>> good evening. >> this is my first. >> i can't hear you you will both have a two-minute rebuttal. go ahead. >> good evening. i have owned my property for almost 20 years. i spent all my money and my work for my home to make sure that everything -- i have a downstairs room that was built in 2009. i know firsthand first hand how important it was to build with permits because of the hundred of code issues that must be followed.

excavation of the foundation wall was required. i was very excited to have a family next door and i really welcomed them in the neighborhood and offer them any help they need. when i knew about the project of second edition on the top of the roof, i try to communicate and express my concerns. i asked the owner more than once to legalize the room downstairs in the basement. two floors down from the addition. i showed them the photo during my project and how a lot of work is needed. the owners told me they will legalize it. but they never did. they applied for the permit for the second edition. i showed them my work. sorry.

they never did. they applied for a permit for a second edition without taking care of the excavation that was done in the basement and without a foundation or permit or electricity. they said i wanted to delay them they asked me to have mediation or communication with the owner. they rejected the idea. we never tried -- they never tried to legalize before. it is a very time-consuming to prepare all of these things. our house -- i am answering to their answer. i told them several times about the room downstairs in the basement, and the deck, and they need -- they never legalized it. if i can show this -- >> pull that microphone towards you so we can hear you too. >> sure.

>> there is electrical work being performed without a permit it was previously installed without the permit information shared hi new construction requirements. it was used to fill out the application to show existing square footage as 1,706 periodicity public website is 1,087. shows new square footage. the legal square footage is 1,087. not 1,706. it should require much more analysis. a legal square footage may have been used. the owner should be amended for filing first application in order to get around the

much-needed analysis of the major project. it was part of this. according to the structural engineer, those are correct. there are 12 of them. there are 1212 sides that can observe. we can see how the first crack is about 16 inches. i don't know how far it goes up and down, because you can see the siding on the top. the bottom you can see the ground. you cannot go down. the white side is their side. i can see this from my garden. again, if you look to it, you can see the crack, this is another crack right here.

the siding is not intact at all. and then they have other cracks also but i did not have a picture, and also we are in a very critical slope. the houses of her 700 feet. i request that we have a new application. >> thank you. your time is up. >> you will have a two minute rebuttal. you will have a rebuttal of two minutes. his or any public comment in support of the d.r.? seeing none, project sponsor?

>> good evening, commissioners. i am the project architect. i'm here with charmaine. this is very simple. they have a two bedroom home and hope to add another with their children's bedroom. they wish to expand this over an existing portion of the building that is currently a roof. so there is the ground level accessible from the street, and you go up one story, and it is half a level. they simply seek to expand that fully to the full building. you can see on the overhead that this is their property. and the adjacent property has done a similar expansion. if you go up the street, there are 18 similar houses they are all expanded to the full footprint. this is not an unusual

circumstance. the filer has come before you and presented a lot of confusing issues about permits and building department history. to be clear, they bought this house about 20 years ago. they have done no work on this property. anything that may have been done was done by previous owner. they bought it as is. the d.r. filer filed six complaints against the property with the department of building instruction. [please stand by]

we invested in the communities

and relationships. the house will look almost exactly from the street. the building department complaints were filed on top of the dr to stop what is really a modest addition. you know, that cost more time. more money. and we are hanging in there, and we are working through the system and we hope that you will, you know, kind of see this. thank you. >> thank you, miss curtis. >> any public comments in support of the project? seeing none.

rebuttal. >> i can show you that shows this is a detriment to my home. this is my home. this is our home. this is also because of what was excavated. and also because of the -- they have to fix it. thank you. >> thank you. >> i have never seen the pictures of the sediment cracks. i appreciate seeing that. i am a structural engineer who designs provisions to the

cracks. just one other comment to follow up on what was said, you know, this is a map of the street and you can see all of the homes that have the full volume of that second level above grade. this is the school that their children go to and this the subject property. >> okay. thank you. we will open this to the commissioner comment and questions. >> the residential designs here

concluded and move to arrive. >> seconded. >> thank you. >> on the motion to approve the project. >> the motion passes unanimously. 7-0. commissioners, item 18. discretionary review. >> first i would like to provide a photo of the aerial -- we have

identified the subject property. publicly negotiated review for permit. i can instruct that one storey vertical addition, two family dwelling with changes to the front rear and side. this building has a historic resource and is category c. [indiscernible] 34 kent street, on behalf of and 34 kent street. there is concern about two issues, the size and the windows will contribute to the loss of privacy, and unnecessary glare and the scale and pattern of the context of the space. the interior were incompatible

with those found in the context. there is no letters of opposition and 12 letters have been received in support. on this recommendation, the question is concerned, we reviewed the project with the guidelin guidelines. because of distance separating the two properties, it is excess of 90 feet, the issue of privacy are not exception or extraordinary. the primary facade material are stained wood and stucco. the project meets the standards and guidelines and recommends the commission not to take -- approve the project as proposed, it does not present extraordinary circumstances. thank you.

