>> >> on february 25th, 2020, the mayor declared a local state of emergency, related to covid-19. on april 3rd, authorization from the mayor's office to reconvene remotely through the end of shelter-in-place. this will be our 25th remote hearing. remote hearings require everyone's attention and most of all your patience. if you are not speaking, please mute your microphone and turn off your video camera. to enable public participation, sfgovtv.org is broadcasting and streaming this hearing live. we'll receive public comment for each item on today's agenda. comments are opportunities to speak during the public comment period are available by calling

(415)655-0001 and entering access code 146 738 6789. when we reach your item, and you would like to submit your public comment, press star and 3 to be added to the queue. when i have 30 seconds remaining, you'll hear a chime indicating your time is almost up. and we will be testing a new chime today. i'll take the next person queued to speak. call from a quiet location, speak clearly and slowly, and please mute the volume on your television. i'd like to take roll at this time. commission president koppel? >> here. commissioner fung.

>> here. >> commissioner imperial? >> here. i do see one person requesting

to speak. we'll take that caller now. caller, you'll have two minutes. caller, are you prepared to submit your testimony regarding the continuances? okay. that caller has left. so, commissioners, that concludes public comment on matters proposed for continuance. the matters are now before you. >> commissioner imperial. >> as noted. >> second. >> clerk: thank you, commissioners. on the notion to continue matter as proposed, commissioner chan. >> aye. [roll call]. so moved. the motion passes unanimously. 6-0. >> i'll continue item 1b for 526

lombard to november 19th. >> clerk: thank you. commissioners that will place this under the consent calendar. we have one matter on consent. and it is considered to be routine by the planning commission. it may be acted upon by a single roll call vote. no separate discussion, unless a member of the commission, public or staff requests. in which event, it will be remove from the consent calendar and considered as a separate item at this or a future hearing. item 3, case number 2020. we should ask members of the public if anyone would like to speak to this or take it off of consent. the mar is now before you, commissioners in >> commissioner mar. >> i love to approve.

>> second. [roll call] >> clerk: so moved, commissioners. that motion passes unanimously, placing under commission matters. item 4. consideration of adoption minutes of september 24th, 2020. we should take public comment. i do see one member of the public. you will have for two minutes. >> caller: i'm sorry. i think i jumped the gun. i want to comment on a later item. >> clerk: okay then. press star 3 when that item comes up, sir. commissioners, i see no other persons requesting to speak to the minutes. the matter is now before you. >> imperial.

>> i adopt the minutes. >> second. >> second. >> clerk: thank you, commissioners. on that motion to adopt the minutes. [roll call] >> clerk: so moved, commissioners. that passes unanimously 6-0, placing us on item 5, commission comments and questions. if there are no comments or questions from commissioners, we can move on to department matters. item 6. director's announcements. >> good afternoon, commissioners. i just wanted to make one announcement. you've been getting some emails and public comment about 317 and our demo. obviously a topic we've talked

about over the years, where we've had proposals and the board has proposals. but i just wanted to let you know, we are working on it, both coming up with our own potential changes to 317, as well as working with supervisors who are also working on this issue. we'll be bringing it before you. i don't necessarily have a timeline yet. but either through a board proposal or our own, this issue, you know, we intend to bring back to you. thanks. >> clerk: sorry, commissioners. i was muted. if that concludes the director's

report. we can move on to item 7, review of past events of the board of supervisors, board of appeals aned historic preservation commission. >> good afternoon. planning department staff. the land-use committee was -- however, the full board that were a few appeals. first up the appeal for the conditional use authorization that this commission deny the project of 552 to 554 hill street. the project sponsor, who is also the appellant, requested that the time be continued for one month. the board ablamed and continued the item to november 10th. next up was the ceqa appeal for the four 90-foot tall light poles at the st. ignatius school. the project also includes the installation of the verizon wireless facility on one of the poles. this commission heard this item on july 23rd of this year, and approved the condition. the conditions approval limited

the schools use at certain times of the day and a limit on the total number of days a year. the decision constituted the approval action for the purposes of ceqa. for the appeal, -- the project does not meet the necessary and desirable threshold required for approval. that the verizon wireless project does not meet the requirements of the siting guidelines and the height of the light holes and the wireless facility should not be exempt under the planning code. the primary concern with the ceqa appeal was that the project did for the nit within the class one or class three exemption. and the project presented unusual circumstances that could result in a significant environmental impact. public comment went on for several hours and enough time -- enough time to roast a chicken with, many neighbors call in to support the appeal and significant number of students and alumni of st. ageny husband is supporting the project.

-- st. ignatius supporting the project. they found the project was entirely to the community at large. we also corrected the misinterpretation of the siting guidelines and the planning code's height limits. the ceqa appeal -- the department's defense was that the proposed alterations facility is an a category exemption and did not represent an unusual circumstance under ceqa. the substantive -- to substantiate the former point, the department identified 18 athletic fields in residential neighborhoods in san francisco, that have evening lighting. that can explain that evening light hadding noise from athletic events near residential areas is not unusual for ceqa. supervisor mar questioned the actually necessitate and desirability to the neighborhood and community. it seemed initially like he was going to make a motion to overturn the planning commission's decision.

he said he'd like to continue to work with the two parties to try to come to a resolution before then. lastly, the board considered the appeal for the evaluation for the proposed project at 1080 howard street. the project is to merge two lots, demolish a single-story industrial building and constructing the seven-story mixed-use commercial and residential building with 24 units and 2500 square feet of commercial space. the planning commission heard this item on june 4th this year as a discretionary review and voted to take d.r. and approve the project with modifications. the modification was that the proposed building wall be set back 1 foot from the western interior property line to allow adjacent property line windows to function. the project site and neighboring parcel are within the air pollutant exposure zone. the neighbors appealed over fewer capacity once the building is constructed.

staff addressed the effectiveness of the eastern neighborhoods construction air quality and noise mitigation measures. staff also explained why the project would not change sewer conditions at the neighboring property. in the end, the board did not feel that the appeal had merits and upheld the determination. that concludes my report and i'm happy to answer any questions. >> great. thank you, mr. star. administrators, the report from the board of appeals. >> there's no report. >> clerk: okay. the historic preservation commission did meet yesterday. and after approving a permit to alter 1035 howard street for the restoration of an art-deco building and the -- and a rear addition, they adopted

resolutions recommending nominations for the mission cultural center for latino arts, centro at mission street, as well as 535 green street, at the sausage factory. after which they considered the preservation alternatives for draft environmental impact report for property of 2500 mariposa street, charlie coach division, maintenance and operations facility. commissioners, if there are no questions, we can move on to general public comment. at this time, members of the public may address the board within the subject matter jurisdiction of the commission. except agenda items, with respect to agenda items, the opportunity to address the commission will be afforded when the item is reached in the meeting. each member of the public may address the commission for up to three minutes, when the number

of speakers exceeds the 15-minute limit, general public comment may be moved to the end of the agenda. i do see one person requesting -- two people. go ahead, caller. you have three minutes. go ahead, caller. >> caller: good afternoon, commissioners. san francisco coalition. i'm calling in response to the announcement that director hillis just made regarding changes that are in the works for section 317. i just wanted to comment on that, because in the past, us activists, the neighborhood activists, have been involved in trying to reform the demolition laws in the city, so we would

safeguard against sound homes, sound homes that are relatively more affordable to be maintained and save them from demolition. but i have to confess we haven't been too successful. and one thing that i just want to bring to your attention, is that when it comes to demo calculations, i am so sorry to bring this up. but in reality, it hasn't helped. i know that -- keeps bringing this up week after week that you need to change the demo calculations so more homes, more remodels could be qualified as demolition, which is what they are. but it just doesn't help anything, because even if we change the demo calculations, the project is going to be before you. as history has shown, the commission never rejects any

demolition. so we might have nip and tucks here and there, on these projects, but in reality the demolition is never going to be disapproved. and it's going to be business as usual. one thing that we've had in the past was was an ill-fated program called the residential expansion threshold or as we called it, the red, and we were vehemently opposed to that we are still opposed to that. we don't believe we should replace section 17 with something that is going to be awarding developers more square footage for more units. that is not how it's suppose to work. if you want to actually save sound housing from demolition, it would be best if you would have some concrete numbers and some concrete measures for saving them, such as what senator wiener delivered from

corona heights. a blanket 3,000 square feet of limits for any development in that part of the city. and that has been put in place permanently. and ever since that happened, the developer and speculators trickling preapplication meetings basically stopped. we're not against development, but we're against speculators. if we want to stop the speculations and save our relatively affordable housing stock, let's stop working, you know, towards something that is going to be -- [bell dings] just another coma that leads to more fundamental solutions. thank you. >> caller: oh, hi. it's georgia. yes. hi. i was just going to call to ask you to hopefully read the emails that i sent on the 3rd of

october, the evening of saturday. it was kind of a dense email. and in the one i sent this morning, the follow-up. but since i heard director hillis and i was grateful for that and their plan -- and plans to change 317, i just want to go back to something that former director rand said back in january, which was they were working on it. that's nine months ago. 2017 the rent disappea disappead section 317 has been around since 2008 and worked on for five, seven, eight years before that. you have the demo calculations. they're imperfect. but the commission can change them. you can adjust them. is it the perfect solution, i don't know. it's never been done. i'd be curious to see what the impact was, if it was adjusted. i just know that the demo

calculations now are either very, very close to the thresholds or they're gotten around during demolition. i mean, you can't catch them. you know, i remember scott sanchez saying in june 2015, you've got to get it at the right time. and basically inferring that i had to be out there with my camera to get it at the right time, so enforcement could do it. but it's too late temperature it's too late. i don't think this burden should be on enforcement. that's why i have stopped filing complaints, because i think it has to be at the beginning. the demo calculationses have to either be better enforced and they should be published on the 311. or you need to adjust them. i really think that given the fact that 317 has been around since 2008, that's what 12 years now, and they've never been adjusted. they probably should have been adjusted twice. would it have done something?

i don't know. but i'd like to think that it would have, because that's what the staff intended when it was written and when it was approved unanimously by the commission at the time and by the board of supervisors and the staff supported it and the neighbors supported and the r.b.a. supported it. and everybody loved it. [bell dings] so there's the bell. i'm going to sign off now. but please read my emails. and please, commissioners, remember that for better or worse, you can adjust the demo calculations. you have that power on your own to do it. thank you very much. take good care. bye. >> caller: hello, this is jonathan randolph, following up on director hillis and the previous two speakers' comments about planning code 317. i'd like to say that chronicle 317 is really an imperfect rule, because it's unclear about its

goals. there's a difference between a renovation that's updating the bathroom fixtures and knocking down internal walls and a renovation that's updating and adding sprinklers and doing seismic retrofits. or a third is one that's expanding the number of bedrooms or doing an a.d.u. or, you know, expanding going upstairs or into the backyard to add more bedrooms that can be rented out. and they all have different effects on affordability. and planning code 317 doesn't really know what to do about them. if you're just updating the interior fixtures, i think walk make a -- you can say that's a clear case. if you're doing interior changes to knock down the walls, that's probably driving up the price. it's all interior. but if you're doing code

updates, that's also likely to increase the represents and prices, in order to recover the renovation costs. but it's probably worth it, because it's doing safety upgrades that help the future tenant or owner. on the other hand, an expansion that adds bedrooms or adds an a.d.u. and adds to the housing supply, would lower represents. but planning code 317 serves to discourage those kinds of renovations as well. and especially so if we lower the tantamount demolition calculations, we're discouraging a.d.u. we should considering how the

city can make the best use of what to see what kinds of demolitions we're okay with. if you do a demolition, you have to replace it. [bell dings] you have to replace the tenants, protect the tenants. if we're okay with those replacements provisions, then we can exempt more of -- we can except more of the demolitions from the fee requirements. thank you. >> caller: hello, commissioners. this is anastasia, district 8 tenant. i tend to agree with.

>> bob d'eith (ndp): y roam. the represent that's stable and in good condition, needs to be preserved. so in order to keep this section of the code, section 317 in alignment with the housing policies of the general plan, you need to set goals for section 317. what's the objective of section 317? tennessee what are you trying to do? you don't want to trigger a demolition, if it's not a demolition, you want to have a c.u. hearing. if it exceeds a certain scope. so look to any changes to keep with the general policy. thank you.

>> clerk: okay. members of the public, last call for general public comment. commissioners, seeing no additional requests to speak, we can move on to your regular calendar. through 9 chair, we'll be taking item 11, in conditional use authorization, out of order first. is staff prepared to make their presentation? >> yes. >> the item before you is a request for conditional use authorization, pursuant to planning code 302.203 and 840 to allow the establishment of an 1,855 square foot canvas

regional use, within the mixed-use general zoning district and the central soma special-use district. no on-site smoking or clarisse is proposed as part of the project. brannan wanted to establish a dispensary. subsequently on june 17, etc 20, they filed a request of the building permits to establish the mcdus at the site. part of the case going before the planning commission, the city implemented a moratorium on new medical clarisse dispensaries, while new regulations were drafted. this application was put on hold until a referral was received from the city's office of clarisse. such referral was received on

may 27th, 2020. under section 190 dof the plans code. no other locations exist within 600 feet of that location today, that's i-- -- that's not used tn the project. the site is developed with a one-story automotive repair facility on a three lot with frontage on brannan, between 4th and 5th street. it includes the site operation, a tenant improvement, removal of the curb along brannan street and improvement to the parking lot of the rear. the area contact is mixed in nature with industrial sites, mixed-use or mid-rise residential developments and future major office developments. the site is located less than a block from the central subway and two blocks from the 4th and

king caltrain station. it meets the 600-foot rule. it is not within 100 feet of any school, public or private or any medical cannabis dispensaries or cannabis retailers that are approved by this commission and with licenses issued by the office of cannabis. as of the writing of the case report, the department had received 20 letters and 59 petition signatures in support of the application. and six letters in opposition to the project. letters in support generally cited support for aiding a new retail use and strong support for the equity applicant for the case. comments received on opposition were largely from adjacent residents, citing concern over crime from the establishment. cannabis outlets in san francisco have not caused any increase in crime in areas surrounding these uses. after publication, the department received an additional six letters in

support of the application and one letter requesting a continuance. the six letters in support included support from the san francisco equity group and brothers against guns. the letter requesting the continuance raised procedural questions about the file and claimed an unfair condition against a competing location at 595 bryant street. staff has reviewed the letter and does not find any procedural errors in the processing on the part of the planning department. i can provide additional details, if so requested. in summary, 518 brannan has been in process for three years. has supportive key neighborhood groups, including filipinos and a project provides the necessary and desirable service that furthers the goal of the general plan and the central soma plan. as such, staff recommends approval of the conditional use authorization. this concludes my presentation. and i and staff are available for any questions. >> thank you.

is the project sponsor prepared to submit their presentation. you have now five minutes. >> okay. can you hear me, commissioners? >> clerk: we can. >> good afternoon, commissioners. my name is jose. and i'm the community outreach director for the shrine group. thanks for allowing us the opportunity to have you learn about our company and proposed cannabis retail project called authentic 415. the name authentic 415 really derived from our desire to stay true to the values and virtues of authenticity and transparency of integrating into the communities we enter, including the soma. next slide, please. authentic 415 is a venture between social equity partner and trusted community leader. i'll introduce rudy in a minute. both rudy and i, and our

families, grew up in soma and we're proud alumni of mission high school. it's a cannabis company, unmatched in many ways, but what clearly differentiates us is the laser focus on the community centric approach we take. it is the careful consideration to do business right, by following our values of authenticity, entrepreneurship and social consciousness. we work toward building stronger communities while building success business. next slide, please, michael. from 2nd street to the east, another street to the west, market street to the south, this is a large swath of the area in san francisco and legislated in 2016 and home to a filipino community for over 100 years, including rudy corpuzhe's the founder and executive director of united plans, a violence prevention organization that serves children and families of san francisco and the soma.

commissioners, i'm proud to introduce you, my partner, my friend, mr. rudy corpuz. rudy, are you there? i think we're going to have to unmute rudy. possible to unmute rudy? commissioners, are you able to unmute rudy corpuz? >> clerk: we generally allow one point of entry. you should have been alerted to that and allowed to conference in. i don't know what his phone number is to unmute him. >> (707)225-7211 number. >> clerk: all right. in the future, you need to let us know. >> i apologize for that. >> hello.

