construction activities starting etc., etc.. >> i can't really speak to other eirs. without having specifics. and those mitigation measures in general or in other eirs are crafted. >> according to the specific of the pro-yekt and the project site and its setting and the particular of what is being done and so it, you know, there is nothing in this situation that warrants particular or unusual mitigation measures around those issues. >> thank you. >> i guess that i am in complete disagreement with that analysis. >> we have worked on many, many reports that have those particular impacts identified, and identified as potential substantial, impacts to a historic resource. and i am not talking about just

any building. and they are identified in the eir and then they are mitigated through the various means that i just described. and you know, like, i can't support the motion. that the eir, or that the environmental review is adequate. >> please call the question. >> on the motion to up hold the preliminary declaration, antonini. >> aye. >> borden >> aye. >> moore. >> no. >> commissioner sugaya. >> no. >> and wu. >> aye. >> that motion fails 3-2. >> is there alternate motion? >> maybe to continue? >> commissioner antonini? >> i would like to make a motion to continue the environmental neg deck appeal

as well as the project itself to whatever available dates we have and probably going to be in september i would think. >> we could potentially commissioners place it on the august 8th calendar. it is not overly booked at this time. >> okay. and my... and my charge to the staff would be to try to deal with some of the concerns that were brought up by the commissioner sugaya and also to project architect and staff to try to look at some of the concerns that were brought up by commissioner moore in regards to addressing the buildings to the adjacent to the property. >> and more contextual and if you want to summarize. >> what i am expecting and i would think that this is almost like a prototype for identification and the neighborhood is to find the buildings that were responsive to the scale and the surrounding buildings and which are all 25 foot lots as far as

i can tell that the buildings and as they come out to the larger building don't look like massive area and space ships. and in addition to that, i want the building to be expressive on both sides and on the mariposa street side and on the potrero street side and then transition down to the verdi club and that is an important thing and if the architect wants to step up? would you mind coming up? do you understand the discussion that we are having? >> i appreciate the concern and it is something that we discussed internally the relationship of the building that was proposed due to the existing verdi club there. and if i may speak to the condition of the variation from one to the other it is one building, obviously and many times in san francisco it will

be an attempt... (inaudible) to to present a character of differentiation and in the valley and most recently a project that is completed. i think that an orientation would warrant the variation in this for instance, or the orientation of openings and the like. it should have a building that enenvelopes that icon with the similar capacity and the material expression and it should step in volume, would i agree and i think that we can accommodate that in our efforts to revive the building. >> i think that i hear that you

understand for my concern and i am not going to prescribe to you to do what does not work on the buildings and that is the most cheapened down the direction that the commission has given to anybody but i would like to see your response to the concerns and that was a new building type in terms of mass and density and height and i would like to see a response and i would understand to settle to that challenge. >> we can address that. thank you. >> there is a motion to continue and i have not heard a second. >> did i make the motion? >> finish it >> you gave your direction, and i was going to give direction to the architect too. >> okay. >> i disagree with the commissioner moore, i think that it is one of the best projects that we ever approved and it is very con stekt youal and it addresses the buildings on two sides on polk and pacific and it is clearly a new

building and uses some of the similar materials in the building but, it is height and it is presentation on the two sides steps nicely down to the side and also it looks like it fits in the neighborhoods it does not look like an alien looking building which is the cookie cutter that we are seeing in every project that we get and i think that you can work on the design a little bit and maybe give it a little variety on the two sides. >> okay, please call the question. >> second, i am sorry. >> for the continuance. thank you. >> on that motion to continue the matter. >> do you have comments? >> yes, i have a comment, i think that we should let professional do what professionals do. >> please call the question. >> on the motion to continue the matter to august 8th, commissioner antonini? >> aye. >> borden, aye.

>> aye. >> and sugaya. >> aye. >> that passes 5-0. >> commissioners that will place us on item 13 a and b. >>3771 and 3781 cesar chavez street. and the zoning administrator will consider a request for a variance. >> good evening commissioners, michael smith and before we get started here today, a member of the public has requested an interpreter and so i have mr.

lynch, and he will be interpreting throughout this particular item. >> you have before you a request for a conditional use authorization to increase enrollment and existing home daycare operating as the preschool and to establish a religious facility operating as habad of noey valley and convert a dwelling into a commercial use and the properties located at 3771 and 3781, and both of which are single family dwellings and currently the preschool operates for 14 children at 3771, and 8 children at 3781. for a total of 22 children combined. the preschool is requesting to increase to 32 children enrollment and also requires a

spaces are required for the use and the existing parking space at 3781 would be removed as part of the project. the operators of the preschool currently reside at 3771, and have operated the home daycare/preschool from this location since 2005. in 2010, they purchased 3781, and began operating a home daycare from that location as well. the department has received more correspondence from the community since the commission of materials from this project were transmitted to you, and we received a petition signed by 50 people in opposition and another pecysing signed by 37 people in opposition to this project. some of the signatures appear on both of the petitions and also received a summary of opposition, prepared by a mr.

