that's duplicative, but rely on that restorative trajectory. i was in an sro that was allowed to go downhill and downhill, and i was forced to move out and could not afford to live there. now, where we now live, we pay $500, and every month, we worry if we're going to lose our home, all because we were forced out. thank you so much. >> thank you. next speaker, please. >> good afternoon. my name's alex burlein. i am an attorney at the hanson bridges law firm. just to give some context where the project is now, my clients are -- >> excuse me, sir, are you part

of the project sponsor's team? >> yes. >> okay. your opportunity to speak was during the project presentation, however, the commissioners may have questions and may call you up later. >> sure. thank you. >> my name is otter duffy. i live a couple of blocks away from this project. i'm kind of ambivalent. i'm not sure if i should have got up, but i kind of support this project going forward. i was involved in the redistricting and in 2012, that particular building was the -- you can go back to actually the files on the redistricting and read this, the bristol hotel was the reason that that block was included in district 6. it was scheduled to go into district 3, you know, and it's true that it's in the -- the union square historic district, as well, but you know, i think

there's some truth that it's kind of a bridging element between the two districts, the union square preservation district and the tenderloin preservation district. that being said, all the people who were living there, we thought belonged in district 6, they're gone. they're gone. the building is empty. the reason it took so long for this window issue to come to you is because in 2012, there were still people living in that building. they had to evict the people in that building before they could bring it to you, so the other thing i would say is that this building as it comes forward, it's going to be much more in the union square area than the tenderloin. that's the plan for it. moichb street is going to be the dividing line, so the other thing i would say, these people, as far as conditions, they never brought you any conditions. they never said let's make requiring this to continue to be a bridging element between the union square district and the tenderloin district. they never made it.

what are their -- what are their demands? what conditions do they want? >> thank you. next speaker, please. >> good afternoon to everyone. my name is abel silva. i have been living in a precarious situation here in san francisco for seven years. i'm a member of the faithful fools, and even though this is about windows, i do support the historical regional windows, but at the same time, i would ask that you look at the greater scope of this and not see this as a local business as usual situation. i'm here to support that there be a better venue to have time to present all the information

about what has happened. if you could do that for us, we would feel that you're part of the community supporting us. and the rest of my time, i would just like to read something that i wrote, just some expression -- forgive me. well, while it's good to keep the character of the building, you are going to destroy the people who have given character to the city if you allow this. there have been rumors at the greater scope about the death of democracy. i am from puerto rico. historically, the crown of spain called the shots there, so we have been a bit slow to understanding democracy, but from where we stand and in the face of all this gentrification

that has been happening here in san francisco, which i am a personal victim of, businesses here will have some truth to report. i will have some truth to report after my country after this decision. what will i tell them? presently, it is starting to look like it needs democracy is a way to pose ourselves as prey for capitalism to commit genocide in the long run. if you want to contribute -- if you want to contribute to proving this idea wrong, locally and abroad in a concrete way, please find a means to integrate the poor population by saving the word community from becoming a joke. the alternative would be allowing the less influential and create the makings of a

cold civil war. all lives matter, especially ours, that, you know, we make your position possible. thank you. >> thank you. next speaker, please. >> good afternoon. my name is jessica lehmann. i'm the deputy director of senior with disability action, and we see seniors every day that are being displaced in myriad ways from all over san francisco, including sro's. people used to say sro's are somewhat immune from the housing crisis. it's seen as low income housing. people with a lot of money won't want to live there, and obviously, that's not what we're seeing.