>> can you hear me now? >> clerk: yes, we can hear you. >> all right. so, first, i would like to say what an honor it is to be accepted as an equity applicant in the neighborhood where i'm born and raised. thank you, president koppel and commissioners for this community. i want to thank you guys, because this is so, so important to me. i know in this short time, i want to make sure i get in with i got to say. as chosen as an equity applicant, my family moved here from the philippines in the early '60s. i was coming up in the south of market in the early '70s. i have nine siblings. i'm the youngest. there is -- my family was raised in the south of market. we went to school here. i raise my own family. currently i have four children. i'm part of a group that's called the sfeg, the san

francisco equity group and i run a program that many of you guys probably know called united -- which is today our 26th year anniversary of serving the city and county of san francisco. i'm so happy and honored to know that i have -- i'm in the neighborhood where there's 100 years of filipino history and the filipino heritage zone to be accepted as somebody who was affected by the war on drugs. and so i was born and raised in san francisco at presidio at letterman's hospital. i grew up on 8th, where they -- they officially started knocking down in the mid-'80s. i had gotten caught up in the street -- in the war on drugs. [bell dings] and i caught a case and was convicted in 1988. three and a half years later, after having to deal with my situation of being convicted and charged as an exfelon, i ended

up becoming a counselor in district 11, while working in the neighborhood center. during that time, i was given an opportunity to come back to my home neighborhood where i'm born and raised as a filipino, to provide services that were needed. so in 2005 -- [bell dings] in 2005, my organization -- [bell dings] we provided services for everybody and all of the people around the neighborhood. and so as somebody who grew up and raised his family here, somebody who is a convicted felon was given this opportunity as an equity partner, i thought this would be very paramount and monumental for me to give back equity to my community. >> clerk: that's your time. >> a neighborhood i used to take from, and now a stakeholder in my community. our center that we have did not declare that we own the building. we serve hundreds of kids and families in the neighborhood.

and so if i'm given this opportunity, i'm able to give equity back to organizations in here that's in in zone, the filipino heritage zone, like west bank, soma filipinos, bishop, cultivated lab. all filipino organizations that in our neighborhood that i've been always wanting to bring equity to our people. >> clerk: mr. corpuz, that is your time. >> okay. >> clerk: thank you. >> thank you. >> clerk: commissioners, we should go to public comment. through the chair, members of the public, will be afforded one minute. >> caller: hi. good afternoon, commissioners. my name is carla lorel. i'm the director of west bay multi-service center. i'm here speaking in support of the conditional use authorization for 518 brannan authentic 4 a 15 and rudy

corpuz. as someone and born and raised in soma, 100-year history of filipinos and someone affected by the war on drugs, i can't think of anyone else who deserves this more. rudy has dedicated his life to saving lives and giving opportunities to folks that most people wouldn't. so i want to support the effort to give this life-changing opportunity that is small compared to all that he's done for others. [bell dings] he's also put others before himself. i definitely know with his organization and him, safety is always first. i'm confident that the same will be for this cannabis store. so again speaking in support for him and the conditional use authorization for 518 brannan. thank you. >> caller: hi, i'm speaking in support of this. i live in the residences immediately next to this location. you can actually see our windows from some of the pictures and drawings on that last page.

and i just strongly support it. i think of anyone -- i may live the closest to this. i'm excited to have mr. corpuz jr.'s business here. i think during a pandemic, to open a business, there's not, -- you know, some wouldn't do well right now. and i think this one will do fine. and i think it's a great addition to the area. [bell dings] i don't appreciate scare tactics that other residents in the area have put together in public comments. i think that's unfair and poorly founded. and as the planning documents state throughout, there isn't an increase in crime in san francisco. and adding on top of that, a fantastic equity component here that i think is really admirable that the city is pursuing. so i strongly support it. and hope you approve. >> caller: hi.

this is henry. and i'm going -- i'm an attorney and i represent the applicants at 595 bryant street. and i would like to point out that we are not asking for a denial of this permit, but a continuance to review the application process relating to the application of 595 bryant and 518 brannan. this is to ensure fairness. both applications are equity applicants. i have submitted a letter with the exhibits on behalf of my clients. and the reason that this matter should be continued is -- is that the reason for proceeding with this hearing was because 518 brannan's application was completed before 595. however, per the planning

guidelines, their application was not complete, because all environmental and -- [bell dings] all forms were not provided timely. >> clerk: sir, that is your time. >> caller: good afternoon. hello. good afternoon, commissioners. my name is misha. i have lived here for the past 20 years, i'm also a san francisco native. i live about six blocks away from the project. and i really urge you to pass this without delay. they've been in the process for three years. and they have done everything that they have needed to-go make this -- needed to to make this happen. we're excited for this to happen. in a time where there's such challenges in the neighborhood,

cannabis partner partners have a huge difference in the neighborhoods they're a part of. i'm excited to see how these two partners together can work together to improve soma. we thank you so much for all of your support. >> clerk: go ahead, sir. >> caller: good afternoon, commissioners. i appreciate your time this afternoon. my name is dameon posey. i am also an approved dispensary, soon to be opened approved by the board. i'm calling in to support this measure. i cannot think of anyone -- anyone in our city more deserving, more appropriate to be approved than rudy corpuz and his team. i would not be in this if it was

not for rudy corpuz and his team. he brought the equity program to my mind. we're in motion giving back to the community. i'm in full support of this measure. any opposition that anyone could ever have, is just some hating and not accurate. we know for a fact -- for a fact, especially on this day, 26 err years later, the anniversary, that this man will do great, great things in this community. and for our city. [bell dings] on every level. i'm in full support of the order. thank you. >> clerk: hello, caller. kim hello. my name is omar. i'm an equity applicant. and rudy is a very honorable person.

and also a humble person to not only his community, but all of the communities in san francisco. not only did rudy earn the desire to have the equity-owned establishment, he put in a tremendous amount of saturday equity into the -- sweat equity into the project. [bell dings] thank you. >> caller: hello. i'm also a resident of the south of market. and i'm callin calling in suppof authentic 415 and rudy corpuz jr. he's the perfect candidate as an equity partner. and they have a great location for their store. i look forward to seeing how we will work together to support the soma community. and i just think that this is the perfect project, not only constructed by the san francisco government, but also in support

of the people that work on activism. please approve authentic 415. thank you so much. >> clerk: go ahead, caller. >> caller: hi. my name is kim mitchell. calling from visitation valley area in support of rudy corpuz, 415 authentic. and being a part of sfeg. this guy and his group will do great, great things in the community that he's already done. i think we just want to support him, get it through as fast as possible. and let you know that rudy snows just south of market, he's citywide. thank you. >> hello. my name is paul.

i work very closely with rudy in the south of market. i'd like to speak in support of authentic 415. rudy is a very positive influence in the community and has been for a long time. and i think that this opportunity to help him spread and continue the positive influence in the community should be welcomed by the city. thank you. >> i'm the opener of 595 bryant, which is near the subject property. i was primarily wondering why there was never a good neighbor community outreach meeting for this conditional use. they basically -- they've done a neighborhood outreach three years ago. this is for a retail-use cannabis store.

essentially they need to go through the change process from three years ago, the residents and owners have changed a lot since then, along with the soma area. >> caller: hello. good afternoon, commissioners. i'm a co-sponsor of 515 bryant street. i just want to let you know that we've been there in that location for a year. we've been trying to work. everything would be told, we were not aware that another application right in the queue. we were surprised that allowing this in planning. we just want to know there's another equity applicant.

>> yes. hello, hi. my name is ed. and i'm actually another equity applicant for the 59 project. and my partner said, we've been going at this for over two years. we were unaware of the other article 16 coming aboard. and, however, they can come aboard and we can't. but there is a procedure where we both can be allowed to do business in the area. and like as an equity planner and someone that's been participating in this for over two years, it's fair if we got the opportunity. i don't think one action is better than the other. we followed procedures best we could. like with covid and other that we had serving covid, we're just as capable and should be allowed to continue with our process. i don't think anyone should move on in this particular situation.

and i just think it needs to be reviewed and we're allowed to continue forward, just as they are. we're not saying they shouldn't be allowed. we want to be a part of it as well. [bell dings] i just thank you for your time. please review the situation. >> caller: yes. my name is shawn richards. i'm the executive director of brothers against guns. i'm also the first african-american equity applicant that went before the planning commission, that was approved unanimously. i'm calling in 518 to support rudy corpuz. if no one else is deserving, he's deserving of this. he has put in so much work and so much time and so much energy. i know what he's done out of his own pocket by having this cannabis retail store, that can help other community organizations. other folks are affected by the war on drugs. he can actually help them and show them and give them guidance and hope that they can become

more than what they are. if no one understands and don't know what rudy corpuz has been through, then you need to do your homework and your background on him. this young man has stepped up to the plate, stepped in front of gun violence, stepped up to families, helping with funerals, helping the community overall out of his own pocket. [bell dings] >> clerk: thank you, sir. that's your time. >> thank you. >> caller: hello, commissioners. my name is joseph. i'm a third generation san francisco native. i've been in the cannabis industry about for ten years and a social equity activist. i have known rudy for a long time. and i want to echo what some of

the other folks have said on the call. he definitely deserves. no one really deserves this opportunity more than him. he's done so much for so many individuals and families that have been affected by the war on drugs in this city. and the program was really designed for individuals like him, by approving this project and approving him as an equity partner, it's really paving the way for a lot of other equity individuals that make a difference in this city and across the country. >> caller: good afternoon. i support rudy corpuz. he's an innovator, ahead of his time. working in the community, offering resources and intervention when nobody else really wanted to do the grunt work of being out there and changing people's lives and saving lives. this man has been very

thoughtful to the community, to his fellow man and he's a humanitarian and tries to employ people to have equity. he's been doing this 26 years as of today, his anniversary. [bell dings] based on other comments, thank you. >> clerk: okay. members of the public, last call to enter the queue by pressing star and 3 to submit your public testimony. okay. looks like we have a few more callers. >> caller: okay. hello, commissioners. my name is john. a district 7 resident. islander community advocate. a member of the san francisco equity group. and an equity applicant.

strongly urge the -- authentic 415. i'd like to thank brian mitchell and his group for partnering up with an equity applicant. my brother rudy corpuz. rudy corpuz is the man of faith. south of market community and the city and county of san francisco for over 25 years. the famous slogan, is takes a hood to save a hood. helping to nurture and support youth and their families, as well as given second-chance opportunities to help youth and adults incarcerated. it's good for the soma community. not only will it be the space -- [bell dings] desperately needed in times of uncertainty. lastly, rudy corpuz is about

humanity. he's the walking billboard for the saying. >> clerk: thank you, sir. that's your time. >> caller: thank you. >> caller: shelley tatum. native san francisco, born and raised, a business in the last 30 years, promoted concerts in the san francisco bay area. calling for support rudy corpuz. a lot of people talk the talk. but rudy has been walking the walk for 26 years, his record speaks for itself. i am a member of sfeg. and we did have a successful outreach program, outreach community meeting. thank you very much. >> caller: hello high pressure -- i'm a community advocate for

the last four decades. i don't want to reiterate all the good things people have said about rudy. i have worked with rudy for the past 30 years. and he has definitely turned out to be a very positive citywide community leader in all the areas that have been mentioned. i do believe, given the covid reality and the need for us to zoom, i do believe that everything was done recently in the community outreach meetings to make sure that as many people could be included. and i would definitely urge this commission to approve the application for mr. corpuz. thank you. >> caller: hello. three generations here in san francisco and i'm also a high school teacher. and the thing that's important for us, it's much bigger than rudy. that's why we do love rudy.

the chance to be part of making money and having an opportunity in this community and city, where people haven't. and everyone else has got a chance to make money off the medical industry. now in the soma, where people went to prison and jails, as rudy talks about, now it's legal and now that same community needs to be able to profit off of this. so thank you. and looking forward to coming through to the shop. >> hello, my name is edwin garcia. i see that rudy is a very popular person. i believe the equity program is for people great and small. there's other equity applicants that might be disenfranchised if the process was not done correctly. i hope there's a continuation and that everything is clarified

appropriately before moving forward. again smaller people. thank you. >> clerk: great. thank you. okay, members of the public, if you want to submit your public testimony, now is your opportunity to press star and 3. commissioners, i see no members of the public requesting to speak. i take that back. go ahead, caller. >> caller: hello. my name is everett butler. i'm a former member of south of market. i have an opportunity to meet mr. rudy corpuz from my reintroduction into society. since doing that, i have had the opportunity to really get to know him as a person, not him as the worker. and he's shown me a genuine side of him and giving back to the

people being there for the people. and with that being said, i think he's more deserving than anybody i know for the opportunity to continue to give back in a prosperous manner. thank you. >> caller: hi, my name is heather phillips. i would just like to offer my support for rudy corpuz jr. and just the tremendous work that he's done. it cannot be understated the amount of hard work that this man has done for the south of market community, how much he has poured into seeking equity for those in the community who have been forgotten by a lot of other folks. and this opportunity couldn't go to a better person, who is still going to continue to look out for all parts of our community. so we would urge you just to support rudy and this opportunity. thank you.

