>> good afternoon welcome to the san francisco planning commission regular meeting for wednesday, august 12, 2015, i'd like to remind the members of the audience that the commission does not tolerate disruptions of any kind. please silence any devices that may sound off during the proceedings. speed up 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 wu commissioner hillis commissioner moore commissioner richards percentage and commissioner president fong is expected to be absent. >> you can leave the door, sir. >> just leave it it will close

on its own. >> commissioner antonini and commissioner johnson will be in attendance today commissioners, that places you under your is items proposed for continuance items 1 ab at order cord is proposed for continuance item 2 ab at 24 order court is for september 24th item 3 record at a hundred i didn't street it continuance for october 22, 2015, and commissioners further on our agenda a request if the project sponsor for continuance of 14 ab

harrison street to september 10, 2015, please be advised commissioners the september 10th calendar does appear to be a little bit lengthy next is september 24th there are no speaker cards. >> thank you any public comment on item items proposed for continuance okay. seeing none public comment is closed. ask commissioner richards. >> i move to continue one a and 2 and 3 a to the dates specified and to september 24th. >> commissioner antonini. >> yeah. i'm probably supportive i was declined to go with the tenth we have items dropping off the calendars like flies last week was not the case but i'll support the project

sponsor did you want to speak to that? >> thank you, commissioners steve on behalf of hines on harrison we requested a continuance to work with supervisor kim on the pedestrian safety issues she's out of town but back at the end of august we consulted with her office and september 10th works well, for her and us this matter was originally skeleton july 16th and has been continued ones we'll appreciate the continuance of 4 weeks rather than 6 weeks to the project continues to move forward. >> it is not the length of time we have 22 bryant there will be 4 hundred people i'm worried about on the testing. >> i think this matter will be

short a coincidence. >> commissioner moore and i am all in support of things coming back smoothly and quickly we have just a number of very, very difficult things coming up they're all unfortunately are turning out out different than anticipated if you could trust our judgment i'll suggest we push it out to the 24th. >> okay please call the question. >> a there is a motion and a second to continue items 1 and 2 ab and 3 to the dates proposed and item 14 ab to september 24th. commissioner antonini commissioner hillis commissioner moore commissioner richards

commissioner wu so moved, commissioners, that motion passes 5 to zero >> on the variance 1 and 2 continuing the variance to the dates specified. >> that places you under the consent calendar are considered to be routine may be acted upon by a single roll call vote of the commission. there will be no separate discussion of these items unless a member of the commission, the public, or staff so requests removed from the consent calendar and he and considered as a separate item at this or a future hearing. item 4 record number at capital after a request for conditional use authorization record 5, at chevrolets street a request for

conditional use authorization there are no speaker cards. >> any any public comment on item items 4 and 5? seeing none, public comment is closed commissioner moore >> move to approve second. >> second. >> there is a motion and a second to approve the females for and 5 as proposed commissioner antonini commissioner hillis commissioner moore commissioner richards commissioner wu so moved, commissioners, that motion passes 4 to zero. >> and places you on commissioner matters item 6 consideration of the adoption of draft minutes for july 13th and be any public comment on item draft minutes? >> okay. so no public comment on draft minutes public comment is closed. >> commissioner moore. >> i was pushing the bottom for

the next item. >> move to approve. >> second. >> on that motion to approval of the minutes commissioner antonini commissioner hillis commissioner moore commissioner richards commissioner wu so moved, commissioners, that motion passes 4 to zero and places you on item 7 commission questions or comments and commissioner moore. >> there was an article in yesterday's paper you may or may not seen it it spoke about starter homes we heard about and the article analyzed the fact the building industry does to the anticipate building any starter homes any longer than it is not pg&e out i found a a sobering statement sobering to the extent we're pondering avenue and in the parts historical starter homes were

the first entry of families and children into ownership a first poem of hair own but with that building type not buildable for all the rebates reasons i assume we're aware of we should be thinking about that as we move forward and answer other questions. >> commissioner antonini and yeah. a couple of things first of all, i received today, the comments in response on 49ers 5 m owe spoke to commissioner wu and also my understanding released to the public i want to make sure it is available to the public and anyone who wants it should avail themselves we frequently have complaints of piano materials this is over a

month to review the comments or questions on 5 m our final action to september 15th for the record unless there's anything i'm missing the second comment i the ask i don't know if our secretary was able to send this this is interesting the annual survey the bay area by the bay area council i was invite a guest last tuesday and part of it was at finding of survey which was done by e mc research a very good survey first of all, one thousand respondents distribution by counties almost exactly to population income levels very adequate and various incomes represented and ethicly

balanced a well formulated survey what was the most pressing issue it delta dealt with the drought more pro-active it said fyi our water infrastructure and so that was you know more than just saying you take shorter showers or don't get water in restaurants so we have a apply around when there is a lack of rain the highest percentage said that and second place was the cost of living and shortly behind that housing so those are the things on people's minds a lot and came traffic crime and homelessness in that order that was a good survey 60 percent of respondent were living in the bay area two years or more you did have a lot of people coming from somewhere else from a prospective from one year to the next and a couple of

the minutes this people agreed with in high-level 66 percent want a reduction of fees and other things if it meant moving housing through faster and also by a high percentage like 55 percent said modification of ceqa to expedite those things while we're still protecting the environment that was an interesting survey one the most interesting things a map and more to it than that they asked people where is housing the most needed 75 or 80 percent of the entire bay area represented 85 percent of the population outside of san francisco 55 percent identified san francisco as the place where the housing was the most needed it is clear people want to live in san francisco have family members who live here and they

understand the need we build for housing asked housing of all income levels not necessarily affordable housing but all income levels it is clear there is a lot of support for building more housing and hopefully, we'll continue to do that. >> ms. john if you could comment on the 5 m comments and responses. >> good afternoon sarah john acting director and review officer we had been on track to publish the comments on 5 m for the hearing date of september 3rd it was continued with - one of the reasons for the continuance of that hearing was to give commissioners adequate time to take in the information we felt it would

would appropriate to push and have it available for a longer period of time than mandated. >> commissioner richards. >> first a couple of points to the survey that commissioner antonini referenced you know, i really want to frame the issue let's reduce fees and build housing as a result issues we increase the supply and demands for affordable housing our nexus studies certainly bear it out as schar the fees some people own call them tax but i call them fees because of the issue this whole issue of building more housing is a fallacy i want to make it point to a lot of people they agree about the chunks that is complicated issue we're trying to create a whole city we have

10 elements in the general plan all perhaps working in concert with each other you can't focus on housing and pump it threw and cause the issues likes in the eastern neighborhoods and around the infrastructure and some of the other areas in affordable housing, and, secondly, i thought i'd seen it all until in any neighborhood a one bedroom parapet for $6,500 a 9 hundred plus square feet 434 deboss student at $70 a square feet only other part time i like any neighborhood but not worth that much money. >> thanks. >> thank you. >> commissioners, if there's nothing further we can monarchy to department matters item 8

directors announcements. >> good afternoon sarah jones acting planning director i don't have items for directors report this, weeks ago so we'll look forward to hearing after the break. >> board of appeals and others preservation commission matters. >> oh, and there's no are report for the board of supervisors. >> the board of appeals met one item of interest to the commission 101 hyde street appealable for the determination of compliance a project another hyde and golden gate also an appeal it on the decision i issued this was the appeal that will be heard in september last time it was uphold the section thirty 9 and ready for that

project that's all i have to report. >> i don't believe there's a report for the historic preservation commission. >> which places you on general public comment not to exceed 15 minutes at this time, members of the public may address the commission 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 reached in the meeting. each member of the public may address the commission up to three minutes. i have speaker cards. >> okay r e david lee (calling names) sorry can't read your last name. >> well here we are again, i got to speak into the microphone about the housing issue when i look at it from where i live guys i see a beautiful city

that's all i see we need a lot of affordable housing for everyone rich, poor abag because everyone wants to come to san francisco because it is a beautiful city correct? correct i mean come on it didn't matter about politics we need more housing period we need it bad period that means our architecture needs upgrading and a lot of complicated things i like this guy but if you were my mom and dad, i feel like it would be me, you understand let's get to done here's how you dodd do it build a big at all building let's go for the moon we can do it right in the middle of the financial district and go for the moon i'm serious about a huge building in the center the

skin. >> would like period the pyramid is begun did say so clustered you don't know i look at the skyline go for the big one make that work perfect we need to bad but preserve the old i'm trying to do it historically i'll report what i the while you guys were having fun, i found a hyphenating so 10 by right where i live okay. i wish you guys could see it, it is to fantastic hidden behind a wall about to determine 0 a wall i found it i still got it my dad i'm just done i like you a lot but a day go ago he looks like my dad this is my mom i still have 57 minutes i'm going to make you

laugh i'll budget & finance subcommittee why did he get rid of his chickens because they bash i have 29 seconds i the that out of respect for robin williams i got to go i love san francisco i'm the weirdo a member of the historic certification committee of one that's historic i got everyone to laugh it's 5, 4, 3, 2, 1 oh, yeah. >> thank you, sir. >> have a good day.

>> very hard to follow a good act i have looked at something called journals.org i'll read you a few lines the san francisco board of supervisors debate legislation that spare housing projects like the marina and western edition and sunset under the proposal by the planning department developers will would 2 stories taller than allowed are get relief from parking space in reserve for low income residents this is all well and fine until we find out there are 7 thousand units left in the city and we keep on using the same arguments we need more housing but yet vacate units i

don't know the mentality of continuing to build when we haven't looked at the vicinity of the land about new build in certain districts may not as neighborhood characteristic historically or something but we also have neighborhoods that are well, what do you callism architecturally designed in such a way to have character i don't know how else to describe it but we have to be sensitive to quality of life as commissioner moore mentioned things about infrastructure that are not there and all those things have to be take a look at it and this legislation i hope it will not be rushed one of the items that are coming up number ten coalition for san francisco neighborhood didn't get 20 days in advance a week before like

the regular people the public and we need to be at the table early on this thank you. >> thank you. next speaker. >> good afternoon. i'm georgia i sent you all two e-mails last night between 7 and 3w9 the alterations that i precede as demos just for the tv audience can i have the overhead please here's the how is it was originally that was in the first e-mail that's your own e-mail here in june overhead please there's the same house as the floor and great bay and into the digging out here it is in july very similar but just this week there it is it's gone that last

little wail is gone and four story so you know i'd like don't want to be a tablet tail there are certain things to be considered but i think what you'll say people in noah valley they're not here but are upset and don't know what to do they're protecting looking to you and the elected officials they have ideas one thing i'll say since i've been coming here in a year and a half talking about this i don't think any of those had department of human resources the 311s but not the drs one of the things starting on some of the recent plans the defense in square footage now the developers my understanding let's not talk about square footage but square footage is

really, really important to neighbors that's where we understand so it i think would be good on the 311 discussion a discussion of square footage what is to a starting at and going to have the many projects that are reasonable someone adding a bedroom or something but too many are egging gregarious i hope you read your e-mails have a nice break by the way. >> thank you. >> commissioner wu i'm donald president of san francisco and the commissioners, thank you for having me today so i want to congratulate the triple c for taking politics out of housing and putting people into housing there were endorsements and as such i know we speak about housing in the

blocks for the last 40 years and splildz in solving our problems and complaints about infrastructure but, however, if the city was doing their job for the past 40 years with a villainy plan with the infrastructure to support all the building we're trying to catch up from a lack of 40 years of building and two blocking buildings is high in san francisco the attorneys are living in $2 million homes in noah valley yet they represent tenants that are displaced and due to the housing policies i want to clarify about the 5 m project it is two hundred and 12 affordable units new open space for the south of market neighborhood is going to be built 11 thousand square feet

and upwards there will be transportation and improvements a commitment to transit there will, $70 million in benefit fees, there will be new jobs 12 hundred for construction and also 3 thousand 1 hundred and 50 permanent jobs in the local neighborhood our arts and cultural continuous will be there focused on youth in the dead belong with attention to the chronicle building and currently on the block of this project site none lives there only a few office tenants work there therefore we need to press forward because there's about i would say 10 thousand seniors, that's vets and disabled renovating around couch sandra fewer as they apply to the

city's lottery for the subsidize housing projects for example, the tenderloin has 65 units only 7 thousand applicant for the seniors and therefore we're in a crisis we need housing yesterday not day it today or tomorrow but yesterday it is utter we move forward and no longer delay them thank you. >> thank you. >> i see there's a number of public speakers from potrero hill sometimes, the limit for public comment is 15 minutes i want to you all to speak but be cognizant of time. >> thank you for the opportunity good afternoon,

commissioners i'm shawn from castro hill last week, i was here with my neighbors to urge the commission to please halt approving the new housing projects due to the comparative nature to potrero hill we plead you to realign to pricilla chan investments in the benefits of open space, parks, recession, and transportation before congressman more residents and workers into a fag i will, unproved neighborhood today is i'd like to amplify your concerns planning is george the neighborhood plan adapt in 2008, i appreciated at the end of public comment commissioner richards questioning sarah jones of environmental planning on the eastern neighborhood plan offers

when the housing plans are exceeded regretfully her comments were inadequate the eastern neighborhoods plan has a flaw the final version adapted in 2008, the board of supervisors was strict of any finding requirement that the recommendations will be implemented and further no guarantee of funding for the promise benefits of 70 infrastructure to our neighborhood one is public parks and open space i presume i'm not sure how to adjust this there you go okay. >> public parks and open space specifically sends a cast to the planning department to identify a square feet potrero hill for a

public park to square additional open spaces what specific steps has the planning department done to honor this promised benefit all to highlight the report pushed in 2010 which has quickly become outdated and obsolete due to explosive growth and what is the planning commission doing with the authority to balance the affordable housing at the same time investing in infrastructure to prepare our neighborhood for this explosive growth i ask the commission to halt the approval for the castro hill obvious and mitigate the negative impacts of the development and to reopen the revised eastern neighborhoods for the studies from our community thank you.

>> next speaker >> hi alison with potrero good afternoon, commissioners as the pipeline of potrero hill gets maxed out some of the largest projects are rush stamps with the exception rather than irs we know the projects in the neighborhoods are no longer relevant and the larger projects will in the adequately address so how does the cumulative impact is not subject to the new analysis and robust review make no mistake the community exception plan lies outside of the planning commissions direct jurisdiction so as project after project goes to the environmental planning without the benefit of an eir no official public comment to

discuss how each individual development is attributing to the building and how mitigations are false there are multiple sites in the industrial areas near jackson park that are contained with asbestos and lead projects under the eir has a mitigation plan in place before being approved but the reviews under the exemption maybe signed off on before the public health department has determined whether a site mitigation is required there are a couple of places next to the park arkansas has 14 underground storage tanks but no sub surface investigation has been done on 13 street with an anticipated 3 hundred plus units with the rich oil complex

has a deed restriction that limits the property to commercial use only i recently spoke to someone at dpw with the backlog of four and a half months kooshl things fail through the cracks how week he stand but with the nearby residents and children in the parks and schools might be exploded to those hazardous materials as to the multiple construction projects occurring simultaneously all within several blocks that discussion will not happen there is way two of at stake until a new eir prepared and a inaccurate appropriate mitigation those exemptions must be challenged thank you.

>> good afternoon, commissioners jay president of the potrero hill association at your prior meeting he apologize for missing commissioner richards asked about the process when we reached the number of pipeline projects there were contemplated in the environmental impact report the answer that supplemental environmental impact report would be required that's the process that would be required while legally speaking the reason we can't plan by internal revenue alone ceqa review is not a substitute for planning as many of you may know understand the scope of an eir is narrowly probed in an item place of residence it might not consider the warriors arena and won't consider pier 70 but it does not address community

concerns and you know this because you're the ones that hold the hearings on the draft eirs so the scope of community comments and concerns you hear run far outing outside of the scope because the comments get to the overall issue of mr. larkin greater than the scope of the eir it's the eastern neighborhoods plan was it's a response to the dangers of planning by eir as aside i find it funny our community worked only with place of business over a a long time pet to accommodate the eastern neighborhoods plan but guess what it was not perfect none to blame but i'm asking what you're community is asking you i believe is that the i am perfection that the bargain we proactively worked on in the

eastern neighborhoods plan a version it addresses the bugs in the current plan and scares the niece of our community with the needs of additional heirs development going forward we speak a lot of numbers they can get abstract if you're not dealing with it anna daily basis i'll show you an briefly the development going on there is 3 thousand units the trend we're trying to get the sfmta to provide for us if you think about it in terms of the efforts put-down forgot for the warriors arena and all the necessary planning and the effort of the transportation pit together those 3 thousand units 65 hundred residents no -- excuse me. - a little bit more than that that is a good concerts at the new arena if you look at the areas of potrero and show place where's our press we have the

resources and the expertise and the political will thank you. >> so we're over time we'll take the 3 speakers and also one more speaker and do the rest of the public comment at the end of the agenda. >> good evening, commissioners rod of potrero hill i'm going to focus phenomenon two shortcomings related that are slated to the urban mixed use development other is the lack of utilizing the reuse currently, the design reviews are for you data they're not looking at a series of robust designs for the residential guidelines so in effectual we're finding their flying by the seat of their pant most especially like neighbor character and mass

and density we're ending with cook current massing ♪ times for a fake industrial look for neighborhood character precious pdr space is being wiped out the city has not addressed adequately unfortunately, the effective new threatens to turn potrero hill into a sterile high-rise community it is wonderful as our projection of 16 mariposa and missouri and 16th street and pennsylvania street it leads to the short coming the best neighborhoods have a strong connection with the past it should place potrero hill area plan promote the buildings and features that provide the

continuity with past development a goal that can be achieved many industrial buildings in our communities present an extraordinary opportunity to fulfill the vision of the potrero hill area plans plans call for adapt reuse unfortunately demolition of those that could be reused for more than purposes a growing list of potrero hill and dog patch off the top of my head i could name discharged proposals o properties in isolation from one another loss the history of all of them at once city planning needs to keep this picture in mind and the adapt use is the best way to adopt the past in mitigating environmental impacts thank you

