approximately. >> take roll at the present time commissioner president wu commissioner fong commissioner antonini commissioner hillis commissioner johnson commissioner moore and commissioner richards first on our agenda is consideration for items property for continuance on item for 93 c on evans avenue is prospered until february 5th not the january 22nd on our item 2 case pc a microwave and planning code amendment is proposed for continuance until march fifth 2015 commissioners

further on our under your discretionary review authorization calendar on delores street has been withdrawn and item 18 for case at 372121st strait has also been withdrawn i have nothing of your duty and i have no speaker cards. >> is there any comments other than the items proposed for continuance? public comment on items proposed for continuance okay seeing none, public comment is closed on items for continuance. >> did i hear you to continue item number 14? no

no >> i wanted to make sure thank you. >> okay seeing no. you further comments public comment is closed. >> commissioner antonini. >> i move to continue item the one to february 5th and the other one to march and commissioner moore. >> i'd like to entertain this continuing our commissioner rules and regulations but we can take that up when we come to it item the uncertainties when exactly it was published we can talk about it now e.r. when item 10 comes up. >> thank you. >> commissioners there is a motion - commissioner antonini's made a motion and it's been seconded to continue items one and two commissioner antonini commissioner hillis commissioner johnson

commissioner moore commissioner richards commissioner fong and commissioner president wu so moved, commissioners, that motion passes unanimously 7 to zero and places you under our consent calendar cascading to be routine and will be enacted by one resolution in the form or forms listed below. if discussion is desired, that item will be removed from the consent agenda and will be considered separately. in which event the item will be removed added this or a further items ab and crick for the case at 800 indiana street please note that after closing public comment it was with conditions including the project sponsor continue this matter until january 8th by a vote of 7 to zero and the next case as 4377

mission street the discretionary review authorization and the next 18 discretionary review authorization and case 6 other sanchez street conditional use authorization and item 7 for 1678 through 88 condominium conversion subsection i have no i have no speaker cards. >> any public comment? seeing none, public comment is closed commissioner moore. >> i move to approve all items on the consent calendar. >> second. >> on that motion to approve matters under consent calendar. >> commissioner antonini well commissioner johnson. >> well, i'm sorry. >> commissioner antonini. >> commissioner hillis commissioner johnson

commissioner moore commissioner richards commissioner fong. >> and commissioner president wu so moved, commissioners, that motion passes that amazing 7 do zero and the draft minutes for december 11th and december 8, 2014. >> my on the draft minutes seeing none, public comment is closed commissioner moore. >> i received a note from the public asking that we consider changing item under meeting minutes of december 11th page 12 item 18 that changes stair to stare case i building that from an architecture lingual planning department as well as the lingual stair applies staircase and stair applies stair i don't believe the verbiage needs to be amended and wanted to bring to

your attention i received this otherwise move to approve. >> second. >> on that motion to adapt the minutes for the two commissioner antonini commissioner hillis commissioner johnson commissioner moore commissioner richards commissioner fong and commissioner president wu so moved, commissioners, that motion passes unanimously 7 duo to zero and places you on item commissioners questions or comments. >> commissioner moore. >> i wanted to raise a question that during the holidays we received a letter from city attorney herrera addressing the issue of the academy of art and while 2 1/2 years ago we received a similar letter under the confidentiality it is in the public and i'd like to ask the

commission we reschedule a special meeting to discuss among ourselves what the issues are and how we're advised to go about it i think given the exceptional length of this particular incident the pile of incidents i think we've come to the point we need more activity pursue our r0b89s are and i've seen that with a clear understanding that we are being considered as complexity and that's of great concern to me and i couldn't be speaking for more personal experience when i have to share you with as hard as it is for me last saturday, i of the about $8 million into the golden gate recreation area in a completely off the track off the

grid location not looking at all recognizable you know when my face when it appears on public comment or commissioner comments i was stopped in the middle of the trail and someone addressed me as commissioner moore on saturday and sunday for the resting of the week i'm not commissioner moore only kathleen republican moore this person said what about the academy of art you guys are not doing our job that's as far as i want to take it i want to schedule this as we get the schedule to judgment u update what we need to do. >> director ram and i and commissioner fong we spoke about that earlier this week originally you wanted to address it during commissioners comments. >> i appreciate that and i

wanted to give you an update of where we are and i think there's a misunderstanding as a result of the letter so just as background in prevail the zoning administrator has a stay and stated the appeal periods would no longer be told and the punished would be on november 2nd the reason there's not progress in the eir before a year before that due to what we believe substantial delays by the academies the goal of that nova at that time it would be desensitive advised, if you will in the last 8 months the eir is 95 percent complete and in consultation with the zoning administrator we agreed that it would not be productive in the

