>> good afternoon and welcome to the san francisco planning commission hearing for thursday may 25, 2023 to enable public participation sfgovtv is streaming lime and will receive comment on each item. each speaker allowed up to 3 minute when is you have 30 seconds remaining you will hear a chime. when your time is reached i will announce your time is up and take the next person in the queue. take ment from persons in city hall first. and then open up the remote access line. those call nothing to submit p.m. call 415-554-0001 access

code: 2591 831 0074 ## had you hear your line has been unmuted that is your indication to begin speaking. if you are joining web ex. you need to log in i have at link on today's agenda. and enter c pc 2023. and you need to raise your hand with the raised hand icon. best practice call from a quiet location and mute the volume on device. for those in city hall lineup to the screen side or to your

right. speak clearly and slowly. i ask we silence mobile devices that may sound off. i will take r. president tanner. >> here. >> vice president moore. >> here. >> commissioner braun. >> here. >> commissioner diamond. >> here. >> commissioner imperial. >> here. >> commissioner koppel. >> commissioner ruiz will be absent. item it is for continuance the family housing opportunity special use district planning code and zoning map amendments are proposed to be continued to june first. item 2. the property of 326, 27th street a cu proposed for continuance to july 27 of 23. i have no others proposed to be

continued we should take public comment. members of the public this is your opportunity to address the 2 items proposed to be continued in the chambers come forward. if you are remote press star 3. seeing no requests. commissioners. public comment is closed. your calendar is before you. is it not working? hi. commissioner imperial. move to continue items as proposed. >> seconded. >> on this motion to continue items, commissioner braun >> aye yoochl commissioner diamond. >> aye >> commissioner imperial. >> aye >> commissioner koppel. >> aye >> commissioner mor. >> aye >> president tanner. >> aye >> that motion passes 6-0.

and am place us under commission matters land acknowledgment. thank you. commissioners. ramaytush ohlone acknowledgement the planning commission acknowledges that we are on the unceded ancestral homeland of the ramaytush ohlone, who are the original inhabitants of the san francisco peninsula. as the indigenous stewards of this land and in accordance with their traditions, the ramaytush ohlone have never ceded, lost, nor forgotten their responsibilities as the caretakers of this place, as well as for all peoples who reside in their traditional territory. as guests, we recognize that we benefit from living and working on their traditional homeland. we wish to pay our respects by acknowledging the ancestors, elders, and relatives of the ramaytush ohlone community and by affirming their sovereign rights as first peoples item 4 draft minutes for march 23rd. april upon 27th may fourth the may 11 and may 11 joint with health and building inspection.

this is your opportunity to address the commission on minutes. if you are here come forward. if you are call nothing press star 3 or raise your hand. seeing no requests, commissioners. public upon comment on minutes is closed. >> and they are before you. >> commissioner am dialled yoochlt move to approve all sets of minutes. why second. >> thank you, commissioners o this motion to adopt minutes commissioner braun. >> aye. >> commissioner diamond. >> aye >> commissionerism roll. >> aye. >> commissioner koppel >> aye >> commissioner moore. >> aye yoochlt president tanner. >> aye >> that motion passes unanimously. item 5 commission comments and questions. >> commissioner imperial. >> thank you. i would like to bring up i think we are aware that nowan marie rogers left the planning departmentful i'm wondering

about the hiring process for the next seat director and as you know i do consider the department as an important part of planning. and as we are also looking to the racial and social equity in terms of in the leadership position of the planning department. i think that we need to have someone who is a person of color in this but of course this will be a hiring process that i think i will be interested to be a part of if there is such. so i would like to bring that and others your opinion on this? >> thank you. director hill us do you have insight on when you could share. >> sure. what i wanted let you know i invited an ma row to come it a

meeting next week or the following. so we can thank her for her work with the department. which you know i said to others she was the soul of the planning department and she has done great work both in our legislative team and the last few years leading the city team and you had experience with her here. she to being a neurojob with the city at treasure island. as deputy director want to congratulate her. i agree with commissioner imperial, it is a huge position that we need to be thoughtful in filling. i want your input. staff's input and especially the staff that work in the city division. in the hiring process. more to come on that. we are -- working with hr team and anmarie in developing the job description.

agree that it is critical decision in would love to have a subset of you all reviewing the in talking to applicants. >> especially when we get the posting we can hair with our networks to get pol to be as deep as we can and diverse and as we can and if mr. rogers come back next or the following week and if not we can have an information am on treasure island. and then if we can make sure we have a proclam a recollection i don't know if we did but something on behalf commission that would be great when we know she is coming. other comments or questions from commissioners? >> okay. . department matters director's announcements item 6 >> claudia florez is leaving she took a promotion with office of city equity taking when she does

for us and expanding it to the entire city i invited her to come back if it is okay with the commission to thank her for her role and will be working to fill that position as well. so. you know congratulations to her, i think that hrc recognized the critical work and how she can expand that citywide and rethe crueltied her that is great that it is a loss for us. we will have the opportunity to thank both them here next week or future week. i wanted to mention you participated in the interviews and tours the [inaudible] urban land snout they have a technical service panel they bring in experts from other cities and it was planning directors and economic development directors and community leaders in uli working with this to think of

the, downtown filling office space, conversions how we activate ground floor commercial spaces and attract new users commercial and residential to our existing building. than i had tours and interviewed over 50 stake holders. and participated in they are going to present a report to the city. they will give initial findings to the mayor's office and some departments. this afternoon. they will follow up with the formal report that we will have here at the commission so you can comment on t. bee are looking forward to that. >> certainly, congratulations to claudia. we will be a loss for the department but glad he is staying with the city to help san francisco over all and from a different angle. thank you, director hillous.

