to all requirements of the planning code. i have a copier of it. -- a copy of it. >> projects sponsor? >> good evening, commissioners. i would like to take this opportunity to introduce myself and explain why i am the appropriate person for this project your your i believe everything it is on the table, and august 11, 2000, i was

paralyzed. i had to spend three months in a wheelchair and a year in rehabilitation, and going through traditional medicine, i know it is an impact on my body and my general mental and physical condition. a few years after, i found medical canibus and it has made me a much happier person theory your i am an adaptive -- a much happier person. i am an adaptive person, and i would like to encourage others to compete in extreme sports they thought they would not be able to do. i have worked with adaptive sports west for construction,

and north star has agreed to give us space on the mountain. this is funded by the project. i am proud of everything we have done so far. i'll leave it up to you to be the judge. >> thank you curator -- thank you. >> good evening, ladies and gentleman. it turns out it is not quite as important. >> we were year the other night. >> until 3:00 in the morning.

>> my name is maciel. -- matthew. i had been working for the project sponsor to make sure the program complies with state laws, which require collectives, no profit during give what we are doing is setting up social service that will use can ibus as a basis for finding. as you can see, it has not stopped him. the goal is to make sure we provide medical canibus in a

format acceptable to the community. i was very involved in negotiations with the neighbors, and we did everything we could to make sure we are going to be operating with the principles that fit into the character. i sing the type of programs they are considering are very unique. i have hundreds of clients in california and colorado. i would say this is a high- quality product, and i would urge the commission to approve it, and i think you will be very pleased with the results. >> thank you.

is there additional public comment? seeing none, public comment is closed. >> i move to approve the project with condition. >> second. >> we got a couple of letters to speak against this obligation. apparently, the zoning administrator considered not only the use leadership institute -- youth leadership institute also preschool as being community centers, which would be a community clubhouses, which would be the same as elementary schools. i am not clear on that. maybe you can tell me about that.

>> the zoning administrator said they were not community clubhouse owners. they do have a meeting room they meet at occasionally, but they do not do programs out of the debt facility, and the other two facilities are the child care centers. they are not schools or community clubhouses. >> child care centers do not count. >> they were not given the consideration. they were not what the board of supervisors chose to put on the list. >> i guess kids behave differently if they are in child care than if they are in school. >> the motion is to take discretionary conditions. [calling votes]

comissioner antonini: no. >> that motion passes. you are now on item 123 done -- on item 12. 12b is a request for the granting of variances curio -- of variances. comissioner sugaya: before you get started, i need to ask the commission to recuse. my firm is still under contract on 150 otis. it is a different property, but it is the same client.

>> ok. [calling votes] >> commissioner sugaya is recused. the acting zoning administrator will consider the request. >> commissioners, planning department staff, before we get to item 12, there are a few things i would like to give to you. the comments time for this project ended on july 28. -- on july 20. there was a letter of appeal. there appellants -- the

appellants have rescinded that appeal, and i have the letter here along with the original appeal letter. the final-declaration was signed on july 22, 2010, and i have copies of fact sheet -- of the sheet, and since the declaration was prepared, the project has changed, and instead of 61 units, it would have 75, and there is a change in three- bedroom units. it is going down to five, and

the 1-bedroom units -- eight were analyzed, and 36 were opposed. the only change that would be made is the unit count. everything else would remain. i had a note for you on that change, stating there would be four vehicles instead of 54, but none of the impact would change and the mitigation efforts would apply to the project. kevin is here to present items 12 a and 12 feet if you do not

have any questions. --b and 12 if you do not have any questions. >> the parking demand is lower now othan it was very dead >> -- then it was. maybe i reinterpreted what you just said. >> with the revised project, there were 54. >> the demand would still be the same. it might be higher now it seems to me. >> she is talking about traffic, not parking. >> although i am saying if there was a change to traffic, there would be a change to unmet demand, not that it is going to

make too much difference. >> parking-related demand would remain the same with the revised project. >> thank you. >> good evening, commissioners. the request before you is for conditional use development on a site that was formerly developed on the embarcadero freeway. the project proposes to demolish an existing parking lot and construct a new eight-story building containing 75 portable dwelling units and approximately 2900 square feet of retail uses. conditional use authorization is required -- requested for the

planning code. the project site is relatively large. given that it would severely constrain and limit dwelling units. the project does incorporate a number of variations with the terrain, so staff believes the design meets the criteria. in addition, the sponsor requested three aspects of the project. the internal courtyard does not meet the findings. a number of dwelling units does not meet the exposure on all floors. finally, while it does require 73 off street parking spots, no parking is proposed, so these requests will be considered

today. staff believes the project will have significant new affordable housing units in an area within walking distance of retail services and employment opportunities within the financial district. the project is compatible with the nature of the area. it would help activate the area. the planning department believes the project is necessary and desirable and supports approval. this concludes my presentation, and i am available for questions. >> thank you, project sponsor. >> i am the executive director. we are the private sponsor, and we are delighted to be here at this late hour, so i will be brief.

we are very proud of the project we completed two years ago. it has one of course -- all kinds of architectural awards. these apartment units are going to be critical. goowe have a mix of financing, s many projects have. if we are particularly proud of the affordability levels of the project, raising it to 50% of the median income.

