tv Government Access Programming SFGTV August 17, 2018 11:00pm-12:01am PDT
. >> -- here's, like, a wall of development here and here, same here. so besides the facilities sauns and tubs are the views that that sun deck. it is obvious that the project would have a significant impact on the views of that sun deck. it took 12 years to create from the time the property was purchased until the -- it was opened on the last day of 2011. by the way, it was built under the existing zoning.
the india basin project threatens to crush thatimed . >> hello. my name is david gross plat. thank you very much. i live in india basin. i live in shipyard with my two children and my wife, and i came here in october, and we discussed some of the deficiencies of the e.i.r., and i felt very good about that meeting. i felt that we had come to a
consensus that there was some deficiencies in the e.i.r., and we would spend some time with the planning department and the developer to try to come to a consensus on that, and i'm very sad to report that nothing happened. we tried to reach out several times and didn't hear anything until it was time to make notice of this hearing here which wasn't even sent to us. we had to find out through back channels that not only was this going to be a meeting about certifying the e.i.r. but that the zoning and ceqa was going to happen. but what's happened is we are reeling in the shipyard for environmental reasons. our supervisor knows what's going on here. she stood up and did he fended us, and what we have found out since then that there is a high likelihood that some of the landfill that we're talking about now came from the shipyard. we don't know which parcel it
came from, we don't know anything about that landfill. in the shipyard right now, every day we have good people from the public health department coming there and testing everything. we have multiple lawsuits going on right now. we -- we feel abandoned. we feel like we did take the step to help the city and bring housing over there. i can't believe that we're getting ready to certify an e.i.r. and not paying any attention to what's going on over there right now, and not paying any attention to the fact that there's a high likelihood that some of the land that lennar has rightfully stopped some of the that development, some of that land may be on this property. my building faces this property through one property in between, and on the property in between, there's giant signs that say do not dig. there may be contaminants. and here one step away, wind blowing right into my unit with my children is where this digging is going to happen, and there's no discussion of this in the e.i.r. at all.
so i'm sorry that i'm getting, you know, excited about this, but i understand there's a lot -- i have nothing against this project. i have nothing against the goals of this project. i just can't believe that between october and now, all that has happened, and here we are, trying to rush, push this e.i.r. through. so what i've learned is there's going to have to be another one of these meetings today, there's no reason to approve this e.i.r. today. like you did in october, insist, insist that our voices are heard, that we have a chance to come to consensus, that maybe we do some additional testing on this land to find out exactly what's going on there before we go down this terrible path again. thank you. >> vice president melgar: thank you. next speaker, please. >> hello. my name is jesus florez, and i'm also an employee of arc
archime archimedes banya. in the draft, not explicitly, the business was not explicitly identified. the banya was considered as an off-site sensesive reseptor in -- sensesive resept -- sensitive reseptor in air quality, noise, displaced. you're right. we're not going anywhere, but including the changes that you want to effect in the area will affect the business and the surrounding neighborhoods. not only is the quality of air going to affect our business because we do have our saunas on your rooftop, anything air, dust, that goes up is going to go into our business and into the areas where our customers are enjoying themselves. now, that should not be conducted on the times that you
would want to construct during the day. if anything, it would be happy to be done at night time. also, i want to say that you should not approve the special use district zoning in this area. you should keep it at the m-1 or mc-2 that we currently have. the height that you want to create of 14 stories, 160 feet, as said in table 2.1 in the draft and in the revision was not changed. we made it a point that it will cause glare, there will be a shadow all over the business and effect the aesthetics, even though in the california environmental impact, it says it should not be impeded. but it will. i would invite you guys to go there and see the business and see what we offer, why people love it so much, and why it's a
great place for the community. also, it said -- how it said that it was a sensitive reseptor, the project site it right on the border of the project site. now for you to say that it's not a sensitive reseptor is incorrect. if we're right on the border, it's going to affect it in all ways. so if you want to, like, look at the sensitive reseptor, i'm referring to it's on figure 3.7-2. like i said, we're right on that line. so i ask you today not to approve the special use district zoning to create the height limits that they want, but instead keep it at the m-1 and mc-2 levels. you're able to trade many things and homes in that manner. >> clerk: thank you, sir.
