public works right in front of the house. and you can see settlements, almost 2 inches in the sidewalk. i have consulted with five licensed professional engineer is. after examining the evidence and providing measurements and some additional information, all of them concluded that my property and the surrounding area, and the proposed development will further already fragile ground conditions.

the technical engineers -- i'm sorry, i need a little bit more time. let me make a few last point. from the evidence i've provided, it is clear that my property is continuously unsettling. the proposed buildings will set off some recommendation -- [chime] >> thank you very much. >> i need a little more time. >> you're allowed five minutes. thank you. are there any speakers in favor of the dr?

ok. project sponsor? you have five minutes. >> thank you for having us, i will try to make this really clicked. i describe this project very eloquently and all i can say is that what we are proposing does not propose anything beyond the foundation replacement. he still will have to go through the exact same exercise that they are proposing to do. the first level of this building has a height of about 8 feet. to level that

to make sure that we get a ceiling. my clients have been born and raised in this house, the son and daughter inherited the house in 2009 and the like to create another unit to they can afford to live in this beautiful city. they have done drilling in the soil testing. there are a huge project done, and we should shut out and put a moratorium on the old neighborhood, but there is no such they.

and asked you to allow my client to exercise their property rights. i am available for any comments you may have. >> the speakers in favor of the project sponsor? you have a two-minute rebuttal. >> i wanted to say that they are in developing their properties and the support that. they have the right the

professional licensed engineers summarized it. they told me, i will have problems. i have a right not to spend my money to repair damages caused by the new development. in my initial e-mail, they do whatever they want to do. the development not m. wald, -- involved, showing excavation. i am trying to make that point who the sponsors had to you as the members of this commission. i have a right not to have any

damages. that's it. thank you. >> thank you. project sponsor, you have a rebuttal, to minutes. -- two minutes./ >> i have an engineering firm as well. nobody has done any work to the foundation. there is no sign of stress, no cracks, the building is completely original on the inside. any sort of settlement in this house, it makes me believe that they are not going to collapse the whole neighborhood. >> we are raised in this house,

we just want to live in the house that we grew up then. our parents passed away two and a half years ago. we just want to rebuild. otherwise, we can't afford to. >> we have been in this house, so there has been nothing wrong with the foundation. thank you. >> of the public hearing is closed. commissioner antonini: i think that many of the things that the requests are brought up are probably out of our province and would be covered because have the proper surely at proper protection is part of the

entire building code. that is where it would be addressed more so than than buying the building and the fear that this would happen. has to be done on a way that there is not displacement of the property. the only thing i would say, i was trying to figure out who the architect was. there is no architect. there is no problem with the facades. how would like to see in the staff work on this. you look at the building as it was rendered before and you are really not too sympathetic to the rest of the buildings in the neighborhood here. you also had a a tram that wouldn't have to be replicated of course.

the mayor may not put it on and it will certainly be more sympathetic. the quality of the hope would be those that a sympathetic to the neighborhood and of high quality. those are some of the things that i would like to see done. i know that they are byrd friendly, but they would be even more byrd friendly. -- bird friendly. i don't see how they are that attractive. >> the project sponsor, they have the bird safety glass, but there is no balconies, right?

they just ordered ceiling glass doors. >> staff, can you work with them and to get rid of those? commissioner antonini, can you work with them on something to do with -- >> be residential design team has not reviewed this. it can go further. we had a similar iterations, issues and, if you will. we understand the commission's direction. >> i know that on the ground floor, they are not rendered correctly. they are just applied. i don't know if they are even real stones. it is an integral part of it.

gosh i think it looks better. when it was finished, it looked pretty good. i move to approve working with residential design team and staff on this one. >> the motion on the floor is to not take dr and approve projects on the requirement that they continue to work with staff. on that motion? [roll call vote] [unanimous vote] thank you. commissioners, that motion passes unanimously.

>> general public comment? if not, the meeting is adjourned.

>> feel like it really is a community. they are not the same thing, but it really does feel like there's that kind of a five.

everybody is there to enjoy a literary reading. >> the best lit in san francisco. friendly, free, and you might get fed. ♪ [applause] >> this san francisco ryther created the radar reading series in 2003. she was inspired when she first moved to this city in the early 1990's and discover the wild west atmosphere of open mi it's ic in the mission. >> although there were these open mics every night of the week, they were super macho. people writing poems about being jerks. beatty their chest onstage. >> she was energized by the scene and proved up with other girls who wanted their voices to

be heard. touring the country and sharing gen-x 7 as a. her mainstream reputation grew with her novel. theses san francisco public library took notice and asked her if she would begin carrying a monthly reading series based on her community. >> a lot of the raiders that i work with our like underground writers. they're just coming at publishing and at being a writer from this underground way. coming in to the library is awesome. very good for the library to show this writing community that they are welcome. at first, people were like, you want me to read at the library, really? things like that. >> as a documentary, there are

interviews -- [inaudible] >> radar readings are focused on clear culture. strayed all others might write about gay authors. gay authors might write about universal experiences. the host creates a welcoming environment for everybody. there is no cultural barrier to entry. >> the demographic of people who come will match the demographic of the reader. it is very simple. if we want more people of color, you book more people of color. you want more women, your book more women. kind of like that. it gets mixed up a little bit. in general, we kind of have a core group of people who come every month. their ages and very.

we definitely have some folks who are straight. >> the loyal audience has allowed michelle to take more chances with the monthly lineup. established authors bring in an older audience. younker authors bring in their friends from the community who might be bringing in an older author. >> raider has provided a stage for more than 400 writers. it ranges from fiction to academics stories to academic stories this service the underground of queer fell, history, or culture. >> and there are so many different literary circles in san francisco. i have been programming this reading series for nine years. and i still have a huge list on my computer of people i need to carry into this.