>> all right. thank you. welcome. >> good evening. >> you can get closer and turn up the mic. good evening, commissioners, i am here today for the submitted request. our building is located in the western end of kent street with a direct view of the proposed project. across the open space in the middle of the block. they have asked for a contin continuance because of a trip overseas. the request was denied on the basis of unspecified new procedures related to hearing dates. and so judy the point person was unable to attend today.

continuance are common. we are not sure the request is denied. perhaps you can provide an explanation. the original design proposal resulted -- relocation of the proposed accommodations. we would welcome the family to the neighbourhood. the central purpose is to balance opportunities for project development and the need for capability with the architectural and visual qualities within the neighbourhood. exhibit a. the building occupied the very prominent location on the eastern end of the terrace, the cul-de-sac alley overlooking the middle of the block with an unimpeded panoramic view of north beach, and quick tower. however, the proposed design of the project -- for the project is not in the surrounding context. for example, the window opening

facing the middle block, open space is half the area of the facade. four floors of wall-to-wall and floor to ceiling windows with minimal detail provide an aggressive, inconsistent and are disruptive. there is no example of large contemporary windows within various locations in the city. as presented in exhibit e, contemporary design is not the problem. the photos do a fine job of illustrating the negative precedent. the use of huge expanse of detailed glass in established neighbourhoods. smaller scale openings with detail window trim are the normal. next image. the argument in favour of the proposed design is clearly false.

there is no commonalty between the surrounding windows and the proposed design for window openings approaching 50% of the area of the east facing facade. please do not compound previous errors that are clearly illustrated by the image of the attachment. the exception to the pattern of windows at neighbouring buildings of the north facing facade on the adjacent building at 840 union street designed by the same architect firm. the next image. the west facing, the 2834 kent street will have a direct view of the east side of the project. we are very concerned, especially in the evening. we cannot choose when we don't

want to see you. installation of this type of window should not be allowed. there is a loss of privacy and it will take away from our ability to enjoy our homes, decks and anything else facing the area. the reflected light in the window and nighttime glare from the interior lighting will create a drive-in movie from the surrounding buildings. last image. this proposed design offers a new shiny reflective object to the middle of the low key residential neighbourhood. this is not necessary or desirable. it is as if macy's decided to open an outlet. it is a negative precedent moving forward and any future proposals. we require modifications to the proposed design. thank you very much. >> thank you.

any public in support? >> good evening. i am john buruso. i would like to discuss the proposed projects and excessive glazing. it calls for a wall of glass 16 feet wide. cutting through 1 and 4 floors. there is more glazing with a curtain wall of feet 22 feet and

7 feet inchs and 7 feet, 8 inches high. the residents are worried that all the glass will lead to a loss of privacy. the massive banks of window will glow like a movie screen by night. they reflect glare throughout the day. the project sponsors the references, the east side glazing is less than what is proposed here. the discrepancies between the proposed glazing and that found in the neighbourhood is seen clearly in the exhibit b photos of the buildings facing the mid-block of open space. consider the interpretation of the design guidelines would leave smaller window openings that show acknowledgment of the

surroundi surroundi surrounding architectures. the window openings all around the proposed building are smaller and spaced further apart. the open space is a precious resource providing light and air to surrounding buildings. the fact that the sponsors only open lot next door does not mean that this building will stand in isolation. it must respond to the existing context. with 17 buildings facing the open space, the windows will be in plain sight day and night. reducing the glaze on the east side would do little to reduce the space and would preserve harmony. thank you for your consideration. >> thank you. next speaker. miss courtney.

