asking for to have that conducive dialogue now that the facts are in i rather than - >> i don't think building by building duration. >> maybe to staff i can this is call the roll possible it takes time what we're doing on a holistic basis we should look that way if they were today to convert those uses from a to example or x to y what's the terms of avenue nexus study converting the uses of housing what are the fees generated i think one as well well on is flip side if we look at 9 time this building was converted from x to y and went back and made even though determination what are the most fines in terms of

fines to get a picture on whether a $10 million settle settle is something we want to look at on a holistic basis i don't have enough context on the financial impacted from all this activities for lack of a better term so i'd like to see that kind of spreadsheet i don't know well someone brought up the eviction history of the buildings i assumed no evacuees are buy outs but the part on the housing which is a big one in addition to several others if he were to take the units that are sro units and dwelling units and put them on the market the ownership or whether the liability corps that exist our or the trust of the au there

would not be much penalty the students pay for semester and we charge them a market-rate i think 72 hours something b if we look at this in terms of an agreement go back to when we were converted and the rents and add the president 6 percent and say if this tenants stays this is generally what the rent will be i know normally a standard turnover those units were to come back on the market and some type of on agreement should be based on the attrition rates of tenant but costing the tenants who have to be grounded some something logical. >> like the understanding an awful lot in the 7 or 8 hundred

pages if we looked at the recommendations i generally agree with staff on the logic behind the recommends i have a couple of questions generally this is the way we want to say what's the impact in terms of the physical environment so i looked at the map and the goal make sense for the a example u to shrink the footprint to commissioner johnson point more efficient not running shuttle one one person and none on them and traffic issues as well so i think understanding the recommendations and the actual impact on the environment would be something you would have a finger in the wind would be nice i think if there were some type of master agreement there has to be a told her on the tdm or have

a shuttle is from want a to b but sorry no more shuttles; right? or increased the ridership we don't want the impact other than the environment to minimize it with the aau as well. commissioner johnson cannibalized i think the word would be open tunic- there was a concentration in terms of relationship i think the one question on the staff recommendation is we have a real issue we're seeing

permits for hotels yeah. i'd look those those sites and determine whether or not a molt can be demolished and made into a larger industry housing for students back into a higher level of percentage of students that actually live onsite those are far away from the core your i got to get if a to x maybe the molts or backing with the housing dwelling units and retail underneath but as a landlord you have the opportunity to do that that and make trade offs and money i think again, i come back with some type of an overall agreement a lot of ann novelist

- the a example u has breached the public trust we kind of needs something akin to tobacco settlements 25 years of whatever we're going to put money into a pot and address the issues and subtractions and in order to get the public trust back whatever has to have some type of account here's the money and if you step over the line we'll stipulate the judgment thirty days to mc make that better or there's a real way to get this in a timely manner that is looter things i've heard from the public one comment on one of the items

one hundred 50 hayes ms. hester brought up should be use as what it was for so these are my comments >> thank you commissioner moore. >> i think the department deserves a remedies for a wonderful things how this is handled is i'm impressed swpd having said that, that started with the first institutional master plan i've tried to figure out the mission of the school i'm sorry talking about a mission but it's delivery of teaching and in an urban settings what they teach has always been not clear to any of us saying that i think that is correct to observe the

acquisition of properties more opportunity driven and the commissioners noted but with that comes indeed by now for definitely deserves a sprawl what an inability to get of where this conflict is and how severe and what it takes to rectify it is not for me to simply acknowledging their dr a code amendment but i think that has ton driven by a better understanding of how the institution works and how it wants to work in the future because as the institution has grown it has always stated thai didn't want to describe how and where they operate partially because they consider themselves dynamic that's a fine word as 0 the reality of city planning the reasonable growth of policy and

reality dynamic is the problem i want to pick up on the transportation comments made by other commissioners, i see for example, the sprawling shuttle become a liability in order to fully vault the effect one needs to look at where that operates but what is the effectiveness and years and years i think 12 the major observation i happy to live in the middle of the campus the shuttles are empty not only because they're small by the big ones and in between ones are more than 90 percent empty but they keep on going on and going on but i look at the effectiveness and who and where they're going and why are they

going if the first place the memorandum of understanding needs to closer look at the full disclosure what is taught and how that relates to stds students and study a subject matter a proximity itself between xhamentsdz of students living in close proximity to where they're going to school and what is going on we will continuing push the impacts ahead of us we can't fully gage at some point we have to commit to a more disclosure how the school operates because any of us be it the inner campus commissioner vice president richards went to the urban campus i went to we knew where

we were were going it describes we were goes as engineering students or art or business students not changing all the time but in particular case i, only talk about my experience and the many condominiums there was a changing dynamic we need to bring some more clearly defined explanations to unchanging the dynamics and making the circling more predictable and which buildings how we shape our own ability to support their approval for the institutions the next thing i'd like to say i'm interested to know what in historical preservation jurisdiction and our own what entering was facing we'll jointd

looking at the policy issues that deal with what we're concerned about how is that handl handled. >> there are separate approvals required by the historic preservation commission i mean, we, detail a little bit marrow thoroughly if you want to know about that now but were certainly whether or not that is appropriate to have joint hearings month likely the issues they're dealing with are specific and limited and probably not necessarily to have a great deal of interaction we can look at if it that make sense. >> we should support each other and pro tem other things into play that will be something i'll find permanent helpful i'm as interested in historic preservation as something we feed to support and them to understand our challenges and

the last question this is something i might do in a memo to staff i have a couple of questions of traditional clarifications on the excellent memo and outline on the project update she gave his a number of policies i think there are 6 of them in some of those policies i would like to see additional clarification of what is involved but not be the right forum here to further commit i'd like a few more descriptions in that. >> commissioner hillis. >> so first, i agree with my fellow commissioners on the thoroughness and usefulness of the staff report that was great to synthesize everything and i generally agree with the