>> caller: hello, my name is rex. and i am also a server of the underserved community in the southeast community of san francisco. so good afternoon, commissioners, mr. president. you know, i don't want to repeat again what everyone else has said, all of the positive things that were said about rudy corpuz. it's obvious what this man has done. i think it would be a disservice if we continue this item. i think right now it needs to be approved. so i thank you very much. so, please, approve this project. thank you. >> clerk: okay. members of the public, last call. seeing no additional requests to speak, commissioners, the matter

is now before you. >> so we're waiting for other commissioners, let me start by saying i do believe that enough outreach was done for this project, due to the tremendous support i've heard today for the project. so i will be in support. commissioner moore. >> clerk: commissioner moore, you may be muted. >> i said i'm in support of the project and move to approve. >> second. >> commissioner. >> i'm supportive of the project. but i'm trying to understand the consequences for the project

proposed at 595, if we do approve this project today. so i have a number of numbers for mr. christianson, if he's available. >> i am, commissioner. >> if this project is approved today, does that preclude the approval of 595, because it would be within 600 feet? >> it does. and would result in an administrative denial of 595 bryant. >> okay. i heard you say at the beginning for some reason this project is not subject to the 600 footprint. is there applications in reverse order, could 595 be approved and then this one could wum in afterwards and still be approved? >> that's correct. 595 bryant was approved first. and then the commission were to remove 518 brannan, because this was a site that was pending a hearing before the planning commission, when the city implemented moratorium and frankly changed all of the rules, they would be afforded an

exemption from the 600-foot buffer between storefronts, under planning code section 190b. because this project was accepted by the planning department and reviewed and scheduled for a hearing, before 595 bryant had an accepted application, the order is just not working out in that way. >> what is timing for 595? when would it otherwise be in front of us? >> so that project has been reviewed. it is -- it is -- the plans are fairly comprehensive. we would just need to schedule it for a hearing and conduct notice. it could be brought up within a month or so. like i said, the issue was that 518 brannan was already on your calendar when 595 brannan even came through the door. >> when 595 submitted its

application, were they aware -- were they made aware that if they -- that 518 was ahead of them and they were processing at their own risk and spending time and money that might be to no avail? >> so they were made aware of this fact, not only when the application was received by the planning department this year, but also when the application was first submitted to the office of cannabis last year in, in october of last year. a full year ago your liaison to the office of cannabis reviewed the initial file before it was referred around -- and reached out to the applicant by phone and email. >> okay. i will say -- i mean, i am in favor of approving 518, based upon what we've heard. i haven't seen 59. i don't know if i would be in favor of approving it. it strikes me a little unfair that, you know, a month from -- the positions had been reversed

and we heard the other one and it's almost ready to be heard, that we could end up approving both of them, something about that isn't sitting right with me. i'm wondering if there isn't a solution to that, other than telling 518 to wait a month and come back afterwards. it just seems odd that, you know, if we continued this item for five weeks, and we heard the other one within four weeks, we could approve both. >> that is certainly a possibility, commissioner. it's something that the commission can do if you'd like to afford the opportunity. i will say, you know, when we did create the exemption from the 600-foot buffer, that was created because we had a number of sites in the city, including this one, which were applied for and had applications before the buffer was created. so the intent of that exemption was if when you were in our process before and the rule didn't exist, you could still go through the process.

it wasn't intended to create a situation where a site like this -- the vast majority of the permitting didn't have a conflict, where we create another 600-foot conflict. to your point, the ordering is an issue if we were seeing this in the opposite order and if 595 bryant had filed their application last year, when they were allowed to, we certainly could approve both of them. >> okay. i'm interested in what the other commissioners think about this issue, because i mean -- this is a great program. and, with the opportunity to benefit two equity applicants, not just one. but, you know, i also am worried about delaying the approval of any project right now for any reason. because it costs these applicants money. as we've heard from other equity applicants, the longer the wait, the bigger the financial impact on them. i'm very torn about this, i very

much want to approve this project. but i am concerned on the impact of the other equity applicant. i'd like to hear the other commissioners. >> commissioner moore. >> it's interesting to hear commissioner diamond going through this. i was aware in 2018 that this particular project came forward and it was considered as -- [indiscernible] it sits in a slightly different timeframe, relative to the original intent. at that time it was far more difficult to go into business, partially because they had an extra layer of -- [indiscernible] so i actually don't think this project that's in front of us stands on its own, given that it fell to the unfortunate change-over between

m.c.d. and cannabis retail. and i personally believe that i do not want to break the 600 rule. that's just my opinion. i'm curious what other people have to say. >> commissioner imperial. >> i have a question for mr. christianson. so you mentioned that -- i'm also in support of this project. and i also share the same sentiment with commissioner diamond in terms of the upcoming 595 brannan street. republican you also -- are you seeing other orders in -- conflict of orders for -- [indiscernible] because of the

previous moratorium. do you see more of that? >> there were five that were disqualified, with this being one of them. 443 folsom is approved now and creating its own buffer. 2055 market, right next to the apothecary and 5 leyland, close to another dispensary. so realistically this is a tricky situation. i don't anticipate this situation coming up again in the city. >> okay. thank you. yeah. i mean, exception -- this is an unfortunate event. if there's no more, you know, --

i will also still be approving of this, for this project. >> clerk: is that a motion? >> president koppel, there is a motion that's already been seconded, in fact, by you. >> i have one additional question. the brannan street and the other one talked to each other and kind of perhaps agreed to one wanting to wait for the other? mr. christianson? >> staff is aware that 515 brannan reached out to 518 brannan to discuss this ordering issue. and essentially that if 518 brannan were to be delayed by realistically a month and a half or two, that other location at

595 bryant could move forward. we are aware that there was an initial email trying to discuss that. but we're not aware of any traction on that. >> one, we do not have any idea about the application -- [indiscernible] and if, indeed, today's applicants could comment on it, i would be prepared to entertain. otherwise i will move forward with what we have in front of us. >> commissioner diamond. >> if is the applicant able to speak to this request? >> is today's applicant able to address this issue? >> clerk: you're requesting that

they -- >> can they get back on the line? >> clerk: sure. actually, they're still unmuted. >> mr. corpuz to speak to it himself? >> yes. >> yes. i'm here. commissioners -- >> hello? >> yes. >> yeah. >> yes. we don't want to move forward with any type of resolution for 595 to go ahead of us. >> could you explain sort of the consequences to you of waiting five weeks? >> you know, we've been paying rent for well over -- almost close to four years. and the thing is when they did approach us, it wasn't in a very good way. it was in a very threatening way. we didn't care for that at all.

>> i see. >> so i think the ask -- yeah. it wasn't in a good way. >> okay. >> commissioner diamond, i would like to ask questions as to whether or not there's a possibility for the other party to come forward as an application, with a variance or whatever would apply here, that we can see it on its own merit. i don't want to hold up the current applicant who has done his homework and has the support of the community. that's really what's in front of pups i d -- in front of us. i don't want to wager, unless we see another avenue for the other applicant to get a variance. [indiscernible]. >> it feels like the five-week timing is really jarring. if there's other way to find the

application to come through, i would be in appreciative of knowing i don't want boggle up today's approval and subject the applicant to an additional, you know, period of represent. -- period of rent, if they don't have a solution from us. mr. christianson, anything that could be done? >> i'm not aware of anything that can be done. the reasoning about that we're the only exemption that's been provided legislatively so far. >> you're fading. >> i apologize. i keep getting muted for some reason. i was just stating that i'm not aware of an exemption that i can provide. the only exemption that's been provided, thus far legislatively, the exemption for these folks that had applied in 2017 or prior and had not yet received -- [indiscernible]. under section 305 of the

planning code, the zoning administrator can not approve if it's not permitted in the zoning district. typically that would be something that's labeled n.p. but i would understand that that would also apply to something that is not allowed under for another provision of the planning code. but i'm sure someone can correct me if i'm wrong with that. >> any administrator available to answer that question? >> hello, commissioners. i was not fully involved in this hearing. so i haven't been listening. but i was listening enough to hear the request. could you repeat the question, please. >> sure. we have a very unusual circumstance where based upon the current order of applications, approved today's

application, we're not able to ray prove the application that would be in front of us in five weeks for 595. however, had the order been reversed, we could have approved both, due to the way the exemptions currently work. and i'm struck by the sort of arbitrariyness of the timing and the be fairness to the other equity applicant. and commissioner moore was asking if a variance -- we were trying to figure out if some other way that other application at 595 could be heard. commissioner moore asked if a variance was possible? >> well, i heard mr. christianson reference the fact that we are prohibited from granting variances related to uses. we can't basically grant a variance to allow a use that's not otherwise permitted. that's fundamental to the zoning itself, which is established through legislation by the board of supervisors. so we can't grant use variances,

if that's helpful. we only get variances from quantitative controls of the planning codes. you know, rear yards, setbacks, open space, things like that that are quantitative in nature and even some of those we're prohibited from granting variances for. >> so the only solution would be a legislative change sought by the applicant at 595? >> i don't know the specifics of the issue well enough to speak on what the necessary solutions would be, other than to say that we could not grant a variance top alleviate the situation. >> okay. >> commissioner diamond, i believe that's the case. i mean, we would need the legislative solution, similar to what was elect elected to allow if it was -- legislated to allow to reverse what would happen. >> okay. thank you.

>> commissioner moore, did you want some more time? >> yes. i want to ask a question one more time. to reaffirm that the other applicant was made aware about the convince as, as he -- the restraints as he moved forward with the original paperwork filing? >> that is correct, commissioner moore. long before one of these applications arrived with the planning department, they first go through part one of review with the office of cannabis. and one of the early stages of that is me reviewing the file to make sure that there is an approval track for the application. at that point they reach out to to the applicant via phone and email and inform them of the proximity issue. did not inform them that it was an absolute issue, because through our point, it depends on the way that the applications are ordered.

but did inform them that this was a potential issue. >> it's unfortunate what it is. i appreciate your very thorough reporting on that, mr. christianson. very much appreciated. >> commissioner diamond. >> so just before we vote, because i sense we're going there shortly, can we call back the applicant for 595? because i thought i heard them say they were not aware of this. mr. christianson is said he made them aware of this. i want to understand where the confusions are arising. >> clerk: commissioner diamond, i really don't memorize people's numbers. there are two members of the public requesting to speak. it might be them. if you'd like, we can take those callers now? >> if the other commissioners don't mind, i'd really like to. >> go ahead, jonas. >> is this the applicant from 595? >> actually this is the owner of

595. so i would be the landlord. i am aware of the issues. >> clerk: okay. have you spoken previously? >> i did speak previously for one minute. >> clerk: okay. let me see if the next caller is the person. are you the applicant at 595? >> i am not. i was just calling for public comment. >> clerk: had you already spoken? >> i had not. okay. you have one minute. >> i was just calling to support rudy corpuz, the applicant. i can't think of anyone more deserving to have this opportunity. and h he embodies everything tht the equity program was created. he does great work in the community and it would be a wonderful, wonderful thing to be approved for him. and that's all i have to say.

thank you very much. >> clerk: is this the applicant from 595? >> this is henry. i'm the attorney for one of the applicants on the line. >> clerk: okay. >> what i have heard from the commissioners is the unfairness of perhaps the calling of these two different matters. and what i have heard from 518 brannan is there would be a cost involved if they had to wait another month. and on behalf of 595, i believe we would be willing to pay whatever expense would be incurred, that they're incurring by waiting another month, so both of these matters could be considered. it does seem to me very inequitable. we have two equity applicants here and if the order of consideration were reversed, both could be awarded a license. and that would be in the spirit

and intent of the equity applicant program, to give them both the chance to do what the program was suppose to allow them to do. >> could you also answer the question that i had asked about whether mr. crist -- mr. christianson had informed your client long ago that there was a chance -- they were taking a chance, because they were second in line. when you had made your presentation earlier, or somebody on your team did, they said we weren't aware. i just want to understand where the confusion lies. >> i appreciate that. and i wish i could. but i don't have that information. pretty much all of the information i have is contained in the letter that i submitted to the commission. >> thank you. >> clerk: is this the applicant from 595? >> this is the owner of 595.

>> clerk: commissioner diamond, did you want to hear from this person? >> can you answer the question that i raised? >> hello? >> clerk: yes. can you answer the question of commissioner diamond? >> yes. absolutely. this is the cosponsor of the 595. go ahead. go ahead, commissioner. syria the question i had asked wae applicant aware of 595, and there was another project of it ahead in line. in the prior presentation, perhaps when the attorney, i thought i had heard language indicating they weren't aware until recently that they might be second in line. i'm wondering where the confusion lies? >> in reality what happened,

commissioner, back in -- when we first applied for that, we did talk to the department of public health. they mentioned that. and somebody from the department of public health called the landlord of that site and the landlord indicated that those guys are gone and they don't have a lease. and i thought it did not exist. then the issues surfaced again last year. but the understanding from michael christianson -- there was an incubator. as incubator, we would be first in line, before the incubator, that's why we did not really pay attention to that, even though it's -- we did not know from anybody that there is another article 16 that's right behind us and we're going to be jeopardized. we had everything to be filed.

edwin made a mistake by -- he did not do it right when he filed. we had all of the documents and everything. and with covid, it didn't make it easy, you know. and 518 brannan is saying -- i reach out to them in a bad way, in a threatening way. no, i did not. i reach out, looking for a way for both applicants to be open and to benefit this program. i also then, you know, whatever they wanted like fees, i wanted to work with them. i was never threatening. how can i threat? with what? i did not. no. >> okay. thank you very much. >> commissioner christianson, did you want to add something? >> yes. i just wanted to add the message was conveyed on august 12th, 2019, via email.

