that shows the project area as well as all the new muni or other picking up public transit stops within a half-mile radius we questioned a map for allocations within the authorization we were looking at for a decision i'd like to request that staff or through the chair request it staff provide a similar map of public transit for all large projects thoogsz with the map we're currently getting. >> commissioner moore. >> i'd like to report to the commission that the subcommittee for the rules met together for the first time and time was much too short we'll be meeting again on march second and report with more detail. >> march 5th and march 5. >> what did i say oh, march 2.

>> thank you for your time on that. >> next item, please. >> commissioners, if there's nothing further we'll move on 0 department matter directors announcements. >> thank you, john good afternoon i was going to mention the memo regarding the prop m the current prop m allocation numbers happy to discuss that further we wanted you to have the last number the updated listed projects currently in the cue commissioner antonini i don't have a timeline typed we're kind of in a lot of discussions on the issues you're raising and hopefully, we'll be able to come this summer with more details. >> commissioner antonini. >> yeah. director ram i neglected in my comments the other question i noticed the number of projects that are approved but not been built and

probably have discussions on those as we move forward i this think we have a policy after a certainly amount of time with the conceiveness it would be great to have reasons why they're not moving forward. >> that will be part of the discussion when we come back. >> commissioners, if there's nothing further we'll move to that to item 7 review the past events of the board of appeals and historic premise. >> good afternoon aaron starr in contrast to last week's there's no land use committee hearing and at the full board this week did signed ordinance reasonable accomodation ordinances and article 2 and urban forest plan and the zoning amendment for portland all received their second reading to the mayor's office and the office conversion landmark this

supported by supervisor cohen has the interim controls for the mc district west of octavia it passed no introductions. >> next and the board of appeals met last time and 3 items to brief the commission the appeal of the variance letter for 312 green street heard by the doctor dr in on-the-job decided not to take discretionary review and the board appeal with a 2 to one to uphold they needed 3 votes by default the variance was upheld and the second item is one 25 crown terrace that is an appeal of the board of appeals the permit setting out to change the method of construction when this

was before this commission several years ago it was an entertainment commission permit not to be considered demolition as you probably are aware in late december of 2013 there was a cat tra to from the the building shored fell and as per planned the building collapsed they substantially revised the application the project stayed the same 9 end result the same and the board of appeals they had to remove more of the building to salvage as much of this and demolition under the blad the section deemed this is was anyone centrally not affordable because the seated value the building collapsed the

assessment was based on on the assessment of the land and the date of the collapse of the building that exceeded $1.056 million administratively it was reviewed and subject to section 311 no discretionary review filed but an boil last time the broadly uphold that permit and that moved and lastly over the past few weeks and months an uptick a dwelling unit oftentimes at the board of appeals hearing it is subject to 317 or the mayors directive their single-family dwellings that have a illegal second unit and not subject to the mayor's office executive directive so i wanted to make you aware we've

had a couple recently at the board of appeals and let you know that i'll be happy to answer any questions. >> thank you. >> commissioners director ram good afternoon carl president of historic preservation commission thank you for accommodating me on this your own appearance by basically, we only community through letters normally you don't know i don't think the letters fully describe our backgrounds of discussions and sort of direction we're taking care of talking to i want to come specifically today, we have a policy paper we're going to be voting on between the commission i want to talk about briefly on the draft environmental reviews coming out and he preference alternatives we're seeing more and more of a fruition where the

premise is messing with any part of the building is significant we see let's say they'll have one hundred or one hundred and 50 units if there's a building on the property they have to chop the property in half that's from a lack of preparedness we see 1 on pine street they took out the building they could have put into the facade but some semi ambulances of what that block looked like you've got another project coming up with two towers if they safe any part of the this one tower goes away we want them to build as much as

and, and save the significant knows it's frout u frustrating our letters it's touch to go into a full explanation with a preservation in that report so that's why i'm here to say there's a lot more behind it and commissioner president fong and commissioner wu and i were speaking it might be smart to do a check in with each other a kwliegs of no voting but here's where we are coming from and heres what we're seeing so much development happening from 9 preservation i want to keep some consistency in the city what this places as looked like for so long thank you very much any questions. >> commissioner moore has. >> i wanted to congratulate you for como this commissions this commission has voiced what you're saying a number of times

and meet on the terms you're saying i'd be delighted to see you here or in our chambers. >> commissioner johnson thank you for raising our hand. >> i forgot yeah. as a rather dir i see a lot of what you're talking about it's a question for you so ear recommendations address how you get to the preservation alternative before the environmental team. >> we actually have sat down with ms. jones and director ram and mr. jocelyn and mr. fry and gone though how to communicate this; right? so in this was we're going to be voting on. >> hey just to add to that what was helpful it is helpful for the staff in particular the environmental review staff to understand the commissions concerns then we can communicate

