tv [untitled] January 26, 2012 7:18pm-7:48pm PST
and the subdivision itself was part of the overall project. this is a situation where we had existing lots of record that were bought by the same ownership. but may be developed in different ways over time. generally speaking in a situation like this, when it comes to affordable housing, the same ownership, the rule of thumb is 10 years. but again, there is no exact criteria. especially when we're not talking about one development lot, some are not real streets. there are other criteria to look at. regarding ceqa, it depends on how the bloc is developed in the future. and when. if these homes are approved and are constructed, once they are constructed, they are part of the environment at that time and any new proposal after that will undergo its own review and those
homes will be considered part of the existing environment. if they are not constructed yet and there are proposed -- proposals for new development depending on how large the development is and what type, it could trigger a larger review for a larger portion of the block or the entire block. there are different types of scenarios, it is hard to get at everyone. this is a high-profile area. this has been going on for some time. i feel like the affordable housing and the ceqa issue is going to be something that will -- we will keep our eye on in terms of how the bloc is developed. >> that explains a lot of the questions and concerns. you have heard what the guidelines are and also the ceqa thing depends upon what is existing at the time. the next single house, two houses, six houses, it is hard to say how many might come and the larger the project, the more
environmental oversight may be necessary. it could be that they could be all -- done and that impact was deemed to be less. there was some talk about these massive houses. 22 -- 2200 square feet is not massive. having seen the site, if they stepped down the hill as houses have to, you have two floors and the rest of them go down the hill. if you make them any less square-foot it she will not have anything to work with. you have frontage is on two of them. it is 18-8 on the other. you only have so much lot to work on as the lots are divided. you have to have enough different steps down that hill to make it to a reasonable size home. the other thing that is good about these is they aren't new three-bedroom homes, i believe. that is something we're not
building enough of in san francisco and for families who want new housing, who do not want to put money into an already expensive home and remodel it to fit their family's needs, this is a very saw after and important thing we should try to do wherever we have available siting. it is appropriate that it is. the other thing that has been pointed out is there is a separation of 90 feet between this last of these houses. the closest one to joye. other houses could be built there someday. now the impact is fairly minimal. 90 feet is a pretty good-sized separation in san francisco today. the other issue about fire slopes, the sewers, and footing, these are issues that are the province of the fire marshal and
others who would have to come in and make sure this is in conformity. it is not our place in the permitting process to evaluate those things. they conform to the bernal heights sud as well as the eastern slope. the parking goes by square footage. when you have 2000 square feet you have to have to car parking which is with the half. and all these other things that are parts of this which are more restrictive than any other place in the city they conform to. i do not see any reason, anything unusual or extraordinary. in this i hope. developers can work with staff on design, particularly the part that faces brewster straight and
try to make it contextual with the homes which are nice looking homes and were built in the last 10 or 15 years. you know the exact date probably. done. commissioner sugaya: i have a quick initial question. there is a map that was submitted by ms. barkley that shows various lots around the construction area proposed project. dates that are noted as construction dates. the one on -- the ones on brewster are indicated on her mouth as being built sometime since 2000. >> the ones across the street? i'm not sure the exact date.
