single-family homes. >> go ahead, commissioner richards. >> or we could have three single-family homes that are on a regular conforming lots and put it a.d.u. in them if they want. here we talked about biodiversity an hour ago and talking about this big redwood tree that we know will go away if that lot is developed. >> commissioner moore? >> to me, conforming lots, we do not have the lines along the streets to create 325-foot lots. >> i was incorrect, i was wrong. >> there's just not the width. even if you make three lots of drop the fourth one, we'll never get compliant lots, we will always have basically the same question to approve a subdivision, his might slightly smaller lots with three homes, which have deeper yards, or with four lots, which later on, at some point, yes or no, will add

another building which will have a larger, deeper backyard, we cannot create 25-foot lots for these properties. >> that's what i said. >> commissioner richards. i move to approve the subdivision with three single-family homes as is with the lots going to the end of the property line. three single-family homes, you have your lots, you have more open space, more livability. >> commissioner hillis? >> i think we just need to report to continuous that looks at the alternatives, one where you have when you are asking for now, two new homes with an a.d.u., potential for in a.d.u. any existing structure, although i see your point on how that maybe difficult, or you keep the four lots and you have four single-family homes that could have in a.d.u. in them, but i think that are more consistent and contextual with the neighborhood that there are three stories a little smaller,

maybe don't dig in from the garage, because i think that is what is troubling me is the size of those homes, maybe it is acceptable within a.d.u., but i just don't see it at this point. >> i would support that. go ahead. >> just to clarify, if it were standard lots, it would not be a conditional use. it would really be -- it would just be a denial of the conditional use. by continuing it, it gives you and the developer a little bit more flexibility in how they approach. if they choose to have standard size lots, they may withdraw that condition except it will not come back to accept her adr. >> i thank you could only get two -- if you came in and made this code compliant and tried to get the maximum number of code compliant lots, i thank you could only get two. is that correct? that is right. you can only fit two on one end

that has your biggest frontage. so i think anyway, let's see, three or four lots, but they're all, even if you do three, they will be substandard. >> commissioner richards? >> so the substandard mess of the lot is the 1 feet, the 24 feet, that is all we're dealing with, that is 1 foot. they have three additional feet and we wouldn't be sitting here. one of just approve it with three buildings with the 1 foot less each lot,. >> at this point, as director ram had suggested, it probably would be best, normally i am always in support of a decision being made at this hearing. [laughter]. >> i think in this particular case because of the comments raised by the neighbors, the distinctive design elements that are associated with these parcels and this property, it might be best for the project sponsor to do continue it. they could go back to the

drawing board, address some of the concerns raised by the neighbors, determine if it is in their best interest to keep back to see you, or if not, withdraw it, come back, they have heard clear direction from our commission, and if necessary, they may have to come back. it may eliminate the need and they just go through a normal 3113 -- 311 notification. i'm confident there is a design out there for this property. one that will meet the project sponsor charge of needs and address those concerns raised by the neighbors. >> commissioner moore? >> i would ask the city attorney , does this fall under housing accountability discussion? >> no. >> kate stacey, commissioner moore, we would have to look at that issue on the continuance occurs. there is a modification from the code requirements here, and we would look at that and see what the standards of the code would be, but we can take a look at

that during the continuance. >> thank you. >> okay. >> given the direction from the commission, how much time do you thank you will need? i would imagine at least a month >> for another hearing? >> yeah,. >> do we have to notify 311 on all that kind of stuff? >> i would say if you gave us a month. >> may 23rd? >> may 23rd. >> mr. washington? >> also, i would like to get some clarification from the commission because i have heard two different sides, commissioner hillis and commissioner richards, as far as if you would be supportive of either not subdividing coming in

with the a.d.u. in the current configuration, and just -- or looking at another alternative with keeping this currently out on the subdivision. it just wasn't really clear and i want to know when we go back and talk with the architects that we have some clear directions. >> commissioner hillis? >> i heard two things, three lots, there still would be a substandard lot, but if you are going to go with these larger structures and in a.d.u. in it, or four lots, but for perhaps smaller structures in this. my sense would be you still go up to 35 feet, we don't go as deep into the ground and eliminate that fourth floor. those can have an a.d.u. or not. >> commissioner richards. >> i really think we could still get four units with two structures on code conforming lots that would be better.

