Skip to main content

tv   Planning Commission 42816  SFGTV  April 29, 2016 10:00pm-12:01am PDT

10:00 pm
night we had the fire commission after 6 months of asking them to come to the mission and came we're concerned about the fires in the mission and part of concern we have is now we're from the research we're doing we're finding that the amount of power that is needed in the mission i don't know about other neighborhoods but because of technology and the amount of people who are using those tech you know equipment you know it is that's in part one of the reasons why there are electrical over power of use that is causing some of the fires so we need to really address short-term and long-term infrastructure in the mission usf u you mean i live on florida street on 26
10:01 pm
street last month because of the wind which we've never seen before a lot of wind tunnels now created in the city because of the high-rises the wind actually knocked down one of the pg&e poles i live in the mission marry you know those poles that hold our power are very old poles and not like other parts of city you have all the electrical underground here we're talking about putting people at risk that pole that fell the wire which when t it hits the ground almost killed woman and she was hurt and taken to the hospital the last thing united states of
10:02 pm
america we've been addressing the issue of gentrification and the development of new luxury campaigns in the mission you you know right now, we're finished doing the study and the pipeline the 18 developers that are proposed to come into to the suspicion that's over 2 thousand new units they're proposing what about the infrastructure please look at that. >> is there any additional public comment? >> okay not seeing any, public comment is closed. commissioner antonini. >> thank you for an excellent presentation and particularly pointing out the changes in eludes that are occurred in the last couple decades this is not just involving young people but empty nesters and the child bearing ages people that prefer to have their children in a
10:03 pm
urban setting they are more convenient and not missing their child's events and want to live near the schools and work. >> that's not going to change i'm favorable to option 3 because if you builds a lot of housing in suburban areas and even if you do include some of the essentials of life they can you know the shopping and various things they need on a daily basis having gown in the livermore valley recreationly they'll be on the road in entertainment for other used for you know for governmental things and rec and park so i think that is one of the down falls of that
10:04 pm
spreading is it out too much so, yeah you noticed the effects you ride muni at 8:3010:30 it is filled with people working much differently than 10 years ago and the same with some of the am not out after 11:30 but late saturday night i want went with any family not a club but it was packed with people and another bar that was less special and had a lot of people so many people are living adopt those are some of the things i think one thing we look at in your designation of pca the preserved areas, of course, we have a lot of housing but i think there are places among the
10:05 pm
infringes of some of the areas now growing up like the infringes of mclaren park and until the san jose we stopped putting additional units we want to preserve twin peaks like the special park at the middle of the town a lot of them angel that can be used for housing and other uses we have to strike a balance on that part so those are you know my main feelings the best option go probably the third option that mailings than the other two and potentially - we have public tnsit that could be enhanced in areas near san francisco south san francisco and daily city and
10:06 pm
pacifica and brisbane and using caltrain and metro that extends into brisbane so i mean we say 0 work with over and over those areas in some instances closer to downtown and parts of san than trying to pack everyone r into the 47 skrielz of san francisco work with the urban and much cheaper their expensive either rents or buy a home at pacifica or brisbane or south san francisco for less than living in san francisco i think that is something that will help us to satisfy the housing of our problem if we do intensify growth in san francisco as well as the open and san jose areas.
10:07 pm
>> commissioner wu >> thanks on this item a lot of discussion about infrastructure especially transit with housing and office and supportive of all of that and this idea that the cities and suburbans needs to do their part in terms of building housing and transit as a result of demanding fees i think i'm struggling i was trying to remember back to 2013 and all the work going into the transbay area i think that there's really a challenge in the bay area and all of california because the cities are different than the suburbans; right? we already live in a dense area and things like the p da overlay that make sense when you are altercating that regionally where there is
10:08 pm
transit causes pressures and challenges we to have the tools to deal with so san francisco overlays the neighborhoods in san francisco ; right? so chinatown and tinder and mission and mid valley if we're concentrating we're not in a different situation if we're in more a exasperated situation so you know if there can be more consideration towards either anti displacement works as much as preserving housing that exists in those areas or making sure that local transit service is looked at equally as regional transit service as well as bart
10:09 pm
or a way to be more california surgery california and definitely oakland but i think that it's not just one-size-fits-all i'm happy to continue the conversation. >> commissioner moore. >> i would like to echo commissioner wus concerns and look to a very strong collaboration as you elevate our discussion and local scale i think that is the see most complex city continues to be the driver of regional trends with housing and affordability and transit, etc. and i think those questions should be really having priority feedback from
10:10 pm
the city which is in the middle of the largest pressures anymore in the country so examine to our p c a the conservatism areas i see in the region as well as the local diagram are only conservatism areas that already existed the bay area the regional park district and people from open space green valencia alliance for the last 40 years nothing new and thought provoking you're not adding new challenges how the region is growing and i think if you're looking at the regional places shows i need to see i encourage you to embrace into statements the big blocks of
10:11 pm
presidio together with again and again park and established natural treasures is not helping the discussion as you look at the hatched outlines for those areas which are your high focused areas as to whether or not preference is between your insure concept neither the preference i think that is important to continue to examine i think most introvert in regional 3 we're in the united states choose and goal is still driving how you live you'll not been able to press everyone into 3 regional centers we're ♪ did dictatorship
10:12 pm
but i think your number 2 hones on the missing links of transportation and building and audible lands are the opportunities potentially are that allows you to wane in unbridle growth but still happening as we talk and potentially have an outcome with more than you're trying to describe i think in the end what i don't hear but talk about users the matrix of the sustainability and economically environmentally not economically investmently sustainable or superior alternative transportation a challenge one of the metrics we need to weigh
10:13 pm
the scenarios and again, what about reflects the amenable choices in the end you have a sell it to the communities and the board of california >> commissioner johnson. >> thank you very much for the presentation a followup that on commissioner wus point with the development is around the city i questioned why we need it this san francisco a dense and long term planning that we're shifting with the infrastructure and people are going to be in a timeframe that is shortly 2040 so i request why we set aside certain parts of city for development and others parts for the larger golden gate park and presidio not sure it is
10:14 pm
necessary to do that level of planning for the regional it is more thinking about broad scale that will help the city plan around the circumstances and so i'm thinking we need to go that i'm confused by that essentialist came up and made an interesting comment about google's and microsoft not providing housing actively i remember reading working with the city of mountain view many housing built out there this is opening up an interesting question but might call a company town do we need to integrate some of that in san francisco i will tell you there are many buildings in san francisco a good portion of the units are rented out by large companies to be used as housing
10:15 pm
for company employees or traveling are whatever so it is actually a great question is opens the dialogue and clearly on argument those companies have major headquarters and their employees are right there and headquarter and thousands and thousands of employees that make sense to have the housing that is basically supported or subsidized but like. >> city like san francisco more diversity are their implications i don't know we've had enough of that discussion we've talked about the workers that work at the companies but not talked about the relationship between the companies themselves and our planning process to how the housing goes so that's kind of interesting. >> and then in terms of the - a question first