your time is up. >> thank you. >> good afternoon, commissioners. i'm cathy perry, and i am a long time resident of bayview-hunters point. i'm a san francisco native. moved all over the city in my younger years, and i've also been to the banya. it's a great place to go, and i encourage you to go at all. but i'm in -- to go. >> i'm in a situation where family is in bad mortgages. my thinking of the need for new, affordable housing for my family members is very, very real, so i'm speaking to support the project because i'm hopeful that it will even solve some problems that are in my own families, where they need affordable mortgages. i've looked into so many different programs, like naca and all of that.
i don't know if you've heard of that. it's n-a-c-a. i woke up this morning, and i didn't want my husband's day to go down, so i didn't let him know that i was worried. so build -- i've known them as build, inc, many, many years ago. and i've known chester and his company. i know this company. they're very principled, and they reach out to the community based organization. they reach out to the top, but they also reach out to the little business. they manage to see chester, to see the needs of including as many people in their process as they can. so i'm really happen that a principle business is applying to build housing on the site, and i'm going to trust that they're going to work with the banya or any city department
staff to make it work because it is a beautiful banya. it will be wonderful housing because they serve families and families like mine who got bad mortgages in the bayview. one of the conversations i had recently yesterday, was someone who was saying our neighborhood was changing. and they kind of wanted it to move into the area of gentrification. i don't believe it's all negative when change happens, but the other part is you have to can plan for your family members. neighborhoods have to plan, community members have to plan, and the people who build and do all this wonderful work, they actually do serve the greater good. thank you. >> vice president melgar: thank you. next speaker, please. >> my name is amicar johnson. i'm an oakland native, san francisco bay area native, and i'm a long time customer of
archimedes banya. i guess my point is the banya has been in bayview-hunters point for years before developers thought about looking at hunters point. as someone who is native to the bay area, there has been issues and comments and real concerns that there is a landfill area with lots of toxic contamination. my main concern is the fact that not someone is trying to do something for this neighborhood all of a sudden, but the fact that it's -- they're not considering everybody in the neighborhood. archimedes has been there, so has the neighborhood of bayview-hunters point. i'm not sure why there's not an attempt to work with the people that have been there longer. pushing people out, is what
they say they're not going to do, and they include the community until it actually gets built. i'm not necessarily against the project. i'm against it excluding people in the community, especially archimedes banya and building above something that's already been there, which is if you haven't been there again, it's amazing. it's an amazing place, and there's a lot of community there. i guess that's all i really have to say. >> thank you. next speaker, please. >> good afternoon, commissioners. my name is dennis lumsey, and i'm a journeyman carpenter/welder. i've lived in hunters point all my life. i'm not here to wear my political hat, i'm here to
wear -- i'm here as a carpenter. i support this project because i feel it will create for jobs for our youth in the community, but i'm also -- how do i say? i've been fighting this community for a long time. i'm 66 years old, born and raised in hunters point. i will go nowhere else, i'm going to die in hunters point. but my concern for the community, and i've been asking for this any way because i want to know if you guys could tell me, how many people have died in hunters point from cancer fr? i'm trying to get that information -- and another thing, i'm hoping this don't be
another fillmore because i see the changes coming. it's a beautiful thing, the parks and everything, but i've also seen a lot of people die in my community, you know, before this change came. i've also noted there's a lot of resources that have came to my community, and the resources have been removed from my community. this is why, you know, you know, i'm for the project as far as creating jobs, but as far as, you know, living there, seeing people die there, i was on the p.a.c. board. i'm also afillated with apri. i agree with what jackie said. i'm glad she brought all these young people in because they're the future. but you guys coming in building bayvi bayview-hunters point, it's all contaminated. i worked in the shipyard. the last ship i worked on was
the u.s.s. enterprise. it was a nuclear aircraft carrier, and one thing i was wondering, where's all this nuclear waste going? i'm welding, i'm making money, but still, i'm being exposed. so i'm for this project, i just hope you take into consideration that the people that are living in this community, you know, we're in desperate need of the jobs, we're in desperate need of the housing. housing is coming, jobs are coming, and that's a beautiful thing, but i'm just hoping you come in and respect the neighborhood. >> vice president melgar: thank you. next speaker, please. >> good afternoon, commissioners. my name is timothy and i'm a field representative with carpenter's local 22. we are here today to voice our support for the proposed india basin project and are thrilled to be partners on such a transform ative project with
