San Francisco Government SmartTranscripts:

[Jonas P. Ionin (Commission Secretary)]: Let me start, and then I'll grab you one. Okay? Okay. Good afternoon, and welcome to the San Francisco Planning Commission regular hearing for Thursday, 06/05/2025. When we reach the item you are interested in speaking to, we ask that you line up on the screen side of the room or to your right. Each speaker will be allowed up to three minutes. And when you have thirty seconds remaining, you will hear a chime indicating your time is almost up. When your allotted time is reached, I will announce that your time is up and take the next person cued to speak. There is a very convenient timer on the podium where you can see how much time you have left and watch your time tick down. Please speak clearly and slowly. And if you care to, state your name for the record. I ask that we silence any mobile devices that may sound off during these proceedings. Finally, I will remind members of the public that the commission does not tolerate any disruption or outbursts of any kind. At this time, I'd like to take roll. Commission president Soe?

[Lydia So (Commission President)]: Present.

[Jonas P. Ionin (Commission Secretary)]: Commission vice president Moore? Here. Commissioner Braun? Here. Commissioner Campbell?

[Amy Campbell (Commissioner)]: Here.

[Jonas P. Ionin (Commission Secretary)]: Commissioner Imperial?

[Theresa Imperial (Commissioner)]: Here.

[Jonas P. Ionin (Commission Secretary)]: Commissioner McGarry? Present. And Commissioner Williams?

[Gilbert Williams (Commissioner)]: Here.

[Jonas P. Ionin (Commission Secretary)]: Thank you, commissioners. First on your agenda is consideration of items proposed for continuance. At the time of issuance, there were no items proposed for continuance. But now, we received a request from the supervisor's office to continue items ten, eleven a through e for case number is 2015Hyphen012491ENV for the San Francisco Gateway Project at 749 Tollan Street and 2000 McKinnon Avenue. Certification of the final environmental impact report, twenty fifteen-twelve thousand four hundred and ninety one, ENV, PCA, MAP, DVA, CWP, and CUA for the same property for adoption of CEQA findings, planning and zoning map amendments, development agreement, special design standards and guideline document, and conditional use authorization respectively. The request is two weeks to June 26. Also, commissioners, items 12 a and b for case numbers twenty twenty four hyphen zero zero zero three four three CUA and VAR For the property at 70 Hancock Street, conditional use authorization and variance, we received a request from the sponsor to continue to July 10 so that they can attend their son's graduation. I'm sorry?

[Lydia So (Commission President)]: It's item 13 a and 13 b. You just said twelve. You just said twelve.

[Jonas P. Ionin (Commission Secretary)]: My agenda shows 12 a and b.

[Kathrin Moore (Vice President)]: Mine does too.

[Jonas P. Ionin (Commission Secretary)]: Oh, really? Yeah. That's not that's not what I see. Let me

[Gilbert Williams (Commissioner)]: Hand clover.

[Jonas P. Ionin (Commission Secretary)]: Okay. Yours yours say 13 a and b?

[Kathrin Moore (Vice President)]: Yeah. It says 12 on mine.

[Jonas P. Ionin (Commission Secretary)]: I must be looking at an old revised

[Amy Campbell (Commissioner)]: So we get two different ones in

[Amy Campbell (Commissioner)]: the app.

[Amy Campbell (Commissioner)]: The printed one is different.

[Lydia So (Commission President)]: I only have one Digital one. I only have the printed ones.

[Kathrin Moore (Vice President)]: The digital one said 12 a and b.

[Lydia So (Commission President)]: Oh, weird. Oh, interesting. Yeah. Yeah. Funny.

[Kathrin Moore (Vice President)]: But where's what happened happened to

[Gary Bishop (Discretionary Review Requester)]: Your printing ones on your

[Lydia So (Commission President)]: The printer one the printer one says 13, but the digital one is I believe it says 12.

[Kathrin Moore (Vice President)]: Gateway became 11. Right. And

[Amy Campbell (Commissioner)]: then 13.

[Kathrin Moore (Vice President)]: Everything is different.

[Lydia So (Commission President)]: The the yeah. The digital.

[Adam Van de Water (Executive Director, Transbay Joint Powers Authority)]: Everything is

[Kathrin Moore (Vice President)]: different. Everything is different.

[Lydia So (Commission President)]: Oh, my gosh.

[Kathrin Moore (Vice President)]: What is 8? It's the same 8 is 4. Portal. 9 is Alabama. Right.

[Sean McGarry (Commissioner)]: Fillmore shifted. Yeah.

[Cameron [last name unknown] (Program Manager, Nordstrom)]: Mhmm.

[Jonas P. Ionin (Commission Secretary)]: Okay. Well, we're gonna go with the digital copy that's, publicly accessible. And these printed copies, I'm sorry, were printed in error. But, essentially, regardless of the item number, the case number, again, I will repeat for the record, 2024Hyphen000343CUA and VAR for the property at 70 Hancock Street, conditional use authorization and variance are proposed for continuance to 07/10/2025. Members of the public, this is your opportunity to address the commission on either of these two items, only on the matter of continuance.

[Mark Gleeson (Teamsters Joint Council 7)]: Good afternoon, commissioners. Mark Gleeson speaking on behalf of Teamsters, joint council seven. We wanna thank the supervisor's office, everyone on the commission, and everyone at SF Planning for continuing to hear our concerns about the operation and employment, of this project at Gateway, going forward. The discussions we're having are continuing to be productive, and we're hoping, at the next hearing that, we can have even some better news from that. But, again, thank you so much to everyone.

[Unknown (Bayview Hunters Point resident)]: I'm so thankful to see you guys again, and thank you so much, commissioner Moore and your team. I really appreciate you guys for continuing this gravely matter. Just real quick, as Prologis intends to galvanize support for the development of the industrial trucking complex, I'd like to emphasize the direct health impacts on the residents in the neighborhoods of Baby Hunters Point and what does dying at the hands of boxed in pollution looks like. Air pollution impacts our lungs, heart, and brain. With every pollution breaks, it breaks directly to our lungs, protective barriers. As our body fights extremely hard to fight off tiny molecules, thousands of them entering our body, sowing seeds of cancer by inserting arsenic, lead, sulfates, nitrates, and black carbon, which goes directly into the bloodstream, sabotaging your entire body by inflaming your blood vessels, increasing your blood pressure until you suffer from a stroke and a heart attack, which is sadly normal in Baby Hunters Point. Please refer to the CalumviroScreen and the data from CARB and the Air District. As we struggle to have healthy foods in the midst of a food desert in Baby Hunters Point, Unhealthy food intake paired with air pollution is a recipe for expedited and rapid stroke and heart attacks, such as pollution becomes more deadly to the human body. We are humans. We need to stop the continued development of environmental invisible killers. We need to stop prologists and their development for diesel trucking. Community scientists provided proof that air pollution has caused heart attacks, heart disease, stroke, COPD, asthma for more than eighty percent of the Bayview Hunters Point community residents. Again, according to the CalumviroScreening Tool, one of the biggest threats to our body is air pollution. Bayview Hunters Point community residents are currently going through some of the largest environmental cases and diseases of premature death. Dirty air is killing us more than health factors of obesity, alcohol, drugs, and high sodium diets. The proposed Gateway Industrial Complex development would be in close

[Cameron [last name unknown] (Program Manager, Nordstrom)]: proximity to the main corridors that links the Baby

[Unknown (Bayview Hunters Point resident)]: Hunters Point to the rest of the city. Links the Bayview Hunters Point to the rest of the city, and the mainline public transport transportation posing a risk to the safety of our children and aging adults. This increased truck traffic and noise could create hazardous conditions for students walking to and from bus stops, heading to school, and community residents seeking health care at the neighboring St. Luke's and general hospitals. The lodging of electric vehicles will further expose residents to electromagnetic fields, which are generated by different sources of electrification, power lines and wireless communications. EMS calls cancer, brain tumors, Alzheimer's, Parkinson's, and brain tumors. And to Prologis, I'm extremely disappointed after meeting some of your advisory board members who are some of the most misinformed regarding the direct and cumulative health impacts this industrial impact will will cause on us.

[Jonas P. Ionin (Commission Secretary)]: Your time. And I would like to remind members of the public that we're only speaking to the matter of continuance, not the project itself right now.

[Unknown (Bayview Hunters Point resident)]: I understand. But this is credited. And we just wanna make sure that we're heard. So you guys can please just stop, you know, instead of continuing.

[Jonas P. Ionin (Commission Secretary)]: Thank you, miss Benagert.

[Unknown (Bayview Hunters Point resident)]: Deny the

[Rochelle Holmes (All Things Bayview)]: project. Hello, commissioner and everyone. My name is Rochelle Holmes, also representing ATB, which is all all things Bayview. I want to address the continuance because I think this is just outlandish and out heard of. I was here on the twenty second. It was continued. What more must we do to be heard? This is a important issue. ProLogistix does not need to be building. We need to take care of this. We need to be heard. We need to be seen. We need you guys to understand. This is not just a Bayview harness point thing. This is a everyone issue. This is a San Francisco issue. So we just need to get this on the calendar, and we need to go follow through with this and take care of everything, you know, because this is very serious. This is very serious. I walk around with this now. 2015, I was diagnosed with asthma. I'm was normally a very healthy person. So we just need to take care of this. It's not fair to me. It's not fair to my children. You know? I don't know how much longer I'm gonna live. You know? This is what I started out with. I don't know what I'm gonna end up with, you know, COPD or whatever. I don't know. But we need to get this on calendar, and we need to really fulfill this. We need to talk to the people. We need to get this straightened, and we need to get rid of Prologis. They don't need to be here. Thank you so much for hearing me.

[Ronnie DeMott Wilson (All Things Bayview; 1000 Grandmothers)]: My name is Ronnie DeMott Wilson. I'm, with all things Bayview and also 1,000 grandmothers. And I'm so angry. Sorry. I am so pissed off. This is the second time that I've come also. There is a whole group of us that were supposed to come today. And thirty minutes before, the commission meeting, I have to text everyone to let them not to come, in protest of the Pearlogis project. I don't understand why thirty minutes you decided that there's a continuance, and it is incredibly unfair. And I'd like you to reevaluate, you know, what you're doing exactly. Thank you.

[Donna Canale (1000 Grandmothers; retired nurse)]: Good afternoon. My name is Donna Canale. I'm also a member of Thousand Grandmothers for Future Generations. I'm also a retired nurse, and I worked in the Tenderloin primarily with some clinics in the Bayview. And, you know, I'm just I'm just appalled that this thing is even being considered and much less continuing another continuance on this on this issue. In in areas where people are underserved to begin with, to add more more layers of pollution and noise and dust and all those things that are gonna come with this project if it passed, I think is is just kind of a disaster. And it's again, it's not just the people in the Bayview. Air travels. It's all of us. So I think we need to consider everything and look for some other alternative in that area. Thank you.

[Judy Rosenfeld (retired nurse; Mission resident)]: Good morning. I'm Judy Rosenfeld, also a retired nurse. Thank you for doing what must be, frankly, just a really hard job. I don't know why Anyhow, hard job you guys have. I live in the Mission District. I don't live in the Bayview. Our air quality is poor in the Mission. I live near the highway. This is going to impact not just the Bayview, but the Mission, Bernal Heights, going into Glen Park, that whole part of the city in terms of our air quality. And it's very frustrating that we can't have the hearing on time. It's really, really frustrating. So do you know how many hearings have been held so far? Because I understand there's a number, there's a limit, you can only have five hearings. Is that true? Oh, for how's oh, okay. Okay. Thank you. Thank you. Thanks again for your hard work, and please let us speak our minds and no more continuances.

[Rudy Gonzalez (SF Building & Construction Trades Council)]: Good afternoon, commissioners and staff. Rudy Gonzalez with the San Francisco Building and Construction Trades Council. I've kind of a unique role to play here and so far as I'm conveying a message both from our counsel and from Teamsters Joint Council seven and from Prologis in this instance. I've been authorized to remark on behalf of all three entities today to ask for your continued patience and to convey appreciation to the commission to for considering a continuance. It's not convenient to keep continuing a matter, but it is important that stakeholders are engaged at every level of the community, and that includes some very important discussions that are ongoing. I'm hoping that we can bring a very important project to you with, an entire breadth of support from both labor and community very, very soon. But those discussions are ongoing. And as productive as they've been in the last seventy two hours, they are not yet done. And as you can hear from prior testimony, there are other voices that I think want to be heard and I think we will get to that place. We will get to that place to really study and review the EIR and to really look at the facts as they stand before us. But at this point, at this juncture, it would stand in support of a continuance, brief continuance. We certainly wanna see the hearing ourselves as well and we recognize that it can be inconvenient for folks who are planning on coming whether or not they support or oppose the project. But at this point, we stand in support of the continuance, and appreciate the patience of the commission as important stakeholder voices are considered. Thank you.

[Blair Sandler (Bayview resident; environmental economist)]: Good afternoon, commissioners. My name is Blair Sandler. I'm a resident of the Bayview. I live about four, five blocks from where this project is proposed to be developed. It's already polluted from the highways and the port and all the other industry that you folks over the years have dumped into the Bayview. I live right around the corner from the bio digesters there for the city. I'm an environmental economist. I have a doctorate from UMass Amherst. And I have a JD from SF Law. And the short story is, if you allow this project to go ahead, it's just another case of severe environmental racism. Because this is already an overburdened community with all the toxic waste and construction and industry. You know that over 50% of the kids have asthma. I have asthma. You know that lifespans in the Bayview are something like fourteen years less than in other nearby neighborhoods. The VOC monitors in my backyard register readings that are routinely twice what they are in Glen Park. And it took me forty five minutes on a bus to get down here. And it's going to take me at least forty five minutes on a bus to get back. And I do have other things to do with my time than spend time on the bus for no reason. It is really outrageous that you don't give people more advanced notice. It's rude and disrespectful. And it's also outrageous that you are even considering dumping yet another toxic project on the people of Bayview who are already overburdened. Thanks for hearing me.

[Jonas P. Ionin (Commission Secretary)]: Last call for public comment on the continuance, only on the matter of continuance. Seeing none, public comment is closed. And your continuance calendar is now before you, commissioners.

[Lydia So (Commission President)]: Commissioner Imperial?

[Theresa Imperial (Commissioner)]: Before I make a motion, in terms of the item 11A, it's continued to June 26. Am I correct? Is that the final date?

[Jonas P. Ionin (Commission Secretary)]: It's June 26 for the Gateway Toll And Street project. Yes.

[Theresa Imperial (Commissioner)]: And I'm wondering if someone from the planning staff can give us an idea whether whether there are negotiations or, I don't know, discussions and whether June 26, we think, is the final date. Okay. So in that case, I move to move to continue items as proposed.

[Kathrin Moore (Vice President)]: Second. I second in the motion.

[Lydia So (Commission President)]: And commissioner Lebron, you have a comment?

[Derek W. Braun (Commissioner)]: I just I would like to double check. So it sounded on the date. So it sounded like June 26 for items ten and eleven. And then did you say July 10 for item 12 a?

[Jonas P. Ionin (Commission Secretary)]: For item 12 a, July 10. Yes.

[Derek W. Braun (Commissioner)]: Okay. That that's the opposite of what I saw in the email traffic this week. And so I Yeah. I mean,

[Jonas P. Ionin (Commission Secretary)]: I was trying to manage your your schedule on the twenty sixth. It's a fairly full agenda. Mhmm. But I was persuaded to keep it on the twenty sixth to maybe keep things moving and in fear of maybe the rezoning informational being bumped.

[Derek W. Braun (Commissioner)]: Okay. All right. Thank you. I just want to make sure the just double checking the dates. I appreciate that.

[Jonas P. Ionin (Commission Secretary)]: All right. Okay. Commissioners, on that motion, again to continue items ten and eleven to June 26, then item 12 a to, July 10. Commissioner Campbell?

[Sean McGarry (Commissioner)]: Aye.

[Jonas P. Ionin (Commission Secretary)]: Commissioner McGarry? Commissioner Williams? Aye. Commissioner Braun? Aye. Commissioner Imperial? Aye. Commissioner Moore? Aye. And Commissioner President Tsao?

[Lydia So (Commission President)]: Aye.

[Jonas P. Ionin (Commission Secretary)]: So moved. Commissioners, that motion passes unanimously seven to zero.

[Corey Teague (Zoning Administrator)]: Jonas, I will also continue item 12 b, the variance case for 70 Hancock to July 10.

[Jonas P. Ionin (Commission Secretary)]: Indeed. Thank you, zoning administrator. Commissioners, that will place us under your consent calendar. All matters listed here under constitute a consent calendar are considered to be routine by the Planning Commission and may be acted upon by a single roll call vote. There will be no separate discussion of these items unless a member of the commission, the public, or staff so requests, in which event the matter shall be removed from the consent calendar and considered as a separate item at this or a future hearing. Item one, case number twenty twenty Five-three 622 PCA for the Reproductive Health Clinics Planning Code Amendment. And item two, case number 2020Five-fifteen 85 CUA at February Conditional Use Authorization. Members of the public, this is your opportunity to request that either of these two items be pulled off of consent and considered under the regular calendar today or at a future hearing? Again, you need to come forward. Seeing none, public comment is closed, and your consent calendar is now before you, commissioners.

[Lydia So (Commission President)]: Commissioner Lebron?

[Derek W. Braun (Commissioner)]: Move to approve items one and two on consent calendar.

[Sean McGarry (Commissioner)]: Second. Second.

[Jonas P. Ionin (Commission Secretary)]: Thank you, commissioners. On that motion to adopt a recommendation for approval for item one and approve item two with conditions. Commissioner Campbell.

[Amy Campbell (Commissioner)]: Aye.

[Jonas P. Ionin (Commission Secretary)]: Commissioner McGarry. Commissioner Williams. Aye. Commissioner Braun. Aye. Commissioner Imperial.

[Theresa Imperial (Commissioner)]: Aye.

[Jonas P. Ionin (Commission Secretary)]: Commissioner Moore. Aye. And commission president Soh.

[Lydia So (Commission President)]: Aye.

[Jonas P. Ionin (Commission Secretary)]: So moved, commissioners. That motion passes unanimously seven to zero. And, before I continue, I apologize to members of the public and commissioners that the printed version of the agenda provided in the hearing room today is an old version, and that the correct version that was issued to you via email and posted on our web page and issued to our subscribers has 1919 Fillmore Street as the last item on the regular calendar. So that was the change that was made. So Folsom Street is now item 13, and Fillmore Street is now item 14. Placing us under commission matters, item three, the land acknowledgment.

[Amy Campbell (Commissioner)]: I'll be reading the land acknowledge acknowledgment. The commission acknowledges that we are on the unceded ancestral homeland of the Ramaytush Ohlone, who are the original inhabitants of the San Francisco Peninsula. As the indigenous stewards of this land and in accordance with their traditions, the Ramaytush Ohlone have never ceded, lost, nor forgotten their responsibilities as the caretakers of this place as well as for all peoples who reside in their traditional territory. As guests, we recognize that we benefit from living and working on their traditional homeland. We wish to pay our respects by acknowledging the ancestors, elders, and relatives of the Ramaytush Ohlone community and by affirming their sovereign rights as first peoples.

[Jonas P. Ionin (Commission Secretary)]: Thank you. Item four, consideration of adoption draft minutes for May 15, both the joint and regular, as well as the May 22 regular hearing. Members of the public, this is your opportunity to address the commission on their minutes. Again, you need to come forward. Seeing none, public comment is closed, and your minutes are now before you, commissioners.

