feedback for this to turn this i'll support of aids suggestion and any suggestion for you to on the doors to let them participate in the fine tuning of how this elliott can be implemented i think we have to change we've sat here, too long to hear the calculations don't work we want to ask you how you calculate square footage we have a case that brings forward gross net figures on the home and the difference deny controlled and uncontrolled is quite significant we have items 16 later where the controlled space is 2000 square feet less than the uncontrolled space islander to ask you how you calculate that's an important question when you determine the right

sizings it is something which i'll agree with neighbors comments i know by the zoning district and the particular neighborhoods the average parties is far blow 3 thousand had opened the door to unintended consequences so i believe there is indeed just as commissioner president fong said the difference deny our different neighborhoods the vintage of the homes and topography and ongoing r so on. >> the trends is amazing in larger new scale construction we have demolishing minimum unit size, however, at that very moment in our discussion today, we are trying to protect that remodel under our doing calculation and encourage the

baseline significantly bigger units i'm concerned eyes and ears as commissioner vice president richards not combining the challenge for densification for the city largely and some affordability discussion in this particular case the simple discussion about density and its will be primary will result the other different keechz legislation but densification is a challenge for any remodel so having said that, i'll say the 3 thousand square feet is high and further to this i'd like to say i am concerned that since san francisco average is not a predominantly single-family city we don't throw all the eggs in

one basket not looking at 3 thousand square feet if you have an average that the way under 3 thousand square feet for rh1 zoning in the neighborhoods. >> okay. >> director rahaim. >> thank you so we have a lot of work to do a couple of things it is wooshth asking mini can just to be clear but i think it is worth talking about and just what i heard today everyone things this issue is ridiculous and we have to get rid of the question is what do you replace it with i heard having a hard and fast number is

not the answer maybe percentage growth i'll argue the square footage in existing homes but i think with respect we're trying to create a system that incentivised smaller homes i think what we have a situation where most of the larger homes come to you anyway, we think under this process fewer will comment to you, i mean i'll ask elizabeth and the others to comment on thank you for the opportunity i'll agree in looking at this proposal we're hoping to reduce the number off projects that come to you on a case by case basis based on the neighborhood and drs by 7-eleven people to be under that thresholds and maybe more and better scale to the

neighborhoods and giving him given a better a path fwrs a practical perspective talking about timelines and in the hurdles and processing timeframes whether you know this project is going to the planning commission their isn't - efficiency that comes that didn't come when a project is under the administrative and the calendars is booked out and we continue it from there, i actually think there is an efficiency by scheduling it for the commission for day one than going through the process and getting catch up in the dr but phone calls are not recognizing and the demo there's so much bravrt it adds frustration we're

hoping to good morning, everyone. hold those back a little bit and again part of your hope by assessing yes this is the trend didn't mean those need to be heard by the commission but a large number of projects because keep in mind we'll go to the design review and not allow a 3 thousand square feet go through if the context is cottages that may not be appropriate for that design reasons but maybe instances we're putting 4 thousand square feet projects on the consent calendar and they're well designed we don't need to talk about that they're on the consent calendar so that's an important piece and again for the commission to see a board snaptd of projects not contentious on the consent calendar that when there are ones contentious but where it was executed well in craft to a

project not as executed so hopefully that answers our questions. >> commissioner vice president richards. >> one more question those are cus. >> no. we're going to create an 309 for a smaller sized project so certainly for review but things we're trying to figure out the other criteria findings certainly we think a relevant one is neighborhood context with density and square footage a those 3 as far density compatibility and square footage we're working on. >> some advise baseline what i've seen we should make that process easy and the appeals should be basically have a high hurdle beyond us if so it a lp h go to the board of appeals and

unknown for the project sponsor by a cu to the board of supervisors that's a high threshold you may want to think that that. >> that's part of intent. >> the end to end process i'll look at as well. >> watching one question any idea have we be able to go go back to the rh1 houses homes and projects to see if 24 were applied 18 months ago how many might have fallen into this category and been on the consent calendar and. >> so for a combination don't have all the data but preparing to bring from real world analysis before you but so for we're looking at one some of the recent either dr or cu cases you've seen that are contention and looking at what the statistics are those did they

meet their full densification and how big and how much e how many over 3 thousand square feet and you understand there is a big burden when we change the rules projects that get catch up in the process we're in the process of serving the staff for the projects not anticipated to be approved in the sort of next month over and over two and so we can do targeted outreach for the projects and have the conversations early only 1 hundred or 200 over the tellers and hopefully get them under the threshold they don't get caught national transition. >> commissioner moore. >> oh, you're done the question for the director you don't see dbi and planning coming closer to seeing eye to

eye on as demolition issue. >> quite the contrary question have the conflicting definitions we're proposing to get rid of the one so we rely on the definition of the building code to make sure question are using the same definition. >> i minutes ago you on that part but some of the careriteri i'm a strong believableer in many of the projects endearments we have quality of life issues more flat by the commission in an by the department itself those issues are about profess and issues about noise and intrusion the captains of roof decks and where other issues i

qualify under the quality of life issues if indeed we're moving the review process more and more into a process for the department i believe that criteria which guarantees those ordinances for me will be critical including a dry run of how that works i'm of two minds i'm interested in shortening unnecessary review but keenly interested in creating nor neighborhood confidence those issues are for the quality of life and more and more as we dense, if any, the community i want to put that out there and we'll talk about it but think another set of criteria that

basically guarantee that those things are considered. >> commissioner johnson. >> thank you. yeah, real quick i was on the next time clarify the over laptop of the process and the dir one dr still equivocates for anything that falls there the cracks peep will use that process and two you cover this process and commissioner moore mentioned i'm wondering whether there are considerations or finding we'll make in a dr we may not in a new type of hearing not a specifically finding we'll make it will be good to see the off laptop if small business it dred versus had this hearing and agree with commissioner vice president richards the higher bar for appeal coming for cases i want them for much more this is the end of the run come to

the planning commission and get you are decision and essentially that's the huge deal and finally let's not quibble over the numbers in our current process we're putting the d in the the discussion we're sort of making decision project by project and not quibble over numbers take something and if it needs changing change it. >> commissioner vice president richards and i have one last question i saw jeremy an issue that came up with the building inspection yesterday they're starting a task force on this issue potentially we are trying to figure out why to have a joint meeting with dbi perhaps one reason to but the question i have for i didn't watch the tape so didn't know what came up in the department of building inspection. >> i was that plaster of media