if you pack another house on that lot in the back, i think that is doing everybody a disservice. you can still get four units with more -- the addition of 12 to a.d.u., and a new construction. i would rather do that. >> i'm sorry. i want to point out we have not voted on this, and i think that there are a variety of opinions, but i thank you have been sitting through this commission enough to know that we want to do both, increase housing in the city, it at the same time, be responsive to the neighbors in terms of density, which is not always possible. perhaps what commissioner hillis is suggesting is that we take down the bulk a little bit, you know, and i think that in between all of those things, we are giving you a direction to explore different designs. i just wanted to point out that we haven't voted on this. to be given a clear direction is

difficult when we don't have a consensus. >> commissioner his, there is a motion that has been seconded to continue this matter to may 23 rd with some sort of direction from the commission. [laughter] >> on that motion... [roll call] >> i don't know what we are saying. >> continue, we are continuing it. >> just continuing it. i will continue its. thank you. [roll call] >> so moved, that motion passes unanimously 6-0. commissioner his, i will place us at any time 1717:00 a.m. to be. excuse me, folks, if you guys can leave quietly, we would appreciate it because we have

additional business to attend to pick a time 17:00 a.m. to be at 555-2575 market street. this is a downtown project authorization -- authorization under use authorizations been a good evening, commissioners. that items before you are a downtown project authorization under conditional use authorization for a ground-floor office at 555575 market street. the site is a large located between first and second street with frontage along market and stevenson. it has two buildings. 555 market street and 575 market street and a plaza connecting the two. the project would reconfigure the ground floors and converts approximately 3,000 square feet of retail use to office. the project also features extensive renovation of the existing plaza between the two

buildings while retaining historic landscape elements. the project would remove the fence blocking access to stevenson street and reestablish connectivity with market. finally, the project proposes to add two new retail spaces, one is a retail kiosk within the plaza, and the other is a restaurant with a bar area along stevenson street. entitlements requested are a downtown project authorization and a conditional use authorization for ground floor office use, with a modification from the ground floor commercial requirement. since your packet has been published, the department has received two letters of support from the commercial real estate services and the district six community planners. after an analysis of all aspects of the project, the department recommends approval for the following reasons. the project would would provide more usable and active open space in the plaza, the project would provide connectivity to stevenson street from market street contributing to a vital

network of streets and alleys leading to the transit center, the ground floor office space will be programmed to meet the planning code requirements. and the project would meet with the planning code and the objective and policies of the plan. there are we making a presentation and i will be available for any questions. thank you. >> thank you. you have five minutes. >> thank you. hello, commissioners. i am alan walker. lyons market center and are excited to present the project today. as it happens, i work in market center and live in the bay area. engaging diverse neighborhoods that will draw people to san francisco, and years ago, chevron repositioned the ground floor at market center to privatize, securitize, and anonymize the assets. our vision is to turn this on its head and hopefully our just bring the neighborhood textured choice and energy to this asset

in downtown. i would like to introduce the design team with sk be and they will explain how. >> san francisco government, please pull up the computer screen. so we do recognize your time and are happy to go into more of a detailed description. we'll keep it brief and high-level. this is an aerial view of the proposed market center design. the project started in 1964 with one tower and a second tower at 575 which was built later in 1975. the images here along market street and stevenson illustrate the current project privatization of the plaza and the constricted pathways that prevent seamless passage. this gives you a feel for the open spaces and alley network in and around the site illustrated in green. by opening up the plaza, it will contribute for this network in a very positive way.

the original plaza design starts in 1967, changes in 1975 with the addition of a water feature and changes again in 1995 with a continued pedestrian restriction today our goal is to reverse this constricted access and open up the plaza. this reiterates the current available public space indicated in grey. so this is a proposed scheme. by reversing the 1995 proposed design, we open up the plaza connecting stevenson to market street. in the buildings, we intend to reactivate space for retail where it is not working and locates space where retail will work. to hone in on the plaza design, we are honoring and incorporating the 1975 water feature. two, adding a retail pavilion to stimulate activity in the plaza and three, create a rich variety of places for public use.

