>> the commission will for 20 . >> like to welcome everyone back to san francisco land use & economic development committee thursday, march 27, 2014, the continued please silence any mobile devices that my sound and if you care to state your name for the record. commissioners on item 13. the 2009 housing element update. before you is a resolution of update to initiate the amendments and to a schedule a hearing >> hi, good afternoon. i'm here to request an innovation which adaptation proceedings for this 2009 housing element it was

approved by the commission we're here today it detective this adapted inform challenge the eir in san francisco subject. as part of the court orders the city has set aside the 2009 eir and it's approval of the 2009 housing element in response to the court ruling the environmental division has atom it. the commission held a hearing to receive comments on january 2wurgsd 2014 and the environmental planning is currently responding to the revised alternatives and expects to present to an april 24th, 2014. the department continues to

recommend the adaptation of the housing element. the 2009 housing element was developed in cooperation with did you mayor's office of housing and a you round table of other community stakeholder. the department building that the 2009 housing elements includes the permanent housing and the recognition of integration of jobs and transportation and infrastructure and our cities role as a sustainable development. we recommend the housing lemon adaptation. a timely adaptation will one confirm and dedication in meeting the california obviously and continue our eligibility for community development and infrastructure fund. this is particularly important in light of the mayor's office

allows the construction of housing and 2014 this is due in 2015 they want to initiate the housing element to schedule a adaptation hearing and staff it available for questions >> thank you. ms. rogers >> thank you very much president i want to take a moment to thank this lady for her first prevention e presentation she was precise and has a master degree in health care from the university of the north carolina chapel hill she should at a nonprofit in oakland she's excited to join the city

division. >> let's open up for public comment. >> good afternoon commissioner president wu and commissioners. rose hill son i'm sure you've gun control a chance to read any multiple document. as you know there was a lawsuit filed and most the neighborhood were panicking height and presidio heights and st. francis wood and joining i joining parks improvement and many others. i think i've left something off.

as far as the responses to public comment i didn't see them posted nor sent a hardcopy i guess it's not works but i'm wondering how you the planners and commissioners are working to make a dignities and part of this question is go ahead and with adapting a resolution of intent to initiate amendments and hop this meeting open april 24th but we have not seen the responses if it's april 24th how is the public supposed to have the time to look it over one hundred packages i made the first one hundred packages and then the public. that's my concern thank you. thank you anything further public comment? >> good afternoon,

commissioners kathy. representing san franciscans for liveable neighborhoods the staff has acknowledged the court ordered avoid it's certification and approval the housing element but those set asides vice president been made and the proposal considering a certification of the housing element before the board of supervisors sets aside it's motion where in the board approved the certification and then the commission will certificate the revised eir and the commission will set aside it's prior certification so it won't be done prior but simultaneously so the city wants to set aside the certification of the eir at the same time as it certifies the certification

without the eir or the boards approval those procedures are inadequate it's not before the commission reconsiders the approval and recertification so the procedures and sequencing have not appropriate so we ask the city comply with the court sdithsdz before this commission considers the certification of the reapproval of elements and in addition the responses to comments are not out so the final eir is not completed the court ordered a consideration of all alternatives we think the final eir had about been pled

and we want you to have adequate time for review we've proposed alternatives such as a you don't need to include chinatown or a policy eliminating the districts rh1 and rh2 and they won't effect the allocation goals. so we hope this come out and are sprieptsdz the rein relation was start before the final eir was produced >> thank you is there any public comment seeing none, public comment is closed. commissioner antonini >> i assure the questions of many of the speakers maybe staff can answer i'm used it it being i know this is a restriction of existing eir and we get our

differing draft there's a hearing and than that a response to comments and after that, you decide a date for the final eir and then the approval of the project so why is the concerning different saw we often do to have the commission do a motion of intent to initiate general plan amendments prior to the completion of the response to comments documents on the eir so we would not consider this an approval action and so the final eir doesn't need to be certified prior to the commission acting on the item. >> so there will not be a vote to approve the revised eir? >> there will on april 24th the

proposal is for the commission to certificate the revised eir and of a normal certification of the eir type of hearing and subsequent approve the housing element. >> i think i said the procedure but there are two things pointed out that the courts found the alternatives i'm not sure i like them one of the things that was missing in the earlier element they weren't adequate alternatives and perhaps you could elaborate on what was contradicted. >> the courts order found the city analyzed an alternative

