Skip to main content

tv   Board of Appeals 12517  SFGTV  January 27, 2017 4:00pm-8:01pm PST

4:00 pm
>> good evening, and welcome to the san francisco board of appeals. the presiding officer is commissioner honda and we are joined by our vice president commissioner fung and commissioner lazarus, commissioner bobby wilson and commissioner swig transportation authority is brad the deputy city attorney and provide the board with any needed legal advice and gary and my name is cynthia goldstein the board's executive director. we expect to be joined by representative we're joined by representatives from the city departments that have cases before this board. scott sanchez should be here the deserve and also representing the planning department and planning commission and senior
4:01 pm
building inspector joe duffy dbi please be advised the ringing of and use of cell phones and other electronic devices are prohibited. out in the hallway. permit holders and others have up to 7 minutes to present their case and 3 minutes for rebuttal. have up to 3 minutes - no rebuttal. to assist the board in the accurate preparation of the minutes, members of the public are asked, not required to submit a speaker card or business card to the clerk. speaker cards and pens are available on the left side of the podium. the board welcomes your comments. there are customer satisfaction forms available. if you have a question about the schedule, speak to the staff after the meeting or call the board office tomorrow
4:02 pm
we are located at 1650 mission street, suite 304. this meeting is broadcast live on sfgovtv cable channel 78. dvds are available to purchase directly from sfgovtv. thank you for your attention. we'll conduct our swearing in process. if you intend to testify and wish to have the board give your testimony evidentiary weight, please stand and say i do. please note: any of the members may speak without taking - do you solemnly swear or affirm the testimony you're about to give will be the whole truth and nothing but the truth? >> i do. >> thank you so we'll start with number one item one anyone wants to
4:03 pm
to the board any general public comment? seeing none, monarchy to item 2 the election of officers pursuant to the rules we hold officer elections he want wanted to take the opportunity to thank you commissioner honda and commissioner fung for their service and i think what we typically do start with the wanting office and take nominations and move on to vice president anyone here wants to nominee a colleague or themselves more office of president >> i'd like to nominate defense attorneyal honda i'll go with that. >> me, too.
4:04 pm
>> okay. any other nomination for this office okay. seeing none we have a nomination from commissioner swig to elect wanting honda for another term and indicated he's willing to serve that on on that motion i'm sorry public comment any public comment? that motion. >> thank you. >> seeing none, then i'll call roll on that motion commissioner fung commissioner lazarus commissioner honda and commissioner wilson i. >> okay. >> got to cough on that congratulations wanting honda moving on to the office of vice president and take nominations.
4:05 pm
>> i'd like to nominate the current vice president to do one more term please. any other nomination for that office and . >> willing to take it they should come forward. >> are you willing to serve. >> i am sorry. >> okay. so is there any public comment on the nomination of commissioner fung to be the vice president of the board. >> okay seeing no public comment. we have a motion from wanting honda to elect franklin functioning as the boards vice president on that motion we'll ask the vice president. >> i. >> and commissioner lazarus and commissioner wilson and commissioner swig
4:06 pm
okay. that motion carries we have the officers for the next year thank you very much. >> thank you very much commissioners. >> okay. so we'll move on on to item 3 which is commissioners questions or comments anything commissioners? >> item 4 the boards consideration and possible adoption of january 18, 2016, minutes unless additions, deletions, or changes may i have a motion to approve those minutes. >> so moved. >> any any public comment on the minutes seeing none, to adopt the minutes on that motion commissioner fung commissioner honda commissioner wilson and commissioner swig that motion carries the minutes are adapted moving on to item 5 the jurisdiction at market street thomas requester asking the
4:07 pm
board take jurisdiction over the application which was issued on september 16, 2016, by the department of building inspection the appeal period eventd in 2016 and the jurisdiction was filed on january 6, 2015, the permit holder is b b and the notice of violation alteration of stairs to item 2 first floor and notice of violation for remodeling of bathrooms we'll start with the requester mr. thomas 3 minutes to present our case to the board. >> good evening and welcome. >> sir. >> good evening. >> can i show - >> i mean - okay sorry.
4:08 pm
4:09 pm
>> sorry ladies and gentlemen, i was here about 6 months ago i believe i'm sorry, i was here about 6 months ago and i believe i saw everybody here then and this is the same case the conditions have changed but in many ways still the same based on the experience in the construction areas that is work at the budget and national hotel the building is one and 11 years old and out lived it's life a licensed contractor or workers would have considered it in months or less we're at months and counting people living in sros are
4:10 pm
considered homelessness their meant as transient corners for workers to stay for weeks or month due to a lack of development and by the appointed officials that are scores of those buildings in the city approaching over one hundred years old many a desire family in one room the living space is one hundred and 65 square feet for example, on may 18th the hand washing under the circumstances were removed and along with the toilets a couple of years ago hand washing sinks were insulate then for some reason removed and tuesday, january 24, 20178 months later
4:11 pm
in the bathroom has a sink people using the sinks can't wash their hands and go to the bathroom for 8 months. also two of the new installed toilets on the third floor are nonfunctioning and still to be installed on the second floor he reported a loss to the building and the department today tuesday, january 24, 2017, there is a raw sewage from the newly installed sewer drain sorry the residents of the budget inwere told all the bathrooms are going to be remoment but some are in the remodeled i was told there are no records of the building plans or the planning department contractor on this job has been sues by the city
4:12 pm
for using asbestos and performing substandard work the owner has been sued many times >> sir, your time is up. >> you want time in rebuttal. >> mr. thomas question for you this jurisdiction request most of your testimony was on the conditions upon which you want to be able to discuss the permit can you elaborate why you are late in filing this appeal. >> because a in filing a. >> we were - there was never a notice posted informing us we had what 15 days or whatever it is to.
4:13 pm
>> nothing on the lobby. >> never been a job card permit in my kind of notice of any type of of the substantial work that occurred was going to happen. >> of any kind. >> of any kind only after repeated trips to the health department did we get a notice of the abatement sign warning warning us that we shouldn't be in the building. >> thank you. >> thank you. >> okay we'll hear from the permit holder now. >> >> good evening and welcome. >> encourage. >> thank you very much mr. president, and commissioners i'm rich a lawyer at the hanson
4:14 pm
bridget law firm i learned about this procedure yesterday or would have gotten something to you in writing i'm higher to give you important context for this jurisdiction mr. thomas was one of four tenants who brought a had been ability lawsuit against the owners during the course the time the renovation work was in progress and made numerous complaints to the city about the conditions that lawsuit with all the condominiums he's related today was settled last october with mr. thomas and others getting a generous amount of money and if anythingness of unpaid rent that was done to complete the
4:15 pm
work that is not nine hundred and 99 percent complete that was signed off to be taken over by the tenderloin housing clinic they're prepared to take position and move forward but notably at the time mr. thomas settled and well paid last october he agreed first and foremost to withdraw the appeals he had previously done last year and not submitted with the renovation work or slow down it is also noted as part of that settlement i have a copy here i'll be happy to submit there was rent forgiveness that the work was not signed off but agreed as soon as the sign offs
4:16 pm
are done he's obligated to presume paying rent we have a cynical attempt by a tenant to try to manipulate the system to avoid paying rent i have copies in the commissioners are interested of the relevant pages of the settlement argument there be only 4 including his snatch agreeing to the terms that are now violate i have copies if you're interested. >> you can leave them with the clerk. >> are you done counselor. >> counselor we have questions for you. >> sure. >> have you ever been in the building. >> many times. >> okay ask you character listed it as 99.9 percent as of yesterday. >> have you been in the building to observe the photos
4:17 pm
as part of our brief that indicates that no more near applicable finished. >> depends on where and when you take the pictures. >> as of your visit yesterday it is 99.2 or are you pulling that back. >> i'll say in the 99s the gentleman is here with copies and pictures that were taken yesterday of the bathrooms in question and i have the hallway and the rest of work it takes a village this is indirect i learned about that yesterday when i learned this was underway i think everything is pretty much signed off except the final final and observing there are petitions to go up in the bathroom because the tenderloin housing clinic expect the
4:18 pm
patients in the total areas be brought to a lower part like an airport restroom that to my knowledge work began this morning i don't think if it is completed toy or tomorrow. >> do you know from the sink the tenants recorded as number one fundamental. >> i think all the sinks and totals are fundamental but obviously people from dbi will be out there to inspect for final sign off. >> counselor is there a reason it took so long to get those repairs done. >> is there a reason yes a lot of back and forth and
4:19 pm
discussions have continued that tenderloin housing clinic that basically specified the level of improvement he wanted and that discussion had continued and city continues but we're down to just cosmetic things at this time nothing fundamental to my knowledge. >> my second question council what's the occupancy of the be automatic to the best of my knowledge only 16 rooms opted out with the idea that was intend to have as few tenants as possible during the work, however, once the tenderloin housing clinic takes over they'll use 90 or 91 rooms. >> so the occupancy will be higher than. >> yes. with the tenderloin housing clinic we'll be working with the city to take area
4:20 pm
medium income or other people and the expected occupancy after they're fully leased ousted u out. >> booked up 90 to 91 rooms as opposed to the 16. >> is there anyone in the housing clinic here this hearing. >> i know mr. randy shaw had sent a communication i think to the board stating the importance of lot cost housing this shouldn't impeded. >> i've not heard whether or not the notice has about this properly. >> i can't commissioner fung speak to the nosey was not out
4:21 pm
there but tip line everything was route and i was unaware of any issue until yesterday when i first read this jurisdiction. >> so you don't know if there were any photos taken showing the notice was divided. >> i did not know i do know i can tell you the work has been going on for quite a long time and anyone living there or interand walking around will be well aware of all of that i know that permits have been pulled but not personally aware of that fact. >> thank you thank you. >> inspector duffy.