approach stabilizing the policy rationale behind when faced with the decisions about prfldz hif those would live in close proximity we'll get for information particularly on the housing and the retail recommendations that are made i think many people brought up the housing issues that the city faces and you know we've taken offline housing how we rectify some of that specifically on the hotel xheshs there is a property on sutter street and 620 sutro i

sutter street one requires a conditional use and one didn't specify why that's the case and the history of those, too they look like they were housing and converted to hotels but as we get more information and you have it now or part of the future discussion on - >> so the 1 open sutter street is that one of them. >> no 817 the commodore and the 620 sutter street in the ones that is the kind of tourists hotels were those sro tourist hotels or? >> for both the legal use tourist hotels the reason for this they're in different zones and close in proximity one in

the c-3 has a right and a the others in our core district requires the conditional use authorization. >> so the one in the c g allows student housing. >> it allows the group housing with as of right in the rc-4 is group housing. >> we get those in the fire chief it would building great to understand the 3 of them when they were operate as kind of tourists hotels that sro slash third tourist hotel we've seen before so some understanding and also you know discussions come up about what percent of that student population is house in aau how that compares to other universities and i know that we've gotten, you know, part of this we're bringing issues

related to the cus but the broader how will we enforce that thirty percent of students be occupied in aau owned facilities and questions about encouraging requiring new facilities be built for housing you know this process didn't necessarily give us that ability the institutional master plan has been not a lot of teeth we talk about it and get accept the institutional master plan and their intent but you know it would be nice to get more teeth to that process as we go you know, i guess when those come back to us some recommendations how we address some of the longer issues brought up but i generally agree where this the the approach that

was taken in the recommendations in the staff report. >> director rahaim. >> thank you. i want to kind of summarize what i heard in the commission and give us direction for the next two weeks the date july 28th that will be the next hearing we'll present the eir to you for conversation as well as the in violation of essentially part of the planning code changes for housing i heard you said they generally supported the policy basis for the early recommendations with one addition which was to look at the assistant housing to the actual san francisco public utilities commission to try to address the transportation i heard a lot of support for looking holistically at all the buildings and looking at the intent of the campus that was kind of the intent for the policy basis recommendations but i think perhaps the thing to side when we come back with the

first banish of approvals and disapproved approvals to have a discussion why in the context of the larger institutional property we'll be recommending approval or disapproval we'll do that a specific request about the octavia building do more research for it this building where under the influence a question of dloefg into the policy basis look at the rationale and look at the benchmarking defines other institutions particularly on percentage of students that are housed trying to do that as well and then also at whole history of how the buildings but used if possible and looking at the

potential fines and fees paid in the past having the building gone forward legacy that's the list i'm sure staff was taking notes but the list from the commissioners questions or comments into the next phase. >> okay commissioner moore. >> i wasn't. >> - >> okay. thank you very much great staff work additional look forward to the next hearing in july. >> commissioners just as reminder 10 ab have been continued to june 2nd so the only remaining item on the agenda is general public comment. >> okay. any general public comment this afternoon.

>> we'll let the room clear out for a second. >> okay continuing on general public comment hello, again commissioners so as you all know we're fighting for the soul of our city each of us no matter position has an ethical obligation to help our community from becoming for profit

playground for the rich i don't blame the rich or any of you we're part of the society that likes the rich and the famous for the soul purpose now is profit we're here before you with a deeper soul purpose to keep our teachers and laborers to raise their children and take care of their elderly i've been to thousands of public meetings over the years like this one and time after time i've witnessed adjoin plans amended, zoning changed and financing offered from the city coffers when the public makes the case to live and work and breathe easier we're often told you're hands are tied there is always a way to defend the communities with will by

supporting the essential purpose of laws that is to enhance a vibrant cultural and community be creative and listen to the publics comments and find a way to make sure that the beast only bryant is not a deficit to our city we're glad to hear this is delayed to off more chances to negotiate with the developer and hopefully, they come to the table and listened and see do proposals public school not - this didn't have a enough of a profit factor this must be part of it from the beginning. >> let me call a few more

names come on up, sir (calling names). >> yes david gibson thank you very much for letting me continue rewarding 10 ab you people have to stop this so is the mayor and public supervisors you will have to stop this i'm tired people sleeping on bart trains and laundry mats that will add this has to stop two weeks of extension to meet with the people the private developers that's the bottom line this is has to stop, stop this nonsense thank you. >> good afternoon again

commissioners i e-mailed a letter a couple days ago but probably got mary again, i'm not going to read the entire letter but thank you for continuing this matter we believe areas of negotiation with the developer and it is good we have the time and hope that you will, of course, consider this things we've been asking for about one to one replacement for pdr and i guess sort of what we are seeing once again the deals with made and we just need to remember the people out in the streets who lost their homes because of these deals were made i guess was a shooting today so we'll be hearing about that again and how do we keep those

situations from happening it seems like i saw the media ready to do a really big one day event with they'll deal with the homeless on the 29 i guess of this month and this is got to be contributing to the homeless situation that's what we're really concerned about we're concerned about the homeless situation you've got to be concerned about gentrification because this is basically what is pushing everyone out of their homes and some people can afford to move to vallejo and some people not afford to move by allowing the affordable units and the affordability of the city to continue to skyrocket or slide or, however, you want to describe it we're contributing to the whole situation certainly

not holding you getable but mart of the process, however, to slow it down is appreciated thank you. >> hi good afternoon, commissioners i'm tracey from pacific factory from the be on bryant coalition and media alliance i want to say to you this afternoon as you consider this project and continued it once again that i'm really hoping you'll start lookings in a holistic way this is not the only mission based luxury project you'll see 6 more in the pipeline coming in the next 3 to 6 months and this is for a neighborhood

where we have reached saturation point according tour how studies in the luxury housing marketplace a while guarantee ago what are we are doing we're studying and making the problem worse there is a disconnect between our stated tings and goals and the actions we're tail taking what the not possible but predictable outcomes as those actions sometimes that happens we're not looking at things holistically but taking them project by project we can't afford to do that anymore in particular situation you have a concrete community-based proposal probably not perfect no proposal is but lace out the kind of taxed axes to turn those