the last 1015 -- 10 to 15 years. >> joy street itself, she has three lots in green which are from the 1990's. >> that particular document was developed by the neighbors. to show what had been developed in the last 10 years and i put that up to show it. that is their product. commissioner sugaya: thank you. if i have a question i will get to it in a second. if you look at the ones in green since 1990, if you look at google street view, those buildings are three or four stories tall. i am getting the argument that the ones that we're supposed to be considering taking are too
tall and too big. and yet these structures are not that much smaller than the ones being proposed, at least in the view i am looking at which is in the backyard area. that is an observation. i may have some questions later. commissioner moore: i believe technically all questions that come with steep hillsides in san francisco were answered, much more detailed than we normally ask for. what i observed since this project has met so much opposition for so many years,é would be one building or three buildings or 2 1/2, it would still be the same questions and i understand when you live in an area where you have an open hill, it is difficult to imagine
a could be developed. technical questions would arise. i believe this city takes extraordinary care especially when it comes to fire prevention to areas of hillsides that are less than desirable to build on which i'm sure you have encountered. we have people who have done this kind of work who are specializing in building in this situation and there would be foolish to come here and say you can build when you cannot. it would not be in the interest of their own practice to say something which does not work. i find the differentiation of three buildings being designed together in this site very interesting and i think it's dresses for me to the subtleties to create a new context which i think is responsive to th that e
already there. there are more or less connected but have already. this makes them more intriguing to me. i think there respond to this circumstance and they respond to this circumstance that neighbors who currently do not have a straight -- there will find parking on the street. parking is not a birthright. if you find a street where somebody accommodates through their design there would be parking space, i have found that very sensitive to the context and i think accommodating. it is clear this building has made every effort to, while they have provided their own parking, they are sensitive to the fact that street parking is available for those who do not have it and live in the circumstance where if you have to rely on having it in walking distance. i am supportive of the design. bé future,
i do not know. i wish the city could afford to buy this but that goes beyond the purview of this commission. i am in support to approve and will make a motion to approve. >> second. >> a couple of comments. ♪:÷ç architect designing three buildings next to each other, variations on a theme, if i can put it that way. this is something that is traditional in san francisco. you find it in the late 1800's through the mission district. and other areas of san francisco. you find at -- it's in the western part, you find it all over. this is very common. there are whole blocks, let
alone three buildings together. the other thing, there was a comment made somewhat derogatory about spec homes. they are billed for project -- profit not to be occupied by individuals. i have no idea who would. i bought my own with my wife 37, 38 years ago from an architect, and 1870's house that we did that house for modern habitation on spec. half of san francisco's individual homes at least have been built on spec. there is nothing wrong with it. compared to the number of individuals who start from scratch on their own homes, most of them and coming to fruition
on spec. i really dislike the inference there is something wrong with that. that is decent business and it is part of the architect and the developer's right to do this. commissioner sugaya: i was going to add that. i was going to say that. probably most of the sunset, for example, was built by developers and subsequently bought. commissioner moore: that holds four russian hill, telegraph hill. -- for russian hill and telegraph hill. in this steep hillside, technically, it is far superior.
one building which has structural and other components which make it an easier thing to build and maintain. >> the motion on the floor is for all three buildings, 183, 187, and 193 brewster. commissioner sugaya, aye. the motion passes unanimously. you are now at general public comment. president miguel: is there public comment? public comment is closed. this hearing is finished.
i have problems sleepwalking at night. i wanted to create a show about sleep. a mostly due painting kind of story telling. these are isolated subject matters, smaller studies for the larger paintings. i fell in love with it and wanted to create more of them. it is all charcoal on mylar. it is plastic. i was experimenting and discovered the charcoal moves smoothly. it is like painting, building up layers of charcoal. it is very unforgiving. you have to be very precise with the mark-making. a mark dents the paper and leaves the material embedded.
you have to go slowly. the drawings are really fragile. one wipe and they are gone completely. it is kind of like they're locked inside. all of the animals i am showing are dead. i wanted them to be taking -- taken as though they are sleeping, eternal sleep. i like to exaggerate the features of the animals. it gives it more of a surreal element. it is a release subtle element. -- it is a really is subtle elements. the range of reactions people get is that normally they get what i am trying to achieve, the sense of calmness, it's really
gentle state of mind -- a really gentle state of mind, i guess. ♪ >> i think a lot of times we look a community and we say, there is this one and this one, and we all have our own agenda, when our agenda is to create great work. if you're interested in that, you are part of our community. >> it is a pleasure to have you here tonight. >> we are trying to figure out a way to create a space where theater and presentation of live work is something that you think of, the same way that you think of going to the movies. of course, it has been complex in terms of economics, as it is
for everyone. artistically, we have done over 35 projects in four seasons from presenting dance, producing theater, presenting music, having a full scale education program, and having more than 50,000 visitors in the building almost every year. a lot of our emerging artists generate their first projects here, which is great. then we continue to try to support figuring out where those works can go. we have been blessed to have that were produced in new york, go unto festivals, go on to the warsaw theater festival. to me, those are great things, when you see artists who think there is no or else of someone being interested in me being a woman of color telling her story and getting excited about it. that is our biggest accomplishment. artists becoming better artists.
