Skip to main content

Due to a planned power outage, our services will be reduced on Tuesday, June 15th, starting at 8:30am PDT until the work is complete. We apologize for the inconvenience.

tv   San Francisco Government Television  SFGTV  May 14, 2016 12:00am-3:01am PDT

12:00 am
or two trip. >> strangle i do so many trucks around. >> commissioner wu. >> commissioners, if there's nothing further, we'll move on to a there is a motion that has been seconded to adopt ceqa finding and authorize the large project with conditions as amended by the commission to continue drinking staff to continue excuse me - directing the project sponsor work with the staff on the articulation along 16th street to develop a hazard mission plan for an interpretative element to car spaces to 10 reducing the assessable spaces by the same amount by 5 spaces to have loading and unloading in the
12:01 am
garage and 23 two bedrooms and other three bedrooms to provide public seating in the north and south amuse and incorporating the entertainment commission conditions did i capture. >> commissioner antonini. >> commissioner hillis commissioner johnson instructor no. >> commissioner wu commissioner vice president richards and commissioner president fong so moved, commissioners, that motion passes 6 to one with commissioner moore voting against the commission will take a break. >> good afternoon. welcome to the doctor monday, may 2, 2016, proceedings. and when speaking before the commission, if you care to, do state your name for the record. commissioners, we left off recur regular calendar
12:02 am
on item 16 for case others mini a street a large project authorization. >> good afternoon rich department staff the the item before you is a large project authorization for the property project on mini a street in the large project authorization for open space and between mix the proposed profoundly is at the demolition of a partd and a 4 story this 403 thousand quiet question off-street parking and 46 class within bicycle parking spaces and two class two bieshz spaces that is a between appendix of 18 two bedrooms and 5 one bedrooms and 23 studios 12 the private open space so far common speak up and the above grade off-street parking is
12:03 am
located off of mini a to date, no opposition or support for the property project the department supports the extension for the open space moreover, however, not for the two dwelling units and reconfigured to have code compliant bedrooms it has addressed the specification 6 dwelling units think site that is available for rent, a company of costa-hawkins has been passed out and the department staff recommends approval with continues conditions it operationally is located in zoning district with and consistent and provide air force appropriate massing and scale for the plain clothes are the project adds 46 dwelling units to the horticulturalist and
12:04 am
below grade i'm sorry below of the on-street parking for the pertaining permitted amount and utilities the eastern neighborhoods controls and pays the impact fees the project sponsor is prepared a presentation of the project that that concludes my presentation. and i'm available to answer any questions thank you. >> great project sponsor 10 minutes. >> good afternoon commissioners my name is ben i'm a promise with equity community believes the developer i'd like to introduce a couple of folks who are going to speak today out of the respect for the long item you've been thrgh and the things that are still behind us on the agenda we want to make sure we respect your time and presents just what you need us to present we were fortunate to work with
12:05 am
the landowner on this site this is a family selling the property for a couple of adjudicators andrew rich is here with the landowner and our partners in this development the architecture is done by t d f and those folks are here and justin and i'm going to turn it over to admit colleague kim gnash the project sponsor and doing the real work. >> thank you, thank you commissioners i'm kim and here always as project manager for the middle eastern a we partnered with andre and excited to turn this
12:06 am
in the urban korea into manipulative needed housing this is mini a street continue 10 and 11 and close to downtown san francisco not no mention all the activities that are happening in the south of market we recognize the work from the community and you are goal from the beginning to develop the projects that fits within the western soma our request for a approve of 46 unions on about mini a - the two buildings will share a rear yard which about fill 9 open space on the setback facing mini a street two exemptions one for open space as mentioned in the staff report our current design a
12:07 am
seven hundred and 35 short of the space and for the we'll pay a fee of approximately $300,000 this have driven by first president to maximize the units under the planners and we went, and, secondly, our desire to provide onsite rent-controlled unit that requires the costa-hawkins the will allow us to have affordable housing insight the second request for a exception to the dwelling unit mix as part of the western soma explain and produce two bedrooms 18 bedrooms and included in the proposal in our unit mix two units that have nested bedrooms one of the two bedrooms does in the direct sunlight we're asking
12:08 am
the commission to preview those and 16 other units to meet the 100 percent mix without this exemption say we building the site will accumulate 43 unit and that additional liveable space is a minor exception with two units i'll be happy to any details and answer me questions to support this we wanted to highlight today thank you. >> thank you. >> opening up for public comment seeing none, this portion of the hearing is closed. >> commissioner antonini. >> yeah. maybe i could have staff or project sponsor either one show us about the nested bedrooms and the light serious that coming from we've had some
12:09 am
of these and their requirements that you know the room be big enough 33 to allow the light into there and big enough space a into the bedrooms they been we can see what they look like. >> sfgovtv go to the computer gene. >> this is andy andrea. >> what page on the right turn corner two unit with that configuration of the 18 bedrooms so as you can see there is at living room and then adjacent bedroom and then oath bedroom that has glazing casings and as
12:10 am
you can see a metric diagram as well. >> it's the interior room we're talking about. >> yeah. the embroider room meets the building code but the the planning department definition. >> the light source is in one direction and 90 degrees san francisco that room; is that correct. >> it is on a yes, but the leadership and the bay window a. >> i see what you're doing may i want staff to tell us what they don't like about that. >> in general one of the key things to relieve the density
12:11 am
requirement that is found in the other parts of city in dhanl with the minimum dwelling mix with the other things with rear yard and open space and exposure so in general you know we're we found the need for single-family homes we understand there is a disparity continue our definition of the bedroom and the building departments definition of a bedroom kind of core where the issues are coming into play so in general we are pushing the project sponsors to say code compliant. >> i'll see what my fellow commissioners have to say. >> commissioner hillis. >> i'm having a if you can back up pull that diagram up where is that bedroom on the bigger lay out.
12:12 am
>> it is - in the on that same plan our looking on a-202 the unit on the bottom in the upper ministry on the bottom left. >> you see the stair and got it. >> the interior along the corridor. >> yes. that bedroom and then two of those units. >> okay. then a question so that's considered a bedroom more to the building inspection but for us in the planning code it is not. >> correct so the planning code we have an interpretation that was published by the zoning administrator that go budget and finance states that a bedroom has it face onto some kind of court or open space arrest street basically meet the distinction
12:13 am
of a bedroom so this was kind of a refinement of open interpretation came out shortly after the publication of the eastern neighborhoods plan we found that the definition of people were calling bedrooms. >> the only place the dpivengs definition of a bedroom matter is this 40 specific percentage of two bedrooms in the planning code or other places it comes up. >> so far as i know that's the core definition of a dwelling mix. >> the way the interpretation works it was 9 or 8 years ago it applies to the eastern neighborhoods; right? >> correct and so this was in market octavia this would be a bedroom. >> connect. >> that's a thought.
12:14 am
>> we saw this a month ago. >> go back for the architect so sorry are we then going to come up with a you know, i think we should be consistent whether or not it is a bedroom in market octavia or is or is not a wreckage in eastern neighborhoods so it's odd this is clarified as a bedroom in market octavia but not the eastern neighborhoods can we clarify that. >> as far as i know our housing coordinator is kate conner is a working on refinancing the dpngz a question for the architect. >> the issue was raised if these if we don't make an exception to the two bedrooms
12:15 am
the 40 percent two bedrooms if we again make that and you had to meet it without bedrooms what do you mean. >> we will need more frontage then for po that unit that two bedrooms for example, will grow into two of the on the units and this grows smaller par we have larger - those units the two bedroom units will be larger so we lost potentially 3 units. >> okay. >> so i mean i'd be supportive of allowing the exemption given that one we can follow the bedroom in other plans gi calls it a plan and if we enforce it 86 the staff recommendations i mean are you concerned with the
12:16 am
loss you know our strict improvement of that interpretation would losses units. >> it is something we can explore especially with the new construction there is possibilities for helping to meet the needs, etc. >> my take if it results in a loss of units i infer to stay people use them as two bedrooms but if you can get the same number of units in a configuration i'll be supportive. >> commissioner moore. >> i like to bring back to this commission azusa we had a few weeks on the castro neighborhood retook on a nested building and in the ended we approved a large building with
12:17 am
primary nested bedrooms and this particular case since there were only two i don't understand the modulation of the building i'll basically agree with commissioner hillis argument so searching the two units do not raise my concerns but when they come as a primary set up for an entire building that is when i can't support it i'm grateful that ms. connor will be diving into this in side end we need in 3 particular case i support the case but i want to ask the following in your stem of our tea the building facing studios i see that you are not raising the
12:18 am
ground level of the studio to the required 3 feet above grade i see the steps going up four or five actually basically ask that that is properly done we can't afford ground floor units to be closer to grade that should say a no-brainer and hope you can accommodate that. >> i think the intent that's 3 feet above grade. >> you're only drawing 3 stairs. >> i see a t o one at the bottom. >> i think there is 6 risers. >> it will be raised 3 feet above grade it meets the residential design guidelines. >> as long as we express that
12:19 am
and staff stays on top of that i'll move to approve. >> second. >> commissioner wu. >> i was going to second we want to commend conform the motion allows for the two units to have nestled bedrooms and clarifies the units on the street side. >> or at least 3 feet above grade. >> sheet want 210 is the feet elevation. >> commissioner richards commissioner johnson. >> i have a question the staff reports recommended accepting the variance of the dwelling mix we are allowing this variance? >> commissioners, if there's
12:20 am
nothing further, we'll move on to there is a motion that has been seconded to approve this project with conditions on that motion commissioner antonini. >> commissioner hillis commissioner johnson commissioner moore commissioner wu commissioner vice president richards so moved, commissioners, that motion passes unanimously 6 to zero and places us on item 17 for case on taylor street a conditional use authorization. >> of this commissioners claudia planning department staff the until the time you is a conditional use authorization for a dwelling merging on taylor located on the east side of taylor the project requires a conditional use authorization to merge dwelling units pursuant to the planning code the project will merge units 804 and 5 with the royal towers the
12:21 am
project will will reconfigure the hallways for one square feet 4 bedroom unit occupied bit the owners family in addition to the conditional use authorization that finding the commission must consider separate criteria in g 19229 project complies it is an owner opted out building not countered affordable two two bedrooms with one 4 bedroom dwelling opted out by the project sponsor not evolve involve any exterior chang's changes the one letter of support and no opposition after analyzing all aspects the planning department staff recommend approval with conditions specifically the project is consistent with the policies of adjoin plan and
12:22 am
