Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

I doubt it was that funny.

I doubt it was that funny.

Okay, good afternoon and welcome to the San Francisco Planning Commission hearing for Thursday, May 7th, 2026. When an item is called that you would like to submit testimony for, 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 30 seconds remaining, you will hear a chime indicating your time is almost up. When your allotted time is reached, there is a second chime and I will announce that your time is up and take the next person queued 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. And 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 Campbell? Here. Commission Vice President Moore?

Here.

Commissioner Braun? Here. Commissioner Imperial?

Here.

Commissioner McGarry? Present. And Commissioner Williams? Here. Thank you, Commissioners. We expect Commissioner So to be absent today. First on your agenda, Commissioners, is consideration of items proposed for continuance at the time of issuance. And to date, there are no items proposed for continuance, placing us under your consent calendar. And the matter listed here under constitutes a consent calendar is 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 this item 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 1, case number 2025-011827CUA1868, Lombard Street, conditional use authorization. Members of the public, this is your opportunity to request that this matter be removed from the consent calendar and considered under the regular calendar today or at a future hearing. You need to come forward. Last call. Seeing none, public comment is closed, and your consent calendar is now before you, commissioners.

Commissioner Braun.

Move to approve item 1 as proposed.

Second.

Thank you. Commissioners, on that motion to approve item 1 with conditions, Commissioner McGarry? Aye. Commissioner Williams? Aye. Commissioner Braun? Aye. Commissioner Imperial?

Aye.

Commissioner Moore? Aye. And Commissioner President Campbell? Aye. So moved, Commissioners. That motion passes unanimously 6-0, placing us under Commission Matters for item 2, the land acknowledgment.

The Commission acknowledges that we are on the unceded ancestral homeland of the Ramatushaloni, who are the original inhabitants of the San Francisco Peninsula. As the indigenous stewards of this land and in accordance with their traditions, the Ramatushaloni have never ceded, lost, or 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.

Thank you. Item three, consideration of adoption draft minutes for April 16th and April 23rd, 2026. Members of the public, this is your opportunity to address the Commission on their minutes.

Good afternoon, George Ashutosh. I have a couple questions about the minutes on the 23rd. The first thing is, are you going to have a hearing about navigating the websites, as the commission discussed?

That's not a question about the minutes.

Yes, it is. It's in the minutes. The commissioners suggested that they have a hearing or do a video on the 23rd, and I just wondered if you were going to have that hearing. And I have a further question or two, if that's okay with you. Anyway, that's my question. My other question is, I just discovered this morning that the building I has a new name. I signed up for building I for Noe Valley. It's called Agency Counter. Maybe if Ms. Wadi was here, she would know. But is my building I request for Noe Valley notification going to transfer over to this thing called Agency Counter? Is that part of the new website?

That's not a question about the minutes. Yeah, it is because she talked about... Just because it's referenced in the minutes doesn't make it relevant to the minutes. There are many things referenced in the minutes.

You mean I'm not...

These are general questions.

Well, that's a general question.

Okay, let's wait for general public comment. Are there any...

comments about the minutes yeah my comments are are those things going to happen and also my other comment about the minutes if i'll just try to sneak it in is the 40 000 units is there any information about the tenure of those that's what i'll stop now thank you thank you miss judas for stopping being cute last call for public comment on the minutes

Seeing none, public comment is closed. And your minutes are now before you, commissioners. The only addition I will make is that for April 16th, we found a spelling error that we corrected for someone's name.

Commissioner Imperial. Move to approve the minutes April 16th and 23rd.

Second.

Thank you, commissioners, on that motion to adopt your minutes. Commissioner McGarry? Aye. Commissioner Williams? Aye. Commissioner Braun? Aye. Commissioner Imperial? Aye. Commissioner Moore?

Aye.

And Commissioner President Campbell?

Aye.

So moved, commissioners. That motion passes unanimously 6-0, placing us under item 4 for commission comments and questions.

Commissioner Imperial?

Thank you. I just would like to inform the public that today will be my last day in the commission. I have served in the last six years in the planning commission, and it's been truly an honor TO BE IN THIS COMMISSION AND TO WORK WITH COMMISSIONERS AND THE DIRECTORS AND WITH THE STAFF WITH THE IMPORTANT PLANS THAT THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT HAVE WORKED ON. SO I JUST WOULD LIKE TO INFORM THAT AND I BELIEVE I'LL RETURN IT AS A MORE OF A PUBLIC JUNE 25 AS A GOODBYE. I WILL SEND MY FORMAL GOODBYE TO EVERYONE. But before that, also before I end my speech, I'd like, since this is my last day in the Commission, and I know in the future calendar that there will be a discussion about the impact fees and the inclusionary amendments, So I'd like to, for the commissioners and the department to also look into the budget and legislative analysis that was published, I believe that was yesterday, the BLA around the impact fees. And there were actually good recommendations, policy options on how to go about the changes in the impact fees and what can be the recommendations to go when there are going through changes on the impact fees, on the inclusionary, and how to track this, track the progress and the effect of it when it comes to housing production. So hopefully that can be part of a discussion on that day of. I know I will not be here by that time, but I'd just like to inform the staff and the commission as well. Thank you.