4:22 pm
>> good evening commissioner joe duffy dbi on the jurisdiction request hopefully, i'll bring some answers and light to some of the questions i too read the brief we have a housing inspector robert with me if you have any questions and he's familiar with the building been out there several times and will be able to update and as of this week i apologize for not letting you know i had a housing inspector with me the building permit that the jurisdiction was for complying with the notice of violation alterations of stairs to item number 2 first floor and inspection nov for the
4:23 pm
remodeling the bathrooms the builder inspector has done inspections i got a look at the drawings today and i did get a report that the work has been substantially done when i first looked at the brief as well i saw the photo of toilet that is typical during construction the petitions for the stalls have not been installed i too like commissioner honda was wondering why it took so long in your opinion those should be strieltd for the convenience i believe there was a holdup for the order for the stalls i was told by the a senior building inspector the building when i looked at the complaints today, i was
4:24 pm
quite frankly shocked i got two over 80 complaints on the building 80 complaints filed with dbi with housing and plumbing and others i'm sure there were over welder some open and some closed i look at the complaints with mr. thomas obviously a history in the building of complaints with the landlord/tenants and with that said, i do think that according to inspector lopez and buildings will back up him on this the work at the start regarding the notification that dbi housing inspection issued a notice of violation that got corrected i believe and the work is pretty
4:25 pm
much done it waiting for a final sign off the question on the sinks i read from the brief i will have a question about the drawings there is no existing plan on the proposed plan it is hard to know, however, i do know that dbi has not given the final inspection which any initial thought to go to the plumbing inspector permanent a requirement for this inches clearance from the toilet and the sink as far as i'm concerned, there to be a sink in there i do need to get to the bottom of of that. >> i'm available for any questions if you want an update from the housing inspector i'll
4:26 pm
be happy to bring him up. >> let's go back to the jurisdictions request does the building department require the photoic evidence of building. >> it's pardon of code. >> then it depends on the code on that - depends on the work that is being done and later finds it is disturbing work so maybe not everything the housing inspection did bring that up it was addressed the containment was done i think that things got off to a rocky start but in my opinion they're moving to a good conclusion. >> i have a question. >> go ahead i have one more
4:27 pm
mr. duffy. >> what was done to comply with two novs can you clarify the nature of the nov. >> i don't have the notice of violations with me but the annual notice of violation and put the bombards on the plumbing i think that was the work without the permit that started the work without a permit and dbi cited them and like i said things got off to the wrongs start i don't know they wouldn't have gotten a permit it was shocking but i think from what i'm told they're in a better place now. >> do you know who is the presidio. >> i looked at that up today is started as the owner builder i do so the gentleman's name i'm familiar with in pulling permits
4:28 pm
the owner is the owner builder. >> thank you. >> the electrical and plumbing permits which i don't have with me would have been issued to a licensed plumbing contractor under the - the building permit can be obtained through the contractor. >> we heard it characterized as 99.2 you said you've substantially done are but those bathrooms assessable and usable by the tenants or not. >> when they're finished they will be. >> but until in that time not assessable. >> you mean for something to
4:29 pm
use i saw the building plans their usable and basically in the same vicinity at the bathroom single occupancy. >> so if we take the jurisdiction and the completion of those bathrooms is extended and the work for the most part has to stop and therefore the use of those bathrooms are - >> are not. >> exactly. >> and that's why i think it was today as well can't make decisions if we are that close to getting an inspection opening an appeal will not stop the jurisdiction it took too long and not usable the one thing i'm concerned about it the sink i'll
4:30 pm
say this to the chief inspector i didn't get ahold of him i think we shouldn't sign off until we are 100 percent sure those tenants are the full vicinity of the bathrooms. >> so if we they're not usable today, if we take jurisdiction then they'll useable tomorrow they're closed metro phonetically tomorrow then whatever is dysfunctional as description might go on and on as well so what if we don't take
4:31 pm
jurisdiction how does the building department's assure us this is actually going to get done and council said 9.9 percent done. >> i think if it was not an appeal i don't know if we can continue the jurisdiction request but not sure that is an option if their 95.9 percent this is 51 percent given a couple of weeks should be finished you'll see - i'd like i'd like the inspector to know about this is a situation you have multiple complaints whether warden or not there was on the 18 of january mr. thomas filed 4 complaints with dbi on the 17 of january he filed four other
4:32 pm
complaints with dbi things must be pretty bad i'll ask why he took them that's a lot of 9 i heard another one 9 complaints in two days so i think we're - i'd like to try to get the permit filed in dbi and take that back. >> i think the other issue the tenderloin housing clinic i believe is taking over the property and trying to expedite it so fits their need. >> this is we can discuss in the discussion but always the issue the perpetrator is the owner can i get clarification on mr. duffy's statement about continuing. >> if we do a continuous. >> jurisdiction request didn't
4:33 pm
stop it you can continue the request and grant jurisdiction at at a later date. >> you want to hear from the housing inspector. >> correct. >> i'm the district housing inspector and 1139 is in my integrity i've received an excess of one hundred complaints entirely from mr. thomas and cited him for a number of violations and generally been good about taking care of the violations ranging from the fire alarm to whatnot in a fashion i
4:34 pm
cited them in june for a lack of public facilities when i first got there the construction was already in progress i don't know it is hard to say what was there before but doing a count of rooms the formula i determined they don't have enough public facilities i cited them and issued an order of abatement that case can't be cleared until they get the permits signed off and the bathrooms are back initially i cited them last june with the stairs. >> what is before us a jurisdiction request not the merits or non-merits if i may ask were you there when the - assigned when the project was started. >> no, i first came to the building because of a complaint i received and the work was in
4:35 pm
progress they demolished some of the bathrooms. >> do you have any knowledge of the attending permit. >> i did not. >> when were you last in the building. >> i was out of town last week and found out but earlier there this month. >> how far along was the completion the project. >> they have done substantial work i don't know if i go so far as to say 99 percent unless there's a lot of work since i was last there they had fair amount to do. >> what about the major complaints in this case. >> i know one was signed off and the shoulder were
4:36 pm
fundamental they're not the barriers between the toilets and one of the rooms i believe they intend to remodel the women's showers that was not there that time. >> thank you the council are pictures of the work if you have those pictures can you bring them up to the podium please. okay. >> good evening and welcome. >> hi, my name is karen i'm the owners son so i have pictures that were taken of the remodel shower rooms and the bathrooms. >> when were they taken. >> put them on the overhead
4:37 pm
please. so this is. >> sorry. >> one of the shower stalls in the communal shower rooms that were remodel this is one of 3 shower stalls just another wide picture. >> on the first and second floor there will be showers 3 shower stalls there and right now curtains but right now their shower doors are installed for ta cs request because of shower rooms. >> okay. you have more pictures i'm interested in seeing the bathrooms.
4:38 pm
>> yeah. yeah. >> thank you. >> so this is a just a single bathroom with one toilet common bathroom this is another bathroom on the first floor single bathroom and this is a bathroom with multiple toilets their missing the partition but their installed starting this morning and will take all day to complete the partitions i'm not sure if you want to see the pictures of hallway. >> i think we are fine thank you very much.
4:39 pm
>> okay any public comment on this item. >> commissioners sam dodge department of homelessness thank you very much for taking this item i hope you understand this is something we take seriously and look forward to the tenderloin housing clinic taking over this is important that we want to make sure this work is done right and this work is done in a way that will last for a long time we have confidence they're close very close to getting through there this is been a long project we have working closely with the owners to go through this and trust this process we're taking a lot of tourists units and convert them into permanehome units andd those for the homeless this is a
4:40 pm
great home and the com municipal that is a good building and will be a very good home the bathroom work is very important for us that it about usable for a full building and this is going to be a 91 unit building and we have hopes to start moving people in this not next month than march this is delayed we won federal support within the federal process the shelter plus care it takes a lot for housing permitting in this city were existed this is happening and no one displaced that is uncomfortable for tenants there are multiple bathrooms always
4:41 pm
available no one is denied toilet assess this work needs updates in the bombards their essential for its ultimate highest use so i appreciate our efforts and hope you're able to get this this open as soon as possible. >> is this. >> mr. dodge question. >> is this project opportunity by the city. >> it received funding from the city but ultimately you know we get from private owners make sure they do all the code compliant work on their own. >> so the hope- who hired the contractor. >> the owns. >> this is all. >> the owners. >> yes. you know it as complex way that we have to do this the
4:42 pm
tenderloin clinic has the lease and the tenderloin housing clinic that won this federal grant through our communities applications to the federal government and then in the budget process there's money looked like for the ongoing support services and staffing to make that a successful building. >> just for clarification mr. dodge are you with the tdm. >> no with the city of san francisco and the department of homelessness i worked on this project as part of mayor's office. >> thank you for attending this hearing. >> mr. dodge since we have an expert in the room i'd like to get context and information firstly when you say tenderloin housing clinic will take that over did they become the master lease he on the building and basically step button role of the owner and responsible for the upkeep and maintenance and
4:43 pm
care of the tenants. >> yes. >> okay. thank you. >> and that will take place continuity on the placement of those bathrooms. >> yes. the sign off of those bathrooms. >> anything in the building that their currently under an nov situation that will prevent that from happening. >> i don't know have knowledge we have the intend to has the clinic that is required by us to have the extensive checklist and make sure they became the master lease he everything is up to a high standard and novs will need to be resolved. >> do you have any knowledge of the history of the building given that you are hands on. >> yes. i mean, i worked for years as a tenant organizer in a previous life and worked with
4:44 pm
this building used to be called the national hotel and worked with the residents in a home for scores off people and you know there is some good attributes. >> how much - how much of that building the rents in that building were subsidized or how much the operation of the building was subsidized but public agencies or was any of it. >> urban design group there are people that had vouchers and a little bit of voucher use but primarily been a private hotel where people paying private market-rate. >> so, now this represents the point at which that moves from private operation to public service. >> yes. >> exactly. >> thank you, thank you. >> thank you. >> any other public comment seeing none, commissioners, the
4:45 pm
matter is submitted. >> i have a question for the property owner. >> no rebuttal. >> okay. from the property owner then. >> does the attorney represent you or represent tndc. >> they represent you. >> yes. >> are you aware of noticing of the permit before you started construction. >> i am not like posting the notice posting the permit notice and was not aware of that no. >> you are the contractor. >> well, my father hired the contractor i've not been as hands on as any father he hires the contractor so hose been dealing with the project more
4:46 pm
hands on than me. >> the notice of the jurisdiction went to you as the property owner. >> can you repeat that. >> i said notice of this jurisdiction request went to i believe you folks because it was the owner who applied for the permit. >> yes. >> thank you. >> thank you. >> commissioners. >> we have no determination as to whether notice was - >> yeah. >> i mean speaking to the merits of case from either side i have no notice i'll lien on the conservatism and allow the
4:47 pm
jurisdiction request. >> how long will that process be vice president. >> however long. >> the board is currently scheduling appeals for march 29 and they can be expedited at the presidents discretion. >> you know i asked the question what was the level of funding for a reason and whether this was a private operation or not if it is was a private operation than coming from the history of the opposite end of the hotel business i know you treat our customers the way you treat them
4:48 pm
unfortunately, some treat them nicely and some treat them both i'll let the panel and audience decide that you know the - the building was sufficient it is being cleaned up the owner which in my opinion was operated a sub quality building has taken steps to lease this building to a city agent and agency will manage it in a positive and constructive fashion for the community if we - don't take jurisdiction we preexempting that step not wise
4:49 pm
for the community if he wanted to be make sure this gets done we can still sustain the oversight by moving forward and not making a decision but seeing in the notice was given or not commissioner fung and the work can progress and will allow tenderloin housing to take overtake that over that's a positive step with that discussion i would kind of punt and move this to another day for the purpose of discovering whether notice was properly served or not. >> that's a reasonable. >> i'm not sure i followed your last statement we have no
4:50 pm
proof the permit was served i want to know what we are accomplishing by punting. >> if we take jurisdiction the work will not get done the tenderloin housing will not take - >> i believe our director said by taking jurisdiction it will not stop do the permit. >> by continuing. >> that's why i'm advocating so the work can continue and in the meanwhile find out whether proper notice was given and hopefully the tenderloin housing will take to over and everything is better. >> in other words. >> who ever has jurisdiction
4:51 pm
the stay of the work didn't occur until the appeal. >> right. >> we know that. >> in the interest of the community and in the interest of actually in the interest of the appellant i would suggest a continuance of this point we should at least get the work done based on the fact we should find out whether a proper notice was served. >> i'll support that. >> sorry commissioners, i have a question can you clarify what notification you're referring to there notice no notification on dbi. >> the notification is for led or asbestos because i'm not sure which one (multiple voices). >> they're not talking about the notification surrounding the neighbors i think they're
4:52 pm
talking about the posting that is required on site and i felt this was addressed during the complained according to the senior building inspector the i'll have to get back with you. >> i was told by the senior building inspector. >> that was not in our brief. >> you're talking about 80 complaints i'm not going to start looking over welder complaints. >> so the reason for any request. a continuance so we don't come back 5 minutes from now but allow it to continue and the tenderloin housing can take >> we can live through the welder complaints i guess. >> no asking for proof the posting was proper.
4:53 pm
>> i don't know. i'm not sure we'll ever find out. >> right that's my question. >> i'm fine with that. >> that would be my motion madam director do you get that. >> you have a request to continue this item we need a date and also someone in particular you want to submit additional evidence about the notice we need to specify that how much time do you want to give them and the march 23 date we have space. >> march 29 a 29 yeah. >> i think if you're intent to have this done quickly in order to not impede you'll want february 28th a while the continuance is going on the work
4:54 pm
with continue and the use of bathrooms tenderloin housing can take - this is where i'm getting mixed messages if we continue the work continues tenderloin housing specification and tenderloin housing when the work is done can take over the building. >> this is not suspending the permit. >> right so basically, the time we give to continue allows sets the time during which completion of the work can get done in the tenderloin housing and can take over; correct? if they allow an appeal be allowed the permit will be suspended. >> what would you suggest
4:55 pm
commissioner that we continue it to. >> february 8th in terms of in determining that. >> okay. >> and is there - are you going to have testimony at the hearing then more information about the notice just so no additional briefly. >> adequate testimony at this time. >> the only outstanding thing the notice issue. >> the notice is a responsibility of the permit holder so let them provide it. >> so i think the motion then is so continue this request to february 8, 2017, to allow the permit holder time for a notice.
4:56 pm
>> and that evidence will be presented at the hearing commissioner fung commissioner lazarus no commissioner honda. >> and commissioner wilson that motion carries with a vote of 4 to one. >> this item will come back on february 8th. >> okay moving on to appeal item 6 appeal andy versus the department of building inspection with the building department approval on clay street for the issuance to henry chan of a site permit to raise the building by 4 feet and alternating the existing floor space 12 feet 9 to accommodate the stair with the egress stair
4:57 pm
with the open walk alter front facade we'll hear from the appellant now. >> >> good evening and welcome. >> we do need to make a disclosure first, the appellant. >> oh, you're the appellant. >> i am now we had a meeting. >> hold on one second reuben, julius & rose on a project as counsel. reuben, junius & rose representation as an entity before the board will not have an effect on my decision. this evening go ahead. >> you're here on behalf of the appellant. >> on behalf of the appellant and project sponsor is out in the hallway i believe we came to an agreement we want the board to endorse to request a special
4:58 pm
permit to adjust roof of they're building to allow light in one of our windows and on the other windows to seem like them up as required and at the back to adjust the stairs to remove the rear stairs. >> as we proposed in the briefly and we request we'll work with the c a to make those changes discussed and we need permission to do a special condition permit to do that change to the roof to lie light with into. >> you're asking us to incorporate >> you have plans to show the revisions. >> no. >> you need some time. >> well. >> it behoves everybody to have something. >> right. >> mr. sanchez a proposal.