marked to owner opted out units and not take rent-controlled unit off the market that will bring the building into conformity with the r mc-2 limits televise sdifshl and sxashl it mergers two units within an existing residential building located in a residential district the project meets all planning code requirements the project sponsor is present and has prepared a presentation i'm done with any presentation any questions. >> project sponsor 10 minutes. >> hello commissioners. i'm with jan representing the project sponsor i'd like to address this commission and discuss the particular nature of the
12:23 am
building which is different from the normal building this is a crotch this built between 1961 and 64 in two stages a co-op the people who live there buy shares in the co-op not ownership in the building and therefore they does not have a market so those unite have always been owner opted out since 1961 never rent and in order to buy the share whether i like it or you like it they have to interview and approved by the board of directors before i know buy the shares if they disapprove of you, you can't purchase the shares in the building so it's one aspect of
12:24 am
it and balls you can't community-based to a bank with a mortgage for the units that the share represents it requires other types of security that is basically looking at your assets that's what they look to lend you the money to buy the share in the building so those are very different kinds of buildings in terms of ownership because they don't literally do not own the units itself in the form of shares as i mentioned before this building none of the unit in the building has ever been rent or leased even for a short time
12:25 am
again, if any of the owners want to lease the unit for that elaboration a short time period of time they have to go to the board of directors and ask for permission and as far as this building is concerned they have never granted any of those requests this is has always been and continue to be an owner opted out building i the project sponsor o'connor sorry about that an immigrant mexico and his mother do not own a home or have an apartment she rents she goes and spends time with one children at that point and as she gets older and the supervision because this particular unit if it is allowed
12:26 am
to be merged will be one that accommodates her on a long term basis and so this is request is also for an extended family of future generations so for the reasons for those reasons i respectfully request this commission approve the project not an affordable units taken from the market or rental units i'll be happy to answer any questions you may have. >> opening it up for public comment mohammed nuru any public comment on this item? >> seeing none, public comment is closed commissioner moore. >> ms. barkley i'll be interested in you to describe to me the units sizes and living
12:27 am
arrangements in my vocabulary as far as san francisco had a 2000 number plus unit was sufficient really for a four-bedroom arrangement this would basically create a 3 thousand something rather setting i believe is very, very large and there are two arguments here i'm concerned about the fact that staff says that a 2000, 72 hundred for me an observed comment that neighborhoods has a large number of very large condominium and apartment buildings that argument didn't hold that means you'll merge the entire building
12:28 am
with a total floor will be occupied by one only at the time that the only was put into a form of core that was approved not to be popular in california banking i know basically only two co-opposite in town 1 on bay street and the other one that one so shares and maybe more protection in condominium buildings i believe there is a gray market merging units that by their own size perfectly ziebl for individuals of different size to live in by aggregating units and merging them i believe we're d factor reducing the number of living units in the city that goes for me personally against the grain
12:29 am
of what mayor ed lee instructed this commission last year to say we should be more than caution to look at it this we sometimes but railway seen unit mergers in the form of condominium or ownership let me be more vague and down it they're like a 200 and 20 left over space we've merged with 8 hundred something to make that 11 hundred before it become a family unit this seems like in excess of what i'm comfortable with. >> commissioner moore in response to your questions - we
12:30 am
start to talk about taking the 3 thousand square feet units and make that into 45 bedrooms the question then is whether or not the board of directors in terms of what they preserve to be and again, when we all disagree but they want the kind of building they want for this co-op so i anticipate we go in and make it a 4 bedroom unit that's one and the other thing this building right now is till when you get to the point of how that will be used is actually going to be most likely a lot of times a 4
12:31 am
unit bedroom and the library will be another bedroom. >> let me make two comments. >> thank you for answering my question building the condominium co-op board agree to agree and monthly have substantive opinions how a condominium is regulated is vague and no expertise required to sit down on the board that aside i perching building at this time not in the interest of this 71 and me to support mergers when, in fact, it takes away ground unit those will be opted out by a member of the family one a single contributor ownership is a completely different matter so i basically i'm not prepared to support this. >> thank you commissioner
12:32 am
antonini. >> yeah. i have questions in the staff report it says the co-op word vacs advocates or requires a merge maybe you can explain about that and if they want it to occur beyond that. >> go back to when the two unit was first purchased it was purchased originally by mr. drake and his partner at this point for swen convenient they wanted to put a door between the two units so we can work together late into the evening and what happened is that when they requested that at that time, it he was only in one unit and the partner using the second unit but the co-op board
12:33 am
required them to join those units and it is between them internally to decide how they want to split the share in terms of percentage in order to allow them to have this connecting door that door was actively not done without a permit but this co-op would for the let you touch anything without permission and you have to show them you have a permit and and licensed contractor and insurance and all of that our so when his business partner decided to break up the business relationship and leave he ends up having to purchase his share otherwise so somehow find someone to purchase his share
12:34 am
that's what happened. >> that was one of those things very strange the nature of a co-op like i said it is something that is more common in new york not something you can put on the market and sell it. >> i understand a big distinction you own shares of stock like a collective group that opposes this building and their shares are pro rated to number of units and the size of unit i'm not sure. >> the biggest it diversifies between a condo and co-op i can sell the condo to anyone in a co-op i can't do that. >> i understand the board has to approved purchase by a new party of a unit or units that
12:35 am
someone may own someone mentioned the fontana the stock was a co-op. >> they're true in california they run across from its on california and jones. >> and then the 1 across the street on california and jones is on the corner then he knew of two on the vallejo the two high-rise i believe those are also condos no their co-ops. >> but entirely different situation in terms of ownership and the fact you know an approval process by the members is not the same situation as it would be the case of condo unit
12:36 am
and can't get individual loans for if you wanted to sell to a person the bureau can't get their own loan you know without the co-op you the reason he know the the two buildings on california street are co-ops when i represented the neighbors in both the - having the live in addition, the mosaic temple they appealed it and those two buildings do not have to go through and get each one of the owners so sign the petition only the co-op or the director. >> collective decision making and the staff pointed out only 6. 6 of the housing units in san
12:37 am
francisco have 4 or more bedrooms. >> that's true. >> someone with a larger family or stent family looks at for multiple bedrooms for their children and possibly one for a study or another bedroom i think this is i'm kind of a buildinger since that's owned uncommon anyway not anything that is affordable i don't see a problem with that merger. >> i'll step in its different to recognize yourself i looked at the 345irs directive on this there was nothing besides co-ops a unit is a unit where i think the rule is the absurdity of it all we can demolish a relatively
12:38 am
single-family home administratively before you have to approve the removal removal of a relatively affordable unit it is absurd i don't know why the legislation was adopted that way for me we had one a merger and have the commission look in the mirror at itself we approved the demolition of a house $6 million 1.64 it is affordable to one very small portion of the population and this is a very large go house half of the percentage of this city we're in reserve this to me the same thing i will ask the commission to hold up a mirror if you want to go from 11 percent affordable
12:39 am
to one percent available you're making this unit less affordable to a person on the street regardless of the opener an official ownership etc. one the arguments in other project on cumberland three hundred plus san francisco as large as 20 thousand fiat square feet question as commission have been on the all over the map with 8 thousand square feet we don't have a definition i honestly this is an expensive unit can't support with the market regardless house it is opposed >> commissioner moore. >> i have one question you said in the past two partners were required to own the units in common but it was two units with a door in between with two
12:40 am
respective placing places couldn't this door established in the right, etc. couldn't the kaurnt owner ask for that door to be close so this unit will resume the former shape with it to be sold at whatever time someone want to step forward i talked to someone yesterday units are barely below one million dollars but belonging to 5 or more people most people put a lot of money down this unit falls way within the aloof being affordable and your talking
12:41 am
about riverside the owner to basically diverse his interests in one of the units and as a result of that he will end up with a unit not accommodating the extended family his family and partners family. >> that's the building that is basically the infrastructure of the building was designed that way and has so many people for the purpose that was designed for . >> but this building the way it is now, one of the units has only two bedrooms and will not accommodate the needs and when we was joint owner with the business partner no longer his partner they actually ended up using one of the bedrooms over the
12:42 am
extended family come and visit so it is just - they need the room what i'll request of this commission is that if you believe that it is going to be a title i respectfully request this matter be continued until the commissioner the other commissioner is here for the vote. >> commissioner hillis. >> so what i think we've put in place and the mayor put in place protections to look at the unit meerlgz but the policy of that is not to preserve every unit you know it was really geared around reducing displacement and protecting existing rent-controlled stuff whether or not affordable or not that's my
12:43 am
interpretation of what the mayor put out there we wanted to prohibit all unit meerlgz let's put the rule on the books it not prohibited i think we have guarantee don't think a good job of - this is - i have no problem with that without getting into the weeds i'm okay with this we've added hundreds of units to the marketed we do that a lot of this morning merging it given not rent control and not affordable no displacement i have no issue. >> i have one question director rahaim even though this
12:44 am
is cooperative it would be a rent-controlled unit. >> what was it built. >> in 61. >> so taking the rent-controlled units off the margaret commissioner antonini. >> the board will have to approve any rental i don't believe that is happening in that building it operationally is true. >> that's the board thinks this by allowing register in that believe it would turn that unit into a go rent-controlled unit i think that is doubtful the board will approve. >> i tend it to agree with commissioner hillis i think you have to look at each situation individually some mergers shouldn't be allowed where there
12:45 am
is units for saving a rental but more accountable this is what w you have common ownership no reason to believe that the owner will sell either the two units eve it is not allowed to merge them it will inconvenience the owner of their own property there can be serious legal ramifications. >> i believe that all the units were introduced by supervisor avalos his intent is correct it is a preserve affordable units and also to make sure that it is the rent-controlled unit that is being preserved that is important and this building is not a rent-controlled unit and i don't believe - has none been seen since 1963 or 64.
