the question is learninger. we have guide lines or recommendations for -- min miegz or configuring lot size. residential reduction in open space and reduction in lot size. i would photography seat entire lives guidelines considered more embetted in rezoning and when we do when we understand rezoning and what height and other impacts it have on the type of guide lines.

snb called it out piecemeal and i think we want to avoid that, that is physical @billions the next step which is already happening. -- i asked mr. starr if whether or not the -- contrain reduck legislation supports or contradicts supervisor megovern's legislation? buzz she spent thoughtful time with us discussing her concerns. and somewhat lighter touch what needs to be done. i minot agree with everything show is trying to do i found her approach to discussing changes in legislation with us for over an hour a bit of softer touch

than dealing with something i find difficult to read and difficult to intgreat into having the residence of our communes inspect my ear. i wean gotta get things done but i'm not sure whether or not the approach that is taken in this legislation is something i feel comfortable. those are my upon comments. next. commissioner imperial >> thank you. i guess i you know for mow my over all feeling about thoughts and analysis on this legislation just you know i'm part of the commission that -- also agreed to the housing element and this is also because there is a promise or a goal of --

affordable housing we don't realize half of 82,000 we said we would make are affordable housing units. there is during the hearings we had. um -- we did mention about the geography and how are they affected. and part of that is the constraints of reductions. and, let of the conversation hatched, too is how the different departments are going to community with one another.

what -- well is a lot of processes in terms how the department is trying to cord naft with one another. and also at the same time in terms of the public upon comments or the what the cua is. we have not i don't remember in the housing element in conversations -- the conversation on the priority equity groups. and another thing there is still you know -- hesitation in terms of using of the map. again had is going to be an on going conversation or on going topic i think this will be brought up to the board of supervisors. is hope the board are particular.

there is something about this -- legislation that does not sit well in terms of again the process of e lim nigz in the public process. in terms of the elimination of process in departments i felt like it is more of i problem the departments are not talking to one another. you know -- and that's i feel that is that is where the constraints are really sitting upon. and i'm glad that is part of the hozing element. but again the -- and process that we take here. and there are pers of the review i know in the housing element we

make amendment in terms of some recommendations is will be more equal this is more revealing about the tenant protections. i think -- i know this will be more discussed in the other forms in other busied as limp this is something i cannot fully supportful >> can i make ape point on the maps temperature important to note we pent time during the housing element on the state gives the monopoly on the resource nichings and ammed to identify priority equity >> ing fees the reason we went with the health department map.

there were similarity. they update it regularly. stalk body where it is pointing more toward well resourced neighborhood and changes to process in well resourced neighborhoods >> there are, again, in the you know in terms of the resource

neighborhoods, right and we have in the planning froesz. almost resoutherliesed neighborhoods that is a planning term. i think there are conversations about the that there are parts of the of west side your that may be a priority equity group. that is not when i'm seeing that is not part of that. so -- these are like -- you know again -- this is why people are referring to udp it captures in the displacement map. or what are the higher risk in likely the highest riskless of displacements. this is where the conversations have not because -- the again the equity group captures the western and eastern side. but well is per of the western side this may be affect the. as well.

we are looking into the hear the highly likely displace am areas that will occur? it may have been more in the richmond area well is multibuildings. gwen. those are my comments. and i think we need to be critical on what other tools we are using. could i ask one question. director hillous in the previous map we included treasure i land that is not shown and in addition the sunset are we not and pointed out to me not in japantown is dlin i didn'ted. but rather the [inaudible]. those are questions data was shifting and it becomes

difficult on irrelevant whole support when there are so many questions, questions and -- leave you say whatting is it? is this or that? >> we made changes to the map based on when we heard concerns from community and others during this process and the major's office. again we are looking for your guidance on the maps we start today baseod hupass instead house being element with prior geography and added some additional cultural districts. will i'm aware of the comment boy commissioner braun this is in the the end of the story this is an important peez of legislation that addresses the

in issues and others remain with the schedule that hen laid out. and so with this i would move to approve the ordinance modified with the language i read in the record. >> here is the language. >> second. >> would you consider adding no history of buy outs >> yes, absolutely. >> no history of beouts >> no history. yes no history of beouts addition to the other. recommendation put a five year or some look back number of years. joy think facility same 5 years that is the other laws no fault evictions and other things. >> yes.

i'm sorry. commissioner diamond made the motion to thank you, commissioner koppel. seeing no further commissioners well is a motion. >> you had your hand up again? i wanted to restate my concerns about the am shutting out of community participation and community notification including revise or no roll of the planning commission in i think critical decision. being a planning american is not a position of power. anybody, soup this is they are mistaken i consider myself exteriorings do as well serving basically the citizen of san francisco i it is, lot of work and requires significant amount of being aware behalf the real issue are and the tenor of when we hear for how this role of commission is being rused and

the upcoming efforts is of concernful i will leave ita that. >> thank you. you motion second to the approve the legislation with ma'ams relate to front set become and read in the record as well at section 317 no history of buy outs with the 5 year clause. on that motion commissioner braun. >> aye yoochl commissioner diamond. >> aye >> commissioner imperial. >> no. >> commissioner koppel. >> aye >> commissioner moore. >> no. >> commissioner president tanner. aye >> that motion passes 4-2 with commissioners imperial and moore against. >> that will place us on item 3 this was pulled off of consent. for case 2022-011807 way, 51

prosper street a c u authorization. >> good evening, commissioners planning stamp the upon department like to request a continuance we have been peek to the experience and there is optimism we can find a path forward that does not involve a planning commission hearing or other pregnant we are requesting i continuance to september and the sponsor would like to speak. that concludes for mow. thanks. >> .

good evening. thank you to request approval for modify project 51 prosper i'm tom and i own 51 prosper with my husband. we live in the apartment 5. we bought this property in this location because of my disability. specific low to age in accomplice. i have a progressist motor neuron disease and getting weaker for 43 years it is retching an urgent stage. i'm requesting approval to merge our apartment number 5 with the one directly above us apartment 2 and apartment 2 is not demo not removing living pace or changing the footprint of the building or either apartment. apartment 2 is in the taken off the market the renter in apartment 2 moved out vol tailor with no prompting from me if you approve my application i will reaccomplice the kitchen in

apartment 2 with a bedroom. this will permit mow to have live in assistance when necessary could be any day. my care assistant are living space but their own bedroom, bathroom and sitting your this is best practice for personal care assist analysis this will per mist me to live until inspect low i need help conducting daily buildings of life and i need assistance for the 4 actifts of daily living these are feeding myself, going to the toilet, showering and dressing myself. my husband assists mow in many ways but this is not sustainable. my powerhouse should not be my full time care giver this would be against all the prince pels of inspect living. we bought this property inspect this location because of my disability. has many combinations. it is in the central walkable

neighborhood and it is well by transand i ground floorent row, park and rental income and the property is subject to rent control we needed all of these. find thanksgiving combination was near low impossible. we is afford to live here and beit it is rent controlled but san francisco rent control applies to buildings from before 1979. which is 10 years before the americans with disability's act. the old building vs no park or lots of stairs to the front door. they are not accessible as a reasoner or owner. because 51 prosper is in a seven roll like i use my wheel chair to participate in the life of the community. this is important san francisco prescription evertrngdz policy

excludes people with disability. i love muni especially the buses and surface level street cars.

thank you. very good. take public comment. members this is your town to address the commission on this matter. raise your hand via web ex.

public comment is closed and this matter is before you. i hope this staff can w with the applicant and perhaps notteen need to come become and would want to make different findings in the proposal made today. xhrp koppel. >> move to continue. why second. how long do we need? >> and keep in mind that through july we are impacted. >> right. yea. september would be possible. any time in assessment the goaled be that we get had administratively or on consent as something different without contention. >> very good. september 7? >> thank you. for being here and thank you for staying during the hearing unrelated to your project. >> we appreciate that.

>> commissioner koppel september 7. >> commissioner braun of that motion to condition this to september 7 will commissioner braun. aye >> diamond >> aye >> imperial. >> aye >> koppel >> aye >> commissioner mor >> aye. >> commissioner tanner >> aye wrochl this motion passes 6-zero and will place us on item 14. the properties 952 and 960 howard. this is information will presentation. >> good evening. commissioners. after 5. monica planning staff this is information will for a project at 952 and 960 howard. will ewe loisz the central soma

housing district or h sd prosecute visions of planning section 343. and the individual asked state density bonus for a 9 story, 86,000 square foot residential above 3 story, 1, 496 square foot mixed use building over all 140 foot tall building the project contain 113 residential units with 29 containing one bedroom and 84 contabling twochl the project includes 51 class 1 and 8, class 2 bicycle park. one off street load and no parking space. site consists of 2 lots merge exclude located within the mixed use residential zoning. and the soma cultural district and split with 45x and 85x height and bulk.

h sd establish in the 2018 the planning department approving authority for any project eligible notoriety h sd approval process this project and any other must be, proved without discretion if complies with planning seck 343. and comp plies with all applicable mitigation matters. soma eir. in order to be eligible for approval a project provide no less of 10% dwelling affordable to low income. must be reviewed by planning commission at an informational hearing the commission provide comment on the over all design. within 20 days of today's hearing the planning district have a written decision aproving the project. with the requirements already noted the project sponsor team elected to utilize the asked state density program to provide more affordable and add residential

density. the sponsor team is seek 50% density bonus providing 15% of units affordable. the project is seek waivers from the following development standards. set become and street wall. dwelling unit exposure. bicycle park. height and bulk and access. and seeking concessions or incentives from open space and inclusionary housing requirementless of the planning code. i want to e will be rit further on the tier requirements. rental projects provide units 55, 80 and within 10% of, mi and each provided an amount required by the planning code. the applicable on sight rate is 21.5% units 12 or 10 units at 55%, 4.75 or 3 units each at 80 dp 8110% ami. . may substitute for affordable

inclusionary using a density bonus incentive n. this case the request would with provide upon 15 p.s. low income tier it would be 12. at 50% um erickson 2 at 80 and 2 at 110. the department received one request for information about the proposal did not indicate support or opposition. otherwise the department has not received public inquiries. i wanted poke to dine a bit had is the purpose of today's hearing. . to allow to you discuss the design with the sponsor team. i thought it would be helpful to note was reviewed boy our design staff. and the team resunrised the project according to the comments made our department staff requested volume depth on the front facade rather what was

proposed and the team provide alternating set becomes and staff appreciated that the project over all employs felony registration and instruct to help the building blur boundaries with mull and large scale building on the block i will,llow sponsor team to walk you through the design in more detail. and just to reiterate there is no approval okay today just an opportunity to discuss the project and provide feedback on design prior to the approval. this concludes my presentation i will pass it over to the design team and we are available for questions. you will have 5 minutes. good evening off behalf of the sponsor i'm george heely. development am manager. with mow is alice the project

architect we are pleased be here to present 960 howard street. monica stated the project consists of 9 story vertical addition on to which existing 3 story concrete mixed use approved under a separate site permit tell stand 140 feet tall. 113 apartment units. 16 affordable. so the project was designed internal low by a design and employs all of the system the standardized and structure systems we use. design project and construct them lower the cost to provide affordable how does and market rate units at discounted rents to competitors. during plan check one comments received was to blend the

building in to environment. so to dress this comment one of the routes we took was providing size this is decreased from howard street to natomah a cascade and in the high in rises of ground and the small are buildings in the foregraund shown here. can the material palette chosen to the project. this slide shows the 5 key materials. the first one is the fiber cement panel for the ivory frame the body material and also has tenthure similar tot stucco and the concrete building in thes neighborhoods. the second material is the high pressure including the navy blue. this in the light has a sheen it

reflects and looks. the third the window loss on the power facade. noted to -- from from an in the facade and inverted base alternate and every 3 floor its slips it is mod lagz and visual interest. number 4 the vinyl windows. acthanking planning recommendations to find alternative to the typical voinl the vinyl windows is of a higher quality premium europe an style this looks like aluminum common in the neighborhood and than i can be custom colored to charcoal to blend better with the rest of the building and the neighborhood. and the vinyl windows do determine better thermally which is important when a building is

facing a busy street. and we have the number 50 screening. this will be coated with navy blue to match. that we believe allows the project to accommodate for smaller children. couples or roommates. lastly our typical 2 bedroom floor plan includes the 5 bathroom. the kitchen will galley type with wash and dryer. the living pace and the 2 bedrooms point out the interior

bedroom has a large barn door. glazing light can be provided for the room. and also the right looking the modern and simple. upon and this concludes our presentation we will listen to your upon comments >> members of public this is your turn to address the commission on this matter. no requests. public comment is closed this merit is before you. >> thank you. staff and thank you for your presently anticipation. q.ed to seat project is moving forward and i will call on commissioner moore and braun. eye evera few simple questions, when was the commercial building built on top of building 6? that project is still under construction. the permit approved 2021 and we

are still under review with the project's architect. why was this not brought forward as a single project. great question. i don't know the answer. . it is a good question. i think the power of execution is fine. i think the more kind of simple facade is fine. i question the vinyl windows the department general low has concerns about vinyl windows i share those concerns with strong west side explosure in san francisco. together with a merry time vinyl does not wear well. and while you can paint it i believe as a rental building it makes it more ruinable in this

high profile location to not wear well. we have for example the mull z. modern art we saw it hit a homerun with a complicated facade and that it is not vinyl we seeing wear and tear that is just unexcusable and makes us cautious to support vinylism want to strong low suggest this you rethink that. there are recall material this is are probably in a similar price range and i am not an expert what that details are but recommend this is a consequently that should be considered very carefully. the other thing i would like to do and i will look toward commissioner koppel. this belling imploys mass timber construction not typical in san francisco. and i would be interested as to whether or not that needs the

labor requirements that we see in larger buildings employs again mass timber is not 2 by 4 residential. construction of carpen real this it is an expertise. has not been practices much in the city. won't don't have timber construction there are rable tall buildings but not in the city. i put this out for the rest of the commission to reflect those would be my comments otherwise i think your plans are fine and the other material considerations exempt for the windows are thoughtful. thank you. is this has been removed in the plan and looking at the street

it is gone. is able to answer the issue what happens. i'm curious. yes. the facade that was short in place the intent was to keep it -- however. about august or september of last year the construction team noticed it was failing. falling down on the ground and took it on themselves to -- demo the facade before i had time to speak with the plan checkers at dbi and demolition permits. >> is there a process that is urn way as a result of this? and i continue is i separate project. yea well is an active case under review by staff and myself as the planner and when there it is an active enforce am case the bowl is to file a permit abate the violation.