what is great about surely coming back to brava, we have this established, amazing writer who has won a slew of awards and now she gets an opportunity to direct her work. even though she is an amazing, established writer, the truth is, she is also being nurtured as a director, being given space to create. >> and the play is described as ceremony and theater meet. in the indigenous tradition, when you turn 52, it is that the completion of an epic. the purpose of this ceremony is to celebrate. whenever you have been caring for the first 52 years, it is time to let it go. they have given me carte blanche
to do this. it is nice for me in the sense of coming back 25 years later, and seeing my own evolution as an artist and a thinker. the whole effort even to put the indigenous woman's experience center stage is very radical. because of the state of fear, it is a hard road to hold up an institution. it really is a hard road. i am looking at where we're 25 years later in the bay area and looking at how hard it is for us to struggle, to keep our theaters going. i would like to think that i am not struggling quite as hard personally. what i mean by that is that in tension, that commitment. what i see is that we're here to
really produce works of not be produced in other places, and also to really nurture and women of color artists. i think that that is something that has not shifted for me in 25 years, and it is good to see that brava is still committed to that kind of work. you know? ♪ >> happy birthday to you happy birthday to you ♪ >> windy will talk about the reflection of the community, we can only go with what we have on our staff. south asian managing director. african-american artistic director. latino outreach person. to us, aside from the staff, aside from the artists that we work with him being a reflection of oz, yes, the community is changing, but brava has always tried to be ahead of that, just
that sense of a trend. i tried to make about the work that shows the eclecticism of the mission district, as well as serving the mission. that is what i feel brava is about. ♪ >> good morning, everyone. i am one of the founders of foundersne end. this is a space for more entrepreneurs, technology and innovation. supporting it is near and dear to our heart. we are happy to welcome ron and
mayor lee here. founders and that is almost one year old. we have had 40 companies come through here to raise over $40 million in venture-capital. without further ado, i want to introduce you to one of our most preeminent angel investors, ron conaway. [applause] >> thank you and welcome. for those of you who do not know me, i am a third-generation san francisco and, for better or for worse. it was a decision my parents made in high school to move to atherton. i ended up staying there until three years ago and have been active in civic activities ever since. it is important to be involved in civic and philanthropic activities.
my day job -- and i am still very active in this job -- as an angel investor investing in bay area companies when they are what we call babies. these are start-ups that have two or three people, and sv angels funds those start-ups. one of the starters -- smartest decisions i made was only to invest in internet and software. we have invested in over 600 companies, many of them in the city of san francisco. for sure, today, we have set a record for any city in the country that has rallied and united the tech community to support collective, civic action. this never happened before. we are in the perfect storm with the election of mayor ed lee, to make this happen and to
accomplish a lot. ed lee, as interim mayor, stepped up for the tech community, he kept twitter in san francisco, got private stock option tech abolished, with the help of david chiu, and convened last april the ad hoc council, which i know he plans to reconvene as mayor. it was not easy to get ed lee to run for mayor. warren hellman and myself, and i know dianne feinstein and mayer brown as well, helped convince the end lead to run. it is one of the best meetings that warren and i have had, when we sat in his office for one hour, and we felt like we meant some headway, and we must have, because he is here.
it is not a coincidence -- it is a coincidence, that the tech community it is following the example that warren hellman has set for this community. warren hellman and i were very close friends, and i think upstairs right now, he has a huge smile on his face. he cared as much about san francisco as any of us. he loved the tech community. a majority of his investments were in tech. he really gets what we are trying to do, and we should advance his cause of civic engagement. after ed decided to run, the tech community rallied around him. in an effort today, not to lose any of them momentum, we are
forming this organization called sf citi. we do not want to lose the momentum for the tech agenda in san francisco, and we think this is an exciting day for us. we heard from ed in his neck inauguration when he declared san francisco the innovation capital of the world, and that is the charter that sf citi wants to but -- promote. his inauguration speech was not just a speech, but a call for action, and the tech community is responding today, less than one week after he gave that speech. we represent the new economy in san francisco, and with this partnership, we hope to create thousands of new jobs. that will be our first quarter. -- charter. we witnessed mayor ed delete during his