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 reexamined and some changes made to this project if it goes forward. Thank you. Thank you. Next speaker, please. Speaker sir with the black shirt i need a speaker card from you. Thank you. Welcome. Hi. Good evening. Peter with the Mission Economic development agency. I want to pick up on a few of those points and move quickly through them. Can i have the overhead, please . You can zoom out on the top there. Katie. Okay. Perfect. Okay. So what we see here in the mission just to look at where are we in this mission area plant . Preferred number is yellow, 1700 units. Kind of high. We are up to 4100 i believe at this point. So just to get an idea how ridiculously outdated this plan is, lets start there. As far as even with it being outdated. Can i have the overhead again please . Even this plan itself is not comfortable with this outcome here. If you look at one of the policies. And we can cite many of them to ensure the significant percentage of new Housing Units created in the mission is affordable to people with a wide variety of incomes. This project does not do that. Its only 13 percent affordable onsite so im not sure why they are representing it as 18. Yes, there are other affordable fees. Those dont come back here. We know this will directly harm lowincome renters nearby. This data has been vetted and it holds up. It is expected to harm neighbors who are low income within 300meters around the project. Mission pipeline heres what it looks like. Blue. Already entitled. Explosive amount of units. Many of them already built, many around this project already built. Red is new tidal wave thats coming right now. This is one of them. We are a growing housing civil rights issue. And you have to address it at this time. Uphold the appeal. I have a question. So when projects like this go up in the mission, do they contribute or donate to your organization . Absolutely not. And im not sure why that was inaccurately represented. Weve asked for the media to make corrections. We run a fund called the Mission Community loan fund which has nothing to do with the new mission which was no part of this whatsoever. Okay. Thank you. So we hope they make those corrections. Thanks. Thank you. If you could give the speaker card to ms. Sullivan please. Thank you. Next speaker. Welcome back. I recognize you as well. How are you . Doing well. How are you . Good evening board, my name is carlos. Im a resident of 72 woodward street. Im immediately adjacent to 80 woodward and this project is directly behind my home. I want to go ahead and echo all the facts that were mentioned and do emphasize to you that your scope of review here is to review these things. You dont have to take the finding of facts by the decisionmaybing body and accept them as fact. The fact is there was a lot of work that was done here and research that should have been done that was not done. Number one leading with excavation. As i mentioned before, missing 25 percent and not looking in and seeing what is happening in those in what is happening below ground is extremely dangerous. Not just for the construction of the project but for the people that are living immediately adjacent and where theres going to be such a large area of excavation being done. Im worried about my housing and im worried about my life. Not just myself but everybody living down the street. With regard to tnc i live on woodward street. Its used as a thorough fair to cut across 14th to get down to the boat. I hate to imagine the amount of traffic coming down my street once this building is constructed. And seven deliveries a day i would say is definitely very, very conservative on the street i live in i know theres probably 60 or less if we are counting total units of the houses that are there i see at least ten delivery trucks coming down my street every day. Let alone that used to be a very largely Latino Community of color neighborhood. We are seeing it now im seeing all the families moving out and a lot of single upscale largely white individuals are the ones moving in. I would say please make sure they do their job and their Due Diligence in reviewing and going through the environmental report and making sure their project and the lives and housing of the neighbors adjacent are properly protected and look at what the impact is going to be because thats just not right. Thank you. Okay. Another repeat speaker. My name is fernandez. Im with our mission no eviction. Somebody brought it up, 10,000 plus people have been evicted from the mission. 8,000 of them. Sir that organization because they are the appellants. This is Public Comment time. Whats your role at our mission no eviction . My role . Yes what do you do there . Im a volunteer. You dont work there. No, i dont work there. Im a volunteer. Youre not an officer or do you just volunteer for them . Yeah. Okay. I apologize for interrupting. Can we start over . For my time. She stopped the clock. Now you threw me off. Okay. Start all over, brother. Yeah. You ask me after im done questions. Im like. You said youre from our mission no eviction, theyre the appellant so they wouldnt be allowed to comment during Public Comment. Im just a resident. Im born and raised in the mission district. You know that. Okay. Let me all right. Lets start again. Okay. So 10,000 people have been evicted from our neighborhood. 