range but the alternative it analyzed the analysis was inclusion we we didn't have enough facts the alternatives would or wouldn't have significant impacts so we went back and beefed that up analysis. in the revised eir that the commission saw and heard comments on. i don't recall the court saying that things are contradictory >> in the report we had today, i'm trying to find the exact language but, yes. the analyze oh, in addition the court found of the proceedings under sequa it's chronic

closures >> so when the lead agency found the significant impacts open the environment they need to make finding and restrict the alternatives so the court found the finding were con closure so when we come back with the housing element we'll have new that the court had concerns. >> thank you. i said the subsequence and there will be time for the public comment on on the april 24th and the environmental document as well as the revised housing elements. >> absolutely. >> this is what we have in the packet is the revised housing element. >> it's the ordinance adapting the 2009 housing element that

you would recommend to the board of supervisors. >> okay. >> but today is the recognition. >> this is 2009 and the changes are in the other document. so i guess we can initiate in the past we kind of have the final product and initiate it with the approval but we are nourishing and we don't have the final product that's confusing but as long as we have time for public comment and digest it and if we're not happy with part of it we won't approve that that's the waydinitis it's going to work >> commissioner antonini. >> let's initiate and schedule public hearing. >> oh, commissioner sugaya. >> i forgot what i was going to

ask (laughter). >> maybe i'll think of it oh, i know. testimony referred to set aside things aside do we need to took formal action or the board of supervisors happen or this not happen what is the legal - >> the document the resolution that you will approve or consider on the 24th of april will include the setting aside previous approvals and adapting new approvals so we can do that in one motion or two motions but that needs to be done saw okay. >> so a second question sorry. when will the documents be

released to the commission >> i believe their aiming for release the second week of april of the response to comments document. >> ongoing i don't think that's enough time. sorry >> commissioner antonini. >> you know i kind of agree a little bit too. i know there maybe some sort of i know we have certain issues that on a state level we have to conform with we need to get this done but usually don't we have a longer period of time between the release and responses of a hearing on the eir >> it's usually about 10 days to two weeks. this is only a restriction of

the alternative analysis to >> i was thinking about the time between the draft and the final hearing usually there's a longer period up to 60 days. there was a 60 day comment period on the eir and, you know, sometimes, it takes longer to get the comments out but because this was only a partial restriction the respond to comments isn't going to take long >> i want to clarify my understanding is what's in in front of us is essentially showing our work on how we analyze the alternatives so that's the new information that's been prepared. >> right there had t this was included in the draft. >> i'm poster of april 24th

marry commissioner moore. >> we're still geeze the public two week; right? and then two weeks later that be took place. >> i believe the final eir was the response is april 14th and the hearing open the 24th and the two weeks in between and temple days. 10 days >> commissioner antonini. >> could we calendar the hearing for the approval or the consideration of not necessarily for the week after the 24th to give the public a little bit more time. >> i can ask the city attorney to respond. >> we do have we're under court order to get back to the court with the what we've done it

comply with the court order by the end of june and getting through board of supervisors and the sequa appeal the april 24th is the last day we can do that and make the june 30th deadline. >> ongoing what do the commissioner is. >> yeah. i don't like being pushed into a corner and now it's the same damn thing that happens when we are considering this we're at the last minute asked to approve something i'm not goings-on to go with that, you know, i don't know if the other board members want to vote for it but not vote on a 10 day period. >> commissioner hillis. >> given the amount of time that i've spent and the city has

focused i'm okay with the review time we're talking about the 2009 housing element i'm fine with the time. >> commissioner borden. >> can you remind me this the recirculation. >> yes. we've certified the commission certified the eir in march of 2011 so what was presented what the planning department recirculated was the alternative chapter the one chapter of the eir. >> and was anything changed since the certification. >> none of the conclusions analysis none of the ultimate cluksdz changed but we showed our work better. >> and there are hearing opportunity in the 4rud committee as well.