12:46 am
>> commissioner johnson. >> thank you very much i apologize for taking my name off so many times i agree what commissioner hillis i think we're all the time out to a make concrete decisions based on the policy urban design objectives i think on this one of the intent of that policy directed from the mayor's office to prevent loss of rent-controlled units and to generally maintain the housing stock but in this case, i think that can't see this is not new york city with the co-op board and i just think in this specific access not southern certain i see overriding circumstances to make me adhere to the mayor's office obviously than the circumstances i'm
12:47 am
inclined to support is it although generally speaking he follow the mayors a mayors decisions regarding merge demolition. >> commissioner wu. >> for me think that is just that you know sort of along similar lines can can't find enough extraordinary issues to allow the merge but build next door to each other he can't port that. >> one item since no commissioners speaking to remind this commission the killed a project on irving within the rent-controlled unit replace that with 3 units of rent-controlled unit i can't we showed up be all over the map this building were reverend i challenge you ms. barkley suddenly two units are not one.
12:48 am
>> it never has been one unit. >> thank you. >> i would request this board this matter be continued until there's a full board or full commission. >> thank you commissioner antonini. >> i'll move to continue. >> second. >> commissioner moore. >> just because we have to see ms. barkley is not getting what they want she is asking for a continuance she's not convinced me this application indeed stand on 0 muster more credibly answered to any of us you really know there is - unfortunately. >> uncontrolled market regarding condominiums and co-ops for all intents and purposes is treated the same in the city so many changes many of
12:49 am
the units unbe not guilty to people have landmarking like new owners but guess what their renters and this is a co-op and today it is vastly changed and in that inability to answer that question i don't believe that you have convinced me this is all just a co-op on the a strike rules i basically can't support it. >> the experience of people that live in ownership buildings and i'm not at that moment the question, sir between condominium or co-op that is basically only a matter of how banks ultimately decide to support this so unregulated and flies in the gray area most
12:50 am
people don't know what rent control is the owners that are rendering in the buildings view is it as absentcy income properties making money way outside the market by which the people know they've lived there a long time but don't know what is happening in the real market i've tried to discuss this with supervisors but there is a reality which needs a magnifying glass to fuel falling within the general rule of how the city is dealing with relent and ownership. >> i agree with you about a third to 40 percent renters, however, you're asking for proof
12:51 am
that believe was never rented i would ask that i grant a continuance and i will bring back the proof this building was never rented. >> commissioner johnson. >> hi yes, thank you so i don't want to see this project continue i think we should make a decision today i'd like to ask - off director rahaim is here if we were to deny the cu what are the ramifications for the project sponsor and when can they bring that back if they want the same project. >> cu they can't bring back the same project for a year. >> i'll not support a continuance we needed to take a vote i'm going to make a subsequent motion to deny the appeal. >> commissioner antonini. >> i want a vote on
12:52 am
continuance i think about four years ago, we had a similar project that was not a co-op that was a condo and some burns i believe that the owner is now deceased it was one of the owners of the giants in the old plaza we did thing more lonely we approved the merge of the two units that was of the same family and wanted to put those unite together that is more compelling this co-op where there is a board and they own shares instead of individuals unit if so possible we deny either of the units will be an individual unit i'm still in favor of the continuance. >> commissioner moore. >> just for the record for the last ten years the commissioner is not here the down side of
12:53 am
living in a condominium that is interning into rental it significant by commissioner sugaya and myself, however, i see a erosion of smaller ownership in condominiums and co-op means by basically mentioning it within and diminishing the rightful operation of what is supposed to merge a building i can't not go for a continuance autopsies call the continuance question. >> commissioner antonini would you like to specific a continuance date. >> sometime when we have a full commission. >> just that 22, june 23rd and
12:54 am
july 21st. >> the june 2nd date ms. barkley june 2nd is a possible continuance date. >> june 2nd is yeah. >> you have to get together our records you promised to show us. >> we can do that yeah. >> that will be the continuance so that's an interesting to see how it changes the feelings of some of the commissioners or commissioner and there is a motion that has been seconded to continue this matter it to june 2nd commissioner antonini commissioner hillis commissioner johnson no commissioner moore no. sdmu no >> commissioner vice president richards no that motion to strike fails 2 to for you with commissioner johnson commissioner wu instructor and commissioner vice president richards voting against if there is a subsequent motion to deny it i'll recommend you make a motion to allow the
12:55 am
staff the opportunity to draft a motion of denial. >> commissioner moore. >> make a motion to deny the change. >> second. >> commissioner johnson. >> no. >> commissioners another motion of intent to deny this matter and continue to might as well a motion. >> commissioner antonini. >> no commissioner hillis no sxhshgs. >> commissioner moore. >> sxhoechlt passes 4 to two with commissioner antonini and commissioner hillis voting against. >> commissioners that places us on item excuse me - item 18 case 9th street a request are for a conditional use
12:56 am
authorization. >> the item before you a railroad for the conditional use authorization pursuant to planning code sections to allow the vacant to a formula retail sales and service with a personal service doing business as as ultra beauty with 3 thousand plus gross square feet within the urban mixed use district and height and bulk district at 555, 4 street staff has permitted the secretary with the executive summaries speak is the exact guide of 88 hundred square feet 7 thousand plus square feet of sales floor area and plus a full
12:57 am
service salon as of january 30th ultra beauty prooits operates across 408 states and one is in san francisco the beauty operates a cosmetics store along geary boulevard and serving approval for other sales and service at 555, 9 street streets of san francisco increasing to one percent of businesses within a quarter of a mile from the uma district from 24.2 to 9 percent the it is compatible with the subject property and since the construction the early 1990s a formula retail use as opted out the space and and a they vacated the property and in question has
12:58 am
remained vacant within a quarter mile from the 10 vacancies out of one hundred plus establishment the showplace square area plan is encouraging the non-conforming used for a mixed uses and continuing the legal non-conforming rules it allows the establishments to remain there as long as the use was previously legally established and it is with non-conforming used to date the department has no comments in charge or in opposition the department recommends approval with the project is promotes at use that contribute to the viability of the overall district considering the retail tenants the space that's been vacant since 2011 to
12:59 am
and provides goods and services to the neighborhood the project need all the planning code requirements and sdifshl and compatible that concludes my presentation. heblgz. >> project sponsor 10 minutes. >> good evening mark reuben, junius & rose here on behalf of i want to thank you for your hard work and the planning department staff we're happy to be here recognizing you guys are a full calendar ahead of you i'll try to be brief just a few points and highlights a one for one replacement what pier one is mr. brown and
1:00 am
continuing formula retail use this is a relatively large tenants space which makes ultra an appropriate tenants ultra has two uses going on in the space not just selling beauty products you but a full service salon the only full service within a quarter of a mile radius the closet similar is sally beauty is a formula retail use and that's this is the potrero service ultra the plans are 25 employees at the site 7 part time a good employer for skilled people that are looking to get to cosmetology industry and another clue tie-in this commission maybe interested in the benefit cosmetics a san
1:01 am
francisco-based company is one of the ultras major vendors is representative is here as well as an architect if you want to see anyone walk you through the plans opening it up for public comment any public comment seeing none, public comment is closed commissioner antonini. >> thank you. yeah, i think that is pretty straightforward going if formula retail to another formula retail which is in an area that is predominantly all formula retail there are some vacancies in the area and this has been vacant since 2015 that that will add 25 employees there is a local connection with cosmetics so i don't see any problem move to approve. >> second.