Commissioner Braun.

I just want to say to Commissioner Imperial, it's been a privilege serving with you on this commission. I've always admired your preparation and the depth of your exploration and your questions about items that come before us. I feel like I'm going to have more work to do because half the time you ask most of my questions if you go first. And so I just want to wish you the best in everything that you do and say thank you for all your service.

Commissioner Williams.

So first, are you coming back to say goodbye, or is this it?

Just to say goodbye, and this is it. Oh, this is it.

OK. Well, then I have to let it out then. Yes, Commissioner Imperio, you've been a role model for a lot of folks, including myself. And you You're someone that not only people in the commission, but from the south of Market to the Mission to a lot of neighborhoods have looked to you for guidance, to be an advocate. And I really, really appreciate that in you. You've been a voice for a lot of folks that don't have a voice. And so I think anyone who takes on that role is a hero to me. So I'm going to miss you. I know I'll be able to call you. But thank you for all the support that you've given me, you know, coming onto the commission. Myself, you've really helped in a lot of different areas. You made yourself available. But most importantly, when I think about you, I think about someone who's a community leader, who's an asset to San Francisco, not only to the Filipino community, but to a lot of different communities. And so I just really, really want to appreciate you and all the work you've done on this commission. It's not easy. It's a lot of hard work. And you've served with honor and dignity. And I really, really just really respect you for that. Thank you.

Commissioner McGarry.

I want to wish you well. It's an honor to know you. You truly are a steward of the community as a whole, not just your own community, but basically the city and county of San Francisco. It's an honor to see that. It's inspirational to see that. And we're going to miss you. And I wish you well on everything you do. And come back and see us. Stay in touch. Thanks.

Vice President Moore.

I actually wanted to say goodbye to you on the 25th. But I will thank you for your courage, for your tenacity, for your depth of knowledge, sharing your real-life experience, which is indeed what matters here at this commission. And in the end, I want to thank you for being a commissioner with a heart. Thank you.

I'd like to pile on here, too, echoing everything the commission has commented on. Thank you for your service. You've been on this commission six years, every Thursday for six years, with the exception of the August recess and the occasional trip back to the Philippines. What I love about the commission is that we don't always have to agree and that we all bring a very different perspective. And I really valued your voice in this conversation. You're a fighter. And I think we are all collectively going to miss that perspective that you brought every Thursday to this conversation. And so will the community. You always had the community front of mind. And I know affordable housing is also something that you're always thinking about first and foremost. And I know that your endeavors after this are going to continue to fight for that and find a way to bring that to the city. And I wish you all the luck. And thank you in advance for continuing the fight.

Before we move on, I will add on as well. Commissioner Imperial, when you said six years, I couldn't believe it. I had to look it up. And indeed, your appointment date was February 12, 2020. I can't believe it's been 20, I mean, 26 years. It's been a pleasure working with you and having you on the commission. So thank you.

Can the public speak or no?

We don't take public comment on this, but you can add on under general public comment. Ms. Shudis, please. Please, Ms. Shudish. Department matters, item five, director's announcements.

So I will. Good afternoon, commissioners. I will start my comments in the same place. Oh, sorry.

Commissioner Williams, I saw you were there. I didn't know if that was.

I'm sorry, Director Phillips.

I did have some other.

Can you turn your mic on?