>> so long commissioner i'm 101 kelly the last one of the potrero hill people arriving today thank you for hearing us i hope to follow up i and listening to our concerns it matches the offer building in the neighborhood i'm going to follow-up on the last comments about 9 impact accumulative impact to the neighborhood a numbing repetitive limited designs i'll show you a limit of the designs this commission he approved over the last couple of years approved not only in the pipeline and you see of an individual project has some interest on hits own there is a repetition of those large

refrigerator box sized accordingly pastel colors but the same basic tile that looks like the design when it was presented to the neighborhood we've had this at the boosters they said it will look different and after building looks like the massing design another example 2 henry adams and so on so on when we went through 10 years we didn't expect the leading should case with the school of architecture there was supposed to be residential guidelines there was a neighborhood surrounding all those projects we thought we'd have a residential design team instead of those have gone to the u data and if you look at the u data if in our packet

their sketcher and short as opposed to the design team i bring this up because you have about 6 to 8 projects on potrero hill heading your way i'm going to highlight one on pennsylvania in front of you and 13 work, 16th street on the project the number of second bedrooms no windows both of those projects are doing the minimum costs of affordable housing they look large piles of money this is what we have to deal with on a regular basis in the neighborhood we have dozens of projects and have design standards and some housing standards to really address the

needs of eastern neighborhoods plan that you guys adapted and thanks for listening. >> thank you (calling names). >> good afternoon. i'm jaeven he this in the richmond district a member of citywide and local neighborhood organizations including the coalition for the planning association for richmond and others i'm here to talk about the proposed local density bonus program and echo the comments you've heard from rose high on a hill it calls to me son i don't know anything about the substance of the abruptly i am concerned about the process this is the first time that many of us heard about the plan to increase the density you know all of san francisco including the richmond district and sunset it is my preliminary concern heights will go up and units will be added i've seen a lot of

blue in the richmond this is obviously the neighborhood i'll concerned about it will impact the expire city please don't work on this at a great speed provide the shareholders the residents in those be communities with enough information so there can be a full and fair hearings of the impacts this will have i've heard the concerns about the process i'm really concerned that this process may end up taking upcoming going through much too quickly i'll asking you to please put the brakes on the process and give us the information so we can honestly and fairly evaluate this otherwise i'm afraid of a local density bonus program will be a bonus for a few people and a penalty for more of the people living in the city

take into consideration. >> weasel continue public comment on item h secretary call the regular calendar. >> item 10 record number technical amendments and corrections planning code amendment. >> sorry i missed commissioner richards and i guess mr. kelly in direct to what i heard two things the potrero hill folks on the eastern neighborhoods cca are joe and bruce and mr. keith goldstein i would suggest we're actually coming up to monitoring the implementation report you folks get in contact with them and talk about your concerns a secondly, a good way to go i've seen the results you've showing us to look at or suggest that the objectives are measured with

the implementation report the second comment we have a large calendar i don't know if we have the list that the committee mentioned the eastern neighborhood was on there all to have a conversation about the items we can figure out whether that he need the eastern neighborhood presentation as a result of that. >> thank you. >> so i'd like to bring it back to item 10 technical amendments and corrections planning code amendment. >> good afternoon aaron star manager the legislative affairs the planning code correction ordinance you initiated from time to time the planning department drafts it to fix the errors that includes the why did

codes the last time was in november of 2012 this codes correction include several fixes to the article two ordinances and other ordinances from three to four and include several updated languages after this ordinance was initiate by the department staff they met and discussed concerns over the ordinance as a result the staff is proposing 3 modifications including clarifying language to the height and bulk recommendation two referenced to section 260 and 61 and to have rear yard with building in sros staff is

proposing two more recommendation which include recommendation number 4 for the prototype language in section onsite affordable housing and recommendation 5 allows the city attorney's office to add number one subsequent issues to move to the board of supervisors should any other corrections be identified staff recommends approval with modifications he have a copy of the signature package for the record not constituent in your packet thank you very much. >> thank you. >> any public comment on this item? rose hill son. >> good afternoon commissioner wu and planning commissioners

and zoning administrator sanchez i'd like to thank the planning department for working with the coalition of san francisco neighborhoods and putting back some of the text that was taken out only it wasn't a correction i'd like to pass out this for the commissioner if i may have the overhead oh, it's already on this is in regards to recommendation number 5 and it is in our packet as well situation is this with the recommendation number 5 i'll read this summary. >> i don't have any problems with the ordinance part as written the code what i have an issue with the resolution portion a new recommendation please delete recommendations 4 that could result in legal problems allowing the city attorney to make the changes and

thanks to the planning that compromises this subject active change even if the changes were non-substantive the assumption is corrections to the mistakes being made, in fact, brand new text that includes the substantive changes to rear yard and height and density does the commission know the correction your allowing a blank check that governs citywide to be dwaekd out of view of the public before the planning commission delete recommendation number 6 i only is this because there has been issues where things that were called non-substantive and had i not said anything about the situation with sros and rear yard all hr ones a and 2 would

be effected citywide thank you for your time. >> thank you i have a copy for the planning commission secretaries i'll send it electronically if you don't have to type it you'll. >> is there any additional public comment on this item? >> my name is beverly johnson i hear issues there is not to the - damages it is important in a better view you know commission building contracts and that i've heard from enter lives have been going on and about this on or about is not

concerned real petition and i have begging some building processes progressing going to throw on august 24th and listening more o more review on other issues that concern the health department and we're gathering much addresses that they wouldn't process and that we it has not been as you may know being conversations and not on real factors thank you. >> thank you. is there any

additional public comment. >> okay public comment is closed. >> commissioners. >> commissioner hillis. >> just a i just want to clarify on that recommendation the city attorney can - we're not approving only recommending approval there the city attorney can recommend changes they all will have to be approved by the board correct. >> correct if you can't add this we did this an article 2 and made a few corrections asked by the city attorney i believe his recommendation don't anticipate any but if we find another incorrect reference or misspelling we wanted to be able to do that the city attorney has i think another review body in

the that looks at changes and me make non-substantive changes all the time. >> deputy city attorney mr. cleveland. >> i want to make sure i understand. >> yeah. deputy city attorney susan cleveland knolls if any substantive changes at the boards then additional hearings under the brown act so that determination is made at the board of supervisors by another level of review i think this is really for just additional minor corrections as the public process continues but again as mr. star said it is completely up to your discrepancy. >> i just want you to have the

ability to make non-substantive changes but you can do that. >> ; is that correct. >> yeah. it is i think the city attorney wanted to make it explicit in case any corrections. >> i'm fine. >> i move to approve with modifications. >> second. >> commissioner antonini. >> yeah, he mr. star one speaker brought of the concerns about substantive changes to the rear yards height and density maybe you can comment on those concerns. >> sure it was recommendations number 4. >> 5 i believe. >> recommendation 5 was one that was said to be taken out. >> recommendation 3 regardisro

effects the sros keep in mind it is very unlikely an sros will be built if an rh1 or rh2 because of the density limitation but i'll add those. >> sros are a term that is independence in article 8 no other reference in article 2 maybe we would have questioned anyway in terms of the rfp district by i agree with staffs recommendations to leave in the language that is helpful. >> error to the side of caution it is likely that wouldn't happen but to make sure that it is not allowed or has to be analyzed if it were proposed in the rh1 or two district.

>> commissioner richards. >> just a question for the city attorney what would constitute a non-substantive change what are we looking at for recommendation number 5 types. >> deputy city attorney susan cleveland knowles you ask what is a non-substantive change most the corrections in the code correction ordinances are non-you been substantive in terms of spelling and mistake, cross-references that are obsolete because of code changes and some of the other things described in mr. sharps report it changes the land use designation you know any eye district or adds or subtract something there is a notion under the brown act a

substantive change the notice wouldn't have lead a person or public to understand would have been included in the ordinance and so our board coincidental reviews every change and every amendment to determine whether it is to the brown act. >> is there any non-sufficient change actually been substantive mr. star. >> article 2. >> well, the article 2 not to make the subjective changes but there were some to this 0 ordinance is putting back those words substantive changes they were part of the original ordinance. >> okay. >> so there could be. >> i mean every change i've gone over several times to make

sure with the city attorney's office if you're uncomfortable don't include it, it is in case we find another wrong reference or something you didn't care in this ordinance. >> commissioner moore. >> mr. star is standing there his hill son represented a concise comment on questions she had particularly related to deleting recommendation number 5 is that something you already heard or thinking about i found her posing issues were convincing, however, trust our own work i'm supporting the questions i'd like to hear from you what your thoughts are about what she said. >> well, i mean i certainly don't inintentionally add

anything that is not substantive the city attorney went there a thorough process so i have faith in the system we have to make sure there are not a lot of substantive changes and what we would be looking at if we missed an error that the code publisher has found in other references this is the first i've heard of her objection. >> i basically would prefer not to have recommendation 5 myself that leaves the review and the city attorney schek rather than making changes i'll be more comfortable with that. >> the city attorney office has an combishlg review that will be reviewed by a separate entities

in the city attorney's office for non-substantive. >> will it came back to you. >> oh, yeah. i work directly with the city attorney's office. >> seems a dir of responsibility i don't want to see spelled out if this particular recommendation. >> i mean praepz perhaps to the recommendation of item 5 to clarify the let the city attorney's office in conversation with the planning department add an additional non-substantive ordinance that is stating what the fact is. >> i'd like to have it would give me the feeling you're doing business as you you usual i'll be more comfortable having that added thank you mr. sanchez an amendment with addressed verbiage of what you just said.

>> is that okay with the maker of the motion. >> i didn't follow. >> the planning department in council in accomodation with recommendation number 5 and the confusion with recommendation 5 that is the practice anyway that the city attorney makes the non-substantive changes by calling it out is a mistake to call it out if we took it out that's substantive and non-sub thank you very much have to cock it is walked taking it out but pit it in this whole conversation is non-substantive we've wasted people's time if so the practice i'm fine. >> i know more than some of us. >> i mean, we all know with the

city attorney in communication with the planning department makes the non-substantive i don't want non-substantive changes coming back there is clear in the motion or whatever los angeles i'm fine. >> with other ordinances they're more specific and concrete but they only deal with one section this is dealing with six or eight articles of the codes we may founded something that is not found here. >> but if there is a reference to correct you make the changes to the board i want to be clear every change whether substantive or non-substantive gets in there and approved by the board; right? >> they're not made post that's why we are doing it as long as we're clear and you're clear non-substantive changes don't have to come back.

>> i believe the request was about more accurately describing the current practices it that accurate didn't ask for non-substantive changes to come back but the planning department is playing a role as the city attorney's office. >> i'm comfortable with the substantive as proposed by commissioner moore. >> please call the question. >> commissioners there is a motion and a second to adapt a recommendation for approval with amendment as proposed to address planning department communication; is that correct? >> yes. >> commissioner antonini. >> commissioner hillis commissioner moore commissioner richards commissioner wu so moved, commissioners, that motion passes 5 to zero and places yon item 11.

>> the second street for the certification of the final supplemental environmental impact report. >> good afternoon commissioner wu and members of the commission i'm deborah from the environmental planning the planning department i'm joined by two colleagues also, if the viable planning in addition to christine and michael from the san francisco public works and allen from the san francisco sfmta are here to answer questions you may have about second street i want to clarify the purpose unlike many of the projects with the certification

of the eir no project approvals are before the commission the request whether the irs and the procedures for which that was prepared comply with the california environmental quality act or ceqa the ceqa guidelines of the san francisco administrative code and that it is accurate and adequate with respect to its analysis the second street improvement project jurisdiction for this project approval is with the sfmta board of directors with the sunset approvals by the board of supervisors and caltrain there will be an sfmta board hearing in the next tuesday beginning at one p.m. for consideration of approval of the second street improvement project given this hearing is only about the informational document that serves to inform the

decision-makers will the environmental effects of the project questions or comments of the meters will appropriately be maids to the sfmta director of public works next week i mean, i'll provider a brief summary and address some housekeeping matters project sponsor will construct the following improvements between market and king street as part of proposed project will there will be widened sidewalks to townsend and in the northbound and southbound directions break-in and pedestrian signal phases along the corridor and transit boarding islands and ada curb ramps and street trees and the installation of trash and bike racks and beverages and pedestrian lighting and repaving the asphalt curb to curb the

travel los angeles along second street will be reduced two in each direction to one in each direction left-hand turn will be restricted and before constructing those streetscape improvements the water main between market and howard will be replaced and sewers will be rehabbed and replied in addition existing overhead utilities are underground on second street to townsend street the project variant was from input from an area residents that use the southbound turn and the vanity is the same as the corner project except for second and brannan there will be no separate signal on the south

side the - a lastly because prongs construction would not occur until there the sfmta will implement the bike facilities not involving construction but will reconfigure the right-of-way for pedestrian safety that will consist of a bike on market and two bicycle lanes on second street subsequent to the publication it was delivered an error in a table related to intersection 19 and in impact statement for the cumulative impact on townsend street level of service from second and brandon as a result was lifted as level of service c but should

be l o s d those are acceptable levels of service and relates only to the proposed project not to the project variance the variant was committed in the discussion incorrectly but was corrected on draft eir there would be no cumulative traffic impact on second and 2 henry adams as a result of the variance and for the commission to document those changes and copies are available to public on the table those changes do not present new information that will alter the conclusions presented in the draft eir and not trigger to circulate the new draft eir to ceqa this response to comments e-mails were sent to you and to the environmental review officer

walk sf and the bicycle coalition the e-mails first and foremost express support for the projects you, however, one e-mail was the notice of violation for the lack of transportation enforcement, alternative streets for bicycle traffic and other because those e-mails were received in the last week and a half we didn't include them they office support coming from the meriting by the sfmta board and or other decision makers in addition the comments addressed in the rtc like traffic congestion and enforcement one comment is public notice the noticing completed e completed was plying with the ceqa and the administrative code other e-mail was sent from mary miles she

passed a letter during the comment period and all the points were addressed in the rtc in addition in her e-mail she made other points i'll address now the eir was prepared in order for it to comply with ceqa and must comply with the fell funding public works is working with caltrans local assistance office as at delete lead office for the process certification of the eir will not violate any requirements the environmental process has adams the public opportunities the comments and concerns are acknowledged and provided to the project team and decision-maker excluding the sfmta director of public works and board of supervisors and

caltrans those are not required to be addressed the analysis and conclusions in the draft eir and rtc are supported by analysis that was conducted using appropriate methods transportation impact study has all intersections study area those accounts are used fosz by the community in the traffic analysis summarized in the internal revenue the first street intersections were inadvertently left out of the response to mary miles in response provided to her on august 10th traffic analysis for those intersections was included in the draft eir cumulative analysis conducted for the project compiles with ceqa for such analysis and the reasonable signages for the warriors were included in the

analysis and the other items raised in the e-mail were addressed in response to the comments having addresses those matters i'd like to conclude any presentation in the supplemental environmental impact report found the prelims wasn't found the significant and unavoidable environmental reviews for traffic and intersections and for removal of commercial loading spaces along the corridor and in addition the project will requirement in a significant impact others 14 intersections and contribute to the loading impacts therefore the mta board of directors as well as the board of supervisors will need to adopt a override pursuant to ceqa as i mentioned

the sfmta board meeting is august 18th at one p.m. in this room a copy of the environmental impact report certification motion for the supplemental to the planning eir for the eir is before you it was published under case the public hearing on the drafts eir was held before i on march 19, the public comment period closed on march 30th the response was published by the planning department and sound-proofed on jill 30th we'll respectfully request the commission adopt the motion that certifies that the contents are accurate and adequate and pursuant to the final eir was complying with the provisions of ceqa and the ceqa guidelines and

31 of the administrative code that concludes my presentation. unless the commissioners have questions. >> no, thank you. >> so staff help me if i get this right we'll open up for public comment only on the matter of certification is this accurate. >> yes. the peanut butters on the draft eir closed. >> any public comment. >> 3 b employees have been work on this project since 2002 it was fantastic i have to pinch myself to see it is real thank you very much and i hope you

certificate the eir today. >> thank you. next speaker. >> ms. johnson instructions i i've not no response on this arrest i'd like to see more accurate statement why we get it likely to do more planning full report to understand what i'm saying to make it clear to everyone thank you. >> is there any additional public comment. >> good afternoon, commissioners i'm poob low the second street caption manager for the bicycle coalition thank you for considering this eir

that's been a long time coming i have with mia hundred letters of support with about 20 businesses along the corridor we support this project and the certification of this eir gone through tremendous community process i want to thank the staff at sfmta and it's been literally years of committee mergers meetings with residents and businesses and in private and in public meetings i just want to support the process that limitations this eir and some of the finding as well thank you for supporting this. >> next speaker and please do silence all mobile devices. >> good afternoon pat the president of the sobering mission association we cover the area of second street we're very much in support of the project and support it going forward it

is important for the merchant to have is safe reinstructed street so people can move carefully and stop at stores we support the project going forward thank you very much. >> commissioner wu and commissioners, thank you for your time i'm a resident of the second street i want to encourage you to support the actual certifications of the eir and echo the other comments in terms of the process this has get off the ground gone through and the outreach he welcome the opportunity to have a wider sidewalk for my kids and communities and for the visitors of the community as well as the mobile transportation opposed this provides i welcome our support thank you. >> is there any additional public commeypublic comment and

public comment is closed. >> commissioner antonini. >> i have some concerns the scope of the project i'm hard end to hear second street a controversial a cut was made in 1968 it ruined a lot of the residents it opened the area up in china baseline for transport for public to get through that this particular critical because of rincon hill because we have fremont and first streets dead end at the bridge no assess so anyone moving to the south has to go to main or beale or over to third street and fourth the only thing so you would this could be changed some analysis in the eir but are we putting

too much on second streets particularly the buses if you're limiting it to one lane for traffic oftentimes the busses will be in the middle of that lane and nothing will move at all so i think we need to look at this situation it turns out it is a total stalemate of moving we can move those to/13 there is a lot more room perhaps buses only lane going southbound on third with all the other traffic going northbound as it don't notice and it might move but we're moving in the right direction it is included as the grounding of the utilities and the sewer replacement which is separate issue but it was analyzed concurrently with the

changes on the streets itself that's fine so i just think as well as we're sensitive to look at this whole project and reanalyzing after the opening the central subway this has to be something that moves quickly from the time it comes out of the ground to cross china baseline for the traffic to move quickly to mission bay over and over the transit rather to move quickly to mission bay we have to make sure that that particular corridor is able to move quickly and analysis any changes on second street with the assessment that's complete and commissioner johnson. >> thank you very much. >> definitely i agree with a lot of what commissioner said

with the environmental impact report and the subsequent eir their analyzing the proposed project original and the changes in a way that makes sense to me and adequate with ceqa again, we don't do the project approval that is the sfmta but i'd like to say that i think this would be a really great change for the neighborhood i know that it is a little bit jagger to see about 26 intersections that will have worsening traffic conditions in the short time with the central subway and hopefully with the caltrans electrical lines fleekt the street and the additional new lines we'll see change in the mode of transport in terms of t

