1550, i'd like to point out that sb-827 would help mitigate these kinds of issues. it would allow new construction to happen in wealthy exclusionary areas that have traditionally not allowed apartment buildings to be built, and it would be very good for social justice to allow, or rather, i'll even say force the rich neighborhoods to build more, to absorb that gentrification and displacement pressure. second comment is about 1266 hampshire street. i live very close to this. it is supposedly the oldest residential building in san francisco. built in 1850 something, and it's historic, and until recently, there was low income latino family living in that building. they were evicted with the

ellis act. specifically, this family was four generations of latino family, an octogenarian, her son, daughter, grandson, granddaughter, and their kids, and this were evicted and converted to a t.i.c. if this was a condo, this wouldn't have happened and they would be safe in their homes. but because t.i.c. loophole, they were able to be ellis evicted. that's when the realtor told me when i went to go look at the building, so i urge you to study that t.i. krichltc.'s do this loophole because this was what happened at 1261 and 1266

hampshire. >> president hillis: thank you. next speaker, please. >> good afternoon. i'm lottie mills. there is no housing issue because housing was never part of the community request or mitigation. this notion that you know what's best for us, with out community input is totally unacceptable. let's be clear: the land is not zoned for housing, it's in the middle of an industrial area. keeping this land for 100% public use would meet the afore mentioned mitigation and keep space open to all southeast residents. taking this land for affordable housing means that only 40% of

the project would actually go to the bayview residents. think about that, please. have a great day. >> president hillis: thank you, miss titus. next speaker, please. >> hello, commissioners. my name is ashley rhodes. i'm here with some of our brothers from the community. we are the aboriginal black men united, abu. we're a community action group in the bayview-hunters point community. our founder is mr. james richards. we are here to speak on the 1550 project. it is to our understanding that this is a project that's laid out for the community. the two plus two plus two is something that we wanted, what we need in our community. it comes to be that the young people in our community that we claim have forgotten, those that are not able to participate in the regular

system, this is for them. this is for our community, and for build group to come in, knowing that they already have the shoreline, they're building plenty of housing down there on the shoreline. we've been to the meetings. we know about it, and we're saying we're just not going to sit by and let build group come in and take what they need out of our community. our young people need an opportunity to be educated so they can be successful in the world, and this is a great opportunity right here that the san francisco public utilities commission has made possible. so we want to see that happen, and we -- we -- we say okay, build inc, it's okay to build on the shoreline, but don't come up into the community and take what we have. thank you. >> president hillis: thank you. [applause]. >> president hillis: thank you. next speaker, please. >> good afternoon. >> president hillis: good

afternoon. >> my name is dr. detriece rogers, and i am the first grandchild of doctor espanola jackson. reared in san francisco, my goal, when i graduated from high school was to go to law school. i wanted to be a politician like my grandmother and be a voice for the voiceless. however, i became an educator, and so i'm fighting for education. i am in the process of becoming an administrator. i've been a teacher for 14 years, and 1550 is a great foundation to continue the legacy of my grandmother, in terms of continuing education for the voiceless, continuing education for those who are at risk. we are ask that you do not allow any housing development to take place. we ask that you continue to allow education programs to continue in the san francisco bayview community area. thank you so much. >> president hillis: thank you very much.

next speaker, please. >> i'm pastor john versas, and i stand in for pastor bill. why are you changing your minds? this has been already promised to us, and i don't understand, that anybody could change. we want to educate our people. we've been moved out of fillmore and all of them places, and who can pay 50,000 for an affordable how's? nobody can pay that, so what you all are trying to do is move us out of the city. we want to say in this city and

it be affordable to stay here, not to move us out of the city. them people's trying to do -- you want us to move where the people altogether is having trouble and no jobs. that's what you want to do, but we're going to fight it, and fight it all the way. if approximate we have to have people coming out and stopping this job, we're going to do that because you want -- not personally -- could kill us. you put us where we live, and we live in a slaughter house. but you don't want to live there, but now, the housing is beautiful up there, and silicon valley, want to move down there? and we're not going to stand