I did have another comment. I was taken off guard by Teresa's announcement today. But I wanted to let the commission know that I know everyone has been aware that we've been receiving several letters from St. Thomas More School, the SF golf course project that was before us about a year ago or so. And I took the opportunity last Thursday, there wasn't a meeting, to visit it myself to put my eyes on the site and try to understand what the concerns were there at the site. And I want to report back that I was actually surprised at what I saw. Acres of just dirt, heavy machinery, and that went all the way. The machinery and all the construction went all the way to the property line, the zero property line. And the building was literally 10 feet away. And that isn't what I recall when it came before us. I recalled some setbacks and some other things. I know it went through here, and it got appealed to the Board of Supervisors. And so there were some changes. But anyway. Noticeably, there was a lot of dust in the air. The windows for the school on the side that I looked at are closed because of the particulate in the air. And they showed me other evidence noise pollution at 92 decibels, a big earth breaker that broke a slab that was like right next to the school and they recorded it. There's some really concerning things going on there. And I could see why all these letters are coming in. I know this commission doesn't have any recourse to address that, but I wanted to make it public and speak on it because I think it's something that we need to pay attention to. But more than that, unfortunately, there was another school Marshall Elementary, that is right next to a construction site as well on 16th and Cap. They're complaining about the same issues that St. Thomas More at the same exact time. It's the big affordable housing development there on 16th. And they're complaining about the same issues. And they've been complaining to all the proper channels, to the building department, to the health department. And apparently they can't get relief for what's happening there. So I think, in my mind, the controls that are in place, the standardized controls to mitigate dust, to mitigate noise, in that condition, right next to an elementary school where there's small children playing, isn't enough. It's obvious to me that it's not enough. And so my question is, how do we rectify this? I know that it's an isolated incident that these two schools, these two elementary schools with small children right next to construction sites don't happen all the time. But at the same time, I think because they haven't gotten any recourse and because, for whatever reason, the system seems it's failing them, that it should be highlighted. And there should be maybe a change in the building code or something. We need to address it. I just wanted to say that publicly. I had a brief conversation with the city attorney, and well, I mentioned it. And so I'm going to write some ideas down. And if anybody in the commission feels any kind of way about it. Maybe we could, through the proper channels, see if we can do something about this. Again, when I went into the St. Thomas School, on the ground level, 10 feet away from these huge earth movers and everything, are preschool kids. And unfortunately, they're on the ground floor, right next to the construction site. It's literally 10 feet away. I didn't have my tape measure out. But as a carpenter, I can assess how many feet it is. And so they're breathing in all this dust. and all this other stuff. God knows what's being done there, but obviously it's impacting the school. I don't know what else to say other than it's an issue I think that deserves some attention and hopefully By me bringing it up, it'll get some more attention. So thank you.

There should be dust and noise controls. I'm wondering if they're being enforced. There is... There is water that basically should be sprayed down at a certain time for any and all construction. It would appear that there may not be adequate supervision of that. So I would suggest, I don't know who the general contractor is, but we could reach out to the general contractor or the client, the golf course, and see that there is water being sprayed. Certainly, if there's any machinery, there should be. There should be a water truck. If the site is truly acres, then basically there should be an in-motion water discharge, I think is the term. But there should be rules on that. There is standards and there's specs that it should be adhered to.

Okay.

Okay. All right, Commissioners, if there's nothing further, we can move on to Department Matters for Item 5, Director's Announcements.

Good afternoon. First off, a couple of things happening in the planning world this evening, so for the public and the commission. We have our Fillmore Community Action Plan, which has been underway for several months, has a workshop tonight focused on housing. We've been focusing on topic areas of economic development, streetscape. Tonight is housing, so we're looking forward to that session. Overall, the Fillmore Community Action Plan work has been a really amazing way to connect with a community that has seen a lot of harm and a lot of change. And I think while there are always bumps in working with the community, especially we have a committee of advisors there as well, we're learning from the community and adjusting as we go. So it's been a really great process, I think, learning in both directions. We also have a community forum on landmark designations in District 7 happening tonight. That's a virtual meeting. Both of those start at 5 PM. Secondly, I wanted to update you all on our budget. You helped endorse our budget so it could move forward in the process in February. The mayor released his proposed budget for all departments, including ours, on Friday. And what that resulted in was probably about a $20 million increase from the budget that you saw in February, a much larger budget. And the primary reason for that is the continued merger of planning and DBI integration into one department. We'll be seeing another 40 to 50 employees coming over from DBI, primarily their administration, legislation, comms, and disaster oversight groups coming to planning and a corresponding work order from DBI to pay for those employees resulting in the increased budget. So just wanted to let you know that, particularly see that budget and you're like, huh, that looks almost 20% larger than what we saw in February. That's the primary reason for that change. We had an opportunity to go over those changes with our staff in our all-staff meeting last week. So I think folks are feeling on board, but anyone that has any specific questions can feel free to reach out to me or the leadership team. I'LL JUST NOTE HERE, WE'LL REACH OUT TO YOU ON YOUR QUESTIONS ABOUT THE LAND USE DATABASE. WHEN WE SPOKE AT COMMISSION A COUPLE WEEKS AGO ABOUT CHANGES TO THE WEBSITE, IT WAS PRIMARILY JUST AN UPDATE TO OUR LAND USE DATABASE, NOT TO THE WEBSITE OVERALL. And I'm not aware of anything changing on Building I, but we'll find out and we'll get back to you individually. And then finally, it was, do I start with this? Do I end with this? I wanted to offer Commissioner Imperial a thank you from our entire staff. um it's uh they've had the honor of working with you longer than i have and i know it's rippled and felt across the department it's a big loss particularly for our community planning and community equity teams where who i know you've worked with very closely on so many initiatives over the years some words that i think our team has expressed about you in the past your inquisitiveness your thoughtfulness, your thoughtful prodding, and your listening. And that's often an unheralded skill, but really a huge skill, have been a huge benefit to all of us. So we've learned from you from that process as well. Your exit came up too fast. I think, like many of your fellow commissioners, I was unprepared for your announcement today, even though I knew it was coming. Hopefully, we have some planners coming up with some planning department swag so that we can get you before you go and you can't forget us. But it's been a real honor, so thank you very much. And those are my announcements.