we're seeing people pushed out of sro's, people who have lived in sro's for decades, units are renovated, and we are looking at people that are moving in with much higher incomes, leaving the low income tenants with nowhere to go, so we have an opportunity to see the situation for what it is, that we make sure we don't move forward on a project that is going to further displace senior and disabled tenants that call san francisco home. thank you. >> thank you. are there other speakers? if so, please come forward. >> hi. my name is freddy martin, and i'm a -- i was born and raised in san francisco. i've seen a lot of changes over the years. i currently -- i'm speaking as a tenant of a tndc property south of market. part of my road to getting there into stable, long-term

affordable housing was staying at the bristol hotel. i stayed there as it was an 18 month program to help as trasignificanceal housing. the conditions became unbearable for me in about 2010. they weren't fixing anything, it was bedbugs. i know many of the people after i left, i chose to couch surf after that because i just -- i couldn't live there anymore. there were mice, there were all kinds of things, and there were several disabled people in the building. there were people, after i left, that, i guess decided to file a lawsuit, but the things that i heard from people that i know who were formerly my neighbors was that they were given relocation money and they were told that they would be able to come back after things were fixed or whatnot, so i know that there's the san francisco general plan priorities which said that the affordable housing will be

preserved and enhanced. i personally know a couple of people that were relocationed because of their living conditions because of their lives, they didn't have that stable housing, and they actually died. one of them was named terry, so with all of the things that are going on in the city, and all of the buildings that are being made and made to house people with hi incomehigh incomes, $8 there are people that are losing their lives. keep that in mind. the most vulnerable of us need protection and need help from the people and the places that are supposed to support them and help them, and that's all of you. thank you. >> thank you. are there any other speakers who wish to speak on this matter? if so, please come forward. seeing and hearing none, we'll

close public comment. i would -- oh, if there's -- so please come forward. we'll reopen public comment. >> hello. my name is chanise valencia and i'm here as a member of the community and i work with homeless people at hospitality house. at the end of the day, what we're talking about is essentially taking out some extremely valuable and needed affordable housing from a community that's already under siege and under attack when it comes to the housing crisis. homelessness is an extremely violent act. we're talking about having a ripple effect that can lead to some serious tragedy for people who won't be able to come back

into the community and will make it tougher for people to find places to live, to put their kids up in a safe place or wherever, and so i really just think we're at a point now in the country, in san francisco in particular, where when we're talking about taking affordable housing or low income housing off of the market, we're talking about committing acts of violence against people who are already under attack every single day in many different facets, so i encourage you to like, look at the -- the opportunity that you have to impact and intervene in this act of violence that would be possibly happening, to look at that as an opportunity to do the right thing, right? i feel like there's really no other way for me to look at it in its essence 'cause that's what's happening here. in krcrisis, there's opportuni,

and the responsibility you have comes with the opportunity to intervene on the side of the people and not profit, and so i think that's what i'm asking you to do at this point is to look at it in those terms, as well. and to recognize that there's no neutral position in this. there's no nut willity in this situation. >> thank you. >> is there any other member of the public who wishes to comment on this item? if so, please come forward. seeing and hearing none, we'll close public comment. i think, and i would say this for the members of the public, that we're the historic preservation commission, and we we have before us a review for

window restoration, and we're looking at the merits of the documents before us, and that's all we have before us and that's what we're looking at. we don't actually have any jurisdiction related to affordable housing and other issues, so i just want to make that clear. i do have some questions for staff, and i think we may have some other questions, so i'll just dive in. i would have to say that these documents are probably one of the least legible documents i've ever seen, so the -- i mean, the drawings were really, really hard to read. and there's a comment in here in your staff report about -- on page 7, i couldn't see anything about gfrc units in the drawings, and under the scope of work on page a-1, they don't mention anything about that, so i'm just curious,

not only for the removal of the affordable housing but for the gentryfication of the tourist hotel. it would be subject to chapter 341 of the administrative code which i did bring if you want too remove that it requires for hearing comparable housing and the essential rights that the existing permanent residents do have any existing sro units.