1:02 am
>> seeing nothing furthers there is a motion that has been seconded to approve that matter with conditions on that motion commissioner antonini commissioner hillis commissioner johnson commissioner moore excuse me - commissioner wu and commissioner vice president richards so moved, commissioners, that motion passes unanimously 5 to zero and commissioners that places you on item 19 for case at clemente street a conditional use authorization. >> good evening, commissioners alexander department staff the item before you is a request for a conditional use authorization to allow the construction of a 4 story 12 unit mixed use building on a 10 thousand square feet lot in the clemente rezoning district it the occupied by a commercial parking lot that
1:03 am
certificate of occupancies 25 parking spaces the building having will feature 12 three bedrooms with total 18 thousand square feet of residential square feet that will be 12 hundred square feet in the area the resulting structure will be 45 fiat in height with a health bonus the proposal is includes 16 off-street parking, 12 class one bicycle parking and two class two at the fronts the property the project sponsor has elected to pay the 20 housing fees to date the department has one opposition o option with 41 snatches and two e-mails in opposition to the proposed project no letters are called in support of the business all comments received prior and chuck that sponsored the petition is not
1:04 am
concerned about the project the remaining ones are the light and air to the west the overall scale and height of the development and traffic congestion effects the value and the lack of car sharing that will not encroach on the lightwell duce to the 25 foot rear yard the surrounded context that about two or three mixed use buildings, however, a number of 4 story buildings in the cord and the urban support the density within the commercial district in order to proceed the conditional use authorization must be done with a lot of excess of 5 thousand gross square feet in the outer clemente ncd 0 so it is
1:05 am
defibrillator and comparable with the soured neighborhood the property project will create 25 more denials think an underutilized lot in the corridor and i'm available to answer any questions thank you. >> project sponsor. >> good evening honorable commission my name is sal the project architect and here to answer any questions we want to commend reiterate and couple of things we've worked with various neighbors to satisfactory some of the things we redesigned for the ground floor retail and make sure it preserve the lightwell
1:06 am
to the rear the this for the floor and the rear that does governor on lightwells for privacy and it is designed with all the living room and kitchen e is on the street, if you will, the noisy side and the bedrooms on the rear of the building therefore on the shadeer part of building and that preserves the quiet space, if you will, for any neighbors that interface on the back of the rear of the property the project has an active use with the ground there are 12 owners in a unoccupied building some have graduated into define industry school and hope to have a dentisty office - that applies
1:07 am
with all louis laws not asking for exemptions one thing we put in we saw another neighborhoods concerned with parking we added currently there are 4 off-street parking in front of this project we adrc two spaces to the front that had been ride share dedicated and one for scooter and rider share parking to satisfy others concerns not use all my time but respond to concerns. >> thank you. i think we'll take public comment first and the commission may ask you questions (calling names). >> commissioners ron wearing a
1:08 am
hat i've not one or more in 10 years on the association for the richmond and brought me back in this is a parking lot since i grew up in the richmond go district it is in the middle of a neighborhood commercial district it is no longer a viable parking lot those are in addition of 12 units something you have been talking about today 12 actually family-sized commends which you don't often find it fits into the neighborhood i want to enlightenment ali and on this would everyone worked together as opposed to to the first item it took 10 years this
1:09 am
pretty much i got into that last september i was moved through. >> this is a good one it is good for the neighborhood i urge you to approve it. >> thank you. >> good afternoon. i'm david in the richmond's 5 years accomplice you passed this day to day you have many types of dreams and some are 10able and some not this would have been a great group of housing units but seems to be the next best choice and takes an underutilized place
1:10 am
with car sharing and attracted transients and from the stand point of satisfying every neighbors issues not a building that was built recently more have and seen the heartening i've been watching on to project that makes absolutely ink happy in terms of being productive for the neighborhood a good use of the space in keeping with the very, very next earth of that place i really applaud the developer for taking a dead peas of land and essentially using that for a positive purpose my only one bit of a small reservation would be that the retail use will be good to the neighborhood paw in the responding a lack of community and senior meeting space perhaps
1:11 am
from the project proponent might think a of a good use in the dentistry office didn't go through i'm glad to see that project is going finally move forward. >> thank you. >> my serb not my first language i oppose this for two reasons one it adversity effects the quality of life of my life and the neighborhoods upstairs because this apartment b will block the airflow and the view and the privacy and they created backyard but that will still block most of daylight from south to south and
1:12 am
also the airflow will be changed who will expecting to pay more electricity bill no - >> and also i'm enjoying the view from the window it will be disconnected and also i'm worried about noise and dust and vibrations during the construction i have two kids one is a one-year-old baby i'm worried about it and we - i can understand when i moved into the apartment that was already there i could compromise but we told the location i liked the environment and now why do you have to give up the comforts and quality because of a few number
1:13 am
of someone else's profit or not great many people seems like to me skaigz the greater benefit of the community and my quality of life and the reason about the community and the whole business this is quiet area residential area with thirty millennium of businesses that are vibrant and active they use the parking lots it had effect their businesses and in the neighborhood and i think most people he talked to tie in the neighborhoods are opposing this project and seems like the profit of small amount of people how do i say benefit of greater than the loss of - my
1:14 am
conclusion is that if we have to give up the parking lot it has to be something that serves the community for the neighbors they - there are many open spaces why do do it ♪ quiet neighborhood with - active businesses >> thank you, >> is there any additional public comment? >> okay seeing none, public comment is closed commissioner antonini. >> very happy to see this project a small step towards density in the outer richmond and hopefully see more projects the west side has to do their share and comments about no benefits the benefits will be these 12 units that are for sale and three bedrooms those are units definitely will attract
1:15 am
families because there is adequate parking, and i think that is very beneficial for a lot of reasons there were comments that we got in the mail about the height the height is compliant there are allowed 45 feet as long as a 13 feet retail that's why it is 45 feet and a 40 feet limit the properties to the west have light and air comes through that is this backyard i don't see a huge impact this is always been a possibility abused it is a empty parking lot it may not be that way forever this is for housing and this is a good use let's see there is ground floor rail they average 4 hundred square feet this is an ideal size for a single-family unit so
1:16 am
i'm very much in favor of the project it serves a lot of needs and added an ground floor retail that is important i'll move to approve. >> second. >> commissioner johnson. >> i agree i think that a very good project for that site that is a terribly underutilized there is going to be three bedrooms apartment in the city a quick question on the retail use it is 12 hundred square feet he was wondering one beam any potential to sub divide that space. >> if there were subdivide
1:17 am
would have spate units be and this is ideal for that type of use. >> that's fine we've talked about that before and i'm assume if we - there are two doors. >> yes. designed with two entrances with two units. >> in case from the subdivided in the future is the infrastructure in place to add another became. >> we're running a sewer line along the plumbing or whatever anything for bathrooms can be added at any point for the rear of the space. >> okay. >> commissioner wu. >> i'm supportive of the project just want to ask from the developer can provide a that have the contact so any issues during construction can be addressed.
1:18 am
>> we'll be publishing a billboard that will have contact for any concerns. >> thank you. >> you're welcome. >> commissioners, if there's nothing further, we'll move on to there there is a motion that has been seconded on that motion commissioner antonini commissioner hillis commissioner johnson commissioner wu and commissioner vice president richards you were viewing this from the back. >> half that it so the vote is i. >> thank you commissioners that passes anonymously 5 to zero and now 20 ab norway we go you'll consider the conditional use authorization and the zoning administrator for rear yard modifications. >> good afternoon, commissioners of planning
1:19 am
department staff the item before you at noticing regular - this has to levels of below grade and a ground floor grocery that building will contain 7 thousand square feet of open space 18 residential and commercial parking spaces with one car share space and 22 bike parking spaces for residential and commercial use the site is located in the mc one in the height and bulk and on noriega are a active use on the ground level are allocated an additional 5 feet in height and take advantage the height
1:20 am
the project requires the conditional use authorization to develop a lot exceeding studying 5 thousand square feet a non-residential greater than 3 thousand square feet and for conversion of the automobile service station it is seeking a rear yard modification it is exempt from ceqa as a class 32 categorical exception and on the department has two e-mail letters 22 e-mail letters and 5 e-mail letters in opposition that are constituent in our packets i'm pga 4 additional letters that came in after packets overall the opposition to the project is considers the residential density of this election concerns regarding the
1:21 am
building architecture and scale however, the planning department residential design team supports the site design and the massing and the location of the first level of residential use and the proposed architecture as proposed the advisory team and mta support this on noriega in order in the affordable units with this project i want to also talk about the condition of approval that sewer seeds in order to appropriately co-authors to the city attorney for f this project i can read the provisions into the record the department recommends approval with conditions and
1:22 am
buildings the project is necessary and desirable that concludes my presentation. i'm available to answer any questions. >> project sponsor 10 minutes. >> commissioners good evening my name is demetry my before bobby the project sponsor for in her regular we have operated since 1985 and represented our family in our other two locations in the hate ashbury and because of try support of your neighborhood we've year over year on in her regular we've expelled as the years gone on look for options to expand if
1:23 am
2 and a half years ago we came up with an opportunity to introduce a mixed use building on the corridor and offer a grocery stores in similar stater and size to other location on hate street nevertheless to say, our neighborhoods be planners were ecstatic to hear we're moving forward to expand the location but invest into our corridor this store will have 25 hundred to 9 thousand square feet adrc 50 jobs to the current 200 employees who 22 are employed out of our area last week that are ecstatic to move forward with that project and offer the sunset what we've been oh, the
1:24 am
other two community now in the last 10 years co-counsel with our neighboring schools to donate over 200 and $50,000 to our parents slashing patrons we love our business and to describe the building in more detail deafly on behalf of the architects that here to describe in detail a little bit more thank you for your time. >> thank you, sir. >> good evening, commissioners david benjamin architects i assume you've look at the plans and maybe driven by the site i have a paramount renderings if you want to go to it. >> not sure how this thing
1:25 am
works press a few buttons. >> anyway - >> so this is what the building will look like in 3 dimensions a few details for the completely done but were get an idea of what that looks like on the corner i'm basically here he assume you've looked at the plans i'm here to answer any questions and i don't really have a lot more i mean, if you want i'll walk us through the building to help you understand if need be if not not waste of time. >> from the commissioners have questions we'll bring you back kansas public safety & emergency services i have no speaker cards
1:26 am
any public comment on this item? please. >> i'll make it short and sweet my name is brad living in the sunset since 2000 ever since we've discovered what i called norega under the market umbrella is home everyone in the sunset would prefer to shop there a than going up across sunset to safeway you can snapt support the neighborhood by way of jobs and proud for the finest produce i'm sure you guys like to eat right o guys keep the neighborhood happy and inhabitant and not drive to the hate to get - when we expand the hate on mission
1:27 am
fantastic food as well short and sweet this should be a support decision. >> public comment. >> hi you might recognize me. >> hi. >> we do. >> hi, i'm lauren i live a few blocks away when i have to take him to go to the grocery store it is i walked two blocks to noriega produce and going through there with the stroller is really hard i just want to get my produce and want to have a berlin grocery stores to walk to i can drive a couple of a blocks but love to walk. >> glad to see you ma'am. >> good evening confirmations
1:28 am
are privilege to be here my name is christi want to speak to what thaifr they've done to support the schools in a way i infrastructure with the family so about 10 year ago i started a preschool and demetry didn't have children wasn't married volunteered to be part of program i think 5 percent of all produce all food we buy as a preschooler members we have a count and give us it back to us and expand to the francis scott key so the other schools we have a smaller preschool he's been nothing but generous the numbers in donations with back to contribute to the schools are accurate no one else green house gas emissions that same level to
1:29 am
so many different schools and been generous generous so this is a place that actively services the community i hope you consider this all are a benefit for the schools isn't area thank you. >> thank you is there any additional public comment? >> seeing none, public comment is closed. >> commissioner moore and it is a well-designed project well-appointed and adding a locally grocery store i regret we don't have a gas station in place i'm in full support of project. >> thank you. i good am in support for all the reasons listed in the staff report with the additional units and
1:30 am
creating more actually retail i share the concerns on the gas station our meter keeps dropping and again, i saw the fossil fuel card and the other thing i have to i saw democrat try in the hallway i hate the market and said i was kidding i came out with a shopping cart on harrison street i was impressed with the selection it is the best greens i have bought in the city commissioner antonini. >> i'm going to go to one 0 of our markets i've heard so many things about the good food once in a while i got lost in the sunset and went to a gas station some of the people knew that was
1:31 am
there this was a big improvement similarly to the last project in the sunset we're adrc those 12 units that are ownership units from what i understand they're not all 3 bedrooms but the 4 or 3 and the other are pretty good sized units with the square footage that's a good thing you'll create 50 jobs so this is wonderful and all the good things such done scripted the schools and all the neighbors are talked about it really a wonderful project and also creating what will be some destroyer units for people to buy and family-sized that's a good project i'm in support. >> commissioner moore. >> move to approve. >> second.