Seeing no questions for the Director, we can move on to Item 6, review of past events of the Board of Supervisors. I don't have a report from the Board of Appeals, but the Historic Preservation Commission did meet yesterday. Last week, the Land Use and Transportation Committee heard an informational item on the transportation and economic development on Market Street. and the full board adopted 13 landmark designation initiations within District 3. The 1O ordinance passed on second read and the SB 79 passed on its first read. This week there were no planning department items at the Land Use and Transportation Committee. However, the full board passed SB 79 in its second read. The Historic Preservation Commission did meet yesterday and two items may be of interest to the Planning Commission. The first being that the Architecture Review Committee considered the 1 through 25 Montgomery Street property, the landmark building for exterior and interior renovations. They were shorthanded at the ARC and requested that it come back. for additional comments and review by the AARC before it went through the full Historic Preservation Commission. At the Historic Preservation Commission hearing yesterday, they adopted a recommendation to amend the landmark designation of landmark number 61, known as the Sylvester House, to essentially rename the landmark as the Blackatter Sylvester House, recognizing the award-winning restoration and stewardship by the former owner, Linda Blackatter. If there are no questions, commissioners, we can move on 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 15-minute limit, general public comment may be moved to the end of the agenda.

Thank you, Commissioner Imperial, for everything you've done. And I wish you everything wonderful going forward for you. So thanks for everything.

Comments now.

Perhaps it's silly to keep talking about the demo calcs now that the definition has been revised and the commission has lost the legislative authority to adjust them further. I will concede that the revision is an improvement, but I still believe that the value should have been set at removal of 40% or more of the elements. That definition would be better for preserving existing sound housing. This has been reinforced by the three examples in the email sent on May 4, three projects that should have been reviewed as demolitions just like so many others. Also, there was a May 1 article in the SF Standard that caught my attention about the single family home on Monterey Boulevard, the site of an unspeakable tragedy that nevertheless sold for $500,000 above the asking price. In the article, some of the author's concerns were, that what should be a family starter home was too expensive for most families, that the city is too protective of older housing stock, and that the planning process takes too long. So in the context of the office concerns, as well as the three examples sent in the email, as well as all the other Noe Valley projects, here is the following. It was policy 2.1 and policy 3.4 in the 2014 housing element to preserve starter homes. But as happened in Noe Valley specifically and in D8 generally, that policy was thwarted, even though the policies were to preserve, quote, naturally affordable housing types. And major alterations that should have been reviewed as demolitions happened shows that the city wasn't and still isn't, quote, too protective of older housing stock. And the approval process can take years, but more often than not due to developers submitting incorrect information or not complying with the rules or sitting on permit applications for years. But here is my constructive criticism. Going forward with the state mandates and the rezoning, please review project applications with rigorous scrutiny and the mindset of a preemptive enforcement. preserve flats, protect rental units and tenants, make sure that there are no UDUs, and put Code Section 317.2, or the TPO, into action. Thank you very much. Here's my 150 words for the minutes. And thank you again, Commissioner Imperial. I wish you everything good. And thank you for all your service. You've been really inspirational to so many people. So thank you.

Last call for general public comment for items not on today's agenda. Seeing none, general public comment is closed. And we can move on to your regular calendar, commissioners, for items 7A and B. Case numbers 2018-007883, PCA-02, and PHA-02. Amendment 2, Balboa Reservoir Special Use District Planning Code Amendment. And for property 11, Frida Kahlo Way for the Balboa Reservoir Development Block C and D, approval of a major modification.

Thank you, Jonas. I would like to first introduce Supervisor Melgar, who would like to make some comments about the project before we start our presentation.

Hi, Planning Commission. First, I want to say my utmost thanks and gratitude to both Commissioners Moore and Imperial for the service. Of course, Commissioner Moore and I served on this commission together for many, many years. And I think very fondly of our time as colleagues. We had some really good conversations and memories. And Commissioner Imperial, thanks for taking over my seat. I was so grateful that you did because you have been a stellar commissioner, as Director Phillips said, inquisitive, curious, and kind. So I am so grateful that you gave all of this time and effort to the city and county of San Francisco and to this issue specifically. So thank you. With that, I am here in support of this item. As you know, the Balboa Reservoir is the largest development that has happened in District 7 in decades. They are right now working on the infrastructure. If you go by Ocean Avenue, you see the cranes. All of this is happening. Just the construction alone has had a tremendous positive influence on the businesses on Ocean Avenue. All the small businesses are seeing an uptick in foot traffic on that block for construction workers and people who are there. It'll be a really good addition to the neighborhood when we work out all of the infrastructure stuff, including Muni and everything that goes with it. I have supported the development team and OEWD in the work that needs to happen to make this actually work. Some of what is being involved in front of you is a rejiggering of the timing of when things are going to happen when we initially entitled this project the market rate housing was going to happen first and then the affordable housing we ended up turning it around doing what we could i am extremely grateful to the team for being nimble on their feet and creative and collaborative always communicative with the neighborhood they have had multiple sessions on unity plaza with the greater neighborhood so that people could stay informed as to any design changes and also the timing of the project so i i'm hoping that i can cut a ribbon before i'm out of office and nora tells me that that's going to happen and i'm actually really grateful so we have renamed streets we have made streets we are ready to go on this project and it'll be a very very welcome addition to the neighborhood, to have new neighbors who can support the business corridor, take Muni, be good neighbors to City College, and overall add to our housing stock. I'm particularly grateful for the addition of educator housing, which we sorely need. So I'm just here to put in a good word, and I encourage you to approve this project so that we can get it done by the time that I'm out of office. So thank you so much.