10:16 pm
so we had planned progress in 2013 now 3 years later i'll ask san francisco how are we working with abag on this curiosity ration of the bay area plan. >> we'll gil and josh can jump in we're doing we're having a series of discusses and meeting with individually with abag as well as with our regional partners one of the things we have to do is respond on the 3 scenarios we've done an initial analysis but clearly snoirz two and three require a level of infrastructure that is current planned one of the concerns we put on the table of scenario 3 the level of infrastructure required between the cities is so substantial not be feasible
10:17 pm
don't know but to echo commissioner crews many of the regions talked about displacement and to their credit i think that abag has heard this loud and clear an interesting conference in saturday, i attended they talked about this issue that was attended by a broad section and specifically on the issue of displacement with respect to the bay area and some of the issues or solutions we might be able to put forward a lot of discussion for example, on a regional respective to the impact fees and even the level the playing field we're building jobs and building jobs versus housing and even level the playing field so we are
10:18 pm
definitely sort of we are robustly involved and happy we definitely will schedule the future hearings. >> thank you appreciate that and then i have one final pointed with the comment on displacement we can pull to prevent displacement one whether or not we should and how we should have priority development or loves development density that are more audible and have low income communities think about that and think about our levels for maintaining the existing stock and affordable housing and one other one really with this planned area 2040 talk about where their gentrifying
10:19 pm
and their plans more affordable housing and really making sure we're cooperating i feel that just the trend in population movement we're seeing we're seeing people of means come to inner centers and want to be near stuff i don't know, we'll be able to handle that but where there is displacement not have the people that are adapted end up going out near where i 5 starts or the in the matter supermarket 20 miles away maybe move to near oakland or somewhere they're at least near to their jobs and nearer to transit that is will take did conversations with our partners are providing environmental impact report housing where we have some displacement so san francisco is so big that people
10:20 pm
are options of other places and have that conversation hadn't happened and the reason i see that because i see the plans that the cities and communities have and i'm questioning their assumptions on the need more affordable housing and how their calculating where those people are coming from in affordable housing and this is some of the apples still need to be taken on where we can't do it ourselves. >> commissioner antonini. >> yeah. i think we have to a lot logically at doing both in terms of building housing especially in san francisco we have to build where there are areas that are unbuilt now or have been uses that will no longer be industrial in the future as we've zoned them to be used for housing and wherever those are in the
10:21 pm
city close to transit lines that should be used so we also need to take areas as the gentleman pointed out that are already built to be gentrified i'm okay are west portal with single parking to 4 to 6 floors with parking underneath for the establishment and having housing above make sense you've got n judah and ocean avenue and a lot of places, in fact, we're doing that in places like park merced that will be gentrified it is important to do both and wherever the areas utilize the vacant areas but gentrify the areas that are now lower rise on transportation and
10:22 pm
we've talking about the affordable housing bonus program whether or not that gets off the ground but a state law in place i think that is a good poeblt of that happening and so i think those are all sorts of places where we could do a lot of growth and then i'm not sure director rahaim said we looked at option 3 and wonder why the transportation cost we could get the money but in a dense urban area per mile is expensive to build transportation but you're not going as many miles and also getting more desirable results because people are living close to what they're working and using their cars less and have the advantage and skills we've not done in almost a century you can make a tlunl u tunnel
10:23 pm
through a hill and cut the cost of construction not ripping up the streets and coyote on the other side, however, automatically got a line to the richmond district so i think we have to think outside the box i think that you're also better off to yield scrawl and having growing up in livermore valley how it was a castro area the one speaker talked about the water problem i see that area is turned into homes and when i grew up that was a truck farm and dairies and a lot of uses not have the water demand and as we continue to build sprawl we're sucking up for water by their nature the grounds demand more water the temperatures are
10:24 pm
hot they need more water all those things we have to take into consideration for growth. >> commissioner vice president richards. >> just a few thoughts i thought the presentation was really well, great grasp of the issues and the other story line you need the tele-prom i was impressed i several thoughts building upon the comments of other commissioners first of all, i read an article in the monthly last summer sharing of impact fees and affordable housing fees for everything and walked away with it was started in 1976 and said why not do that we have to go to the state level but seems to be work that is the only jurisdiction in the cry cio that has that model the issue whether the plan in
10:25 pm
the development areas are and generally low income areas and the fact that our nexus study said affordable housing sorry the market-rate housing generates a - avenue, i guess the question i have we've talked about the low income and talked about of that 0.4 where does the scale end up with the needs how many mechanics and retail clerks and firefighters i don't know what the .4 consists of and where does it live to my great disappointment this morning in the chronicle on the i believe first page the bay area council did a survey of one thousand residents in the county area and the residents the survey participant said they're concerned of affordable housing for 37 percent was an issue and
10:26 pm
basically, what the 50 percent of the people said oh, yeah, we need more housing but outside of bay area to have improved transportation export the workers during the day and get them out of here in the night and 36 are open to the development and i think the other thing i mentioned this before maybe you'll get sick of me saying that an article in good franchisee and link between our income and the time to travel to get to your job and clearly i looked at the different cities and those graphs and there were virtually no city in the u.s u union station not an ability to move up the ladder if you would far
10:27 pm
away from our job is creating a permanent you know class of people that are stuck and i will asking you suggesting to take an interest it is telling i think from a business point of view how many people to do the things to support will life in a city living closer makes a lot of sense from a intnlt from an investment this the list goes ongoing i'm worried about some of the displacement we had in areas where the protecting people are actually being sent out of the neighborhood a couple of other things politically if we can get this stuff done in the same article in the chronicle jim saying we're stuck this is what people think they - if we don't have a mandated i don't know how to
10:28 pm
make progress and it in the same article roughly one hundred thousand new units it p can be created in the structures i think jim or someone that spoke said we need to relax the rules we're starting to in district 3 and 8 but the price to get a new unit is wolfed thousand at least so this be existing ways to do it we have to have the political will and parking issues and like that we have to figure out how to get around that company housing i worked for carnegie steel lived in a company house went to the company store and has a very bad connotation their a slave they can control our aspect of you're being there was a commentary
10:29 pm
where you work all day and exhausted and went to the company housing in the night they controlled the workers that kind of solution get off the idea we've not support that i mentioned this to other people and said oh, my god the company will control every so offering employees to live within a quarter or half a mile that's a great first step amazon this week booked homeless people into a building and in a hotel in seattle we need to go look at those but i love to see that i don't think anyone wants to go back to the housing this company housing what is in the 30s. >> thank you, very much and
10:30 pm
abag for coming out, i thought that was helpful and every year or two years it is sort of tying things together so thank you very much and the commission is going to take a break and pick up with >> good afternoon he and welcome back to the san francisco planning commission francisco planning commission and when speaking before the commission, if you care to, do state your name for the record. commissioners, we left off commissioners, that places you under your regular calendar this is a department sponsoring planning department engagement on intent to initiate.