[Gilbert Williams (Commissioner)]: Commissioner Williams. I'd like to make a make a motion to adopt the draft

[Derek W. Braun (Commissioner)]: minutes. Second.

[Jonas P. Ionin (Commission Secretary)]: Thank you, commissioners. On that motion to adopt your minutes, commissioner Campbell.

[Theresa Imperial (Commissioner)]: Aye.

[Jonas P. Ionin (Commission Secretary)]: Commissioner McGarry. Aye. Commissioner Williams. Aye. Commissioner Braun. Aye. Commissioner Imperial. Aye. Commissioner Moore. Aye. And commission president Tsao.

[Lydia So (Commission President)]: Aye.

[Jonas P. Ionin (Commission Secretary)]: So moved, commissioners. That motion passes unanimously, seven to zero. Item five, commission comments and questions. Okay, seeing none, department matters. Item six, director's announcements. Item seven, review of past events at the Board of Supervisors, Board of Appeals, and the Historic Preservation Commission.

[Aaron Starr (Manager of Legislative Affairs, Planning Dept.)]: Gonna keep this moving. Short report for you. Aaron Starr, Manager of Legislative Affairs. This week the land use committee heard supervisor Dorsey's ordinance that would amend the controls for the health service uses in the mixed use office districts. The proposed ordinance was first heard at land use on May 19. The item was continued to this past Monday because the amendments, which incorporated some of your recommendations, were considered substantive. At this week's committee hearing, there were no public comments, and the committee sent the item to the full board with a positive recommendation. There was nothing at the full board, related to planning. So that's it.

[Corey Teague (Zoning Administrator)]: Alright. Good afternoon, president Sohne, commissioners. Corey Teague, zoning administrator. The Board of Appeals did not meet last night, but they did we meet the week prior. And at that hearing, they did consider two appeals for a project at 695 Rhode Island Street. One was an appeal of the building permit. The other one was the appeal of the variance that had been granted for that building permit. This is of interest to the commission because this project came before the commission in 2019 as it publicly initiated discretionary review. One of the neighbors had concerns about the project. It went through the the Doctor process. This commission unanimously voted to not take Doctor and approved that project as it had been proposed. They had made some design changes leading up, and the department was supportive. Because it was on a slope and there were COVID issues and some additional review by DBI, it took a while for their permit to kinda get to issuance. And it was issued at the 2024, and then that permit was appealed by the same Doctor requester. Upon review of the appeal, we determined that the, permit was no longer completely code compliant due to some code amendments that had happened since the Doctor hearing, which necessitated a variance. So we had to have a subsequent variance consideration for that project. It it did meet the five findings. That variance was granted. And so, again, we had that appeal for both. The appellants made basically the same arguments that they made during the discretionary review, although they made one additional argument around the potential presence of a UDU in that building. Ultimately, the Board of Appeals did vote unanimously, though, to deny both appeals and uphold the voting permit and the variance. However, a rehearing request was filed for the variance, again, focusing on this potential UDU issue again. So that that will continue to be heard, in a few weeks, but the underlying building permit was upheld by the board of appeals. And I'll report back again when we get a final decision on the variance, and hopefully the project can move forward. Thank you.

[Jonas P. Ionin (Commission Secretary)]: The Historic Preservation Commission did meet yesterday. They had a very light agenda, but adopted recommendation for approvals for a number of legacy business registry applications. Haystack Pizza on 24th Street, Moe's Grill on Grant Avenue, O'Keefe's Bar on 5th Avenue, The Kilowatt on 16th Street, San Francisco Children's Arts Center, on Marina Boulevard, Phil's Electric Company on Lombard Street, you Unity Mutual Benefit Association on Haight Street, Tokaido Arts on Webster Street, and Shaw's San Francisco on West Portal Avenue. Also, just as an aside, Woody Labounty came under general public comment and advised the commission that Richard Carrillo's position, who was the program manager for the Legacy Business Registry application program, essentially since its inception, his position has been terminated. And so he was urging the Historic Preservation Commission I believe he's come and spoken before this body as well to urge the mayor's office to reconsider that eliminated position. And so the Historic Preservation Commission directed me to add an agenda item for their next hearing in order for them to consider such a letter. Commissioners, if there's nothing further, we can move on to your right excuse me, to general public comment. At this time, members of the public may address the commission on items of interest to the public that are within the subject matter jurisdiction of the commission except agenda items. With respect to agenda items, your opportunity to address the commission will be afforded when the item is reached in the meeting. When the number of speakers exceed the fifteen minute limit, general public comment may be moved to the end of the agenda.

[Amy Campbell (Commissioner)]: Could you set up the overhead for me, please? Upstairs, SFGov. Oh, thank

[Lydia So (Commission President)]: you. Okay.

[Georgia Schuttish (Public Commenter)]: Okay. So, yeah, I sent you some emails about flats on June 1, the flat policy. I know the staff's working on it. I've talked to mister Switzke about it, and I appreciate that. But I I really concerned that that there's not enough words to define a flat. I think it's very critical. That's why I've been sort of harping on it and plaguing you with it. So here is a project that I think illustrates my concern. So this got its planning approval letter. This is the original flat. The the x is where the kitchen is. This is the lower flat or was the lower flat. And this is the plan. So you see, they get rid of the hallway and they have this big room with the kitchen and then one bedroom. So it's been one bedroom flat when before, the rooms aren't marked, but it could have been a two or maybe even a three bedroom flat. People use them different ways. Here's the upper flat and you can see there was the kitchen, but now it's been approved. There's the kitchen put in the closet, and I've seen that a couple times. But this is marked as the dining room. I mean, would you wanna have your kitchen there and then your dining room there? This is all bedrooms up there. So that's just my point. That's why I'm harping on these definitions. I sent you that study, that's really great study that was before the HPC. I think commission president Tsao was on that commission when that study was approved, the flats and small apartment buildings. And their definition is pretty good. It's from 1911. A building of two or more stories containing separate self contained dwellings, each dwelling having an independent entrance on the level of the street are from an outside. That's the key word, outside vestibule, not an interior vestibule. I've seen that a lot too. The current definition is fine, but I showed that thing for a reason. Those flats go through, but I cannot not believe that at some point they're gonna be connected. So the current definition says a residential unit in a building containing two or more units that has contiguous habitable space that extends the full depth of the building on the same story from the front street facing facade to the rear of the building and has windows or doorways on both front and rear facades from at least one habitable room. So I just think he needs a little bit more. You need to have hallway in there, you still need to have the kitchen size in there, as I showed. Maybe you need to have restrictions on interior demolition. Back in March 2, I sent you a thing about that Beaver Street project, which had a 68% interior demolition. It just sold in the last month for $5,600,000 That's the one with the sliding door where it could all be connected. The Jensen Flats, which were a few years ago, that was all the way floor through, but 5,000,000. It looks like it could be one unit. One I sent on February 23 on Chavez Street, that's sold for 4,900,000.0. That's one that had the kitchen in the closet. So I've sent all these emails. I've sent them to the commission. I've sent them to the city attorney. You have it there if you want to read them. You know my point.

[Jonas P. Ionin (Commission Secretary)]: Thank you, miss Shudish. That is your time.

[Georgia Schuttish (Public Commenter)]: I know. I just keep talking.

[Jonas P. Ionin (Commission Secretary)]: I know. That's why I have to remind you it's your time.

[Georgia Schuttish (Public Commenter)]: I wasn't even watching the clock today. I should have done that. But the flat policy definition, important. Thank you.

[Jonas P. Ionin (Commission Secretary)]: Last call for general public comment. You need to come forward. Seeing none, general public comment is closed. Commissioners, it'll place us under your regular calendar now for item eight, case number 2023Hyphen000384CWP for the portal, also known as the downtown rail extension informational presentation.

[Matt Snyder (Planning Department Staff)]: Good afternoon, President Hsu, members of the commission. So excuse me. I'm Matt Snyder, department staff. In early January, we brought you an informational item on several interrelated, efforts in around the San Francisco rail yards. Today, Adam Vanderwater, the Executive Director of the Transbay Joint Powers Authority, will present an update on the portal formerly known as the Downtown Extension which looks to extend the rail lines from the existing 4th And King Rail Station to the Salesforce Transit Center. As you know, the rail yards area involves several distinct but highly interconnected projects all working towards increasing rail capacity into railyards in downtown, providing new development opportunities at the railyards, and improving connectivity between the surrounding neighborhoods of South Of Market, Mission Bay, and Showplace Square. As you remember, the key initiatives include excuse me the Prologis transit oriented development, which you'll hear more about next week in another informational presentation. And we're anticipating a development agreement application this summer. Caltrain recently completed a long range vision plan. The Pennsylvania Avenue extension, which looks to further study tunneling of the rail under 7th Street and Pennsylvania Avenue and dealing with the crosses at 16th Street. And then, of course, our department's work through the Railyards Working Group, which culminated earlier this year with the development of the public ground study. So I believe at your January, you also were particularly interested in some of these components. And so today, I'm going to hand it over to Adam Bandarwater for the portal.

[Ahmad [last name unknown] (Project Sponsor, Alabama Street)]: Thank you.

[Adam Van de Water (Executive Director, Transbay Joint Powers Authority)]: Thank you, Matt. Good afternoon, President Tsao, commissioners, director. Adam Vanderwater, I'm the executive director at the Transbay Joint Powers Authority.

[Cameron [last name unknown] (Program Manager, Nordstrom)]: If I

[Adam Van de Water (Executive Director, Transbay Joint Powers Authority)]: can get this to stand up nice and tall for me. Excuse me. Hopefully you can hear me. I'm pleased to be here this afternoon to give you an update on the portal, what has previously been called the downtown rail extension, which is a project to the city and our partner agencies have been working on for some decades now. So if we can get the presentation up, a number of things to cover and I look forward to some of your questions. If we could go to the next slide here. The Transbay Joint Powers Authority itself is a major contributor to the South Of Market neighborhood. And we are the owner operator of the Salesforce Transit Center, the former Transbay terminal. This is the largest open space in the neighborhood with a rooftop park of 5.4 acres with about a 100,000 square feet of retail at the Ground Floor, and we're currently serving eight operators through the eight county bus region. And then we have a two story train box beneath that that we're working to connect to Caltrain and high speed rail as the northern terminus of those two systems down the peninsula and across the state. We have over 600, free programmed events at our center every year in a, collaborative agreement between the Eastcutt Community Benefit District and our agency. So you can come do bird walking bird watching, excuse me, fitness classes, toddler Tuesdays, opera in the park, a whole diverse range

[Cameron [last name unknown] (Program Manager, Nordstrom)]: of

[Adam Van de Water (Executive Director, Transbay Joint Powers Authority)]: activities. And then in phase one, the creation of this $2,300,000,000 facility generated about 24,000 jobs. And with your your work and your predecessors' work, upzoned that neighborhood for several million square feet of commercial. About 15,000 residents now live within walking distance of the area. And we have, we're about 70% leased on the, commercial side. Thanks. Want me to click here? Great. So the Transbay Joint Powers Authority is is itself an eight member body. We have seven voting members, four from the city and county, as well as the operators AC Transit, Caltrain, and high speed rail. And the the former owner operator of the building, the state of California, Caltrans, is an ex officio member. So those eight members direct our work and there are three legs to the stool of the scope of work for the Transbay Joint Powers Authority. One is the completion of the transit center, which is fully completed and in operation. At least the upper four floors are. Two is the, upzoning and reimagining of that part of Downtown San Francisco, which is, as you know, largely complete. There are still a few sites that, we're working to get into entitlement, and and some will connect into our building directly. And then the third is what we call phase two, which is that rail connection, into the basement. So currently, Caltrain is the primary transit provider down the Peninsula, terminates at 4th And King. I know next week you'll be discussing a rail, development potential there, and, I wanna highlight all the good work that we're doing with our many partners in that specific location, because we'll have a station under the street at Townsend. Going the wrong way. We're going all directions for you today. Here we go. So if you haven't been down to the transit center, we invite you to come on down. It is six stories. You see the cross section here at the left and the rooftop park in the middle. The upper four floors are complete. And then the two level train box beneath will have three platforms and six tracks serving Caltrain and high speed rail with a mezzanine above and some limited back of house and retail serving those passengers. The neighborhood, amazingly, just twenty years ago, looked like it did here on the left in the before picture. This is the old Transbay terminal. And notice the large, on and off ramps serving the previous key system, the electrified rail to the East Bay, and then for many decades, the bus system for AC transit, and Muni to, Treasure Island. And then we consolidated that interior to the building with one bidirectional bridge, which freed up a lot of that vertical capacity for some of the highest, and tallest buildings in South Market. For phase two, this is a rendering of what it'll look like beneath the the center. So you saw the cold shell of the basement in the previous photo. This is a rendering of what it would look like with high speed rail coming in the middle and Caltrain in the two platforms on the wings. Again, three platforms and six tracks coming in with regular intervals for both operators. And the overall system here, the inset shows the Caltrain 77 mile alignment from San Francisco to Gilroy. That'll be a shared use corridor with high speed rail. They, of course, went fully electric, last September. So if you haven't been on those electric multiple units, it's a very quick and quiet and clean, beautiful new ride. It's getting very good reviews, and the ridership is returning in part as a result of that. And then you see the alignment here with the Salesforce Transit Center on the larger map at the top, running almost four city blocks through South Of Market. And then the phase two connection would be underneath 2nd Street and Townsend Street to the highlighted area of the rail yard, shaded here in red, which will be the topic of, I believe, next week's discussion. This closes that gap in a one seat ride from, Gilroy through San Jose and Silicon Valley into the heart of San Francisco. If you're a peninsula rider or worker or visitor, you would get off previously at 4th And King and then transfer to your final destination, which meant you need bike share, walk, other means. And this could save you as much as fifteen to twenty minutes each direction and bring you within the the heart of the density of downtown, where those eight bus operators currently come in in a block and a half from the Embarcadero BART Station. As a result, let's say, we're expecting about 90,000 average daily riders once we reach bring both passenger service into the train box, both Caltrain and high speed rail. And it's a designated state and federal program of national significance. And we are now in the engineering phase in the Federal Transit Administration's New Starts capital investment grant program, which last year committed $3,400,000,000 to this construction. So oh, I keep going the wrong way. So you see the 3,380,000,000.00 here in blue. The Federal Transit Administration has granted us the right to include the 2010 investment to that train box of $729,000,000 as a match to that grant. We have nearly a billion dollars committed and another half budgeted towards the project. We've recently taken about 10% of the scope out without impacting ridership and benefit of the project. So we're over 70% funded. We are working with through a number of sources to close the remaining gap. I show two of those slices here. One is a state commitment. This is two different sources that have been included for a number of years. One is a, high speed rail capital contribution. Of course, they are under, construction in the initial operating segment on Bakersfield to Merced right now. But the current discussion in Sacramento to stable funding source for the authority, could unlock their ability to invest in what we call the bookends here in the San Francisco Peninsula and also down in the LA Basin, where the majority of that statewide ridership will ultimately enter the system. The other one here in the planned state category is, a program called transit intercity regional capital program. We're with the Metropolitan Transportation Commission, our regional transportation provider. Our planner has endorsed us for a $500,000,000 allocation from that source. So the remaining slice there, the 1.4, is really a combination of a number of smaller slices, That's some of which is land secured and, development based downtown, some of which is impact fee, some of which is state and federal discretionary sources. There are a lot of small slices that are really kind of too small to show individually. But they're listed in kind of large part here on how we're remaining closing that funding gap. So what does that mean to our schedule? Boy, if My mouse was like this at work, I'd be a lot less productive. This goes one way.

[Lydia So (Commission President)]: There we go.

[Adam Van de Water (Executive Director, Transbay Joint Powers Authority)]: So the project was environmentally cleared back in 2019. We've had a couple of notes to file since then, but our project definition has been stable for some time. We've been in project development engineering for a number of years now, and you we're now in that 2024 to 2026 bubble where we've been entered into engineering. That's a formal designation under the Federal Transit Administration, and we're in early stages of procurement. Our goal is to, close that entire funding gap to sign what's called a full funding grant agreement or FFGA in the 2027 horizon, which would allow us to mobilize contractors, start heavy civil tunnel construction starting around 2028, for five years of construction and a year of testing and commissioning with the first trains arriving in that basement around 2035. You'll note the important asterisk here on a project of this scale and magnitude and and given the many sources required to get to that FFGA, everything is funding and schedule dependent. So looking forward, that is our goal. And that is what we are aiming towards, to bring revenue service. So you'd be able to take a bus from anywhere in the Bay Area into the center, the elevator down, and catch a Caltrain, to down the Peninsula all in one connection without that, mile and a half gap down to Forth Thinking. This one. Next week, I know you're gonna be hearing about the development potential. I don't plan to speak on their behalf. But I want to convey a couple of things. One, we're in very close coordination with Prologis and with Caltrain, as the operator and with the various city and county departments on the coordination of this. And you'll see that shortly. But here, this is, an aerial view of the 19 acre site. You see the purple dashed line is the corridor for the portal. We will have a new modern ADA accessible station beneath Townsend Street. That's the white kind of rectangle there that spans 5th Street under Townsend. And then that will continue on underneath Townsend, curving up second and into the basement of the Salesforce transit center. So everything you will see, for planned development of the site preserves that corridor. And then the the, question is kind of timing, phasing, and then interfacing between the proposed development, the streetscape improvements the city has contemplated, and our work on the portal. In terms of interagency coordination, we ourselves are a joint powers authority. So I mentioned the the many agencies that are on our board. You see those in the center circle here. We have a rail yard working group where we work regularly with your team and your leadership staff as well as those from the city, Caltrain, and Prologis. And then there is a rail rail yard development team you see here, including economic development, Prologis, Caltrain, the County Transportation Authority, who is the lead agency for the Pennsylvania Avenue extension, mister Snyder mentioned. And then we have an inter agency cooperation agreement, or ICA, with the city and county for our work. So when we advance the planning work of the portal, we are beneath the street, and the above grade touches fire, muni, DPW, port infrastructure. And through that interagency cooperation agreement, we are paying for the city's review of that and their involvement so that what we do meets the needs of those departments and puts back infrastructure that meets or exceeds its current condition. All right. Final next steps for the portal. We've got some advocacy work ahead of us on closing that funding gap at all levels, local, regional, state, and federal. And as we continue to do that in parallel, we're working to complete the durable, technical, and pre construction we work we need to do to, as our speaker, Emerita, often says, make dirt fly. So before that dirt can fly, we need to complete our design and procurement documentation. We need to complete master cooperative agreements with our operators. What will they own? What will we own? How will we operate and maintain it? We are on the precipice in the next several weeks of issuing a notice of street vacation. This is really the envelope under the street. It's really an easement to put the tunnel there under 2nd And Townsend so that we can start the subsurface utility relocation. Townsend Street, being Townsend, is got a lot of major utilities. We wanna put that in a shared use corridor on the edge of the street so that we have the capacity for the tunnel. The earlier we're able to do that and move that through, the the, less we impact our schedule and cost risk. What we have at risk register for the project, and that's high on that list. And we can sort that out for future development, such as the proposed railyard development. Cool. We're also looking to onboard the tunneling contractor. This is the one who will actually build, the tunnel, and do the excavation. And we're about a year away from that. So we're working on those documents now. And then where you have a right of way program, there are a couple of parcels, in the curvature of the tracks that we'll need to acquire, either an easement beneath or a full acquisition, to construct the project. And then finally, we are continuing to collaborate directly with all our various stakeholder partners. So that's that two operators, Caltrain and and, high speed rail. That's Prologis as the owner of fee title of the dirt underneath the rail yard, and that's the many city and county agencies, that have infrastructure along the alignment, as well as our our various other partners and funders through the MTC and the County Transportation Authority. So I believe with that, I'm happy to take any questions you might have about the portal or the Transbay Joint Powers Authority. Thank you for your time.