over 2 million gross square feet of construction to be over the next 10 to 15 years, we are particularly excited about the future job opportunities for our members. we're talking about hundreds of jobs, apprenticeships for people in the community. the project will add 1575 units of housing including a substantial amount of commercial work space -- about 200,000 square feet of commercial space. the construction project will generate opportunities for over 5300 jobs for the build out. it will add 1500 permanent jobs to the community. the community has done a great job in reaching out to our union and the community. we are looking forward to this project being expeditiously approved. i couraurge you to adopt the pt
and let's move forward with this. >> hello. >> todd davis on behalf of the san francisco housing action coalition. let me say all these people standing in the back, the carpenter's, habitat four humanity, san francisco housing action coalition, i'm really proud that they are here and supportive of this kind of amazing project. i want to just talk about what -- the things that we really like about this project. all right. so one of the things, start with housing. 1575 units of housing. 1575. 25% of which will be affordable. that's 400 units of affordable housing. build is doing a really interesting and kind of out of the box thinking around this affordable housing. they're doing some other site b.m.r.s, they're doing some working with habitat for humanity, examiand they're doi some other things to building
100% affordable housing. we could be talking about potentially $18 million fees in affordable housing that will remain in district ten. really interesting things. not something that we see very often in kind of doing a little bit from column a, a little bill from column b, a little bit from column c. you know, one of the other things that i don't think we talk about nearly enough is the fees. you know, we often say, and we believe it, housing in and of itself is a community benefit, and it is, but what are the other benefits that come along with a project like this? about $276 million in fees for the community. that's $70 million for public infrastructure improvements, $20 million for park infrastructure, $40 million for maintenance of parks, $6 million for child care and public education.
these are key benefits that help everyone in san francisco truly like when we're seeing housing built, new developments being created, new neighborhoods, like, we often need to think about what are the other things that come along with that housing. you know, the other things that i personally really think are kind of amazing, the india basin neighborhood association, the build's plan that s.l.m. is also a part of, it came out of the india basin neighborhood community plan. current zoning allows for an additional 500,000 square feet of development, right? because of the -- because of the india basin neighborhood association's plan, they're moving back, they're pulling back development from the waterfront, right? so there's a lot of the -- the community has a lot of input into this plan. and so -- and then, the last thing -- i'm sorry, the ability
to actually get a supermarket into the neighborhood. there's space for one here. any way, thanks. bye. >> vice president melgar: thank you. next speaker, please. >> i have a letter to submit officially, if i can just provide that. >> clerk: just leave it right there. >> good afternoon, commissioners. my name is tom fisher. i'm here to represent myself and my partner, chad white. we're residents of bayview-hunters point, and i want to applaud build for thinking about their innovative way of looking at the space 700 innes. i think it's a really great design overall. we're for development. we're not nimbys. i used to run sustainability operations at salesforce for five years, so i'm quite aware of all the inconsistencies
within, you know, low-income communities when it looks like economic development. the -- the thing that we're here to basically speak about, though, is to object to quite a few of the things that we're seeing within the plan for 700 innes. i think you're hearing a lot of those things that are coming out of the -- the other people that are speaking out here, and i'll try to summarize what i -- my thoughts are, you know, and you have a letter, which you can read, as well. but at the high level, i think what the thing is that's bothering us the most, when you look at the site, and you see the proposed development, there really isn't any justification for the need for such a high-rise amount of buildings to be built on that site. i mean, they are at a lower size right now, it provides a good amount of opportunity for any developer to take that on. however, what i'm not seeing is any justification except for