projects one by one into things we'll not center the exact predictable outcomes that we are saying in our reports over and over and over and over again, we can't have the definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results 42 hours that needs to stop this project is a good place to say if we want different outcomes do different things i encourage you to take advantage of this period of time to do something different and to do something better for our city and for this neighborhood thank you. >> hello commissioners my name is jonathan i stood there this commission 16 years

ago and was asking the president annette harris if she would imagine a future of san francisco without arts a san francisco without musicians, a san francisco without communities or color and she was frustrated with my comments i was doing it in the voice of her grandchildren and asking grandmother why this way would certificate of occupancy you have done and anyway she took about 30 seconds of my time to scold the audience for getting animated at which point i got my time back and i had 3 minutes and going to continue it speak the full 3 minutes even though

you took 3 minutes of my time the buzzer rank they gaefld for a sheriff bailiff that wrestled me to the ground and made first page in the san jose and san francisco chronicle and open tribune and ran for two days on the news battle gets ugly this is an opportunity now to initiate some policy changes that mandate community planning process i was unfortunate to be part of community with the citizens housing in 2002 and the mosaic project is the result what happens we undertook nonprofit sell space was an

organization he was the founder a community partner and other nonprofits we made every effort to reach out to all the stakeholders as a result we met for months and months and hammered out the delays as a result when the project was feinstein sort of inenvisioned was approved if we don't do a community planning process we had over 200 people confirmed to speak that is because they have not been heard the developer is not willing or interested in meeting with the community interested in satisfying the wall street real estate investors and not the community thank you. >> speaking of wall street the

genisis part of j.p. morgan chase requiring 20 percent returns that's part of why o'dell is not having the money to do anything other than the absolute minimum this is the biggest project from the mission in a while and there hadn't b&b been any affordable builder now the opportunity to work it we did a rough sketch which is here of what amount of profits we'll see by the minimums this is $18 million in profits i think there is wiggle room those are figures based on meetings with olsen and the community and builders association who calm came up with the idea of 6

hundred thousand to build a project we've not seen his book like across the street he will meet with some of our people that would then sign a confidentiality and agreement and go over the performa to see if there is any widen room it is k s we'll figure out the best deal more affordable housing that will retain and protect the pdr lost this is the backbone of the mission with blue-collar jobs with spanish speaking without an education and earner for your family the propaganda from them pr if i remember, he will take a blighted block and build this was two years ago a

24r50i6r8 community two years ago union jobs doing work that is shipped out to canada works auto repair middle-income guys were raising a family and jonathan talked about this building has such a potential we have moderate plan that is asking for 10 thousand more square feet that makes it a 50 percent affordability we're thankful the pressure of right thing to do didn't happen we'll sit with them and hopefully, will be able to do something i've raised on the phone a couple million dollars for people willing to put with local 261 come up with 500-0000 and money we don't require 20

percent we require - thank you. >> okay. any other general public comment. >> my name is a andy a paradox in the artistic community honorable this is the very first time i'm addressing government in a way no with a drama or a raised fist i'll coming to speak to government and say i don't hold you in contempt for you actions this time we're in is one way the government is clearly seeing more the first time in a participatory way to be called to communicate with the people there is a democracy being born

it is different than what has been before and in this time people will come and they will want to share and have strategies they will have ideas they will crowd fund they'll find ways to raise the money and find ways to communicate to their constituency and actually create something of value for them skigz the communication that is vitally it is the communication that happens between us the people and you the representatives that speak to the greater representatives that sets the codes and laws there are manager i can't tell - people who have not the most

money can afford to send their agents to be manipulated to do their bidding tailor wise people that live here willing to work with you, please please listen to us before it's down to torchs and pitch forecloses it's changing we all know 24 so, please just consider what time we're in and there are very many people willing to work with you and the strategies that can afford an actual communication with the people not just the one percent thank you very much.

>> (calling names) and good afternoon, commissioners i'm sorry eric i just want to talk about commemorative effects of the mission we are founder of the latino cultural we have 5 large developments that are coming in the latino cultural district within the next month or two and we're talking about 2 thousand market-rate housing into the mission we really need to look at the bigger picture of what is happening i know we're not down or done with the map yet not in place we need to slow down and look at the projects how they can benefit the community right now what we're seeing with the developers they're creating a lot of smoke and mystery as well as the benefits to the community we have to look at those projects closely and looking at

how they add up to what they're putting out to the media and community and the benefits to the community they're really not not - you know those numbers are coming out not accurate been i medium of the folks in the neighborhood i'm from the neighborhood we need to look at the numbers add them howe up how they benefit the community we're also requesting in the district hopefully, a report for a social economic report for the eastern neighborhoods plan did an eir with the latino cultural district was not in place at that time, we need to look at things that didn't work yesterday so i'll ask you to look at things closely and making sure they truly benefit the community thank you.

>> my name is kim i'm here to talk about 2000 bryant i live in the outer mission i'm butt in this is setting back the precedent in the mission what other projects will look like setting the precedent in excelsior or tenderloin with people where they live it is good you delay and i'm hoping you'll keep the pressure on what is happening in the city we want to doing everything we can to fix it i'll conclude what someone said about manhattan you can say about a city of rich people and good things to say about a city of mostly rich people but not say is

interesting. >> good afternoon. my name is rodney i'm here to talk about what i've been seeing i'm an artist an educator so iuoe i talk about what is happening in both of those areas my friends and coworkers are leaving they can't stay here when you put like the beast on bryant and the other developments in the city and call them market-rate housing they can't stay here they're picking up their practices and not moving just away from san francisco to the eastbound or richmond that's getting tapped out not oakland or vallejo my friends were teacher where i work in san francisco at independence high

school they can't afford to live here close to their work to the point where a friend of mine her sister sister-in-law and brother their choices are seattle and portland people have to pick up and leave people educated and professionals their department of human resources and nurses their you are your accountant people that provide the mid-level services they can't stay here my friends artists most people think of artist they sort of live and work make sure we are flakey most of artists are 9 to 5 and 9 to 12 job they can't stay here because of the concerns of work and live and how they'll make money for them