4:59 pm
>> the da would like the podium. >> so do you have the existing plans it is straightforward on the the subject property that involves the removal of spiral stairs at the rare and endangered for the portion and behind the existing lightwell they would pull the roof and separate on the appellants prompt raise those windows the property lines windows between sloping of the roof and do window they'll perspective the light and air maybe put it on the overhead. >> they'll mention they'll be closing the other windows sealing these. >> not part of this permit a separate permit required to seal
5:00 pm
off the windows that is a conditional use permit their stating for the record they've resolved closing the property lines windows. >> there are two items that effect this property one of the reinforcement of the stairs and one the roof specific information in order to deal with the enforcement. >> can i have the overhead, please? so the area in question will be first, the removal of the spiral stairs at the rear of the property and between this a lightwell on the appellants property and the rear building wall it is currently a flat roof the building is raised a little bit over 4 feet and the idea this portion here will be sloped
5:01 pm
with the existing flat roof will be removed and sloped down those details have not been worked out that will be in coordination with the extent of the slope in coordination with the separate permit that relocations the property lines window to raise it up and kind of the idea to line them up between the sloping of the roof and it will preserve light to that. >> mr. sanchez i think what we are looking for something we can note in our records this evening if we are able to give you time we'll have the drawings submitted we'll hold this over and hear the next case and go from there. >> we can accomplish that. >> okay. >> thank you for your confidence and time. >> so why not go ahead and hear the next case.
5:02 pm
>> that's great we'll continue - okay. we have not decided it yet if you want to take public comment. >> we're having a temporary break we'll have public comment when it comes back; right? >> okay. >> thank you. >> okay. >> so we're going to hold-off on deciding item 6 and call item 7 lincoln versus the department of building inspection and it is protesting the issuance to ray chan for the vertical and horizon one one bedroom and start with the appellant and. >> good evening and welcome. >> unfortunately, the same law firm i've hired reuben, junius &
5:03 pm
rose their appearance before this board will not have any effect on any decision this evening please proceed and welcome. >> i'd like to enter into pictures and i'm sorry. >> photos. >> it hboard has to agree and them on the overhead. >> i'm christine thank you for your time and congratulations on your re-election. >> we have filed for appeal for the project on granite for 2 reasons first, the significant concerns over the use of the property that is purchased in 2001 they applied to convert the units in february 2003 and denied by the city and reapplied and later approved in 2005 and applied for a single-family but
5:04 pm
were denied the cal hallow guidelines allows for rh2 current property at 32 feet but the city regulations for rh2 allow for 40 feet maximum in height while their taking advantage of the zoning for additional housing they've owned it 16 years and uses it as a single-family home and it is a modest renovation over to 24 hundred square feet the proposal increasing the interior space the second reason of not adhering to the san francisco city regulations those owners had a previous property on third street in pacific heights and evicted their tenants under the condition they'll occupy it but
5:05 pm
didn't renovated the building with a penthouse and made a profit they then brought the owners to the state of california and settled for damages it is not on the sustained property first street they came in front of the board of appeals after the issues related to that property and adjustments were made number 3 for the good neighbor adjustment i'd like to make corrections their attorney has outlined first, as noted in a letter which we shared in the cal hallowing association in 82015 and other queries and the concerned neighbors as well as the association the 3 setbacks they've noted actually creates privacy concerns this is not a benefit to us nor to the dr parties the penthouse noted ♪
5:06 pm
letter this was a significant area of concern for other neighborhoods and the association and eliminated there was discussion they agreed to eliminate it in discussions with the architect in addition another setback they noticed is not done per their request this is the systemic areas our notice to the plans is the 311 in 2015 they have errors plans within the 311 were miss labeled and misinformation again april 1915 and in addition to this they made reference to the 311 in comparison to a property on invention issue street in
5:07 pm
2015 we nor the other significantly impacted owners on greenwich issue didn't receive notice of those plans in addition to when the other dr requesters had filed the dr and paid money unfortunately they're not included in the e-mail from mary woods in 2015 and informing the owners as well as us and the association of dr hearing that would be held in december and the other two dr parties didn't get a notification apart from the general notifications the neighbors are required to see in addition, we hosted dozens of meeting with the cal hallow association with the other dr requesters and the planning department and the architect and his representatives and spent housing in proposals unfortunately, the owners didn't
5:08 pm
offer compromises with the cal hallow the only conformation following dr was erecting story poles e poles we have concerns with the disregards of laws and regulations we're we reject those owners will not over any accommodates and we ask you to take the recommendations from the canceling hallow noted on the letter from broke samson and place restrictions with the elimination of the upper roof deck to address the privacy concerns and setback the wall by 12 feet that adds square footage to their property >> thank you.
5:09 pm
>> thank you. >> in addition he wanted to show some of the photos of neighboring properties that are multiple units including the multiple mailboxes to demonstrate those are adjacent properties on the same block and just photos of their property and how there is single mailboxs with no separate addresses so - >> single address 567 greenwich street this is their property >> can you use the mike please.
5:10 pm
sorry about that here's another one as well as photos this is photos of their property single address and single mailbox. >> separate entrances no separate entrance. >> that's all. >> thank you. >> thank you very much. >> thank you. >> mr. silverman. >> good evening and welcome. >> counsel. >> good evening commissioner honda and commissioners david silverman on behalf of the permit holder. >> ray chan obtained the permit to alternate their home on greenwich for an upper story
5:11 pm
that will be setback 12 and a half feet from the permanent house as you heard the sponsor provided 3 foot side setbacks the increase in the height in addition will be 8 feet the building steps remained unchanged the proposed addition is in context to the 09 homes on the block and permited by the planning code no variances involved the planning commission held the dr hearing a year ago on december 10, 2015, the same people the appellants were there they presented the same arguments as they presented tonight the planning commission approved the project 7 to zero. >> unanimous approval the adjacent contiguous homes to
5:12 pm
the east including the appellants four homes which i'll show you in a moment all have substantially the same or larger height they all have larger massing than the proposed project they have propels to property line houses this is unusual in san francisco no rear yard whatever as opposed to to any client that as a rear yard the adjacent home to the west that is similar no size to any clients house has received building permits almost dental to the one want to and that is under construction therefore in a contiguous row of 7 homes the site stand out as one story shorter than the rest rae having a code compliant rear
5:13 pm
yard the appellants here tonight are located in the east of the project and will continue to block light and air to any clients house regardless whether this is built or not when reviewed in complex the addition results in a building that will remain quite a bit smaller than the building to the east and nearly dental to the neighbor to the west the appellants themselves have a vertical addition with a deck yet to the board deny the property owner a smaller upper story in sum the appellant are failed to demonstrate in any reason to overturn the planning commission 7 to one decision in favor the permit holder it is
5:14 pm
the case that the appellants may lose some partial views from their deck, however, views are not protected by the planning code we submitted within our brief 7 letters of support from the neighbors that received an will additional letter we have now 8 letters of support i wish to show you two photos - now you can go back. >> more. >> okay. >> that's good. >> thank you gary. >> project sponsors house this is the appellants house as you
5:15 pm
can see the appellants house. >> can you speak into the mike. >> i'm sorry. >> this is the project sponsors house right here this is the appellants house you can see the appellants house is lot line to lot line and the project sponsors house is here this the adjacent to the west they're constructing as we speak a vertical addition with a deck virtually dental to what is before you. >> this is the neighbors top
5:16 pm
floor under construction this the appellants house which exceeds the height limit by 7 feet with no rear yard the next house to the east has no rear yard exceeds the height limit two smaller houses here had look much the same after the work is completed. >> i'll be happy to answer any questions you may have. >> and the projector architect is here if you have any questions about the plans or the elevations thank you. >> counselor. >> yeah. >> are you aware was the project that is built is that dr'd as well are you aware if it project was dr'd. >> it was not dr'd. >> not dr'd and .
5:17 pm
>> and cal hallow didn't file any letters. >> any addendums or change to the plans since the planning commission. >> yeah. the deck was made smaller maybe the architect can talk about that. >> please step forward well introduce yourself. >> architects with wushgs c you project architect as part of plans we reduced the size of the deck from the rear we cut off a 45 degree angle eliminating parts of deck what we showed at the planning commission. >> that's i'm done maybe - >> questions. >> well, one the things i noticed the drawings you showed you are dated in 2015. >> uh-huh. >> you're saying that there
5:18 pm
are drawings subsequent to that. >> actually, i brought - >> so the drawings that have changed if i can show them. >> overhead. >> we included the existing diagrams this is not included in the planning commission drawings previously otherwise the interior floor plates are the same. >> and the main change on the upper floor we basically cut off the section to allow for the decrease good great of a travel distance for the stair. >> okay. >> thank you. >> thank goodness an
5:19 pm
architect. >> thank you mr. sanchez. >> thank you. good evening scott sanchez planning department. the subject property even located within rh2 two dwelling units are allowed legally as a two family between that was a prior permit that reduced the permits from 3 to 2 their reducing the size of the unit but legally maintaining as two dwelling units we under 317 a protection measure for the protection of dwelling units nothing that requires someone to represent that unit to the general public comment but it is maintained as a two family
5:20 pm
dwelling unit it was first submitted in i believe 2014 and underwent the neighborhood notification in february and march of 2015 during that time 3 discretionary review requests one by the immediate adjacent single-family dwelling and two drs filed by the two unit building one building further east and the photos that have large windows that were fairly well developed on the lot and had windows originating over the the subject property for a view it was during the did drs were filed consistency in the the drawings of 2030 and no additional discretionary review
5:21 pm
filed that was heard by the planning commission in december of 2015 the planning commission unanimously voted to approve the project as proposed and the appellant has raised the issues of the notice and conduct of that hearing i don't have any evidence to support that i mean, i was not able to connect with the planner before the hearing we are a noticeed public hearings the planning commission felt that of the parties didn't have the ability to properly address them they could have continued that and don't have anything on the record that was a concern they voted not to take discretionary review the most of issues wanted to raise a code compliant project assume looking at the adjacent property to the west no
5:22 pm
discretionary review on that that was issued sometime in 2014 so long since passed available to answer me questions that the board any have and i got one. >> okay. >> one the famous o pair the question how do you get a property that didn't have a rear yard. >> well, it would have been conducted before the current prado i didn't see any plans that allowed the construction but i'll note this block faced on greenwich the lots are short but the property is 82 feet deep the property that fronts on filbert is a deeper lot.
5:23 pm
>> the question any variances or exceptions to this condition. >> not seeking any variances are exceptions. >> thank you. >> thank you. >> so it seems one of the issues of the appellant that a two unit building is used as a single-family home is that a problem. >> well certainly we would like to see all the dwelling units utilized but nothing we be, require something to rent on the open market no internal connections between them they - but nothing to require someone to renter a unit it does happen some people can afford it will keep both units and maybe have>>
5:24 pm
next speaker. >> in-laws in one unit or an - we ask this is preserved this is maintained a a two family dwelling. >> if they sell the building it needs to be addressed a can be utilized as such. >> i interpret that as no harm, no foul i rather not have that that way no harm, no foul. >> anything on this inspector duffy okay any public comment on this item? okay. seeing none we'll have rebuttal starting with the appellant. >> good evening and welcome. >> loins owner and i wish i had more time to dispute the
5:25 pm
attorney for the chan's to keep it short in the appellant package the sponsors removed the waltz and using that as a one unit building and again, you guys are the experts in the planning code the planning code section clearly states no application should be issued by any city department unless a construction or other activities that is permanent also so these guys combined the unites; right? which david who was their contractors said that wants done without permit and e-mails from mary woods and the attorney present today those walls were removed by put back up post the fact; right? they submitted the plans to the planning commission were
5:26 pm
factually incorrect number one and number two our house was built in 1908 the owners bought the house with no alterations to the height of the house; right? their conveniently talking about other multiple unit buildings on block with no obviously tings to do so you know, i think that the question was asked the proof the other applicants were not notified they were and the other e-mails from mary woods went out of her way to consult the architect and the attorney interesting not contemporary to those they're put together as there is a material impact not outside of the living conditions we live in san francisco; right?