as i said before, there are 41 legal sro units within the existing building and 16 tourist hotel units. all the of the prior residents do have the legal right to return to those units. that's all additionally spelled out in the legal documents that are in the packet. >> thank you. commissioner johns. >> thank you. i just want to go back to what president wolfram said about what we're here for today. it's clear from the members of the public who have spoken that there are very, very serious problems and they have raised some quite important issues. and as many of the speakers said and miss rhodes was one of them, this was not the commission or the court that can address those

things. the limit as i understand it of our functioning this afternoon is the approval or disapproval of windows. when window restoration and storefront restoration and although people may have raised or have raised very significant questions. we are limited to dealing with replacement of windows and store fronts. as to that it narrow area, i think that i would be in favor of approving the replacement with the conditions that the staff has stated. >> thank you, commissioner pearlman. >> thank you. i concur with president wolfram

and commissioner johns on this. it seems to me that you as a group haven't been advised well because it seems like to spend your time, i mean everybody's time has value. to spend your time to come here today, you weren't advised as to what we have any jurisdiction over being able to do. i mean many of you talked about our responsibility but they didn't advise on what our -- the scope of our responsibilities are which sadly we can't address any of your concerns it seems to me there are pub milk comment periods for the planning commission. that there are many as miss kerby said, it sounds like many violations ever the planning code and administrative code. so spinding the time that you just spernt and go to the

planning commission might spark them because they have the authority to speak about the issues that you brought here today the board of supervisors, there is general comment on the board of supervisors. this seems to be to be a potent issue. i'm sorry we can't do anything about it. but there is general comment there. there is newspaper, there are blogs. there are many ways to raise public awareness about this to the people who can actually make a difference. so i encourage you to do that. maybe you've done that, i don't know. thanthank you -- public comintds over -- sir. >> you have done that. >> that's fine. sir -- >> excuse me, public comment is

not over. we're not having an argument here. >> you're occupant of order at this time. >> sir -- you may be respectful in not calling us stupid. >> we're not having a debate. >> this is not a debate. so i encourage you do that, maybe you've done that, that's fine. ire not going to get any help from that balls we can't. if you can't understand that, look at the rules of how this works. >> excuse me miss kerby. >> [inaudible] >> it is but maybe you should go

higher an closer -- >> i would like to add that because the project sponsor has not met timelines outlined by the courts. there is a special master receiver who is overseeing the construction timeline to make sure they get occupyable again within a reasonable amount of time. they were operating in limited construction times previously. the planning department and dbi both have avenues for reporting violations if this does end up actually becoming a tourist hotel, that would be rorpted to us and we'd make them go through the typical legal avenues to correct the violations and hopefully get the sro units back on line. >> commissioner. >> i want to echo my concerns on thresponsiveness to your concers

which are certainly legitimate. and assess tad, situation is really sad. but it's true. we have a permit before us for window alteration. i have no quarrel with that. and i guess what i would, you know, and commissioner pearlman, you recommended -- there is the planning commission and board of supervisors. we mow that--we know that the planning commission and the board of supervisors has in the past rejected or overruled some of our decisions and most immediate one that i'm thinking of is our approval of the mills act contract. they were looking at whether there had been been abuse of the mills act and we were making decisions on approvals when in

fact, the board was questioning whether there were abuse in the past and they were holding up our approval of the contracts. which to me is -- we ought to be considering those kinds of things. but you know, and be concerned about that. i guess the only thing i would say at this point is i'd still be in favor of, you know, improving the window restoration but to recommend that these concerns because it appears there are violations that need to be addressed and that the board and planning commission would be the arena for that discretion, i don't know whether in the future our cultural heritage assets committee would think about some kind of policy

or some statement that we could be making that looks at the relationship between our authority and how we're looking at the historic value. i thought the comments were very eloquent on that issue. soy want to thank the public for that. >> thank you, commissioner matsuda. >> thank you, as commissioner wolfram and commissioner johns pointed out, our commission is narrow. we should not ignore the comments that the community has raised and if there is some way that we could officially as a commission tell the planning commission that we have a group of people that have come before us and raised serious issues about this issue and maybe receive the proceedings today and to be asked to review them and seriously consider their comments. i don't know how procedural we could do that, but if we can do