>> very good, commissioners. 7, review of past week's event at the board of supervisors. i have no support from the board of appeals. historic preservation about d in the meet >> good afternoon airstarr. over the last few weeks land use had the designation for westwood park gate and pill arts and small business month fee waiver ordinance. this week the land use considered the ordinance would allow the use of existing shared spaces in the mission nct without trigering boonldzment of under ground parking lot you heard this on april 20 on consent and recommend approval. it is intended legalize pandemic out door activity area maintaining the use should that out door activitity area be removed. one of the ordinance of the bar

spoke in favor during public comment. committee >> the the past few weeks the small business among fee waiver by supervisor engardio passed the second read. the landmark initiation for the west wood gates was adopted. and the land mark designation amendment for the castro theatre was continued to june 6. finally this week the board her 2cu appeals the first of the c u authorization at 301 to the land that include a change from wholesale storage to private parking garage. there was the other for the c u authorization at upon 1160 mission street. that included a change of use from public parking garage to fleet charging. this commission heard and voted to recommend approval for both.

both the appeal petitions signod by all 11 board members stated for both the approval of the c u authorization was to cover for approval of a parcel delivery service. staff's response was the approval was for the use identified in the approval motion nothing else. if the applicant does operate a parcel delivery service there they would be in violation of approval. for 301 a robust conversation. several members believed the true use would be a parcel delivery given the operator was way mo. supervisor waltonmented a guarantees from planning that parcel delivery use would not occur at the site we could not givement and and occurrence over how the parking garage use spchts areup hold to the transit first policy. occurrence over the conversion of pdr to non. there were 25 speakers primarily union representatives in favor

of the appeal. and in the end the board voted unanimously to over turn the planning approval and disapprove. 1160 mission they reached a settlement agreement prior to the hearing adding a condition of approval. there were brief r from thes appellate and sponsor and no staff presentation. there were 2 remote speaker in support of the project with the proposed amendments the board voted amend the cu approval with conditions that reiterates the approval was to operate fleet charge and does not permit parcel delivery service the board approved the amended cu authorization. thank you and i'm available for questions. if there are no other items questions we should move on

general public comment on items of interest to the public in the jurisdiction of the commission except agenda items. with respect to agenda items your opportunity to address the commission will be afforded when the item is reached in the meeting. each member may address the commission for up to 3 minutes. when the number of speakers exceed this limit general public comment may be moved to the end of the agenda. >> georgia, quickly want to mention chester heartman passed away. here is his book. . >> and staff >> may 17th, 2007. the commission had a hearing and the summary was entitled proposed planning code amendments to require cu or dr for certain applications to remove residential units. this was the draft what became

section 317. the first suddenlies of the back grounds read. during the past 2 decades, the loss of existing housing an issue of san francisco land use. that's an issue in the year since. because the section 317 demo calcs. were not adjusted. kind of like this, and that. and so much so even the staff finally declared no evaluation of de facto demolition in 2020. and of course epicenters spread out. the commission approved housing outside of this room housing in the market is real estate. the demo calcs. allowed for reason remodels or expansion of existing housing not to create multimillion dollars housing. read the e mail i sent

yesterday. >> the project on sanchez street was the very few that had a dr. it probably was not sound and should have been demolishes rather than turned a monster home. looking at the record, the staff had a difficult time in reviewing the demo calcs. if they had been adjusted at the time this project could never have been approved and there would have been eye different outcome. however, this is the exception that proved the rule. because there was so much existing housing lost, but disguised alterations with tremendous multimillion dollars increases in the before and after sales price. which changed the market. because in real estate these other comps. and starting in june that first sentence in the backgrounds about the loss of housing seems

likely to be policy. and that's not going to be a good thing. so, here is the executive summary the first few pages and the dra for that project on sanchez street to show what you decided. thank you very much, take care. >> last call for general public comment. >> go to remote callers. thank you. don't forget bus. dave ird rincon pointful just a couple of comments about all the politicians from the mayor to the governor calling on planning processes to be stream lined. no one supports waste and unnecessary procedures; you notice this none of the pol

tigsz are calling on the city to lower the high standards or to cut sound planning practices. in fact, i would suggest that the city employees go too far and stream lining things and there are bad result. the approximately tigzs may not support you. i heard many nayers say something like, yea, i woulded to stream line things bididn't want them to happen. an example of stream lining creating bad results is the recent permitting over the counter behind closed doors of numerous new signs on landmarked rincon annex building. on mission street near the embarcadero. it was designed by the nation's greatest architects of public buildings.

upon he designed the [inaudible] hotel. the permits allow 2 new signs on the northern corners of the building. and they are no less than planning atrocities. . what is frustrating is the big signs are unnecessary. a crafted sign worked out with the redevelopment agency and the developer in 1980's. that worked. for 30 years rincon center was a thriving business center. now feeling the downtown like everyone else. new signs are not what is needed to get customers back. people will never turn if the food and products are low kwauchlt new signs are no replacement for bad business decisions. the new lower standards will

leave blank signs on the newer [inaudible] on the old pg and e building. the old southern pacific will building. the former federal reserve. on the historic parts of the fairmont hotel. if you do, you may find the same pol tigsz backing away from you. what is the point of creating landmarks if you will ruin them later? are there others. >> there are. >> hello. hi. sorry. i had difficulties on my end.

