>> i would like to call to order, the finance committee to order. our chair, spurp mar will be here shortly, and i'm lon down breed and we are going to get this started. to my left

supervisor norman yee and jane, kim and we should call the record. >> commissioner breed? snechlt here. >> compos? >> absent. >> kim >> present. >> mar? snechlt absent. >> yee. >> here. >> could we approve the minutes, without objection, those are approved. >> we will take the public comment. when public comment has been completed. >> all right. let's get to item number, 3. and we are now joined by commissioner mar. who is the chair of the committee. >> item three.

state and federal leg sislativep date, this is an action item. >> welcome. >> happy to be here today. i thought that i would give this a brief, overview of where we are at the capitol and where we are. >> could you identify yourself? >> i am sorry, yes. >> mark watts, advocate for the transportation, authority in sacramento. the legislature welcomed the new assembly speaker yesterday, when he was sworn in and he was elected in january and so he is now, fully in charge of the transition has been completed. and it was a very, very, happy ceremony. and i think that he has filled out priorities for his term. and i think that they will suit the state very well. beyond that, where we are in the legislative process for the

capitol, is on a sheet of paper here that i can't seem to find. >> darn it. i apologize, here we go. the end of february was the last day to introduce measures and you will see that reflected in the matrix today, where we have gotten about 40 bills, that we reviewed and made recommendations on. and i will come back to that in a moment. but next major deadline for legislation would be april, 22nd. for the bills that were introduced in late february. and they have to clear the first committ committee or they are dead or they are dead for the remainder of this session. there is a spring recess in the midst of this process, on march 17th, and march 28, they will be in recess, so the hearing for these measures will be very, very, heavily attended.

and very, heavy agenda. s and as they try to get through all of these by the end of april. in terms of note, on transportation, funding, which is a strong interest around the state right now, senator bell, has a measure in the special session and he intends to amend and we had hoped to see that on monday or tuesday at this point in time, his office says that he is refining some of the amendments, his amendments will add significant amounts of funding and finance for transit projects. even though the main balance of the bill will be focusing on the state and local, road repairs. there is an indication that the administration may elect to move on with a more stream lined proposal in about $2 billion range, that would not require a super majority vote in the legislature, we are trying to

understand if that is something that they are working on. but there are indications that there are, or there is a preference to try to get a small amount of funding for state and local road repairs, rather than make the push for the larger amount, that is represented in senator bell's bill and the assembly member's frasier's bill. and i will be keeping you abreast of the developments as we go through the next couple of weeks. in terms of the matrix of the legislation, there are 13 specific recommendations that we are making to you. one is a changed position, and then the other 12 are new bills for your consideration. and in addition, there is like 32, or 33 other measures that we have recommended watch for one reason or another, and they have may have applied to a policy area, where there is not much flesh on the bill at this point in time and many cases there are spot bills on topics that may

become of interest. and so rather than trying to find them again, when they get amended and we put them on the watch and that allows us to monitor that flux more evenly. and so if you would like, i can cover the 13 measures, starting with the first one, which is ab 1550 on page six. this is a position we had recommend that opposed in the past. and we are recommending watch. and it deals with disadvantaged communities in the cap and trade area. it did not change for the proportions of the projects or the funding that is required to be spent in the disadvantaged communities and as you may realize, or you may recall from the first go around of the money and the disadvantaged communities in the region did not fare well because of the way that is designed, and this bill, takes another step and leads the

current, 25 percent requirement in place, but as the requirement and 25 percent of the funding must be for projects that benefit, low income households. and so, what we have or why we are recommending moving to a wasatch front rather than oppose. we would like to continue working on the definition of disadvantaged community more in the background and working with there is a green gas reduction, and working to see if we can improve the disadvantaged definition. and we are asking for your changed to a watch position. >> i just wanted to thank you so much for being sensitive to the low income communities. and in some ways whether they are in the san francisco bay region or east la, so that we are taking in some ways a regional and even a state wide approach to equity but policies, but thank you. >> and we have seen a number of these types of measures over the last couple of years, and we are