this permit had been filed the permit is already under way. in from a technical the stories

above the ground plain a setback and it is three feet and after each floor is one more foot after. then the project itself up to 10 floor the building setback again to provide that light to a lower level >> i appreciate that does comply with the code i want to make sure it has been taken in consideration the long-term the neighboring property will take that is really the main question about that.

and moving on to the mass timber aspect the projects getting built in downtown oak left lane or proposing. i'm curious may be almost so. we certainly would not believe we dot addition if a conventional concrete or steel frame. comments was it is -- the

loudest noise they pick a panel. hard low noise and a floor and a half every week. typical duration is concrete slab we reduce by 50% with hard low the same amount noise compared to concrete. >> and the -- the -- question was raised earlier about labor and -- i think probably standards and this thing. i'm curious. new construction technique! is the -- have been challenges in the region related constructing? >> no we are our own gc and subcontracted project in oak land to web core they opened the mass timber division left year. they are the acting gc on the project and plan to use web core

at 960 howard >> thank you i appreciate that. i'm not aware of labor issues i know that dan with architects built the first timber -- project in san francisco. and that went without issues. upon not than i know of. and -- but with this project i'm a huge fan of the housing sustainability districts i wish they covered more your and for future area plans or what not i'm a supporter of those in every way, shape or form. and what -- developer would not want to -- bypass ceqa? i mean, you want to talk about hurdles and stream lining --

this is the way to do temperature no ceqa. talking to a developer earlier 550 unit building. any develop they'res wants to get their projects built a lot faster please use the districts if you are in central soma, of course. again. saw it to the developer for getting this here and make thanksgiving work i'm in support. thank you. commissioner diamond >> being you show the picture i had a question.

california building code does not allow for the system or panel given the thickness to be exposed using a 5 inch panel and this requires 2 layers of type c. so that is inaccurate and should be painted white. >> tell be white. >> correct. you will not see an orange as you do here >> when the orange is gone from tht front is white? or painted the color of the sealing. there you see exposed timber by code we are not allowed have. >> inside of intear yors the

sealings were all regular sheet rock. explain your thoughts original the building the upon front base is very different than the front facade which is very different than the side different than the navy blue portion. just talk you to about your design inspiration and you know why all the change sns? i understand like the part one was the more to the a jayceand. commercial you see the data is carried across the 3 story reading i learning are volume of

more ties better to what is going on in the commercial level the lower level. you see on the side and back. those are facing more the natomah street. we want the reading to be different. the frame and infill readings the post and the columns and the infill structures is different material. not sure. i wantedage explanation it is unusual i wanted to understand. i wanted address the different contrasting i guess context around the 4 sides. howard is i different feel.

. thank you. if in the commissioners. we can move on to the rest of your items on the regular. items 15 was continued to september 7. item 16a and b for in var the property 395 third. you will consider the learning project authorization and the zoning add administrator will consider request for variance. good evening, commissioner zoning add administrator. planning staff. the item before planning commission is a large practical authorize to permit a project in

height. the mixed use residential zoning and central soma sud. will utilize the state bonus program and request waiver and incentives and concessions from gentleman am standards and the project is seeking a variance from the wrshgs a for relief on dwelling unit mixed requirement. the proposal contains only 25% up to units and the code requires 40%. project includes the demolition of existing service ping lot on the project site and new construction of a 35 story, 374 tall mixed use building with 456,000 square feast residential for a total. 524 dwelling units. 4500 square feet of retail.

208 class one and 32 class 2 bicycle paces and 125 off street park below grade parking spaces. under the state density program the project requested 4 reverse from setback. wing, height and bull rk requirements to achieve up to 42. 5% density bonus and 2 incentives and concessions from the street and open space requirements of code to reduce housing construction costs. the project will provide 84 affordable units including 49 low and very low income. 17 moderate indm and 18 middle income unit. over the left 4 year the sponsor conducted neighborhood out roach including meetings with individual and it is prean

meeting the department has not received support or opposition of the projects. in conclusion the department finds the project is on balance, consistent with the air plan and the muni doomentd housing element and the policies of the general plan. the project will increase residential density using bonus on under utilized parking lot with in close proximity to public transportation the project the increase the housing stock providing 524 new dwelling units. 84 will be affordable. this concludes presentation and i'm available for questions. sponsor team is here and has prepared a presentation. >> thank you. experience you have 5 minutes. >> thank you.

good evening madam president and commissioners. i'm mike at coen principle with strappeda investment group importance here. we are excited a littles tired excited present to you for approval our project 395, third street you heard it is a 524 unit, 370 foot building 7 roll soma and state density bonus compliant including all of the affordable housing requirements. because the site is prominent it is really more of a downtown site than most of central soma blocks within the sf momma and mos sceney center. we had an interinitial search press to identify a design team

befit thanksgiving location. and the result of the efforts was at least when we think an ideal pairing of the danish firm in a larson. thank you. and i want to take a few mobile homes to talk about the design and when we are thinking and creation of this unique being project. when we started we remember looking at san francisco. upon finding inspire egg in the redwoods and inspirations in sir ammics we know from copenhaggen and light and shadow.

we see an opportunity it fits outside the city personal hinge down to a jiend stadium and mission bay. it is a tower on third and harrison. the lower portions of the tower you see in this generous [inaudible] open up and create interaction with the street level like the bay windows.

there are cut backs on the corners of the of -- the street level to now access to the lob competence ping on one hand and to a generous retail option -- on the corner of third and harrison. and as we move up the tower the winds we have fewer balconies and open generous and than i are on the top of the tower blended with the crown and star to define the building on the skyline of the san francisco. here is a look at the building from the harrison street. we see here composes of may be 2 towers. a large exterior mall are tower. this navigates the lower buildings in the neighborhood. you see how the building in expression references become to the redwoods and movement from the street scape and ending up in the crown. you can see here well is amenities on the 11th building

connects the learning are tower with the mauler and a poring on the upper tower or the officer club. looking from third street and into the building here you have see the pulled becomes from the street allowed us to get traffic. you pass in parking and the main lobby. as you must have in closer to the building on third street looking back toward harrison street you see the very generous walk continues a blends with the comums and the tower the green scapes and canomys and a bulge out sthird and harrison and stepping further back.

between street and residential units allows every unit to get fresh air and reserves become to the bay windows in another way it is in the a bulge out but, thank you this is your time the commissioners may have questions for you later. >> okay. >> members of public this is your opportunity to dress the commission. public ment is closed and the matter is before you >> thank you. >> i am in general support of this project. i do recognize the dwelling unit mix is not met.

we did submit ray variance request for consideration by the wrshgs a. and -- there are a myriad of reasons which i will not go into unless you want mow to about the unique characteristic of this site. that create a hard help in the

context of the efficiency and feasibility. of the project. manage we as a company are focussed on. as well as the fact that traditionally, we have 550 units through lease open and construction 1629 market. we are 0 active. our experience is had the 2 bathroom requirements are the least efficient to build. slowest and hardest to lees not with standing the previous. god speed. and -- they are overwhelmingly occupied by room mates not serving the original public policy intent for family housing. we did consult with some of the community members who have been engaged with us and we learned that for the fordable units

there is demand. for the 2 bathrooms. it is our intention to -- resunrise our requests to the za so that, reduction would only aplay to the market rate and not affect the affordable units >> thank you. >> i would like to put that recommendation or -- part of the continuous in he's approval. approve with conscience with recommendation. dwelling unit a loyal to the affordable unit mix. would meet the development mix requirements >> thank you. >> commissioner moore. >> this project is the level to

exceptional and i'm interested to penned 2 minutes talking about the treatment of the facade and close up there is manage about it which is very lovely, i lacy curtain and irrelevant an attention to the quality of living in a reasonal unit. i think i want to eli have that for everybody to appreciate. here you see a portion across the top the top 3 floors set become with i wrap around. you see units this occupy. >> could you poke in the microphone. >> occupy several kooks.

the intent is to offer journal balconies so that everybody has the tune to open up their unit and get fresh air in the facade itself is thought of as either a precast concrete facade. and -- of course with openings winnows that are operable. there is a unique design feature important reference become to the bay window and the way they approach the street level it is i mix of draping the facade. thank you for explaining that i hope everybody could see it limp i want to talk with mr. coen one more time. we have been under pressure as of late. it is i large project with 524 units with i large element

affordable. is this being built. and to point out strappeda is one of the exceptions having realized buildings the time everything else where the people who should have been able to bring it forward did not. i tick that as a strong point of credibility and make a motion to approve with conditions. including comments and requests med boy commissioner imperial. recommending. but a condition of approval, right >> i will puts condition. >> acknowledged by the applicant already i think this is an person thing to do. >> absolutely. okay you want to jump in now? >> if i can jump in on one issue. and i'm theme wait. on that issue, potentiallieen

though 25% will be 2 bedrooms make its 40% affordable 2 bedrooms, and once that proposal came in we have been looking in the code to see if there say method to aluthat. the planingly code requires that affordable units be comp republic to the make in the building. and provisions in the code this don't allow them to modify that. and there is limited times and ways which this can be modified. not clear that is something this could be conditioned if possible if we want to move this out today we andeen you want to include that in case that it is an outcome to caveat that language with something, if determined to be permitted under the code by the zshg a, et cetera. the limited time we had to look into this we have not found an exact way to allow that between

the unit the building as a whole and the fordable units that makes sense. upon we can also include it as a finding. >> could you repeat? >> since the project experience amenable to that condition of approval and the za is expressing concern wlp we can continue it then we can as an alternative we can include it. iot challenge is if it is -- that is the method in the code to allow it to happen the provision of the code the affordable housing units must be comparable in size to the whole project as a whole. >> i thought that applied the condition of the unit you want the unit of lesser quality on the grounds flower not to the unit mix of bedrooms >> applied to facets of it including the bedroom size,

et cetera. guess beyond. why we can w good to hear your. stance because what that code language was try to get at we would not lower standards on affordable. that's helpful. um i believe it is fine to make a finaling that says that the project experience committed to the 40%, 2 bedroom mix for the -- on site.

units. there is a part of this that it it is purview of za to intercept the code and how the code gets impelemented. i'm happy to work with the za and the project experience. to the commission intent to if you wanted to make an approval today. we can work together to figure out -- i think -- the lines what he is proposing we would try to ifrm element this direction. in a way tell not knowledge -- you will not bring the findings but per of the conditions the language of the za caveat, what was the language? >> i don't think if it makes a difference in the findings or the conditions as long as the caveat is there we can't say

that that can be achiefed under the code. it come up late and there is in the a clear path way in the limited time we had to look into it under the code. the language is the bisqually require it if deemed possible. if we want to move forward. if you want to move forward with a motion on that. -- the large are varianceos that issue. >> do what commissioner moore motioned to the extend feasibility under the code. >> is this amenable to the make exterior seconder. >> great. >> second. >> i see commissioner koppel next? okay. thanks to all involved i want to shed more light on the wham investments has been doing as a whole for the stele in the couple years not only with

bryant but with the market street plumber's union they have been using skimmed workforces a lot think we should out source and hire outside of the city and use workers outside of the city because it is cheaper combu keep are operating businesses helping invest in san francisco. lose our blue collar workforce. they use aparensises that are

actually formal aprentice bunkham state approved programs here in san francisco. that are very specific direct gateways to career opportunity for city build graduates when are women and brown and disadvantaged residents. have ship it inform if you ask me. and i'm a product of all these bodies and groups you know when i to being the bus and rhode my bicycle to every site i built in the city. i got my money here in san francisco and stay here in san pran and i'm spending my money san francisco i want to say, thank you from all of the trades and the labor organizations. to you for keeping us working. >> thank you. commissioner diamond. >> i'm supportive of the project the design is beautiful i

think -- amenities ever wonderful i love the way they did the balcons and the role balcons inset up top. features that are you know really beautiful to gaze upon and i hope you build it quickly. this is -- mr. teague an i have a question for you. because i'm struggling with when we are approving the original request when i read the report was i variance instead of providing 2 bedrooms 40% they wanted 2 bedrooms at 25% is this correct? and now the affordable units 2 with respects at 40% and in the market rate units 2 at 25%? over all well is a greater number of 2 bedrooms they are providing based upon the current proposal then and there when we got in the staff packet am i correct in my understanding?