the over density that's going to happen in that space, which i think is going to bring on a number of problems. i know there's been a set aside are 25% for b.m.r., but you also have a lot of public housing around there that is not going to have a good connection to the community. and we are wanting to see more connection and more effort by build to see how that is going to play between those -- those communities. we also have seen here today that there's been a failure by -- by build to win the consent of the neighbors. the shipyard residents who spoke earlier i think was a good indicator of that and a notification of that. and although there has been a large number of meetings that have been held, it has been really kind of difficult for us to find out the next information we need to be able to make a decision and come here collectively and present
what the real -- what the needs are of the community and those that are actually live there and own within the neighborhood. overall, we feel that it's an overdense development. the building heights are incompatible with the rest of the neighborhoods. there's two inappropriately tall towers that will be developed on the space, and it's an every denseification and transportation is not going to be supported by what's currently on offer. >> clerk: thank you sir, your time is up. >> thank you. >> vice president melgar: thank you. next speaker, please. >> good afternoon, commissioners. cory smith on behalf of the housing action coalition. it was actual not originally going to speak here today, and i rarely kind of get emotional of these projects. i do so many of them that at a certain point, you become a little bit detached to it, but then, i heard a lot of people prioritize views over homes for
people. based on this unit dex, we're talking about 3500 people. that's how many people are going to get to call this place home. 25% of this unit is going to be subsidized housing, permanently. that's 875 people who will have housing security in our city if we build this. one of the things president cohen pointed out earlier is that 40% of those homes are going to be available to neighborhood residents. that's 350 people. there will be 350 people that are currently living in the neighborhood, low and middle-income folks that are presently housing insecure, that like me, are feeling the pressure of all of this, and people don't like it because of their view? i frankly think it's an embarrassment, and if we really are going to prioritize that,
prioritize what people can see over the basic human right of shelter, then i think we just have a fundamental difference in world view. please approve this project. melg me >> vice president melg thank you. next speaker, please. >> james bryant. i'm the western region director of the a. philip randolph institute. good evening, everyone. today, i'm not going to take a position on whether it was to be or not to be. i just want to bring you all to one important attention. this community is torn apart over this housing. this community should not be in this position. you know, one of the things that i do is i mediate construction workers, construction projects, called
construction partering. you -- partnering. you all ever heard of that? it needs to start here. there needs to be some mediation where the folks who need housing, the folks that need opportunity for jobs, the folks that need opportunities for land all can have a conversation, and we can reach a reasonable conclusion to this problem. our community should not be torn apart by these kinds of activities that are put forth, whether they're opportunities for housing, whether it's opportunities for jobs, because the reality is this community has been offered a lot of the same stuff over and over again, ladies and gentlemen, and obviously, this community has not been serviced with those opportunities. so i would really hope that
today, you all take a -- maybe a step back and really think about how important it is to come in with a total concluesive opportunity of the meeting of the minds because that's what we need here. we need a meeting of the minds, we need the community to feel as though they're going to have an opportunity to have this thing work. now, i've been out in that community -- a lot of people was telling you about how long they've been out there. but i've been literally on those shores where the old power plant pg&e used to stand for 12 years. and most of these folks, i haven't seen. but i will say, my brothers and sisters from the carpenters have been there, laborers have been there, operators have been there. so as you all know, i'm a union guy. but i want to stress, the
importance today is for you all to take a leadership, lead this community and say to everybody, class, we're going to sit down, and we're going to work this problem out. thank you very much. have a great day. >> vice president melgar: thank you. you, too. next speaker, please. >> hi. laura clark, yimby action. i'm going to second a lot of what cory was saying. i get a little dead inside too, and it takes hearings to really remind you why you got so mad in the first place and why i've been out here fighting for housing for what feels like way too long. you heard a lot of community members talk about their personal needs for housing, you've heard about people that are excited to build the housing, you've heard about the amazing community benefits that the project is going to have. i think you get it.