hi. california [inaudible] traffic safety. and [inaudible] cal trance i want to share the importance of the [inaudible] to go [inaudible] with education program, to help to bicyclists, drivers and pedestrians can share the road safelyism want to share a statistic of [inaudible]. that is [inaudible] in countries that have the most incidents of accidents. [inaudible]. [difficult to hear] was that follow up e mill with more detail. i want to e mail the planning commission -- [inaudible] >> sure. you can sends it to our e mail address commissions. secretarysfgov.org.

okay great. thank you >> you are welcome. >> eileen coalition for san francisco neighborhoods speaking on my own behalf. repeating my comments at may 22nd meeting of the [inaudible] planning committee. the area cycle member 6 dictate housing for 8 years. does the housing element account for the difference between the west and east side of the city? most of the pdr cites, large ones, on the east side. the west side has few cites and all are small cites. does the planning department believe that the housing element will change this? some of the east side neighborhoods have a high percentage of singles. west side is mostly families. does the planning department believe the housing element create a massive demographic shift of single from the east to

the west side. the return on investment for developers is less on the east than the west side. does the planning department believe the housing element will change market dynamics? the west side is in the [inaudible] does the planning department believe the housing element will change weather patterns and with the housing element, will the west side be in the words of song, walking on broken glass? thank you. last call for public comment. no other questions, general public comment is closed and we can move to the regular calendar for item 8. for the property at 19 heron street. this is a conditional use authorization.

>> good afternoon members of the commission. i'm vincent page planning staff. the project before you is a request for conditional use for planning code section 317 to move an unthursdayed unit from the seconded floor of existing 2 store build nothing 19 heron street in western soma. the project is from planning complaints. which pertained to i dwelling unit with 9 bedrooms. worked with the planning department to legalize the unit pivot in 22 to "unit's removal. the project experience demonstrated this would not be financial low feasible to legalize the unit the resulting 32 huh huh single family unit in the building developed for commercialing use would not be market viable and add little value to the property the 3200 square feet would be reverted to

production distribution and repair. authorized usech the space respondeds to an objective to the commerce leadership of the general plan and soma area plan. call for retention of pdr space in historic buildings. the building is an historic resource contributor to the national and california register eligible western soma light industrial and historic district. there are no letter in opdecision or support. there is a house speaking matter. the plans included not guilty packet contained an error on sheet 8.2 b the project's scope. proposal to remove the unit not to legalize temperature revises set of plans sdrkted to you on tuesday and i have them on the computer if you want to look at them more. the department finds the project to be necessary and desirable and consistent with planning of the general plan and western

soma area plan. this concludes my presentation and i'm available for questions. >> thank you. >> we should open up public comment. member this is is your opportunity to address the commission. if you are here come forward. you have 5 minutes >> good afternoon will i am here to represent my client. and basicly field questions about the removal of this unit. it is an interesting building with a bridge over the approximately right of real we are not here to discuss this we will get to that later in the process. today we want to deal with the removal of the unpermitted unit.

the building to be frank was never suited for residential use. the owner. have residential units or rooms upstairs. but it is actually. an old very heavy -- construction concrete reinforced industrial building. >> and -- as an architect, looking at the viability of break throughout concrete and doing the things we need to do in the upper level to credit a legal unit. the process seemed to be not viable and that was just from a design point of view and producing drawings to create cost estimates and approvals from other professionals. it was clear there is no real market value in the area it

is -- very urban context. alley ways and very valley. we hope that will commission allows us to revert building back to what it should be and originally designed for. and that's it. >> thank you very much. now open public comment. if you are here come forward if you are remote press star 3. or raise your hands via ebb ex. seeing no requests to speak, commissioners. picture comment is closed and this matter is now before you. >> thank you. commissioner moore. i have a couple of questions. what use is being what pdr use is in the building and did the owner live in the unit and had other bedrooms or was this -- what is the history of that?

according to the permit record the last use was warehouse no furniture. and that falls in the definition for pdr under planning code. not entirely sure who built rooms. butt owner did live there as one point. >> you wanted to add. jury room >> there were 9 single room occupancy and also cleared out, there was a settlement outside

of court regarding the rental situation. that so there are the building is vacant now. and ready and the process helped make that so. so, the buildings ready to match the drawings before you in the proposed reversion back to the last authorized. >> the building not used as a warehouse as well. >> it is all uses there was for several years before covid there was a dance studio. but and this process really -- came to a head during covid and so kinds of fortunately, economicate, market wise, that person could not go on. they had to leave and the people upstairs, of course, have all left and that's all cleared out. other thing to clarify is anything that was upstairs that was built to make rooms was entirely nonstructural and readily removable and the building is stout. got thick concrete floors. it is primed to common sense way as much as we love to turn it to residential property and the owner could make more money and

straw is in the viable. here we are. >> thank you. this owner is intends towing keep the build and return it to pdr or intent to -- >> owner will follow through on the permit. and look to in the construction industry somewhat so they have the means and the connections and what not to make it so. but whether he is able to get a renter or a buyer he does not know. and at this stage you can imagine he is happy to sell the building but you know we need to get through these administrative processes before we can talk about that. >> have you looked at adaptation that is like live/work with emphasis on work over live?

