be a stronger, more welcoming, healthier cleaner safer place for the people of this community to play. there are going to be new green areas, a full-size basketball court, outdoor fitness equipment, community garden, a brand-new clubhouse. it's going to be a much more welcoming spot for a neighborhood that really needs it. ♪ ♪. >> good afternoon and woke up to the planning commission regular hearing for thursday, june 11, 2015, disruptions of any kind. please silence any devices that may sound off during the proceedings.

and when speaking before the commission, if you care to, do state your name for the record. i'd like to call roll at this time. commissioner president fong commissioner antonini commissioner hillis and commissioner richards we expect commissioner moore and commissioner wu to be absent and commissioner johnson to arrive late commissioner first is the continuance calendar for the 24th are promoted for continuance until june 25th and next case capital avenue is proposed for continuance until july 9th and further under our discretionary use authorization calendar commissioners we've received confirmation that item

10 maple street a discretionary review has been withdrawn. >> okay. any public comment on the items proposed for continuance okay. seeing none public comment is closed. . >> move to continue items one and two to the dates specified. >> second on that motion to continue. >> commissioner antonini. >> commissioner hillis commissioner hillis and commissioner president fong so moved, commissioners, that motion passes unanimously 4 to zero zoning administrator, what say you? continue item one to the date specified. >> thank you commissioners that places you under our consent calendar at this time, members of the public may address the commission on items of interest to the public that are within the subject matter jurisdiction the subject matter jurisdiction 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. item 3 case no. c and d on mason street a condominium conversion subdivision and he sacramento street conditional use authorization. >> any public comment on item the two items on the consent calendar? not seeing any public comment is closed. commissioner antonini >> move to approve items three and four. >> second. >> on that motion to approve matters in under our consent calendar. >> commissioner antonini commissioner hillis so moved commissioners, that motion passes that places you under consideration of the deficit minutes for the may

rules committee meeting and the draft for the may regular hearing any public comment on item draft minutes? >> not seeing any public comment is closed. arrest commissioner richards i was a little bit confused only the meeting minutes for the inner or 14 i thought the rules committee we would have a punt to the life second. >> not the minutes the actual hearing on the rules and regulations we continued until july 2nd. >> that includes all the - and essential the same as the minutes. >> move to approve. >> second. >> on that motion then to adopt the minutes for may rules committee and the may regular hearing commissioner antonini commissioner hillis commissioner richards and commissioner president fong so moved, commissioners, that motion passes unanimously 4 to divorce and places you commissioners questions or comments and commissioner

antonini. >> yeah. i grew up up how the pleasant and livermore area i was on my way to 680 some land under construction it might be developed probably housing couldn't say the land is owned by itself city and county of san francisco the puc and we own. >> huge amount of land there to the south of berry necessarily avenue and part of that land was developed some years ago for residents and for small shopping area really well done and mines was the city sold that land and something else developed it i don't know for sure i'm curious as to what is going on with that parcel of land is not wise to sell land it is worth a lot you get the revenue from the rental and the and a presentation so it

is wise to hold into land in desirable areas and should consider some of the land to be self-developed and build housing or affordable housing, we could built supportive housing oath middle-income housing and i'm not sure we'll get the credit for the regolden technically in alameda did you not u county but the idea to divide those up the whole bay area is behind on the housing needs and to arbitrarily draw lines lines in san francisco didn't make sense as a region be able to meet those goals and have shared objectives that go throughout the entire anyway that was the subject of a

meeting he attend i was a guest at the bay area council and one the subject that was discussed was a assessment of our performance in providing housing units it is bad not some much san francisco we're one of the better ones compared to the be sure particularly the coastal regions california as a whole is bad compared to the rest of the country coastal for the variety of reasons it poor in providing additional housing a lot outside the borders of san francisco and seeing this built it is a big problem but that was a very interesting hearing. >> commissioner richards i received an e-mail from a citizen i think in district 2

supervisor farrell's office referred to me the cooperation of a potentially landmarked tree i sent the nomination into the department of public works or the department of forest thinking this was going to get the landmark tree process going unbeknownst to me it should come before the planning commission i ask all the papering paperwork to go to the point and vice president of the commission i want to know if this holds true it will be interesting. >> yes. in order to be nominated it would have to be the planning commission or director or the historic preservation commission they've all the same person reached out to everyone so if you wish through the direction of the commission timing we'll calendar that for

next week. >> i'd love it. >> okay. thank you. >> commissioners, if there's nothing further we can move on to the director's report under department matters number 7. >> good afternoon commissioners with only quick announcement a change of date you've continued an item on harrison to the middle of july and there was a proposal to bring back a design discussion at an earlier date to talk about the design of the building we talked later in june but moved that up to june 8th so the design and discussion will happen next week on june 18th. >> okay item 8 receive of past weeks board of supervisors and the historic preservation

commission. >> good afternoon aaron star there was no planning department items at the full board they heard the two short-term rentals overthinks one by supervisor campos and supervisor avalos and the other supervisor farrell and the commission heard those items and took 15 separate votes at the full board hearing the planning department represented by director ram emily rogers and scott sanchez and might have were not called on for questions supervisor farrell wanted to continue the issue and supervisor campos asked his proposals be removed and supervisor avalos used his opportunity to make a motion to terminate the debate requires a