>> okay. >> commissioners, if there's nothing further, there is a motion that has been seconded to approve this matter, with conditions. shall i call -- >> please. >> clerk: on that motion to approve with an cans, commissioner chan? >> aye. >> clerk: commissioner diamond. >> aye. >> commissioner fung. commissioner fung. >> aye. >> clerk: commissioner imperial. >> aye. >> clerk: commissioner moore. >> aye. >> clerk: and commission president koppel. aye. >> clerk: so moved. the motion passes unanimously 6-0. and placing this on item 8, for case number 2016-531 bryant street. is staff prepared to make their presentation. >> yes.

can you hear me? >> clerk: i can. >> great. the department staff. the probably before you is an office development authorization for the proposed project at 531 bryant street. the project includes demolition of two existing buildings and new construction of a six-story, 65-foot tall building. the project includes about 46,389 square feet of office use and 2,899 square feet of retail sales and service use. the project includes about 2,700 use of private open space, provided via a rear courtyard and roof decks. it includes bike parking spaces and no vehicular parking. for the project to proceed, this project requires approval of the cleanup legislation related to the central soma area plan.

this cleanup legislation will clarify the heights setback requirement in the narrow street controls. since publication of the packet, the department has received clarification of some public correspondence, which has expressed support for the project. in particular, the department and the commissioners received letters of support from the project from united players and the west bay filipino multi-service center. the commission received a letter from tom and madeline coreson, who expressed concern on security, trash and shipping, backyard garden and trees, lane, air and privacy construction. the copy of the correspondence was forwarded to you. i provided a rise motion on tuesday, october 6th, for more clarifications on the applicable development impact fees and to address minor errors in clarifications in the findings. i do want do clarify some expectations of provisions that you heard on the central soma area plan.

if the board of supervisors does adopt an additional fee, that is applicable to the project, this project would still be subject to this fee. at the core, the project has to meet all of the requirements of the planning code at the time. in consultation with the staff, department staff would like to address an additional approval, this conditional approval would read, major organization coordination, with respect to the 1% public art program. the department staff recommend approval with conditions, specifically the project does provide new, smaller-scale office space, which assists in creating a diverse, economic client to the city. the project sponsor is present and is prepared a presentation, this concludes my presentation

and i'm available for any questions. >> i'm going to share my screen. >> clerk: project sponsor, you have five minutes. >> okay. can you hear me? >> clerk: we can. >> okay. good afternoon. i'm susan mcgee with urban land development, the project sponsor. what you see today is in front of you, as you can advance to the first slide, it's been designed to complement the scale and character of the surrounding neighborhoods. it will be fill a niche for small and mid-sized companies, that have a hard time finding space in larger high-profiles, that will eventually dominate central soma. you're ink probably thinking why office now. and so i'm just going to give

you a short answer and then happy to answer any further questions later. we do see a trend towards space design and office, greater dedication for privacy and separation from others, which is easier to get in smaller, self-contained buildings. and we believe that there will be demand from small and mid-sized companies to be small buildings, where the user can own an entire building, [ please stand by ]

next slide, please. >> we have worked for a long time on the components for this project. they are not last-minute elements, but ones that we have been designing since the beginning after talking with our neighbors and listening to the elements outlined in the essential plan. next slide, please. with our 1% art program we have been working with the filipino community to implement a community art program. this program includes several components highlighted on this slide. first, we are creating a sculpture garden in the courtyard of the project. we plan to display pieces of art that is part of the program. and these parts were given to

local artists to create works of art and now these pieces will have a permanent home in our garden. next slide, please. the courtyard will also include an artist created mural remembering those in the bay area who have lost their lives to gun violence and we intend to work with the filipino community to select a local artist to create this amazing mural. we also wor worked for last thre years with our neighbors and made significant changes to the building to reflect those concerns. those are the concerns that rick mentioned in the letter that you received and you also received a letter from us, a commitment letter that we wrote to our neighbors, which we shared with the commission that outlines all of the changes that we have made and addresses the issues raised in their letter to you. next slide. and to further local entrepreneurship within the filipino community, we have also dedicated one of our retail shops to grow local food

business or to see a new one started and this is the picture of what the microretail looks like on that street. i will hand it over to our architect now and he will talk about the design. next, slide, please. >> we're still not getting him, so do you want to continue with the presentation? >> i will say from the start

that as eloquent. and the ground floor is 19 feet and then we have four floors of office above that. and the height is 65 feet and the open space is in the courtyard and the roof terrace and we have bike parking on-site and shower facilities. next slide, please. this is a view from the street, and i know that one of the things that glen would tell you if we could that this is a view on zoe street and you can see the units with the courtyard on the right and the patio between

the two microretail units which we really think that will enhance the public realm on this street in a wonderful way. we provide the seating area that links them together that sits in the middle and that is of no cost to the tenants in the micro retail units. and a picture from zoe and bryant street. and you can see that the building is sitting well within the environment and the scale is very similar to the adjacent building to the right and one block down and we have tried to use the metals in order to pick up the industry particulars in the market.

(please stand by) >> caller: hi, good afternoon, commissioners. i remember carla larell. i'm here to speak in support of the project and i have been working with urban land development along with them on the creation of the community art program at urban lands land street project. and we're happy that they're

including the structures from the gun buyback that the public will be able to see. additionally the urban land will be working with us to create area in the courtyard to have -- (indiscernible) on this project. and also [broken audio] and making sure they go to the folks in the communities so they can be able to grow a business and we're appreciative of them putting the community to mind in that. and i wanted to acknowledge john for his efforts in making sure that this community is thought of in the long term and that we are able to support our marginalized community members and a shoutout to susan in helping in effort as well. thank you. >> caller: yeah, hey, commissioners, i am louis corpus and i want to first say thank you guys on that thing that you

passed. -- we talked about putting this in the location so we had a good discussion about building a strong relationship and i support this project really, really, you know, 100%, because of the fact that you know he believes in ending senseless gun violence and building a relationship with the community, you know, i hooked him up with the other filipino group in the neighborhood and we all are trying to help to build this bridge to working with this

gentleman. johnny is an amazing man and susan is an amazing woman and hopefully we can get this passed. thank you so much. and god bless you guys. >> caller: hi, i'm madeleine corson and with my husband, and we're in the short-term building right adjacent to this. and we think that the architecture is really great and we know that the architect and the developer have given special considerations for things tha that -- because we have been here for 30 years south of market in our lived work building and the new heights of buildings adjacent in the area seemed so huge compared to the narrowness of the street. and, of course, we put in solar panels and things like that

here. as they make their way through some of the things that we're still working out with them.

>> clerk: members of the public, we ask you to and -- >> commissioner imperial. >> commissioner imperial: thank you. i have a question. you sent us the amendment, and i heard you earlier regarding the infrastructure fees. but they sent out the last one i believe this week and it strikes

at the infrastructure impact fee. this is the central foma cleanup legislation. what is the reason for that, can you clarify that again? >> sure, happy to do so, commissioner. so since the planning commission didn't recommend moving forward with the fee, i amended the motion to basically to reflect what the commission's determination was over to the board of supervisors. if the board, for example, does decide to up and adopt that fee, and if the project is subject to it, they still would be applicable. they still would have to pay the fee. so they have to come in line with whatever the planning code is at the time and the motion that we have before us only becomes active when the board

adopts those. and it would be folded in accordingly. >> okay, thank you for that clarification. >> commissioner moore. >> you are the planner and i understand that 531 bryant street was eligible for individual inclusion into the california (indiscernible). and so could you state why this building is being torn down, what is its history and i assume that it goes back to the e.r.a. i was created and why in this particular case from the planning department's perspective, that there are no policies or considerations being

given? >> we're happy to, commissioner. so, yes, i am a reservation planner through and through and i enjoy, you know, being a steward for a lot of our historic buildings in the city. when the department looked at this proposal as a whole, it was decided by the department as a whole that we wouldn't apply and/or advocate for the retained elements policy in this instance, just given the difficulties in rehabbing the existing building that was on the site. and looking at the overall design of the new building. so i think that in this case the department felt that the building was good. and met basically the intent of what was outlined in the central soma area plan. so applying the retained elements at this point and moment wasn't something that we were supporting at that time.

>> vice-president moore: i mean, (indiscernible) tearing down the building is far easier than trying to reuse it for (indiscernible). >> yeah, we did -- we did have the applicant explore a scenario earlier in the discussion, particularly when we had them file the project assessment. but we decided at the -- as we kind of moved this forward to public hearing that we would then kind of force the retained elements such as the policy of the commission and the policies that the commission adopted in this particular instance. and given the location. >> vice-president moore: but there are people in the neighborhood that are very disappointed that this is starting to disappear. and that's all i wanted to say. but they do explain it.

thank you. >> president koppel: commissioner khan. >> commissioner chan: i think that the building works for the scale and the site. and i am appreciative of the community benefits and the project sponsor to work with the community organizations in the neighborhood. and for the economic development opportunity. but i do have minor reservations about approving the process fees at this time as we think that at least in the near future, having options for different types of office space, especially smaller size (indiscernible), at this point i am supportive. >> president koppel: is that a motion? >> commissioner chan: sure. i move to approve the project with conditions.

>> second. >> clerk: thank you, commissioners. if there's no further deliberation there's a motion to approve this matter with conditions with revisions by staff. on that motion [roll call] this is passed. and items 2348c and for the property at 123-127 collingwood street. you will consider the conditional use authorization while the zoning administration will consider the variance. the staff is prepared to make a

presentation? >> i am, jonas. >> clerk: great. >> all right. good afternoon, president koppel and commissioners. the department staff. and we have a request for conditional use authorization for planning code sections 178 and 303 to have a horizontal addition to the three-story facility. doing business as lurk and to have approval under motions number 1356 and the request to expand the existing building for the rear structure to be demolished and rebuilt and expand the hours of operation and eliminate the meal programs and the council meetings and increase the number of clients served to 75. and to increase the number of organized activities at this subject property to 10 per year and expand the rear as an outdoor activity area within the arts three zone district.

and the lot is located on the east side of collingwood street between 18th and 19th street. the subject property is developed as a three-story building and a one detached structure locate ad the rear of the property. the property has (indiscernible) and prior to 1999, the subject building was utilized as a three-unit residential building. and founded in 1988, lurk is a community facility with the mission to develop community and inspire positive change with bisexual and queer and questioning youth and their families and allies of race and class genders and abilities. prior to 1993, the facility had operational concerns and then after at the women's building in the city. in 1993, the facility was relocated to the women's building. and with the issuance of the conditional use authorization

under motion 13536. and in 2000, the (indiscernible) and 15038 was a conversion of the structure into a garage and into a storage space for the community's facilities out liization to date the department has not received any accord sponsens and opposition. there's been 17 correspond else in support of the project, including letters from the neighborhood association and merchants and the upper market community benefit district and the historical society. in order to proceed there was a conditional use authorization for the sections 178 and 30320 expand the existing facility on the ground floor and into the rear detached structure. and to amend the conditions of approval 1, 2, 6, 9 and 17 in motion

i am available for any questions. >> clerk: are you prepared to present? you have five minutes and your slides are up. >> okay, can you hear me? >> clerk: yes, we can. >> good afternoon. could i get page one of visuals if they are not showing. president koppel, commissioners, my name is jodie schwartz and

i'm with a non-profit that serves low-income lgbtq plus youth in the castro. i have led them for 5 years, overseeing a staff of 32. could i please get page 2 of the visual. here's a photo of me with two of our staff. together with our colleagues in support of the city contracts and private donations we provide housing access and leadership skills to more than 50 o 0 vulnerable youth. can i get page three, please. founded in 1988, they are a primary non-profit organization serving low-income lgbtq plus youth. 79 percent of our youth are people of color and 47% are transgender non-conforming youth. it is a beloved home to our participants and a committed advocate for lgbtq partners and

a highly respected service provider to our city partners. of the youth that we support, 99% are low income and 92% are survivors of violence and 45 have a disability, and 39% are homeless or marginally housed. the need for the programs has expanded significantly. our budget has grown by almost 100 percent over the last three years and requiring the staff size to double. could i get page four please of the visual. as it exists now, the facility is not really meeting the needs of our youth and staff and their programming. the youth arrive early to programming must often wander the neighborhood until their counselling session or group activity begins. and with urgent needs, and sometimes it seems that there's only two private meeting rooms. we have been borrowing spaces from strut and using the eureka library. we have to stagger group meetings as we can only have two group sessions at a time.

even with these creative solutions we don't have enough space for our youth. and the same is true for our staff. prior to the pandemic, all lyric staff had to be on rotating work from home schedules. can i get page 5, please? we are here to ask for your support. this allows for those who live in the same footprint of our facility, and these features include 34% more usable space for our facility, and including a third group space plus any new small rooms for a total of five, plus an additional bathroom. we will do this by rebuilding the former garage currently allowed to be storage only. and by the more efficient use of the existing building on the lot, including expanding the first floor to match the upper floors. these additional spaces are offering our youth the privacy they need. this is essential since many of them have experienced violence, homelessness and mental health challenges. we host our middle schoolers in the summer for camp.

we do not have a large enough functional rear yard space and a critical program element for this age. our facility also needs to support events such as graduations and fundraisers up to 10 times a year. we do not have a functional space for all who wish to attend. the rebuilt garage space allow the attendees to move back and forth between it and the adjacent outdoor space where we propose to remove decking to make it more arkansas saysible. this open space would be the same level for the first time, critical for the 45% of lyric participants who are youth with disabilities. similarly, the renovation will create a sidewalk level highly accessible entryway and reception area. all of the neighbor experience the renovated facilities. we're very proud of our good relationships with our three adjacent neighbors, all whom moved to this street years after lyric did. and the rear yard patio area is more visually enjoyable to the neighbors and the rear annex

will have better noise and structure than the current structure. we have the first floor reception to fit in the outdoor entryway to better use the space under the existing upper floor portal. removing a space that has been a problem area for lyric and the neighbors and it is hard to see what occurs there at night. we appreciate the support from the planning staff so far. we are pleased with the conditions of approval, except for one that deals with hours of use and levels of use of the outdoor open space. i would like our land-use attorney brett gladstone to address this and other technical matters. we also have other technical questions that we can address from the commissioners. page six, please. back to you. >> hi, this is brett gladstone, the attorney for lyric. can you hear me? >> clerk: we can, but your time is running out. >> thank you. the building is in the middle of

the castro. you have to cross street from a city-owned recreation center. this photo before you shows a deeply recessed double door leading to a rear yard garage -- >> clerk: that is your time. >> can you hear me? >> clerk: we can hear you but that was your time. >> can you hear me? >> clerk: yes, we can hear you. >> i'm sorry, we were told that we had 10 minutes for conditional use permit hearing. >> you have up to 10 minutes. >> okay. look, may i continue please? it's only five minutes and 50 seconds. >> clerk: through the chair, if he wants to afford you more time. >> president koppel: we'll give him one more minute. >> clerk: very good. go ahead, mr. gladstone, you have one more minute. >> one minute now.

yes. one minute now. i understand that there's an adjacent neighborhood that moved into this home next door over 10 years ago who decided to jump into this approval today with a letter that i have not received but i understand that my client received an hour ago. we have been delayed by the pandemic to october and he is requesting a continuance, that is very disappointing. it is also (indiscernible) while the resolution is ongoing and it will be resolved soon as we're in the middle of a negotiation. we ask the commission to not get involved in resolving private agreements and incorporating private agreements into the matter, but that is why it's requested to you today and we ask you to not fall through that slippery slope. thank you very much. >> clerk: great, thank you.