recommending oppose on ab 1768, and on page 10 of the matrix, and essentially, it directs, the, remainder of the high speed, rail bonds to be used to pay off the, outstanding high speed, rail bonds, effectively, turn nighting the stream for the project and so as a consequence, we are recommending oppose. and in the several more and i will cover them briefly, because i don't think that there is going to be concern about the recommendation and we are recommending oppose on 1866 on page, 12. and this would redirect, the remainder of the high speed, rail bonds to the state water project funding and again, that is a major change in the high speed rail. and we think that the policy of this before you is for the high speed rail program. and the next measure, ab1886, we

are recommending a support and i have to tell you that i have to draw a diagram, three or four times before i fully understood this one. and essentially, there is an exemption provided within the e seqa, where 25 percent of the projects are no further than a half mile. this takes it to 50 percent, so no more than 50 percent of the land mass, is an expansion of the sequa expansion for these types of project and we are recommending a support position. ab 1964, on page, 14 is another, and a long series of bills, over the last couple of years, this one is little bit different than the ones that we have seen before. this simply extends the white sticker, authorization, to access hov lanes, and the white stickers are pure, battery and

electrics and the natural gas vehicles as distinguished from the greenstickers, when are the hybrids. and so this, applies only to the white sticker vehicles, but they are growing in sales, and the population throughout the state, is growing. and the concern is, that allowing, the continued and expanding access of the hov lane and so we recommend an opposed position. >> ab2034, on page 15, recommending the support position to you. and more than a decade ago, the federal government, authorized the delegation, to state transportation departments. to over see nefa, of the reviews, within their state. and that was enacted and it has been continued once and this simply continueses that authorization at the state level to allow cal transin

circumstances to administer and over see both nepa and sequa documents but i will not comment on the effectiveness, but it is a continuation of an existing policy. and what will bring the high speed rail program to an end. it says that no more bonds could be sold. >> and it will have to go back to the voters and so there is a double layer of protection against this becoming effective. because i don't see this measure moving forward but that one is found on page 15, if you would like more details or more information. we are also recommending support on ab, 2126, on page, 16. of the matrix. and this applies, to the state's current authority to utilize construction manager, and general contractor and authority, for administering projects, large scale, complex, projects and it will be coming to another bill, similar to this

in a moment that applies to you, about you this applies, only to the state. the state has the authority to do six and they have occupied the six slots in statute, and this will extend it to 12 for cal trans, to administer. >> mr. prazir is the author. and the state, highway and protection program is the main program or the main, financing source at the state level for the projects that are approved or we construct that provide, major maintenance and reconstruction, as well as the operational funding to operate the state highway system. and the funding is generally, only available to the cal trans. and the ctc and the annual report, recommended the expanding a one small provision within this program to allow the operations, to also have capitol

improvements. so previously, up to now, the operations will be you know, widening the guard rail, and you know, expanding tauxiliary lane, and this allows for the capitol projects to qualify for the same projects. this bill, ab2374, was introduced by mr. chui. and we are recommending that the transportation authority not only support but register as sponsors of this measure, because it came from staff conversations with the author's office. and it would uniquely expand, or authorize, some what uniquely authorize, that the ramps, for the -- island, program and the ramps that connect to the bridge system, would be eligible utilize the cmgc authority just like we, or just like cal transhas now for a certain

number of projects. and i would specifically be targeted towards some of the complex engineering and construction that is anticipated for phase two of the ramp project. and i have been doing a lot of due diligence with state engineers and other folks who have had concerns in the passed about the similar authority. senator bell, has introduced sb 1066 which is on page, 35, and we are recommending a support for this measure, it does not appear to do much on the surface. and it is more of a place holder sponsored by the -- and what it does is it provides in the state law, the authorization for the new fast act revenues approved by the federal government and by congress to flow to the regular programs at the state level that we anticipate them to. and in essence, it does not really change the law, but it is, and it, it would, actually