>> good afternoon and wait a moment to the san francisco planning commission regular meeting any kind. please silence any devices that may sound off during the proceedings. speak directly into the microphone. and when speaking before the

commission, if you care to, do state your name for the record. commissioners commissioners, we left off on items 12 and 13 that had been called together 302 silver avenue an appeal the night negative declaration general plan amendment zoning map and conditional use authorization. >> planning department staff as noted in here oscar pistorius remarks this is a negative declaration or pmd for little jewish home of department you should have before you an exclusive summary concerns of the appellant the copy of the letter and the negative declaration and a draft motion upholding the negative declaration it is located in the

excelsior district on a 9 acre site silver avenue to the north singles the 1870s the city has provided care for the dulls for the jewish home they submitted an application to the planning department that initiated the environmental review this is the demolition of the main site and construction of two sites with care units for the assisted living in the services the project includes new services for adults that reside on the home site that would be made available to the larger community in the squad car planning department lead agency is kaiser out ceqa and determined that the project with mitigation manufactured will not have an effect on the environment it was provided on

may 27th it was circulated for thirty days the department received two e-mails responses to the e-mails are included in the packet on june 1, '25 individuals prepared a letter appellants raised issues about traffic generated exclusion and noise and shadows and building height related to neighborhood character and construction effects the response is provided no exhibit a addressed the concerns of the appeal letter further we building that no substantial evidence has been in effect for an eir the staff recommends they uphold the negative declaration because the project will not result in significant environmental

impacts and no eir is required i'm available to answer any questions very much. >> thank you. >> good afternoon commissioner wu and members of the planning commission i'd like to take the opportunity in a planning department staff the item before you is a request to adapt an recommendation of approval for the amendments to the general plan and general map and the ceqa and for the qualifying of the existing jewish home as michael mentioned at the residential care facility for the elderly occupying a 4 city block in the mission neighborhood home has been in existence since 1871 since 1923 the home would propose the new construction of two new

buildings 2 hundred 565 square feet and 80 feet in height up to 2 hundred and 10 residents for more additional retains the home will provide up to 48 hundred use of ground floor used for admitting frontage to achieve the goal described a lot of as mentioned the home seeks to create a special district for the map 5 pertaining to the map and the shadowing that limits the height and bulk to 40 feet and the digital feet it includes a zoning map for a special use district on map 11 to how the boundaries by silver avenue and

affordable housing lop and other avenues the zoning map will be map 11 for a health and bulk of memorizes it shows the height planning code adds a establishment of the jewish home special use integrity. >> the f e d a planned modification to allow a limited amount of non-residential uses not only for residents 90 in the vicinity it is innovating not limited to the medical use and catch-22 ring with the harmonies of liberty; acute sites and such as religious facilities and administrative office space sud will allow a floor area up to 2.1 to 1 with individuals for

the floor area for the district will not exceed 8 to one and additional it allows up to 24 parking spaces for the facility and finally it requires that is equivalent to the sud district for the identifying signs shabby permitted the text of the general plan has changed since may for the appeal i have signed copies of the ordinances here. >> to date at department has received 5 letters from the members of the public and others concerns recommended to the removal of trees and the active front street and the parishes two letters were sent for the negative declaration that was published as mentioned on may 27, 2015,

since the may 21st hearing the home has met with the council of the neighborhood organization and the supervisorial 11 in addition to the community meetings and presentations presented to a number of neighborhood groups in the area those railroad mentioned on the may 21st initiation department recommendations that the adaptation of approval for the board of supervisors to the general plan planning code and zion map amendments the department recommends the authorization pursuant to section 43 and allow the zoning district and the jewish home of california special use districts as well as make the ceqa finding and adopt the monitoring and reporting program as exhibit c of the conditional use

authorization that concludes my presentation. i'll be happy to answer any questions. >> so i believe now we'll take the appellants so the 5 appellants will have a 10 minute times period. >> good afternoon, commissioners my name is grace i'm a resident of one 43 in san francisco i have signatures and letters and some maps signatures and letters were written by people who are want to appeal the p in the wrong direction m.d. and the maps illustrate something we'll be talking about as a resident of the excelsior neighborhood residents that will be directly impacted by the planned project at silver i want to voice the concerns regarding

the environmental review the sizing size and scope of the project will result in a number of environmental issues including traffic impact their noise and pollution is an issue along with the post new entrance at avalon and lyndon with idling cars and an issue significant traffic safety issue with cars. >> (speaking foreign language.) >> from avalon from either direction in addition to more traffic of the increased density through the issue and people coming and going turning into. >> out of lyndon street and cross lyndon in the direction of excelsior it is a death trap sewer and water potential water drainage issues due to impact of the removal of natural surface

drainage with the grass area with buildings with different surfaces many trees with decades the growth on avalon and mission is contradict to the effort plan not mitigated by the fewer planted trees there is noise pollution to the surrounding area from the electrical generators and noise from any rooftop appliance is from further distances t if plaid higher and lake light pollution from the artificial lighting from the retail sections could have potential to be a nuisance to neighborhoods in the view point and a great loss of

natural light in the immediate area with the proposed under consideration or increase in building density and in conjunction with doubling the currently doubling height to feet per as a result of those environmental concerns we respectfully request the board consider rejecting the pmd and ask for a full environmental review prepared thank you. >> hi, i'm rich a resident on avalon which is directly across in the jewish home in the excelsior district as a representative of the neighbors it is directly impacted through silver i'd like to voice our opposition regarding the request for a general plan amendment

allowing the maximum height to triple from the existing 40 feet height limit the jewish home is also zoned rfp to allow for a health of 40 feet while hundred percent of the adjacent lots surrounding the jewish home are rh1 with a maximum height of 35 which is 5 feet lower than the jewish home the existing zoning is greater than the existing buildings allowing sdooep to increase to up to hundred and 20 feet the jewish home has 3 hundred heights greater than other buildings in the surrounding area currently along mission street no buildings higher than 3 stories and most buildings are one and two stories below the height limit of rh1 zoned area

elevation is hundred and 20 needed for the jewish home is the tall itself building along the excelsior corridor setting precedence for other changes of character of our rh1 zoned neighborhood you should have copies the zoning map and as you can see the jewish home in the center which is the zone you'll see around it is our rh1 zoning so you as you can see within a miles radius not more than an rh2 so approving this in the zone will have a significance impact on that neighborhood and going to forever change this is a very important change i strongly recommend you not

accept the zoning changes proposed maybe support from some neighbors but those are noted representative the strong opposition of the residents within the immediate area unlike they're impacted by the development we've submitted over 32 signatures from people the right way adjacent to the property that are posted the zoning changes in the vicinity and on behalf of the residents of the surrounding neighborhood i respectfully ask the board to listen to the residents of the immediate area and protect the zoning of the area rejecting the zoning zoning changes at silver thank you for your time. >> hi i live across the street

from the jewish home as a neighbor of the excelsior that will be impacted by silver i want to voice our opposition to the conditional use authorization to allow the development exceeding 10 thousand square feet parking is severely limit in the neighborhood it is currently worsened by the parking in the street 247 the addition of 2 hundred and 10 more residents some of whom will have cars and visitors along with the projected hundred and 25 additional staff and volunteers will have cars and the vehicles of the 2 hundred projected daytime clients deferred by the square will impact the extremely limited street parking surrounding the judiciously home they're proposing an additional of 24 to 46 challenges and even

bigger concern regarding the traffic is. >> (speaking foreign language.) >> on avalon it has my blind corridors the proposed entrance at listen done will increase the traffic and add more traffic in general many school children and families from the alternative school and the boys and girls center are at risk because the. >> (speaking foreign language.) >> and high density the traffic will impact the neighborhood it jewish home has not proposed to remedy any of the issues shich providing crosswalks and electronic. >> (speaking foreign language.) >> signs, etc. similar exists at the corner of avalon on behalf of the residents i

respectfully ask the board protect the existing zoning of various areas thank you. >> thank you. >> okay we'll openly to the project sponsor you have 10 minutes. >> good morning, everyone. commissioners i'm pamela duffey i'm with the law firm of duffey and basis and represent the jewish home in that matter i'll be very brief i know you have a large calendar i'm here to reexpress the support it was contained in our july 20th letter and urge you to share that support for the departments determination they have been some concerns

impressed by appellants that the department the a light job and responded objectively with the negative declaration in the first place there has been no evidence presented to the department that i know struggled through to come up with the responses to inform the appropriate effects and those concerns and there are fun the jewish home project does not present any negative declaration and the solution volts ceqa in this circumstance so hope you support the department uphold the negative declaration and continue with the project thank you very much. >> thank you. >> good afternoon. my name is a daniel the ceo the jewish home in san francisco and held that post for 13 years i want to thank you. the commissioners

and of any person(s) responsible for the ringing or use of a and supporter our mission to enrich the elderly juice and non-juice we currently serve 3 hundred and 740 skilled residents and patient the home is the largest nonprofit provider in the state of california we have rated a 5 star facility for quality of care, the highest possible ranking next slide, please for many years the jewish home run is a deficit made up in philanthropy medi-cal's was cut this time by thirty percent it threatened our existence based on our hard work were successful in having our medi-cal rate be run states but left with a

liability of $18 million we're still having to deal with that captioners underscored the jewish home to flow score the needs those factors with the aging baby boomers and the recognize those baby boomers have different needs and exception for prior generations and prefer to live at home or a more residential like community 3 the urgent need to change our financial model to reduce the unreliable and silencing federal and state money as well as you think sustainable levels of philanthropy and four finally the need to address our seismically changed infrastructure which is not are regretting the changes next slide, please the result is our project that involves and advances our mission and keeps us in the excelsior

we will have the ability to serve an additional 2 hundred and 48 assistant residents on our campus in addition, we know that many elderly adults they'll suffer from loneliness and depression and challenging for they're what wear proposing as part of this project a revolutionary new model called the new scare that supports the family members and caregivers that point to continue to live did not in the community but able to come to one local to have their social and needs met it will increase the availability and accessibility of primary care among the city's

more vulnerable elderly adults in short this enhances model of care that concludes assisted living will help us better serve older adults and provides a ribbon hood approach we will help to substance those better insulating late the home from budget cuts i'm going to turn it over to rick williams. >> good afternoon rick williams with the architect designers in san francisco we're working with the architect in portland who specialize in elderly and senior care there's been a long desire from the jewish home to connect strongly with the neighborhood in the excelsior particularly along mission street and relate

to the concerns and work within the neighborhood the existing a campus is a community made up of separate interconnected building that functions well of a different time and don't create the community of the future the plan to remove 9 campuses two out mode buildings and to tie the campus together through landscape and new buildings of a contemporary nature i'd like to take a moment to what you around and through the campus the silver avenue entry continues to be the main entrance and exit the parking lot will substantially remain in and function as it dones today, we'll add sub parking under the

memory facility the mission in silver avenue plaza is being upgraded and transformed and at a city's request we've closed the other assess to the campus that was at miblth because that's a transit first policy for mission there will be a new mixed use urban frontage with active retail and seating areas along mission street that is desired by the city and supported by the community the second new industry is locked on london street and avalon avenue for the new assisted living and memory care facility particularly care is taken along that edge of avalon we'll describe it further in a moment and also at the request of the community along lyndon we're providing dshlg parking now a

little bit more daily at mission and silver tla gateway there's a desire for community upgrades it explicit supportive everything today, the new plaza provides new seating and additional lighting and discussing gateway signage with the community for the excelsior along mission street will be transformed with a strong new urban presence that is desired with wide sidewalks for the better streets program and new active retail and new streetscape opportunities as well seating particular the existing corner of avalon and lyndon which will be transformed into a new plaza and retail the cafes and then we'll extend the

mission street from the existing retail across to the south and along our frontage of admission and then we'll be changing the character as we precede up avalon avenue because that is a residential street as we precede up we'll see how you'll see how we've responded to the fact it is a remain street in the neighborhood so avalon avenue we think of this site that there is an extensive evaluation we've take advantage by not impacting views from above and then along avalon after the existing photo to the left shows avalon at lyndon street intersection and the new building which will be lower than the height limit will also fit into the neighborhood and

step down the streets as thank you you, your time has expired i assume the commissioners have more questions so two or three more minutes. >> one minute if we can if you can too the next slide as you can see avalon avenue enterprise and london from above we've reduced the frontage along avalon to minimize the effect and maintain the cypress trees and stepped down and the new trees along the street will be screening the new buildings from the neighbors across the street and we have retained the setback of the existing buildings so they're not directly on the street but a step away and down and the additional height is

actually stepped significantly back if avalon avenue and shouldn't have an impact on the neighborhood we feel this is next slide, please. >> an in closing i'd like to say we feel this will bring a new energy to mission street and create an active neighborhood and the new community will help to meet the expansion of the jewish home and continue to serve the senior community for years to come we thank you and our entire team it here to answer any questions. >> open up for public comment if i call your name, please line up on the screen see of the room (calling names). >> hi good afternoon, commissioners my name is france shaw i'm here on behalf of

supervisor john alavos and to talk about items 13 and we're here to express our support for the proposed project at 302 silver avenue we've been working with the team at the jewish home for quite sometime and seen little project develop and view the particular concern for the supervisor has been the proponents community engagement efforts we've worked with them over the course of the years to we believe they've got it right and done more robust engagement with the community groups that are telegraph hill involved not only in mission street but in district 11 in general they've also really been sensitive in taking a great approach to the news of non-english speakers we have a significant amount in our district and immediate residents

on the project itself they've been open to incorporating neighborhood feedback we're happy to see the newest ratings arbitrations it reflects a number of changes from neighborhood groups and neighbors for the project itself you know at&t's as you've heard the jewish home services the vulnerable in the xoifr and bay area for a long time and we believe this proposed captains will allow many of to continue in the excelsior a growing demand and you know state of the art facilities it is really something that our neighborhood deserves we urge to you forward this to the board of supervisors and the plan to sponsor the panning of the legislation hooimz /* i'm

available to answer any questions you may have. >> next speaker >> 2011 a fran ginsburg a practitioner i've visited the jewish home over the last 20 or 25 years in different capacities now i'm retired a volunteer for the bay area jewish healing self-center i visit people at the end of their life i also worked with carries for many years and been inside and outside of retirement homes in the city my experience is anytime the reliance of a facility can have interactions with the community and the community for them does nothing you benefits the parties the redesign will help that to happen i hope you'll consider that thank you. >> thank you.

>> hi, i'm dixie i was dressed do the longest and short time care which any 87-year-old husband fell breaking his hip and requiring a heart pacemaker that requires a rehabilitation stay i was assured that the jewish home rightfully earned their reputation of the best facility in the area and so i began to navigate as a caregiver of my husband first in the short time of the rehabilitation unit and vivifying in the long term unit i building that reputation is warranted as well my husband and i ate and exercised as carefully it presented challenges we couldn't

foresee plan for or avoid i count the jewish home as a miracle i encourage to make their plan to they can continue enormous services that is now needed. >> thank you. >> as the next speaker comes up i'll call more names (calling names). >> good afternoon, commissioners. >> ma'am, could you please pull the microphone down. >> good afternoon, commissioners and everybody i'm representing the seiu union working and at the same time seiu and the jewish home for 23 years i want to support this

project of the jewish home because i can see this proposed project will improve the excelsior and bring much needed jobs to the area this project is expected to generate up to 2 hundred jobs part time positions in addition to the construction needs not only that but there will be an overwhelming impact on the economy in general but the workers including those employed by i architect and engineers and others consultants that are engaged in this project as well as the factories and local shops will impact the excelsior district economy in a positive way so i strongly urge you to approve the jewish home project

i thank you, very much. >> thank you. >> next speaker >> hi my name is dei'm from san francisco but currently enrolled in college of new york city i've had a connection to the jewish home and my great-aunt sarah was in a crisis she was two frail to live where she was after a major health event i remember the tremendous relieve when they moved into the home she showed us something different about the art room or some nurse she had a great connection with or introduced me to at lunch they came to the jewish home in a

crisis and thrived and spider by the homes work i became a volunteer at the age of 12 and tutored a woman while i was 12 rachel came to my bar mitzvah on air aid and i came to hers that experience with my aunt and rachel left a mark on any life and heart and brought me back to the home to intern i'm looking for to make sure the times in history as the jewish home it plays a vital role i hope you commissioners will approve this so the home will continue to expand to the most vulnerable aging dulls in san francisco and maybe some of us in this room

thank you very much. >> thank you. >> good afternoon, commissioners and thank you so much for allowing me to speak i have been - thank you. >> i have been active at the jewish poem e home for over thirty years i was president of the women's auxiliary and their goal in the auxiliary was to enrich the lives i was president of the jewish home now the chair of the jewish home foundation i feel deeply about the homes mission to serve the elderly and to enrich the quality of life for the residents my father noah valley who was the past president was a resident for 10 years being a resident of the home allows one family not to

worry 24/7 they know they're loved one is well cared for our campus has understandably we understand the need for the jewish home to upgrade i truly support the jewish home project and recommend that the planning commission approve the application thank you. >> thank you. >> as the next speaker comes up i'll call more names (calling names). >> good afternoon. my name is a stephanie i'm the executive director of the excelsior action group group building the jewish home project will enhance the excelsior as an organization that works to achieve the corridors the aging can attest

the retail space and straight and landscaping will be an welcomed addition to the corridor mover we recognize the robust efforts to local community members and organizations we are encouraged to see how community feedback is incorporated into the design from increasing the square footage of retail space to beautifying the plaza known as penguin plaza we hope to create a co-he has neighborhood and look forward to supporting the jewish home and assist in this process we're looking forward to this project coming to fruition and it sets an example for future projects and please support this project thank you very much. >> thank you. >> next speaker

>> commissioners my name is paul and coming to you on a personal basis both my parents were jewish home or arrived there in 2002 and my mothers since passed away but my father turned hundred on august 9th and still there and i can't tell you how grateful i am. for the quality of the jewish home my father and mom were holocaust survivors my father was a musician never able to accomplish that in his life at the jewish home they have a lot of pianos and he started playing and played in all the building that are under and became very popular and made his life very

worthwhile i'm very proud of what the jewish home has done to support my family and i'm very in favor of the expansion thank you. >> thank you. >> good afternoon, commissioners my name is mike my mother has been at the jewish home since february of this year a lot of what i've heard of the aging baby boomers and the help and where are the people going to go we are living proof of that my mother was downloading diagnosed with dementia but didn't the the resources to take care of home

share or the brain power after trying to take care of her myself over a year i it was clear i couldn't do that you look and say i want to feel safe they'll feel safe and the jewish home has done that it's an amazing place my mom is really happy and thriving as all the people mentions my mothered is a medi-cal patient no difference in how they treat her i just wanted to show you briefly this was my mother who she was when i grew up when i knew her this is who she today she's thriving and smiling because of the jewish home i ask you approve this thank you.

