tv [untitled] December 30, 2010 7:30pm-8:00pm PDT
and finally a detailed description of the process that i am about to describe. it is reviewed at a public hearing and the executive director of the rent board. within 90 days, that is the first step. i want everyone to understand there is a plan that gets circulated. it goes to the board and the existing tenants. we have a replacement building that has been called out in the previous relocation plan. and the rent board and any residence associations. the contents are detailed explanation, he writes or
redress that can be obtained through the rent board. and completion data for all of those existing tenants. i have a slew of notices here and i will try to move through it. if you remember, that initial notice was the first trigger. check the box. after the replacement building is close to completion, we require the developer provide an availability notice. this is a notice that says units are going to become available soon. this has to be issued one year to six months before the building can be occupied. many tenants will give a one-six months notice that the building will soon be ready and they will
be able to select units. the first acceptance notice is when the tenant says, thank you for notifying. the tenants are allowed to list the top five choices within the and that type that they qualify for. you can't lift a 3-bedroom unit or upgrade unless you want to enter into a new lease. once the developer sees that first notice, it is not a lottery but they run a selection process based on seniority. they get the first pick in you move down the list. we have not figured out a fair way to deal with this. we're open to hearing ideas from tenants.
once they received the replacement unit notice, this is the unit that they are proposing to provide you. the tenant has to accept that. there is a second who accepted mr. notice. when the first certificate of occupancy iss7ñ issued and is ry to be moved into by human beings, a relocation notice is given. that notice you wanted is ready. they agreed by mutual consent to move within 30-60 days after that notice. and now i have walked you threw in as simple of form as possible, how the process works. we are almost done. what about the tenants that want to stay in the existing housing but don't want to move into a new unit? a couple of important things, they are allowed to stay in that
rent-controlled unit. they remain in rent-controlled in perpetuity until they are demolished. they don't get to remove rent control restrictions. if there is a delay, the replacement building is built in the market falls out. we have another great recession. the developer has to maintain that building. that is subject to zero rent- controlled provisions. that existing tenant who chooses, i don't want to move into that unit and i love my garden. i want to stay here until the end, so to speak. they can stay in that unit until the demolition permits for the building is issued by the city. the developer cannot force them to leave. the developer has the full permits issued. the stop leasing other units and
the developer cannot be leasing units while he tells the tenant who is hanging around to scram. they have to stop leasing units and finally, the developer has to deliver a 60-day notice that is the rent board standard. 60 days. all existing tenants are required -- entitled to full relocation. that means up to a maximum of $13,500 per household. no difference. the developer may lease vacant to be replaced units to new tenants. until the 60-day notice to vacate decided to stay. let me be clear. if a tenant says they are ready to relocate, they leave, and other tenants say they don't want to leave, the developer has
a right to release the unit to a new tenant. but this building is slated to be demolished and that tenants knows that before they enter the lease. it is fair and transparent. they are moved into a building that will eventually rejoin down. the concept is pretty basic, you have a fully informed agreements to read that unit and knowing it will be demolished. we are not proposing giving that same assistance to new tenants that come out after a full notice to be demolished. that is it. i will limit my presentation to that. i will get into details of members of the commission would like to discuss its.
>> ok. if i could get the slides up. we started the transportation discussion of sort of the pedestrian aspects, the pedestrian mobility. we talked about new connections across a lot of the major streets that surround the project. there is a series of new access points. we talked about that and we will skip the component.
we can come back and talk about that if you want, but we will go straight to the traffic into transit component. like the new access that is being created for pedestrians around the site, there is a substantial amount of new improvements being made or proposed for vehicular circulation. there are very few access points in and out of a project. there will be a bit least six new or substantially new vehicular access points into the project so they don't need to circulate around the project. and there is sort of major congestion. people coming and going can this -- to distribute to the most convenient access points. both the brotherhood will be reconfigured.
