>> good afternoon and welcome to hadstuff planning commission regular hearing for thursday november 19, 2015. the commission does not tolerate disruption or outburst of any kind. please silence mobile devices and when speaking before the commission do state your name fl record. like to take [inaudible] commissioner fong, here, wu, here. antonini, here.

commissioner hillis, here. commissioner moore, here. commissioner johnson. seventy-first dprrgz items proposed. item 12015-0000988 cwp. interim controls related to mission plan 2020 is proposed for continuance to january 1, 2016. items a and b [inaudible] 24 ord cort conditional use authorization and variances have been there is request from had project sponsor to with draw. there was a full public hearing and the commissioners adopted intent to disapprove and continue to november 19.

from the september 24 hearing there was a longer time period for the continuance to allow the project sponsor to alter the project in some fashion, so if there is consensus to allow the withdraw then there needs to be no action, otherwise we'll need to continue the motion of disapproval can be brought before you. commissioners on your regular calendar, item 9, for case 20s 15, 00011449 redefine formula retail to include subsidiaries. we received a re quest from supervisor mar to continue this matter into mid-in an. i recommend jan 21. i have several speaker cards on items 1 and 9. >> thank you. georgia

[inaudible] larry badner, paul weber and peter khan. >> good afternoon. i'm in favor of the continuance for interim controls. i want to read the footnote in the staff report. i think that is probably a important thing to read the one from uc burgly. i also think that while you are continuing it there are things maybe you can consider. expanded the district. i brought up the san karlos thing. there are 4 units that. i also want to point out maybe in the ucb report but there is a lot of activity of units, 117 units according to the report i get from the real estate company. 117 units in flush over the last month. i don't know what it means, but it means something.

condo, tic, unit. the last thing i want to say is i discovered accidently the pipeline for 2012 first quarter and it said above moderate units percentile, 60.6 percent and found had one for the second quarter of this year and the same thing, 116. that is-what does that mean? what is going on there? is that just all the high rises or the mission or noe valley? i think that is something to consider >> larry badner, badner urban planning. i encourage you tacontinue the missionintsroom control. maybe

not to jan 21 but it was on the continuance calendar but that is usually that is the practice. i don't think people are ready to respond to this today. next week is great or whatever the staff thinks is appropriate, i'm just concerned with today. i think issue is important and should be heard as soon as it can though. >> thank you. peter pop dopilous, [inaudible] tommy mecca, susan [inaudible] and maria [inaudible] >> i was called in the first round, my name is paul weber and here on behalf of telegraph hill [inaudible] on item 9 and the continuance. this was a project started last year with

a working group to strengthen the ordinance as it related to formula retail enterprises. that is to say, companies or activities that already were subject to the formula retail to pick up something currentry called subsidiaries and we are still in discussion with supervisor mar's office about the nature and scope of that strengthening and we very much appreciate you putting this over until january. thank you very much. >> good afternoon commissioners. peter cohen. here as a citizen today and want to echo mr. webers comments. this is about formula retail controls. you made bold steps in updateing

the legislation passed a decade prior and it was time to do that and one critical piece that you asked to have come back to you is the issue about subsidiaries and it is very real at there and we have been deiging into it, had success with the working group. supervisor mar is committed to come up with a good set of policies but giving more time to january is helpful. this is a big issue to make a big decision on. thanks. >> tommy [inaudible] from housing rights committee. we support the continuance of the interim controls to give planning staff a chance to work on them more. specifically, we feel that they need to address the issue of the demolition of rent controlled units and what will happen. obviously we

don't support the demolition of rent controlled units at all and feel this commission and the planning department should have a policy of no demolition of rent controlled units, however, if there is in the interim controls any protection put in place for displaced tenant or what happens with rent controlled unit, we feel the interim control as it stands now doesn't address that or adequately talk about how all that will work so we would like to see something concrete for addressing the issue of the rent controlled units. that includes the one to one replacement and bmr units if that is what they propose. we would like more information about how that will function, the ami levels fl life of the building. there are a

lot of questions not answered in the draft of the interim controls. we would like to see more detail on the report developers will have to produce on the effect of market rate development they are bringing. what the effect will be on evictions and runt and how rent may increase and the effect the diversity of the neighborhood, so again, i think there is a lot of room for further development of that idea in the proseal. finally, we hope the planning department will work with the mission community to further strengthen the interim controls so that they will become a proproseal we can stand behind and support. and help protect the mission against further gent fisquaigz discorrection of the diversity the mission has. continue this item and

the planning department should continue work wg the mission community to make the interim controls a document we can all support. thank you. >> good afternoon. mission sro collaborative and here to speak in support of the planning department staff recommendation to be continued until the planning commission meeting on the 21 of january. we appreciate the support the planning department and ask all of you to engage in the community to find solution tooz the very real affordable housing crisis in the mission. the realty on the ground has not changed, the crisis in the mission remains as does the call from the community for strong provisions so let's be sure the proposal that

comes up does reflect that. thank you. >> good afternoon commissioners. maria and organizers with [inaudible] also here to support the continuance by planning staff for controls to january 21, 2016. we want to make sure planning staff has enough time to strengthen the proposal for the mission. we appreciate the support of planning staff and planning department and we hope that within during the time of the continuance the planning staff will continue to work with mission community. we urge the commissioners to respond the mission community demand that allow 100 percent affordable housing required to keep latino artist, working class people in our

diverse and vibrant neighborhood. thank you. >> good afternoon commissioners. pita pop dopilous with cultural action network and also want to speak in support of continuing this proposal. i really appreciate the support of the planning department in bringing this forward. there are some things we hope will continue to be lookinged at and investigated for strengthening the impact reports are a vital part of this proposal and like to make sure they are clearly defined in a way we feel confidence that helps curb the displacement we are seeing. the loss of rent controlled units is a ongoing concern no matter what the replacement i'm happy to see there is investigation of displacement but would like to see if there is a way to strengthen that so we are not losing more rent

controlled units which a huge concern. lastly it brings me great cheer to see 1 to 1 replacement of pdr whether it appears in print or otherwise and see sphwe can expand that or strengthen that because new pdr does not have the same curbing effect on displacement as old pdr as well if we talk in a percentage ratio we have a scenario where we see properties carve up and if we retain a level of pdr, the percentage of the actual building stock can start to get quite small given the size and development we are seeing. those are some the things my community would like to see investigated as wego forward and this time can help us talk about this more so ask that you please continue this proposal. thank you. >> my name is [inaudible] i'm a

volunteer with the applauseey 16 coalition recollect a small business owner and a parent at a public spanish school and also in support of continuing the hearing on interim controls and also want to thank the planning department for this. i think it is a big step in the right direction and with a little more time we can get more support from the community, but that takes time. it needs to be dusiminated and translated into spanish but translated from planning jargon to regular english and then spanish and that takes time but think it is a step in the right direction and hope you will consider some the adjustments like perhaps make tg go to had entire mission neighborhoods and not just the pocket within the mission neighborhood that it is covering at the moment. basically i want to say thank you very much and think the community

will be supportive of this effort. thank you. >> good afternoon commissioners. [inaudible] mission resident. working for [inaudible] i want to recognize keeping this interim control [inaudible] i'm in support of the continuance for the future and i appreciate that you want to do something for the mission in response the community and the community is clear, we need more affordable housing and whatever it takes to have more affordable housing we are [inaudible] we know the interim control [inaudible] but it will provide a more [inaudible] and we want the developers [inaudible] they see the impact in the community for diversity, the working

class neighborhoods that is the mission and make the changes with [inaudible] if there is a way to make it stronger we will really appreciate that and we are behind a stronger provisions for the interim control. thank you. >> good afternoon commissioners . sean [inaudible] residential builders. i'm here to echo my frustration where we discussed this very item. [inaudible] there had been no out reach at that point to the development community and not any sense. this is a poncht issue for the development community, we are playing by your rules. this is

a eastern neighborhoods zoning done by all these groups involved. it isn't our plan it the communities plans. it is all our plans y. was frustrated because there were different version, some had grand father and some didn't. at the end of the september hearing we were told there is a fresh approach. most commissioners said let's wait and see what the voters want. what is the will oaf the voter. we go what that will is now but yet the controls put forward today are the exact same. when i looked at the item and saw it was on the continuance calendar i thought that is good. there is a lot of work that needs to be done. these are all very legitimate concerns. then i learned there was a request to center the item heard tomorrow. we have 1500

units that are code complying playing by your rules. if the rules are going to change in the middle of the game we deserve a courtesycally and something more formal than a e-mail. this needs to happen in a quick process . we need to be able to follow this and connect the dautss. we remember when the springing conditions were placed in front of us. not everybody was sitting but those that were sitting, that was a big big deal, to the small developers iptown. the projects are not just wall street money guys, it is the retirement and college education money for our children. this is serious stuff and when the rules change we have some-you guys have a obligation to keep us involved. i haven't heard a

word from the planning department about graund fathering or those controls in a long long time. something has to change here. we were delighted to play by the rules, tell us what they are and we'll honor them. something needs to happen moving forward, we agree. but please let's do it in a respectable fashion. thank you. i support the continuance. >> is there additional public comment? >> if i could just-sorry, go ahead. >> good afternoon rks steve [inaudible] also speaking in support of a continuance. did want to point out whault is in the package is the same set of controls you heard on september 24 and we are continued at that time with direction from the staff and direction from public comment. that direction has not been

incorporated into what is before you. that was after the controllers support was issued so this document doesn't have the findings the controllers report and if it goes forwards we need touse the analysis for the a baseis if there are individualized reports. before this is heard there needs to be work by the staff to bring this up to date and also with what [inaudible] indicated earlier. support the continuance and ask if this [inaudible] all the stakeholders in the community to perfect this. thank you. >> good afternoon. i'm here on a different item, my name is chris parks and urge you to deny the 24 ord

court withdrawal. neighbors attended the september 24 hearing to express concerns for the conditional use request. both the projects exceeded the [inaudible] adopted by the board of supervisors last spring for our neighborhood. neighbors agreed not to oppose [inaudible] with the condition at 24 ord court conditional use there is denied. a conditional use permit be denied on the property and the trees prerfbed. neighbors presented materials and kailed back 24 ord court [inaudible] no additional conditions were included at the time the motion was adopted. commissioners

expressed the desire to preserve the trees and approve the permit for 24 ord court and drackted staff to bring back motion to deny. now that the project sponsor request application be with drawn, if that were allowed what would happen? could the owner or future owner bring you a new cu application or a new application that builds on top of the trees? neighbors obtained a decision denying removal of the trees but only if the developer does not obtain purmtds to build on top of them. will the projects come back to you as another cu or dr and use your time again on this project? neighbors are confused and disheartened by the staff recommendation for with

withdrawal. neighbors appealed the 22 ord court not because of the intention the planning commissioners to accept a compromise but because a compromise is jeopardy. neighbors are grateful to commissioners time and effort to address neighbors concerns on the project. we did want to point out one thing ing the code section one, in the event the commissioners pass a motion of intent to disapprove a permitted application before them the applicant can not withdrawal the application prior to commissioners of action with passage of a written motion of findings or resolutionism thank you for your time >> any additional public comment. not seeing comment is closed. i would like director to make a few comments >> commissioners related to the interim

control item we have put-you voted to continue the controls to this date that is why it is on the calendar. we propezed to continue to january to allow more work on the controls and incorporate the neighborhoods mentioned around rent controlled housing and other things we are working on with the city attorneys office. we would continue to support a continuance to that date. i think the confusion today and the reason for amount of testimony which is in agreement doesn't happen often, is i sent oit a e-mail because we were told there were a number of people wanting to hear the item today. that turns out not to be the case so we recommend you continue this until the end of january where we have more time to incorporate additional work. just to be clear, there is nothing

obyour advanced calendar in the next 3 months that is effected by the controls so there are no projects that are effected. >> commissioner richards, >> i move to continue items 1 and 9. i move to continue items 2 a to next week where i agree with a speaker that we [inaudible] section 4, subsection 6 c, we do not allow the project sponsor to withdrawal his application that we-that is part the bargain on this. [inaudible] >> december 3. >> to when we can get a motion >> you said next week. >> december 3. >> second. >> commissioner antonini. >> on a couple items, first of all on the ord court it seems to me

and i can be corrected if the project sponsor revises a project no longer need of approval there is no reason for it to come before us. >> the project sponsor could revise the project to a code complying project and believe the zoning administrator at the time stated that would be a significantly different project that what comes before you than conditional use so that would go through its own process. i think what commission richards is pointing out is the rules and regulations spell out after a motion orphintent and stopped reading after the first sentence incorrectly and after the commission adopt as motion of intent to approve or disapprove that action be completed. >> completely understood and appreciate commissioner richards bing that up. as far as the controls, in 13

years i remember a item that was proposed for continuance a week ahead and changed to be heard a day before and if it were to be heard it is unfair to the stakeholders reading the continuance calendar assuming it would not be heard and did not prepare them sevl squz come to speak. i didn't read all the previous material which i would have done if i thought we would be make any decision or having a hearing on this today. we have policies in place that guvern a project that may come before us in the interim. there isn't going to be a project that will fall under that so i don't see a reason not to continue this. i think it is better to take our time and find something that can be broadly supported and i'm in favor of the motion to continuance to the the 21 of january. >> just have a different

thought on this. continue the item for the maybe commissioner rich rbds will take these up, interim control, i propose we continue to the 17. on the 21 we are moving towards looking at the formula retail control and take up affordable housing bonus program which we had 2 informational hearings about and will have a substantial hearing on that. i feel adding the mission control is too much. i know the 17 is closed but those items seem much less time consuming and substantial so i suggest we move the interim control to the 17 on the calendar and if we want to push it out further we can. on 24 ord court december 3 is fine but it is

my understanding because we had inteent disapprove that doesn't show up on the regular calendar it shows on the consent calendar. i want to confirm that is what we are doing chblt for redefining formula retail, this wasn't commissioner richards program and would take the recommendation from supervisor mar we continue to january 21. >> one interesting thing is you mentioned affordable housing density program and we are talking about rent controlled units replaced in the mission. one will inform the other and like the fact that we should probably center on a policy around replacement of rent controlled units and do the mission control. >> sorry to intrupt, but the advance calendar has the affordable housing program >> the 28. >> 21 is related to

inclusionary housing which is a different >> different program. >> i just want to-i like the commission to have a policy on replacement of rent controlled units and a larger discussion and filter into the discondition of the mission so would like it a week or 2 after the affordable housing density program. >> that puts it into february. >> yes. >> okay. i'm going to not do that for a reason that you know i won't want to do that. perhaps then would it be possible to look at putting the afford able housing-i actually think that one can inform the other in terms of the treatment of rent control. our discussion about [inaudible]

the affordable housing bonus program will inform the same thinking for either program. to me it doesn't matter which comes first. we'll have the discussion and it will form the other discussion. my proposal would still be to put the mission interim controls on the 17th. no, january 14th. >> let me check with staff on this if staff is available and if what you are thinking about could be done by the 14th >> at thits point we don't know what can be done but it is our hope and desire the issue of the rent control housing units and how we deal with those are settled in advns of the affordable housing bonus program so it might work out under the way we are thinking of things but if we

discuss something that enables us to discuss the affordable housing program. everything is up in the air and a work in development so whatever the commission comes up i'm sure staff will adjust their schedules. >> that's my proposal and happy to hear other thoughts. mission interim controls january 14. december 3 for 24 ord court and that is on the consent calendar and january 21 for redefining formula retail to include subsidiaries. >> commissioner richards, accept. >> does the secondary accept the modifications? >> yes. >> commissioner hillis. >> on the ord court issue, did we-i tried to think what we did on that because i know we were in agreement to reject 24 ord court but not

sure we passed a motion. >> there was a motion of intent of disapprove and i- >> doesn't show up on the continuance calendar. [inaudible] thank you. >> commissioner moore. >> a support continences on the displacement of rent controlled units. i generally lake to ask we start initiating policy discussion of displacement of pdr [inaudible] intimately connected as we are losing work place and threatening housing and losing housing threaten work place. to not talk about the environmental issues that govern that. i would like to ask the city attorney and i clearly would [inaudible] secretary ionen tell what the rules are regarding the continuance on ord. could you restate what

the considerations are by which we are bringing it back to deny the project? >> would you just read it again >> reading it into the record. this is uner deyour rules and regulation section 6 voting under c. the commission passes a motion of intent to approve or disapprove opermit application before them the applicant shall not be permitted to withdrawal the application prior to commissions completion with a written motion of findings or resolution >> thank you for reading that again. i think it is a very important message and very much appreciate

commissioner richards remembering that. >> commissioner antonini. >> in terms of the proposed continuance it doesn't make too much difference but supervisor mar's reason for the continuance on his proposal for formula retail extensions was because of the holidays and retailers who may not available and presumebly they are available on the 14th january. it may be bet toor get that out of the way on the 14th. [inaudible] revise those to put formula retail on the 14th and >> as i understand his request is continue to mid-january. >> 31 days, i think the 15th, pretty close. >> my understanding is the motion is to

the 21 for formula retail subsidiaries. >> that was included in commissioner richards original motion and changed the mission interim controls toa earlier date >> you propose to amonday mend >> leaving the interim controls on the 21 but moving the formula retail to the 14th. there is no reason to wait any longer >> we have affordable housing on the 28. mission controls on the 21 and formula retail on the 14. that sounds reasonably spaced to me, i accept. >> commissioner moore >> would the supervisor not being here i don't want to pick a date for whatever reason-i know how who

talked to so unless mr. stark would shed light on it&we can talk about the 14th and do talk about the 21 at a later date. as missioner antonini said, it was to avoid the holidays and small business having to deal with that >> it may involve the small business commission and all kinds of things we are not privy to. when someone make as suggestion i dont think we should second guess it and unless we are told it isn't possible i'm here to support that. [inaudible] >> commissioner johnson. >> sorry. >> commissioner richards >> commissioner johnson came and wispered in my ear that is the day she is expecting her baby so out of

respect for commissioner johnson, i would like you here as well. propose the dates that will work around what you anticipate happening >> 14 for interim control, 21 for the formula retail and we are not talking about affordable housing on the 28. >> 14 and 28. >> 14 for interim control, 21 for formula retail and then the other dates are 24 ord court >> out of courtesy for commissioner johnson i accept, >> thank you for announcing my pendsing birth. >> the public should know. >> they should know, having a baby. >> second of the motion i will support that with a caveat should the supervisor have other reasons to explain it to us we can continue again so i'll support the amendment

the motion with the caveat. >> commissioner richards >> i want to point out to everybody in acknowledge of commissioner moores to discuss a pdr policy along with the housing policy i urge those in the audience who has a stack in the pdr game to state for item 8 where we talk about commerce and industry. become familiar with this and stay around for this and we can have a policy discussion >> commission sthra motion that is seconded to continue item 1 to january 14. items 2 a and b to december 3. item 9 to january 21. would you like me to call them together? ? >> commissioner antonini, aye,

commissioner hillis, aye. xhishzer -that motion passes 7 to 0 and places you under your consent calendar for item 3 case 2115 [inaudible] 619 shot well street. i have no speaker cards >> any public comment? not seeing public comment is closed. >> move to approve. >> thank you to approve item 3. commissioner antonini, aye. hillis, aye. -that motion passes 7 to 0 and places you on item 4-commission

matter consideration adoption of draft minute november 5, 2015 >> public comments on the draft minutes proposed? not seeing public comment is closed. >> prove to approve the draft minutes >> second. >> thank you commissioners on that motion to adopt the minutes for november 5, 2015. commissioner antonini, aye. hilts aye. johnson, aye. -the motion passes 7 to 0 and places you on item 5. commission comments and questions. >> commissioner antonini. >> i want to compliment commissioner richards who convened a meeting last saturday at the swedish american haul and had many stakeholders present with a variety of positions, probably 35, i don't know the exact number but in that range and it chs a good discussion and

interesting prooposals brought up. i could only stay a little under 2 hours because i had to get back to my dental office to see patients but thought it was extraemly well done. >> commissioner johnson, >> i appreciate commissioner richards put toort and wasn't able to attend but will be there for the next one and sense commissioner records said it will continue my announcement. i'm expecting and i will take a leave from the 21 is my last meeting is march 1 is when i'm back so 5 or 6 meetings i will miss >> a couple things, conversation we started on twitter and after [inaudible] character messages i am