i think you all have seen the level of crisis that people have. so i'm going to speak to people that are here fore the banya. i hope that you all have also learned something from this hearing. i hope that you have heard and listened to the people that are out here asking for those 1,574 units of housing. i hope that you have listened to yourselves talk about views. so -- and i'm saying of this from a place of views. sonia trura got married on the roof of the banya. it's a beautiful place that feels like it's surrounded by nothing. there could be so many more people near you coming to the banya. they will be your new neighbors, and they deserve the opportunity to be near you and engulf you because they are
human beings. they deserve housing. and i understand we had someone say, i'm not a nimby, but i want this to be less dense, and i want less people to live near me. i want you to listen to yourself. i want to hear yourself when you talk about views here because people talk about views here all the time, and i am so sick of hearing about your views. it is not okay anymore. we are past that point. we are way past the point where we are okay with hearing about your views. i am done listening to it. it is not okay anymore. the people who are here because they are worried about contamination, they are completely valid in their fears about when trust has been lost, it is completely understandable. and i want everyone to know i am not lumping those people who
are worried about the future of their community with the view conversation. the view conversation needs to end. san francisco doesn't have time for it anymore. thank you. >> vice president melgar: thank you. are there anymore public speakers on this item? yes, please. anyone else who wants to speak on this item, standup, and you can stand to my left, thank you. >> hello, commissioners. i'd like you all to close your eyes for a minute and i'm sure you know the property that i'm talking about. can you imagine if it's a public park, can you imagine how the whole community as a whole would benefit from it? do you think that mclaren didn't have a vision? it could be high-rises, it could be all condominiums.
the bay in this environmental impact report has not been mentioned once. the birds, the animals that are there since the shipyard has closed is immense. when you build a walkway on a low layering area and do not take into consideration the shadow that will remove the these animals, we're not thinking of the bay. to me, san francisco bay is the essence. it should be enjoyed by everybody. we -- if this -- if we had somebody like the haas family that preserved the marina green and bought the property and donated it to the city, those houses that the projects, everything there above, would be able to enjoy it. you're talking about if you put a world-class park there on that whole parcel, it would enhance the development of the
hunters point shipyard once it's cleaned up. the city should have cleaned it up completely before they took certain parcels, but that's a different subject. but i want you to just know, when you're thinking about planning, and you want to go down in history, think about what a world class park on that whole parcel. you can probably change my name to eminent domain, and mr. mr. vasquez and his company are excellent people. they could be compensated for their investment in this property and make this a world class park. then everybody in the city of san francisco, in california, in the country, in the world could enjoy it. thank you. >> vice president melgar: thank you. any additional speakers on this item? okay. with that -- oh . >> good afternoon. thanks for hearing me speak. i'm thomas fowler.