be operative, if it were to pass. the game plan, however, is for the self-help counties to have, a joint, jointly, jointly managed bill that they can work on in case there are wrinkles in the fast act that the people have not anticipated and some of the funding formulas. so this is to preserve their option is to move the legislation. and senator glazier from the east bay has introduced us, and we are recommending the support position and it is on page, 35. the mtc, has commute benefits ordinance, and they have the authority to adopt a commute, benefits ordinance, and that is soon to expire. and this was, simply, extend that authorization, indefinitely, and consequently we are recommending support. and the final measure for your consideration, is sb, 1259, by

senator runner, and on it is page, 36 of the matrix and we are recommending oppose. this picks up the idea that have been attempted several decade or more to allow veterans with special, decals and the ability to access toll facilities and there has been similar, authorizations in other states, where we have, and the reports are that, it can result in fraud. and associated decreases in the toll revenue. so, it is, mainly an issue of equity. with that i bring my oral part of the presentation open for questions if you have. and i will try to answer them. i am still trying to digest all of the bills. there is more than 1,000 in each house. >> so questions colleagues? >> i wanted to say on the

sb1128, by glazer that the bay air quality district, and the community benefits policies and give many options or a couple of options to employers, and i think that is a really important one in insuring that we are reducing greenhouse gas and trips as possible. and the coalition that are really trying hard on automatic speed enforcement. and the speeding cameras. but i know that some communications with some of chui's office were fruitful up until the last minute but we are hopeful that there is legislation that comes forward, but it is a little disappointing but i want to give a shout out for the work behind the teams on those efforts but thank you so much, mr. watts for the great presentation. and commissioner yee? >> thank you, for your presentation, and i know that you mentioned some bills may not have all of the details,

necessary, or whatever, and so you are watching it. and one of them may be, under or possibly may be ab 1677. >> on page, 9. or 17? >> i guess that what i would like to do is to move that to suggest that we urge you to move it from watch to support. and the reason for this, is because this is a bill that, so that the board of supervisors have already passed a resolution to support. and we want to keep it consistent and we want to keep the heat on. and we are actually, my office is working with the senator on this particular bill and we are trying to give them as much information in terms or suggestions about the bill, as possible. hopefully, we will have some meat on it.

>> so, commissioner yee has made a motion to add, ab 1677 from the move from watch to support. is that your motion? >> yeah, this is in regards to the tour buses. in terms of making it possible for local jurisdiction or the local government to have the additional inspectionses as sort of the general idea. >> is there a second on the motion. >> so it is seconded by commissioner, breed. so we are adding 1677, to the action list, presented by mr. watts. any other comments, colleagues? >> let's open this up for public comment. is there anyone from the public that would like to speak? >> seeing none, public comment is closed. and so on the motion to add ab1677, from a watch to a support, position, could we do that without objection? >> the house has changed. >> so the house has changed.

roll call on the motion. >> breed? >> aye. >> campos? >> absent. >> kim. >> aye. >> mar. >> aye. >> yee? >> aye. >> the motion passes. >> and then now on the recommendations on the new bills and the recommended positions can we do that same house, same call? >> yes. >> thank you. >> thank you, so much mr. watts. >> next item? >> item 4, introduction of new items. this is an information item. >> so let's open up this for public comment, anyone from the public that would like to speak? public comment is closed. next item. item 5. ? >> general public comment. >> good morning, commissioners. (inaudible) trueself or well-being. (inaudible) money, (inaudible)

making oneself a well-being. (inaudible)

>> thank you. >> next speaker, anyone else? >> i would like to speak about number, 18, please? if you could go to 18. so i think that we have already handled. >> you might be in the wrong meeting. >> i apologize. >> or actually i am sorry. i apologize. >> i think that the proper time would have been when we were dealing with the legislation. but you could speak on general matters. >> that is fine. >> okay. so seeing no other public comment, we will close public comment. and mr. stamos next item >> item 6, adjournment.