this is too much they much rather move to new york where their supported y where their supported in neither culture and value in what they do than stay in the bay area it is just makes you sad to that is my friends are to the that the it is just leaving so where does that leave you you don't know you don't have people to teach our kids and things are the sample it is a drop in the acknowledging population here they've been leaving for years so with the beast on bryant we're asking as you people said earlier it is setting a precedent a bad precedent where a splap in the face for people po that love and bought into the

is various cultures and can't stay here thank you very much. >> next speaker >> hello commissioners i'll be brief peter with the cultural action network and thank you for the continuance this is an important step to figure out something i want to talk about a couple of things in a general way i think the breast on bryant is in a strong relationship to i'll ask you to think we add to the population about 200015 luxury units into the mission in the pipeline we don't think the mission is with stand that that doesn't destroy the economic fabric that's the way the commission community is viewing this we don't think that is necessary like collin shared

numbers love to see the developers numbers from the mainline is this is legal i can't afford it anymore we would like to see the performas this is a minimum offer still you know my parents see us in the news on the east coast and my mother from graham called i'm i going to get evicted we're on tv amend from guatemala we have developers with minimum offers this is what a the community is shocked by that a minimum offer will be pushed forward a 35 be offsite dedication which while the media is confused it is a 26 percent of footprint dedication; right? a minimum dedication they can do a lot more 26 percent of foot he paid

$9 million that is where he is mathematically we would like to see the numbers on mission street he shared his numbers with the community as spike showed 100 percent union build and pdr retention 200 and 13 percent owe over our mission of pdr loss and a 50 percent land dedication a significant profit at least on our back of napkin we only do the math the developers do we would like to see the real math and know that the developer can do more and people are working in this room working to find initiative solutions to finance this we appreciate the continuance and let's ask the developer to do a lot more thank you very much i appreciate it. >> thank you.

>> hi commissioners rick haul i was here last week and spoke on the portland project at the at the time quotient repeat i was talking about the eastern neighborhoods plan and it's pace and the rezoning and a lot of issues that are clearly problematic at this time but i stayed and listens to the q and a and he was somewhat concerned i'm glad for the beast now there say we have two weeks i think there is something you guys use that those weeks for in addition to the things such heard about when i watched

planning answer mr. richard questions last week about where we stand in the plan and the numbers it was interesting but the day she didn't present and the questions she didn't answer or answered with a different question her numbers show the basis for the eir that the q and a requires are are obsolete numbers with options abc that were studied without telling you the exact figures that were applicable to the plan between b and c i'm sure they know the numbers they've shared them in the pdrs she not limited to we're clog to being at a point

they can't be approved and averted the conversation how thai keep up with the changes and the impacts and mitigations along the way to be sure what neither recommending a c pe they'll not recommend if they feel they shouldn't feel did that mean planning is redefining the basis with now impacts and mitigations when they're considering how they feel about recommending a c p e is that possibly a legal measure i sincerely doubt the commission has a duty from accepting recommendations on this basis you know and until it is cleared up i'll be recommending you dr c p e for example, in the mission

the projects that show net housing units completed or under environmental impact as of 2016 i'll leave it for you. >> any other general public comment this evening okay not seeing any, general public comment is closed. and the the meeting is adjourne

>> how are you >> good evening, and welcome to the san francisco board of appeals. wednesday, may 18, 2016, the presiding officer is commissioner honda and we are joined by and joined by vice president commissioner fung and commissioner ann lazardus. >> commissioner swig commissioner bobby wilson that be absent to my left is thomas owen for legal advice at the controls is gary the boards legal assistants boards legal assistants executive director. we're joined by representatives from the city departments that have cases before this board. at the table in front is senior building inspector joe duffy dbi providing the advice for the department of building inspection and joined when i

scott sanchez the zoning administrator who will be representing planning department and planning commission and carli short the bureau of the department of public works as well as chris buck forecast with the the public works please be advised the ringing of and use of cell phones and other electronic devices are prohibited. out in the hallway. permit holders and others have up to 7 minutes to present their case and 3 minutes for rebuttal. have up to 3 minutes - no rebuttal. to assist the board in the accurate preparation of the business card to the clerk.

speaker cards and pens are available on the left side of the podium. the board welcomes your comments. there are customer satisfaction forms available. if you have a question about the schedule, speak to the staff after the meeting or call the board office tomorrow we are located at 1650 mission street, suite 304. this meeting is broadcast live on sfgovtv cable channel 78. dvds are available to purchase directly from sfgovtv. thank you for your attention. we'll conduct our swearing in process. if you intend to testify and wish to have the board give your testimony evidentiary weight, please stand and say i do. please note: any of the members

may speak without taking so, please stand now do you solemnly swear or affirm the testimony you're about to give will be the whole truth and nothing but the truth? >> i do. >> okay. thank you very much so item nun on the boards calendar is general public comment an opportunity for the people to address the board on the jurisdiction but not on tonight agenda any public general public comment seeing none, the second item is commissioners questions or comments. >> commissioners anything? let's go warriors. >> okay 83 and ethiopian item 3 the minutes commissioners. >> any additions, deletions, or changes if not a motion to accept. >> move forward

you any public comment on the minutes to adopt commissioner fung commissioner honda commissioner swig thank you very much that item passes with a vote of 4 to zero the next item is one that is going to be done i understand that the nellie win is here are you with the person who great please begin the interpretation of the item and everything that was said during the item that needs to be interpreted. >> madam director prior to be starting because of the length of our calendar and the amount of cases to be heard we try to get this we cut the public comment to 2 minutes across the board so we can get to the later cases in the evening. >> okay item 4 a jurisdiction request the subject property on

rectifying a letter from the jurisdiction of the building permit application which was issued on february 19, 2016, by department of building inspection is evident and the jurisdiction was filed at the board office on may 22, 2016, the project to add two bedrooms and relocate the bathroom on the first floor and one full abandonment on the 72 hour and one remodel on the second story start with the requester step forward and because you have an interpreter we'll give you 6 minutes to speak to the board.