>> not sure i follow the second part. total number of 2 bedrooms is grirt than if you did 25% cross the entire getting more 2 bedrooms but well is a deficit of 2 bedrooms missing 15% of the 2 bedroom in the market rate. they still need a variance of some kind. or if you can find a way it is 40% below a variance for the 15%. could they volunteer to do more? and i men it is for you and the city attorney to work out in the findings. could they commit to doing more than required each though the code -- requires them if you grant the variance for 25% for

all of it that is permitted, correct? >> if we guarantee a variance and they do 25% 2 newscasted 40 the code says 25% of the on sight affordable need to be 2 bedrooms. >> yea. >> when we say the challenge is that's the code. the distribution proportion portional. >> and commit in the findings to do above and beyond when is required. i am saying that would violate the code >> yea they would volunteer to rilit the code. the code says proportional. so -- this is the difference with you know simple low doing more affordable housing that are two bedroom that it is not on the table here. but that is right. they would whether we condition today or vol tearing the outcome is something the code does not

permit this is the challenge there. >> soy -- you know you and the city attorney need to work out how they get there. and i'm supportive of the result i think it is a great result i hope you get there. i have not heard anything about the hardships. and circumstances that were justify a variant that is more your purview ours i'm entered in yet site we don't usually push people to require all of the required 2 bedroom and so i'm interested in more e will be rig you made reference i'm interested. you know the primary sort exceptional circumstance that create the hardship in this case has to do with the configuration and dimensionality of this property. in comparison to other large projects in the central soma area. and the hardship is irrelevant

one of -- efficiency and -- commissioner moore e louded it as did commissioner koppel we pride ourselves on actually getting the projects we get nilinged built. the way we do that is in addition to beautiful buildings well it is a lot of work that goes into efficiency. and know gib that program terse and i'm not coming up with the right terminology. typeset is much harder from an efficiency perspective to deliver the project then and there for enthusiasm.

and potential low be you know more family friend low as affordable in the buildings. it it is food for thought after a longer term and -- policy wise. but as far as this project itself guess looks like a great project i'm excited to see ab4 dealt deed units i hope it gets built soon >> thank you. before i call on the za a few comments then turn it over >> i would say and i'm normally like the commission seen a housing project had reservations ever. only reservations shared with your team is the use of the vicious to get where we are going. i don't being it is the proper tool. mr. teague if you find a way,

that's awesome we gotta do it i'm prepared support the motion today. but what gives me pause is using a rarns and other bonus or similar project that the configuration lot challenging for efficiency it is in the a steep hill. kinds of the standard lot i don't see a lot there. i get concerned about not this project butt others that come in the wake and that's where i have my pause. that said if we make it work, great. i think i ask the experience you know -- this some application came reason compare to the over all project application, why the switch to using the tool and needing it from the mix. not with you i know you said it meches more sense in the finances but i wander could you have gone taller or asked for i variance or waiver.

>> a couple things. in theatre could have gone taller. i am will tell you we begin the state density bonus. i think we are at urn 50% it is 45 or 46%. we could have gone to 400 feet we stopped at 370 feet at that height the shadow impacts are negligent we strive to good with the community niche and so we made the decisions that in meet the extra 30 and thinking about going taller as a means to recovery the units would otherwise lose. we did analysis and like shadow impacts go up 25% it is the break point we made a decision

and thought it was the right thing to do for our neighbor and partners. that we tested out there. we do believe well is interesting potential for the use of a density bonus waiver or incentives for this thing. irthink in conversations with the zoning add administrator, and the city attorney's office we look at how to best, chief the policy objectives we are happy top have the conversations and i adopt to address a very basic point. if the zoning add administrator determines this does in the fit properly within a variance we will still go ahead with the project. we are 100% in on this project. what we might do is find

another -- vehicle. like we will not stop. we think the public policy argument that commissioner braun and others e louded is strong. we would like the opportunity to work through -- those opportunity whether it it is through the state density bonus. if we had to go to our. legislative body to the board and say for central soma projects closer to downtown on the freeway offering up can we have i lower requirement. we are going to we are not going to stop no matter what. i do welcome the opportunity to work with the za city attorney's office to find the most fortunate solution and i think today we are just hope to get project authorization from this commission and then we will do whatever we do to move it forward. >> great >> glad to hear that and balancing different objectives mind the shadows manage we value

and personal. left thing i will say is i'm not an attorney, however, i you have explained the rational of why it is not appropriate to have a variance or have i dwelling unit mix something waived or conceded i would ask you bothed mr. ylang to look at that againfulip don't see, i don't upon find that per swayive. to me. take that for what it it is worth. i have concerns about the variance but don't think you need one. i like to comment on this before. >> commissioner diamond. i agree with commissioners tanner and if you think the ludoes not allow it consider an amendment. i think it is silly. quite frankly we can't get more if in the afford annual units. that seems like bad policy to

me. i recognize you deal with limitations of complng and it it is getting in the way we should propose they don't need to we could propose the metropolitan to accomplish it. i agree with that entirely. >> or the wrshgs a could issue the interpretation. so many ideas here. i think the intent is in the that we want more we want upon a diverse mix of housing in the affordable market. there is a place for all the unit types there is an issue in the building itself to have you know the affordability representative of the building and not clusters. we need you will of them. i agree on the policy issue. . .ive whenning we look at the

project everyone is in agreement it is a great project. a lot of things the city wants us to do. you know commissioner tanner stole some of the challenges like with the variance. again the variance intended to be manage that will something u nobodying to this site creating a hardship this is really impacting the property rights for development. and it is not the biggest sight. this is substantial can hold the units. and -- the switch on the drone unit and an among 6 weeks ago can you talk about what changed in your calculation.

the honest answer, we work in many other jurisdictions in the state california and all of them allow to you use a density bonus waiver incentive we thought we would be able to we understood that -- there is a standing interpretation that says you can't hear. so we -- we just decided to pursue the next best alternative. and as we said. we will if this one discipline not work we'll find the next one. >> do you think the issues you raised for this site. some was like -- better efficiency but not inability to accommodate. du feel there are issues in the dwelling unit mix for this site this is unique to other standard

development sites in districts that have the mix. i'm asking this is know issue of -- universal issue because of some issue in the current market or changing dynamics. and answering the wes and the question now -- look i think the end the day we are being asked to accommodate a lot at once avoiding the break point where shadows do a beautiful building request interesting elements. and -- -- the -- inefficiency by

that elevated requirement in central soma plan opposed to the 25% requirement citywide is a hardship in the way we think of the word. and look i -- think are weave going to build this building, yes. i think if the more we lean to efficiency we will it will be sooner feasible for you to do this. because i don't near the current condition where efficiency is super important for us it is a fair the text book definition of heardship. i don't know if this is the legal definition. i will say in the application i don't very close we did go we were, wear of the issue and well is detail in the character of this item i can't recite them.

>> okay. thank you. i think the things discussed e lab rit more. the adopted policy is to do meet the dwelling u nit mix there is a potts in the plan saying this is fortunate we should do it and keep the mix there. and would never have i variance for mix. and we had few cases that planning commission torous that. we are in uncharted waters here and to president tanner's point. it it is a square peg and round whole with issue, process and limations in the variance press. they are challenges especially considering the president this sets. i think this if this is an issue that has been as you know.

a lot of legislation before you is more coming i'm not aware of this being an issue raised. and brought up. most of us here lived in the room mate situation at some time. even if they are ram mate intagzs they can, comidate a family in the future if things change. there are values of having them

if is there is a way to keep those. i hear it is a great project we want it to move forward we don't want it to be delayed to an extent this is unnecessary. i am happy to not make decisions on this tonight and you know take it under add sunrisement and work william team on a lesser variancing on or manage like that. but i think there is a lot to consider and happy to hear you say if you are moving forward regardless. but those are my thoughts on the variance. etch i gis want to and vehicle for you know looking at your concern and thoughts are.

i guess my again -- i want to -- ask you in terms of occurrence in terms of the -- the law may be asking them to violate. swon should the variance be grantd and the second if granted for i less are amount and i proposal to compensate for this doing a larger proportion of 2 bathroom afford believe this take its out of the make. are in the found a clear way

what it is not 19we want to get out of this project move forward tonight. that is why i felt like the caveat to the condition language was necessary and helpful. >> okay. and not response.

>> if the planning commission authorizes the project authorization and, prove it, but it turns out that the vicious can't be used to change the unit mix in this way or there are problems that being come up. does our authorization still stand even if the mix changes in the 40? not going to come become to us or what. great question we talked about this. in this case if the variance was denied. the unit mix chinks the number of units reduced the amount of housing is not reduces. it is i mix it would change. and -- our standard language in

commission motions already have a provision for changes after entitlement when there are modifications come become for additional approval this change would be a variant was in the grnltsed in full would not rise this that level of coming become. give % 2 bedroom mix and you know depenning on the out economist vicious this could be modified appropriately. add thanksgiving finding in addition to the condition with the can haveiot as previously state snd >> anything if silttats a broader ability to look at the problem, yes.

>> is this all right >> yes. why yes. >> >> okay. great you don't see hands up. do you have your hand raised? >> very good. commissioners i motion seconded approve this matter with conditions to include 40% 2 bedroom mix in affordable unit portion if per missable a finding indicating that the planning commission would being satisfied with 225% 2 bedroom mix. commissioner braun. why aye >> commissioner diamond. >> aye >> commissionerism roll. why aye >> commissioner koppel. aye >> commissioner mor >> and commissioner tanner. aye. >> so moved it passed unanimously. we will the variance and take this matter urn advisement. >> we remember you are

welcome back we are left off on item 17, the property at 372, richistry a cu authorization. where good evening again. planning staff. the item is a c u authorization to per nit a kwan bills retail in central so many zoning district and sud the project will establish a 2800 square feet retail with existing 1 story commercial building the project proposed interior improve ams no major changes to exterior are proposed.

project does not seek on site consumption or cannabis products. the draft motion for approval is condition to probability on sight consumption of cannabis products at the site. any future addition of smoke or vachor room will require conditional use authorization. the project is in the located within a 600 foot radius of existing private or public school or cannabis retail or medical cannabis retailer. the experience conducts out reach good neighbor policy and meeting on december 1 of 2022 the department received 5 all rights of support. the department finds on balance issue consistent with the soma plan and objectives and policies

of the general plan activates commercial space by bringing a new time retail business to the area and support the equity program boy office cannabis and finds the project necessary, desirable and compatible with the surrounding neighborhood and not detrimental to persons or properties. i'm available for questions the sponsor is here and prepared a prison a recollection. . thank you. good evening with mike at wright eye pleaseed present our proposal for you our company to bring a mule cannabis discovery front i was borning in the mission and i pride moiz in bringing knowledge insoil to the

local market and trends. micheal has deem rots here and we entered the cannabis industry with sustain be ath, corporate believe responsibility and community out reach and leadership we believe this will be a contribution to the community as evidence by letters of support and proud to be advancing this project during a challenging economic time in san francisco. i will turn it over to michael to walk you through the approval. good evening i'm michael wright. had is a proposal to renovate underutilized one story commercial building with a new cannabis retail use.

the building located on rich between towns extend brannon and contains mall spaces that have been rented retail 10 annuals. most spaces sat vacant for some time now. it is a noncontributing structure in an article 10 land mark we endeavoured minimize changes to exterior to preserve existing neighborhood characteristic. we react have aing the space we hope to be a pillar. support on the street and in the community. the interior will be remodelings including ad a accessibility and security upgrades. i mentioned our intent to limit

exterior changes there is mentioning the front set become of the store front will be improves with ad, up grids new identity do you recall bicycle rack and landscaping improvements. this is showing the current 2800 square foot building. you might imagine imagine a number of the space have not and attracted long-term tenants. here is the liout for custody sxhers complying with the planning code's active use requirements. the blue arrows point to officer mounted cameras the only

aterations proposed. the commitment to safety and security and a good neighbor our guard will enforce age restricts, discourage light anding consumption outside of premesis and will soak to prevenn double parking on rich street. beyond the out reach we you could can with neighbors. plan to a main stay in active low participating in commune organizations and community based projects. attracting a diverse workforce develop in the future of the u.

can which we believe not only ensures the best customer experience but the long-term viability of the store. thank you for your time and martin myself and the project architect and other team measures visible to answer questions. thank you. member of public this is where you are town to address the commission if you care to come forward. or press star 3. raise your handled via web ex. no requests to speak. public ment is closed the merit is before you, commissioners. >> commissioner koppel >> make a motion to approve. >> second. >> thank you. >> commissioner moore has a comment i would like to ask the applicant. there is, lot of writing about over const.trician and somewhat

too many cannabisern prizes in the city this are failing. this commission has been in spchlt condition bills but with the lest news we hear there are questions and in this case i read this in one direction have you another cannabis store 950 feet away the next is 1500 feet away in the other direction is that of concern. why this is you are 100% right about over concentration. in our area if you look at the map there is a less concentration where we are. there is also no other dispensaries between us and the chase center. with all of the development there i think there is a good opportunity to cover this your as well. i appreciate this comment. thank you. why thank you.

>> other comments or questions. >> seeing moncommissioners a motion seconds to, prove this merit with conditions on ma motion commissioner braun. >> aye yooch commissioner diamond. >> aye yoochl commissioner imperial >> aye yoochl commissioner comel. >> aye >> commissioner moore. >> aye >> commissioner president tanner >> aye >> that passes unanimously. item 18 for 1541 polk street this is a conditional use authorization. good evening.