suggestion to put together a group of people the person he was thinking is not here but senior if planning and fire a whole bunch of individuals to look at this issue it's not working and the question the building code i guess and the planning code are different in terms of what we destine demolition the piece of the third floor is called an altercation is that a state definition. >> what happens in the 80s sdoov judy wrote and code that was the responding special this is true (laughter). >> people are coming and getting a kitchen remodel permit and the inspector comes out all that was left was the wall of kitchen the house was torn down and judy wrote this rule it is

incredibly onerous intend to discourage people because you have a 5 year penalties and teams to rewrite it because that is solving a problem not existing no one is pulling a permit to remodel the kitchen tearing down the building that's why it is written and need to look at what people call remostly and showing the drawings and counts it is a 2 dimensional drawings and the 3 dimension is not working. >> so someone in the task force. >> i'm not on the building department it needs to have a whole bunch of people we want to fix this one's and for all. >> that definition that yud wrote is it in the building code. >> so ideally what we call a

demolition. >> that definition should be thrown out quite frankly write something that applies to today's world and hopefully one definition of planning and building we're all speaking the same language. >> i can't tell you how many people say i put photos on my phone an alteration and public trust is zero. >> thanks. >> commissioners, if there's nothing further, we'll move on to we can move on to item 10. >> for pca temporary homeless centers in the valencia districts a planning code amendment. >> good afternoon commissioners i'm not aaron starr it is

conducting 9 planning code ordinance that will reorganize part of planning code i'm here to talk about the ordinance to amend the planning code to lie temporary homeless shelters in the following zoning district the pdrs the western edition office use and the arts industrial district and in all cases this ordinance will require the authorization throu cu for the temporary homeless shelters will be employed only if one it will not operate for more than 4 years and go operates in the management felt city and county of san francisco this ordinance will only allow the temporary structures to construction of permanent building is not preliminary in a homeless shelter located within

an existing building the building must be not have been previously occupied by and temporary homelessness shelter trying to make sure their short term solution for a long term solution elsewhere on june 21st of this year, the board of supervisors passed an ordinance to require the city open and operate no fortune 6 operation centers by 2018 this already adapted ordinance requires the city develop plans for equitable distribution for shelters this new ordinance before you enabling the temporary shelters it intended and remedies the support of proposed ordinance b will will you for equitable distribution of shelter and limited impact on the spaces for our valuable

distribution and use that concludes my presentation. but for one slight clank to the draft resolution before you under the ceqa clearance it is necessary for this ordinance we cited some citations to the california environmental quality act those are encorrect the correct one this project is not the finds of the project under ceqa guidelines and that's the appropriate clearance we ask you to put in the motion for . >> thank you opening it up for public comment. >> hi henry congratulations scomplar to this it is deemed as conversion really products of you anyway on the council of the merchant association and we really have a problem with the cabins we realize you have to

have in the open to provide temporary housing on the streets they're safer and better off right now encamped on 16th street one of the members from the north commission kaplan has a place and really makes it difficult for someone to renovate, upgrade when customers want to good by there was a situations one of the folks that works i believe has stepped on a needle and had to go into a hospital so it is a great - that's been presented by planning and hope you'll approve it thank you. >> mary sorenson i want to

know if you're any of you in pacific heights or marina cal hallow or let's see whatever areas telegraph hill or over the navigation center in the mission or bayview i'd like to see in equitably spread around the city thank you. >> remember saying my name my name is silvia johnson. i think we're in the process and this one here kind of happens that way sometimes things do like when we do you know the bay

area and you know clear up all the - the time that you know provided everybody is you know - under guards so we are the you know better in the policies to declare and to clear you know - there are dark itseest moments. >> okay is there any

additional public comment? >> not seeing any, public comment is closed. >> commissioner hillis i recommend approval with the modifications directed by staff. >> second. >> thank you, commissioners on that motion for approval as amended by staff. >> commissioner hillis commissioner coppel commissioner mondejar and commissioner president fong so moved, commissioners, that motion passes unanimously 4 to zero and places you on item 11 for case 25 street navigation center conditional use authorization good afternoon, commissioners the item before you a request for a conditional use

authorization to establish a temporary navigation center which is a homeless shelter with accessory social facility use and the site is would be a temporarily vacated right away at the eastern 25th street the board of supervisors amended the administrative code to require the city to own and operate no fortune 6 of the navigation center the 25 street navigation center is modular mobile trailers operating up to 3 years with 6 months of removal after which the street will rupture as a public street the navigation center will cane 68 shelter beds and 28 hundred workspace for cohen and housing assistance and meals and other services for the homeless residents the site is split is between the

heavy industrial and the distribution repairs zoning district and while homeless shelters are permitted in the spiritual it requires a conditional use authorization to establish it in the pdrs zoning district it does require to other approvals in addition tattoos conditional use authorization in order to proceed the planning code amendment to the pdr district court must be adapted as the ordinance to temporarily vacant 25 streets of san francisco prior to this hearing the mayor's office of housing xhushth outreach to businesses and community groups excluding the dog patch neighborhood association and present to the port commission and the advisory group and the southern advisory committee today, the department has not received me opposition with

that, the project is necessary and desirable with the surrounding neighborhood the project will create a navigation center with 68 shelter by these, and will be owned and operated by the city and county of san francisco, thus meeting the mandated from the board of supervisors, the project will offer health and mental health and others services as well as case management a temporary obvious of no more than 4 years and no permanent blocking of the public and not displace any businesses or residents in the area this that concludes my presentation. and i'll be happy to answer any questions you may have. >> the project sponsor is here to answer any questions. >> thank you project sponsor please. >> good afternoon commissioner president fong and commissioners, thank you for hearing this item as ellen mentioned the navigation center would provide an additional 68 shelter about

the accident a critical exponents of the mandate to provide 68 navigation center within two years we've been working with the community and with the associations as well as the adjacent property owners specifically the mta who metro is immediately adjacent we've been working closely with the port commission and the street is under the jurisdiction of the port they've been an excellent are partner throughout the past few months in planning this we presented a to the port commission last week and we it was approved unanimously by the port commission as an acceptable use of that property and others temporary use we also had a subsequent meeting with the dog patch association that actually took a vote on the measure and

passed overwhelmingly with the homeowners association overall we feel that this is a very innovative use of as a a city right away that is underutilized as a dead end street and as it's only a temporary facility as required attests legislation we feel that is an excellent addition to the city thank you. >> i'm available to answer any questions. >> thank you. >> opening up for public comme comment. >> hello, my name is silvia johnson. and navigation center can be you know as exempt but another process mayor as we have a

professional taxpayer will you know push you know different marks and this is will be a what i call or any kind of process because our measurements our hours very per size and what this is where a lot of this has been wound up and not to be

stepped on this is where our lynn and our railroads and bulk system has a lot of the which we've been trying already so many times be out there and process the jobs and finally found out exactly can this nation was and that took me a while because he had what you call environment first of all, it pushes up releases - >> and you know sometimes when you have depression it was not precise because of the - how we

hung and it shouldn't be doing that stuff because our you know police control and lab reports you know need exercise and that's where the main part of this has come along and i know even the reason doctors done the processes for human faculties have a lot in how lab reports and how and the examine a human being you know. >> ma'am, your time is up. >> is there any public comment on this item. >> not seeing any, public comment is closed. and a commissioner. >> perhaps.

