he is with me here today. >> before you go forward, madam president, would you like to hear her on the variance? >> it will briefly highlight the variance request. >> in the first relates to the quantity of commercial parking. 13 spaces would be required for off-street parking spaces for the ground-floor retail uses. no commercial parking spaces are being provided. the second is for rear yard. it is irregularly shaped.

in strictly provides a code complying rear yard at the rear of the property and would be somewhat difficult by definition. as an alternative, the project sponsor has proposed a series of interior courtyards situated at the center of the property. the third variant being requested is for columbus avenue. it would create a 10-foot wide curb cuts. this variance is necessary because of somewhat recent legislation that added this portion of columbus avenue to the list of streets where the cuts are prohibited. and that this will be new construction, the pre-existing rights or pre-existing curb cut, the rights to utilize those are extinguished. that is being requested. that is the summary that is

being requested. president olague: can we hear from the appellant at this time? the appellant is who we hear from at this time. >> is the appellant year for the appeal? if you appeal, then yes. >> i am appealing the environmental, right? i of told to of the three variances. i uphold and agree with the variances, we talked to the residence and you will know why. i would very much like to defer

that if you would like. if you can vote against it, that would be great. if you would like to know why, i can really give you have in the street reasons if you would speak for the part of it. the other part is finished. >> if you are appealing the preliminary negative declaration, now is your opportunity to present why you are appealing it. we're looking for your case as to why you feel the entire environmental impact report is necessary. >> i stand before you allow the appealing to your higher sense of right. i ask each of you -- however, i don't know if you could approve it and have one exception for a focused traffic study. i know if that is possible, but that is our only problem, the

traffic study. the intersection is dangerous. you have the package in front of you. i really would like a chance to defer this so we can talk with the developers and the possibility of removing the request of providing affordable residential housing in the place of commercial. we would not have any variance requests. it would provide affordable housing. there is a great need for seniors, handicapped, and the young star outs. we would not have war zones over parking. it would help the intersection. i don't want to comment bitch and complain. i would like to provide solutions to talk about. should i a wait until we come back to variance? i am blurring the two.

president olague: it relates to both. >> the reason we don't have a bunch of neighborhood groups here, they don't really understand it. i told them i would speak to the issue and try to understand it and bring it back to them. if worse comes to worse, we can go to a d.r. president olague: at some point, i would suggest a member of the department's staff sit down with you and explain to you the process. it can be overwhelming and confusing. >> this is the reason i am alone here. there must be a nonprofit out that that helps. i don't know. anyway, i am speaking on behalf of the senior center. i am very active in the

neighborhood. we just have a problem of cumulative of fact. the decision last week creates more who were buses coming out our street because of restricted streets in north beach. it is political. it creates north point as the gateway for digital signs showing where tourists can park. in conjunction with that, we have a fax from the e-line and the f line. there are so many big books to read. the other thing is america's cup coming. we have the manhole over a tunnel that gets hammered by these large trucks. i wish you could lease an apartment that i tried direct there for years. i cannot keep tenants for more

than one year. every three minutes, you think it is an earthquake. it is a problem. i want you to feel that as we feel it. >> when i got this, i read it and said there would be problems with this based on my knowledge of the area and based on the whole in the planning cut. the planning cut has over the past 30 years developed notice procedures for products in our zone. those notice procedures give people early warning and the opportunity to become engaged in

talks to staff. that was the first notice. i have no idea. but the planning department has a responsibility to update its own code. we have a code system that has a whole. there are no notices for anything. these are the areas at the northern end in the eastern end of district 3. it is an intense area. it is an intense area commercially. people live there. the planning department has a responsibility to plow through this and allow people to get involved before your told of a $500 and you have 20 days to do it.

i am really sympathetic to this woman and her frustration. the planning department should immediately come back to you next week with a notice procedure. you can do it on an interim basis, when you have got to cure it. this should not be allowed to happen. the needs to be broader community discussion. this is telegraph hill, north beach. it deserves better. i am not involving anything except i read it and i said, all my god. i thought there would be some issues is looking at the map. i don't live there. the staff has got to pay attention to areas that are really congested and dense.

