purview. >> that would be something i would like to see done. i would like to make an amendment to the motion on the floor that we have a redesigned to include a bathroom in each of these units, the elimination of the common bathrooms, and how many units you end up putting in, i would hope that you could have 23 or more. >> a and does not convinced that this can be done. this does not mean that we would not want to have this

conversation. i don't think that this is something that we can require although this is something that we frequently discussed. >> my thought is said to don't think they have to be limited to 110 feet. obviously you could make the and is larger to be able to accommodate that. i think the bathroom would be an important feature. >> i would like to approach the issue from another angle and engage mr. sanchez.

if it would be anything to have 24 units including four bathrooms and more than half of it is 50 feet away and this is somewhat ridiculous. this is asking for trouble. i would like to ask minter sanchez with corridors which are three by 4 foot wide, you have people rushing towards those bathrooms, what kind of safety hazards to you cause when you have people standing in that corridor waiting.

i find the distribution of necessity somewhat -- why not you or rooms with better distributed amenities. the committee rooms are barely 110 square feet with 20-25: units per floor.

we head a visit a month ago which provided a simple matter and kitchen within a small unit and i would expect that we are raising the standard for a new sro. what is provided is substantial. have we talked to the fire marshal about this? >> thank you. you have made some excellent

points regarding the current units. they are taking the existing guest room layout and converting those. that is in the edition. in regards to the building and fire and housing code issues that you have race, this would go on to the agencies for the appropriate level. we have not contacted those agencies to discuss this matter. this would be within the commission's purview to direct and. there could be a minimum room size as the commission desires. >> thank you. with that feedback, i would like to continue this project. this is a really important issue. given what is in front of me, i am not prepared to move the project forward. >> second.

>> a motion and a second to continue. there is no way that i can vote for this configuration. >> can we ask sanchez to see what is a reasonable date for these answers. the linear transformation is not really the basis for talking about an sro. >> given the staffing concerns, the debate might be -- >> any comment regarding november? >> considering that we have just talked about having this on the

18th, i would suggest that we take two days in december. >> ok. >> there is a motion on the floor to continue this item through november 2nd. because you're asking for changes to the project, this will remain open. >> we still have comments and once we vote to continue, is this over? >> technically, a motion to continue. >> it seems like the

configuration of a converted hotel is minimal at best. if we will grant something like that, then i think that there needs to be more work as everyone has talked about. going certain directions like that would merely increased the cost and this with just be passed on. this is not an affordable housing project. bathrooms are the most important thing that you can put into this building. even though this is a quality of life issue and it makes things more convenient for people, there might be a compromise solution in there were certain rooms may have them or will lose them. we will lose some rooms and that

some mothers may not hav have hy but they share bathrooms. >> i have concerns about the management of this place which is kind beyond our control. it would be nice if mr. shawn who supported this thing in the tenderloin housing clinic could manage it. >> are you suggesting that we have some trust for the management situation that would deviate some of the neighbors' concerns about how this thing will be run and how confident is? i assume once we take action, if we take action in the future to do the conversion, does this day sro forever? >> the hotel conversion

ordinance regulates all of this. they can talk about this but there are restrictions. this requires only 23. that is defined in the hotel ordinance. we are using those and they don't have bathrooms or kitchens. >> thank you. >> i would like to have staff consider that similar to trinity plaza, we could have some kind of agreement or condition or something that a fifth street building received a building occupancy permit first before the tourist hotel does. we would defend a surer that the project will actually move ahead and those conversions will actually be done. so, if staff it think about a way if that is even possible.

i think in trinity, it had to be a development agreement. if we have to do that, i would be willing to consider. if not, we may just not have a project. >> on the pose conditions of approval, the very first one is surveillance cameras and that kind of thing. they can install all of that stuff but then we don't have any insurance that we will use it. there has to be a mechanism where they are actually using the equipment and keeping the tapes or whatever disks, whatever, get recorded in some period of time. holiday inn express and the

parent company is intercontinental. this part of their reprinting as holiday inn. my understanding is that intercontinental has control over holiday inn and they are doing very well all over the country. they are under this big sort of free branding effort. hong -- 3 branding -- rebranding effort. >> my concern is that we do need more affordable housing in this city. we have provided affordable units of housing for people at the very limited income. i am concerned in seeing that

something will go forward. i think that there are many sro's that have shared bathroom units. i don't believe that they have bathrooms but that would be great. that is not required. there should be to be kitsch's but that is nothing in the code. maybe we can look at the code. i'm happy to hear that they're providing those on each floor. i think there are ways of making these units livable. i am concerned that we not lose affordable housing. also, i don't really want to

criminalize people who live here. i have worked for people and in the collaborative for six years. there are many people who are trying to pull their lives together and put a roof over their head. >> i should have continued when asked a question about intercontinental.

for that project, there are probably setters that holiday inn is imposing. from that standpoint, the commission could be taking a look. there are some enforceable conditions that seemed reasonable in this case. >> we are not in one and% support of sro's.

