Skip to main content

tv   Abatement Appeals Board 81915  SFGTV  September 5, 2015 3:45am-4:31am PDT

3:45 am
san francisco building council and the bayview council staff has received 3 letters of opposition from the rincon hill favor the park that is containing 3 hundred pulse signatures and stuart street and the embarcadero association it should be noted in the recent memo their character as a letter of support they calls and clarity that was an informational letter only therefore staff get one letter of opposition from the heights association in 2013 this letter was reference not in the packet that was referenced the project not the subject project that is proposed today with the exception of the letter from the billiard project the boulevard wraunt and one letter of support
3:46 am
all other letters are included in our case packet i have a copy of the alleged letters for those who want to look at them in conclusion replaces an underutilized position the members of the public opposing that seize it too tall it is 2 hundred fooep feet with the upper tower estimation extension and it is diepdz in scale as an extension the downtown corridor provides a ground floor think howard street and services by local and service transport staff recommendations this is persuade with condition concludes my presentation. i'll be happy to answer any questions. >> project sponsor. >> good evening commissioner
3:47 am
i'm mark smanz with the paramount group adapting of the development of construction i'm very pleased to be hereafter four years to present our vision for 75 housing we seek your permission to replace an 8 story parking garage think howard and stewart street with the residential tower you are architect greg of skid mark cohen and merl will walk us through. >> if we could have the slides of the presentation. >> good evening i'm dressing with me my which kind of calculator we are pleased to bring that project we think that is a future of our city making that a pedestrian ordinary
3:48 am
twenty-four hour city in the the first of this project is, of course, located in the transit district as you may know 75 howard conforms to the height of the district and also compiles with the district in contrast this was a 56 hundred plus parking and taking suburban cars home we know that this site as opposed up and by the embarcadero freeway in terms of we see kind of the blight on the neighborhood about this garage in removing this garage we're replacing cars not people we presented a significant opportunity for in one of which the new parcel reviewed at the embarcadero and stewart street on the waterfront between you are project site antes at
3:49 am
stewart and howard street in the embarcadero as you can see on your screen that parcel could be developed up to 6 stories with 24 thousand square feet hidden that our sites on howard street the 5 hundred plus parking garage we propose to eliminate this garage, of course, and to eliminate about 4 hundred and 48 cars currently think the sites remaining too cars in the parking garage and in the process eliminating one thousand automobile movement of cars on the streets in that neighborhoods residents will walk directly to work the medics the project is proposed is
3:50 am
sprayed by gardens and vertical outdoor living spaces that is a view as you can see of the looking back the neighborhood today and here's the view looking at the neighborhood as it is composed as the projects under the review right away are approved begin to fill out this important district in our city this will have incredibly important improvements including and ground level as you can see the removal of scars replacement
3:51 am
the restaurant and cafe and widened sidewalks and setback for outdoor feeding for restaurants and single service for all the, of course, the ground floor and replacement of this structure which will happen we'll replacing is it with this building they have glass and stone and very, very highly porous and active eye at the empowering similar things on howard street and how it will be replaced by the lights and luminous structure we think a very, very active gg park with the restaurant adjacent think howard street the project will continue as san francisco's urban form it does
3:52 am
this by stepping down if the west to the east and the north to the south it is podium based where will continue the streets bmi the neighbors and top floor conformed to the bulk district the height restrictions and as in doing so shorter than it's vanity nefarious to the west and east sorry to the west north and south at the neighborhood style it continues the historic forum down if market street to the bay woods on the makings diagram how we've articulated the basic zoning envelope to result in a thinner more cylinderer building chase has a lonts profile and active in its expression of residential use the resulting
3:53 am
view from the south you're looking up xhaerng and pass of the gas building likewise looking back if pier 14 it fits ballistic a glove into this neighborhoods the massing is less floor area than a non-articulated zoning envelope that is allowed by reducing the lower tower we achieve the more slender form that articulation the building means is also of 24 thousand square feet compared to the bulk compliant 2 hundred foot high building on the left so as you can see by having a small requesting small exception on the upper tower reducing in a sixth way the bulk in the floors on the lower tower and the baits we think result in a legislator