for it, and we going to fight you all as hard as we can. [applause]. >> president hillis: thank you. >> good afternoon, commissioners. my name is tina marerro. i'm a resident in the community, and i'm speaking about build inc claims that they want to build affordable housing, but affordable housing to who, and who are able to afford them? at the end of the day, nobody cares about the bayview or our fair, our fair housing. it doesn't make any sense to us or our community. just -- thank you. >> president hillis: thank you. next speaker, please. >> good afternoon. how are all of you? my -- i'm dr. veronica honeycutt. i'm the chair of the citizens

advisory committee for the shipyard, and i'm here because this is a very important matter that needs to be resolved. now let's just break it down. the community operated in good faith by attending all the stipulated meetings, and that took quite a bit of time, okay? number two, any good new concept should have been introduced to the community and discussed within that context so that some decisions could have been made. and you know, i'm reminded of something that my grandmother used to say to me, what you do in the dark comes out in the light. okay. so when people do these little side meetings, and use their privilege and their connections to be able to fashion some new deals that exclude the community, well, then you understand why the community is not happy. that's when you have people that build these rooms or -- and go down stairs to the room down stairs, it's for an

opportunity to speak. so i'm saying this to you because it's really kind of a nonsense situation -- it's a common-sense situation. the community has done what they're supposed to do. they want a community center. now if they can have the jewish community center over there on california, and if we can have some of these groups come to you, and when they present their parks plans and all of these little plans, no one says to them, you have to build affordable housing on these plans, because in those upscale communities, they are not going to allow you to do that, okay? let's get real about this. all we're asking for is a comprehensive community center that would meet the needs of everyone in that community. that's all we want. thank you very much. [applause]. >> president hillis: thank you, dr. honeycutt. next speaker, please. >> sue hester. i would like to thank

espanola's family for speaking out today. the planning commission needs to hear from communities that are being run out of the city and the flower mart vendors need to be heard, as well. i want to talk to you about the mission. on -- 11:00 on monday, on mission local, the issue exploded about 1266 hampshire, and i couldn't hear what you were discussing prior to me coming in because i was out in the hallway. but this is the oldest house in san francisco, and displacement of families that are non-english families or latino families that have lived there for 30 years. that is what is happening week by week on the mission. that is why you have arrested people from the mission. i along with a lot of people from the mission participate in

the eastern neighborhood's planning process. no one was talking about this level of massive displacement happening as part of the eastern neighborhood's plan. the planning department changes the industrial areas of the mission, and the process we have right now has broken-down. the planning department needs to have dbi move all buildings that are older than the earthquake to the planning department for approval. i found out when i went onto the pim that no planning analysis had ever been done of any permit for this project on hampshi red e stre hamp hampshire street. there were a whole lot of complaints, but there were no planning. planning told dbi to pay, no

project in the mission before the earthquake gets -- must get routed to the planning commission. thank you. >> president hillis: thank you, miss hester. next speaker, please. >> hi. are you -- my name is janet, and are we ready to talk about 43 emerson street? >> president hillis: no, we're on general public comment, so your item will be coming up. okay. >> president hillis: is there anybody else who would like to speak on general public comment to items that are not on the agenda? seeing none, we'll close general public comment. commissioner johnson? >> commissioner johnson: first, i want to thank so many members of the bayview-hunters point community for coming out to express your outrage about how this process has been handled at 1515 evans. i want to actually share that outrage and disappointment. despite a long history of planning related discrimination and displacement, the african

american community and that community has continued to come to the table in good faith to have a hand in the destiny of their community, and we failed them today. i think the civic process shouldn't work for just some, it has to work for all. and especially knowing this history and honoring the community that again and again has come to the table in good faith, we can and we must do better, and so i'd love to see a clear plan in place for how we're going to address the concerns that were brought up by the community and also just frankly repair our relationship with the community members that came out today. >> president hillis: thanks, commissioner johnson. commissioner richards? >> vice president richards: so i'm not sure where 1515 is in the process. i haven't actually taken a look, but if it's not -- with this kind of an outpouring, maybe we should have some kind of a brief informational on it so we can wrap our minds around