>> commissioner moore. >> i'm glad that we were agriculture to identify a site it is always we were following an example where san jose has similar solutions and glad that all departments came together to facilitate and make it happen within obviously asked the question what happens over 4 years to look at it happening the number of people who are occupying our sidewalks is without homes is visibly increasing 68 is a small dent in to what is extremely urgent particularly with fall and winter upon us i'm glad we

realize this project without much delay and timelines. >> thank you the - we currently actually have entered into contract with the modular building manufacturer to start the fabrication process we anticipate the trailers to be delivered probably mid december and hope to be open at the end of january. >> who's - can we ask who is manufacturing in terms of quick mobilization. >> the contract was awarded to design space modular i believe in fairfield. >> they've done modular building for the city as well. to address our comment about the at the end of the four-year

process part of notion of using 340d last year buildings and connecting everything above grade with decking was that we will have a minimum impact to the street and it's infrastructure so at the end of the 4 years we'll remove it with little permanent impact to the city right away that is reverted to a right away >> chases the lifespan of one of the trailers. >> the buildings- the manufacturers frequently say 25 years we've seen schools for thirty and 40 years the first navigation center as 1950 mission repurposes bantsdz trailers that are were left on the seat they have quite a long lifespan and part of notion of the city's ownership is as the

site expires we'll be able to region this to another site and from aggregated into smaller to large units and can they be replaced. >> the sun exposure will not do that but modular and they can be combined into larger units and he appreciate the sustainability one with close distance with local support for local lavish and for short travel distances adds to them being very desirable for the city i'm no full support and move to approve with conditions. >> second. >> second. >> if i may this is an important item to me this is one of san francisco's most difficult problems that is one of san francisco's most

obviously problems and at the planning commission we talked about affordable housing of human life on the street in a non-sdigd way is important this is a great crossroads so i think those navigation centers are popular one on south van ness and i got a tour to landlords to approving this right now and hope 4 more and ms. sorenson's comment about the city should be shared amongst the city. >> commissioner coppel. >> yeah. i'd like to echo the comments of commissioner moore and commissioner president fong and following the homeless issue and what is going to result from the decisions for a while and have heard did phrase the best way to solve the homeless to give them homes it is good the

number 6868 beds as a result and in favor of the motion. >> thank you. >> commissioners, if there's nothing further, we'll move on to i'd like to thank to approve that matter with conditions. >> commissioner hillis. >> commissioner johnson. >> commissioner coppel commissioner mondejar and commissioner moore and commissioner vice president richards and commissioner president fong so moved, commissioners, that motion passes unanimously 7 to zero expirations that places us on item 12 at pennsylvania street this is a large project authorization. >> good afternoon commissioners kimberly planning department staff you have before you a request are are for a large project authorization pursuant to the planning code section 329 for 48 thousand polluting plus square feet residential building with

48 residential and thirty automobile parking spaces and commission fill out a speaker card and submit it to the commission secretary. and class 2 bike parking spaces in the district the project proposed proposes seeking exemption to the rear yard and permitted obstruction pursuance to the planning code and further interim controls apply for the large project authorizations within the showplace square potrero hill and the waterfront the following criteria shall be considered an awareness of urban parents and harmonize the physical relationship between the existing buildings and natural features and view corridors an awareness of neighborhoods scale and materials and renders the buildings facades with texture and depth and modulation of buildings vertical with rooftops

to be seen from vague points as far as communities comment the project sponsor has not limited to they've conducted outreach to the friends of jackson park and hosts two meetings for the adjacent neighbors and interested community groups on june in 2014 and most recently in february of 2016 to date the department has received one letter in opposition for the concerns regarding potential adverse effects to the nearby industrial tenant businesses and the reduced parking in the area the project sponsor has since the passage package submitted 6 letters in support of proposal, with an from the friends of jackson park citing supports from the project sponsor for their efforts and from the

neighbors request citing support of development of residential unit and affordable units in the area and improvements to the site and development of the site in a more pedestrian friendly way, that is a good in development and as to the neighborhood safety and business for the existing residents the base for the departments recommends approval with conditions and the base for the recommendation the department buildings this project is approvable for the following reasons located in a zoning district where residential use are permitted and the showplace square potrero area that is a sub area where the residential development is encouraged the project produces 48 units onsite affordable rental units and

updates including the sidewalk and landscaping the appropriately project is requesting on this two modifications one for rear yard and one for permitted obstructions which the staff has generally in agreement the proposed administration are supportable given the design the department has evaluated the project nipping are the interim controls and finds it in performance with the applicable criteria and with the neighborhood characteristic and provides the massing and scale all frontages are gun designed the 280 is remove and the project proposes parking rash of approximately 7 point - .75 spaces for dwelling unit which is the maximum ratio for

smoovpz the prestige will fully use the control planned area and pay the 2ke789 xooekz o impact fees with the exceptions and noted and consistent with the policies of general plan that concludes my presentation. i'm available to answer any questions thank you. >> project sponsor please. thank you commissioners john with reuben, junius & rose on behalf of the project sponsor the project before you will replace the project on pennsylvania street a 48 foot tall building with a low grade garbage and ground floor townhomes with pats along 17th street and pretty simple project what was a key aspect of this

process was working to get the bmr units onsite as rentals this is going took be a project owned by the mr. hardy and wants the bmr units onsite and in conversations with the neighborhoods we heard the same thing they want to see the units problem we developed one hundred code compliant project it can, trick i didn't go when you have a costa-hawkins and the state sites went away we went through an interesting process over the 5 months and ready to come back in april but delayed to creativity modify the project to make it eligible for the costa-hawkins agreement we did was that we added two units blow the rear yards platform which was formerly a garage space and pulled there 3 of the units go

or down to the below grade it triggered a rear yard exemption but didn't change the building the building it looks like 100 percent code compliant and have two new units saving to upcoming proved 17th street the idea should 280 come down in the future and forward better late than never making sure this building properly speaks to the commissioner tang if and when that happens a positive experience and glad to be here with the units onsite the project first in well with the neighbors if i can get the overhead a moment this is looking eaton 17th street our site is right here the project will be shorter than