i go to the banya, and i'm not here for the view, but when you see this space, it's very clear that it was a landfill, and with waters rising over the next 80 years, hard to believe that it's not going to rise to some of those levels. and there is a -- very little i have -- i'm hearing about the environmental impact of all of this, and i don't know how they're planning on cleaning up, you know, the toxins of the past, but i want housing for people, and 25% of low-income sounds great. you know, it would be ideally 100% affordable housing for the people of san francisco, but, you know, i see people rolling their eyes, so -- you know, i
do believe that the cityscape would change and -- if it's towering over the hunters point. they have these 160-foot towers put up and everything gets approved today or whenever, then, a lot of -- a lock of fo foresight in the environmental impact would be devastating to the hunters point community. because like other members had said, there's current issues going on with the safety of the people that live there, and there does need to be growth there. there will be growth, but there's no rush to the decision on this project, so i believe, and i urge you to look a little bit further into a better plan
and a better project for the future and not this proposed one currently. thank you. >> vice president melgar: thank you. any additional public speakers on this item? okay. with that, public comment is closed. commissioner johnson? >> commissioner johnson: so first, i want to thank president cohen, and i want to thank all of you for taking your time to come out and share your perspective. a j the word jewel has been used to describe this community, and it is a beautiful jewel, a place to call home, but it's great that you're engaged in the shaping of this area in a way that will both benefit and meet your needs. and also, i think an exciting development for the rest of the city. i had the pleasure of walking
this project twice this week -- just this week in in fact. one time with community members, and i thank those community members for inviting me in and this is also with project sponsors. i want to honeor the folks tha have come out and make sure that we are addressing some of the core concerns that have been brought out, and i'd love for a combination of city staff and the project sponsor to answer some of the following issues. the first one is the concern around landfill on this land and the issue of potentially if there is a higher building height on this property, whether or not it will be safe for future -- for -- structurally safe. the second is concerns about the precedent that the s.u.d. would set, and just, you know, maybe there's -- from the -- from the planning department,
just explanation about s.u.d.s and how they work just so people can understand that. and third, from the project sponsor, i've heard a lot about banya. i'd love for you to talk a little bit about how you've tried to engage banya, and just answer those concerns, as well. thanks. >> vice president melgar: will the project sponsor come up and -- thank you. >> good afternoon, commissioners. i'm courtney pasch, the senior project manager with build. so i'll address, i think, your last question first about the interactions with the banya spa, ownership, and managers. so before i started on this project back in 2014, the project staff from build met from the banya to try to understand, to try to work together to understand what
their primary concerns were about future development at the site. we heard from them that they were primarily concerned about their views from the upper deck and privacy. in march of 2015, after i came on board, myself and the s.o.m. staff went out to the banya to take some photographs from their decks so we could do some photo simulations to see what the buildings would look like from their decks. over the next few months, we evaluated several options internally to present to the banya. these options included moving around our buildings in front of them to ensure that they would have a view corridor to the water from their upper deck, relocate the banya spa to a different location within our site, build a roof deck on top of their existing roof deck so that they would be above the --
higher than the buildings kind of directly between them and the bay. we offered, you know, we had a dialogue about those. the owner didn't really seem interested in any of them at that time, but we continued to offer and talk about them and try to understand what they wanted. we also offered in an e-mail to include them in our rezoning effort to increase the height of their building, allow for a commercial kitchen that i believe they had already had in there. they declined that offer. in september of 2015, we met again with mikel, the owner, to show them our revised plans, and we reoriented, without -- without his, you know, direct input, we reoriented the
buildings in front of his buildings to ensure that there was direct view corridor to the bay. we also moved some of our buildings around so there's now a 55 foot parcel break that we're calling it directly adjacent to his building on the north side; which is, you know, about as wide as it is tall. and after the last meeting, we met with mikel at s.o.m. to talk about the revised plans because it appeared that he was looking at a previous version of our plan. we continued to work with him and we want to continue to work with him. we just need to -- to understand what it is that -- that he's asking for. >> vice president melgar: okay. great. >> commissioner johnson: so the next question was around the thinking of the density of
the 14 stories in question. can you talk a little bit about that? >> sure. first, i'd like to talk about the fill. because in 1956, this site was open water. it was subsequently filled -- the site was owned by a grading contractor, and all of the -- we own a lot of water parcels as well as the current filled land, which\ are very, very available because they're not worth much, if anybody wants them. in those days, you could take materials from a job site and dump them into the bay if you owned those parcels, and that is what happened in this point. when the cut through the landfill and the cut through daly city happened, it was brought and dumped to this site. so between 1949 and 1952 and when this site was filled.