>> but you'll need to speak into the microphone when it is time. >> so, please begin. >> we're ready yeah. >> (speaking foreign language.) >> my name is ann win. >> (speaking foreign language.) >> i'm at the address 221129 avenue, 2002. >> (speaking foreign language.) >> so i live in the house for 14 years and seeing i have it from the first moment the house included all the windows.

>> (speaking foreign language.) >> this neighborhood is very safe and my neighbor is very nice and gentle. >> (speaking foreign language.) >> during the 14 years. >> (speaking foreign language.) >> so mr. can bought the house on river street i knew he didn't spend any time there before. >> (speaking foreign language.) >> so mr. can have paperwork to permit the construction but he did not let me know about it.

>> (speaking foreign language.) >> that's why i have to delays when i you know when i submit my letter to the field. >> (speaking foreign language.) >> mr. can fixed the entire house included the inside and outside. >> (speaking foreign language.) >> i don't know if he fix the house to live in or rent out or to sold it. >> (speaking foreign language.) >> that the fact that he built the deck effects any families a everybody else around it. >> (speaking foreign language.) >> especially for my house

location. >> (speaking foreign language.) >> sorry a minute. >> (speaking foreign language.) >> because the location of the deck is directed to any room i feel like anyone standing on the deck you know can see straightforward to any room. >> (speaking foreign language.) >> and i have from views in the credit cards to have the ocean views i love the fresh

air. >> (speaking foreign language.) >> my children love to hang out in the garden and play in the garden. >> (speaking foreign language.) >> plus my child has asthma so my child's need more clear air that helps with the situation. >> (speaking foreign language.) >> and i want to say that building the deck is very inconvenient and make me feel very uncomfortable for my privacy for me and my family.

>> (speaking foreign language.) >> once again for the safety and the health of my family's and all the people around the neighborhoods i ask if you, you can consider the permissions of building the deck thank you very much. >> thank you. >> okay. thank you we'll hear from the permit holder now. >> good afternoon. my name is derrick the designer and permit holder we're the architect that drew up the plans for 1915

rectifying i'll start with the design of the deck the deck height is 9 feet one hundred and 13 inches off the grade and in the planning code nothing under 10 feet not requiring the 311 notices it is 10 feet including the stairs and subject property 1915 river it is one across from the avenue in we're invading the two 22 privacy we're invading through someone else's backyard our adjacent neighbor which is on the map is 1909 rivera.

>> now on the subject property the deck itself is if or 2211, 29 after the windows that facing our decks are property line window on the property line are those windows permitted? are they ever you know on permit or there, there before or existing we do know i can't say they're not they might be but they're a property line window and regarding the avenue yards did yards so close to an open space but it is enclosed with a patio

it is we have a picture it shows the enclosure with those windows installed and the property line in san francisco i believe there are no real - i believe we're not blocking any sunset and open space of 22, 11, 29 avenue and we got our plans approved based on code compliant and it was issued and we built according to plans. >> thank you. >> i've got a question, sir so looking at the brief wasn't clear that is a side yard you said a vacant lot between. >> that was a vacant lot it

was on rivera street that is the same lay out, same deck we're basically flush with our property. >> okay. your the third house from the corner. >> side third from the corner. >> can you thrum what you're lot size. >> it is by one hundred square feet our zoning should be 25 percent rear yard variance within that rear yard area. >> thank you. >> anything from the department the jurisdiction request. >> sew scott sanchez planning department this is in the rh1 the deck is code compliant and a notification would have been required i'm available to answer any questions thanks. >> mr. duffy anything. >> good evening joe duffy dbi

the building permit mr. appeals to have been issued properly by dbi a typical remodel on the ground floor rooms at the deck and rear didn't require the firewalls the deck has been pulled in from property line a current approval and we - the building is second story and we did the structural notification and there is an open complaint on the property i on intersections it is filed by the appellant and it was the deck was blocking the view i can't see my room in the window in the yard so we investigated that the complaint is open the inspection on the deck and permit was on unapproved plan many it's updated prior to the suspension

of the permit i'm available to answer any questions. >> your notice only goes to the adjacent. >> that's correct. >> doesn't go to the. >> no. >> the appellants property. >> right a structural notification for both sides. >> subject excuse me - to this hearing the nov will it be abated. >> not an nov we issued a - from the permit is upheld we certainly have no reason to keep it au open. >> it was hard to look at the pictures from different angles but properly lined windows if the appellants. >> yes. >> is that legal or not legal. >> there are very hard to say you'll have to do a thorough investigation to see what the original permit you're allowed the property line windows under new construction and they have

to be 3 quarter fixed windows in the metal frame you give up all relevance if someone want to build against you a lot of buildings have property windows many, many years ago we don't get that many complaint unless something like that couples they're hard to investigate you're trying to keep bodies happy those windows are there for 40 or 50 or 60 years you're not popular. >> we'll had a couple of those cases here. >> right depending on how things go certainly on the neighborhood the permit holder not - and warrant the jurisdiction. >> right. right we can look at

it. >> just asking. >> thank you inspector duffy any public comment seeing none, commissioners, the matter is submitted. >> >> i might explain for the appellant the standard of review in a jurisdiction is whether the department erred most of the discussion was on the actual issues of the case itself notice was properly given notice that of required properly given i don't find that the department erred. >> i agree. >> i concur would you like to make a motion. >> move to deny the appeal the permit was properly issued. >> okay. thank you so the motion then by commissioner fung 0 deny the jurisdiction on that motion commissioner lazarus commissioner honda

commissioner swig okay that motion carries with a vote of 4 to zero he wanted to ask from the parties for item number 8 on 21st street are in the room if you could raise your hands are you expecting many patterson who is not in the room we'll move on and try to get to you soon, we'll take item 5 panning ramp versus the urban forestry on mission street requesting the denial retrieval and denial to not plant 60 inch box trees at the subject property it was held on october 2015 and on for further consideration on october 2015 that was continued to allow time for the parties to talk about -