Again, thank you, Supervisor Belgar. Good afternoon, Commission, or President Campbell, fellow commissioners, Jeff Horn, planning department staff. Sorry. The item before you today is, there's two items before you today, a request for a planning code amendment to modify the Balboa Reservoir Special Use District and for major modifications from design standards of the Balboa Reservoir DSGs and SUD for the vertical development application of block C and D. The Planning Commission approved the Balboa Reservoir design standards and guidelines, established the Balboa Reservoir SUD, and approved the overall Balboa Reservoir project on May 28, 2020. The project entails an approximately 17.6-acre site located north of Ocean Avenue Commercial District, west of the City College of San Francisco's Ocean Campus, east of Westwood Park neighborhood, and south of Archbishop Riordan High School. The site is also known as Balboa Reservoir. The primary project elements for the overall project include 1,100 residential units, of which 50% would be affordable, community serving uses, including a community room and child care facility, publicly accessible public open space, including Central Park with approximately two acres in size, and new pedestrian and bicycle connections to adjacent neighborhoods. The Balboa Reservoir project began construction in late 2025, with overall site grading and installation of the site-wide infrastructure and public streets in progress. Vertical construction is underway, with construction started in March of this year on Building E, the project's first 100% affordable building. And construction is anticipated to begin later this month on Building A, the second 100% affordable building on the site. Pursuant to about the SUD, the Planning Commission's action is required to review and approve vertical design review applications that seek one or more major modifications, which is partially why we are before you today. The project proposes a approximately 250,000 square foot, 243 dwelling unit residential building located on a single parcel. This parcel consists of both block C and D within the project. The 243 units would consist of approximately 18.5% studios, 35% one-bedroom units, 44% two-bedroom units, and 2% three-bedroom units. On block C, the building would be six stories tall at a height of 65 feet. And on block D, the building would be five stories tall at a height of 54 feet and six inches. Block C consists of lobby and mailroom, co-working space, garage with 24 parking spaces, and 138 class one bicycle parking spaces. building services, and DUAN units on the upper floor. Block D consists of residential units, building services, and an accurate courtyard at the ground floor level with residential units above. And block C and D would be connected at floors three, four, and five by a bridge element containing residential units. This would be over the Brighton Paseo open space. Design review application for the vertical development of block C and D is compliant with the Balboa Reservoir DSG document and most of the building standards and requirements listed within. The project deviates by more than 10% from the dimensional standards. in the SUD and DSG pertaining to these specific standards. Permitted uses, minimum setbacks, setbacks at the upper floors, opening to interior courtyards, entries to the ground floor units and location, and spacing of stoops. required materials, and the off-street loading requirement within the SUD. The project also requests minor modifications in regards to the required amount of open space, height of the ground floor, common areas, service areas, materials, and building base zone, and the location of the garage. The planning code amendment would allow for the development of the building connection over the over space connecting block C and D. The amendments to the code would include adding language to figure 24.90-1 to allow for uses above this public open space. Currently, they're only permitted below per the original design intent of the SUD. Also amend table 249.90-1 to permit residential uses within block J, one of the open space blocks, and to figure 249.90-2 to establish a height within block J, where currently no height exists. The requested modifications meet the intent of the planning code, section 24.90, and the DSG requirements on balance, and further the development of a 243 residential unit building with public open spaces. The project will develop an underdeveloped site within a well-resourced portion of the city with a desirable residential development that would provide housing units and publicly accessible recreational amenities. The department also finds the project to be necessary and desirable and compatible with the surrounding neighborhood and not be detrimental to persons or adjacent properties within the vicinity. No public comments have been received on the project. Therefore, staff recommends the commission adopt a recommendation of approval of the planning code amendment and approve the request for modifications for the development application for block C and D. This concludes staff's presentation. I'm available for any questions. Also joined today by Jonathan Cherry, manages implementation of the Balboa Reservoir project for OEWD. Thank you very much.

Project sponsor, you have 10 minutes.