3:54 am
loved one form it reduces the impact think the neighbors and the neighbors directly to the left this building will be highly sustainable more sustainable in the city and designed to last for ages made of stone and glass and wood it is designed to faucets the policeman level and the strategies of sustainable cycled water to irrigate those building as it reaches the sky along the strategies as you can see we'll be resulting if in high-level sustainability the reduction 40 percent allowable code use for energy and 50 percent less water consumed the shadow the questions raised about the shadow and one is the zero shadow cast that park and
3:55 am
rec, and, secondly, no shadow cast on rincon hill park so rincon hill park as you can see in this is analysis of the 7 or 8 rincon hill park is to the far left it is one the sun it park in the city this is a somewhat curb showing you it throughout the year that is june 21st this is the most sun and the least shadow our building continues in dark blue which is the contribution of shadows to this park in the summer months it goes away before and after this shadow a lens one percent in its contribution, in fact, the eir consultants have piling 0.6
3:56 am
contribution it is fairly minimal we tried to thinks that in context of the other elements we know f to know the shadows cast by the crossbow and arrow is equivalent to shadows our building will contribute to this park so in summary we wanted to simply say we're limiting proud of this structure building that is a lark of the city and advanced the 21st century san francisco i think morris wants to conclude. >> thank you, greg. >> commissioners we understand this is essentially all the market rate projects are undergoing scrutiny we've reduced f this go times to be
3:57 am
the code compliant project before you today, we're eager to replace not a particular attractive park strategy whether cars were the center of you are world it will create. >> i'm sorry sir, your time is up. >> we may have questions don't leave yeah. >> okay opening it up for public comment (calling names). >> and if there are any people left in the original on the
3:58 am
first floor make our way up for this item. >> i see 3 minutes i'll not use it in brief we remain supportive of this project it is close to public transit it replaces the garage the project sponsor has begun a long way since proposed to make it fit in the scale of the existing buildings around it we so no reason not to support it and you. >> thank you. next speaker, please. >> good evening commissioners matt from the bayview council we represent 3 hundred the regionals largest employers we survey those employers and the last 3 years the lack of affordable housing is the concern for the members we had
3:59 am
an annual survey of voters across the bay area the lack of affordable housing is the number one issue in the first year of 20 years of doing the survey the voters will accept for density in their neighborhood if it lowers the cost of housing i hope you've read the rotator in the protective analyst department the cause are primarily under production a generation on the coastal regions of california and the biggest consequence of la has discovered it is the birth rate of poverty the bottom californians spend 67 percent of their pay think housing costs we have all that that's why we support that san francisco is
4:00 am
for the immune in the 2007, 2014 san francisco betsy carmichael 43 percent of the units required in the arena plaza you've heard rhetoric we've closely underbuilding luxurious building thaifrtsdz that's under produced we urge you to support that this will relief all levels of affordability issues thank you very much. >> good evening, commissioners depends on residents a from the city of san francisco san francisco is a network of liveable neighborhoods she should a drink culture and the project takes a parking garage and activates it with mixed
4:01 am
housing and neighborhoods serving shops and services the building preserves a view the bay and fits within the skin. >> with the same height of the buildings the code compliant proposed a development of one 33 condos above ground floor retail and improves the liveability to support the nearby straight option f it promotes clean staff streets this building is well served buzzed the embarcadero and reempowering the neighborhood restaurants and businesses with a minimal impact on shadowing this building uses natural resources energy sparely and cycles gray water and 9 points $8 million will be eye to
4:02 am
do bystander housing in the afternoons the summer needs more shade for tourists how much shadow benefits one percent for 1.5 hours during the summary during the winter it is hundred percent shadowed without howard if we're sores about the mayor's goal to deliver for affordable units by 2020 we need to stop erecting obstacles to building and start having the code compliant thank you for your support 75 howard. >> at the.