>> thank you for coming today. meeting adjourned. thursday, ma >> good afternoon welcome to the regular meeting of the planning commission for i'd like to remind the members of the audience that the commission does not tolerate disruptions of any kind. proceedings. and when speaking before the commission, if you care to, do state your name for the record. i'd like to call roll at this time. commissioner president fong commissioner vice president

richards commissioner antonini is here commissioner hillis commissioner moore and commissioner wu we do expect commissioner johnson to arrive shortly commissioners, the first item on your agenda is items proposed for continuance at bush street conditional use authorization is proposed for continuance to june 16, 2016, item 2 ellis conditional use authorization is proposed for continuance until june 16, 2016, item 3 at market street conditional use authorization is proposed for continuance to june 16, 2016, item 4 sutter street conditional use authorization is proposed for continuance to june 16,

2016, and item 5 for case you fourth street conditional use authorization is proposed for continuance until june 16, 2014, and item 6 geary street conditional use authorization is also proposed for continuance to june 16, 2016, all annex happy staefltz any public comment on the items proposed for continuance. >> thank you john with reuben, junius & rose on behalf of the project sponsor partners a quick recap it is recommended to the project you guys approved last summer on turk, las vegas worthy that was was group housing project the other half of the project that is a transfer of a number of residential hotel restrictions from various

tourists and identical hotels throughout the union square to the new building we have been delayed a handful of times we were originally going to hear both matters they - we're ready to go right now the residential hotel conversions requires that dbi notified the pending application they've done that but want to clarify the lapsing in that notice that's why they've asked for here today with a continuance we understand did needs for a continuance with that said, the appeal period the notice is 15 days so it is something we can resolve riffling quickly and easy hely be bac and be back here late april and be ready to go the proposal for continuance it june 3rd full months a very long time and this

aspect of the project is holding up the finance and a construction of the group housing project it is a very positive project we'll talk about in detail but we're providing an additional 40 plus housing with the rents we'll be up to 29 percent of the restrictive rent and those on a lease with the firefighters units and the boys and girls club we're looking forward to presenting this to you and really are asking you to find the time to hopefully in late april bus 3 months is impact when we can get the construction going and the units online i'm here for question. >> thank you. >> is there any additional public comment on items proposed for continuance not seeing any, public comment

is closed. and commissioner moore. >> propose suggest continuance as proposed for items 1 and 6. >> actually, i move to continue sorry my language is not quite there commissioner antonini. >> well, i think project sponsors attorney made a good point it would be good do remove this up to a calendar donate that might give them an opportunity to be heard i spoke with the gentleman and though april 21st has a lot of items not none that will take a long period of time and a lot of them look like ones it would 0 drop off i'll propose instead of june april 21st and if not we'll bump it to a at a later date. >> jonas how did that look.

>> commissioners continue it to any date you see fit none of the future agenda are light on april 21st you have seiu introduce and a medical cannabis dispensary at the end of the agenda on the 21st again i mean there are no light calendar we'll be if you choose to pick april 21st we'll do that. >> accordingly we'll move to april 21st you don't mean i don't believe that commissioner moore's was a seconded i move to april 21st for the items on the calendar. >> i'll sweet spot that but in

use of force the ability they're not ready we'll push it commissioner moore. >> i have asked why i received a letter from dbi i am completely unprepared to say one way or another we haven't received a letter if dbi it was a controversial issue and very, very difficult for all of us florida until i have more information i'm i'm not proposed preempted to support and wait for the appropriate time to be on the same page how we support or not support this project. >> commissioner hillis you. >> i know this is complicated we've heard about the e-mails back and forth from dbi i have no problem of hearing it with the option to consider it informational it is a complicated issue i right now