Thank you, commissioners, for having us here today. And truly thank you to Jeff, Jonathan, Supervisor Melgar, and her staff in your continued support in getting us here. It's truly been a group effort and a real partnership with the city. And we're really grateful to be under construction and moving this project along. I'm Nora Collins, the Vice President of Development at Avalon Bay. And along with Bridge Housing and Pyatoc, we've been working on this project since 2016. As some of you remember, we completed our entitlements here in 2020. And since then, we've been working diligently on infrastructure design, and most recently with Bridge Housing finally breaking ground on their first affordable building. Over the last six years, Avalon Bay has been continuing to look for a path forward for our buildings and are excited to share that plan today. We'll mostly be presenting on the CD block, but our plan is to build buildings C, D, G, and the park, and are looking to start construction next year. With that, I'll pass it along to Peter, who can talk a little bit more about our buildings.

PETER WALLER- Great. Thank you, Nora. Thank you, commissioners. I'm Peter Waller with Pyatoc Architects. Are you seeing our slide show on your screen? So I might need a little help with that.

NORMA HANSON- There we go. Now we can.

PETER WALLER- Now you can. OK. And I don't think I have it on presentation mode. Is it large enough? NORMA HANSON- Looks good. PETER WALLER- Don't want to miss any details. And then I'm going to assume I just advanced the slides from right here.

Or Nora will actually answer for you.

So good. OK, great. Thank you, Nora. So I'm going to make sure I know which slide we're on. This will be very brief. I'm going to run through a version of essentially what was in our entitlement package, and then glad to answer questions about the specifics. Thank you very much, Jeff, for his good staff report and summary on this. So we're going to focus really, you've gotten kind of an overview of this site from Nora. And we're really going to focus on blocks C and D, which are obviously before everyone today. So we go to the next one, Nora. Next slide. Great, thank you. And so I think everyone knows the basic location of this site. The whole design process, the community process, has been a great collaboration with the neighborhoods, the stakeholders, City College, Ocean Avenue. And the outcome of this project is really a result of that. And if we go to the next slide. So I think this slide shows some of the companion projects that are going along at the same time. The affordable projects, wonderful. They've been able to go first at Block E that has been in front of you and Block A, both those under construction. And then, of course, city colleges advancing these really important projects, including the Diego Rivera Theater. Next slide. And this is all under construction. If folks have been by this site, it is amazing to see the backbone infrastructure, the roads, construction starting on blocks E and A. Next slide. And then we had a chance to get back in front of the neighbors. We've had a long, productive conversation. They are generally very happy to see this moving forward. Glad to talk about more detail of that. And then briefly on the design, this is the ground floor of C&D. Basically following the original concept design, they flank this paseo that leads into the park, lined with the community uses, the amenity spaces, with a small garage behind that. Each block has a courtyard. And the courtyard on D has this nice aspect that it really opens up to the park. The other thing that we've been able to do here is relocate that garage. Previously, there was a garage underneath both blocks. It went all the way under the Paseo. That was allowed in the DSG. We found a better way to do that, concentrating most of the parking in Block G. So just a small garage here. So this project really sits closer to the ground, more related to the park in a nice way. Next slide. And then at the upper floors, you see the blocks together. You see that sort of serpentine. A floor plate that really opens to the park, produces a lot of great corner units so people are connected. And then one of the major modifications we're requesting that Jeff outlined was this connecting bridge between the two blocks. There's two important things for us. One, we get a few units out of that, nine units. And we were down a few units because we took a whole story off these buildings to make them more cost effective. So getting a few units back is critical. But then also allowing the building internally for residents on the D block to be able to get to the elevators and the services and so on on the other side. And then we think we're also, if we go to the next slide, able to make this into a really kind of lovely gateway, completely open, completely public, but frames that passageway. And you see here, looking back from the park at the site, you see how those two buildings open up to the park. You see that three-story element framing it in the background there, the active uses along the way. And then if you go to the next slide, you see it from the other side, where if you're coming in from Wisteria or ultimately from Ocean Avenue through Brighton, Paseo, you get this framed element linking the two buildings on either side. Next slide. Just looking at some of the corners, the prominent corner at Wisteria and Mayor Edwin Lee. Avenue, just a sculpted, straightforward form of very fine-grained material, shingles, and then this strong landscape planting at the base. Next slide. And then at the opposite side, where we're closer to the townhomes, Westwood Park, the buildings step down in scale. We have that strong brick base wrapping around, and then this canted roof, kind of mansard style. that we have come up with as a way to soften the character of these buildings. Next slide. We have just a couple more here. The materials, I think you've gotten a sense as we go around, we really emphasize the strong base, all brick clad, use some metal siding in key areas, and then the shingles, cement board shingles, where we wanted a little extra texture, and then a good quality stucco, recessed windows, pretty straightforward palette, but all very good quality. Next slide. And then briefly on the height conversation, just to remind everybody, we are a full story lower than what is allowable on both blocks, but you can see the buildings still maintain that stepping quality from the City College side down towards the neighborhoods. Next slide. Briefly on Block G, which is not in front of the commission today, but is going through an administrative review and approval, just some minor modifications. We designed these blocks together. And so Block G is important for the park because it's kind of the headboard. It's across the street, but visually, it really creates the endpoint for that park, frames it. We wanted it to have a campus-like quality to emphasize this as a public park. So that whole facade is brick-clad where it faces the park. Next slide. And then where it turns the corner, you see these kind of mansard elements reintroduced. So that ties back to the original block, or excuse me, to block C and D, so that they're cousins, but they each have their own character. And you can see there in block G where we tucked that garage in between the residential units, which was cost effective and concealed the parking.