10:31 pm
>> game-changer commissioners not many of you here i'm sarah jones director of environmental planning last month you took the step of a lemons we were hear talking about how we're going to hopefully from counting card trips to doing something last month you gave us the tool to staple appear if it sounds too good to be true, it probably is. the car movement we're doing something joining me a wayne carlie of the sfmta and michael schwartz of sf accurately and a member of the cross departmental sp c team so all of us have experienced that mist that exists of one-size-fits-all san francisco is no more
10:32 pm
one-size-fits-all than the stirts at my sons favorable store san francisco rejects the notion that san francisco becomes a one-size-fits-all city well one-size-fits-all is a mist when it comes to travel it is proving when it comes to the workers in our city so why shall new development being a one-size-fits-all why should we be thinking only about how driving in cars will be accommodated why would we not doing everything we can to give people choices so the car is not automatically the easy objective transportation of choice regardless of what type of trip you're taking. >> this is going to look unanimous u familiar feels we've
10:33 pm
been talking about the t spc and we're seeing green and red and blue cots in our sleep invest is now the law for the first time new residential development has joined commercial development in putting millions of droorz dollars go solar proclamation from new growth per we are aligned your transportation needs concerns and priorities and now we're at the final piece consists our growing population towards modes of travel we can accommodate this is shift component links the components by the supporting people with the network and reducing the amount of driving insuring that new residents asia leaders in projects have the tools to get where they need to go i'm going to turn it over to to carli the land use development and transportation
10:34 pm
manager from the sfmta. >> good afternoon, commissioners. callie from san francisco municipal transportation agency i'm delighted to be before you with a shell last year team of interagency partners to bring you this proposed ordinance san francisco is growing and we know that we just can't add capacity to the thought cars to our network eve we could doing so will in the align with the transmissions first policy our goals for green house gas emissions reduction and our health and safety goals we need to invest in expanding the sustainability transportation and use the existing system for efficiently and making the choices you're going options other than cars for more of their trips the good news first of all,
10:35 pm
we're already on our way investing in enhancing and expanding sustainability transportation options and that trends show that is what san franciscans are moving towards the idea of shifts is not that we are telling people they need to do something we don't need to do but aligned with more and more people want to be doing shifting is from driving to sustainable modes is on the rise no matter the commuters we've seen in between 2006 and 2014, 94 percent of commute trips are outside of a personal automatic all and contemporary to car free households is out passing other households whereas 1/3rd of how households were car free between
10:36 pm
2014 san francisco added 19 thousand housing units and 6 about 2/3rd's of those are accounted by growth in car free household the shift effort look at the limited capacity to accommodate driving trips of city goals and asks what roles can the city play to support of residents and visitor and others for new sites in assessing them with excellent options not drive alone trips that the transportation management it focuses on this management refers to physical measures and incentives and information and tools it support sustainable trip choices these are measures beyond what in the planning code as much as they include but beyond the planning code last week bike and parking and car
10:37 pm
share onsite and other things like that molted into what those examples are those are measures that are controlled by a developer or property owner that focuses on tenants and visitors and other folks a large management that goes beyond wasn't we're talking about ♪ ordinance it really about what a development can do to support it's tenants and visitors to make it easy for them to choose sustainable modes before we get into the details of the ordinance i want to point out that transportation demand management is not new to san francisco here's what we are working with as a as a starting point some projects today are subject to transportation demand management based on their use or location and size those are
10:38 pm
fixed and not more of a one-size-fits-all if you fall into that category then what we're proposing and any project include the tdm they're on improvement measures and don't fundamentally shape the project are the projects transportation demand we have some requirements related like residential parking and parking 3450789 we don't offer a memo to select from that suggests neighborhood context or target demographics we honestly are not insuring compliance after a project is built we don't have formal dedicated attendance on the transportation demand management after a project approved now we looked at best practices
10:39 pm
throughout the country on transportation demand management and found there is useful lessons to our approach in san francisco other jurisdictions really articulate a comprehensive approach to transportation demand management ouch fueled by target or a goal and have separate standards updated to keep you think up with the state of the practice transportation demand management integrating the project to shape the projects demand and transportation program and their linking to parking provided w which we know is one of the impactful influence in how and choices that people make about how to get around from a site
10:40 pm
they offer flexibility to rehabilitate the neighborhood context in projects and they have a built in compliance and many have dedicated staff and better funded through recovery of their costs so we've taken that to to the tdm ordinance we're proposing to get into the details of that proposal i i'm going to turn it over to to wade from the planning department staff >> thank you carli and commissioner president fong and commissioners i'm wade with the planning department staff i'm excited to be here once again to talk about the final elements of attorney-client privilege as carli and sarah talked about the challenges and solutions i'll tell you how we took the solutions and refined the proposal to be san francisco go
10:41 pm
specific as well neighborhood specific throughout the city and this proposal has been refined since i've presented in february at the informational hearing based on research or i'm sorry feedback we received as well outreach we've conducted in the last two months as a reminder when i talk about the owners not just the owners with the staff report but also in reference to programs standard that will be adopted along with the ordinance when it comes back before you had in july. >> so there are 3 basics to this ordinance the internal revenue service it is setting a target aimed at reducing vehicles miles traveled had will apply to new development greater than 10 years and 10 thousand square feet of noirl that meets
10:42 pm
the criteria when i say that the standards the vehicle miles traveled a reminder this measures the distances of a project that causes people to dry drive and the matrixes we're using for the environmental review and the start is based on the absolute number of off-street parking provided at the staying site more parking at the site and tdm measures you need to priority and carli alluded to that there's more and more research coit there is a relationship between the amount of parking in an area and the amount of driving that occurs so given that a project might provide more parking we need more tdm to counter balance it incentive to drive for more if
10:43 pm
not outline trips a project sponsor will be able to once they know their the fact of the matter based on the number of parking spaces being able to select a memo of options to reach their target they can choose to have flexibility specific to their project as well as their neighborhood the memo includes 26 measures automobile intend to reduce the vehicle miles traveled and each measure is as i said a point value the entire memo and point values that are attachment is attachment e in the staff report the point values are based on whether to review the research as well as our own data collection and research we've done in the city over the last two summers a low point value means it is
10:44 pm
relatively less effective at reducing vehicle miles traveled as opposed to the point values on the higher end this is at low end as much as signage in our building is indicates where bicycle and car share parking are on the high-end the reducing parking supply so how this will work a sponsor will go online to the website and find a tool and enter the number of parking spaces and enter the amount of development their and denominator their target automatically be updated and choose in the memo and select from the measures to meet that target this tool we'll post online in the coming weeks with the material so project sponsors as well as members of the public can play to understand how
10:45 pm