[Jonas P. Ionin (Commission Secretary)]: Thank you. If there aren't any immediate questions, we should open up public comment. Members of the public, this is your opportunity to address the commission on this informational matter. Again, you need to come forward. Seeing none, public comment is closed. This matter is not before you, commissioners.

[Amy Campbell (Commissioner)]: Commissioner Campbell? Thank you. And thank you for the presentation. I think I was one of the commissioners that requested it. I love the transit center. It's such a gift downtown. So I know that's not what we're talking about, but it's a part of this network. And if you have not been, I highly recommend it. The Gardens and Open Space are phenomenal. And I've actually always thought that, like, in the meantime, those that two level train box could be a really interesting opportunity for, like, a night market or laser tag or concerts. Anyway, something to think about. It could be revenue generating. I guess one question I think this is phenomenal, obviously. One question I had was around the tunneling and future location of stations and how that impacts, you know, foundations or future development for anything that could be impacted by what's happening below grade. Just thinking about property owners and developers that might be considering those areas, pockets of the city where we're doing that below grade work.

[Adam Van de Water (Executive Director, Transbay Joint Powers Authority)]: Great question, and thank you for the shout out. If if you haven't been out, several, residents are still discovering the transit center. We opened in 2018, and, of course, a lot of people have been working remotely ever since. And not everybody has discovered the beautiful botanic gardens on the roof for our our great tenants.

[Amy Campbell (Commissioner)]: And the programming too,

[Lydia So (Commission President)]: which is And

[Adam Van de Water (Executive Director, Transbay Joint Powers Authority)]: the the programming is pretty phenomenal. We work in the building. And so, you know, it's a great place to have that hive of activity surrounding us. You asked about the below grade and some of the foundations. So the majority of the alignment, it will be under the right of way, under second and unturned towns. And where there are exceptions to that is where those curvatures connect from that perpendicular access. So trains don't make left turns like cars and buses do. So they will be beneath private property, both both at 2nd And Townsend and at 2nd And Howard. We have a couple of categories of right of way. One is full acquisition. So right adjacent to our building are some lightly tenanted older buildings that will be full acquisition. Right at 2nd And Howard is what we call our throat structure. To get into those three platforms and six tracks, at that intersection, it's about a 125 feet wide. That is what'll be called cut and cover, construction, where we're going top down to construct. And then we'll put the, the street conditions back, and there'll be a, vertical, capacity up to about nine stories, I believe, above that upon completion. The second street itself sort of crowns up towards the hill. And so with the, the depth will be very deep under second. You won't actually really know that we're digging under there for a good part of that alignment. It starts to get shallow again at Townsend near the edge of Mission Creek. And there, we will have some easements, but we also have a full take parcel for an egress for the station, at Townsend. Those properties have been stable for ten years, maybe more, through our environmental impact report process, and those property owners are very aware, of those impacts, and we're in regular communication with their, their owners. Our goal is not to displace any active tenants until it's absolutely necessary for construction. So our first tranche of right of way acquisition, are parcels where we think we have a willing seller and where we're gonna need those parcels for early stage construction, and we don't have much in the way of tenancy. So it's an ongoing discussion with them, but it's fairly limited the amount of full take. And then there are some easements where we'll have a tie back, for instance, of our tunnel that might, go into a subterranean, property right of a adjacent property owner. There are a few cases. The creamery has been, before you before, And we've, worked with that property owner to come to a specific, agreement around their foundation and our foundation, given their close adjacency. So we've already gotten that, approval, and we're looking forward to that, project moving forward as well as ours, but making sure that our project doesn't impact theirs and vice versa. So, it's a complicated set of, considerations, but I think we have the right, agreements in place and the right notification to do this, pretty seamlessly.

[Amy Campbell (Commissioner)]: So for future developments that run along the where the line will be or the tunnel will be, would those project sponsors anticipate additional engineering, that would have to be factored in based on the fact that they're, running up against tunnels or stations that will be there in the future. Much like we do today when when we're doing projects along Market Street, sensitivity around, the lines that are running underground.

[Adam Van de Water (Executive Director, Transbay Joint Powers Authority)]: I think the answer depends a little bit on the geography. There will be full acquisitions, I have mentioned, adjacent to our building at 2nd And Howard. Throughout the majority of 2nd Street, where the street itself crowns up and we stay at a a similar grade and we are fairly deep, I don't think there will be conflicts to even foundations. Down at Townsend Street, part of the reason we're in close coordination with Prologis, the Creamery, and others is because of the adjacency of those, foundations. We see it as, mutually beneficial that by putting a modern station underneath the street, it frees up capacity for things like the vertical development of the rail yard, which has been contemplated, I believe, since the inception of that rail yard as a temporary facility sixty five or so years ago. And you'll hear more about that next year next week from the property owner. But there will be egress, and there are there are ventilation shafts to accommodate that 1.3 mile extension under the under the ground. But we don't anticipate differential settlement, real challenges. Along Mission Creek, where it's shallow and the soil goes from rock to kind of a marine sediment, we need to be very careful about that. And that's why we had that agreement with the Creamery Project for a foundation.

[Amy Campbell (Commissioner)]: One last question is and I'm sorry if I missed it in your presentation, but there's a on the the map that shows the line, there's a a dashed orange arrow that shows a future rail crossing. And I'm sorry if I missed it, but could you explain what that is?

[Adam Van de Water (Executive Director, Transbay Joint Powers Authority)]: Yeah. I wanna be clear what is and is not in our scope.

[Mary King (Bush Street Cottage Row resident)]: Okay.

[Cameron [last name unknown] (Program Manager, Nordstrom)]: Because our

[Adam Van de Water (Executive Director, Transbay Joint Powers Authority)]: scope feels large enough as it is to deliver the portal to downtown extension. That'll be the last of the Transbay program. But we're working closely with two, other agencies that would extend that program. One, as you referenced, is a future Transbay crossing, what is also referred to as link 21. Link 21 is being led by, the Capital Corridor, the Amtrak system to, Sacramento and BART. They've been working through a series of consultant studies to determine whether it is conventional gauge rail, what most railroads operate on, or BART gauge, which is a wider distance between the two rails. They are planning to come to those two boards, Capitol Quarter and and BART, with a final gauge decision very soon. And then that would be the extension across, the bay. If it is standard gauge, which is our expectation, it would utilize the existing investment at the transit center and go from an input station as the northern terminus under state law into a throughput station. Again, that's not our scope to deliver, but if once they get through environmental, through that gauge decision, through funding, that would allow trains to come through San Francisco and cross and vice versa. Similarly, the county the county transportation authority is pre environmental with something called the Pennsylvania Avenue extension. That has been contemplated for a number of years to continue the below grade, treatment of our tunnel from the station at 4th And Townsend all the way under Pennsylvania Street towards, Potrero Hill. This was really born of the East West grade separation conflict getting in and out of Mission Bay. And as we increase the capacity and and frequency of those trains, putting them at a different grade to the street condition will help bikes, peds, vehicles, others going perpendicular east west.

[Amy Campbell (Commissioner)]: Exciting. Those are all my questions. Thank you so much. And thanks for your hard work, you and your team. This is phenomenal.

[Lydia So (Commission President)]: Thank you. Thank you. And commissioner Barran has some comments.

[Derek W. Braun (Commissioner)]: Yes. I thank you very much for being here. Really appreciate the informational hearing and the update on this. I I guess I have just just to follow-up on, two points I heard during, Commissioner Campbell's question. So for Link twenty one, has have they settled on, an alignment that would start at the Transbay at the Salesforce Transit Center?

[Adam Van de Water (Executive Director, Transbay Joint Powers Authority)]: Formally, no. The the last presentation at their, board, the California State Transportation Agency, expressed that desire to utilize existing investments in Caltrain electrification in our project and and, other opportunities across the state. The state rail plan that was just released in December envisions a one seat electrified ride from Cal from Sacramento through the East Bay, across the Transbay, through the Salesforce Transit Center, down the Peninsula, into Deardan Station, and points south. So it's a long term vision with multiple agencies involvement, but, no, the boards have not formally made that decision yet.

[Derek W. Braun (Commissioner)]: Okay. Thank you. I was just curious since I know there there were some different alignments being discussed a while back. It's been a while. And then you I just missed where did you say that the cut and cover construction would primarily occur?

[Adam Van de Water (Executive Director, Transbay Joint Powers Authority)]: The cut and cover is really at the two ends. So Townsend Street itself is fairly shallow. The top of the station box is not many inches below the concrete, below the asphalt of the street itself. So that will be top down construction. Similarly, at the western end of the Salesforce Transit Center and into the 2nd And Howard Street area. In between, the the predominant length of the excavation will be fairly deep under 2nd Street Mhmm. And will be what's called sequential excavation mining, heavy equipment pulling that material out from down below. I wanna assure the listening public, we are not closing the street and ex you know, excavating the entirety of it for long periods of time. This is a do work, deck it, open to traffic, rolling lane closure kind of situation. We're very aware of of previous efforts in other cities, and it's part of the reason why some of our, partner agencies, the Valley Transportation Agency down in Silicon Valley is going up fair fairly low and deep with their planned, excavation, so they don't have that surface level impacts. But really just at the north and south ends of our alignment.

[Derek W. Braun (Commissioner)]: Okay. Thank you. Yeah. It it caught my attention just because, you know, there's such a a history of controversy over the construction of the Martin Street subway and cut and cover construction. And then also I've been following what's been

[Cameron [last name unknown] (Program Manager, Nordstrom)]: happening with the BART construction by VTA in Downtown San Jose and

[Derek W. Braun (Commissioner)]: the debate that happened there about, you know, VTA in Downtown San Jose and the debate that happened there about cut and cover versus the very deep boring they're doing. So, yeah, I I thank you for the the response to that. I I had a few other questions. So as far as, during construction, is there anticipation of any disruption to Caltrain operations? I mean, I assume it's still terminated at 4th And King in the meantime. But do you anticipate any disruption to their operations?

[Adam Van de Water (Executive Director, Transbay Joint Powers Authority)]: Yeah. I mean, I'm joined today by Kansai Uchida from Caltrain, who may want to speak to that. But I can say briefly that the work will start at the Western end of Mission Creek and where it will go from an at grade condition to a below grade condition. That transition is what we call a U wall, which I always visualize as the entry of the, Muni subway at Embarcadero to get under Market Street. Right? So as you're standing at Embarcadero, there is literally a u shaped concrete wall where the train starts to dive beneath. That'll be within the rail yard. It'll be on the North West corner of the rail yard, and it will disrupt Caltrain's access to their storage tracks where the Christmas tree train previously has been stored. I think it's been moved elsewhere at this point, as we go through that, grade condition. It will not disrupt the mainline tracks into the majority of the yard to the south of that, closer to Mission Creek. But we are working through a, a 4th and King Rail Yard agreement, with Caltrain for that very reason. How do we demise a construction, perimeter to the north while maintaining operational perimeter to the south?

[Derek W. Braun (Commissioner)]: Okay. Thank

[Aaron Starr (Manager of Legislative Affairs, Planning Dept.)]: you. Kansai?

[Kansai Uchida (Director of Systemwide Planning, Caltrain)]: Thank you. I'm Kansai Uchida, director of system wide planning at Caltrain. Just to add to Adam's answer, we've been working with TJPA on a construction operations plan. So that would ensure that Caltrain operations can be managed alongside making room for construction of the portal project.

[Derek W. Braun (Commissioner)]: Alright. Thank you. I need just two more questions for you. So one is the you mentioned the variety of different funding sources for this project. I'm curious to what extent the funding for the project is contingent on, high speed rail related funding sources versus, those that are just that could potentially complete the project based on Caltrain's extension primarily?

[Adam Van de Water (Executive Director, Transbay Joint Powers Authority)]: Yeah. So the the project, as you saw on the slide, is looking to the state for two primary sources. One is a $550,000,000 capital contribution from the California High Speed Rail Authority. This is something that's been included in four of their business plans as a planning concept, but without the funding to back it. There was a decision consciously made in Sacramento, at the legislative level to complete the what we call the initial operating segment, which which is what under is what is under construction in the Central Valley before they make large investments, in the urban core at the northern or southern end. One of the probably the, primary funding source for kind of high speed rail is, cap and trade.

[Cameron [last name unknown] (Program Manager, Nordstrom)]: Mhmm. Cap

[Adam Van de Water (Executive Director, Transbay Joint Powers Authority)]: and trade has been authorized in ten year increments. It's it's valid through 2030, but the legislature is actively, right now, having hearings and discussions about extending that. The governors may revise proposed extending it to 2045 and including a $1,000,000,000, annual minimum for high speed rail investment so that they could attract private, investment in that and complete their construction process. The legislature is considering that, and once they get to a reauthorization, it will give some certainty for the next twenty years of the state's contribution to high speed rail, which will allow us to have a conversation with the authority about moving forward what we call the most, important mile in the system because it brings it into Downtown San Francisco where those transit operators, those other 10 operators, join in one location, and as a result, drives about 30% of the ridership of the entire high speed rail system.

[Derek W. Braun (Commissioner)]: All right. Thank you. Yeah. And actually, you raise a really good point. One of the reasons I'm so excited about this project is this helps to really reinforce San Francisco's just their hometown pride moment here, but, like, our primacy as, you know, one of the region's primary jobs destinations and the ability to access those jobs and to maintain a lot of density and to do all that while not having an impact on greenhouse gas emissions. And so I think it's regionally important that we do this. And so that connection to downtown is a big piece of the puzzle that's always been missing. And so I'm gonna get down to a very small scale question here about that connection, though. So the transit center is is close to Market Street in this Market Street subway, but it's, you know, two blocks off. And so my recollection is that in the very early plans for the transit center, there was there was potentially going to be an underground connection to Market Street. Is that still in the plans at all, or is that kind of left behind now?

[Adam Van de Water (Executive Director, Transbay Joint Powers Authority)]: Yes. Good memory. We have environmentally cleared a a subterranean pedestrian connector from the transit center's east end directly into the Embarcadero BART Station. So just like if you've traveled internationally and you've connected the subway to regional or the high speed systems, there's often a long pedestrian corridor to connect, but it is well signed and illuminated, and it makes it that path of travel pretty easy. That is still part of our scope of work. It has been, indefinitely deferred by my board because that it is not a necessary condition to bring the trains into the station, which is our first goal. You could arrive in the station, go up the street, and walk to Embarcadero or from the other end a little less conveniently to Montgomery Station, and it still drives the right ridership. When when we can get that under construction and underway, we can revive the connection. Because if you can recall the pre COVID condition, Beale Street, which is that connection directly into Embarcadero, is one of the narrower sidewalks in downtown And in a well utilized condition where everyone's working and traveling through that area, can be a fairly congested condition. So, we still plan to do that, but after we can bring the trains into the station.

[Derek W. Braun (Commissioner)]: Okay. Thank you. I'm glad to hear that. I work in the East Bay, and every now and then when Bart has troubles and I'm on a AC transit bus into the transit center, Beale Street has been a little bit sometimes not the greatest connection back to the Market Street subway. So thank you for that, and thanks again for coming to the commission. Appreciate it.

[Lydia So (Commission President)]: Well, thank you. There are a few more, lined up for comments, so this is a very exciting topic. So thank you for being here. Commissioner Williams?

[Gilbert Williams (Commissioner)]: Thank you for your presentation. Very, very thoughtful and very, you explained everything really for me to understand. It was it was great. Thank you. One of the things that that caught my attention, was, you mentioned that there's gonna be, a portion of a turn that's going to run along Townsend Street, and then there's gonna be some buildings that you guys, are purchasing, and there's tenants. There's people living there. Is that is that right? Is

[Adam Van de Water (Executive Director, Transbay Joint Powers Authority)]: it Pretty close. Okay. We will be beneath private property and the curve from 2nd And Townsend. The depth is fairly low so that we don't see a conflict even with the subterranean foundations for those buildings, and there aren't full acquisitions within that curve. The full acquisition on Townsend Street is really where we have egress, where we're coming out of the station or we have ventilation.

[Ahmad [last name unknown] (Project Sponsor, Alabama Street)]: Yeah.

[Adam Van de Water (Executive Director, Transbay Joint Powers Authority)]: So one of our right of way acquisition properties is a, one story convenience store. It's not a residential, location. So, there are some office buildings and some, a couple of commercial properties, along the alignment. But along Townsend Street, it is really that convenience store at the corner. Mhmm. And then a future phase would have acquisition of a commercial property next door.

[Gilbert Williams (Commissioner)]: Okay. Yeah. Because at first, I thought I I thought I heard that you were gonna there was gonna be some buildings that were gonna displace residents. And so, anyway, that that caught my attention. Is that

[Adam Van de Water (Executive Director, Transbay Joint Powers Authority)]: Tenants commercial tenants is really Commercial

[Gilbert Williams (Commissioner)]: tenants is right.

[Adam Van de Water (Executive Director, Transbay Joint Powers Authority)]: Proper term there.

[Gilbert Williams (Commissioner)]: And and okay. So, yeah, no, I I that's just something that, you know, always triggers my interest in and and thankfully that there won't be any any residents getting displaced. Yeah, it's a very ambitious project given the current situation with the federal government and funding and stuff like that. And so how how much, you know, in the next few years, I mean, how much are we relying because I've read some things in the paper, that have to do with funding from the federal government and and, the current administration trying to pull back some of that funding. Do you see that as as being a problem? And and, like, how are you guys navigating through that? And how is that gonna affect the timeline for the near the near parts of the construction that you're presenting?

[Adam Van de Water (Executive Director, Transbay Joint Powers Authority)]: Yeah. Great thought. Two things. One, share your concern about resident displacement. We see ourselves as one of the early projects to usher in the fifteen minute city, which is why we have 15,000 residents that can walk to the transit center now because of some of the vertical residential properties that were brought in from the rezoning of, of the district. But to your question, obviously, aligning the various sources of funding, regional, local, state, and federal is our primary challenge. Any delay or, confusion or deferral of that project threatens our the certainty with which we would approach our procurement and our relationship with our contractors to actually deliver the project. Each year that we are deferred for lack of funding, we have to absorb basic inflation. As you know, we we're coming out of a high inflationary environment, but a standard is we're returning more to a standard around 3%, but 3% on a multibillion dollar megaproject is a very large number. And that's the one that kinda drives us forward to deliver this as soon as we can. The good news is, in the near term, the work we have to do, you saw my actionable next steps there, is technical. It is coordination with our operators and our funders. It is advancing design and procurement. It is relocating utilities. It is requiring right of way, none of which has been targeted since the beginning with federal funds. So we can continue to complete that work while we also seek state funding, local funding, and then work with our partners at the Federal Transit and Federal Rail Administration to realize this program, which they've designated, is a program of national significance. So very much turbulent political times, but there's a lot of work in front of us, and we're head down continuing to do that work.

[Gilbert Williams (Commissioner)]: Thank you. Thank you for explaining that to me. I appreciate that. Mhmm.