So I think we'll pause there.

Glad to answer questions. And thanks again for hearing us out.

Thank you. If that concludes sponsor presentation, 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. Last call. Seeing none, public comment is closed, and this matter is now before you, commissioners.

Vice President Moore.

I just have to jump into this, because I'm so excited about seeing this project. We rarely have the opportunity to see a project through more intense examination of design come back and ask for modification other than I need to add more storage, I need to add like 100 more units in order for it to pencil out. This is exactly the opposite. A real careful look and a real kind of like looking at the essential is creating a project which I think is better than it was before. One, I think it has the incredible luxury to teach all of us that five stories is the prevailing height of high density housing, mostly all across Europe. Old buildings, new buildings, and they all use similar tools than what this particular project does. The mansard roof, to add variety, to add scale, to break the relentlessness of the five story block. The ability to do what I think the architect called a serpent building. by which it is not just soldiering buildings next to each other, but creating surprise, discovery, variety. When you look at it, you can point to a person saying, I live in that building, because there's enough ability to orient yourself. Breaking bulk, breaking scale with variety of materials, window treatments, et cetera. So everything, and I have to admit, I had the opportunity to have a meeting, a short meeting yesterday with Ms. Collins and Mr. Waller, and just the ability to quietly listen to a presentation, understand the project and appreciating it, made me just want to jump in and share with you the excitement of what's being done here. I think this project overall is remarkable, and I think the commission has really worked on this hard for a long time. And it was not always like a tug of war, but community, supervisor, et cetera, supported something which evolved over time, together with the very wise decision of starting with developing the affordable buildings first. I mean, that for all of us is really the proof of the pudding. And so I am so excited. I'm not even quite sure how to properly express myself, but I'm in full support with the legislation, with the modifications, with all and everything, because I only started to read about the modifications once I understood what this project really has to offer. Then everything kind of falls in place, saying, why not? The modifications, as they're spelled out, are only a tool to achieve a good project. So if with other thoughtfully designed projects, of which there are quite a few others, particularly PeerTalk has also Schlager Lock still hanging out there somewhere. They were the architects of that project. I think we can only win when, because I think it's in the maturity of developing good design where all of us ultimately will have something better. And I think everybody should be delighted about that.

enough said i am in full support thank you commissioner braun i want to start with just one question before i get into my comments and that is um the the addition of sort of the three floor um space that is above the paseo that leads into the reservoir park now I don't really have any concern with that except for one, which is in looking at the project, I wonder or worry if that passageway might read as being more private than is actually the case. And that it will be very, I would like it to be very clear that that is a publicly accessible paseo and very welcoming and inviting. And I'm curious, maybe it's a question for Mr. Waller, but what steps have been taken or could be taken to ensure that the space reads as a public space?

Yeah, thank you for the question. Yeah, it's certainly critical. And that goes right to the original concept for the whole project that we were linking from Ocean Avenue all the way through to the park. So that's been an important aspect of it. And the things that we have done in the plan, and we're glad to have further conversation about it, obviously we kept that still quite wide. The width is more than 40 feet as it passes through there. And then the columns come down. to support that, even that's 20 feet wide. But then the actual passageway that we've worked out, the actual walkway with GLS, who's the landscape architect, is a very wide pedestrian way that just makes it very clear that you've got a wide street crossing and a wide passage that goes right through there. And we really emphasize that with paving to just be like, well, that's clearly the public way right straight through to the park. Landscaping, lighting, all those elements. And of course, there's no fencing. There's no gates. There's nothing there that would even allow somebody to close it after hours. So I think we've gotten to a point where it will be very inviting. It is, in a way, the important design challenge here. So I appreciate the question. But I think the framing and the invitation in some ways will actually make it a more intimate passageway. But I think particularly what JLS has done with that walkway reinforces the public quality.