it. i did read about it in the newspaper, but i don't have a lot of the deep history a lot of the neighborhood has. it was just an article. i throw that out there if some of the other commissioners are interested in it. i know i certainly am. regarding the flower mart, we have new things hurled against the developer and there's vendors now involved in not wanting to service the stands. every week, it's another issue. i really, really think before we vote on central soma, having an informational on the flower mart, where it's been, what it was supposed to do, where it goes, is a good idea because it is a cultural asset to the city. it's kind of a one of a kind and before i vote on central soma, i want to make sure that i understand what really is going to with the flowon with what actually is happening, and what would be happening. i'm happy to meet with kilroy,

and i'm happy to meeting with anyone from the flower mart if they're open to meeting with me. i do agree with miss clark. we're trying to get efficiency cost savings wrung out of the system. that was one of the mayor's directives, former mayor lee before he passed away, so any data the department can get on data savings, cost savings as a part of the initiative would be welcome. i think transparency is the key so we can understand what the impact is. >> president hillis: thank you. did you want to address that? >> yeah. regarding 1550 evans since i was included in a couple of the e-mails, i think it's appropriate to say we received communications about the site a couple of months ago. the property is currently zoned pdr and will require a zoning

for the community center to do some of the work that they want to do on that site, so you will see a recommendation to the board regarding zoning. it is certainly our intention to fast track that process and bring that to you as soon as possible. with respect to the housing question, the issue that was raised by a couple of colleagues is simply the question of whether part of that site could be used for affordable housing, and i recognize there was a long-standing process that the community worked out to -- to develop the community center and educational building on that site. the site, as i believe, about five acres, and we were asking whether some of that site could be used for housing, i understand how strongly the community feels about it. we were not involved in that process that led to the current plan on that site, and so i wasn't aware of the long-standing process that led us to the place that we are today. but nonetheless, we will bring you -- the community center can

proceed regardless of whether there's housing there or not, we will proceed with that zoning and get that to you as soon as we can over the next few months. >> president hillis: okay. when do you anticipate that -- that happening? it's just a zoning change for us to do -- to be able to implement the -- >> yeah. the zoning change, because it's currently a pdr-2 zoning, it doesn't allow them to do what they want on the site today. i anticipate it could be here in about three to four months. >> president hillis: all right. so we look forward to that, so we can help implement the community's vision for that site, so thank you all who came out to testify today, and we can move to the first item on the calendar. >> clerk: very good, that'll place us on item 8, case number 2018-00319, pca extending the lower polk use district for an

additional five years. >> the item before you would amend the planning code to extend the lower polk street alcohol restricted use district until june 1st, 2023 or five years, and to expand the circumstances in that district when a temporary closer of a liquor establishment is not considered abandoned. a representative from supervisor peskin's office is here to present on the item. i'll continue my presentation after his remarks. >> thank you, commissioners, commission president hillis for considering this item before you. i think aaron basically described the whole thing. it's pretty simple, straightforward ordinance today. we are extending the sunset on the lower polk alcohol district by five years. it currently expires on may 30th. this would extend it to 2023. we are doing this at the explicit request of the lower polk neighborhood and the community who have done a great

job to steward this neighborhood who have worked hard to bring in the various proprietors of business in the lower polk area to bridge those communications between the business owners and residents who are very frequently living on top of bars, who a couple of years ago were proliverated and causing a lot of problems, and now, it's a fun part of town that's undergoing a lot of change, a lot of re revitalization. the only other changes to the r.u.d. that we're making today is to accommodate what's going on at 1331 polk. the project owner there is moving on with a project demolition and project at that address. it is our understanding that the project sponsor and