to appear before the board to address how americans with disabilities act impact this permit on 2015 that was continued to allow time for the party to further discuss the city's requirement for the site and try to develop a plan so i'm hoping that the parties to this case are here this - it public works in the room wonderful i on intersections we should hear from the departments and see we're tasked with action and then we'll hear from the appellant. >> commissioner honda shall we give each side 3 minutes? okay. thank you >> good evening across the city bucking urban forest urban forester thank you for recapping the history this is a lengthy case the original permit to remove 5 trees 2 were very large

and to replace with 5, 60 box replacement trees that didn't we were not able to sign off since the october hearing we met with mr. jensen onsite with the sfmta kevin jensen i have his e-mail i'll put it on the overhead his concern with the layout was that the last second sfmta once the building is inhibited they changed the code marks don't line up so the last several months the applicant the appellant had to go back to the sfmta to get permission to modify the color curve so that's been done at this point and i do have an e-mail interest kevin jensen he sent the other day to

- overhead please. he says thank you for the confirmation it is depicted as discussed, in fact, sure the appellant stated see below the screen shot the highlighted areas we'll fill in a planter concrete to accommodate you we've agreed upon upon site and kevin jensen is acceptable our ada issues are addressed and the appellant is waiting for mta to color the curbs but the ada issue was addressed at this point, i on intersections we're circling back to the - one idea to start over move the utilities it sclft

with those trees and other option our department suggested is a way forward is they planned 36 inch boxed trees and this is 29 hundreds to install a 6 manipulative box tree is $5,000 so times 5 trees $10,000 plus a fee the board is tacked how to come up with a penalty this is not a penalty this is what was planned not arbitrary and one way to move forward this is the one remaining issue we have no other issues on site regarding this permit. >> thank you, mr. buck. >> thank you we'll hear from

the appellant now. >> that's correct across the city across the city kevin and i met onsite as chris said we respect to sfmta and applied for the white curb and as a result kevin wanted a loading zone we accommodated that and made i paid all the fees kevin from ada is okay with that and given us the green light to move forward i might add that overflow room we had committed to doing 5, 60 inch box trees but planted 9 as you recall that was dictated saying the landscape was - we followed the better landscape

plan we planted 9, 36 inch trees we thought that was sufficient the result of plan check confusion within the department as to how we end up with that we are cognizant of the fact that you know we should have come back to the board of appeals and clarified that but those projects tend to be pretty complicated what you know executed them and had a number of permits that was one of '75 permits we got the drawings stamped so the 9 trees i guess you have to review those as part of plan check so in an effort to close this out i on intersections we left off talking about the difference and the other thing from dpw is paying the in lui fee which is

18 per tree i heard a total of 5541 we can do a check for that you know, i on intersections that chris agrees the site looks at great the trees as we see the projector we had brought up our landscaper architect says that within 5 years a 36 inch box tree will fill out what a 60 inch box they trithis is in 5 years a 60 box tree would have been we're looking to the board to close it this out we're in line with dpw and ada and fta this site looks at good we're looking to close

out at the direction of board tonight thank you. >> thank you thank you. >> your number is different than the d s he said 5 at 21 hundred. >> that was the delta so i think the confusing thing with the board is trying to follow kind of a rule book book with the city an in lui fee which is 1890 and the delta of planting a 36 inch tree and a 60 inch my understanding the 36 tree is 29 hundred to plant and a 60 is 5 thousand that is the delta of 10 thousand 5 hundred we were supposed to plant 60 inch but if you calculate it a number of ways the 5 for 5 the delta is 10

thousand nine hundred or add up you know the total that we spent which is 9 times 2 nine hundred versus 4 times 75 hundred we're looking for a way to close this out and have the board make a discussion how we want to do so. >> are you fine with the 10 thousand 5 hundred number that the department has come up with. >> yeah. i mean we spent a bunch of money applying to sfmta and phil the concrete taking down existing trees so i on intersections ideally we would like to have it be lower but if this is what the boards decision we can commit to that. >> okay. thank you. >> thank you public comment on

this item okay seeing none, then commissioners, the matter is submitted. >> and again, just a reminder what is before you is an appeal of a denial to not plant the 60 inch box trees okay. >> perhaps a further response from mr. buck. >> based on your presentation we're down to the number. >> thank you, commissioners chris buck with public works whenever a new building constructed a number of trees are assessed to be required to be planned this site is required to plant 14 trees to the right-of-way in the end there's a planning department of 7 trees so 3 of the trees, 4 of the

trees are even substitute skulk landscaping for required trees 7 trees planted landscaping totally the equivalent of 4 trees and paying 3 in lui fees to meet the planning code that is where the 5 thousand plus comes up that is charged regardless of 60 inch box issue a total separate fee just to clarify that is the simple price differences between a 36 inch and 60 inch box tree the difference is $2,900 per tree so $10,000 san francisco public works has an adopt a tree fund in lui fees are adopted we have a mechanism that money is literally a lockbox for tree not

purchasing new tires or trucks but towards the planting of new trees we want to commend clarify that amount. >> so you'll be accepting the po and owner o overturning the denial that $10,000 plus will be paid into our tree fund. >> yes. and for the record our preference is the 60 inch box trees, however, i will say that the 36 inch box trees were planted a year ago they're in the ground 36 inch trees and establishing well i can say that the site is doing well it is performing well it is a little bit of a consolation a learning curve when we head into some of the cases but to move forward and

based on the number of months we've worked to continue this it seem like indirectly another message to applicants to adhere to the rules of board otherwise the approvals will not accompany we will be okay this treatment. >> listening to you is the 10 thousand 5 total or plus the 10 thousand. >> it would be $10,500 specific for the tree size the other matters is a separate fee that is taken care of okay. thank you. >> thank you. >> if cliepdz to make the motion there ought to be a price to pay i don't consider that a huge amount. >> commissioner swig was not