commissioners, that concludes the project sponsor presentation and we should take public comment. through the chair, the members of the public are afforded 10 minutes. >> caller: hello, can you hear me? >> clerk: we can. >> caller: thank you, commissioners. commission secretary, good afternoon, commissioners as a member of the public and a proud alumnus. and i have served on the board of directors for six years as board treasurer and in full disclosure i am on staff here at the san francisco planning department. but i'm here to speak to you today about the impact that lyric has had on my life. like many lgbtq adolescents arriving in san francisco from all over the country over the last decade, i myself landed in the castro as a 17-year-old kid, not long after having been

ejected from my own home. i came to san francisco seeking community, seeking security, seeking purpose. lyric helped me to find that purpose in a very vulnerable and disconnected time in my life. in the ensuing eight years that it took me to earn my undergraduate education, much of that is as a part-time student i was a participant and then a staffer at lyric. and from professional development programs they provided. first organizing a national conference and the experience helped me to understand the essential (indiscernible) into a constructive building and eventually i joined the staff at lyric and the organization nurtured my growth and the success and the leadership. i (indiscernible) [bell] not only surviving my late adolescent and early adulthood but shaping my vocation as a public servant.

i know that i'm not the only one. over the last three decades, lyric has been a bedrock in our community, giving direct service to case management and, of course, leadership development. they have changed generations of activists, community advocates and civic le alumni of their program have become executive directors and community service organizations around the country. (indiscernible) >> clerk:thank you. >> it can be difficult to accomplish. and this allows lyric to

continue cultivating young leaders for another three decades. >> clerk: thank you, you are out of time. >> caller: good afternoon, commissioners. i am terry aston bennett. from 479 castro street. our store is two blocks from lyric. we had a relationship with lyric and its clients since they opened their doors in the early 1990s. i'm speaking on behalf of lyric and i'm asking you to support their project. since its inception, lyric is a necessary member of our community. lyric has created a safe space for lgbtq youth to get the support they need. lyric provides these youth with counselling, job training, educational support, and leadership development. lgbtq2 youth are at risk of becoming homeless or addicted to drugs. the services that lyric provides are critical in mitigating this risk and giving these youth a

safe space to be themselves, to learn and to grow. lyric has prided themselves on being a good neighbor. they have done this in actionable ways. they shop local and give back to the community that supports them. they instill a message of respect for the community they serve. and they keep the area clean and quiet and respectful to their neighbors. it takes a brave youth to seek out help and it is our responsibility to make that help accessible and welcoming. this project will allow lyric to expand in the quantity and the quality of the services they provide in a safe and welcoming environment. once again, i ask you to please support lyric's application. thank you. >> caller: hello? hi, my name is mash mosher. president koppel and members of the planning commission, my wife erica walters and i live at 119

collingwood street next to lyric. we support lyric's mission of helping the lgbtq2 youth and do not oppose the project before you today. however, as it requires the demolition of all structure that shares a wall with our home, specifically our bedroom, we would like several conditions attached to lyric's conditional use authorization. first, that lyric be required to immediately rebuild or repair the exterior wall of our property upon the demolition of their adjoining rear garage to ensure that we have watertight integrity of our property. and that lyric pays for any damage done to our property during the course of ininstruction with their insurance, not ours, as a backstop to cover costs that. any assessment of damage caused to our property to be performed by an independent contractor, not one performing services for lyric, that all work commence no earlier than 8:30 a.m. we have incorporated these as changes into a neighbor party wall agreement that lyric and

their attorney have proposed. honestly, we don't want to delay their project, we don't want to stop their project, we just want to make sure that we can have assurances that we don't wind up, you know, having problems with our house. in short, i'd say that, you know, while a lot of people are not in my backyard people, we're not that, but -- [bell] so we're looking for support from the commission to just ensure that these conditions are put in place in a binding way. and we would appreciate any help that you could provide. >> clerk: go ahead, caller. >> caller: hello, commissioners, i'm sky delano and i live in the castro and been here for 20

years. i'm reading excerpts of a letter from sam cobb who is the c.e.o. of tipping point community. and the all in campaign. he couldn't be here and i wanted to share his unequivocal support for the proposed model of lyric. we know that 45% of chronically homeless adults first experienced homelessness before they turned 25. and that lgbtq2 san franciscans make up 14% of our community. but 27% of our homeless population. among young people, the disparity is even more pronounced. 46% of homeless young people identify as lgbtq and many report losing their housing due to discrimination and/or abuse. lyric provides a safe harbor for youth in their most vulnerable moments and help them to chart a course towards security and autonomy. by expanding the facility, lyric can more intensively serve over the 2,400 young people who pass through its doors. while making those doors much

more accessible and appealing from the street. we're proud to voice our support for proposed remodel and look forward to the flourishing that it will bring to lyric and collingwood street. and kind regards from sam cobbs and from a neighbor here who would be delighted to see this investment in the young people and thank you for your time and consideration. >> caller: good afternoon, commissioners. my name is noah and i'm the operations director at san francisco human rights commission. and i'm here to speak on behalf of our executive director cheryl davis. as you know the human rights commission is a city agency dedicated to advancing racial equity and non-discrimination initiatives and the protections for the lgbtqi community. to that end we have partnered with loric for over five years and we wholeheartedly recommend them for the expansion that would allow the wonderful

programs to grow in response to overwhelming need. so in january 2015, h.r.c. partnered with the lgbt center to produce a lgbtqi needs assessment for the city. and one of our partners in producing that report was lyric. so back then, it was deep connections and hard-to-reach populations within the lgbt community and the peer engagement models and their effective safe spaces. we were thrilled when in 2017, lyric was accepted through our r.f.p. process to become a full-time partner with us. in fact, their work has been so exemplary that they have continued to win funding for violence prevention and intervention services for lgbtqi survivors of violence and are funded through 2022. in our five years of partnership we have seen lgbtqi youth

benefit from the blend of individual and group activities and counselling, leadership development, many advocacy-based counselling hours and trauma informed practices that have continued to exceed expectations for the grant. moreover, their staff are extremely professional and organized. we're so grateful for the dedication, expertise and the efficiency that lurk brings to the work. we know that the capital renovation project that is requested is of extraordinary value to the community that it serves and the city as a whole. one of the reasons that we partnered with lyric is because the population -- [bell] lyric has been doing this work successfully since 1988 in their model work. we hope that you will facilitate moving forward of their project to continue their amazing work. thank you for your time. >> caller: good afternoon, commissioners, i am a 15-year castro resident and a board

member of the district, and the castro merchants and a huge fan of lyric. i will read a letter from clara barley who could not speak today. my name is clara farley with the city and county of san francisco. i am writing in support of this important project, not only because of the impact that lyric has had on my life but their support for thousands of young people across the city. over the last 15 years i have had the opportunity to advocate for trans and lgbtq rights. this would not have been possible without the support from the lyric staff and the leadership development that i received at the heart of the castro. when i first arrived in san francisco fleeing violence and discrimination, i was welcomed with open arms by lyric. and joined their youth internship program. i had the opportunity to gain new skills and to give back to the community. i have been inspired to support lyric's work and growth, not because of only their incredible services but their commitment to

the san francisco queer youth who will go on to become community members and change tomorrow. thank you. >> caller: good afternoon, commissioners. i am a former youth commissioner for district 8 and the current lyric participant. as a queer trans youth born and raised in san francisco, there's not many places in the city where i feel seen. lyric provided me and many other queer and trans youth to have a place to be our authentic house. many of us called the big hurpel house our second home. we have strong relationships with the people and the organization who gave me motivation and hope. at lyric i finally get to be part of a community that respects and celebrating my identify. through their support i gained skills to overcome my challenges and to become more self-determined. i learned what resiliency is and about the power of community. lyric is the only youth-friendly spot in the neighborhood.

as the organization continues to grow, more youth will enter through the doors seeking a place for support and shelter. the renovation will create a bigger space for us to convene and to get the needed support for us not only to survive but to thrive in the world. lyric youth are the leaders of tomorrow in san francisco. thank you, and have a nice day. >> caller: good afternoon commissioners. i am alex lundberg, i'm with the president of the city's oldest neighborhood advocacy group founded in 1881. we focus on improving the quality of life for all residents of the castro and the eureka neighborhood. and we voted to support the expansion plans. we also agreed that we and the residents of collingwood street could not ask for a better neighbor than lyric. they provide well-being of youth on the castro and throughout the city and have reached out to

every possible stakeholder to ensure that any concerns were addressed. we likely would have supported the project without lyric asking us, but the inclusion of the neighborhood non-profits and stakeholders throughout their planning process makes our support even stronger. the proposed expansion of the property will provide vulnerable lgbtq youth more services, and more safe space and more job training and graighter path grer their future. as president of the neighborhood association, a neighborhood that is beloved worldwide as the heart of the city's lgbtq community, i cannot imagine a more important cause than this one. and we heavily encourage you to approve this project as presented. thank you so much for your time. >> question: hello, commissioners, i am lance pope. as a black and indigenous queer disabled youth born and raised in the castro, lyric is a second

home to me. lyric has given me opportunities from employment to education and even socialization that i wasn't able to find elsewhere in the city. at the same time that lyric has grown in the resources they can provide and the need to come in, it seems like the house got smaller. the small space is difficult to navigate with mobility, and i wasn't able to access the resources that i had built there. during pandemic times, lyric has done a fantastic job to provide what youth need to keep afloat. but the more i worry about the very vulnerable youth who rely on the organization and the upcoming accessibility of the house. it's crucial that queer and disabled youth not only have the space but we can stay alive while accessing it. thank you. championship hello and good afternoon, commissioners. i am amy pevo and i live

directly next door to lyric. i was on the ground floor and so there's very few people who would be as affected as my household. i fully support this project. generations of lgbt plus youth have come to san francisco seeking acceptance and community. the community and coalitions that those individuals built have changed law on both the regional and the national levels, making life better for lgbtq plus folks all over the u.s. and the world. building those communities starts with organizations like lyric who focus on ensuring lgbtq plus youth have access to housing, health care and internships and emergency services and general support. lyric understands that healthy communities and healthy cities start with healthy individuals. the services they provide are the very definition of essential. with attacks on the lgbtq plus communities coming from the highest levels of government, lyric is more important than ever. i am myself a survivor of

childhood abuse, and i see that this renovation of give lyric space to have improved services and to make the neighborhood greener and cleaner and safer. i urge the planning commission to approve the proposal without the essential modification. thank you so much for your time. >> caller: hello, i am also a direct neighbor of lyric. i live at 131 collingwood street which is above 129 collingwood street and directly next door though not in line directly with the proposed construction. i support lyric in its desire to rebuild its space and make it more accessible. i think that lyric is a good neighbor and i would hope that would continue to be a good neighbor, including throughout the construction process. we have no objections in our

household to lyric's proposed plan to renovate and we would expect and fully hope that they would, of course, take any reasonable things that need to be taken into account during the construction process, should that affect either our building or any other neighbors' building and we would hope and expect that they would take that into consideration and be a good neighbor as they have been throughout the seven years that i have lived next door to them. thank you. >> caller: good afternoon, commissionerrers. i'm tracy zu and a former board member. and i'm here to speak wholeheartedly in support of lyric's application for a conditional use permit for the renovation of the ground floor. i was born into an immigrant family and i had my first job as a summer intern after i graduated from high school. early in my career as a youth development worker i was invited

to serve on the board for three years and i learned that lyric had the good fortune of owning its building. it's important to have a welcoming space for lgbtq youth in san francisco. as many see san francisco as a queer-friendly city, many youth don't have enough uplifting spaces to be themselves. lyric has opened up so many doors for queer youth like myself to enter through various programs. internships and housing referrals, therapy, support groups for sex workers and trans youth, to name a few. the purple doors of lyric are a physical commitment to queer youth that they belong in san francisco and approving this application means that there will be more of the lyric house to host more youth safely and with more joy. you can create more joy and safety for queer youth by approving this application. thank you.

>> caller: good afternoon, commissioners. for full disclosure, i'm the president of the san francisco arts commission and today i speak on behalf of the san francisco lgbtq community center with i am the deputy executive director. since opening our doors close to 20 years ago, the center has been a stakeholder in the castro neighborhood. and a programming partner with lyric, serving the lgbtq plus transitioning aged youth. i want to express strong support for lyric's proposed project. lyric's services are a vital part of the network of services available to support san francisco and the bay area's young lgbtq people. and the plan to expand the space to support youth as well as to increed the a.d.a. access will create valuable resources for the prem do not nealy low-income youth they serve. lyric has been an integral part of the castro neighborhood for

decades now and it's one of the few essential non-profits operating in the neighborhood and this project needs to move forward in order to support some of the most vulnerable people in our community. these are precarious times for lgbtq youth. many continue to be disconnected from services and especially during this health emergency, many lack the access to supportive spaces that meet them with respect, love and kindness. at lyric, young people, particularly black and indigenous people of color, trans and non-binary youth receive education and career training and health promotion services and they have the opportunity to build community, which is so vital and necessary for them to thrive. i urge you to approve and to support this proposed project today as time is of the essence. thank you so much for your time. >> caller: good afternoon. i am mary helar, and i strongly

support the request by lyric to make proposed changes that will enhance their ability to provide valuable services that serve the youth in our neighborhood. thank you very much for your consideration. >> clerk: members of the public, if you wish to speak to this matter press star 3 to get in the queue. commissioners, i see no -- well, always a couple. we have a call more callers, i apologize. >> president koppel: sorry, take the callers, please. >> hello, commissioners. i am douglas styles and i was born and raised in san francisco and i'm the executive director of huckleberry youth programs, a partner of lyric. i'm reading a letter from someone who could not speak today. dear san francisco planning

commissioners, i am writing in support of lyric's proposed capital renovation project in san francisco. the proposed project will enhance lyric's existing space and accommodate their growing demand for supportive services. lyric's mission to build a healthy community and to develop meaningful relationships has been part of the castro neighborhood since 1993. lyric provides crucial services to the lgbtq2 plus youth in our community and they continuously inspire positive social change. lyric's staff has doubled in size and extending the services to accommodate their expanding group programs and individual sessions. i respectfully ask that the san francisco planning commission please consider lyric's request to expand their existing space at the collingwood location. thank you in advance for your consideration. sincerely scott wiener.