>> right so the commission would the plan would be the commission will certificate the eir and the hearing open the adaptation the howard's and that will go to the board of supervisors and the full board of supervisors. >> we've never seen this document because it goes to the board this is noted the last stop at the train so i personally am okay. >> commissioner moore. >> can you clarify that the public and commission will have the data in hand by the 24th. >> i believe we usually push on wednesday which i believe is the 14. >> it's a wednesday and the 2014 it's the 16th. i'm looking at the calendar and i'd like to have the commission

as well as the public access two full weeks ahead of the hearing in order to give sufficient room to familiarize ourselves and that's fair given this is a really unusual circumstances we have to be fully informed >> i can talk to staff it's the respond to comments we're talking about. >> i'm fully aware but we as a commission have many other things and jobs, etc. and the public in particular is under the microscope hearsay a fair my safe way of doing that. >> okay commissioner antonini. >> yeah, just a question about the is state they want to see the progress but did they say

you need a complete revised housing element or is it in pro-progress. >> the court said we needed to its called returned to 9 wright we need to fill a return to the wright by june 30th. >> they want to see the certified final product by june 30th. >> yes. to fully comply with the wright we note to have an adapted element that is from the board of supervisors and the mayors signature, etc. >> i share many of the concerns by other commissioners that we could hope to get the comments and responses by the 9th or 10 especially the public i can get it later and read it and be ready but on a contentiousus

issue the public can have review time. >> can i ask staff is there a possibility to get the information out earlier. >> unfortunately, the staff in charge are back at the offices doing that but we can convey to them the commissioners concerned. >> thank you commissioner moore. >> may i remind you that this commission is taking the 17th off before ooertd we are trying to a basically have the break so the tenth is by default the correct date to receive this material. am i correct we're taking the 17th as a dye >> you take the 17th but you

have the 24th he'll owe a you'll receive the packet there's no hearing open the 17th. >> so its easter and he think we all want a break it will be a reason to move by the tenth. >> re, certainly tell staff that's the date you're looking for. >> okay much appreciated. commissioner sugaya >> well, i don't know that the relationship between the commission and department but i kind of think we sometimes should be more forceful when we want to receive things. and two weeks seems reasonable to me whether we push it into may or have staff finish it by

the tenth >> commissioners, if i could just address something deputy city attorney everyone has heard the message that the responses to comments should be made available to the commission and public as soon as possible and if you're entire is to have it no longer than the tenth i suggest you initiate the hearing for the 24th staff and our office will do everything we can within the t that you suggest we'll have the hearing open the 24th if the comments and responses are not able to be produced by the something in the comments that are concern to the

commission, of course, on the 24th you'll have the kreths to request more information or not certificate so i think that at this point, you know, we're under some deadlines and we would recommend that we continue to have the hearing on the 24th at this point. you know, you will have the discretion on the 24th to determine if you have the information necessary to make a decision >> okay. thank you for that recommendation. commissioner antonini >> i'll move to initiate. >> it's been moved. >> second. >> please call the question on on that motion commissioners on the housing element and schedule that adaptation for april 24th

commissioner antonini. commissioner borden. commissioner hillis. commissioner moore. commissioner sugaya commissioner president wu. so moved, commissioners, that motion passes 6 on 5 to one with commissioner sugaya voting against >> i have a quick question are reto keep these housing element documents are these being revised. >> could staff answer. >> those documents will remain the same. commissioners item 15 case at 4871 through 73 request for conditional use authorization >> good afternoon commissioner president wu and commissioners jessica of planning department

staff the case is a request for conditional use authorization to legalize the relocation for the friendly use at the 4871 to 73 mission street doorknobs as lucky cash cashing in the commercial described with a friendly restricted use lucky money cash is on the mixed use and its mailing he'd is 4873 mission street and this current size is 6 hundred square feet lucky cash is providing services for over 20 years as evidenced by state and city licenses since july naivete they have been at

3843 mission street from 2007 to 2011 the project sponsor was at the defy location. it was during this time or that the legislation regulating the service use became effective and the use no longer required with the zoning. since it's moved locations in 2011 to its present location on mission street it will moot the conditional use to ton to operate. i'm going to talk about the history since there's an active enforcement case the enforcement process began in july 2012 and the enforcement case led to the department having a penalty.

after the hearing the notice of violation and penalty letter said it would be legalized. the notice was vooushl people appealed to the broiling the board of appeals continued the item that the sponsor go through the process and legalize the use. throughout the process the zoning administer has said that during the restrictive use district is a non-conforming use and wants to relocate subsection o or e to belief talk about this a non-conforming