4:03 am
>> thank you. next speaker, please. >> we thought the plans 2 1/2 years ago we saw it 25 few months ago your reviewing that today and the projects we're replacing a parking garage that is random innocents of the 20th century and it will be walkable and the great benefits with the we're having taller towers and i'm going to turn it over to you've read the business times we saw this make a commitment to hours by alexander more heights they've talked to the city paying over half3 4 f1
4:04 am
>> thank you for your time
4:05 am
>> next speaker >> good evening commissioners thank you for staying out this long. i submit 15 signatures [inaudible] here are the san francisco bay area renters federation and in support of the [inaudible] street project. i cannot comp hend whatever [inaudible] expressed by luxury condo owners. who are opposed to this project which has undergone years of xhounty output and adhered to neighborhood certains. 75 howard had several stories cut and lost 10 million dollars that would have gone it the tendser loin neighborhood development center and as it is 75 howard is a necessary adilgz. to the project site
4:06 am
will be greatly improved from a parking garage as it is a eye sore it too the water front. not legitimate reasons to oppose housing. [inaudible] property value jz denying shade to park users [inaudible] i urge your support >> thank you next speaker. >> good evenening commissioners [inaudible] i'm with the san francisco bay area [inaudible] this project at 75 howard has been on the drawing board for many many years. the developer have bent over backwards for
4:07 am
the community in many aspects and i think it is a great project and it is something san francisco sorly needs and the idea is the [inaudible] we create more housing availability for the community and [inaudible] reduces our cost [inaudible] for affordability housing so it is a win win for san francisco. now, you mentioned the idea of the [inaudible] big trees have shadows so i mean the realty is it is a great project. [inaudible] many many years and think the developers have bent over backwards and think it is
4:08 am
great it has finally come to this stage and we need to move forward and i'm in full support of this project. >> thank you next speaker and good evening recollect glen roger a landscape architect. the staev 5 howard project has the same short falls as the number 8 washington project and is is against propersition b opposing a wall on thewater front. 75 howard is not on port land it is very close effecting the urine design. paying 9.8 million dollars to the mayors office is not acceptable. affordable housing should be on site. this project represents [inaudible] in addition there are no set
4:09 am
backs on this design. today with over 20 thousand vacancies and housing in this sector no new housing is being created by this project. thank you. >> thank you. next speaker. >> good evening. >> it is reset >> my name is [inaudible] association and also coalition for san francisco neighborhoods. there are many point about this project that we disagree upon. first of all, it is in the wrong location. it is too close to the embarcadero. this has to be several blocks away because at 200 feet that is even higher
4:10 am
than the washington project. another item is um, regarding the shadow on the park. prop k, it violates prop k. i believe that 200 feet so close to rincon park is not acceptable. in regards to affordable housing, i can't understand why some of these previous speemers about the renters they are renters they must be high tech renters because the type of housing that is going to be developed is for multimillion airs and the number of affordable housing that-the fund going in are not acceptable. it is too low. for these luxury apartment it has to be much
4:11 am
higher. 40 percent may be more acceptable. the [inaudible] locations, it is hard to understand how they can just give you a number and say, these are your numbers and these are the allocations for the different levels of affordability. it is just talk and talk is cheap. [inaudible] if they were serious about the affordable locations they should have it so that each level of affordability is met and if you want market rate housing to go beyond your level that would have >> to wait or should have to wait until the level of affordability below it is met and there should be no more market rate housing until
4:12 am
affordable housing demands are met and that way the arena allocation i think is a joke. it has got to be enforceable. do not approve this project as it is. thank you. student>> next speaker. >> could you reset? thank you. my name is sol rockman with the [inaudible] action committee. i want to speak about 75 howard because it continues to be one of the problems that emerges all around the city. the traffic problems are terrible as they ist now and the builder acknowledges that this is only going to add to the problems. at the same time, they acknowledge this is a place where people can walk to work and want more than the allocated number of parking spaces on site. this is a inconsistent with the planning commissions own wishes and preferences of the city. there
4:13 am
is also a issue of affordable housing on site. there is none and as other speaker, it would be wonderful if those that need affordable housing could also live in view of the water. thank you. >> next speaker. >> good evening tim colon on behalf of san francisco action housing coalition. i want to drill in on a couple key issues. we tracked this project closely over a couple years and the mbs of the project review committee while they like this brulf architecture is they believe it would benefit from being taller. the current design blend in too well the w the other buildings and more height is appropriate cht in fact, this project is code compliant and conform tooz the rules the
4:14 am
city established. the stecd point on the project height as we understand it the california housing accountability act says you don't have the ability to down zone unless it effects the heblth saerft of the community. on affordability this is a painful topic. the project sponsor offered a [inaudible] a concept that everybody across the spectrum country seems to agree is a valid one, but for whaerfb reason the city was only able to accept this offer and this rare opportunity slipped through our fingers mptd it should be noted the enhanced funding was representing 100 percent of a project [inaudible] sadly it was approved with lower heights and fewer homes because of lack of fundingfelt we should be ashamed at this missed
4:15 am
opportunity. but it takes a special [inaudible] to say this proposal doesn't offer enough affordability. the sponsor made a earlier much higher offer, it was turned ow down and that ship has sailed [inaudible] this project complies with the rules that the sit a set for it and it earned your support and i wanted also to express my gratitude to craig heartman for putting the shady issue into context. if i understand this project has a shad eeequivalent to that of the bow and arrow structure across the street. this project has been through the ringer and deserves your support and time to take action. >> those in line can come forward and i'll call the rest of the names. [inaudible] katherine [inaudible] kyle hui, megan [inaudible] daniel camp.