[inaudible] the dates kept shifting and we can only have 3 commissioners in a room discussing policy so some were not aware. we had 30 people there and former planning commission ron migel and ff grow and [inaudible] mission plaza 16. [inaudible] and a lot of neighborhoods leaders so it was a good discussion and all but one person wanted to continue the conversation so i look forwards to having other commissioners cycle in and out of the conversation. i'll send out notes and you will see what was accomplished. the main goal is people got in the room and didn't beat each other up. there was a good conversation. since i have been on the commission we have done a housing element inventory and have commerce and industry inventory

and 8 other elements in the general plan and want to understand when we have the other 8 elements inventoryed and discussed and understand the interplay is important. the third thing, update on the short term rental registration numbers? one other thing, i know we'll talk about the calendar for the next year, i would ask we consider when we schedule next years calendar we meet a hour later so we can have lunch and not make the public wait. i ask that we consider that. >> there is nothing further we can move to department matters item 6 director announcement >> commissioner, just answer a couple question. the short term rental registration the numbers were around 750 but more importantly the

the office of short term rental is staffing up so they will be up to a full compliment of 6 people, most will be spent on enforcement since registration is probably reaching the maximum. just if i could about the report, the report that you are referring to are not related to elements of the general plan. we don't-part of our regular cycle is isn't to issue a report it is on specific topics that are required. the [inaudible] and housing report and downtown plan report and other plan reports. what i would like to suggest is staff to do a memo to the commission outlining the array of reports and monitoring that we have to do because it is much more extensive i think people realize and there are

overlapping reports and requirements and schedules so like you to be aware orphthat and maybe at some point we can have a discussion. i think there could be legislation that will help coordinate the reports better and be less of a buden on staff but until then i think we'll prepare a memo outlining the schedule of our normal reports. >> commissioner moore >> perhaps you could also provide a calendar of the federal and state mandated update for general plan housing element which are not the reports that you are referring to. for example on the housing element, the state just amendsed the update that occurred every 5 years occurs every 8 years so there are legislative adjustment that effect us. those are 2 elements that if staff could

kroib that. >> commissioner wu >> it is interesting to hear the update numbers about short term memoes. just by way the news, mayor debecauseio announced he is committing 10 million dollars on short term rental so we may have work to do. >> nothing further i have a 7 review of past events of board of supervisors board of appeals >> aaron star. at this week [inaudible] sponsored by supervisor yee. rezone properties facing ocean avenue [inaudible] ocean avenue nct. the planning commission herds this june 18 this year and voted unanimously to recommend approval. the

supervisors herds from exponent tev director from [inaudible] who spoke in favor the ordinance [inaudible] after public comment the committee voted unanimously to recommend the ordinance to the full board. the roof top [inaudible] sponseards by the mayor was continued to december 14. at the full boards the land mark designation of 350 university avenue also known as university mound old ladies home sponsored by supervisor campos passed the sucds read as did the transportation sustainability fee. the notice to all tenants of dwelling units are demilation sponsored by supervisor wiener and tang passed the read and preference in affordable housing [inaudible] supervisor taing made a motion to reduce the neighborhood preference from 40 percent to

30 percent but the motion failed to get a second. supervisor tang made a veckd motion to add a amendment that requires annual reporting on the impact of legislation in particular, how many units filled by residence who use the displaced and neighborhood preference. this passed unanimously. supervisor tang made a amendment to include owner move in. the preference percentage remains at 20 percent but includes ellis act and owner move in. this passed on a 6 foomive vote. the ordinance passed with 9 to 2 voret with supervisor mar and tang voting against the ordinance. next was the 5 m project and involved [inaudible] 800 thousand square feet of office and acre orphopen space. september 17

the commission herds separate approval actions. this week the appeal the environmental impact report, conditional use authorization and office allocation was heard by the board. in addition to the general plan and [inaudible] this resulted in a 6 and a half hour hearing with more than a hundred speakers that endsed a civil disobedient act similar to the one at the planning commission hear. the number of affordable units increased from 33 to 40 percent along with a [inaudible] and number of parking spaces decreased. the boretd voted 8 to lee, campos, avalos and mar dissenting. all the project were upheld or approved. nob flaub use a good faith teerft establish childcare and related amendment tooz the sud, nda and additional payment of 1 and a half million to address the

increased shadow on yerba [inaudible] the demnition of 90 foot tall parking garage and construction of 220 foot tall 20 story residential tower [inaudible] this commission heard the isprojeblth september 3 and voted to approve with 52501 vote chblt at the full board the appellate raised issue regarding the variety of topics including the adequacy of the shadow analysis and range of [inaudible] and eir of traffic analysis. [inaudible] over 6 million to the city for the use and inclusionary affordable housing plan. the board upheld the planning commissions certifyation of eir for 75 howard with a unanimous vote and there

were no introductions. >> commissioner hillis >> on the 75 howard project, how is that additional payment-how does it come about or structured for affordable housing? we don't have the ability to [inaudible] >> they did it voluntarily. i can figure out the mechanisms >> it is a voluntary contribution? >> that is my understanding. >> by e-mail or something if we can get to know how that works. >> sure. >> commissioner antonini >> on saerfb 5 howard that was the upheld the environmental document but was there also approval to the project at the same time? >> [inaudible] >> there was no need for them to act on that . thank you. >> commissioner wu. >> somewhat detailed question so if you cht to follow up that is fine.

the 5 m affordable housing there were 3 components, payment to the tndc building, the off site senior building, and land dedication and on site rental building, were the changes going from 33 to 40 percent made on the on site rental building and could you get back to the tears of the affordability in that building. >> not sure of the answers so i'll get back to you on that >> commissioner richards >> i think to the point when we were here with the folks from mayors office like mr. rich we had numbers that the project gave us and would like a updated final final. there has to be a number to close it out, i appreciate you reporting back on that.

>> happy to. >> thank you. >> good afternoon tim fry department staff here to share from the historic preservation. the commission started with unanimous approval of certificate appropriateness for 135 townsened street which involved a conversion of retail structure to office use and the planning commission will see requested for office development authorization in the near future. the subject propt is located within the south and land mark district as a contributor. the commission then also provided or the recreation and park provided a overview of the project for [inaudible] this is a two phase project. the first certificate of appropriateness involved exterior alterations to the exterior structure. the remainder of

the project will be phased based on financial contributions and will before the hpc at a future hearing. the main component is convert the existing building to a community fusimty and that will also require review by this commission at a future hearing. the commission granted a certificate of appropriateness with additional condition or modified conditions for the van ness brt project and this is just for the section that ones within the civic center landmark district. the commission asked for the project to come back it them for additional certificate of appropriateness, in particular related to the design the new bus shelters and retention of up to 4 trolley pulls that are along van ness and are required to see a rehabilitation of the trolley

pulls and their inclusion in the district. the remainder the project was approved as condition. this includes instead of a cut and replacement of a portion of the sidewalk in front of city haul and landmark district dpw and mta replace the entire sidewalk and all granite curbs be retained and uses and where granite curbs are missing they be installed. finally the commission provided or the commission reviewed and commented and then endorsed the lgbtq city wide historic comment statement. there are a number of folks in support of the adoption. one member the public felt more time should be allotted to the public for review of the document, however, there was a very

robust outreach endeavor associated with the document, the historic prezenivation funds committee provided most of the funding for the contact statement and planning department staff provided tech cg assistance. the document was unanimously approved and will be forwarded to the historic preservation office and used by the department as a planning tool in the future. that concludes my comments unless you st. questions. thank you >> commissioner moore >> i don't have questions but would like to ask mr. fry and the planning department there is discussion on the lands use [inaudible] are you being asked to participate and if so i would like to hear the department and historic preservation report to us as the discussion evolves. >> sure. >> good afternoon president

fong [inaudible] i was going to touch on question that commissioner antonini had about 75 howard to provide more information. as was reported the eir was upheld this week by the board of supervisors. the downton project authorization was appealed and schedule to be heard in december at board of appeals. the variance is also just issued today and the appellate indicated they would likely appeal that as well so both of those will be heard at the board of appeals in december at the earliest so we'll report back to you on that when the outcome is complete. as to last night the board of appeals had a meeting and consider a item that may be of interest, it was appeal of the garage door whip variance and rear [inaudible] 1364 and

1317 pacific. proposal 2 mixed use buildings that are single family units on substandards lot that back to lynch street. the project was the subject of discrepgzary review herds with the zoning administration in august of this year. the planning commission imposed condition requiring a 3 foot set back, additional landscaping and windows on lynch [inaudible] >> there are no question we can move to general public comment not to exceed a period of 15 minutes. at this time members of the public may address the

commission within the subject matter of [inaudible] afforded when the item is reached. each member may address the commission for up to 3 minutes. i do have a number of speaker cards that may go over the allotted time limit. >> i'll call in the order you gave them. john broderick, carol broderick. [inaudible] charles. gus her nan dez, tess [inaudible] richard [inaudible] and kevin welsh. >> good afternoon and thank you for giving us the opportunity to voice our concerns. one by one by one they are disappearing or being destroyed. they survived the earthquake and fires in 1906 but not sure they will be able to escape this crisis. my name is

cairbl broderick and live at 367 jersey street. my house is a queen an house built in 1889. next door is another vick torier, the mirror image of ours. thaes are not large housing, they are appreciately 2 thousand square feet and are disappearing. beautiful victorians are gutted and replaced with 3, 4 and 5 story houses. we were invited to view the house next to us tfs scheduled to increase from 2 thousand square feet to 2800 square feet. several mupths later on the advise of people that had graun through a process we had a architect go to had plang department to review the latest plans and shocked to learn the square footage in a new revision increased to all most 5500

square foot. we were stunned to learn that after the preapplication meeting with the neighbors architect he was able to increase the square footage and make substantial changes from the original design without notification to the neighbors until final plans approved by the planning deparchlt the developer and the architect have a chanss to meet with a planning department employ aiz with no feedback from had neighbors. in this case from us. neighbors who share a wall and foundation with the owners of the project at hand. with our neighbors and the hoech a organization called, protect noe charm we are beginning to fight back. the 4th revision of the plan shows 3 storys, a thourt story star deck and pent house, a second unit and

under ground garage comprising 4 thousand square feet. the negotiations have turned ugy but we'll fight to preserve the butteo of those homes. i ask for your help to do this. give the preservation committee more say in the design of the treasure jz yes both houses are designated historic resources and not let development destroy or unique and wonderful neighborhood. thank you. >> good afternoon commissioners. my name is john broderick. you just heard from my wife, carol. we have been residence of noe valley for 22 years and live at 367 jersey. i'm a member of protect noe's charm. i be came a member because of our experiences with the project proposed at 363

jersey street. fast forwards from what carol said to november 20s 15. the developer is back time and time and presented plan number 4. the planning department asked the developer to revice plan 4. he is preparing plan number 5. the developer continues to try to get plans approved which don't conform to the planning departments comnlts or requirements of the planning departments preservation team. some developers abuse the planning departments approval process. here is what they are doing, developers submit massively out of scale plans and when the planning departments asks them to make changes they submit the same plans with minor modifications. they are allow to do this over and over. the hard working planning staff has to devote more and more time to

the project. developers have no fear of disapproval because they know the worst that can happen is submit revised plans. why is this behavior acceptable? there must be something the planning department can do. can the plan department charge for each revision? is it possible to impose sanctions or fines for repeat offenders? the planning department scuteinized the massive revision that are visible. we are grateful to the preservation team and planning department for doing is, but what about the rear yard? why are projects allowed to go up in the back of a lot at the expense of adjacent and rear neighbors who lose light and priferbacy? why is the height limit so often open to interpretation with so many loop holes? these projects are about vertical and horizontal

additions with maximum square footage. can the planning department make the plan approval process more transtarant and require the developers to supply revisions to the adjacent owners? keeping effected neighbors informed of change is a win win for the developer and planning department and neighbors. it is often said a picture is worth a thousand words. picture was taken today from my year yard nob nobble [inaudible] nob >> thank you, next speaker. chaps [inaudible] rez dent of north of pan handle and devirs dairy

[inaudible] speak on behalf of a couple projeblths happening on our street. when the rezoning happened june and july and approved january and july we felt as a coalition there was little outreach to the community. we believe thit this rezoning on divirs dareo will impact significantly or neighbors in accordance to affordable, transit and neighborhood character. as a coalition we are here to pronounce ourselves and we feel that there should be more outreach and more work with the community to get feedback and opinions when it comes to something so significant. i introduce to you [inaudible]

>> neighbor counsel land use and housing chair. the approval by this commission and by the board of supervisors of the are zoning of divisadero from basically market street to van ness increasing density with no increase in affordability requirements, i think is characterized by your staff is not the planning departments greatest moment and perhaps you dropped the ball. we are here to pick up the ball and invite your participation in us picking up the ball. the same supervisor who rezoned divisadero with no increase in affordability requirements at all was the author of a measure to require neighborhood pref rchbs for affordable housing. a preference for nothing is

nothing. what we have in our effort to redo this first of not to process projects, this violates you own proposed affordable housing density program and represents we think an agregious error and would like to invite you to participate with us and correcting that error. >> good afternoon. my name is richard k and i lived in the divirs dee [inaudible] city planner who ever saw our quaunderant anded to meet with neighbors and walk around the area and get to know sth area and understand the concerns that we had and get a

first hand account of what we liked about our neighborhood. i recall her meeting at my place with other neighbors addressing concerns and asking questions about the neighborhood. i recall we walked the area exstense ivly so the planning get a better understanding of the historic and less understood part of the city. this seems to be in sharp contrast how information is gathered or communicated by planning today. the nct rezoning is perhaps the most significant change to effect our area in the many years i lived there, but thrrfs no effort made to reach out to the community to solicit input. we ask planners spends more time with the community to listen to our concerns about the nct

rezoning. with that in mind, we urge you to attend our workshop on december 5 from 10 to 2. weal 'll provide more information about that in the coming week. thank you. >> thank you >> good afternoon, commissioners. gus her nan dez with the affordable deviz coalition and lived in the neighborhood for about 10 years thmpt are zoning of divirs dareo neighborhood commercial transit district, we were notified but not really vaurfbed involved in the process of the rezoning and so over night for example, there is a project at devirs dareo and grove [inaudible] cl previously was a 16 unit project propolesh and now it is 60

units. because they have taken advantage of the rezoning. so, we feel that this is going to have pretty significant impacts in our community. the neighborhood will become less affordable with the surge of more expensive condos. the units won't be affordable to neighborhood residence. commercial rents will rise which threaten the locally owned neighborhood serving businesses and the impacts on transit will be significant, so this is the point i want to focus on. i think it is easy to call a neighborhood a transit district as i heard just earlier that ocean avenue to [inaudible] the realty is that we are-diverse dareo isn't near a bart station or muni station and are not a

major transit artery. we are one the minor lines on the map. there is one line, 24. we are no more transit district than the dozens of other districts. [inaudible] is a recipe for disaster. affordable de ivisadero we asked supervisor breed to reverse the rezoning and she said nee. she said prop c prevents higher ifordability requirements when are zoning a neighborhood. however, prop c allows for higher affordsability mandates when up zoning neighborhoods and we ask that you listen to our community and as richards mentioned we are hosting a community drirfben neighborhood planning process saturday

december 5, 10 a.m. totwo p.m. you are invited to participate and hope the outcome is a community focused plan for our neighborhood. >> thank you, next speaker. >> tess well born with affordable deviz rchlt we believe the community should have a voice. affordable divisadero hosted 2 community meetings about large scale development. over 100 residence ateneded and there chss strong upsition to the the rezonejug concern about large market rate development in this neighborhood. hundreds more have signed petitions saying they are unhappy with the nct, unhappy with the massive rezoning until the neighborhood has a good chance for input.

we host the community planning workshop december 5 at 10 a.m. at independent on devirs dareo and invite planning commissionsism we ask you wait fl completion thorf planning process before you go forwards with request for approval that take advantsage of the density increase. we'll report the results of the process to the commission and encourage anyone who wishes to get involved to attend the workshop or [inaudible] >> i think we can move to had regular calendar. we'll do public comment continued at item h. >> very good commissioners. [inaudible] >> i think the good neighbor

meeting that is a requirement that we have for major alterations and remodels in houses gets under mind when you submit a set of plans 2 thousand square feet and goes through the 5 thousand square feet. i ask planning staff to consider a multiplying if the project does 100 percent of what it originally was there should be a neighborhood meeting required brf the notification goes out. it can prevent drs and may stop the process so just a thought. >> thank you. >> nothing further we can move to regular calen deer for item 8. [inaudible] 2014 informational presentation. >> good afternoon. my name is

[inaudible] with the information and analysis group in the city wide division. today i'm briefly present background and highlights from the 2014 commerce and industry inventory and i'll be available for questions and comments. just for background, the commerce and invenitation inventory is produced annually. it covers a range of economic data and gathered

from a variety of different sources. or goals with the engentory are in the short term to just make the data available tothe public and other interesting party and in the longer term to establish a consistent time series that hopefully serves as background information when we do updates of the element of the general plan. the biggest story is jod which grew my 5 percent to over 640 thousand which is a new record high for san francisco for employment. job growth continues about the same pace as it did in 2013 and the city added 27, 700 unemployment

tell fell to 4.4 percent which is lower in the region, the state and nation. the average wage sales tax collections and city revenues have all continued to increase this year or last year and then you can see that our city expenditureerize up but they are less than the city brought in in revenue. building actirfbty which we measure by the number of permits that are filed were up 4 percent to 28, 170 permits which is higher than the previous high which was in 2007. even though the number of purnlts increase in 2014 the construction value went down 13

percent to 4.8,000,000,000 dollars. i feel like i'm presenting you day old news. some of the data came out last month so it takes a while to compile a full year of data. aprieveia what is going on since then, the state now estimates the unemployment rate at 3.2 percent, which is typically we think around 4 percent is full employment, so our unemployment rate is quite low. as always, the report and data are available on our website, sf planning.org and with that i'm happy to take questions or comments after public comment. thank you >> thank you. open for public comment. going once, going twice. okay. public comment is closed.

