Approving this project. You could not be looking at a more appropriate project. The site is currently occupied by a genuinely on pre, sit and significance suburban office of his building which should have never been constructed in a residential neighborhood. It is a great place to put housing. You also have an excellent sponsor. I am personally and professionally up acquainted with the sponsor. He and i worked together, many years ago, when he was starting his career. We worked for a Company Whose job was to invest on behalf of pension funds, including the pension fund and the city and county of San Francisco. Due to their enlightened leadership in our hard work, we made a lot of money for that pension fund. Your retirees are more financially secure, as a result of our efforts. I am very proud of that. I am aware of his work, i am aware of i have watched it throughout their growth growth. They are a group, they have a significant axis two resources to complete this project on time, without the pressure to cut corners. I strongly urge you to approve this project, and do so in such a fashion that you send a message to the board of supervisors that we need this project. Thank you. Thank you, sir. It next speaker, please. Good afternoon. My name is marcy glazer, i am the ceo of the Jewish Community center of San Francisco. I am here today to speak in favor, of the proposed project at 3333 california street. For 86 years, they have served the people of San Francisco, from the corner of presidio in california, directly across the street from the project site. We provide a vibrant Public Community space, for people of all ages, backgrounds together, explore, connect and flourish. You will find little kids, and their caregivers, young adults, families, robust and aging seniors as well as people like me walking through our doors and for wellness sports activities, hands on our hearts as well as thoughtprovoking arts and cultural events. Over the past several years, we have worked with the city to provide Public Health and safety respite in the face of smoke, heat emergencies and other emergencies. We believe that 3333 california street development, as proposed will create a more vibrant neighborhood with more housing activity, and open spaces which will benefit the Broad Community that we serve. We understand the acute need for housing, especially Affordable Housing for seniors in our city, and are pleased to see this as an element in this project. Along with most other social scepter organizations in San Francisco. We struggled to help our more than 600 employees find reasonable housing to provide the services that we offer. We appreciate the publics projects, the open spaces and design that thoughtfully is to just together. We believe this will benefit everybody by encouraging more walking and access to outdoor space in our urban environment. The open space, in this project, allows us to continue to have an emergency evacuation location nearby. Which is a very critical to our Community Serving purpose. I want to make a special note scum of the inclusion of the social services and philanthropic facilities as a use in the s. U. D. Proposed ordinance. This designation provides a helpful pathway as we consider how the jc csf will help our Community Serving uses to our new neighbors including the low income seniors directly across the street from our current facilities. We would like to thank the prado group for its diligent efforts to address Community Concerns in the past 4. 5 years, the jcc has been a regular participant and host for community meetings, led by the developer of the project. Thank you for your consideration. Next speaker, please. Good afternoon, commissioners. My name is charles ferguson, i am president of the Presidio Heights association of neighbors, commonly referred to as fan. Three months ago, i appeared before you and that was in connection of a project at 3700 california street. At that time, i pointed out to you something that im going to repeat here. Former acting mayor, former supervisor for district to and i worked out an agreement, when the city signed a Development Agreement for the huge Sutter Health hospital on venice avenue that required a certain kind of procedure to benefit the neighborhoods around the old campus, which is in the middle of my neighborhood to actually have a meaningful way to participate in the design of the project. That agreement, which the city signed, and which was honored on that particular property was limited to that property. But, the prado group was foresighted enough to read it, and to implement it. You heard from mr. Safir from moment to go, hes had 160 meetings with various neighborhoods and individual groups, from around this project. We think that is really something that should be rewarded and recognized, he had no obligation to do that at all, yet he saw what happened with 3700 california street, and he followed the exact same pattern that we had set up there. Secondly, i want to point out to you that my neighborhood is one of the largest, if not the largest neighborhood in the city eligible for inclusion as a Historic District on the state list. We know about Historic Buildings , and we know this about Historic Buildings. Yes, it is nice to keep them, but they have to be adapted to modern living standards. And modern societal goals. It can be done properly. It has been done, in our neighborhood, over, and over, and over again. I think this particular project, 3333 california street has accomplished that goal with the design they have put in front of you. We recommend that you