2/3rd's vote succeedcy supervisor campos and supervisor mar and failed with others voting against the motion when supervisor farrell's motion it passed with supervisor campos and supervisor mar and another voting against the policy those who voted did see they wanted more time to come up within an ordinance the majority could vote for 2, 3, 4 general those who didn't vote for the continuance were skeptical a compromise could be reached in one month the board had 8 months for a consumed ordinance that was all for the planning department at the board there were 3 introductions two reintroductions one for the embarcadero commercial district and the fillmore commercial district they were modified to

take in the modifications and there was a hearing request on the status of legalization of the dwelling units asphalted installed out a permit that concludes my presentation. >> any public comment on the report? okay public comment is closed. >> do you have the board of appeals report last time. >> 3 items an appeal to the authorization for one 50 van ness you've approved multiply entitlements for a variance conditional use and as part of that i demonstrated that in our deliberations you could consider an exception from the lot expectation which was 80 percent not all of the unit face a street and as the project was bloody there were units at every level that explicit face into

the street to the subject to grade the 80 lot requirement the boiled challenged first, the zoning administrator had the authority to determine you could hear that as a section 309 and concerns about the project itself and the impacts on the school appeal was made by parents and students and their concerns about the impacts on the property line windows board considers those concerns and also during the appeal process the appellants raised concerns about the calculations by the project sponsor we reviewed those calculations and determined they were not accurate before you was authorization for an exception for 83.4 percent the calculation at the ground floor was more accurately 89 percent which we found not 2, 3,

4 conformance and second level it was half percentage off we said was in companions and the project was compliant the board granted the appeal to eliminate the need for american people exception of the ground storage 3 hotel rooms hotel rooms meant to be for the tenant of the building but they could have visitors stay in short-term rental and those were moved to the spaces previously occupied in the interior with that change no dwelling units facing all dwelling units were at ground floor were facing the street and they uphold the decision it was unanimous two other items on

steiner street the discretionary review there were concerns recommended to impacts light and air to the adjacent property on steiner which is to the north and downhill a down slopping hill portion on stern with that the the commission took dr and had a 2 foot reduction and the extension something the project manager had at one point proposed to the neighbor the neighbor rejected it but it was uphold last item on 10 avenue you heard on jangle second a horizon yaeks addition and the main impacts on privacy a deck that was cigarette 8 feet if said property line and stairs and further on additional feet

the deck was sent and it was uphold that concludes my report. >> no historic preservation commission meeting yesterday so if commissioners, if there's nothing further we'll move on to to general public comment this time, members of the public may address the commission items of interest to the public that are within the subject matter jurisdiction of the commission except agenda items. 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 up to three minutes. i have in speaker cards. >> yes. i'm michael nolte i'm representing john public last week's welcome back was posted on sfgov so people can't see the audio and visual i don't know if something can be done when it was first put up not working right and no closed

captioning at that meeting posted on the viewing and we currently have people in the audience that are hard of hearing so thank you. >> my name is david welch i'd like to speak to the question of affordability of hours which is certainly within the pressure view of this commission i noticed there's a number of projects coming up in the tenderloin where large new developments are being planned and it seems to me especially in that neighborhood although in any neighborhood in san francisco there should be priority given to below grade

the term is a little bit below market rate and not have any impact on what the person has to pay for their housing i believe there should be genuine market rate housing in that neighborhood and a requirement on any builder and building company or developer that wants to put up housing in the tenderloin they've generously market rate housing at least 50 percent of the units that they build there i mean, i think this is outrage situation in san francisco what the rents are everyone understands that the way to approach start right now with new developments approving only those that

provide for generously blaurd u below market rate housing. >> good afternoon, commissioners i'm john nolte and i here to talk about last week's meeting in which the chair miss construed last names and i have a brother so i'm speaking on behalf of of last nominates related or now and then related or siblings so when the chair came to my brothers and my speaker cards he thought that was the same we've got this going on problem not only this commission but i caution the chairs when they read those speaker cards not to assume they're the the same person.