commissioner antonini, i did have a question to maybe i'll ask the question first. you may have heard my voice message. as i went through page 34 you showed the history of the population of san francisco and there were a couple places where i think it is a error because it shows a population of 856,000 and the year before 845,000 which i dont remember happening and i think it is the highest population we have ever had at 845.6 in 2014. >> i did look into that and-the state department of finance-we are fortunate in california that that department does a separate count of population of all the states counties, so we have the u.s. census and then the state

and typically we trust the states numbers more because the state accounts for all types of people we thipg the census misses. these are the states numbers by year and in 2008 and 09, i think these are the numbers that they reported as being the cities population. then you see it fell dramatly in 2010. we think the state captures the people who move here for job during boom times and maybe leave when the jobs go away where the census so takes a longer term view of what the trend is and then-- >> it doesn't seem to agree with what just i seem to observe, but is that being a really high population time oppose today the present time it seems like there are more people here

now but that [inaudible] but your figures were consistently the state numbers, you didn't jump from one to the other? >> that is correct. >> a lot of very good things here and the one thing that you pointed out and didn't say in your presentation, we only have a population that is 11 percent of the bay area, we represent 18 percent the bay areas jobs which is typically always the case with san francisco and should be more because we are the center for business and we have the infrastructure to support that and makes a lot of sense. you did point out the avenueerage rage of 91 thousand dollars which is quite impressive i think and a lot of good things in the report and it is good to hear positive news and especially the unemploymenterate being lower

at 3.2 percent. those are my main comments. i think also you pointed out in the transportation 53, 500 per day, to 38 geary which is a call for rapid transit tothe richmond district where people can be in a subway or other means of travel uninterrupted which is the way bart does things. people drive their cars less if they have that available so that is very good. the other point i want to show is we have the largest number it seems of employees in san francisco are office employees by quite a large amount. 261,000 and cultural institutional and educational are the

second largest at 158 -we have discussions and people say most of our employees are in certain things, but at least this particular documents shows where the real employment numbers are. thank you very much for a interesting report. >> commissioner moore >> this reports are becoming more and more interesting. they are consistently published, the content varies over the years and when you open them next to each other it becomes interesting about the strong dynamics of the city. to take the report as a positive message is one thing and bring it into the context oaf what we are taxed to do here such as affordable and [inaudible] i'm smiling out of one side of my mouth while i keep the

other side of my mouth very much in question mark and hope we are able to find a bigger balance between this very positive and darker sides of our success. >> commissioner richards >> there is a lot of amamazing things in here and can spend days looking at this. honestly. as i look at this and the job types by number of people, land dedicated and look at san francisco versus the bay area and other cities in the u.s., what is the right mix of job types to create a whole city enyour mind? >> in my mind? >> what is the idea-what is the percentage? these are great, but if i put them into context what do you think we should be seeing? are we light on something? [inaudible] if we

are-heavy on something maybe we allocate mixed use space to something that is more complimentary to the city economy. you don't have to answer that if it is too complicated. >> [inaudible] reporting on the data. i think you are raising a larger issue about the cities economic plan and strategy. [inaudible] any city prefers to have a diverse economy, what the right percentage is i'm not sure. as with any other region there tends to be a cluster of certain types of industries that cluster together and drive the economy over a region and each region varies. la is about entertainment and we are about technology so those things tend to cluster. >> i would say these kind of

conversations are exactly what our department would enjoying have when i think if you look at our commerce and industry inventory it hasn't been update td in quite some while so maybe the next update is a way to frame what type of city do we want to be as far as the commerce that happens here and how do we make that happen and plan for that. >> we mention pdr space and have projects always coming where we have housing or pdr and potentially office, when i look that statistic here the pdr by number of firms, the state is the same over the past 10 years it just everything else has grown much higher. my worry is we have pdr space which drives pdr job jz everything else grows around it, we should try to

preserve some pdr space because it keeps the employment stable. st. is decreasing, but if we eliminate pdr space that number will keep going down. i have a question and probably should have left you a e-mail in this. on page 16 if you could-- >>the rates of change on employment on land use type in the bottom hand. if you can do the first line if you don't mind? >> basically it says in 200530 percent the city jobs were office jobs. 2014, 31 percent. from 2005 to 14 office jobs grew by 34 percent and in the last year they grow by 7 percent.

if you compare those to the overall growth, so office jobs grew much faster than jobs in general >> thank you very much because that illustrates a point where pdr jobs have fallen or gone up and everything else is exceeding >> we think pdr jobs are stabilizing. if you look at pdr jobs as a percent of total jobs it declined. it rises and fallwise the rest of the conomy but as a proportion of total kwraubs it is a long term decline and now we think it is stabilized, so it goes up and down with the economy but it held steady at i think around 12 or 13 percent. >> i read in one of the infographics you have house hold employees

as a category. two questions, if i am a person and do short term rentings 360 days a year am i considered a hotel? >> you are not. >> you have pdr, transportation, if i am aubeer driver do i get counted? >> i don't because of the way urber- >> there may be other things in here that would ampify the economic activity that are more stealth. i think commissioner moores point this with the housing pupidate and economic strategy could start a robust discussion and help inform policy discussion on what we want to see in the future, versus what we see today and could can be reflected in how we use the land so

welcome that in the future. good report. >> commissioner johnson >> thank you very much while i turn my microphone on. thank you very much. fantastic report. fantastic data. commissioner richards brings up goods points. it is great to know if there is hidden economic activity. when i read it i think of shared economy workers probably being work from home or in their primary occupation if they have one, so it is interesting to see if they are in that or totally dropped out. just a couple other points, one on commissioner richards also brought up, the idea of using land use as a way to do economic planning and i'm 95 percent positive if we had ty [inaudible] it is a chicken and

egg tail wag and dog problem where there are many places that tried to use land use to encourage economic activity and sometimes it works and sometimes it doesn't. it is awesome to have todd or something from oewd to talk about that because of my limited understanding how they do the future planning it is clear there are aspects they like to leave as market driven. you can limit uses for the land and encourage orts that encourage businesses to knh here because the ability to have physical locationicize a one factor in one what type of economic actirfbty cities have. the other thing is follow up on commissioner antonini and his comment on the transit ridership, transit use and how it impacts the land use. i

like subways and think those areas that are packed trabzt corridors we need to fine a way to move people along faster and more efficiently because they will be more desirable and people that are passed because it takes forever and they are crowded like sardines in a bus. the one thing i would bring up is related to the transit planning going oen and know we are doing work on transit management programs and how they can be integrated to the approval process and i noted 41 percent are taken by car and assume people use shared ride like uber and lift and the other ones like how i got here today. it would be interesting to think about whether or not we can sort of increase

that discussion around community shuttles or integrated the idea of shared rides more closely to transportation demand programs. i think that is something people are beaming accustom to see why not include it as a part of the planning process and it may take aif the pressure having to have major infrastructure commitments like a subway or other types of ways you would increase traffic in transit corridors. the last point i wanted to make is about the paragraph in here on wages and the data about wages. clearly we have seen a up tick in higher income jobs typically in office type environments in san francisco. one thing that i want to wonder is whether or not that data

jives with how we consider our affordability needs today. i think we need more affordability and that is a chicken and egg prm. if you have more affordable housing maybe that percentage will change over time but i'm thinking about the lower income positions and wonder if what we are considering as revised or increased affordability requirements, if it is jiving with the level of affordable needed in the city. if you have one percent of the people or 7 percent making 35 thousand a year, we want to try to make our city more equitable and increase that population over time but even right now does the level of affordability we are talking about cover that 7 percent the population? i'm not sure that it does and it seems this is a example where you want to take data and not just say that is

fascinating but actually use it. i hope that over time we can actually start to integrate this type of data into our discussions because now i feel like the affordability discussions are somewhat qualitative and it is great to match it up with the population proportion are we thinking about with increasing affordability? what percentage of the population do we want or can we support being different level of income. thank you. >> thank you. just want to add a couple comments. thank you for the work. i am hearing a theme from commissioners around wanting to incorporate the data into a decision making or larger decision. it would help to have the list or time line of the reports mandated by city legislation or state or federal regulations. i think it is helpful to

have it ovover laid with the annual work plan or longer work plan. i know [inaudible] i think the commission is open to more ideas about how to have these conversations outside just these ajnda itedms which we know are the ones no one gives public comment. commissioner antonini >> another look that pdr pictures on page 52 and while as a percentage of total jobs, pdr jobs have fallen over the last few years between 2011 and 2014 pdr jobs are up over 9 thousand from 72,000 to 81,000500. 3500 of that is in construction which you may say it is because the construction but a jump is in whole sale and other categories. there is a

increase in pdr jobs in the city and have to encourage that and make the most efficient use of our pdr zoned areas, particularly the core areas that are best designed to process that kind of work because we get caught in individual small projects and it is a important issue and have to look at the big picture and find how we can best promote those jobs in the best sites possible and keep this growth. it probably will never reach historic levels when we were a manufacturing city in the early first half the 20th century but we can probably continue to support those pdr jobs that are appropriate and can sur vive and thrive in san francisco. >> just one other comments i should have brought up. we had a discussion here and had discussions arounds the

polk and north beach. [inaudible] as i read low the figures i know we have added a lot of square footage the last decade in retail space which includes all that stuff. the conclusion i grew from the data was the number of firms of retail establishments we call traditional retailers that sell goods rather than food or drink hasn't gone up or down it is all this new square footage allowed more eating and drinking establishments. we look that policy discussions on what is the right mix, 20 percent to low 75 percent is too high but it looks like a lot of retail space is eating and drinking. in my neighborhood the retail space is eating and drinking. no traditional retailers go in. >> director [inaudible] >> i appreciate your interest

and discussion. i think it is very interesting. a couple things i herds is have a discondition with oewd about the report and i'll talk to todd about that. one thing i like about this work and enjoyed about be agplanner and thinking about the relationship between the aspects of were work and this work and the housing work and affordable housing is very important and it is hards togather all the data and see it all in one place but talk about re lationships is important. the issue about land use and effect on local economy is fascinating to me. there is a chicken and egg issue. the economy is based on supply and demand and the growth of certain industries

and changes in other industries, but i say one thing land u.s. use does is timper that over time. when i arrived 8 years ago we were trying to determine how much industrial zoned lantd and pdr land we should keep and got bombarded from all side. people who said get rid of all the pdr land and those that said don't use a square foot and we split it down the middle and ended up with 7 percent of the pdr which is a low percentage for a american city but we are also gegraphly small. at that point the manufacturing jobs were quite on the decline and in the 8 years since there is a substantial change. it hasn't grown as other industries but there appears to be some growth

thanks to organizations like sf [inaudible] and interest in small scale manufacturing so it-if we had given up that pdr land 8 years ago like some wanted we would be in a much different situation. land use tends to be long term in how it effects our economic conditions of the city. having said that, i think it is great to have a discussion about this with oewd and will try to get something organized when you have a free moment on your calendar which i don't know what point that will be. >> thank you. >> commissioner, if there is nothing further we can move to items 10 a and b [inaudible] 616 divisadero and 1282 hayes. this is conditional use

authorization [inaudible] will be considering the variances. chris, if you want to hold on >> i want to introduce you to oorlt planner, this is chris may who began with the department in september and a member the northwest team. he is new to the bay area from toronto with tern years experience in the lands use and public sector. prior to coming to san francisco he served as a planner for the city of toronto for 7 years where he reviewed complex applications for commercial and mixed use and conducted land use studies in association with several plan subway expansions

in toronto. he held a masters in city planning and from the ohio state university and a bs in physical geography in gis from barack university in ontario. >> good afternoon, chris may of planning department staff. you have before you a rerequest for conditional use to permit repurpose the [inaudible] for use as a bar amusement game arcade retail and other entertainment and movie use and construction of 7 unit 5 story residential building frontsing hayes street within the divisadero street commercial district and [inaudible] the former harding theater building one of 23 nob nub movie theater non contig ws multiple

property historic district. the property was evil waited which involved the removal the fly loft portion that rear the bilgding and determined to be a rehistoric resource. the building was eligible for listing on the california register baugz of association with the location of single screen muchby theaters in san francisco and nblshly for the association with prominants san francisco movie theater developer samuel leaven as a work of master architects the read brother jz type and period of construction the early 20th century neighborhood combination movie theaters. the most recent use is a church but it is vacant for many years. the proposal would repurpose the builds frg use as a bar, game and amusement use to be operated by the

emporium while [inaudible] two small retail spaces would flank had entrance. [inaudible] these features being the mechanical room on the south side thf building which isn't require fl use as a theater. one feature the fixed theater seating is proposed to be removed to facilitate teared flooring plat forms. most the seating dates from after the construction the theater and doesn't hold a primary level of historic value in and of itself. many of the original seats have been removed during the use as a church and the furnishings are nearing the ends of useabout and replacement would be necessary for continued use. the bar

and arcade use will not preclude the use the building as a live performance or film issue now or in the future. [inaudible] of the california environmental quality act. the proposem involves the construction of a new 5 story rez dejs building on the vacant norfgz lot fronting hayes street. the new building will contain 51 bedroom unit ranging from 705 square feet to 755 square feet and 2, 3 bedroom units of 1784 square foot in size. 7 bike parking spaces will be provided in the basement with ramp access to hayes street as well as 2 staffed parking spaces on the ground floor. these 2 spaces require a variance for being located within the first 25 feet in front the main

wall. planning staff doesn't support this variance as residential off street parking isn't required in the devirs dareo nct district and doesn't contribute to the active streetscape. this space [inaudible] dwelling unit would contribute more pause trfbtyly to the public. the project also requires a rear yard modification which is to be considered concurrently by the zoning administrator. the subject lot is appreciately 13, 285 square feet and bar and amusement game will have 14, 618 square feet upon completion. for sites within this district planning section 303, 74611 and [inaudible] require conditional youth authorization for change of use, development of lots

greater than nob nub the department received public comment from 4 individuals who supported the application. one whos letter of support is in the packet and one from the alamo square neighborhood association, one from the presidentf osan francisco theater foundation and one from the north of pan handle association and i have these here. those came in within the last couple days. staff also received one telephone call from a member the public who doesn't support the repurposing opthe space for any use other than a independent muby theater. in conclusion, the department rmds the commission approve the project with conditions on the basis the project allows for the reuse of historic resource. the tenet is a family run business and not a formula retail use.

the new business would provide goods and services to the immediate neighborhood and create 25 jobs for residence. the residential building represents a infill of the lot and [inaudible] and other than those requirements the project meets all requirements of the planning code and propose land use that are in conformity with the planning code. this concludes my presentation and available if questions. >> opening to public sponsor. >> good afternoon presents fong and commissioners, david silver man work wg

the project sponsor. i have done so since 2004. the former harding theater closed 43 years ago. the project before you preserves the building for reuse and has entertainment value. there is a very intensive and long term effort to find an operator for this venue. the sponsor has found that operator in emporium and you will hear from dan marks who is the owner of that business. they operate several locations in chicago. the use includes several bar areas, stage for live entertainment and arcade games. a screen is available for movies. the praiject is located on a l shaped lot with a small parking area that fronts on hayes street. the vacant portion

will be developed with 7 dwelling units. sfgovtv-thank you. this is the theater building. you can see here. this is the vacant portion of the lot fronting on hayes. with reference to the parking variance, the issue is where the parking is on the lot . there is a section in the code which states the parking should be set back 25 feet in order to allow for active street uses. however, that section i believe is intended for commercial areas such as devirs dareo, so the use will be here. this is a residential street. there is no need for active use on a

residential use, in fact no one wants active use there. this next photo shows what hayes looks like. a lot of old victorians, some have added garages in front. you see here a garage, a garage. there are no active commercial uses here, so we believe the variance is well justified. there are also 2 family size units in this building. they will of course need a parking space each so that is 2 spaces which is what the proposal includes, so we urge you to recommend approval the parking variance. this project represents a opportunity to bring back to life the long dormant theater and we believe this will provide significant benefits from the community which received this project very positively. i believe

chris may mentioned the letter from aelfy felter whoperticipated in this since 2004 mpth he is the president of the san francisco theater foundation. he states the restored harding snob nob we hope you will approve the conditional use for this project and look forward to seeing the harding reopen to the public as soon as possible. one thing i would like to mention, a note about the draft approval motion on page 31, item number 22, it provides hours of operation. you would like to-if the project is approved we would like to make that uniformly open at noon every day rather than what is stated there. i would like to introduce to you now

dan marks who is here to say a few words about the operations of the emporium and i'll be available for questions. thank you. >> good afternoon. my name is dan marks and own emporium in chicago with my brother who is in the back row. emporium is a as david said a venue that hosts a combination of a variety of events and we have a large assortment of arcade games, pen ball, fooz ball, other fun game options. we also have a bar program with a strong emphasis on local and regional

breweries and other craft distillers and things like that. our environment is well suited towards groups and a variety of groups from fund raiser tooz corporate events, to birthday parties and other types of things. we have been very well received in chicago since we opened. our family history is actually in the amusement industry specific with old movie theaters. our family opened our grands father and great uncle opens a movie theater in chicago in the 60's and it grew from 10 to 15 movie theaters in chicago before they sold that chain in the early 1990's. the harding theater is

a logical type of venue for what we like to do. the space itself is really an amazing space and the community is well knhing to us. we presented at the alamo square neighborhood association in may and at the north of pan handle neighborhood association in september. in both cases received generally positive report and good suggestions for those that 1 hundred percent positive but for the most part we were well received. we are excited to come to san francisco which is a amazing city wree excite td to be a part of especially this specific neighborhood. i-that's pretty much i think

the project was well detailed by mr. silverman and if anyone has questions i'm available. thank you for your consideration. have a nice day. >> thank you. we have a few minutes left. mark [inaudible] is here, the project architect. >> thank you commissioners. it is nice to be here today with a project that finally involves and brings the harding theater back to the public realmism as you know it is closed for 43 years as was stated. most reentsly used as a church as which departmented in 2004 and i think the effort that we have worked on for so many years is finally hopefully going to pay off. the savings of the theater, the interior is primarily preserved, we will do restoration of some the damaged architectural features on the

interior. very minimal intervention of leveling off the floor area to promote the entertainment use the arcade, bars-as for the new biltding that is constructed on the open portion the lot it is a area that is appreciately 45 feet by 45 feet so fairly small. we are able to provide 7 new housing units, two of which are stated will be 3 bedroom family size units and what we feel is necessary for those units to be effectively a family unit is to also have the off street parking and again, we are looking at providing 2 off street parking spaces. by use of a car stacker it does not preclude or dus not require any further widening of garage door to had street, so whether there was a garage for 1 or 7 cars,

the same curb space is taken at the front the building, the garage door remains a single door of approximately 9 feet in length which allows access for the 2 cars independently to use the car stacking device. because the lot is only 45 feet deep, sth cars will park within thfirst 25 foot zone. the other thing mentioned about bringingic tavety to the street, since the previous iterations of the project where the parking was never questioned and activating the street wasn't a issue. we have provided one the 7 units at the lower ground floor level so we activated that along with a lobby area. we are appreciately engaging about 24 linear feet with 45 foot dimension so we have a active front and hope you can support the parking as well as the rest the project. thank you so much.

>> thank you. i know [inaudible] from the supervisors office is here. >> first let me say that good afternoon commissioners and director ram. i have to say-i have to honestly say some of my gray hair is from this project for the last 9 years as a aid and so i am happy to be here. i just want to speak today in support of the cando project at 616 divisadero including the harding theater development. supervisor breed feels the project is the right combination. finally after 10 plus years. the harding theater as a entertainment business and arcade fits within the devis dareio corridor

character, a business that may not have been possible without supervisor breeds preservation which the condoes are subject to. the idea of a arcade is enthuse astically supported. first supervisor breed came into office she said this is something i want to see be completed and everyone happy by the end of my term, so we are hoping that happens today and to put it simply, supervisor breed is esstatic this project is moving forward and supports it fully. >> open up for public comment. michael smithwick, kevin weir, [inaudible] penser. jj strausal, gary stevens and cristina [inaudible] >> michael smithwick and lived

2 blocks from this project for the last 26 years. for those 26 years i don't think i have seen anyone go in or out of the building. it has been a dead space the last 11 years i guess it has been boarded up cover ing graffiti qu fites to correct that so thrilled to see this happen and get much needed housing in the neighborhood and for the city and reactivate that space. the other thing i will add is it has a wonderful entering vestibule as a grand theater does. it has a nice tur ozo on the bottom. the sidewalks on divisadero are narrow and try ied to solve that but it is narrow

sidewalks so i appreciate the privately owned part of the space that is the entry provides depth to the sidewalk at that location. that gets congestion out of the way and enlivens the space as well so very thrilled to hear this happen. >> thank you next speaker, please. >> good afternoon everyone. my nake isen weir and live at 1290 hayes. the building on the corner that is sandwiched between the 2 structures. excuse my nerves, i prepared what i would say but it may go out of my head. it is nice to finally hear about the plans. i have been traveling a lotto missed a lot of there planning meetings and i'm new to the project. i think it is better to have the harding theater stay there and not go through demolition , but we have concerns. i am

as one of the few tenant-it isn't a huge building but we have concerns because the area changed over the 10 years. i have been there since 194 so i have sheen it change dramatly over that period of time and we have great businesses there that are good neighbors and partners. nopa and some of the other ones around. we just have concerns. we don't have the band width for the traffic we already have so that is something that hopefully will be addressed with the planning of the is. even with the lugestics of the building itself rkts, we have shared utility lines so our phone lineerize on that theater and these are things we haven't been communicated to that well over any the

planning that happened with this so it is nice to see the people here in charge of this but for those that have to live through and suffer through it is nice if there could be better communication. weare not trying to stop anything but hope the emporium and their owners would be good neighbors and partners as apos said to having a successful business on one side and cuck sessful condo on the other because we have to live there and keel deal with it. i support something positive happening. it has been hard to see the decline of the theater over this time. i knew the members the church. they were great people. they were a good part the community and hope they can be a good part the community, but there are concerns. thank you. >> good afternoon

commissionersism [inaudible] with north of pan handle neighborhood association board. i will speak for jj [inaudible] a board member who had to leave to pick up his kid at school. you did receive our letter which was summarized of how nopa is excited about the developments both as a long time blighted harding and new housing, which is welcome. one of the reason you received our letter is because we were on the fence until we knew for sure there was a tenant signed which there has been as of last night and we do appreciate the brothers coming to our meeting and letting us know what the plans are, we think this is a good for the-especially

happy to hear the new improvement to start day time hours at noon. we work with the devirs dareo merchant and it is very important to have more day time merchant activity as well. now i'll speak for myself as a neighbor and architect who knows what the processerize like, i support the variances for the housing because this is an unusually site to work with so the front set backs do seem like a reasonable hardship. the rear yard limitation is reasonable as well since we are fortunate to be in a area with a good amount of green space, alamo square, the pan handle and buena vista. thank you very much.