[Lydia So (Commission President)]: It kind of brings us back to me. And, well, thank you for spending the afternoon with us today, and thank you for the team to show up here to give us also a chance also the public to hear, what are the greatest long range plan we have we already had been working on, and also continue to work towards the ultimate goal. Personally, I truly believe mass transit is a way to address our potential future, climate resiliency, and also enabling San Francisco to continue grow as an urban center for our region. Very happy to that you brought up Link 21. I really hope that, eventually, someone will agree on the gauge so that we can move to the next stage. Thank you, Kathleen, to be here again. I really don't have any other major questions. I really want to give a round of applause to your leadership and also the collaboration among all the agency. This this this cross three big circle of work, it's not a small piece of potato. It's it's massive. And, really thank for our planning staff to be collaborative with the work that you do and with Caltrain. Well, I can just name everybody here. But, I would like to say, though, one thing is that if anything that in our department can be, extra helpful to your project in any way, we're here. You know how to find us. And thank you, appreciating our staff leading the team. I do want to say I just really wish that this could happen within the next five years. But now I hopefully, it will happen before I retire. So I would like to see if any of my fellow commissioners like to say a few words, and then we should get these guys back to work. Right? Commissioner McGarry.

[Sean McGarry (Commissioner)]: I'd just like to thank you and commend you for and you and your staff for all the work you do on this. This is near and dear to my heart. I was on the CSC for TJPA for six years. I know people are on it right now, and I know the work that they do. I know the outreach you do. Basically, it's, no stone is left unturned. This the scale and the magnitude of this project is something that isn't going to this is going this goes far beyond any of our lifetimes here. This is this is basically commerce, and the book ends and it ensures that San Francisco is basically the bookend of it. So I would like to thank you for everything you've done and wish you, Godspeed and all the support you need going forward. We're we're basically here. This is, this is a tough one to follow through because it just keeps going. And that tunnel to Embarcadero, that is meant to have movable that was originally had movable escalators, didn't it? I would love to see if that could actually get value engineered back in in the future. Thank you.

[Adam Van de Water (Executive Director, Transbay Joint Powers Authority)]: Thank you for your service. You're welcome on RCAC anytime.

[Kathrin Moore (Vice President)]: Thank you.

[Lydia So (Commission President)]: Thank you.

[Adam Van de Water (Executive Director, Transbay Joint Powers Authority)]: Thank you very much. Appreciate all your great questions.

[Lydia So (Commission President)]: Thank you. Bye.

[Jonas P. Ionin (Commission Secretary)]: Okay. Commissioners, that will place us on items nine a, b, and c for case numbers 2025Hyphen00406. 7PPS, 2025Hyphen004108PPS, and 2025 hyphen 004072 p p s for properties at 819825, and 831 Alabama Street. Sponsor, you have five minutes.

[Eric [last name unknown] (Project Sponsor, Alabama Street)]: Good afternoon, commissioners. My name is Eric and I've prepared a short narrative about the project scope just to give some information. Subject property consists of three currently vacant lots located on Alabama Street. The proposal includes the development of three residential buildings each containing three units, two primary units and one ADU, resulting a total of six primary units and three ADUs across the three lots. Project is located in an RH2 zoning area and has been filed under state law SB four twenty three. Project is fully code compliant and the architectural design, while modern, thoughtfully incorporates traditional elements found in surrounding buildings such as bay windows and defined cornice lines. Each of the three buildings has been individually designed to create variation in facade articulation, massing and exterior materials ensure ensure ensuring, excuse me, architectural diversity and visual interest across the project. The development respects the mid block open space pattern established by neighboring properties including the adjacent Wells property. Additionally, the building height has been carefully considered. A 4th Floor setback reduces the visual impact from the sidewalk, maintaining the perception of a three story streetscape that aligns well with the character of the block. Thank you all for your time.

[Jonas P. Ionin (Commission Secretary)]: Thank you. We should open a public comment. Members of the public, this is your opportunity to address the commission on this item.

[Amy Campbell (Commissioner)]: Good afternoon, Georgia. I'm interested in SB four twenty three projects because I do think that they parallel with the priority equity geography neighborhoods to a degree in these projects that you've seen. And, I I still think that the demo calc should be adjusted for those neighborhoods. That's so that's one reason I looked at this online. I think that, as I sent that little email to you, I wanted to give some context because you don't have any context. There's no staff for this yet. It's nothing. And just my opinion, I felt that the buildings as seen did not reflect the neighborhood. They don't reflect that Schonstein and Sons organ building that's on the corner or the four single family I guess they're single family. One's a pair of flats, I think, across the street. So I just felt that it needed to have some context that didn't have. And certainly historically, it was, you know, one lot originally, and there's nine units, but there's no affordable housing. And this is a neighborhood this is a census tract that's supposed to have be concerned with preserving housing or preserving residents, preserving vulnerable residents in the neighborhood. It's a vulnerable population. I was puzzled by the affidavit. They checked off the thing saying it's not a a moderate or low low resource neighborhood, but on the PEM, it said it's not a high resource neighborhood. So I think the affidavit's a little off because they do have to have a hearing. That's why we're here. You're having a hearing. Maybe that's just a little minor remark, but I just wanted to bring it to your attention. I think that the windows could be smaller. I think those large windows, which are becoming generic in a lot of this housing, could be small. It's something to consider. That could be an objective standard. Certainly looking at the nearby architecture could be, an objective standard when it's reviewed or if it's reviewed. But I do think the main point, I assume, was about s b four twenty three being amended to by San Francisco, asking the state to remove the priority equity geography and the non high resource neighborhoods. Maybe that's a pipe dream kind of like adjusting the demo calcs, but I think this project has the potential to do what you don't wanna do in the priority equity geography neighborhoods, which is add vulnerability to populations that live there because it's gonna be three market rate units. And I guess that's it. Thank you.

[Jonas P. Ionin (Commission Secretary)]: Okay. Last call for public comment. Seeing none, public comment is closed. This matter is now before you, commissioners.

[Lydia So (Commission President)]: Commission to Vice President Moore.

[Kathrin Moore (Vice President)]: In strong support of adding housing and finding creative means to do so, as an s p four twenty three project, the information that you are providing is a little sparse, and the words that you presented are explanatory. However, they do not substitute for what your drawings are not showing to the public. The commission does really only have one shot, and that is talking with you to encourage you to broaden the discussion and actually put pun some of the words that you are mentioning into the context of drawings and explanatory diagrams for us to better understand it. I think the best way to address that is really to speak about context, and that is where in the city is it, how does it relate to direction of sky, north, south, east, west, how does it relate to building height, predominant building styles in the vicinity, including photos, etcetera? I think that is a big drawback to do your project justice, and I wanna say that positively together with the fact that typically for this type of presentation, we would be expecting your professional license stamp because these drawings moving from no further discussion with the commission into approvals with the department reviewing things. However, we would like to know from the get go that these particular sketches are buildable drawings. What I would have appreciated is some kind of schematic layout of unit plans. Where are the windows? Where are the stairs? Where are the living areas? How did they relate to open space courtyards? And how did they relate looking at adjoining neighbors in response to just what is context and residential in context is really critical to design a successful livable environment. Overall, as I said, I am, supportive of your, work, and I'd like to just mention to my fellow commissioners here a project that we all heard on May 22. It was 125 Powell Street. Mr. Goldman, architect, presented that project, and we were all really thrilled to see something which all of us could understand based on, the drawings that were provided. And you may take a glimpse at that. I'm not saying that you emulate that, but the informational quality by which that project was set exactly into the Powell Street neighborhood was just amazingly convincing. And I'm sure you have that in the back of your mind, but expanding how you tell the story in a in an SP four four twenty three environment would be really appreciated by anybody and particularly, by this commission, who in principle has to be supportive of, projects coming forward under 04/23. So thank you.

[Lydia So (Commission President)]: Thank you. Commissioner Williams?

[Gilbert Williams (Commissioner)]: Yeah. I, like to just concur with with everything that, Commissioner, Moore mentioned. This site is pretty interesting to me because I grew up on 21st Street when I was a kid, and 21st between Alabama and Florida, which is right there, 2814 21st Street. So I know this block well. That lot has been vacant for decades that there hasn't been anything built there. You know, I I I don't have any real objection to what's being built there other than it won't be affordable. And, you know, being someone from that neighborhood and understanding, the displacement, gentrification that's happened to a lot of, people that grew up there, That is something that is important to me, you know. And so, I would just hope that that somehow a portion of this, it's not rec you know, not necessary. It's not through the state law. You don't have to make it affordable, but it would be nice as a as a as a gesture to the community, understanding the the historical context to make some kind of an affordability gesture here for a portion of the project. And just I'm just going to throw that out there. But, yeah, outside of that, that's about all my comments. Thank you.

[Lydia So (Commission President)]: Thank you. Commissioner Braun.

[Derek W. Braun (Commissioner)]: I just have one question. I know that maybe the interior layouts haven't been really designed at this point. But at the rear, I think it's a four story wall, essentially. And I'm curious what is envisioned for the Ground Floor behind the garage. Would you mind coming to the microphone so we can hear?

[Eric [last name unknown] (Project Sponsor, Alabama Street)]: I don't have much to expand on at this time. It is in progress, and I'd have to just follow-up with the design team and get more information to answer that question for you.

[Derek W. Braun (Commissioner)]: Okay. Thank you. Well, I understand it's gonna keep on evolving. My one thought is that, you know, I in the interest of adding diversity to the housing mix that's in these units, perhaps there's an opportunity for an accessory dwelling unit or something on the Ground Floor of the garage that would be a relatively smaller and relatively more affordable unit and add to the the housing unit diversity in the area. The other just thought I had is that, the neighboring building at 835 or I guess it's, I think it might be 835, They have they're not lot line windows. They are set back from the lot line, but they do have windows that face directly towards where these drawings show windows on the side of the building. And so I just would call out the need for some sensitivities, both for the sake of the people who might live in the new buildings as well as the old one, as for the placement of those windows and and how they kind of interact with each other. Thank you.

[Lydia So (Commission President)]: Thank you. I also have a few things I would like to say here. I think that this is great that you are invested in San Francisco, bring more housing into San Francisco. But I do have to also echo my fellow commissioners' mention about if there is a level of confidence that perhaps the licensed architect of your project shall stamp these drawings to at least give us a bit of reassurance that what you're designed, what you're about to do, had gone through the life safety of not just structurally sounding, but life safety and preliminary approach of what you can do as, like, a licensed architect can actually, stem this. Right now, we really is seeing just a little block site boundary diagrams. So it's kinda hard for us to say any more further. But in general, I felt that we when project sponsor came forward through this specific project, through the ministerial approval process, we have seen a lot of good architectural set of drawings that we actually blessed them with just can you go please get a bill tomorrow? You know, there's nothing from stopping you. So I would like to give take this opportunity to let the public know that we really encourage people to invest back in San Francisco and isn't really trying to try to cross examine your drawings. And we're really, really trying to want to for myself, I really want to have that reassurance that, you know, walking down the street, you know, this thing this thing's finally really gonna get built and good family, good people are gonna move in here. So I just want to use your project example to show the public that we really isn't here to prevent anything, where he actually try to encourage people from like yourself and your company. Thank you for coming here from Walnut Creek to actually be part of our movement, right, to to invest back in the city. Isn't yeah. So what what I think my staff would really appreciate seeing a little bit more than just a few boxes of, like, boundary outline. I think you get my message. The little rendering was a little helpful, but, it brings some level of curiosity that my fellow commissioner have just pointed to you. So yeah. But overall, you know, thank you for doing this, and we're looking forward that hopefully you got the architect on board and the rest of the building safety component and all the code is gonna be conformed. That's all I have to say, and I'd like to pass it to commissioner McGarry. He has something to add.

[Sean McGarry (Commissioner)]: I'd like to ask, your use of, S P 423 extension at thirty five. Why did you keep it under TEG units?

[Ahmad [last name unknown] (Project Sponsor, Alabama Street)]: Good morning, commissioner. My name is Ahmad, project sponsor also. The reason is we don't wanna build a massive structure on a lot. It's four story is good enough to match the neighborhood. And we created the two unit, so and then so this is a six unit plus three ADUs. Some families, they wanna stay in San Francisco, husband and wife and kids. Unfortunately, we try to drive them out of the city because the family, they need a bigger space and the kids grown up and stuff like that. So therefore, we wanted to have it somehow for the family to live in San Francisco, not go to Walnut Creek, not go to to other places as Concord or something like that. We wanna have some bigger unit versus a smaller unit that they they can move around, you know, the kids grown up and, you know, and that's the reason we we try to stay limited to, you know, so much square footage. And we're working on a design response to the commissioner. We are working on a design. We have architect, everything. Everybody is in, it's in life safety, everything. Our main goal is to be safe and you know? But this is just the initial, you know, starting point. So we we know what we know. We have a very good architect that we're working with, and we're gonna bring a very nice drawing, you know, to present to you next time or if any anything. Your staff would tell you what's going on then. K? Any more question, I can respond. Thank you.

[Lydia So (Commission President)]: Okay. Well, thank you.

[Jonas P. Ionin (Commission Secretary)]: If there's nothing further, commissioners, items ten, eleven, and 12 have all been continued, placing us on item 13. For case number 2020Four-eleven657 CUA for the property at 2722 and through 2726 Folsom Street, this is a conditional use authorization.

[Vincent Page (Planning Department Staff)]: Good afternoon, commissioners. My name is Vincent Page, planning department staff. The project before you today is a request for conditional use authorization pursuant to planning code sections three zero three and three seventeen to merge an unauthorized dwelling unit with the dwelling unit on the 1st Floor of a three story two family building located at 2722 Folsom Street. The project proposes to replace the merged unauthorized unit with a rent controlled accessory dwelling unit in an existing structure at the rear of the lot. The department has received 21 letters in support of the project, including one letter from the Calle 24 Latino Cultural District and one letter from the Intermission Neighborhood Association and no letters in opposition. Support for the project is centered on the fact that it would not result in the displacement of any tenants and would add a dwelling unit to the city's housing stock. The project is necessary and desirable because it will replace an unauthorized dwelling unit that was removed. In replacing the unauthorized unit that was merged, the project will result in the addition of a legal dwelling unit, which will help address the city's housing crisis. The department finds the project to be necessary, desirable, and compatible with the surrounding neighborhood and consistent with the goals, objectives, and policies of the general plan. This concludes my presentation, and I'm available for any questions. Thank you.

[Jonas P. Ionin (Commission Secretary)]: Thank you. Project sponsor, you have five minutes.

[Catherine Alberts (Attorney for Project Sponsor, Folsom Street)]: Good afternoon, commissioners. My I am Catherine Alberts. I represent the project sponsor, Michael Turon. I'm his attorney, and he has made submittals to you. And unless you have specific questions, I think we'll rest on those submittals and, turn our time back over, to the staff

[Lydia So (Commission President)]: and the commission.

[Jonas P. Ionin (Commission Secretary)]: Wonderful. Thank you. With that, we should open up public comment. Members of the public, this is your opportunity to address the commission on this matter. You need to come forward. Seeing none, public comment is closed, and this matter is now before you, commissioners.

[Lydia So (Commission President)]: Commissioner Vice President Moore.

[Kathrin Moore (Vice President)]: The project is interesting. It is not a a stand alone occurrence regarding the merger of a UMU. I believe that what is presented has a lot of support from the community. We have received a large number of letters, which I think speaks for itself. And just generally having found a solution to add a uni you you ADU is indeed what this commission would have been asked for anyway. So coming forward with that as an idea is indeed a positive step in the right direction. And and I'm in in support of really, approving the project. So, I I think I can make a motion, for approval with conditions.

[Amy Campbell (Commissioner)]: Second.

[Jonas P. Ionin (Commission Secretary)]: There's no further deliberation, commissioners. There is a motion that has been seconded to approve with conditions on that motion. Commissioner Campbell?

[Amy Campbell (Commissioner)]: Aye.

[Jonas P. Ionin (Commission Secretary)]: Commissioner McGarry? Aye. Commissioner Williams? Aye. Commissioner Braun? Aye. Commissioner Imperial? Aye. Commissioner Moore. Aye. And commission president Soh.

[Lydia So (Commission President)]: Aye.

[Jonas P. Ionin (Commission Secretary)]: So moved, commissioners. That motion passes unanimously seven to zero. And we'll place us on item 14 for case number 2024Hyphen010748CUA at 1919 Fillmore Street, conditional use authorization.

[Elizabeth Junker (Planning Department Staff)]: Good afternoon, commissioners. Elizabeth Junker of planning department staff on behalf of Honora Montano. The item before you is a conditional use authorization to allow a change of use to formula retail sales and service, doing business as Nordstrom Local, within a commercial space at 1919 Fillmore. The project includes interior improvements. The subject property sits between Pine And Wilmette Streets within the within Supervisorial District 5. The property is located within the Western Addition portion of the Upper Fillmore Neighborhood commercial zoning district and has been vacant for approximately a year. Regarding outreach, the project sponsor conducted a pre application meeting in October 2024, attended by five individuals. Additional outreach was conducted by the sponsors team, including holding meetings with the Pacific Heights Residents Association, the Filmore Merchants Association, the offices of Districts 2 And 5, and the Office of Economic and Workforce Development. Email and in person outreach to other neighborhood businesses and groups was also conducted. The department has received, 22 letters in opposition, including from the Pacific Heights Residents Association and some neighborhood businesses and residents. Correspondence should have been forward to the commission and is in substantial part included in packet materials.com commenters raised concerns about traffic loading, curb management issues created by the store, and the lack of street parking in the area, particularly in relation to the store's type of operation. Commenters also raised concerns that this formula retail use is not appropriate for the corridor. Conversely, the department also received 29 letters of support, including from other Fillmore area businesses and neighborhood residents. Supporters stated that the project would bring a desirable convenient shopping area shopping service to the area, boost, foot traffic, and support the Fillmore Corridor as a destination area in the city. Supporters also emphasized that the project would provide access to an established retailer, for, residents since the downtown Nordstrom departments are closed in 2023. Overall, staff believes the project would be both a neighborhood and citywide serving retail use appropriate for the Fillmore area, and on balance, will complement the mix of goods and services currently available in the district. Therefore, the staff recommends approval with conditions. This concludes my presentation. The project sponsor is here to present, and I am available to answer any questions. Thank you.

[Jonas P. Ionin (Commission Secretary)]: Great. Thank you. Project sponsor, we have five minutes.