here but the three of us were here. >> i was here. >> yeah. so. >> i will make the motion to grant the appeal overturn the denial of the department and condition that would be payment of $10,500 into the b u s tree fund. >> okay. thank you so we have a motion in the vice president to grant the appeal and overturn the appeal by the department on is condition that $10,500 be paid as an in lui fee is that acceptable commissioner lazarus commissioner honda commissioner swig

that motion carries with a vote of 4 to zero thank you very much mr. >> i don't see him. >> no. >> okay. we'll move on to item 6 appeal number stephen gains versus the urban forestry the property on 95 norway do have street to, llc the tree removal moving a tree to the rear of the property and this is on for hearing tonight we'll start with the appellant >> you wish to say i have retained reuben, junius & rose on a project reuben, junius & rose representation appearing before this board will not have an effect on my decision this

evening. >> you have 7 minutes to present are your case. >> overhead. >> commissioners good evening i'm steve my wife and i are the appellants on 49 next door to the project awhile i testify on my own on behalf of i have snatches for people 0 wishing to enjoy the redwood tree and where it exists the neighborhood associations represent thousands of families surrounded the tree i have a roomful of neighbors that care i want to talk about the tree a 50 coast redwood as noted in the brief less than 04 percent of trees are native to the city this is a privately owned tree visibly within the public realm because the proximity to the public right-of-way that is designated

under the public works code the city staff described as one of the largest trees in the neighborhood providing shade and character the evaluation was for the denial of the original application the trees location is important it is indirectly dribble behind the park and it is essential to one neighborhood important neighborhood intersection with the two other nearby redwoods one landmarked it is one of the last visible reminder of golden gate park in the. >> can you stop, stop the time have you been trying to use the overhead we need to have the overhead you if wanted to use the overhead you have to ask in

the microphone i did not hear you, you're on the overhead now go ahead. >> on the same evaluation board the dpw said the tree is healthy and sustainable we marked the tree it showed excellent color this tree is healthy it is covered are new growth and shows inform sign it is in danger or peril the arborist declared the tree now that the sponsor wants to move the tree so healthy it can sustain it's roots it is bold and moved and placement attached to the platform in a new construction site we ask you consider this reserve all of

opinion the trees are laid out in article 16 lacking from the section is the term relocation it speaks of removal in fact, no where is relocation mentions whether you rove a tree or you may not roach that no section of relocation in the brief you saw the staffs response to the acquiring the application no place form for relocation so the staff instructed the sponsor to use a removal form and change the name no circulation and no legislative authority although the adopted application the notice to the community regarding the permit was about relocation in order for this for roaming of a redwood but the actual permit was for removal of a street tree under section 806

not a street tree the tree is on private property by the sponsor as a significant tree you'll hear from the sponsor that authorizes dpw to allow for the removal of trees that's open a half-truth it established the procedures whether or not significant trees thereby removed we believe this is no legislative authority and only conditions that will protect the tree and the neighboring properties if you believe that relocate can be considered it must be considered in the standards that apply to the removal of a significant tree this tree exceeded protection and has been denied permit and full removal by dpw it was ruled final by this brotherhoods in 2015 which changed nothing other than

the sponsors arborist, however, such a permit because the unsafe conditions the sponsor this have a geotech report of soil removal to have soil engineer and structural engineer study this undertaking on the historical single-family on norwdoff - and have the sponsor pay for the residence of 49 to the offsite housing during this event keep in mind this decision has no public input the period of time discussions were take place the decision was made i tried to contact the department 17 times

only after the written notice on the other hand, the lobbyists exchanged 49 phone calls and used the arborist as the only person with the expert opinion no outside independent kourlts i want to move on to the tree has to go so the city can be provided with four new housing units that is untrue first if you approve the dpeemgs of the historic home and the subdivision of prominent lots and third the construction of 4 new believes in the exact location no way to know whether or not this will happen and if we influence that it will not happen bus the tree is important in the current location in the brief we printed in the record out rules used for 4 unit of

housing in different configurations a decision not reserved whether or not a tree is removed in the past didn't matter f eve they move this tree the tree is healthy determined by multi arborist and dpw it is healthy moving it it the only thing that put united states it at risk for 4 units without toughing the tree please don't make this decision thank you. >> (clapping.) no- please thank you. >> a procedural question i know you limited it to 2 minute but people wrote for 3 minutes. >> the problem we say several long cases they've not come into the room if we go to 3 minutes we'll not be able to finish the evening.

>> thank you we'll hear from the permit holder now. >> mr. duffy. >> good evening commissioner honda and members of the board tom reuben, junius & rose on behalf of the permit holder and property owner, llc as we see the it appellants raised 3 main issues the first, the legal authority of the department of public works to authorize it and the replanting of the tree this clearly is addressed in the urban forestry ordinance together authorized department of public works to and through the urban forestry to both remove and plant trees planting can be done on its own accord or the mitigation of the resolve them a tree in this case the removal and replanting of the same tree a difference without a

distinction the bureau is clearly authorized to issue the permit second issue environmental review and in this case the larger project was granted categorical exception and that project included the remove of the tree it is important to understand what the categorical exception that didn't mean no environmental review first is a determination of whether a categorical exception even applies and second there as a determination whether the project results in any significant impacts nevertheless, and in this case, the project was studied including the removal of the tree and the hectic value of the tree and of the home and the planning department determined no significant impacts the only change in the project now that the tree will be replanted an environmental

benefit we submit the environmental review was proper the third concern was really the technical and physical ability to successfully roach and replant the tree with that we have our expert david cox of the environmental design inc. to speak to that issue i'll is the world renowned and removing and replanting trees this is a 98 percent success rate they've removed trees in the white house we have our tree arborist mr. roy for any questions thank you. i'll turn to mr. cox. >> good evening. i'm david cox with viral design based out of houston, texas we are the large tree removes we've removed significant trees of this size