>> the supportive audience has allowed michele to try new experiment this year, the radar book club. a deep explorationer of a single work. after the talk, she bounces on stage to jump-start the q&a. less charlie rose and more carson daly. >> san francisco is consistently ranked as one of the most literate cities in the united states. multiple reading events are happening every night of the year, competing against a big names like city arts and lectures. radar was voted the winner of these san francisco contest. after two decades of working for free, michelle is able to make radar her full-time job. >> i am a right to myself, but i feel like my work in this world

is eagerly to bring writers together and to produce literary events. if i was only doing my own work, i would not be happy. it is, like throwing a party or a dinner party. i can match that person with that person. it is really fun for me. it is nerve wracking during the actual readings. i hope everyone is good. i hope the audience likes them. i hope everybody shows up. but everything works out. at the end of the reading, everyone is happy. ♪

commissioner campos: good afternoon and welcome to the march 23, 2012 meeting of the san francisco local agency formation commission. i am the chair of the commission. linda wong is the commission clerk. madam car, if you can call roll call. commissioner avalos: present. >> commissioner olague is absent. commissioner schmeltzerchair ca? commissioner campos: we do have a quorum of the commission. >> approval of minutes from the 2012 -- commissioner campos: before we

take action on this, is there any member of the public that would like to speak? public comment is closed. motion by commissioner schmeltzer, second by commissioner avalos. call item 3. >> community twice aggregation, a status update on cleanpowersf program, a status update on proceeding at the california public utilities commission and a status update on state legislation. [chime] >> good afternoon, and director of cleanpowersf. a few things to update on, we continue to move forward with finalizing the services that we need, the call center in

tracking which puts customers and and out, working with noble america's on that. having some good discussions with them on that. will waiting for action on the board of supervisors as well as the contract for the energy and supplies. it is up for the first year in force of the committee, and subsequent board of supervisors to follow. we have had continuous discussions with local power on their ideas around enhancing the bill the associated with the program. in fact, staff had a meeting

with some of the advocates this morning on that subject. both of my remarks are in response to the request of the last meeting about opt-out and such. we wanted to give an update on the last little bit. analyzing the types of customers that make up the the average customer base here in san francisco, it would be in the high 40% for opt-out. we think it can get lower by figuring out ways to target different communities, and different types of areas, and

different attitudes or makeup of customers. we go through the deep analytical work and the statistical models to overlay what we can gather from market research in terms of asking customers what their attitudes are about the real ovals and the price premium a as well as overlain with records about demographics as well as things that related to public power and how people voted in various precincts like pg&e's coccyx team effort. it went down pretty handily in san francisco, but in other ways, it went down more heavily than others. we're looking at various energy related matters on the ballot

here in san francisco. commissioner campos: before you continue, i know that commissioner pimentel has a question. first of all, i forgot to thank the moembers of sfgtv staff. i also wanted to welcome our new a member, commissioner christina olague. with that, commissioner pimentel? commissioner pimentel: be no witch sides of the city have the highest opt-out rate? >> we don't know yet, we have projected rates. commissioner pimentel: do you know which side are more in favor? >> we will be doing much more granular research than we have done in the past. what we have seen is the north

and the western parts of the city, because of the nature of the research we did up until now out, it wasn't really granular enough. that is the next level we're going to be doing. in general, the northwest, if i had to make my best guess now, it would be the area with the lowest hot out. san francisco as we know ait is more like swiss cheese. i am thinking there are different ways home yet. that is how we will bring various proposals in terms of strategies on how to rescind or opt-out notices. commissioner campos: mr.

campbell, as you're doing this analysis in looking at the data, when you think you will have a better sense of what the often- out number will be? >> we think it will have results to share about one month's time. commissioner campos: can you talk about if you are communicating with some of the advocates to make sure that the rate is as low as possible? >> we have discussions regarding local power work and they talk about off-out rates there. it is very much a plant discussion. we're keeping those dialogues open. just so i can be complete, the proceedings related to the cpuc and state legislation, the

latest intelligence is the cpuc is making a final decision on what the performance bond would be, and it is really an august timeframe. it is related to bonds for direct access. those are going through the process first. regarding the implementation of state legislation that we had, it is moving forward with proceedings of having their be enhanced code of conduct for how the utility's interact. we are very active in that proceeding. we have been working with other communities that are interested to make sure that we have a unified front. there are also comments that will be due april 16.

we will be filing on monday, the cpuc will be taking up those items to decide on code of conduct rules. commissioner campos: the august date, is that something you have received from puc saying that is what they are expecting? >> it is based upon conversations i have had with those that are familiar with the proceedings there. commissioner campos: in terms of the code of conduct by communities, what are the kinds of issues that we are talking about in terms of the kinds of things that protocol will