projects will be affected by this proposal prior to it coming back for adoption and by a project sponsor building inspector to use this tool before necessary come to the planning department with a formal application is they will really be able to integrate the things of the project up front as when carli was describing today once they work with the tool they'll submit a tdm application with the department and here's a hypothetical example of what it tdm plan might look like here's a project in the dog patch i talked about this in february we updated to reflect ore memo that as 44 dwelling units and 12 parking spaces based on the number of parking spaces and a residential project they need a start of the 14 points
10:46 pm
under the code today they will get 3 points for doing bike parking and separating the costs from the unit theretofore they need 11 more points the next thing they'll look like how many points for parking supply and the way points are assigned for the parking supply measures is consistent request other planning code provisions and design guidelines that look at the neighborhood xhashlth in order to do that you need to be blow the neighborhood parking rate when i'm talking about residential parking rate the number of spaces per unit so in this instance in the dog patch this the neighborhood parking space rate is approximately .6 spaces per unit when we come back to the project their parked as half the number
10:47 pm
of or half the rate of neighborhood so they'll get 6 points between the existing code and parking supply 9 point and 4 more points needed and i selected some measures for them to get there. >> same project now different amount of parking so this time 33 that concludes my remarks they have a higher target because we have more parking and this time they're not getting points for that parking supply is not parking at or blow the neighborhood therefore they need to provide more tdm once again i selected some measures from the memo to illustrate how they'll get the target this becomes in either scenario the tdm for the project they'll submit to the department
10:48 pm
once again we submit the plan the city staff recommends them as conditions of approval before you you would eventually approve the project potentially and building permits will be issued following the third basic element of the ordinance and maybe the mother critical element and that's an implementation strategy there are two points one city staff insuring the measures that we are offering in the memo are effective and we will do that by doing data collection at buildings that get built over time as well as research that is out there in the tdm field we want to do this because we want to be nimble and up to date to the highly dynamic nature and we're proposing in the staff
10:49 pm
report we'll come back to you when we updates to the memo for adoption of more substantive updates the second part of implementation strategy to make sure that the developers are following through the candidates they made in their tdm plan and this will occur through a preoccupycy compliance check so prior to receiving the certificate of preference the city staff will make sure the physical measures like bicycle parking and car share are in place once that occurs the building is occupied 18 months after occupancy they'll submit templates we'll provides officially of forms they're providing so the documentation
10:50 pm
they're continuing to submit to the measures city staff will do spot checks every 3 years to make sure the measures are still in place. >> as sarah and carli talked about this reflects a number of years of research as well as a robust outreach we've done as part of the transportation sustainability program focusing on shift over the last six months we plan on doing further outreach i'll just appoint a couple of dates one is an open house we're hosting members of the community to come other planning department on may 18th and i want to make note that different from the staff report we're intending to go to the mta blood on june 7th
10:51 pm
today, we're looking for our initiation to start the process and we're continuing to hear feedback from the community and specifically we're interested in your thoughts and about grandfathering and really it is awe mriblth when the ordinance will be applied to the ordinance or what projects should be applied to the tdm updates talked about when we will come back to the planning commission when we just want the memo and third incentives when i mean by this in those two examples scenarios in the dog patch city staff will see the projects above and beyond the call of duty what their projects is required to be we're interested in you have feedback with regards to the incentives to make that happen
10:52 pm
in summary is he look forward to the next process if this happens. >> thank you. >> commissioners one additional comment first of all, thank to the staff of all mta and the ta and planning department for this a quick reminder the budget you resolved in february actually had to positions specifically devoted to this program because of the very clear need to have preoccupancy and post occupancy working with the developers to select this to wanted to remind you two place holders assuming this goes forward. >> opening up for public comment there are no speaker cards. >> mr. dulling la visual and
10:53 pm
executive director of liveable city god there's one will that and one why are redoing it this way and not the more long time way the will that is it does omit any parking garage as defined inform section one 02 it is didn't understand are not objects not a plat piece of ground it is. >> you can combine them a very, very long time for example, in the downtown since anyone built a garage, however, they have excess parking okay multiple uses a good example market street the trinity that and you
10:54 pm
get accessory parking but can't it did that you have to do another use the public pain and suffering you're saying we're concerned about the auto trips by the accessory to the residential to the office but we don't care about the majority of trips that are generated by the other use in the building that is parking so we'd is either include parking lots and parking garages they have the biggest potential and include them in the ordinance or simply if you want to include them only exclude them if their others only use on-site and look at the projects as a whole it needs a tdm requirement not just the part of garage use otherwise we're kind of in - it is only
10:55 pm
audible trips not parking this is not true and the second thing if we know that parking is required one space per unit far exceeds what onsite need generates other trips we were hoping when one 41 this is the section that as has the parking requirement was amend if neighborhoods are dense not talking about rh but half the city but mc - c-2 we don't need parking can you as a commission in 2016 having the findings if you read the muni blog we say if parking is not necessary for urban residents it generates more trips why require it in the letter we sent you, we proposed in the district in c m and c-2
10:56 pm
eliminates it altogether rather than require it but reduce it and not require is and lower our requirements some restaurants you need more areas for parking than in restaurants thank you. >> any other public speeches on this item. >> commissioners ron this is not what i came for, however, i'm confused and i have not read the materials beforehand so what i say maybe not right but, however, why you're giving points for parking and unblunld i bundled i don't know you'll projects are required to have that i'm active in potrero hill and dog patch we're pushing and have been successful with
10:57 pm
developers pushing one bike stall per bedroom in the just one unit they're coming one unit automatically so they know we won't talk about that ununbelievably is a standard i don't understand why that is part of criteria for the buildings using neighborhood criteria as the example of pulling 6 depends on entirely how you define neighborhoods is it some new multi family building within that area is single-family homes with sometimes 2 cars per garage so as a standard you have to be very, very careful how to set up the perimeters of what you're calling neighborhoods in that case and the other thing that
10:58 pm
neighborhood groups in dog patch and potrero hill have been pushing for are the requirements for white zones important hundred and 50 to two hundred unit buildings or taxis for uber or for lyft and climate change that sort of thing we're not getting the double parking we get in those instances i believe this should be part of your mix as well thank you. >> any, any other speakers on this topic that portion of the hearing is closed. >> commissioner antonini. >> but, initiate i have questions he assume one of the ways to remeet or get the points so to pay obviously we don't have view money for mass transit and people don't use it three
10:59 pm
bedroom units with 3 kids won't buy the place and rent it if they don't have a car that's one of the ways to get their points by paying into a fund. >> the transportation sustainability fee which came through here last year is a you know represents a subsequent contribution towards the ultimate transportation system towards the entirety transportation network a lot of that goes towards transit and other non-auto needs the up to this time is part of that the additional tdm would belabored on top of that. >> so that would be an option that would be available to a project sponsor. >> no they're paying anyway.