proprietors of hemlock tavern have reached an agreement to have hemlock return. we cut our punk roots there a decade ago. i'm very excited the community -- that's really owed to the lower polk neighborhoods wneighborhoods -- neighbors who brought to all sides there was a cultural revitalization at risk here, and it's going to maintain its place there. that's about it. with that, i appreciate your support of this ordinance, along with both the planning staff's recommendations. one is to accommodate that which were hemlock tavern, and i other was nonsubstantive, but a reference to section 2023 in

the code. thank you. >> president hillis: all right. thank you, mr. hepner. >> commissioners, the lower polk alcohol -- [ inaudible ] >> -- contributed to numerous quality of issues. the proposed ordinance will extend the iud for an additional six years. department supports the proposed contention of the r.i.d. because it will help ensure the lower polk street has a diversity of goods and services while also allows existing bars and restaurants to remain. lower polk remains a livly nighttime destination, in addition to having a healthy mix of goods and services. 9 department ease recommendation is to approve the ordinance with modifications, including eliminating the grandfathering date for modifications and new

construction, and some clerical changes to clarify the abandonment provisions. oed has submitted a packet, and lisa devon is here from oed in case you have any questions. >> president hillis: thank you. we'll open this up for public comment. i've got two speaker cards, john nolte, michael nolte, and if there are any other speaker does, please lineup on the speaker side of the room. >> good afternoon, commissioners. my name is john nolte. i'm a long time member of lower polk neighbors, also associated with two business associations in the area and the cbd. i helped form them, so i've been working on this area for a number of years. and my concern is that this legislation is good 'cause we did a planning process a number of years ago, and this is one

of the thicks that came later out of that process. and i think it's because of the cbd that we're now getting into this because of the issues of what has gone on on polk street relating to its alcohol establishments and what they -- the overflow what they do at 2:00 p.m. and how they disturb the businesses and residents after they let out. and also, them bussing people into that neighborhood, so there have been a number of issues that we've had that we've tried to address over the years on the liquor establishments, and this is one of the tools that we're using to abate the problem that's been going on fore a long time on polk street. thank you very much. >> president hillis: thank you. >> hi. my name is michael nolte, and i am the cofounder of alliance

for bear district six. i'm also the cofounder of lacra street youth services. i've been dealing with this neighborhood many, many, many years trying to improve with the merchants and you know all the sha the stakeholders in the block, in the area that this s.u.d. or this district will be formed -- or reevaluated in. so i would like to express my thoughts that the recommendations by the office economic and workforce development in a letter dated 3-21-18 be instituted into this -- these amendments that will be adopted today so that we are all on the same page, and i think that they're well thought out in the letter that's exhibit a in your packet. thank you. >> president hillis: all right. thank you. any additional public comment on this item? seeing none, we'll close public

comment. commissioner richards? >> vice president richards: yes. i'm trying to find exhibit a just so i understand what a member of the public's just said. i have a b, but no a. b. >> there's a b. >> vice president richards: b. >> okay. >> vice president richards: i'll pass it while i read it, my comments. >> president hillis: okay. any additional comments on this or a motion? commissioner o'koppel commissioner richards? >> vice president richards: they make a period of time more than one year which a bar might relocation and make accommodations before they deem it abandoned.

i think that's reasonable because we've seen that things take time. i'm open to that if other commissioners are supportive of increasing the one year limit. mr. starr, any comments? >> i was just going to say, we do have two modifications on it. >> president hillis: and that was one of them? >> no. one of -- they were just clarifying ones. one was to change the january 1st, 2018 date so that hemlock could take advantage of it. there was a miscommunication on that date, so it's more of a drafting error. >> president hillis: and do you have an opinion on the oewd recommendation? >> it really depends on what the community wants in some respects because the one year period allows for atrition, so if someone can't find a spot within one year, then they go out of business and there are fewer alcohol establishments in the district. the three years allows it a little bit more time. less atrition that way. plus, the r.u.d. is only