[Jacqueline Gamble (Director of Selling Programs, Nordstrom)]: Good afternoon, commissioners. Thank you, Elizabeth. My name is Jacqueline Gamble. I am the director of selling programs at Nordstrom and here on behalf of Nordstrom and specifically our president, Fania Chandler, to respectively request approval of conditional authorization to open at a Nordstrom Local at 1919 Fillmore Street. At its core, Nordstrom Local is about convenience and community. It's a neighborhood service hub offering our most valued services such as order pickup, returns, alterations, and clothing donations, and much more. It's close to where our customers live. We currently operate five Nordstrom locals, in New York City as well as in Southern California. And we are excited about the opportunity to bring this concept to San Francisco. We selected the Fillmore location because it's a vibrant retail environment, strong foot traffic, and proximity to public transit, and most importantly, because our customers live here. Our nearest Nordstrom local or our nearest Nordstrom rack stores are about a thirty minute drive from the Fillmore location. And we estimate that about half of those customers living will be within a ten to fifteen minute walk of 1919 Fillmore Street. This is a high concentration of digitally engaged, service oriented customers in a retail focused neighborhood, and that's why we've selected the Fillmore location. We analyzed other potential Nordstrom local locations throughout San Francisco and really came back to the 1919 Fillmore location as the best opportunity to service our customers, but most importantly, add value to the existing neighborhood. The Fillmore location allows us to serve our customers closer to their homes and to support the vibrancy and destination for shopping and dining in the Fillmore neighborhood. It's important to note that Nordstrom local customers, they enjoy shopping. We know that from our other locations, customers are inclined to shop and dine at nearby businesses when they visit a Nordstrom local, and we believe that the local will strengthen the economic activity around Fillmore. We understand that traffic and transportation are the top concerns. We wanna assure you that Nordstrom Local is designated to serve nearby and existing residents. It's a neighborhood hub that provides convenience with its location and high valued services. A local enables customers to pick up an order, try on items in a fitting room, make a return, or get alterations all in one visit. And what we've seen today from locals is that around 30 to 40% of our customers that are coming into the locations are engaging in multiple services during one visit. And because of north of local customers actively engaging with the team, they're not just in and out customers. We train our employees to engage with the customer, to give a high level of service that is safe, secure, and convenient. To address the community's concern around customer parking, Nordstrom is in communication with the MTA to offer validated parking passes to customers at local, garages in the area. This will provide customers with parking options within a five minute walk to the local. Nordstrom will also proactively share this parking information with customers online, in store, and encourage, and ensure responsible parking behaviors. Additionally, there are five other, nearby parking lots, three of which are within a five minute walk. And, again, we will share all of that communication with customers through our website as well as, through our employees. Regarding deliveries, Nordstrom Local will receive packages from carriers like UPS and FedEx that are on the same truck that are currently serving other Fillmore businesses. We do not anticipate adding any additional truck traffic to the Fillmore locations during the daytime.

[Cameron [last name unknown] (Program Manager, Nordstrom)]: And I do wanna note that all deliveries from Nordstrom

[Jacqueline Gamble (Director of Selling Programs, Nordstrom)]: stores will occur overnight, to, again, Nordstrom stores will occur overnight, to, again, minimize, traffic disruptions to the area. We have strong relationships with our delivery partners, and they're contractually required to follow traffic laws. We'll advise our carriers on loading zones, times, and other restrictions that reinforce, and will comply with the city. There are at least six commercial loading zones within a block of the store that include a a dual yellow and white zone directly in front of 1919 Fillmore. We're committed to using these spaces responsibly and will not accept deliveries from trucks that we know are parked illegally. We recognize that the traffic concerns are not new to Fillmore. And since last fall, we've engaged with many residents, customers, associations, and businesses, as well as city's officials to proactively hear and address all of the concerns. These concerns or conversations provided valuable feedback, and we have incorporated all of the feedback.

[Jonas P. Ionin (Commission Secretary)]: Thank you. That is your time. The commissioners may call you up for some clarifying questions.

[Jacqueline Gamble (Director of Selling Programs, Nordstrom)]: Thank you. Thank you.

[Jonas P. Ionin (Commission Secretary)]: Okay. With that, we should open up public comment. Members of the public, this is your opportunity to address the commission on this matter. Again, you need to come forward.

[Sean McGarry (Commissioner)]: Wait. I brought the wrong one.

[Jonas P. Ionin (Commission Secretary)]: Come on up, folks. Okay.

[Carol Brownson (Neighborhood resident)]: Good afternoon, commissioners. Good afternoon, commissioners. My name's Carol Brownson, and I live in the area near the Filmore Commercial District. And there are two issues I'd like to talk about. And one is it is a local commercial district, which adds a great deal to the neighborhood. Its character matters. The second is the bus. The 'twenty two film war is one of the most successful lines post COVID. Apparently, it's had more ridership than it had before. Now, I certainly use it a great deal. Now, the character of a local community district, shopping district, can be ruined by traffic. And Fillmore Street has two traffic lanes and parklets. And we see delivery trucks double parked frequently. And this promotes honking, angry driving, etcetera. I'm sure you've seen it in San Francisco. Now, the second is the bus. And one of the places those delivery trucks park is in the bus stop, two or three. I mean, if they can't park in the bus stop, then they double park. And I have had to pass up the 22 more than once because of delivery trucks parked in the bus stop. Now, on the North Line, I think one time I had to wait for three buses to go by before I could get in because they'd been backed up further down the line. And so they were full. Coming south and coming down the hill, the bus has been stopped through a whole light cycle waiting for delivery trucks and double parked cars. Just going in to pick something up for a second. I won't be but a second. It's not making for a good bus line. It's really interfering with the 22. And it's not making for a good local shopping district. I don't really consider shopping picking up a package. Shopping is an old school activity where you go and look and, oh, look at that. I'll try that on now. Or, you know, you've done it, I'm sure. Okay. So in short, I would really rather have a local store than a delivery from a chain store. Thank you.

[Sean McGarry (Commissioner)]: Hello, commissioners. My name is Brenda Berlin. Since 1984, I've been a homeowner on Bush Street in the Bush Street Cottage Row historic district, just steps from Fillmore. I'm speaking today in opposition of Nordstrom's conditional use application for nineteen nineteen Fillmore. Fillmore has come through the economic downturn, as you know, with flying colors. My concerns are that this particular section of Fillmore Street is simply not suited to the intended business practices as it is located, as as has been stated, in one of the most congested areas of the street with parking always at a minimum, no area for unloading or loading, and very heavy traffic going to and from downtown at both Pine And Bush Streets. Adding to this congestion is the hunt for parking near the valued Walgreens, which has seen increased patronage due to the closures of many Walgreens. And we haven't even talked about the delivery issues and the trucks, the delivery trucks that service all of the wonderful stores on Fillmore. Where do they go to park? Where do they go to unload? I'll tell you that they they they come onto Bush Street and many of them double park right in front of my own house, and making their deliveries with after unloading with handcarts. The UPS driver making his deliveries in the neighborhood is a regular every day, and he double parks right in front of my home, and we always say hello. The restaurant supply delivery truck double parks on Bush Street as well in front of the Amelia condos and the Fillmore Bakery, which brings up the very important question of how and where the proposed Nordstrom will receive its packages and serve its customers efficiently without adding to the street chaos. And what services will they provide that we don't already have, in the neighborhood? We already have post offices, shipping centers, and many talented tailors in the neighborhood cleaning establishments. We also have keel we have keels. We have we have paper source, and let's be honest, the services are redundant, and it will only add to the chaos on the street. We we suggest because there's no parking that they consider Laurel Village or even the target center further down at, Geary. So please, finally, I feel okay. Thank you so much. I I wish that you would, reject this proposal.

[Lisa Platt (District 2 resident; transit advocate)]: Hello. I'm Lisa Platt, a D Two resident and daily transit rider. I spent a lot of time on Fillmore doing neighborhood cleanups, and with that, lots of time waiting for the delayed 22 bus as it gets blocked by double parkers. And when that afternoon wind comes in, waiting for a bus' cold. As we try to manifest San Francisco's economic recovery, we want to say yes to all development. As a transit advocate, I believe increased density and reduced vacancies will lower our cost per rider. And we all felt the loss of the Nordstrom store in Union Square, but this isn't any of those things. This is a straightforward CUA that fails to meet the criteria for approval. To meet the conditions, it must not impede muni service. The proposal claims there are enough parking spaces in the area, including a lot on California, but we can all but guarantee the patrons will primarily be double parking. Put yourself in the shoes of the common shopper. You just need to drop something off that you ordered online, you don't like it. You'll only be inside for two minutes. As a convenience shopper, you take a car. This area has a 70% car ownership rate, but the nearest spot is a five minute walk each way and requires paying the meter. It's not worth the hassle for those two minutes, so you double park on Fillmore since Nordstrom is mid block. In those few minutes, which happens 20 times each day, the 22 bus is unable to pass, gets caught in an extra traffic light cycle, and is now delayed. A seven minute headway becomes 10. We experience crowding and frustration, and muni quality is reduced. This line already experiences a ton of bunching and delays. This is not standard retail. This is a delivery location that will ensure double parking and transit delays. I ask you to deny this CUA based on its negative impact on a critical transit line. Thank you.

[Mary King (Bush Street Cottage Row resident)]: Good afternoon. My name is Mary King, and I've owned my home since 1986 in the Bush Street Cottage Row, a historic district just blocks from Fillmore Street. I'm not gonna repeat. There was quite a bit of information already that we have. We have two UPS drop offs. We've got a FedEx drop off. We've got post office. I don't know which company Nordstrom's going to use that's gonna deliver in the middle of the night. I guess they have Nordstrom Express. The 22 bus stop actually has to pull out and Pine Street has to pull out to go around the parklet that's there. So they have to cut out a little bit, particularly if there's another bus coming, another 22. Another thing no one's talked about is there's a little one way street that goes off of Fillmore, Wilmot, between Fillmore And Webster and Fillmore And Steiner. I'm very familiar with this because for twenty five years, I rented a parking space in Wilmot. At that point, we had a hardware store, that was a sort of in and out store, a dry cleaner, which was in and out, and then our lovely bakery in the corner. I cannot tell you how many times I had to wait on Fillmore Street in order to turn into to get to my parking space because there was a car parked there. Oh, it'll just be a minute. We'll just be a minute. In the meantime, I'm on Wilmot. I mean, I'm on Fillmore. So that's I don't think that your basic Nordstrom shopper is going to change that type of behavior. I don't have much more to say. We've all talked a lot about the congestion. I've seen a lot of change in the Fillmore area since 1986. And I can understand that the landlord would like to go with Nordstrom because I'm sure they're the highest bidder. But it's really not benefiting our Fillmore community at all to have Nordstrom there. It's benefiting Nordstrom, and it's benefiting the landlord. And that's about it. Their customers don't want to have to drive to Corte Madera or Stanford Shopping Center, which since since it left Downtown San Francisco, those are the only places they can go. So they shop online. Of course, they're going to be making a lot of returns because they can't try it on online. It's just the wrong business for this particular neighborhood. I agree with my neighbor. Laurel Village has a big parking lot in the back and that the Target Center is a rush with parking. Plus they have, EV charging stations because look and how would that convenient be? You can charge your EV, your Tesla, and you can shop or you can go to Nordstrom local all at the same time. So that ends that ends my, I'm there's my gong. Thank you very much. I hope you reject this, request because it's just not right for Fillmore. Thank you.

[Dika Reiner (Pacific Heights resident)]: Good afternoon, commissioners. I have here a packet that I would like to hand out. There are two pieces of paper for each commissioner for yourself. What's in the packet is a checklist of requirements that we would ask of any business that would be doing business in Fillmore Street because we're going to start asking people to commit to things that they have said is something that they intend to do. But then we wanna start making these contractual because we've had so many people who've made agreements and then walked away from them. And the other one is a spreadsheet of vacancies. We understand that there was a list of vacancies provided to you. Those were erroneous, and this spreadsheet corrects some of that misinformation as to what's actually vacant. My name is Dika Reiner. I've lived in Pacific Heights for twenty three years, just steps from Fillmore Street. I'm speaking today to oppose Nordstrom local's application for 1919 Fillmore Street. We look at what businesses do, not what they say. We have had supposed lots of outreach and lots of communication, but as soon as Nordstrom's and the people involved with this learned about the pushback, the disinformation began. While I am not at all automatically opposed to retail or formula retail, we have lots of good formula retail on Fillmore Street. That particular block is such a, a, a congested block, and I wish I had brought a drawing for you. If you can picture this, the first store is Kiehl's, who has written in support. Of course, Kiehl's sells at Nordstrom's. The next one is Paper Source. They have paper wrapping. Nordstrom's is going to come in in paper wrapping. The next is Rome, which is a burger place that has a parklet. In front of Kiehl's and Paper Source is the 22 bus stop, so you can't park there. Then key then the Rome has a parklet. Then the empty store, nineteen nineteen, has white marking in front of it, a loading zone. That's where all the delivery guys park and they argue with each other. They argue with you if you try to pull over for a minute. The rest of the block in front of Florio, which is the next store, has been painted red because of the daylight. That's where the Ubers sit waiting for their next call. I think it's a formula for disaster and conflict. This particular block is the worst block on Fillmore Street that they could have picked. The services will not be beneficial, just like everybody said. Nordstrom's local on Fillmore Street is nothing but a billboard for Nordstrom's after they've left the the facility. Multiple locations in Southern California were cited by Nordstrom's.

[Jonas P. Ionin (Commission Secretary)]: Thank you, ma'am. But that is your time.

[Dika Reiner (Pacific Heights resident)]: Am I done?

[Jonas P. Ionin (Commission Secretary)]: You are. Thank you. Well, you're not done, but that's your time.

[Sean McGarry (Commissioner)]: Thank you.

[Cameron [last name unknown] (Program Manager, Nordstrom)]: That was a good

[Bridget Maley (on behalf of Pacific Heights Residents Association)]: one, Jonas. Good afternoon, commissioners. Bridget Maley. I'm here to stand with Pacific Heights Residents Association in opposing this CUA. Recent board of supervisors legislation lifted formula retail restrictions for Van Ness Avenue. This is a business that the city should encourage to take advantage of retail space on Van Ness rather than a neighborhood serving location like 1919 Fillmore. It's not an appropriate location for Nordstrom Local for two reasons. One, the predicted adverse impacts on vehicle and bus traffic. And two, it is neither necessary nor desirable as it is unlikely to generate or support the foot traffic essential to a vibrant NCD, nor does it address unmet needs in the neighborhood. Approval of this CUA would exasperate already difficult traffic conditions and obstructions on Fillmore, further the unsafe conditions, and hinder rider access to the 22 Fillmore. While I absolutely agree it should be the priority of the city to fill vacant storefronts, proposed uses should be compatible with the neighborhood and the location. This proposed project is neither, and it will, have little chance, of increasing the foot traffic, and the viability of Fillmore Street. I ask you to please deny this CUA. Thank you.

[Paul Wermer (President, Pacific Heights Residents Association)]: Good afternoon, commissioners. My name is Paul Wirmer, and I'm speaking in my role as president of the Pacific Heights Residents Association in opposition to this request. A lot of comments have already been made. I can't add a whole lot to them. I also submitted more than one email letter to you about this. There's been outreach. Absolutely, there's been outreach. But outreach is more than just telling people what you're going to do. And it's more than just saying, oh, we can bring stuff in from the back of the building when there is no possible way to bring it in from the back of the building. Outreach is more than saying, yes, let's talk about the traffic. And when they are walked through and pointed out all of the reasons, those six yellow zones that she talks about, we require parallel parking to use by the delivery vehicles. How many times have you seen a delivery vehicle parallel park? That space in front of the store, I measured it, is just 23 feet. That's less than many of the delivery vehicles. So they're proposing for their strategy to use parking that if they did for unloading, parking a large obstructive vehicle overlapping into the daylighting safety zone. Is that a good look? Is that what we want? I mentioned the numerous errors of fact in the case report that they submitted. Ignoring some formula retail to get their percentage of formula retail, the distances they claimed for stores much greater than 300 foot radius they talk about. I would note that I have talked with bus drivers because I ride the 22. And it's really interesting talking to the operators. The operators are really good. And when I was saying to one of them, you know, isn't that stretch between California and Bush problematic? He said, no, you've got it wrong. It's from Sacramento to Sutter. And that's because of all of the cars stopping to let someone off. How many of you have seen an Uber or Lyft or Waymo stop in a traffic lane to let someone off? How many of you have seen the Uber or Lyft or Waymo pull over to the curb, leaving the butt sticking out in the traffic lane? How many of you seen an Uber or Lyft or Waymo wait there while someone just runs in to get something and come out? We have a twenty second green light on Fillmore for the bus. That's easily taken up by one person just letting a passenger out, not even double parking for a period of time. This is intensifying an already bad problem that exists because the city has not really managed traffic issues there. Thank you.

[Jonas P. Ionin (Commission Secretary)]: Okay. Last call for public comment. Seeing none, public comment is closed. This matter is now before you, commissioners.

[Lydia So (Commission President)]: Vice President Moore.

[Kathrin Moore (Vice President)]: I'm glad I can speak first because I have been a frequent visitor of Fillmore Street for the last forty years that I have lived in San Francisco. And as this particular street has been in front of this commission with various projects for many, many years, I start to appreciate how the neighborhood has engaged in really curating the street with an intensity that is hardly has any precedent anywhere else in the city, perhaps a mission. But this is really a village main street for all intents and purposes, and one of those small streets that has a character of almost a European type street given that it's not just retail, basically much locally grown and developed retail, but also the charm of people sitting on the sidewalk with restaurants, filling out restaurants, basically being open from morning to late afternoon, evening. That makes it very special. There are bookstores. There's obviously formula retail. There's Starbucks. There's everybody else participating in a manner that makes it a very, very interesting street. With that interesting street comes lots of people. And, I really appreciate and on a very profound level that people who live there and understand the street came forward to really share a nuanced experience that is very, very convincing and that I personally experience being a frequent visitor. My dry cleaner, who I have used for the last twenty five years, is on Fillmore Street. So here we go. To the issues of impact on traffic and public transportation, the 22 Fillmore, I would add the issue of pedestrian comfort. I come and walk to Fillmore actually from Knop Hill. I live on I live on the East Slope Of Knop Hill and that's a good 1.7 mile walk from there to my cleaner. And I do that frequently. And each time I do that walk, I do it because I like to experience coming to the street. It's kind of really step stepping into a small town urban environment as you're going up California Street, which is basically a strong movement corridor but doesn't have much to offer in terms of, stores, etcetera. It's not the greatest walk, but it's a it is an okay walk. But when you come onto Fillmore, there you are. And And it's enough fun to to exert that energy to experience it. So I very much understand the incredible burden of the the the the Waymos, the, Ubers, etcetera, making even the pedestrian environment on Fillmore quite impacted because you would like to just flow through it. However, the light the the light cycles between the different blocks are short. So you're continuously stopping and there's another taxi making a right turn, another you was stopping right at the crosswalk of where you wanna to cross the intersection, and it gets just really frustrating. And you wait and say, okay, I'm going to stay in the sun for a moment and then move on. But I think that this particular use would exacerbate of what is already a congested environment. And I believe that it not only is exasperating the movement, but also safety because the traffic on Pine is uncomfortably fast. The the the the pear, Pine and Bush, are very fast moving corridors which are interrupted by cycle light cycles coming down, both coming and going, both on both of those streets, but it's not safe enough when they come to Fillmore. People barely making it across the light and as a pedestrian, you have to be very careful in order to, have a safe safe crossing. I believe that this particular store in this location would make it more difficult for traffic and pedestrian safety to be not impacted. And I am I basically do not see the necessity that a digital engaged customer base has to have a, convenient drop off location on Philmo Street. I do not do not believe that this type of establishment will enhance or offer the needed variety of retail on Filmore Street. I think it can be anywhere. I think it should be conveniently accessed by people who can park, and it should not burden those who respect the rules and need to basically deal with an already narrow street to make it functional. So I will, unfortunately, not be able to support the project.

[Lydia So (Commission President)]: Thank you. Thank you. Commissioner Williams?