the building next to it and the seam height as the building across the street that completed construction this year it will get in well with the immediate neighbors and - take a look at the area so here's the parking lot mr. hardy owns the building in the right direction owned it in 1999 this is an area that i've you know was discussed and changed over the last couple of years but certainly an area where residential and commercial are able to co-exist we have the new building across the street with the 22 units 10 unit building down here you guys got close to approving this down the road and this is several hundreds unions so residential and commercial are working well

in the neighborhoods so lierpd please be advised the ringing of and use of cell phones, hardy owned the building since 199589 and next door to the scrap metal and not conflicted to we feel good about this working for the neighborhoods we're happy to say we have gotten the support of 5 neighbors we worked the friends of jackson park and happy to have their supported we believe no opposition at this time so in closing the project does exactly it eliminating the parking lot and provided the onsite bmr and fits in well we respectfully ask the commission support the project thank you. >> opening up for public comme comment. >> good evening my name is

silvia johnson. and exactly you know where i was trying to stands when the building code and to the area to you know make a better you know road on the property and you know that you know for planning difference to you know make it short it is easy for examples not - pure to you know things that are not you know in what we have today it would be you know for to

improve and in this manner of the the subject property for the policies that we would you know begin to release because there's no greater thing that ended here in city hall explaining things or building contractors question always had a prior way of you know doing our building code thank you. >> thank you. >> one other name jude. >> good afternoon commissioners i'm with the friends of jackson park we were talking about earlier this average the eastern neighborhoods was the fact that

your area has not gotten the 4 acres of open space that weighed heavy on us we're in support of this project because this developer also recognizes this problem in your neighborhood and supporting us in our efforts to expands the park and renovate as a member of potrero boosters organization we're glad the affordable units are antidepressant and we're happy with that project that has the open space often the roof and landscaping and worked with us and we support it. >> thank you >> next speaker, please. >> good afternoon again john here to support this project in the pipeline and scheduled for

commission hearing in may but due to the costa-hawkins and we didn't have the costa-hawkins exemption so it is back in front of you 7 units of onsite affordable rentals the project next door was mr. hardy co-existed with the scrape metals no conflict i ask you to approve it today. >> thank you, mr. o'connor. >> next speaker, please. >> shawn i believe i poke in favor of the project next door back in 1999 when he got that approved i applaud the neighborhood outreach and the creativity used to keep the unions on the site that is a good work think everyone's on behalf of thank you. >> any more speakers on this project. >> please.

>> good afternoon again commissioners i don't know that project it seems to me looks like two classic issues we have concerned we're happy to see affordable housing on site but looks like the minimum requirements they're in this time is not at all what we're looking at for in our neighborhoods and i don't see this is really taking the inner mixed use idea and using it is in a way we like to see it uses arsz as mixed use by this point during the eastern neighborhoods that was the intention and got pulled ousted at the last second the communities is not okay and like to see the urban mixed use stay and changes to the project reflect those thank you. >> thank you. any other speakers on this project. >> seeing none, public comment

is closed. commissioner moore >> i like to ask a couple of question first is this is extremely difficult to build when i - my first question perhaps the gentleman is speaking for the architect can you please explain 5 floors in a 48 height zone without what type of construction you're showing 9 foot 5 floor to floor i'm not quite shore what ceiling heights can you explain that. >> yeah. i'm actually going to hand it off to mr. hardy it is showing 2 floors with wood above. >> yes. so the construction of the building it will be two floors of concrete for the

garage and the first floor is concrete the rest of the building is a wood-frame building request floor to ceiling and - >> you're talking about 8 foot. >> four or five something like that. >> those are low ceiling heights i'd like to see that in the staff report the question i'm always raising it is is great to do onsite we hardly have any but away to escape that i'm glad our step forward but what types of units is it rental this is a difficult sites if i look at the unit lay out the nested bedrooms with lightwells which i'll describe as we're close to creating tenement housing i have an issue

with that and with fewer undersized go lightwell your basically only getting sufficient light to the upper two floors that at least of leaves the usage on the bottom dark pretty much all the time we have a problem with that and both unions your trying to assess from 7th street in their innovate paroling elevated by the required 3 feet to create profess for those people that live on the floors i like the idea but don't like the dimensions so the open space while we do so a lot of rooftops being used for open space i believe that the open space pressed against 280 freeway is a nonusually space and we're using the sound continuation in that

sense not approvable last week question september a project back to reconsider that if you'll do that about a roof deck with green for privacy he could see that a better solution. >> that having said that, and difficult how to skin the cats you'll have this project to design it he would have basically put the back of the house against the freeway and done a west facing courtyard and created a u-shaped shaped building that has the proper exposure and not that complicated compounded building that for me is for the creating discernable unions i want to see the units i don't want to see to be maeshthd as affordable i have 3 problems with that particular

project and confined for the site choice and commend you for putting affordable on the modes, however, the creativity in building lay outbuilding orientation in units design and quite meet media exceptions sxaengs for the higher density. >> commissioner coppel. >> i last week to support the fact thinclusionary housing is site and applaud the project sponsor for going through the costa-hawkins process and looking at the roof plan we heard some potential legislation through supervisor wiener's office on green roofs and or solar pick or thermal or whatnot being installed and want to know

if there are plans it looks like half the rooftop for the rooftop open space and there's another nice church of unoccupied roof space. >> thirty percent of the rooftop will have solar we've got that covered and you know usually when we get here the landscaping has not been fully planned out we're happy to continue to work with the staff to you know maybe in light of supervisor wiener's recent legislation to see what we can do to continue to fulfill the most recently policies the city is deciding we're doing solar yeah. >> commissioner hillis.

