Statement overriding sequa findings and that was not unanimous. The omission of an analysis in sequa is an emission so the measure analysis is legal issue. Its was incorrect any use of the design guidelines. Is that it . Yes. Ok, i want to say these pub pubc hearings for 22, 26 and 30 have been held and closed. We are now reconvened as the board of supervisors. We will take up the items related to the exemption from Environmental Review first and that would be items 23, 24 and 25 and we will be making an analysis of the adequacy, act accuracy and completeness of the environmental report, certified by the Planning Commission for the project at 3333 california street. Again, this requires six votes of the board of supervisors. Do we have a motion on items 23, 24 and 25 . Supervisor stephanie . Thank you, president yi. First of all, i would like to start by thanking everyone who came out today to give Public Comment. I do take these appeals very seriously. Here at the board of supervisors we sit in a semijudicial role when voting and we have to act on the merits of the information presented to us and the confines of what is actually in our generation. Jurisdiction. With that said, i were like to take time to specifically address president yi, should i talk about the sequa first or all three appeals . Probably easier for us to follow as we call out the numbers. So in this one, the review. With reregarregard to sequa,t to be clear that the grounds for appeal of an eir center on this question. Is the eir adequate, accurate and objective, sufficient as an informational document, correct in its conclusions and reflects the independent judgment and analysis of the city and whether the Planning Commission certification findings are correct . The appeal of the eir certification includes 18 claims which you have heard about, not all of them, but weve heard about them, read about them, from the appellant and planning staff and many centered around questions about what is and is not covered in the eir. What we heard was that the sud, special use district amendments, the Development Agreement and clarifications, construction enhancements, parking reduction and tree removal were adequately covered by the eir. And i want to specifically address some of the claims made about the historic nature of the buildings currently on the property. The eir comprehensively evaluated and determined the project would have a significant and unavoidable impact. Thus all alternatives were studied in the eir and rejected as infeasible in the Planning Commission timings, 7. 0. When weighed against the benefits of this project, namely the creation of muchneeded housing, and a more walkable streetscape, the mitigations were found to be sufficient by the Planning Commission. Furthermore, the appellant proposed alternatives that were similar to two alternatives studied in the eir. Packages of design changes to mitigate the Historic Resource were included in four preservation alternatives in the eir, which are not considerably different from the alternatives proposed by the amelants. Appel. They argue it should have been included in the chapter but similar alternatives were studied and sequa did not require that an eir consider every alternative or combination of alternatives. Based on evidence presented today, it is my belief the final eir complies with the sanfrancisco admin code, providing an adequate impact of the project and thus, will be making a motion to deny the ail peel and affirm the final eir certification. A motion made and is there a second . Seconded by supervisor ronan and then lets take role call. Deputy city john givener. Just to clarify the item that youll be voting on as a motion to approve item 23 and take items 24 and 25. That was the motion. Role call, please. role call . There are ten ayes. Ok, so the motion passes. Were going to move on to the Planning Commissions decision well, the Planning Commissions decision is affirmed. We will consider the conditional use appeal, which is items 27, 28 and 29. Consideration of the appeal of the conditional use authorization involves analysis of whether the plans commissions determination to authorize the project was appropriate. This hearing is quasi judicial. To reverse the plan Agency Decision or authorize conditional use, we would need eight votes of the board as required. So do we have a motion . Supervisor stephanie . Thank you. To summarize, we heard from the Planning Department that the alternative plan would not produce 744 units of housing with 58 familysized unit. The anies werthey were studied r the most benefits for our city and neighborhoods. Specifically, the proposal includes 186 units of subsidized affordable Senior Housing, onsite childcare for 175 children which is more than offered at that site. Over five acres of open space, including 2. 