>> shown here, the design captures the vision to increase -- to blur the lines between public and private realms and encourage activation, engagement which currently does not exist. here is the special relationship between the new pavilion on the existing towers. 555 is on your left and 575 is on your right to pick the pavilion, located between the towers, is 900 square feet and offers protection of market street. this view is looking east with 555 in the background with a clear sight line and physical connection to stevenson street along the 575 tower. looking south to the 575 lobby across the living room, within the middle of the plaza. this view is from stevenson street, and it shows we have removed the existing wall to provide a direct physical connection to market street. this has been replaced with matching granite stone to allow for gathering. here we have various strategies meant to provide nighttime

strict social strategy in keeping the area vibrant. this plan drawing shows the intent of moving what is a very challenging retail on market street back to stevenson street. the goal is to create a visual energy along market with the inclusion of a tenant amenity along 555, in 555. this illustrate some of the challenges with the retail surviving in the space, most notably, the setback and elevation change off the sidewalk. we are proposing an updated tenant centred hospitality lobby space accessible from the plaza. we have a retail concept in the lobby area as well, which is accessed from the plaza and is visible from market street. the tenant amenity space will have an activated visual field into a hotel lobby and a social gathering place which has a strong visual connection to market street. this is the plaza and the pavilion as designed.

we are available for any questions, thank you. >> thank you. do we have any public comment on this item? i don't have any speaker cards okay. without public comp -- with that , public comment is now closed. >> i have tried to traverse this plaza to go to stevenson street before. you have to go in the building and come out and pretend you were going somewhere in that building. if you just pop up, can you just pop up the current floorplan of the two buildings and then the revised one? i just want to clearly understand where retail is going , and where new and old retail is going. i think this works. >> i have a handout. >> just pop it on that. can you put it on the overhead? >> you've got it up. currently on the east side of 555, what is that? what do you use that space for now?

>> it was the bank of the west, private wealth management. it is vacated now. but all along that market street , and turning in the back towards stevenson, that is what that was for. it was more or less an office space. >> it was classified as retail and it was used -- >> right. >> back where you have office amenities, that you are making actual retail? like a real retail? >> yes. >> okay. >> we enlarge that space because it is currently a fitness room, attendant tenant amenity. we enlarged that and included a kitchen space back there too, wanting it to the preferably a tavern that has access, and to

stevenson and the plaza. >> and the reason you came to reach on market street is because -- okay. i get it. i agree. >> okay. >> i really like what we are seeing today, the space is being described as awkward. i am i allowed to go in there? can i pass all the way through? this does clear everything up. i make a motion to approve. >> second. >> there is a motion that has been seconded to to approve this matter with conditions. on that motion... [roll call] >> so moved, that motion passes unanimously 5-0. placing is on item 18. this is a conditional use authorization.

[please stand by]

>> application materials and information provided on the applicant. [cheering] website, escape s.f. provides interactive escape scenarios which they work to escape the room within the allotted time limit. the games are designed for small groups of two or more participants, and typically have a one hour time limits. the operation hours will be from 10:00 a.m. with last reservation at 11:00 p.m. the establishment does not propose a sale of alcoholic beverages or any food on site. the department has found the project to be on balance, consistent with the general plan and necessary and desirable. he recommends approval with conditions as outlined within the staff report. the project would activate a currently vacant space that has

historically been used for storage and personal parking, create additional employment opportunities, as well as a regional and local entertainment option on a daily basis. the proposed use of general entertainment is principally permitted within the broadway district, and congruent with the zoning zoning district chapter controls which encourage a mixed-use characteristic and encourage further development of the area as part of a larger commercial and entertainment district. conditional use approval will not affect housing supply and should not overburden traffic or transit operations. this concludes my presentation. i'm available for questions. the sponsor has a presentation to follow with additional details. >> okay. thank you. we will hear from the project sponsor. you have five minutes. >> hello. i am a principal. basically, you stole my presentation, anyway, everything that he presented was on my

notes. normally one thing i would try to explain is actually the nature of our business, because it is people who are talking with the community and talking to us, they were really scared that it would be a bar with loud music or generating huge traffic , which is not true. what we are doing is actually really small groups events and it is a mind game, which means you are migrating from one puzzle to another, and finally got a final trophy, this is our players. so you see it, this is a small number of growth, and this is one of our projects, and this is how the basement looks right now

so this is our -- yep. we have a few complaints, and the most important ones for us was concern of our neighbors that we will change the character of the narrow alley, which we are really considering. this is the bottom of the current character, and we want to change it. this is the homeless people and there's a lot of trash bins around, and you see it is actually really hard for our neighbors to take care about it, so we want the alley to look a little bit different right now. everything else was in the nature of the presentation. if you have any other questions, ask me, if not, i really appreciate your patience. i did not expect you -- i really don't know how you were doing it >> thank you very much. [laughter]. >> thank you, thank you for your time. >> okay.