1:32 am
>> thank you. >> thank you on with matter. >> commissioner antonini. >> commissioner hillis. >> juxtaposition commissioner johnson commissioner moore. >> commissioner wu and commissioner vice president richards so moved, commissioners, that motion passes 6 to zero and zoning administrator, what say you? >> on the variance, close the public hearing and and grant the rear yard request for modifications (clapping.) commissioners that places us on item 21 ab case eddy street you will consider the request for conditional use authorizations and the zoning administrator will requester are consider a request for variance. >> the project on this proposes a new constriction 80 feet tail building containing 28 units and retail use 27 hundred
1:33 am
private open space and 7 off-street parking and 32 bicycle parking spaces it is located in the european town historic between leavenworth from the south side of eddy street the project requires a conditional use authorization to approve the building studying 50 feet in height in a height and bulk district their included in the packet and the project is initially it reuses the first story garage and turns it into a mixed use building which 3 units are affordable the historic preservation commission reviewed the design and found it compatible with the secretary of interior standard and the uptown it requires a evaporates for the
1:34 am
10 units not 14 but the and posters indicated the correct number of units but the language was not appropriate updated the deserve have opine after the commissions takes a motion on conditional use authorization and thirds in compliance the project sponsor reviewed this with the entertainment commission the entertainment commission requests the planning commission adopt the measures for the calculation for the waterproofs plus the project sponsor curds with the conditions lastly staff recommends the commission adopt the draft as shown and made modifications to the inclusionary housing language and months ago after the key pauktsz were published under o is code compliant for the following statements the inclusionary is required for the pending large project authorization that the voters approved the charter on the
1:35 am
june '78 elect, condition this is the subdivision a to be amend in the project is subject to a different requirement that the chartered amendment is approved the project - the number of market-rate housing changes the required affordable units will be required in consultations with the mayor's office of housing and section should be changed the required affordable units and two two bedrooms with the mixed use that is required from the inclusionary housing requirements change as discussed above subdivisions b changes if any building is permit is issued for the project the project sponsor shall have designated 12 percentage of the total number of affordable units and in
1:36 am
addition to the outreach including the staff report the staff get letters of support (calling names) and the follow-up from kirk of the west tenderloin community or w rc a thank you to the project sponsor for more or less meet the requirements i have additional letters of support the department supports the project is meets the goals and objectives and utilized the parking lots with much utility parking to be continent with the neighborhood character that concludes my presentation. i'm available to answer any questions. >> jennifer i have those pages for you. >> thank you. >> project sponsor you have 10
1:37 am
minutes. >> good evening commissioner my name is nick a project manager with a development i'd like to start by talk a little bit about we're a third irish run san francisco-based company specializing in further development and construction our development and experience in san francisco dates back to 1960s recently completed the projects you may recognize sutter street, 15 second street and on frangsz that is currently under conduct and valencia which you approved
1:38 am
and schedule to be completed throughout the process we've worked tooifrls with preservation to have a design it is sensitive for the hectic resource and compatible with the neighborhood since that time we've increased the building setback from 10 to three feet in order to mitigate the impact and developed a punched window system it was differentiated and incorporated a trier design with the building tap with the surrounding district morph from early on with the sgas interface and neighborhood and nonprofit in the tenderloin seek their input as evidenced by randy shaw letters and the tenderloin corporation and the housing action coalition and held two meeting for the residents and
1:39 am
presented a stakeholders meeting for the alliance we also respective excused an impact to the tndc residents in the came i don't residents we designed and conducted thorough outreach from the community and support therefore we believe this deserves our full support now, now i'd like to introduce my colleague to provide an overall of the design. >> i'm happy to be work on this project we've done quite a few of the projects and this will be a good project.
1:40 am
>> this is an image of the site as you can see there is quite a difference range of architectures and scales outside this central part of this image the kind of more traditional victorian fabric of the building and then large active building from the 60s we've had to navigate those and this is the across the street image which has a more consistent type of fabric this is an image of our project and this is the elevation which
1:41 am
shows the strategy we took of the kind of massing strategy of the existing historic building with a very strong central bay and then a smaller tear of bays on either side doubled so the stripes that you see of mass on the existing facade are excluded into the new supply and here you see the image of this building in sits savings account and the restored historic building with the new this that is now setback 25 feet so we will clean up and replace and replicate the historic elements of this building and necessary and this is the top of the building sunshine chase has a termination in a - in the center
1:42 am
of the building a similar kind of organization and structure to the base building which is the historic building that is a side plan we can see the 25 foot setback if the facade of the existing building and then the last court in the rear the light exposure for the units it essentially is this is the ground floor as you can see the experimental space, the garage and the existing elements of the building and the parking and essentially on each floor four units most of the larger percentage the units are two bedrooms and as you can see where the units in the front
1:43 am
have been setback and have a roof terrace at the rooftop of the existing building and the light cord that lights into the l-shaped part into the rear and i'm sorry - and this is the section of the building as you can see on the left-hand side the setback from the existing facade that the terraces which are nestled into that area and the building that rises up behind on the right with the light core gives light to the rear the elevation of the front the elevation of the rear which on the entire place around the light court and the units is
1:44 am
essentially 12 one a one bedroom plus den and 14 two bedrooms and 2, two bedrooms has 28 units 16 of which are 50 percent of two bedrooms 47 percent are two bedrooms and again, the image of the building and in the street yeah. >> thank you. >> thank you. >> kansas public safety & emergency services i have no speaker cards any any public comment on item this project. >> seeing none, public comment is closed. commissioner moore >> it is an amazing building and fun and great scale transition didn't exist before it fwifz for meaningless to the street and there are nestled bedrooms they're close to the light not anything you worked on
1:45 am
the concerned about and it is a building which i am fully in support of and move to approve. >> second. >> thank you, commissioners and there's a motion there is a motion that has been seconded to approve as amendment and read into the record commissioner moore. >> as amended and staff and read into the record. >> thank you on that that monoxide. >> commissioner antonini. >> commissioner hillis commissioner johnson commissioner moore commissioner wu and commissioner vice president richards so moved, commissioners, that motion passes unanimously 6 to zero discovers on the variance, close the public hearing and and grant the requested variance in the rear of the application. >> thank you, commissioners places us on our final item under the discretionary review calendars items 22 ab pacific
1:46 am
alcohol, tobacco & firearms deserve will consider a request for variance for case please note that on february 11, 2016, the commission continued to may 12th by a vote of 5 to zero commissioner johnson and commissioner wu you were absent and need to say you've reviewed the materials in order to participate. >> thank you, commissioners? the second hearing traditionally you don't provide a full amount of time with the public traditionally has been 3 minutes for the project sponsor and the 3 for its dr requester and 3 for the public. >> go ahead. >> good afternoon commissioner president fong and members of the commission carlie planning
1:47 am
department staff the item before you a public initiated for a conditional use authorization for a building application think pacific which is located in the pacific avenue commercial district this is to convert the square feet second story what is a into a mixed use with the residential units and 9 hundred square feet of commercial between the ground floor and basement floor it included a vertical addition within the vertical area of the lot renovation of the front facade and within the existing building for an interior court that was continued if february 11th at that point, the department was supportive and the dr requester and the association expressed concerns the lack of 4 rear yard grade and the light and air on adjacent properties the general
1:48 am
consensus the massing was two large a more smaller massing that incorporated the open space will be preferred the commissioners argued that needs a admonish - great setbacks along the western property line for residents along larkin street the upside down of the project was bought up since then several changes little rear yard 25 percent has been removed for an upgrade fill above grade that has since been reduced to 3 feet two the maximum rear yard and additional setbacks have been provided along the west side propelling and to create a commercial units with a secondary feature and individual penthouses to the roof deck have been removed and the elevator and stair penthouse is required
1:49 am
by the did this and the project includes 9 units two are two bedrooms and a non-complying lot and lot depth the building has been retained at the 5 or 6 for the rear yard open space the project requires the variance for the addition of the uses within the non-restricted compliant uses since the previous hearing the department received r received the following public comment 3 letters in opposition one from the polk and the cathedral hill i have those letters if you want to see them the recommendation in the staff memo indicated the commission take the dr, however, centuries packets were published the project sponsor has reduced
1:50 am
the rear yard to 3 feet above we recommend you not take dr and approve for the - the project is brought the existing structure into the planning code by reducing this massing and there are no exceptional or extraordinary that apply to this project and applies to all seconds the planning code that concludes my presentation. i'll be happy to answer any questions you may have. >> thank you project sponsor you have 2 minutes. >> dr requester 3 minutes. >> schizophrenia have had overhead on please.