guaranteeing don't have all the facts and dbi and others that are tape recorder laws the last time i toured some of the sites each of them is different and has their issues i don't mind hearing but with a notion we may not take action. >> i agree director rahaim could you speak to the dbi request from director huey. >> as i understand it is correct a notification that has to happen for the notification it happened but an additional time that is requested just to be clear that process sorry to put you on the spot are carli can answer that and carli good afternoon department staff notices distributed early on the process to convert filed under

dbi they've changed slightly since you've heard the proposal for the group housing on leavenworth two additional hotels have been added one removed from the project we want to make sure that dbi notifications requirements under the admin code were satisfied we had a hard time confirming that and everybody is noticed. >> commissioner antonini. >> yeah. a question for carli we have 4 weeks until the proposed continuous the eater so in our opinion can that 90s took place be able to say answer our questions concerns for that. >> definitely the noticing is only a 15 day and the admin code and specifically it is including

specific language about holding the planning commission hearing for the public comment the past with those types of cases a different circumstances that have changed the recommendation but nicole we're still trying to workout the processes to a present the dynamics to you that the conditional use authorization but also to satisfy the requirements with the administrative code when provides you the opportunity to hear the public comment on the proposed conservation and making the compatibility of the new housing units and hotel units i that is a process we're trying to make that as clear as possible and 4 weeks is doable you know june 16th maybe a little bit give me more time to prepare but given the indication to maybe start the conversation april is definitely doable.

>> thank you as always if it is continued the event itself or other is stakeholders not ready and obviously can be pushed forward at that time. >> commissioner wu. >> i just want to clarify i heard commissioner hillis talk about is different than at the calendar we don't have an informational item to talk about the administrative code or the residential verse the tourists units is that the realm of possibility maybe do something like that in april but hear the item in june. >> i'll be happy to prepare some go it a scompla complex it is very complex ebt to prepare for april. >> commissioner moore. >> i just need to ask a question when the department makes the suggestion and when to hear it i have to trust that

they are fully in control of delivering something we're asking the maximum of the information and seeing the references to the work and we're asking to efficiency and the planning commission hearings and why would we try to pull something forward in 8 weeks it is clear there are a lot of questions i'm a little bit confused by even trying so. >> commissioner vice president richards. >> i think you know speaking to some of the items we've heard recently, i want to make sure people are clear we have proposed projects with the designs are not final and we realize the current situation given the housing demand this would one is so incredibly complicated i went to the sites

with commissioner president fong and support on informational in a month or whatever the date with the potentially hearing the item before the 16 i want to make sure that staff knock it out of the park this confusing commissioner antonini. >> i acknowledge the fact there are questions to be roved by dbi it seems to me one of the reasons it was far ahead we didn't have open days that was a desire on the part of ahf everyone to have to sooner so i'm in favor of the motion and if it doesn't work out that day perhaps informational will be the place if staff if feel they're ready. >> project sponsor. >> thank you for the

opportunity commissioner speaking to commissioner richards pot ebt to come back on april 21st have an informational item with the folks with you i'll ask that it is still you know the ultimate project approval is impacting our timeline if we can agree to come back on april 21st and early may come back with the actual project that will be working for us and again give that much more time to dbi to work out the issues i want to put that out there. >> thank you for that offer. >> commissioner vice president richards. >> i think that's a good compromise the one we get all the information we'll need and first, we'll get the first chunk and giving staff enough time to present the project and not wait an additional several months but i defer to the commission secretary to say a place to put

that. >> i'm not going to suggest and date i'll leave it entirely up you all. >> may 19th. >> no 2000 bryant is on there there is no good date commissioners you can look at dates through june no good date may 12th. >> may 12th. >> i'd like to amend the motion for may 12th. >> i'll revise this to may 12th the seconders is okay with that and we still the informational hearing on april 21st. >> is that amenable to the secretary. >> so those items will be continued to may telephone with

an informational presentation on this sort of action on april 21st my understanding. >> out of the form normal to schedule to w two meeting in an order. >> i mean the commission wants an informational i mean it seems like your drifshg us to do an informational prior to the action. >> probably my action is we're asking staff for informational i'm suggesting the 21st a good date for that. >> i will - second that motion. >> very good commissioners shall i call the question? then. >> yes. please. on the matter of continuance for items 1 through 6 - to may 21st.