>> good afternoon, everyone. commissioners my name is hayley a san francisco residents and he would at the community church in the excelsior and the co-founder the food pantry you'll find the letter from our pantry last summer we lost our old location and the jewish home offered a new space to provide 3 hundred families every saturday with free groceries those are families with children would come with their children those are seniors and multi currently group living in the 4911 community and filipinos and chinese and hispanics and

besides the food we distribute tons of food we distributor as a pantry in collaboration with the jewish home point pantry is a great way to volunteer an opportunity for the volunteers we'll have volunteers from local residents in want community you know local private and public high schools, middle and high schools in san francisco unified and beyond and partnerships with other groups into the bay area even east bay and south bay the jewish home was a great place when we were looking for a new location other partners we were trying to negotiate with only interested in charging us rent we're true partners with the jewish home and there's no rent involved in this at all they truly want to help the community

that they live in and you know the besides that i just want to point out in the a agrees collaboration that was born out of love our pastor and others met at the wedding that's how we formed the collaboration and there's a clear intention i see from all of my abstractions with all the staff and volunteers at the jewish home they want to serve the community and especially the families in the excelsior and we really hope that the project will allow us to support the project in expanding their outreach to the community thank you. >> thank you. >> good afternoon, commissioners my name is a leslie i'm a pastor with the mission bay community church i'm

here to speak over on behalf of myself and pastor don we've been at the mission bay in the excelsior since 2008 and we start this food pantry in 2010 and serving more and more families each week throughout all the years we were able to offer this until last year, we move forward our current location was taken away we were looking for a place that we could continue to minute try to those folks if in the excelsior in deep needs of the service we were happy to find partners in the jewish home they provided an sclent site and partnership great envision how to continues to grow and serves needs in the city we're deeply concerned

about the possibility that the jewish home could go away we looked at far and wide in an area to find a place and the jewish home was the only place that 7th street to help us if they're not not neighborhood our food pantry will not in about the neighborhood and for this reason i'm requesting you, please approve little jewish homes application so they remain a neighbor in the excelsior district thank you. >> thank you. >> is there any additional public comment. >> seeing none, public comment is closed commissioner moore. >> thank you to the public for sharing their personal stories it is hard to do and i think this touched and moved and inspired but going to the

facility says it all you don't have to sit here and talk about it being there a moving experience i went there just to get a better understanding of the issues and hearing the members of the community object and hearing are really, really clear a simple story of why this facility has to be brought up to code for seismic reasons, brought up into the 21st century relative to care and health care and elderly visions the story is simple i don't find anything exceptional or extraordinary circumstances about increasing the size we're sitting here every week talking or 5 hundred foot stories that is in the 63 range i couldn't find out anything about it even formulating an option i believe

the architecture thoughtfully addresses the site by itself is like a it takes a village the new buildings that take down and demolish certain buildings is critically sensitivity dealing with demographic and tuck buildings in and preserve the building and deal with the landscape and on and on and adding a program that basically speaks to the provision i've not heard of perhaps we've heard the board talking about those but if we ever get old if you get into the depth i've heard in the presentation i couldn't believe the critically thoughtful stories i've heard which i walked around that is where it

hits home i've never seen an elderly facility with as much caring and as much claim inclusive care i've been in elderly homes quite a few of the on elm street home sharing institutions they're quite institutional through there's care but being able to live in a small vinyl that is like 1871 to be able to carry that forward into today is money and many increases in the environment is remarkable and all for all the reasons what you all personally said about your patent and what you're seeing when you see them there makes me completely supportive of your project i said the m m.d. sufficient accurate and complete.

>> i make a motion to approve. >> uphold the negative declaration and approve the project as proposed. >> second. >> we are going to take the motion separately. >> i make a personal motion. >> second. >> thank you commissioner richards. >> i'm sorry, i wasn't not able to get there i want to take a tour love to see what commissioner moore saw one of the things seeing and discovering new things never, ever would have made it auto there i want to take the chance and do that we have a large hospital very close to davis medical center i virtual understand what a hospital kind of setback amongst itself what the trees and fence it is more of a by gone era we were working with the camtc folks to engage

if the strength rae asked to have it on millie street i see the same thing happening the architecture is great what buildings we're talking about 50 or 6080 feet tops and the subtlety makes sense one thing the public comment here i'm thinking how the buildings subcontract with the neighborhood and someone brought the residents will be interacting and that's a great idea the project adds to the neighborhood and brings the homes into the 21st century a lot of community engagement we took the feedback and used it with the supervisors support we have nonprofits support i appreciate what you've done with the food bank and the nurse that spoke i'm happy to support the project congratulations. >> commissioner antonini.

>> well, i'm also very supportive of the promotions for reasons i'll state first, i should answer some of the comments that were maids out the vw for the appeal of the negative declaration staff has done a wonderful job of answering that the increase in traffic from the new project would be one .5 percent of the threshold the sintsz so minimal but operational noise increase is 3 decimals shadows are largely on site no mirror or reflective glass no reflection and the water is 4 one hundred of the percent of the retail uses in san francisco and another thing that is significant a concern about traffic from people driving they're for the uses of the

square staff has come up with 15 percent taking public transportation and 50 percent shuttles 25 by family mentioning members and only 10 percent driving a lot of the traffic concerns are answered in those figures i'm very familiar with this facility in the last 3 years i've had 3 dental patient and a couple of family members in the facility i've gotten to know it well and very impressed especially with contrasted with at place people have been moved to the jewish home, i think it is a fantastic treatment facility and as was stated earlier there are some challenges there's a seismic challenge, the lack of lierlt due to the lack of government

funding and the future patient of my age group will be coming in that direction in the next few decades the answering with the assisted living in the square are wonderful answers that is a great project there's neighborhood serving retail along mission street and i think the architectural design is beautiful can't say much to approve that maybe some small remembrance of the georgia architecture of arthur applegate if there's a place where this should be put was the key czar stadium with a remnant a kind of a nice touch by other than that everything is superb. >> commissioner moore. >> i want to say the public

side of the project i believe that the edges of the upgraded facility are sensitivity done as they integrate retail and bus staple stop in a manner of gateway and others avenues so we're comfortable how this project presents itself to the outside. >> commissioner richards and one last thought when we were working with the camtc exception around the site not permit parking so parking become an issue maybe you might want to consider permit parking around the perimeter so you get employees parking within the site and within the confines of

the site so this is something you might want to consider thank you. >> commissioner harrison. >> just want to add i agree with everything that's been said as far but the that he had in kind of calling out height we don't take height increases latin-american we're doing this because it is done architecturally well, it is justifying the height i want to compliment the way you allow mission street where we take those and have actives uses and took advantage of the grades to avalon this building through there is higher heights within the building will be per south side of along avalon number one they're not there it i want to compliment you and those who

came out and testified along avalon street you've heard from them and look around this is a typical condition along the corridor the buildings have higher and setback and we even see that on the one side of the street just want to compliment that how you the that within the site thank you. commissioner johnson. >> yeah. really quickly i'm supportive i appreciate all the work that went through this project i think that will turn out well, it is great to see something like that we were looking 5 m one the benefits senior housing people are fighting all over the city to get assisted living all over the place that is a great opportunity to expand a facility that clearly doing the great services to the communities and great job why not put more under

and continue to fight the fight in the mission and other neighborhoods to get housing for seniors and others on assisted living. >> commissioners there is a motion and a second to uphold the stem commissioner antonini. >> commissioner hillis commissioner johnson commissioner moore commissioner richards commissioner wu so moved, commissioners, that motion passes unanimously 6 to zero. >> commissioner antonini and yeah. so i'd like to make a motion for at general plan amendment for the planning code zoning map amendments and conditional use authorization second. >> there is a motion and a second for to approve the items 13 a to c as proposed commissioner antonini. >> commissioner hillis commissioner johnson commissioner moore commissioner richards

commissioner wu snoechlts e so moved, commissioners, that motion passes unanimously 6 to zero the benefit of the public items 14 ab on harrison street have been continued until september 24th why not give a minute for people to exit the chambers. >> so congratulations on your project we have further business

commissioners that places you on items 15 ab record at townsend street a request for a large project authorization and building authorization. >> good afternoon planning commission chris with the planning department staff the project is a lapsing project authorization request for the proposed office for townsend street under the large project observation their seung a

modification to the planning code regarding dynamics for /* off street loading than required by code for reference the modification pertaining to the open space was eliminate since the zoning administrator determined that the sixth floor satisfies that requirement an allocation is required for an office beyond 25 thousand square feet since the office allocation category is required project proposes to demolish an existing warehouse building on the existing two lots and construct a 5 to 765 square feet

office building with a subsidy terrain access to the rear 406 parking spaces and off street loading spaces a 25 foot pedestrian walkway connecting harriet to townsend and a expensive o comprehensive straight with noornls with the better scrape plan 11 new street trees and the bulb out including an capitalization of the sidewalk to 15 feet the proposed site is zoned western selma and located within the western selma directly if the enter state elevated freeway on the north side of townsend street between storefront a sto

6th street the office uses are vacate the zoning are saying sally to the north mission bay plan to the south and the freeway occupies the zoning designation immediately adjacent to the area has a mixed use with incremental showroom and retail and industrial mixed use warehouse uses as well live worth and buildings which occurred to the north into the and the east surrounding buildings are typically rectangular which is catalyst of the industrial of the area a number of businesses occupy harrison to the rear with

the auto repair and warehouse uses the sites setting the property is immediately occupied by the caltrain rail lines with regards to the comments with the department has frequently with a group of who have a concern it has a neck impact to they're living operations they feel the vehicular traffic congestion associated with the project willes bat harry i do not street that are already congested the business owners hidden valley high school their concerns in a my mind that is included in your packet as a result of their concerns the project sponsor has a parking assess alternative that is concerned vehicular frontage

along townsend and in collaboration with the environmental staff it was analyzed and through a transportation environmental impact report in which sfmta conducted that the proposed alternatives was stabilize and coupled with the fact that townsend has a hearer lane of traffic than brandon no interruptions along brandon for a greater negative impact to the circulation of the area just today, the staff got one letter of opposition president with the heritage group business owners and one letter of general support from a local residents that race one concern that the building may negatively impact the fumes that are e not limited to if the night work companies

in the area in terms of the building height and massing and preventing that from leaving the residential area the important finding include the fact the project addresses 59 thousand plus secret that contributes to the city and los angeles townsend street it enlightened if in the policies and objectives of the square footage is outlined in the draft motion and currently underutilized the walkway to harry i do not along with the straight improvements and the plan will light even the straight it was approved ambassador the proogz by the planning department and the platinum certification it is magnificent and scale is

compatible with the architect within the neighborhood and the project will attribute $13 million towards the environmental review and unbalanced it is consistent with the objectives and goals the western selma susan from the environmental planning is available for the under the circumstances considered available to answer any questions you may have thank you. >> thank you. >> project sponsor your team has 10 minutes. >> good afternoon, commissioners thank you very much my name is teresa with alexander state entities we appreciate the opportunity to bring our 510 townsend project to you we very much presented our staffs hard work they've helped us to create a project better than it was and that

addresses many of the concerns that we are raised this is a lead project as said it implements the visions of western selma plan we're fully compliant with the plans and zoning district including the height and massing we've tried to address the concerns of the harry i do niet now my colleagu discuss the streetscape prompts and other details thank you. >> thank you. >> hi eric are the studios architecture can we have the slides please this site is located in the

western selma district that is known for its light industrial architecture and the caltrain station east of our site our proposed billing is characteristic of the earthal tip metrological of the area we're using a brick system that is commemorate with many of the buildings as well as large with these next slide, please. >> if you look at this slide the bottom elevation it i want to point out some of the detailing center area is a group of large punched windows all of them has been more than 12 inches to get

the articulation of the facade and elevation the elevation shows the two tops this is the window about 6 feet to create an arrest warrant can do that increases the pedestrians inheritance we have a 15 foot sidewalk that encompasses 11 trees 5 of them are palm trees that basically highlight the entry to the passageway and the other thing of note the location next to the 280, 6th street ramp is the it creates a gateway for the regional traffic that is, in fact, the carrier on the 280 also, if you look at this slide

this is one of the first projects that fail under the new western selma master plan we're complying with the 85 height limits along the street if you look at the context of this site the building is like on the top of east by the 280 ramp and on the right by the townsend street we're proposing a 20 foot wide landscaped be assessable is packet to harrison street. if we look at the site plan for the site a little bit closer and the first floor the tenant is providing a series of active uses other than the right and on the bottom along the passageway

those activities will create a sense of engagement between the exterior and interior we think this is also a set of ice on the passageway in terms of crime prospective and so forth the lobby is located on the intersection of the passageway and townsend street west facade looks at stepping the building down if the right the 2 henry adams street side to the north towards harriet it acknowledges the fact there are two sites the southern 85 and the northern half 65. >> here's an image of the north facade from harriet and some degree from brandon the top in the blow up of that condition. >> this is the elevation on -

well on the east side you can see the light slithering goes to where the ramp appears for the 3 lane elevation that that concludes my remarks margaret. >> good afternoon, commissioners mary do from nicholson i want to thank staff for their comprehensive and want to thank you for the opportunity for talk about the signages for project approval first of all, the project is within the scope of the western selma eir as documented in the community planning exemption the project whether not have impacts that are not identified in the previous eir second the project implements the western selma area plan to establish a mid-rise corridor on selma and in addition the project complies with the standards for the w mo

including the height and massing and parking limits and loading and bicycle parking and others in particular it provides 98 bicycle parking 29 more that is more than that is riders the only exception we're with respect to the size of the loading to accommodate the smaller vehicles in the garage that replaces 48 surface parking space with 46 underground including one car share and it has a generous 15 foot wide sidewalks and thirds it meets the requirements for an office allocation by virtual of the general plan and the western

selma the highest quality design and provision of open space and provision of employment opportunities and finally, the project will meet the requirements. a large project authorization and provides a mass and scale appropriate for the location and high quality architecture and assess consistent with with city policies and assess of codes requirements and a mid block connection and straight consistent with the better streets plan it is consistent with all the requireds for approval briefly i'm going to turn it over to teresa for communities outreach >> i'm cognizant we're short on time i want to acknowledge the comments into the harriet street recipes we tried to find an alternative approach but for the san francisco aging & adult services commission and mta we were advised it was townsend

street it should be the main sorry harriet should be the access we should add a fourth loading dock to try to alleviate some of the concerns and we wrrpt at this time request your approval for the c p and the allocation for our project on townsend street we're here to answer any questions and we'll open up for public comment i have a number of speaker cards (calling names). >> feel free to come up to the podium if your name has been

called. >> my name is warren bird i'm with california night works on grand street a frontage on harriet street we appreciate the commissioners providing the opportunity to bring our concerns to you speaking for our business we enthusiastically support the project on townsend street has embodied in the project alternative or project variant we oppose the project as presented project of this magnitude there could be impacts that are any by

definition significant those should not be addressed by either failing to identify them, or designating them as unavoidable if in fact, they are a large building requires robust vehicle access to function safely and accurate and provide a safe environment for those who work there and the community that surrounds it not simply for the street that fronts it we're requesting a continuance and additional review by the commission of the project alternatives which has been present submitted to the planning department staff by the project sponsor and the alternatives provides it's it vehicular assess if

townsend street as well the transportation impact study contains one major flaw it is absolutely incorrect in its determination of the duration the projected after about delay to the brandon street at harriet street traffic in the project with harriet street assess were approved the average current delay during the peek hour is 12 seconds the additional traffic generated by the project if 8222 vehicles would increase that detail by two seconds per vehicle this is a result of using the increase in the delay time is related to

the increase of the number of vehicles that travels eastbound into the intersection that method would be valid in the govern constraint of harriet and brandon will carry the paragraph flow, however. >> thank you. sir, your time has expired. >> could i read my last sentence. >> one sentence please. however, the governor constraints the timing of the traffic signal at the intersection of 6th street which allows one vehicle per minute to turn from harriet street into brandon street. >> thank you. next speaker. >> good afternoon i'm patricia douglas 0 my husband and i. >> speak into the mike. >> my husband and i are the

owners the building on harriet street our business in the south of market 13 years on harriet street we're completely aware of the traffic issues on the 6th street and it is near our location the area is at a level f and adding the additional vehicle and pedestrians and bicycle traffic to an already congested location is a major overburden to our section this is not the townsend street bronze but the transportation and assess associated with this project which is the inclusive use of the harriet street when an alternative was prototype by the developer there are curb cuts on townsend street which we believe should be used for egress and

ingress for the additional and not be eliminated in order to fulfill their western selma area plan traffic mitigation was apparently not on the agenda when the city agreed to the use of harriet street we all point issues traveling in p.i. any direction is and approximately the nonprofit the eastbound traffic signal changes every 7 seconds which on a good day may permit one or two possible 3 cars in the renewal to travel 6th street the legal unit will be at a standstill was not considered even is the counter a