president olague: any additional public comment on this item? public comment is closed. did you want to speak on this item? it is just public comment. you get three minutes. >> i am the public sponsor for what we call russian hill corners. i applaud the staff and the planning department for working with us to meld this very unique site into something that works for all of us. it is a phenomenal location that is extremely important to the city. and to north beach, the main bus stop, the whole works. right now, it is an office

building. when of 20 or 30 parking spaces. a dozen cars back out through a bus spot on to columbus avenue. we were talking earlier about taking approximately 60 cuts, turning it into 10 feet and moving it away. the staff wanted us to add the more than standard amount of commercial because they want to have a presence in the neighborhood he. they want the pedestrians to be able to walk on this side and not be walking past the parking lot where people are living and unfortunately doing wrong things. the switch from this building, as a commercial, it will reduce traffic in the area and reduce the amount of traffic coming and

going from the property. this has also been put into the traffic study. what has been in process for two years, we believe that it is very significant. and when that is a concern that the neighbors you have heard state. less traffic, more safety for pedestrians, we are within the zoning code. we have not asked for eighth extra unit or anything to that effect. we have parking so nobody sees it. and instead of a big parking lot, it is 90% going to be retail commercial and attractive. we started working with our neighbors in the 100 seats from our project over four years ago having discussions about the plan and how we should proceed.

they very much approved of our project. we made changes for them, including the fact that the residential side of columbus, we change it to look like vertical townhouses that kind of mass to the residential field of the street. and on the other side of the street, we had to match in the commercial field, the marriott hotel, and keep our bolted down and get beat building to look appropriate and attractive. if you look at the plans, that is what we have done. he worked with the planning department. it has been a very long road with a lot of tough times as you know, out there. we like to have a resolution from you today.

president olague: is there any additional public comment on this item? public comment is closed. >> there has always been a certain amount of confusion between the environmental issues and projects themselves. it becomes a little clouded. we are considering here is whether or not the preliminary mitigated declaration is adequate in analyzing the environmental impacts. this comes in different categories. if there is virtually no environmental impact where they are below a level where any consideration has categorically example, certain projects are exempt from environmental analysis. others can be dealt with in this form. we will deal with whether this adequately analyzes the impact.

it is, of course, much larger and adds a lot to the process. you are only undertaken with is warranted. there are some kern's turns that were expressed about the project itself that there will be an opportunity more than likely about what sort of approval process. and more than likely, there will be a conditional use. there is not, thank you. but the appeal is on the environmental analysis. it is not on the project itself. if there were no, this is the avenue of the discretionary review. i assume there are other ways that could be brought forth. in any case, i think at this point, we are analyzing the environmental peace, not the project itself.

i feel that it is adequately discussed. they talked about the curve issue where they actually have a smaller cut than was the case before. they talk about the pedestrian impacts, the historic and pacs, and i am satisfied that they have addressed this adequately. again, we're dealing with environmental and tax in the various that is handled by the zoning administrator had not the project itself. commissioner borden: i completely understand the concerns about the process and i knowledge that she had a point about the notification issues. i know this has come out before and there has been talk about making changes in that arena. at a future hearing, we could discuss any of those other districts.

there are a couple of those districts where the issue exists. in the case of the project, it sounds like there has been thoughtful consideration given to dealing with the impact. that there was work that has gone on with the neighborhood to work on the safety and traffic issues and that the appellant has actually mentioned. in this case, it seems like the report covers the top in sufficiently and provides the information that we need to know. there are larger traffic congestion issues in that area. another were some other things in that neighborhood, perhaps looking at the greater area. i realize there is a financial implications. >> there is a larger environmental impact report

being done right now. i don't know if this particular intersection is. >> the public knows that there are other reviews, obviously one project is not responsible for all of the environmental impact in a particular region. it is the conglomeration of a lot of different projects. not providing the in the right direction, in the sense that it is minimizing the impact, people are coming to do commercial activity. in that regard, it doesn't increase that. i know people in that part of the city if they have cars, they did not give them very often. with that, i would move to uphold the preliminary mitigated declaration. commissioner fong: second. president olague: this is a

separate topic, but i would like to talk about doing some brown bags or really have a thing where the public can ask for this question. most people see us only once in their lifetime. it is not light the project will impact their quality of life very often. it is something that we should calendar and discuss issues are rounded noticing. i am unsure where it is. >> supervisor chiu introduced legislation regarding the zoning district. that may be an appropriate time to address making modifications. >> and the environmental impact, he environmental report

is adequate. commissioner moore: i think it would be advisable to sooner rather than later have an update on america's cut. -- cup. i don't want to exacerbate the problem. this is a very difficult corridor. most people don't take those buses, but there is quite a bit going on. in addition to the geometry of the street, it is a very difficult place to maneuver. it is a temporary fang. to sort out the construction schedules. and it will be a total mess. i'm just throwing that out, taking the bus down the

corridor. we have got to watch that. >> she is exactly right, it has been with 16 million visitors coming. the work is being done in fisherman's wharf. there are some things happening. north point st. recently received a biplane on that street. golden gate uses that street as well. there is a confluence. i think we are sort of marching in the right direction with this. >> of the motion on the floor is to uphold the preliminary mitigated of declaration. [roll call vote] thank you, commissioners.