8,000 of them latino. No other neighborhood in San Francisco or across the country has been vehemently affected by gentryification like the mission we dont need anymore luxury housing in our neighborhood. Beyond that we have more luxury built in our neighborhood than any other neighborhood. The sunset bay do not allow it. The sunset residents fight it every time, and they win every time. The access is a developer, are you familiar with access . Axis bought this land. And axis sold it to them because axis knew of all the problems with this particular property. And lets talk about across the street the Mission Armory. The Mission Armory has a creek going have any of you been to the armory . They have a creek running through the bottom basement of the armory. Its real. The water is real. And then on top of that when the armory has events, they have to have public outdoor potty chairs toilets, because the sewer gets backed up. The city has failed to do anything. The board of supervisors approved this project based on the fact that off an old plan of 2008. Now my question to you has there been any changes in the city of San Francisco in the mission since 2008 . In the last 11 years . There has they need to reject this project. Thank you. Is there any other Public Comment . Seeing none, well move onto rebuttal. Well hear from the appellants. You have three minutes. Thank you. The general plan does require the adequate study is done. This isnt just something for ceqa. Mission area plan has its own requirements as well. You heard about the housing. And you read our brief. Its listed in the brief. But regarding this foundation, potential foundation work, commissioner honda, you would know, if theres an existing foundation that is 8 feet deep and has been abandoned is there a possibility that thats going to need to be excavated . This is not been addressed in any of the documentation that has been provided. So there are grave concerns that they are going to get in there, they are going to find debris and they are going to need to keep digging and they are going to need to do water to get the work done to remediate the soil, even if they are only doing the slab. A twofoot mass slab for a building of this size after seeing all the work at the adjacent buildings that have been done at the greek Church Everything else, i dont think thats going to be the case when they get in there. And a lot of the neighbors dont. And they are very concerned. And this whole idea of this Affordable Housing being 18 percent this isnt this is all one building. The base project is not a separate building. Eight affordable units out of 60 is 13. 3 percent. It is not 18 percent. And the community is tired of having these things pushed forward without what we feel is adequate study for the mitigations needed to stop the harms within this within a half a block radius of this project already 70 neighbors have been evicted under the table. These are immigrant neighbors that are terrified even if they do have Legal Protections and rights, they are terrified to meet with a lawyer. They are terrified to do anything. And so they leave, and they are living in their cars, and they are living in tents. They are staying gnat neighborhood, stay close by they cant keep their jobs because the police take their stuff. The people that taylor referenced, junior and her boyfriend, they were evicted. Theyve been living on the street for the last year. He grew up in the mission. And his parents cant take him in without risking eviction. And we need to have proper study done. We need to have amendments made so these harms dont continue to be inflicted on our community. Thank you. I would like to add our mission no eviction, no one gets paid there. This whole community saw its part of united to save the mission. We are here as a volunteer organization. We put in long hours. Compared to these two lawyers who submit nasty letters calling us names the supervisors pointed that out. I just want you guys to. Thank you. We will hear from the determination holder. Thank you commissioners. John on behalf of the project sponsor. The number of additional ceqa issues brought up in Public Comment im happy to talk to you about any of them if there are any questions. All of this was discussed quite a bit at the board of supervisors including tncs ubers lyfts, including amazon loading, including expected growth in the eastern neighborhoods. If there are questions, let me know. To respond to a couple other points street trees of course the project is going to be lined with street trees every 20 feet for the entire project frontage on three streets. We also worked with a group of neighbors on woodward street to agree to additional street improvements. Theres going to be a raised crosswalk across the woodward street. We are also going to do special paving up the street add additional trees on woodward street. So these are the things that we have discussed in some detail and committed to. The project is also going to be removing significant number of curb cuts around this site. Again, reducing the amount of conflict between automobiles and pedestrian. Thank you. And if you have any question please let us know. Of course i do. I think all three of us have questions over here. A lot of people from the members of the public so youre at 18 percent affordable so how many units and how many are affordable and does it come up to 18 percent . Per the state density bonus law you get your base project which is what is principally permitted under the planning code. You subject it the state law only requires 11 percent so qualify for the density bonus. San San Franciscos current rules 18 percent. So that 18 percent applies to the base project. The project the density bonus above that of 35 percent those units are subjected to inclusionary housing fee because per state law the city is not able to apply its Affordable Housing requirements upon the density bump. Those units are subject to the inclusionary housing fee. Okay. I wanted that explained. Thank you. My question is around the deliveries and curb cuts. It looks like from page r1. 0, driveway onto stevenson street. Theres a gate. Is that for bike parking . Can you explain that the delivery parking, trash, et cetera, situation is on property . Can you mention that sheet number again . R1. 