there is an extensive pattern of detached homes. we did find that. i want to also know we did find that this subdivision is compliant with the general plan, particularly with the housing bill -- the housing element. we found it was compliant with policy 1.4, which is to locate in-fill housing on appropriate sites. that came up at the planning commission hearing, the fact that the west side of the city does not have a lot of opportunity for development. the commission was happy to see there were going to be three new single-family homes constructed on the west side. policy 1.7 is to encourage and support the construction of quality family housing. project 8.9 is to encourage new home ownership opportunities through construction that increases owner occupancy but

does not diminished rental housing. policy at 1.5 promotes existing housing that enhances the neighborhood character. in total, the commission and department found that because -- with the subdivision of this lot into these elements, these policies could be met and fulfilled. supervisor chu: just a question about the size and bulk of the proposed three buildings or three homes. are they generally -- it seems from pictures i have seen that they look fairly consistent with the house -- with the height of surrounding homes in the area. you are not seeing a home being proposed that is much higher than other ones? >> no. the houses are actually extremely consistent with the pattern out there. it is basically one story over a garage. they are modest houses. it is consistent with the

pattern of development out there. they are not going higher. supervisor chu: a final question. a consistent thought that was expressed by many of the individuals who came to speak today was about how this could set a precedent that this would be potentially a pervasive issue. what are we seeing in the miraloma area? are there tons of these open lots where we could see this occurred? >> we actually are not seeing a lot of applications for this type of proposal or subdivision, mainly because there are not a lot of development sites on the west side. this neighborhood is particularly developed. that was one of the reasons the commission was excited about this project. we were able to get new single- family homes. i think that hopefully answers your question. president chiu: any further

questions, colleagues? why don't we now move to the real party and interest for a presentation of up to 10 minutes? >> good evening, at supervisors. brett gladstone. i would like to think the planning commission. they voted 7-0 to approve this. as you probably heard, commissioners olague, sugaya, and moore were particularly excited to see new families on the west side of the city in code compliance lots. that does not see a lot of new construction as the eastern side does. they talked about how there should be new homes spread around the city. i wanted to show here a map.

in blue, here are the lots in question. in the white, you see single- family homes which are detached, which have side setbacks. we calculated it. planning did too. 80% of the lots in that area have no room between the homes. they are not attached. there are a couple in white that are. neighbors are always understandably afraid of change, but my client is only creating two new lots, not four. we are merging two and creating four. the lots are very oversized. one is 53 x 60. one is 39 x 30. it is not an exception to any code. no variancees, etc.

the city is getting three new homes for only two new lots. it is a good deal and an efficient way to use property. it is necessary if the city is going to see in-fill housing. these are quite small. they range between 2320500 square feet. these are not monster homes. -- between 2300 and 2500 square feet. these are not monster homes. what our architect did do is reduce the height of the building so people across the street have a view that is now between 2.5 and four feet lower than the buildings that were initially presented with. some of the neighbors across the street withdrew their opposition as a result. the appellate did not. there is a disagreement among

them on that side. on page 6, the appellate mention the potential to use -- to lose property value. what you have to keep in mind is my clients are developing a very overgrown, maryland 3900 sq. ft. lot. we do not understand how that reduces property values and reduces the neighborhood character. property values are not protected, of course. the appellate thinks that one fewer lot and fewer homes should be created because of what he calls a lack of city services in the area. we are not sure what he refers to. it is really the eastern side of the city with the residents moving into former industrial areas that are lacking city services. for that, the board has widely

adopted the eastern neighborhoods plan and its government -- in its development plans to fix that issue. the appellants as there are no yards or green space in the project. that is not true. we provide as much regard open space as the lots immediately next door that our existing. -- that are existing. the miraloma association agrees with one issue, that there should be one fewer lots. they liked the design and the heights and everything else. although most lots are 25 by 100, small ones are not unusual. we counted 191 lots that are less than 2500 square feet on the 27 blocks closest to the subject site. appellant proposes two new lots

of about 38 feet in width instead of three lots. the lots uphill from us, here, with existing buildings, are only 25. if ours were 38, this is what they would look like. they are not consistent. they are not the pattern. it would result in large buildings and would not necessarily give side yard setbacks. the objection here, ironically, is that there are too many single-family homes that we propose, but it is a single- family neighborhood zoned for the single-family home. the appellant and the neighbors say the difference between adding two versus three lots would greatly change the traffic, parking, and noise. we believe the difference would be negligible.