it has been upheld. on the variants. >> we close the public hearing and we note that it is a significant hardship on the property. as the appellant noted, it would support various requests. the appellant has updated concerns with the parking variance for commercial spaces. it is a trade-off. i think it is generally preferred to have ground-floor retail use rather than a parking use. with that, i would grant the requested variants >> we are

going to take a 10-minute recess before the next item. secretary avery: the planning commission is back in session. if i could remind everyone to turn off your cell phone or any other device that may sound off during the proceedings. commissioners, you are on item number nine, 201 0.0771ec, 300, 307, and 311 gaven street.

>> good afternoon, commissioners. this is for the san francisco school at 300 gaven street. it is a private school offering instruction from preschool to eighth grade. they operate their main campus at 300 gaven street and uses 307 and 311 as office space. they lease a space for outdoor recreation for the students. the proposal before it is to expand the school and includes multiple components. the first component is to increase the enrollment size of the school. of the planning commission approved enrollment cap of 268 students in 1998, and the school currently has 277. the proposal is to increase the cap to 285 to allow for natural fluctuations instead of rights. the second but it is to legalize the dwelling unit conversion of the single-family homes at 307

and 311 gaven street across the street from the main campus. the school purchased those locations in 1999 and 2001. they're both approximately 1050 square feet. in their home is visibly altered, and they are currently used as an administrative office space and faculty office space. the third proposal is to demolish part of the main building and construct a 40-foot tall, approximately 14,000 gross square foot center. the main building was constructed in 1960 as a church that is currently used by the school as preschool, the library, and administered of offices. the multi-purpose center will include the office space, and the gymnasium that also be used as an auditorium. the school currently has no gymnasium or auditorium space and has to hold all of its athletic practices, competitions, and similar events of sight. the construction of the center and associated reconfiguration

of the existing school space will result in a net increase of one classroom from 17, 18 total. in order for the project to proceed, the commission must grant conditional use authorization for allow for a pud enrollment cap increase and the conversion of the two single-family homes from residential to school administration used in the rh-1 zoning district. the project requires an exception for the rear yard and height measurement requirements of the planning code. additionally, the planning code provides five criteria for the planning commission to consider in the case of a dwelling unit conversion. while the department is concerned with the loss of the two dwelling units, we feel this means the majority of the closed -- the majority of the criteria. the schools have been in use as school use for some time. and because the residential

buildings have not been altered. additionally, a condition of approval was added to prohibit any physical changes to the houses in the future. therefore, it would be easy to convert the homes back to residential use once the school as the funds to do so. the department received 23 letters of support and no letters in opposition to the project, although i believe there is one person present today who has some matter of opposition. the planning department recommends approval for the overall project with conditions for the following reasons. the enrollment cap increase represents a very small increase for a neighborhood school that has operated in the area more than 40 years. the multi-purpose center is designed away at that is highly compatible with the residential surroundings. the lack of physical changes to the homes at 307 and 311 gaven street and the condition. but in any future changes increased ease said the likelihood of their conversion back to residential use. finally, it beats all applicable

requirements of the planning code and is consistent with the general plan -- it meets all of the applicable requirements of the planning code and is consistent with the general plan. that is all i have an idea for additional questions. president olague: thank you. project sponsor? >> my name is steve morris, i am the head of schools at the san francisco school. my job is to tell you a little about who we are as a school. first and foremost, but to make it clear that i think we are a little different than any private school that has been in front of you today. i will show you why. as he said, we are asking for is the enrollment limit to reflect our current capacity. we're looking to convert 307 and 311 to office and teacher

workspace. and we are looking to bring the multi-purpose center on the campus to house the gymnasium and theater and intense classroom space. -- enhanced classroom space. one of the things that i think makes us different from any other private school is the fact that we walk the talk with regard to our mission statement. there are certain words in there that really jump out. intellectual, imaginative, humanitarian promise, practice mutual respect, we embrace diversity, we inspire passion for learning. it is my belief if you were to take that mission statement to the campus today or tomorrow and walk around, you would see it alive and kicking on the school yard, in the classrooms, in the hallways, etc. a bill history about the school. we were founded in 1966. by a small group of parents and teachers. we have always been in this neighbor