55 brandon distinct 7th street and 8 street to sixth and brandon where the floert thrives the surface streets will be impacted and harriet is the closet to the 6th street intersection will have more than it's fair share we rely on our customers and ups. >> common carrier freight companies further eliminating access to our streets will be detrimental to our business we strongly urge to consider and approve the project alternatives thank you. >> thank you. next speaker. and. >> good afternoon, everyone. president of the matter association first of all, we should tell you on the west portal task force for a number

of years i think it is true we wouldn't approve that current way of entering and exiting of the project from harriet street we were never approached south of market were never asked about this project at all nobody poke to us about that i know this area very well and been driving past it a number of towns townsend didn't get the traffic that brandon does not even close more traffic coming from the project into harriet street you'll have good luck it is total insanity but i know how mta works and others i think the other thing on townsend there are over 14 driveways that are

zerg or exiting garages or loading docks so when you really look at this whole thing the owners and the neighbors of the businesses don't have an objection to the building it's the building is not but it will impact the businesses i have to tell you what we support as small businesses the california knife company they've been in selma over a hundred years so you commissioners we will make it hard on them we need to have small businesses in our city i urge you to not support the project as proposed thank you. >> next speaker >> commission i'm harold a separate a business on 7th

street and brandon and been so marked in a variety of ways for the quarter of a century i was involved in the enterprises on harriet street i can tell you with a certainty more congestion on harriet i've for the last 15 years operate on interstate distinct 6th street and 5 the lights at 6th street and brandon allow 40 vehicles maximum to go through this i get on the 6th street ramp every day to go home building me it's no picnic i urge to you have driveways on

townsend and this project in the 40 years i've seen this particular subject property has never used and has driveways on townsend and harriet has never used the driveways on harriet only preliminary assess if townsend this is how it should remain all the projects in the neighborhoods are great and happy to have them but this particular project this particular street is a bad idea to put all that traffic onto harriet street i ask you please thoughtfully consider the alternative that allows the traffic to come out open townsend it is nice to not have a driveway you know create townsend with a thoroughfare with mirror rise buildings but

isn't it a fact that the traffic an brandon street will anyone who wishes to speak make that a nightmare not only for harriet and townsend thank you very much. >> thank you. next speaker. >> hi, everybody i'm harry lee i've been in harriet area for the last thirty years i've been seeing a lot of changes a lot of good and a lot not so good first right of refusal as a small business owner on harriet and brandon corner i own a small business there for thirty years and a couple of small properties in the area i'm reject of oppose this

project i want to project to come to our community at the same time for me and most of my friends and almost all my customers this is going to ruin our harriet culture our san francisco culture all the businesses in the area been over 50, 60 hundred years and we've been working together very nicely no trouble no problem it does have any things on the city we clean our own streets it is a harmonic communities only concern i have is i don't want harriet street to become highway for this mega buildings i wish we could do something about it if not what i want to

know is what this project can help our communities i don't want to see harriet as a dead end street it ever see even before it is never a dead he said street always the traffic to go through the harriet street is the only street for that the past hundred, hundred 50 years the major entrance but notice to mega building becomes a bad entrance we want to see this building to see to harriet street as a communities as a main street for all the people in this area

that's all i can say thank you very much. >> thank you is there any additional public comme comment. >> my name is hillary johnson i think that no other - the traffic jammed up on this project for harrison to be more friendly instead of traffic zone and probably that building that they're talking about is probably one of the hazards to start the building at the end of the area where it won't be one of the hazards zones and make

sure that harrison building does stay open and be more convenient and this is more you don't i don't want to say i'll say later on this is a better san francisco office. >> next speaker >> hi, i'm eric and retained that lives nearby i'm favorable for this building but i want to also reiterate what the other speakers said no way it harriet has less traffic than pa brandon the second light during rush hour harriet street is backed up for blocks both ways and 2 henry adams is almost always clear i don't know what traffic study

would say i've lived here for over a year in the area and 8 years not seen townsend busier than brandon i have a concern about the size of the building possible blocking the flow of the air because of the families that come from the local businesses i was warned about this when i bought my property i'm not trying to get anybody in trouble it can get smellly maybe a infiltratetion because the building is blocking the flow of air it may not have an effect at all but something to think about in the future that's all. >> thank you. >> is there any additional public comment. >> okay public comment is closed. >> commissioner antonini. >> yeah. he think this is a very good project i'm supportive but i do have a question for mr.

guy. >> he's not the staff. >> sorry not our project sorry. >> yes. >> okay. i think you said there was an exist parking lot at the end of harriet that has 48 or 50 parking spaces. >> that's right. >> and sound like your proposing 46 approximately the same number. >> that's right. >> so my assumptions are correct thanks i have thoughts on that it's a very good project completely compliant with wrmg eir and the plan itself it has already leased from what i think so the project leasing is what i believe a tech company there is typically a little bit less use of automotive use

they're providing 98 pays and the parking spaces is now the case i'm at a loss to see the difference of the impact as opposed to to what the skai case it i won't be opposed to an entrance think townsend if the city thinks this is acceptable looks like you get in there one way or another didn't make any difference but the back up everyone assumes everyone is leaving at the same time maybe the lights on harriet is an engineering problem changing the eliminate to allow more times for the traffic out of how far i do not otherwise everything is fine this project generates $13 million in fees and appraise a lot of jobs and provide you

know the beginning of what we're hoping to do in western selma but it is important that you know we tale with any traffic problems so i'll see what my fellow commissioners have to say but i'm fwlafr the project with the flexibility in my mind to allow the city to put the entran whatever they feel is the most best place for parking and commissioner richards. >> this is an ad to the neighborhood but the folks on selma the egress and ingress for traffic and loading up to this point i'm waving in any supports on alley street away from the neighbor street but harriet is a bit of a different case i've

looked at this it looks like brandon is much more congested than 2 henry adams. >> curve cut to create a better experience on 2 henry adams, however, we're putting a peak p.m. 97 car trips act out of an hour we have 62 delivery trips if you look at harriet i wish i'd gone out there this is a tight street and businesses been there i have to thank the folks from the knife group that put together the plans to figure out how to figure out the calculations per day and week what type of vehicular activity with the ups and express customers all that stuff i could go either way i'm looking perhaps taking some of the traffic on townsend and

leaving on harriet pitting all the traffic on harriet is too much perhaps the deliveries on harriet with the 4 spaces but we as will vehicular traffic on townsend putting all on harriet is too much. >> commissioner hillis. >> so, i mean i understand we face this issue with the residential projects as to whether we put parking entrance on an alley or on the main street it is a trade offs we're going to do everything we can were trying to activate townsend and make that more walkable and there are not situations so detrimental to townsend to shift that before i to townsend although i get the folks on

harriet issue that will certainly change the character of harriet if you look at the pictures there's a basketball court on google maps someone put on columns to block off spaces it is a sleeping i didn't street that will be impacts there will be 40 more cars on that street who are assessing the garage not a huge impact but you know you may not be able to play basketball on the street because of additional traffic the 5 times the amount of traffic is a bit overblown how we calculate traffic we were talking that is based on square footage we're assuming the traffic study says 96 more vehicles it can't be 96 there are only 46 that is the square footage of the building not necessarily how many cars

will be on there so that's not going to happen it will be less so it is a trade off for us we said it will impact harriet not huge you know, i think it will change it from the character of being somewhat someone's private driveway for the businesses there to an alley but still kind of a sleepy out but the trade off not a occur cut on townsend but industry and there's a cafe they're proposing on townsend and other businesses the accuracy is on townsend the trade off we add more potential confidentiality between percent and trucks and traffic on townsend so i understand the issue that i lien to harriet

street and keep the feeling of townsend as we develop on townsend street. >> thank you thank you i think this is a well within the what was envisioned in the western selma overall this is a great project i agree it is definitely challenging to think about the vehicle traffic no choice that that will involve some sort of compromise actually, i live in this area he bike commute and ride downtown i'm aware of the issues in the area the reason i support the project as proposed the compromises for harriet are less than the one on townsend we're

looking at townsend as it currently exists and that is showing much more potential conflict than a brandon townsend has a 20 to thirty percent more traffic no sidewalks on that part of townsend but still percent and cars that are going to 280 and trying to get to ball games in the wrmg and sfmta plan the traffic that will come from the improvements and completion of the motorbike project including the enough warriors arena i already see the conflicts on townsend student are potentially a little bit more than we want to consider approving below an option that used harriet as an entrance for the cars i agree with commissioner greaves that the transit - the impact study

looked square footage but only calls for 46 vehicle spaces that is doubling what is there to some stent so i definitely think the project works as proposed it would have been nice i'll say it would have been nice to see discussion on the staff report i felt last week it was challenge as a commissioner to compare and contrast but overall i agree with the project as proposed. >> could i ask staff to talk about the process continue environmental and sfmta. >> thank you commissioner wu and commissioner susan so we met with the neighbors last fall and they brought the exit harriet streets activities and the project design for the access on

harriet we misdemeanor our access to look at o and in the pi f we did sovereigty analysis for harriet and the activities and adams the project and alternative access on townsend street as requested to the transportation analysis to be circulated internally and the staff for their feedback following that analysis we found a few things one the project will not have a significant additional impact that wasn't identified for 6th street and brandon that is considered on a ceqa level and secondly mta came back in their comments they'll not support that project alternative access an townsend merely base it's a bicycle corridor with the exciting

bicycle traffic on townsend street leading to the caltrain corridor they especially\think that was consistent with their goals for making bicycle safety access and thirdly, we meet internally with the policy project meeting to other planning staff as well as mta and our analysis indicated in our consideration came out we support the alternative access on townsend ones because that's a bicycle corridor a vision zero hi impact corridor as designated by the city and putting that kind of vehicle access and choosing the access on townsend over the pedestrian bicycle safety on townsend was not something we'll support that's our analysis. >> okay commissioner antonini. >> yeah. to staff i'm not exactly sure there's confusion

will the parking is the addition or the parking for this project in addition to what is there or parking there eliminated as part of this project? >> any existing is 19116 parking spaces are part of new development that's it. >> did that mean the existing parking is removed. >> that's right no existing parking to remain. >> so we've got a wash a maybe some loading are something but i think this - the traffic study could took the worse case scenario but i don't know if the project is as large as some the proponents is actually going to be. >> that's mom and dad's.

>> as i say i'm supportive i don't think we can pass anything that gives staff the discretion to work on the parking is that possible. >> sarah jones. >> the first question with regard to the parking and the existing parking and removal our transportation impact analysis guidelines don't not consider removal of an existing parking to eliminate strips as you said it was a worse case scenario the transportation analysis does to the account for removal of spaces in reality those spaces and the corresponding trips are removed from that immediate location but secondly, our the environmental review the project description is from harriet street access so no

environmental review that covers access from townsend street i don't have concerns that any thoughts conclusions p are different from the impacts but the dimension could in the approve a project from townsend street at this point. >> thank you that answers my question you add but not subtract the suspecttion makes an assumption that the parking spaces are not there one can assume they're not usedable. >> united states assumption the trips associated with those parishes are staying in the area. >> that's not the case no place to park i'm going to move we approve the project as presented. >> second. >> commissioner richards. >> up think a couple of points before i ask the project sponsor for an ask to get this thing

over the line i stand corrected on the square footage the generation of trips i'm learning as i go thank you for hermosa beach me i believe there is a lot of he was distinct the residential and commercial traffic residential is more frequent and business traffic is coming and going one-way and two-way streets are difference like fulsome and other projects that is a lot harder your dumping for cars into a busier street brandon and townsend someone is dignifying up from floater where are those cars camtc from behind the pleasure mart are we getting rid of the curb cuts on townsend and from planning department staff

maybe the teams ca ca wag weigh in its my understanding the vehicle assess from the rear and the street is a inadequately approach. >> thank you. i think project sponsor thank you i know there's you know the improvement measure number 3 to work with mta to figure out what we want to do on harriet street the businesses need to step forward and fought under is a lot of stuff going on interest this will add to what is there i think i heard you say you'll supply an attendant i want to amend that the attendant be there during peak. >> okay. >> that works for me. >> to support the measure. >> commissioner moore

question we've raised with alleys and egress and ingress to start putting pressure on how traffic is regulated in the alleys and we had the idea that basically restricting cutting no traffic in order to support and sustain local small businesses but allowing the unification in the major corridors in the townsend or brandon for that matter and formulate a shift in policy we ultimately want the new buildings but want to make sure that the proper functioning the small businesses is equally baldly want to suggest that the new owner who's now the new neighborhood on the block has that particular department with sfmta because

something has to give we've made that previous suggestion where we have users having issues with the traffic into buildings we're coming to a critical intersection for that discussion to be had in the cyber interest the implementation of western selma and all south of market that there is an independent life of alleys and all kinds of shapes we can't hear those people on the functions and impacts and wanting to approve new projects something has to give increasing the level of challenge and discussion, live been the planning department as well because to repeat myself something has to give i'm looking towards the applicant being that neighbor who is actually taking the lead

alexander has been around in mission bay and ready to do that with the lady in charge. >> thank you commissioner moore we're more than happy to do that we're part of the community and participate actively we look forward to working with the neighbors. >> thank you. >> commissioner antonini. >> yeah. so it's my understanding the attendants will be there with a minimum of 7 to 9 in the more than and 6 in the earning it could be longer as far as metering the cars and that's the timeframe but as we work with that community if it needs to be longer that will be. >> we'll continue to work with the city like traffic signal light timeings.

>> we've been participants in the mission bay management association for 15 years we're very active in this manner. >> thank you. >> thank you. >> commissioner richards. >> one last amendment i'll ask the motion maker to consider since commissioner moore that is a learning in process i'd like to have a one year quick informational on how this this end up and what the process to make this better so we can learner all the other projects coming down the line. >> i like that. >> written or presentation. >> presentations. >> it didn't have to hurt to have an informational presentation how the traffic ended up if there fine with the project sponsor and that's fine to understand one year after we've been in operation. >> yes. >> yes. >> commissioner johnson.

>> yes. mates my clarification one year from now. >> please call the questions. >> commissioners there is a motion and a second to approve the project as modified to include a parking attendants and a one year presentation. >> commissioner antonini. >> commissioner hillis commissioner johnson commissioner moore commissioner richards commissioner wu so moved, commissioners, that motion passes unanimously 6 to zero. >> t 5 minute break. >> commissioner. commissioners, we left off on item 16 and 17 item 16 ab at pacific avenue and item 17 ab at pacific avenue request for discretionary review in in addition zoning administrator will take up the matters are

rear yard variance in those items. >> with of any person(s) responsible for the ringing or use of a to demolish two existing buildings and to reach a heights of 40 feet with ground floor retail as mentioned several actions by the zoning administrator and i'll address those first, the first is the width of the parking entries to due to the narrowness 6 to 6 and a half feet wide the project is a 10 foot wide entry on pacific and 1370 pacific the second a modification for the rear yard requirements for the subject properties the planning code measures the lowest depth

containing a dwelling unit and a discrepancies in the code that specifics a 40 percent rear yards with the building but regardless the building will be constructed with no rear yard therefore the project requires a rear yard motivation so administration to it will consider a requester inform a discretionary review the focus is on the issue of height and scale as a view from pacific avenue and limit street they focus on a lack of rear yard that compromises the character of the area effect the privacy of abutting residents and fails to provide sdierdz open space so since the concerns the project sponsor has tried to address the concerns the decks

to the property line have been eliminated and the upper rooftops are setback from the pacific avenue and see stair power point were deleted and parents were eliminate preserved it from pays off and a lightwell was adams and it second floor and above however, the massing the rear of the building has remained the same the property explicit fall into the zoning district, however, your secretary of interior a dr the team reviewed the properties for the compatibility but the retain guidelines does not apply the team was supportive of the massing without a rear yard and i'll need the overhead to go

into more detail. >> so the viewer you're seeing on your left is looking at lint street those to buildings with the rendered rear elevation and as you can see the sort of intamcy and narrowness and kind of tithe independence edges of the street and the overhead character of lint street the configuration is consistent with the urban pattern of buildings built to the sidewalk and that consistent with the scale of other buildings on lint street the purchase to provide openness and promote a block of open space but as you can see no open space for the loss of the front along lint street the separation is in the presence of lint itself and sunlight assess rfgd

in the building that has a preservation ever light on the alley you see a small portion the renderings but it is taller along the frontage i should mention that there is some discussion about an additional setback at the rear the building the staff is concerned creating the setback creates a unique condition on the block no consistent with the partner here and creates safety concerns if there are a hidden space an aberration on the alley that could be hidden if public view and be a public nuisance i should mention the project was to be heard on february 3rd staff received allegations of violations in the current building on site so the

commission continued the item if the planning department and the department of building inspection visit the properties to identify violations so i'll summarize those the building on pays off a change in use in the front of the building to change into a retail to alteration shop at the rear it was create we permits it was occupied by the parents of the pardon and operate the alteration shop and operate a budding retail hop in terms of violations at pacific staff found an awning ways installed without permits no evidence the residential use since that time the project sponsor has on the building permits for the building should be noted the construction will abate the violation by

demolishing the existing building to the extension of removing the prouchlt that were established without permits in conclusion the project has included the recommendations of the design team and others modification the project is scaled in context of the character of the block and the project compiles with the planning code with the variance and rear yard variance staff recommends not take dr and approve as proposed thank you. >> open up for a presentation from the project sponsor if you said want to represent it is during the dr requesters time ensue if i want to represent yourselves do that in public

comment. >> face down or up. >> face up. >> like this. >> yes. >> commissioner wu honorable commissioners i'm ribbon tucker i'm the co-found and the co-chair the neighborhood association commonly known as than an your organization is the dr requester in 2007 the san francisco neighborhood association in

partnership with the planning department initiated a down zoning for the panics from east of polk to taylor streets the new code incorporated the pacific avenue mc d that's what it is known as the purpose of the down zoning to preserve the small-scale character and predominantly low-rise nature of the neighborhood in the existing speak up and encourage new development to provide the same 5 years of planning, hand in hand with the planning department approved by the planning commission and approved by unanimously but the board of supervisors went into the down zoning of pacific avenue it was not a fly-by night effort those properties that are the subject of this dr border on the

alley or at least one the narrow it valencia a very narrow alley adjacent to pacific avenue at first fwlans that seemed reasonable and consistent but measured on lynch alley that building will be 15 turn around on pacific avenue four stores facing an extraordinary and uniquely alley sets a dangerous precedent for the entire communities mcd for all the alleys running parallel the project as proposed by the applicant is out of scale and out of context please are roll

call tell me what part of that building is in context with the current structures that occupy lynch alley than an provided an architecture plan for the project sponsor to accommodate the same number of bedrooms and baskets but fewer negative impacts tenants request for a smaller imprint is not excess we urge to urge the project sponsor to have a alternative plan they've regretted the design to have a fact there's a 5 story building across from the properties on pacific avenue is kind of

interesting i see that the 3 individuals that opposed the legislation in 2007 and before you're here today which i would expect but the only 3 out of the entire neighborhood that obtained to this legislation i ask please honorable commissioners please let the light shine on lynch alley otherwise what could result is people on the north side of lynch alley feeling like they live in an elevator shaft try to visible a wall of buildings that are looking at this project going all the way up to taylor street and all the alleys that are vanity having the same impact if something like that it allowed to be built it is not just about one building but a

community and a communities i live in and many of my neighbors live in thank you very much please take the dr and ask the project sponsor to rise the design to incorporate a more appropriated design for the neighborhood. >> well open up for public comment for those in support of the dr honorable commissioners my name is otter i timely literally directly across from in proposed site i'll be using a lot of overheads, however, that gets incorporated planning assess in its document the project has expressed along the lint street

frontage is xhashlg with the scale of the alley and doesn't overwhelming the narrow streets really? this does overwhelm this didn't alm the neighborhood street this is in endanger to the others projects next to it how can planning in good conscious say they've done their job in establishing this didn't overwhelm one of the narrow it alley in the city and based on my analysis in the country they're proposing to build a 4 story high building where effectively two cottages or comparable to cottages that is the existing sunlight situation on lynch i can this is

the only sunlight is directly across into the existing building all the rest of lynch is in darkness repeat it over here in a photograph from a different point of view sprnz claim they've done an analysis study they sent a video ever 4 seconds and made no sense to any of us we did our own sun analysis study here's where what the statement said lynch street between hyde hyde and las vegas worth is 94 percent shadowed and during the time of 7:00 a.m. to p.m. and it was on - of the if this property will be builds that adds another thirty percent of lynch alley going into

shadows just kiss lynch alley good by when the purpose the intimate character the right of ways 40 feet is width and narrow and the alleys are is an important unique component of the city the scale of those streets should be preserved to make sure they're not overshadow those are documents from the city finally regarding the setbacks here's a document in no case the setback should be less than 15 feet if you'll indulge me i have only >> thank you. sir, your time has expired. >> i'm sorry, i have a number of more speakers