303 and 303.1 and to alaw a cannabis element 7 use with no on sight smoking or vapor of products permit in the the polk street zoning district. the project establish an approximately 4,000 retail use with no on site consumption on the grounds floor. 10 apt space was occupied by st. luge republican church it relocateed another location on polk and no expansion of existing envelope or store front modifications and all no modification in new business signage will be applied for complies with regulation for examples cannabis use the closest open retail likes are spark at 1735 polk 620 feet away

and the california street condition bills company then 98 california a thousand feet away. code section requires cannabis retail not within 600 feel of a circumstance-12 schools. tiny day care 490 if he felt redding elementary is 630. academy preschool is 720 feet away and another 1100 feet away the applicant is shanti deluca meets requirements per the office of cannabis. since pub laboring the packet the department receives then letters of support and no letters of opposition the laters noted the experience has been accessible for feedback. the applicant has an admirable kaeshg the business will hire

local work and good noise odor and security plan in place the department finds the project is on balance, consistent with the objectives of plan and meets the planning code it the account i have i vac an store front. access to products and increase diversity of retail and support the ecequity program. it is necessary and sdoirable and compatible and not detriment. this condition clouds the experience is here and prepared a presentation and we will be available for questions. thank you. good evening. i'm shanti i'm the verified applicant on this flkz. i robbery in san francisco the left 22 yoors i work in the

hospitality most low working for restaurants and bars. i still work at house of shields for 12 year my wife and i live in the sunset got married here in city hall in 2008 i have to sons that attentive sud drivenlth and this hen a lifelong dream for me. my family was affected adverse low by the war on drugs and i worked hard for legalization working with jack herrer and dennis per own expect in 2018 i started this journey to upon realize my dream of having a holistic medically focus it is cannabis dispensary in van fran. work hard to find the right partner and i bought the bought them out biasod their manuscript

to being the most compliant, diverse and their passion for social equity. and righting injustice in cal. thank you. >> switch over to the -- >> good evening chair tan exert commissioners and staff and residents i'm josh black i'm the chief of prescriptions at element 7. resident of san francisco my wife came from vietnam and called city home and convinced meto move here. i wanted take you thrive a quick present a recollection. the. theme a diverse team across california. we operate 8 retail stores in california. from rio in humboldt and chula

vista in san diego. business plans are simple. we are looking to take over this belling here on 1541 polk. it was a bank of america belling has an active volt in the become makes our life of easy to secure product and operators lug republican church. edward plan is supportive of us. the church was moving out so we took over a vacant building we are using it as our office. and have been shopping at the restaurants, bars and cafes and many past of sick months. we are engaged the local community around us. and -- as you seat dots here represent the businesses that have sent letters of support

that include the security company to small calfys and restaurants and bars and multiple buildings in the your. on makes sure she goes in every 3 months we are doing the right things. 43% of customer base over the age of 40. we skew a littleoar and conservative then and there other dispensaries to commissioner moore's question earlier do we worry about the near by dispense easier and over concentration. not irrelevant. there ever12 anymores restaurants 2 or 300 feet either side. 2 dispense easier close spark. we serve a slightly older and more conservative demographic we

will roach a different audience. >> in terms of safety a lot of different things go in the building. a living rooms. motion detectors and that sort of stuff. we operate 8 stores cross california. humboldt down to chula vista and have irrelevant strong design standards and hope you approve this on the basis we met all zoning over 600 feet from competitor dp a thousand feet away from the second competitor. a minority partner. shanti is the ceo will own 51% and control of the company this . it is a social equity business got the support of neighbors and there is vacancies african-american us which able to. that is your time. commission may have questionys.

>> thank you. >> member of the public this is your town to address the commission on this merit if you are here come forward if you are call nothing press star 3. >> good evening will xhfrns i'm jack arey upon dornd son i'm coe and social ecwrity owner then 98 california street in knob hill. i like to point out reasons why this application should be de92id. element 7 was deceitful in the affidavit they state than ied had 8 existing locations and 2 pend nothing sudden front. . when than i have 4 had in san francisco and 8 outside of the city. i know the name of the location is element 7sf4llc.

i atomb the 4 indicates this is the fourth location. second low i attended their community meeting where they shared strategy for success. upon which involves leveraging size to under cut the kwochl tigz had it is an amazonification of the industry undercuts the mom and pop businesses like myself. if this it is,llowed i question the entirety of the sf equity program mission support equity applicants from san francisco communes over pleased on the war and drug and emergency nalized than i did in the attend the meet and state federal they were designate nitted formula retail they would change the name and reapply. >> there are 4 local low owned dispense easier in 1500 feet. concentration when the rit i

don't of licensees to pop will lagz in which the applicant is lected exceeds licenses to population in the county in which the applicant is located. based on local population the neighborhood is over saturated not to mention the population is declining adding another dispense iary will not be good if the health of other dispense easier. thank you. >> commissioners i have written testimony. the first page is per innocent and sum rises the others for your review i'm chris shoemachine a resident of lower polk we oppose the dispensary most of them novelty because of the our strategy because of forced strategy on part of the

applicant. applicant at a meeting told other members that if they were found to be a formula retail they will change their name and trade mark and come to you as a wolf in sheep's clothing. >> put burden on us. rather then and there give them an opportunity we are here to say, they are formula retail. big cana and have a vaj against our mall local businesses and deceived and fallified the affidavit i present i packet this dem tris the form well retail status and deceit. we counsel 18 or more current applied for stores with loses and often approvals from jurisdictions. the affidavit clearly and staff confirms they are required report stores with signs they did not i can state desire for up to 100 stores in california

plus the country on the evidence summary page. we ask to you deny we don't need if under kuth our businesses. i ask you it contract concentration of the others here from other testimony of thank you. and i appreciate your consideration. go to our remote caller. the equity ordinance of spark. opposition to this. and i go to the website to prove they are form well retail they have 8 active stores which --

[inaudible] on their website an additional 46 stores that are coming up. so -- that is one issue i have. the second issue is my community out reach lefted 8 montes and i went in the community and neighboring communities and introduced moiz and won them over it is, pauling the coe was not asked the meeting as a representative of his company that he fought hard for. i did a little also offensive this they are sick 20 feet from my store and they will sdmat our community. i'm against it and hope you take my consideration in your vote. >> last call for public comment. seeing none. it is closed this merit is buffer commissioners.

>> thank you. i will ask the experience if you would if want it respond it is concerning to hear information this minot have beenk rit on your political. regarding the number of locations you prit in the city can you dress this. why. s when we made the application we did note we had other political in we were looking at 4 location in sudden front twof those are in the per sued one on bush street we could not get a lose in accomplice and one inspect castro because the landlordmented to keep their restaurant. we are only pursuing 2 location in san francisco. which it is allowed. we do only have 8 store yes we are a mall ambitious company i'm in the erred by the fact we are called by amazon or corporate cannabis we are a private company we are admit public we work really heard and ambitious

and work with small farms across the state to help them. i want to interrupt. this show we have that has 4 like in san francisco you say 2 are being pursued including this location. one in lower village and one in polk. >> okay. >> commissioner koppel. >> >> i wanted say thank you for neighborhood in people who came out i don't have questions, them. >> i know mr. shoemachine is involved in all things poeshg street and dra cary is shown his face a number of time and not thrilled hear the opposition from other operators. as of now i'm not supportive of the project and curious when the others think. >> thank you commissioner. commissioner moore. y like to speak about the polk street after covid polk street is coming become slowly. and i think my heart guess out

to those who have percent voired through this time. the church phase was original low a strong community anchor served for mostings regarding other planning matters vacate when the church moved to vaness and since this time i feel this am the location is not correct location for a cannabis retail partial leave because of over side and over 4,000 square feet i don't see that need come more in support seeing the few near by cannabis stores thrive they came in under the equity program and i believe this they deserve our support at the time when polk street is time to refind its own signature i will not be in support of this project. >> thank you. commissioner moore. commissioner braun? i have a question to department staff. i we heard from the experience

about the number of locations they v. but what was staff's review of the issue and -- how do we know that this company is not form well retail or do we not know >> upon they did complete and sign formula retail affidavit when we use to affirm they are not a formula retail business temperature is them saying they are not. i believe than i are not formula retail the as is the documentation we have. . >> okay. and to add when we get formula retail we do an initial google search to verify we don't go deep in the weeds but voip the information and make sure well is not anything this contradict its the other piece i note there are criteria in the code that what defoins a formula retail and logos and uniform.

display of merchandising we flan with this local or small are size businesses than i motorbike the same owner and have a different looking foal and they are variables the short answer is we do verify them when we get the affidavit. >> okay. may i add and ask for your verification we formula retwhal it is locally grown company that signifies or support for close formula retail localern prize this started here can have exceed the number of stores >> and to add to that our cb3 p you seat cu this come through. we intentionally up the number and said this form well retail capped at 20. mall retail are enroll immediate this for that purpose. which it is like your blue will

bottle. >> precisely. >> in the location of the storm will be a cu authorization. to allow retail use. >> we can double check the upon punch line is this project is in the form lamp they are not here is this before you as a form well retail. >> right. today is not a form well retail. if there is another application that onlies in the east bay that happens from time to time. the control for the formula retail controls when the entitlement suspect improved when have their status. what are than i today is the

irrelevant certainly upon question.

>> okay. thank you. >> i want to make sure i understood that issue properly. you know the store does have an equity per in. i have historically been less concern the idea.ed saturation of the stores. and -- you know ultimately if the store can provide the experience -- or other competitive advantages than you know i thank you will be per of the competitive press i'm in support of the store.

>> commissioner diamond. question for staff. we have confirmation they are not form well retail. or they in compliance. they are not. are they in compliance with our requirements? >> yes. >> this is a compliant proposal and than i have. i don't think we can turn them down we don't like saturation we should be changing the rowels which we may well be not guilty future but at the mobile home they meet our requirement dps so i am supportive of the project. >> commissioner imperial. i'm in general support of condition bills and we approved the other from the south of market your that has a saturation as limp usually when

i look in the cannabis community support or sometimes the opposition of the community and are taking into consideration. also the size of the for mow when it is more then and there 3,000 square feet for condition bills i do find it a little bit concerning. and -- also the points taken in terms of the you know the this is whether locally whether had is locally started or local low start up here in san francisco. that is manage this i find it as manage this i -- also do not support. so --sed same time i'm concerned there are decisions that is by the public this is from the neighborhood as well that has

gone through. i understand the applicant is within through the equity application as well. . but of course there are different crip tear yes on the equity applicant. those other points that -- i and don't support this project. >> on the questions of furthermore well retail the question was whf we count a location when they have a local entitlement which they are located or they have operating license to open and custody admirals come in. the standard of land use president trump not open and operate. and again we do our best but

don't call local yam as would not expect you to. and newspaper its is not fault of staff. i understand the concern the commission has today than i are not approved to be operating a formula retail dispensary that is not the action buffer. it is brought to our attention like with any enforce am if member is without proper approval they'll be rechoird that is a discretionary obligation. i like to take the discussion form raretail in the amount of license. one operator has. we tuck body this before in the equity program we are looking for local disadvantaged people

getting licenses and here is member when hasit this is the concern than i are trying to address. that is i corn are store with windows in watch watch and front age on polk street what happens to this application is that permission pending. buzz this will increase the frequency and concentration of polk street. happy to take that question. in terms of your question, we -- i don't have the full answer when the office of cannabis

rowels are concentration of licenses but, lot of the equity applicants partner with other folks to get business up and rung. the equity applicants minot have business experience of running i mall business and the thing its teches to have the financing to get a new business prescription to do tenant improve ams and the legal hurdles and most of the equity applicants we see are per inning with another business entity or person to open cannabis retailer. what we areune see suggest that secondary partner has several applicants in their portfolio. we are not seeing the same degree one witty applicant having 8 licenses e. we see the converse of the partner business entities having an interested in more than one.

gi appreciate this answer. i felt it was more corporate voice here graszive in the business. when i look at the gentlemen california i walked boyd that accomplice every day and they are really try to be good neighbors. i continuing is pick up and i clearly heard when you were saying. i every day walk by. jop i think we seen this in blanking on the address of the 2 situations where we saw a cannabis dispensary an equity applicant the secondary and over time as they got experienced.

i suggest we give this more time a couple of us up here that want to feel better about this. next suspect written in the stage where i think shot down is appropriate you want to make a motion to condition this item. jonas you said the schedule is slammed early september? >> escape 14th time for the importance to touch base with the opposition and get duck in a row. is that a hands raise a second commissioner braun? i will second.

i would like more confidence the publishes is not rapidly expanding all over california and we are holding the bag i'm protective of our local businesses more so than ever. and so i'm having clarity this and i we are deliberating among ourselves. we have the confidence this every card on the table and well is clarity-is and when is not including pending or approved application. no further deliberation a motion and seconds to continue to september 14. on this motion commissioner braun yoochl aye >> commissioner diamond >> aye >> imperial. are aye. koppel. >> aye >> moore >> tanner. aye. >> that passes 6-0.

item 19 for 1 phantom street a cu review. good evening chris of planning department staff. you have buffer a manned sorey cu request to modify a conscience of approval on the line in the august sick 1981dr of the project to allow closure of the public low @rum to host private events a general entertainment of use and the installation of green living with yous. the property is on the southwest northwest corner of sansome and sutter.