0 site survey. Thats the first place in the plans that show a driveway and a roll gate, i believe onto stevenson street. So im trying to understand. There was a comment about pedestrian safety. I think removing curb cuts is great having limited parking, we can argue if its great or not great but i want to understand how deliveries and trash is imagined to be coming in and out of that site and what that driveway is used to service. Thank you commissioner. Currently weve got two curb cuts on the site. One is on. Do you want to use the overhead . Yeah. Thank you. The overhead please. Weve got a 22foot wide curb cut on 14th street and an 18foot wide curb cut on stevenson street. Those are both used for access to the current parking lot onsite. Leaf that up there for a second. Sure, yeah. I just wanted to. Thank you. Can i move on to the next . Picture is a thousand words. So the project proposes no offstreet parking. So theres no curb cuts along either stevenson or 14th street. The project is going to be seeking a commercial loading zone along 14th street, which is a separate process, of course this commission its something we have to pursue after approval. So the loading will take place off of 14th street pursuant to that process. Thank you. And then can you explain a little bit, and im going to ask mr. Sanchez about the waiver for the usable open space, how you are providing open space for the residents of the proposed building . Sure thing. The project actually meets the numerical requirement of open space and in fact exceeds it. I dont have the number off the top of my head but it exceeds the square footage. Its provided in an interior courtyard where the rear yard is now. Thank you. Great. So its provided at this interior courtyard and in the upper levels there are some groove deckses. The reason we needed a waiver is the courtyard, the sun angle is such that it doesnt meet the standards for the planning code. So while its actual open space it doesnt have a 45degree sun angle on i believe its three sides thats required so therefore it doesnt technically count toward the planning code requirement and thats why we sought the waiver. The last area of the questioning is around this slab excavation, et cetera. You know we heard cases tonight where people are concerned about excavation and what that does to surrounding buildings. Theres sinkholes that have been illustrated in neighboring area. How do you plan to assess and deal with potential changes . You dig up the asphalt thats there you find something else, its deeper than you thought. Is there a company that is prepared to address those issues . Thank you for mentioning it. This isnt even their description despite the fact they want to deal with this properly i was hoping inspector duffy would still be here because its not an uncommon condition to be in field doing work and something comes up thats not totally expected. There are provisions in place where we work with the Building Department its really a Building Department issue. The Building Department can make sure we deal with any unique situation adequately. And again not even at the discretion of the project sponsor, overseen by the city. Thank you. Thank you. We will now hear from the Planning Department. It feels like were at the Planning Commission doesnt it . Would you really want to be there . No. No. You guys . Come on. The Planning Department, just to clarify a couple issues that were raised and the comments. And i think they can represent how they are calculated under the code. They have the 18 percent code applied to the project. But with the ultimate project under the state density bonus it dillutes that requirement. It is effectively 13 percent. But under the planning code we have a provision that we will assess a fee and thats what i said previously was approximately 1 million for the Additional Units that is gained. The state density bonus law is not new. It dates back to 1979 burr we are seeing but we are seeing more of these projects now than before. The standard review as stated by the attorney is not d e novo for the review. It is improper application of the planning code so that is a slight nuance there. In regards to offstreet loading the section does not require offstreet loading. This is less than 100,000 square feet of use. There is no requirement of the planning code for that. And although this project has been around since 2014 and the first application actually looking at the history i think more than a decade ago in the mid2000s, there was another application i think for more, even 80 dwelling units. This was before the eastern neighborhoods rezoning. And actually part of the site is the rear portion which is being maintained as parking is a pdr Zoning District which doesnt allow housing but back 15 years ago when that previous project was sought and i dont have any details of what happened to that. Obviously didnt move forward. But the whole site would have been allowed to be developed as residential but less can be developed under the eastern neighborhoods plan. Although it has been around for a while i dont believe any Building Permit application has been filed for that so there will be substantial processing in going through the approvals for that. Im available for any questions. I have two questions. Can you talk about the difference of waiver in terms of the density bonus law. Ill do my west my best. Its getting late. So the waiver is the quantitative requirements where the concessions in that term is used interchangeably with more of a zoning or use change like they would be allowed to do a mixed use zoning the higher densities. There is no density limit here, per se, in this district. But the base project is calculated on a feasible code co