process to issue the 90s notices, in fact the draft eir will be noted next month you'll have a copy in march as i said we're 95 percent complete with the eir and the academy has with new consultant w is working diligently with us that's the change before that point i also want to say i think there's a number of actions that have happened since then two properties that the e a said they couldn't legalize on taylor those properties have been piloted on taylor that building could be occupied and in the case of the 295 taylor they've reduced the size of the building

it would be legal list and they vacated the property that was part of the violation notices on howard street and under has been a number of da hearings they've appealed his decisions and withdrew the appeals and didn't contest the notice of violation they started the process their own process of contesting the notices and withdrew the objections, if you will, and we have confirmed they vacated portions of the building on taylor so that building can be legalized the appeal of the where do you live of the notice of stay, if you will, is pending at the board of appeals that's one thing they haven't withdrawn and their preparing the appeals

subject to the stay so we anticipate that those decisions will be issued after the completion of the eir with no penalties so the bottom line for us is that the eir is 95 percent he complete we've felt the da felt it wouldn't be productive at this point to issue penalties when we are that close and issuing the eir next month. >> thank you. we'll be scheduling a hearing commissioner antonini. >> thank you i'd like to speak for a moment first of all, i want to wish everyone a happy new year but i want to speak about an recall in the tuesdays chronicle on the front page entitled growing controversy there are remarks they were accurate remarks of mine out of context there was a picture on

the chronicle friend of mine because those remarks were placed that that article in the picture about the developments in corona heights the public were led to building my remarks were in favor of a monster home actually, i was very fortunate to be helped by staff today and given those exact information about actually tina chang set back me those renderings 1942 not one structure but 4 different structures two of which have their entrance on museum and two of which have their entrance on state street this was not approved by the planning commission, in fact, immediately after the article come out my wife said why did you approve that it's massive we

find out it was not you approved by planning it was private property no demolition the heights of all the structures are a under 40 feet and no dr it filed by any of the people in the area or maintain in my place in the city it didn't come great us is was it approved administratively there are large structures the one on museum and the one on the other street 2 thousand square feet 4 separate single-family homes that's why would you see is not also what you get it is judging from the picture in the chronicle thinking it's one structure it is not it's 4 structures their large but the one you see on museum are coming down the hill

not 6 levels as presented only 4 levels on museum and 2 on state street also in regards to the remarks that contributed the remarks railroad accurate taken out of context i was not speaking to the fact having huge houses to occupy with families there are families that live in crowded conditions that will be happy to have a home of one thousand or 12 hundred secret if it's safe and clean we have to work on 0 that considering the housing element later on today i was speaking to the fact we have a says it of homes in san francisco on 21 percent of 3 bedrooms or more and there are wears building a tiny number of

new families in san francisco there's a demographic of - for all ages business and professional people with children who are making decisions everyday i how to raise their families in san francisco or move to the peninsula or the east bay and oftentimes one of the big factors in addition to costs is what's available and oftentimes the older homes need a lot of work and that's it there's another huge price to bring up of them up to the standards for a family today and i see this in my generation and my children's generation so are becoming larger for homes because we have multi generational families we hear about a lot of them that work from within theory homes or

at least part of the time require a home office in a separate room to keep their business affairs operate separate in the rest of the family mr. jean said inaccurately i didn't say people need to have large homes i said in you choose to have one it's expensive i'm sorry. it's this way we have a desirable place if anything not building homes of all size even those that are larger exacerbates those because those people that point homes 2 thousand or more are competing with the existing stock the letter to the editor for one one hundred and 50 are yerz years we've had enough land where private builders where

incentives from the city were met those niece by building new homes for a all income levels in the sunset and the outer richmond and all parts of san francisco eventually around twin peaks we have to find a way to incentivize those dollars a demand one of two things will happen more people with families are productive members of our society and ocher have enough discretionary time to attribute to ventures it's good to have those people here if we can keep them here and many of the commissioners said even if you build larger home you can't

guarantee their 0u7d by families it could be one who has a large home with no children but if you don't build the homes there are families that have the desire for moderate to larger homes to leave san francisco or drive up the prices that still exist and another thing that's deceptive when you discuss this even today, people measure square footage who don't count bathrooms you do not count the garage or don't count downstairs its or the rooms that are semi improved to a house from years past legally listed with a square footage and today's home is per square footage that includes many of the same things you have to compare apples to