5:27 pm
those are interior issues with light and privacy not take into consideration by the are project sponsor we you know we you know we think that you know the other multi unit we never received the notifications and the applicant didn't receive the noticed plenty of records we can submit to the commissioners again, we as outlined our support that the board of appeals take action to the size and scope with the recommendations with the cal hallow association. >> you done, sir. >> if i have more time i have a lot more to say. >> i have a question. >> sure. >> if you're disputing the
5:28 pm
size and scope the project sponsor why didn't you file a notice. >> we've not received a notice. >> i'm sorry if you want to come up to the podium. >> i have an e-mail if you like it confirming that from mr. lindsey. >> also another dr requester. >> i'm talking about the next door houses. >> oh, i have that available if you want to see it. >> that's fine thank you very much. >> that's it. >> okay rebuttal from the permit holders. >> thank you commissioner honda the appellants raised the same issues regarding notice of the planning commission hearing which i believe there were 3 dr
5:29 pm
applicants present and the planning commission found no merit. >> i'm sorry you can't speak. >> the dr hearings has been over for a year i'm not sure why they're raising this stage in addition the appellant is only one of the 3 dr applicants that filed an appeal presuming from the other dr applicants have an issue of the notice they'll file an appeal as far as the, there was a 3 unit, 2 unit merger 10 or 12 years ago and so currently the building is two units they have straight doorways and kitchens and separate bedrooms so forth i've been at two different
5:30 pm
inspections because the appellants called have called the well the to inspect and i've been at the folks house twice and both times the planners found to the units were fully in compliance with the planning code as the zoning administrator confirmed i believe that's it thank you. >> thank you counselor. >> mr. sanchez. >> thank you just to note that the the subject property was the subject of complaints with both building department and planning department those cases were closed the plans that are before you do have code compliant conditions they were to at some point in the future remove the walls and have connections
5:31 pm
between the unit that is in fact, a merger and the fact their code compliant. >> mr. sanchez any planning notice of violations given to the property. >> i don't know how far the enforcement went but i mean at least the staff investigated and found the violations were stated. >> okay. thank you. >> commissioners, the matter is submitted. >> i haven't heard anything to persuade me for this permit. >> i'm not in agreement with that. >> me, too for the audience this is a notable hearing what happened they planning commission or the planning commission didn't happen at the mraths we don't take into
5:32 pm
consideration the facts are what is supplied in the current briefs i'm in concurrence with my colleagues. >> move to deny the appeal on the basis the permit was properly issued. >> thank you a motion from commissioner lazarus to deny the appeal and on the basis it was properly issued commissioner fung commissioner honda commissioner wilson and commissioner swig that that motion carries with a vote of 5 to zero are we ready to go back to item number 6. >> if they're ready we're ready this year this is appeal number of i think before we hear further from the parties we should take public comment. >> yes. >> okay public comment on item number 6. >> sir, do you have public
5:33 pm
comment. >> this is your chance thank you for waiting. >> thank you. >> >> good evening and welcome. >> i apologize for the wait. >> my name is a bernard i have two names i'm an actor i live there for 26 years moved in 26 years ago the backroom which is i'll show you quickly here this is the beauty of this neighborhood it is quiet, clean and that it is used to have trees there were to giant trees i live on the top floor of the 3 unit 3 floor building the tree next door in the building next to me a at all tree higher than the
5:34 pm
took up floor and two giant trees in the yard they purchased and it filtered the noise and flirlthd a lot of the soot and the dust in the city and made that a quiet area if you - so mainly what i'm concerned is the loss of privacy the loss of light, the amount of noise that might be generated by putting in by moving the unit four feet closer to the property lines of the apartment building i rent. >> which is speaks to privacy but you have here if i can show you this is their unit this is the corner building this is the building i live in that the building next door.
5:35 pm
>> you can see right now effects the corner building that is 6 unit maybe 3 unit that are directly adjacent and the building as you can see here and here 3 floors that are 6 units and 6 unit if in building next door and 6 unit next door to that so if we look at it right now this is at least on any side of the property they want to come closer owe and i can look out the window and see space they'll go up i'll have a window looking into any window we've lost the trees it immediately got needser and those changes they'll make will effect 15 unit at least just on my side irrational damage to the neighborhood i moved out of my
5:36 pm
this is last friday night they make assurances that will be quieter from the time those people moved in. >> may i and this is 1229, january 21st saturday morning. >> (people talking). >> you can hear - >> this happened frequently. >> and few look at the layout family. >> go ahead and please finish our comments. >> thank you, thank you very much this is a drum essentially wood on all four side sound will be
5:37 pm
magnified if anyone is talking on the ground level they're talking about outside my third floor window if they put windows there are a deck on the back for a roof deck they'll have - >> sir. >> thank you. >> thank you very much. >> thank you. >> any other public comment on this item. >> okay. we'll invite the parties back to speak to the board about their proposal. >> thank you, tom on behalf of the project sponsor and i just like to show you the modifications to the plans on the drawings if i could.
5:38 pm
>> maybe zoom out a little bit gary oh, the other way perfect that's fine. >> yeah. >> so what this is showing is the rear stair being taken out which we proposed it in our papers and the additional change we're agreeing to say a roof at that portion of the building and the detail is above shows that their window their property line window at that point will be rabsz as far as they can go 0 above and then we'll be pitching the roof adjacent to that window it falls below the
5:39 pm
bottom of that window. >> may ask if these plans are clear enough for the zoning administrator know what kind of dimensions will be needed a yes scott sanchez planning department. there is still a little bit of a x factor in terms of the window needs to go up but we are a good relationship and the plans suffice to allows us to develop the special permit. >> so director i imagine have those dated today's date would be that advisable. >> norm we'll want that but certainly do that if the board wants to adapt a motion to reflect those changes those are not the plans used for the specialized permit. >> those will need to be drafted and meet the building
5:40 pm
code requirements but this is sufficient to document the agreement is. >> okay. >> thank you for working that out gentlemen. >> are those - will you date those are today's date. >> i don't think there is any other public commissioners, the matter is submitted. >> the motion to grant the appeal and condition the permit on the changes to the plans as submitted today on today's date. >> and a basis. >> on the basis the parties agreed to the changes that are in their must actual interest. >> so the grant the appeal and
5:41 pm
on the provisions and the plans submitted their submitted have they been submitted? with today's dates on the basis it reflect the agreement of the parties commissioner fung commissioner honda commissioner wilson commissioner swig okay. thank you that motion don't carry e to zero and item number 8. >> can we can take a two minute break-ins thank you. >> welcome back we're resuming the tuesday, january 24, 2017, of the san francisco board of appeals and calling item 8 connie chan and
5:42 pm
lincoln chan the property on 18 avenue protesting the issuance of outside loaned to erect a 3 story building. >> we'll hear from the appellant now. >> >> my name is michael phelps the attorney for the appellants and no relation to the swimer i'm not with reuben, junius & rose so. >> there are 3 issues which we discussed in our brief and if to the board has no objection i'll talk about them in reverse order with the ethnic and setback and bulk of the building we would like to just speed limit that issue based on the brief we submitted and obviously i'll answer any questions the board may have the second issue was that we asked that the board
5:43 pm
either deny the site permit and grant the appeal or else condition the site permit on the requirements that the permit holder give two business days prior notices of excavation not a problem the permit holder in the brief on page 3 again recites the request to mandate the permit holder have to business days before excavation the response that is a perfectly reasonable request and the permit holder would be happy to have agreed to this had she been asked there is limited time involved in this we're asking that rather than relying on the permit holder to voluntarily give us the two days notice we ask it be conditioned on that
5:44 pm
the third issue i'm the focus on tonight is the issue of the inadequacy of the provisions in the engineering plans the shoring plans to safeguard my clients property we submitted the 9 pages the engineers drawing to have shoring provided so no provision for dprout and no provision for under pine now i'm sure that everybody well knows the reason with they put sand in honor glasses it runs that is exactly what will happen it is chemical grouting and basically hardened sand not does
5:45 pm
not run this is coming closer but like the board to impose something specific page 3 of their brief it has always been the permit holders intention to incorporate forms of foundation shoring and structural systems deemed sufficient by the engineers app abdominal building code and dbi and work with them throughout the process and note that just while the permit holder is willing to have it reviewed and incorporate valid changes the ultimate responsibility is that dbi again what we are asking for rather than the permit holder voluntarily compliance will not to have any obligation to do with we are asking this board as part of its protection of the property owners keep have that
5:46 pm
mandatory mandatory - briefly have i a couple of photographs the main ones in green just to set the stage this my clients property and the the subject property are on the same block. >> sorry to interrupt you can you speak to it as you're looking at it thank you gary. >> got it. >> i was focusing on the ones and again there are several lots that used to be the parking lot of the alexander theatre and my client has from problem the problem my client has with the vacant lot adjacent to my clients property the green grass on the picture that is to the current but a stanley area for the other two areas as you can see the property my clients property and the permit holders
5:47 pm
property starts at the street and slopes up from there and is you know has a substantial slope to it we would like to have the position of those requirements not only the two days notice but thought requirements that they put the provisions our structural engineer has spoken to the architect i'm going to turn it over to him to recount those discussions. >> he's not here i'm careful what i quote i talked with him and my colleague will confirm i convinced my clients in their best interest to grout to do their shoring they're under pining but this needs to be
5:48 pm
grouted and any confusion to mr. duffy that have other projects that everyone is on the same page i believe the architect will confirm that everybody is on board with the grouting; is that correct anyway that's i that's my concern if everyone is grouting it i have no doubt the project will be good. >> everybody is pretty much on the same page they want to they'll do it out of goodness of their heart we want enforcement as it seems this is a reasonable request thank you. >> thank you counselor. >> we'll hear from the permit
5:49 pm
holders now. >> >> good evening and welcome. >> good evening commissioner president honda address board members i've been practicing in so for for 2 two years and this is the first time that i'm in front of of the board of appeals our team the owners who is here tonight the architect and kevin o'connell the structural engineer we have been open and transparent on the first preapplication meeting december 2015 all the way down to today with the appellants the chan's about the plans for the building through meeting and e-mails every opportunity to communicate on an architectureal design and the structural design for the project i'm sorry and my client is disappointed this is not enough and to file this appeal so addresses the 3 things in the appeal the first one to provide stronger protection for the properties
5:50 pm
is, of course, in everybody best interest to do this correctly i'm the architect for the alexandra project one parcel away only one construction project by the way, one big construction project if that project we shoring and we went down 25 feet we were only proposing to go down and our engineer you know very willing to work out whatever is necessary to make this a safe building for our proximately and not effect the chaunz property next door the bottom line the site permit doesn't need the structural drawing and therefore this intention didn't apply for the permit again you know we are willing to work out this and we've had xhfgdz this week with
5:51 pm
mr. boskovich but didn't apply to the permit so no conditions to be attached with the addendum of the structural permit. >> which are not appealable. >> that i did not know. >> okay anyway, the second one about the two days notice the two business day notice we're willing to do that you know a matter of all the time and memorandum of understanding like i said jessica myself and mary woods the planner and the engineer have all been available we have lots of e-mails and correspondence back and forth expressing our willingness to work with that and the third contention about the size and building inspection and height this is strange when the appeals
5:52 pm
were filed by the chan's for the safety of the building make sense when we got the brief an additional concern about light and air and height and all those things it feels like something angle attorney will throw in to juice this thing up like there's a a problem those were vetted and from the first moment the chan's received the notice of precirculation meeting sent out in 2015 connie chan attended that meeting the chan's were innovative of the section 311 posting from june 2015 to july 21st, 2016, and had every opportunity to file a discretionary review on that the section 311 was on the fence next to their driveway it is
5:53 pm
likely they saw that everyday and through e-mail the chan's were provided drawings of the project and so over a year for almost a year there of the not one iota of the concerns of the architectural design and at the last minute that pop up this was vetoed by the planning department the design is fully compliant with the code, there are concerns with that being significantly larger but only - this complaint really have not bearing on the issuance of the site permit it seems like no illustration how the issuance of the error to the process of either the planning department or dbi as note with the many e-mails
5:54 pm
challenge and the owner jessica has been more than willing to work with the appellants in summary the appeal we believe the appeal has no merit and urge you to uphold the issuance the permit i'll be happy to answer any questions you may have. >> the appellants made a statement the courage that something about you folks agreeing on the grouting. >> i mean, we're in discussions right now we have submitted any structural drawing. >> your comment is complying very general complying to our engineers needs and the planning department's needs i did not hear anything specific. >> we're willfully willing to do that again, we started i think mr. boskovich was hired last saturday and called me i happened to be in the office but
5:55 pm
only yesterday i believe - no only yesterday that mr. boskovich talked with our engineer it was in the early stages of what the appropriate thing to do and my is willing to do whatever. >> so let's see what the building department has to say about it. >> have you looked at the investigative work thought how you the - a. >> is could require underpinning 4 feet at one point that requires under piping if they're willing to do that, of course, workout an agreement underneath the appellants home and there has to be permit and some kind of an agreement we've done other houses in the sunset and the richmond that have's e
5:56 pm
has sand. >> the next question since i'm on that lot any daughter goes to that i saw water introduce the entry of the alexandra what are you guys going to do with a building. >> with the alexandra this shouldn't count towards my time. >> we submitted to the planning department to look at creating a swim and education center in that building and if so in process we submit. >> that's not part of case but thank you, mr. romania. >> we'll hear from the department now. >> who wants to looks like mr. duffy wants to go first that's great. >> batter up. >> commissioners joe duffy dbi mr. sanchez let me go first for a change. >> (laughter). >> planning building explosion
5:57 pm
there. >> no, no that's okay. >> all good for a building permit erected a 3 story family building only a site permit the addendum needs to come in and one of our robert is the assigned the dbi engineer and everything he heard as far is pretty good regarding the conversation regarding protecting the adjacent be buildings foundation that is, of course, in the san francisco building code anyway under section chapter three 307 and the under f line e pining needs to be done on any adjacent property that is effected and should go down to the bottom of the foundation for the new property and it is pretty standard procedure discussed between the adjacent property owners and the person doing the work on the new
5:58 pm
building and it will be under separate permits as you've heard for the actual property it works well and essential and needs to be done the neighborhoods get nervous but i can reassure them it does work and done it plenty of times. >> i'm available to answer any questions. >> one last question and underpinning is not required is it. >> not in every distanced no, but in this case it is and in my experience if you have an existing building as far as you know commissioner vice president fung it has sand and sometimes a foundation on the existing building the neighbors building that didn't have rebar you get a new function on site pretty much a strengthened foundation i should say not required all the time you're right and the
5:59 pm
grouting is another option the dollar pining they both achieve similar results underpinning is a foundation put underneath the building of grout loan the property it works both options work well. >> inspector duffy can you tell me i've heard we have a lot of new rules and regulations regarding excavation and foundation due to the new thinking millennium does that effect that. >> nothing added to the building code not there before not involved in that building at all i'm not sure they maybe changing the code but nothing i'm aware of that came across any deck. >> by the way, the notification in the building code is a 10 day and the
6:00 pm
notification shall be delivered nolessly 10 dazed prior to the excavation i heard that will you 10 days per the building code. >> thank you. >> mr. sanchez. >> thank you scott sanchez planning department. the on the project architect did a thorough presentation this is added at the end the bulk with the planning code issues the project is code compliant and meets the residential design guidelines and the section 311 no discretionary review that's all i have to say thank you. >> thank you. >> any public comment on this item? please step forward.