(calling names). >> again, the one i wanted to speak from stayed on top i'm rosemary i'm here to speak about the development across the street 21 years ago i moved into my home on lynch street directly across from the proposed project the first time i saw my home it had a the character and benefits of urban living the size and scale of the homemade that open mall for a first time buyer a small single-family home of one thousand square feet and over a hundred years old over the years

i've remodeled and taken care of to keep it small home in a sdeeshl neighborhood lynch street is 10 feet wide from curb to curb with no street parking but offers respite from the combatant flow of traffic hence the rear yard setback the alleys ♪ part of the city are part of the educate character not drab in the ones created in other parts of the city i understand the sgiefr to build the property, however, my major concern over the proposed project the scale $0.83 sets a precedence and turns lynch street into a

characterless streets no future residents will enjoy the dream that currently exists small-scale single-family home will have no chance to thrive is that the have you beenable part of the future don't believe that higher and bigger is better law the scale with the corporation of the residents it will effect the most i or not request you deny the demolition for 1664 pacific avenue and keep it within the scale in accordance with the legislation thank you for your time >> thank you. >> next speaker

>> honorable commissioner my name is marilyn i live on lynch street directly across the street if where the proposed projects in a house thank you in a house over a hundred years old i'm the third-generation to live in the family par fraig the applicants i don't want trouble with the neighbors that is resist of the onyx o opposite the applicant refuses to compromises with the neighbors on lynch street most effected by the project than an and the neighbors have met with the applicants at meetings several recommendations the last meeting on july 15th all in attendance agreed to meet on july 21st the applicant cancelled the meeting less than two hours before the scheduled

time this applies the applicant was unable to negotiate with the recommendation proposed by than an or the neighbors an lynch street i've been a neighbor of the applicant for many years we've enjoyed a community for those years i strongly believe that the legislation passed in 2007 by the board of supervisors and the planning department with extensive input from than an must be awe herd to please deny the permits for demolition and buildings please preserve the small character the neighborhood. >> thank you. >> thank you. >> good afternoon honorable commissioners accompany andrew on pacific avenue for 8 years

i've lived a block and a half from lynch alley i'm primarily concerned with the other speakers say a lack of rear yard setback as others have mentioned in 2007 the foundation of the pacific avenue neighborhood commercial district required 45 rear yard setback i don't want to be redundant i'll ask the commission keep that in mind and deny the demolition and the building permit request thank you. >> thank you. next speaker. and. >> good afternoon, commissioners my name is don i'm the chairperson the middle post association than an happens to be within

middle polk we work closely together as two sister organizations i'll be speaking first read a letter to you i written by the very esteemed colleague kathleen if the russian hill kaebt is traveling she writes dear honorable commissioners and the russian hill commission joins with the neighborhood commission and requests that the commission take the discretionary review and require the project sponsor to redesign the project that compiles with the small-scale neighborhood and unique character of the pacific avenue and lynch street the proposed project has ramifications for the broader community the proposed project rises to the level of excelled and unique circumstances given the precedent nature it disregards the zoning

development by neighbors in close partnership with the planning department approved by the planning commission and unanimously approved by the board of supervisors in 2007 this community worked for years to develop a zoning plan that protects the small-scale character of the neighborhood while recognizing the small businesses in the area and in hindsight a mistake it request the developer of 1355 pacific to right now that project to proceed this proposed project exceeds the height of its neighbors and it is contrary to the city design guidelines approval of the proposed project says to the surrounding communities that the city zoning and guidelines provides inform protection for the character of their neighborhood also it is such an invasive

standard for narrow alleys excuse me. just a second here approval the proposed design element of balconies will create a true problem and having open balconies in close proximity to a neighbor it setting an unacceptable precedence this is ramification we respectfully or respecting ask the commission take the - all the special zoning that was developed for than an be completely solid by the letter of the zoning as well as the spirit and intent of that thank you very much.

>> thank you. next speaker. >> good afternoon, commissioners mary maguire i'm a long time residents 33 years of lynch alley i'd like to address - well, let me talk about rules and regulations specifically the 2007 sgoeven e zoning legislation crafted by the neighbors and your department and robin said the department worked hand to hand so i'm a little bit confused i don't think so why the planning department approved a project that is contrary to the rules that it created those are your rules if you're not going to endorse our rules why did i create them i'd like to address an unanimous letter in my neighbors mailboxes this letter was written in

longhand and signed it has a threatening tone basically filed if the project is not approved the project has the connects and big bucks to get a larger project approved this says the rules are for the little people for me and my neighbors not the powerful and well-connected now those setbacks guidelines those regulations there so important in a dense neighborhood we dense i respectfully ask i please don't not approve that project as proposed thank you. >> thank you. is there any additional public comment. >> good morning, everyone. commissioners jeremy paul i've been attend some of the meetings and watch this project move forward a little bit

and i'm kind of surprised the way things have developed you've heard from marilyn the tied up meeting with the project sponsors directions by the commission the project sponsor cancelled at the last minute not an negotiation moving forward from the last meeting variances are being requested here and in order to make a finding that no material harm is done to surrounding properties is really it is strikes me of absorb to think this kind of design can be create and make a finding those decks don't create material harm or injury to lynch additionally this is something you'll see in a reextorts in canning con the i am of a mayan

temple he building this project sponsor can get variance and achieve the program he's trying to get and designing a more appropriate building for this site this building just didn't see it there is no justification for the kind of impact those decks are going to have i mean the code clearly asked for a setback nearly 10 feet at the rear if we're going to grant a variance to allow this structure to be built ♪ way there some be admitting circumstances created it creates a better berringer building for this neighborhood two large single-family dwellings it is up to the pertaining to decide what we said want to do with their project but up to the city to decide how to grants

entitlements and grant variance to facilitate unusual entitlements that don't comply request codes in those locations no single-family dwellings those are smaller dwelling units if this person wants to don't two large single-family dwellings do it without shadow decks over the alley and those large go garage doors at the sidewalk i suggest those decks need to go and the masks showcase shifted no reason if we're going to grant a variance why not use that for housing shake our head zoning administrator i look at this and see not appropriate and significant that dr is appropriate thank you >> thank you. >> is there any additional public comment in support of the

dr requester? >> okay. seeing none. >> there's one. >> there's one. >> oh. >> speak into the mike. >> i'm very moved may i have speak on two issues and my name is susan i grew up a couple blocks away on glover street we played in lynch alley from classmates from spring valley a wonderful way to grew up it was intimate and small like we were the aesthetics of our neighborhood i live around the corner between jackson and washington the aesthetics of our neighborhood make that desirable but the new generations new kids coming up now

of all races i'm very, very sad to see this commission just converting its own guidelines i strongly urge you to take another hard look at this proposal if fit on the evidence will then show alley i'm very, very unhappy what is happening to our neighborhood we understand change is part of life by this science life explicit go well, for our neighborhoods. >> thank you. is there any additional public comment okay. seeing none project sponsor your team has 5 minutes. >> hi good afternoon commissioners listened reuben, junius & rose overwhelm here on behalf of the appellant of the pain family

that owned and operated and skewers about this neighborhood once those homes are built the folks plan to live on the pacific site with their daughters family and operate their retail store on the ground floor we are asking you to deny this for a number of reasons i want to point out there were a number of images of the project shown by the dr requester and those are not current images they reflect the project before several moevengz removing the modifications from the roof area that decreases the massing and eliminates the second floor deck area that was take out at their request for context those two properties are among the narrow

it in the block 17 feet wide respect the neighboring lot to the east 28 feet for context 1/3rd wider narrow lots between 40 feet it constraints their development i've got a image to go up on the monitor this was shown by kevin in his presentation the rendering the building along lynch i'm providing this to show you the community as you can see the remainder the buildings are built to the lynch alley their health without setback and that includes a few doors up a four story building above a garage not an unusual design i do want to note we are requesting some variance the planning department described

those we are requesting a rear yard exception at the second floor as explained the district required a 25 percent rigorous setback section one 34 requires that the lots are 60 feet deep i'm going to place a western elevation up on the screen give some context to this as you can see this is provided on page 87 in your packet so we're looking west introduce the building with lynch alley at the pacific avenue at the front as you can see we've got the ground floor which is the commercial use built to the alley and a portion of the garage entry that presents it in that area but above that area you begin to see side setbacks of the building

that far exceeds what is found if otdz buildings in this area once you come up to the server you'll looking at roughly a 10 foot setback so the 5 foot difference and at each succeeding level by the time you get to the maximum built on pacific avenue your set back more than 45 percent there's a significant setback this tier design at access requirement a code requirement and it is also non-variable can't be redesigned unless you redesign the site for height and you know given you're on a narrow lot with the standard that significantly impacts i

want to directly address the modification requests if than an a number of outreach and attempts to coordinated coordinate with the neighbors and than an has asked for a setbacks on all levels between 10 and 15 feet the commercial floor and garage we don't feel this is appropriate for a number of reasons i think i lost some time in the monitor up here but first, because it is not required by code and is at the first floor given the setbacks more than a traditional rear yard than you'll see otherwise and second the department agents the ground floor is preferable with the scale of the additional would you mind if i continue my

comments. >> you'll have a two minute rebuttal you can respond then thank you. >> so we'll take public comment in support of the project i have a number of cards (calling names) as i've called our name you can approach the podium. >> my name is james burn i'm the owner of the adjacent property which is 1374 pacific avenue and then it will be 75 lynch will be the address in the rear i operate any small law office in the building been here for approximately 15 years some of the neighbors that have testified for the discretionary review are my neighbors as well

and wonderful people but on this matter i must respectfully disagree a few years after i moved into the property they've been talking about the sobriety they need a variance for the neighbors park their cars but a window on the side of my building that goes in and my office is bronze into and the computers were only 5 or $6,000 to replace but the papers to my law firm was more expensive filling up that lot for me is essential i had to put iron bars on the back but guarantee i don't want to look at a prison in my other was but the second point is again when i

bought the property 15 years ago the area itself needed a lot of redevelopment a lot of the owners let their property go and in particular with all due respect i'm speaking 40 in support of the neighbors the neighbors property next door is ugly and any way i can facilitate i it is an ugly store and awning it needs to go and if the gentleman times to move into one of the pieces of property i support him on that i think so the feeling the neighbors behind lynch the property will be 10 feet shorten the property across the street i don't see the character the neighborhood changing with all due respect to

my neighbors i'd like to i like what is happening in the last 15 years it is less shall beer the people are maintaining better and that's the new san francisco thank you. >> next speaker a >> good afternoon commissioners piecemeal i i'm john speaking in support of the project i was asked by 4 of the owners of the newer condominium building on pacific which is the last building developed on the block about 7 months ago to approach the dancing because they support a 40 feet building on the block we are concerned about two stair penthouse and

parapets and so i reached into my experience before any commerce on the commission thirty years ago and remembered how we converted stair penthouses to get rid of them and i approached the tangs they were suggesting so the plan was a product a compromise of those neighbors which effected everybody along pacific avenue to the positive and didn't demean the uses of the proposed uses so support on behalf of the four owners dribble across the street the project as i sit here listening he got on any telephone to remind myself the prior height it was 65 feet so the commission reduced the

height from 65 to 40 and anticipated this kind of demolition in a 40 foot building i think the design comports with what the commission perceived with happen in the line of development along this block thank you. >> next speaker >> hi good afternoon commissioner collin i'm here to support the tang project on pacific avenue i've lived in the knob hill and russian hill 6 of the last year's on pacific avenue about a block and a half away i like to walk around the neighborhood and explore and quack to and from and punishment the tang and their community store means to us you know it's

been a pleasant experience they're a function it is your with their dogs on the sidewalk and getting familiar what is happening with that project i feel like the project is going to make a positive impact and keep a long standing small business operation and my needs to buy a lottery ticket every week i've become familiar with what is going on and in total agreement agreement with the of any person(s) responsible for the ringing or use of a and a discretionary review oust to be did understand from what i understand the tangs and the project sponsor have been accommodating of the request of the neighbors especially trying to address the niece of than an and some hasome have gone

i looked through the packet and got a idea of what the signatures about 5 hundred and 80 people no port of the project and hundred and 10 opposed that's a 5 to one ratio with that, i'm urge you go ahead and approve the project. >> good afternoon, commissioners i'm karen an owner occupant a block and a half away one of the benefits of living in the neighborhood it allows me to commute by quacking, however, the reality is that we have urban homelessness and lastly

assaults against women so safety is paramount to me i sports the tang family plan as is and in very concerned about certain requests for backyard and open space that is inconsistent with the existing believes in creating unsafe areas our carports and yards with i desk and it is actually unsafe and impractical any open street level areas actually visits of invites homeless to camp in my building we had our garage door stuck in an open position and it creates a homeless hole two got in and kamgdz on the top floor so the commercial cross across the street is a commercial building with an setback of an open patio

and months constant homeless they first tried to install light sensors that doesn't work they tried to install lights that stayed on from 8 o'clock to 6 in the morning that didn't work they came and had the homeless pickup that didn't work so finally they put a bunch of multiple commercial dumb series in the open space that's how they solved that problem even our city park identifies the homeless problem the broadway park a block away from the tang is gated and closed because of the this i support the tangs sorry - the plan and i urge us

to think about the saved issues as it relates to creating open spaces because as a woman walking around a lot in the neighborhood i want to make sure to keep it safe thank you for the opportunity. >> is there any additional public comment a. >> good afternoon. i've lived on knott's berry- russian hill for 25 or thirty years i live at jones and jackson i like to say refraining and for 15 years i've been going to see connie and harry a beacon of light in that neighborhood what they've contributed to that neighborhood a unparalleled with all the collins and the crime that neighborhood has very

little to offer in way the coffeehouses for descent stores when i saw their earth renderings i thought wow. is this going to improve the neighborhood with all respect pan is one the most dwinth neighborhoods in the city i have lived in every neighborhoods from the sunlight to telegraph hill to marina and racism i'm a walker if i can find the baddest and narrow it alley in san francisco i will find out have they been to north beach lastly everybody lives on top of each other one of the things i've learned is everybody can see into everybody's home this is just an accepted fact

people, see me go to the bathroom i just close the bathroom people can see me sleeping do we stand and stare at each other no, it is what happens when you live in a crammed city i've been there through every trial and tribulation this meant so much to me today, i should be in san diego with my 89-year-old mother she's dying i'm going there tomorrow but here to represent two of the two kind itself consistent people in the city that worked every day i've known them to take one vacation public school sunday's through sunday's they've worked hard their whole life and want to build the great american

dream their industry is great i don't know about the height structure it will enhance the neighborhood critically and how luck for the neighbors they've been in a quiet sun lit alley i've looked for a place like this i'm going to move to sonoma i don't kept it here in the city so i'm here for harry and connie. >> thank you. >> is there any additional public comment? >> hello, i'm sarah johnson i know a lot of people that don't live in this area now noises and question that is everywhere you live at a and i

port this area that is for the homeless they should have no more depends for the communities areas for san francisco and for any children that play over there and keep it all clean you know so they get more ideas after the fact that is everywhere still and but i'd like to you know make that a whole lot better than the areas that have been living in and first, i know that my housing in different areas

for small alleys have, of course, i have mostly been in the hate district and martin place and the hill potrero all the areas that are a far distance i have to explore you know and gets a little bit more knowledge of what's going on in those areas of course, i still think if those remodeling housing is going to be different than what we look at everyday i still got the planning department to you

know take view of what housing that i'm talking about so remodeling the walls and other things different areas of the housing that's being built and a lot of you know which play areas for children is a real good for for children to be you know thank you. >> thank you. is there any additional public comment? okay. seeing none public comment is closed. >> dr requester you have a 2

minute rebuttal. >> i would like to make two comments if i may one is i really want the record to be straight or accurate from than ans prospective and the neighbors we as the applicant has through their attorney mentions mentioned that the applicant has accommodated than ans request for some of them but, in fact, the only request that was challenged for those that the applicant will have to accommodate anyway other than requested by the planning department not than an than an has not been accommodated pursuant to any of

the communications we've had with the project sponsor this is not about the applicant his business has dogs think the sidewalk, his neighbors and my neighbors i mean, he and his family are part of the community so it is not about a single project it is about a community and for that reason i'm asking you to please take a second look and don't take this project as one that is meeting the requirements of code and therefore should be sportsd by the commission thank you very much. >> thank you project sponsor you have a 2

minute rebuttal. >> all right. >> thank you, commissioners i'd like to speak you know briefly again to the concerns that we have with some of the requests that have been made by than an the request for the additional rear yard setback at the commercial level of the building and specifically the concern that this is going to create a serious life safety issue right now 1370 the building with a significant setback on lynch street it attracts trash crime interests been break ins on the building and the neighbors an little west asked we avoid a

setback because of that reason and set up security the southern that will defeat the purpose and complicate entrances to the garage additional if we incorporate setbacks that will eat into the buildings commercial areas those are alley 9 hundred plus quiet a 10 foot setback reduces that and those are quick especially in you consider the commercial spaces not have additional access to shortage storage and finally a sloping site towards lynch the building plan sets up up to accommodate the approach it will curae foot or two from the step up area creating he dead space so in essence this is a process