, we will now take public comment on this item. anyone who wants -- please come on up. >> good afternoon. i also did not expect for this to take so long, but i learned a lot through all of the things from biodiversity and issues. i am the executive director of the family support services. our letter was submitted and is part of the package along with other neighbors who are on the alley that are concerned about changing the nature of that walkway. this is proposed as 447 broadway , but the actual entrance will be a nottingham place, and so this is not part of the normal entertainment that you see on broadway, this is a quiet alley in between some office space. we have some residents that face that alley. there isn't even sidewalks, if you are to look at that picture,

so our concern, you know, when we serve the homeless, there is a nonprofit homeless agency. and we are a nonprofit that works to prevent child abuse and domestic violence. it just changes it totally. my biggest concern is really about safety, escape businesses have grown and proliferated and it is wonderful and wonderful entertainment, but i don't think this is the right place, especially the entrance. if you look at some of the exhibits, i will point you to 102, there are 14 rooms in this 4,000 square-foot space, and they're proposing an ingress and egress to come out of that one door. there isn't another alternate. you can't go up or out or into the other side, and if there was a fire at the front of the building, which is adjacent to

our property, ten and 12, people will be trapped, and i have suggested to the proposers, the sponsors, that they find an alternative through 447, or through the roof, any number of things that are an option. they say for business purposes they will not be able to accomplish that. supervisor peskin has mediated with us, and they tried to have a meeting with the property owner as well, which i don't think was successful, our concern is that, again, there is safety involved. we have four or 5,000 square feet adjacent to, and we have six ways to exit our building. they have two and they're all in the same place. i think it is a fire hazard, i ask you to reject this proposal as it is. thank you.

>> any other public comment on this issue, come on up? >> my name is david. i represent the owners of the building, and we are involved in helping to find his tenants. this is a unique kind of business. they cater to professional small groups, people from salesforce, for a binding organization, they come and they are quiet, they are professional people, they're going to occupy and use this facility for helping their companies, it is something great for the city of san francisco to encourage these companies to come and where care and have a methodology of making our businesses work. the tenant is working closely with the fire department. the owners are working right now with a sprinkler company to put sprinklers and if needed.

this meeting i think is for us, is not how to gather discovering the internal workings of the business or the fire protection systems, that is up to the fire department, and as far as the alley, i think it is not for cars or automobiles, and right now, it is people driving up and has been used as a garage for people driving up and down there , and when this business is installed, it will no longer be for that purpose period, it will be only for the pedestrians, and they are going to clean up all those dirty garbage cans that are sitting out there, and i think it will be a great asset for the city. thank you. >> yes, come on up. sorry, project sponsor, he already had your turn. thank you.

>> excuse me, thank you, i wanted to be able to give open discussion a little bit. >> please speak into the mic. >> i was not prepared for my lateness a little bit, but i wanted to get a little bit of information in about the broadway area as well, i am a pedestrian here in san francisco , and i have lived in san francisco all my life, basically the broadway area is really a quiet area like they did say. entertainment is okay if it is not really loud, at 3:30 a.m., i used to being inside, so if i'm out and catch a proper decent island, reluctantly, his navy because of somebody's party, or somebody charges altercation like the front of the building like now, but i say sickly really had interest in that area

too as well for my living conditions, and it is right in the broadway area where 2900 vallejo wait over the hill of broadway, broadway is over on the next block, so i wanted to be screened about entertainment and what we want to do. i want production of a program inside the residents on broadway , but it is up the street from that particular address, and i really do submit my opinion to you to to endorse the entertainment, because i think that some people can gratify off of goodness and their entertainment and what they are presenting to the courts, or what they're presenting to television period, and i just think that programs, or entertainment programs that have no relevance to ethical relevance to the household, or two families, for families or