6:01 pm
>> >> good evening and welcome. >> i've not come before you, you want my name and i'm maria i live on 18 avenue and i represent a lot of the neighbors of this project we're concerned there is 10 bedrooms and only two parking spaces and we are already have a lot of parking on that street there is a church and ymca and also stores on the corner and this project around the building theatre and 42 units one point is higher than that and lower and not sufficient parking for all the cars that will come into the neighborhood so see a building that will be higher than the other houses on the block the old rule used to be thirty feet now up to 40 the
6:02 pm
drawings of this one are higher and other neighborhoods we don't want to see another 10 foot clearance that impacts privacy of a lot of people and also pushed up the height of the building and also in front of that building is a huge sink hold it used to have to be filed regularly with a lot more vehicles up and down the street and our concern is the impact thought so many people perhaps coming into is a building that will have 10 bedrooms and only two parking spots plus the height of the building and the impact on the neighborhood like i said thirty foot and now going up and up and it is sand thank you. >> any other public comment. >> okay seen we'll have
6:03 pm
rebuttal michael phelps we're worried about the lack of trusted on the part of permit holder my client for many months asked for copies of the plans that were being submitted only after the appeal was filed did we get anything what we got payroll was not approved we only saw the approved plans when we were submitted for the hearing there is funny business going on i don't want to rely on the promises of the permit holder i would ask that the board put some teeth into that and take what appears to be an agreement and make that enforceable by specifying a company that was pointed out the site permit is basically the only appealable aspect the addendum one is not
6:04 pm
appealable this is our only shot to get the conditions imposed he respect mr. duffy but he's got a lot of projects going on i will submit we want to make sure to my client to make sure those things get enforced okay. >> anyway so we will ask again, the conditions either be encompassed by the board or alternatively that matter be continued to give the parties enough time to work out an agreement in writing in which case we ask the appeal will be withdrawn. >> just to clarify to dig this material you have to grout it not a trick deal you can't dig in soil once you change the vertical elevation by shoring and if you go really at all put in under pine so it is in everyone's best interest to work
6:05 pm
with the project sponsor on developing a shoring plan and i think work working with the project sponsor in the building department the inspector duffy will be great and inquires a geotech to eliminate the trust and work with the building department particularly joe duffy. >> you said your client doesn't get the plans under the 311 artists the plans required. >> what was given to us was not what was submitted to this board in its brief what was submitted was stamped 2015 the representative represented to us the plans she'd given us in early december after the plans
6:06 pm
were you issued were the most recent plans and there were no approved plans those statements are both false. >> let's clear up that item right now no approved plans until the addendum goes through appeal. >> i'm sorry, i meant file standing plans the files - >> we got that. >> no, no that's fine but this is our only shot - >> thank you counselor. >> mr. for man. >> i want to clear that up i'm shocked about trust issues if you look at every e-mails they submitted and they submitted there were conversations about this we never got responses from mrs. chan so i'm surprised they're the ones saying we're the one side that are not to be
6:07 pm
trusted i think the site commissioner president honda you asked about the 311 they received overseeing drawings they absolutely received overseeing drawings they were sent out by the department address their address was on that so i find that again to be a strange statement in terms of plans we'll november submitted in any addendum mr. phelps makes it turn down u sound we're trying to conceal something as long as we had the draurlgz they were drafts not something we had already submitted and asked to have their engineer review it we asked them over you know like of weeks in about numerous e-mails do you have any other questions does your engineer have questions we never got a response we've been directing i
6:08 pm
incredibly transparent and agree with mr. boskovich you know we need to sit down and say you know this is what we're going to do and those are the plans and you know again dbi has to review those plans we can't do something that will not be approved by dbi on a very regular basis tens of thousands of building in the sand and for instance, the building next door to the alexandra that was done with shoring no underpinning of the neighboring property and faces 9 properties and there was no grouting of the soil next door it was done with shoring so there are enormous ways to do it i'm not saying one way or another but we had every intention and of course in everybody's best interest no one wants to look at this down the road i'll ask you not to suspend
6:09 pm
the permit that was done legally and i think mr. phelps thinks otherwise but i think we've demonstrated completely we'll do the best we can to make sure that there is no damage to the neighbor's house. >> mr. pearlman from the 311 notifications have they've been any changes from there. >> design changes no. >> thank you. >> anything further from the department. >> no. >> commissioners, the matter is submitted. >> before we enter perhaps detailed discussions i'd like to clarify a couple of technical points one is the appellants brief miss matched the comments related to lift in terms of how
6:10 pm
you handle the phil of the site afterwards to what they were talking about in the excavation secondly, is our efforts should be geared towards the review of the overall project there is going to be some technical element that we'll interest have to depend on the department we have no idea of the structural aptitude in an analysis of what was there i'll leave that up to our structural engineers at the building department to handle it kind of detail and thirdly, is that we've been getting a lot of these xaktdz and perhaps at the city will have to change their procedures in how they deal with
6:11 pm
those as an example i would think that the city would be - would want to make that a requirement that anybody who is excavating a certain amount has to provide a monitoring system in terms of elevation secondly, that the - there is a level of conservatism among the designers whenever you see their reports i always put a well never mind i won't say that they'll be the most conservative and their emissions in terms of highest i'm - if they'll write you a
6:12 pm
letter in response to something it will list the most conservative approach possible not that it is not necessary in this particular instance i agree grouting is a good idea but neither here and there i'll leave that up to the department so if i look at that approach as any feelings on the technical side the other half of the presentation on the more of the planning side contextually and volume and parking those kinds of things i don't see this project expand beyond the way i have to take this. >> i'd like add you don't know i don't think something tashgd to it either and. >> i completely concur anyone want to make a motion.
6:13 pm
>> you know it helps them to establish a working relationship yobd conditioning that they provide notice within two days of construction. >> does give 10 days. >> contemporary to the status it is 10 days your reducing to two. >> i think what - and we're giving them what they're asking for . >> if i'm understanding this correctly we want notice to be prepared for the work where 10 days is open could you someone from the appellant side step forward as the department indicated 10 days is standard is there a specific reason you're requesting two days.
6:14 pm
>> this was an additional have someone scheduled to be out there. >> prior to the two days additional to the 10 days. >> i'm sorry, i should have. >> that's okay. >> i don't think that is a big deal i'm not sure i will get involved into this structural engineering i depend on the experts for the structural engineering. >> was there a motion there. >> actually two days didn't make sense. >> they'll have a monitor. >> i thought telephone days. >> no two days before. >> another notice. >> basically a 10 days notifications already two days
6:15 pm
prior to the work consensus they want someone to monitor or whatever. >> i don't think i have an issue i will grant the appeal with the condition the approval on the basis that the appellant receive further notice to days before construction starts. >> the excavation or construction. >> the excavation. >> and to approve the project on the basis that - >> identify had a case at the planning commission where commissioner said something like that and all of the other things
6:16 pm
were thrown button basket i want to make sure there is clarity the only thing that the appeal is uphold on is the to day. >> our conditions are the only things that get into there. >> thank you very much. >> so the motion from the vice president is to grant the appeal and uphold the permit on the condition the permit holder provide to the appellant notice to days before excavation begins on the basis the permit is code compliant commissioner lazarus commissioner president honda commissioner wilson can you read that again. >> to grant the appeal and uphold the permit on the condition that the permit holder provide the appellate with notice two days prior to the notice of excavation on the basis the - it is code
6:17 pm
compliant and the building code didn't get superseded by the boarders rule will require a 10 day notice. >> sounds like ambiguous if the department is willing to have a friendly amendment addition to - >> the statutory notice. >> that's something. >> okay. so i'll recall the position then the rule so to grant the appeal and uphold the permit on the condition the permit holder provide the appellant with notice two days before excavation starts in addition to the statutory notice on the basis the permit is code
6:18 pm
compliant from the vice president commissioner lazarus commissioner president honda commissioner wilson and commissioner swig. >> okay that motion passes with a vote of 5 to zero commissioner president honda there's no further business. >> -
6:19 pm
6:20 pm
6:21 pm
6:22 pm
6:23 pm
>> san francisco is known
6:24 pm
worldwide for its atmospheric waterfront where spectacular views are by piers and sight and sounds are xhanl changing we come to the here for exercise relax ball games entertainment, recreation market, exhilaration a wide variety of contributions easily enjoyed look up the bay the waterfront is boosting for activities boosting over 25 visitors every year the port of san francisco manages 7 may have million dollars of waterfront from hyde
6:25 pm
street and fisherman's wharf to the cargo terminals and name shoreline the architecture like pier 70 and the ferry building is here for the embarcadero and a national treasure the port also supports 10 different maritime industries alongside with the recreational attractions making san francisco one of the most viable working waterfronts in the world but did you think that our waterfront faces serious challenges if earthquake to damage the seawall and the embarcadero roadway rising seawalls will cause flooding at high tides and major repairs to a safe many of the piers the port is at a critically turnl
6:26 pm
point time to plan for the future of san francisco's waterfront this year the port is updating it's marts plan the plan working group to invite a wide variety of poichdz from the city and bayview and other advisory teams to share their expertise if intense and maritime operations the waterfront land use plan has guided the use and development of the lanes for the last 20 years major physical changes take place along the waterfront and now is the time to update the waterfront plan to continue improvements that will keep our waterfront vibrate, public and resilient the biggest challenges facing the waterfront are out the site an aging seawall along the
6:27 pm
embarcadero roadway and seawalls that will rise by 21 hundred to provide and productivity of tides seawall is built over weak soils and mud the next earthquake will cause it to settle several feet without the urgent repairs that will damage the promenade and other things we've been fortunate over the last hundred years less than one foot of seawall over the next hundred years scientists say we'll have 6 feet of seawall rise imagine the pier 30/32 will be floated, the embarcadero will be flooded our transportation system is fog to be heavy impacts unfortunately, the port didn't have the financial resources to
6:28 pm
repair all the deteriorating piers let alone the adaptations for sea level rise. >> it is clear that the port can't pay for the seawall reinforcement or deal with the sea level rise on its own needs to raise money to take care of the properties at take care of the maintenance on the properties no way absent anti funding the issues of sea level rise or the schematic conditions of seawall can be development. >> as studies talk about the seawall challenges the working group is look at the issues please come share our ideas about recreation, pier activities, shoreline habitat, historic preservation and transportation issues and viral protection. >> we know this planning process will not have one question and one answer we need
6:29 pm
the diversity of the opinions how people feel about san francisco waterfront and want to hear all the opinions. >> the challenges call for big decisions now is the time to explore now and creative ideas to protect and preserve san francisco waterfront. >> now is the time to get involved to help to shape the future of our waterfront. >> we need the debate please come forward and engage in the process. >> this is your waterfront and this is your opportunity to get involved be part of solution help san francisco create the waterfront we want for the future. >> this is really to dream big and i think about what our waterfront looked like for all san franciscans today and generations to come. >> get involved with the planning process that will set the fraction for what is coming at the port.