as one of the strongest partners working with youth in san francisco, our programs, along with scott wiener, support the expansion of lyric's facilities. thank you, thank you for your time and your consideration. >> caller: good afternoon, commissioners. daniel bergorac. i'm the co-owner of a business on castro street. i was the president of the merchant association for castro. and we are concerned about the condition of the approval of this. and on the lot between the lane and rear buildings. and the restrictions that limit the use to 19 persons. in creating condition 17, your staff may have misread the plans that 8.04. and your staff may have looked at the line on the chart that refers to the open space between the two buildings only and noted that it refers to 19 as the

maximum occupancy load. however, the occupancy load for this portion of the property should be all of the property rather than just the main building. that is the occupant load should be the load for the open space, and the load of the rear yard and annex together. the chart shows that when you have the open rear yard combined, the occupancy level is 49. any limit to 19 means that the former garage now becoming an annex for programming could not be occupied. the staff meetings have been on the outside space with all 32 members. that's not the only time in the past when there's been more than 19 people that have occupied it. none of the three adjacent neighbors today have expressed objection about the prior use ever the rear yard. another problem -- [bell] is item 17, the time limited from 10:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. rather than it be 6:00 to 9:00,

where they -- >> clerk: it sounds like you're part of the sponse project sponsor team? >> no, i'm not, i'm a resident and business owner. >> clerk: okay, i apologize, go ahead. you have 30 seconds. >> caller: to meet the needs of the programming funded by the city, both the interior and the exterior would need to be open to 9:00 p.m. i strongly urge the commission to approve lyric's growth plans. the castro is a welcoming and an accepting neighborhood. we sure care about our youth and we need to focus on the gay youth of san francisco. thank you so much for your time. >> caller: hello, commissioners, i am jeffrey picket, the current president of the rotary club of san francisco castro, which normally is at (indiscernible)

and not during the pandemic. we are via zoom right now. i am reading a letter from someone who could not speak today. dear planning commissioners, i support the lavender youth information center which is the proposed project at 123-127 collingwood street. i live at 267 diamond street. i support their desire to expand and to improve their facilities to provide services that are essential to the youth in our community. i care about these issues because i wish i had a place like lyric when i was younger. our youth need all of the support they can get. they are tomorrow's leaders. lyric is quiet and respectful to their residential neighborhood surroundings. jodie, their executive director, has reached out to me personally to talk through the renovation project and how it will benefit the organization. they have always been good communicators both about the regular activities and this

project. the renovation project will not significantly impact the enjoyment of my home or a place in the neighborhood in any way. the improvement and accessibility to their facilities will allow me to enjoy my home and our neighborhood even more. i strongly encourage you to approve the proposed project for lyric's facilities. sincerely -- prospect bee [bell] >> clerk: i should ask if there's any additional members of the public to speak to this matter, you need to press star, 3 to enter the queue. i see no members of the public requesting to speak at this time. commissioners, public comment is closed and the matter is now before you. >> president koppel: commissioner moore. >> vice-president moore: i wanted to thank everybody for testifying -- with your

testimony, it was inspiring. (please stand by)

>> there's a couple that still need to be discussed with the project architect, which i plan to do tomorrow. we're very close. we both have incentives to make sure that property is -- we have no wall. we are going to settle this very quickly, and we would ask that this not be continued. >> vice president moore: okay. i have a question because you were cut short in your presentation. the second is the occupancy load. this seems to be a misinterpretation. occupancy is appropriate for the use that we are approving

it. i think there is more need than the few that were mentioned. >> you are free to look at the chart on page a 04. if you look at the chart, the architect's information will note that there's areas that point out in the middle occupancy is. the rear yard occupancy should be for both the rear yard and the space between the two buildings. the space between the two buildings and the annex together have an occupancy of 49. the tenant looked at the occupancy of the open space, which is only 14, and assumed that keeping the occupancy for the entire rear space and the annex.

[inaudible] we respectfully ask the arc tech and the commission to look at that chart and to note that the open space and the area behind it and the annex should have an occupancy of 49 people. we also had a question about the [inaudible] operations, but i'll just limit my response now to your question about occupancy. thank you. >> vice president moore: if you want to go further to clarify that, i'd rather have it on record because the architect wrote a letter to us. i'd just like a record that these issues are being further addressed and clarified. >> well, i don't -- i believe staff has understood the error. i wasn't able to give the presentation, but if staff is okay with allowing me to submit as 49 instead of 19 for the rear half of the lot, we'd be very pleased if they'd accept that. the one question we do have,

and thank you for allowing me is operations [inaudible] the operations of the conditions of approval indicate that they should only be to 6:00 p.m. appropriate days of the week. programming needs to be at least six days a week. we respectfully request that the conditions of approval read that the operations, both indoor and outdoor, be allowed to be up to 9:00 p.m. each day of the week. if there's any consideration of neighbors, then i haven't heard any disputing this program. we'd be happy to limit it to 8:00, but the funding and the programmi programming requires that we be allowed to operate indoors and outdoors. thank you. >> vice president moore: if you could explain what the current operating hours are so that the commission has an understanding

of what it is you'll be asking for? >> well, the current operating hours and the conditional use approval that i helped obtain about 20 years ago is 9:00 to 6:00, but over time, people have stayed a little longer, and now that [inaudible] has come through for more operations, we feel [inaudible] used for city funds and the programming, we will need to extend that 10:00 to 6:00 to 10:00 to 9:00 p.m. sometimes, staff needs to meet, and there's no room for the staff. sometimes staff needs to meet in the open yard or in the annex and the open yard or they may be meeting up to 9:00 on certain nights, and we respectfully request that that be allowed to happen. >> vice president moore: thank

you for explaining that. i believe that a facility of this importance should be allowed to operate during those hours, but i will defer to other commissioners commenting, and i am in support of this project. >> thank you. >> president koppel: before i notice commissioner diamond, i'm in favor of this project. it warmed my heart hearing other commissioners, other community members calling in, putting their two cents in. we historically had some representation for the lgbtq community on our commission. currently we do not specifically, but i wanted to just let everyone know that no part of you guys have been lost or forgotten, and definitely in support of you here today. i will call on commissioner diamond next. >> commissioner diamond: i,

too, am in support of this project and wanted to commend eric on this project and the support of the community members. i'm supportive of the decrease in the number of occupancy load of the outdoor area and of the extended hours. but i do have a question about condition 21, the report back condition. it strikes me as unusual. i haven't seen much of this in the year that i've been on the commission, or almost a year, and i'm wondering why we would impose this kind of a condition on a relatively small nonprofit when we don't impose these report-back conditions on large office projects, on hotels, on large multifamily buildings. i'm not getting why, in this particular instance, especially when there doesn't seem to be community information on this project, why we're requiring

this a year from now? so perhaps staff could address that, i'd be interesting in hearing from other commissioners whether they feel it's important to retain that condition or whether we should [inaudible]. >> yes, gabriella here, department staff. in terms of the condition to report back, that condition was in place in the 2000 c.u. that was approved, and that's a little bit of combination of things. just because of the uniqueness of the site, it is located in the rh-3 zoning district. the conditions are meant to protect the residents and concerns that way. the report back is kind of a way for us to be able to communicate to you all if there are any issues that arise. previously, there was -- i think the sentiment pretty good is now in terms of the project, and they operate in good faith, so the discretion is entirely up to you all if you would like to maintain that. it seems like we have pretty

good neighborhood support for the project. >> commissioner diamond: thank you. >> yeah. >> president koppel: commissioner fung? >> commissioner fung: question for staff. gabriela, you and i had discussed the extent of the conditions in the previous conditional use were fairly extensive, and apparently, there must have been some concerns raised by the neighbors at that time, when it was originally accomplished. you've indicated that there have been no complaints in recent times, i presume, and that they seem to be in fairly

good condition relationships with their neighbors. what is staff's opinion about the change in times for the outdoor open space? it's different than what you have proposed. >> yes, gabriela here. so in terms of the history behind, like i mentioned, previously, the initial establishment was a bit -- and there were neighbors that had questions and concerns in 2001 that second to you came in [inaudible] a few neighbors with concerns and [inaudible] today, we don't have any active commission cases or received any complaints, so the facility has operated in good faith. so with that said, i think the expansion of hours in operation is fine. i think from the public comment, they're fully supported, even by the adjacent neighbors, so it's all up to

you guys, as well. >> commissioner fung: okay. >> president koppel: mr. teague? >> thank you, president koppel. i just wanted to add a little bit more context. it is fairly common when you have commercial or nonresidential uses, especially when this is going to have operations or assembly in the rear, and you're surrounded by residential properties, to have these type of report backs just because there's the obvious potential for conflict that there doesn't apply or assume that there will be conflict. i think when hours of operation go later than existing, that's always a concern. finally, this is a specific organization making this request, but the planning commission would be granting this for land use.

if this organization were to leave, other organizations could use this site and operate it under this criteria. i just wanted to give some reasons for why we give these recommendations of these types of report backs. and this block has a really strong pattern of rear yard structures on the adjacent parcels to this one, but also, really, the entire block, and what's being proposed is not in any way significantly greater than what's been there before for many years, and in the front, as was pointed out, would be really an improvement and allowed to be able to remove that curb cut and garage door. so i'm generally in support of the variance, as well. >> president koppel: commissioner moore. >> vice president moore: thank you, zoning administrator

teague, for giving this positive step. in response to commissioner diamond's question, the record back condition is actually frequently uses for rear yard uses, but the predominant land use is not exactly what we're doing. i consider it a positive outreach for the planning commission to keep an open eye and remain basically a negotiator between the parties. we're not putting this as a punitive measure but as a participatory gesture. i have seen in 99.9% of the cases above feedback on these reports. so i would suggest that we keep it and make the motion that we approve these conditions. >> president koppel: second. >> clerk: commissioners, just to clarify, you are approving with conditions as requested to

be amended by the project sponsor. staff seems to be in support of the increasing the occupancy to 49 and the programming to 9:00 p.m. >> vice president moore: yes. >> clerk: is that what the seconder is in support of? >> vice president moore: yes. >> clerk: very good. there is a motion to support the program and increase the hours of operation to 9:00 p.m. on that motion -- [roll call] >> clerk: so moved, commissioners. that motion passes unanimously, 6-0. zoning administrator, what say you? >> i would close the public hearing with the variance

granted. >> clerk: commissioners, somebody needs to mute their phone or get paper or their mic. commissioners, that will place us on item 10 for case number 2014.0734cua -- [inaudible]. this is a conditional use authorization. staff, are you prepared to make your presentation? >> yes. can you hear me? >> y >> clerk: yes, we can. >> good afternoon, president koppel, vice president moore, and commissioners. [inaudible] to legalize the change of use from a community facility to a performing arts school for grades 6 through 12 for up to 250 students.

the proposal would add a new third floor for seven group housing units for teachers and visiting individuals, and a second floor renovation and addition to the existing two-story building. the overall building area would increase from approximately 31,000 square feet to 54,700 square feet. [inaudible] >> the project includes 25 classrooms, seven parking spaces, 103 class one bicycle spaces and 23 class two bicycle spaces. the project is also requesting a planned unit modification to coprovisions related to the floor area ratio under section

124, front set back, under section 132, rear yard, under section 134, and dwelling unit exposure under section 140. the commission would need to approve a conditional use authorization with the planned unit development modifications. since last week's commission packet distribution, staff has received seven additional letters, two in support of the project, and five in opposition to the project. i just want to clarify that four of the opposition letters that you have received were also referenced in the staff report. staff has also received an inquiry from the commission regarding pickup and drop-off

information. appendix j describes the various transportation management strategies that the project sponsor has agreed to implement, such as staggered times for pickup and drop-off, having staff on the curb for pickup and dropoff periods, and applying to the san francisco transportation authority to lengthen the existing white zone for passenger loading to reduce queueing and double parking on the street. the department finds that the project is consistent with the neighborhood. the project is consistent with the general policies of the

environmental plan. the department's recommendation is to approve with conditions. this concludes my summary of the project, and i am available for questions. thank you. >> clerk: thank you, mary. project sponsor, are you prepared to make your presentations? >> i am. can you hear me? >> clerk: we can. you have five minutes. >> can i have the slides, please? i'm hearing an echo on my end. i'm not quite sure -- can i have the slides, please? thank you. my name is larry badner, and i

represent the institute of arts and culture. dr. cherie zhang, the president of the institution of arts and culture, as is [inaudible]. cherie, can you mute your phone? commissioners, i want to thank you for hearing this, and i see we're on the second slide. since 2014, the school has been located in potrero hill. in 2013, they purchased the boys and girls club at the current [inaudible] locations and they waited for the boys and girls club to leave the location and move to their new location down in city hall area. in 2015, they occupied the building largely as-is. next slide, please. this is the only private arts

high school in san francisco. it covers grades 6 through 12, with college prep and professional education in performing and visual arts. they have after-school and weekend community programs. there's a big focus on traditional chinese culture and band. precovid, they had approximately had43 students. they are proposing approximately 350 students, but that will take a while to get to that level. next slide, please. the existing facility is a two-story structure with a play area enclosed by a fence on the second floor. there are five dance studios, six classrooms, and approximately 31,000 square feet. there are significant space constraints. next slide, please.

>> clerk: larry, i'm going to interrupt you for a second. i've paused the time, but it sounds like you're flipping pages and rubbing the mic, and it's coming across really bad, so i just mention that. >> thank you. appreciate this. i'm also getting an echo, but thank you for this. >> clerk: i'm not getting an echo. >> maybe my copeople have their mic on. if they could mute. okay. with a significant set back in the rear. there would be six dance studios, two art studios, three music studios, 14 classrooms, and approximately 49,500 student. i think we're the only school that's proposing teacher housing. seven group housing for teachers and visiting -- group

housing units for teachers and visiting artists. next slide, please. we have had a number of the meetings with the neighborhood over the years. one of the things we've heard is the rear extension was a problem. we've moved the third floor set back from 5 feet to 25 feet to 35 feet, and the side set back has been increased from 5 feet to 10 feet. we've expanded the white zone to accommodate an additional eight to ten spaces, and we've added seven parking spaces with the intent to take parking off the street. there was a concern about rooftop mechanical.

we have set back that rooftop mechanical by 23 to 30 feet and enclosed it in sound proofing. next slide, please. there was a concern about shadows. we've done a shadow study which shows that the only shadows are really in december, and those shadows really are on rooftops, not in rear yards. next step, please. we've heard concerns about the existing and the proposed pick-up and drop-off. we are encouraging children doing [inaudible] in child care. the white zone is not currently active because the school or sfmta is not enforcing the white zone. [inaudible] is slow street, which means there's no through

traffic, so when there is some double traffic, it's a minimal inconvenience. sfmta notes the purpose of slow streets is for essential travel, and the access to child care is essential. next slide, please. as barmary mentioned, we do ha an extensive transportation allowance plan that talks about the extension -- i am not going to take my queue -- i am going to take my queue, and i will conclude my statement. >> clerk: commissioners, we should open this up for public comment. through the chair, you'll have

two minutes. caller, are you prepared to submit your public testimony? >> hello. my name is terry [inaudible], and i'm a middle school principal in san francisco. i'm just calling in to offer my support for the san francisco institute for the performing arts. even though they are a competing school, they offer a high school product, and they offer a program that no one else offers in the city, especially when it comes to the cultural dance and graphic arts, and it's a great opportunity. i've worked side by side with dr. cherie zhang, and you could not ask for anyone better. i look forward to sending many

of my middle school students to this future high school. thank you for listening. >> clerk: go ahead, caller. >> hello. my name is vivian dwyer, and i'm a resident at 1965 page street, and i work with paulette taggart architects in san francisco, and i'm a chairman of the a.i.a. committee. i have some concerns about the conditional use to change it from a community center to a performing arts school. this'll create more density for people that will need these

types of community services? and currently, the -- my concern is, also, there hasn't been complete transparency with the performing arts program and what they're trying to do and the information they've shared with the community, so we're not feeling entirely confident with what they propose, and that the growth will actually occur, and also, dealing with this change on a residential street to have this many cars coming and dropping people off. they block the street, and even before covid, it was not a situation that they seemed to be able to control. so we hope that whatever decision you make, that they're going to follow up with their

proposal, and that everybody follow the terms as accepted. thank you. >> hi. my name is kristin houck. i'm a parent of a school student at the san francisco institute for the arts. my son is absolutely thriving in this school, and i think this is a very important addition to the community. it's a very unique school. we are from bayview-hunters point, and they go out of their way to attract other students. i think it needs to be approved so we can open it up to more students in that way. thank you so much for your time. >> clerk: go ahead, caller. >> yes, can you hear me?