apples so i think that i wanted to clear the air a little bit about that and i'm very much in sympathy with people that want to help keep families here and produce income at all levels it doesn't mean we only need to concentrate on larger homes but there's a place for those and if appropriate to the neighborhood they're not having adverse effects they serve a good purpose purpose. >> commissioner richards. >> i have are done a lot of thinking we've received a lot of feedback of some of the things in the press and picking up on some of the rules of that policies and the things we're going looking for to fit in the first thing it if this were a

private company and the planning commission were a separate board of directors for the interprets in the organization we approve the projects we approve those certain projects and decide conflict this is a dr role no private industry for the policy and direction having a strategy committee compensation committee that a moderate committee are we functioning like the letter from the city attorney the governance committee and the registry the supporting acts for the board of directors they approve budget and have line items to make sure that nothing it amiss and supports the strategy they said and hire and fire the ceo they make the decision of conflict those are few and far between

because we get to the board of directors really means someone is at the top in the organization i think for this organization the policy and direction only thing concrete that lays out our policy rule in seeing what the prop m relocation criteria that's the only specific thing i've seen in my 5 months we're trying to get the decision pattern, making when i look at isn't always consistent so setting policies bye your decisions are not always the same i view the director as the ceo an industry analog increase an offer lay that's policies and results and action that are fiscally

responsibly and delivering on the policy in conjunction and the city attorney the ethics commission the fcc in the example and the ultimate affordability it is ballot box hey, we're going to keep on doing ballot boxes the are voters are the ultimate shareholders we'll have the planning in the last elections like lincoln and beyond the height and several people are threatened in front of us they're to initiate the ballot box the site program and the 5 m and the hallmarks i think we need to listen to the stakeholders being our organization our rule in setting policy has not been optimized as

a result under the effectively i received and the letters from the people i'm tired of running into they're looking a louis trust in us a couple of items from the policy point of view i struggle with what takes priority over what especially, when we have a which i say offering and housing and pdr space when we have a project coming up by right if we don't give an allocation of office taking the pdr what's our policy so people understand they shouldn't be out buying spaces to turn them into office and if affordable housing what is affordable housing and what take precedent over the for sale and we had that over clemente the

board over turned our decision the enforceable approach i mentioned we have received way too which feedback this is the kind of behavior we don't want and i think this commission needs to take a larger rule in the leadership and making bigger decisions especially around governments and how to set policies and what are the rules we need to change i was surprised the rules we're supposed to be adding more and more we need to address the issues it's critical given everything happening in the city i don't want to be at the end of my term and have people could be and say where was the planning commission so i want to go on record we need to take a larger role he support the governorcy

and other things thank you. >> thank you commissioner fong. >> well, i didn't want to start a discussion i appreciate the thought but five or six most is a reasonable objection it is easy to compare it to other organizations it's compatible comparable and it is a little bit more free flowing and changing with the winds as the city grows and slinks some of the dangers of the setting the policy as the city changes you need to have reactive measures to counter active events that occur that can be done and boat ridden to new policies and

procedures i share it this organization plays a role i think we don't a great game we're on top but it can be improved i will be interested in carrying on that conversation. >> at the. >> commissioner johnson. >> i would also again in the efforts not make this decision today but in the future continue the conversation with the vein of how to increase our calculation with other departments i agree with you setting the vision not that we can't change the procedure you gave the example you're not going to get all 7 to agree the devil is in the details b there

are a lot of activities in terms of policy if we have no connection to those other offices where in the mayor's office or other departments or agencies that our vision doesn't really go past our hearings so i'd like to have a discussion also around we had a little bit today is we talked about the enter departmental decision by to get into our collaboration and how to mix with the vision of other departments and agencies. >> thank you so commissioner fong and i will definitely follow-up with director ram and others i think there's a start next week with the citywide work plan mr. kelly as alluded to and another opportunity i believe is through the informational be hearings we have commissioner johnson you pointed out today's

hearing i think this is the scheduling consecutive scheduling to talk about the issues that have been raised. >> very good commissioners commissioners, if there's nothing further we'll move on to o to items 10 consideration of amendments and adaptation commissioner moore a recommending we continue this matter i believe based on noticing but i wanted to point out this matter was advertised on the dis18th agenda when was issued on december 11th so it's been close to a month that members of the public have received the notice and it was on the agenda and since this agenda was issued last friday, i basically received one inquire regarding the matter. >> i think we should at least

have a discussion and decide whether or not to continue the item i want to be clear, sir on the december 18th calendar was the attachment a red lined actual rules and rules changes or only the the agenda for today. >> the hyper link to the proposed changes were linked to today's agenda the notice of this hearing was on the december 18th agenda, however, the one inquire i received that person received a draft on december 19th. >> okay. thank you commissioner moore. >> putting aside what secretary owen explained the essence of the comments sorry that's not my microphone. >> she's speaking into