[no audio] >> all those who want to speak on the continuance can come up to the microphone and this time. up -- at this time. >> good afternoon, members of

the commission. my name is joe butler. i was hired earlier this month by david to help him with his discretionary review at 226, brio -- 226 cabrillo. he was in the hospital. his rounds of chemotherapy have begun. last week, he was hospitalized for seven days because he had had a reaction to one of the earlier drugs. for the next six months, he will be in chemotherapy. we will endeavor to work in the weeks off to get ready for this hearing, but we respectfully request that you give a 90 day continuance to this dr requestor. vice president olague: i believe the project sponsor is here. would you like to speak on the continuance?

>> i am the architect of the project and also the applicant. the project was originally filed back in december, 2009. one of them will be proposing demolition of the existing dilapidated structure. the other proposal will be building a new three-story structure with two units, owner occupied. the applicant and also the owner tried to go above and beyond the basic guidelines recommended by the planning department. everything we are proposing here is compliant with the general plan residential design guidelines. we have 10 individual neighbors supporting this project.

the abutting neighbor is also here and could be the witness. we eventually it worked with the neighbor. we are trying to be very cooperative. in terms of a schedule, we have been as flexible -- been flexible since last october. we urge the commissioners and not to vote for a continuance. -- not to vote for a continuance. this is a two unit residential project in a dense zone for multi-unit project. the subject property is the only property which is set back from the front property line more than 50 feet. it is a public eyesore to the neighborhood and the block, the district. we urge you once again.

please do not grant any other the continuance so there will not be any further delay. vice president olague: thank you. is there any additional public comment? >> good afternoon, commissioners. i live at 224 abrillo, -- cabrillo, right next door. it is basically an empty lot with the cottage in the back next to us. it is a dangerous place to live in and walked in and out of. there are portions where you would walk and your foot would go to the floor. but it was low rent and they had been there a couple of years. they were happy there until the owner decided to sell the house. she moved out.

a contractor bought it and my wife and i were really pleased, because we thought maybe now they could remove this eyesore and build something nice on that. he never got around to building anything, but he rented it out to a series of tenants. one summer, he rented it to an irish football team. it was like animals next door for the summer league -- for the summer. it was really awful. eventually, he sold the property to these folks. i was contacted by the architect, who just spoke. we are all for it. we are really ready to see something go up on a lot -- on that lot. vice president olague: this relates to the continuance. >> i am so sorry.

i did not mean to be long winded. vice president olague: i enjoyed the story about the football team, so i lost track of what i was doing. [laughter] >> we are really eager to see this began. it has been a long, long time. in terms of continuance, i am hoping they can just move ahead and do what they need to do. vice president olague: thank you. >> sorry. vice president olague: no worries. >> my name is hiroshi. i am here to support the continued and since the -- the continuance since the dr requestor is unable to represent themselves. it would be unfair for the process to continue without his presence. vice president olague: thank you. is there any additional public comment on the continuance?

>> -mark myers. i come from san francisco, it is unprofessional -- a design professional. i think he should let the process goes through. as a property owner in the city, it seems that when things fit within the guidelines to set up it is ideal that you let the planners do their job. i think when anyone can just drag out the process for property owners here in the city, that is a strain on the property owner as well. vice president olague: thank you. is there any additional public comment on the continuance? seeing none, public comment is closed. commissioner moore: i am looking for the city attorney's guidance on this particular discussion and how we go about it. there are two concerns. the human side is normally not

what we used to make a decision, although, being human, that inadvertently comes in, including compassion and understanding of what can happen. a concern on the other hand, as a planning commissioner, is the length of time with which this project has been worked on. we are here to speed up the process. a small building having been around that long, including acknowledging a potentially blite effect on the neighborhood, is a concern to me. i am not putting these thoughts out to influence how we decide to do that, but it puts me in an awkward position, to say the least, to the knowledge that. perhaps we can hear the city attorney give us some guidance. commissioner antonini: maybe i could speak to someone representing the dr requestor.

