The project consists of a mix of units. To date, the department has received significant opposition to the project. The concerns are centered on the proposed Building Height and creation of new market rate housing in the mission. The project sponsor has hosted Public Outreach meetings with the community. Subsequent to the Planning Commissions direction encouraging additional Public Outreach, the project sponsor hosted a Community Outreach meeting on april 30, 2019, inviting more than 1500 owners and occupants within a 500foot radius of the project. 16 of the invitees attended the meeting, including members of the united to save the mission and the Mission Economic development agency. Seven neighbors from the woodward street, two neighbors from 18 street and amy binart, assistant to supervisor ronen. Subsequent to the Planning Commission on april 4, udat provided additional design for the entries and the cat walks. The project sponsor has elected to utilize the project density bonus law. The project requires an inclusionary housing rate of 18 . The project sponsor has volunteered to contribute one additional percentage for very lowincome households. Since the previously scheduled public hearing on april 4 of this year, the project sponsor has updated the project as follows per Planning Commissions comments, the p. D. R. Small work space building was removed from the project. The additional height permitted for nonhabitable elements was removed and the parapet reduced to the regular safety height. Per comments from the Planning Commission and feedback from udat, the cat walk unit access was revised to include two communal seating and planting areas on each level. Privacy screens were added in select areas. Additional sample unit plans are included in the drawings submitted to you all. Three large bedroom units were replaced with smaller units. The introduction of the junior studios, and two bedroom units. Per the neighbors comments, the parking eliminated all of the parking in the basement level. The retail space is now shown as demise as street at the point. Per udats comments, the side of the windows along woodward were reduced. The ground floor unit entries remain unchanged and comply with state requirements for accessibility. A mezzanine is provided in these units. The Department Recommends approval with conditions as the project is skints with the general plan and the planning code. The Department Finds that the project is on bound consistent with the policies of the general plan. The project results in new rental housing including new market rate units for rent, which is a goal for the city and are more diverse uses than the consisting parking lot existing parking lot. This concludes staff presentation, and im happy to answer any questions. Vice president koppel thank you. I do have one speaker card for steven scherr. Clerk we should hear from the project sponsor. Vice president koppel oh, okay, sorry. Mr. Scherr, can we hold off for one second . Sure. Vice president koppel i forgot to hear from the project sponsor. My name is manus 14h, and i the project sponsor for this project. This project dates back to 2014. My first Planning Commission meets was set for february 2014, and cancelled, rescheduled, cancelled, rescheduled until we got to april. April was rescheduled to june. We then sent out 1500 invitations to all the neighbors within 500 feet. We received four emails in comments. One was a proposal to purchase the property. The other three was to support the production of this building. Weve had multiple meetings with everyone who showed up at a meeting for the past few years. As mentioned before, we moved the package, we turned our retail spaces into smaller spaces. We completely eliminated the 20,000 square foot p. D. R. Buildin buildings. We had multiple people commenting that they didnt want a garage and digging down might disturb the water table, so we completely eliminated the garage and basement of this building completely. We installed the walkways between the buildings and apartments. Basically every single comment that was made was implemented in the floor plans. We meet 1500 invitations were sent out, and we met with people that came to our meeting, some people were from the building on 17 and stevenson streets. A couple of the groups wanted to meet. The residents of woodward street, we met, and we greagre that they had some concerns, speed, bumps being reinstalled. We said okay, if the city allows that, well finance that. They wanted some other beautification to be installed on the street, install trees, install full brick paving up to the budget allows. They asked that a lobby be moved from woodward street to 14 street, and we signed a lobby with them, and they ended up supporting the project. We met with meta and offered them 1,000 square feet of rental space at 2 a square foot for 20 years. They wanted 1500, and we said fine. Clerk sir, your time is up. Vice president koppel okay. The only Public Comment card i have is steven scherr. Anybody else wants to speak, please lineup on the righthand side of the room. Good morning, commissioners, my wife and i live in 63 woodward street. So commissioners, thank you for encouraging the project sponsor to hold meetings with the neighborhood, including mitigating the impact of the high density. The project sponsor has agreed in writing to a number of mitigations, so id like to thank manush for signing this agreement. Theyve agreed to add three more furniture along woodward street frontage. Id request that these agreed items be added to the conditions of approval. The sponsor has further agreed to clerk thank you, sir. Your time is up. Thank you. Vice president koppel thank you. Next speaker, please. Good afternoon, commissioners. We are back before you without without having reached an agreement with the project sponsor, but this is not for lack of engagement and sincere effort to reach an equitiable Development Agreement like we have many times for similar projects. We actually thought we had an agreement which even received an approval vote from u. S. M. Membership, but then we found out that the fees for the new state density bonus law were lower than those from the city and this new offer did not gain any support from coalition members. As part of that regroup, the project sponsor has put forth a new proposal, but as of this hearing, we havent had enough time to reach an agreement and allow for necessary internal discussion review with potential administrators and agencies. Clerk thank you. Your time is up. Thank you. Vice president koppel thank you. Next speaker, please. Good afternoon, commissioners. Kelly hill with united to save the mission. I want to point out there are still concerns despite the cutandrun changes to this project. Theres concerns with the geotechnical report. We pointed out previously with the missing detailed from the c. P. E. And a really strong geotechnical report to make this this Commission Must demand the exercise of reasonable Due Diligence in confirming these impacts on the Historic Buildings neighboring the project and within this historic district. You can send environmental staff here all day to say that all the regulations are in place and everything will be fine, but we see for ourselves that these rules are seldom implemented or managed. Thank you. Vice president koppel thank you. Next speaker, please. One minute, huh . Geez, you guys are cheap. Mar mar mar marie sorenson, save the mission. What is rent right now . 