18 of the units are going to be stumbling, -- sampling, so we really tried to meet a number of needs, and we think it is compatible with the neighborhood. we got since support. -- good support. i have the project manager. if you have any questions on the financing or other aspects of the project, but i would like if this time to introduce to i think is a wonderful architect, who is the architect for this project as well. >> thank you very much. we would like to hand you a packet of slightly updated drawings.

nick was the project architect. i am pushing the wrong button. this is affordable housing as city repair. it is on a prominent site. that is the gateway to jackson square to the north and north beach to the west. the site is were two

interesting parts of san francisco history intersect. the typical pattern of small lots up and down is the pattern to the west. east and north, there is a completely different pattern, which was originally warehousing and manufacturing for the port, and is now office buildings for most of the block. our design, which is very different from the drawings on the screen. i suggest you look up the ones on the screen. a design this shift in context that occurs on the eastern si

de and a vertical element on the right side. this strategy presents a variance request in the planning code, which do not anticipate bob demands of the site. -- anticipate the demands of the site. the articulation of the building in several spaces does not literally follow it as written in the code.

the view looking up broadway. then it turns the corner. it steps of the slope and then becomes the vertically- proportion peace related to these wonderful little buildings. at the low end of the side, there is a retailer commercial piece at the corner. the rest of that level is mostly below.

the next level oup also has a commercial level. around the corner is the lobby entrance, which leads into a courtyard. a portion is then scooped away to provide light and air in the adjacent building. the next level is the typical residential level, and it shows the location of a number of things we are asking for. section 140 stipulates -- may i continue?

section 140 gives the width and length of required light and air. this exceeds the langs by about twice and is probably narrower -- exceeds the length by about twice and is probably narrower. the requirement of 4,700 feet of yard does not -- is now at the site where it does not permit the rear yard periods of -- the rear yard. these two levels of roof deck for the project reagan -- for the project. this view you have in front of you addresses the design and shows also the two roof decks

that have the use of downtown and the bay. we're very proud to do we hope the design is self-explanatory and would be glad to answer questions. >> would you like to add anything? >> good evening, commissioners here reagan -- commissioners. this is actually a really good example of a collaboration. it became under the jurisdiction of the department of housing, and they actually purchased the site, so the mayor's office is

providing housing. we urge your approval. we have a successful project, also our plan being surplus by the city. gerd we are looking forward to do something on the side. >> i would like to open it up for public comments. is there any public comment on this item? public comment is closed. >> i am thrilled with the opportunities to enthusiastically support a second project of affordable housing, which is pretty remarkable. this is a well-designed site.

i have often wondered what is going to happen with that site. it is exciting to see that 75 new units will be billed for families to continue to live in san francisco. i think it is a wonderful project and i approve. >> i also think this is a wonderful project, and it is completely the appropriate avenue to provide affordable housing in san francisco, especially using our affordable housing fees, but i think we will be equally enthusiastic about allowing people to do so, and we spend hours on some small issues, yet on the big ones they go in five minutes. we would hope the same

cooperation exists when we have projects where people are trying to improve, so thank you very much. >> to all communities who are afraid property values will go down if you build affordable housing, we are doing the opposite. this is exactly the project we want, the transition to chinatown, and people having a quality experience would make it wonderful to walk five. i would support on all possible exemptions. it does a remarkable job.

>> this could be another excellent building. it fits so seamlessly. i am sure this will, too. it works to meet that end. >> before you is a motion of approval. on that motion? [calling votes] >> thank you. on the variants. >> i would close the public hearing in light of the usual configuration and would grant those for the conditions. >> thank you.

you are now on item 13. [reading item] >> i am kevin with neighborhood planning staff. the request is for conditional use operation. in measures roughly 1100 square feet plus an exterior. no amplified music is hosted by the bar, and the project proposes no extension or physical changes to the interior for an exterior. they have operated continuously since the 1960's. in 1970, they rendered its non- conforming to reagan -- non-

conforming. our records indicate the department failed to send notification to the property prior to the state. the zoning administrator previously determined the project sponsor would be allowed to remove the termination date and legalize the ongoing operation of the bar. although the subject bl residene variety of uses are found in the neighborhood including offices, retail, and tourist activity. it is not situated in an area with a high concentration of eating and drinking establishments. it acts as a neighborhood gathering place. the owners have agreed to a number of measures including prohibiting smoking on the rear