i just have a question in the length of the continuance being asked for. i realize that the dr requestor is undergoing chemotherapy. there is no guarantee that at the day we continue it to he will be available for that date either. >> you are correct in that assumption. we will endeavor to take his lucid moments and make the most of that. but it is unclear how successful that will be. the longer a time we have, the more opportunity we will have to work together. if you would like it to be two months or one month, that can work. six weeks perhaps? commissioner antonini: if that is enough time and there is a reasonable thought that he might be able to be here in six weeks and you can gather together his concerns and be ready in that

time, i think it is fair to the project sponsor that we have the short continuance. >> understood. we will be here to represent him, whether or not he is able to participate. commissioner antonini: i will see what the other commissioners have to say. i am sympathetic to the continuance, but i think six weeks is fairer to the project sponsor. commissioner sugaya: 2 planning staff, mr. starr -- to planning staff, mr. starr, i think we received an e-mail with the chronology of this project. and my thinking of a different one? >> you receipt that earlier today. commissioner sugaya: -- am i thinking of a different one? >> you received that earlier today. commissioner sugaya: could do

summarize that and come forward from there? >> it probably was done in 2009. it took a while for staff to review the application because of the soundness report. we were going through the transition and there was no one on staff to be able to review that. there was a three month delay on our part, but mr. lee was extremely patient and understanding during that period. from my perspective, we have delayed this case too long for what they are doing. they have a code compliant project. the building is unsound. they have met every requirement we have given them. we set them up for a hearing before the planning commission in october because we thought it needed one, but then we found the building to be unsound, so we canceled that. then the dr was filed, and we have 90 days to get it there.

we are within that 90 days, but just barely. the case has been protected for that reason -- protracted for that reason. commissioner borden: i know we have previously done accommodations with the americans with disabilities act. there is some level of accommodation supposed to be granted when there is a medical reason related to a request. i would say that the length of time is -- 90 days is way too long of a request to grant. i noticed that on the application it seems like the wife is also listed. i wonder if the wife would be able to represent the position, since they both are named don d. -- are named on the dr application. mr. butler said he would be here regardless. i am all in favor of finding a sooner date to hear this case. it sounds like either between mr. butler and the project's

sponsors wife, who is also a filer, that they could come in and represent the case. i understand this is an unsound building. we need to deal with it sooner rather than later. luckily, it has not been raining lightly. i do not know what the appropriate time is. unfortunately, i have lots of family members who have had cancer. there are no guarantees at all as far as length of time. it is complicated to pick another date. commissioner moore: mr. butler? i understand this project originally was represented by mr. williams. that is my observation based on the package i have here. >> that is correct. commissioner moore: when we asked to step in and take over this project? >> i submitted a proposal in

late december. i believe it was early january, this month, when i got the signed contract back. commissioner moore: we are ourselves in the second hearing in january. you said you had relatively little time to fully get into the depth of all the aspects. is that correct? >> i was only able to meet with my client wants. commissioner moore: thank you. mr. lee, please. mr. lee, as an architect of small residential projects, does this continuance create hardship for you? i understand project fees for smaller projects are extremely sensitive, and sometimes these additional delays are a hardship for the practitioner. is the corrected this particular case? >> that is exactly correct, and

thank you for being understanding about our economic situation. for example, getting construction right now is close to impossible, no matter how much you put in. it is a challenge. i can tell you this. the owners' inlaw has been living in the -- commissioner moore: i do not want to go there. i do not want any of the details that deal with the personal aspect of what is going on. thank you. you have answered my question. you were right on target. i will have to ask the city attorney personally, unless the other commissioners agree with me, to give me some guidance on what is best year. -- best here. >> this kind of question is

really within the commission's discretion to try to weigh the various equities and hardships. the commission is seeking that kind of information. commissioner moore: i appreciate your answer, because we will be hard-pressed to find the right answer here. commissioner antonini: i would like to make a motion to continue to march 10, with the understanding that if the project sponsor is unable to be there that day we should move forward anyway. in fairness, i think that is a good compromise. this has nothing to do with the continuance, but i would like to mention that it gives us more ability to look over some of the historical data on here. there is quite a bit in regards to that particular site. it also allows the project sponsor to maybe give us a little bit better rendering of the design.