6:30 pm
>> find for in upgrading dates on the ports website. >> (ship blowing horn in distances)
6:31 pm
6:32 pm
6:33 pm
6:34 pm
6:35 pm
6:36 pm
6:37 pm
6:38 pm
and when speaking before the commission, if you care to, do state your name for the record. i'd like to call roll at this time. commissioner president hillis commissioner fong commissioner johnson commissioner melgar and commissioner moore. >> commissioner koppel is here and commissioner vice president richards will arrive shortly commissioners, the first item on your agenda is items proposed for continuance items one ab x and c on howard street conditional use authorization and discretionary review authorization are proposed until march 22, 2017 and next at 47124th avenue is proposed until march 23, commissioners on monday we issued an addendum to the agenda under this seblgs for
6:39 pm
item 2a de haro street conditional use authorization is proposed proposed for continuance until february 23, 2015. >> item 3 second avenue has been withdrawn as item 4 at 44 aztec street discretionary review has been withdrawn and further under our regular calendar c and b at the 650 conditional use authorization rear yard modification we received this morning a request for content from the project sponsor to continue this matter out two months out it approximately march 23.
6:40 pm
>> there is no other items proposed for continuance and there are no speaker cards. >> >> we'll take public comment on the continuance calendar any public comment? to ask to >> john on behalf of the project sponsor we've heard the desire from the strong desire from the neighborhood to look at the affordable housing for the site we've continued this twice last summer and again in october we've been working with staff closely and achieved to place the onsite the rental abhorring units onsite we're working through the ultimate percentages of the bmr rates work with the community with the help of the supervisors office he need a couple of more months to get it together and the legislation, in fact, the bmr raised and fillmore and divisadero we need
6:41 pm
more them and hope to come back next time we ask for a thank you. >> is there any additional public comment on the items proposed for continuance? >> good afternoon, commissioners hernandez with the affordable divisadero community so we're happy to hear this is proposed to be continued out 2 months as you may know we've submitted letters of opposition to the project as proposed not include enough affordable units so we're hoping that the 2 most continuance allows the city the supervisors office and committee to come to an agreement so we have the next door neighbor of
6:42 pm
this property here if she wants to speak now you'll not hear this afterward if you decide to continue; correct? >> right now the only matter we'll be accept testimony the matter of continuance. >> so the divisadero supports the continuance thank you for your time. >> is there any additional public comment? >> from the project needs the extra time thank you for being here. however, it has been changed from 52 unit a request for variance on the rear yard sunlights a major, major problem for me, i have a letter in my pews from a perspective. >> we're hearing testimony on whether or not to continue this involuntarily the project will be before us. >> i want to say 24 before
6:43 pm
they bid the plan extra units and the rear yard setback assuming that will happen it effects any property so they want to continue is fine but i hope they're not planning on building extra unit i oppose it that's all i have to say. >> thank you. >> is there any additional public comment? >> not seeing any, public comment is closed. commissioner fong 3, 4, 5 and 15 ab second. >> just for cluster 5 is under discretion thank you commissioner fong commissioner johnson commissioner koppel commissioner melgar
6:44 pm
commissioner moore and commissioner president hillis so moved, commissioners, that motion passes unanimously 6 to zero and . >> and the variance to be continued to the dates specified thank you zoning administrator commissioners that places us under tissue consent calendar may be acted upon by a single roll call vote of the commission. there will be no separate discussion of these items unless a member of the commission, the public, or staff so requests in which event the matter shall be removed from the consent calendar and considered as a separate item at this or a future hearing. item 5 for case 2016 plus at alabama street conditional use authorization. >> there are no speaker cards. >> thank you jonas any public comment on item number 5 1245 alabama street seeing none, public comment is closed. commissioner johnson. >> i move.
6:45 pm
>> second. >> thank you, commissioner on that motion then to approve item 5 under our consent calendar commissioner fong commissioner johnson commissioner koppel commissioner melgar commissioner moore and commissioner president hillis so moved, commissioners, that motion passes unanimously 6 san francisco to zero and places us under our commission matters consideration of adoption draft minutes for 2017. >> any any public comment on the draft minutes from january 12th seeing none, public comment is closed. commissioner moore. >> move to approve. >> second. >> thank you commissioners to adopt the minutes commissioner fong commissioner johnson commissioner koppel commissioner melgar commissioner moore commissioner vice president richards you to chime o in on
6:46 pm
that one thank you and commissioner president hillis so moved, commissioners, that motion passes unanimously 7 to zero and places us on item 7 commissioners questions or comments. >> commissioner moore. >> i'd like to ask the question to get an update with the permit tracking a joint effort before planning and dbi planning was on track but this commission has supported allocation of funds over the years i kind of feel i'm waiting for it to happen and trying to find the permit and unifying couldn't this would be more cooperated and easy to get questions to answers that are not there at the moment. >> commissioners john rahaim with the department the department - the planning department went live on october
6:47 pm
of 2014 and there's been delays on the department of building inspection side we expect them to not total clear but likely b be another year before they go live the third component, of course, the public assess consultant that relies on both departments being on line although i will say we're logan options of having a component before that timeframe it appears to be another year before both departments are live all can i ask a followup obviously you have a integrated system you understand the perimeters of software and i understand a breakdown in i
6:48 pm
don't want to be two technical, however, does that mean the planning department retroactively has to invest more money to make the joint interface. >> i don't believe so there might be a modest amount of resources needs to merge the system but not retroactively make any changes going forward. >> your system works well, i hope that we're not losing anything given we've made a significant investment in supporting your system. >> okay. thank you. >> thank you commissioner vice president richards. >> a little levy thank you. i go to new zealand, however, if i think it is what i see in the nosht about what is going on in washington. >> may not see me anymore i'm staying
6:49 pm
(laughter) commissioners, if there's nothing further, we'll move on to department matters drourmentsz good afternoon. thank you jonas commissioners, i said to review a memo in your packet with you to see you on the implementation on proposition 64 the adult use of marijuana i realized this is information that is relate to a couple of items on the agenda i want to go over a high-level with the situation is how we're implementing prop 64 as you recall it passed last november but the basis of prop 640 before any business may have a sale of adult cannabis that he must obtain a licenses those will not be issued by the stailt state until january of next year and it doesn't take prop 64 didn't
6:50 pm
take away control from the local level we anticipate we'll have ♪ place with lmgz are issued whether or not as you asked us to look at whether or not if we anticipate that a medical cannabis dispensary which you have approval authority on today would in the future b be converted to a use we can't speak with 100 percent certainty that will not be the case in our opinion highly, highly unlikely local regulations will happen the adult medical cannabis dispensaries are sales of any type of will be defined a separate land use in the planning code that means a medical use can't be converted they'll be two different land
6:51 pm
uses in addition if for any reason the regulations don't play out that way we think is highly unlikely do board a adopt or you can adult your own interim controls requiring the medical cannabis dispensary is a discretionary review 0 so to make sure that there is not any kind of automatic conversion, if you will, from a medical cannabis dispensary to a adult use sales i wanted to give you that information before the hearing today so we have that as background thank you >> just a quick follow-up to that question so you anticipate the medical cannabis rules and regulations how their permitted and continue on. >> it is i think it is likely to continue on there maybe revisions as we move forward but
6:52 pm
on the sales is our focus how they're regulated locally. >> okay. thanks. >> jonas. >> commission item 9 past event of board of supervisors the board of appeals no historic preservation commission hearing yesterday. >> aaron peskin at the transportation demand management or tdm ordinance commissioners as you recall you initiated this and voted to recommend approval in 2016 after traffic signals to transmits to the board this was the third time it was at land use committee the most significant amendment were proposed by supervisor cohen recommend to the exemption of 24 are less dwelling units from the mist fee for the city funded nonprofits from the
6:53 pm
administration at land use committee director rahaim chaired the board and the executive director for the ta gave opening comments about the merits public comment on the proposed ordinance was mainly for the project went further for the points for parking after public comment and the general support for the program the committee members from the members supervisor sheehy sitting on the land use committee in supervisor scott weiner's case added as co-sponsor after that was accepted they recommended the item to the full board last on is agenda a hearing to provide an update on the task force represents which was published late last year supervisor scott wiener sponsored the legislation that funded that that began in early last year members of the task force presented at a later
6:54 pm
date recommendations that touched otdz on the taxes and justice public comment was in support and the formalization of medical cannabis, however, one commenter that recommended that the chinese-americans are expresses concerns over the medical cannabis activities the committee has two questions the city has a lot of work to do for the structure of san francisco and reach out to communities with concerns of the future of recreational cannabis commissioner sheehy toubd i talked about how it helps him and he also commented how the plan was demonized by the federal government community voted to continue the item to the call the chair at the full board supervisor peskin and in fills designated agree
6:55 pm
significant c-3 zoning districts passed it's second reading and the ordinances by supervisor peskin requiring the conditional use in the district passed first reading and the mayor's interim controls that requires conditional use authorization for indoor argue and seconded by commissioner sheehy that to expand the grandfathering provisions to two mr. president, one applied to the department of building inspection for building permits or applications are two attempted to apply to the department of health for the building permit and was not referred to dbi until avenue november 18th an attempt by supervisor kim to extend - the board voted to approve the interim controls next on the board was the hope sf the general plan and zoning
6:56 pm
map amendment all passed their first reading and then last only the agenda the environmental appeal for the fulsome street this involves two single-family residences on two vacant lots on an unplanned portion of fulsome this was an exemption in 2016 an appeal was filed in 2016 the day the appeal at the board the ero resonated and tabled the hearing on the tabling supervisor safai was recused and it was eined the ero explains that future study needs to be done by little permit for the impacts to the unknown pipeline with the results of ero will determine the appropriate level of the environmental
6:57 pm
review and issue the environmental review determination that means the project requires more entitlement no introductions that are new. >> thank you mr. starr director rahaim. >> i wanted to kind of highlight the committees approval this week of the tdm more than to year process between the planning department, mta and ta and was a hell of a lot of work what is most interesting in the stand point of transportation it starts to address some of the transportation impacts in a more robust way for new development and interesting to pout we look at out cities no other city has done anything else so we're leading the agenda i'm proud of the work of the department and the sister agencies in further work thank you. >> i'll note the board of appeals met two items of interest to the commission
6:58 pm
first, the board had their election of officers and the previous officers carried over commissioner president honda and commissioner vice president fung and other item granite street a discretionary review heard in december of 2015 the board of appeals last night were concerned about the procedural issues were addressed and the board denied that appeal no meeting on until february 8th. >> general comment not to exceed 15 minutes. at this time, members of the public may address the commission to the public that are within the subject matter jurisdiction of the commission except agenda items. with respect to agenda items, your opportunity to address the commission will be afforded when the item is reached in the meeting. each member of the public may address the commission up to three minutes.