besides these new access points, there will be substantial improvements in some of the major intersections that are troublesome in the future. the best is being proposed. these improvements have come about not just through the proposal, but the planning department and the mta. and will come up with a substantially improved at some of these locations and hopes the ceiling doesn't cave in. through the environmental review
process, we identified substantial improvements that can be made to the intersection. looking strictly at the vehicular level of service, if you will, that is typical for environmental review analysis, some changes were proposed for the intersection specifically, adding turn lanes to make vehicles moved through better. there are some trade-offs there, and there are already existing deficiencies for pedestrians. it is difficult to get across the lake. the planning department and the mta came up with -- it enables us to add crosswalks tok that intersection so that people can get across. it will be one of the new major
access points. it will have traffic improvement as well as pedestrian improvement. just a couple of other intersections to highlight ha, the project in through the environmental review process, there is a need to add additional lanes to those roads. and at the same time, create opportunities to add new crosswalks where none exist today. also, the intersections at 19th avenue present substantial opportunities in this reconfigured addition to smooth the flow of traffic. you included modest improvements of the immediate
intersection, one that we just wanted to show the extent of the dialogue and the improvements that are being considered. this is the intersection a couple of blocks north of the site. through the traffic analysis, we identified the need is the priority was to keep the vehicular level of service at what is considered acceptable levels. it comes at a compromise of other important values such as pedestrian safety and on-street parking. to monitor this overtime, should traffic horse and -- worsen, the city will have the opportunity to engage the community at that point tod8 see if the highest priority is to keep traffic
flowing or improve pedestrian safety. those choices can be made in the future. but they are laid out in the documents. moving forward, you have heard a lot about the proposed realignment of the m streetcar through the site. there are also questions from the commissioners in the previous hearings about other forms of transit, particularly in buses. it works closely with the mta to come up with a new bus route in plan -- routing plan. just to keep it brief, it would create a new intermodal bus and rail hub at the new transit plaza as well as realign some of the bus routes that run through
the sights to better serve the housing as it is proposed. meshing with that is the proposed shuttle plan to serve residents and workers as well as stones town and shopping area. they have been designed to match with the bus system in the light rail system. they are actually -- in the transportation plan, there is a full plan are laying out the required headways in the different trigger points that one of the project hits, has to start providing this increased level of shuttle service. it is very well laid out in the project. a couple of other aspects, we talked about land use and how it supports reducing vehicle miles traveled, but there are
other more active things that are in part of the project that is important to point out. one very important one is the community benefit. transit subsidies. $20 per unit, per month. the logistics' are still being worked out about how it will be implemented. the residents can take advantage of that. there will also be the active management of the pricing. you heard about the share that the project would implement. the city has not ruled out a program at. before i turn it over to the mta, let me touch on parking.
in a nutshell, physically how the parking layout would be his underground. with the exception of a couple of blocks northeast in the neighborhood, a commercial area. -- neighborhood-commercial area. in terms of how the numbers layout, parking would be essentially concentrated in terms of how it relates to the ratio of the number of units to a number of parking spaces. there will be more parking on the west side vs. the east side. that is concentrating year transit so that there are more units to fit as much parking and rolling it out as it gets less dense. on the east side, the ratio is
about half a space per unit. overall, the project is proposing one-one parking. some residents, if they choose, if they live on the east side, the parking will be market price. you could pay less and have the parking space closer towards the boulevard of that was your choice. as was required by the code, it works together to support of the household choice and the nature of the project. how the ratios compared to other recent plan areas, you can see that the key ratio is up on the
screen there. that is what is proposed, and it is similar to the recent projects of a similar location in the city. ocean avenue near the balboa. in terms of the non-residential units, you can see the ratio there. but this area is a little more transit accessible than hunter's point. it is a little bit less parking accessible than right on the balboa part of the station. we feel like the ratio is a sort of the fine line between location and in other comparable
plan area. i will turn it over to peter who will talk about how this all fits in with the larger context. >> members of the commission, i would like to talk about a couple of main aspects of the transportation planning. one is how we have been involved in helping shape the project, and the second is to talk specifically about the nineteenth avenue corridor. we have heard a lot about it. what i can do is outline what we mean by that. first of all, of like to point out that even though we have a major transit near there, access to transit is still an issue. you have to navigate the traffic to go to either side, or if
you're coming manhattan when you have a series of tough road and awkward connections to make before you get there, those are some transit context pictures that i would like to give before i go in to my description. the nineteenth avenue study is at the request of supervisor elsbernd. what do we know about growth and traffic patterns happening in the corridor? to do that, we look at major properties in some proposals for development. san francisco state as a master plan that they have updated. we paid attention to the numbers that they talked about just to make sure that we could analyze a potential future. of course, we looked at the project because the proposal is pretty specific. looking at those projects, we
want to analyze what they would do to the transportation networks on the corridor. we started what we called pier 1. what would have happened if none of these projects came on line. what would it do to the system of over the 30 years, it has already grown. it took another layer of review. it took all of the projects performed -- and by public agencies. they all have an influence on the system. we know what those projects were and how they would affect the system.