[Gilbert Williams (Commissioner)]: Thank you for for all the neighbors, from the Fillmore District, the Upper Fillmore District, show up. It's one of the things that I enjoy about being a commissioner is listening to folks from different neighborhoods. My neighbors come here and give testimony. And so it's something that makes me feel more close to different parts of the city. And so I just want to acknowledge, I appreciate you guys coming out and giving your experience and your concerns to the Commission. Nordstrom is, you know, I mean, everyone has a great well, I should say everyone that I know has a great experience with Nordstrom, especially being here for so many years. It's a place where I was just thinking about all the clothes and, items that I purchased at at Nordstrom that I still have today. And so I appreciate Nordstrom. I have great memories of my shopping experience with Nordstrom. And I hope that whatever happens here today, that you will continue to expand. It was sad to see Nordstrom leave. Having said that, I've been reading a lot of the letters from the community and folks that live in the surrounding area. And I have to say that they've made a lot of good points. I think Nordstrom probably has the means to find another type of location that would be better suited for this type of business, the delivery business. And I, unfortunately, I won't be able to support this location. But I would, you know, want to say that, I hope, again, that whatever happens here today, that Nordstrom continues to look, for another location here in San Francisco. So, anyway, thank you. Thank you for your presentation. And thank you, again for coming here. And I, again, I hope Nordstrom, whatever happens, I hope I hope they expand and reopen a store, like they used to have here. Thank you.

[Lydia So (Commission President)]: Thank you, Commissioner Williams. Commissioner Brown?

[Derek W. Braun (Commissioner)]: I have a few comments and questions for the project sponsor first. One is just a comment on the plans. This is not really a big deal, but I will say it was a little confusing. The plans in the packet were drawn in a way where South was at the top of the storefront, essentially kind of making it look like the store was on the east side of the street, went on the west side of the street. Otherwise, the plans were fine, but that was a strange I thought it was a little strange. But then I I have a couple of questions about the about this. So I'm curious to learn more. You know, Nordstrom has a few of these Nordstrom local stores at this point. What we have our own transparency requirements for the storefront, but, you know, what people do with that space varies from business to business, and I have heard concerns from the community about the relatively blank or bare nature of some of the storefronts. So would you mind just telling me what the company's thoughts are on this or potential changes that could, be coming that might help to address this?

[Cameron [last name unknown] (Program Manager, Nordstrom)]: Hi. My name is Cameron. I work for Nordstrom as a program manager, just helping to support, locals and other services that we provide. That was definitely a concern that we heard as we were doing our outreach with the community, and we were very receptive to that. Our standard local, storefront as of right now, part of it is advertising the services on the window front because large from locals are different than a traditional store. We felt like that was important for the community to hear. We also do, like, mannequin displays or, like, clothing displays, and we are actively looking at reevaluating how we are doing our storefronts, Not just in this location, but across the country as well to enhance and make it more inviting for our environment as well. So it's something that we definitely are aware of. Our team takes great pride in our work and being able to provide a strong visual merchandising experience for our customers. And part of the goal with the Nordstrom local location would be, hey, educating the customer with what is provided at the store, but then also making inviting and having that, strong service experience.

[Derek W. Braun (Commissioner)]: Okay. I do hope that gets rolled out more. Certainly, this is the concept that's gonna be rolling out in a lot of cities. That way, it will be more there will be more receptivity if there's a better track record on the storefront design.

[Cameron [last name unknown] (Program Manager, Nordstrom)]: Okay. Thank you.

[Derek W. Braun (Commissioner)]: My you know, there were some other points raised during, public comment and the the, idea for an agreement as well that we received here. I do want to just note that we have, sidewalk maintenance requirements, as part of our conditions of approval for this. So that is in there. There one of the suggestions that has been made is really around engagement with the local community in terms of, you know, fundraisers or programming and things like that. Now that's not something that really this commission can mandate when it comes to third parties. For those who have made these suggestions, they're good suggestions. I went a few rounds on this for the Castro Theater item, and there's some real limitations when it comes to, these kinds of, ideas. But I am curious to hear more about, for where there are Nordstrom local stores, has there been local engagement? What are some examples of supporting local organizations or programming?

[Cameron [last name unknown] (Program Manager, Nordstrom)]: Some of the services that we offer at the local include the clothing donations. And so for example, with our New York City or Manhattan locations, we have a very strong partnership. It's heavily used service where we will take in donated clothing from the public, not just Nordstrom customers, and then we will partner with a local non profit, for example, and have that engagement. And that is something for our New York stores. They will cycle through clothing, like, I wanna say every couple days. It's a very heavily engaged process. And so, we would offer something similar at the Fillmore location. We also do beauty cycles. So that is something where people can bring in their used beauty goods and we, prevent, like, those items polluting going to the landfills. And so, and we're actively also looking at other engagements. And, we try to cater to the local community in each location. So as there's, certain opportunities that might be able to service the Fillmore neighborhood more specifically, we're absolutely open to that.

[Derek W. Braun (Commissioner)]: Yeah. Okay. I you know, the thing the services, the sort of community driven services you mentioned are are certainly in line a little bit more with what we think of when we think of Nordstrom and its and its mission as a business. But, you know, one of the great benefits of a small local business, and you're entering a place with a number of wonderful small local businesses, obviously trying to, is is that deeper engagement with the merchants association and with the organizations in the area. And so although I can't demand that that would be something that you must do, I do want to give strong encouragement wherever the story ends up being. But I do want to strongly encourage that. Do you have the

[Jacqueline Gamble (Director of Selling Programs, Nordstrom)]: I came up to share with Cameron. We Nordstrom Local is about the community. We want to hear what matters to the people in the community and bring them services that mean something to them. But we also want to be good partners to your point and be engaged with the community and the merchants association. So things like holidays and decorating for holidays and being a part of the community really matters to us. It matters to us for Nordstrom Local, but it matters to us from our whole ecosystem of Nordstrom, whether it's Nordstrom stores, Nordstrom Rack Store, or Nordstrom Local. And we pride ourselves on being good partners and giving back to the communities that we serve. We do donations. We, want to participate in anything that the community cares about because we care about the communities that we're in. We also care about our customers and our business partners. So I just wanted to

[Amy Campbell (Commissioner)]: add that in for you guys.

[Cameron [last name unknown] (Program Manager, Nordstrom)]: Okay.

[Derek W. Braun (Commissioner)]: Thank you. I want to move on to so those are my just sort of nudges. I want to move on to one point about the loading and traffic concerns that have been raised and your response to those concerns that you mentioned. I'm curious, what has been the actual sort of process for ensuring that look, you have stores in Southern California. They're in extremely congested areas in Southern California. They're in areas that are corridors with storefronts lining them in a similar but different scale kind of way in a Southern California sort of way. But I imagine some similar issues exist in those locations. And so what's been the process for trying to address double parking, these delivery challenges, customer parking challenges?

[Cameron [last name unknown] (Program Manager, Nordstrom)]: Yeah. So we were we have from a commercial delivery standpoint, we have really strong relationships with our transportation partners. And, that's something that, as we mentioned in Jackie's speech, we're going to be proactively reaching out with them and making sure that the concerns that have been expressed today, but also throughout our outreach with the community members, will be shared and making sure that we are proactive in enforcing that. And then from a, customer standpoint, you're correct. Like, our New York City locations are Southern California. It's like, it's making sure that customers are aware, with especially ahead of time being proactive with communicating where they can safely park and engages their stores and also the other stores in the neighborhood. And then also just promoting that behavior. Our stores take great pride in knowing their customers when they come in. It's not just a faceless ex into exchange or interaction. So just engaging with them and making sure that they're doing that safely and making sure that as if and when we do see behavior that wouldn't be compliant or encouraged by the city or the community, for example, we're making sure we're being good community stakeholders and recommending that they either get dropped off in a better place or park in a stronger location. And we've been trying to proactively reach out to multiple parking garages, some of which are city owned, to make sure that we provide them with provide our customers with a strong and reliable and safe parking option as well. I know that the comment was made. It is only a five minute walk from the store, and, we are hopeful that that is sufficient for meeting those customers' needs. And if it's not, then we will absolutely, like, revisit it, and engage with our community stakeholders as well. And we've been ever since the initial hearing, we've been doing a lot of outreach with our community stakeholders. And so we want to continue that dialogue and make sure that we're taking the concerns of the Residents Association, the Merchants Association into account and being involved in those conversations long term.

[Derek W. Braun (Commissioner)]: What's been the actual method of communicating the parking locations that are available or the working with the the delivery vehicles? I mean, you have there's a track record here for Nordstrom locals at this point in heavily congested areas. What's the communication method and sort of oversight for that like?

[Cameron [last name unknown] (Program Manager, Nordstrom)]: To be transparent, this has been the first time that it's been such an overt concern. Obviously, with New York City, it's a very common area to have, like, congested parking and everything. So for us, it's been just having those just like we have a customer ask, like, where they can park and whatnot, but, like, it just hasn't come up very often in the past. This process has been the first time that it's gonna come up.

[Jacqueline Gamble (Director of Selling Programs, Nordstrom)]: We do have specifics on our website as well as in your if you're picking up an order in the email that comes to the customer instructions specifically for each location when that customer has selected. So we can overtly say in an email a confirmation pickup as well as our website the specifics that the community where they allow parking and do not allow parking or drop off. And we can comply with any of those restrictions through the email communication that when the order is ready to be picked up, they will see that, as well as any type of communication for alteration pickups, or any type of other return operations. And we can cite that both on our website as well as in customer communication who are going to engage with the store.

[Derek W. Braun (Commissioner)]: Okay. Thank you. That's the kind of detail I was hoping to hear because, I think that you the peep if people do something illegal, they're doing something illegal. But still, there's a role to be played here in proactive communication to do everything you can in your power to to discourage illegal parking and and tell people where they can park. So that that's very helpful to hear that would, be in the email itself where you have other tools for for doing this. Thank you for responding. I I I'm just gonna share some thoughts. So so, you know, I find this just a detached way, I find it sort of fascinating, this evolution of retail where we don't have the big great big Nordstrom store anymore. And, this I think this is interesting just from the perspective of I think we're gonna start seeing more things like this in the future with the way e commerce is affecting retail and how we're losing these large department stores. But now we need, you know, potentially these service hubs that replicate some of these activities but in a much smaller footprint. So it's it's a little disappointing as a trend as in a retail trend, but I think it's the reality that we're we're sort of here. I as a concept, I think this is a really, interesting idea, like I said. It's a it's a resource especially for, well, I'll just give I know there's a lot of people in the city who can't get packages effectively. I count myself as one of them, but there's no place for the package to go. It's likely to get stolen. Being able to pick up from Nordstrom here is helpful, but you can also do that in, of course, other mail box locations. But then the services that are on-site here, you know, it allows it to be a little bit more of a one stop thing instead of going back and forth, back and forth to pick up and then return items or things like that. And again, it's just, I think, where retail is has has gone. As far as this particular location, I'm I'm really appreciative of all the concerns that have been raised about the context of this. In many ways, the traffic congestion concerns and the concerns about how this impact in the 22 Fillmore are sort of symptoms of success of a place. And so I understand the resistance and fair points made about is this the right use in a place that has achieved this success. But nevertheless, I believe a lot of the challenges in the area are symptoms of this success. And, you know, we route our bus lines down our busy places that people actually want to go. And this is one of those places that people want to go. Could it be better managed, maybe? Yes. Could street parking and loading be better managed? Probably, yes. But, you know, that's it's part of being a vibrant and successful place. My ultimately, where I'm landing on this is still sort of from the perspective of I don't hold Nordstrom Local. I don't hold the application that the sponsor is being sort of responsible for the illegal behavior of of other people. And the one benefit I see of Nordstrom Local coming in here is that this is also yet another anchor for this neighborhood. It would be the only one in the store. I'm in a car free household. If I was to go to this, I'd be on that 22 Fillmore experiencing both the benefits and frustrations of it. But you know, I I think that this I I don't see stopping this, project from moving forward in this location because of what others, do to do illegally in the street. So this does have my my support right now. Thank you.

[Lydia So (Commission President)]: Thank you, Commissioner Burwin. I'd like to thank all my commissioners' comment and, they're really well said. And a lot of questions have been asked that I would like to ask too, but I am glad my fellow commissioners had addressed them. I'd like to start telling a story of with the people who know me, number 22 Muni line is my favorite line, and it's also SFMTA's favorite. It's the highest recovery and the cleanest bus. We take that line from Mission to see the Warriors game and also go to Japantown and then the few more and stop by and and have our coffee and our favorite bakery. So I frequent that neighborhood. I love Fillmore Street, and I'm really happy to see that even through so many histories in San Francisco, it came out so vibrant and attract international level of retailers coming in. I was just there eating pizza a couple days ago, the best rumour pizza if anyone have wanted to try it. They also have Vermentino wine really from Italy. So I love that. Right? So one of the good thing about you take the 22 bus and you can drink a little bit more Vermentino on few more. And I also remember I also carry a little bag of my little purchase from Lululemon that didn't fit me when I got it online. And I was happy that I can actually just stop by there after picking up a few cookies after rimentino and pizza, and I can just go change exchange whatever I need to change. And I don't wanna share any more detail about, you know, trying out things on Lululemon. So I think that this is this is, like, a great, vibrant neighborhood, small businesses thriving. And for the mix of local restaurants and also the Fumor Bakery has been there for so long, and then the florist and then my hairdresser is there. And if we can continue to allow it to thrive and also adapt how people actually really prefer to shop right now, with everybody is really busy these days because we're all on our screen. And, I was having a little challenge of how to find my daughter a dress to go for her graduation because normally, we would just go downtown, take the BART downtown, and go to 5th And Mission and just try things on. But I had to get her to Hillsdale Mall because the closest Northstorm for us is Hillsdale Mall. And we love Northstorm local just because the customer service is really good, and the shoes is amazing. So that's a really painful thing to see, the shoe is disappearing. But I I I really think that, like, right now, what I might wanna say that I love our MTA bus, and I also love our garages. Right? So I would park at my favorite parking garage, which is run perfectly by SFMTA. It's called the Japantown Parking Garage. Then I'll just walk up and continue my visit. Right? The Boulangerie Bakery, Fillmore Bakery, pick up my pizza. Now I know that I can get my vermentino there, which is great. And I will just continue to shop. You know? There's a soap you can get in Australian lotion store. I'm not I'm not getting any endorsement. I'm not doing free advertisement here, but I'm just sharing a little story of, like, how San Franciscan, a mom and a daughter live our life, you know? And I would like to see more high school kids can actually just pick Fillmore to go to after school. Let's hang out in the Fillmore and eat some seafood there and get some pastries and not needed to drive. And the the the parking congestions, it's an issue, but I also echo commissioner Braun's statement. It's a indicator of success in some way. But that doesn't mean that we can we shall let it be like that. But I think there's an agency that should really take a good whack at this. It's SFMTA, street division, how to actually make sure that the community's frustrations are being heard and also work with the existing merchants and retailers there to establish a better understanding of how do you regulate your delivery. I I actually do recognize. I see delivery truck just double park, and they're delivering raw chickens to a restaurant. So, yes, I know the concern. I thought that was also a little weird. And it is not a single incident or the only unique frustrations on Filmor. There's many other successful neighborhood strips are also having to deal with parklet and food delivery, Uber or DoorDash, all that stuff. So I think that is an issue that we as a city, as an agency of our fellow agency and SFMTA should really look into it and actually reach out to more of the neighborhood associations to come up with a better plan of operations to address the ongoing ongoing concerns and inconvenience with the neighbors. They can definitely do a lot better, more than they already had done. I love the list of wish list of approval and agreement. I think that that is actually more on the community side of aspect of wanted to share with the Nordstrom. So there's something about some community. When I work with community, they really want to work with the the owners, not necessarily a a third party fancy lawyer or fancy public affairs people. Just having someone that they can talk to, I think that is the beginning of the gesture of actually planting yourself and invest yourself in the community. I don't think they bite. You know? They're actually one of the really nice community associations here in San Francisco, and they look really pretty too, and now they're sitting behind you. So they want it they want a they want Girl Scouts cookies. They want SFUSD fundraisers, which we all knew that, like, we all need the money for our kids to go to our public school. And, and they want you to be participating in the Fillmore Merchant Association and be supportive with their, annual Fillmore Jazz Festival. And they really I think, at the bottom line is they really want you to have someone that they can call to and talk to just like a neighbor. And we can't really enforce this into our conditions, but I'm just reading it. I felt like these are pretty reasonable. You know, you're nodding, and I'm nodding. I do love to see I would definitely buy not just one box of Girl Scouts cookies if I ended up having the chance to return my stuff from to Nordstrom and Lululemon and and and then have my Bernardino again. But, you know, I think this is kind of a we want to send a message to everybody else who are wanting to come back and bring their business in San Francisco. We are in a very interesting time. Right now, we are evolving, and also ecommerce is really overtaking a lot of our businesses. This is even before COVID. I can speak of it as my own personal work experience. So I'm really appreciative that Nordstrom had really instead of just close the door altogether to San Francisco, you come back with the inventive approach to adapt your business into the new generations of ecommerce and enhance it with a public with a public and customer services. And I do recognize that, my commissioner, Braun, had mentioned that the storefront could look could use a little love, and I I think, yeah, eventually, you would. Maybe you allowed some SFUSD fundraiser banners to be up there. I don't know. But it's it's something that you should kind of hear that we really appreciate, people coming back with a new adaptive reuse and also reinventing your business. I think that the traffic concern is real and valid, and I would like to, really highly encourage or if there's anything we can do in our capacity to give a nudge to the SFMTA to make sure that communications needs to go both ways, not only relying on small local business to understand how you operate, but also we might be able to do something with the MTA to really get the word out there, making sure that enforcements do happen when double park happen, and then clearly identify some of the area you can park. I mean, I don't have problem parking in the Japantown garage and then walk up to a few streets. I mean, even the because every street I can is actually pretty bad. I can pick up cookies, and then I pick up wine, and it's you know, maybe someone will open up, like, a healthier juice place for us to to pick. With that being said, I I really hope that Nordstrom will be successful just like all the other community. Actually, you're actually a West Coast company started in Seattle. And I really hope that other company, even though they're really big now, they continue to pivot and reinvent themselves and reinvest back to our business and in San Francisco. Like, you're coming back, but with something even greater and more jazzier approach. I I love that. And I I actually getting sick of returning my stuff in, like, in the middle of nowhere in some warehouse. It's actually really nice to returning my things and also know that I can also meet a friend for coffee and then later on the pizza. So, I am in full support of this, and I but I also want to make sure that your commitment, the Nordstrom commitment to really work with the community, to come up with a robust plan to engage with them. And and then we would like to see if anything we can help to help with the MTA street division. I I would like to leave my floor to some of my fellow commissioners to say something, and I also seen some public might want to add more stuff to it if any of my fellow commissioners would like to bring them back in. You may too, if you want to. Okay. Alright. Okay. Okay. Commissioner McGarry.