it is hard to tell what it is going to look like. it seems like it is not to contextual with the rest of the street. -- to contextual -- too and textual with the rest of the street. it might make approval easier if we could see what is going on and how it will blend in with the other buildings, which is an area with a lot of similarities in architecture. that is my motion. vice president olague: is there a second? commissioner sugaya: if i am not mistaken, this has not been continued by the commission before. some of the delays that were talked about by staff were internal other things. i am of a mind to continue it, but i am having a difficult time landing on the exact number of weeks. vice president olague: march 10

gives them about six weeks. >> it is almost six weeks. as always, if you choose to continue it further, it is easier to do that than to hear it sooner. commissioner borden: i mean, i am supportive of continuing the project. i think march 10 seems like an awfully long time, especially since we are not hearing the project sponsor and the dr requestor are going to be working together. if there was something going on between the two sides, that would be one thing. >> it is based on the availability of the calendar. march 10 is the soonest date of availability. march 3 might go on. commissioner borden: i feel bad

because it does -- to delay its so long -- it's so long. it is not the project's sponsors fault that there was a change in who the dr req uestor is working with. vice president olague: we could move to march 3. commissioner antonini: can i restate my motion as continue to march 3? commissioner moore: i was going to ask, and this is really, and more than anything else -- very often, dr requestors defer negotiations about their projects to the representatives who are standing in for them to provide as with the expert opinion. well the relationship between mr. butler and the applicant is new, i do believe that we have that quite frequently.

i have seen that many times, someone speaking on behalf of somebody we do not know. he would have the full authority to speak for the applicant. my question is -- is that something we would consider? i still believe that staff support on this particular project is the row -- is thoreau -- is thorough. i have a clear understanding about this project intends to do, how it conforms with the general plan. it does not ask for anything unusual. i feel like hanging is up for you to consider. vice president olague: the motion on the floor is for the continuance. that tick president. commissioner moore: -- that takes precedent. commissioner moore: i just want to let you know that is in the back of my mind. president miguel: i would vote

against the motion. i think the motion is to give mr. butler time, and mr. butler has the background of everything mr. williams did on this for some time. i do not always like to hear a matter when the principal is not able to be present, but as commissioner moore stated, we often, in fact a large number of times, perhaps half, do not hear from the principles. we hear from their representatives. to my mind, certainly, three months is totally out of line. personally, i would not like to see it delayed. >> on the motion to continue the matter to march 3. commissioner antonini: aye. commissioner borden: no. commissioner fong: no. commissioner moore: no.

commissioner sugaya: no. president miguel: no. vice president olague: aye. >> so moved. excuse me. that motion fails. my apologies. vice president olague: we should just hear it now. we heard from staff. we will hear from the dr requestor at this time.

>> my name is rose hillson. i would like to present some information. this is a google map of the site. this is the cottage, the shack. i said in a report it was in the southwest corner. obviously, it is in the northwest corner. i would like to make that change in my accuracy. this is a picture of the cottage in 2009. this shows some investigative work done on the cottage to try to find out whether or not it was [unintelligible] this is a close-up of the portion the were looking for, the green paint. they did find it. the history behind this area -- i have some more documents to turn in later. the history behind this. is it used to be the bay district racetrack. the bay district racetrack

became the campgrounds for the 1898 spanish american war troops of the u.s. army. the u.s. army 23rd regiment regular -- i am just doing this of the top of my head. the 23rd regiment regular was positioned in the exact location where 226 cabrillo is. there were a lot of military activities going on in that lot and the surrounding area. there are about 39 pictures of one not bore you with. this is all the design surrounding third avenue, fourth avenue, mostly mediterranean and stucco turn-of-the-century homes. many single-family. tree-lined streets. i want to show you some of the camps. there were earthquake checks. what we are most familiar with is the one-story pup tent earthquake shack.

it is not necessarily the only thing they had during the 1906 earthquake. the war also programs that most people do not know about, the grant relief bonus cottages. those were given to people who had some means. they were given $500 loans to get special buildings. in your packet, i showed you various pictures of other camp buildings. the owner of the shack, one of them was an undertaker. he embalmed president harding. he died after taking a trip to alaska. he also embalm william randolph hearst. here he is, walking in front of the funeral procession. i have too much information. that is what i wrote the 65-page historical docu