>> my name is greg steven and ceo of cotent and save our theaters and i want to give you a backknround of who we are. in 2004 we prop l on the ballot that saves all the movie theaters in san francisco and use a portion of hotel tax to pay for it. that initiative didn't pass and the government promised to the people they had a better way along with the neighborhood [inaudible] foundation they would save the theaters their way, so we stepped aside and have-and can say the watch of theaters is under the city and neighborhood theairtd foundation but if you look around there are not many theaters left. before i spoke we talked about a

balancing the economy and all the arts and one of the things that we think is going on in san francisco is we are displacing our artist. we are displacing what makes san francisco great and that love of culture. what people don't realize since the theater closeed 43 years ago, very few people have seen the inside and don't know what it is and what they are giving up and what we are giving up here is a castro theater at the majestic quality at the scale of the castro and it is such a high quality we believe it should be used as a television studio and the reason san francisco doesn't have more media is we have no studio space. there can not be a jimmy kimal live here because the spaces don't exist. when we

take this art space-we do not necessarily approve at the form because when and do gaming what you are doing is firing the artist and get rid the performer and why it sound like it is entertainment, it is entertainment without people. when and get rid of the seating and it is secondary and have no seating you have no focused audience. we are not looking at it as making another movie theater, we are saying this is so great it can be a tool of economic revitalization and we can fulfill that prom ess so we save this along with the yogesee and plan to put this on the ballot in june. it is going on the ballot and know how to dothat. we also think you need to save those lots because without freight entrance we are

not interested in that theater as a stud wroe. what people need to take into account is what happens if these guys go bankriment or leave because we are here for 30 years--[inaudible] >> thank you. next speaker, please. >> christie [inaudible] with [inaudible] and save our theaters. this is to oppose 10 a and 10 b. this foreign non san francisco entity doesn't have a plan [inaudible] open the opportunity to a more socially minded plan. the plan proposed dozen offer our community value aside from more expensive unit. pin ball, fuse ball, arcade machines are not art and they rupeering to be a non viable economic solution with the

foreign owner. save our theaters [inaudible] created space to support local artistic talent. >> any additional public comment? public comment is closeed and opening up to commissioners. >> mr. silverman have a question about the use because this is presented as a preservation and the screen remains and according to the plans there is still a bal cuny above but they want to take the bank off where the seats are now. is their ability to put seats back in if they have a puformance or movery? professor>> there will be about 100 seats. there will be a stage and screen for movies. as far as the angle of the slope of the floor i'll let the architect address that

>> that is important to take a look. there are a couple speakers that addressed that because that is concern we want to be able to be flexible to use it as a movie theater or live performance >> the proposal is level out the floor much in the way the masonic is altered, the fox theater in oakland and warfield on market street. there is more flexibility for standing live performance event, chairs could be placed on the flat surface as it stepped so the entire space isn't at one level. we are proposing 3 step terraces on the auditorium and 4 on the balcony. >> it sounds like you have steps so if and have a movery or live performance you can put seats in there at the different levels and someone

can have that which i encourage because the big thing is it is supposed to be a community space and any the arcaidde type games could be taken out temporarily and the seats could be put in. >> correct and there is a mobility feech toor the arcade games seem with the seating. i know the masonic and fox where they brought in seating so that is something that is conceivable. not sure whether that is in the emporiums plans but they have the flexibility and from the discussions we had with the emporium with danny and doug they want that ability. >> i have a few comments, i think it is a good project. i go back to the original approval on december 4 of 2004 when the commission approved the plan

to essentially demolish the theater and build 18 units and parking spaces and then appeals came forth as to the historic naich thorf theater and it wasn't for another 4 years till alternate plan came up with only 8 units and savored a good part the theater accept for the fly. it still was appealed and felt it was generally decided the fly was essential because many theaters were built thun 20 pfs for movies only but this was built with the idea it could be live performance area and included a fly which allows you to store your props and everything in there and have these items that will allow for live performances. as it turns out it is great it is being saved and have to make sure this type of use is practical and part of any approval

we make. i'm also in favor of the cono miniums in the other lot which make a lot of sense and help to make this all possible because this particular developers is doing a lot of this to save theater and space and make it a multi-use area and liven that dead part of divisadero where it now sits. their frontage there is 45 feet and hayes as pointed out is not a area where you will have active retail use. in fact, it may not be permitted and if it is permitted it isn't encouraged. 45 is a lot wider than many victorians that are 25-foot lots that installed parking garages in addition to the door ways. the parking garage in the entry and passage way on the side for

emergency exist from the harding theater makes a lot of sense to me, especially we do want multi-bedroom unit, family sized unit and anybody with 3 bedroom with children will want a parking space. they won't run around trying to take their kids all over the city to school and other places if they don't have a place to park the family car and it is a litm tough to park on divisadero. in favor the project as it is with the caveat that the theater has to be designed in such a way to allow for live performens and movie performance and assembly area for the neighborhood and what a speaker thought about a filming or types of performances that might be filmed on television. i'm in favor.

>> commissioner moore >> i have a couple questions [inaudible] the architect describes he made modifications to responds to had department challenges regarding parking within 25 feet. are the drawings reflective of what is emplied or is that is a [inaudible] what you are trying to suggest to them? >> the drawings the commission represent what the project sponsor is requesting. >> what he is describing? >> yes, >> you are standing with your recommendation to the commission that this does not meet the departments interpretation for the first 25 feet? >> that's correct. >> thank you. >> it needs a variance in order to proceed. >> in order to be fair to

everyone else in that predicament i strongly support the position the department is taking because that is essential to creating on small lots what we want residential frontage to do. another question-skipping fast forward. i was part the 2008 extremely complicated and laborious effort to assess the condition of the harding theater which behind the facade was vandalized and brought into question how to support the preservation that was a historic resource. [inaudible] squp the slope for the theater which was a big part the special character of declaring it is a historic resource i do recall the apollistry there was chairs broken apart that the chairs

themselves, the way they filled the auditorium including the apollistry were part of what was required to be preserved or restored. since we were as commissioners asked in smaller groups to tour this devastating experience in the theater we took a close look because see tg first hand [inaudible] we needed to weigh of what we could support or not but in the end the commission was very strongly in support to see the restoration follow the secretary of interiors recommendations. in this particular package i have not seen or asking had this been disacussed with historic preservation to the extent we as commissions at the time need to look at this? >> my name is shelly [inaudible] preservation planner who

reviewed the project for the categorical exemption. i am familiar where the project and assigned for the last 6 yearsism we ruvood the project [inaudible] per the secretary of intear yer stamdards and we found that it would meet the secretary of interior standards. [inaudible] called out a a contributing feature the interior space. it is one of many contributing features. it wasn't consider a primary feature such as the stage or [inaudible] or the exterior features and considered the loss of the seating in our evaluation. we found that loss would not rise to the level of adverse impact to the historic resource. the vast majority of the resources will be retaind and preserve and the historical

significance will be conveyed. do you have other questions? >> yes, for example a hithetical question, in the case the currents user cant maintain a successful business operation which is part of verchering into using the space like that, would we be able to reuse the theater in any form or shape as a puformance based [inaudible] >> we work would the architect to insure the teared flooring is in place and will be under neath the plat forms created to [inaudible] the plat forms could be unbolted from the floor and the tear ded flooring space would be restored. the new flooring plat forms will only be bolted to the floor surface and will not attach to the

deckative decorative [inaudible] work [inaudible] in addition there are two smaum infill areas in the lobby which could be removed in the future without harming the characters of the space >> is there a historic preservation architect to advise on this? >> gary balian architecture thfs historic preservation project and involved in the project since 2012 if not before. >> thank you. >> commissioner hillis. >> thank you for the-i live 3 blocks from the theater so know this block well and thank you [inaudible] in supervisor breeds office. it was a long time yfs i was involved

in this project and able to tour the space and think it has come a long way and taken a long time but a better project prevailed where the keep the theater. it isn't kept as a theater [inaudible] you have to reuse thes but it is done in a way that could be reversed if needed to and if demand for a performance venue came back again, so i think that is being done well. i particularly like the fact they are preserving the 2 adjacent retail spaces so you get 3 retail spaces and reuse and activating the hayes street frontage which also isn't pretty at this point. it is a place that cleblths garbage on hayes, so it is a about time. we have a project we can approve and adaptively reuse

the theater. a couple questions on the hours, i was concerned to see the week day hours were only 5. how did that come about because i know this area is primarily food service and restaurant and a lotopeb fronl dinner so think it is great you propose to change that and open at noon. how did the original 5 p.m. come about, was that a staff recommendation or proposed by the project sponsor? i guess it doesn't matter- >> there were discussions back and forth and probably went into had motion and didn't catch it before but it should bow noon and not 5 >> i support that. the parking is a variance but just so we understand it, because i think if you walk down that block all most every project or

building has the traditional parking and residential entry. the rosen for the 25 feet is because the lot is l shaped that fronts on divisadero and don't want the parking on the first 25 feet but retail isn't appropriate on the side on hayes street, so just maybe clarification on that. >> [inaudible] a couple issues there. the parking variance is before the zoning [inaudible] part the overall project with the cu that is before the commission as well. active use does not only include commercial use, it includes residential use and residential lobbies. when we talk about active use requirements it isn't just referring to commercial use it also refers to residential use. we do

acquire that the ground floor has active uses, but they don't have to be xhrjs >> we require that because this is a n ct and want it on devis >> the active use apply in a very portion of the city not just nct. the issue with the parking which applies where the is a parking maximum is we have a parking set requirement. we don't want to have parking at the ground floor that essentially results in blank walls >> if you go lot east on hayes street would that parcel require the same active frontage? >> not necessarily and just to continue on that, we do have a scale of requirements for parking when it comes to how they impact the ground

floor, so we have the 25 foot set back requirement. if you only park one vehicle you can park within the 25 feet because it doesn't make sense to push it back further. if you only park 2 you can park in tandem so essentially 50 feet. in this scenario they park 2 and the depth does want allow them to do the way the code prescribes and that is what triggers the variance. >> what is before us on the parking? what is before the commission? >> the project is before us >> the code allows how many spaces per units in a nct? >> in this nct- >> allows 1 to every 2 units. >> they are allowed 4 and a half >> the 2 spaces are permitted how they are located

>> they are doing less parking than they would otherwise. i think they can't do more unless they -constrain the lot. [inaudible] i'm fine with the parking. i think the reason it is coming up as a variance is the way the lot is l shaped. generally i'm supportive of the project and change of hours. >> commissioner richards. >> couple questions. i thinkimeer ex static the theater is saved and done in a sensitive way. this is 2015 and have to find a economic model that works to get this all to work with the housing and business and two store fronts. maybe the director can help, the other theaters that had this kind of food and beverage type thing like the new

mission, is there food being served here or just a beverage? >> my understanding is no food will be served. >> i don't know if you recall, is it a mix of food and beverage? >> i believe it but it they also put 4 screens-divided into 4 screens at the new mission. >> so, i'm not antepin bowl or pole, it seems like there is so much less community space than like a brew cade in my neighborhood which i frequent. i do share concerns about activating the community space and having live performance and movies. my question to the folks that spoke gaenss it, the appeal happened 2005 and 08,

all this time elapsed what happened in terms of your ability to activate the space? >> the watch of saving movies theaters is under the city and neighborhood theater foundation. we are a different organization. we are the ones that put it on the ballot and solve this for real. the other thing you have to understand is that when we put this on the ballot we will fund it so not allow that to stay vacant, we solve the problem and not only that, the owner of the property will make whole and compensate in such a way whereo theresenoharm rchlt we are interested in what is the greater gooed of revitedalizing the artists in san francisco and if we rid of all the theaters and if you get rid of that lot we are not interesting and can't use it. i was talking to debbie brew baker

and requirement for the studio space is have to pull up a big rig there and unload in the rear stage, if you lose that it is unusable for. you put the housing you killed the theater and having a 100 seats doesn't create a live audience. it is like saying you will do something but you get rid of it it doesn't work. >> thank you. project sponsor. yes. >> so you have how many establishments? >> 2 in chicago and about theopethen third. >> the one in chiaugo are they ret row fit like this >> no they but they are in [inaudible] we reused a lot the original wood that we had to relocate out of the

ceilings. the other is [inaudible] we do care about this preservation. >> how many type of live performance ? >> we do have a lot of that. i feel i maybe under represented that part the business because we valot of live purp fons and 20s foot movie screen and have video games--on the screen we do live events 3 or 4 nights a week and fund raisers. >> thauf top of your head as percent of hundred how many performance and movies? >> i say we have some type of performance or event more than 50 percent of the year >> do the other locations serve food? >> one location we have

permanent food truck with food truck operation come in and take it over. the other one we do a bring your own food where we partner with local rest ron in the area and allow patrons to bring in their food >> i would love you for you to apply that here >> partners with local restaurants is the reason we want to [inaudible] providing food would force to alter the space to make way for kitchen and things like that >> sounds fantastic to me. you converted me. thank you. >> commissioner johnson, >> just a couple questions. generally speaking i think this a great project. the first one is i look at planning staff on this one, but we'll see if you can answer this. i appreciate that we

use that empy lot for residential and understand the people who are objecting would want to see that space used for space that would make the stage more useful for other events but i'll get to that in a second. on the residential there are 2, 3 bedroom units which i think is fantastic we are doing family size housing but i'm already anticipating those families showing up and saying my poor toddler can't sleep because they are playing all that loud music until 2 in the morning. is there anything that can be done to sort of prevent that problem happening or are there sounds proofing or something along that east wall? we have been through this with so many other

neighborhoods and i support it i call mixed use development but anticipate the complaint that may show up. >> my understanding is for the emporium tenant to get their place of entertainment permit they have to go to the xhrt tainment commission and that requires notice. i do know that the project architect has probably more information as it applies to sound proofing the new residential building: >> the there is legislation supervisor breed put forward that requires new development to have higher standards when pertaining to a entertainment venue >> we had version of residential new [inaudible] next question, the idea that was floated just now with

commissioner richards line of questionings brings up my question about the off street loading requirement. it is difficult to have food trucks outside or loading for live performance. my question is if we do not support that variance for off street loading what would they do? >> they go to dpw to get off street loading permit. [inaudible] yellow zone that they use and my understanding having spoken with the project sponsor that they are in talk with the owners and operateers of the independent to coordinate their loading in the same area at slightly different times in

the day sharing vendors because a lot of the delivery may be from the same vendors. >> i am aware the independent is nearby and familiar with that area, this may be a dpw question, but if they were to not support that variance, would there off street loading requirement over lp with the independent such that it might have the same impact? i'm concerned-this is supposed to be multi-use and support having live events and thinks where you need to load things that are not necessarily kept in the building so i'm very concerned about setting up a circumstance where there are issues in the neighborhood with traffic and watt not because we did want give the building what it requires which is space to get stuff in the building and space to have food trucks

outside for special events or space for vala parking. do we think those spaces would overlap if we didn't approve the variance? >> it is difficult to say. they have a secondary option to egress corridors that go through the residential building. those connect with the rear the harding building. it is still on street but in front of divisadero isn't a option perhaps on the hayes frontage that can be a option >> if the variance waents granted they have to provide a off streelt loading space and at this point is on the portion the site are where the residential is proposed. all the

[inaudible] on divisadero is taking up. cutting a hole into that wouldn't work. the very short answer is if they are required to do off street loading that would completely kill the residential building or significantly impact it because that is the only place on the site they can put off street loading >> they have to cut into the plan for that building to have the off street loading? >> yes. that is the only viable place and the architect maybe can speak to this better but my understanding is that the only the place to put off street loading. >> sorry i'm raining on this, if you have a building like this we make financial change tooz have the residential there that proclude some use, not saying that is a huge deal but procluding some use, we not to just

keep it be a theater because there is a mar key on the outside but use the space. what we are saying is they would be a hardship to have the hauf street loading so they work something with the independents >> the independents loading is on the street. >> it is on the street. independent up the block from this so they would share that on street-- >> they would have to figure it out on street. whether that is working out something with the independent or some other arrangement with dpw. that private-they have to figure out a on street solution if they provide no off street loading. >> i have a couple other questions and may come back to this item because this gets to the heart of supporting the

arts and other performances at that space and this is where it doesn't seem like a big deal and come back a few years later and wonder why there are not as many performances at the space and the answer is because there is no loading. we can't get stuff in the building so trying to head it at the pass. last question, i support the hour change to noon. i thipg this is a place that would have business in the late afternoon. it is a interesting layout but support it is multi-use, [inaudible] that is why they closed douchbfelt i think we need tolife how to use that space and think that is a good thing. the only other question which is obvious one, the

teared seating sounds like there are plat forms that can be bolted on and off to make it level for when it is multiuse arcade and taken up and that is teared seating for performance up to 100 seats and ask the obvious question that that is the plan if there are performances in the space, it isn't just something with wherethe platforms are bolted on and there in case the building is [inaudible] in the future and restore it but that is part the operation. >> my understanding is the tier floored is sem i-permanent. where don't think it will be removed between performances. i know danny how you would--it would not be a

flexible space like the oracle areney arena where it transitions from one set of seating.

>> lots live music events and night market craft foods and people come together and turn the floor into a market type place we do toy drives and sponsoring organizations they have a band and play games if it is a fun space for people to come whether a company party or fundraiser it is an attractive space a community driven space we partner with local merchants all the time and could support each other through serving food for the patrons or do group birthday parties and that kind of thing we do fundraiser and stoop all the time. >> commissioner antonini

a question for the project sponsor maybe staff mr. may there are passageways alongside the residential onsite ain't e onsite i believe those assess the hampering theatre that's correct and yes. >> how wide are those spaces there are ways to bring proposals or things into those spaces. >> yes. they are i believe 5 feet in width 5 and a half feet. >> yeah. that might be bringing the larger items through the front you probably could bring things along the side with that, i'm going to propose approval conditional use of this as presented by project sponsor which will include the two parks

parking spaces place and the openly other 12:00 noon and closings times in the staff report ability for some sort of you don't need a kitchen by a refrigerator or some sort of headed elements that allow you to have food service you might have a truck out tolerant but space within the facility to keep the food from spoiling and make that more easily served work with the dpinlts to try to solve share they're loading space with the surveillance will be allowed and that will say my motion. >> second. >> commissioner richards. >> yes. obvious question we're having alcohol i'm not sure the

license 282434 people between 18 and 24 allowed in the premises. >> 21 okay. >> and is if state law. >> yes. >> okay. >> director ram. >> thank you. i wanted to we've all been working on this project for a very long time not the only theatre and space of this type 1 of the challenges we have at every city older city the reuse of old theatres and churches not used for the original purpose and the reuse of those exteriors embroiders are challenging the staff working hard to make sure what is done can be undone and returned to a traditionally theatre in the future i think

this is unusual the theatre it being used for performances and entertainment and other theatres like the metro as a gym which takes a advantage of the space but it is more in keeping with the historic use of building it is a performance space or can be used for a performance space unlike other space thanks. >> sociocommissioner moore. >> can we condition a project in front of the to do things not designed for example, food storage o storage and heating of food has its own challenges by saying are we over stepping our ability of what challenges there is a generic so for the for the building for we can't start to shape the concept of was in

front of us that might fly in the face of that will an approval what's our response. >> if i understand correctly you're asking can question condition a project to affirmatively fact on to project. >> that's what we're trying to do. >> i'll defer to the city attorney on the final say there is some amount of difficulty in doing something like that there maybe other regulatory issues or constraint that are not aware to us at this time. >> the other question have you made suggestions relative to those two parishes being at an democrat spaces they're not requiring a surveillance i want to 19 see a pro-active of parking not not form has staff maids suggestions of how to achieve that.