>> may 12th i thought. >> i'm sorry may 12th. >> commissioner antonini commissioner hillis commissioner johnson commissioner moore commissioner wu and commissioner vice president richards and commissioner president fong so moved, commissioners, that motion passes unanimously 7 to zero and places you under your consent calendar are considered to be routine and may be acted upon by a single roll call vote of the commission. there will be no separate discussion of these items unless a member of the commission, the public, or staff so requests removed from the consent calendar and considered as a separate item at this or a future hearing. item 7 for case fell street documentation of shadow finding

i have no speaker cards. >> okay. any public comment? >> i don't see any public comment is closed. >> commissioner wu. >> move to approve thank you, commissioners. >> yeah. i wanted to ask something if this is okay. >> i probably should have brought this up we're agreeing with rec and park does as far as the shadow allotment this is fine but it seems to me other times the shadow issue at least it gets on the calendar we have a hearing on that and . >> you have heard this project it was actually on other that was the shadow finding were adopted as part of a finding as opposed to an actual motion stand alone. >> i remember the project i

was a little bit confused that's why i'm not obtaining. >> very good on that motion to approve or excuse me - adopt the findings commissioner antonini commissioner hillis commissioner johnson commissioner moore commissioner wu commissioner richards and commissioner president fong so moved, commissioners, that motion passes unanimously 7 to zero and commissioners, that places you under your commission matters consideration of the draft minutes from march 3, 2016. >> any public comment on the draft minutes? >> okay not seeing any, public comment is closed. commissioner moore. >> secretary would you be kind to please update the commission on an e-mail that came through

after people left an e-mail on the completeness of the things you explained why they're complete and what the writer talked about didn't apply to the approval of this commission. >> commissioners a member of the public that felt that the minutes were inaccurate associated with items 11 ab with arkansas street that project was approved by this commission the motion included on amendment to add the entertainment commission conditions of approval that person felt a deliberation with the parking the decree of parking during the deliberations commissioners realized this is in the purview of the mta and it was not included the official motion as a condition of approval so i respond to that mustache as such and advised i

adopt the minutes as they are proposed and before you. >> okay. thank you for that clarification. >> commissioner moore. >> move to approve. >> second. >> sew commissioners on that motion to adopt the minutes commissioner antonini commissioner hillis commissioner johnson commissioner moore commissioner wu commissioner richards and commissioner president fong so moved, commissioners, that motion passes unanimously 7 to zero and commissioners, that places you under your on item 9 commissioners questions or comments. >> commissioner moore. >> two articles one about pdr the loss of pdr i thought was extremely well written i will keep it when we discuss this a few weeks and student housing and will probably accompany today again.

>> commissioners, if there's nothing further, we'll move on to to department matters drourments. >> commissioner antonini and sorry i wish everybody a happy sxhafgs. >> thank you commissioners i'd like to ask we close the meeting the honor of the ma car a member of the staff that passed away yesterday morning he was with the department for 20 years and immigrant from nigeria and moved to the west the early 90s worked the 15 years for the public information counter and well known with many, many members of the public and he was really dedicated to publicize and have much enjoyed his time and

survived by my wife and children we ask for your support for the family and ska ask you close the meeting in his honor thank you. >> commissioners 11 past event with the board of appeals and historic preservation commission. >> good afternoon, commissioners happy st. patrick's day another 0 short presentations no items and the land use committee that planning was involved with at the full board supervisor wiener's for the second story the commercial passed its second reading on we have two introductions the first one was an ordinance that for inclusionary affordable housing and the preparation of economic feasibility study this will come before you on march 31st is