what we do not think would be negligible is the fiscal impact of my client for creating two new homes instead of three. mike plant balance sheet for this project will not look good enough for lenders if all the costs of land acquisition and construction is spread across two and not three new buildings. the new homes would have to be quite large to pencil out, and a larger would be less affordable and would be less consistent with the district homes. thus the neighbors do not get more open space to look at. they did not get the side yard setbacks which the planning department and planning commission did not want here. the appellants says we have no independent corroboration that our survey is accurate, but as they told you they have not

hired a surveyor in the three months since the planning commission hearing to provide any facts that do not support our surveyor's work. that has been independently checked by the zoning administrator, the building department, and the department of public works. if there is a surveyor they have hired to say otherwise, it would have been nice to hear from that person tonight. you have heard that a fault 1750 square feet each of these lots must lie within 125 linear feet of the corner of forrester and los palmos. the planning commission does not believe a lot lies outside of that. it is icing on the cake if that is what we have here.

we are confused about all this discussion from the neighbors about a zoning exemption for a zoning variance. this requires nothing of the kind. the neighbors are proposing the code in this area be changed so that 1750 square foot lots are no longer possible. that may be a good idea, but that is done through planning, through in parliament to review, and to notice to owners. changing rules in the middle of somebody's investment and somebody pay for work -- and somebody's work, and putting the city to work on something that is code complying and then deciding the law should be different -- it is neither fair nor does it make sense if we are going to encourage people to build new housing in and the areas of the city such as these lots.

i would just like to show exhibit them of our brief. -- exhibit m of our brief, the planning commission brief. the rear yard open space behind our proposed match exactly that of the existing single-family homes uphill from the law we have today. here you see in green the rear yard open space of our lots, which comply with code. our space is in the green. net finishes up my presentation. i appreciate you're listening to it. i hope we do not send a message

tonight that lots that are code complying should be ignored and should be thought of as open space that is owned by the neighborhood. it is not. it is privately owned. this is just the kind of very fine-tuned development that we need. thank you very much. president chiu: colleagues, any questions? with that, why don't i see if there are any members of the public that wish to speak on behalf of the real party of interest? at this time, why don't we move back to the appellant for a final three-minute rebuttal? >> the reason you do not have the surveyors report from us is because we were not given permission to have access to the

property. we requested this several times. as you saw in the previous map that was put up, the back yards of these new houses will be approximately 25% the size of the existing backyard of the adjacent homes. the existing green space the developer refers to is everybody else's back yard, not theirs. they are taking away green space from this area. the overgrown empty lot the referred to was, as i said earlier, world known, featured in the sunset magazine until it was stripped nine months ago by the developer. the general policy also refers to the fact that any new development must enhance the

existing neighborhood character, which this project is not going to do. again, as the representative from the planning commission specified, the width of the lots, 25.948 feet -- that is why we insist that we be given a chance to get an independent surveyors report of the slot where it might be shown the measurements are not as accurate as they seem to be. when this lot was initially subdivided, we were told by the planning commission that the existing law was large enough for three new homes. approximately eight months later, that was changed to a request for a subdivision to four lots. that was the first time we found out, when we met with the developer. at that point, they told us at the neighborhood meeting in front of many witnesses they

would need to get a variance for the existing house because the backyard would not be large enough. then one day we find a bedroom was removed from this house to qualify this lot for the subdivision. when is the last time in san francisco's somebody shrunk their house? that is why we feel this development is going to set the wrong precedent for this neighborhood. thank you. president chiu: colleagues, any questions to any of the parties today about this appeal? seeing none, this hearing has been held and closed. these matters are in the hands of the board. supervisor chu: thank you, president. the item before us today is whether or not to grant the tentative parcel map for los palmos drive. it is not an eir or a cu.

it is pretty clear we have to take a look at pretty clear parameters. one is whether or not the proposal is consistent with the general plan. from the comments i have heard from city planning, it sounds like this proposal is consistent with the general plan. we have to see whether the site is physical is suitable for the type of development, whether it is physically suitable for the proposed density. we have not heard the site would not be able to accommodate the development or the density. it is going from a single-family neighborhood to single-family homes being proposed for the site. the next issue is that we are supposed to consider whether the design of the subdivision is likely to cause substantial environmental damage. we have not heard that from any of the comments today, nor have we heard there would be a serious public health problem with the subdivision. finally, it also does not

appear that the subdivision would result in a conflict with easements required by the public at large. with that, i would move to item 31 and table 32 and 33. president chiu: supervisor chu has made a motion seconded by supervisor dufty. supervisor mirkarimi: aye. supervisor alioto-pier: aye. supervisor avalos: aye. supervisor campos: aye. president chiu: aye. supervisor chu: aye. supervisor daly: aye. supervisor dufty: aye. supervisor mar: aye. supervisor maxwell: aye. >> there are 10 ayes. president chiu: the motion passes. we can now go to roll call.