approve it as it is presented to you today. I just want to add that i have sent in a letter that explains in more detail how it is that we come to support this project. Thank you very much. Thank you. Next speaker, please. Can you hear me . Okay. My name is chris dez b. For nearly 21 years, my family has lived on clay street, three blocks from the project that is proposed. This is not a downtown construction zone. Laurel hill is at the intersection of four family neighborhoods, for quiet family neighborhoods. This scale and timeline of the prado groups plan will destroy them, in every way. Fifteen years of noise, construction dust and congestion is simply unacceptable. The plan for commercial and retail would destroy Laurel Village, which already has nearly everything we need. Furthermore, chopping down 200 trees, in the era of Climate Change is equally unacceptable. Commercial and Retail Operations should be restricted to 10 00 p. M. , not 6 00 a. M. Until 2 00 a. M. In residential neighborhoods. It is not appropriate. The noise and congestion would in fax, make the new housing that is proposed, less desirable the benefits reported by the prado groups plan are already there. We have the green space. Why tear down a hill . Why tear down 200 trees . We arty have Child Development centers. The buildings that are there can be adapted. Those buildings were built, in such a way, so that anywhere you are inside the building you would be no more than a few feet from the green space that is there. I do not understand why it needs to be paved over . Finally, i support the Community Alternative which would preserve the green space without disturbing the park like setting. And, destroying the trees, while adding much needed housing, in the character, and height thank you. Thank you. Next speaker, please. [applause] please, if you can remain silent. You can wave your hands, but just know clapping. Thank you. My name is kelly robertson, i live on walnut street. I am in support of the Laurel Heights effort, our neighborhood group. I think this project is extremely disruptive to our neighborhood. With that said, the city needs housing. Due to the scheduling of the immediate process here, i would recommend that the Planning Department analyzed the two Community Alternates, again, if possible. In order to make possible changes to the developers proposal. Especially relative to height limits. I think i heard today, there was an 85foot tower mansion. If there is an 85foot tower that is twice as high, as the existing zoning would allow, its also four times as high as any houses on walnut street. That is a significant vertical change, in the neighborhood. It also creates significant shadow patterns, in the Early Morning until late day as the sun moves across the sky. There is much more shouting to immediate residence. We would love to keep any New Buildings off the green space. Those are some of my basic concerns. I also wanted to talk about, in particular, construction duration. Ive heard a lot of different numbers, over the last few months. [laughter] you know, 15 years, seven years, et cetera. I thought i would look up some comparable comparable, maybe not exactly comparable, if i can have the screen . We will make do here. So, this is obviously a highrise building. This is 1500 mission at south van ness. The goodwill was demoed in october of 2017. Construction will be hypothetically complete in december of 2020, that is three years and two months. It is fairly difficult, because it is right near market street, van ness, anyway, this project has five and 50 residents. 550 residents. The Foundation Construction start date was march 2016. This was three years and four months. Site access again is a bit difficult. It was a dense area with rushhour traffic and transit. 570 residents. The paramount building, been around for a couple of years now, at 680 mission street, started construction in 2,000, completed 2,002. 495 residents. Perhaps the darth vader of residences. Anyway there it is. That is at construction starts november 2011. The point being 1020 thank you. Your time is up. Grade thank you, your time is up. Thank you. Next speaker, please. Good afternoon. I live in the Laurel Heights neighborhood. I oppose the Developers Project , and support the Community Alternative. Because, we support housing, especially the number of units for seniors. I am really concerned about the retail space. We really do not need all of that retail. We arty have the Laurel Heights neighborhood, and the shopping area, the village there. I also was concerned that our Community Alternate plan which takes care of lots of the similar issues, without destroying the neighborhood, or taking 15 years to build, is not considered. I would really want that to be included. Thank you. Next speaker, please. Good afternoon. My name is judy dome. Except for one year, spent living in north beach, i have lived on california street since 1970, nearly 50 years. I love my neighborhood. I am aware, however, that the city needs more housing. I am very concerned about a number of issues on this project, and i want to speak about two right now. One, up to 15 years of construction, let me ask you all something. Could you stand having 15 years of continual construction because one your neighborhood . Please think about this. Carefully, and consider a neighborhood alternative plan requiring only three years of construction. With three stores in Laurel Village closing just recently. We certainly do not need a retail opportunities. Let alone something called flexible retail, at the site. With the