>> good evening. i am katherine courtney. i am from the community association. i ask you to pay careful consideration to the request. we believe the issue of excessive glazing will be significant glazing. a it is a poster child for excessive glazing. in the letter december 5th to the commission, mr. rubin said the intent of the rdg was for the character.

where there is a mixed visual character which is present on the subject block, the rdg allows for greater possibility and opportunity and design, particularly on visible facades. commissioner, eastern space of 1012aladin is not a non-visible facade. the residences are surrounding the courtyard. it is noted that the concerns are not simply privacy, but the probability of a drive-in movie show of light on the mid-block of the space. in the exhibit e, mr. rubin has provided examples of excessive glazing which the community association will be distributing to the sister organizations throughout the city because we have been -- we have to address

the issue of excessive glazing. this is not a manner of taste. this is not architecture preference. it is a matter of public policy and the protection of the quality of life of the community. particularly when the open space is issue. the dr request, i met with the project sponsor. to request modification of the excessive glazing on the eastern facade of the project. based on the discussions that took place, i was expecting some accommodation. that has not been forthcoming. i respectfully ask the planning commission take discretionary review and address the excessive glazing and coming to a favourable solution.

i urge you to continue this case until mr. winslow is here and he can answer questions about it. thank you. >> thank you. >> good evening. i am chris bigelow. i will submit a petition in support for your consideration. the petition has been signed by 28 neighbourhood residents who are in agreement that the issues delivered by the previous -- who represent the extraordinary and unusual circumstances of justifying a discretionary review of the project. how many copies should be provided >> as many as you like.

>> additional comments? none. project sponsor. >> good evening. the project sponsors. jimmy and renee have been reviewing the property. the project we are discussing accommodate themselves and their families. the project is compliant and there are no exceptional or extraordinary circumstances that warrant the commission to -- the dr should be denied and the project approved as designed. the issue is the dr request claim that the amount of the eastern facade provides loss of privacy.

that is reducing the ability to freely use the deck spaces. the property is over 100 feet from the dr. there will be 6 other properties with direct views and their decks. they are closer and constant from the subject property. the dr decks do not face the facade in question. you have to go out there and turn to the west to view the facade. further, this art is disingenuous a bit. this is the rear facade on the property which contains a large amount of floor to ceiling windows and doors that lead on to the deck spaces. it is acknowledged there is some loss of privacy to neighbourhood buildings due to expansions and alterations. the block as dense as this one, some loss of privacy is expected. the proposal is not causing a loss of privacy to the property.

for the amount of glazing of the subject property. the amount of glazing, i want to point out that the eastern facade is the only one. only the southern part of the eastern facade, the lower portion here, has the opportunity, there is a 7 foot terrace, narrow around here and as you can see, the property spans to the eastern facade. the glazing that was proposed was carefully thought out. it did not do wall to wall, the entire facade, west to west of glazing. they chose to do it modestly, 60 feet on each floor and the lower floor it is important because we are going down slopes. as for the design, i will let

the architect speak to that. i want to point out before, we don't have a petition, we do have 12 letters of support in the packet. there were an additional 4 letters e-mailed to you. i want to say the private sponsors are cognizant of the neighbours before they started the process. they worked hard in the process to meet with neighbours. the overwhelming support shows they had a thoughtful and successful outreach. for these reasons, there are not exceptional and extraordinary circumstances. i will turn this over. >> good evening. could i get the over head, please. -- overhead, please.

relative to the context, it has a very mixed character. the facade faces the open space. it provides a greater design flexibility around the guidelines. regardless, the proposed design still takes is relevant to the context. directly adjacent, the other buildings, the two buildings effectively speak strongly to one another in shape, glass and articulation. the finish qualities and glazing. the design is modern but contextual. relative to light, and air and glazing, it is generally understood and accepted that the facade the mid-block open space in the open environment is often the most appropriate facade

for -- it is necessary to bring light and air to interior spaces. this is even more the case with this property, the front facade facing a 14 foot alley. and the facade faces a sliver of open space. the existing three floor mass extending 12 feet. on floors 1, 2. the glazing on the facade facing the mid-block open space is critical and necessary to bring natural light and air into the interior space. thank you. >> all right. thank you. public comment in support of the project sponsor? >> good evening. i am at aladdin terrace. my property is 16 feet away from the proposed project. i look out of the building.

it is one of the ugliest buildings of san francisco. i don't think there will be argument. it is an atrocity. i look at every day is a massive stucco, ash, asbestos wall. it is ugly. i am thrilled that they have taken the time and the sensitivity, the more windows my neighbour has, and i have do not conflict substantially with the windows that are proposed. i would love to be able to look at the building with those windows rather than what is there now. what they have done, it will be a beautiful addition to our neighbourhood. thank you. >> thank you. >> additional public comments. seeing none. the dr request, we have a two minute rebuttal.