OK, thank you. I appreciate the response. And I would just encourage that if the designs are being refined further, that there's consideration given to how to keep thinking about making that a really inviting entry point for pedestrians to the park. um but that that being said that was my only question uh i this has my my total support as well i'm excited with i'm excited by the fact that affordable housing is going to be moving forward uh first uh one way or another that it was in the mix and that now we are moving this forward before the rest of the development i hope we can unlock the rest of the development as well if conditions change in the near future You know, I can see there's a nice balance being struck here of trying to achieve some sort of cost efficiencies with the building, taking down half of it that's just, you know, type 5 wood frame construction probably, or all wood frame construction either way. And then, you know, there's some difference in the materiality of the facades. And yet, to me, there's been other steps taken that really still make this a very appealing and attractive building. And I can also see with the deletion of the entries and stoops in this, I appreciated that one had me concerned when I first read that, but then seeing the designs and seeing how they were replaced with a lot of private porches and seeing the decks that are on the rest of the building, I think it still has good sort of visual access to and from the street, good eyes on the street kind of perspective and still access to the outdoor and open space. So that's really great to see. I'm very excited about seeing the continuation of Brighton right through to this public park. The project off of Ocean there, it's just been a dead end for a while and whenever I see it I always saw that potential and how exciting it could be and it's really great to see this coming to fruition now. So this has my full support, like I said. And I'm actually just going to jump the gun a little bit here and make a motion to recommend approval for item 7A and to approve item 7B.

Second. Commissioner McGarry.

I'd agree. This one's a long time in the making. If Ocean Avenue itself is phase one, this would be like phase two behind it. 2008, I think, if I remember. But it's been an open space for a long time, and it's been a desolate open space, and it It just makes the car park in City College look that much worse for a long time. You're creating a village here. It truly is beautiful. The scale seems to be really, really well done. The entrance in the park, it actually softens it. I think it'll protect the park as well. It'll take that wind tunnel out of it. And building E is going first, and A is shortly behind it. I think it's just phenomenal that out of 1,100 units, the first 287 are affordable. So it's commendable. It's basically what we should be doing. We should have one of these going in every district in the city. And it's a great example of what we should be doing around the city. And it has my full support.

Thank you. Commissioner So could not be here, but she sent along her thoughts that she asked that I share. This project represents the kind of transit-oriented community-focused housing our city needs. I especially want to commend the sponsor, Avalon Bay, for prioritizing larger housing units for growing families, which are critically needed if we want families to remain in San Francisco. I also want to recognize Avalon Bay's proven success along the Ocean Avenue corridor and their consistent attentiveness to neighboring communities over time. In addition, I would like to acknowledge the PayTalk architect and design team for centering quality community design with careful attention to open space, pedestrian experience, and neighborhood connectivity. The Balboa Reservoir project is an important opportunity to deliver much needed housing in a transit rich location and for those reasons, I am proud to support this item modification. I have a few things to say as well, but Commissioner Williams, do you want to go ahead?

Sure. I can't top anything that's been said. There's been some wonderful compliments to the project, and rightly so. I live in the Excelsior, so I was... been a part of the community that has been pushing, that was the original. community active folks that pushed for the vision of this development. And so it's really fulfilling to see it come to fruition. And so such a really beautiful project. I couldn't agree with Commissioner Moore more about all the nuances about the project. And so just want to thank Mr. Horn, thank the developer, but thank the planning department, but thank the community, because this was their vision. And it's amazing to see the power of community when it comes together and pushes for something that they want and is needed. And so thank you. Thank you for, and also, I want to thank Supervisor Melgar for seeing this through, making sure that everything connects correctly to this development, transit, and all the things that are going to make life more easy for the folks that are going to inhabit these beautiful residences. So thank you so much as someone who lives near there. And just a very, very proud moment for all of us. Thank you.

Thank you. I was also going to thank Supervisor Melgar for coming. It always is really fantastic. Appreciate the endorsement. And I also, like Vice President Moore, had an informational call with Ms. Collins and Mr. Waller, which was incredibly helpful. And shared sentiment here with my commissioners. It's clearly a very incredibly exciting project for the city. And I think it's very clear. It was clearly spelled out why the modifications and adjustments need to be made and a lot of thoughtfulness that went into how we're tackling each one. So whether it's the bridge element, removing the stoops, the shift in materiality, It has my full support, and I think we just can't get it built fast enough. So thank you for tackling this. And with that, oop, and we have Commissioner Imperial. One last comment. Thank you. Yes, one last comment. Your last comment.

Yes, I'm very happy that my last hearing is the Balboa Reservoir Project. And, yeah, it's very meaningful to me. Before even I was in a planning commission, we've been – I've been also – looking into this project, and I want to thank pretty much everyone that's been part of this development, the staff, the developers, the architects, and the community itself as being part of this. Again, there's so much words to say, but I think it has been said already, I really love this development and how it comes about. So go San Francisco, and let's make this kind of development like this. So thank you. Yes.

Okay, commissioners, if there's nothing further, there is a motion that has been seconded to adopt a recommendation for approval for the planning code amendment and to approve the major modification on that motion. Commissioner McGarry? Aye. Commissioner Williams? Aye. Commissioner Braun? Aye. Commissioner Imperial?

Aye.

Commissioner Moore?

Aye.

And Commissioner President Campbell? Aye. So moved, commissioners. That motion passes unanimously 6-0 and concludes your hearing today.