possibility of latenight activity, noise, where previously there has been none. Retail at this site makes 3333 california street, destination destination, not a residence. Since time is short, i will end with this, i hope all of you will conclude that we need a 30 day extension to allow the Community Alternative plan to be considered as fully and carefully as the developers plan. Thank you. Thank you. Next speaker, please. Thank you. My name is anne harvey. I am very familiar with this neighborhood. My sons were born and raised here. This is a very important resource that the city has come and it should be the best of the developer coming with us, they have some good points, but it is not the best there is. I think the laurel Heights Association has a great project plan, that is a good thing for the bad ones. It doesnt take 15 years to build, does not have so called flexible, which is ridiculous in this area of Laurel Village, the place is closing sacramento street. It should be used for housing, but not as being proposed. Please give the Laurel Heights project consideration. Thirty day extension considered if need be. Thank you very much. Thank you. Next speaker, please. I am going to try to keep it short, because weve already spent way too much time on what is objectively a fantastic project. We need to get this built, we need to get it built as quickly as possible. I agree with maximizing housing. I also think the Community Plan is fake. We need to be skeptical when these kinds of Community Plans going forward, that are not based in something that could actually be feasible, or realistic and are really designed to delay the project. Maximizing the housing potential, at this site, is a great idea i wish there was a commitment to making sure we get that done, as quickly as possible. The time is ticking. I spent an our getting coffee, with one of the members who lives in his car, and was spending time, sometimes in the south bay. Basically running from the tickets. That is what it is like to live in your car, is to strategize every day about where you can park, so that you wont have to deal with the crisis that is happening here, and the tickets i can line up. We dont have time for these projects to take as long as they do. The dr is that we sat there, were excruciating. We have to do this all in a much more efficient way. Thank you. Thank you. Next speaker, please. Excuse my phone, my notes are on here. My name is sarah. I have lived two blocks from the site for the past four years at lie in ambush. My husband has been there for ten years. We have two little girls and i work in the neighborhood, as does my husband who has a business on sylmar street. As a residential neighborhood, i as a commercial agent that does retail deals, throughout the city, i welcome this project. I think this project would benefit other retailers, in Laurel Village, who have felt the effects of the hospital moving to van ness. It would add to the retail mix that we arty have, and i, for one, would like more local shops and Services Near my home that me and my girls can walk to. The three retail shops, that the other woman had spoken about, that closed recently on laurel have had offers, and will be leased quickly. As a real estate agent, i have worked with prado in the past, only seeing their retail space at the we have negotiated various leases, such as valencia, market street. They have only improve these areas but those mix of tendencies, and have been very fair landlords in in terms of retail. I know they will be thoughtful foz when their choice of tenants for this corridor this project is honestly far more beneficial to the neighborhood and what is currently there. I urge you to support 3333 california street project. Thank you. As you come up, i will read a few more speaker cards. [reading notes] my name is valerie. Im speaking on behalf of the San FranciscoHousing Action coalition. We are pleased to support the project, as proposed. This project has received the highest grade we have ever given. The mix of incomes, retail uses, and proximity to transit, it is hands down and easy support for us. We hope you will support it as well. Thank you. Next speaker, please. I am nancy goldenberg. I am a historical architect. And were retained to assist the community in developing the Laurel HeightsCommunity Alternative. I am also a neighbor living in the nearby Vista Heights neighborhood. I would like to touch on a few points relative to the site, and the Community Alternative. First, as you know, this is a historic site. The property is on the california register. It has been through eligible national register. It is significant for, and also for its team of leading landscape architects. The building is integrated into this mature designed landscape. Both the building and the landscape were designed to complement one another, and the complex reflect mid 20th century design principles. Second, the Community Response to the project is not the result of enemy is in. The community is in favor of the project that would provide this level of housing, which we all agree is badly needed in our city. It would like to see one that takes into consideration the historic significance of the property. The third. , the Community Alternative was founded by a nonprofit group, which does not have the resources of the developer. As such, the alternative cannot be as well developed. However it is at least as welldefined as the alternatives included in the e. I. R. The intent of the Community Alternative was to show that a high level of preservation is feasible, in facts, while p