that as a comoition and show that we've taken them seriously, i'd like to request that. >> thank you, commissioner hnld. >> i would echo commissioner matmatsuda's comments. i would propose -- i think we can continue this item. the a item before us as writteni would not disapprove. when it comes back, i'll support it. the window replacement should be supported. we could ask the planning commission to take this up and figure out if from is any other venue. then it will elevate it instead of puppet in a public comment. >> mr. ionin, that a paroled

ural possibility? >> you could seek additional information from staff and staff could convey your concerns to the planning commission, our staff could convey those concerns to the planning commission. i wasn't sure what would be before the planning commission as far as the property in p a future hearing. it did sound as though there was something that was going to happen, that it would have to go to the planning commission. i don't believe there application pending which maybe the difficulty. >> and are there interior changes? >> there are other interior permits approved in 2013 and 2014 that are underway which is why the building is entirely vacant right now. >> there is -- if we look at it on the sake of the fact that if

what miss kerby said was true that the sro units will be available again to the sro tenants, there is a benefit to moving the project along if everything went according to the way one would want, there is a benefit to that. >> we can continue it, we're only extending the timeframe for getting people back in their homes and enapprovinging it today would help the people as opposed to pushing it further into the future. >> commissioner johns. >> i do agree strongly with the president made and commissioner pearlman has made that we should not do anything to delay this.

we heard there is a special master to supervise and approve this. there is litigation. i have serious concern about the commission inject itself into areas that are occupied and apparently with some success on behalf of the members of the public who have spoken. to attempt to get ourselves into an area where we do not belong. i think the best and most helpful thing we can do this afternoon is to approve the project with the condition stated by staff and leave those other problems to the special master to the courts and to the

planning commission. that's as far as i want to go so i do move that we approve this item with conditions. >> second. >> commissioner matsuda. >> i'd like to add the condition affording the comments made today to the planning commission. >> i reject that amendment. >> we have a motion and a second. >> shall i call the question? >> i was the second. i'm not sure that i reject that. i think that somehow the information that we -- all this testimony that we heard today should go beyond us. again, we made it clear that we can't do anything about it. so whether it's the board of supervisors or the planning commission somehow this information should be conveyed forward to someone who potentiay i suggested the general comment

period of the planning commission. if there is no project of the planning commission, you can't go and talk about it except it at the general comments. >> with all due respect -- >> i would reject that. >> you did second it without th- >> i secondedded it without it-you can retract your second but i'm not sure that those comments are appropriate to include in the motion of approval of the window of alteration. i think to the chair, you can direct staff to convey these concerns to the planning commission and to the director and for staff to continue to pursue other actions. but as far as the motion on the table, i think i'm not sure where do you put that, right? where do you put the comments in. >> i think it could be very appropriate to do what you suggest and to convey that to the planning commission. but leave the motion so that that can proceed so we can get the windows fixed so people can

move back in. >> if it's the case, if we can approve the window replacement and in addition strongly the president's permission, direct this to the attention of the planning commission to the mayor as well as the to the board of supervisors and i would support it. >> as a separate letter. >> separate thing. >> that seems reasonable. i agree we should do that. >> very good commissioners. there is a motion seconded to approve this matter with conditions on that motion. commissioner johnck. >> commissioner johns, mightser pearlman, yes. >> commissioner hyland, and missioner wolfram. >> yes. >> and we'll mac sure she get conveyed to the plan commission an department. >> is the planning commission the board and mayor? >> board of supervisors and the mayor. >> thank you. >> commissioners items 10 a and

b for 17 lbr. >> 479 castro street and kearny street. these are legacy business applications. >> good afternoon, desiree smith planning department staff. the eye tomorrows today are two legacy business applications, nominations submitted to the planning department on october 19th and ready why for your recommendation. while all applications were previously reviewed by the office of small business for completion prior to transmittal to the department. your packet contain a draft resolution outlining the tradition as to the success of each business. the first application before su for cliff variety. a neighborhood hardaway and variety store founded in 1936. it's a family-owned store and it