>> i'm sorry commissioner moore. >> commissioner hillis. >> no, no go ahead. >> i will continue. >> it was interesting he went down to the project and saw it across the street we approved a while back i think at the time some of the concerns that was a challenging site japtd to the freeway but that project came out well, he think actually kind of you know starting to create a neighborhoods under where it wasn't i do appreciate that the units and a rental and affordable units are onsite that is important we like to see more affordable housing but i think it is appropriate for this project and where it is and kind of meets the grandfathering provisions it is well-designed

and leave domestic businessmen's but similar to typical san francisco flats and most of them have the distances of 6 feet so move to approve. >> commissioner moore. >> i'm interested in supporting the project i like to see a couple of changes like to see the rooftop flip side to the other side i can't support the mixes of freeway we talked about this will not work and the development were ultimately what we like to see - i'm actually trying to talk to the project

applicants but not having any traction. >> can you repeat that. >> caught between two i would like to see a little bit more work with the department to work on the size of the light shaft as i look at them at the moment i'm not sure but i need to see the light into the lower units the lightwells are undersized and a don't quite work i'm not asking for a complete redesign but were need to see some important tools here. >> sorry commissioner i get your drift i sense we've got adequate guidance to be able

to take a look at this issue with staff and you know prior to the approval of the site permit. >> commissioner moore. >> i'm confident if we want to reorient the rooftop towards the west property line for work with the project manager. >> the real issue we have to again users again and again dough want to live in this building we are basically at this moment supporting a tenement housing i cannot so if the department is prepared 0 and willing to push the design so we have better lighting for the lower units they have many things about that that are right on i'm prepared to support the

project and again, no continuing wall i want to see visible shielding with the green plants, etc. that creates the green spots on the roof but nothing that creates an island effect and didn't do anything anyways if this is accepted as a continue i'm ready to support it. >> i don't want to lose units to a lightwell or something like that but i'll be cafeteria those are lightwells for the bedrooms not the main living space they're the nested bedrooms that we've seen before as said along that project i'll actually, i want to make sure we're not losing units we had this conversation about gentrification so that's the amendment. >> commissioner hillis any further comments.

>> there's a motion i've not heard a second. >> he seconded. >> thank you there is a motion that has been seconded commissioners and commissioners, if there's nothing further, we'll move on to approve that matter request conditions as amended to flip the rooftop away from the freeway to improve lighting to the lower units by reconfiguring the light courts without losing units and no wall to the freeway. >> will you please call that lets. >> that's right what. >> they're called light courts on the plans but commissioner hillis commissioner johnson commissioner coppel commissioner mondejar commissioner moore commissioner vice president richards and commissioner president fong so moved, commissioners, that motion passes unanimously 7 to zero

expirations that placed us an items 13 ab for case numbers fulsome street this is for a large project authorization and for a conditional use authorization commissioners please note that on august 4th of 2015 you heard this project and after hearing and close public school testimony continued to today's date commissioner antonini voted against commissioners commissioner coppel and commissioner mondejar neither of you were actually at the hearing or seats on august 4th so you need to acknowledge you've reviewed the video of the previous hearing or for today's hearing if i can do so i'll appreciate that.

>> i did so as well for the record thank you very much. >> good afternoon rec department staff the item before you lack of foundation and conditional use authorization for the proposed project on fulsome street a large project authorization as in the zoning district and to a allow the dwelling unit for one between dwonl for modifications for the requirements for one rear yard, two dwelling unit exposure and 3 frontage and 5 mass reduction as amended the proposed project is the demolition of 3 existing building and now construction of a 4 story residential building with one and 17 dwelling units and 65 below grade parking spaces and one car share and one and 60 class 1 bike parking

spaces and class 2 bike parking spaces with a dwelling unit mexico with 2, three bedrooms and 46 one bedrooms and 24 studios the project includes public open space mid block alley of a common coast guard and roof decks and terraces and the project includes lot mergers since the hearing the project sponsor has decreased the number of off-street parking agent below for a total of 5 plus square feet including the seven hundred square feet on the first story level and increase the overall open space from 11 house plus to 13 thousand plus to reflect those changes the departments published. >> new exception for the

project to reflect the description that is handed out hard copies and electronically per the planning code section the project will provide 19 bmr below grade rates dwelling units at a ratio of 16.4 as noted by the project sponsor they elected up to 20 percent that will be detailed and the project sponsor has entered into a costa-hawkins with the city to reflect the affordable housing retirement since than the project sponsor have engaged under robust dialogue this dialogue has been managed and the director and ruled in a position of public defender's in the basement level and refinement of the mid block alley they have been supported the department appreciate the dialogue and the communities contribution especially in

lights of the 2020 work and the zoning controls the department staff recommendations approval specific that complies with the refreshments 6 planning code and as a policy and the project is located in a doan's the pdr and residential use are pribl permitted and producers a mixed use being ground floor retail and going once, going twice below grade pdrs and significant upgrades due to landscaping and furnishings and private and common open space and utilities the eastern neighborhoods ambulances for the development impact fees the project sponsor is preempted a short presentation of their yuptdz project that concludes my presentation. i'm available to answer any questions. >> okay project sponsor please. >> supervisors that is the second hearing the project sponsor will be afforded 5 minutes and the organized opposition receives the same

public comment receives one minute. >> very good. >> on behalf of the project sponsors with the access development thank you for the opportunity for a consecutive update since august 4th over the past 6 weeks continued the discussion we want to thank director rahaim for his leadership and bringing people to talk through issues and focus on a path forward a lot of discussion on the mid block angle tree avenue in response to show how it connects the architect prepared a short video as you can see we started looking at 9 mid block alley to the liveable streets left it the public art and to the right you see the liv get to the mid block

alley the artwork to show that is not what will look like bull murals when you turn to the entry widened and a double height and a sign calls it out and with the double height ceiling take advantage of the murals but can be an testify space the planters on the mid block all over the place have been pulled back for a clear path of travel and the mid block alley space the projects creates an active and interesting space at the august 4th planning commission hearing discussion how the project complies but with the pdr and while not adapted measure x by providing 52 hundred square feet of pdr space the space is dedicated an

elevator off the fulsome street that's an image of that space which will include 16 foot ceilings that is provided one dollars for 55 years and has agreed to pay for the build out this is the space that is divided syndrome into stoourz studios it is unprogrammed space because the space is provided and below grade access is providing 2 navy times for 52 hundred square feet and working with the public and it is about - the addition of pdr replacement is reduced the parking to 65 spaces a 39 percent reduction proposed the project as you may know workplace the later than you think cultural district that and establish any code requirement by 3 key components they are

retaining the commercial spaces and creating jobs and protecting affordable housing not displacing or eliminating any neighborhoods serving commercial uses and created 52 housing unit pdr sheet for artists creating jobs and part time onsite jobs and jobless overseeing the pdrs and jobs for the artists that will union that says that a look like san francisco contractor for the project and to insure the jacobs are local their requiring they give priority to the minority contractor and finally, the project is not displacing any existing housing it is providing more affordable housing than required by codes at the august 4th assess that was valor i didn't to create 20 percent affordable housing onsite to increase the number of

affordable units from 19 to if a 26 percent increase over the leave was made after cafeteria consideration in the latino cultural district and discussions with the communities that commitment is reflected in the koolts with the city and authorizes because of the four exemption granted that will result in 57 more units than code compliant project combined the bmr units the 52 of below grade space and the selection of a union contractor meets the intent of the policy statements and conformation of the latino fulsome street a great project been in the pipeline over two years yet throughout the process the project sponsors were available to meet with anyone and continue to meet with few weeks extensively community each of and involvement and mohammed and his partner truly appreciate

your - thank you for your time and consideration and respectfully ask a distoday for support of the project i'm available to answer any questions. >> as stated organized opposition this this is your time to speak must have 3 speakers the organized opposition has to have 3 speakers right. >> it is for an organized group. >> with multiple speakers. >> i think so as an organizer. >> okay. >> all right. so i have a couple of exhibits i'd like to show. >> okay.