[Sean McGarry (Commissioner)]: I'd like to echo what everybody has said. I've been a 22 writer since basically 1995 when I arrived here. Lived on Market And Dolores, so it's bang in the middle. I wound up then living on Fillmore And Green, just down the bottom of the hill there. And basically, I work on 18th And 3rd. So, basically, it's basically from one stretch to another. It's always been a slow road. Great boss, can't argue with it. It's fantastic, but it's always been a slow road. And I really miss the Fillmore of of the late mid mid to late nineties, February. It's changed an awful lot. It's been engineered in, you know, it's it's not the Filmore of old. But there is a Merchant Association there. I do I would really ask that Nordstrom engage us fully with it. I think it's phenomenal to come up with deliveries at night. Number one, occupying an empty storefront. What's wrong with that? You know, there's too many in the town. It's a pet peeve of mine. I drive around. We spank in new buildings, and it's just decals on the Ground Floor. It kills me to see it. If it's not, at the moment, the most the prettiest, I'm pretty sure that Nordstrom's can do a good job addressing up the the frontage of that. The fact that there's the deliveries are at night, I think the neighborhood association should be looking at a commitment of all its members to do things like that, if they're not doing it already. Pickups coming with instructions and parking validation on top of that, this is all good stuff. I just really hope that everybody can basically sit down, work out a way of mutual satisfaction here because I think all sides have a lot to offer. I think that Nordstrom does a knock on effect from one shop to another shop and another shop and another shop. And, basically, we need vacant units, filled. I will utilize it. The shirt is Nordstrom's. The shoes I wear is Nordstrom's. Not too sure about the socks, but I know the shirt and the shoes are. And I'll use it again. So I will be in support of this, and, basically,

[Cameron [last name unknown] (Program Manager, Nordstrom)]: I

[Sean McGarry (Commissioner)]: have a hard time picking and choosing or being in a position or put in a position where we get to pick and choose who does well or who moves in something. And that's that's that's a that's a problem I have with a ground floor lease of of a commercial property.

[Lydia So (Commission President)]: Thank you. Commissioner Imperial?

[Theresa Imperial (Commissioner)]: Thank you. And first, I wanna appreciate the public and also other commissioners' comments and also Nordstrom as well in actually, also engaging with the community and also in terms of putting effort in, how can Nordstrom be more integrated with the community. But I I have also first questions, and then I'll go with my comments. First, what other locations have you been identified and what's what's wrong with those other locations?

[Cameron [last name unknown] (Program Manager, Nordstrom)]: So when we were looking we did a nationwide search across the country to figure out where, should we and can we open on Nordstrom Local. And so we looked at everything from a census block group level, so like a little bit more detailed than just zip code. And so when we were looking at that, we were looking at the concentration of digital and digitally engaged customers that shop Nordstrom and rack.com. We looked at the number of, the concentration of customers that engage in services. So what the ones that we mentioned before, but also all the other services that we offer in store. And so when we're looking at where there were clusters of customers that utilized both of those criteria, that is where Filmore came up. And when we looked at other locations such as Laurel Village and other areas that were recommended throughout this process and our outreach with the Residents Association, We took those recommendations seriously. We did look at our internal data to see if there was enough clusters of customers to support a local. And we didn't we just found that the 1919 Fillmore location was the strongest fit. For all the reasons that you're recommending or mentioning before, there is a strong retail environment. There is public transportation. So, not only are we expecting a large concentration of customers to be local, but for those that aren't, there are reasonable ways to get to the store and to comfortably embed in that environment.

[Theresa Imperial (Commissioner)]: So you mentioned earlier, or your representative mentioned earlier, that a third of your clientele is coming from that area. And so that is the reason why 1919 Filmer Street or the Filmer area is, in a way, considered to be the location.

[Cameron [last name unknown] (Program Manager, Nordstrom)]: Yeah. It's a sincere best guess. We're based on we don't based on our customer data, we are estimate we don't have, like, all the addresses. There's, like, a lot of protections on I can't see that data. But based off of our first location being in San Francisco, we are estimating about half. So I think it was around 40 to 45% of customers who would be within a ten to fifteen minute walk. And then within a mile, I would think it was around 80 to 85%. And then based on the outreach and the we understood that a mile is not close in San Francisco terms, which we are definitely responsible we're is we were responsible to responsive to, excuse me. And so that's why that 10 to 15 mile mile ten to fifteen minute walking radius is where we about half of our customers, we expect to be very, very close to the store.

[Theresa Imperial (Commissioner)]: And then there this retail store will also offer other engagements? It looks like there's tailoring and what else? What else? And there's the it looks like there's also fitting rooms as well.

[Cameron [last name unknown] (Program Manager, Nordstrom)]: Yes. Absolutely. So there's order pickup. So a typical journey for a customer for an order pickup, they would engage with one of our our staff members. They get usually they try on the item in store to see if it fits or if anything needs to be adjusted, see if they like it. And then they they can then either process the returns of the alterations and but to be that's like our core services that belong to the donations and the beauty cycle and that we've also mentioned. But we also have a history with our other locations of doing local pop up engagements. And so we do partner with local businesses. I think for there was a studio I think it was like a yoga studio. There wasn't a sorry. In Manhattan, there's been local businesses that we've engaged with where we have their business cards or they actually take over a a space within the store for a set period of time. Mhmm. And so we do have those engagements as well. And yes.

[Theresa Imperial (Commissioner)]: Yeah. Yeah. Just looking into the site, I mean, you know, there is a sales area. There's a stock room. I didn't see that much a little bit of the waiting area where, you know, I guess, people can wait.

[Cameron [last name unknown] (Program Manager, Nordstrom)]: Yes.

[Theresa Imperial (Commissioner)]: I see, like, a little portion of that. I guess, for me, I'm trying to understand really the intensity of the of the retail store in itself. However, you know, the thing is that I from what I'm real you know, from what I'm seeing, this is only about a 648 square feet, you know. So it's a small, you know, it's a small store. It is. And so so I'm also, you know, identifying whether how much of the intensity that will be coming here. Another thing that I'm also considering, and I'm glad that you reported that you're try you're partnering with parking areas. Can you can you mention which parking areas you have been identifying?

[Cameron [last name unknown] (Program Manager, Nordstrom)]: Mhmm.

[Theresa Imperial (Commissioner)]: And and looks like you're also in a conversation with MTA with that as well.

[Cameron [last name unknown] (Program Manager, Nordstrom)]: Correct. Yes. I've involved I've been in communication with the manager of the parking garages. So the first one that we are trying to prioritize, and there are spaces available that we confirmed as of last week was the annex garage. That's five minutes nearby. I think it's, like, 1650 Fillmore Street. Mhmm. And then there's also the Japantown Center, the main garage. It's in about a nine minute walk to the store. Obviously, we are trying to get the annex garage just because that's more convenient for our customers. And based on the demand of that, we can adjust our plans as necessary. But the current plan right now would be to purchase validated parking passes. So as customers go in to the store, assuming that they park there, we can, provide them with that service as well.

[Theresa Imperial (Commissioner)]: And in terms of the loading, I mean, this is a big, you know, this is a big issue that the community concerned. I see in the, you know, in the mapping, there is a bus stop in that block. And it looks like, as you mentioned, that deliveries will come in the midnight. Is it around midnight? Or what are the time

[Cameron [last name unknown] (Program Manager, Nordstrom)]: I do wanna clarify, because I recognize Jackie who's as she's going through the speech, there was a time constraint. So the overnight deliveries are specific to the Nordstrom store to store. So what because Nordstrom is a top market, we have special services that are provided to our customers in this area that will and so if someone orders an item during like, today, for example, we'll have a fleet of, delivery transportation partners, that Nordstrom runs that will deliver that product, like, tonight to be available in store in the morning for pickup. And so those deliveries occur overnight. In regards to our other, like, delivery partners, whether that's UPS, FedEx, so on and so forth, those would occur during the normal processes. And so but our deliveries would be on the same trucks that are already servicing Fillmore Street. So I am definitely, understanding and want to proactively work for those partners. So, obviously, there's been issues that are long standing in the, on Fillmore and in the area. So we will do our best to partner with both the Fillmore Merchants Association and the other community partners as well. But those would our deliveries would be on the same trucks as the existing trucks that are already serviced. So we wouldn't anticipate incremental delivery trucks in that regard.

[Theresa Imperial (Commissioner)]: Got it. Okay. Thank you for all that explanation. And, you know, for me at first, you know, I I you know, the the retail store, I mean, we I think we all recognize that the Fillmore is a neighborhood serving area, and and it's a very thriving area as well. But we also cannot deny the traffic congestion and also, you know, pedestrian safety at the same time. I do agree with, precedent. So in terms of, like, how MTA because Nordstrom is not the only store that is actually going to be affected with it. I think the MTA needs to have a play role, and I think the MTA needs to have a plan when it comes to delivery, also in the traffic congestion as well when it comes to especially to small businesses. So that is I don't know if the after this so after this with the planning, that will be the next step is to work with the MTA on this. And there is is there a policy right now with the MTA on in general, in terms of delivery and how they, in a way, mitigate the issues of delivery and traffic.

[Lydia So (Commission President)]: It's a little outside of my area of expertise, but I have to assume that the city has robust delivery and curbside management regulations. So I'm not speaking to enforcement, but in terms of the regulations existing, I am sure they exist.

[Unidentified Planning Department Staff]: Thanks. We obviously worked a lot with MTA when Parklets came about and how the street's managed. And you know, they'll talk to merchants associations and go work with merchants associations where there are conflicts with buses to manage curb lanes and add loading zones and whatnot. But I agree. Like, Nordstrom is not gonna cause there's there are issues, and MTA addresses those issues. Obviously, some some places more successful than others. But it certainly is an issue that MTA manages

[Theresa Imperial (Commissioner)]: to It's for us also us here in the planning too when we are you know, there are TDM. We have travel, you know, TDM plan. And I think MTA also need to need to step up. I feel like in this kind of I mean, you know, for us here in planning, we're talking about land use and, you know, and that also correlates with with the traffic management at the same time. And we've had here in the commission where where MTA will consider, alternative plans as well. So I I I think I

[Unidentified Planning Department Staff]: mean, they they look at corridors that are that are, you know, where there are conflicts and where there are bus lanes. But it's not you know, it's a it's a aggregate effect on a corridor. Post offices, dry cleaners, you know, grocery stores, all kinds of things have drop off and pick up that may cause additional congestion. You know, and like somebody said, the success of a corridor often kinda breeds conflict with with MTA and people double park. It's not one store that MTA is gonna say, this is why I'm gonna enter into Fillmore to take a look at it. It's the overall nature of the street and how transit may be conflicting with with with other uses. And so it's a big issue for him to

[Cameron [last name unknown] (Program Manager, Nordstrom)]: Yeah.

[Theresa Imperial (Commissioner)]: I mean, you know, as we are, you know, grappling with vacancy and, and at the same time, if, let's say, the con economy comes back and the traffic issue is always a concern in many residents, I think that's what my message is at this. And we cannot just rely I I think for me, it's like a collaborative effort of businesses, of the ACD agencies. And also and I think Nordstrom, you know and and I do praise Nordstrom in a way that you're trying to at least mitigate the behavior of people. Like, in in my other line of job, if we have events, we would advise on, like, which parking lots to take on and which transportation to take. These are kinda like the advisory that we would, you know, put up, you know, if we have those kind of events. So it these are kinda like, in a way, regular things to do by north you know, by businesses, and I'm glad that Nordstrom is stepping up on that as well. But I think there there is a bigger picture here about the traffic and the congestion and that bus delays. I'm I'm a big transportation rider. Like, bus delays affects my whole schedule and my whole day and my whole mood. You know? And so we want this to be you know, Filmer is such a vibrant street, but at the same time, the city needs to manage it well. And so I'm trying to understand for the planning role in terms of, like, the role with the MTA. And I wanna emphasize that, like, in terms of the the the Fed, the UPS, or federal trucking deliveries, that there needs to be more management from MTA. And I hope that your whoever is your community liaison also work with the planning staff and also planning and, you know, with the MTA on this. So that's something that, you know, I, you know, I the way I I see this, that Nordstrom Local is a small retail location. And also, unfortunately, you know, the retail economy has is changing a lot, you know. And and it is changing how we shop these days. And we as a city also need to understand and how to adapt in these changes. And so and yeah. So we also need to prepare for that. I'm you know, I I guess, you know, I'm I'm in support of this. You know, I I just hope that, you know, that you continue the dialogue with the community on this, especially in the traffic congestion area. And that, also, please keep abreast the planning staff and also MTA in terms of any traffic issues that are happening so that there can be plans be done with it. And also, I would, again, to continue having conversation with the communities. I think what the community wants is really for business, especially for a big retail, to be able to integrate with the community and be able to get to know with the community. So I'm I guess those are my, you know, my comments. I think community liaison is already part of the CUA, and that's gonna be adopted anyway. So, yeah, so those are my cons comments.

[Lydia So (Commission President)]: Thank you, commissioner. I mean, Piero. Commissioner Campbell?

[Amy Campbell (Commissioner)]: Thank you. I also wanna thank folks from the community for coming out. This is not an easy meeting to get to. It probably is worth mentioning though that there while there were a lot of folks here voicing concern, we did get many, many letters of support for this project. That was people that live in the neighborhood and small businesses in the Fillmore Commercial District. And those folks tend to not always show up to these. So I just wanna shine a light on that in support of the project. I echo a lot of my fellow commissioner sentiment around shifts in, you know, brick and mortar retail. The way we shop is evolving. It will continue to evolve. I think it's really gonna inform what we see come before us, both for our neighborhood commercial districts, also for downtown. I think we, we need to better anticipate and prepare for, you know, what that means for what's happening at the Ground Floor of our buildings. So I think staying open to that and I think staying open to a project like this is is good. The reality is the store has been empty for several years. I think my abundance outlook definitely anticipates this bringing more footfall to the neighborhood, and I think that's probably why we're seeing a lot of support from some of the local businesses around that too. So I echo the concerns around the the double parking. Hopefully, we can get some more meter maids. Do we probably don't call them that anymore. Parking enforcement officers. Seems like there's a lot of money to be made, up and down Fillmore. Right? Yeah. And then I also I think the parking voucher is, like, incredibly generous, as a biker, someone that would bike there because I am a Nordstrom shopper. I think it could be interesting. Maybe you could survey or, you know, monitor your customers over time and see if maybe there's a biking incentive kind of like or, you know, muni incentive that the zoo does something very similar where you get, like, a little discount for you know, if you ride muni. So if that ends up being, you know, something that your customers tend to do in lieu of parking. I'm not a fan of cars. So and then my only other thought was as a biker, just making sure there's enough bike loops. And I don't know if there is room for more. I noticed there's really just one right out in front of the store. So if there's more real estate for that, that would probably incentivize some bike bikers to come instead of cars. So otherwise, I'm in, you know, full support, and would make a motion to approve with conditions.

[Kansai Uchida (Director of Systemwide Planning, Caltrain)]: Second.

[Lydia So (Commission President)]: Thank you. And then with that, also, commissioner Williams has some comments.

[Gilbert Williams (Commissioner)]: Yeah. Just really quick. Commissioner Imperial touched on something I think it's not talked about enough. And that's the way SFMTA has gone about its business taking parking spaces away from our corridors. And I know this isn't really a part of plan use, but it's just notable. And and I'm just talking about my neighborhood and and every other neighborhood in San Francisco that has a that has a a corridor, a small business corridor, and storefronts, and and places that are frequently shopped. It's getting harder and harder for us to to shop there because there's there's less and less parking spots. And, you know, in in my neighborhood, Excelsior, we have a lot of hills. And it's not a flat part of town. And people are in their cars. They're in their vehicles. There's a lot of seniors that, you know, they go shopping, on Mission Street. And, you know, it it just seems there's some kind of a disconnect, between, like, the reality, of the the existing residents that live there and as what the the policies of SFMTA is is regarding parking and and understanding the, the way the city actually moves. Yeah. I know that my neighborhood, you can't find a parking spot because we have tons of cars. You know? And that's even multiplied because now, because of the the cost of housing, we have multiple families living in I'm just talking about my neighborhood in Excelsior, and and that are living in one home. And so we have these these conversing, you know, realities. Right? I'm all for, biking and and public transit. I think, you know, it's great. And we should be building that up. Having said that, the reality is we have thousands and thousands of cars, on our streets. And we have a lot of people, that just are using utilizing their vehicles. It's just the reality. And so, you know, I, I think part, part of this, discussion is around traffic, and, part of it, there's other issues, obviously, that the community was concerned with. It wasn't just parking. But again, I just wanted to kind of bring that up here at the commission. And I I think the city really needs to study all the changes that have happened are happening around around our street use, how it's affecting small business, and moving forward, if we're doing the right things. Because, you know, it's great to have ideas, and it seems that there's a lot of people with a lot of, you know, ideas that they think are are really great, but only time will tell. And just because you have the power to push your ideas doesn't mean that they're gonna work, and doesn't mean that they're gonna be a positive have positive outcomes on our communities. So I think, you know, again, I think, just wanted to put that out there, and I think it's worth it. We want to keep our city thriving, keep our small businesses thriving, and I think access has every indication. If there's good access to our small businesses, they're gonna get more business, and we're gonna keep growing our corridors. That's all I had to say.

[Lydia So (Commission President)]: Thank you so much for that. That's why MTA had a lot of pilot projects, but, not all of them are successful. And so we continue to that's why they have a lot of pilot projects.

[Jonas P. Ionin (Commission Secretary)]: So So there is a motion that has been second to approve this matter with conditions on that motion.

[Lydia So (Commission President)]: I mean, sorry. The do you does do you want to say anything more, the the community? I mean, you some of them you're I'm trying to just be friendly. If you still wanna say one or two things.

[Jonas P. Ionin (Commission Secretary)]: Are we reopening public comment

[Lydia So (Commission President)]: for No. I'm just asking them a question. If there's a I felt like, you know, when I was saying something or somebody was saying something, they were, they were a little bit animated. So I just wanted to see if there's clarifying

[Cameron [last name unknown] (Program Manager, Nordstrom)]: it.

[Lydia So (Commission President)]: If it's a muni related or traffic related question, I think it could be preserved to the SFMTA. But if it's related to the community, yes. Then if there's two okay. Can you

[Paul Wermer (President, Pacific Heights Residents Association)]: Just just just a comment. We have tried to work with SFMTA. You talk about pilot projects. You're not talking about the incompetently implemented yellow zones that SFMTA does not respond to unless the property owner asks for it. So we've got fundamental problems where you are passing stuff off saying, oh, SFMTA will fix it. They don't. Thank you.

[Lydia So (Commission President)]: Okay.

[Dika Reiner (Pacific Heights resident)]: I just wanna respond to the fact that we spent a lot of time as a community once we found out, and we did not know for a long time that this project was coming. The Fillmore Merchants Association is a very small merchants association. They did a survey of the community, but they only sent the survey to the paying merchants. We did our own survey. We went and talked to 33 different stores on Fillmore Street. 35, excuse me. Of the 35 stores, 33 were against this. Two had not heard of it, and they were but they were for it. They had most of the people had not even heard that Nordstrom's Local was coming in. Nordstrom's has not reached out to the community. We called the stores in Southern California. Every one of them has a parking lot behind them. They don't have a traffic issue. They all said that Nordstrom's local does not participate in the community and that they do not have a storefront that has any appeal. So we've spent a lot of time on this. We value our street. We all agree there's traffic problems all over San Francisco. But this is not a place where you're going to go and you're going to exchange your Lululemon. This is a place where you're going to drop off your package. It's a package store. It's not an exchange. They talk about every once in a while they'll have a pop up something, but they don't provide a service that isn't already in the community. And they're going to create no benefit. So our our feeling is is that we don't trust what they've said. We wanna see what happens. If you approve it, we're gonna have to stay on top of it. But this is not the kind of business that we think should be on Fillmore Street. Thank you for listening.

[Lydia So (Commission President)]: I understand. Well, you you have another one. Okay.