>> the problem i think with doing at an democrat we have a. >> i'm sorry the problem with at an democrat we have only a 45 foot deck so not even that. >> chris. >> yeah. a corridor at the rear of the ground floor that projects forward there isn't that much spaces for at an item spaces. >> not enough height for the mechanism stacking. >> they're proposing the stack one the first 25 feet. >> i have a hard time supporting a project with a residential project with a variance we can call it two but the residential did work. >> the variance is in front of

the zoning administrator. >> my support for the project is con migrant things are done in the way to support you're policies i have a problem. >> commissioner johnson. >> thank you commissioners commissioner moore point the motion to the requesting you cus but at any rate okay. just a quick question for the yes, ma'am importantly have you spoken to the independent authority on the loading topic. >> yes. i met with allen scott and john i believe this morning the owner and generally manager to our earlier points we'll

primary if not all the disinterest rates from the same beer companies many prefer that that will not present any new deliveries in the neighborhood and generally establishments at the same time and traffic times so, yes we have discussed with them. >> okay. thank you. >> i'm going to ask for an ad to the motion a 6 moss month look back at the opening to see the events and how - >> that's fine i agree with that. >> is the seconder. >> so moved. >> may i have a point of clarifications that on the motion my intentions on the draft motion couldn't allow them

to open before 5 they want flexibility to open at noon we are not asking they shall open at noon the opening time will b be according to the market. >> not open any earlier on any given day. >> so zoning administrator. >> that was a question to speak on that issue which is the district they're in allows the 6:00 a.m. to 2:00 a.m. the way the motion was drafted a condition of approval limited hours of operation not until 5 from the commission wants to provide no restrictions beyond the hours of operation we'll eliminate that that will allow them to open at 12 or 11 or

earlier i'm not sure the commissions desire to put an a.m. limit or not provide any alleged restrictions other than opening from 6:00 a.m. to 2:00 a.m. >> i have a question for the maker of the motion basically, if we set no time and restricts they'll open as early. >> 6:00 a.m. >> that will mother happy often but okay with not having the restrictions. >> are you amending our motion. >> yes. >> for the seconder. >> commissioner richards i appreciate my fellow commission commissioner antonini taking up on this site for the alcohol to make a better project adding the condition i'm not sure what the condition was how many refrigerators or storage areas

and the project sponsor appears because he's got o a good business model and maybe ask commissioner antonini not as restrictive and take off the food service condition. >> i want to talk with the project sponsor will the understanding on that what i said in the motion was just the ability you know it is not necessarily condition maybe it should be a finding you'll try to promote food as quickly as possible that that serving alcohol housing unit without food and making it more acceptable for that people to be in for a longer period of time did that sound reasonable. >> yes. excellent food

strengthens we'll draw on the strengths of the routine. >> i'll modify to make it a motion. >> director ram. >> thanks i was going to remind the commission as shelly pointed out part of the food service the advantage of not having food services not as many operations that's one the advantages i want to mention there have testimony to the effect that some of the residential neighbors felt there was not assess i pistol that the residents should work with the implementation as it move forward it is typical. >> i would expect that is part of motion. >> commissioner moore. >> should the opening hours perhaps start with a trial

period as commissioner johnson if it is dwoolt at night and the toddlers can't sleep we do have experience with that composition i'm in support of it being there tired of the ruin of theatres and being more increasing liability for all of us with the historic resources but is that an idea to consider a trial period by which it can be opened and proves to be successful and in support of neighborhoods it does what it does as generally loud in the court. >> there is an existing venue that is has a sound system that will blow the doors off and the entertainment commission has a buffer has acknowledged the

rights someone purposes the buildings and enters into the venue next door i don't know if it is necessary not that kind of venue there has not been a performance for 10 or 12 years i'm supportive of this getting activity a beautiful theatre it is not the castro but let's get to open. >> commissioner antonini a look back an issue that can be addressed and certainly something that we can look at if this is any kind of problem. >> commissioners shall i call the question think outside the box on the motion probation officer approve that with conditions as amended to strike condition number 22 regarding the hours of operation adding a 6 month update after opening in the form of that memo and the

sponsor work with the operation of the use and adding a findings that the sponsor shall try to promote the food as a business model commissioner antonini commissioner hillis commissioner johnson commissioner moore commissioner hillis commissioner wu and commissioner president fong so moved, commissioners, that motion passes unanimously 7 to zero and on the variance, close the public hearing and and setback variance with an intent to grant the rear yard modifications and take the off-street loading under advisement. >> commissioners for item 11 at 403 irving street.

>> we video more business if you want to take the conversation outside that would be great. >> good afternoon. alexander the the item before you is a request for at conditional use authorization to legalize the establishment of approximately 14 hundred square feet wine bar and ground floor of the mixed use building located an iving in the enter sunset the subject commercial that space was occupied by a grocery stores that vacated the space and occupied by the project sponsor since march of 2014 the sponsor proposes to operate ban 8:00 a.m. and he 12:00 p.m. in a

meeting space providing the catering services from 10:00 a.m. wednesday through saturday sorry focused on the production of california wines and beer the proposed use as an independent locally owned business the survey a total of 5 directing establishment including the proposed wine bar it makes up the linear feet the property this is the enter sunset is predominantly within a radius the subject business adds to the concentration of the eating and drinking and one of 6 bars within 4 blocks with 19th avenue, however, shindig about

not only offer an constitution is contributed to the establishment and not effect the existing noise within the area duo to cat the department has 3 e-mails and 1 hundred 88 letters of support including the merchants and no phone calls or letters in opposition to the project the department recommends approval with conditions in compliance with the codes and policies and is necessary and desirable with the surrounding neighborhood it is a business that focuses on beer and wine and space available for rent that concludes my presentation.

i'm available to answer any questions. >> project sponsor. >> good afternoon, commissioners by way of introduction i'm shawn i own this business with my wife unable to be here to care for our children a nature born and raised in the city lived here all my life and i'm happy happen to be one of the residents that lives 60 feet of this location the back of my house looks at on the back of chin doug dig we're not seeking a typical bar but educational calories around wine and beer we've have 6 classes with local wine and beer and food litter education in the first two education ear looking to hire locals that are instructors if in other areas

reand have identified 3 residents that fit that career and understand many more the project is on the idea of selling ticket on the subject that will help attendees that will presuming be attendees and fucht understand what their buying in the steers dpaevents between beers on the food and literature have book signing and lecture e.r.'s on farming and food issues with the aggregate business of the u.s. we've got publishes that are interested in the space as well as speakers the ultimate activity here is to sell the ticket as previously mentioned and be programming in

at least one of the events 3 nights a week on the other nights making the space available for rent for private events and in order to maximize the use of space wale make the space available during the day and plan to have 20 percent of that valuable time for nonprofits and community groups to use the space at no cost to be able in support of neighborhood the experience we'll provide will not only desirable to the neighbors but captor to the neighborhood and i'd like to mention api i've been in the business for 18 years and my wife in the event business for many years so to be successful we've connected with the police

department and the park with the neighborhood not only my children can be safer by the neighborhood and want to mention in addition to the one and 88 letters of support 100 percent of the neighbors touched for the urban that are in support of this project i i mean that the parcels on the corner you have a lot of units that touch the back and side of the units as well as residential belief and the residents that live above the space are in supports as of this morning a letter from the enter sunset merchant we've received with written support of project so thank you for your time and open to questions if you have any and great, thank you. >> we may have questions opening it up for public comment

(calling names). >> good evening, commissioners thank you for having me. john i'm i proprietor of wine bar down the street i completely support this project i had the pleasure of this business they're great to the neighborhood their residents, they've visited my establishment with connections i have no opposition and it is gives the neighborhood more diversity we have customers that go to private events we get asked i don't have the space so thank you. >> good afternoon how you guys doing i'm directly reginald from the coffee comment next door

from shindig on irving i run a coffee shop next door i have known them and before he came to his space was a little bit run down and wasn't very friendly any employees would come into early and nerve because people sleeping in the doorway so i've been able to he's let me have meetings in the space with my employees when i needed to i've actually since he's the neighbor and right around the corner had to call him my alarm has gone off he's walked down to make sure the store was okay. i'm all for this all the employees love the space next door and all the people that

come to the coffee shop we serve a lot of people in the neighborhood and people love the space the way it looks and he's a great person and his family is amazing his wife they've been getting coffee from us since they've moved into the neighborhood it is amazing i want to see it move on tuesday. >> great, thank you. >> thank you. next speaker, please. >> good evening, commissioners my name is jack i'm a native san franciscan born and raised in that neighborhood i'm here in support of frank and his establishment i think he compliments the neighborhood and offering a service hard to find especially in that neighborhood and he does

if with a lessons that attracts curiosity from the people and i'm in the neighborhood often i see people peering through the window and say hey, what a great space that is beautiful i hear nothing but positive comments and people that look inside i don't see any reason why it shouldn't be used for his purpose and he's a good person devoted to the space not only a business owner but a resident lives right around the corner he is devoted to the space and to his work being he is lives there thank you for your time. >> good evening my name is jim i'm here many in support ever

the restaurant and i also am a small business owner in the neighborhood i live 10 blocks away i want to echo what the people said before me spanking how it live evens up the neighborhood and speak to the type people san francisco needs to run small businesses i get emotional i talk about small business that the backbone of our country we need more small businesses in a city that is changing so much and we're seeing so many different big projects happen we need to remember the small little projects that add to the neighborhood i've gotten to know him and his wife for 12 years sorry i just think when we have opportunities to support people if san francisco that live in

san francisco that own homes and send kids to the schools into a place they live in our obligation as a city to support it it adds to his fellow neighbors and none opposing this project thank you. >> is there any additional public comment? okay not seeing any, you've got some good friends here commissioner richards >> i don't think i've seen a project with such support of 100 percent i think this is a complimentary use and sir, you should start counseling on the project sponsor and happy to move to approve. >> second. >> commissioner antonini. >> yeah. great project in a great pollutant neighborhood we have many pollutant neighborhood from 1 time to 7th street is

great from the streets further into the sunset a great area to walk around for the reasons stated and educational on beer and wine i'm very much in support. >> there is a motion and a second to approve that matter with conditions commissioner antonini commissioner hillis commissioner johnson commissioner moore commissioner richards commissioner wu and commissioner president fong so moved, commissioners, that motion passes unanimously 7 to zero and places you on item 12 union street this is a conditional use authorization. >> good afternoon, members of the planning commission sharon the the item before you is a conditional use authorization to establish the retail use an joe locate on union street in the

vacate ground floor he commercial space with 15 hundreds secret of ground floor relevance from the paparazzi the neighborhood xherlt district the proposal and tenant improvements to the space no expansion of the envelope as far as the consideration currently has 57 store worldwide with no existing locations in san francisco the promote project louis allows the first joe independent retail store in san francisco according to the project sponsor mcd there is 41 formal empowering establishments within the union street neighborhood commercial district restaurants, retail, personal and financial establishments

the existing of former retail establishments is approximately 70 percent of all retail businesses within the district and 20 percent of the commercial retail street frontage the subject project will add an additional retail establishment increasing the contemplation of establishments to 18 percent and will increase the formula retail use in the district based the frontage of all retail within the three hundred foot radius of the project site 7 of the retail establishments are former retails 22 percent of businesses and 21 percent of commercial frontage at the ground floor the proposed use contemplation will increase the contemplation of formula retail use businesses to 25 percent and not onlyly

effect the ratio the formula retail use street frormg within the industry and mcd that are few similar establishments within the district which specialize in cosmetic and fragrance and staff and homebody pursuits within the district to dates the department has not letters or phone call in opposition of the proposed project the department has received one letter of support of the project from the union street association the parklet recommendation is approval with conditions that concludes my presentation. thank you. >> thank you project sponsor please. >> good evening, commissioners i'm taylor with barbary coast consulting i want to briefly introduce the project from our prospective and the uniform support we've 80 so far received as mentioned earlier we have

received a very glowing letter merchant are exciting and the neighborhood and a preapplication meeting a small number of people and neighbors and shoppers were supportive of the project and excited to see joe mellone come into the neighborhood with that, i'm going to turn it over to kathy with joe mellone thank you. >> hi i can still say good afternoon we're very excited this office of this project on to my left is that's okay to my left is jonathan a colleague. >> excuse me. very quickly in sfgov could move to the computer thank you. >> thank you. go ahead. >> so i thought i'll give you a little bit of background who is joe mellone joe mellone is a

british lifetime with the fragrances with a center core of the arts so for those who know the brand you you know there's a lot of personal touch in terms of the way we wrap and we know that binding fragrance is personal we very try to teach people how to create hair own signature fragrances a couple of things you might not know they like us we have a nice little business for candle and lemon sprais sprays we teach hoping people how to set up their home appropriately it is teaching things like a grape flute be candle and it makes our house

happy and we do a lot of with the personal gifting and ♪ picture and usually one the things that people love is giving a gift to someone else a little bit how we fit within a community well, we like to make our place a home for play and activity while we're committed to teaching to letting people compressor /* explore and discover and how to make basis let's if someone wants to have a party we give lots of things go on you, you know we'll go directly to their home as well but we also celebrate things to like birthdays and bride maids

people kwoiment their wedding party and do parties in the store for us a community and being close and intimate it is important and important to support the brand a passion for giving back with a local garden trip a few steps away gardens are a source of the inspiration over the past year sponsored and working closely with local charity with brooklyn and came in landlords an organization in dallas that he built a beautiful 0 was for the children and underprivileged area that was fantastic right now we are working on long island with an historic library to create is

very first reading garden in long island it's important and when we looked at you know locations because you obviously we only have one store in solon the west coast we really wanted to make sure it was a unique area were there wasn't a lot of spores maybe light space in terms of none like us doing what we do a duplication like a enhancement on the street and wanted to make sure that we could be at home and feel at home with the local community we had time to spend with the local community within 36 hours so i'm going to ucsf's jonathan this will take you through the location hope you, too think this is a good idea

>> thank you, everyone good afternoon the exterior a beautiful building the landlord put in a lot of activity and from an exterior prospective we plan on doing minimal introduce an awning a. >> and leave the door black and leave the planters in front of the store see the planters to engage and talk about the fragrances a moment for us and opportunity to welcome the community moving into the space we here's a quick lay out 15 hundred square feet and the bow technical takes up frontage in the front the piece of our stores is the discovery table it attracts the people and our key

feature is the tasting bar we explore the tame petersburg and see what happens behind the main bow technicutiq plaintiff we choose the cream and black our brand and give us the opportunity for launches throughout the year an active before that happened with products a platform to display that table is our discovery tasting bar it is a great moment to attract the community. >> in closing another view as you can see the back area as

matthew was discussing gift giving and enlist wrapping a point every product is hand wrapped with the paper and the bows are chosen by the clients so that the experience is acquit it is quite ceremonial and great, thank you. >> and i guess questions? >> okay opening it up for public comment if there is any? >> no public comment public comment is closed. >> commissioner moore. >> since former retail is not what we're talking about it fits the union square we're experiencing quite a few vacates the building is appropriate to the use and so the smallness of the operation i personally have questions about formula retail i think this falls with that

discussion partially because it as we look back at the early 70s union street is really the 1 neighborhood commercial street which kicked off what we experiencing in minus the formula retail but, however, union street has to reinvent itself i'm interested in seeing not vacant storefronts but active retail it creates a formula to compliment the lieflt setting i personally don't have any problems i think from an overall aesthetic it fits and it is union street merchant support the project as they seem to i don't think i'm supporting the project. >> commissioner antonini. >> yeah. i'm supportive it is a very good product of fragrance for men and women and a lot of

people really like it i've heard of it before even before today and what's nice it is only the first store for john malone in california that cac can bring patrons to union street like to product and a lot easily to come to a store more of an experience as opposed to buy it at a large department store it is possible but have a positive effect on some of the other stores in union street and so i'm supportive and most of the to approve. >> second. >> commissioner richards. >> first of all, the compliments to the staff the project sponsor the map you provided was fantastic and to see what is around there 18 formula retail in the district only 22 percent within three

hundred and feet and it is complimentary and really a good shopping experience i very much support this project. >> there is a motion and a second to approve that with conditions a commissioner antonini. >> commissioner hillis commissioner johnson commissioner moore commissioner richards commissioner wu and sxhorng so moved, commissioners, that motion passes unanimously 7 to zero. >> commissioners, that places you under your 13 ab for the case at spear street an office authorization as well as a conditional use authorization. >> good afternoon rick department staff the item before you is the conditional use authorization and office authorization for the project at spear street the proposal includes a change of use of 400 thousand plus square

feet to office use on the third and fourth floors it will retain the cu use on the floors one hundred 9 thousand square feet specifically it is requesting a conditional use authorization to establishment a non-residential use and authorize to date the department has not received any letters of opposition just as a remembered in the future from the project applies for another change of use it will be substantially have to draw if the office allocation it is applicable for the next 10 years the department staff recommends approval the project is the applicable planning code and consistent with the policies and procedures of general plan in

the zoning district that permits office use and approximately 4.1 of a small office space available for allocation and the project sponsor is present and available for any questions that concludes my presentation. thank you. >> thank you project sponsor please. >> good afternoon steve with the digital the owners on the property of spear brought copies of the project it is fairly straightforward project we own two buildings on the block and as intended to develop 360 spear what an internet exchange weekly the current san francisco and we're at an office component is

complimentaryy for the tech companies and access to companies that ♪ proximity and other opportunities in san francisco given the space and the availability we find the conditional use complimentary a community meeting where we had an open house and 360 property and invited the local community members to see a presentation and ask questions we had somewhere around thirty participants and some really good questions nothing that seemed like major opposition we tried to maintain good relationships around the buildings over the past years and continued to also be a good neighbor overall it is the wrap of project if need be we'll turn through the plans that the basic project is to provide 49

thousand, etc., etc. secret square feet of office to fit within the requirement the entire fourth floor and a portion of third floor we'll get is it marketed and look at the tenants and bring it into the building in 2016 so - that's our project >> okay. >> we might have questions. >> okay. >> opening it up for public comme comment. >> sue hester from san francisco reasonable growth we're starting to see 49, 9 and 2 types projects and i'm a realist about

how building permits are preceded in the city hopefully e hoping that my colleague was here raised the same question on 16th street the planning commission needs to come enclose the position that explicitly says that building permit that is honest building has to alert the building inspection they may need no approvals of the tenants improvement without it being in the planning department why don't i say that i've read the files those are being approved without rooting through the planning department and coming in it 10 years or 2516th street and they deliver in anyone in the city can hire someone to go to the

building inspection and flash a permit gateways a new this every industrial building has on office every use possible has an office the only way that is really 49992 permanently or until they come back with an application there is a condition that tells buildings they may not improve over the counter for anything planning department knows the difference between offices use and accessory offices okay. except how to deal with the offices in that building and convert it like this it needs some attention because the department is

soliciting people 49 secret and john a ram that is on open secret we have a lot of 50 thousand square feet and a tight entrance so i'm asking the commission to be realistic and enforce the damn code put a condition they can convert 49992 again not the rest of the third floor or other places in the building thank you. i'm going to stay a one 35 he checked the plans and you can't see that you is there any additional public comment. >> okay seeing none, public comment is closed if the project sponsor comes back with on a additional request for office allocation if

the big office allocation or- >> thai trigger the 50 thousand square feet the amount of small cap will go back to the small cap pack and it will be looked. >> i have a question for the city attorney i'm hearing what ms. hester said explores conditions on the project sponsor i think that sound like a condition on staff with the building inspection is it done. >> kate establishing if the city attorney's office there may be some imperial mechanism like putting a note staff may be able to come up how they coordinate. >> that's a reasonable request i'll definitely support it the motion to approve with the scion be put.