6:59 pm
there are no speaker cards. >> any public comment on items not on the agenda. >> line up against the screen please. good afternoon andrew yip this state over the people with guidance along with the missionary paths with virtues for kindness in delivery for the people for early management of livelihood and of persistence and living tra transit of live force to live not wellness of prosperity for the society for the characters of the people must having peace of wellness for checks and balances and social benefits and political leaders should involve the nation with good trust and take on leadership pathways for the humanity and civil justice for the destiny on the right
7:00 pm
principles will establish the presentation of people's livelihood and nationalism and democracy for early rescue of people construction of this kingdom for the society to deliver good hope for our people in having created for a century ahead of us thank you. >> thank you, sir. >> next speaker. >> good afternoon, commissioners first of all, congratulations to you commissioner president hillis now for your new position and seismic i assure you you come back because we need you so i'm here to bring up the issue of documented programs and policies for the planning department we know the budgets will be coming up shortly and
7:01 pm
hopefully the planning department low tissue the candidates like other departments do for example, planning has not developed comprehensive procedures like in the last budget cycle and new planners that don't know how to look at quantitative code requirements we have uneven and inconsistent ways projects are reviewed each one different than the next and so the sponsors and the neighbors don't know what is going on we believe that the budget dollars should be tied to concrete and measurable goals and those goals should be met this is a government agency and from my experience with government regulated industries as a whole they usually have operating procedures a follow
7:02 pm
those procedures this is the example that needs to be regulated so i really urge you that in the coming year please do develop those procedures and policies because not only the neighbors are going to be benefited by the project sponsors and developers as a whole this will be a great accomplishment for the residences as well as the developers thank you. >> thank you >> next speaker, please. >> hi good afternoon, commissioners again congratulations to commissioner president hillis, commissioner vice president richards i'm lisa president of the liberty neighborhood association i wanted to address a one concern in the lastly draft of
7:03 pm
urban design guidelines we appreciate the changes on the website these guiles will not be the over arching design that was arrived at by a democratic process with the neighborhood organizations opposed that idea by the current draft says it should apply to the non-residential the mixed use and commercial corridors let's look at the commercial streets in the neighborhoods the stores are in a variety of structures many built at the same time as the older houses surrounding them have housing of upper ground zero and stand alone residential houses as well there is a clear visible continuity between the residential and the commercial buildings examples are van ness street and
7:04 pm
hill and 24th street and noah valley and even say mission street south of market to daily city the udgs don't fit the style and scale of the commercial buildings in the residential neighborhoods placing new more than buildings alongside the older ones is visibly jagger and industries the can you think nut not what we want we will suggest that the udgs be removed from the draft udg in the neighborhoods with the residential design guidelines continue to serve as the best design guidelines thank you. >> thank you next comment - >> next speaker. >> good point hello good afternoon,
7:05 pm
commissioners commissioner president hillis and fellow commissioners i'm anastasia i would live in noah valley heartened by the family-friendly housing initiated by supervisor yee and the report presented to you i agree that putting a policy in place to assure housing priorities is endeared to creating and maintaining house of families in the city's general plan historically noah valley was a neighborhood of working-class families it now trends towards the development of unaffordable condo and mega sized homes and dispositions characterized as housing why didn't the planning code stipulate that rh-2 13egd properties actually get
7:06 pm
developed as to fame sized units planners approve and present the projects that includes oversized rooms and lardly sized rooms you passed commissioner vice president richards pointed out there are discrepancies with the building and planning code with regards to the planning codes planners at the front deck as was said not suv trained when plans are presented and the procedures are not standized to find and followed by planning staff the late joint hearing of planning was held in 2014 i urge you commissioner
7:07 pm
president hillis to calendar a time certain for a joint meeting of the planning commission and put the following few items i might suggest the demolition, art spaces, the permit tracking system thank you. >> thank you is there any additional public comment? >> general public comment seeing none, public comment is closed. jonas call the next item. >> certainly that will place us under our regular calendar commissioners for item 10 the south of market plan draft eir impact please note the comments will think accepted until february 13, 2015, a good afternoon commissioner president hillis and planning commissioners i'm mike with the planning department staff the purpose to take public comment on the adequate very and
7:08 pm
accuracy and president electness of draft eir report refers as at the central soma no action is requested the central soma plan unincumbrance blocks within the south of market area that extends from townsend in the south to the regular boundary along fulsome to the north from second street to 7th street on the west the primary objectives to be in the proximity for the subway line to provide rapid service between the square and chinatown as described the plans proposed to meet the subjective by men and women e amending the portions the plan where such uses proposed may restricted or not permitted by amending the height and bulk
7:09 pm
district from a great height and decencies that are currently loud and administrative reviews the janitor plan by established new and open space and contrary to the controls by the land use or the preservation this eir reviews the proposed changes that may affect the design of fulsome and howard and brilliant and third street and beyond the boundary commissioners in april 2012 the planning issued a environmental impact report and followed in may of 2013 held a scoping peeing to prepare the environmental impact report in 2013 or sorry 2014 the planning department prepared issued a study for the plan that
7:10 pm
focuses on the environmental impact report we're here to take comment on the analysis impacts in the draft eir folks on the transportation and circulation noise, vibration and wind and hydraulic uses the draft eir finds the impacts not fully mitigated and in addition to the promoted plan the implementations the draft eir study has 5 alternatives that reduces of eliminates the environmental impact those have a no project alternative as well as a height and bulk and a modified alternative by the owners and development corporation as well as the land use i'm sorry the land use not including the streets changes as analyzed as part of plan the planning
7:11 pm
commission published in 2014 and 61 public review day that ends in 2017 last wednesday the historic preservation commission held a public hearing and in general they find the document adequate for the historic preservation commission impacts and the mitigation measures the members of the public that are interested in writing letters sent to 1650 mission street san francisco by 5:00 p.m. february 13th the members of the public 3 tied up to comment please state your name for the record and direct your comments to the president electness the comments will be contributed when the work is complete and the planning department will provide copies to those that comment public comment on the draft eir maybe submitted by the
7:12 pm
planning department - soma when the department has responded to all comments from the draft eir we will request the commission verify the eir is complete that concludes my presentation. if you have any questions i'm available thank you. >> thank you, sir. >> we'll open up for public comment on the central soma plan draft eir i have two speaker cards richard and arthur and additional folks that want to comment line up on the screen side of the room, sir. >> good afternoon. honorable members of the planning commission i'm from the law firm i'm a resident of west portal and representing a group called the soma members and represents dozens of people that live in the central soma neighborhood a residential and mixed use community of over 10 thousand
7:13 pm
people those residents are long term residents we urge the planning commission to reconsider the eir to consider the mid-rise rather than the high-rise i want to emphasize our the central soma neighborhood is not opposed the mid rides allows 90 percent of the job growth and housing growth agency the high-rise alternative but maintain a liveable family-friendly community on a pedestrian scale with access to light and air and open space all things that make that neighborhood attractive i want to emphasize that draft eir is a radical depamper from a document issued by the planting in 2013. in 2013, the planning department issued the central corridor plan that strongly favored the middle rides and said this so be
7:14 pm
maintained in 3 short years the department is favoring the high-rise we be in that is inappropriate for a marginal increase in jobs and housing will deprive the people of the human scale that is essential to a mixed use neighborhood we don't want to see a second finest or financial district the mid rides allows for the - the cluster around at bart station and caltrans station that allows the hundred development where that is appropriate for offices but encourages the use of public transportation rather than putting high-rise on harrison street not assessable to major public transportation routes with we think that is important to retain a family-friendly character as supervisor yee has is now promoting this area through it is one of the most
7:15 pm
ethically and diverse in the city it has one of the highest industries of ethic diversity and slither higher incomes but twice the level of poverties and faces challenges like high crime and pedestrian safety and twice the level of air pollution and about twice the number of asthma that addresses all the alternatives and we urge you to direct the staff to emphasize the mid rides instead of high-rise thank you >> thank you. next speaker. >> good afternoon commissioner my name is arthur i'm a resident of soma i live on second street down at the second and bryant
7:16 pm
basically ground zero for people on the bay bridge on the eastern edge of proposed district i'm in favor of the no project alternative i've seen the written comments will be better than ramping for a few minutes my overall thing there will be plenty of roads in san francisco under the no project alternative plan will be growth i think about 50 percent of what is found under the plan the high-rises are inappropriate that is the marc beniofftion of soma that is a 0 low-rise memorize path in the past and should continue looking at the traffic from the bay bridge i get a horn concerto outside of any window starting at the 2 o'clock in the afternoon if
7:17 pm
this is translated into the rest of the soma area i think that will be a total disaster frankly my preferred no project alternative the no project alternative avoids with 7 of the significant and unavoidable plan and cumulative impacts regarding traffic noise and other things there will be growth i just don't think this needs to be high-rise for hundreds and hundreds of feet not like harrison like the former gentleman was talking about and this is ground zero will be hundreds of feet tall including hotels and hard to believe not alleged auto traffic at that location that when is not helpful as far as the bridge goes i'll comment written comments thank you for your time
7:18 pm
and thank you very much. >> thank you. i'll call additional speakers. >> next speaker. >> good afternoon, commissioners and cynthia research with the local union we have 13 thousand resident no san mateo couldn't and this is will be in the soma with the sros hotel we have general concerns about the plan i'll touch on concerns about the displacement of sro residents in the central plan area and urging that further studies of what the impact of all the zoning may be but i want to focus on the jobs housing and balance that is prepared in the draft plan and discussed in the eir and a statement in the eir that only a portion of employees or
7:19 pm
residents the given building will be likely to relocate to the area bans the housing again that is little eir no subsequenttion for the claim but to increase pine the assertion that protection from displacement will be provided in the central soma residences and this shouldn't be presented and it also budget committee lies san francisco's history we've seen attorneys for high developments that advertise to twitter and other tech companies as around incentive so we believe that is not accurate to see is that those kinds of developments will not cause mitigation and limits to the area there should be an analysis and basketed of the kind of jobs under that plan specifically by in case level and the types of housing the prices ranges of
7:20 pm
those housing and the kind of family-friendly housing that maybe expected to be especially in light of the recent analyze a terrible shortage of family-friendly housing in no and particularly the green house and the traffic and public transportation demand analysis should be redone in the light of this more detailed study and finally we're as we mentioned concerns of displacement in terms of resident and vulnerable groups and also concerned that the structure of this plan seems to mes a great deal of of 67 percent of high-end market-rate housing that second housing or investment housing often end up as illegal units and no analysis in the eir felt trip designation
7:21 pm
or other impacts that were done for hotels that a certain will be short-term rentals. >> thank you, ms. gomez. >> next speaker, please. >> my name is mike farrell my family's are long time owners between farrell and 6th street we would like to make comments in writing regarding the eir to the central soma plan we feel there is additional land use poland proposals that can be done been bruin and brandon and between 6 and 5 and like to submit those comments in writing for you review
7:22 pm
and that's all thank you for your time. >> thank you. >> next speaker, please. >> oh, will this reset. >> yes. it will. >> go ahead. >> good afternoon. as a long time my name is marketability i live on fulsome i am a long resident and have any issues with the central soma and the draft eir first and foremost i want to say that central soma is a drive though corridor not that and district attorney glad that was renamed central soma has beautiful historic buildings and transit development and the park central soma faces many challenges the areas of the worst air quality and areas are underutilized with
7:23 pm
a pedestrian experience often grim with the constant highway and the highway likewise, the cause of surrounding streets bringing traffic to a standstill and also constantly threatens pedestrians as you are aware the central soma plan 2013 includes changes from the high-rise option in the central soma option the option was revised without on explanation the proposed high-rise option for the excited proposals of their choosing concentrateing along - thankfully the draft eir exposes the mid-rise option for to any
7:24 pm
dismay is inferior it will develop the neighborhood at the right scale with the central soma with the central soma has developers interest in mind why is sf planning not having the interest of residences and why build parking lots next to our ears we want to area to focus on light and air and open space want a safe walkable neighborhood that preserves and bans the architecture and balances residential, office and retail use please indirect staff to reduce the corridors as a alternative the mid-rise will provide residential growth and preservers the neighborhood growth help our neighborhoods thrive thank you for your time.