extended for five years. >> vice president richards: so i'd ask the motion maker to amend it to 18 months instead of one year. >> that's okay. hill h>> president hillis: th fine with me, too. >> we also incorporating the modifications to -- proposed by staff in. >> president hillis: yes. >> clerk: very good, so commissioners, there's a motion that's been seconded to approve this project with modifications extending the one-year time limit to 18 months. on that motion -- [ roll call. ] >> clerk: so moved, commissioners. that motion passes unanimously, 5-0. commissioners, that'll place us on item nine for case 2018-0019 imp at 505 howard street. this is an institutional master plan. >> good afternoon president hillis and members of the

planning commission. nick foster, department of planning staff. before you is an imp for lehigh university. upon receipt of this submitted imp, the planning commission has the discretion whether to hold a separate public hearing or just hear this item today. all medical nugss and post secondary educational institutions are required to have on file with the planning department basically a current imp which describes its current anticipated future development, locations within the c 3 zoning district that occupy a site area of less than 1,000 square feet are able to submit an abbreviated imp. lehigh university does not currently own or any property in san francisco, and they only lease office space, so they're allowed to submit abbreviated imp.

previously they entered into a partnership with the san francisco nasdaq. the university has been. [ inaudible ] -- the university's principle venture is called the lehyatt nasdaq center, where people can come together for a rorite of experiences -- [ inaudible ] >> -- the university is currently focused on developing additional educational programs for le high students at the center during the 2017-2018 academic year. while engaging prospective students and aaluminum n--

alumni -- [ inaudible ] >> -- after reviewing all the contents of the submitted imp -- [ inaudible ] >> -- that concludes my short presentation. i think the project sponsor wants to make a few comments. thank you. >> president hillis: all right. thank you mr. foster. project sponsor, you've got three minutes. >> thank you. good afternoon, commissioners. my name is dr. -- >> president hillis: pull that down a little bit. thanks. >> good afternoon. my name is dr. samantha daywald. le high university is excited to be in the city of san francisco, and we look forward to interacting with the community in a meaningful way. i thank you for your time today, and i'd be happy to answer any questions you may have. >> president hillis: all right. let's see if there's any public comment on this item? any public comment on 505 howard street? seeing none, commissioners? i think we get these smaller

imp's, we may want to look at establishing a minimum size threshold. i know under 100,000 square feet, we've got abbreviated imp's, but we've seen kind of these smaller lease space kind of ones. i think it's not necessary to do this. i think i'm fine with this imp, but maybe set a 50,000 square foot threshold. commissioner richards? >> vice president richards: i find the imp complete and move to close the hearing. >> second. >> clerk: seeing nothing further, commissioners -- >> president hillis: there's no vote on that; we just close the hearing, right? >> clerk: that's right. i apologize. >> president hillis: all right. so we can move to the next item. >> clerk: very good, commissioners. that'll be item 10 for case number 2016-010340 anv at 500 turk street. this is for the final environmental report. please note that the public hearing on the eir is closed.

the public comment period for the draft eir ended on january 16, 2018. public comment will be received at this time; however comments submitted may not be included in the final eir. >> good afternoon, commissioners. i'm judy pulling from the environment and chapter 31 of

the administrative code. that concludes my presentation, and i'm available for questions. thank you. >> president hillis: all right. thank you. we'll open this up to public comment. i've got two speaker cards, mr.

nolte and mr. nolte again, but if others would like to speak, please lineup on the screen side of the room. >> good afternoon, commissioners. my name is john nolte, and i am a cofounder of tender association coalition of san francisco, and this site is being developed for a t.i.c. building at the location. it's currently a tire store, and i think that the -- the -- again, there was talk about the environmental impact report. the issues of the dirt and so forth from a tire location over the years, and the other issues that are related to, 'cause it's a parking lot next door, and how the oil and other things seep into the dirt has to be looked at very carefully before we build a 107-unit

project on the site. so i've -- at this time, i concur with the final eir report. thank you very much. >> president hillis: thank you. >> hi. change my time. hi. my name is michael nolte. i am the cofounder of the alliance for better contradiction six, whi contradiction -- district six, and founded in 1999. we wholeheartedly support the draft eir, but we also would love to see more affordable housing being built for our constituents because there's a lack of that, and we know that