tier 4 adds one more layer. what do they add to the system to make it safer and make it more reliable? tier 5, with all of the information we have got, how do we make it the best possible corridor and how we plan for the funding and implementation of these projects? to help illustrate what we are talking about, tier 2 looks at the project and the growth. tier 3 includes two realms. traffic calming and all of the transit proposals we have been working on for the last five years, looking at making lines, giving them more capacity,
making them more reliable. on top of all of those networks, we looked at the specific improvements. we have the pedestrian safety improvements, and not just the streetcar. the intersection and the crosswalks, the bicycle improvements work closely to make sure that if there are gaps in the network, where work with the project sponsors and we sought diagrams that show that. the shuttle system is important. we know that it complemented the bus services that we provide. the outline that they gave, all of that figures into the kind of service, and a big things like he realignment has and what it does for the passenger experience.
it has been a big point of discussion. and whenever we change the alignment of the streetcar system, we know it is congestion that impact it. things that are incorporated here, as passengers get off of the station, one of the busiest stations in san francisco, no matter where you're going to, we are not just transit. we worked bicycle engineering. we recognize it as a tremendous safety benefits. we want to recognize that the crosswalks are improved. it is a benefit for both. this is not so sexy, but it is
important for operating the system. as people who ride it no, it takes a long time to get out of the system. it really gunks up our ability to have a place that is not only a terminal, but a place we can fully disabled train out of the system and let them run freely. i have heard some information and confusion about what the service plan is. this is both going through the ocean view neighborhood and a short line that adds more capacity directly between this and downtown. there will always be a proposal going to and from the park that will remain in the ocean view neighborhood.
what happened in the corridor study? i think i have shown this to you before, but i will talk it to you quickly because i think it is a good story. the growth rate of nineteenth avenue far exceeds the population growth of san francisco. when you see a circle that is red, it is an intersection with a lot of congestion. and an intersection that is going to be dark outlined shows intersections that gets progressively more congested with the extra layer of development. i went from tier one, a lot of interceptions that are congested, to tier one. congested again, even if we did nothing. i'm going th wrong -- the wrong way, sorry.
if we add these numbers alone, not the project, just the housing and jobs, if you intersection's become more congested. you don't know why there may be a way to really assess the performance of a system. we are worried about things that are not measured by that. it shows that there is a quality of life and transit access issues that are very important to us. i don't want that to be left out. what happened was the project improvement proposal that joshed outlined. all of the green circles show
what was improved over tier 3 and tier 4. the way they are not all bearing down on one street. but through the east side, we can get it through. again, this is so important for us to take all of the information and figure out a plan to make it work much better. the way we do that, we have already had a few meetings with the agencies, to identify what the priorities and goals are to make the corridor better. then we get some certainty. if we know what those goals are and the foundation of all of the planning, we are able to make some progress. if those are solid and real, i and my colleagues can start building a better future. it is a