11:00 pm
>> so no points on the tdm. >> have them pay more if they want more parking you because you'll never have a decent transportation policy unless you have lots of money they want to build a structure with one-on-one parking they'll have to do it that's one way to generate income and also to you know have them getting points. >> well the fee out option is something that was considered you know we can look at it more it does raise issues around nexus and so it is not at this point, a component of what we're proposing. >> i'll suggest you do because i think realistically you're living in a dream world if you
11:01 pm
think that people with a lot of kids won't have a car if they don't have a parking space they'll hog up the streets and not use the parking spaces that mr. boskovich talked about especially with the number of break in you don't want to leave our cars on the street their broken into every week. >> and as described the proposed ordinance don't allow the developers to choose to allow parking under the code but if they provide parking we're asking they supply other amenities to make it easier not to use the car. >> i understand the point and the other they know that was odd you're not charging or making affordable housing projects with anything into the system but the presumption that the residents
11:02 pm
will not have cars i'm not sure that's true and also is true that eve that's the case your put more wear and tear on the muni system so the affordable units should be able to pay into that two in my opinion. >> thank you. >> and the other thing as far as grandfathering you can grandfather anything before this is passed like we do things in san francisco we pass the laws when the projects are approved what is approved is based on negotiations as to how much parking you'll have we live with that and i like to see that thing implemented as soon as possible but should go forward after that is passed so those are the most things i wonder about what the gentleman brought up about the garage not
11:03 pm
included that is the use more willing to cause a use of a car then someone that has a garage in their house the car could set there all week but if you have a parking space the car will be used more. >> certainly the way we've assessed the projects looking at the whole of the project you're talking about ceqa people we talk about the whole of the project so you know no matter what a developer calls they're parking if their parking spaces proposed as part of a project that will go into the bucket of the tdm plan. >> okay. thank you. >> commissioner johnson. >> thank you very much i'm a major passport of tdm
11:04 pm
happy to see it and looking forward and appreciate the work from the staff with the folks just. >> couple of things i think that thank you for clarifying the question that - i'm not sure if i'll agree if there was a will that i'm not sure i'll agree with the potential solution the point of tdm to provide measures that prevent trip generations that are originally from the project so not orient from the project to find a way for bike sharing or getting rid of not sure from the trips are generated in other areas of tdm measure helps that is where i have the question for staff do we anticipate that some
11:05 pm
of the manufacture that will be on the list will be mitigating trips generated from other areas outside of the city. >> to the degree that the tdm requirements will apply to noirl developments sweetheart residential developments an office development will be subject and need a tdm plan and presumably effecting the people from outside the city to use cars less than they might audits for example, if there is easy parking provided in the building with regards to stand alone
11:06 pm
planning commission's parking spaces we're in a better position to consider accurately under the v mp metrics from ceqa rather than the level of service we were assuming that that trips always stayed in the area and assuming is parking in and of itself was not generating trips looking at it as v mp metric if someone it proposing a garage we have to look at the kind of vehicle traffic it is generating so i'll say to conclude that we in a better position at it this .0 assess and address the transportation of a stand alone parking garage then we used to be and be in a better position
11:07 pm
when we just want our transportation analysis there's a lot of things around transportation i think when it comes to a parking garage only to make that smaller. >> that's what it comes down to but we don't get a lot of stand alone parking garages. >> i guess a followup question that's great from 9 beginning i understand the point system make sense but haven't seen that list of measures that could be potentially used i think my questions we talk about the most i sort of i'm not sure they work to help to mitigate trips generated from other areas and i know there is a lot of measures i guess my question i know we have a few positions that will be could you be do we have a
11:08 pm
sense of the list of measures to predicament for the measures and started to think about how to build it point system. >> yeah. commissioner johnson wade planning staff the full memo it is attachment e the description of the list means we are going to be a attached to the tdm st. patrick's day standards documents i've mentioned in the ordinance wirptsz intending on hearing feedback and doing more outreach before we release all the descriptions of those facts sheets what we're calling them fact sheets the actual description of the measures because we wanted to hear more thoughts about how we could potentially define some of the measures and honestly we're working through the details of
11:09 pm
all the individual measures fine tuning them and we intend on doing that realizing that over the coming weeks and well in advance of the july 7th hearing hearing to people understand what they mean. >> thank you commissioner vice president richards. >> i guess first when i hear to m t e to monitor and the office i like where the enforcement it is rather than waiting for someone to call saying they didn't put up the signs i like that i hope we go to a practical enforcement for everything short of that i'll take this i'd like to see from the get-go the murder saving in the
11:10 pm
environmental review i know it it takes time in the process of the group the director has to the mayor to improve efficiency i'd like that to - the measures to whatever i think question i have is i'm sitting here as a developer and i'm thinking, huh? i looked at the two examples with the 12 and 33 spaces now i know that as a developer he can get so much more parking space i unbundled is the standard or not so i agree with commissioner antonini one of the - oh, former commissioner miguel if you're doing something required not getting points you're not doing anything above.
11:11 pm
>> commissioner vice president richards we've heard this comment the way the targets are set for each individual land use is based on the total number of points that are available to that land use so fwerp to remove individual measures such as bicycle parking it would lower the number of points available and therefore, might lower the target what we firmly believe that bicycle parking we believe but research in the tdm measure and parking is a tdm measure that's great we have it in the code and following up your comment right away as part of program we want to enforce those measures as well if we are removed them from the memo that gives us less of an opportunity to do that make sense so i'm the
11:12 pm
developer i see i'm asking for more parking than out loud - i do the math and the bicycle parking costs this much can i make a profit by saying i'll take more spaces and it will cost me less but i want to make sure there is an incentive or measuring the cost of the impact not something a financial gain. >> we firmly believe that the memo provides that opportunity for that developers to do that cost balance the budget analysis and ultimate we're not the purpose not to try to determine which costs more necessarily but try to reduce the vehicle trips we did consultant with lydia and
11:13 pm
did a workshop and she stride to provide estimates of things that will cost but in the end there is flexibility in how you design our program and the parking space you're going to save a lot of money by not building the parking it was tough to come to a conclusion what costs more than the benefits. >> per the question i know we were 3 percent beacon trips in the city a few years ago now 6 or 7 doubled i think so we provide bike parking for residents in the potrero hill only 7 percent of the trips are generated is that reflected in how you get the points. >> it's based on impact. >> we did a review best practices research to try to
11:14 pm
determine the range of points for each individual measure we firmly believe that if you provide for bicycle parking per bedroom for example, is more effective than per unit u unit our point system reflect that we plan as i alluded in the implementation strategy to go to the sites avenue r after they're built to see how close our estimates are. >> one more question my thought personal recommendation on your example for the dog patch neighborhood instead of zero points we're asking for more parking ask for nothing else points that will be above the norm i think that makes sense we have countered that. >> that is grairthd how we
11:15 pm
looked at doing affordable housing and you put your points depending on the points whatever not the whole thing i think some type of graduated portfolio system with some rational system make sense i don't support the fee out, however, if you consider it the fee should 100 percent i think iteration is key based on the data you've collected and a look back and is here's what we got you need to fine-tune it i'm very, very supportive of this great job everybody i'll move to approve. >> second. >> commissioner moore. >> i am esteeming excited about that going forward you're
11:16 pm
breaking the mist that parking to finance buildings something we've been battling with through the last 10 or 15 years including in the eastern neighborhoods plan and market octavia plan that was to hard fought for the lower parking ratios agreement and building came we only got the answer that that is based on the traditional parking ratios at the expense of how we grow the city have we broken this is one of my questions. >> i can't answer that but anecdotal we've seen more promotions with less parking i'll say that anecdotal in comprehensions we've had with developers on this program this
11:17 pm
- that was not a commitment we heard. >> xhirlsz that's right we hear that comment less and less because i hear more and more from the developers that ma of every their tenants don't have cars and barkers and lenders are less concerned we have less projects that are proposing to provide no parking so they're proposing that from the offset they must know they're getting financing. >> so to a project we asked on april 7th whether or not that parking was necessary only to hear that most people want to a park their illustration cars when they're out of town that is counter by which our setting up the program that will resolve it's itself when we come to -
11:18 pm
>> i'm sorry can i interject the research that calm u came out we're really trying to reflect in that work providing parking has been shown as the single biggest detriment whether or not that someone will drive and anecdotal that's true if you plan on going out to dinner the decision how to get there there is no place to park projecting not going to drive there more than that even there is recent research that was presented at the transportation board that parking actually has a costal relationship where you have a situation if this is parking available the more parking you provide the more your causing people to drive the real the new level we've gotten to in our findings of this issue.