4:16 am
laura clark. >> hello commissioners [inaudible] with the rincon neighbors. i lived in the neighborhood for 25 years and i never seen a more united renters, businesses condo owners and property owners are opposed to this project. over 350 people signed our petition. with all the give and take between the geper and planning department and commissioners it st. appalling a misshapen over sized copy cat project in such a important area can get so far. more luxiary condoes are not a priority. helping a new york developer make hundreds of millions of dollars before leaving town is not a priority so the big questions are, why would you consider a exception
4:17 am
to add bulk? why would you consider extra height especially when the criteria for doing so are not met? there are so many problemwise this project. no 100 foot analysis was done and should have been done. the neighborhood pattern is violated. the buildings has no significant set backs thment down town area plan calls for interesting top and termination which is no such thing with this project. and keep in mind what planning said about the shadows. here is the bottom line commissioners. this is from the planning department, any development of substantial height approximately 100 feet or taller on the project site would shadow rincon park as far
4:18 am
as no feasible mitigation to reduce the impact to less than significant level and by the way, while the percentage sounds low it is a higher percentage of shadow than would have been shed on that park in selma that was rejected by recreation and park department in january. sorry, i can't remember the name of the park t. is 240 feet high with 10 percent extra is not earn squd the heavy screening is excessive. it violates the step down requirement as you can see on the screen. it does not step down from the buildings behind it, that violates the down town area plan, the urban design element and the transbay district requirement. the neighboring buildings all have set backs for their upper towers, this
4:19 am
does not. please continue or vote against this project. thank you. >> high name is john [inaudible] resident of central market and wanted to point out a couple of [inaudible] regards to this project. the 35 story version of this project would send 20 million dollars affordable housing funds to a couple blocks away from my house in the tenderloin and if we think about what 20 million dollars is we have a housing bond that has to get 66 percent approval this fall, 20 mill qulian dollars is about 6 percent of that bond which would be the basically the fee paid by one building is 6 percent of the entire
4:20 am
affordable housing bond. i think if the bond doesn't pat we should be regretting not building some of these buildings that could pay a lot bigger fees. i know in areas like the hub on van ness we are talking about providing many extra stories for buildings to get a higher rate of affordability out of and capture the value from the development so missing that opportunity here, honestly i would like you to disapprove the project so we can get the [inaudible] but i'm here to support it today. thank you very much, i won't waste anymore of your time >> [inaudible] thank you for giving me a chance to speak tonight. i love thix project and think it is trachbzt oriented and love the massing and sensitivity it showathize the urban fab rb. my favorite
4:21 am
thing is it criblts 9.7 million dollaratize oo the houses in the tenderloin and a step we need to take to make the sate more affordable to everyone. the shadow in my opinion isn't a concern. when you think of what we are getting for market rate housing, mixed use space and affordable housing i think that is a wonderful trade off. thank you. >> good evening my name islia beckman and renter with sf bay renters federation. one speaker that avenue wn was united against this project, he doesn't speak for me. i definitely support this project. i'm a frequent user of rincon park. the shadows
4:22 am
don't bother me. i think this is a great project t is transit oriented and conforms to every i think concern that has been addressed and i just urge you to consider that this does benefit renters by easing the housing shortage and adding to supply. thank you. >> hi, my maim is lorly clark i hear with grow sf. you don't need to hear from me about why you should pass this project. it is already scaled back and that is what we have sheen is projects get proposed and scaled back and now we are in this crisis. at the bare minimum i won't ask you to support sore not support, we can't to continences anymore. it is unfair to all the people who show up and all the hours
4:23 am
we waste over and over again. there are people who have been here since noon. you are bored too and it is a total out rage we waste as much time as we do. i appreciate public comment but we need to scale it back and you need it make decision. perhaps that means we need a second planning commission to get through the back log but nobody wants to be here kwr we need to moval these projects forward in a timet sensitive manner. thank you. >> hi, my name is daniel camp and also a renter who conterary to one of the other peoples comments and support this project as a renter. i want to add my support to something someone else said that recently the california legislative analyst office stated our states insanely high housing cost are mainly a function of