those concerns ahead of time to the project sponsor we're not just reacting to the eir but drafting it ahead of 7, 8, 9. >> 2 will think formally drafted as the historic preservation commission. >> commissioner antonini. >> on the same subject we have situations with the project sponsor or the commission has agreed to the preservation alternative oftentimes the new project isn't not conceptual you're wanting to delineate but sometimes, it's night and day so it's noting other things to throw out to you guys where the projects we're combining the historic elements. >> absolutely understand that's at&t's an issue as a policy on

facadeism because they may not agree with the direction the commission is taking so we may want facadeism to save some of the buildings not to knock them over not everyone is going to agree from the preservation community. >> thank you commissioner richards. >> i'm completely glad you're here i hope we have a meeting to understand what you folks do to date i've only been here 6 months what's going here so i think a little bit more it makes sense on the time you go on the hpc how many times after the eir is completed how many times it was actually taken the alternative. >> no, we render an opinion to be honest, i don't follow it

there are only certain projects i've been 2, 3, 4 contact with the sponsor ask them to please try to save this portion of the building. >> i think it's important i guess i'll ask staff are you aware you how many the preservation all of the elements have been choun. >> no mr. fry a holding you zero. >> that's a track record you're keeping track of that when you get to one let us know i'm sympathetic with you i saw the 5 m and what it looks like the preservation is doable to see if it gets done. >> we're happy to work with folks i know i help them draft because 5 m we're going to lose the whole feeling of the alley;

right? >> appreciate the usual work you're doing. >> commissioner moore any public comment? i'm glad this is happening with the one sloth it's important i want to acknowledge the professional qualifications this group has it stakdz up high >> where i was on the 4ru8d preservation committee this is the most depth of professionalism we have so thank you all right. that's correct very much we'll see you soon thank you. >> commissioners that places you under general public comment is closed. commission on items of interest injured with respect to agenda items, your opportunity to address the commission will be afforded when the item is reached in the meeting. each member of the public may address the commission for up to 3 minutes. image i have a couple of speaker

cards we'll see. >> police and steve. >> the subject matter is 460 fulsome if you want to speak to that matter this is the time. >> good afternoon, commissioners my name is a list i'm a resident on district 6 i'm here to speak on behalf of as well as many other residents xhukd dave osgood in the rincon hill neighborhood group i'm here to raise our awareness of the serious concern that involved block 6 part of the transit district plan the exact address 160 fulsome adjacent to the track bay terminal building across main and spear street the

bidder has submitted a proposal for the height limit to be increased from three to four hundred feet the additional 1 hundred feet is against the transit center district plan of which it took a good five to six years to come into play we're concerned this approval will be considered a spot zoning and sets is precedent for the zones to ignore the city lots we're here to raise our attendance to this matter and it's serious concern amongst the groups we have 8th washington and 45 howard and other buildings where the warriors stadium was being built and many other buildings under review from the planning

commission thank you for your time. >> my name is steve i'm here to speak is to the same issue i'm concerned about the 160 fulsome project we believe that shadows blocking natural sunlight in the parks is an issue and the additional one hundred feet of height is not in the contemplated eir significant increases in shadows will dictate even the rincon hill park and the new park in the transit eir it took seven years to develop the transbay plan and to make it a law we now have a developer attempting to buy illegal height everyone wants to address affordable housing issues truly

effective issues this is not the right way transbay has an affordable housing housing ratio at 45 percent that's at better than the 33 percent the briberyy under does the good work you do and not have another manhattan in san francisco i'm asking to support blocking this extra one hundred feet it didn't do anything but enrich the developer thank you for your k. >> i have one more card (calling names). >> hello commissioners, thank you very much name lee i'm here to before your accident a serious issue regarding a proposed development seeking height increase it is significantly going to add

shadow to two neighborhood parks the rincon hill park and the transit where it's located the project block one from three to four hundred feet increase and the affordable housing price as the height increase awhile affordable housing is much needed the price the public will pay by diminishing the two parks if this is allowed here is can happen anywhere in san francisco with the same negative telegrams effects thank you very much. >> thank you is there any additional public comment comment? >> sue hester addendum for this meeting was sent out for the first time on monday morning

because there was a breakdown in the cities computer system they awe vamentd themselves to the 72 hours rule it's not been done nor the calendar second after the agenda combouts there's an e-mail blast to i don't know some list of people who get noticed o november's of planning commission it never went out after the agenda filing on moped 9 o'clock and not on friday so that basically pulled me into thinking about how you use e-mail less system the department i've come up against roadblocks the department is not going to deal with it i have an official notice no one gets nos

of the subsequent matters liken from the commission like the 5 year planning there was no one here but three and four no one was noticed you're having a substantive decision for 5 years there's no mechanism in the last process for the i have no better word for that thing that the planning department does it micro send out notices a particular planning process that exists other than the commission that's not right there's been no notice for the rules committee and the rules itself if you had a substantive if i recruit a list of people that want to get notices and give

them the notice and they don't show up hates one thing you don't try at present it's a commission not a rules matter all of you all 7 of you i'm not sure how many of you knew your agenda didn't come out i know bus i couldn't fought why i if have an agenda in my e box i 1kr578gd and sent an e-mail anti at 5:00 a.m. in the man or a woman and vauven u eventually the staff set up the agenda you need to know how the mechanic process too bad we don't have the electronic wisconsin's here he's at work right now thank you. >> is there any additional public comment.