[Lisa Platt (District 2 resident; transit advocate)]: Sorry. With with all due respect, I totally appreciate the viewpoint that you all feel like the double parking is more traffic and transit issue. But the other businesses you cited didn't need a conditional use permit to be able to drive that traffic. The reason that it is part of conditional use is because it is under your purview. And so I ask you to consider that as actually part of your role because it is written as part of the conditions. The store in New York, the Street View, I know you asked about the traffic. It's on a four lane, one way road. The Google Street View in front of the store shows two double parked vehicles. One is parked in the bike lane. So that's a very different streetscape than what we are talking about here. So I ask you to reconsider your role based on the conditional use itself. I spend every week with SFMTA doing the same thing. And and I think you do play a very important role here, especially in sending the message that this needs to be something we consider. Thank you so much for your time today.

[Lydia So (Commission President)]: Thank you. Alright. Jonas?

[Jonas P. Ionin (Commission Secretary)]: Shall I call the question, commissioners?

[Lydia So (Commission President)]: Yes, please.

[Jonas P. Ionin (Commission Secretary)]: Oh, there's one more. Look at that. There's one more.

[Lydia So (Commission President)]: Okay. Well, I think this is

[Mary King (Bush Street Cottage Row resident)]: As I listen to this, this

[Lydia So (Commission President)]: is This is not a this is not a place for repeatedly stating the same thing. I was just simply honoring some of the people mentioning

[Mary King (Bush Street Cottage Row resident)]: that that were some people. Before you vote, check the numbers that they have. I think parking vouchers, that's a wonderful idea. But they said there's five parking lots and two parking structures or whatever. Where are they? I mean, I've lived in the neighborhood for a long time. I've driven around for twenty minutes looking for a parking place. So I just I think their numbers they also say they have 35,000 potential customers within walking distance. Woah. Okay. Does anyone check that out? I just think some of their numbers need to be checked a little bit. They're a little bit too high in the sky to be believed. Thank you. Thank you for letting me speak.

[Jonas P. Ionin (Commission Secretary)]: Anyone else?

[Mary King (Bush Street Cottage Row resident)]: Well,

[Lydia So (Commission President)]: you know what? I I need to emphasize that I wasn't asking public for general comment back. I was just genuinely asking questions of when they wanted to say something, I was wanted I was clarifying it. And so then I'm we're not violating any Brown Act here, that I was just giving them an opportunity to answer some of commissioner's questions. But that does not imply and encourage that ended up becoming another round of public comment. So we're ready to vote, and I wanted to make sure that we send a message to our businesses that San Francisco is welcoming you back and welcoming Nordstrom back, welcoming whoever else wanted to come back here and or, never been consider coming here because things are hard, come back here because we really need to adapt and change. Everyone do. And, I echo some of my fellow commissioners' concern about, the accessibility issues from people coming from different geographic locations. That is something that I would like to have some follow-up conversation with you too, Commissioner Williams. I got I got some thoughts that I can but that's not related to this item. So, okay. Thank you, commissioners. And, Jonas, we're ready to vote.

[Jonas P. Ionin (Commission Secretary)]: Pausing if anything else wants to okay. Commissioners, there is a motion that has been seconded to approve this matter with conditions on that motion. Commissioner Campbell?

[Amy Campbell (Commissioner)]: Aye.

[Jonas P. Ionin (Commission Secretary)]: Commissioner McGarry? Aye. Commissioner Williams? Nay. Commissioner Braun. Aye. Commissioner Imperial. Aye. Commissioner Moore. No. And Commission President Tsao.

[Lydia So (Commission President)]: Aye.

[Jonas P. Ionin (Commission Secretary)]: So moved, commissioners. That motion passes five to two with commissioners Williams and Moore voting against. Commissioners, that will place us under your discretionary review calendar for item 15, case number 2024 hyphen 007305, DRP for fourteen through sixteen thirtieth Avenue discretionary review.

[Trent Greenan (Staff Architect, Planning Department)]: Good afternoon, Commissioners, Trent Greenan, staff architect. The item before you is a public initiated request for a discretionary review of building permit application 2022Dot0314Dot9904 to restore five previously existing dwelling units, which involves a new third floor vertical addition, horizontal rear addition. And the scope also includes the addition of a two story detached state EDU in the rear yard. The project will abate enforcement case February for construction without a permit, including removal of the roof and an upper floor. The existing building is a category a. The historic resource is present and is built in nineteen o eight. The Doctor requesters, Gary Bishop and Charity Reed of 785 San Jose Avenue, Unit E, are concerned that the 3rd Floor addition will block views from their unit, obstruct light, and create privacy issues. In addition, will not conserve neighborhood character, both because of its design and height relative to surrounding properties. Their proposed alternative is to remove the upper floor and replace it with a roof deck. To date, the department has received no letters in opposition and 46 letters in support of the project, including seven from immediate neighbors. So our recommendation is that staff supports the proposal as it is both code compliant and consistent with the residential design guidelines. The primary concerns of the Doctor applicants regarding views being obstructed, character of the addition, and impacts to light in privacy. Maintaining views from residences is not protected by the residential design guidelines, and the vertical addition is set back from the pri primary building face, maintaining the predominant scale and character of buildings on the street. The subject property and adjacent homes on 30th Street back onto a parking lot present presenting no impacts in the rear, while impacts to light and privacy to homes on San Jose Avenue, including the Doctor applicants, homes are minimal. Therefore, we recommend not taking the Doctor and approving the project. Thank you.

[Jonas P. Ionin (Commission Secretary)]: Thank you. With that, we should hear from the Doctor requester. You have five minutes.

[Gary Bishop (Discretionary Review Requester)]: Good afternoon, commission. Sorry. I, if I if I stumble through this, this is the first time I've ever had a need to speak to a commission. And I'm a bit nervous. But please bear with me, and I will make my points as quickly as possible. We are the owners of 785 San Jose Avenue, Unit E, and my neighbor, Unit F. We are requesting this discretionary review because we believe it creates exceptional circumstances that standard code compliance does not address. We're not opposing the development. We're asking for reasonable modifications to protect the neighborhood character and livability. I'll present this in key points. Key point one is our privacy concern. The developer's architect, their drawings of the roof deck create sight lines into our kitchens, living rooms, and bedrooms. Probably very likely our bedrooms as well. The developer's subsequent proposal of adding a 42 inches wall along the deck does not seem to address our privacy concerns. Light reduction. Our kitchen and living room areas are dependent on light for early morning and afternoon light.

[Kathrin Moore (Vice President)]: We're on

[Gary Bishop (Discretionary Review Requester)]: the 3rd Floor with the backyard directly below us. We believe that the proposed addition of what is essentially I guess a 4th Floor or a 3rd Floor, I guess it depends upon how you look at it, will cast shadows and deprive us of light in our units that we currently have. We have looked at the light studies that were provided by the developer's architect. But we believe that those should be done by an independent party to ensure accuracy. The developer's light study also only tested 9AM and 3PM on two days of the year. And that's ignoring the breakfast time that we would spend as well as, well I'm sorry, but I defer to my prior request for an independent study. The developer's architect is also stating just in terms of scale and height that our building is currently only two to four feet taller than the proposed unit or that their building would be only two to four feet taller than our current building. But this is based on Google Earth estimate. And we believe that independent parties should conduct the height requirement or conduct a height survey just to ensure accuracy. We're basing everything on the developer's architect.

[Lydia So (Commission President)]: Sorry.

[Gary Bishop (Discretionary Review Requester)]: So there is this height addition, but there is also a depth addition and an ADU. So the bulk of this building will be substantially increased and will be the largest, most bulky building within a large area of the neighborhood. We believe that the scale fundamentally is incompatible with established neighborhood character. I do admit that we are concerned about our view being blocked. We have a very nice view of Bernal Heights from our living areas, which we appreciate. I also understand that these are not protected. However, these are landmark views that contribute to the Mission District character. And that's exactly what we believe a discretionary review is here to help protect. These views were part of our reason to purchase this home, which both my neighbor and my wife and I did within three years. We did that just three years ago. So I'm sorry. Just it's it's very difficult to have our views reduced while this building will gain views to for the developers benefit, not just in value. And it's not balancing the right to develop without disproportionately affecting the community. I understand that's my time. I understand your time is valuable. I could say more. I will rest. Thank you.

[Jonas P. Ionin (Commission Secretary)]: You have fifteen seconds left. That wasn't that was the pre timer.

[Gary Bishop (Discretionary Review Requester)]: I'm sorry. I just should mention that it is very tough to gain access to ownership in the city. I have lived in the city for twenty five years and have just become an owner. And to have our property value diminished because of this lack of view that is important to us and was a very important part to us making this decision to purchase this property.

[Jonas P. Ionin (Commission Secretary)]: Now that's your time, sir.

[Gary Bishop (Discretionary Review Requester)]: Thank you.

[Jonas P. Ionin (Commission Secretary)]: Okay. We should hear from the project sponsor. You also have five minutes. You have to unplug the mouse. It's the one USB port.

[Bob Nelke (Property Owner, 14–16 30th Avenue)]: My name is Bob Nelke, and I'm the property owner. And, I just want, wanna introduce myself and introduce, Dawn Ma of Q architecture. Who's been working on the property. When I purchased the property, it was a concrete building in very vacant and in very, very bad shape. I'm it was my intention to restore the property, which I, has taken a number of years. And it's my goal to provide housing, simple housing, not luxury units, regular moderate, moderate style housing that is safe and up to date. The building has been vacant for years, and rehabilitation is going to be a major investment. I am not a large bank or represent an investment term. It's simply myself. And I think this project will be a real benefit to the neighborhood. It's definitely in character with the neighborhood. The facade is not changed at all. And the building was five units when I purchased it. It's still five units with an ADU on the back. And I'll I'll turn it over to Dawn Ma right now.

[Dawn Ma (Q Architecture, Project Architect)]: Good afternoon, commissioners. My name is Dawn Ma from Q Architecture, the project sponsor. So the building, in question is usually made entirely out of cast in place concrete. That's including all the exterior walls, all the interior walls, and all the floor plates. Thereby earning its category a classification, sadly due to years of neglect. It's structurally compromised, and it does not meet today's building code. Our proposal is to preserve all the remaining concrete exterior walls, as well as the floor plates, as well as the entire front facade. While inserting a new co compliance structure within it, it is a very costly endeavor, like Bob's mentioned, but we are committed to make the best use of what's there. Our project is to provide moderate but quality housing option to the neighborhood. We are replacing previously five non compliant kinda SRO style type of layout, units to two to three bedrooms units, five units in the in the same building. We are designing for, families to take advantage of the existing neighborhood amenities, such as grocery stores, day cares, restaurants, and abundant public transportation, options all within one mile of walking distance. We do have a detached ADU in the rear yard that faces the Safeway parking lot, so we are moderately increasing the unit count from five to six. As mentioned in the Doctor review analysis prepared by the department, our proposal is fully co compliant with the planning code as well as the residential design guidelines. The highest proposed building height is at 38 foot two inches, which is below the maximum 40 height limit. The new 4th Floor is set back 10 to 13 feet from the street to reduce the visibility, and is similar at the back to reduce the overall bulk of the 4th Floor addition. We've eliminated a clear story, and we changed some guardrails to low walls. These adjustments were developed in direct response and feedback with the planning and preservation staff from whom with whom we've worked closely throughout the process. The current design reflects, we believe, a refined and responsive solution that meets both neighborhood and regulatory expectations. We understand the Doctor requesters and concerns about privacy lights and views. First of all, the project has no side facing windows, to their properties, only obscured glass blocks to let light in. We are very conscientious about privacy in open view areas like elevated decks and balconies. All the decks are purposely set back five feet from the property line, later added new, low walls to further respect the privacy from the neighbors. Second, a shadow study confirmed that there is very minimal, shadow impact in the request requester's property. It's worth noting that the Requester's building is currently the largest bulk in the block built almost to the rear property line. The building next to us is also taller than us. So while our 4th Floor addition is slightly taller than the neighboring building, it remains in harmony with the overall block. The 4th Floor addition is essential to the project and enables the two upper unit to be fully functional as well as meeting the only way to meet this, Planning Co's open space requirement for those units through the front and the back decks. So overall, the the project is measured, co compliant, solution to address safety, preservation, and housing needs

[Jonas P. Ionin (Commission Secretary)]: Thank you.

[Lydia So (Commission President)]: We respect

[Jonas P. Ionin (Commission Secretary)]: That is your time.

[Mary King (Bush Street Cottage Row resident)]: Time. Thank you.

[Jonas P. Ionin (Commission Secretary)]: You will have a two minute rebuttal. At this time, we'll open up public comment. Members of the public, this is your opportunity to address the commission on this item. You need to come forward. Seeing none, public comment is closed. Doctor requester, you have a two minute rebuttal.

[Gary Bishop (Discretionary Review Requester)]: I would just like to say that this was just noted as a two to three bedroom unit replacement. But there are four bedrooms and two of the units on their plans. That is just part of it. I would also just like to say that these do not seem to fit the needs of the neighborhood. There is a building right across the street on 30th that was sold. It's a single family unit or building. It was sold for $1.5 or over $1,000,000 It's a flip. It's now listed for $2,400,000 And it's sitting there empty. Nothing is being done. I believe these units could be substantially decreased in size. I believe that the top floor could be eliminated to preserve the character of the neighborhood, while still adding valuable units to the city in terms of housing that are needed. Thank you.

[Jonas P. Ionin (Commission Secretary)]: Project sponsor, you owe a two minute rebuttal if you need it.

[Dawn Ma (Q Architecture, Project Architect)]: I don't have anything else to add.

[Jonas P. Ionin (Commission Secretary)]: Very good.

[Dawn Ma (Q Architecture, Project Architect)]: I'm happy to answer any questions you have.

[Jonas P. Ionin (Commission Secretary)]: Very good. Then with that, commissioners, this matter is now before you.

[Lydia So (Commission President)]: Commissioner Lebron?

[Derek W. Braun (Commissioner)]: This is this is a block I'm very familiar with. That's the Safeway I go to. That's the Walgreens I go to. The pho restaurant that I go to. And I understand that first of all, I'll just say I I am very sympathetic to the requester for the purchase of your property. I had the view at the time. And with the character of some of the buildings on that block, it's a very consistent sort of height right now. And I could see why it would be a little surprising this would be changing. However, from my perspective, the development project is pretty modest and not really unusual in terms of the overall scale of it, any impacts it might be having on private views, which as has been noted are not protected. It is code compliant. It is under the height limit.

[Gary Bishop (Discretionary Review Requester)]: And

[Derek W. Braun (Commissioner)]: the visual impact from the street is pretty modest. The rear deck does conform with having side setbacks in order to draw it back a little bit in order to reduce any impacts on views into adjacent properties. I recognize there are some. It is a change. And from your perspective, I understand it recognizes not a positive change. However, from everything that I've seen in being on this commission, I just don't see any exceptional or extraordinary circumstances involved in this project. Thank you.

[Lydia So (Commission President)]: Commissioner Vice President Moore?

[Kathrin Moore (Vice President)]: Following up on what, Commissioner Brown just said, I would share the majority's observations, but also pointing out that I believe that this is a creatively, actually very well designed building, which I find interesting because it undertakes a densification which is so subtle that I think it provides exactly the type of units, the visual interest, and the type of quality that I would like to see in denser residential buildings. And in that sense, I do not think there's anything exceptional and extraordinary. I do regret for the Doctor requester that indeed, even if I am but if your empathy for your concerns, views are not protected, and it is not even anything that we could consider relieving it from not being exceptional and extraordinary. Thank you.

[Lydia So (Commission President)]: Commissioner Williams?

[Gilbert Williams (Commissioner)]: Thank you. I want to just add on to what my fellow commissioners said. It's very well done. I was surprised to hear that it's all cast and in place. That's very unusual for a residential building of that time period. But again, like my fellow commissioner said, you know, I kind of feel for my, the Doctor requester because I understand, your concerns and the things that, that, that, you know, why you brought this forward. Unfortunately, you know, there was only so, so much, we could do. I sympathize with your concerns, but, you know, this project is going to build five units, you know, that are necessary. Hopefully, they'll be affordable. At least a couple in there, you know, would be helpful to, to, keep, keep residents, around that are working class folks. I think it's a well done project. It I was looking through the plans, and they're pretty detailed for a project. You got a lot done and a little bit of space, so there's a lot of compact design elements everywhere with stairs and everything else. I know this block well. Like Commissioner Braun, you know, been through that block. As a matter of fact, I think I knew somebody lived there back in the '80s. I remember just going around there, and somebody lived on that bottom floor. You know, a friend or a friend of a friend. But, but anyway, again, sorry for, you know, there's no, I don't think there's going to be much that, at least from my perspective, for the Doctor. And thank you for coming. And it's hard. It's hard for me to sit here, because there's always going to be a concern. There's always, you know, unfortunately, with views and stuff like that and folks that spend a lot of money, investment, the biggest investment of their, probably, lifetime, there's going to be changes. And that's kind of, it's hard to balance that with new development that comes in. And so, here we are. Again, I think, you know, looking at this project, there's a lot of positives. It's adding a lot of homes that are needed. And so I know I already said that, but it's I'm tired of getting late. Sorry. Anyway yeah. So I'm I'm I'm in support of or I should say, not in support of the Doctor, unfortunately. Thank you.

[Lydia So (Commission President)]: Yeah. Commissioner Campbell?

[Amy Campbell (Commissioner)]: Thank you. I echo the sentiment here of not seeing the exceptional or extraordinary circumstances, so I am going to make a motion. But before I do that, I do just have one quick question, maybe for future Doctor, requesters. There was mention that they would have liked to have seen an independent study of, you know, around the shadows or independent study around the views not trusting, what the applicant paid to do. And in my mind, that would be something the Doctor requester would do because it costs money. Is that is that advice we give to Doctor requesters when that's the expectation or the the doubt around the the application itself?

[Trent Greenan (Staff Architect, Planning Department)]: Yeah. We we certainly don't require that it be done by another party. They're providing it voluntarily to, you know, shed light on the the circumstances. So, so it would be up to the the sponsor whether they wanted to have the study done by an outside consultant.

[Amy Campbell (Commissioner)]: But if the Doctor requester wanted an independent study done, then that would be on the Doctor requester to do that. Correct?

[Bob Nelke (Property Owner, 14–16 30th Avenue)]: Correct. Okay. Mhmm.

[Amy Campbell (Commissioner)]: Just for future Doctor requests.

[Jonas P. Ionin (Commission Secretary)]: We've had the review requesters actually submit independent studies that where they hire their own contractor or architect or whatever to to do a study.

[Amy Campbell (Commissioner)]: This building is the site for sore eyes. So I think the project, is going to bring not only some beauty to the neighborhood, but some much needed housing. So, good luck to you. And I'd like to make an a motion to not take the Doctor

[Sean McGarry (Commissioner)]: and approve the project. Second.

[Jonas P. Ionin (Commission Secretary)]: If there's nothing further, commissioners, there's a motion that has been seconded to not take discretionary review and approve the project as proposed on that motion. Commissioner Campbell?

[Theresa Imperial (Commissioner)]: Aye.

[Jonas P. Ionin (Commission Secretary)]: Commissioner McGarry? Aye. Commissioner Williams? Aye. Commissioner Braun? Aye. Commissioner Imperial? Aye. Commissioner Moore. Aye. And commission president Soh. Aye. So moved, commissioners. That motion passes unanimously seven to zero and concludes your hearing today.

[Lydia So (Commission President)]: Okay. Meeting is adjourned. Thank you. Thank you.