4:24 am
lack of housing production in costal areas, that would be us. we could have done a lot more or a little more to off set this trend of sky rocketing housing cost by approving the origial version which included more housing and more funding for affordable housing. i think the fact we allowed it to get down zoned as it has is a testament to the fact that our city is not always as welcoming as its reputation is, but as such, anyway this still contributes a lot of housing and urge you to support it. with regards to the issue of shadows, i would like to say i don't think it is a concern because the city got its name as the foggy city as fr a reason and someone who ask norseed to make use of sun screen i can tell you all are people who like having shade in
4:25 am
the park. yeah, and just with regard to fact it might block vows because it is a tall building, what bft does unobstructed views to somebody who had to move to central valley to find room to live? thank you. >> hi megan [inaudible] also with the bay area renters federation. to me the housing crisis doesn't mean watching my property value sky rocket. it means delaying marriage and children due to economic concerns and spending money on rent rather than community non profit and artist. this project is beautiful and sustainable. it will replace a parking garage. i don't understand how you can deny the citizens of san francisco housing in this climate today. with regards to the shadow, we had a little shadow party in
4:26 am
the park in the time of day which wh the shadow would be worse when the building was built and we were excited because we saw tons of people. clearly the shadows are not annoying these people. they are of their own free will so please support this project. >> good evening. mife name is [inaudible] i know it has been a long day so i'll be brief. i just wanted to say that i support this project. i think it is-[inaudible] lots of housing and it works well with the neighborhood and my only regret is it couldn't have been taller and used the extra density to send more money to affordable and non profits. thank you. >> my name is [inaudible] i'm also a renter and i'm here with
4:27 am
bay area renters [inaudible] i'm here to support 75 howard. it is well designed build{seems to be a great building we should have. in terms of increasing the amount of housing that is available in san francisco because as we know one of the main things we need to do to reduce the cost of housing is produce more housing whether that be at market rate or affordable housing level and this does dribet affordable housing. i wish it were taller. to the mention who mention said he doesn't understand who renters who are not multimillion airs support this because we can't afford to live there, making housing at market rate is valuable [inaudible] that we want those reduced housing rates and we want the housing market to reach affordable levels so the best way to do
4:28 am
that is build things like 75 howard and tall towers that produce a lot of housing units in a small amount of space which keeps coming up in san francisco that we not much free space to work with and better make use of the space we have so i support 75 howard and projects like it. thanks >> good evening. i'll be more dipmatic than laura and thank you for your patience y. have been here since one so i feel a little of it but you have had more fun time than i v. [inaudible] i'm here to speak to you as a neighbor. i work at the hills brother plaza building which is a block from the site and walk by these garage on the way to mission and market street and to thefery build toog get lunch so i walk by it and the-somebody
4:29 am
earlier described it as a relic from another time from when the embarcadero freway existed. you torn down the embarcadero freway and the wall on the water front and everyone agrees it is a good thing and the parking garage is one of the rel ics left. if you walk by it it is covered in trash and smells likeureen and it isn't representative of the wider area so there is a good opportunity to replace it and blighted structure with something that will build housing and grounds floor retail. maybe things will be open for dinner and there will be customers for the grocery store plan frd the [inaudible]currentry the area
4:30 am
is filled with people who commute in for the day and leave at night. more residence will make the area more attractive. i strongly encourage the commissioners to support the project and build the unit as proposed [inaudible] 10 million dollars to subsidized housing non profits and like i said, i'm here tonight to speak not as a home owner for from the richmond district or somebody who doesn't understand what renters go to but you want to you build the building so the people that live in it are not trying to out bid me with what i live in. i strongly urge you to support the project and thank you and good night. >> hi, first of all i want to thank d


info Stream Only

Uploaded by TV Archive on