11:19 pm
>> i appreciate your restating that point because the other report you're saying we recently had a developer who fraudulently installed parking and after an inspection he choose to reinstall to double the amount of onsite parking despite the fact he was not entitled to do so it works both ways as this rule requires the enforcement at the point of prelims to follow up to keep this program on track the second party want to ask the rating and finding a point system the point value why you said it was something you'll exam as aau you implement pulses
11:20 pm
me the way of the sign you'll have these days that is not worth a point, however, when i look at onsite affordable housing as the incentive - having the same point value i'll challenge to put under the microscope the second additional car share parking that has it's limits a point you start to counteract our tdm is about i hope experience will have you dune it but as the codify you need to be codified it means cast in stone and many times years later we codified or didn't codify only to see it is
11:21 pm
insufficient or doesn't work. >> your points raised something that i think will be useful for this commission to consider as we glow the coming months and move towards adoption of the ordinance which is the point values that are assigned are they're a assignment of points it is based on the relative effectiveness of each measure at reducing trips and reducing the v mp based on our research and others research we made a conscious decide not to apply a filter or lens whereby we'll be assigning for points to measures that are more desirable for policy reasons that is something for the commission to consider as you go forward and as you consider that ordinance
11:22 pm
to keep that approach or i think about the policy consequences behind the various measures and then the point of codification that is exactly the reasoning behind putting the point values into the implementation documents which will be under the control of the planning commission to change as needed rather than codifying it and needing to bring it to the board i - when we have a new measure or need to adjust things. >> well, your professional expertise and overarching responsibility for environmental review i'll hope you'll to the commission and the board of supervisors or montgomery anybody who has a say in the discussion to stay in the subject because we are not looking at this everyday you're studying it with cutting information so i will urge you
11:23 pm
to remain the steward and gatekeeper. >> it has an ongoing implementation function and, yes we'll not bring anything to this commission without providing full information about whether or not i think that is useful. >> the third point i'll not support or want to discuss a fee out this is in direct face of the policy trying to be plenty i'm interested in the gentleman's concerns the parking garages that are garages in critical locations therapy at the edge of city and counties cities for regional transportation not coming downtown but strategic places
11:24 pm
they were served by bart or other systems to keep people at the time edge of the city without their cars those below dui visual- lastly you talked about the idea of the incentives the ideal priority and one idea outreaching i've not heard and in the sure if so a good idea but the parking of smaller cars like in europe two cars occupy one traditional parking space is something we should consider we've never done it we have no provisions on 2 even heavily parked commercial corridors but
11:25 pm
we're at a point we should bring that into this discussion. >> commissioner johnson. >> thank you. i time to make a brief comment it was appointed by a couple of commissioners i don't support that with option one i agree with commissioner moore not supportive of the policy obviously the measures in the memo we don't need more definition of options anyway those measures are - if you were to take a fee from a project in anticipation of either the city taking over responsibility of putting in some sort of measures in that location or all throughout the city you put it elsewhere in the city it takes away the tdm for the physical location and run
11:26 pm
into issues the city is not able to implement certain mowers on private property for to those reasons we shouldn't talk about a fee out option it flies in the face of the policy and not implementing 9 policies should we decide to collect the fees. >> commissioner antonini. >> i disastrous on the fee the biggest detriment from public transportation not non-existence or takes you two hours to go somewhere you can drive there in thirty minutes you'll probably drive whatever we can do to fund more public transportation will have a bigger impact on fewer auto trips than all the measures in trying to lessen i'll vote for the initiation but whether the chicken or is egg came first
11:27 pm
further promotions are people are owning cars you've self-selected the people that have to have cars families with 3 kids live in multi-unit buildings but a parking space they'll consider it they'll not drag their groceries and kids on the streets someplace and try to figure out how to get them to school this is a factor in driving families out of san francisco you have to be careful but if you look at the strategics and make sure you're not looking at those you created projects that will not consider i'm happy to support this is american people initiation and see where it goes. >> commissioner vice president richards. >> 3 more points what struck me was commissioner antonini we wrestled with a lot of projects
11:28 pm
in potrero hill looks like one-on-one parking spaces and other factors not in my hand here how do those requirements sit with the neighborhood was it the neighborhood parking space rate. >> so that's allowed is one-on-one how does that jive. >> that's a great question we did sort of an overlay map of looking at the neighborhood parking rate compared to what the zoning district requires for the on the residential side of things outside of rh it is consistent one to one in the older more established neighborhoods in the city given you have a number of homes that
11:29 pm
were built prior to actually park minimum into effect in the 1950s the neighborhood parking rate was lower than the parking district allows. >> wouldn't that led to a bigger conversation in the future to say maybe we should lower the minimums so using the 1950s measures that's the loss of service this is more enlightened when we did market octavia the way the neighborhood came together it will take less parking we had the contents data i strongly suggest the department consider i know that is not needed to do but angle enlighten time process like the
11:30 pm
2020. >> a year 2 or 5 come back with an informational from the selection break down the mitigation, the impact of th measures and come back and let us know and talk about and reiterate the table we're in control of its great to come back and measure to share with us great. >> great. >> commissioners, if there's nothing further, we'll move on to there's a there is a motion that has been seconded to adopt the resolution to initiate commissioner antonini commissioner hillis commissioner johnson commissioner moore commissioner wu commissioner vice president richards and commissioner president fong so moved, commissioners, that motion passes unanimously 7 to zero and commissioners that places us on item 11 fillmore street. >> a request for conditional
11:31 pm
use authorization. >> good afternoon. members the planning commission sharon planning department staff this is a conditional use authorization to establish a formula retail use doing business as the apathy care selling products in phil street light on a vacant ground floor space previously opted out by a chief store within the upper fillmore zoning district the proposal will involve storefront and a tier with tenants ground floor commercial space with no
11:32 pm