3,034 for a onebedroom . So were going to have another development thats going to cause many People Living together because who can afford 3,000 a month . We need more Affordable Housing, and this is just another big, ugly highrise. And guess what . We if all those sb blah, blah, blah go through, maybe well lose the ability to protest these things. Any way, please delay the vote. Thank you. Vice president koppel thank you. Next speaker, please. Rick hall with united to save the mission. I would just like to say that we with the last set of changes that are proposed, that were discussing with this group, were very, very close to being in agreement. We just need a bit more time to make it happen. Thank you. Good afternoon, commissioners. Peter papadopolous with meta and united to save the mission. I think weve had a good conversation with the developer and his team. One of the reasons it ended up taking a considerable amount of time is i believe this project and converted back to a state density bonus. We did environmental and came back again, so thats part of why were still here. Its unfortunate that we havent reached an agreement. Like i said, we thought we had one, and as we panned out the numbers, it turned out we didnt. I hope we can still reach a agreement, otherwise we can expect some gentrification and displacement impacts in this area both residentially and commercially from these highend slips that are proposed. Thank you. Vice president koppel thank you chlts ne you. Next speaker, please. This is a very large, modern building in our neighborhood which consists mainly of victorianera romeo flats. And i i have just one request, which would be to extend the paving to that we discussed with the developer that would integrate the modern building with the romeo flats, which is a texturedtype faux brick paving to extend the length of woodward street. Thank you. Vice president koppel thanks. Any other Public Comment for item 12 . Seeing none, Public Comment is closed. Commissioners . All right. Ill take a little stab at it. I pretty much have seen almost all the items we brought up previously addressed and am in support of the project. Commissioner fung . Commissioner fung couple of comments, since i went there at the original hearings. I reviewed what was discussed, and if you abstract out the issues, especially those that are still brought up today that are remaining, it really reflects on what they want is a change in the zoning there. The question of whether its designed for the height these days, with the density bonus, these Tall Buildings are going to be the norm. With new york exceeding the existing height building based on that bonus, youre going to get Tall Buildings. It reminds me of when i lived in new york, and you know, it was sixstory walkups everywhere, especially in the poorer areas. But the questions that are still coming up today as an example, some technical questions whether its the underwater streams and this is not the only area that had that. I mean, geary has that, also, so its a question for building, and in terms of the structural designs to accommodate that in the Water Treatment design. But theres been Significant Movement by the developer. Im not sure i would have supported reduction of the parking, but im supportive of the project. Vice president koppel commissioner moore . Commissioner moore i still have the same questions i had before. The quality of the parking, the seating creates an element of open space use on the cat walks, with exterior residential corridors alongside bedroom units is, i think, a real imposition on quality of unit and privacy, and i generally do not believe that is an appropriate building type, and we have had that discussion in previous projects. The second thing is i do have questions about the buildings size in the location that it is. Just its primary marketrate units, and with our concerns about the mission, this project leaves many of those questions unaddressed. Vice president koppel commissioner hillis . Commissioner hillis yeah. I think this is a good place for housing. Im generally supportive. A question, miss jardines, i think weve run into this before with the project on Mission Street and the density bonus project, and there wasnt much we can do. Weve got a fee and its the only option for the denisity bonus units the project is electing onsite. Commissioner hillis for the for the inclusionary housing requirement, and then, the fee would be assessed on the bonus square footage. Commissioner hillis on the bonus. And this is the project that fell under the legislation that we had. This is that project. Commissioner hillis this is that project, so the fee that we implemented going forward, this one is paying it. That is correct. The fee became effective on june 18. Commissioner hillis id rather have the inclusionary units onsite, but its ive had a discussion well, commissioners, keep in mind you get both. Eight of the 60 since theyre doing the state density bonus, they have to provide 8 units. Commissioner hillis for the ones on the nondensity bonus. Yeah, correct. Commissioner hillis because there isnt an option to do them on the density bonus. Correct. So out of the total number of units, which are 60, 8 of them have to be provided as onsite inclusionary units, and then, we will get a bonus on the state density bonus. Commissioner hillis and miss petrucelli, could i ask you a question on that . This saturday, the project sponsor made a new proposal where very we feel very positively about this new proposal . But it involves us talking to agencies and people that can help us administrate part of this proposal. And we havent had the time to work through that and had the time to work through new language. Commissioner hillis so whats kind of what are you still discussing . Well, there was a proposal about possibly giving money . Commissioner hillis okay. So this we dont do that here. Yeah, exactly. We dont do that, either. So were trying to figure out how we we had a great conversation with the project sponsor a few days ago, but this isnt enough time to work out the things that we actually do do from project sponsors, and how we can channel what hed like to offer into something thats constructive for the community. Commissioner hillis are there specific items that are being negotiated that would specific affect the project thats before us . It could potentially actually because he hes given us an eitheror type situation, and some of this situation could affect the ground floor, but if we choose option b, then ground floor gets pulled away from us. So these things that are actually could affect that, and we did ask the the project sponsor to allow us to you know, another week. We really could wrap this up. Were very close . But because of his the timeline, he didnt feel that he could do another week. Commissioner hillis okay. Thank you. Thank you. Commissioner hillis again, i i think you can continue these discussions. I know weve seen these discussions a couple times. Im disappointed that we dont have the p. D. R. Having a standalone p. D. R. Would be really good, so hopefully, we see that coming back. But again, i think its a good site for housing. I like the changes, taking away the parking just for that street and where it is. It tends to be congested and its close to transit. I get its kind of a big kind of building here because of the state density b