restint exclude reconstructed portions of the anglo and left lanon paris national bank building and a category ahistoric resource. with resolution 985 allowed for construction of the office tower the commission required the 10,000 square foot adopted for public use as semi open space for sky lighting and land scaping design for community use. on may 6. 2019 a planning case opened to address a complaint on the closure of the accessible @rum. the case was closed after post signs noting agreements to reopen the space in 2019 following upgrades including enclosure with rotating glass and the remove of a nonfunctioning found an. on january 20 of 23. the planning department issued a

notice of violation for the closure of the 8ate rum for the building perimism new opinions installed over marble panels inside and existing light if i can urs replaced. . after february 9 fwent 23 hearing on the matter of the z aissued a decision up holing the notify violation and directed the experience to continue work to complete building permits to legalize improve am and reopen to the general public 8 a.m. and sick p.m. monday-friday in i march consistent with resolution 9085 and the guidelines for dun town open pace in the downtown plan. in response to the proposal expressing a sdoir to close it for private events the za add sunrised a building permit required establish an

entertainment use and close any portion it between 8 a.m. and sick p.m. would be inconsistent with conscience of approval and require a dr to modify conditions. the project experience prosecute poseed modify the approval allowing up to 12, 24 hour weekday closures per year with no machining low compliment 24 ply week day closures.

good evening marx genius and

rose on behalf of the owner. i want to thank chris and core and he his team and everybody on planning staff for heard work. we are pointed to be here to present the team's vision for activating the open space to revitalize downtown. i bit of background we call the conservatory. was, prove in the 8 employed

mayor's road map for downtown future san francisco's future including enhancing public space. new use and flex ability in

existing bell and transforming dun town to a night life destmation and consistent with the downtown ordinance that the board of supervisors passed last tuesday. wrun returning through the changes we are asking for flexibility in 2 ways. one relate to full day even and evening evans we are asking to hold no more asking to hold more then and there one full day event per among. if the commission cease fight let us have more than 12 per year that would be welcomed. and second for evening stage in one section in the mid afternoon leaving another section open with public seethe. we are askings to start evening events at 5 instead of 6 and degree for 24 partial closures per year. 2 times per month when it would

be closed to the public starting in mid afternoonch >> the changes are necessary to succeed. getting rid of the monthly limit on full day events allows events with more demand. and for the 24 partial closures 2 p.m. is mess to make sure they start on time and be successful and 5 instead of 6 keeping people downtown when evans start too late. more important low the changes will not affect the public's use and enjoy am. we are not asking for more full day an allowed in i year just flexibility. were for partial closures 2500 square feet will be opened to the public and agreed to provide seating with the minimum count and the ordinance importance it

is most frequented during lunch consistent with most of the downtown. there is minimal use in mid to late afternoon. staff has we worked on several dr conscience. and -- we think than i will ensure this activation does not interrupt the purposes a public open space. so this project represents a huge commitment to the downtown and the sponsor's hope it serves a catalyst for other business and bring this is space to life exit have 15 more secondsy will show a couple photos. thanks. this is the yesterday at 1. . 30. and this is what it looks like. thank you very much is another event. thank you we are available for questions. >> thank you. member of the public this is

where you are opportunity to address the commission on this matter. if you are here come forward if you are remote press star 3. no members in the chamber let's go to remote callers. am i'm calling on behalf of the manager association in san francisco. just want to reiterate everything said this is a tremendous commitment by sponsor at a time we are getting folks down to and look for example anchor locations that will assist with things like the mayor's plan the downtown san francisco partnerships over come action plan. to preserve open space from the majority and get the project

flex ability to make sure that this is feasible for them. i hope you will support this and want top thank you for considering and the experience showed investment in downtown. >> thank you. >> good evening, commissioners i'm jowlia calling on behalf san francisco travel in support proposal for 1 samsmchl dest nigz marketing organization focusing [inaudible]. long with our membership bifs 700 organizations we're eager to sppt victim in the city like this proposal. will in order to drive business and foot traffic to the financial district public space and increase opportunities for art and entertainment events. close to mos sceney. it is i deal like [inaudible]

for convention and [inaudible] touring through downtown. with the remodel and opening of [inaudible], jayceant we see the pace a new vocal point for events. visitors coming revenue by hopping and staying over night contributing to our city's recovery. we hope you support this xoiting development. thank you all for your time and considering and all that you do for our beautiful will city. >> okay with that public comment is close third degree merit is before you, commissioners. >> thank you. really excited see this a line myself with the comments this it is important and and more if you

were to have more days you will follow through on correcting violations and tell be open to the public on the hour its is supposed to be open. >> absolutely. if we want to add an additional condition, specifying okay. are you going to follow through and make sure this is accessible. >> no. the space -- when we started getting involved we were able to work with the building owner and staff to come up with the realistic time to finish all the work to get the space open that was the first prior and alined with staff making sure we get the open space opened to the public. it hen open since april now.

and when i was walking here, before the beginning of today it was wonderful than i have they are high tops i show exclude than i had guilty pods of -- co workers eating lunch. sun was coming down it was grittism walk by this every day in the morning and every day when i get become on to bart. it is opened by 8:30 when i go to bart it it is still open in the evening this is a long -- long process involved the entire ground floor i think there is commitment to ensuring. it opened there is inspection the foible on a friday and opened the mondayor tuesday after that. >> and as far as the events is the question you want more than 24 events.

would that be helpful. our goal is to activate it 4ing wile open before 8 in the morning we'll opening at 7:30 in the morning and we were planning events on sundays and weekend days to bring in the public as the tenant of the space it is part of our business model to activate the space and program it to make it an active space in the city from that front. on the question of the 12 full days, as opposed partial days. the full days go to the fact that the parties of that size and that manage tude it is irrelevant about setting up and and the especially if we have a

conference if there is droll force or occurrence. .7 files away from space the producer of the events are going in and settingum at a high level trying to draekt over a thousand people in the space. that is good to hear and get folks down i love when we have multiple uses in one location one open to the public and one closed to the public if activated that is great. i'm open to more full day events. don't know the right number want to balance making sure it is a

public space used and off public hours private low. but primarily a public space. where commissioner koppel. >> i don't think it is i secret i have been worried about dun town and it is not a speedy recovery weer herelet we approved 420 sutter and talking 952 howard and 395 third. and now this project. so kudos to you, thank you for having the courage to even attempt this time project. we are in dire need of activation of dun town. well is still it is still a ghost town it it is still a ghost taunt all day long. morning, day long and especially night time. it was even sparsely populated primetime now it is a ghost town.

it is steps from the bart and muni train stop by suand the list of support coming from the chamber and the hotel and sf travel. this is pact low when we need downtown and exactly the time we need temperature so i want to give this property owner or the project experience the tools he needs to make this work and succeed and bring more people downtown and create a better of a public open space for the public. when it is available but -- i'm definitely in support and i don't want to limit or hamstring the project it a point it it is in the as successful as it could exhibit not revitalizing downtown to the level we could with if we make certain decisions tonight. i don't want to limit him i want to give him as much opportunity

to set up the events and continue to have the eventses and make the property a better venue. so open hear to hear when others thinking i want to make this a show case item to send a message we are trying to revitalize downtown. >> thank you. commissioner diamond >> well said, commissioner koppel i agree with every word. how many additional full day events do you want to increasior chances of success? >> can you come to the mic. you know it it is a good question and i say from a safety valve perspect itch well is a restaurant as well we want to keep open there is a balance we want to do events but we want to be open to the public as well. i mean in a perfect world 24 would be a great number. >> okay >> i will say we are in a completely different world, sadly then and there in 1981 when this project was, proved it

hen a spectacular public pace enjoyed by downtown workers tirety and convention atendsees for almost 4 decades and -- we need tong about the different low the events you are prosecute potion seem like they are designed to not only keep people downtown but attract people downtown. i'm in support of when you want to do. i don't know this i would go to 24. immediately but i could certain see you know -- going comfortable 18 to 20. full day closures any time during the year you want. pui would like to hear what others have to say >> thank you. commissioner braun >> i guess i money it is a wonderful space.

the response from mr. loamer about how grit it does and opened since april noise it was opened furthered than that it would have been enjoyed longer. i have a different perspective on in of this with the space the thing that stands out is the public space part of this. i get what it it is private low owned but to me it is a public pace and recognize it is in the always open but when i think about am using the pace for private events its is like to what extent are we willing to have a park use for private evens that does happen there is a process. like i'm flexible on this to some extent. but i don't want to move far from the original mission as a public space. so -- i also point out the renovation of the space there was no approval to have the private events or the changes.

for using the space at the time the renovation plans were put forward it and not sounds like that was per of the story, either. and so -- i am comfortable with the what is proposed begin to us already. the upon 12 if you feel day closures a year. change to occur any time instead of witness i among i'm comfortable with that. i think and i am comfortable with the 24 -- days a year with the partial closure maintaining the space still open. but also ato be closed 5 p.m. for private events i'm comfortable. i'm not willing to go further than that i would not support expanding beyond that, personal low. again, i want to make sailor it maintains the presence as a public space and concerned we set a precedent and if we

further we go with this precedent for other spaces many would be wonderful. private event spaces. i don't want to create a rush to -- really intense low start the privatizing the uses of the space. i'm comfortable with what has been propose today is giving a lot for private uses. i personal low am not going further

as of travel write partner as of trouble or advertise it. this is an open space when there are no private events happening. so that's just something that i would like you to consider when you have a community liaison. and i'm in all of the conditions

that are being proposed here by the department, i'm generally, you know, in support of them. i actually i'm glad that there will be biannual, biannual, you know, report by the wsa. and i guess by that that's when we're going to really see in terms of, i guess, the biannual report. is that something whether they are implementing the closures and the partial closures, is that what it would mean? yeah, the biannual reporting is to both advise the department of future planned events like the dates just so that if we get calls from the members of the public being like why is this closed. we know in advance and we can tell people why. and then also it would report the previous six months to basically verify when those events took place so that we can keep track that that, yes, they're staying within the 12 full day and 24 partial day closures. okay. thank you. yeah, i'm generally comfortable with

what the department has offered to us. i think it's because the fact that, you know, i think this is a balanced, you know, and again, i commend the department in terms of having this kind of conditions because we with the balanced approach of having private and i understand there needs to have a flexibility on having active the program. and i would also encourage actually, if there's also community benefits, whether the private events will be also happening to some community programs as well. i mean, that's for me is also a definition of a good open space. but i'm comfortable generally right now with this and yeah, i guess that's where i am right now. uh, i appreciate, uh, commissioner brown's thoughtful analysis and i have to admit, operate being

an introverted public open space is extremely difficult. i know this corner for too many years and always felt it was not as inviting a public open space as others are. it is really more a formal passageway, like a lobby per se, a public lobby. yet it had a more private feeling. the issue is frequency, which i agree with as 12 and the subset for evening events. but i think the most difficult position is mr. teague. when this sets precedent. mr. teague, would you for a moment, help us talk through this? i think as a short for downtown at this moment, i think it is a great idea. however for what precedent are we setting? sure uh, corey teague, zoning administrator. um, i think as was mentioned, our properties in the city are

really divided into two camps. we have what most people think of the properties that are actually required and have been since the downtown plan was adopted. and so that's an actual code requirement since roughly 85 and has very specific controls. but what was happening prior to that is that the planning commission was just ad hoc, requiring these open spaces without any code structure around it. right. and that's where this falls into. and all of these do have this route, right? they can come back to the planning commission and request to have those conditions modified. so this is i mean, i'm not off the top of my head. i'm not familiar with any other propose, at least in recent history that's come through this process and ask the planning commission to convert or remove in some way, you know, a portion of a required downtown propose. so this you know, this is an example of that. and whether or not that's going to lead to more requests to do the same thing. i mean, i think that's to be seen.