>> clerk: yes, we can. >> thank you. yes, i live across the street from the school. i'm a neighbor, and i have many, many concerns about this expansion of the school. ever since they've become my neighbor, there has been excessive traffic congestion? there are constant traffic issues, and the school has acted very aggressively in taking parking away. myself, i've experienced it personally, and other neighbors. there's noise right now, i'm having a little problem hearing you because there are children on the roof yelling and screaming. this is usually an all-day experience for me. we have construction in our neighborhood, but typically, it is over around 4:00-ish.

normally, we don't have construction on saturday. this proposed construction is 6:00 to 6:00, 12 hours a day, six days a week. i've counted on this block 15 cars that are being used by the star. 15 cars on one block. that's not counting the parking spaces, and this is for what? so with 250 students, these issues are going to be out of control. so a lot of concerns, and i would like the commission to please consider those concerns. thank you. >> hello. >> clerk: yes, go ahead, caller. >> hi. my name is eric [inaudible]. i live in the neighborhood at

woodland avenue. i've lived here with my wife and family since 1999, and we love the transitioning of that area of the neighborhood. i think it's, from the days of the califoods and the mcdonalds, i think it's improvements, and this is further improvements, and we're looking forward to seeing it. my daughter also attends the school, and we're thrilled that she can walk to school. there aren't many high schools in the neighborhood, so that fills a niche for that reason, but it also fills another niche. she applied for soda, and she didn't get in. there just aren't enough spaces for the number of talented students that are in the city.

if the s.f. institution for the arts wasn't an option, i don't know what my daughter, who wants to study opera, would be able to do to get that necessary education to enter the arts. i also intend to live here the rest of my life, and i'd like to see that school thrive because i think a school with the motivated people that i see there and filling the need that it does can only approve the neighborhood and attract more families to it. thank you very much. i appreciate your time. >> thank you. my name is denise bradley, and i live across the street from 1950 page street, and i wish to net my concerns to the expansion plans sought by the school. no clear information has been provided by the school listing the needs to expand the building that will be impacting my neighborhood.

the current enrollment is approximately 50 students, and the school has produced no documentation supporting the expansion to 350 students as they project and they say they need this plan for. along with ten of my neighbors, i submitted a letter with concerns to the planning department, and this letter was also provided to the city. at the most recent community outreach meeting hosted by the school on september 17, the school's director, its consulting planner and architect were not able to answer some of the questions that were raised. due to technical concerns at that virtual meeting, many of the people who were attempting to access the meeting were not able to, and they were not able to provide their input. i request that the planning commission delay any approval of the conditional use authorization of the school's plan until more detailed information is provided on structural engineering issues, parking issues, shadow impacts,

and other concerns raised by the neighbors that will impact our residential neighborhood. thank you. >> hello? >> clerk: yes, go ahead, caller. >> hi. hi. good afternoon, commissioners. my name is natalia. i'm a parent, and my [inaudible] is attending the san francisco high school of the arts. my daughter is in the chinese dance program, and my son is in the art [inaudible] program. i want to bring up this is not a typical dance and arts school. it is a truly amazing and one of a kind arts school. i have a background in dance growing up in hong kong, and i looked for a dance school for my daughter for years. we looked for years in our area [inaudible] and i'm so happy to find this school. the school covers so much more

technique than any other chinese dance school offers. [inaudible] my daughter is only nine years old, and she has already learned so many techniques, such as side aerial and front aerial, something that i would have to send her to other gyms to learn. [inaudible] the program in traditional art is truly nourishing for children and will truly bring out the talents of the arts. i'm very proud that we have this school in san francisco. i've spent some time in other cities and living in other countries, and i have to say this school is something you won't find elsewhere. it is a hidden gem. i hope the commission allows the school to expand the

current facility. it is limiting the amount of children that can attend the school. i believe with the expansion of this school, more and more children will benefit from the opportunity of attending this school. we need this school, and san francisco needs this school. thank you very much. >> hello? >> clerk: yes, go ahead, caller. >> oh, hi. my name is michael mcgowan, and i'm a parent of a student at high school of the arts. my wife and i have been residents of san francisco for 25 years, and lived in the inner richmond for the last 15 years. my daughter has been a full-time student at the school for the last three years, and she first began participating in their after-school programs as a kindergartener, so we have

eight, almost nine years of experience with the high school of the arts. i just want to lend my full support to their expansion plans. it's been an excellent experience for us, and one that i think, as other parents have expressed, it's difficult to find arts programs in the city, and the city needs more of these types of programs. and i would also like to add that my other two children, who are in the s.f. public school system also take piano lessons and dance at the school in the after-school program, as well. so i just wanted to lend my support, and that was it. thank you. >> hello? >> clerk: yes, go ahead,

caller. >> my name's jason [inaudible]. i'm a parent of a student in the san francisco high school of the arts. i'm here to speak in support of s.f. arts high school project which would allow more students to study the various arts programs. [inaudible] is an accredited school [inaudible] and participated in the dance program and the chinese language program since 2017. my kid has benefited greatly from being in the dance

program. [inaudible] in arts, dance, music, and more. they will require more space. in conconclusilusion, i fully the expansion program for the arts high school so more families can benefit like we have, and i urge your approval for this project. thank you very much. >> hello? >> clerk: yes, go ahead. >> hello. my name is angela [inaudible] and i am a resident of san francisco, and i strongly support this project? i am a parent of two current students, one dance student and one arts student, and they are thriving in this environment? in addition, i am also a san francisco public schoolteacher,

and for this school to try to provide housing for teachers in this expensive city, how can we not grant this proposal to go through because this would really, truly support school and teachers. thank you. >> oh, hi. can you hear me? >> clerk: yes, we can hear you. >> hello? oh, great. thank you. good afternoon, commissioners. my name is [inaudible] yu. i'm a father of my high schooler, who study at the high school of the arts, and he joined high school of the arts when he was in middle school. and now, he's become a true artist. he does amazing works at that school, which inspired and educated by these top quality art teachers. i invite anyone to come visit

the school, and i'm more than happy to show you my son's amazing art piece that he has done at that school. i'm really proud of my son, and i want to express that i am really proud that san francisco has a high school for the performing arts. i want to urge you to expand the school to that more students can benefit from a high quality education at san francisco high school of the arts. thank you. >> hello? hello? >> clerk: yes, go ahead. >> hi. my name is kathrin lang. i, along with my parents, are the owners of 1922 page.

i'm speaking on behalf of us and 1928 page, sam and maria dorsey. we own the two victorians adjacent to the project. we feel that the project is out of the scope of the neighborhood. the proposed building is twice the size of the number of building, and the number of occupants will be increased five times. this will have a direction effect on decreasing the neighborhood's residential aspect, and in addition, more personally, to both of our houses. this new proposed height increase will actually completely tower over both of our homes, casting shadow across both of our houses and our yards. right now, i can only see from the top floor of my house, like, 10 feet of daylight with

the wall of the existing school. with the new two floors, it'll be no daylight, no sunshine. also, the -- there will be windows on the east side of this school, where now, there is no windows. those windows will be looking directly into our properties and infringing on the privacy of our house at 1922 page and our neighbor's house at 1928 page. the depth of the project in the rear is not in keeping with the green space and the rear that are in all of the existing homes here in the neighborhood. this is really a residential neighborhood, and it's been mischaracterized as something that's more commercial, and this building would be changing the character of the neighborhood in a way that i think is not desirable. i also feel that the neighbors' input has not really been taken into effect for the scope of

this project, and that the san francisco school of the arts has not been clear to any of the surrounding neighbors, the scope and scale -- >> clerk: thank you, ma'am. that's your time. >> all right. thank you very much. >> clerk: okay. members of the public, last call for public comment. commissioners, i see no members of the public requesting to speak. public comment is closed, and the matter is now before you. >> president koppel: commissioner diamond? >> commissioner diamond: thank you very much. i think it is a wonderful opportunity to expand arts programming for middle schoolers and high schoolers, something that's not generally offered in depth in public schools. i think it's a good reuse of the boys and girls club. i don't consider an upper limit of 250 to be that significant when compared to other independent schools in the city

or compared to the use of the building by the boys and girls club. i think it's fine, actually, a good idea for schools to be in residential neighborhoods, but i would say it's fine only so long as there are robust and enforceable transportation management plans. and to that end, i have reviewed exhibit j to the transportation report, which is a difficult eye page document signed by the school but outlines in detail the elements of the transportation plan. and i believe that larry badener was beginning to explain that in detail. i'm also interested in knowing from the city staff and the city attorney's office if we can enforce condition j as a condition of approval because we need to have some mechanism

by which the school -- the neighbors can have an enforcement device if, in fact, the school does not comply with all of the elements of the plan, which they have indicated that they're going to. and short of including them as a condition of approval, i'm not sure how we can approach that. so maybe staff -- well, maybe larry can outline the elements of the transportation management plan, and then, i'd like to hear from staff, if that's okay, about how we can construct this as a condition of approval. >> can you hear me? >> we can. >> could you -- mary, could you put up these slides again? well, i'll step into it.

okay. the points of the transportation management plan are a white zone extension, staggered day starting, so the school starts at staggered times, thus reducing the loading of the cars. a formalized drop-off and pickup procedures are sent to parents, and that's available on the web. there's a queueing mcment program, which i'll talk about, transportation demand management program that encouraging transit, bike, and pedestrian modes and serves [inaudible]. >> larry, can you say there was a coordinator? what i'm really anxious to hear is that there's someone from the school who's assigned to be out there, ensuring that people

are adhering to the loading zone requirements and not doing u-turns and back ups and everything that affects neighbors' residents. >> yes, i was getting to that. there's someone preparing the children in the lobby to get out when they are called. there's at least one on-street monitor, and they communicate through a walkie-talkie system. the on-street monitor creates a maximum of 2.5 minute loading. mary, i'm on the next page. there's no double parking allowed. they help with receiving and dispatching the children, and they manage the white zone and the queue.

if the queue gets too long, they send people around to come and pick up again, rather than waiting. they also maintain a complaint log. >> commissioner diamond: okay. so i assume that the school used outside expertise from a consultant who has prepared these plans for other schools in the city, is that correct? >> that's correct. it was prepared by aecom. >> commissioner diamond: could the staff address how we would attach this as a condition of approval, if -- how we'd do that. >> commissioner, we can adopt a condition of approval that

would reference appendix j. the transportation management plan is actually quite large and has a lot of measures within it that are somewhat ambiguous, and there's a lot of encouragement and discouragement that measures, and there's some things that are internal operation measures. i think our preference as a department, thinking down the road, in terms of what's effective conditions and what we can enforce and implement are the most objective parts to your plan. so the fact that they have at least one curb side person during drop off and pick up, we obviously can't require m.t.a. to grant approval to expand the white zone, but we can require the sponsor to apply for that, you know, at least to go for that. and so my only, you know, caution would be just to, if possible, thinking about those

elements of the transportation management plan that are more objective and more easy to implement and enforce over time than maybe perhaps just wholesale adopting the entire management plan as a condition of approval. >> commissioner diamond: all right. and is this the kind of project that we could attach -- is this a project where we could attach the one-year report back kind of condition? is this appropriate for that? >> absolutely. i mean, that type of condition is almost always about operations and potential conflicts, right? and there's lots of different context where that comes into play. this is obviously one of them, where you have kind of an institutional use but very heavy transportation specific issues in a residential area. if you wanted to have a one-year report back, that would be absolutely appropriate. >> commissioner diamond: so fellow commissioners, i would

be interested in attaching two conditions to this. one is the one-year report back, depending on your views, and also, i am mindful of mr. teague's suggestion, and i don't think we could draft this condition on the fly right now about what objective elements are included. if you think we can, that's great, but i would also be open to continuing this for two weeks in order to draft a condition that contained objective transportation management measures so that we could impose something that's enforceable. so i'd be interested in hearing the other commissioners' views on this. >> president koppel: commissioner moore? >> clerk: commissioner moore, you may be muted.