households, it really doesn't need to be needed, that i can see something that brings lightning -- in relation to the children into the families, i think it would be in good favor. that is all. >> thank you. go ahead. >> you are part of the project sponsor's team, right? >> and part of the team and i would like to offer public comment. >> sir,. >> sir, your time to speak was under the project sponsor's presentation time. if the commissioners have questions, they may ask for it later. >> any member of the public not part of the project sponsor team who would like to speak? without -- without, public comment disclosed. >> i have a question for the public sponsor. what are the hours of operation going to be? >> we are working in the

weekdays and weekends. on the weekends we are open from 10:30 a.m. because -- there will be small kids birthday parties and they want to do it in the morning. >> 10:30 a.m. until 11:00 p.m. >> and on weekdays? weekdays. >> weekdays are pretty much the same, usually the corporate team comes around to lunch and hangs around until 6:00 p.m. the team building events are not kidding. >> right, got it. the interesting thing for me is, somebody said, people do this at salesforce and this is what i would do at my team and have fun there is no food or drink, which really is a good thing, because if you start adding -- we have seen the gatsby thing where you are part of the play and there's been issues with drinking or coming out in and out of the building. it out 11:00 p.m. does simulate if there are bedroom windows on the alley, especially if people

are scared out of their mind, and they're still, you know, hysterical, but i think it is kind of a pretty good use of a space. i don't know what you do with it other than having cars go in and out. >> commissioner moore? >> i have two questions. one is to ask staff how did the project move from being a see you to now a community business priority processing program project i'm asking,? >> this was always processing as this. >> no, it was not the first time it was on the calendar it was on the consent calendar, and december of 2018, and it was process as a c.v. >> i apologize. i must have forgotten. i have to say that there was something in the presentation that was disturbing to me, and that was a comment that since we have a nonprofit who uses this

alley, it is a family support service for the local community, and because there was a homeless person, i felt very uncomfortable hearing, cleaning up the alley, and that it is common for me, one recology has pickups on alley is in the locations where there are -- they will not be changed all of a sudden because youth moves in that was not originally used for the purpose we are asking to convert it to, so the cans will be there. it is easy to criticize and i did not see any image by which i was told of how it would be improved. the fact that a homeless person happens to be waiting for support from the services and nonprofit available as a separate issue, but it is something i am sensitive to. that will not all of a sudden disappear. i am concerned that the space is being used for downtown corporate events like this

because the element of gentrification in an alley which is typically just a neighborhood alley, of which there are many in this part of chinatown, is of concern to me. this is chinatown, i do not necessarily see, aside from the comments about the density of used on the type of use that this is a perfect match. i was also surprised to hear that the other facility that was entertained is in the 600 block which is not very far away, so i just want to give you my reaction. i can be persuaded if a commissioner feels differently and makes comments, to which i need to listen to when you make your comments, please. >> commissioner hairless? >> i'm generally okay with this. i know it is a tough spot to use it is down below the existing building on broadway through kearny, so it is a tough spot in a large site, especially

broadway where there's a lot of nighttime and entertainment uses i think this is a good use for that space that is not akin to some of the uses we see on broadway that generate complaints for the neighborhood. i get this residential right on that alley, but especially in dense neighborhoods, we see this a lot, you have to work urinate with your neighbors and i would encourage you to do that, but it is a good use for that space that is not terribly intensive for a large space that i think could work here, i am generally supportive given the hours and given the type of activity that is here to the approving of this finish i thought, commissioner. >> i was going to move to approve. >> i was going to say i am generally supportive too. i think it is a good adapter for use of the space.

>> i moved to approve. >> second. >> commissioner richards? >> could we have a memo year from now to see how things are going? >> yeah. >> thank you snapped commissioners, there has been a motion that has been seconded to this matter with conditions as amended to include an update memo in one year. on that motion... [roll call] >> so moved, that motion passes 5-1 with commission moore voting against. that will place us under your discretionary review calendar for item 2019 for 2018-007006. discretionary review.