we have gone through complete e.i.r. now, wefr ae gone through -- we've gone through various tests on the site. various contaminants are at the site because they were there subsequent to the fill. it was used as an informal dumping dump for many years. so you've got construction debris, you've got lead paint, you've got a variety of things. that being said, we are -- we have a program in place and are required by law to mitigate all of that toxic material so that there is no doubt that that has been done. the -- as to nuclear waste, we've looked very carefully -- believe me, we've looked very carefully at that. it concerns us, as well. there is no indication, once again, in thousands of pages of analysis and testing that nuclear waste or any materials having to do with the
decontamination of ships on hunters point was brought here or dumped here. during the course of something, if we see something, we will stop, and we will figure out what's there, and we will mitigate it, without question. in terms of the density, you know, there were a couple of issues there. one is the tradeoff is obviously higher density means more open space. that's quid pro quo. the amount of density that was available to us on the site, we actually didn't take advantage of all of it. we didn't take advantage of the 2 million feet. we got 1.5 million feet of square footage. we put that back towards innes. the tall buildings that are there now are -- will sit on bed rock, they will not sit on fill because we pulled back towards the original shoreline. that was deliberately done. these buildings, there's no issue of safety in these buildings. but the -- in order to provide
a five-acre park and pay for it with this project, a totally public park, permanently public park, an enhanced shoreline, a connection to other parks in the area, working with r.p.d., we pushed the density on the proposed site, and that included two 14-story buildings. those buildings, we don't believe are out of scale with the neighborhood. we're in san francisco. this is not the flat earth. there's a large cliff right behind innes, and the sites behind that go up rapidly to more than 200 feet. so we believe that there's context for tall buildings. we believe that it provides the ability to provide open space. which thi we think it's good planning. we think it's smart to form the project in this way, and, you know -- and it was four years of planning. none of this was out of the hot, and all of it involved the
community. does that answer all your questions? all right. thank you. >> vice president melgar: thank you. commission commissioner ko commissioner koppel? >> planning staff, i wanted to elaborate further on commissioner john's question on the landfill. we did have a geology and soils section in the initial study. it it's attached to the draft e.i.r., and that was scoped out, meaning we found less than significant impact on geology and soils, because any project development that would be required to conform with the san francisco building code which ensures safety in all -- for all construction in the city. we have standards for their -- their -- they have to analyze and -- and -- and clear the geotechnical studies for each and every building. [please stand by]
>> i remember him documenting that the eastern side of the city will be completely transformed. i also toured the site earlier this week and a lot of thing became clear to me then that weren't before. the fact is that just driving down the road to get to our meeting place, there was a culdesac road around it. it's setting the tone already for this had huge empty parcel that can completely be developed. i think bill has done all the right thing what they are given to pull back as much as they can with the density and leave as much open space as possible. there are hills and cliffs just
behind the site which won't leave any ridiculously protruding towers as they are being referred to. the make up of what we're looking at is on par for what's best for the neighborhood. looking forward to hearing what other commissioners are saying. very confident that the e.i.r. is adequate and looking forward to seeing this project more. >> commissioner moore: i i have followed this project for the entire time. i walked the site and spent time with the community to hear them. at that time it was like coming into a fishing village i thinking where am i. i was hard it find and two very unusual to get there and see a this was possible. now that all of the other
projects are filling the southern border from planning this project is a natural and i think it's time to collect. i'm amazed about how it has been able to really connect 70 down to bayview and shipyard. i think it's in a complete response to the larger ideas of developing the southern front. sitting on the city's northern water front. i see first ideas really dealing with developing san francisco as a waterfront city. i believe that the work is thorough. i believe the work is creative. i'm intrigued by the sizing of buildings. i'm very intrigued a the
building height. it's not actually protruding above the cliffs beyond but it nestles in front of it. i think that's a positive sign. i'm sensitive to the questions that community is asking. i appreciate commissioner johnson actually digging deeper and having experts talk to the particular aspects of it. we have actually supported development agreements and certainties that come with supporting them. many of the larger projects in the last eight or ten years are all based on that same model. i assume he will come up and
speak to it. i'm very confident that the document that thorough planning effort are all spot on and i feel very comfortable of supporting them including the guidelines package. at this moment, i'm in full support of all aspects of the project and i like to also say that i believe that they presented themselves as extremely responsible developer who has been open to questions and challenges. i think that it needs to be said.