>> vice president moore: that happens quite easily. mr. baddener, i have a couple of questions for you, just following up on what commissioner diamond was asking. mr. badenner? >> can you hear me? >> vice president moore: are you there? >> can you hear me? >> vice president moore: yes, i can hear you now. thank you so much. i hope you're well. mr. badener, can you speak a little bit to the s.o.-type rooms that you are speaking of? we have similar rooms as other schools where we see accommodations for visiting faculty, but we've never seen them to the condition of s.r.o.s.

there is the adult revisitation for privacy, kitchen and bathrooms, but in your proposal, we see a communal kitchen and bathroom, which is somewhat unusual. could you comment and explain that a little bit to us? >> sure. do you want to -- i'm going to let -- >> vice president moore: mr. badener, are you there -- okay. you've put up the drawing. okay. >> can you hear sharon? >> clerk: no, unfortunately, we can't. >> okay. >> okay. cherie is explaining to me that

it is more like a dorm, and they are communal living. >> vice president moore: since this is communal living, this is somewhat unusual when we're talking about teachers who need a little bit more privacy from students. i'm talking about the principles that underlie mostly this type of arrangement. >> cherie, do you have a response to that? >> vice president moore: why are we unable to hear the applicant speak in herself? is he or she muted? >> i can hear her on my phone, but this was a concern that i raised earlier, how to get

people more than myself talking. >> vice president moore: if you are the project planner or facilitator, are you not familiar with those basic principles of how the school is organized? >> i am familiar with how it is organized. i did want to get to cherie, who's more familiar with it, to respond. >> clerk: larry, you've got to put her on speakerphone so she can be heard through your microphone. >> she's on my phone through the microphone. >> vice president moore: if we cannot get her today, this would be an additional element of clarification if, indeed, the rest of the commission is looking for a continuance on other questions. the other thing i would like to ask you is you have, over the years, been in discussions about many different buildings and building types. i'm a little concerned that the

third floor of the building, indeed, would put the adjoining two victorians to the east significantly at a disadvantage because a building of this size with a third floor will completely put them into shadow. i like that particular question be deferred for an adequate answer. the other thing, because you are the community oriented planner, mr. badener, the community has expressed several concerns that i have read, that there is a lack of communication and lack of transparency. you are a very hands-on person, having sat in on, over the years, of many planning commission meetings. can you speak of why community members are writing to us, expressing this concern,

transparency and engagement? >> commissioners, we've had a number of meetings, and cherie is on-site, always open for drop-in and for conversation. we've met with a preapplication meeting in 2016. we had a meeting in february 2017, so we've been very open with the neighbor. >> vice president moore: so that is very great, but that is four years ago, that is three years ago, that is two years ago, and with coronavirus, i believe there may have been people who may have moved who didn't know what was happening. [please stand by]

>> it can be in a couple of pages i would hope that if we continue the project sponsor provider and really use the benefits of the other plan in addressing some of these same issues and that have brought forward in this particular project. the mobile app that's been used has significantly assisted in the pick up in terms of the cueing and waiting and everything else. and it has been highly

successful at other schools. the one area of this detail quite lengthy is, which think requires further that is related to staff parking. i don't think it's fair to inundate a neighborhood with a 30-odd staff and just ask for from the tdm van pool and things like that which is fine and they can do that. i think we'll need to see something a little bit more robust than that as part of the tdm plan.

>> i also support follow and and a couple of weeks and as for me as well, i have concerns in traffic management plans and the parking and the dwelling units as well. i know ha it looks like the school has been shadow impact but i'm wondering with communication that can be properly addressed or more transparent on that. i have questions in terms of the dwelling exposure. it looks like four units are incompliance with the required rear yard or open yard. the three units are not.

and just logic for our staff. >> are you questioning whether or not the group housing as proposed meets exposure requirements into the planning code? >> yes. >> ok. if you do mind, let me just take a quick look at that and i'll be happy to go when you are done with your other comments. >> i'm pretty much done with my comments. i am happy to look at that and follow-up on that. very quickly before i do that, i want to make one quick point relative to some of the transportation comments that have been made and sometimes the terminology and the ideas can get confusing.

this project will have both a tdm plan, a transportation demand plan and they'll have some of the own strategies that they'll employ outside of that and that's really about trying to prevent or reduce the number of vehicles trips that occurred for the project and it's really how do you deal with the trips that do actually occur. so the cars that do show up, what are you going to do it in terms of the drop and pick up the project will achieve 13 points in the plan and the transportation analysis includes some additional work on that and they will have a tdm coordinator which is required by the codes and they'll be doing what the code requires from a demand management perspective and most of the focus of the neighbors and mission is more about how to

handle the trips that actually are current and with that i'm happy to hop off for just a moment and take a quick look at closure and the plans and get back to the commission. >> let me call on commissioner diamond and we can come back to you later. >> my experience with the transportation management plans at multiple schools and on occasion there's a bad actor, a parent who choses or a teacher who choses not to follow the plan, so i am interested in knowing how this school plans to handle that and the school enters into a contract with the parents and with the teachers for other purposes and i'd like to know how the school intends to enforce compliance with the

teachers and it's an indication of the seriousness which you are treatintreating a subject. >> we'll follow-up with that? >> yeah. >> commissioner moore. >> i don't think -- i'm good. >> if i may ask, from your own experience, i understand schools have a community liaison so a phone and what is known to all neighbors and if there's any incident and there's immediate kind of feedback. is that what you hear from other

schools it's a critical component of the plan. i saw a community liaison condition and a draft motion but obviously, it would need to be applicable also for traffic transportation management violations. >> that's correct, i would hope for all aspects of confirmation. >> thank you. >> so we're just waiting inform mr. teague to explain. >> sure. and i was just checking with the motion as well. so, there are in short, some of the rooms meet exposure requirements and some of them don't and that is actually one of the proposals in this pine unit development is requesting an exception for exposure or several of the rooms that don't meet the exposure and or if you

have one common room of a certain size meeting open air that meets the requirement in this case the common area does not front on to any street or open area to that providing it such that all the rear rooms, 1-4, meet exposure but the rooms, i think five, six and seven do not meet exposure and they're about five feet off from being able to get an administrative modification for those rooms and so they are specifically requesting and exception to exposure for those three rooms. >> in terms of the dwelling units or the group housing, in terms, if it's intended for the

teachers and artists as well. it does seem like a community, w. i gueswell, i guess we'll har from the project sponsor when we get more information about the dwelling units. i find that concerning as well. >> go ahead commissioner moore. >> i'd like to make a motion we continue this project and so that the questions that were

raised on different subject matters and -- say that again mr. banner. >> is it possible two weeks and they did. i can continue this matter to october 22nd. >> if there's no objection, i make a motion that we continue this matter until october 22n october 22nd. >> commissioner chan. >> i was going to make that motion. >> if there's no further disability layings there's a motion and second to continue this matter to october 22n october 22nd with direction from the commission to the project sponsor. on that motion -- [ roll call vote ]

that motion passes 6-0. and places us under your discussion ary review calender. this is a discretionary review. is staff prepared to make your presentation. >> i am, jonas. >> michael christianson. it's for discretionary review of building permit 2019-024973 proposing to establish a new 2,500 square foot retail dis

spence reon site smoking and vaporizing lounge at 457 measure a pose a street. cannabis retail is a land use and the urban mix district pursuant to planning and 843. project site is 5,000 square foot one--storey industrial building divided into two condo units. it's located in the urban (inaudible) at the boundary between the dog patch and mission bay neighborhoods. south of the project site the neighborhood is comprised of a mix of small industrial residential and retail uses with the neighborhood rapidly developing as part of the eastern neighborhoods' plan. to the north of the project site to the north are major office blocks under development part of the mission day area redevelopment plan.

close to the dis carry review was publication additionally the dog patch neighborhood provided a letter in opposition to the project and opposition from area residents were received. think have principals with the project the broader dog patch neighborhood is over concentrated with cannabis uses and the business would remain open later than existing cannabis storefront in the neighborhood. the children's ontario, prevents educational services and the dr requester believes it should be considered a school use under planning code section 202.2. in response to these concerns, the dog patch neighborhood was rezoned to urban mixed use zoning districts. under the central waterfront area plan. these zoning districts principally permit cannabis retail uses pursuant to planning

code section 311. while it's true the neighborhood has lacked commercial activity as it has transitioned from an industrial neighborhood to a mixed use district, the addition of commercial activities to the neighborhood is allowed by and encouraged by the zoning controls and area plan. the long-serving number two, existing medical cannabis dispensary at 2544 third street and doing business as dutchman malflat has reduces hours of operation however the city standards hours of operation was 8:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m. daily and this is the precedent acceptance specific cases where compatible was of concern. it's a vacant parcel as a staging area for other construction which in the long-term is planned to be part of the ucsf mission bay campus.

and the underlying zoning district provides no limits to hours of operation and further does not limit other late-night uses such as night-time entertainment which is permitted. as such, there's not a contextual basis for a limit of hours of operation on the site. number three, with regard to the hospital, in response to the request for discretionary review, on march 6th, 2020 the project sponsor submitted a letter of determination the hospital provides education service this is conjunction with the san francisco unified school district. the zoning administrator provided a determination that

the ucsf children's hospital school is a use to the hospital use of the site and the facility operates in a man they're is a typical tie school in terms of its student population and daily transportation to the facility and given they are a inpatient care at the hospital. it does not does qualify from being used as a cannabis retail facility under 202.2. given zone particular does not circumstances warranting discretionary review. the department recommends the commission a proves as proposed. keep those and i am available for any questions.

>> d.r., you need to mute your computer or your phone. or your tension. we're getting a strontelevision. >> you have five minutes. >> sorry to be the 50th person to ask that question. good afternoon, commissioners. my name is joel bean and i live one block south of the subject address. i'm a member of the dog patch neighborhood association and a member of the executive board of that association. i filed this discretionary review request the location was inappropriate. the property the chase center.

the property is located very close to four public parks, in two of which we already seeing substantial marijuana use. it is located very close to two public children's playgrounds and it's on a block of measure a pose a that has no parking or stopping and that carries heavy traffic during both the morning and the afternoon commute hours and during events at chase center. the staff recommendation indicates that quote the site use and the use of both adjacent parcels is industrial and quote. to give some color to that comment, this is a strip with three buildings that backs on to a residential area.

the parcel in the center of 457 measure a pose a is part, also, containing 455 which is used as a residents. it's currently for sale. they contacted me this morning to ask me to let you know that there is a prominent organization that would like to acquire that parcel to build affordable and worker housing. abutting the property at back or to the south the rest of this long block is residential except for sandwich shop and the carpenter's union. the next block to the east is

crane cove park. the block to the west is fully residential except for a restaurant. the map in the aerial photograph of the area that's included in the application are long outdated. but what is shown is as maintenance equipment yard, for example, is a five-storey 50-some odd unit apartment building. the neighborhood is hitting an effective camp for cannabis retailers to the 600-foot rule i hope they were not put for the city to have a cannabis retail location every 600 pete 600 feet throughout all residential areas in the city. this application would be the fifth site allowed within a square block area of dog patch and the eastern slope of petroe hill. to prevent the use of 457 measur457miposis the existence 2

school, under the san francisco unified skill district and within 600 feet of 457 just last month, the zoning administrator issued a letter of determination indicating the school would not qualify as a defined school use under the planning code because it is not the facilities' principle use. the letter of determination indicates that the school serves children which is certainly true and the lod does not mention is that the school also serves their siblings who are housed in the neighborhood nearby to

develop a memorandum of understanding that the business will run and keep with the good neighbor policies, with the dog patch neighborhood association and the boosters neighborhood association. we are very close to an agreement in april pending the outcome of the issue with the administration and with the primary open issue being opening hours which we wanted the applicant to conform to other cannabis retailers in the neighborhood. if they say the application should be approved, despite its inappropriate location, i would urge that it be approved subject to an agreement than operating hours will be between 10:00 a.m. and 9:00 p.m. to conform with those of other cannabis lounges in the neighborhood and subject to the signing of a merve dumb m between the applicant and the neighborhood association. thank you for your time.

>> thank you. public sponsor, you have five minutes. >> good evening, commissioners. this is brendan hallahan representing the project sponsor for item 12, 457 miraposa street. they determined through our collective expertise and experience this location was suitable for a cannabis retail facility. we mailed notification of our plans in an open house schedule for nine open houses for a.

>> there's no use between our proposed business and the ucsf host. the dc was filed in january and it coincided with the covid shut down and resulted in a very painful and extensive 10 month delay on the project. the fact is in our determination that this was a good location for the proposed where you front uses and ucsf.

and they were also no stores west until mission street and south until visitation valley so it was a huge underserved area of the city. the subject location is on a block with no residential uses and no active storefronts or lighting on the block. there's a large building on the corner of third and miraposa. the building on the other side of us is up for sale and it's an art gallery. the closest are mission rock resort restaurant and bar, sandwich shop, stem kitchen and garden are also nearby and of course the hospitals and the chase center are a block away, which attract thousands of people to the area everyday. our plan is to bring a clean, comfortable and safe business to the area providing a lounge for cannabis users instead of on the streets of the waterfront and our store would be the only active storefront on the block that would provide security and

lighting tone sure property crimes do not occur and patrons are not loitering or causing mischief in the area. during the day, we'll provide our neighbors with safe access to affordable lab tested and taxed cannabis and medical patients visiting the medical extras with safe convenient access to high-quality medical cannabis therapeutic products. from the beginning, we've made a good faith effort to engage the neighbors to come up with a plan to rely their concerns and we were rebuffed but we were able to meet with mr. bean and a representative of the dog patch neighbors. after the meet, we proactively drafted a neighborhood mou to memorialize our agreements. unfortunately, we were not able to grow on all the terms because we're not willing to agree to place limits on our hours of operations as evidence of a negative impact of the neighbors or the neighborhood caused by operating under normal operating hours. doing so will cause damage to our business and our chances of succeeding in opening a retail business, we have operated for

10 years and know that customers appreciate that we accommodate working people with our hours and there's no negative impact that results from opening and closing in conformity with the city of san francisco and the stave of california allowable operating hours. at it location where there's activity at night and we have our security present after closing until the 10:30 or 11:00 every night to project the block, our neighbors and the business from people leave the chase center and we are confident that we're going to open a great business at this location and be a benefit to the community. we're also confident that when we're opening and operating our neighbors will appreciate us and the services we provide to the community. i'm available to answer any questions if needed. thank you. >> that concludes project sponsor' presentation. we should open this up for public comment members of the public, this is the opportunity to submit your testimony and

pressing star 3. >> good afternoon, can you hear me? >> yes, we can. >> hello. >> ok. good afternoon. toe fer delanie here. i am the owner of the building that is the art gallery. at 600 illinois or frank's place. i can assure you that neither our communities or the planning department (inaudible) on our neighborhoods by well-funded business entities that create a matrix of dispensaries and

600 feet with a caveat mindful of schools. as you know, we have given the grown light to now four dispensaries in the dog patch, why we need a fifth marijuana dispensary with a security guard or guards for potential danger located across the street from children's hospital and in direct public access to our new waterfront park and the gaslamp. i would recommend that you -- >> thank you, ma'am. that's your time. >> caller: go ahead. >> thank you. my name is brent and i'm a resident at 1301 indiana street and i suppose sort the project and 457miraposa as well as all cannabis project in the dog patch mission bay neighborhoods.

i believe the approval is very important because the neighborhood is growing and the need to meet demands was only one current dispensary, the opening a chase is only going to explode it and there's no place to consume and there's zero consumption lounges in the neighborhood. so, i don't know what everybody else is talking and it will create job opportunities and businesses and prior to covid i visited 457 mirapos a and it would be a welcome edition. i thank you for your consideration. >> hello. can everyone hear me? >> yes. >> caller: hi, michael and i'm a resident of 610 illinois street. i would like everyone to know

that i was originally not opposed to this dispense row i t in practice i am more concerned. my unit looks over the rooftop of this dispensary and there's been a smell of marijuana that has required me to keep my windows shut and my four and a half-year-old son to be putting him to bed and smelling marijuana is increasingly disturbing to the point where i cannot keep my windows open. i am 95% sure the smell musting coming from this building. i see the slights on 24/7. i'm not sure whether they're growing or processing whether it's actually permitted now. i would like to ensure that if this is approved there's