9 acres with walkways that integrate the existing neighborhoods and more than what is required of the project sponsor. The proposal maximizes neighborhood reference by offering no those presiding three quarters of the project side. It a leading level, targeted lead gold or better and increase neighborhood resiliency with an awss fee in the amount of one million. The proposal will generate millions in Community Fees towards jobs, housing, and transportation and millions more in annual property tax revenue by converting a tax except use to a taxable use. The Public Benefits this brings to our neighborhoods and our city makes the conditional use both necessary and desirable and for those reasons, i ask today that we reject the appeal so we can move forward with creating these muchneeded homes for families and lowincome seniors. Were looking at 27, 28 and 29. So i can clarify my motion. I would like to make a motion to move item 27 forward and to table items 28 and 29. Dido you have an amendment to item 27 that you would like to make . Yes, we do have an amendment that everybody has received. And this is on page 1. We have to make this amendment and i will ask deputy givener to explain lines one, 22 and 23. The amendments that supervisor stephanie circulated 27 and 31 which youll consider shortly, both merely updating the sequa findings that accompany the motion. So supervisor stephanie has made a motion to amend item 27 as described. Is there a second . Seconded by supervisor walton without any objections and well pass the amendments. Do we have a motion to approve the authorization as amended . So moved. And motion made and seconded by supervisor safaye. To prove the authorization, can we take this motion as amended. Can we take this motion same house, same call . Then the motion carries unanimously. Mr. President , youve tabled items 28 and 29, as well. Yes. I believe the motion was to approved 27 as amended is tabling 28 and 29. Correct. Thank you for the clarification. And now we will lets move to the tentative map approval. Do we have a motion for items 31, 32 and 33 . Thank you. As publics works described, many relate to sequa rather than the map itself and they are best addressed in the sequa appeal which we just dealt with and i do not want to address the i do want to clarify two claims. The first claim is that the tentative map includes inaccuracies. Public works describe the fact of the map is accurate and errors are minor in nature and corrected. The appellant i think this is important on the record why were ruling in a certain way. Specifically, the appellant claimed the map sheet that lot one has two commercial units and 17 remembe17 residential units. The proposed sconin zoning chans would allow fronting on california street. The public works identifies condominium parcels, residential or commercial. The two units to facilitate parking for the duplexes which park works considers a nonremember use for purposes of identifying the condominium. This will not allow a public use under the planning code where such code is not permitted under applicable zoning. The claim that the map is accurate is unfounded and this board should reject it. The city failed to not the appellant per the block book in the. We know the city satisfied all reviews and block books are not provided by the public works but by the San FranciscoPlanning Department. Weve been inform ed thi informe block book is not required but are intended to provide the applications for permits on property within the city that is subject to the San Francisco planning code that the requester would not otherwise receive. Both Planning Department and public works satisfied all requirements in this regard. With that said, as we heard, none of the claims made an appeal before us on the tentative map approval, show errors in the. Maps anmaps. I ask that you joing the appeal. I would move item 31 forward so before you do that, would you like to make a simple intercept. Amendment . The same one made with regard to the ceu just plained by deputy city john givener and i would like to move that. The motion to move it and is there a second . Seconded by supervisor brown and with no objection, then the amendment passes. And so now the motion is to approve item 31 as amended and approving the department of public works determination is to table items 32 and 33. That motion was made by supervisor stephanie and is there a second . Seconded by supervisor walton. Can we take this item as amended same house, same call . Ok, then without objection, item 31, as amended is arrive is appd 32 and 33 are tabled. The final map is approved. Call 3446. 3436. Referred without recommendation from land use and transportation committee. Item 34 is to create the 3333 california street special use district and to make the appropriate findings. Item 35 approves the Development Agreement between the city and Laurel Heights partners, llc for the development of the 10. 25 area site located at california street and presidio avenue and make the appropriate findings and item 36, an ordinance to approve a major encroachment improvement for Laurel Heights partners to occupy masonic avenue, pine street, mayfair to drive and laurel street jan fore purpose of maintaining landscape planters, and other improvements and also to make the appropriate findings. Supervisor stephanie, would you like to make a motion to amend these items . I would like im not prepared to yet make the amendments on these items. Do you want us to come back later . Or do you have no amendments . Well, i would like to make comments about the ordinances themselves. Ok. Is that ok. You can make a comment . Ok. Thank you. I think this merits standing because i think this is an extremely important moment in terms of legislation that we are about to pass. , hopefully. Before you is legislation creating a special use district, a Development Agreement and a major encroachment ordinance to bring to life a project that has been in the making for five years. A project that will bring muchneeded housing to district two and to our city, as well as many other benefits for our community. When this started in 2014, i was a legislative aid to supervisor farrell, i was the person who went to numerous, Numerous Community meetings at the jcc, peoples homes and my office. All along, i have cared deeply about the community, the neighbors who