>> i don't disagree with that at all. that is why we are continuing with the project. i am grateful with that. >> maybe there would be a configuration that brings in closer, maybe some have

bathrooms, maybe some are shared. ththis is not a history of somee having this. if you are a tenant and you have convictions, then you would no longer be a tenant. that is a different situation. >> the motion on the floor for a continuance what the public hearing to remain open until december 2nd. >> aye. >> aye. >>aye. >> aye. >> aye. >> the motion passes. what is the average size?

i think 350 is the standard. for >> to be defined as this kind of unit, it cannot be more than 350 feet. most of them are actually smaller. >> the what an average of what it is, actually. >> i'm assuming since you did not speak on 19th street. >> you are now on item number 20. case number 2009.03.68g.

ahthose are for 673 brussels street. this is a mandatory discretionary review. >> good evening, commissioners. in regard to public comment, the project has made the mandatory notifications. the staff has received 21 letters in support of which there has been no opposition and no publicly initiative discretionary reviews. the department disagrees with the assessment as noted on page 65.

staff recommends that the commission take discretionary review and disapprove with the commission. -- and approve with the commission. the condition of the existing building was the result of deferred maintenance. that concludes the staff presentation. i'm available for your questions. >> there are numerous similar is between the two. what we found to be the biggest distinction is the perceived affordability. we found that the project is not affordable and this could be an affordable unit because this was a close call. this was difficult distinction to make. the single-family proposal, this

is maximum. this is a cautious recommendation on our part and this is a close call. we would like the commission to consider fully the arguments that a forward by the sponsor. >> thank you. >> project sponsor. >> good evening. the would like to thank you, commissioners, for meeting with us. it is never easy to be open about our first live let alone with someone who has an impact on our lives and future. i hope that you have taking consideration of information we have provided so that you could

understand why this project is more than just a dilapidated one store unit. this is a two-story building. i have a letter appended to the letters received from the neighbors who are in support of the project. perhaps this project is perceived simply as buildings that you have to beautify and improve the property value of the neighborhood. this will be home, our home. this city is where we want to stay. my husband and night are sincerely requesting --

approval to construction. thank you, commissioners. >> good evening, commissioners. think you for your time. i come before you today to asked to approve the request and demolish the nonviable building. i am a native san franciscan. i have resided in north beach, chinatown, and colonel heights. all my family lives and still lives in the city. san francisco is the only city i have ever known.

at first, i was very hesitant. there was so much to do and i am not sure which place to start. at the time, the housing market was under decline and this is a great opportunity for us to buy a house and start a family. we can only be able to afford one or the other. two things helps me to decide, supporting my wife and my desire to be able to own a home and continue to live in the city. we took on the task of doing something with the property. this process has been an emotional roller coaster. now we stand before you pleading our case. there are some anything's to say. we are not the previous owner of the property. there are restrictions on what

you can do. i want to share something with you that is not documented. my wife and i are a very active couple and think we have a lot to offer the neighborhood. besides helping our neighbors get rid of the eyesore, the best thing my wife and i can bring is a sense of community. gathering signatures at the support of our project, many neighbors were looking towards this project to be done. some took the time to share stories with us about how we were always going to lend a hand to our in mons. one man with sharing stories about the neighborhood and how he talked to people around the block. we must of talked for half an hour. i have to share some stories of

my own. please note that we have the best of intentions. i hope be decided in our favor so you can't -- we can continue to live in the city. >> thank you. >> good evening, commissioners. on the project architect -- i am the project architect. i would like to have approval for the demolition of the subject building.

the legal precedents for the property ownership followed. since this took place, the building was abandoned and left unattended. there are major leagues because of heavy rains. then the permit processing took enough time. we are revising and resubmitting our plans to comply with the neighborhood character.

this is the situation. we are still working and would like to have the plan to alter the existing building. using the existing foundation, -- being built to in 1908, the existing condition it is unstable.

we're asking for your kind consideration because the others have been -- not to mention frustration and a desire to have a nice home to raise a family. thank you. >> thank you. >> is there additional public comment? if not, public comment is closed. >> i think that i am much more in favor of the demolition on this one than i was on the earlier one. you have a house that is in much worse condition, you have a thousand square feet for the existing 1200.