rochman a neighbor and four additional letters of opposition, 24 additional letters of support were also received in that time. those opposed to the site are concerned about the traffic and parking and noise, the sponsors have agreed to institute a staggered pick up and drop off program xh includes the new white zone for the passenger loading and the staff assistance with the children. and in response to the concerns about the noise and the project sponsor was missed a noise analysis, and estimated that the noise will increase 3 decibels, and however, the analysis also provided actual recommendations to achieve greater noise reduction. these recommendations include but are not limited to increased fence height and lining the play area with sound absorbing materials and staggering outside play time

and installation of rubberized flooring to cover the entire play area, it is my understanding that the sponsor is amenable to some of these recommendations which i will let him discuss in greater detail. the department is recommending approval with the conditions because it would allow an established use to continue to provide a unique service that is unmet in this neighborhood and the preschool child care services are difficult to find in the city and those that operate have long waiting lists and the ability of the city to provide the services to help the disability to attract and retain the families in the city and this concludes my presentation.

>> if i could pass a couple of things up to the commissioners. >> it has been a long day and i will my best with the community that has come out in strong support for dan to keep our presentation to the point. and but, there are a lot of people who have a lot of writing on this and a large community that is really depending upon this project moving forward and a lot of people care deeply about keeping familis in san francisco, and keeping families in this particular part of san francisco. i would like to start by saying that i misspoke last week. and i have found that there are

indeed, some people who don't love bacon. >> many are in this room right here today. and the... i would like to go to the computer please? >> this is a map of the... you can see the 101 and 280 and you can see where it feeds down to 101. this is the location of dan noey is that blue box, and on the other points are shown are the child care facilities in the district. and some of those that are indicated with the red pins are also elementary schools including the closest one which is katherine michaels. and i think that it is important to understand that there is no jewish preschool in the southern part of san francisco. i raised my kids in the castro

district and i drove them every day to the richmond to attend the jcc preschool before they left there and went down to the chinese american where that was a new school then. and it faced very unique challenges with traffic and entering in the community. the layout of the space is a very interesting one. and i passed up a garden detailed plan because i didn't think that we had one that really showed the layout and told the story of the use of this space. it means garden, the garden at the front of 3771, is the unique and special resource in san francisco. for young parents, deciding whether they are going to stay in the neighborhood, or they are going to go down the

peninsula or up to marin as the kids reach the age for child care, they are considering what the experience of their young child will be when they are dropped off someplace not at home for the very first time. this can be traumatic for a young child and having a unique beautiful garden setting adds a lot of richness to the family's experience and a lot of confidence to the young parents who are dropping that young kid off. >> i want to jump to the issues that have been raised and what we are seeking to do about them. you are going to hear very specific commentary from the members of the community about the traffic management plan. and about the acoustic measures. you have a list of the measures that we are proposing following

the report done by engineer from salter he is here to present his report and his findings to you, but i want to say on behalf of the project sponsor that these eleven items that we presented to you, we are proposing that these be included as conditions of approval of this permit. of this conditional use permit. and it is very important to us that we be as proactive in addressing problems, as we possibly can. children in our community make sound and we hear them in the background and they are part of the fabric of our community. it would be disingenuous of me to say that this block will not be affected by the students being served here. >> i believe that increased number can be managed

believe that dan has made the commitment to manage the additional children in a meaningful way. it is an important director to keeping glen park and the castro all of which intersect at this point and funnels to the freeway to this point and funnel to the major mass transit lines at this point it is very important that there be this resource for our families. and i would really encourage this commission to act today, to support this application. part of this application is a parking variance and we have sufficient parking in front of 3771. and the removal of the existing parking for the benefit of the dan noey and the habad use at 3781, it will not have a

significant impact on this neighborhood. the dwelling unit will not be functionally eliminated such that in the future this house will be able to be readapted for a single family use in the future if that becomes necessary our hope is that they will have a long and prosperous lifetime contributing to the fabric of this part of the city. i don't want to use up all of the time on the clock. we have a lot of people and i will encourage them to be as brief as possible and i will do my best and keep that organized and moving, thank you. >> thank you. >> open it up for public comment and we do have a lot of speaker cards here, it is a later hour.

and if you find yourself... (inaudible) >> did you make a request to... >> okay. so we will take that organized opposition first. >> hello, i'm ashley rober man from citizens concerned about it. i am a mom and an educate or and i have learned on the street for 20 years. we understand child friendly policies and don't question the right to exist on our block. but they have operated two family daycare sites behind the homes since 2005 including my own. nor are we making run-of-the-mill objections such as mere inconvenience, and

decreasing property values or a desire not to be around children. we are deeply concerned about the safety of panneding enrollment to 42 children at this particular location. because we are seeking to merely double enrollment and they don't automatically get a green light a child friendly policy actually limits the daycare center locations for example, not locating them or expanding them where it is potentially unsafe. the commission will decide here whether this expansion is indeed safe and therefore child friendly. what exactly is an unsafe child care center location? and in a proceeding on december 13, 2012, the commission considered a application on harvard street for 20 children and explaining the need to locate the daycare within the residential neighborhoods commissioner borden stated we don't want them preschools, on a busy street where they, children, can get hit.