have had their concerns with the project, including the appellants who i know well and i have wanted to make sure that we ended up with a project that would be not just good for the neighborhood, but a project that truly enhanced the lives of our community. Obviously, theres disagreement. Youve seen people in favour. Youve seen people in opposition. Thats called life. I knew that i wasnt going to make everybody happy. Its absolutely impossible, but i wanted to stand before you today, colleagues, knowing that in my heart, gut and mind and its not just about my heart and gut, but hoping to facilitate a project that would be an incredible add to an already vibrant community. To do that, i knew when i became supervisor that adjustments to the project would need to be made. So what did we do . As youve herbed at length today, the Development Agreement is for a 744 unit Housing Project with 186 projects dedicated for seniors. The developer will be responsible for funding onsite Senior Housing and the Development Agreement is the best way for the city to ensure that this major benefit is realized. Now, the original development, the original proposal had an Office Building planned for the site across from the jcc and only 558 units of housing. When the neighborhood raised concerns about the Office Building and the potential traffic that would impose upon the community, i wor worked to eliminate the office instead dedicate that to Affordable Housing for seniors. Why seniors . We know that there is an unlimited key man for all types of Affordable Housing, both family and Senior Housing in our city. And although i cannot solve all of the citys problems with this one project, i knew that i could most definitely hone in on a problem that is important to me and not just in district two but also in the city. And the facts are clear, we are not coming close to meeting the need for Senior Housing now and into our future. According to the Planning Departments 2018 housing inventory, in the years between 202014 and 2018 were for senior. The board president has been call for a larger emphasis on the production of Senior Housing and i have been there with him. As in my own personal experience, dealing with a sick father, i have immersed myself in what it takes to properly care for our seniors and learned how precious few resources are actually available to them including housing, especially in San Francisco. And so we drill down on how to make this project the best fit for the neighborhood. It became clear that there was an opportunity to increase that unit count by changing the walnut building along california street from office to housing. Seeing this opportunity to provide 186 units of affordable Senior Housing in the standalone building. This is what is so great about this project. There are Senior Services on the ground floor. Together with Childcare Services in an Innovative Partnership with the senior facility. And this is something i could not pass up. Its something i was going to insist upon if we would move this project forward. And what we need to understand about Senior Housing is that its difficult or impossible to provide it in some type of distributed inclusionary manner and the fact we have this whole building opportunity to me was absolutely significant. And in addition, there is an existing senior facility across the street, offering the opportunity to Share Services and create a Senior Community in this location. I think we all know or we should if were paying attention, one effort worse things senior suffers from is isolation and loneliness and the fact were bringing them together with services across the street in a jcc and a neighbor transit rich and where you can walk to a grocery store, restaurant or movie is something that will enhance the lives of those seniors as we look forward to welcoming them to our neighborhood. The affordable senior building will be on california street, adjacent to transportation and retail across from the jcc. The Development Agreement requires direct marketing and a reference in leasing to seniors already living within a three quarters mile. Usually the radius is half a mile but we increased it to include not just district two, but parts of district five and district one, as well. I have come to understand the derth of housing for seniors and how expensive housing can be and how even with family help it can be hard to age in place or find a suitable, affordable home. I am determined to do everything in my power to address our seniors needs, especially when it comes to giving them places to live. That is why im proud of this Development Agreement before you today, which ilene will create more affordable senior homes than we have built in district two over the past decade. It is very telling of the Robust Community process that we do all agree that we need housing on the site and im proud to have pushed the increase to 744 units and proud that everyone does agree that 744 units at this site is desirable. The remainder of the project, the remainder of the project is designed with multibedroom units including a new large Childcare Center on site to appeal to families hoping to stay in the area. How many times do we hear about families in San Francisco and about the lack of childcare and parents who cant get to work because they cant afford childcare or not near where they work . We hear about it all of the time and we try to create Public Policy around it and we are able to create 58 more slots more children in this site. Between the Senior Housing, Childcare Centre and family size units, this project will accommod