1:51 am
thank you. >> my name is robin be you worker speaking on the above the dr filer and this is in a straightforward way there is a key point that double dips by asking to introduce the will two units into a non-complying structure the attorney says it didn't expand the non-complying structure she's missing the point it if xavend but ads this maximum amount of development in the buildable area and uses the non-restricted comeplegic structure the results is no different than a new prestige that is an, an overlay of the currently property larkin
1:52 am
elevation on top of the green outline it is the existing structure the red the add the small blue is proposed for removal the room is the rear yard line we are happy to see some of the structure removals but palace in comparison what is added sponsoring reusing the structure for residential purpose without expansion beyond the envelope and construct a units for preserving the light and air by 2007 legislation stacey the pacific as mohcd the project sponsor we want you to commissioners for the sponsor and others neighbors to know we support housing and like helping open this site we ask you to recognize what the sponsor is
1:53 am
asking for development of the entire lot this is not the rights building this location. >> please do not approve that design for variance thank you. >> speakers in support of dr requester. >> we - >> thank you. >> we prepared two minutes. >> yeah. >> i apologize hello my name is maurice good evening planning commission board i was introduced to this project through a friend of mine a neighbor i'm in the lower middle polk i'm here to represent somewhat of our neighborhood my friend was saying this project would cause air space to be blocked and his
1:54 am
view now i don't know how many other people in the room is for this or against e against it i was wondering how to show the pictures on my cell phone. >> face the cell phone that. >> sorry. >> so how do you do this. >> lay it down. >> other way. >> oh. >> i'm in any at that and how do you blow that up i'll run through each picture. >> you're not going to have time we may a question for you thank you. >> andrew madden. >> just to be clear it is the second hearing i have one
1:55 am
minute. >> thank you good afternoon, commissioners i'm andrew i own a unit next door to the project sponsors development the variance that the sponsor is requesting it significant we found in research quite unusual essentially a version it is required when when non-compliment structure not used for this wants to introduce essential units we were only able to find 6 instances that have been acted upon in the last decade 5 of those 6 cases did not involve any expansion in any part of the building including the buildable area that i've provided the variance decision letters to the secretary the key point is in each of these cases a trade off a project sponsor can have residential use with a
1:56 am
non-complimented or knock it down with a code compliant structure. >> thank you. >> (calling names). >> good evening commissioners i'm got in the pacific avenue for 25 years. >> i want to follow up on the other surveillance that were granted for conversion of floifrpt buildings off the allows of 6 projects we found the one important specific is leveling 77 howard this is large in scale the existing building a a lot like the one on pacific a industrial building that covers 100 percent
1:57 am
of the lot the developer the developer can have proposal for fuel development area while retaining the no knowledge compliment structure didn't double begin making made a choice within reusing the building with high ceilings ceilings or demolishing it. >> thank you, sir, your time is up. >> we may have questions, sir. >> i can turn this into the secretary. >> thank you. >> can i please have the projector. >> good evening i live nearby the housing in the industrial building we can reuse that to accommodate the residential he project sponsor can reuse it as see without adding to the frond or don't worry about that code
1:58 am
compliant with our building we seek after the demolition up to a 4 story with the pacific with a preference for 3 stories on the setback the building has a side setback along larkin with 10 feet in above the second story if we can have a setback above second story the setback helps with a loss of the light and air on both the rear of the buildings what want to be clear this is a new building for demolition. >> thank you (calling names). >> i want to follow up that
1:59 am
conversion variance i hear the rangers with the developer making and choices with you look at the graphic this project wants to take advantage the non-conforming and wants to build out the buildable area if you approve that ever non-conforming building will be views to drive a truck - please don't let this sponsor to have an fully built addition if so a horrible precedent in our neighborhood in chinatown and the bayview south of market and it will be a resoundz debate for the people that working hard for this commercial if you ask this is really something that - thank you very much. >> thank you.
2:00 am
>> thank you commissioners i'm i have a house an mccormick been in the neighborhoods since 1989 with the roof decks there are not many our block has no such roof deck one was added to a building on the other side of the block a problem for the neighbors the project design should have visible mitigation especially to the entering block accustomed to this the current plan shows fronting bedrooms of the units those decks are poor design and run krntd to pacific avenue controls that is a intend to preserve the liveable of the patterns the neighborhood special circumstances of other neighborhoods blocks in the
2:01 am
building an larkin and mccormick sit tight with a orient with the mid block open space. >> thank you. >> my name is kenny live on mccormick street it recent explained to us by a planner who worked for thirty years non-structural rooms in buildings have a limit useful life and will be torn down over time to mac make way for the structures that follows the rules of zoning district in this situation those are railways dated from 1960 things get old and torn down and other buildings were constructed question live in a time the exorbitant heirs rules and it is
2:02 am
possible and economically feasible to connect a large new edition so 0 century old building this is a property owner with a non-complying structure or building phlebnew rules thank you. >> we represent between indicate and broadway the proposed project on pavlgz pacific avenue is within you are boundaries and can't support it we appreciate the project sponsor investment into the neighborhood by creating more housing units and non-commercial space, however, the project sponsor should maintain a 4 percent setback requirement under the planning code this will bring that building auto the non-coming from use classification we see two setbacks demolish the front building and build with the low
2:03 am
rate parking or to from the building is not wanting to demolish remove the private terraces for the two location in summary is he urge the project sponsor to follow our recommended changes prior to granting approval it is a fair outcome for all party involved thank you. >> is there any additional public comment? >> in support of dr. >> seeing none, project sponsor 3 minutes. >> good evening, commissioners project sponsor architect we came to it project a little bit late and get caught we reviewed and in good detail the hearing with our comments in mind i'll briefly go over the revisions we made to address the
2:04 am
commissioners questions or comments at that time first of all, we organizing the facade of building we organized the commercial and lobby tonight together for more transparency and lifts did height of the for ground for more since of a presence on the street and we organized it so the driveway was over to the west side of the site and therefore allowing the commercial area for more presence on the street the preliminary initial in this project has been the massing and i think clearly we've done a lot to setback in the rear yard and many places up to 4 to 10 feet and eliminated the private penthouse stairs and setback all the terraces and at the top floor we setback on both larkin and on the east side 4 feet
2:05 am
predominantly the area of the building more light and air and we reduces the height of the parapet in the back with the existing building in the back down an average which of 7 feet and thus giving more light and air to the this we moved the two units in the rear that you saw before that i think brought to ifshz attention we moved to this area with their own private terraces it steps down in a gracious manner so the three percent rear yard is now reduced down to only 3 feet above the garage floor and one of the issues has been interesting where is the grade around this building why are we not fully quarry the reason a lot of the
2:06 am
buildings are non-compliment neighbors only one building that is adjacent with a colonel applying rear yard they've been scooped out and the paramount is at the top of that on ma exotic we're going two feet below grade i talk a little bit about the speak up we provided 24 open space is 25 percent code compliant and we brought this building to a code compliant working closely with staff an this and to that extents our open space in this building clustering the top terrace 5 times the required minimum. >> thank you. >> speakers in support of project sponsor. >> seeing none, dr requester
2:07 am
no. there's no rebuttal okay. before we deliberate i have a couple of questions i think that people are given a thought, sir can you come up i have a question about where you're going with your - >> pictures. >> not the pictures you mentioned precedent excuse me - finish our thought to help us that would be great. >> yes. thank you. i appreciate my last name is g a n d i no problem. >> what i was finishing on was that we if you could magnify on this specific part where i have it bent we know the zoning administrator ca considers this type of a variance as as tasted because of
2:08 am
the condition and self-approvals as shown in the condition one essentially this condition as a because you have to keep the noncompliant structure future instructions in the building area requires a new variance the zoning administrator may say he put that condition on a lot of evaporates that two is the point with you get something in the rear you may not be able to build in the front i'm requesting based on that, please don't allow to the sponsor to have that both ways we were their double dipping as opposed to following what other followed and thank you very much i appreciate this portion the commission is closed commissioner antonini. >> there were changes years ago one of the changes that was put into place this 45 percent rear yard and the other change was to allow you know the height
2:09 am
on the front end to be i believe it was 40 feet and, you know, this is what the project sponsor was asking for they're not getting things additional in the front there is a parapet 40 feet height this is conforming and the other part the rear yard is now at grade or low below grade it is 3 feet so lower than the grade before and it is 25 percent and we've been told that we can do armenian in the averaging allows this to be 25 with little rear yard that's the only thing we're giving to the sponsor 9 rest is all conforming as far as i, see there is almost everything we'll we've asked for they've given we asked them to make the rear yard
2:10 am
into a rear yard they move forward the structure in connection with the building itself and asked for more space on both sides and added a 5 square foot sixth district and 7 feet on the first thirty feet of the structure that are on larkin street will and both structures have they're light comes from the pacific and 7 feet is not a bad separation a lot of the single-family homes with 6 feet between them and get more jerps as. >> get further back things with these cut back to the minimum on the structures on the roof an elevator in the two penthouses is the minimum they've improved the commercial space and improved the design they've providing us with the units ever very nice housing with the 5, three bedrooms and
2:11 am
two, two's and average of plus square footage so some a little bit larger and smaller i've been out to this site and work with the dr requester and project sponsor so i'm very happy i like the new all of the evidence i think this does the things we've asked them to do i'm in favor of the project. >> commissioner moore. >> this project leaves me with a number of questions he acknowledging the new architect does some the elements of the site i believe there are still a number of issues that have of great concern to me for one i am uncertain why this is to reuse with the construction no calculations old foundation and new foundation i'm not sure what i see but i do not see this
2:12 am