>> good afternoon, president, commissioners, david winslow, steph architect for the agent before he is a request for discretionary review for a public initiated request for discretionary review for a building permit application. a mandatory seismic retrofit through removal of three offstreet parking spaces and construction of accessory dwelling unit in the ground level garage of an existing four story apartment building. no expansion outside existing building envelope is proposed. the reason for the d.r. is the d.r. requester from the san francisco tenants union, on behalf of one of the building tenants is concerned with one issue, that the removal of the garage space is part of the tenant services that are included as part of the tenant lease and the tenants have not agreed to give up.

public comment to date, the department has received no letters in support nor any letters in opposition. and the recommendation, in light of the d.r. request, department has reviewed the request and proposed of the accessory dwelling unit complies with the planning code and the applicable design guidelines procedures and policy goals the proposed project started with the removal of six ground-floor parking spaces to provide the addition of tomato accessory dwelling units. tenants are required to be notified for screening notification procedures which would require not an affidavit including the housing services. based on input from that process , the tenant to remove three existing parking spaces

that are not tied to tenants and retain one garage that is tied to a tenant housing service. and it is worth noting that the removal of the allocation of tenant housing services is not an issue regulated by the planning department rather by the rent board. with this, the staff finds this meets the project to the department standards and guidelines and recommend the condition -- the commission not take the d.r. as it does not present any exceptional or extraordinary conditions. i am here for questions. [please stand by]

>> the owner sent out misleading notification that stated it would 6 to 12 months for seismic work. seismic work should be unobstructing. this is really for the a.d. u.s which hasn't been permitted yet by the office. the owner also not offered additional compensation for the time for her to be out of this parking spot. which is normal. we're open to coming to a compromise. we ask you to sort of get us back together to the drawing board. i think the permit was applied before the a.d.u. change with the just cause.

the tenant might have more information. >> president melgar: do we have public comment in support of the requester? >> i'm alyssa stein. 2000 grove street has been my home for years. >> president melgar: you're the tenant? can she speak as public commenter? >> are you listed on the d.r.? >> president melgar: okay, go ahead. just trying to follow the rules here.

>> i know city is encouraging to increase san francisco housing stock. this long-term resident from rent controlled apartments to create new apartments at market rate doesn't seem to be the intention or the way forward. this proposal to remove relocate garage is violation of my right and violation of my lease. this apartment came with a garage space. in 2007 building owner illegally increased the space by 50%. she had history taking away people's garages. it wasn't last year i felt supported by san francisco laws to filial petition to get some of the rent back. which i did in january successfully. even after that, i permanently lost thousands of dollars simply

because afraid of losing a garage. in 2013, the building owner son moved in the apartment over my garage. i was forced by management to move into a different space. i did this under protest because i was intimidated. i learned this a violation of my tenants rights. i won't go into other forms of harassment and intimidation. ty dealt with this for years. last summer i received a letter from the architect plan to take away my garage space and turn it into an a.d.u.

i'm certain this is another attempt intimidation as shortly after i received prebyeout prebt disclosure form. my last car was stolen when i parked it in front of the apartment building overnight. attempting to remove the garage and rent controlled apartment is another form of continuing to harassment. i love my apartment and i love san francisco. the fact he wants to make thousands dollars a month market rate register tool does not change the fact that breach of contract. thank you.

>> president melgar: any other public comment in support of the d.r. requester? we'll hear from the project sponsor. >> good evening. thanks for your time. the property as you know is subject to mandatory seismic retrofit. there's six existing parking spaces. two occupied tenants by the building and who volunteered to move. one was occupied by the builder whbecome building owner and one was occupied by melissa. she didn't want to move.

she filed discretionary review. in order to cammed her concern -- accommodate her concerns we did away with one of the a.d.u. it's one building. there's an entrance in the middle. we're going to put her back on the other side. one of the a.d.u.s could be built. this is explained in an email that contains the revised plan. it was stated as intention to give the tenant one of the parking spaces. this was not enough to satisfy the tenant even though we changed the project drastically. the demand was sent to us in early january and frankly it seem that the demands are not relevant to the planning process. they don't affect the permit and

they're not the purview typically of the planning department. the permits have been issued. work has not commenced. we're waiting for approval on the a.d.u. so the work can go in tandem to make time of displacement for the tenant. thank you. >> president melgar: is there any public comment in support of the sponsor. you have two minute rebuttal. >> only thing i want to say, there's really still this problem with the permitting process o of a.d.u.s.

this is a private contract dispute. it's really unfair that you guys are overraiding that. i feel like this stuff should get worked out before comes to you. >> president melgar: project sponsor you have a two minute rebuttal. >> i would agree that it's unfortunate it's taking up city time. in this particular case, we acquiesce right up front and it seems this should have been on the consent calendar rather than here chatting with you guys about it. >> president melgar: thank you. >> commissionr hillis: just a question, this project is seismic. is the tenant being accommodated with the spot in that building

the other side? i guess it's the west side. >> yes. the other side and they moved the laundry and there was other things that were changed. >> commissionr hillis: there are six spaces, one is occupied by a tenant associated with their lease? can you tell us -- you know the rent ordinance more than we do. can you take away -- if you were going to go away a parking spot, can you do that and then have reduction? can you reduce a service like parking if it's part of your lease? >> tenant has a choice to do that. there are certain things if there was structural problem and you couldn't park there at all and then they have to use your rent. it's her decision. it's an optional.