>> thank you is there any additional public comment? okay public comment is closed. >> commissioner richards. >> i guess i have one the speakers mentioned the requirement for bmr and maybe the city attorney can give a two or three sentence explanation what the limits are on foblt and is that something we could do here and deputy director mirena burns i'm going can i repeat. >> one of the speakers said all future development should have a limit on bmr i know there is a limit under prop c can you give a quick explanation i'm getting this down the street can you clarify. >> the zoning administrator can speak to that. >> the planning code contains requirements for below market rate units and the flexibility

to change the current code requirement is limited to prop c but otherwise bound by what is in the planning code so we have planning code to implement i mean generally 12 percent that applies to develop that are specific for somewhat higher levels of affordability but otherwise a separate part of code that goes through the prop c process. >> thank you. >> commissioners, if there's nothing further we'll move onto the regular calendar items ab for the case hide street a section 309 determination of compliance and the zoning administrator will consider compliance.

>> good afternoon commissioner president fong and members the commission kate co-sponsor o connor planning department staff you have before you a project constrict an 8 story 85 unit with 89 hundred square feet of ground floor and 15 off-street parking oar 10 inclusionary housing unit provided on site it is has a one story structure leased to the united states postal service the project is located in the c-3 g and the hide and bulk district the project manager will give a presentation but i'd like to focus on a number of regulatory issues in order to proceed it requires two's requirement the downtown information or

authorization it includes u includes ground level wind cutters allow it from certain sections of the code compliance with the criteria for wind and the backyard exceptions is described in the motion in our packets i'm available to discuss this but in short the staff believed the exceptions are warned and meets the exception in the code it requires the exposure requirement and the bay window dimensions is complies with explore by facing golden state avenue or hide street 238 units that require an exposure surveillance they face the courtyard as such the project is seeking a

permit for that. >> the project includes a corner element it exceeds the bay window requirements the 0 projection is 4 feet and the length 29 feet on golden state and 20 feet on hide street an architecture feature as such the project is seeking a variance that are stipulated in the planning code zoning administrator will o after the commission takes a stand the department has received two letters in support and the if one correspondence in opposition one neutral e-mail regarding the proposal and in addition the department received 3 e-mails about the demolition of the possessive and the effects on mail delivery and the post office boxed in the area the u.s. d s provides the service

approximately 4 blocks away their call roll pursuing an expansion for the possessive in anticipation of the closer he anticipate that completion of the captains will be done in october of 2015 s p.s. says the mail service will be accommodated within the vicinity in conclusion the department supports the project because it meets the goals and outburst to have you housing close to jobs and within a walkable urban or urban context it is desirable or desirable and meets the codes aside street exceptions exemptions required through the thirty the staff recommend it be

approve with conditions project sponsor. >> project sponsor please. >> good afternoon. i'm paul eir son i want to thank the commissioner and the mr. larkin staff and kate who sheriff's deputyed this i've managed this trust for over thirty years it has owned the property since the 1960 so first a bank of america and substantial leased to the united states people of the state of california agency a limited facility over 5 years the 101 hide street was placed on the closure list almost 4 years ago november 2011 a plan was implemented for the redevelopment in in conjunction with the planning department that we're presenting to you

today you have before you a comprehensive package presented by your staff i want to point out 3 highlights one the project does not displace any local residents instead st. it creates 85 onsite bmr units two the project will be adding 6, 3 bedroom sfntsz and 3 the current post office holders had been moved to the united states people of the state of california fox plaza facility and we've worked hard and long to accommodate the input from the staff in the neighborhood outreach has included randy shaw of the tenderloin clinic and david the hastings college of law and supervisor tang and

tenderloin police captain jason cherniss thank you for your support and now to introduce the architect albert . >> good afternoon commissioner president fong and members of the commission planning staff i'm albert the architect on the project i want to give you a quick overview on the project the proposed project in front of is a mixed use building with ground floor retail and residential unit below one below grade that related in the design

it is present here today we worked extensively with the planning department urban advisory team that recommended numerous modification including the moving the rear yard sent or the required set back to the inside corner of the site it's a corner site to create a consistent street wall along golden state and hide having a l shape configuration on the west side of the project we've provides water a matching lightwell in general the project intends to utilize the green materials including a state of the art awhile taking advantage the natural light and air and compatible windows and well-appointed rooftop we'll be providing open common space on

the roof and over the course we've received only positive support from the community in summary we're excited about the project the design we believe the project will revigilant the corner the tenderloin and i want to thank the planning staff for their help yes, ma'am kate connor for her assistance and that concludes my presentation. if you have any questions, i'll be happy to answer them and clarifications thank you. >> thank you very much. >> we may have questions opening it up for public comment first david welch i'm going to call this four times michael nolte michael nolte and michael nolte in case there's 4 michael nolte's and john