t.u.c. has always come to plate and done that kind of housing for our residents, so we look forward to seeing this developed and more people joining our district that can actually afford to live in our district and our city. thank you. >> president hillis: all right. thank you, mr. nolte. any additional public comment? seeing none, we'll close public comment. commissioners? hich richards? >> vice president richards: i make a motion to adopt the statement of the eir and overriding considerations. >> second. >> clerk: thank you, commissioners. on that motion, then, to certify the final environmental impact report -- [ roll call. ] >> clerk: so moved, commissioners. that motion passes unanimously

7-0. items 11 a and b. [ agenda item read ] >> good afternoon, commissioner hillis and members of the commission. laura aiello, department staff. this request for conditional use authorization to legalize the merger of a four unit building into two units was originally considered back in

october 2017. the project was eventually continued to the march 8 hearing. at that time, the commission denied the motion to disapprove the project and directed staff to return with a draft motion to approve the project with conditions. at the march 8 hearing, there was discussion regarding the change in building code occupancy of a two-unit residence versus a three-unit residence, the high cost of implementing the necessary safety upgrades needed, and the existing high quality of the interior spaces at the site, as well as concern regarding future demolition. the commission directed the city attorney to investigate if it is possible to create a condition of approval that would protect the interior spacing of the home and require all permits for interior renovations not to be approved

over the counter at the planning information center but instead be routed to the planning department for review. this condition has been included in the draft motion as condition number nine. it reads as follows: all building permit applications for interior work shall be subject to review and approval by the planning department and may not be approved over the counter. since most permits to modify the interiors of private residences, even if they are located in a historic district are not normally reviewed by the planning staff, guidance from the commission is sought on how -- on which criteria is to be used when reviewing future permits for interior alterations. for example, are certainly features not to be removed? is a linear limit on demolition of partition or load bearing walls to be opposed? please provide directions so planning staff will know how to implement this condition in the

future. two conditions have been added to the draft motion in order to clarify the approved change to two dwelling units. condition number six requires removal of any remaining cooking facilities from the units that were removed. perthe project plans, a third kitchen with a stove is located on the top floor of the building. and condition number seven requires the applicant to request an updated 3-r report from the department of building inspection to reflect the authorized use change from four family to two family. this concludes my presentation. i will be around to answer any questions if you have them. thank you. >> president hillis: thank you, mr. aiell-- miss aiello. we'll open this up to project sponsor. since we've heard a couple of times before, we'll limit it to

three minutes. >> i would ask for public comment and then ask for commission input on proposed language. >> do you have any suggestions, mr. tunney 1234d. >> we're comfortable with a linear footage or percentage threshold. >> of the interior walls. >> for intake of a permit for review. we submitted some language, as well. >> all permits should go to a preservation planner -- >> president hillis: you've got to speak in the mic skbr all permits should go to a preservation plan checker. all are routed to them, but they should have the discretion, if you're doing a kitchen hood, that shouldn't have to be intake, but if you're touching a certain percent of the walls or a number like 15 linear feet, which is about 5% of the walls, that should be intake. so some threshold of what gets intaked, but everything is reviewed by a preservation planner at the counter, and then they decide with some guidance from the commission

what should be intaked. >> president hillis: all right. thank you. any public comment on this item? seeing none, we'll close public comment. commissioner richards? >> vice president richards: just to reiterate, the reason why we're doing this is, this has been a long road to get to this point. we understand we made some errors on this side and that some economic decisions were made by the project sponsor on their side, and in order for us to take it back to four units, we basically have to gut the building and start over and put sprinklers in and fire walls in that would ruin the character of the building. i've been in the building. there's a lot of character in the building, stuff that's