>> commissionr hillis: it's part of the lease. they couldn't do that. you can't do that under the existing one. if she's being accommodated on the other side, what is it that's holding this up? >> we want written assurances. there's other things how long she's going to be out when she can park her car in the front when construction workers are there. there's really minor things he wouldn't say yes or no. >> commissionr hillis: ultimate. if the parking spot is part of her lease. you got to figure that out. she's got to be compensated. i'm having a hard time on this

one. she's not leaving the building. it's going to be for a period of time in reduction if services. it's really an issue of the rent board. i get coming here, some of the cases you brought us, are more appropriate here than the rent board. this one, especially because she's getting parking back is really a rent board issue. that can be adjudicated through the rent board. i'm uncomfortable taking it up here as a d.r. losing parking at the end of the day. >> she is. she's agreeing to move spots. she's going to be losing it for the time of the whole construction of the a.d.u. she would for seismic work. she's not required to move for a.d.u. >> commissionr hillis: this one i think it's more appropriate to be in the rent board figuring out the reduction of services and competent of services than

here. >> she could hire a private attorney that's going to say, you don't have just cause and stop the whole thing. >> commissionr hillis: that's a rent board issue. can't they shift to the other side and put the a.d.u. on the other side? >> it would be a court case not the rent board. >> commissionr hillis: if they weren't moving her spot. they were moving her to the other side. you're saying the issue is because they're moving her parking spot. could they put the a.d.u. on the other side where her parking doesn't exist? >> i'm not really following. it gets confusing because you're saying they're moving her parking spot. she's agreeing to move. there's a legal distinction there. >> commissionr hillis: all right. there's a parking spot remaining. she's getting a parking spot. i don't feel comfortable adjudicating this one as we have in the past.

it's a really a rent board issue. it's good we're adding an a.d.u. it will be great to add two a.d.u.s. she's kind of in control of whether they take that or not. >> this permit is inserting eyeletitself in between their pe contract once again. >> commissioner richards: does the tenant have rights to a specific space or just a parking space? >> best of my knowledge what the building owners told me, the lease indicates that the tenant maybe moved to a different parking space at the discretion of the property owner. >> commissioner richards: if it's in the lease, i don't understand what the issue is. >> also to the point of the rent board, there's a separate amount of lease for the parking space.

the tenant is not going to be charged renting the parking space and the construction timeline, the a.d.u. side may take little longer to finish. if the garage finished, they can park there. >> commissioner richards: is the parking space she's in now going to be part of the a.d.u. and there's no more parking space? >> do you have a requester, please? she has it in her lisa she's entitled to a parking space.

>> no, it doesn't say that. you can ask her. it doesn't say owner retain the right to move your parking spot. it's part of her lease. it's accepted. >> commissioner moore: i would ask ms. winslow about how do you see that. i'm confused. just like any garage, you get assigned to a space. if the space is moved, you move with the space. is that the way you see it? >> that's exactly the way i see it. >> commissioner moore: parking space is an amenity. it's one space or the other. i live in rental building.

i'm trying to be practical. i do not understand the challenge here >> that's the way we see it. look at your plans, there's six parking spaces. three going away for the a.d.u. and there's three left. mandatory seismic work happens on all six at the ground level. this is a shell game when you do construction. you can move into a place once it's completed. that being the open parking garage space that is not slated to be a.d.u. that will be done whenever the timeline for completing the seismic upgrade is done. whatever the distance is, it's equivalent size. the lisa is the extracurricular

-- the lease is extracurricular. >> commissioner moore: you maybe losing an inch or two on your own parking space. that's the name of this improvement. no rights to what constitutes a parking space that you are renting as long as parking space of equal size and in general location and where it is, that's the way i see it. >> commissioner richards: one last question before i make a motion. are the three remaining p