7:25 pm
>> next speaker sir. >> good afternoon, commissioners john when the central soma plan first got rolling over 5 years ago on the eir 2011 we saw that was basically a downtown expansion plan from that date we have insisted with the department that the neighborhood building have people priority with the economic expansion and the staff and the commission have generally sports that but equal means equal not window dressing but making it real when we look at what comes from the department it gets hard to believe we're getting that goal with the equal priorities because when you look at the eir and you look at the public services section which is where all the matters are of everyday
7:26 pm
life police and fire and ancestry all the topics you don't find it no public service analysis in that draft eir that was in the initial studies done several years 21 thousand new jobs don't add demand for public service now perhaps it seems to me that is ludicrous but since you must look at two of the consequences in ceqa the adjacent south of market to the west of sfrvt is growing dramatically and, of course, the adjacent rincon hill east of central soma that is growing more than enormously all combined among them the whole south of market will have a large new demand for public services the quality of life issue of
7:27 pm
residents need more police and street cleaning the one it is dramatically important i want to focus on the crisis we have when is no where near enough childcare fats in the south of market to support the population of the preschoolers we're witnessing everyday we see that and 200 more households in south of market and in the west and 10 thousand more where is the plan the analysis now our community plan would be requiring 8 major the commercial sites all required to have onsite childcare services for the workers and the residents the department has no plan the department eir didn't have an analysis to figure out how much we need how many spaces and square feet this is clearly not legally adequate add a comprehensive
7:28 pm
section to the eir. >> thank you. next speaker. i'll call one additional speaker card. >> hi commissioners thank you i'm alice director the community mr. haney at todco and right now unless ours is a transportation planner it is difficult to understand the howard street changes those will have a huge impact on everyone that lives and works it is important it is clear what the consequences are of this project right now the reader is if they want to figure out they need to dig through sections of plan or
7:29 pm
go back to the appendix not acceptable to everyone and basically requires to find a lot of scattered information and try to consolidate yourselves to figure out what is happening because of the extent of the changes really needs to be a single section that lays them out clearly with graphics to show the impacts for example, should be a side by side graphic of the directions there should be 0 another graphic of the left turns on each intersection where there are to the left-hand turn and no turns will improve the incremental and be a graphic side by side graphic for alternatives that should the cuing and lining up for the ramp
7:30 pm
- to get into the freeway this in some cases streets will see less congestion but that helps us understand what we're looking at and providing a simple way that the graphics will help us understand what is going on into the neighborhoods. >> thank you, ms. light. >> next speaker. >> good afternoon, commissioners my name is director heinecke he is a city resident and resident an
7:31 pm
you to said how hard to walk in cathedral to bart it is scary i wouldn't things i wouldn't want to repeat i want to go to any distance class as 11 o'clock ♪ location you guys are planning construction construction construction everyday my hair is on edge i can't believe what you're doing to the city it is ridiculous i'm a single happily married woman i do any best job and get to vote i love voting i love - i studied urban studies with the university of north renal and graduated before that earthquake i want you guys to listen to other people and stop
7:32 pm
thinking about one group and that group we all live in this we're the international city in the world we must recall or respected that and hear everyone go to a distance class safely you guys to think about that it's not save you need to understand that i encourage you to walk the city make that part of your plans with the projects don't take cars can't walk up the hills impact the cable cars but walk and see what's going on and this particular projects effects not only those people i won't go there unless my husband goes with me thank you thank you for your time >> thank you. >> next speaker, please. >> good afternoon, commissioners corey smith on
7:33 pm
behalf of the housing coalition. we're going have not report with our members getting a responded to work with staff i have two comments we have had the opportunity to review the hands on with that a long time with the central soma and appreciate the station 49 working with us and trying to make sure that is open and available to the public as possible any of the comments is related to the eastern neighborhoods eir and the conversation please, please, please let us avoid a duplicate situations we'll take the time and spent a lot of time and money we need to stick with that it is a cycle if we can get everybody on the same page and keep everyone's best interest in mind we're better off thank you. >> thank you. >> next speaker, please. >> hi commissioners i'm john,
7:34 pm
i live on the edge of this neighborhood at 6th street and market what happens will impact me quite a bit the main thrust of any comment will be jobs, housing and balance we've seen this happen in so many plans in san francisco we kick the can down the road and say oh, other neighborhoods will pick up the slack the haight and western edition they're not wanting to pick up the slack it is kind of responsible to add a big area plan to within that area plan what is the jobs balance and look at central soma 6 to one so we have created so much incentives to build for office and disincentive you know what i'd like to send this back to the planning department and
7:35 pm
create for housing with the density bonus program and more disincentives or asks from office developers i don't think that pushing the office development to open is a bad thing as far as the transportation we have a bottleneck crossing the bay and more jobs available to oakland as opposed to to here but a massive housing shortage i'm not against development i'm not i'm almost always in support of projects let's get it right at the wide planning staple and get more sfefdz to put housing as opposed to only office thank you. >> thank you. >> next speaker, please. >> ms. hester. >> sue hester you've had a
7:36 pm
whole lot of very good comments i'll go down the topics with an or one say, i think you're risking the eastern neighborhood exemption because you - you adopted the eastern neighborhoods plan based on the eir and you're cutting away and changing the zoning we'll have 5 m there are massive changes in traffic patterns since the eastern neighborhood plan was adopted a versus consulting transportation are dumping from silicon valley over in lyft have started and become a disruption of traffic because they stop in the middle of traditional lanes
7:37 pm
on the north south streets and don't allow the bay traffic prohibition take illegal turns and their abruptly the traffic and abruptly muni we've had a shift from retail to truck delivering packages and that is massive in the transportation analysis this area is mostly all the bay before it was here on bay fill you can't build types of housing without driving up the costs you're going to have to have full analysis and have to have piles driven into housing it drives up the possibility of housing you have had a massive there your supposed to have a massive
7:38 pm
increase in the muni lines bans the ooefrment and western edition those have not happened the reiterates we've been explaining or blaine about south of market 19 are different from blocks north of market oh, only a two block area it is ridiculous none knows them as two blocks if you use the north of market blocks the distance has to be 13e8d up i want a proposed mitigation for all offices and new market-rate housing that don't pitch the conditions this is a sterile area there are services for low income residents and there are pdr uses we - the planning commission imposed the do not pitch
7:39 pm
condition so people move into those housing unit can't plainly about those this is not a abandoned word i understand. >> thank you ms. hester. >> next speaker, please. >> good afternoon commissioners i'm andrew agree long term resident and represent 20 community organization that part of filipino thank you for our filipino heritage as you may know this includes some of the most important aspects as much as the grand filipino mosaic lodge in south park a historic site the filipino education center the mural and the south
7:40 pm
street the middle eastern son house and center and many other buildings and aclu that are homes to the community we're concerned that the central soma will will have impacts in the immediate areas that comprised the reality value and therefore the affordability of housing and rental space for community serving nonprofits and small businesses. >> within a filipino member that are seniors on fixed income and working families are vulnerable to rising rents and evictions like the i hotel they have fears that with the zoning and so many office spaces will mean displacement one of the main goal is preservation of the long-standing filipino community we ask you to look at the
7:41 pm
vulnerable population of central soma not just the filipinos but all the sro people and the department of building inspection and lastly look at how we can be reflected to come from zoning district all of central soma is in the filipino currently heritage district we want to help to insure that the residential design guidelines are integrated in the future development in the area thank you. >> thank you. is there any additional public comment on the draft eir for the central soma plan. >> seeing none, o open up for commissioner comments on the eir. >> commissioner johnson. >> thank you very much this eir is special so for use it is one of the last neighborhood plans that we'll be seeing more quite a bit if ever
7:42 pm
and congratulate the staff on a job well done a lot of comments i heard that are reflective of good questions i'll be looking forward to the responses i personally have a number of comments related to transit capacity and population and some of the findings that are in the draft eir but to save time i'll provide those in writing and if there are changes that are needed for about the final eir we'll have that discussion to see where we are so thank you, again to the staff and everyone that came out really great public comments have a lot to think about toy. >> commissioner vice president richards. >> two weeks ago i said i read do controllers recorded these on the fiber economic for the economic report the two things that struck me the limits the
7:43 pm
city is sitting on housing and transit and limiting the companies coming in here because poem can't afford to live here and hard to get around really a difficult place to live so i listened to the comments and look at the plan i truly like the judge gentleman sfechd when i read the plan that was 7 thousand dwelling units in balance and i'm not sure if we are exacerbating a situation i don't know. i looked at the population around the project alternatives the lawyer for the folks in south of market who spoke first brewery some compelling things around the percentages of what we'll achieve with the low rides
7:44 pm
alternative, etc. when you do the balboa's it is exactly the same across that how much is the larger number but what the same balance the woman if local 2 really had good comments about what kind of a drops south of market one of the 3 lowest and poorest neighborhoods except for chinatown i think from the federal reserve and here we have those probable high jobs come in and worried about displacement we're all over the place here probably especially true with the increase in the population probable like no - i think i really want to understand what the level of housing that is protected either in rent stabletion or how to apply them
7:45 pm
so we're not dropping a 92 bomb on housing somebody pointed out over the 7 thousand units or whatever it turns out to be how many people will live in them ero this on the action list and talked about with any colleague we want to tease that and understand how many people live there some other place in san francisco to take advantage of hiding it but appreciation but the price ranks of the housing that is already applied to the level as the woman from i cu said childcare didn't register with me until john got up and talked
7:46 pm
about that last week that's a good point and the other point i think we've been talking about that quite a bit the transit and the capacity of the roads, etc. for vehicles do they consider a change we're seeing in uber and lyft and other services i think that is important uber how to when i get any dinner so is that in their i have questions around that and interesting thing the city needs to grow i agree but we need to balance the roads with the ability to have the housing and the transit and all the other support services keep up we've seen what happened in potrero hill and about 16th street we have a bus line and cars john rahaim the streets and talking about the horror with the circle of questioning whether the eir make sense that was 10 years ago and so m much
7:47 pm
as changed may be given the 25 years the level of change might not make sense anymore there is a book i'm reading called we're late i suggest the ero industry it is talking about the acceleration of change and the level of change happening it is in our history so i'd like commissioner johnson will be sending in comments in writing as well. >> thank you commissioner johnson. >> thank you. i can't help myself so on childcare and related facilities the reason why i didn't want to go into too much daily to provide written comments not just about the potential of rezoning district but administration codes about childcare not requiring that building provide childcare we actually need state and local
7:48 pm
law changes to make that legal as of right now the way we're set up we can't build those i think there is a number of these types of facilities and what you talk about how to shape our community to account for new services that are changing the face of our city like assured housing and shared transit the delivery services and things like that those are all requiring zoning and code changes and building code changes when every one of everything is dropped off by amazon we'll require the changes to create the space this is not only about what we want to see but more mechanisms in the zoning lodging we have to consider thank you. >> thank you commissioner moore. >> i appreciate everybody's comments with the neighbors made and the comments are not against
7:49 pm
you, we are here to shape the documents of that it is basically informing the decision makers and be comprehensive and shedding light on things contrary many of the comments we here you know are similar comments we heard an individual projects particularly in the eastern neighborhoods and they are all loud and clear in the room and the idea of public services the balance of the housing job balance all of those are repetitive i'll not repeat the comments they're coming almost to a screeching intersection at a huge projects given we're not talking about individuals buildings but talking about the change of the larger quadrant of city the comment i'd like to emphasis
7:50 pm
the public discussion has overlay on the family-friendly discussion initiate by supervisor yee and i'd like to have the discussion to be augment by the discussion on those particularly reflecting on the guidelines of the downtown plan the work we've done prior to 2013 and the preparation of today's eir spoke about the mid rides solution with the snoring borrowing that was discussed where people - i believe as push back on more than one front and the urban design guidelines and the modeling of the alternative in the larger context of the urban design plan
7:51 pm
is important to me and require further veting i'll submit my comments and both in rincon hill the special treatment of 5 m and hub effect this project and we need to find a way to reflective and interweave the discussions on a border discussion of transformation of the city at large. >> commissioner moore commissioner vice president richards. >> i know we've not had a chap be to sit down face to face a way to understand in other parts of the city we add the jobs and where people live i know we have the report we had all the facts come together thirty percent of the people don't live in the
7:52 pm
city but outside a quick accounting where we expect those resident to live that would be great we know how much we're entitled so where based on the way things are on the ground with the people given the city and region at a whole that will be a helpful discussion. >> commissioner melgar. >> thank you. i don't want to repeat any of the comments that the other fellow commissioners made i the president to zero in on ms. gomez comments there is you know we're adding jobs we're also displacing jobs i seen a study last year where folks lived in the midst who worked in the hospitality industry i think that those are the members of the a t r e and patterns much to
7:53 pm
my surprise that are left in the mission since speculation in the research was that folks live close to where we work they can't afford to commute those are the folks that are walking to work and riding their bikes to work can't afford parking as the parking unit disappear it becomes difficult to come up with the workforce here we already know the hospitality industry is suffering that cuts off the service industry to the jobs i think that you know we placing with with the bmr units is not the population we're trying to serve i'll cognizant that you know we're planning for dispenses phil ginsberg the central soma we have to be
7:54 pm
careful not to cause displacement and the issue of childcare and services if we don't do this the market will provide those services that are more expensive than people with afford i'll submit comments 2, 3, 4 writing such thank you for all your hard work. >> commissioner moore. >> i'm raising the question that is almost impossible for you to address mr. gibner the issue we're living in a time of reality where functions change in the last three or four years that is a comment by ms. hester and by many others how to quantify that and bring forward into something to to the decision makers. >> thank you seeing no
7:55 pm
additional commissioner comments remind the public that written comments can be submitted to the planning department up to 5:00 p.m. on february 13th. >> commissioners, if there's nothing further, we'll move on to the next item which has several pieces to it item 11 at 1028 market street a final environmental impact report and items 12 abc and d at 1021 the x k the cu arc fornix conditional use authorization and the zoning administrator will consider the variance at 1028 market street initially the project sponsor anticipated presenting their public art component for item twelve e
7:56 pm
they're not any longer than present this is an it possible item not effecting today once you hear from staff and the project sponsor you can open up for public comment at the conclusion of public comment certify or consider certifying the environmental impact report if you do see with the project itself. >> commissioners, i apologize the project is prepared to present their art so i'll include this at the 1028 market street the informational presentation. >> thank you jonas. >> so we're ready for the
7:57 pm
staff presentation? >> good afternoon commissioner president hillis and commissioners rachel planning department staff also with me are lisa gibson our acting officer and senior environmental planner the preservation planner and the preservation planner for this project members of the sponsor team are present as the commission secretary has indicated the 23u789 is a certification of a final i went for the 1028 market street project department case the project is located on the ned of mission street between taylor and jones in the downtown civic center neighborhood what the definition of the commercial building and the construction of a one and 20 feet tall story
7:58 pm
building and come pricing 4 tenant spaces a copy of the draft eir certification motion and the response to comments document are before you the draft eir was published on september 21st, 2016, the public hearing on the draft eir was held on october 2016 the public comment period closed in 2016 and the responses to the document walking by was published on january 13, 2017, the responses to comments document combination with the dryer that you received previously constitutes the final eir now you'd like to provide you with a brief summary of eir findings the project is located within the market street go historic district and the eligible tenderloin lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and
7:59 pm
queer or harvey milk historic district the existing two-story commercial building constructed in 1907 a contributing structure to both district this should be noted the building is not individually eligible for listing not a historic resource this is detailed in the historic response or h.r. dr that concluded that will result in two significant unavoidable impacts to the historic district to the market street theatre and this is related to the demolition of the existing contributing structure for a significant effect on the district larger due to the fact the district is small in size the xhapths of distributor is low and centrally located within
8:00 pm
the decision and the definition decision please note we've included figures to laubltd that one the context of the historic district i believe started on page 15 and with the evaluation that includes pictures this is related to the construction of proposed project that will have a significant impact on the theatre and district because the replacement building will not be comparable with the size, scale and architectureal features two litigation measures are included but first, the half documents the second a permanent display with the documenting of the market street building with the market street theatre in the district, however, even withhe


info Stream Only

Uploaded by TV Archive on