>> second. >> on the file. >> parcel. >> commission just to clarify the condition of approval it will be encouraging outreach with the department of building inspection regarding the future permits. >> i don't remember the terminology but we'll snag projects forgot the terminology. >> we have a parcel information database but generally dbi didn't have access more of an internal cooperation and work with them what's the best methodologies. >> trust you on that commissioner antonini. >> that make sense two weeks ago we approved the digital realty and you know it they also have one on main isn't too far away make sense that some of the

usage experienced into office as by the project sponsor the fact that you need to have it for the businesses using the i s e want to say be closer to the storage facility themselves and have sort of the hands-on experience is make sense to do this and i appreciate the fact it we brought up the point that you can if it were to be a large anywhere space going to the large gap i'm supportive of the good blends to have the office space there. >> commissioner wu. >> i want to ask staff to explain i don't know if there is a usual what's the planning between staff and the dbi where's the crack. >> from mined the it belies on

the definition of the project from the sponsors end dbi will route it according what the sponsor tells them the project if in their only coming in with a interior permit with no change in occupancy then up to date necessarily get routed to planning for example, but when dbi seize a change in occupancy or some other kind of exterior change it gets routed. >> it raise a large issue of the enforcement overall thank you. >> commissioner johnson. >> yeah. thank you. i agree with commissioner wu and i don't want to belabor the point i don't understand the motion the problem if they get an approval for office space the difference

between small. >> large cap might get lost on the department counter maybe a subsequent change for the half of the fourth floor realistically what is it we can do i did not understand the motion. >> i think at that point it is before us the way to flag it if there is a change of use on the subsequent floors that will be the mechanism you know hopefully that dbi will recognize a change in the subsequent floor that will tip it to a large cap situation again there are layers of what office projects some projects that contain office accessories to dbi might not see that as a good use and might not route this is a large issue as looking at when the change of use a number ever years ago a

memo when projects come to us all the categories that come to planning i think this is a good time to look at you know an update that kind of memo and see the better ways to partner to make sure those changes come to us commissioner johnson if i understand the motion correctly it is to internally put a flag on the permit tracking system any future tenant improvements will be routed to planning. >> future that is internal. >> to be fair a part of the issue that methodist was raising not necessarily we won't catch a change of use but plied clank of use property owners say this is a ready office not proposing a change of use this has happened in several locations the dbi has

not routed the plans they look at plans and building it is utilized when it is not. >> i understand that as well i think that is what i'm trying to say part of the reason the 49 thousand square feet part of one of the froorz not the entire fourth floor and partial felt third story it is so o to say half of the third floor is office i don't see over-the-counter department staff between one half of the third story i'm trying to be realistic this is a larger conversation and revisit it especially we'll have the sort of office allocations prop m allocation fleeshg i'm not sure i guess to keep the flag not sure that will get to what we're

talking about thank you. >> commissioner moore. >> i'm interested in the technology integration into the dbi something in technology by which a red light to a footnote in any databases who makes them and where they were things that can be done is there oath depth and data sharing that allows for the extra footnote a question i'm hanging on. >> commissioners i heard a motion i didn't hear a motion. >> i'll second it. >> thank you commissioner antonini. >> so there is a motion and a second to approve this matter with conditions as amended to include that planning flag this property for any future tenant improvements to be routed to the planning department commissioner antonini commissioner hillis commissioner johnson commissioner moore

commissioner richards commissioner wu and commissioner president fong so moved, commissioners, that motion passes unanimously 7 to zero and place you on item 14 at 135 townsend street. >> good afternoon rick department staff the the item before you is an office detriment e development authorization for 49 thousand plus square feet at 2 henry adams street the proposal is a change of use of the 49 thousand plus square feet under self-storage a retail use of ground floor retail space the proposal will undertake the laefls of a new roof deck and stair penthouse the department has received one letter of support and one of omittance to the project on november 18, 2015, the

historic preservation commission granted a certificate of appropriateness for the exterior work at noted in the motion after analyzing all aspects the department staff recommend with conditions the project is with the planning code and consistent with the objectives and the project is located in a zoning district that encourages the growth of office development and the project is an allocation of 1.4 percent of the cap available that concludes my presentation. the project sponsor has prepared a short statements i'm available to answer any questions. >> thank you project sponsor. >> thank you, john with reuben, junius & rose on here on behalf of the project sponsor as mentioned it is the conversion of the retail soft

story building to office use i'll start by having jim come up to give you a give you a little bit of background of the building. >> good evening, commissioners my name is jim field the owner and applicant for one 35 townsend street a color bagged i was born in 1954 and 55 my dad started the base called custom paper products on townsend street and he operated this businesses for years and years until the two-story and the trung was obsolete and a problem to really with the congestion and all the growing amount of people in that area he moved the business eventually but supplied many companies he had a great

little business going on townsend street nevertheless, i spent most of my youth grouping on to section between second street and third street about thirty years ago my dad and i bought a second building with storage in that building for that entire time i think we partially waded through a lot of changes we have been there to the some pretty tough times in many market seen high tech and seen clank if the ball park we have a vision i have a vision for what i think townsend street can become and part of what we're doing in police vehicle the application trying to fulfill that vision for townsend street part of the reason wear trying

to moved on this i think the storming has become more obsolete and incomparable with the area part of there are rental truck coming and going and cars in and out of the building a problem with the level of pedestrians in that area i think we wanted to see retail brought that's why 40 percent of our storefront as retail and doing many go to be a nice addition what we hope is a community in that area we would like to see the building can't do with tenants want to renovate, upgrade the seismic and do the ada life safety so all those things currently a building tied to the two neighbor buildings when our

building was built two brick buildings on every side of us as a whatever company built that we're tied to the two buildings we have met with alice rogers from the south of market neighborhood group they're going to help us with the retail we have a vision we think is a shared vision of trying to bring more life and garage to it street i'm excited request working with them we have an agreement mou you'll see in our package from the soma group supporting the group al listless was here to speak barbecue but unfortunately had to leave so i think that is all i want to unsettle we're looking forward to work working on bringing this

together we have a lease for the buildings we've been working on 80 this building for two years have a lease with under armor to bring their group for health and fitness division and all lieflt and community lieflt thank you very much i appreciate your time. >> thank you, commissioner a couple of other comments west portal or with respect to the zoning district we obviously office is a principally permit subject to prop m not in any pdr protection zones outside of the supervisor kim's pdr protection ordinance area but of we were in f it because of a retail use self-storage is highly

disfavored not permitted ♪ zoning so self-storage use is not permitted it didn't activate the street and draw a number of workers to the area and not create jobs this project will restore the facade of this historic building which was approved by the hpc roach the parking and the thirty foot curve cuts better forever the pedestrians and create a neighborhood serving retail use we'll have voluntarily reached to the out to alice and rincon hill and the merchant association working with them they're in support of project and jim mentioned under armor moving their technology to the building and they're a well established copy company here

two doors counsel from townsend at the commission not a lot of things that building was eliminated in a pdrs use we're not doing it here we have the project and our tech is here if you have any questions and respectfully request you approve this office allocation >> any public comment on this item? >> that was the woman that left. >> okay public comment is closed. commissioner antonini. >> yeah. as pointed out office is permitted in the mou where self-storage is non-conforming in mou not an active use not many jobs and brought up the other thing to renovate, upgrade the historic building an article 10 building the other thing is there are probably other self-storages in that area and unusually had you

go to self-storage not whole in on a hand-cart you load a truck in the east bay a family home they want to save furniture and treasurers we got a storage room a couple of miles away once you're in a truck not any difference a block or two miles somewhere in the vicinity not in soma and the other thing under armor are an excellent product and moving to san francisco part of their operation i guess their health and fitness from texas i'm not sure it is texas most of time businesses are out of california to texas he it's good we're getting someone coming this way in a pdr protected business i'm in charge and move

to approve. >> second. >> commissioner moore. >> i'm interested in why storage is in the retail definition i see a value you've captured here in taking self-storage to office is not properly regretted in the fees we're las vegas i am read the to have the department elevate that discussion in order to not penalize but properly distribute how we collect fees we're a new uses very, very specific how the actions this particular case it might be based on an old definition a time that is appropriate relative to the overall transformation in the city at large with older buildings i see the value to capture we've not alleged i want

to hang that out this is a good example i'm in support of project i like the project think that is a nice adaptation and sensitive done but the issue that i outlined is extremely important to me i'm not sure if we can resolve this with respect to this project perhaps the city attorney or someone else you can't can address that i'll see from my historical sense prior to the eastern neighborhoods self-storage was a pdrs use there was a time it was considered pdr directing your attention that was morality as what is a use more pdr not having a lot of people coming and going as opposed to to the

self-storage so given that thought process i think we felt this was appropriate to we can indefinite revisit it per you're suggestion or having that suggestion you know we're going to the central soma that is an avenue to which this could be definitely addressed in those terms. >> the city attorney wants to weigh in. >> kate establishing if the city attorney's office i'm not sure what commissioner moore you mean by value added when the city assesss an impact fee we're going to to study of impact of the project and to establish a nexus between the impact on the neighborhood are impact on the city as related to the particular kind of fee i'm not sure if the city has conducted a nexus study or shows the difference in impacts on any of the normal fees we collect if

this was defined as a retail use now an office use without that study or without that nexus connection i don't think the commission could establish assess a fee on this project at this time unless staff can tells you that the nuking analysis has been done i would say in central soma or other plans the city is certainly do the nexus study. >> it is a core of any question i'm not suggesting to amend the process had a nexus study is required i'm talking about policy the area is transforming with the specific boundaries to south of market, etc. i think that would be timely for the planning department to gather the other part of city family to discuss

value added to the nuking by which we'll consider had a fees we're las vegasing i appreciate that a small core the forward leading thought as i said, i. in support of this what project does and delivers in terms of the hpc. >> commissioner richards. >> a point of clarification on commissioner moore's comments from retail to office no fee. >> correct the way our counter fees work they receive a change of use credit they basically get a credit for their existing use and most of the typical fees that apply to this project like or tsf the retail component is a hire you basically pay a higher amount so going from retailed to office they don't they're not a

fee that the city basically applies. >> the difference is less. >> correct. >> maybe a point i have taken this note down is there a place where there is a schedule of fees in one place i can be directed to understand this. >> the best place the dbi registry where the fees are indexes but we have a case 23.3 the eastern neighborhoods change of fee if you like give me a call. >> the one - and the dbi registration. >> one other question a formula retail use ms. rogers discussions and you this will not require a requesting you. >> correct within the eastern neighborhoods district if a formula retail use were to come into the retail says that a cu

will be required. >> commissioner johnson. >> thanks very much just really quick i will be supporting commissioner moore's comment from the central soma and this is not the only opportunity commissioner antonini i think r he rhetorical question like two blocks away from this one it is possible that we might have the discussion i'll round it off we're talking about is whether or not we need differentiate within dispenses he intensity the soma after a lot of the industry went away those are low density and many of them retail and pdrs but certainly ones higher in density be maybe a more of a conversation appreciate having that as well. >> common core.

>> i assume a motion i hear a lot of. >> there is a motion and it's been seconded. >> commissioner antonini. >> yeah. just in keeping with that through it didn't speak to the impact fees the check list goes through the possible impacts and nun none of them are significant and is public housing logical resources and land use and mr. haney fails underneath the eastern neighborhoods pdr so that kind of answers a little bit of that i guess. >> commissioners a motion seconded to approve with conditions. >> commissioner antonini oar commissioner hillis commissioner johnson commissioner moore commissioner richards and commissioner wu so moved, commissioners, that motion passes he unanimously 6

duo to zero commissioners that places you under our discretionary review calendar for item 15 on the case at ann district attorney street an abbreviated discretionary review. >> good evening. i'm david lindsey of department staff this is a request for discretionary review of a project that proposed vertical and horizon to a second story single-family homes on ann district attorney street between 45 and 46 avenues in the outer richard the proposed third story sixth district from the existing front wall to the existing rear wall the proposed emotion and guess will extend beyond the day and night and first and suzy loftus a 10 foot beyond the rear

addition at the first and second story it includes the major remodel and exterior modifications the subject property is one is of 6 single-family homes conducted in the 1920s both corners chooshd by larger buildings the massing the 2 of the 6 single-family homes have been altered two doors to the east has a setback third story and the house to the etc. of the subject property extends to the front and rear thirty wide by 90 feet deep in the rh1 district the rear property line abuts the side and rear yard of the property that fronts on 46 after

the exist front yard is thirty feats and the proposed depth is 22 feet the dr requester is many is mona the owner on ann district attorney street east of the subject property many 134 west concerns with the property according to the dr application she has concerned with the single-family homes will be converted to 3 united without adequate parking and a concern that the proposed massing and occupancy are greater than those of surrounding houses the project is originally submitted significantly larger than the project and the residential design team reviewed the project twice and have comments that result in reduction of the height prior to the neighborhood notification being initialed the rdt reviewed

the project in the advisory committee of dr requester the rdt found the project is appropriately designed through the use of setbacks that provides the spagsz to protect light and air and including the dr requesters house while the enlarged subject building provides generous space not units they requested a modification to the proposed windows on the front facade the modifications have been made does for the create or and staff asked to take dr and approve the project. >> thank you dr requester you have the first 5 minutes.

>> thank you for having us here to review this project i believe this project will negatively impact the characterizations of this neighborhood and street for the following reasons the owners proposed to build the 3 story building 4 stories in the whether or not 2 appears the owners will build a 3 unit building each underscore is designed to be a stand alone residents and not modified to the entrance this is designed to be a 6 bedroom project allowing a one car parking space for project this size will negatively impact the parking on our street there is not sufficient parking on this street to sort of a

structure of this magnitude we're built on a steep hillside the structure has a greater massing on the streets the mass and magnitude of this home can compromise the foundation especially those with the zero lot lines currently, we have to retaining walls on the home one retaining wall below the houses and one at the rear lot line i believe this was the support to our homes as a result of being built on sand in the richmond district will the city require an engineering report and a geological survey to make sure our properties are safe i currently have solar panels on

my roof the fourth story will block the solar energy to my home please review the solar act of 1978 that applies to us you can't block sunlight i provide extra copies the ear extension of the fourth floor will interrupt our private enjoyment and comfort women the views and light it will effect our quality of life for a joining property owners who have lived on this block for almost 50 years all setback this strictly be observed our way we share with the owner is a second means of egging regress these buildings were built 90 years this will

not augment it with light could cause harm or injury for people attempting to leave the premises and create drainage and needing problems if this is higher - they want to split the walkway and make their homes higher so maybe drainages and flooding problems going into our property the home on the west side share a common wall what will the damage be to her home and mine as a result a modestly this i want to ask for a continuance to have additional wanted to confer with our neighbors and their architects and possible forum with the planning association for the richard or richmond district a nonprofit organization we vice president had a chance to have a friendly

exchange or dialogue with those folks they just have not made themselves and their architects available to go through the blueprints and answer any questions we've had thank you for considering our case. >> okay. thank you. >> we're now going to call speakers no support of dr requester. >> i have extra materials. >> okay leave it on the bench right there calling speakers in supportive dr requester. >> good evening thank you for allowing us to be here i'm sandy i'm the neighbor who has the common wall with my neighbor those houses are unique it is just that one block on ann

district attorney between 46 and 45 on think south side from the bridge of the hill in 1928 they were built and a duplex style they have a reverse plan with a beautiful view the bedrooms on the street side and have a reverse floor plan but we have that darn common wall to that like siamese twins one the twins will be really big my concern for the integrity of my house i want to make sure that the city really keeps an eye i'm sure my neighborhood doesn't want the retaining wall to crack and fall in on him

to the address he talked to the architect he wasn't too sure about the retaining wall we need to have smart people in there and also i'm going to lose the lighted from the front of the house facing east because of penthouse and in the back of my house the extension of the footprint come out an additional 8 feet that blocks with the whole morning sun on any deck and master bedroom just comes past my deck i'm going to have this big house right there and windows are on that side i can touch the person in that house so i have no privacy people on that side have windows looking into my master bedroom so you know, i want you to know there is more to this that's been

satisfactorily looked at with i've lived there 45 thank you very much. >> thank you. >> thank you. next speaker, please. >> >> good evening, commissioners i've lived in the neighborhood since april of 2011 across the street my husband and i moved there with my daughter of 4 in the character of that street oh, part of problem when those folks starred this project no communication with the neighborhood at all there was the notice and an additional meeting but it was very acrimonious no questions answers the initial plan 6 thousand square feet home it is ridiculous if in neighborhoods nothing like it anywhere nearby and since then a couple of

meetings no questions and no attempt to integrate what is a otherwise end together neighborhood i too have concerns about the house in that that is a 6 bedroom house that seems out of character with the existing there i believe that the current plan called for a 35 foot home it is reduced from 65 but much more on the houses i live across the street in a home that is a bit over 2 thousand square feet one of the larger homes in that street and one that is 35 hundred secret a out of step the other concern i have this is i apologize a little bit late to the game i have one copy i can hand out we had an architect review the plans and it seems to me according to this architect

that the plans don't actually match of u up to the permit some of the addition is wrong on the plan and didn't match the permits by in some cases even as much as a foot excuse me. so again, it is an example of not knowing exactly what is happening with this home and finally simple like to make the point to address the precedence in the neighborhood there is a corner unit this is 3 stories high that payroll was built angle supra floor in violation of permit and payroll the only penalty assessed was that the owner couldn't rent the top floor for one year in addition to the house that was mentioned there was an additional done to that house done illegal they built it

and i want to point out that some of the as opposed precedence for building a structure so big in the neighborhood is dubious at by itself thank you for your time. >> good evening my name is scott i own the house next door a contractor in san francisco the one aspect that has not been discussed this is a hill there's a huge retaining wall behind the house 25 feet and four homes essentially this lot is not buildable they're looking to push the envelope no analysis on the retaining walls that are behind there one of the retaining walls is part of on existing house below any problems during construction or

earthquake there could be possible problems there needed to be an analysis i want to see that pushed where we can do those plans are no engineering so we don't know what will happen with the build normally you push those plans you approve e.r. not it goes to engineering and the engineers will redo it if he decides to do a huge process what will happen how much will they disturb the soils and also the neighbor sandra has a continuous response time behind her house they'll cuz cutie am looking at those plans not bids those without structural plans it is a language of destruction right now only a concept to approve

this i'm sure that the architects concepts you're leaving out most of details i'm against it more thoughtful and analysis last week anyone any architect will tell you the thing. >> thank you. >> thank you. next speaker, please. >> >> hi commissioners i'm kathy lengthy live on ann district attorney i've lived there for 25 years i really am here to support my neighbors who are more directly effects by those projects this particular project because of all the things that have been raised the side issues and the significant hill, the lack of dialogue we've

tried to have meetings we've gotten no answers i would agree those are conceptual plans with engineering needs to be computed into this and really please allow us to have the time to really look at this project and for the experts to make their comments so that done in a fashion that didn't destroy other people's proposals their light and view and solar panels thank you. >> thank you. >> my name is ernest i live on ann district attorney streza st.