no the just the there is no emphasis on live. and it doesn't seem viable for live/work situation if that is your question. because of the thick floor plate its is a large open spanned 2 story building with tall ceilings dividing to live/work and the architect ral and code related challenges and making something habitable for a home rather than industrial use is too much. i'm not sure if live/work is allow in the that zoning i didn't look into that. >> thank you for your. >> thank you very much. >> appreciate it. >> thank you. any other comments, commissioner moore. >> any other comments, commissioner braun? i will say that this building

never should have been usedad a residential use in the upper floor. special although idealee when we have a dwelling unit it is nice to legalize them. this is -- unless this could be brought up to be safe and building code and safety requirements, i don't see that this could be anything but reverted back. it is concerning that there were 9 rooms used as house nothing this building. and it scary but that this was happening knowing there was not adequate egress and not built to code or permitted. so i'm happy to put forward a motion to approve the conditional use authorization. >> second. >> with the amendments submitted by staff. >> yes. >> that's right. >> we're getting to the vote

can i ask staff on this note, want to make sure what is the process from here to ensure that the rooms are removed and what do -- the building but do we have a check and follow up? how do we know at the end of the day observe it is sold if sold this is removed the process is complete and no future folks can dwell here? >> there is an enforcement case which i'm assigned. i will work on it until that happens. >> and enforcement the nov will not be lifted until it is complete >> that's right. will we be verifyd that in the field? building, how do we know they are gone? >> ad hoc base ask dbi to include enforcement planners in the final inspection. can i ask the code enforce am manager if can do t. >> appreciate the request

given the nature. so want to until through to the end. where commissioner diamond. >> nov are recorded? >> no. i don't think we issued an nov the notice of enforce am stage we have been working with them through that process. assuming they don't follow through we would o'riordan nov on the property at this stage they are working with us we don't see a need for it at this stage. >> short of reporting something on the property how do we have comfort that it is not sold with the buyer selling without notice of enforcement. it would be on the title. yao will record the nsr against the property. why excellent. that makes confident. there it is a motion that has been seconds to approve this with conscience with the amendments. on that motion commissioner

braun. >> aye yoochl commissioner upon diamond. >> aye >> commissioner imperial. >> aye >> commissioner koppel. >> aye. >> commissioner moore. >> president tanner. why aye. >> that passes 6-0 and accomplice us on item 9 for 32 byxbee street. a conditional use authorization. good afternoon will green lightel, planning staff. the project buffer requests a condition aguse authorization.

to subdivide the existing 5,000 square foot lot at 32 byxbee to 2 lots of 2500 square feet demo a single family home and construct single family homes with accessory dwelling unit for a total of 4 units. it is in ocean view didn't average and republican dolph in rh1, 40x height and bulk district. the existings home proposed for demo a one story over basement. the 2 replacement structures 3 stories with the primary this each occupying the second and third floors in the accessories in the grounds floor. the primary unit on the new north lot 32 biks beale be approximately 2, 360 square feet with 3 bedroom the and the primary buildoth nile south lot at 28 byxbee will be 2, 390

square feet with 4 bedrooms the project includes one off street park. 2 bicycle spaces and front deck for each new building it is edu for 32 biks beale be 815 square feet in the adu for 28 byxbee will be 784 square feet. the department received 2 comments about the project. one neither in support nor opposition focused on the eljibltd for sb9 the other indicated opposition to the project and focused how byxbee is mostly single family homes and construction of multifamily has the potential to impact neighboring property value. opposition focussed on occurrence regarding park and traffic and how demolition and construction can cause noise. tell create one unit for per lot to exceed the sensity for rh1

zoning on both lots by adding 2 units per lot they are code compliant and in compat ability with massing, scale and material and in the permitted height limit of 35 feet. department finds the project to be compatible with general plan and necessary and desirable for the communities and recommends approval with conditions. i'm viable for question the sponsor will now speak. >> you have 5 minutes >> thank you. >> mark, architect. i want to thank you for hearing us today. i hope the plans are clear and they speak for themselves. thing i wanted to add in gg touchod is that we did try to increase the density via sb9.

when the policy came out in january 2022. that would have been able to give us a triplex on each parcel. but as we got in the process, we found out that the previous owner performed an [inaudible] in the last 10 years which had disqualified us we reverted back to the scheme that is before you today. and i hope you could approve our project. thank you. >> okay. members this is your opportunity to address the commission on this matter. if you are here come forward if you mean are calling remote press star 3. see being no requests to speak. public comment is closed. this merit is now before you. >> thank you. seems like a thoughtful designed

project. support approval. unless there are comments. commissioner diamond? i would move to approve and increase the density from 1-4 and nicely designed project when we are frying to accomplish. >> absolutely. thank you for the clear plans easy to read. >> thank you. >> seeing no further comments from commissioners there is a motion that has been seconded approve with conscience on that motion commissioner braun. why aye >> commissioner diamond. >> aye >> commissioner imperial >> aye yoochl commissioner koppel. >> aye >> commissioner moore. >> aye >> commissioner tanner. >> aye. >> that motion passes unanimously 5-zero. and will place us under the dr calendar. for the final item on your legnhi calendar item 10 for la avanzada street. a mandatory discretionary

review. >> good upon afternoon, commissioners president tanner jeff warren planning staff a request for monday story dr with conscience of approval for a picture at 1 la avanzada street at sutro tower. permanent rehigh school move of met an panel cladoth vertical elements. the tower would be repainted to match the orange and color and stripes. planning code section manualed store dr from the planning commission is required for all building permits at the site. commission heard an informational item on the proposed project and related to the enforcement cases. at a hearing in the fall of