>> okay. i'm representing the coordinating latino cultural district council that is in opposition of this project because of lack of affordability it is 80 percent luxury units 95 luxury units totals a feeling to persons that are aribnb around $200,000 a year what concerns us the cumulative impact that that project and other projects have on the latino cultural district this project is in the latino cultural will district a total of 6 hundred and 80 market-rate projects in the district this enflux will accelerate the gentrification that is already curving in the later than you think cultural district a detailed much in my july 29th letter which you should have in

our appellate courts i want to illustrated with the gentrification looks like let's take a down van ness street a lump bag for 200 and not a lump but a camera bag or diner between 50 and one hundred dollars not many people in the ami that populate the area that can afford that and not many businesses in the lcd thlook li this is what gentrification looks like pertaining high earns under mean this to preserve the culture and legacy of the latino

cultural district ceqa requires that we look at negative impacts, negative physical direct and indirect impacts on businesses in a district i call that gentrification blight because what will happen if the 6 hundred and 80 high ends up units are put into place is it you'll have an acceleration of a gentrification process that will pit mom and pop businesses and people selling the mexican pastries out of best contrary to the purposes of the lcd and contrary to the purposes of the eastern neighborhoods plan, contrary to the purposes of the map 2020 program we have asked for over a year that the department examine the impacts of market-rate

development such as this cumulative impacts that under ceqa you have to identify and evaluate and what that impact on the latino cultural district we had nothing on august 3rd supervisor campos made the same request still not happening we need to protect those districts and first evaluate what the impact and design mitigation to preventive negative consequences yield to - >> thank you. >> yep sure can i have the overhead oh, they have them we're looking at the eastern neighborhoods this is the mission area plan forecasts in the eir and again, this is to go back to this how we're over built no

housing 24 and roughly 17 hundred and the high end is 2000. >> and this right is showing that the number of cars that those waeshth residents are roughly doubled and drive two times as much as the current residents. >> thank you commissioners. >> i've preble seen in one hundred times the point is the mission has a very real cumulative problem with the over building of luxury

uni units. >> okay opening up to public comment on this time (calling names) line up on that side of room it makes it easier (calling names). >> good afternoon good evening co-sponsor smith for the action housing coalitions thank you for the opportunity i'm asking you to approve housing we despite need housing for a met for for

chinese metaphors the second best time is today, we should have built this 40 years ago and made the same mistakes intentionally this will bring one and 17 new homes and more it will bring 9 or 10 below grade to current or protecting residents the project improvements have been previously states we're excited about the reduced paving and the there's bike parking and lastly more importantly you know displacement and gentrification is happening all over san francisco happening in the mission happening in the hate and the richmond's where we have a number who have been evicted twice thank you, sir, your time is up. >> >> good evening my name is. >> (repeated.)

>> the constitution of the united states. i live about half a block where this will be built i want to ask you to support this the area is currently displaces nobody and the block across the street is vacant this is an area that needs tobacco built up and we need housing an opportunity for new friends and mr. ferris for all the businesses along 24th street and hope you approve it. >> good evening or good afternoon commissioners resident of san francisco i'm hearing representing the parts of congress a coalition of 4 different groups and we completely port this project especially, since the local builder has coordinated to make the changes to please all parents in the neighborhoods as well as we truly believe that

we're leaving gentrification in the mission is building more dwelling units not stopping the housing altogether only 47 units were built years ago so therefore scott has it wrong about gentrification please accept the large project authorization and the conditional use thank you, commissioners. >> good evening commissioner president fong and supervisors and welcome commissioner coppel and commissioner mondejar my name is adrian the leader for carpenters local 22 we are here to ask for your support the project sponsor assess development has contracted with the union isn't going try local san francisco fisher development and guaranteeing one hundred union carpenter an this project that's what we're here for

provides homes and homes for some of the brothers and sisters i see behind me we need that in san francisco we hope you'll support that and thank you. >> good evening. i'm michelle from mission hire hall the general manager we're here in strong support of this project the mumdz and the partners met with our staff to solidify our brarngs in identifying and bringing workforce to this project that will serve first folks in the area that is in and, of course, san francisco residents mohammed and theo have a proven track record of saying they'll do what they say in the western edition we worked with local young adults to put them to be

work and placed african-american families units where they have been displaced previously so 33 they helped to get them placed and mission is commented to placing long terms employees for the low to moderate. >> thank you, ma'am, your time is up. >> thank you. >> good afternoon, commissioners omen william i'm proud to be here as a graduate with the academies 25th cycle i'm going to be and then heinecke and citibuild has given me a second chance i'm asking you to support the project that is before you which will be creating jobs i'm truly grateful to be politically the work on the 2675 fulsome project and put

into action the skills i've learned as a people of color i know the opportunities are somewhat limited by thanks to people like those people and others i know my communities is looking at out for me, i'm also landlords to working on this project thank you very much. >> thank you. >> tim colen, san francisco housing action coalition. and our experience that is kind of unthink presented to a project that complies come again and again and make improvements and sort of appears to be a public auction or something like that this project needs to be moving forward and there are people no project is about acceptable any kind of market-rate housing and something has to happen if not going to remain unproductive and

hallow we look to you for pragmaticism and solutions to take what foyers appears appears to be a fair eave to protect us from people that turn down units of permanently affordable housing in terms of of the pdrs and air traffic controller space rather than allow a single market-rate housing to be built no possible civic by the people to delaying please move forward. >> good evening commissioner president fong and commissioner i'm tom a senior project manager in time for 5 years of service i'm here to speak open above blast executive director he's in conference we're here to vows

strong supports for the project it was based on on the principles of assess development have a stronger track record for working with racially diverse community and we're committed to make a change go for the project we find important 43 affordable units for the program providing housing for 23 low income families will help keep some of the socioeconomic we commends them for building those units onsite too many projects we support of inclusionary housing so the below-market-rate housing thank you, sir, your time is up. >> >> good evening commissioner president fong i'm the executive director of the mural music and arts 15 years we