first, this is a very good test let's apply it. first, is this location a busy street sf >> the answer is yes. project three of the page 3 of the project summary describes the location the project sites are located on a heavily trafficked street that is the main thorough fair for access highway 101 from the valley. this portion of the street is unusually congestived because it is a uniquely narrow clogged artery by three multilane boulevards and the sidewalks are narrow here and the deadly traffic grid lock is common especially during the morning and evening commute. here are photos of the usual morning commute conditions.

shavez is here and doloris is with the palm trees. here is another one, with completely blocked crosswalks. another one. different light cycles. and then, the narrow sidewalks and the congestion also cause parking problems getting to the sites. here is a picture of the car parked around the sidewalk. and a woman going through the grid lock traffic.

i am not talking about here about bad manners or in convenience but real safety concerns of the things exist now. both for students coming to the site and for the neighborhood kids. next can the children get hit at this location? the answer is yes. beyond these photos many neighbors living in the block over 20 years each have stated that numerous injuries and accidents and even deaths have happened here over the years and there are even recent hard statistics to show that it is unsafe. how many serious injuries collisions, serious enough for the police to be called and a report made have occurred on the very treat where this daycare center is located? here is a report from the city of san francisco mta history of mid block commissions between

doloris and guraro, 19 reported collisions with 20 injuries have occurred. children can get hit here, because the city knows that 20 individuals have already recently been hit here. simply hoping an accident does not occur at this site is not a plan. it is not child friendly to concentrate a lot more children at this challenging location. we recommend keeping the enrollment at existing numbers at this site. thank you. >> i am speaking on behalf of the four cs the staff has recommended that the project be approved but that is based on a mistaken assumption that the preschool would be operated in compliance with the state and local regulations, the

assumption is mistaken, that in reality has a long track records of violating those regulations it is commission should be aware of what that means, let's take a look at it. >> just three months ago, the state licensing agency cclz, went to the location at justin drive for one reason and one reason only, to shut that facility down at the close of business that day, why? because the daycare was not safe. the licensee did not live in the house which was the condition. no one lived in the house there was not even a bed. weber had been gone so long that the staff told them that they did not know who she was. continuing to operate the daycare was in ccld's words a zero tolerance violation. but wait, it gets worse. there were not any working smoke detect tores in the

house, they had not conducted any fire or disaster drills. in all, there were five type a violations, the most serious type of violations. and the owner and director of that daycare, the one responsible for those violations? well staff told ccld who was that. potash, who comes to you today and asks you to trust her and let her expand her daycare. just to be clear i want to show you that the closure of this site was initiated by the agency, if you can see right there, that is agency initiated in the highlighted part on the closure there. that is important because the potashes have told us as well as the staff that they closed it voluntarily. >> that is not true. let's look at 81 which is not licensed for any type of daycare even though noey

continues to use it. the former was pick over, like weber, pick over was a sham licensee. he was not operating a daycare, how do we know? well, you don't have to rely just on his length in profile to see what he was actually doing, he was never aoe site when ccld came to inspect. and not on october 30th or on april 17th. and each time that they visited they found no food in the fridge and no kitchen equipment and not even any personal hygiene items and to find all of that stuff you have to go to haze valley where they had moved in 2012, from which he tweeted about the neighborhood. they kept up the pretence that pick over still lived there, next door to their own house all the way up to the end of last month. the safety report at this location was also grim. and it operated in the upstairs of this building and there was one way in or out in the

interior stairway, according to ccld, he used the stairway as storage and leaving these free school children only 24 inches to squeeze through in an emergency. the barrier to the kitchen was left over with access to a knife and mold in the fridge, and was cited and find for exceeding the license by having too many, and less than three weeks ago and over this in the past nine months this accumulated five more type a violations, plus the violations licensing management, and the second zero violation in just the past few months. and the respeeded failure to file the rules and regulations governing the safety of children which is compelling

evidence. the commission might impose on the cu and the record also shows that these violations continued and increased during the four month since it has filed the application which it new that it would be under scrutiny. why does this matter? >> last week, this commission disapproved a cu application on these same grounds the application by a restaurant and longe that sought entertainment and it was fatal there is that i had been cited three times in the past year by violating the existing permit and was not able to show that it could comply in the future. and many more violations. more than a dozen of violations and it was just concerned the effect of one businesses noise on another business and these compromise the children and it might not be family friendly to

ignore and allow for the responsibilities which are even more compelling now and we urge you to draft the notion to disapprove the project. this preschool needs a time out. >> what was your name again? >> richard ross man. >> thank you. >> good evening, commissioners my name is bill somer and i am speaking for the four cs my wife and i live at 3787 directly adjacent and to the west of 3781. and i have been engaged with the conversations with potashes since 2005 on issues of traffic, parking and noise related to their daycare. >> the number of storis for that building and the current activity areas it is near the center of what is essentially a