>> i've concerned we've had too much traffic on the road we live on a hill people like to park up and down anza street and concerned about the precedence this project will set expanding the footprint of the house of a house that's going to encourage the robbery of the project throughout the richmond thank you. >> you want to say something. >> great thank you. >> thank you. any additional speakers in support of dr requester not seeing any, property owner project sponsor you have 5 minutes. >> i'm amy lee here

representing the project sponsor michelle lee we'd like to be speaking brown-bag as well as and lisa and paul residing in the residence currently, the project sponsor is seeking to renovate a single-family homes to reconfigure the homes for the parents mobility this provides age additional 60 square feet there are 3 primary concerns of the requester not sure where the thought of or concern of adrc the additional units has come about we're looking to renovate a home where she can accommodate not only here parents but future parents in the single-family homes with an additional of a master bedroom at the thirst level it is a full third level

with a massing of the setback requirements on this level i think the previous plan the original plans were submitted by the architect i might have lead to confusion miss labeling the rooms that perhaps in the living room her father will stay and use it as a bedroom we've substantially corrected the plans to make sure it shows accurate labeling of the rooms looking to provide for an overall 4 bedroom home the second concern this project will increase the mass and this is incorrect the footprint we're proposing is the same depth to anza i believe is the requesters address and this height and it matches east of this property the restoration the names doesn't propose any occupancy of

the renovation will add square footage to a single-family and in addition in our packet as you can see the aerial photo one as well as the photo two it shows the neighbor properties this is a much smaller home the neighboring properties have expend extended their properties significantly as well and the third particular concern a mason's that michelle lee was a foreign national willal and trying to profit from this project it is incorrect mission bay is a citizen who emigrated here and graduated from uc berkley she's assigned to work in asian as well as san francisco maybe that's the my understanding but this is an investment and a permanent home for the parents and future family we had many meetings with

the neighbors i believe in our packet there's been most recently a fourth meeting on september 29, 2015, when i came on board amuses e-mails and numerous opportunities for discussions and micro tried to address the concerns some confusion request language and inability to explain the project in meeting with the neighborhoods in september the overall concern the neighbors in the parts previooposition didn' follow the planning code and didn't seek any permitting process so they were concerned for us to make sure we make sure of the permitting requirements and to that end ms. lee has been working since be late 2012 she

purchased this in 2011 and made steps with her first draft in 2012 was a plan that the architect showed what she could do maximum capacity and made changes to comply with the guidelines and the building code and we've got a second architect and replaced the previous one and in addition 3 planners assigned and reviewed by the residential design 3 times i'm surprised at the opposition we'll deal with the structural concerns and absolutely marshall make sure with the planning department we have a engineering and make sure that will be done in a way that preserves the integrity of the neighbors. >> thank you calling the

speakers in support and jonas offer a little bit of clarification there are speakers that are part of project team. >> on this those speakers can speak in support of project not part of team the project sponsor didn't get 3 minutes anybody they've hired to work on the project as much as the architect not afforded 3 minutes. >> she can make her comments under rebuttal. >> okay. thank you dr requester you have a two minute rebuttal. >> if you choose. >> okay. so project sponsor you have 2 minute rebuttal.

>> good evening commissioner and oh, my dear neighbors i'm the property owner michelle after thirty something years living in richard or responding i have my preliminary residence when i was young i went to washington high and graduated from uc berkley any current job i'm working on requires me to travel to do my work i always been hoping to have a home for my elderly parents my future family and myself. >> right after i bought this home for my parents and myself i started the planning process this planning process in the last 3 years has not been easy

for me i want to insure what we're doing is in compliance with the planning and with blamd and also that counts plan be in harmony with my dear neighbor so we have a total of four neighbor meeting in the past 34 years the intent is to make sure that the black and white plan they're looking at they understand it and address any of the concerns however, many actually most of questions being raised are from imagination not the black and white that is shown it is easy if we have a 3 unit or these are not the intent not

easy to answer the questions that is not from the reality and then. >> thank you, ma'am, your time is up. >> the commissioners may have additional questions okay. the public hearings is closed as commissioner moore. >> i want knowledge the applicant it is sobering to hear i've not heard this that makes me uncomfortable i think one of the reasons why this project is potentially not fully understood in the way it is written mr. lynn 61cy i have to ask the project in terms of the middle guidelines those are leaves out an important part to which we're asking for i have to

ask about other cases and we're behind the projects coming forward in a critical dr people need to understand the relationship between the existing and the proposed project having said that, the issues in the dr given that this project will be reviewed by dbi and all the standards for for soils and structural and rvlts effect on the joining foundation is not what this commission considers in a dr if this project only come forward with a slightly perhaps more informed drawings a little bit sketchy not drawn with the kind of information that registered architect will brick forward to show e but that aside

the project is within the code and the project is indeed approvalable the only question i have kind of like really stretching it perhaps i'd like some feedback did the design review - i don't want to raise suspensions. >> we did review this not only through the residential design team at staff level but we have guidelines for review what we

call ground floor rings for the very reason that sort of scouting out for potential illegal units so we have concern requirement they have to meet one of these an open staircase we have that and we also limit we look at the bathrooms and wet bars in this case in their providing a full bathroom and no wet bar we allow one or the other from an assess point of view if you want to see this is potentially independent assess from the outside but not beyond raising the questions i possible see and trust this indeed is

suggested for its purchase as it is prepared and for that reason i can't see that the issues raised with the dr requester rise to level we'll consider to deny this project so it is not there so i have to move to approve that project not take dr is it possible including what i see here. >> second. >> commissioner antonini. >> yeah. i have similar concerns with the ground floor maybe the project sponsor can answer some of my questions this is the garage that is it looks like you're not get too much

here. >> a more open living she - he may not sleep in the bedroom downstairs but in the family room so we really were mindful the ailing parents monitoring that looks at more open and in particular this is michelle hopes to find a husband and at some point wants separation from

her in-laws. >> this is fine the new master and two bedrooms for potential children on the main floor but i think if that that bathroom were set back it would. >> we can look at that. >> less constrained in the front and don't need a really long walk into the closest. >> her parents have a lot of stuff to keep together but we will look at that. >> that's the original thing other than it is reasonable. >> okay. thank you. >> commissioner moore. >> i personally can't participate in telling other people how to live that is it is what it is but we're tdr interested in the project and it's approval it to code and the issue that i raised regarding

using it as a separate unit or potentially using it has been vetted by the department of the standards to use i'm prepared to move to approve approve the project as is because i can't tell people how to live. >> commissioner richards and i want to echo about the 3-d drawings that really, really helps i strong encourage it. >> from what i understand from talking with the architects it produces a 3-d drawing as a the other project sponsor before us if you do that i'll appreciate it. >> commissioner antonini. >> to staff that was no feeling any light and air impediments. >> commissioners we did look at that as art of residential

design team residential building between the dr requester and the subject building 3 feet 8 inches or of inches to the east and the project sorry the dr requester has a setback along there side property lines so the project is setback from the vertical addition and even with the rear wall at horizon maintenance the setback on the east side and actually includes a 5 foot setback on the east you. >> thank you. >> commissioners, if there's nothing further there is a motion hates that's been second. >> on that motions approval of the project. >> commissioner antonini. >> commissioner hillis

commissioner johnson commissioner moore commissioner richards commissioner wu commissioner president fong so moved, commissioners, that motion passes unanimously 7 to zero and place us on general public comment which i have in speaker cards. >> okay general public comment this evening. >> can i ask that mr. anton is renamed rather than mr. lee. >> yeah. whatever it was fortunately. >> it's a glitch in the old monitor. >> on our monitor commissioner antonini read mr. download i didn't and okay. no public comment the meeting is adjourned thank

>> alfred welcome to your unit >> so we're going to take >> alfred welcome to your unit >> so we're going to take you. >> hi, i'm carl with the fisherman's we're thrilled to have you here i get to open a lot of buildings or buildings and none of them brings me more pleasure than today a one and 90 units of air force's affordable housing in the heart of san francisco mere jobs and near transit in the middle of the worst housing crisis to see this project come to reality having

done this inspires and brings mayor edwin lee me pride a huge public-private partnership this deals dates back to chris daily in 2003 and in his office talking about what level of affordability we'll need what is now infinity that deal 12 years ago is finally give me rise to this project and the two at infinity close to 4 hundred uptsz among those 3 sites so i'm grateful to the supervisor to the supervisors predecessor grateful to the mayor and the mayors predecessor for the public and private partnering to make that happen and grateful to the mayor's office of housing who's down the logistics and more importantly thank you to

don and n mtc that controlled that site and worked with us this is their product their housing we're thrilled to be partners with t n d c the labor life company that saw and put money into this project that helps to provide housing. >> jobs in san francisco and perry this is a huge public-private partnering but you explicit come here to hear from me we got a call could we pull the agenda for this forward i week i didn't see what a wonderful morning to be able to open one 90 units of affordable housing on the dawn of the mayor's re-election by more importantly the passing of prop a and the commitment to the housing bond in san francisco so congratulations to everyone

(clapping.) with great pleasure introduce mayor ed lee that helped to make that happen congratulations. >> thank you. >> thank you, carl. >> well campaigns is over we're going right to work and i am also grateful to carl and to your relationship with tndc to our work request supervisor kim and making this happen he was here already months ago looking at the some of the unit and visualizing what some of the new residents will see are a long, long time i'm glad they're here that is the exact the stories we're chasing when we said let's get a promotion up before the voter and get a $310 million which will be matched with other money from the budget thanks to

the board of supervisors and us agreeing with a higher goal he, he we are already with this how do we do that? bond we're already locating nonprofit partners for more housing we are using the word carl something you and your investors know about investment and about leveraging and this was a parking lot that we invested in now we're leveraging it into residences one hundred 90 brand new unit all 100 percent affordable it an incredible story i told don earlier he's the only one that can tell the history how many hands and how many relationships had to be built and trust factor to be created in order for today to happen it is complicated i'll

let don tell the story but those agencies that live to tell those stories i'm glad he's with us and not only do we have this particular site to celebrate but it is on the dawn of celebrating more we'll have a lot more keys given out to love people that need housing in the city the workforce is part of the success whether or not teachers the one teacher got in on an incredible lottery that she had to wind travels in order to get in but hopefully for teachers and health care workers people that work in restaurant and hotels make a good living but find it did to the will live in the city in is what the housing bond does as part of this this is what the private segment a dog more and more with us in government is

trying to match up what they can do with us so you can literally see that people in the business whether the market-rate or low income housing can find that connection with government and be supportive to make sure that more units are affordable the obligation here targeted with one and 602 unit somehow and someway that story and that relationship was to solid with city government we reached up to one hundred 90 units that's what we want to do supervisor kim; right? we want to set a goal and see how we can steady this is what the incredible story is about we'll do that in many sites certainly with the package of prop k you are joint efforts to locate oil public land we've

gun control sites and some of the developers with literally calling and saying what wee, we do together now the message is clear you can do more we can all be more successful if we work together that's the message our prop a, prop k, our incredible relationships with the private developers and certainly with community-based nonprofits i'm landmark to handing out keys and people will be happy to receive and having this incredible courtyard that is a positive experience right in the middle of san francisco are these center and we have a number of sites within two or three block radius that are going to be underdevelopment in the next few years that signals on i didn't believe amount of of affordable

housing people will say it great that is guarantee close to transit and close to our civic center park and going to be center of a lot of good activities that people want to be close to as we want to live here and closeness to our arts organizations that continue to lead the effort along mid market and so there's a lot of good news and grad to see the office of economic workforce development is here and the department of building inspection, because we're all ready tarnishing not only the sites we're going to do housing on but ideas as to how to accelerate them and an accelerator fund maybe talk with our kwiblt partners to accelerate all the goals we want because i know that our labor

folks don't have enough to do want more work; right? michael they want more work and do it the right way and get the housing up that is for the would it be fair to say as well thank you to you everybody all the partnerships we've had here and let's keep doing this more than slnlt let's go to work and get more done and video more smiles on families thank you. >> (clapping.) supervisor kim. >> first of all, i want to give a big congratulations to the mayor for winning his election 4 more years. >> (clapping.) we've not had much such a mayor and such an hour how were you to work with him and 24 particular we're seeing 80 percent of san francisco's development the statistic i'm proud of district 6 is building 44 percent in all

of san francisco's affordable housing (clapping.) and i would not be possible not for first of all, the strong support of our mayor and working with us to push the envelope both looking for the nonprofit institution and our private developers who know how important to how's everyone in the city but also i want to recognize we have a strong institution of community-based organizations in the district that fight more affordable housing for decades and tenderloin corporation with search warrant r is one of them i want to acknowledge their work additional don fox leadership (clapping.) and building more affordable housing and we have several anymore sites i'm excited about mixed use p mission and howard and 4 and the forethought so when the revenue and the

opportunities came forward we built affordable housing in the city where the land is incredibly scarce but what is exciting for me, i want to share a story in august i interviewed commissioners 3 applicants what was astonishing most of 3 applicant were recipients of the affordable housing program with an lived in my district court and the second was the housing magnitude by life-saving strfrtd and the third housing for 14 mists a tenderloin residents it is how for this work is it feels last week we're not building enough when you meet the youth and families in the neighborhood we've built affordable housing those are the most cranial moments i'm excited to welcome our recipe to the in and look forward to serving you finally he just want to give a

shout out and thank the city for their support of building more affordable housing it has been 20 years since we last passed the affordable housing bond no 1996 for one hundred million dollars and last night for one hundred and $50 million that will have a tremendous impact not only to the district i represent across the city and we have a lot to do a lot to do when i came into the office we were building at 80 percent of low income housing needs that is good but have to keep up the numbers we were this only building others less than 12 percent we have to continue to build low income affordable housing we have to we must build more middle-income housing in san francisco in order to keep diverse san francisco whether it is giant on this site or you

know with future projects i look forward to making sure we are doing the balance we need to see thank you very much and congratulations to everyone involved (clapping.) >> thank you, supervisor kim i'm don fox ceo of the tenderloin development c n b c i'm tired those kind of projects have hundreds if not thousands i want to recognize our partners mayor ed lee supervisor kim and the mayor's office of housing tishman's and hundreds of others we just are part of progress and those don't happen without a collection of people the story of this site begins in 1998 and so if nothing else this is a story of perseverance bank of america owned a parking lot the

bart or parking lot the purpose was because they were going to eventually need to expand the data center right next door they were going to need more computers well, it turn out because of the rapid growth of technology computers don't need more space but less space they declared it surplus land and argued to to proposal to sell the property in a bargain sale below the market value value in order for us to build housing it is 17 years later that's a very arduous and difficult process through recreations and boosts the detergent of affordable housing resources that are available from the state and federal government many challenges to overcome to

produce housing like this i think that is important for me to say and for us to understand this is not mark farrell affordable housing not mark farrell dwelling units those are homes and home is the platform for opportunity for people if people have affordable homes they don't have to make the choice been paying rent and medical skewer and teacher of the hear of their children we do much more than off for you walls and a ceiling thank you very much for being here and ems to the next person that's correct (clapping.) >> we have two units that are open for anything that wants to go in and see the units what

else am i supposed to say eric. >> but we thank everyone for coming that this is a great public partnering thank you to everyone for working together to make this you.

>> is the monitor not on?

>> good morning today is tuesday, september 22, 2015. this is the welcome to the regularly scheduled meeting of the building inspection commission i'd like to remind people to turn off the electronic devices roll call. >> commissioner president mccarthy commissioner mar commissioner lee commissioner melgar commissioner mccray and commissioner walker commissioner clinch commissioner clinch is excused presidents amazements. >> good morning and welcome to wednesday, november 18, 2015, bic committee i have annunciates

special thanks to the fire department and the dbi staff that responded to a 3 alarm fire in the mission at 16 for the entire shop burned down and damaged a adjacent apartment building 20 residents per the engineering recommendations for that director huey signed a permit for the immediate parapet that is eminent to public safety and the demolition order applies to the remainder the building the apartment has code violations was red-tagged as unsafe for occupancy due to the fir damage and posted with a notice of violation for unsafe seriously dry rotten rear stares with the demolition on the way this past monday staff admonished the building owner

with the order and the possibility of a serious public safety reflex especially last sunday's high winds big thank you to dbi staff along with the other city family representatives how volunteered their time on a saturday to help educate people in chinatown community fair in 2015 the gratitude we saying i really appreciated everyone to help another effort to help the dbi customers the public in jean when louis and overview lane forgive me attend the city update kudos to our planning review services that received a letter mr. howard is a level of expertise has truly helped to us complete our project if a timely manner that we had helped to

meet the growing demand for housing congratulations inform commissioner walker in the san francisco examiner she urged supervisor wiener ordinance requiring tenant notification aimed to those in illegal units of an permit to remove that the boards supported this ordinance which is expect to take legal effect by the first upcoming new year the director stan designated bring to your attention on the cannabis legalization task force they'll be covert and overseeing the district 2 we will have 19 members in total and make finding and recommendation to the local implementation ones the state acted a ballot measure

is expedited many thanks to commissioner mccarthy and thing thank to the fire department and the sfpuc who had the final merging the board ordered interagency task force on and on over the next month they'll finalize their recommendations and get back to the board with the fire and life safety in multi-unit buildings that are at risk for serious injuries and finally to the staff to have the blow quarter 3, 2015 please send in our nomination to william at sfgov.org as soon as possible to allow the recommendation committee to have the december meeting

mr. secretary that concludes any announcements. >> any quo on the president announcements. >> the bic will take public comment within the jurisdiction not part of agenda. >> seeing none, on to item 4 discussion and possible action to approve a member of the code and 5150s for the engineer fee appointment recommended by the nomination subcommittee is bryan expiring august 2016. >> commissioner. commissioner lee or commissioner melgar. >> the nominations the committee met 10 days ago i suppose we drilled bryan sandra on his desire and willingness and knowledge about the fir

protection seat on the code advisory committee and found out him knowledgeable about the fire engineering and protection engineering and he's also a resident of san francisco so we would like to unanimously recommend that he be postponed to this seat today. >> commissioners any comments >> also on one hand if he is here. >> like to address the commission or - >> you, you don't have to. >> i am bryan i've been a practicing engineer in the city for 5 years and i've this was passed on to me there a colleague i reached out to so on

a i can't i'll be interested in serving on the committee. >> thank you. >> thank you. >> so i will there that i am on this item i'd like to take a motion on that item. >> okay. i'll make a motion to accept his nomination through the nomination committee and appoint him to the commission. >> second. >> there is a motion and a second. >> second. >> okay. >> roll call vote commissioner president mccarthy commissioner mar commissioner lee commissioner melgar commissioner mccray and commissioner walker pursue okay. the that motion carries unanimously congratulations and have you come up one more time

(clapping.) >> thank you for volunteering so, please repeat after me >> i. >> do solemnly swear. >> (repeated.) >> (repeated.) >> the constitution of the united states. >> (repeated.) >> and the constitution of the state of california. >> (repeated.) >> >> (repeated.) >> foreign and domestic. >> and that i will bear true faith and allegiance. (repeated.) >> to the constitution of the united states. >> (repeated.) >> and to the constitution of the state of california. dooildz. >> (repeated.) >> without any mental reservation. >> (repeated.) >> or purpose of evasion.

>> that i will well and faithfully discharge the duties. >> (repeated.) >> and during such time as i hold office. code advisor committee of the san francisco ethics commission. >> (repeated.) okay that's it congratulations thank you (clapping.) >> thank you.

>> on to agenda 5 discussion an is tracking system. >> now we're - >> good morning, commissioners director huey i'm henry with the department find technology project manager for the prelims at beginning. >> i'm john working on the limitations for dbi. >> we're represent the current status the third party assessment which we spoke about at last months meeting of revenue went on, on november 3rd at the time of in front of 16 the dew dates as of the 12 when we prepared this since then hearing back if the

marketplace vendors we've stated that to the november response time due date and just to reiterate during this project rewith not actually engaged with the dollar resources at this time we continuing to do activities on the project team dbi staff and shawn will give you an update on those. >> with regards to the project progress we are still working on testing to the some of the fixes incorporated we still have in terms of configuration and reporting there are still a total of one hundred 41 critical outstanding issues we're testing in the status of waiting the users

tests and finding for defects their increasing over time there are still 70 important migration issues open and the statistic the reports worked on by excel and 60 total 14 have been accepted and the internal dbi there are 71, 11 accepted on the next slide as you can see the status this is the number of defects we've found you'll see their increasing their increasing because no vendor activity the defects are not fixed it is up slightly as expected as we continue to test and find more issues. >> we had been asked for at

the prior meeting for more detailed list of the total project expenses to dates it is what is provided here a total of 4 contracts signed and the four contracts are numbered here the initial project and permit tracking system agreement that was provided at the last meeting there's a software and license agreement 4 major agreements that are signed within between the city and excel 21 tech the initial project for the implementation of the software has 6 amendments to date all of the contract with the "x" sell 21 tech partners an unpaid balance for where we are through amendment 6 and balance set for held for unmet deliverables and

future dlieblz activities this is a more complete accounting we need more time to compile the fingers this is what was asked for . >> i'll be happy to answer any questions. >> i think you're off the hook commissioner mar. >> first of all, thank you for i want to thank the deputy director madison for the projected budget but i have some follow-up questions maybe not for this meeting but a followup meeting about the budget which is again you're right last meeting we got the full agreement project tracking system number one i would like

the agreement for the amendments because it is important for the commission to know what we're getting for the dollars that would put out for each amendment there's been a little bit find a back and forth about whether they were a change of scope of work verse the defects things like that it is important for us to said and also there seems to be blank dollars amounts on the filipino-american and the other all the time. >> the first amendment i have to do this from memory the first amendment and the 6th amendment was a push anti loan no dollars amounts when we get you the detail you can read that. >> okay. >> commissioner walker please. yes, so.