2022. after hearing public comment and discussion the commission directed staff to move with review of the no cladding removed alternate for the tower. citing public safety. and financial constraints the sponsor has from the federal communication commission reimburse am payments for work performed. the time linocaine department scheduled for a hearing on april 25 of 23. march second, 23 letter from federal commission stating the dead line of april 30. prior to the hearing there was a continuance to have conversations with the neighborhood on the staff proposed conditions of approval and the sponsor an extension of the dead line was granted by the fcc. the department has received 2 letter in support permanent removal and we are aware of of

communication between the neighborhood residents and their supervisor as well as the experience per standard continues of planning code. this project includes standard continues of approval and the department created preservation related conditions of approval they were createed memorialize the character defining feature the metal cladding panels. left night the sponsor submitted to the commission and staff a set of modified preservation conditions. this morning staff met with the sponsor team to discuss the proposal. and submitted to the record today to the commission this afternoon, is a red lined version of the continue

conditions of approval and they include changes that we made in discussions to incorporate some of the requested changes to summarize, the red lined versions and changes beginning on page 7 of the standard conscience of approval and document. for condition number one the department changed the language for the site of panels to be the preferred site to be off sight and the department will work with the sponsor on locating a site. number 2, or yes. the salvage panels the sponsor is in opposition to that requests condition from the department and continue 5 on the roadway repairs can improvement the staff added paved to make it clear that no new expansion of the roadway is anticipated that any paving, repair would be on

the existing improvements of la avanzada. the case report or materials provides to staff include a red lined version and a clean copy of the eir the department clarified some of the existing conscience rational for that baseline. our staff is here if you have questions on the technical changes. the department supports the project and recommend approval with conditions as proposed. we are available for questions. >> thank you. >> thank you. project sponsor you have 5 minutes. >> members of the commission. thank you i'm kristin peters representing sutro tower inc. the owner and operator of sutro

tower. sutro tower operates primary communication facility you heard me say before we are luck tow have temperature we are hear seeking approval of sutro tower vertical cladding e elimination you like to recall from the hear nothing october, the architectural cladding on the vertical was temporarily real muled for a repacking project and other improvements. the vertical cladding elimination cladding on sutro towers vertical leg system favored by sti. sutro towers safer without the cladding it eliminates weight. winds load and reduceings componentses could fail or rattle. based on the feedback at the

october informational hearing department staff worked dillien low to under take review and develop a plan to authorize the permanent removal of the cladding this includes legalization mem randledum with approval before you today. as well as the environmental impact report. showing no significant project impacts. sti requests that the commission exercise dr and approve vertical cladding elimination through your approval of our vertical cladding elimination application and the department's legalization mem recentliedum with the new continues of approval agreed to with the department this morning and provided you now by the planning department of the except that the we are concerned about the condition relating to the salvage panel to local artists. we had concerns that the

conscience of approval originally proposed by planning department were not supportive by the community or supervisor melgar and violation of our permit. we are comfortable with the changes except for the concerns about giving out salvaged panels concerning -- containing levels of lead paint on the cladding. we acknowledge many neighbors don't support a requirement for annual neighborhood open house. at the facility. with these changes, we look forward to your approval. thank you for consideration and we remain open to questions you may have. >> that concludes presentation we'll take public comment this . is your opportunity to address the commission. if you are here come forward. line up on the screen side of the room or to your right. if you are call nothing remote press star 3 or raise your hand

via web ex. >> good afternoon i'm. sterling chen the neighborhood liaison for mid town terrace. with sutro tower and wanted speak about the open house requirement. sutro tower is inviteed mid town terrace annual street fair and attended for as long as i remember in my 32 years in the neighborhood. their neighbors or residents have every opportunity to speak to sutro tower representatives which they have taken advantage of and enjoy. the open house is for our benefit along with twin peeks and forest knolls. we have no concern about lack access to sutro tower represent and they have in good faith addressed our other than consist and request for meetings or

visits. so we don't see the need to have the open house be a part of conditions. and we would support upon just leaving it the way it has been, which is if the neighbors want to request more time with sutro tower then we can do that and we are confident that they would provide address our occurrence that way. thank you. thank you for your time i'm the legislative aid for supervisor melgar. supervisor melgar could not be here. you should be in receipt of her letter in the packet. the supervisor heard from neighbors and somewhere here today. il state that having neighbors in sutro alignment on anything

is unpresident in the my time you appreciate all that has been done and will be in the future to keep that harmony. regarding condition 1, supervisor concerned about permanent installations. i appreciate the staff work and being flexible with us and meetings we had. had concerned about the letter on the panels. and making sure that those panels are dealt watch the supervisors are to create inspiration and curiosity in regards to signs and architecture and the natures and so the young people in the neighborhoods of mid town and twin peeks she looks forward to completion and documentation of the tour. and lastly condition 5 the