i mean, we are we do have a number of enforcement cases open regarding propose right now. and we are working, you know, we're engaging thoughtfully with all the property owners because it is a challenging time and we're trying to make sure we understand each case. okay. but we do hear that there is less of a desire for some of these spaces to stay open or at least stay open in the same manner they have been in the past. so i don't think it would be a crazy leap to say this might not be the first one that we that we see come across your, uh, your view here for this kind of request. but but this is the only one that's officially applied to this point. i, i assume, and i hope that you'll study on the helm as we move forward. i do think at this moment it is a necessary move. however i would like to see should this venture not succeed at the way that we are currently supporting it, that there is an additional look because as this place would be less active or not really pick up the way we're

envisioning it, that it remains public and is being fully reviewed to two public open space just as a quiet sitting place because if we don't pay attention to that, it will ultimately be privatizing. and i think that is a fair way to having the reporting back and seeing. and i wish that it will happen, that it becomes really a magnet and a destination point. and i would very strongly ask if at all possible, that certain evening or late afternoon events are indeed public, i.e. having some jazz or whatever. there to bring it into the experimental art environment that is truly missing. and in downtown, but can be a magnet to bring people together that would be my suggestion. otherwise, i'm in support of the 12 month. once a month set up into 24 others. okay commissioner brown, it's just kind of a self-education question for the zoning administrator. you know, the as

i understand it, i could be wrong, but as i understand it, the ability to have 12 full, full, 24 hour closures of one of these spaces once per month that comes from the downtown plan from 85, the guidelines for downtown open space. in that plan. but it seems to apply to this space, which is pre downtown plan. is that is that right? i mean, what's the relationship between the downtown plans requirements for them? and sure, for you, there's kind of two questions there. the once a month, i mean, we have a temporary use authorization now that doesn't just apply to propose but applies kind of across the city where you can have one 24 hour event per month . and there's some requirements around that. and that's a temporary use authorization. that's that's an option. but it is limited to once per month. you can't you can't load your 12 into one month. right. it's just once, once per month separate alley again, going back to the fact that a lot of these pre downtown plan proposals were

adopted as conditions of approval without a lot of guidance. it was kind of like as proposed and like they might say the square footage and they just say that to be open to the public, they don't really talk about weekends versus weekdays. sometimes they talk about certain types of features and furniture, but they're not that clear. clearly once this became an actual program in the in the code, it was much more structured and the requirements were much more clear. and there was actually a matrix designed for specific types of open spaces, whether it's an atrium or a plaza or a greenhouse. et cetera. and each one, the downtown plan provides guidance for the appropriate hours that it should be open. what type of seating and activity should be permitted? there and so because we don't have that guidance from the conditions from these older projects, they're just silent on that question. it's been our practice to basically apply to see where those old properties fall into the downtown matrix,

what type of open space it is. here. it's an atrium and apply those kind of operating controls from the general plan to those spaces because we don't have any other anything else is kind of arbitrary. and so that's what we've done consistently and that's why we kind of have these pre downtown plan propose that are technically subject to the provisions of the general plan, the downtown plan. okay thank you for that. that was really helpful. and just in case we do see more of these coming forward . so i appreciate it. and i'll also just say to the point about kind of activating this space, even though maybe there's a limit on how many private events can occur, of course it will be wonderful to have public events that can help to activate the space, help to support the restaurant in it. so i do hope that we can see that. your time is, um, so i'm hearing only

three votes potentially for more than 12 days. so i think what i'd like to do is make a motion to approve the project as proposed. and you know, if it turns out as you operate, that you think that more days would be necessary, then come back to us and we can reconsider that in the context of what you've been doing so far and what this economic circumstances are and public events that have been held. but for now, i think we should keep the motion the way it is in the package. so i moved to approve with the modification proposed by staff believe there are some modifications. what's the. no, no. all right. very good, then. i mean, i was just going to suggest, i think the conversations have been good. i just don't want to miss a potential opportunity. i mean, we struggle. i've been working with the office of economic development and the mayor's office on downtown and how we get more activity downtown. we

had july here who talked a lot about events, so maybe we can come back in a year and set that as a time period and see how it's operating and change the conditions because it is a nice space commissioner moore i had the same experience. i worked a block from here for many years, even when it was open as a as opposed before the renovation. it didn't feel terribly open and inviting. there wasn't a lot going on in there. so i just don't want to miss an opportunity to both make this public. you know, and keep it open in public and have seating there. but also, like we do in our own parking spaces, whether it's urban or union square or or whatnot, have the ability and flexibility to have some private events there that clearly activate it. and the surrounding area. so maybe we can calendar even just in a year. but where you can change the option, do you want to require them to come back or just invite them to come

back in a year, invite but but you're telling us open it up in a year, report back. you know, maybe reopen those conditions as well. but i don't want to create an opening to change the conditions in a way that's less than what we're doing, because they're going to be making investments in an expectation. so yeah, yeah. it's why i'm a little anxious about adding it as a condition. i think rather i would just encourage you and invite you to come back and we can actually calendar asking them to come back for an informational hearings and if at the time they want to open it to expand the conditions, i think that would be great. well, maybe i'll just say one last thing. is that anybody in in any way, any of the three commissioners who are not supportive of more than 12 days could be persuaded to do 18 or 20. i mean, overall scheme of things is a very small percentage of the days that it's even open to the public as it is . so just to say it's still mostly super, super, mostly going to be open to the public. but if there's not, then, you know, we have the motion we

have. yeah, i'm comfortable with commissioner diamond's actually recommendation. i guess you can call it a recommendation to in terms of having the report back and having for the, the, the commission to consider to add more. but not less in your event, in your private events. but in terms of director hill, is because i think you're also asking separate in terms of having a separate hearing or a separate in terms of looking into the possibility. because i do think the context has changed downtown, right? it's a it's a tough environment. this will actually attract people downtown . i get the history. there were permit issues, but i also very much remember this space walked by at a thousand times, was never compelled to go into it even when i worked there, because there wasn't much there. and it's just a it's a great transformation. so i think we want both the public, but the ability to generate activity and have events there. yeah yeah. i'm open to that to have like,

you know, i guess to put that standards. but again, you can do 12 events now. we're not giving them much by saying you can do 12 and you can just spread them over a month. you know, again, i'm asked every day about what we're doing downtown. so give 18 or something like that. i think is appropriate. we can have a report back, see where it goes. commissioner koppel. yeah, really be interested in the report. i'd even be open to a sooner six months. i mean, i'm only because i'm downtown every day. there's nobody downtown. there's nobody downtown. and this is invested i don't know how much money into an incredibly beautiful space. and i mean, he's taken the walls that are windows and made them open up so that not just the doors like literally the building itself opens itself up to the public. and anyone can just literally walk right in. so i, i can't see a better example of what could revitalize as the financial district part of

downtown, where there is nobody in this guy is willing to take a chance and like stick his neck out for almost the whole the whole downtown and i'll have my i mean, i just want to add that, you know, i go to the salesforce bobo's and it's one of my favorite posts in the city and i think the reason that salesforce is successful is because it's designed to be an open space to the public. and there is actually when it became when it was opened, there was some marketing on that. and so there are people from outside the bay area coming to the salesforce property. and once and so i've never heard of it, so i've never been inside and i also go to that area to at least like twice a month in that area. but when i go to the so it's i guess we that's going to be a separate conversation in general for the challenge to them to make it feel public and open when it's

not closed because you and i had the same experience. it didn't feel public and open and inviting it felt like a lobby. you'd walk through. so i think it's both a challenge to them to make it feel more public and invite the public in when it's not open. at the same time, we're giving them some leeway to program it for events. okay, commissioner dimond, do you have another comment? all right. well, we haven't persuaded anybody else to join the 20 day club, but we have invitation for you all to come back, hopefully with some success stories. so was there a second to commissioner diamonds? i will second the motion. thank you. there's no further deliberation , commissioners. there's a motion that has been seconded to take and approve this matter with conditions on that motion. commissioner braun, i apologize . could we clarify? did we add the condition to come back in a year or in six months? it's there's no condition. it's just that they are they can come back just report back. okay. they are going to do a biannual report. so that will happen, which they could have staff could share

that with us. but they're not required to come back. but if they would like to come back to pursue more days, assuming that they could do that and we would entertain that happily, sure. and we all have the ability to walk by that during lunch. to set a good example. so here you go. and let me add, it can be sooner than a year. we're not saying you have to wait a year to come back. if it turns out that you've got a great plan going and financially you really need to do it, then come back and make the pitch on that motion. commissioner braun. hi, commissioner diamond. commissioner imperial high commissioner moore and commissioner. president tanner. i move commissioners. that motion passes unanimously 6 to 0. and we're just saying farewell to chris may is his last. chris your last day you're leaving in two weeks. chris is moving to london. oh, my god. he's been with us since 2015, so is going away. party is down at one sansom tomorrow. closure testing the territory. well thank you so much for our service to the city. we thank you. bon voyage. farewell. yeah.

wow commissioners, item 20, case number 2021. hyphen 00726. hyphen zero two at 939. lombard street. a discretionary review. sir, we need to hear from staff first, and then we'll call the requesters. uh, the evening commissioners. david winslow, staff architect. hi got him before he was a public initiated request for discretionary review of building permit application. 2021 07094 4046 to demolish an existing mr. winslow, could you raise a mic because the public always has kind of having a floppy issues here? i'm trying to keep it going. i got somebody get the practical joke, mike. i see if i can. there we go. uh,

to demolish an existing two car parking structure at the front of the lot and construct a new 5173 square foot single family dwelling. the site is approximately. 27.5ft wide by 100 and 37.5ft deep, laterally sloping lot. there is an existing building located in the rear of the lot. there are two requesters. the first martin ng of 953 lombard street, the adjacent neighbor to the west, is concerned that the proposed project will affect the structural stability of the retaining wall adjacent to wick elementary school. that the setback and rear yard requirements are not met and that construction impacts including fume gas and suppliers and workers, will take away parking and spaces from tourists and be hazardous to people's health and safety. his proposed alternative is to deny the permit. the second requester mark schwartz, representing 945

lombard street homeowner association, a four unit residential condominium adjacent to the southwest, is concerned that the proposed project does not protect the neighborhood's character nor enhance the quality of life for the city. additionally, the proposed construction will create significant impacts for the residents of the lombard hoa street hoa. the proposed project is sited directly adjacent to the driveway and will most likely require significant disruption and of vehicular access. while excavation and foundation footings are constructed, the department to date has received no letters supporting and one petition letter opposing the project from parents of the elementary school staff supports the proposed project as it complies with the planning code policies and residential design guidelines. construction impacts are not within the purview of the planning department to regulate

. the proposed building is within the buildable area of the lot. the adjacent uphill building of the requester at 953, lombard is separated by an approximately nine foot wide driveway, while the adjacent building at 945 lombard occupies nearly the entirety of the rear lot accessed via an easement. access across 953. lombard these lots were originally one one lot, which were split into separate lots in 1989. the proposed project would create a condition similar to the adjacent neighbors. the proposed building is four stories in height and aligns with the front and rear walls of the adjacent street. fronting building at 953 lombard additionally, condition number two in the 1998 variance ssr stipulates that the zoning administrator, after finding such expansion, complies with applicable codes, is compatible with the existing neighborhood character and scale, and does not cause significant loss of light air view or privacy to the

adjacent buildings may determine that a new variance is not required and staff met with the czar prior to the neighborhood notification notification being sent out and he determined that a new variance, in fact would not be required to facilitate the proposed project to 939. lombard as it has code compliant as it is code complying is compatible with the existing neighborhood character and scale and does not cause significant loss of light air view or privacy to adjacent buildings. therefore staff deems there are no exceptional and extraordinary circumstances and recommends not taking discretionary review and approving the project. thank you . for requesting you have five minutes. do we need to wait? anyway, my name is martin. i i'm involved with a north beach neighbors, the russian hill neighbors and the tower high. and the caca and. and the school. i i'm opposed to permit

. for many reasons. and woody doesn't benefit me personally. permit or not. i think the biggest suffer i think it rendered the school is almost useless. a lot of times the noise, the films, the dust and the little kids, the kindergarten, they right next to it. okay and i also wonder environmental thing, the sequa and so there's two discretion reviewing. there's a few others they missed a deadline otherwise that you would have 3 or 4 and some of them are going to speak on the phone. okay. if we well, we have so many interests opposing it. you know, i just recommend maybe you guys want to hear more. and then this section for other people. but anyway, the school there with a retaining wall. i think you have

seen pictures of it. and anyway , the imposing building here and that's going to cast a giant shadow and then look at the look at the retaining wall all the way down, going up the hill. so anyway, if you look at the natural disaster like flooding or earthquakes, that's not a safe wall. and besides, there are 29ft wide. i used to own this lot and we have two grand restrictions. i have a grand restrictions on this lot. and then we know family, the famous cimino, they have a granny restriction also. and then freelander ■of limit furniture and he's okay with a special restriction. he built a garage there. freelander anyway, if you just look at it, has a common sense that lot is it's too small. it's dangerous. and also,

i heard they have to drive 25ft down for pile to secure the building. if a building is 45ft with the roof top and all that, i mean, i think earthquake could flip that building over. that happens in pacifica, cliff. and then in in china, taiwan, india, it happens even today. and the flood could wash it down. you know, you know, natural disaster . it doesn't matter how strong the building is. and that's not the right place to it in the school going to suffer. and the construction could go for four years and you've got parking and the parents are lining up on the street and then you got delivery truck people, they don't care. they have a long truck. they're going to block the street and you want to argue with them. you know, you could put your life in danger anyway. that street is funny. i sorry to say. there's a baby. got drunk, a across the street and then there's a worker

in castle court was killed by the rocks. he was thinking of the garage and then the car hit the tree. so we do have some bad luck on the street. and i don't feel good about this construction. okay, so this problem must be stopped. even if you let him build 1000ft!s, he's going to have to do the foundation, the noise. and the third, it's the same old thing. so. so it's not going to do it. this when i talk to many buyers , one of the buyers i they say, no, we're not going to do anything in the front. so actually, i'm i'm doing a favor not for myself, but also for the kids, for the parents. a lot of these parents, they don't speak english and not not not all of them have the time to come here and you've got after school activities right now going on today and then weekends too because they want to keep the kids off the streets crimes so they keep them busy there and they make all the noise they

want and that's fine. okay if you look at that lot, it's not a place to build. you already got a house in the back is what the house is already very expensive and it's historical and if you pay on the front, you're going to hurt the house in the back. who's going to buy two houses next to a school? so i wouldn't i wouldn't i actually i might do the developer a favor not to do it because he could he he could go bankrupt. and he's not qualified. he take 5 million to build a house for 5000ft!s. he put down 750,000. that's a disservice for san francisco. it has not benefit the poor. it does not benefit the rich. even the middle. the middle class can't afford it. so. so the construction is very expensive. so i got five seconds, right? you have no seconds. well, anyway, sir, you have no soul. no more time. you will have a two minute rebuttal. okay. thank you. second requester. hello my

name is mark swartz, and i'm here representing the owners and residents of 941 through 947. lombard our hoa is situated behind and just to the west of the proposed development at 939. lombard our concerns are as follows light and ventilation due to 9951953, blocking most of the natural light on the northern exposure of our building. the only oasis we have for light and air is from the from the front of our units is where this proposed building will be. as you can see from our application, well over 75% of the remaining light and ventilation from our units will be blocked by this development. it's not a coincidence that all the renderings of 939 are from the street or the school side, not from the southwestern angle where the real bulk of this building will be most acutely felt if this project proceeds as designed, we will be effectively living behind a wall of buildings, disproportionately affecting my young children are