project has answers all questions this commission raised the most important to design relative to the approximate proximity of the buildings that u button this property that's not successful on for example, for the issues of privacy the 8. 2 i believe that all this side west si west side and east side the terraces that look crossing the rear side of larkin street basically, not meeting the requirements for the privacy we talk about in all and ever other project that aside it basically would require that that building starts to express
2:13 am
and becomes a smaller building on the east and the west side we have private terraces from bedrooms to the west, we have roof deck occupying the terraces in l-shaped kind of create very large private open spaces learn some of the units we're approving this commission i believe this project overall is too logger largo of what we're proposed to to do ♪ area i have concerns with how we define grade i don't believe that aside street four to five percent to which this building is at paut a deck on open space is correct interpretation sense you have indeed ungraded planted in the soil of open spaces to the south and east side of the
2:14 am
project i believe that there is a definition of what constitutes at least my impression a larger green space which leaves the neighborhoods in its small sensitivity from the o profess building that it was and clearly amnesty the building to participate in the context so it is the makings, the enar tuition of privacy and not respectfully the prosper opens the east side and west side and including this open space i'll suggest that the overall number of private terraces and rooftop gardens of the private subdivision of this open space is not in the state of how we have few or no roof decks in this area he would basically see this needs to be rejauftsd so to the that moment
2:15 am
with those observations i can't support the project and don't think that this is stuff disclosure on a number of issues >> thank you. i guess the question for corey teague several speakers bought up the double dpw you can't have to both ways gives the definition of the rules in terms of non-conforming structure and the surveillance. >> so corey teague assistant zoning administrator i think one speaker pretty put it pretty well the code is set up to say you have allowed to retain the structures and ultimately if you can bring them into conformity that's great or leave as is in this case it if you have a building not with a rear yard
2:16 am
and want to maximize the envelope there is nothing in the code that says a rear yard surveillance or modifications can't be granted but not continuing a process the concern because of vacant property they'll only been building an envelope with the situation essentially building a envelope and retain a certain amount of yard. >> i guess the question for the gentleman we have to many an enormous i wish you were more familiar i didn't see that a few weeks the above grade and below grade where the deck is that built on top of how does that work i only liken it to my dwrard sleeps if i want to put a fence up it goes
2:17 am
with the lot it is a 10 foot lot to make it even this is a platform with different grades around that who is at base for that. >> we use the floor the existing floor concrete floor the garage building as our fwrad, if you will, and this deck right now by code in the rear yards can be raised 3 feet above grade and this is a very code complying the zoning administrator was decree and what happens around the site is this site right here on mccormick the grade is at natural grade my understanding and it's points scooped out and the mccormick sites are always sleeping up those properties
2:18 am
along here had natural grades reduced to the basement level they are below what we call our grade back here this is been clearly this itself - >> i'm sorry. >> in the sense this is a manipulative higher grade those properties have over time scooped the basements out so thankful made their basements into living spaces that's fine but only one of those buildings this wyoming's one as their own code compliant the other 11 properties don't dr. complying arranged in terms of the depth the larkin street this specific does slope down gentle towards the west that's why the natural grades between the larkin street is lower since they've between scooped out we don't know a natural grade we have a
2:19 am
replenish admonish of grades around the building. >> flaektd that concrete floor is what anything. >> underneath is presumably indisturbed soil. >> so just the concrete floor it you blow it up it is a creating concrete grade and i think so it has been there almost one hundred years. >> scompln. >> yeah. i was bimentd by the architect while there isn't a provision asking for the 45 percent rear yard no one else has a rear yard dwp equip one rear yard up think this project is done a lot of things i certainly would be receptive to any modifications i assume the
2:20 am
organizations from are co-sponsor is the top part of the building ramp the decks further back because i was on the decks of some of the houses in mccormick i don't see why those decks are for interview the privacy so i'll be willing to hear that but don't see anything wrong with the project and as we we're talking about the compliance appearance a dr this is a code compliant project it is dr because of it's neighborhood and you know instituted dr so what has to be shown something that exceptional or extraordinary with those moichgsz i have a trouble finds that exception we tend toward not a lot of instructors on the tops of building but assess we
2:21 am
need an slate and stairways way before i ask you to speak i have a question in the packet only page 2 it has what the commissioners were to modify the project and the structure. >> you okay okay. no problem the commissioners made a following suggestions to modify i want to go over to understand what we're removing the structure at the rear looks like they did that is - can you give us a read. >> so what happened in that case in this situation is by removing it from the rear
2:22 am
property line and attaching it to the back of the building it has exacerbated what we're hoping would be eliminated bowl eliminating those two units we realized that one commissioner side or one person at the commission maybe you can think about attaching it to the rear of the sgrasht it into the fronted building, however, sgrabt it operationally is one thing and attaching it at the back the building is yet another base new there are 7 additional properties that are effected by that attachment one is personally my own this is lights on there and the properties on the mccormick streets coordinating across from the properties.
2:23 am
>> the structure effects how many properties. >> the revised structure is 20 properties. >> from and the existing conforming and non-conforming is what. >> it effects the non-conforming as is it would be we have been would be. >> right but it effects the same amount of prompts properties. >> that's correct. >> we incorporated the parking they did. >> at the did not. >> oh, they did not okay so i apologize setback from larkin along 17 feet of area. >> excuse me - i believe they had it at thirty feet and the front building between pacific and larkin is sorry it is all dark. >> move back the units for the other units you've talked about
2:24 am
comes to the experience of the rear yard and review as it is vacant lot. >> they have not done that they tenderloin from what we have been able to tell a lot of changes up to 3 days ago. >> but they said they've not by placing the two one bedroom units now what is occurred they've still embolism on the 45 percent rear yard setback and if i may just say this one thing section one 34 doesn't identify the mohcd to averaging the rear yards not identified maybe assumed because of the other
2:25 am
districts that it would be compute but needed specifically identified and . >> can you examine on that corey teague with the zoning administrator she's correct the there's a precision in section one 34 the rear yards basically said that district with a 4 percent requirement will with the average generally speaking that provision only applies to residential indignity and within of the reasons that that subdivision it set up that way historically our commercial district only had a three percent in the city with a rear yards never a need at that point to have the avrmg in the districts but it is correct that average is not available for to property even this is 45 percent
2:26 am
requirement. >> more massing at the ground floor with the open space and i'm sorry what did you say and provided a shorter massing at the ground floor with the open space. >> i believe i wasn't there when that i can't say you know that at least two of the commissioners including commissioner president fong said that is the building makings is two aggressive now this is more aggressive we have are more massing and the setbacks consider it to modify the with the revisions a limousine. >> i want to do the same thing get a summary of the structure of the rear. >> the three brought the last
2:27 am
25 percent to grade and it brings about a completely different project with the below grade. >> financial feasibility and everything live and this is a setback and we'll provided the setbacks along larkin street for the building facade we were looking at the street 82 you need to full width but provide a section it is opens up a point where the building was across larkin now we'll have setbacks there. >> move back move the back units to the front with the other units. >> we've done that. >> with a greater than 4 percent rear yard. >> we evaluated that can we bring the grade the mid lot to
2:28 am
grade incorporated to do that chop the building in half and not accommodate parking with the staircases and everything it if work. >> so the cement. >> yeah. that's why we put the grade at the rear and the savings accounts of the side. >> we've deny that with the rooftop alone. >> now provide with the open space. >> we did that question brought it down to the grade and we have it thank you. >> can i make one more point the one big obviously all along this is an industrial building in a residential block given an opportunity to make this a residential building and provide 9 units when we did as revisions we've tucked back and lost 33 percent of the residential area
2:29 am
and a loss of 2 three bedrooms so our average a tloouks i think with 33, 2 and 3, one we have them in housing but we do want to keep that obviously to provide more united and make percentage better. >> thank you commissioner antonini. >> yeah. we do something some years back it was finished and reused of what was a parking garage prior to that a repair facility and they did go somewhat higher and add some on the back i think that was you know it it had impacts there was a small additional on the south side i can't remember the alleys name it was russel and you know
2:30 am
it was very well done with commercial on the ground floor level this is not unlike that? taking some of the existing structure down i have a question for you regarding height of the building the units are being added on if you will could tom mike. >> okay - what is the existing height of the building at this particular time. >> above grade as much. >> we'll call fwrad for our purposes the existing floor level the existing building which is the mid point at the pacific avenue and this will be the floor of this part right here and that's
2:31 am
what it's all about. >> that's 20 feet above grade and in the the existing building 21 a little bit lower at this which is where we pushed 2 one bedrooms i don't think so why the dr requester is saying it made more of an impact it seems like. >> i'll agree. >> yeah. i don't understand that part thank you. >> i'd like to make one for the record it was made there were 21 units growing units effected that's innovates true there are 10 contiguous properties and one of the contiguous is code compliant at 25 percent so i want to make that very, very clear we're trying to make sense for the past builders that built into
2:32 am
their propelling this is the fit is. >> i understand what you're doing the other thing i on the dr requester put up a line at the 45 percent rear yard that's where the taller section the 40 foot section ended so as you good from there it is the rear section zero grade or 3 feet whatever the grade. >> correct i don't think so the impacts here the only thing i can possibly entertain the depth on the top if they're necessary for the project to go forward i will listens to what the the commissioners think if this has any merit. >> the one thing we did the
2:33 am
destine you saw on february 11th had anti to the edge of this we set them 5 feet so the prospective from the public area public realm will not be 44 more like 40 starting feet so we made that concession. >> i understand you did that from the - their setback. >> i think so. >> we'll see i don't see the harm in the decks i'll see what my fellow commissioners have to say. >> commissioner moore. >> i just wanted to ask the gentleman as it whether or not you looked at the sanborn map i think the buildings that are there we are built prior to the code prescribing the required rear yard you referred to as non-compliant that is a
2:34 am