extension of the retail use it has many stores worldwide with no locations in san francisco the proposed project will allow for establishing the diverse space in c with k with the location in san francisco they currently have 4 dependent retailed stores in california the findings are in the motion for the commission to consider to date the department has not received any letters in opposition to the proposed project the sponsors are made outreach to the fillmore merchants association and the pacific heights residents association the fillmore provided one letter of support and the pacific heights provide a neutral response the planning department staff received 3 letters of
11:33 pm
support and one phone call from a member of the public e member of the public requesting information as far as the planning department recommends is approval with recommendation that concludes my presentation. >> thank you project sponsor please. >> good afternoon, commissioners my name is carlos i'm president space and k apathy car - found in 1993 nike is an entrepreneur a lifestyle beauty junky and world traveler here vision when we started the company in 1993 to
11:34 pm
bring beauty products if around the world and that's our vision today so our investment is an respite for beauty consumers that are overwhelmed by choose your highly trained staff is there to answer consumer questions, to educate, and provide an environment that is a respite from many choices they encourage education, they encourage questions, they encourage sampling and in an environment where we will carry 60 brands that are curated that are carefully chosen for each store will offer a variety we offer products constantly
11:35 pm
looking for newness and innovation, instantly bringing unique products and choice for a tailor sort time those beauty products are skin care and personal products for men and women wellness and therapy and home products and candle we think our products will be an excellent addition to the fillmore street neighborhood so with that, i will pass the microphone to my colleague noah that will give you more information and specific details on the store. >> good afternoon commissioner i'm noah i'm the managing director here in the united states as carlos mentioned
11:36 pm
curation is one of our key brand values and one of those things we applied that to our sit selection as mentioned two, 4 california stores two in northern california and one in minor and one in palo alto it make sense for the occurs ration process to be in the fillmore street area in regards to the site election we found that first name is a great neighborhood the synergy is aligned and as we decided think on this space as of 2009 of him street we found the 11 square feet corner was great for us as you can see the space takes the corner of fillmore and pine and we've maintained the exterior the building remaining
11:37 pm
similar to what is existing today we toned to do local vending and hiring and senior management here as well with that, i'm available to answer any questions. >> thank you open up for public comment if there is any. >> okay not seeing any, public comment is closed. commissioner antonini yeah, he think that meals on wheels a vacant space and - people may be attempted to drive here that makes a lot of sense to say save miles and, of course, that is a lot more density in population a great choice for the sponsors i'll move to approve. >> second. >> thank you, commissioners
11:38 pm
there is a there is a motion that has been seconded to approve that matter with conditions commissioner antonini commissioner hillis commissioner johnson commissioner moore commissioner wu - okay. that's it. >> thank you, commissioners so moved, commissioners, that motion passes unanimously 5 to zero commissioners, that places you under item 12 case silver after a conditional use authorizationafter a conditl use authorizationvafter a conditional use authorizatieaft conditional use authorizatinaft conditional use authorizationua conditional use authorizatieaft conditional use authorizationft conditional use authorizaticondl use authorization good afternoon commissioner president fong and members of the board planning department staff the item before you is a request for for a conditional use
11:39 pm
authorization to satiate a formula retail grocery stores doing business as grocery outlet on silver avenue within the zoning district as well as within the 40 height and bulk 14 thousand square feet and the existing off-street parking the project will undertake additional shaping on the facade that includes the installation of a mural along silver avenue the grocery outlet will have 20 liquor licenses the intensity of formula retail use is increasing from 11 point plus to 13 plus with all businesses within a quarter of a mile from the mcd and the street footage is increased it is compatible comparable to how the
11:40 pm
subject property has been used construction in 1964 a retail use has occupied and the previous occupant vacated the property the proposal to reestablish the formula retail grocery use the commercial use of general plan encouraging strengthening viable neighborhood commercial areas to insure the retention and provision of the neighborhoods providing goods and services the department has received public comment and numerous letters of support one by the association overwhelming support to stainer a grocery no opposition has been expressed that has done
11:41 pm
significant outreach with many excelsior and has engaged supervisor campos office the the castro hill association and the middle school and the latter is a nonprofit service the department recommends approval it is consistent with the planning code the project is the only grocery store within a quarter of a mile from the nc one the project will fill the vacant by a closure of another formula retail use the project meets all the requirements of planning code and the project is desirable and compatible neighborhoods that concludes my presentation. i'll be happy to answer any questions you may have. >> okay. thank you project sponsor explain. >> thank you, commissioners john with reuben, junius & rose on behalf of the project sponsor grocery outlet we're excited
11:42 pm
with the two new outlets to occupy two-story building first like to have the ceo of grocery outlet to explain their outlet. >> hello commissioners and thank you for having me. i'm gregory the co-ceo of the grocery store a third-generation of our family we're grateful to have to stores one in visitacion valley and one in the richmond district i had the opportunity to appear before you a couple years ago it is unique the way we buy and the way we sell we established long term relationships with virtual virtually every company and the package changes and we round that out with a maid to order
11:43 pm
sofrment with to 60 percent savings and 20 percent versus wal-mart about 15 percent of our business is used users a b b t we cater to many community with the household of 50 or $60,000 a year we're here to provide the customers 3. to stretch their dollars to feed the families we have a focus on healthy products and switching gears we've participated with independent operators to run that store and essentially we buy they sell we are responsible for paying the rent and buying the manufactures and comboufr them
11:44 pm
to run the store their facilities we operate and they tailor the merchandise and their as a matter of law community they could be the mayors of the town this is no expectation no political boogsz we enjoy getting emersed in the community and we operate in the richmond and visitacion valley hope to do so in the mission in the poorer neighborhoods thanks very much. >> just quickly commissioners so at 14 are 1390 silver it is occupy by fresh and easy and the bell market before about it has 35 new employees and grocery outlet is working with a local nonprofit to exist and identify
11:45 pm
local hires we're working with the castro to identify the side of the building as - we have a type 80 beer and wine license and limited to 5 percent of the sales of the floor area and we're also not required by code adding street trees along the frontage and the rear to brighten up it up. >> and conducted community outreach 15 members of the community attended and one letter on file from the barry toll association and various nonprofits including alive and free and the football local and in closing a great unique food retailer they'll an a great addition and the neighborhood is welcoming them with open arms would he ever respectfully request you approve that.