supervisor mirkarimi: that came up quickly. hold on one second. president chiu: we can go to public comment if folks would prefer to do that. why don't we go to public comment? why don't we refered supervisor mirkarimi and go to dufty? supervisor dufty: i want to refer to an in memoriam. he was a member of the running club. we were very saddened to learn about his unexpected passing. rod had been a member of the club for over 25 years. he organized the branches following our saturday morning runs in golden gate park and was affectionately known as the british queen for organizing the establishment we went to. he had a passion for restoring old cars. he would have five at the time that he would start in his

crotch. he would spend several years working on them, calling card shows all over the state of california to find parts. on special occasions such as the private run, he would show up and unveil his cars and there would be in pristine condition. he was part of in honor of his contribution, his camaraderie, someone who believed in sports and team work, the best in show that is award is known as the rod billings queen mum award.

thank you. >> i am introducing a resolution for the department of the adult probation to accept and extend a grant to create a reentry court. this will be the first of its kind of a reentry court for those ex offenders that are established in san francisco. they will help them to return to a good life after prison. we hope that this will

complement the reentry court and superior court is also an established in this thanks to a grant from the california management agency. they're always on the grand. i am trusting that this will be effective and successful. this is trying to synthesize the needs and networks of services both department late, interdepartmental it, and through the non-profit advocacy community. next, i am forming a better neighborhoods planning process working group to explore the creation of a kennedy land

trust for commercial border. this would be the first time that the land trust would be established for commercial quarter. this has only be -- been applied to the residential quarter. we were able to secure $50,000 towards the planning process. we have also helped with the procurement of a grant from the ford foundation. both will be applied towards the exploration of what the version might look like. this is done anything we have done. i am requesting that the plan department formed the japan town planning group.

pertinent to the america's cup that we had earlier, sending a hearing to review the fiscal feasibility and responsibility including analysis from the budget analysts of the city hosting the america's cup regatta and in a term sheet to fully put forward the city's expectations and the benefit that would accrue to the city. i look forward to court and knitting with the budget share and my expectation would be over the next several weeks. >> thank you very much. i would like to began by thinking supervisor dufty for being a co-sponsor of this resolution i am introducing today which is a resolution

affirming the importance of maintaining a safety net for lg bt youth and to encourage universities to prevent a bowling -- to prevent bullying. we have been touched by the incident that happened at rutgers university just a few days ago where you had where you -- where you had the student who committed suicide. two students invaded his privacy by taking -- by videotaping and private interaction he had with

a person of the same gender. there are many lesbian, bisexual, gay, transgendered people that have been harassed by their classmates and online. lgbt youths are more than four times more likely to commit suicide than their straight counterparts. in san francisco, they were 8.4 times more likely to report attempting suicide.

we are near the year 2010, you still have many teenagers and young adults throughout this country that are driven to suicide because of a trauma of being bullied. we need to do something about that. close to 90% of those students experienced some form of harassment at school in the previous year. that means almost nine of 10 have experienced harassment. we are lucky that we have a board of education has been very sensitive on these issues and was creating a safe classroom program which makes the safety of these kids a top priority.

even though san francisco unified has been working on this, there is still work that needs to be done. that resolution basically makes it clear that the board of supervisors and the city of county of san francisco firms the importance of maintaining a social safety net for lgbt youth. it resolves that the board of supervisors encourages schools, colleges, universities to increase their efforts to stop borrowing, raise awareness about lgbt youth and foster acceptance among all students. >> thank you.

>> i am introduced sheehan and resolution supporting the california air resources board leadership to promote emission reductions for motor vehicles. i serve on the air quality management district which is a leader in insuring that the most polluted committees are prioritized. california has been experiencing a public health crisis due to poor health quality. air pollution causes severe adverse health impacts including asthma attacks, hospitalization, and premature death. there are many anbar militias that must be addressed such as kroger summers, force fires. san francisco ha