historic or stuff that's original with the house is really what i think we're concerned with. we don't want somebody to come in in five years and blow it out and create a white box, and what to do with it now and put four units back. i'm looking for original features, removal of original features is what i'm focused on. the kitchen's modern, the bathrooms are modern. we're not expecting you to retain everything, but it's just the original features in the house, and i'm open to a certain percentage of the walls or, you know, mr. tunney? i'd like a percentage of the -- of the character of the original features to remain. >> if you are going to do it, i would recommend not using a percentage over the overall because then, you've got to make calculations. >> president hillis: why don't we just say it's routed to the planning department for review by historic preservation planner with the understanding that, you know, the intent is to retain the historically significant layout of the building. >> vice president richards: the original features and layout of the building. and i think that the rider is

if in five years or ten years somebody wants to come in and blow the building out, we should put four units back. i mean really, that's the intent. >> president hillis: so is that a motion? >> vice president richards: it is. >> president hillis: did you want to add something? >> could you restate the motion? >> president hillis: i think that it was that my interior permit would be routed to the planning department for review by the preservation staff, and if there is a removal of historically significant features, our layout staff will initiate a d.r. >> vice president richards: original features. >> okay. our only concern is that requires all interior permits, any -- any work on the interior to -- >> president hillis: yes. >> -- and then, we're looking at significant time for review. >> vice president richards: well, the review is at the counter by a preservation staff person to ensure whether it

should be taken in. >> president hillis: the comment that you made about a hood, that shouldn't -- >> vice president richards: plumbing in the house, i think that should be a judgment call on the planner's portion, but i want to make sure that there's a notation on the property and a notice of restriction recorded. >> these conditions will be recorded and noticed as restrictions. >> president hillis: okay. so there was a motion and seconded. >> it has been seconded? >> seconded. >> thank you. so there is a motion to approve this motion with amended to include that interior motion denied ficatio denied -- modifications to be routed to the preservation staff to determine if there are any further restrictions. on that motion. [ roll call. ]

>> clerk: so moved, commissioners. that motion passes 5-0. and that places us on item -- >> i'm going to close the public hearing fore the variance and take the variance under advisement. >> clerk: thank you, zoning administrator. items 12 a and b, commissioners, f commissioners. [ agenda item read ] >> thank you, jonas. i do have additional letters that were received after distributing the packets for distribution. andrew perry with department staff. the project before you is a request for downtown project authorizations at 135 hyde street located just south of the intersection with turk street within the tenderloin and downtown civic center neighborhoods. the proposed project would

demolish the existing one story auto repair garage and construct a new eight story over basement containing 69 dwelling units. the basement level will accommodate 18 residential parking spaces plus one additional space devoted to car share, as well as class one bicycle parking for 69 bicycles. common usable open space for the residential units is provided at the eightth floor roof deck and meeting the project's open space requirement. additionally there's a ground floor courtyard available to residents, though there is not counted towards the project's open space requirement. the project requests exceptions to the requirements for rear yard set backs and for ground level wind currents. the department believes the requested exceptions are warranted and meet the criteria established in the code. with respect to the rear yard controls, the project's design

and massing have taken into consideration the configuration of the adjacent building at 421 turk, in order that both sites may retain greater access to light and air, and an average wind speed of 11 miles an hour, and under the projected scenarios, these would average 12 miles per hour. the project would not result in any hazard level wind conditions. the increased wind speeds shown from this analysis are relatively minimal and would not represent asub substantial change to the existing conditions. furthermore it's highly unlikely that there's any project design that could successfully eliminate all of the existing comfort ex-pa expediences, therefore, an exemption is required. the units that required the

exposure variance all face into the project's courtyard, and the exposed volume created by the courtyard is sizeable and is increased if one takes into consideration the immediate courtyard at 421 turk. the zoning administrator will consider the variance request after the commission has deliberated on the downtown project authorization. to date staff has not received any comments in opposition to the project and has received letters or signatures in support of the project from 19 individuals. additionally the project has received letters of support from the it tenderloin housing project, the university of california hastings college of the law. the last two letters which were distributed to you today. in conclusion, commissioners, except for the previously discussed request for exceptions and variance, the project does comply with all applicable requirements of the planning code, is consistent with the objectives and