supervisor strong desire to have sutro maning make a one time replacement in repair of the roadway la avanzada. thank you for lynch and appreciate lynch to your deliberations. thank you. you will not have time to read it now >> i'm walter caplin for 25 years the forest knolls liaison to sutro tower. for many years we have been trying to get the city to accept

its responsibility to repave la avanzada because it has been a dang and hazzard and created liability to the city. this agreement in total encompasses the concerns of the neighbors and sutro tower and the city. this is a great break through. sutro towers willing to address the issue of paving the street which is clearly for at least 70% it is responsibility of the city. and hay will under take that at their expense. additional low, from the per view of the neighborhoods we are opposed to handing the panels that are covered with lead paint. we think that is manage what should be out of this agreement. other concern is we don't

believe it is necessary or appropriate to require afternoon annual gathering for the benefit of the neighborhoods. as was stated. sutro tower is involved and active in the neighborhoods. participate in all neighborhood activities and event and for many years open to collaborate with the needs of the neighborhood and this requirement really should not be and does not belong, we believe in this agreement. other than that, i think it is fantastic. for years we have been coming here at the 11th hour when well is a tower issue. it is banged out on the final minute this is is a great agreement and i think it addresses all of the issues concerned to the establishment to the historyics preservation people of to the neighborhoods. and to sutro tower itself.

i urge you to accept this with those 2 modifications as to the lead paint on the panels and the requirement of annual gathering. thank you. >> okay. seeing no other members of public in the chambers go to remote callers. >> good afternoon. commissioners i'm george wooding i'm president of the mid town terrace hoa. consisting of 820 homes in the mid town terrace neighborhood at the foot of mount sutro. we are in support of sutro towers propose vertical cladding elimination. however, our association opposed conscience of approval attached

to the mandatory dr analysis published by the planning department on may 18th. 2023. keep are in favor of the alternate recommendations made by supervisor melgar in her letter to the planning commission dated may 16, 2023. finally, mid town terrace is in support of the repair of la avanzada street, such repair should be limited to an in kind repair of the asphalt and not be extend or expand to the roadway in any manner to encounter its use as a through fare to the

unpaired area of the intersection of la avanzada and palo alto avenue. if the area falls to what might be otherwise considered part of the roadway. thank you for your consideration. have a good day. bye. >> last call for public comment if you are here come forward if you are call nothing remote press star 3. seeing no requests, commissioners public ment is closed and this merit is now before you. >> thank you. before i turn over to the commissioners i did do a site visit last year of the site. thank you to sutro towers for arranging that and did go up in the tower it was frightening and beautiful. look out and not down is the advice. i want to upon commends our environmental staff.

last time this was here for consideration the concern was whether we get this done in time i want to credit the staff and all the staff planners who worked on this to get it back quickly. we continue today glad to hear the reason was out reach. i want to thank for out reach. and for all the neighbors working with the project to come buffers. with changes that will consider and question for changes i think over all i'm proud of the work all the parties have done to get us become to the points. i will turn it over to commissioner diamond. >> thank you. and i agree wefrg you said especially about looking out not down. i visited the tower last fall when this was in front of us. and came away with an appreciation for the industrial nature t. is hard hat territory. it is mall and cramped. hard to maneuver.

does not left-hand laned itself to pedestrians and a small enough translator for the wars who do important work well. so, with that in minds it affects my view of the proposed conscience. i'm appreciative of staff's effort to provide us right now with a red line copy of the conditions of approval. which tries to gather together staff's take on the numerous versions of the conscience which we received over the last week. appreciation to staff for that. so i have comments on 3 of the conditions. with the installation i'm in favor of interceptive installation it is important for people to understand what is going on at the tower. i'm delighted see staff's

preference it is off site. what i'm not okay with is the last sentence. says if they can't find a suitable location they can do it on site. i don't think this location should be on site under any circumstances and i think that i don't want to create an incentive to avoid finding off site it is more expensivism don't think sti would they don't typeset on site, either. i don't believe it is appropriate for the fall back to be it is on site or adjacent on site. i think that sti needs to work with the neighborhood association and staff to finds an off site location, period and remove the last sentence. second, i agree with the neighbors i don't understand why we are saving the salvaged panels they are cover in the lead. it is not safe.

and even if sti think its can cover with an indemnity and official of the city i'm not comfortable putting out lead panels to the public. i think we should be getting rid of them in a safe manner and end it is use of lead panels and not encouraging reuse through artists or anybody i would eliminate that condition which i understand supervisor melgar was in favor of eliminating unless i read that wrong. >> and third is i don't understand the purpose of open house. the original conditions from the 1960's said this is in the to be a place for the public went exit don't understand what changed that makes it important for the public to go there. i take to heart the comments from the neighbors that said they believe they have opportunity to meet with sti they don't need an open house for this. i don't want the panels on site. i don't bed why we need an open

house of hard hat territory. so i would also eliminate the open house condition of approval. i am supportive of the vertical panel removal and appreciate the work done boy staff to get us to this point. i would move to approve eliminating the last sentence of condition upon one can be on site. and i would eliminate condition 2 in entirety. and i would also revise to eliminate the last paragraph of condition 4 the requirement to the open house. >> second. upon commissioner braun. i think i have a question for

department staff was what the thing on the open house condition. behalves the thinking behind that? >> department staff am thank you. it was one way to allow people to experience sutro tower. as part of that. so we understand the occurrence we had lots of conversations. with sutro tower and the occurrence about the makered to but we wanted to offer the opportunity for that. we think we made a scotch myself.