>> from our side, i would make three comments. the first one is i am confused why there is no -- it is heard for the first time. they want the right representation and comment, we want to hear from both sides with the right representation there. we find it agreeable. we are looking for two things to be addressed. the excessive glazing. some kind of solution. i said earlier, they can

choose -- open the windows and close the windows. i don't have a say on the other side. that is a concern. and the size of the windows. there is another way to mitigate their concern. so those are the images to support that. and i will leave it at that. >> thank you. the project sponsor. >> thank you, commissioner. the dr request have not raised issues that have not been addressed. this is a code compliant project. no significant expansions are proposed. it is regularized at the rear. importantly, the lower unit is going from 840 square feet to 1,000 square feet. and from 1,000 to 2100. the areas east of the building will remain open space. this is an amenity, not just for the project sponsors but for the entire block. the glazing on the project is

minimal. with the eastern facade allowing all the glazing... again, the amount of glazing on the property is over 100 feet from the subject property and faces a side wall. it directly faces many other neighbours which creates a loss of privacy. the entire facade has more glazing and opening than the one proposed on the project. it is compatible in a neighbourhood that is eclectic in design. there are modern buildings with more glazing than this one in the block. including the one next door. 840 union street which is the building that the dr requester had issue with. (please stand by)

moli . >> commissioner richards: i

mean, where, if you have the drive in movie screen effect. there were times before where i lived i put a flood light out because people were congregating and doing certain things on my property. i got a call from my neighbor on noe street saying oh, my god, your light is shining right on my property. i never realized it. i think the building is hand so handsome. i think it's an addition to the area, and i can appreciate the gentleman who won aladdin terrace. i do think we should take into effect both light pollution and outdoor living rooms. i'm a bit hesitant to take d.r. on this one because of the situation of the house and where the light is and where

the light would actually fall but i'm waiting to hear what some other commissioners think. >> president hillis: i think it's a well designed project. you've got some constraints there on that small lot. this is basically the back yard of this house. i agree, we see some projects -- i have -- i think this one doesn't rival other ones we've saw. i would agree, i think it's somewhat is the same configuration if you look at the percentage of glazing in the d.r. requester's done just done in a different style and a different way, but i don't think it rises to exceptional or extraordinary. i think it's a well designed project and will be a great addition, so i would support it. commissioner moore? >> commissioner moore: mr. washington, since this is a code compliant project, it also

includes its conformance to the california energy code, correct? >> i will say correct in that i trust on our staff architect in that he's confirmed. >> commissioner moore: with this being a code compliant project and the difference between the east facing windows and the d.r. requester being s 100 feet, i believe this is not an exceptional and stroor circumstanstroor -- extraordinary circumstance. there are not too many people other than the people 100 feet away commenting on it. i don't find anything exceptional or extraordinary about the project, and i'm in support of it. >> president hillis: commissioner fong? >> commissioner fong: i, too, don't see any extraordinary or anything in that curtains,

shades, or shutters could cure, so with that, i make a motion to not take d.r. and approve the project. >> president hillis: second. >> commissioner richards: second. >> president hillis: commissioner richards? >> commissioner richards: i wish you would have turned in the 3-d drawings that you put on the overhead. i spent hours struggling with the context. maybe in the future, if you do have those, please include them in the packet. >> president hillis: very good, jonas. >> clerk: very good. there's been a motion to approve the project and not take it d.d.r. on that motion -- [roll call] >> clerk: so moved, commissioners, that motion passes 7-0, and i believe that would be a wrap. >> president hillis: yep, our meeting's adjourned. thank you.