quick turn around and supposed by supervisor kim and supervisor peskin and supervisor peskin supported an ordinance for the accessory dwelling unit citywide. >> thank you. >> and the brothers-in-law met only one item of interest the appeal of the variance i granted for 3636 webster as a discretionary review a joint review the board heard the appeal and denied the appeal, of course, a subsequent appeal opportunity on the building permit with our inclusionary decision. >> thank you. >> good afternoon commissioner tim frye here to share a couple of things from the historic preservation commission the commission anonymously approved the context statement and hectic resource survey is they'll be used florida the environmental impact report for the corridor

area plan as well as provide 0 support for the cultural heritage within the central soma particularly the filipino district that is underway the findings will be used to to the district plan and you'll see those drafts policies when the plan comes to you over and over in the future and finally, the commission forwarded an unanimous positive recommendation for the 25 to thirty avenue this is historically as the alamany health center a community sponsored designation and supportive supervisor avalos the two buildings that are entering connected are known as part of the city's early emergency health system and one of the buildings contain some w pa the

commission is seeking funding to restore that is moving to the board of supervisors and aaron star will keep you updated that concludes my remarks unless you have any questions thank you. >> thank you. >> seeing no questions move on to general public comment not to exceed 15 minutes at this time, members of the public may address the commission on items of interest to the public that are within the subject matter jurisdiction of the commission except agenda items. with respect to agenda items, your opportunity to address the commission will be afforded when reached in the meeting. each member of the public may address the commission up to three minutes. i have one speaker card. >> commissioner moore. >> not to use the flash please it is difficult when it flashes in our eyes. >> no flash photos please.

robin bishop. >> i have papers. >> you can leave it there thank you. >> yeah. the computer please i think there we go you're up. >> thank you very much. >> good afternoon, commissione commissioners. >> go ahead you can use that mike good afternoon commissioner my name is robin birch bishop a lifelong recipient i was born in

potrero hill i come before you representing the project the planning process the project addresses carolina street a similar project came before you the discretionary review in 2002 your decision was the proposed at the time of the accident was out of scale in height and volume the projects of the neighborhood the current project now in planning for two years to build a 4 story building with an enormous footprint this explores the character of the adjacent wall at 897 carolina shown here as you can see the existing structure for 897 is not next to the subject property

this unusual setting allows the calculation for the project to be bias so the new structure can be built deeply into the lot the folks enjoy the restraining order percent of the lot ordinarily blocked by the adjacent property despite this it is grossly out the character will extend 75 percent of the lot dramatically reducing the light and members of the public may address the san francisco local agency formation commission on the light it access to a light harms the neighboring residences for this project the residential design guidelines of are uppermost porn for the development of you how area by building to a depth of 60 neatest feet in the droplets and here for public record the depth of 60 feet is going to

allow for the mid block open space to be preserved so 897 carolina we've owned for more than 40 years will be in a shadow it failed the rest the support of planning commission in 2002 we ask for scrutiny with respect but not to exceed height of the immediate context and the preservation of the mid block open space to reduce harm to other residences thank you very much for your consideration. >> thank you. >> is there any additional public comment? >> general public comment okay. seeing none general public comment is closed. >> commissioner moore. >> no sorry. >> commissioners, if there's nothing further, we'll move on to to your regular calendar for the academic of art presentation.

>> probably. >> good afternoon mary woods department staff. >> sorry mary before we start i've spoken with that an issue is raised in regards to this item that is a general informational and claurld type of situations that deals with the whole academy of the arts universities like many of us i have own property within the city and county of san francisco if any one particular project that is owned by the academy is within 5 hundred feet of the any of my ownership i'll recuse myself but in terms of this i've been advised by the city attorney it this kind of general type of discussion didn't collectively exclude anyone that owns property in san francisco that's what i've been told to

comment on wanders it this situation i'll fine in participating in this. >> staff you you were going to open up for public comment but it is - >> sue you know the order staff please. >> good afternoon, commissioners mary woods of department staff october 2015 staff provided the process of the a u and now providing additional information regarding the a u enforcement and the environmental review and the approach for the a u applications as well as a u institutional master plan update regards to enforcement staff has devoted a lot of time and