worked with young people to beautify thaer neighborhood in east palo alto and here to support the fulsome street project the project is not only included 5 thousand pdr space is which the arts and culture pace but were helps with the affordable housing as a nonprofit executive director i speak for the importance of programming space like this and commend the developers for creating - environmental protectional agency for the accommodates and working to preserve i evens the mission district to help with the local space for latino artists i know that theo and mohammed mother runs the museum in florida the oldest black town in america and i know this is not - this art space will be very well used

thank you. >> hi, i'm here to speak no opposition of the project first of all, i don't know how thank you you can say i care about the arts and culture but, but this is as as an explosion of our cultural it is a mural that is symbol leggings all the people that have been killed i don't think so how you guys don't think that will make an impact on the communities we continue not to allow space for people to gasket and city planning is not doing its job not mission street incomes and not making we have a huge displacement - i don't know what we're doing today -

oh, my god all the map 2020 not anything implemented what will happen to that space. >> thank you, ma'am, your time is up. >> my name is thomas ray i'm a native san franciscan and live in the mission district i'm opposed to this project 39 percent of lecturer condo vietnamese since 2000 has absentee owners those people those developments are investment properties not housing just look at it and so forth. >> with the current pace of gentrification the latino community will be gone one 5

years the real question here today were you as a so-called representatives and city planners who care to help the last but not least district and the last but not least heritage community and businesses we need to create new protective zoning laws like the one protecting chinatown that has worked. >> thank you, sir, your time is up. >> hi my name is mar sorenson two letters i was going to read one from iris and christine but i don't have time those of us in readings apartment which is given the stability or reflex losing 2 after the first open house in my launder lady will

put it up for sale because she can get more for luxury condominiums built across the street she's a school teacher a new child living in her car request mother and baby sister and iris 2/3rd's of all new peep in naebt are disabled or elderly women i think you need to bear that nickel and dimed and say not to delay the project. >> you p good evening with the latino cultural district working in the office of economic workforce development i want to say their knowledge - those increases of things the developer is giving to the community is not because of

they're generally reiterate organizing many, many meeting question already tired of the crime we're getting from the developers we do and the position continue would like to have the lands remember we had a goal of 24 hundreds affordable units and this in front of of the school a perfect place. families and teachers they don't have a place to live we're asking for the brothers and sisters from the labor think about them with the brothers and sisters they don't have a place to live thank you >> good afternoon commissioners my name is pat, i live directly across the street from - and which is behind the

park i've been there for 28 years moved ♪ 1988 seen many changes in the neighborhoods some good not so good what we had before was a cement factory now an opportunity to have a complimentary housing next to the park i wholeheartedly support that and meet with the assess development company this is a project we should wholeheartedly support please join me thank you >> is there any public comment on this item. >> okay not seeing any, public comment is closed. and director rahaim. >> thank you, commissioners so as question discussed last time we convened the several

neighborhood staff and the developers to talk about those issues and talk to see if there is frankly and meeting of the minds for a project in the laitsd cultural district as you may know we're working hard to get the map 2020 to an implementation phase and working on that now i was hoping to get to an agreements we were not able to get there i think there was movement made by both sides i appreciate the dialogue from all parties it was a civil conversation i appreciate very, very good suggestions on boos and good progress maids the condo agreement i'm willing to stay further involved if the project is refined and an outlook agreement we'll

certainly stay involved as with other projects in the district so that concludes my remarks i want to make sure you know, we had the meetings and will continue to do so. >> commissioner vice president richards. >> question for the director what is the gap looking like in terms of the communities and the development. >> the community members maybe can speak to this i'm not sure they put a request the amount of affordable housing and the amount of pdr space which was to be devoted to the artists as you heard today, the developers have property i think to expand the pdr space to 5 thousand square feet and build out and rather than identify at

that stage what erection might manage that space to work with the communities to identify an organization that will manage the space so up on the communities will have preferred a more art space and certainly you heard more affordable units onsite. >> thanks sir, you knew i was going to call think on you can you tell us what you think. >> well, he think i guess i want to start the number one the presentation was probably not as clear as we would like i think the number one concern is simply passing another huge project in impacts mitigations and map 2020 spent thousand of hours and no impact mitigation in place we i

don't think so why that make sense and have affordable housing the perfect location but as far as the details we would like to see more pdrs replacement 5 thousand on a 20 thousand square feet lot and 19.6 percent affordable unit we want to see more working-class families next to a park and school we didn't get down into the details we feel stroopg those promotions should be detailed we think that thousand of hours we are spent to make those projects save scott wiener we should be bringing this to fruition you if you look at the the page after page what zoning point of view map 2020 not the

cultural district would be the the evidence will then show we'll help to help you port 24 project or mitigate. >> from a stand point it is legal. >> right? part of it i'll say in discussion as dwam for example, we would last week to see things like potentially detain zoning around large projects we're seeing in the mission start to evolve but other things more difficult as you know, we all know mitigation packages come into place around them the first time is small businesses will lose their leases rights we want to see overseeing protections really a whole mexico of packages. >> okay that's correct i guess director one more question the pipeline we hear you know, i

quite a few get the sense of after urgency with the 2020 map the map 2020 plan if we paragraph this project how many units will be applied to the mission for the future. >> roughly. >> i think that's been said there is close to 2000 units in the pipeline including the projects but trying to on the projects there are not projects to this scale in the next three or four months but rich can answer that has mention along bryant street and north mission street that will come and some small enough won't we're proposing a we're working on a first round the changes in the 2032 that political to the cultural district with the down

zoning of 24th street and such as looking at the abandoned the storefront mergers to be frank we haven't figured out the issue that was mentioned how to address if the issue of the immediate impacts of a market-rate project but the immediate vicinity something that can be done around the vicinity of the project that is through the economic development it talks about to oemdz oewd about where 9 projects are happening tee keep the local businesses in place we're trying to work on that i recognize there is a lack between the projects but having said that those projects are so years from opening we have the ability as

the projects precedes under construction. >> thank you. >> commissioner johnson. >> thanks thank you, thank you rich thank you very much i appreciate the work that the department has done and the communities has done in working with with the department multiple meeting with the developer and department i'm happy to see not an agreements but glad to see way better than where we were 12 or 18 months ago and good to see. >> i am generally supportive a couple of things i want to mention the projects has sponsor as agreed 19 to 20 percent in affordability so i'm happy to see that carry through today i've been with the there's pdr is not the intooer lot not what