this is a project that has challenges and we need to be sure that what we are approving indeed has a very high likely build as we are approving it. >> thank you. commissioner richards. >> commissioner richards: i have one question for ms. richardson. can you come up a second? i was really trying to understand the history and what you were trying to say in the three minutes. can you expand on what you said. >> yes please. i appreciate your time. when the site -- when a.e.s. was going to build the power plant. we've been very prodevelopment.
we went to port of san francisco to the planning commission. we ask them. this neighborhood is a mixed use. we welcome houses. we put together the bayview master plan which you have in your 100-year anniversary. no neighborhood in san francisco. you have residents, youth, seniors and workers trying to create this vision. you have that plan. we created the india basin neighborhood plan. i wish everybody here can look at that. we have housing in there. we have all the mixed use element. that is not the case. >> commissioner richards: what's the difference between what was in front of us today? >> that zoning, we have shown -- [indiscernible] i wish you can
go. how many the commissioners have chance to be there. you all need to go to india basin. we can create housing. we're already building house. we are creating the bulk. we are very pro-development. you can create housing and i would like for you to see the plan that the community has put together. you will be impressed. >> when you say dangerous, do you mean physically dangerous or economically dangerous or social justice dangerous? >> let me qualify that. the ecosystem, we have identified places where you can build houses. we have done all that. it's in plan that we have given
you. innes avenue is only two blocks long. all the developers that have come out there, they have the zoning that you have. you will be creating this blank wall. it is bad planning. i know the pressure on you to go ahead and do that. it has opened up spaces of discussions where do we go from here. that place, innes place, it's not place you will be able to build that 16-stories. what is behind you today is to up the zoning of that area. dozen in the compatible. it is not good planning. the ecosystem that one of the people mentioned, it is a place that we want to create restaurants and everything that is in that plan. >> commissioner richards: are any developments in the southern
waterfront -- if you looked a the planning and developments from mission bay all the way down. i'm not sure what area it covers. what actually looks like the plan calls for. what areas? >> i worked on mission bay pier 70 up to shipyard. all those areas. we have the master plan for that. i was here supporting pier 70. i was here supporting work space, everything. have you ever seen that plan? director has the plan. >> commissioner richards: if you move around and keep going south in candlestick point, 120 and 1 foot buildings buildings -- 14t building. >> if you look at the
candlestick where the stadium used to be and you look at the area, they came out here. that is not the same place. it cannot introduce those kind of elements. not everywhere in san francisco is the same. even though we cannot treat everywhere in san francisco is the same. you have the greatest opportunity you'll have on broadway. we have identified places. some of the people do not want homeless out there. we were here saying no, bring it. we cannot accommodate that? we are always pro-development and pro housing. people should not mischaracterize what we are talking about. i would have you go there to
study bayview and look at the plan that we have. together it has a lot of housing more than anywhere in san francisco. richard >> commissioner richards: can you comment on this plan? >> i think the will be helpful to look at the plan for the shipyard in candlestick point. there are buildings there similar to this project, there are low rise and high-rise buildings. the candlestick point has buildings over 30 stories. all these projects have had a combination of high-rise and low-rises and mid-rises. as it was said earlier, the high-rises do two things. they free up more land and they provide certain amount of density that help pay for the amenities. the combination of those two