that exceeds what is by a code compliant setback that is well-designed and consistent with the scale of the neighborhood and we're asking you, please reject the dr request and allow the construction thank you. >> the public hearing portion is closed upping up to commissioner richards. >> a few thoughts on the project sponsor and is dr requester ms. tucker i appreciate all the work it comes from the heart he encourage you to keep on doing it as for the tangs i met the tangs their delightful people i have a gay respect for mr. eric tang he had a continuance bus we wanted the dr requester to have due process i have a

huge amount of respect i like our doggy want to make sure that i echo ms. tucker's sentiment not about people but a sense of community i hope whatever we decide the community can move on and become a community nothing personal to one the speakers? not a popularity he contest how they feel we make our decision particle on the communities sentiments mostly on the speakers go that is the highest in any mind for people to get in their opinion but the merits of project as it relates to the planning code so that all being said i have a question for mr. guy so this pacific avenue was

sdroerndz in 2007 or 8 are all the properties along pacific 60 feet in height this is steering wheel narrow and short. >> so in depth sorry. >> i believe they're all consistently 60 feet. >> so everything meanspirited that was not a corner case to there's a hundred feet. >> if i may add an this block and this side of the plain clothes it is 60 feet on other blocks their deeper. >> okay. >> so this is probably the - the two of the smallest lots. >> smallest. >> in all the districts. >> so those lots are somewhat different to you appreciate that i think thank you. appreciate that. >> i think in terms of that helps me put this in context i think in terms of the height request had the rezoning was

done with the neighborhood organization and commission and board of supervisors really looked at the site hey we have stuff that's under 40 feet we'll set that and 40 feet was determined it was passed the hearings were held and the board of supervisors voted on it 40 feet is 40 feet i don't think we can shorten the building it is turn around the other buildings we set a mark of 40 feet no question that 40 feet is the right height for in building this is how the building was designed i work categorize the street i see huge building that are overwhelming and small buildings that are really under developed he think the project sponsor certainly has a right to develop them i think a couple of points the angles of the believes in the

presentations for the folks that showed the building i think the dr requesters diagram you're looking at down from the lynch alley the solar panel from the door on the roof it shows the building bigger than if i were stan on the additional so the angels are tricky i think that when we're looking i think a lot of the issue is on lynch alley it is a intimate alley a 10 feet widest private property i property line i think that is rezoning was done which the development happened it was respectful of alleys my issue is around the alley not to have a setback interest if we squash the property we have an issue

with square footage it is a small lot but it is a sun access plain is a bit tight and issues with safety i hate to disdain buildings around an issue but i get it planning code minimum calls for 7 foot 6 inch setback the zion is 15 feet i think that i would support some type of a set back between the two numbers the commercial space on the ground floor is kind of strange i'm not sure how it takes two or three stems up to get to it if you're looking at the renderings from lynch windows those are residential not commercial we need to look at those windows they certainly don't fit request the scale of lynch alley that all being said the dr requesters alternatives proposal is equally strange in having residential

behind commercial that didn't work for me either this is a bit weird i think this there are exceptional or extraordinary circumstances as it pertains to lynch alley i'll support taking dr and printed in the record a setback and i'll see what my fellow commissioners have to say. >> commissioner antonini. >> yeah. i have a question for mr. guy some were answers we commissioner richards i've heard about the objections of pana and those rules in place some years ago we've established a part of the rules with a 44 pooekt height limit it scomplielz with what the codes says but what the than an rules are so what are the other ones i

guess a setback for new properties and how big a setback would those rules call for . >> thank you commissioners if you're referring to the rear yard there's a inconsistency either three percent of residential and above that allows lot caffeine of the commercial line or 45 percent rear yard requirement at all levels but the expectation of the code language was to impose a rear yard requirements with that said all rear yards for all parts the city robs many aspects the zoning code their referred to in different ways for

different reasons but mechanisms to recognize that the zoning that maybe be permission all creating for preserve what is special may not accomplish that when applied usually across the board thank you. yeah, i think there is a case with a surveillance in line probably that is a place where that make sense everything else is back to the property line down that area i'm not sure a what we gain by the setback the case has been made by sixth district setting back the first floor garage and first floor i interpret that as two floors i know what you're saying you might be able to let in more sun it will be govern by the

height of the building on pacific so i know maybe at some instances where the sun is at the certain times of the year at a different angle might let marrow sun into the alley that's the only advantage everything is at that line i might be poster of a modest setback allowing sun in some instances the rest is a very good project lots of things were done by staff or accommodate the neighbors they were good a changes the penthouse par pet was eliminated the light wall the commercial level was eliminates the decks on the thirds and fourth level

setback respectfully 5 and 10 feet they scombans the lighted to the additional in and of themselves i agree regardless of what we pass probably that windows on the commercial floor is too big and insisted necessary or appropriate i think we should you know modify that window that is a commercial space didn't need a big window in that space and also be supportive of a psa i'm thinking the first floor depending on howe you interpreted it so i'm basically supportive of the project i could support it if we leave it or bring it back a modest amount on those first

floors the garage floor and the commercial floor i wouldn't be supportive of any more of that .5 feet i'll see what my fellow commissioners have to say. >> commissioner moore. >> i think there is a very long sentiment that the tropisms of the pacific avenue is what it is it is happening everywhere in the city how do we deal sensitivity with the joining neighborhood and i think where the person is i am - i met with the tang family on the day the little baby was born the grandfather had a second grandchild and that was kind of fun (laughter) and i fully understand that they are trying to increase the usability of the property they've owned for a long time

with the ability to potentially building the other one as an income stream i find my conversation request them supportive and interesting and the original thing i have some issues with is indeed that when you buy a small lot that is a substandard lot but the 25 to hundred this is the average the lots those are 20 and 7, 5 by 60 respectfully we have to assume you still have to deal with those rules that exist because you knew all along you have to sign it was in the letter of the law what wear trying to do here is bridge a changed legislation which came in a number of years ago and what historically had

already happened on pacific a large building was built prior to the legislation being going into finally effect a certain expectation you can push the envelope but you really can't but you can be creative the primary change the legislation is really to establish at the ground floor of the all buildings as commercial and create indeed a mixed use neighborhood that has all of the vibrancy and possibilities of other neighborhood of like character and like thoughts that becomes an pacific slightly more dense regulation of increase in 40 feet, however, the orientation of actually commercial into a pacific is one the key elements why we're doing this what do we do on top we have 40 feet we need to

understand in east west i'm concerned about a certain factor those buildings are a little bit more difficult easier to distinguish themselves i have raised that question before not gotten a lot of response i think that there has been accomodation made relevant to the penthouse this is a good idea the deck has been moved back this area is foggy at night that is your choice to have a deck and use that is not for me to discuss i find the argument of crime is a weak one to give a variance that didn't jelly live a few blocks over and an increasing the homeless

population that doesn't seeks out safer neighborhoods to lie on the sidewalk in front of of my house is just an unfortunate realty it doesn't matter where you live i live on the east slope of knob hill between jones and taylor a few blocks away no difference we all of a sudden request a variance and sitting on the april and say that makes any house safer but minor the residential character that is at safety of the neighborhood i want to speak to why i have a difficult time with the garage door sitting where it does and the property variance we you will you you all know that parking space and a garage a 10 by 20 the driving space an

lynch additional alley is 10 feet when i want to make a turn into the garage you basically have to go all the way to the rights almost hitting the cushion the far see of the street in order to make a turn i believe that the location of this garage is somewhat scanning the system particularly on narrow streets the garage door is setback you basically make the turn in an open drier you have a little bit more room and maneuver our car into the garage we are zag a situation you basically be more lenient in prescribed garage door widths i'm for about similar to commissioner antonini and commissioner richards said that the building

has to hold to the edge of the rear wall and then as to whether or not the step up in the commercial space becomes crowded for storming and rear of the property with a minimum window that would be fine by me i totally agree that the alley window is far too residential and that is a contradiction to what you have no commercial spaes is allowed on pacific of any real windows think to the alleys hidden they're mostly have storage space totally close facades and minimal windows for access to light and storage messiah my recommendation we support the project take dr and cut the building back so that the maneuvering of the car occurs within an open driveway

and the building holds back i think is 9 feet 7 inches. >> zoning administrator sanchez. >> thank you so i first read this project as you may know has the evaporates for the garage door width and and rear yard modifications i read this in april of last year in 2014 subsequent to that hearing with the discretionary review filed and now this hearing date at this time that was a significant amount of neighborhood concern the encroachment in the raider i want to express concern the building given the adjacent properties concerns from the people across pacific avenue there was penthouses that is a small group between the penthouse dominated

that roof area and it was revised and it was reduced those are quite unique lots i mean those are make the smallest in this district at 80 by 60 and kind of following up on commissioner richardss questions about the other lots in the area so this is a unique block and half the block as well when you go to the east you have longer lots between pacific and bernard by really the alleys are mostly on that the ned of pacific with lynch and bernard those are hundred and 80 feet some are through lots but some subdivided out 60 foot lots with footages on bernard and the paper is to me a clear lynch and

on bernard of having buildings that are at what is the property line of lynch or bernard so we don't in the two considerations i need to make first for the garage door wicket i find this is for the variance completely merits the variance you know we have the 5 finding needs to be made a lot with 17 and a half and one of 20 feet, a code requirement that says the garage can be no wider than 1/3rd and your last width was 6 and a half garage doors that are completely impractical that is justified and at the time a lot was made of the hefty of pacific avenue actually at the time of the pacific avenue mcd was

created in 2007 a 10 foot wide garage door and 10 foot widest 10 foot would have been allowed on both properties the codes changed in 2010 for street frontages and if take into account the narrower lots throughout the city again, the variance is very well justified the rear yard miefgs is not a variance the finding are different not the 5 could have the high bar for a variance the rear yard modification provides for the usable open space on the lots which they're doing will reducing the impacts on views they're doing here i don't see how a project with a codes complainant will have any lessen light and access the finally is the mid block open space nun to protect this brings me to the

actual pacific avenue mcd itself and speaking to the reason it came about those controls are tied up to have liveability in a low rise and enhance the protection of the rear yard partners at the ground floor so here there really is no pattern of residential rear yard partner at the ground floor every others properties on this side of lynch street this block here earnest lots has frontages up to basically the lot line of lynch no pattern that is projected by allowing the property to go to the rear i refreshment commissioner moore's concerns about the liveability of cars that is an important consideration to that i'll note the garage door on the plans the

setback about 2 feet 2 inches there some that are immediately across the street lynch that are setback more setback substantially more but east there are some that are at front property line some are wider but in the project sponsors interest to have garages that can be assessed and they've zegdz that and that is why they have the two foot setback that's been addressed i bresht all the concerns of people that came out and at the continuance the hearing last year, i said overall be supportive of what in their requesting aisle those items you'll thinks that while i may through the variance of rear yard administration allow the

proposal, of course, the planning commission has the ability to be more restrictive i wanted to share high thought process of allowing something oh, another points mr. paul had referenced in his testimony why i was shaking my head oh, we can move down the massaging it sounds like a great idea but you can't obtain a variance the sunlight access provision their boyd but further justifies an enrollment in the rear yard it reduces where they can have a buildable area by the sunlight plan reduces that ability and jifz greater encroachment into the area consistent with the pattern in way to reconfigure that and one of the if the court please we looked with kevin guy

not a variable provision it is a unique set of blocks i think that the project hfa as proposed is justifiable and want to share those thoughts. >> thank you commissioner hillis. >> so thank you, everyone for the comments i was able to go down lynch on any way here to check outlets alleys i share some thoughts the paramount it was hard to kind of listening to comments both the project sponsor and the neighbors the project is responding to the zoning in a lot of what the neighbors are asking to its been arena for awhile i'm surprised we can't get to a result on that but on lynch i don't have 19 r a problem the commissioners said 40 feet on pacific on lynch you

you know, i think every building is up against some are slipping but the paramount street pattern on lynch the only one with a alley directly behind the alley florida there is a split the alleys are beyond the 60 feet but on both sides every building is pretty sure up against the street equal half of them have garages in them in most of them go up more than one story most of them go up up the adjacent structure three or four stories from lynch so i don't really know what you get by setting back that building on lynch i could see it as a good neighborhood thing but i don't see any reason to setback the garage level you end up with a fence you have to

starts the way that the property slopes i don't know how you get into a garage you start degrading the commercial level if you push that garage towards pacific while it may not be a safety concern you have a fence there it certainly you know having a garage there is pretty consistent with the street partner and the pattern of believes that is having all the buildings up against the evidence will then show street so i share the zoning administrators thoughts i could see setting back the slope up on the commercial level to get the garage in there i won't support

the garage level that currently exists they use it for a parking pad if you setback it for a parking pad it wouldn't be a parking pad it would be unused space, i.e., imagine that be not used. >> i share somewhat sent times i am looking at a-7 the zoning administrator said the garage level is set back 2 feet 2 inches i maybe interested in 6th district at large the i'm open to other considerations that avoids a coffee where the garage is a little bit better for seeing what is happenings in the garage door area and see i want to confirm no

deck on the first floor crook i would be interested in setting back on the first residential story two and that's just to give a little bit more room right now it comes up against the sun access plain but i for me not a big move smaller moves that give me a little bit more room. >> commissioner richards and i guess a couple of questions for the zoning administrator i appreciate the comments so the solar goals for the mcd can i tells you about that to councilmember downeys when a part what would is a sixth district a 90 percent of shade of the alley. >> again, the ideas of this an assess plain to provide for

solar light on to narrow alleys in particular those that are oriented here this is even the south side in the northern hemisphere it would have the most impact in terms of what the sun is and maybe mr. guy one of our solar experts can correct me. >> the sun plain that the center of the lot across the street is the property line. >> correct. >> is still you have to be up against the house to get the full effect. >> but also, this is on a 45 degree angle so depending on the sun in the northern or southern hemisphere i don't know what our latitude. >> your comments resonate commissioner wu's comments recess nasty want to make a

motion to setback the garage 3 feet instead of 2 and the commercial space the same and provide some type of a planter box to make it look better address execute down other than the big plate glass windows work with the staff on something more appropriate an additional foot back if the fwrarg and make it flush with that garage line 3 feet. >> i'll second that and i would like to also add if it's okay with the maker of the notation special restrictions for the special space not commercial but residential. >> i would like to better thinks you would not like the ground floor to ever be converted to a residential use.

>> yes. this is within our authority to do that. >> commissioner johnson. >> okay i can agree with the motion i would say generally speaking i was okay with the project as proposed it didn't represent exceptional or extraordinary circumstances in light of the other buildings in the area he think if we were talking about a whole block of one story buildings with no parking and no garages that would be a completely different story but i don't know. i that it is fine the way it was my one question 6th district at large another floor would have would setback from the curb so from the property line. >> it would be a 3 foot setback. >> so 3 feet total once you put that. >> the garage door was recessed 2 foot 2 but the upper level the

level was setting back the commercial level. >> my only concern what with commissioner richardss original proposal was 17 feet and another parallel park their car in front that would happen. >> commissioner moore. >> i have a question either for commissioner sanchez are junior the question unfortunately, the project had a code violation with people living in commercial space for my own reference and not seem any others changes to one way or another what wear discussing i'm interested how to implement a project with a

international situation that building will to the result under a new this tomorrow but a period of time where the space as is a was not occupied and what does we do about a situation in the type of housing unit with all the situations what is your advice the plans here. >> at this point the department of building inspection did investigate and issued notice of violations and have schedule directors hearing their moovdz bystanders their enrollment process i informed the division chief and in my opinion that project before you will and i bait the violation this results in the result of the unit when the building is demolished with not our intention as is planning department to pursue the

enforcement until a decision on the project but i understand are you asking we pursue enforcement to have it removed or. >> you have to set forward a timeframe by which it remains the decision we're not approving residential on the ground floor specifically that's not part of zoning not now and not in the future so what transition time do we give for the record to reality approve a project not displace but find a reasonable solution i don't this point to drag on for another 5 years i want this to happen in a manner with a beginning and ends and particularly with the validity authorize is 3 years to the a cu but guidelines from the building inspection for timelines to

process your permit and start the construction within a certain in the amount of. >> i'll ask mr. tang junior perhaps can you speak for our family what building you'll be living in, how you want to realize building one or move into building two as you the plan to move into construction as soon as possible. >> with both buildings. >> both buildings. >> and my parents will move in with one of the relatives and which building. >> afterwards. >> occupying both buildings eastern neighborhood you said you changed your mind because of the market will you be living in 67 or 70. >> my situation is my family lives in about buildings we haven't investigated the construction costs but if it turns out the financial burden

is too high we'll sell one and occupy the bigger lot. >> i think that is h 264. >> 1364 and 70. >> i'd like to see a clear timeframe because this is a very sxenl situation of we approve the project the sworn is not being followed so basically a commercial use being used for residential that might happen in other places we need to be clear how we change it back to the permitted condition. >> we can certainly discuss that with the project sponsor do insure there's a this inclines and the illegal unit is abated

if they start construction as soon as possible that we know know when but that can be resolved it goes to the plan connect of the dbi the issuance the permit that can still be appealed and the construction documents and before the contradiction there recent time expeditiously through the process. >> what's the ideas of pursuing both buildings simultaneously or one switching over and doing the second one. >> the goal to do them both at the same time but if the costs are probable cause active they'll sell one to use the money to build the other i don't know if they'll sell the project or the finished building by decisions that need to be made. >> we want them to wish them luck they'll be able to keep both but i'd like to ask the

excision base it is so unusual to have an update on how it's progressing. >> commissioners if i may repeat and get clarifications i heard 4 modifications one a setback at the garage and first floor of 3 feet two reduce the commercial windows an lynch street and 3. >> and working with the staff on that. >> 3 adding an n s r there the commercial use and fourth providing planters can i get clarification for the planters and planters think the ground floor and there was a 3 feet 3 feet setback on the ground floor and the first floor was 3 additional feet. >> okay. >> i didn't hear i say that. >> the planters. >> in the setback on those floors i heard you say it on the

ground floor but to the first year. >> on the first floor. >> so the planet is at the ground floor adjacent to the garage door the counter plans have a planters on the roof of that first level not deck on that level do you want to maintain that planter as well. >> yeah. okay. that is consistent with the others planters they have. >> okay there is a motion and a second to take dr and approve with conditions as amended commissioner antonini commissioner hillis commissioner johnson commissioner moore commissioner richards commissioner wu so moved, commissioners, that motion passes 6 to zero. >> on the rear yard

modification and the variance i'm inclined to approve but i'll note the conditions that are imposed by the planning commission. >> commissioners that places us on item 18 record number mission street a mandatory discretionary review. >> good afternoon or evening commissioner wu and members of the planning commission. >> there's only three of us. >> the item before you say an

application for a mandatory discretionary reviews of a building permit to expand and amend the operation of a mcd.org as barbary coast on mission street hold on one second please take our conversations outside we have further business. >> it is located within the 2025 downtown zoning district a bulk district logged on e.r. located with the central selma bounded by 6th street to the east and the proposal will allow for onsite medical cannabis and the medical cannabis eatables and allowing up to 99 plants to be located onsite anticipate captains mcd by adding 6 hundred