residential neighborhood i assume i want to take issue where your paycheck to non-conforming rear yard when they were existing prior to the codes explaining the rear yard but the code you gave a number of years ago it required the property to provide 4 percent below grade is basically non-complienlt and explain what you're showing on the section where at least the way i read the section describe it to me tell me where the section and i fail to see that's my problem at least. >> 83.3. >> yeah. a section drawings agriculture yes. >> north of section drawings through the building showing the rear yard in the way your
2:35 am
proposing to configure it and amended i mentioned it you're telling me telling the commission our rear yard operates on is same level as your ground floor on which you are locating parking; is that correct. >> no, i didn't make that stipulation the drawings unfortunately, we reduced that rear yard deck to 3 feet we're showing 5 feats on the drawings and would you mind putting that on the overhead and push it up it's the east west higher-up there we go. >> i have a different section drawing this deck right here on our drawing is 5 feet above the
2:36 am
garage. >> uh-huh. >> we have agreed to reduce that our new graphic that was submitted reduced that to 3 feet our understanding from tplannin staff is that 3 feet above grade is code compliant we're using this elevation from the parking level we think is the natural grade of this building. >> what i'll surprised about is that the concrete floor does not reach to the rear of the property that at least in the section drawing i have here it looks like the floor has been rays above above dash grade and it's on top of i don't understand we're not able to put the gasped on the grade and i
2:37 am
want it ask the accountants architect that have a holds on mccormick talk about the transition between his garden and this particular rear garden would you mind coming up you testified your property adjoins this how do you see the grade different and your response what is presents presented. >> i own with an - and properties on the larkin street side are 3 feet below and all their levels are one foot above grade except my property the national natural grade their drawings show the grades in the
2:38 am
back of the building and college that is down at the level of their lot. >> it is clear enough but from our prospective your describing it more into obligation then remodels will this building provide it on existing grade on soil. >> certainly they're taking out the first slab of the first three percent and raising the grade 5 feet now they're only going to raise it 3 feet and putting the slab back in at that level. >> thank you for explaining that i said earlier the drawings are not executive setting back this building apart from the neighborhood a modification of
2:39 am
on grade gardens with real soil this is really what the 45 percent rear yard tries to have eve if so a smaller rear yard it should operate on grade and soil in addition we want to commend - thank you sir, i know you came as a second architect and of these it harder i believe the building to the site east side as well as to the west side has pulled back a little bit but not prove or disprove deal with the issues of privacy we're still having opted out portions of the side roofs we have balconies coming from bedrooms and living room into the opted out roof and i believe this the rear terrace
2:40 am
on unit 203 and 4 would also need to hold back in line with the building in order to create a proper spapgs between the properties when people stands on the terraces at the, a lot both other people's bedrooms he find that unacceptable this project has a lot of issues and evolved i think i don't think we can redesign the building but this this needs more work i can't support this as is. >> thank you commissioner antonini. >> i'll be amenable to make minor changes one of them would be it seems to me what rear yard grade see he'll be willing to take dr and drop the grade to who's considered the soil level of people have spoken to for the 25 percent rear yard
2:41 am
and then also want to ask commissioner moore to tell me about the seat that is bothering her i'm not sure whether it is to take the decks out or make them smaller what's your interest. >> not a question of that that sensitivity towards the privacy of the adjoining buildings the earth hoa's to make to the sliding doors and proximity to maximum misses all and every inch of potentially usable space at the acceptance of labors this requires more than talking where the things occur but someone looking at this more wholeheartedly. >> naomi kelly in most of the discussions we talk about an urban environment people have
2:42 am
decks if people don't want privacy they don't have to pull the shades this is plastering whole thing a distance so, anyway i think let's hear i'll see what my fellow commissioners have to say and commissioner hillis. >> so on this you know, i agree with commissioner moore we're not there yet this project tends to be tired and angry but i think that the positive thing actually a great potential we've added to the confusion with that discussion and tried to check off boxed that kind of some of that intent we're trying to do but in total i don't think we're we're not there yet it is a challenging site but you're
2:43 am
trying to keep the existing building and work with that are demo it and build a new project this is hallway there a potential either way i've talked about about the project sponsor we keep the two units in the back and drop the grade with a smaller front i know i have parking needs and concerns they have at grade parking that is causing problems in the retail use so i think we need to steps back and ask the planning department to look at it is working with the pardon and a couple of us and try to challenge ourselves to get a better project here warranty think i take responsibility we've given you comments that contradicted with
2:44 am
other people's comments and we're not there yet we'll 2009 get there with a project is disappoints us all i think there is a built in environment we have to keep in mind but i think that is a great site with a great project on that will work we're not there yet you know i'll be open to continuing it and working on that or hopefully you know engage the staff and a couple of folks from the neighborhoods and, sir but to get a better project i think we can be proud of her. >> is that a motion. >> sure. >> i'd like to not give it a time i realize we've put you back this is the second bite but want to get it right. >> nibble at it. >> a quick note that was
2:45 am
reviewed with the staff and the designer at the policy cooperation light here we go that would be helpful if we had some type of - i know - >> i understand i don't think that that caused the problems last time we give individual direction and you know differently peep had different ideas and end up not there in the past we've done a process a couple of us get engaged with you and others from the staff as well as the architect and tried to come to a quick resolution of a project that i think could work better. >> thanks. >> maybe that's pie in the sky by - >> so i guess a couple of things i like continuing it and commissioner hillis and
2:46 am
commissioner moore on the sub group with the design i guessed a thought that rising above the conversation here it seems like retaining the existing portion of the existing structure kaufrgz issues to me start over i know 2 seems like that the cost engineering for what is there from a greater point of view and money point of view i get it but lastly i look at the project from the sky i can't help think of all the zoning administrators in noah valley it is reasonable like a hotel resort with all the decks and that is a compound sitting in the middle of the area i'll definitely try to ask you to open up and make that less resort i know usual maximumings
2:47 am
that but it is so close to everything. >> commissioner antonini. >> yeah. i think continuing summoned will have to be one time more but ask the project architect to make all those things we're hearing. >> i would like to get common direction i think that you know we came to la and we had to pick up the parts and working closely is w the staff and had neighborhood meetings and meet our february 11th comments i think we read them well and he thought we designed it responsibly to
2:48 am
those comments but what so proudly we hailed at the twilight's last gleaming? you guys have to bear the burn to tell you what you're directions are you know if this is too big the project sponsor does want to retain this building and it is an adapt active reuse to destroy that this and start over it is a totally deft project that's not in his goal program right now i'll say that maybe i'm systematically b spoke for him but to tune this up a little bit we'll need to get evans comments back and forth i don't think anything will happen shorter think outside the box that a very nuanced project. >> june 30th. >> i'll recommend that date and okay. let's continue to june 30th i'll add a couple of
2:49 am
things there seems to me about the grade level of the rear yard and not being low enough so i think that is one thing it has to be what we consider upgrade that something i heard and heard the commissioners talk about the location size of decks on both the top of the higher part of the structure as well as the ones on the east and west i'm not assessing you have to listen to to the the commissioners and if they're in a narrower form or eliminated those are the only 20/20 things i've heard that makes anything needed to be done i'm hearing from the other commissions there are new issues that are not protected it is what it is that's the thank we
2:50 am
deal with. >> commissioners if i may jump in i think i heard from commissioner hillis was a suggestion that a couple of commissioners sit down and work rather than having a before and after contradiction so the couple of commissioners will sit down with staff and sit at the table rather than a dialogue it is challenging reverent. >> so i'll suggest that we sit up a meeting as quickly as possible is commissioner hillis and commissioner moore and little project sponsors. >> on pennsylvania and to the projects that were members from other groups. >> i didn't there were 3 people from the neighborhood extremely successful way of doing things conversations challenges yet great exchange of
2:51 am
bringing it. >> commissioner hillis will be having the same level especially sits on the commission. >> thank you. >> can i ask for more classification for direction. >> commissioner moore. >> director rahaim i appreciate your summarizing what i think commissioner hillis summarized preferred way of doing it also paraphrasing we think things somebody said but start with an open mind and fresh and highlighting the activities and the conflict and the potential solutions and move forward with a clean slate nothing and everything is on the table to discuss to agree on with a positive way this is the housing size no doubt in my mind about this is i know you will
2:52 am
have a sixth body of experience and nothing is undoable except the realistic questions and certain observations we have normal than you participate in the conversation he feel this is the best way of handling it. >> if i may pest of that will be helpful in the community can identify two or three people. >> ms. tucker are you prepared to do that now can you please come up and let us know. >> let me talk with practical please carry on conversations out in the hallway. >> there is a motion that has been seconded to continue this matter to june 30th and to have community meeting with at least 2 of the commissioners to be part of that commissioner
2:53 am
antonini. >> commissioner hillis commissioner johnson excuse me. sxheer commissioner wu and commissioner vice president richards so moved, commissioners, that motion passes unanimously 4 to zero and place you on general public comment i have no speaker cards. >> any general public comment no seeing none, the meeting is adjourned. >> at 62942 working with
2:54 am
2:55 am
2:56 am
2:57 am
2:58 am
together we can support your children. it's been my dream to start is a valley school since i was a little girl. i'm having a lot of fun with it (clapping)
2:59 am
the biggest thing we really want the kids to have fun. a lot of times parents say that valley schools have a lot of problems but we want them to follow directions but we want them to have a wonderful time and be an affordable time so the kids will go to school here. we hold the classes to no longer 12 and there's 23 teachers. i go around and i watch each class and there's certain children i watched from babies and it's exciting to see them after today. the children learn how to follow
3:00 am
directions and it ends up helping them in their regular schooling. they get self-confidents and today, we had a residual and a lot of time go on stage and i hope they get the bug and want to dance for the rest of their >> good afternoon i'm calling the meeting of san francisco public utilities commission to order my we have the roll call.