and larger for on the united states capital ground the white house, the supreme court, we've done work in many area he moved the tree for soma and work in trashing moving a 65 inch a different species to move and currently working in santa fe on several projects and basically remodeled projects and preserving and replanting them on the same prompt that's primarily all we do we don't remove trees or do tree removals with the open up for public comment we're specifically a tree transplanting in business since 1977 hold the world record for the biggest distance of move

and the diameter and the tallest you name it, we transplanted the tree on peaceably beach in the year 2000 because of the tree the pine trees dying from the disease a significant history in the civic county and area if there is any technical issues you want me to discuss i'm available to answer any questions. >> thank you. >> thank you. >> we'll hear from the department now. >> good evening, commissioners carli short san francisco public works i said to make a couple of points i on intersections we wanted to emphasize the fact that the department approved the relocation of this tree on this

after reviewing the proposal way are concerned initially the tree might not be successful in its relocation we want to see the tree preserved we actually felt this was a win-win i hate to say it we've yet to see a tree not removed and when a development project is at stake we thought that preserving this tree onsite will protect most of the concerns raised by the community and the concerns the tree is not significant we addressed by requiring a notice of special restriction on the property so we felt this this was actually a good solution to preserve this tree visually with all the environmental benefits that come along and many of the benefits to the community i want to address the idea the briefs are saying we have a

secret active progress we brenda over backwards when the tree - in conjunction to the board of appeals rather than having that addressed at that the body loan we agreed that the most transparent concept to be to a new thirty day notice on the tree and held another public works hearing and that was appeal able to the board of appeals this was not done in secret we felt the public should know that is the best way to get the notification out to the public by following our typical process and lastly the suggestion not consistent with the code addressed by the permit holders brief you know relocation of a significant tree the code requires we plant a tree of the equal value

or obtain a fee if that is not possible relocate of a significant tree to a different spot on the same property is in our mind the most ideal equitable of a tree we feel that is consistent with the code so again, i on intersections that the departments perspective we would love to see this tree retained the initial denial we want to see the tree retained relocating to a new recognition arguing having better ground it is constrained because of the exist property and the sidewalk we felt was a good solution to maintain the benefits of the urban forest we're charged with and maintaining most of benefits the community and preserve and protect this tree the regret i have it tree is not visual to the public that's the one thing

we can't achieve through the solution but that roves that we felt this was a win-win given the proposed development project on the review and the existing location of tree. >> thank you. >> ged. >> is there any use of consistency in the actual permit itself neither location where google brought up by the payment. >> we followed the process of removal process we felt that we were trying to communicate as clear as possible we said the tree was removed and we expected people to be concerned so i on intersections that essentially we're following the code with the tree removal

process our use of term relocation we were not approving the out right removal but relocated within the property. >> commissioner swig. >> how old is 12 tree. >> i never like the guess the age. >> a range of restraining order years. >> like range 50 to one hundred. >> how old is the neighborhood. >> i don't know perhaps the planning department will know. >> i'm trying to establish which came first, the chicken or the egg era the significance of that tree and what i'm wrestling with a bunch of other stuff is changing the character of a neighborhood it is clearly a tree when establishes a character in this neighborhood and one of the

briefing a couple weeks ago on things that go wrong or right or wrong with the jauflts to home renovations the key elements which is remote is changing the character by renovation of. >> house changes the character of a neighborhood or inconsistent with the character of the neighborhood it seems to me this standard will apply with this tree i am not this is a i'm wrestling with the importance of this tree and the character of the neighborhood is that part of character of the neighborhood do you on intersections. >> absolutely i on intersections that any large tree is the character of a neighborhood and certainly this from the does i on intersections that our

concern that the tree with the out right removal by perceiving it within the neighborhood and within the basic property footprint we felt was a better alternative than out right removal of tree. >> i'm wrestling we believe the tree is the expert his success ratio is good but am i willing to take the risk the tree will live or die what happens from the tree didn't make it. >> from the tree didn't make it the requirement for an 84 replacement tree seller not as larceny as the tree by honestly given the amount of resources investing in the relocation i don't on intersections anyone will be intentionally spending

that much money for the tree not to survive. >> it is a one hundred plus-year-old tree i'm old i if i got moved i'll suffer for a one hundred plus-year-old tree deeply rooted and established there is risks. >> certain i'll emphasis you know that someone brought up why not angle outdoor arborist the staff has oovshtd we've condominium our lives to preserving and protecting trees that's why we're in the business we reviewed that carefully i was initially resistant and if you read through the material you'll see we were concerned initially about whether or not the tree could successfully be relocated after reviewing the proposal and the success rate of firm and how they do it we believe it can be

successfully ronald. >> our decision to whether to upheld the appeal or deny the appeal we're taking the risk to move the tree will live or die; right? >> no, i mean i on intersections you're taking - >> taking on the risk. >> sure okay. yeah. >> okay. thanks. >> i'll note this board has on many occasions approved the removal of trees. >> again to see you by the way. >> good to see you in the appellants brief their concern the relocation and specific relocation of where it will be put in not a good place could you explain that to me. >> well, we accident as a response to that concern raised at the departmental hearing met with the adjacent property owner he looked at the site where the

tree will be relocated our feeling a good location not a conflict with the neighboring trees in many ways a better location because of the existing site constraints of the sidewalk very close. >> and the 4 o'clock that's my next question. >> i have a question the conditions does that literally mean the permit is not issued until the conditions are satisfied. >> yes. so i should also note our approval constituent conditions that all the necessary planning and building permit be satisfied the tree will not be loudly to be removed until the other conditions are satisfied. >> if they get the approval that will changing change the character of the neighborhood as well

so damn if you do damn if i don't. >> thank you. >> thank you. >> okay public comment can we can see a show of hands of how many people wish to speak under this item. >> okay. i'll ask you to do a couple of things line up on the far side of the room and if you haven't filled out a speaker card do so before or after you speak and hand to other collect the person to speak step up to the podium. >> so two minutes. >> i'll do any best. >> good evening my name is dr. evelyn rose fwlerp i'm - the residents of any neighborhoods are the ones that know their neighborhood the