around the residence require and next to the tower and it is appreciate to the base from the public trail that exist now. for that. i appreciate the backup of the open house i say i always don't seat need for the open house. the portion of things. the upon grounds if you go on the trails. so i'm okay with eliminating the open house requirement. and then on the installation, i'm hearing the neighborhood

concerns about the possibility that may be a little out not a big destination. want to make their way up to seat panels on the site. either way i understand the neighborhoods and if it is off site i suggest if the city was okay i mean we have our control, location on twin peek would be great people seat tower from there. you get a great view of the tower and panels. that makes sense. i am in agreement with the motion i have one question. though, and this is more for commissioner diamond a motion maker. there was an alternative by supervisor melgar to of may be engage with an artist for with the panel.

there was language by sti at one point about potential low including along the lines. i'm curious i don't think it is a make or break thing i'm curious what reactions might be to the suggestion i have the language. if we. sti interpretation was the project experience artist to prowse a work of art inspired by the tower stoen sthoent students within 18 months of project approval. and there was more.

i was thinking that is provided it was not necessary to add in the artist interpretation. so. i don't feel this strongly. i didn't think it was necessary on top of the other gestures that were being made. why can i ask director hillous that was was in the manity rigzs for the bit of this. is that do you know if it is supervisor inintention to remove the -- inspirational work with the kids? >> jeff warren, planning staff. that language first appeared from supervisor's letter and then was include last night in the sponsor's conditions trying to flush out and provide a written documentation of the intent of the conscience. that was that language for the title student engagement that

condition of approval exist in written form in the letter prepared by the sponsor mitt to the commission yesterday evening. >> do you know if this is supervisor may be can you speak. continued to include this language or comfortable with when we have today. >> i think the supervisor representative left. >> unfortunately. >> we believe that it is already in the there is a component of the temp refer installation that encourages us to roach out to the upon students and require ~age that component that's why we didn't add it become in it is there with the virtual tour and the temporary art component. >> thank you. >> commissioner braun, does that address your concern about including or not including the work width youth and the artistic interpretation? >> yes. >> and i'm satisfied with

that. >> great. >> commissioner diamond? may be i assume you include the amendments with staff. commissioner am died, the last sentence of condition number one at the amended last sentence of the first paragraph or last suddenlies of the condition? >> thank you for that. it is the insertion of the last sentence at the end of the first in condition one should start suitable location not identified within 12 mons can be outside of the. >> portion in green. >> yes. >> very good. commissioners well is a motion and seconded to -- approve take dr and approve with conscience as amendd and submitted to.

>> i'm sorry. i want to hear from staff do we agree we feel like working with the art irrelevant and young people is included in the conditions i want to make sure michael is not here. were we coverod that request from the supervisor as well. >> dan cider with department staff. we are in a bit of an awkward situation. in our conversations with her working with the school and the children was important to her office. we have language from the sponsor you know i think the end of the day this is your decision we have draft language submitted by peters last night. could be imposed i imagine supervisor will support it we can't speak for her. >> commissioner diamond and braun you made this -- second. if you would willing to add the condition we saw last night and/this morning in there it sounds like everyone disagrees make sure it is spelled out from

the letter dated 10/2, i guess of the revision submitted to the department. >> could somebody read it in the record. who has that for us. i can put it on the over head. sfgovtv can we have the over head, please in i can read it myself. i think great to add if we are willing. can i ask sti you have no objection? >> i'm amending my, go ahead. >> i'm sorry. we would suggest that we modify

the references that appear in this condition 1b to renumber both the condition and the conditions reference inside to reflect the current version of conditions. >> yes. >> i amend my motion to include condition 1 b student engagement with the references updated to reflect this discussion. and the version of the conscience were adopted. >> second >> thank you. so there is now a new motion seconded. to take dr and approve with conditions amendd and submitted by staff with amendments by the commission under the preservation conditions number one striking the last sentence in the first paragraph of that condition. striking the second condition of approval in its entirety. and striking the left paragraph

of condition number 4 and then adding the referenced condition 1 b regarding students engagement with updated references. on that motion commissioner braun. >> aye yoochl commissioner diamond. >> aye yoochl commissionerism roll. >> aye >> commissioner koppel. >> aye >> commissioner moore. >> aye >> president tanner. >> aye >> that passes unanimously 5-zero >> thank you, commissioners and everyone. have a great holiday and see you back next week. we are adjourned.

>> this is one place you can always count on to give you what you had before and remind you of what your san francisco history used to be. >> we hear that all the time, people bring their kids here and their grandparents brought them here and down the line.

>> even though people move away, whenever they come back to the city, they make it here. and they tell us that. >> you're going to get something made fresh, made by hand and made with quality products and something that's very, very good. ♪♪ >> the legacy bars and restaurants was something that was begun by san francisco simply to recognize and draw attention to the establishments. it really provides for san francisco's unique character. ♪♪ >> and that morphed into a request that we work with the city to develop a legacy business registration. >> i'm michael cirocco and the

owner of an area bakery. ♪♪ the bakery started in 191. my grandfather came over from italy and opened it up then. it is a small operation. it's not big. so everything is kind of quality that way. so i see every piece and cut every piece that comes in and out of that oven. >> i'm leslie cirocco-mitchell, a fourth generation baker here with my family. ♪♪ so we get up pretty early in the morning. i usually start baking around 5:00. and then you just start doing rounds of dough. loaves. >> my mom and sister basically handle the front and then i have my nephew james helps and then my two daughters and my wife come in and we actually do the baking. after that, my mom and my sister stay and sell the product, retail it.