[♪]

>> i actually knew when i was young, when i was in high school. it was the iconic dancer. [♪] >> the hula that he did was what i'm totally accustom to. the extensions that he did where he left hula flavor of the rest of his dance and performance was almost like stepping into a new sphere. it's not just the physical, the movements and the tempo and the lyrics, it's that he keeps it, i think, philosophically connected. [♪] >> he was young. he was ready to be molded.

he came with a combination of fear and respect and awe many of it's a perfect place for a new student to be because it offers you that opportunity to mold them. >> with patrick, when he came to class, he was like a sponge. like a sponge. and he kept true to it. you know what i'm saying. when it was starting to study, he was so intense. he had to be told to relax. >> patrick is a sweetest, kindest, most loving man i met. >> he is charismatic. he is motivating. he is inspiring. he is brilliant when it comes to choreography. you've got the whole package. >> i think patrick is a good example within the whole world of being able to have a firm grasp on past traditions while

shooting forward. ♪ the first time ♪ ever i kissed your mouth >> with hula songs, they're in hawaiian. not everybody knows hawaiian. when you watch a hula, you don't understand the story being told. he can use ledge songs and put a hula do it and everybody understands what it's about. [♪] when they came out in that black and that one simple hairpiece, less is more. you get to enjoy the dance. you get to enjoy the faith. those are the things i look for. [♪]

>> i think he is one of the best risk takers. and he makes me braver, to try things. i love thinking of an audience going, what the hell. what? [♪] >> i think it's all about variety. he looks for something else that could relate to other cultures, other people other than just hawaiians, it allows him to explore other cultures. they are so loyal to him. whatever he brings, they know that they will be surprised,

entertained. a part of something that is inclusive rather than exclusive. [♪] >> he loves san francisco. san francisco embraced him when he needed it most. and he is on a constant give back. he has built such a nice inga tral working relationship with the community. >> his passion for it is, i think what touched me most. there's a drive there. there's this energy that comes from him that motivates you to do better. it motivates you to do more. it gave me that encouragement to start my own group. to do what he is doing. i want to replicate that. i have some young hula students that are excited to be a part of

that lynn' age where it falls back and goes all the way back. it motivates them to want to keep doing it. >> i'm very proud to be the fly on your wall. to know that you have made me proud and that you will carry the legacy with you. he is so deserving of this legacy and it will carry on. with everything that he has given. >> you do leave a legacy in passing. >> you go. you go catch your legacy. and you continue to teach hula. you come back and you learn more stuff and you keep teaching me about that kind of stuff. and then, with all of that, laugh. [♪]

[♪]

the cultural started at arts mission. this was the first set of grant money that the arts commission had to give away. by 1998, it was not only the cultural equity grant program but the cul actual center that happened. it meant that communities of color went from zero to like four or five million a year. just over a very short period of time. >> instead, we focused on building the arts community. the queer arts community. and out of that came fresh meat

and radar and queer women of color media arts project and the transgender film festival and those organizations, some of those people are like part of the landscape now. whereas, in the year 2000, they didn't exist. it was artists who raised the questions about equality, about gender, sexuality being different than gender. we think about it in our own life what we've seen go on here in the last 30 years. to see why the arts are important. they're worth investing in. [♪]

>> i think it really is important to have government funding that is specifically targeted at people who live and work on the margins. it's so easy to overlook what those. before they can start the race, just getting to that starting block can be very, very difficult for cultural reasons, the queer cultural center asked me if i wanted to apply and they would help me apply. >> if you are white and you work in a black community and you are racist, you need to be -- >> i thought ok, well, i'm doing a writtenning. san francisco is so full of

writers. what are the chances. i wasn't banking on it but when i found out, that i got the grant, it meant one, a group of people who were experts in the field, believed in me. for an artist, that's the hardest thing. cities flourish when they have a creative class. when they have a layer of artists who are creating space and energy that supports other artists and attracts people who are fans of the arts. as long as there are young people in the city who are interested in our future, who are going to have strong and progressive and van guard arti artists. >> i cannot imagine my own work and organization's work can be

possible without the support from san francisco arts commission. i feel like to share those voices and to be the voice for those and to be the neighbor of those voices is something that we can be very proud of for the city. i'm very grateful and at the same time very proud that we are are among our peer organizations. i feel like if i imagine 25 years from now how this san francisco arts commission will be, the san francisco arts commission has become a people's commission. i think that would be a huge legacy to leave behind. [♪]

[♪]

>> this is the regular hearing for wednesday, december 19th, 2018. i would like to remind members of the public the commission does not tolerate criticism are outbursts of any kind. please silence your mobile devices that may sound off. when speaking before the commission, to state your name for the record. i will take role at this time. [roll call] >> commissioners, first on your agenda is general public comment members of the public may address the commission on items of interest for the public that are within the subject jurisdiction. with respect to agenda items, the opportunity to address the commission will be afforded when the item is reached in the meeting. you may address the commission for up to 20 minutes. d