resources on the effort and has made process with the inspection of the improvements and correction of life-saving irks and the reprimanded and retrained violations are related to - that ties to the discussion on how to review those change of use applications that require the commission review and action with regards to the environmental review the draft environmental impact report was published no february 2015 a 60 day common period and april 2030 a hearing for the direct was held one and 9 comments were received by the department during the public comment period and staff is working on the comments documents that is expected to be published in june

of this year for public review and the final environmental impact report is anticipated for a hearing in july 2016 also in process a department draft existing sites memo that is expected to be published in may 2016 and will under go a thirty public review and comment period during the comment period staff will bring this e s t m to the historic preservation commission and the planning commission for our review and comments a review is scheduled for may 18 and hearing and planning commission. may 19th with regards to the approach to review the aau applications that requires commission action the

october 2015 informational presentation staff presented several approaches to reviewing those applications based on feedback from the commission at a time staff will be working on and refinancing how to process those entitlements applications and in sum of 40 properties that require commission action 10 will require conditional use two will require a building permit application, 13 will require historic preservation commission review, six the department buildings contain willing uses and 9 not allowed the planning code these reviews are raided an the highest level required by the commission some of the properties that

require krufz maybe other building permits require historic preservation commission review require but to establish what the highest level of reviews require these are the numbers that are currently that have been determined and also a note those numbers may change upon further review by staff as well as new information is presented to staff by aau. >> be finally with regards to the institutional master plan update initially the institutional master plan requirement was established in 1976 with the primary purpose to to the city and public on existing and anticipated future developments of post secondary educational institutions as much as the academy of art university

aau file is first full i mp and was accepted and heard by the commission in november 2011 the co-chair requires updates are submitted every two years to include the descriptions of projects completed and opening and to begin in the next 24 months and projects that are no longer being considered a u has filed off it's required updates one in november of 2013 and one in 2015 the lasts i p m update has been considered and reviewed by staff and the department has considered it to be complete. >> the summarize the various aspects of aau project i'll be happy to answer any questions you may have. >> thank you. >> opening it up for public

comment i don't know if there are any speaker cards on many item okay. thank you. >> sorry commissioners, i wanted to add two points for clarification one that was raised this week during public comment as note in the staff report one 21 wisconsin is not a property violation but a request that requires a building permit to document the change of use sow we've moved that category and in the past we've talked about the notice of violation using those as a lever for the compliance in time of the action we did that successful the past with the direct published and establishing a new deadline of july 1st of this year for the responses the e s t m and

justice department the notice of violation phase over the coming week with these the fee if they don't complete the responses the s t m by july 1st, i wanted to make you aware of that change. >> thank you for that additional information opening it up for public comment (calling names). >> good afternoon, commissioners i put a chart up it should be on the screen from today's chronology those properties marked in red of out the compliance with the zoning and building codes the properties in black is in compliance the violations of some of the

properties span over two decades he digit u doubt that the history of sfta san francisco at property owner that has violated the planning codes to this esteem with multiple violations on dozens of building as you may know those violations are consequence of impact people in neighborhoods indirectly directly and the staff memo on march tenant entry the paragraph the department motivated other properties to compel the academy to complete the eir process and dee to file the planning code amendments for prosper that are mother allowed under the planning code this is a convoluted way to say that the planning department it reducing the academy outstanding finances for violating the law for the academy to file a proper

permit applications to bring their properties into experience that is request for variance and subsidizing think illegal and bad behavior didn't the planning commission help those to - how much has is aau raked up in finances in violations no mention the memo several months ago the city attorney states those penalties could have amounted to 3 and a half million dollars through dennis herrera has said the planning department has given the academy unprecedented extensions and accommodates despite the long outstanding violations of the allowing law and quoting the city attorney the treatment of the aau jeopardizes the enforcement effort and, yes the