offers hardware, home goods, candy and other every day items for over 80 years. when the oldest son eriny joined the business he started the tradition of creating elaborate window displays especially during the holidays and designed a ribbon machine, two button machines and rolling ladders. currently operated by fourth generation family member, cliff variety store serve oafers 700 people daily. the second application is for thomas' restaurante serving north beach since 1971. it's roots date back to 1935. however, when it was called will you pleaseos. it was found -- it was called

lupo's they introduced pizza to san francisco and perhaps the entire west coast. it became famous for the wood-fire brick often. the long time chef took the new name. under the new name, the restaurant continued to serve a i growing clientele and in 1973 it was sold so the krati family. they added a few family recipes to the menu but otherwise maintained the same decor as the previous owners. after the review, staff finds that both applicants met the criteria to qualify for the registry. i'm happy to answer any questions and i believe some of the representatives may be here. >> thank you, commissioners any questions? at this time we'll take public comment on this item.

you have three minutes and there is a warning buzzer at 30 seconds before your time is up. >> i'm terry aws rn bennett. i'm the fifth generation at the variety store. it was started by my great great grandfather in 1936. we're an integral part of what the castro is today. we serve over 700 customers a day on a slow day and curing dug this time of year we look for 1500 customers. we are a destination for the castro. >> thank you for tomaso's, i've

been going there for 50 years. i just couldn't be more thrilled to have a couple more wonder, wonder san francisco businesses. >> thank you. >> i agree wholeheartedly. i think cliff's is home to many of us. i treat it as home. a lot of questions, talking to folks, they go there, and tomaso's, thank heaven that is still there at kearny and broadway, so i think it's great we still have these before us. >> i will echo understatement.

cliff's variety is the best of the best and it is what 2 omaso's is about, and it fills a different realm in the restaurant realm, so i also think these are two of the shining stars of our legacy business or will be of our legacy business registry, so i also wholeheartedly endorse both of these. >> just more echos. i must say cliff's is definitely a legacy, and i walk by it every single day, so it'll be more special even more. >> so do we have a motion? >> i so move that these two are accepted into the program. >> second. >> clerk: thank you, commissioners. on that motion to adopt recommendations for approve of both legacy business applications. [ roll call. ] >> clerk: so moved

commissioners, that motion passes unanimously 6-0. >> so the question is how did tommy chin's beat the person who was named -- beat the person who was named for the restaurant? just a comment. it seems strange, that's all. >> clerk: commissioners, it'll place us on item 11 for the waterfront usage plan. this is a usage presentation. >> good afternoon, president and commissioners. i'm the president of the staff for the preservation of san francisco, and i'm just going to say a few things about our waterfront planning effort if i can get the mic to stay -- yeah. so we all know the waterfront has changed a lot since 1997,

when the port adopted its front waterfront use plan. that change was precipitated by the embarcadero freeway, the embarcadero roadway and to the boulevard it is today, but less prevalent with the polici prevalent are the policies that the waterfront adopted that also contributed to this transformation. so part of this was the public growing understanding of preservation, of historic resources, and how that repaired to create and support public trust consistent waterfront development. the waterfront land use plan also required that there be an alignment between the land use plan of the port and the bay conservation development commission, and as part of that process of aligning those two

planning documents, there was a whole awareness and public education process about historic resources that had never really happened with an agency that was really geared to recognizing natural resources, so we felt that that was really important, and it led to requirements in the plans that the port create -- if the port was serious about historic preservation that it create a historic district, and we did, then, embark on the nomination process and create the embarcadero historic district. that led to a new awareness about the stewardship responsibilities and also to thinking about how we would rehabilitate the historic piers, and particularly about the tools available to us now that the property was listed on