>> okay seeing none, public comment is closed. >> commissioners that places you under our regular calendar item 8 feinstein's the fiscal year department budget and work program this is an action item. >> independently commissioners john ram for the record today, we're asking for your approval on the proposed budget we've had two other hearings about the only thing i'll raids before i'm going to turn it over to keith mary senior citizen 10 to go over changes in the interim week we've discussed a lot german your concerns and other concerns for the staffing for the short-term rental program you've received a memo we've proposing to add 3 positions that go

unfund for now, the advantage i mean, the board approvals our revenue and the position authority so the advantage of doing it this way when they approve the positions of we don't say currently have the funding it allows the hiring processed to go quickly that will not require us to go back to the board we think it's a good interim solution until we figured out the now staffing with that, i'm going to turn it over to keith to go over the budgeting thank you. >> good afternoon commissioners my name is keith the finance and it manager for the planning department my pleasure to present the final presentation for the 2015-2016 and 2016-2017 budget i've made copies of the presentation as well as members of the public and commission secretary i'll

pass around the short-term rental memo that was e-mail address to you earlier in the week and copies for the members of the public last week i'll be highlighting changes to the proposed budget so this slide right here a pie chart of the of our full-time fte staffing allocation classification of the department the only change made to this fte allocation was since the last commission meeting this is a change from what is outlined in our memo on february '89 or 9 we're proposing to include 3 position for the short-term rental program you'll find those are in the compliance direct examination divisions those will be unfunded and require either a supplemental appropriation in 2015-2016 or additional funding in the next fiscal year budget

cycle 2018 we'll need approval from the mayor's office to activate those actions in 2015-2016 if the need occurs this does gusts the additional position authority to ramp up hiring to fill the positions as quickly as possible when the need arose no other changes made to those staffing allocations in the department again, this slide shows the fte allocations across dwigsdz trend over the current year to the two budget years the only changed to the 3 administration positions for the short-term rental program slide shows our volume trends what we're projecting in the upcoming budget years we've

noting made no changes to the assumptions growth over the next two years. >> this slide shows our budget and the only change to the revenue budget prior to the hearing the inclusion of one additional grant from the transportation authority to our department. >> next speaker. >> the the amount of 2 hundred plus thousand dollars for the environmental review on the endearing bus rapid transit or the brt project that is shown on the third line revenue from ocii and mta there's an additional $139,000 if in the 2015-2016 column other than no changes made similarly in the expenditure budget the only change the inclusion of expenditure

proomentsz for the transportation authority in the project line there's an address of $39,000 for appropriation authority other than no changes made this slide shows the requested new positions if the proposed budget the only change the inclusion of 3 additional staff positions for the short-term rental program that is line 11 other than no changes from the prior public hearing moving ton on the grant budget no changed made from the prior public hearing as well and then finally on the capital request this lists the planning committee for seven hundred the only change to include one

additional request during last year's for the chinatown beyond the ports smith we already made this request approved by the police vehicle and it was adapted i'm showing you a complete list of capital requests other than no changes to this slide. >> and finally the budget calendar has mentioned last week the historic preservation commission voted unanimously to recommend approval the fiscal year 2017 budget to the planning commission on february 4th you'll see in our packet the comment letter summarizing their comments in your packet you'll see the draft resolution summarizing the 2017 proposed budget at this point, i respectfully request the

practicing those approve the 2017 budget so we may submit the property budget to the mayor's office on february 23rd concludes my presentation. i'm happy to answer any questions you may have. thank you very much thank you. >> opening it up for public comment no public comment public comment is closed. and commissioner antonini. >> mr. de'mario 10 he have a question on the pie chart and the works program i guess those are not the same thing but the percentages look diversity on zoning administration you have 20th century 1.92 but it is only 17 on the work program 17.5 or for 2016 i on those positions are not yet fund but the two seem to

be different numbers. >> keith martini staff my apologies 2 should be 19. >> 19 i guess. >> actually, the pie chart is wrong it should be 6.12015-2016 that annual listed ftes to 2016-2017 my apologies. >> it should be open the pie chart 167881. >> correct. >> thank. >> commissioner richards. >> thank you so much for adding those 3 positions to the short-term rental program this is a good investment thank you. >> commissioner johnson. >> thank you very much yeah. we've gone over this with a fine tooth comic based on our presentation i know we have an