11:46 pm
>> opening up for public comment. >> good afternoon, commissioners phil just about 25 year residents at 20th and guerrero prior to being disabled i was in the workforce development area also prior to that i was a health indicator i'd like to thank grocery outlet for engaging the community i found out about that that's plans to be in the location on south van ness by flyers in the women's building they had a engaging
11:47 pm
meeting with the communities i was able to reach out to babe and others that have been working on this got any questions answered i know that they're reaching out to different groups within the mission to do local hiring as all of you know the price of housing has gotten out of control and - in san francisco but next the cost of food is the next largest increase that we've seen so having a store that meets the needs of community not only for hire but for meeting the needs of people that are actually living in the communities right now pursue is an important goal for me thank you.
11:48 pm
>> thank you. >> i'm laura third generation san franciscan i'm so happy their in san francisco back in the san jose the canned food center a pregrocery outlet i live in the outer richmond it is the gary store that's been opened both rose and travis are wonderful their welcoming we get customers of that so i go amend almost daily getting different things if you're willing to be flexible you can do all your shopping at the outlet they're concerned about the prices ever vegetables have gourmet items and things you find at gourmet stores and
11:49 pm
all the employees are nice they speak to you rose and travis really reach out to the community they know many of the everyday customers by name and they welcome you by name it is great to have them back in san francisco before they reopen mind i'd have to go to pet aluminum and it is more grocery outlet in san francisco the better if you visit one you'll notice people shopping are carts are filed we have resident from sea crystal-clear and the greater richmond district with a grocery outlet that is a great opportunity to shop there's diversity in the items and also the price point is just amazing
11:50 pm
so i hope you'll consider those stores 2 will meet the needs of folks in those communities thank you very much. >> i'm daniel i brought this or a letter by one of my fellow neighbors who lives in by the proposed site she had to leave early she asked me to read it i willable after any explanation this is my area of the expertise i put a nice shirt open i'm the direct next door neighbor the rear side of south van ness he own thereby property with my folks we find ourselves in an odd
11:51 pm
position of support for 2, 3, 4 store i say odd because the prior store with the property owners the folks had been a period marked by contention relationships with me and my family the trusting absent i didn't trustees found we had an inpermitted easement if he were dismayed and the intense harassment began against my family therefore when grocery outlet came along i had trepidation i noticed they seemed generously interested in my concerns and the concerns of the community aid respectful of our easement and have not thwarted it i began graffiti
11:52 pm
abatement i've done so for 11 years free of charge 1999 until 2012 in the last 6 months the grocery team has mended the difference my family had with their landlord the matter at hand we need to grocery store is an effective food desert and grocery outlet is responsible and sensitive to the needs of community i have no reason to believe they'll not be different going forward and grocery outlet to be successful this this neighborhood it is he is he expensive they'll need to operate shownisms to be responsible and a great track record i'll ask the commission to consider the needs for the
11:53 pm
community for this grocery store thank you. >> is there any additional public comment? >> okay comment is closed. commissioner vice president richards. >> one of the first speaker took the words out of my mouth i saw the expenses our incomes and food is next expensive we need the economic diverse mixes of the citizens and having the grocery store if this neighborhood will help to fray the cost of living it is doesn't to see the price down and with wal-mart it is an underserved site someone said that was a desert place but since 1994 since the outreach of the nonprofits and the supervisors office i move to approve.
11:54 pm
>> commissioner wu. >> i just grocery stores should be treated differently that is necessary there all of us and really great to see a neighborhood one that meetsz the daily needs of neighborhood glad to support. >> commissioner antonini. >> in addition to this grocery stores less expensive than many that are out there they will employ quite a while people if this is typical in the rest of san francisco i understand the richmond store employees 90 percent of their employees live in the neighborhood and close to 100 percent percent of the visitacion valley so this is really another positive and yeah. i remember when it
11:55 pm
was a bell market you know it was closed by the temporarily a fresh and easy and support that. >> commissioner moore. >> i support it want to make one point at facts were significantly insensitive to the communities providing food or sometimes irrelevant to the people that live through for the applicant to mention that they were twairlg part of the merchandise to help the community is encouraging we have the neighborhood that have strong food demands based on cultural and ethnic history i appreciate the volunteers will
11:56 pm
tell us that so i'm encouraged to see that happening. >> commissioners, if there's nothing further, we'll move on to there is a motion that has been seconded to approve that matter with conditions commissioner antonini commissioner hillis commissioner johnson commissioner moore commissioner wu and commissioner vice president richards and commissioner president fong so moved, commissioners, that motion passes unanimously 7 to zero and places us under 13 at south van ness avenue this is also a request for conditional use authorization. >> good afternoon commissioner president fong and members of the commission planning department staff full name is a request for the confusion pursuant to planning code sections to establish a formula retail grocery store doing business as grocery outlet
11:57 pm
and reestablish the collaborative licenses on van ness located within the mc-3 commercial and rh2 two family zoning district as well as the heeblt and the mission collaborative beverage special use district the project will maintain and reuse the existing grocery store measuring 21 thousand plus grocery store outlets reduces parking spaces if 63 to 49 with landscaping and altercations providing code compliant signage with the 21 collaborative license a general license within the collaborative sud grocery outlet has demonstrated - the density is increasing in 7. to 8
11:58 pm
plus within a quarter mile of the mc-3 district with a footage from 10 to 13.4 square feet w that the suggest property since councilmember johnson umu in 1959 a formula retail use occupied it the commercial space an has been vacant in the interim the existing formula retail use groceries within a quarter of a mile 22 vacancies out of 200 under the influence establishments they encourage the strengthening the commercial areas to insure the aforementioned continues to serve the needs of the neighborhood and recognized the expansion of opportunities to
11:59 pm
date p.m. including numerous letters of support to establish a grocery at south van ness the neighbors are excited about the project and want american people approval without further detail outreach of the mission district and has engaged saint peter's and the quarter and the representatives regarding the can in addition, sponsorship and the grocery outlet has corporate two murals with the elementary community the youth development organization involved with the first mural an additional meeting occurred on april 6th with a various nonprofits the project is continent with the planning code the project will result in a reduction of number of off-street parking and the project is the only grocery
12:00 am
store of its size capacity within a quarter of a mill from the mc-3 and the only formula retail within the vicinity that will - the project meets the ms. hayward requirement and is desirable and compatible with the needs of neighborhood buildings that i'll be happy to answer any questions you may have. >> opening up for public comment. >> this location south van ness 21 square feet building to be occupied by the foods going to the 1950s the commission approved that portion of space in 2012 but fresh and easy went out the business unfortunately, it is vacant for a number of