the national register, primarily looking at the 20% federal rehabilitation tax credit. and then, also, through the planning process and working with the bay conservation development commission and the state lands, having to achieve a delicate balance of commercial uses with retail and maritime that could satisfy the public trust requirements and also provide public benefits, open space, and public access to the bay. so that has been sort of our model moving forward. we've accomplished some significant projects, but the projects take a really long time. i would say six to ten years on average, and the port's resources don't really have that much time, given the

advances state of deterioration and the deterioration as it advances just exponentially, the costs increase for the work that needs to be done. so even with the historic tax credits, these projects are challenging and in many cases economically infeasible. so in addition, we've also studied the seawall. the seawall is also sort of the foundation for the historic district, connecting all the piers, three miles in length, and we now have the engineering information, and we know that it's vulnerable to a major seismic event, and so that has to be addressed. in addition, sea level rise, another new challenge that has arisen since the creation of

the waterfront land use plan also has to be addressed. and these two threats together have created questions about the long-term development of the waterfront and whether or not our model can still work in terms of these projects. so the waterfront land use plan seeks to address these challenges by providing policy guidance rather than identifying specific solutions. and to support this effort, we convened a waterfront land use plan working group. commissioners hyland and johnck, we were fortunate to have them in that group. one of the first processes we did was background studies, and in the area of historic resources, we did a report on

histor historic resources and stewardship, and we presented that report to the group, along with other areas where there's preservation embedded in other topic areas like land use and resiliency and transportation. we also did modelling of the economic feasiblity of projects with different land uses to see if they could support rehabilitation of historic piers, so this together with the general understanding we need to create a more resilient quarter front to require the adoptation of the historic district in ways that are unknown to us today. and because of that, we felt that it was important that we identify the public values that we should bring to the effort. as a result, we -- we developed with the committee seven

guiding principles that affirm the public's value and the priorities for the waterfront. for historic preservation, the historic principles clearly state the high value and the port's cultural significance. the guiding principles will then be used or have been used to help guide the sub committees in their work to develop recommendations in the areas of land use, resiliency and transportation. also, i think it's worth pointing out that of particular note is the contribution from your commissioners in the area of making sure that we included aspirational goals in our process, and that those goals, although aspirational, still be

accountable to the realities that we face today. so that -- we thank commissioner hyland and jounck for advocating on behalf of that approach. so i think i'll stop there, but i did want to introduce diane oshima, deputy director for planning and environment. she's lead planning staff on the effort, and also was the staff that led this -- the land use sub committee. also with me is ann cook. she she she's principal planner with the port, and she did some work with me on that sub committee. and just in talking about the tax credits, i wanted to pass forward a fact sheet

just information exchange that we need to set as the foundation for the different alternatives and solution options that we'll be looking at over the next couple of years. so there's a lot of first year, year and a half that we'll be doing a lot of data collection, that the team that andrew is a part of will be working with the port onto inform them, very manically, the development of alternative scenarios for seawall improvements and at -- somewhere in that realm, we'll be having to contemplate how it

is that addressing sea level rise and ongoing need for resilience planning. >> >> -- so that's the shortest answer to a really mindbending question. if you spend any time just starting to think about it, it starts going in multiple different directions. but it's a conversation that the more that we can own the fact that this conversation's coming along, even though we may not understand all the details, i think that creates a more receptive community for us to really be creative about what's in the best interests of the city that balances the public values and enjoyment that people have and associate with the san francisco waterfront while making it the infrastructure of the 21st century that it needs to be. >> thank you very much. i appreciate it. >> commissioner hyland? >>commissioner hyland: thank you diane and mark for coming

today, and for all the work that you've put into this site. i think it's been two years now -- going on two? more than two? i thought it was a good point in the process to kind of bring the commission into the conversation. commissioner jounck and i have been giving kind of very general updates over the last few months, two years, and thought we would spend a little time so that you all understood what was happening. the port assembled the working group, spent the first few months establishing the working foundation, bringing the working group up to speed on all the different pieces and the background and the information, and then, we went into sub committees, and we divided it into three areas. land use,