>> we have now spent as much as we initially budgeted in the last 3 years. >> for amendments so i just want to point out that to the commissioners that is double. >> yes. >> and that's just in the last 3 years so i know that last meeting we spent a lot of time putting blame on the beginning of this or whatever we still have problems that have not been solved in spite of the budget being doubled i wanted to point out that we now have a reset as opposed to a pause i'm hopeful that reflects the fact that commission has no more

patience with the details on this project i'm concerned that the vendors is not involved in helping us identify the defects flo undergo this process that doesn't make sense i wanted to understand why this is the case. >> the vendor is not involved because we're not occurring more vendor costs. >> are we identifying our problems internally. >> we're identifying problems with the software that was implemented. >> are we identifying the problems internally. >> yes. >> were pointed out not appropriate data gathered at the beginning so we're focusing on this right now? as we are. >> we're going to come out of the reset with our ducks in

order. >> yes. >> yes, so the foundational reason to have done the reset this was a large topic of the last discussion was the very large gap in the operational dbi verse the requirement that were documented during the firefighter of this that gap remains that's what we are trying to fill whoever does the assessment it is so obvious that gap needs to be addressed we're mobile listing and starting to work on that this is fundamentally the issue that is bringing think this project when you look at the vendor and say what they're looking to those requirements are incomplete and the department has to be fulfilled before we have any vendor build this dbi business

use. >> what is the projection of what this side to the timeline when we anticipate getting the vendor to finish this project. >> we haven't received until we have responses on the rfp for the assessment we don't know how long any of them might bid to do that work we don't want to see that go out months and months and months we expect it assessment on one of the criteria it is done efficiently. >> we need to put a timeline it is our job to say we want an ascertainment back in the timeframe we're handing out i mean, i'm not sitting here defenders the vendors we have a vendor that is committed to us and han this project up i think because of our own lack of

progress so i would like to put a timeframe on the process of reset. >> and we do - we purchasing didn't set a timeframe because we want the folks responding to give us their honest assessment of what it will take we definitely are not accepting an assessment that says oh, 6 extinguisher 8 or 12 months and i'd like to see the commission put a set time in the morning 60 days for an initial report and a report a month later to get going i mean, i'm just looking at i've been in all of the meetings i've heard the same thing over and over and over again, i can't give a timeframe without that definition we're here 4 years later saying it is not even clear how bad it is.

>> so i have no more patience i'm not going to if you say 6 months brown for a report this not acceptable i have no more, more patience. >> commissioner melgar. >> i'm not going to repeat commissioner walker i think i was clear at the last commission meeting about my position on this i don't think we should have taken a pause but unfortunately couldn't make it to the meeting but i want to get a commitment if you director because at the last meeting we heard from the gentleman from the formally grand jury who remind us of the fundamental problem that the scope of work

was not developed properly to begin with that is not an it issue per say an issue of our staff you know focusing in on what they need out of this process and making that codifying and finalizing it so to what you know commissioner walker was asking about i want to make sure that we're not just putting it off on a third party assessor what will look at a defect e.r. whatever you want to call it we will if we're going to the tremendous risk is a g big risk not engaging with the vendor for 3 or 6 not telling us long i want to make sure i have you're showing commitment we'll end up with a proper scope of work with a commitment that on a he does to be involved in the by his side to do what their

populated to do in addition to the it issues we need to resolve. >> commissioners morning tom. >> i have you know hear you're showing concerns regarding the scope of work that the way before any time, however, they divide that one thing for this is to here on behalf of the appellant because we didn't move forward advertised not only the timeframe we turn it on and that's it you have the customer suffer you know because right now you know the how to begin the scope our business as mentioned we need to have a calculation up to now how many months we're talking about how to fix the fee calculation initially they proposed to do a hand calculation and my staff

did a hand calculation no way to do that the customer calls for 5 hours to get - it is unacceptable just only want to do a time turn it on we need to look at right now i don't want a good quarter and the department of technology controller and everyone jumping in to help me, you know, february if i can turn it on tomorrow i would but unfortunately, i turn it on the whole system messed up and the system in the city then it will be worse. >> let me clarify director i'm not asking you go turn it on right now this is completely unreasonable and clearly not

working i want you're showing commitment to addressing the mental issues not it issues it is at the root of problem a management on or about of making sure that the scope of work is where this it supposed to be. >> the minute i take over the directorship i instead of being closed i had my order end yours to commit to work and begin the scope unfortunately, the contract with the consultant we are fighting back and forth i have brought on 14 months and can't resolve the contract issue you know the scope of work the scope or defect that's what the argument and then that's why the dollars amount goes up you know

trying to hopefully finish that and can go out and fix it every time the quality of work not satisfy us not fix the amount and come back and again, if you want and we can give all presentation regarding those items. >> can i ask commissioner mar will be up next i don't want to hick hick commissioner mar. >> i want to address commissioner melgar i'm category vices this as miss findings it's been documented i think the issue we are facing all of us currently today is the genesis of that those business pros

processed we are familiar with and documented it way back so i'm talking about a number of years; right? we do have those and all of our subject matter experts do come to the table with the requirements already prepared and they use that assembling to do the yours test for old and legacy data we've done that and they're also looking at trying to create brand new ones you know just like a psych tuesday business the contractor can't get on the website and use the access portal and create a permit and we're finding the problems are inherent in the ability to do that we know what is required

it is just it is the inability to marry all the requirement to the software itself i want to make sure this very clear commission our staff is dedicated, a they've put in their time to go in much to their consternation you see the circle it goes around and around it goes with the 8 point zero interface the vendor is quite knowledgeable about the deficiency because as captured in the community and expressed you think online and i know we have unique situations for us in terms of of an agency and yet there is -

they're not so unique that the agencies may not face the same problem so please, be of the understanding our staff really don't understand the business process and work diligently to convey to both henry and shawn during those testing sections what their finding is issues i don't want to can go grizzly and characterize as defects they're not able to conform to our business needs that's where. >> in fact, i said at the last commission meeting he was total clear. >> knew what you were doing when what we heard from the grand jury representative the original scope of work was not where there should have been

there were disagreements i was referring to not in any way to you're showing ability to know what is going on you know, i know you got it but i want a commitment that fundamental issue will be addressed i don't see how it had been addressed without our input and the input of our staff if it is not i don't want to leave it to the third party vendors you know to have a say that is about staff i think. >> i fully expect when the third party is selected embedded in the process is sitting down with the staff individually the subject matter experts made up of permit issuance and inspection, etc. so also the

incorporation of other agencies as well in the process so i would be shocked if we don't sit down and go over that and then put all the cards on the table that's probably the only way to get to see the lights at the end of the tunnel a reengage of staff and you know the whole process itself again, i'm not here in purpose to achieve to stand here and point fingers the process itself we will be fully engaged that's my exception with the support of senior staff and also the director. >> thank you commissioner mar and commissioner walker. >> i want to concur with a lot of the comments commissioner mar said but not repeat like herself not repeat anything she's said commissioner walker said the

problem with this whole reset or whatever is not the bic is not engaged i feel like regarding the scope of work is not just the staff that should be engaged it showcase bic i feel like the city attorney when i asked about this made the decision within the directors purview to do the reset boom it was done now i think the beck is less engaged i'd like to ask for something they next meeting we have the third party going to be higher i believe the rfp be written for the thirsted party person coming in we don't know what the rfp says ; right? so i got a business card in front of me miguel junior of the city information officer as opposed to be on top

of this; right? i'd like him and asked had i met him could he come to the bic let's see know what is going on and maybe the city attorney says he didn't have to well, if that's the position then at least send us a message saying i don't have to tell you what is going on i'm asking pubically i'd like to the officers who is going to put out the rfp and hiring the third party consultant to come before us and answer some of the things that commissioner walker said what is in the rfp how much are we paying them and how long will they take the rfp should say but with that, and he might come back and say i don't have to tell you i'm pubically asking. >> may i respond from the department of technology. >> yes. and the follow-up

points as long as no reason i can't we'll send you a copy of revenue that was issued to the technology and marketplace i thought that was a public venue but happy to provide it not including a dollar amount here's our proposed timeline and the exception of the deliverables their this is the third party assessment not result in the full set of requirements we expect that obviously will be one of the finding that vendor dbi you guys need a full set of requirement to complete this project that's the step we are starting with the dbi stakeholders to start doing that work we know it will be asked for not- and so i know miguel will be happy to present here

beyond the scope you don't know if it was formally asked of him to attend i'll be more than happy to do that i want to respond to one clarification on the requirements in general any software project is not unlike building a house you as the customer know what you want you higher the engineers and people knowledgeable in building in this case the software implementation partners to do that work the dbi business owners own the requirements they know what they need it is the responsibility of the software vendor and implementation partner to get those requirement out and documented and numbered so that this is what you develop and test against that is what you accept the system yes sittings it's satisfied the requirements that's the piece missing until

that is complete my recommendation we don't continue to spend the rate marries money building something without a firm definition. >> thank you commissioner president mccarthy. >> my issue about the rfp that was spoken. >> commissioner walker please. so i also want to see the rfp i think we need to see that and talk to this guy where the commission and our job to oversee this department and whether or not we are actually, the ones that issue it didn't matter i also wanted to know what the timeline that was put in the rfp can you answer that right now. >> yes. i mentioned earlier there is not a proposed timeline we want the folks responding to the rfp to propose what we on the timeline is. >> that's a huge mistake i'm

sorry what we have here is drift and we've had drift from the beginning i think that when we maybe the only person on the commission when this start there was a set e e set of best practices whether or not this get translated or our staff was engaged i have not been this involved but certainly since 2012 since 2011, 2012 when we had you took over i believe in 2012 we have been involved people have been engaged on this project and none of this was identified so at this stage of the game that is a management problem and in my mind is it a crisis we'll condominium instead of

$3 million now $8 million, 4 years later and no closer to this is a managed problem not a staff problem i think the staff probably would like this to be revolved on one hand but it is not going away the system will be put in and so i would like to see a timeline from the commission no more than one month to get a report back about it taking at vendors being able to do it in 60 days to get a report back and 90 days to reengage our vendor and move forward and give us a timeline shortly thereafter, i mean this is insane i mean, i expect to be if 24 place if we didn't spend $7 million i could have gotten us in this mess. >> if i could quibble refer.

>> i'm going to - the meeting with commissioner mar and commissioner mccarthy represented from miguel miguel the state his timeframes the two to three timeframe but we minded the respondents to the rfp to give us their timeline and commissioner melgar and i'll talk. >> i pointed out to the point of spending the rate payers money having a pause and not engage the consultants while we resolve those issues is actually not fruitful you know it is the short time verse long term strategy that's my problem with the pause everyday the consultant is not engaged the

day you're losing this brain capacity that's been built up over 3 where's years with that vendor and staff that is moved on to other projects i think this is a cross benefit analysis; right? of you know okay. we'll pause and paws for two or three weeks or a month is very different in terms of the cost benefit analysis of 3 and 6 months it makes me very uncomfortable we're not putting a timeline in this instance we 50 don't have a say at the least to get the staff to commit we're not spending the rate payers money is not correct we've already invested $3 million through the contract in building up the capacity with that the staff and that vendors and everyday that it goes but we're

losing that investment. >> commissioner lee and i if i may. >> please don't accept my silence on this issue to be in agreement with the staff i'm more in line with the commissioners here with my colleagues here it is frustrating very frustrating what you need to do is rebuild our confidence in you okay henry you've bun with us for 14 months that's a long time and it took you over a year to get to this point to tell us this big problem? if you told us maybe 2 months into our time with us yeah. maybe i understand you're doing this correctly and know what is wrong but a year later asian-american we're starting to lose confidence that's the issue

until we redeath and injury that confidence we'll be asking tough questions. >> so if i may i really want to communicate with the notice this is important i agree with pretty much everything commissioners is saying the commissioners that dealt with that for many years on the other hand, i felt commissioner mar was there and an open debate but where i was on that meeting a lot of people at the table invested to get this done coming to the conclusion we deal with our demons now we're talking about money commissioner walker we're sensitive from the taxpayers point of view but this could be a lot more money later on if we don't we deal with that now and face our pain right now it is going to be a lot more

expensive later on and wanders to miguel i came away with strong confidence and he pointed out in the meeting not his first rodeo but dna to let the process happen and at last 8 or 6 months and letting people do their job to get to the point and come to the conclusion too many red flags to continue the path with regards to the timeframe commissioner mccray and commissioner mar and others by the end of the day it is the fundamental big issues along with the tack to commissioner melgars point not lose out on to because a lot of people engaged

my understanding from that that meeting once the vendor is selected to henry's pointed image in the next the dependent vendors will be done in the next week or so they'll give us a comprehensive timeframe now if that timeframe is a month that's great we don't know we'll have to get a better point but my understanding this is no problem but want to point out one thing the idea of bringing this independent person to have the transparency at a dependent both sides are represented we have to be cafeteria of our demands of the dependence and be sure they're fair and equal in their analysis of what is going on what necessary come back we're guaranteed that is not clear when they had their ducks in a row we'll have any time to

sit down and communicate with them what our a past experience the commission and concerns they'll take that and do with a report but the timeframe on what you i think we need to figure out but we rodent e won't have the honest answer yet that to be hopeful in the next two weeks we're going n but we're helicopter maybe a couple of others weeks. >> commissioner walker. >> yeah. i see our vendor i wonder if we could hear from our vendor about our vendors i don't want to get into pointing fingers but about our process i'm nervous the vendor is not involved in a reset because there are partners 0 whatever this is happening right here i'm glad and happy that we are

looking our house and putting it in order we have a lot of problems in house i want to make sure our vendors commented to us and whatever this independent thing is going on they'll figure out the details of anything can we hear from the vendors simon someone want to to weigh in. >> the assessment includes all stakeholders. >> that's fine i want to hear from the vendors. >> no one is excluded their sitting down would everyone. >> we're talking about not a engaging them in problems that effect them. >> well. >> inspect the work. >> to the is he set the independent person we'll be talking to. >> you have questions or when a want me to - >> i'm concerned we're double into our budget and 3 times the

amount of time it took and i'm not laying blame i think there is a lot to go around but what are you're showing feels about the steps our process is taking right now. >> what what is happening with the pause you're showing vendor team obviously not engaged. >> speak spot microphone. >> sorry so obviously be the vendor team is not engaged and the test is going forward without them their continually finding defects so historically when we look at the log we see a variety of categories so there gambles in requirements when they see and feel it is missing or a title not what we want or functionality things like that so gallops in the requirement and two things that something has been coded not working as

designed and that seems 20 percent of less what is logged so when we are in the situation like this where each time a user groups comes in to do testing at a layer of requirements basically so layer after layer after layer of requirements adding tour our configuration this is unstable requirement based and therefore the configuration becomes unstable so we need to affirm solid requirement before you will see that firm solid configuration so some of the concerns that are brought up by henry and shawn about the defects that will stabilize and those numbers will come down when we have those final so we can look at the

report for instance, and take with an specific work and look at the history and show you the history and how many times it cycles it is kind of in a motorcycle micro coming and cos getting. >> we test it and fix the bugs and move on those are r were gathered and tested not what we want we need dweekz to make that work and test it not quit it we're not cycling with this pause; right? we would like to see rather than future testing i believe that shawn alluded to

this and ron talked about the large gaps then testing without the vendor partner it would be anymore beneficial for the teams to colonel together and really solidarity not a pause but include the vendor partner and getting the requirement to back to have a normal cost implementation to work and work well with the requirements and do the testing fix the bugs it come out and have a stable environment that's what i feel right now and the second thing i want to talk about the third page they talked about the all the times i don't know if you want me to go into that nower other questions

on the topic of where we are now. >> deal with the questions that kind of have been asked. >> just want to add i'm with the chapter two 1 tech without having wanting to doing any blaming my take on this i speak for the vendors group i wish we could sit down with dbi and say which requirements work and which ones don't what do we need to do with the documents and get the commission to sign off and go forward it doesn't seem to be something that warrant this growing bigger and bigger and bigger and much more expensive i mean it will cost so many to get anyone in for an ascertainment

and getting into worrying about things and fingerpointing and starting the process from scratch we are 80 and 90 percent of the way there less than a year ago we sit down and said when we finish testing this functionality is in phase two we want it in phase one give us everyone they came up with 25 items and difficult requirements and got sign off this is delivered they're testing we need to go live it was very, very urgent we did that is seems like we have those requirement what seems like the issue the normal 25 items earlier those requirements have live holes in them let's go back and clean that up i think the effort in doing the requirement with the right peep from the room from

dbi is not very long we've got a lot of that done it seems like the whole things seems overblown and much more expensive. >> thank you yards to the we can you'll have a chance to do public comment on so i'm trying to keep it to - you'll have a chance for public comment. >> okay. >> go ahead. >> what's the question and i wanted to get from our vendor their assessment of the process we're going we have a lot of concerns about them not being involved. >> so that's yourself public comment. >> you can use this other microphone. >> i'm leann the senior vice president of the company i've been involved in this project in the beginning there were requirement as part of revenue

in fact i think another study before we started this project i concur with the experience described by my colleagues and understand the frustration of dbi president to get the system right so do we so i believe this is going to take us you'll working together we do this everyday we know how to document things and configure them it works all over the country's so strongly recommend we get back on track but we remain committed if so the point we're here we're not letting go but see this through to the end. >> thank you. appreciate that. >> commissioner walker. >> yeah. having heard that i have a strong preference to include our vendors in our current process to help us with coming forward with a list of

qualifications or requirements i think that is not a senate thing to include them i agree that testing during the process is mute until we have our requirements agreed on and put in writing to it doesn't make sense to test something. >> shawn please. shawn. >> you know i just wanted to respond to what's been said for the last few minutes and respond for directly to some of the commissioners concerns that were raised actually that was good to hear from the vendors they agree will be layers upon layers and we need to begin the set of requirements the problem is if we keep doing exactly what it is we're not seeing amendments we'll see amendment 7 and 8 and

9 up until 2, 3, 4 moment building to the old set of blue chips that were wrong; right? the whole purpose to get a proper set of blupdz and what's what is needed that's why the reset is needed if we keep on with the same people following the same methodology i'll guarantee you'll see amendments 7, 8, 9 with the whole the point of this reset to stop and do is it correct once do it it properly once we had a problem throughout this process to follow a methodology how you gather and develop and design the system and this process is what you hire a vendor to do you follow their methodology that's why you hire them they've done

it before this is if the working to date they own the documents and analyzed building equivalent to building the set of blue chips they were mirandize to be the architect with blue prints. >> we still don't are a blue chip and without the project pause and reset whatever word we're using we keep on doing what we've been doing and bleeding million dollars we don't want to do that. >> again one second. >> commissioner walker yeah. >> i mean i think this would be helpful to see the original requirement submitted as part of this project.

>> if you want - that had been we can easily provide pate e what's been document. >> our part to figure out what is added to and missing still i don't know i mean at this point i'm not certain where they're not complete it seems more our bad than their bad a person drawing the blue prints will only draw them to the specifics like the person - >> the history of how it happened at the last meeting we explained that the truth was the truth was the shareholders and people that own the businesses were not involved in the first accept 19 set of requirements the vendors said 3 waves of requirements first one i don't want to get into naming the

names the first two if you go back and watch what was recorded last months the first two didn't involve the shareholders the blue prints were drawn up without the proper people being involved the blue prints are wrong it is no minor thing; right? the assessment is important to help us fit and begin what needs to be done what the proper next steps having a third party clearly two major forces of disagreement here having a third and partial body is important here the phrase use somebody's.org not in the fight that's what we need and the third party assessment is needed trust me if you think we can keep on doing what we've done and coming up with