♪♪ you know, i don't really think about it. but then when i -- sometimes when i go places and i look and see places put up, oh this is our 50th anniversary and everything and we've been over 100 and that is when it kind of hits me. you know, that geez, we've been here a long time. [applause] ♪♪ >> a lot of people might ask why our legacy business is important. we all have our own stories to tell about our ancestry. our lineage and i'll use one example of tommy's joint. tommy's joint is a place that my husband went to as a child and he's a fourth generation san franciscan. it's a place we can still go to today with our children or grandchildren and share the stories of what was san francisco like back in the 1950s.

>> i'm the general manager at tommy's joint. people mostly recognize tommy's joint for its murals on the outside of the building. very bright blue. you drive down and see what it is. they know the building. tommy's is a san francisco hoffa, which is a german-style presenting food. we have five different carved meats and we carve it by hand at the station. you prefer it to be carved whether you like your brisket fatty or want it lean. you want your pastrami to be very lean. you can say i want that piece of corn beef and want it cut, you know, very thick and i want it with some sauerkraut. tell the guys how you want to

prepare it and they will do it right in front of you. san francisco's a place that's changing restaurants, except for tommy's joint. tommy's joint has been the same since it opened and that is important. san francisco in general that we don't lose a grip of what san francisco's came from. tommy's is a place that you'll always recognize whenever you lock in the door. you'll see the same staff, the same bartender and have the same meal and that is great. that's important. ♪♪ >> the service that san francisco heritage offers to the legacy businesses is to help them with that application process, to make sure that they really recognize about them

what it is that makes them so special here in san francisco. ♪♪ so we'll help them with that application process if, in fact, the board of supervisors does recognize them as a legacy business, then that does entitle them to certain financial benefits from the city of san francisco. but i say really, more importantly, it really brings them public recognition that this is a business in san francisco that has history and that is unique to san francisco. >> it started in june of 1953. ♪♪ and we make everything from scratch. everything. we started a you -- we started a off with 12 flavors and

mango fruits from the philippines and then started trying them one by one and the family had a whole new clientele. the business really boomed after that. >> i think that the flavors we make reflect the diversity of san francisco. we were really surprised about the legacy project but we were thrilled to be a part of it. businesses come and go in the city. pretty tough for businesss to stay here because it is so expensive and there's so much competition. so for us who have been here all these years and still be popular and to be recognized by the city has been really a huge honor. >> we got a phone call from a woman who was 91 and she wanted to know if the mitchells still owned it and she was so happy

that we were still involved, still the owners. she was our customer in 1953. and she still comes in. but she was just making sure that we were still around and it just makes us feel, you know, very proud that we're carrying on our father's legacy. and that we mean so much to so many people. ♪♪ >> it provides a perspective. and i think if you only looked at it in the here and now, you're missing the context. for me, legacy businesses, legacy bars and restaurants are really about setting the context for how we come to be where we are today. >> i just think it's part of san francisco. people like to see familiar stuff. at least i know i do. >> in the 1950s, you could see a picture of tommy's joint and looks exactly the same. we haven't change add thing. >> i remember one lady saying,

you know, i've been eating this ice cream since before i was born. and i thought, wow! we have, too. ♪♪

>> i am iris long. we are a family business that started in san francisco chinatown by my parents who started the business in the mid 1980s. today we follow the same footsteps of my parents. we source the teas by the

harvest season and style of crafting and the specific variety. we specialize in premium tea. today i still visit many of the farms we work with multigenerational farms that produce premium teas with its own natural flavors. it is very much like grapes for wine. what we do is more specialized, but it is more natural. growing up in san francisco i used to come and help my parents after school whether in middle school or high school and throughout college. i went to san francisco state university. i did stay home and i helped my parents work throughout the summers to learn what it is that makes our community so special.

after graduating i worked for an investment bank in hong kong for a few years before returning when my dad said he was retiring. he passed away a few years ago. after taking over the business we made this a little more accessible for visitors as well as residents of san francisco to visit. many of our teas were traditionally labeled only in chinese for the older generation. today of our tea drinkkers are quite young. it is easy to look on the website to view all of our products and fun to come in and look at the different varieties. they are able to explore what we source, premium teas from the providence and the delicious

flavors. san francisco is a beautiful city to me as well as many of the residents and businesses here in chinatown. it is great for tourists to visit apsee how our community thrived through the years. this retail location is open daily. we have minimal hours because of our small team during covid. we do welcome visitors to come in and browse through our products. also, visit us online. we have minimal hours. it is nice to set up viewings of these products here.

welcome to the small business commission meeting on may 22nd 2023. the meeting is being called to order at 4 30. pm this meeting is being held in person in city hall room. 400 broadcast live on tv and available to view online or listen to by calling for 156550. the small business commission thanks media services and sf gov t v for televising the meeting, which can be viewed on sfp t v two r livestreamed at hgtv dot org. we welcome the public's participation during public comment periods. there will be an opportunity for general public comment at the end of the meeting, and there will be an opportunity to comment on each discussion or action item on the agenda. for each item. the commission will take public comment first from people attending the meeting in person, then from people attending the meeting remotely. members