policies of the general plan and the downtown plan area, is desirable and compatible with the surrounding neighborhood and results in the addition of 6 # units of the city's housing stack, including ten permanently affordable units. this concludes my presentation, and i'm available for any questions you may have. thank you. >> president hillis: thank you. project sponsor, welcome. >> good afternoon. my name is clementt.czar. and i'm standing up to walk you through the design of the project. i think we're using -- we're using this overhead projector. so andrew covered many of the bullet points that helped define this project, but if you'll allow me to go to the second page, i'll show you a diagram that shows a code compliant rear yard versus our proposed rear yard.

the size of the screen is a little small for my page, or my page is a little large for the screen. >> president hillis: can you zoom out on that -- if you want. >> i'll have to do it the other way. >> president hillis: there you go. >> thank you. as you can see on the left is a code complying rear yard, 25% of the depth of the lot would be allocated to an open rear yard. that ends up being approximately 34 feet by 55 feet wide lot. however, because of the existing conditions of our neighbors, we're proposing more of an l-shaped building, where the rear yard becomes a courtyard, maybe not in the

legal sense, but you can see on the right that it becomes a -- an open space of about 43 by 41. this is essentially equivalent to the rear yard on the left, but the benefit we would argue is that existing neighbor to the north, 421 turk, has something like 63 windows in that courtyard, and if we were to do a code complying rear yard, you can see that their courtyard is cutoff by about two thirds. this seems like a reasonable response to existing conditions, improves our project and improves our neighbors. we have a first floor plan that is a little larger scale, you can see the major features are the commercial space in the front.

to the right or up on the screen is the ramp going down into the parking deck underneath, where we have 69 bicycle parking places and 19 car vehicle spaces. we have located the stairs and the elevator near the center of this -- of the building to take advantage of any windows that we can, and as you can see, the courtyard is defined up in the upper left. [please stand by for captioner switch] commissioner:

>> interview: you can see we've broken up the large roof plate into some smaller niche areas, if you will, with landscaping. it minimizing the wind affect and makes for nice seating areas and privacy. you're not up on a large wind

swept rooftop. we're also providing the square footage for solar panels on the left image. upper right, you can see the architecture looking down into the courtyard. that would be the west and north and in the lower right would be the facade of the building facing hyde street. we recognize it's the tenderloin and we're choosing characters that fit the neighborhood. the first floor has more of a mercantile feeling with a clear-story and glass panel shaped differently allowing 1890s. we have bay windows going up the

building plus and there are two cornices in the area. i would also mention it's more three dimensional in the face of the building. many are trying to traditional. they're very flat and that's a -- not been in keeping with the character of that era. we'll show you a couple unit sizes with a rendering on the right. tis a one-bedroom with a den or a dining area. it's about 420, 450 square feet

depending on why unit you're looking at. they're livable and the features are complied with the square footage and it's affordable. most of the units look like this. they're a one bedroom with a nested configuration. we've provided clear story glass as well as a glass door. to try to maximize the light in the unit. also on the top floor we're providing a skylight for the bedrooms.

this rendering shows how it fits win the neighborhood. one thing we didn't do was render the new building at gold golden gate and hyde and the two deco buildings are the outliars and the rest will be nearly 80-foot tall buildings. the buildings across the street are nearly as tall. this is my closer, if you have any questions, please ask. the sponsor's here. >> commissioner: thank you. we may have questions we will

open it up to public comment and we have two speakers. if others want to speak line up on the screen side of the room. >> good afternoon, commissioners. i'm john elsy. i want to talk about 135 hyde. back in 2015 i tried to contact the property owner dealing with 101 hyde street project and the impactses on this property of 135 hyde. in december of 2015 a new property owner which has several properties i feel the property owner over extended what he's going to do and the same thing he did at 101 hyde. had they just wanted to go three the entitlements but didn't have