it was bus the there will make it viable and great to see more local communities representatives in the cultural district is not meeting the other line items not sure 33 how they impact that says that a couple of things in public comment i understand the tension every time we hear one of the projects i don't necessarily hear you're wrong it is the lever; right? there are not approving housing is not the way to go you need to concrete the wood and sticks in the ground and then talk about what levers you can pull to make sure the community that point to build is represented in that space and others and the surrounding community is protected the map 2020 program i still have issues

with some of the elements owe ever seen if they get the policy observes that sxhifshgz comments some may not be legal no are rent control your rent is x but other levers that have been discussed like controls and things like that that are levers that foundationally and material help the communities to stay in the new units so i do think we need to move forward about housing and glad the affordability was increased i think that is something we didn't hear from the last meeting he want to continue at the communities as a 34r579 and commission haves discussions with what other levers to help those units also in the ground be representative of the community we want to build and

then finally a point for the community members that were in oergdz opposition i'm sure we'll see you in but future i want you guys to be able to accurately talk about what it is that you want to see changed with an comment ceqa is not your tool i heard you mention ceqa there are discussions of displacement and gentrification impacts in the controller's office report and other reference for this project and others for the mission controls and a number of reports issued by the land use recently that talked about the economics of urban development and what are the impacts of market-rate development in neighborhoods with the urban land and i really highly suggest you all meet with the commissioners and meeting with the department and sort of make our arguments that is, i think it is challenging for us

as a commission when you point to levers that are not the right tools it makes us dig what will resonate what do you want to see and that common barrier i appreciate the work that everyone did to get here. >> commissioner mondejar. >> so thank you. i can't approve or support this project and at risk are being labeled yes, so what i said he scant support this project of reflex of being labeled by mr. colleen we're having the map 2020 process for a reason that are interim controls for a reason with the mission district went through a process and prop ion

the ballot a whole context to why opposition for this project that is outside of this project is what is going on in the neighborhoods so while i saw the hearing and said there is a process and people have come closer together i appreciate that the developer has moved forward closer to what the community is demanding fulsome street is you know a street it is fairly low density the bus on that lot is an eyesore but consequences to putting a very large residential building there and it will change the neighborhood before we spend thousand of hours finalizing the map 2020 to approve a project that large that will have a population that is so deft from the rest of fulsome street to meet is not right thing to do.

>> commissioner hillis. >> so, i mean we've been here before and appreciate the work by the project sponsor and wouldn't have gotten here to the points we're at without the community pushing it and rerecognize a lot of faces they've been here to push for the projects and eave i've stated the intent of the interim controls that we adapted 50e789 against development i think we'll be if the court please our headnote sands if we thought that stopping the prestigious physically to go into a neighborhoods will stop the general fiduciary if you work down divisadero or court lands

what is haven on van ness street other neighborhoods are xrerps that we're fooling ourselves if we say somehow if we stop the projects we'll stop displacement or gentrification it would make our jobs easier but innovate helping the issue in grappling with the ordinances we're dealing with those are happen through rent control and small site acquisitions someone mentioned chinatown and the similar in japantown some work some do not that's the hard work to be done in order to tackle some of the issues of affordability and gentrification so i think this project has its been a long time coming and worked with the developer and encouraged them to increase the affordable housing percentage it

was metro resistance we're at a closer number of three percent and additional pdr but i'm generally in support of project and appreciate where it has been moved to. >> commissioner moore. >> you project has come forward by leaps and bounds but i'm having trouble about the comments there was deepen but i think given this project is on the calendar today has not completing the dialogue pea i'm in the middle of the dialogue but i believe as we're supporting the author and thoughtful creation of 2020 plan we believe that the project may needs more time to be fully talked out i would like to see a project on the side and like to

see a project indeed has the support of community dollars no more time to sit on the sidelines with the way things are changing with the ellis act and this and that and madam clerk, are there any announcements? we're eroding what is special i at that moment can only support what you said you're putting yourself in the middle of trying to be partnering in the dialogue that is what i'd like to see. >> commissioner vice president richards i sit up here and think about director rahaim said and the communities said and had th couldn't figure out where the money will come from in a funds somewhere there, there were i would be beating the drum let's

go for it i honestly read the report there were more people moving into the mission that is obsoleting gentrification or not by doing this projects are re struggling that with that director rahaim has been talking with the folks at the berkley i hope that conversation sustains if it doesn't or does accelerate displacement wear two years away from having something happen in terms of allison parkcy i think if we work on the mission 2020 plan and he get levers in place that help to alleviate some of the issues the communities talks about 57 unit project will cause and they could be applied before the project opens that's what all hang my hat an we're not going to solve more affordable

housing but can come up with mitigation between now and the occupancy certificate heaping some touch report after 2020 goes if and says this is how it applies to project that are approved and yet astonish approved. >> commissioner johnson. >> thank you. >> just as an aside commissioner vice president richards this is a competition of 2020 about that's a list their might be a case where the commissioner or legislative legislation is sponsored but there might be ample tools i'd like to make a motion to approve this project.

>> very good initiations commissioners there is a motion that has been seconded commissioner hillis commissioner johnson commissioner coppel commissioner mondejar no commissioner moore no commissioner vice president richards and commissioner president fong so moved, commissioners, that motion passes 5 to two with commissioner moore and commissioner mondejar vetting against. >> jonas let's give a second for the room to clear if you want to stretch your legs. >> okay hey.

>> that places us under our discretionary review calendars at this is a discretionary review. >> good afternoon, commissioners rich on behalf of the sponsors this is a discretionary review authorization of a building application. a two-story with the 3 story, two family dwell the overall height will not increase it will

cover an addition of the roof areas the retained rdt found the residential design guidelines and found no exceptional or extraordinary that whether warrant changes to the proposed project it is in compliance with the residential design guidelines it bans go following factors not extending beyond the property an second avenue and limited to two stories in height and a greater setback of the property the dr requesters concerns are the privacy by offering decree lien of sites the deck size higher than and larger than two decks on california and 255 and i gull and 3 the formidable for the decks to be used for parties

to date the department has to letters of support and no opposition other than the comments the department recommendations recommends it came into applies with the residential design guidelines and exceptional or extraordinary exception >> thank you dr requester please. and good evening so you've covered the concerns he won't keep - you've been here long enough our concern with the noise additional another concern with the noise there are 2, 90 years old only california streets that will be affected an 80 years old all of people are

health problems this is more than just an 0r7b8d noise consideration and we are welcoming the people needs nor space we're not arguing as near as can be determined the deck is there to placate that puts the other neighbors in a position to deal with a loss of profess for the convenience and expansion this doesn't make sense - those are the concerns. >> okay speakers in support of dr requesters if there are any. >> hello, i'm ann we live on