50 gross skate for storage room and gross street for an all purpose meeting room within the storefront on the empowering total it square footage for the mcd will increase from 2 thousand 18 to 3 thousand 3 hundred and 2 gross square feet previous mandatory discretionary review for the establishment of the mcd at the spibt subject property was approved in june 2011 that permit the mcd to operate on the ground floor with approximately 2 thousand square feet the applicant to sell cannabis didn't permit the onsite medication of medical cannabis so the proposed hours are 8:00 a.m. and the security

for inside and outdoor cameras and security guard stathsdz at the doors and per the medical cannabis act approved by the board of supervisors and the mayor the department of public health serves as the leads agency for permitting the mcds and it is general limited to the characteristics of mcds while principally permit within the c-3 districts to whether or not to look at the discretionary use authorization pursuant to the planning commission code in terms of public comment to date, no option to this project received by the department one letter of support and approximately 15 signatures that has been collected by the project sponsor he building the project sponsor has before you this evening

department recommendations the department of approve the project the site is more than one thousand feet from a surrey school it is well served by public trait and xapdz the increases and the mcd.org current operates audiotape in 2013 and maintained and clean record with the sf ph employment levels are consistent with the mcd approximately 8 employees and the mcd compiles with all standards and policies of the general plan that concludes my presentation. i'm available to answer any questions. >> thank you. >> project sponsor. >> good evening, commissioners

brandon for barbary coast barry is located between 5th and 6th street business hours are 8:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m. originally proposed in 2011 it was designed to utilize the square footage and include onsite accumulation the project sponsor unilateral scaled back the project to make sure that the neighborhood was cajole and the operation was capable with the surrounding neighborhood if into effect the mcd was not a cause of nuisance the mcd will coming come back to this commission after a couple of years and demonstrate their track record this project was originally before the commission there were concerns nearby youth facilities not identified by the

planning department staff and it was commenced on the adjacent lot and the dr filed in opposition the matter was continues for 3 months and the project sponsor meet with altitude the people in the neighborhood to make sure there are no youth facilities within one thousand feet and the adjacent developer withdraw his opposition and submitted a letter in approve approval the commission don't dr and approved the project by the vote of 6 to one only in opposition was commissioner antonini didn't support this project because it was the most responsible application from any mcd i'd like to note fords there are 4 mcdonald's within a 6 block radius of barbary coast they allow onsite consumption and

there is 6 letters in support and 2 thousand signatures in no opposition and notice have been given to the communities and the project sponsor met with the neighbors and the hearing was originally set for july 23rd and barbary coast as a notification since july 12th and this allowed barbary coast to allow the patients within the setting setting and the dispensary will not get over crowd with product demonstrates in the same area that the patients pursue their medications i'd like to to split the time with barry i'm the project sponsor and general manager of barbary coast when we first applied for the permit we

want to be positive with the neighborhoods 4 years later we have formed a positive partnering with the neighbors we donate to a number of youth groups and helped to fund two buy backs with for guns i'm at barbary coast and not received one complaint into the san francisco health department we are or not by our patients and neighbors we've strived to make i blocks save for the neighbors and general block we have two security cameras and paid security guard if an outside security companies 7 days a week at barbary coast we care about you are community and earned the

terrorist of the community and city of san francisco to undertake this expansion to allow us to provide security for our patients thank you. >> based on the after mentions we're available for any questions the commission may have. >> we're open up for public comment i have a number of speaker cards (calling names). >> if i've called your name, please come to the podium. >> good afternoon commissioners my name is michael cohen a resident of san francisco sorrow and i'm a patient cannabis patient i have hiv disease and as a patient hive a real desire to have social contacts with people social contact with people is

very good for more people most people needs more social contact and i support the granting of this permit to barbary coast it is important to meet others patients on the face to face basis who shares their comparisons captioners and treatment and their diseases or problems with their health let's see the dispensary 950 mission will allow access for me and other patients to social lists and to medicate therefore, he support this space for onsite consumption thank you. >> thank you. next speaker. >> good evening commissioners

i'm david golden o goldman a logical residents and homeowner and vice president of the cannabis democrat club i served on the medical cannabis task force i'm here in support of the onsite consumption space for the barbary coast they're an exempt dispensary offering high quality medication and continuing new product deems alerting the patients to the new patients important for us to rehabilitate those developments in the city there are currently only 8 places brown where medical cannabis patients can legally con assume their medication two are currently under rae modeling many places in the public where medical cannabis patients can't

medicate near schools and restaurants and bars and many patients live in federally subsidize housing they can't use their medical cannabis it is a schedule one drug illegal in the federal government please approve that as a to add for them to approve their services thank you. >> >> next speaker. >> and good evening. i'm paulal long time residents of san francisco i want to echo what the previous speaker just said about the social aspects and being able to discuss the needs and different things that are as research as it comes down the pike the bud tenders are knowledgeable to barry koovts

but the patient - they want to take the time and discussing things amongst themselves is sponsor a place to social lists also the culture vacation they'll be spilling plants for other patients to leaving grow their eaten grooeg it from seed is not the easiest things to side but if they have to have the juiceing program to juice the raw leaves it is essential you grow it yourselves i strongly you support barbary coast and approve their expansion thank you very much. >> thank you. next speaker. >> and we have oh, that was you. >> good evening. i'm susan thank you for the opportunity allowing me to address as

interest and knowledge increases about medical cannabis patient rely on spaces to meet with others in similar situations and illnesses as the previous speakers mentioned barbary coast is unique the proposed build out is a viable surface for the patients to allow for the increased space for the well intended seminars and environmenty therapy it - the staff has knowledge and is helping with the quality of life in the mint area the welcoming the aesthetics in the barbary coast louder than these san francisco's past i encourage you to get our 215 and visit it is a beautiful, beautiful place welcoming in the extreme dispensaries engagement with the neighbors offices well, to the

fire chief of san francisco i strongly urge your support of the welcome and needed expansion thank you. >> thank you. >> next speaker >> sarah johnson i listened to this building to construction second to that. >> and few more of my drawings wish to constructs of my house and ask me what i know apply for that and as far as i think you've got a mason's of cancer this - i agree with the shareing

and the communication that the doctor that you know not his hearing this processes of what goes on in cancer and only takes you know years depending on how long you have cancer or illnesses you have you know and also getting in more clarification to allow those to reestablish to where we can understand the medical cannabis club is all good and the consideration for carrying the

considerations and the misunderstanding project, of course, i need more to explain my episode and the san francisco historic preservation commission with doctors and you know filling in more about what the years of this episode and - the issues on building construction is really important that we may have more knowledge into build on this process see what the me on the application to starts in the mission district and thank you. >> thank you. next speaker.

>> good work commissioners staff i'm terrence allen most recently working with the board of supervisors to create the medical cannabis task force over the next 18 months will offer recommendations similar to those how mcds are sdrbld around the city about a little bit over a decade i was fortunate enough to be asked by one the disappears in the early marijuana distribution process to become a board member of champion an market and church street the first ever experiment where all excess money stayed inside the champ facility and used and reinvested what that ruled in a huge socialization

space you had a dispensary on one side and overwhelming popper the area to social lists you hear people sharing information until we really know and what works within the cannabis and the pardon me t h c in impels until we know that as science patient like myself rely on the information from other partiality it is important that be continued in san francisco i see in san francisco i see the no sign i'm proud to see let's fourth how to do it with barbary coast looking at their operation you can yep them or google them if anyone is for the this bringing this one step further

this should be barbary coast. >> thank you is there any additional public comment public comment is closed. >> commissioner antonini and yeah. he was opposed the times before i'll be opposed today, i think this particular firm does the things responsiblyly but one the things i was more repetitive they especially\have onsite smoking particularly growing the cannabis on site problem my experience has been that it is difficult to see the effects on cannabis it is easier with alcohol you can get a blood alcohol level the effects of the alcohol on the person and i'm afraid that is more think avenue in and out type of things people will get in cars and drive when

they've consumed i think that if it is treatment for a medical problem then it is not this is not legal yet to be done so you should be getting our medication and going home or whatever you go and take our medication as any other prescription drug so i don't see that as an additional i think that is an area wear trying to clean up between 5 and 6th street and even if the owners of this establishment run a clean establishment there are people leaving with the substance and they'll be substantial to be robbed and lots of cash some of the cash the patrons are bringing up be with them and it is a formula for additional crime there are you know it is true in schools within one thousand

school there are quite a few of the that are more than one thousand feet away we've heard 6 other facilities in the area certainly not a shortage of facilities by which you can fill our prescription and get our medical cannabis and so those are kind of my feelings on that i approximately hoffman ton is not opposed to this next door i remember their opposition before when it came before us and 5 m ask going to be a few blocks away this is another area that might be a problem but other mcds in the area as it is so that's my thoughts on this project. >> thank you commissioner johnson. >> sorry. >> ready sorry about that. >> yeah. you know, i want to agree to what some of what commissioner

antonini but seeing this on the planning commission we still have to evolve on what mcds are how they're used i'm not sure whether or not the ends result will be a bar whether alcohol is served or something closer to a pharmacy the jury is still out on the land use will ended up being with that said i be that would be good to keep laboratory of consistency i want to ask staff my memory is failing me what did we do with spark a couple of months ago about onsite xhupsz about >> bob: but drinking and smoking or eat how we do that if anyone from staff remembers. >> i was a 5, two vote no

onsite consumption. >> they did not it was only the expansion of hours. >> outer mission. >> i'm sure i'm talking about the inner mission not within the fusing few blocks of this site. >> they have onsite consumption. >> well, the thing i remember when it came here my question was i feel last week, we had some other conditions or finding regarding h back and hours how long on site i'm sorry if any details. >> i believe our purviews is limited that's in terms of sf dpw is the referral agency it is really the geographyic location in terms of the same thousand

foot's threshold is applied in that no so to speak smoking or onsite consumption within the sf d beyond that it is recommend by nothing in our purview to regulates it other than dbi smoking is not allowed in the state of california in public places. >> that's not very helpful he know that spark has vaping at least can't remember about the eight or the streft location. >> b that being said some onsite consumption that i could be okay and how we're doing that as we see is findings from the task force and as question see

further rulings out board of supervisors try to have some sort of consistency i'll be okay with the project and love to hear from the commissioners specifically the onsite consumption. >> commissioner moore. >> over guess years to speak more directly to the question as commissioner johnson just raised the commission has held up san francisco law supporting master cards in controversial cases but the position we've contestantly taken in consumption no vapor on site that's a fall back position we're in a time which the first push back from the fed's certainly mcds were close we asked the board of supervisors asks for a policy we tried ourselves ran both a brick wail commissioner avalos didn't like

the indictment in which we were going basically 9 years of trying to deal with that but our fall back position came to supports mcds until we have extreme neighborhoods push back in supervisor tangs district but generally how support came in if non-consumption and non-assembly you get our stuff and get your advisory and then that's as far as it went i spoke last night and have to admit the area is under extreme transition especially in the mid block and i tleblt r technicality tlebltd i would be more

supportive literally every building had a for sale on it in participation with 5 m the building itself in which the downstairs is basic the usual large window fronts looked clean but the thoughupstairs didn't l curtains askew and all this stuff the block didn't leave me with a feeling of this is think a established place i wish your application and times and pattern will be clear i'll be honest it will be a solid refurbished neighborhood an expansion of businesses supporting each other i did not see that with respect to the hampton question that particular

building not in operation from what you saw either refurbishing in the building or either of the two no operation of a hampton in where the sign is. >> it is no more hotel a construction chain link on the outside i couldn't see a construction sign not in operation so i'm really torn i'm come from a general hundred percent support for mcds in this particular case i'm a little bit hedging and going to i'll see what my fellow commissioners have to say. >> if i can add a couple of thoughts for me, i agree i want to treat businesses sort of evenly i know the bart has vaping i visited when they have the controversial proposal so i think i'm leaning are towards

supporting as is it would be helpful to have more knowledge what exactly is vertebral in the neighborhood already. >> commissioner antonini. >> yeah. i can see with a certain amount of certainty that allowed for onsite consumption the commission didn't approve are onsite consumption but we've vote for many of them when we asked them to not have onsite consumption then they were approved that is the second bite of the alisa miller they're trying to come back and try to change the situation that bothers me i think that right now it is supposed to be for medical needs and taken care of something you have a problem that makes sense but not yet legal not yet a socializing situation i agree with

commissioner moore i walked if 5 and mission garage to the twitter building two weeks ago to see where the bridge issue to see it first hand this is not the most pollutant area between fifth and up to about eight street still needs a lot of work and places that need you know in mice stimulation to be approved i'm not sure this is going to actually help the neighborhood it may not a deterrent that's my position as opposed. >> commissioner hillis. >> so i i i mean, i share concerns i generally look at this is this deal dealt with bunching or two. in the neighborhood the neighbors are telling us if this is well run and there's a testament none here opposing it and some are

dead commercial spaces but your storefront is one of the betters on the block mcd or no mcd and vibrate not a lot of gates and security person looming over the front in this case i'm supportive germany wouldn't like taking additional kind of frontage on mission street but actually using it for onsite consumption and having people i would be against if they're using it for storage but i like the fact for onsite use people are more social aspect and i'm glad we're looking at in the future how we handle those it is a little bit of a question what what they are do they belong on the second floor pharmacies this one is well run and anymore active component to the block on mission street so i'm supportive

of it as being recommended by the department. >> commissioner richards. >> i'd like to hear more if the project sponsors i hear the look on your face do you have anything to help us out with that would be great. >> we were able to verify that spark has full consumption on mission trend it definitely towards vaping and that will be encouraged vaping will be there but smoking will be discouraged we depended on want to deny the patients access to activities on site because they choose to smoke and not vap the vaption is being promote in this space and not smoking will smoking will be

phased out the products as they become safer and cleaner i want to - do you want to talk about the neighborhood. >> we tried our best to add to the neighborhood to honestly clean up the block in a positive force on that block we do offer quite a bit of services we offer our services are not just around the medical marijuana but offer massage and acupuncture and offer more services it is classes and nutrition and things like that so there are a number of places in the vicinity bloom room is behind us approved for consumption and spark has consumption and the green door down the block has consumption we want to be able to be on the

leveling the playing field but it is something our patients can't have when they come into our location we want to offer that to them. >> commissioner moore. >> mr. - while you're still standing i was talking to allen and henry. >> the building has above the board what's the the upper floors. >> a sros hotel. >> do you find this is compatible. >> we've had a long time relationship no problems at all with their tenants worked hand in hand with their property owner and a good relationship in terms of it's i think that is a zoned c-3 which is you know the most per administrative for

those types of use no schools and use facilities anywhere nearby and generally hotels and offices so- >> which floor will you be occupying our building right now like i said from the beginning the project entire 4 thousand square feet as rented and we decided early on in the process instead of coming in with a large you know request of this commission and the city for onsite commission we'll do it in stages and smaller dispensary in and out serve and builds ourselves into the community and have good relationship and support community groups and show we're serious we are good neighbors and live up to our word when we came in here three years ago we're not trying to do a switch it is just in stages based on

our merit that's why we waited 3 years to come anyway. >> i appreciate our saying it is a proven track record to expands some people might consider that to be a substantial permit you operate other facilities in san francisco nearby i think i remember ta hem as well as 214 cal state your coming back to us in a few quitclaims and asking for 50 thousand plus thousand square feet; is that correct. >> their completely unrelated to those barry is not related to this one i'm the attorney for all those. >> i don't know about the interest. >> i don't know. >> or about any of them. >> no. >> i appreciate our answer.

>> commissioner hillis. >> so i was going to move to take dr with approval for the modifications by staff. >> commissioner johnson. >> just real quick question on the onsite cultivation where you, you cultures the have and have not's new. >> but we'd like i want to clarify not cultivate but offer little patients the clone a small baby plants to culture elevate in their eaten homes keeping it grou but not intending to have a large growth per say sniefdz the dispensaries. >> where it is for consumption on and off sites you're asking for this to sell smaller plants

can you explain that. >> there's a 99 plant limit in san francisco we just want to provides our patients with that opportunities if they want to take home plants they can get it into our faults where is your general product. >> outdoor vendors that come in. >> the members are delivering to your shop. >> yes. >> thank you. >> okay please call the question and. >> commissioner there is a motion and a second to take dr and approve with modifications commissioner antonini no commissioner hillis commissioner johnson commissioner moore no commissioner richards commissioner wu so moved, commissioners, that motion passes that passes 4 to.

>> (clapping.) commissioners that practices on. >> any general public comment ms. hester. >> sue hester i have two things to talk about pursue one is relating to an e-mail he sent the 30th of july about presentation matters to the commission and copies therefore but anymore immediate things they want to talk about today about the next chair you

have is three weeks from now a day before everyone leaves for labor day the last one was 12 hours you kicked off a lot of issues until that hearing i humbling suggest that you are offer calendared for the third you have to do the mission district project kicked off the mission controls in 2104 you have a vote the following week on 2000 bryant street it is automatically approved unless you set out the rules on the third mission district those mission street those two initials i think conserving two to three hours i went through the hears and spent the entire 12 hours

here per the next thing on our agenda is the information hearing on fifth and mission i requested a bunch of presentations there's going to be a shadow presentation, a presentation of 3-d of the site understand from talking to people in the communities that there are probably 0 the informational presentations that will happen why are they going to be at that hearing your slated to vote on the 5 m project two weeks later how many eliminate you have on fifth and mission you know it is conserving $2,000 in the real word you spent two hours on two units on pacific that was an hour and 50 minutes i look at the rest of the calendar you are going to have the

highest building on the waterfront ever on the calendar a 2 hundred plus 2 hundred foot building with extreme luxury housing obstructed use on the waterfront not any time to get into that reality if you don't have a two or three hour hearing i mean, i'll be shocked and continued 4 hearings last meeting you continued 4 items so i'm looking at this calendar and i don't think this is realistic to go 12 hours the day before a holiday weekend that is abusive to the public and abusive to yourselves i'm sorry. >> if you have any questions, i'll answer your questions but i just plead for sanity take control of your