92, 91 year old homebound neighbor, to say nothing of the lack of a study and the shadows that might darken school. however we understand there's a housing crisis in san francisco. i'm a san francisco native, the son of two, san francisco unified school district educators who were able to purchase the home that i was raised in years ago. something that today is nearly impossible . and i completely understand the affordable housing crunch that our city faces. i'm a pilot. my wife's a nurse. we have good jobs. yet we were barely able to scrape enough money to buy our modest condo. we're not opposed to building even in our front yard. what we are opposed to is a 5000 square foot mansion being built for the ultra rich. if this proposal was for a multi unit condo or a reasonable home, that reasonable people could afford, we'd be in support of it and we'd work with the developer to kind of address some of the situations that we brought up. however, that's not

what's being proposed. the city needs affordable housing. it does not need another $10,010 million mansion. i'm now going to invite trey sims, one of our residents, to speak. thank you. i appreciate it. so i would like to read a statement that was prepared by my 91 or 92 year old downstairs neighbor who is also a resident and couldn't be here today. but she she writes, it is our contention that san francisco planning general code, section 101, sub a, b, c, and d, as well as section 101.1, sub two and three have been completely ignored in order to approve the 939. lombard project. however in section 311 sub c sub, one of that section of the planning code provides that residential design guidelines shall be used to review plans for all new construction and application of the guidelines is as a mandatory

step in the permit review process and all permit applications must comply with both. the commission's website states that san francisco is known for its neighborhood aids and the visual quality of its buildings. a single building out of context with its surroundings can be disruptive to the neighborhood character and, if repeated often enough, the image of the city as a whole. so sub a of the previously mentioned section requires the guidelines to adhere to control and regulate future growth and development in accordance with the city's general plan. however, this project has been approved by the planning department in ignoring several areas of the city's general plan and subpart b requires protection of the character and stability of the residential area for the proposed project visually from lombard street. if built, would be seen as a massive modern flat plane or a

monolith extending 40ft skyward and 27ft wide, beginning at the edge of the sidewalk, the existing neighborhood buildings use period designs to and elements to break up their inherent masses. the proposed construction does not attempt to address its mass with any elements that would help fit the neighborhood. the proposed construction is out of context with its surrounding and hyper disruptive to the neighborhood's character and the guidelines also call for providing for adequate light air privacy and convenience of access to property and to secure safety from fire and other damages. and i personally think this is really important. the existing single family home is 82ft from the street behind the proposed construction and would no longer have direct access to the back single family unit. this would create a physical barrier for the fire department. this

barrier would substantially affect response time for firefighters and reduce the safety of our building, which is only inches apart. is that time or your time? okay, i have. i'll yield to my public comments and i have a few more things to say . okay. members of the public, this is your opportunity to address the commission on this matter. if you're in the chambers, please come forward. if you're calling in remotely, you need to press star three and you will have two minutes. hello. good evening, commissioners. i know it's been a long day for you all and for us watching at home. i am stephanie falcon stine. i am the parent of a rising second grader at elementary school. i chair the school site council and i am also a member of the russian hill neighbors board for families. we unfortunately did not make it in for a drt, but we have been working with the school, the sponsors of the project. we have two major concerns about this project, which have yet to be addressed.

one, as mentioned, is the light , the light issue, the shadows that will be created on the school yard are unacceptable. all it is, it will be taking over a third of the school yard in the fall and spring. unfortunately, our school is a late start school so 3:45 p.m. is still a time when most students are outside our school extends until 6 p.m. for aftercare programs and we really want these to be considered just as they've been considered for beer gardens, public spaces and other concerns. so we want the needs of the children. if you're not aware, serves a very broad community. we very much a component of chinatown. down a third of our students are english language learners. that means their families do not speak english. so we have a school liaison to address that. in addition, a third of our students qualify for free lunch. it is completely upsetting to us that a 5000 square foot single

family home will block the light of children for generations. quickly. no we're also very concerned about the lack of a sequa on this, given potential contaminants of lead in the soil , as well as the 25% grade of the hill and potential for land slides, which was in the geological study. thank you. and i do apologize. project sponsor . it's your opportunity to speak . i apologize. jump jumped the gun a little bit there and you have you have ten minutes. uh good evening, commissioners. thanks for hanging in there today. i won't take the whole ten and try and keep it to five. chloe angela is here on behalf of the project sponsor. the sponsor purchased this property in 2018 and completed a renovation of the existing house at the rear of the lot in august

2019. he lived in that house for several years and it's now being leased to the current tenant who lives there now. the sponsor is now proposing to demolish the garage at the front of the structure, at the front of the lot and construct a four story single family home, resulting in a two home lot with a code compliant, shared rear yard. the two doctors filed in this case were brought by two of the adjacent neighbors who are primarily concerned about the temporary inconvenience of construction and the effect the project will have on their views, which, as you know, are not protected by the residential design guidelines or the planning code. further for this almost nine foot driveway, they adjacent to the property that leads to 945 lombard, which is not shared with this property, creates a built in buffer between the project and the adjacent buildings, ensuring that this project will not result in light and air impacts to the adjacent properties. the fact that both requesters have asked for the permit to be denied outright rather than proposing potential modifications reinforces the

fact that their goal is to see nothing built on this lot at all . the project sponsor and his architect have been communicating with the neighborhood throughout this process. respond to emails from the community and presenting the project at neighborhood group meetings in response to the school parents. the sponsor also completed a shadow study which is based on the massing originally proposed, which has since changed the results show that the project would add incremental shadow to the northwest corner of the school yard in the summer and fall starting around 3:30 p.m. by 530, even under existing conditions, the school yard is almost completely shaded anyway . the school yard sits at the bottom of a steep slope on lombard, which means there is quite a bit of shadow. so late in the day. regardless of what happens on this lot in response to concerns from the neighbors and the requesters about building, massing and privacy facing the school, this sponsor

has revised the project substantially. he converted the east facing decks to planted living roof areas so that there is no longer sitting and standing access for people right above the school yard. he has incorporated a five foot setback from the east property line for the entire fourth floor and has eliminated the rooftop stair and elevator penthouses, which hopefully you can see here. this is small regarding construction , a geotech report has been completed which confirms that the project can be built safely without adding any additional load to the retaining wall shared with the school. further, this sponsor has already completed a substantial project on this lot with the major renovation of the home at the rear of the property, which was finished without any construction related complaints . additionally, and a handful of instances as the school had asked for construction noise to be limited to account for special events happening in the school yard, the owner was happy to accommodate those requests

and we'll do the same for this project. on the whole, this sponsor has demonstrated a willingness to be a good neighbor by reducing, building, massing and converting the east bay east, facing balconies to living roofs in order to provide additional privacy for the school yard. the project is consistent with the character of the russian hill neighborhood. the immediate vicinity includes primarily 3 to 4 story buildings and the block across lombard contains several large single or two family homes. ultimately, the requesters have failed to establish exceptional or extraordinary circumstances that justify the exercise of discretionary review. we hope that you will decide not to take drt and allow this modified version of the project to move forward. thank you. and i'm here with the architect and the sponsor. if you have questions. thank you. okay, let's go back to public comment in if you're in the chambers, please come forward. if you're calling in remotely, you need to press star three. so you've already spoken . so this is public comment. yeah this is me as a renter.

when you're on the project sponsor team, you have to do during this project sponsor time, but you'll have two minutes of rebuttal. you have a two minute rebuttal. okay i can't take two bites of the same apple. all right. i read my other tenants statement into the record, though. can i project my own views during minute rebuttal . okay, let's go to our remote callers. oh, hello. my name is natasha babylon. i've been a parent of students for 11 years and the outdoor education teacher there for five years. i have significant concerns about the sizable shadows that will be cast across our school yard where activities begin on site at school at 9 a.m. they finish at 6 p.m. when you account for our after school program. we also have programs running throughout the summer. the ymca conducts a summer camp there. so

the shadows cast will significantly impact the fruit trees and other food and native plants that we have planted over the last six years and work very hard to cultivate. so the shadows are a significant concern, as is the plan to start construction when permits are received received instead of planning around more, more safe schools of finish and start times. also very concerned about the lack of study on soil contaminants. so thank you for your consideration of my comment .

mr. color. to kent. did you want to submit your testimony? let's take the next caller. again. when you hear. go ahead. go ahead, sir, can you hear me? yes yeah, there's a i'm a parent also of a second grader at. so i just echo what i think you've heard from both the families that just have spoken that i think they're just making concerns around shadows that have been mentioned. i think just safety for the for the children there, particularly around the contaminants in the soil or any particular studies or really just understanding what types of structural damage could happen with the retaining

wall. if you just look at it. and so it's kind of same that those considerations have been met. and then another point i don't think a lot of the fact that had the really had a chance to really understand that this was even going. so i think this had to come together quickly. and i think if we're going to do that, this is happening a lot more good. so for all my comments, thank you. thank you. last call for public comment. hi, my name is renee kwong. i am a parent of a child rising second grader at elementary. i am also the coach, treasurer of the parent teacher organization . i have quite a few objections to this one being the main one

being the shadows cast upon the schoolyard. i think you've heard many of the other parents speak about how the shadows will affect the children. you know, and we're talking about this affecting them for years and years and generations to come. you know, if i asked that, no shadows be cast upon construction of this building, um, my other objections are in regards to the retaining wall traffic and construction and the dust and particles coming from the disruption affecting the children. you know what is a kindergarten to fifth grade? we have young kids there and many kids also with special disabilities studies need to be done in terms of how this will affect the children. um one of our teachers specifically, mr. had an issue in regards to the noise and the effect of learning with the kids who are trying to

learn to read and do math and learn and, you know, even limiting the noise and disruption may not be enough because especially with after the pandemic post pandemic, we have a lot of learning disabilities and issues with the children. this is just going to tap upon issues on the children . and then my last issue was in regards to the character. i don't believe the 5000 unit structure really is in line with the character of the neighborhood. it's massive. it's huge, and i just have all these objections. thank you for listening to me. okay, final last call for public comment. thank you. my name is martin kent. i've i have also a student at well, a second grader about to be the second grader. and also i've been a contractor in

san francisco for the past 20 years. i have listened to the. proposed bills out and have sat in some of the meetings and i'm not quite convinced 100. there was a certain and forgive me for saying this a little bit of an arrogance when we ask for a certain time scape about the length of time for doing major foundation work and giving me, i think they said a dozen weeks to do such a major repair was i know it was built to do a little bit of making us feel comfortable there, doing their part to get their project done. it's it just it was kind of fantasy. also, i from what i understand, the construction that they did do on the property that is in the rear, it was

mostly interior work. it was not major disruption because it was mostly interior. and the people that did have complaints didn't know who to complain to. thank you for your time. the equal also has we have two miles to severe autism classrooms for students up to 14 students who are exceptionally sensitive to noise. they're health and safety and well-being should be considered when you talk about construction so close to our school, that noise will be extremely upsetting to them. these are nonverbal students. thank you. okay, commissioners,

that concludes public comment. first requester, you have a two minute rebuttal. you don't want to have rebuttal, sir. okay. it doesn't matter who goes first. so i just want to say that the design and the construction of the plans are developed to be facially compliant, but really don't appreciate the on the ground realities for residents like myself, i'm definitely pro housing. i'm from oakland, california, but this is not anywhere near the kind of housing that will address sf's housing crisis. i'm also an attorney and realize they have put together a compelling, one sided narrative. i haven't talked to any of these people other than the notice that was put on my front doorstep. and i live right next door. but make no doubt, this is a hyper luxury housing unit on a lot where one resident already lives. they're

trying to have their cake and eat it too, by failing to compromise on demolishing the main living structure to build a lower housing unit. but they ask us to sacrifice our views, our privacy, our personal space for their hyper luxury development. we think there's more flexibility to be had here for me, there would be a definite lack of privacy to the back of our apartment is a parking lot where cars come and go. no privacy. there is a lot in front with windows that look into my apartment. this would ensure that they're even more windows, less light, more shadows. and i will have to continually close my shades, which is would be disadvantaging one of the parts i love most about my apartment, which is the view and the view from the street of my beautiful 1913 constructed apartment. it would be completely blocked from the street if this were to take effect and lastly, i haven't heard anything about how the housing, how the development

will protect the migratory patterns of russian hills. beloved parrots. there are two trees specifically that parrots migrate to and visit on predictable basis and this is the city's official bird. and in major tourist attraction, as tourists walk up and down lombard street, all day, i haven't heard anything. i believe this is one of the purposes of sequa to explore how these patterns will be impacted . thank you. evening honorable commissioners and the chair. um. yeah we have a massive garden there. you know, with the paris and you know, you got raccoons. you, you even have rats there. so one time they clean it up and all the rats and they ran all over the place. came to this, and they're. anyway, the sequel must, must we must have it. and also the water coming down the hill, all the way up. and it's going to it's all the water is

the buck stop there. that's why the trees grow so big and high and eventually it could loosen the soil and the whole building flip over if that happens. okay. it's not a joke. no matter how strong you got, an earthquake is coming. right. and then the hundreds of people i talked to like like cafe greco, the owners , they they all hate it. they. but they are against it. and there's hundreds of other people are. and this project doesn't really it does not benefit san francisco. it does not benefit all any classes of people. i think they might just try to sell the permit and get some money. who is the who, the dummy going to build and going to lose money? okay. and first of all, i didn't know there were some special guests. there's a special school. they got autism. that noise, bang, bang, bang. and the drill. i know it really mean it's really bad and it's

going to it's just like your home is almost useless. you got to get away. go away from there. i'm also a contractor. i'm a developer. and so i know all this stuff. okay. and peskin, these had the interim control and they waited for that to expire so they can go up to 5200ft!s. but but hopefully peskin could renew that control and that could kill the project. and we want you has a for the public for the kids for san francisco. it's not a place to build there it's a lot you already got a 4000 square foot house here. thank you for your time. okay, commissioners. oh, excuse me. projects sponsor. you have a two minute rebuttal. i know we're tired. thanks, commissioners. chloe angeles. i just want to quickly address a couple of the environmental geotech concerns that came up during public comment. this

project requires less than 50ydt of excavation, which is below the threshold for the major program of environmental site assessment. you know, the as david mentioned, the we're not talking about construction, right. permitting requirements here, but structural drawings will be reviewed by dbe. they will determine if any further geotech analysis is required. we've already done a preliminary geotech study that makes recommendations and said this can safely be done here. and then lastly on the discussion about shadows, this is within the principally permitted height limit. this is 40ft. we made a massing concession already. we got rid of the rooftop penthouses. we haven't studied what that looks like to shadow, but presumably less any anything that got built here could go up to 40ft. and it seems like all the concerns voiced tonight would be voiced even if this were a multi-unit project. so thank you. okay, commissioners,

with that, this matter is now before you. it's on but it's been going in and out all the time. all right. thank you. thank you, everyone who came in. and thank you for the staff, also for the staff presentation and your work with this project as much as i know, offense to the project sponsor, don't love to see a giant mansion going up when we're in a housing crisis and affordability crisis, it's code compliant. there have been some sculpting of the building already. i don't see any unusual or extraordinary circumstances. commissioner koppell moved to not take and approve with modifications. there's no further deliberation. there is a motion that has been seconded to not take discretionary review and approve on that motion. commissioner braun i,

commissioner diamond, commissioner imperial no. commissioner koppell i. commissioner moore and commission president tanner i move commissioners. that motion passes 4 to 2 with commissioners imperial and moore voting against commissioners. it will place us on item 21 for case number 2021 hyphen 004066 drp for the property at 372 dolores street, a discretionary review again. good evening, commissioners. david winslow, staff architect. the item before you is a public initiated request for discretionary review of building permit application 2021 0820. 6824 to convert the existing an existing first floor storage and basement of a four storey multifamily residential building to 180 u using the local adu program. the site is approximately 28.5ft wide by 100 foot deep, and the existing building is a category a

historic resource built in 1907. and it looks like we just have the project sponsor here. so i'll try and do your request for zack ward, who didn't show up, is represent 380 dolores street, the adjacent building to the south is concerned that the proposed project will affect the structural stability and that construction noise will impact his tenants. his proposed alternatives is to reinforce the foundation prior to construction . to date, the department has received no letters in support, no letters and opposing staff supports the project. as it complies with the code and the city's housing goals. none of the concerns identified by the requester. our land use issues regulated by the planning department. thank you. very good. is the requester present. well, there are some people online that i don't know. looks like brett gladstone's on, so i thought maybe if they were, they could raise their hand. but if not, project sponsor. you have five minutes. good evening. my

name is mark brandt. i'm the architect for the project. good evening, president tanner and commissioners. did you say there is someone on the phone waiting to speak? they're not raising their hands. so okay. so i think we're all pretty tired and unless someone wants to pause it, some questions to me, i'll just let you guys take it under advisement. thank you. um i have. let me just at least ask for public comment. members of the public, if you have any comments, this is your opportunity to do so. need to press star three or raise your hand via webex. let's see. anybody else in the chambers. public comment is closed. you, i guess, defer your two minute rebuttal. it's now before you commissioners. i find the addition of an additional unit actually very interesting. very well done and i think it's an example for how it should be done versus where we really

destroying a building. i think it's sensitively done and i move to approve. second, thank you, commissioners, on that motion to not take and approve the project . commissioner braun i, commissioner diamond, i, i, commissioner koppel, high commissioner more and commissioner president tanner so moved commissioners that motion passes unanimously 6 to 0 and. and i keep starting not the following.

as sf gov tv san francisco government televisisisisisisisis >> i'm alice king this is my husband shawn kim and we other ordinance of joe's ice cream in san francisco. joe's ice cream in rich mondistrict since 1959 and we are proud to be registered a san francisco legacy business since 2017. and we offer more than 50 flavors of homemade ice cream. and delicious home style burgers, sandwiches, hot dog, salad and more. we have a lot of different ice

cream flavors both classic, long forgotten but classic and asian flavor inspired flavor like 3 red bean and black and now we also brought the korean i'm from korea. korean coffee krooem. we mix our traditional and trendy flavors all together. shawn and i are the first generation of the immigrants here in san francisco. so as immigrants, we have a special connection to this diverse community, san francisco richmond district. so we made this place our home. that is where we are trying to build our business as a place where everybody can feel welcome like we felt when we first came here what really makes fisher or

joe's ice cream we have been growing together with our community. so we support our local schools throughout the fundraiser. we provide job opportunity for high school, i hire them every year. built a beautiful parklet outside funded by donations from over 200 neighbors and friends and i think this really shows how joe's ice cream and our community like lives together. so -- you see our mission is to serve as a fun community hub in san francisco and richmond district. so, i hope that we can stay this way for many years.

>> [music] art withelders exhibiting senior art work across the bay for 30 years as part of our traveling exhibit's program. for this exhibits we partnered with the san francisco art's commission galleries and excited show case the array of artist in historic san francisco city hall. >> [inaudible]. call me temperature is unique when we get to do we, meaning

myself and the 20 other professional instructors we are working with elders we create long-term reps i can't think of another situation academically where we learn about each other. and the art part i believe is a launching pad for the relationship building:see myself well. and if i don't try when my mom again. she may beat the hell out of mow if i don't try >> seniors, the population encounters the problem of loneliness and isolation even in a residential community there hen a loss of a spouse. leaving their original home. may be not driving anymore and so for us to be ail to bring the

classes and art to those people where hay are and we work with people in all walks of life and circumstances but want to finds the people that are isolated and you know bring the warmth there as much as art skill its personal connection. men their family can't be well for them. i can be their fell and feel it. >> i don't have nobody. people say, hi, hi. hello but i don't know who they are. but i come here like on a wednesday, thursday and friday. and i enjoy. >> we do annual surveys asking students what our program does for them. 90 plus % say they feel less alone, they feel more engaged. they feel more socially connected the things you hope

for in general as we age. right? >> and see when i do this. i am very quiet. i don't have anybody here talking to me or telling me something because i'm concentrating on had i'm doing and i'm not talking to them. >> not just one, many students were saying the program had absolutely transformational for them. in said it had saved their lives. >> i think it is person to support the program. because i think ida elder communities don't get a lot of space in disability. we want to support this program that is doing incredible work and giving disability and making

this program what supports the art and health in different way bunkham art as a way of expression. a way of like socializing and giving artists the opportunity also to make art for the first time, sometimes and we are excited that we can support this stories and honor their stories through art. we hope the people will feel inspired by the variety and the quality of the creative expressions here and that viewers come, way with a greater appreciation of the richness what elders have to share with us. [music]

>> san francisco is a positive impact on my chinese business. >> i'm the founder of joe-joe. i'm a san francisco based chinese artist. i grew up in the bayview district. i am from china i started at an early age i started at age of 10 my grandfather my biggest inspiration. and i have followed with my traditional art teacher in china:i host educational workshops at the museum and local library.

and i also provide chinese writing in public middle school and that way i hold more people fall in love with the beautiful of our chinese calligraphy. it is a part of our heritage. and so we need to keep this culture alive. hand writing is necessary field that needs to be preserved generation toieneration. this art form is fading away. but since covid i have been very dedicated to this art and i hope that my passions and serving this art form. there are many stores and shopping centers and companies that are interested in chinese cal iing ravi. i feel motivated to my passion

for chinese calligraphy in today's world. so people can always enjoy the beauty of chinese calligraphy, from time to time i have a choice to traditional chinese calligraphy to make it more interesting. we do calligraphy on paper. i can do calligraphy different low. >> my inspiration is from nature and provide calligraphy that was popular style of persons time. i will invite to you check out my website or instagram. and there is some events and updated upcoming events that you

can participate. >> my name is patricia yuen and captain of the fire department of division of training. >> i was born as a child of 2 wonderful, dull this is decided to have 7 kids. they had 6 girl and one boy. a traditional family family immigrate in the 70 and mom owned a sewing fact row in china town. my dad worked 60 hours as a waiter. their hard work ethic trickled down to the family >> my journal tow becoming a firefighter happened when i was in college. my senior year had 2 friends that were firefighters. lieutenant rob wong who is still working and retired ricky hughy. they would tell me about their advent urs. daily activities of being a firefighter. i think it was the unknown that

sparked my interest and finding out more about the department. what it does. every day is different. that really made me want to work hard to get that job as a firefighter. when i got in the department in 1996. okay. asian firefighter association let me see what this is about. back then the main people what were in the organization, retired chief chan. retired chiefically. took he under their wing and said, you have to represent go out to the chinese new year parade. show up to events that are in item an town community and show an example to the community that our parents become doctors and lawyers, firefighting is a great job. you are helping others in the community. >> our program neighborhood emergency response team training program, started after the quake in 1989 and 6 course program

where you take all sick classes to teach how to rely on themselves help themselves and neighborhoods. started back in 1996 teaching. i'm an active instructor now in 2023. we train up to 2,000 people every year and really it is our best way to reach out to the community so we can inter~ act in case of disaster. representing myself in the fire department always thought of it as dot best job can i do. work hard so i earn the respect of all of my coworkers. i know that now that i have more time to go out to my community, i see moiz in a lot of people that would never envision themselves as firefighters. i think as years progress i saw how important it was to put myself out well and show them this is a great job. show your best. shape the lives of people that did not think about theion here. i think it is just that

progression of knowing how important it is to teach people more thing and seeing how important it it is as the years passed. >> the stewardship program is a (indiscernible) based program. we work with student kind r garten through 12 grade and work with scrks fusd and (indiscernible) focus on 5 themes. sense of place, plant adapation and animal adaptation, water soil or (indiscernible) depending on the grade level and accommodations the class may need the educators

work to adapt the programming to be whatever works best for the class, so they can gain activities (indiscernible) some don't, we try to meet students where they are at and get comfortable connecting in the space and feeling a sense of ownership and safety within their (indiscernible) >> the first component of a youth stewardship program trip will be a in clasds visit where we go to the school, we give a presentation on the natural history of san francisco, we talk about the concept of a habitat, so what does a habitat contain, understood, water, shelter, space. >> children at this age, they learn best through using their senses, having the real life experience and (indiscernible) students also learn about

responsibility and it is a great message for student to learn, if you take care of environment, the environment will take care of you. >> so, when we finally get the kids outside, we have two main components to the field trips. one is going to be the restoration component where we are working on the habitat and parks by pulling out (indiscernible) or maybe watering, and then the other side of our trip is going to be the educational component, which can range from a nature walk with a sensory theme where we are talking about what we smell and hear, to a focus on plant adaptation and animal adaptations. >> (indiscernible) >> just a great opportunity for students to learn more, connect with nature, and hopefully what they learn from the

youth stewardship program they can take with them for the rest of their lives, and they will appreciate their environment more. hopefully, when they appreciate it, they take care of it more every day. >> (indiscernible) >> so every year we open the application up in the fall. interested teachers can apply for a classroom visit and up to two field trips to the city park of their choice. field trips are 2 and a half hours long and like i said, they can happen in any city park (indiscernible)

>> (indiscernible) i just know it. excuse me boys, but does anybody have sun block to block this skin from the sun? >> yes. that's right, i need to get my (indiscernible) >> many of us last summer (indiscernible) reapplying sun screen is like getting the second dose of mpox vaccine. >> wait, two doses- (indiscernible) >> isn't it too late to get my second dose? >> girl, it is like sun screen, never too late to put more sun screen on. >> that's right, i need to get my second dose of mpox

vaccine before the summer starts. >> let's (indiscernible) 21201 to find the closest location to get the vaccine or go to sf.gov/mpox. >> thank you for the information (indiscernible) >> excuse me boys, do you mind checking please? >> sure. >> that doesn't look like a sun burn, you might want to getd it checked out. >> what do you mean clecked out? >> checked out. i was told if i got my second m pox vaccine i would have less severe symptoms. (indiscernible) >> maybe i schedule the second dose just to be safe from mpox. >> most vackeens offer you a level of protections, just like sun block. sometimes you need

to reapply for more protection. the m pox vaccine is based on two shots several weeks apart to provide the strongest level of protection. visit sf.gov/mpox to get yours. >> thank you boys for that reminder! make sure your are fully vaccinated for m pox this summer. text summer vibes to 21201, to get

but i have it here. yeah. i don't know. thank you. now we're return back from lunch. recess or to 15 minutes. recess i should say. and then here we can continue. and i believe in. mr. clark, could you correct me if i'm wrong? i'm trying to reconcile between the budget and legislative analyst's report here that i'm looking at for today as well as the meeting agenda. and now i believe that the last city departments on the for today's agendas like in terms of discussion which we will continue to recess till tomorrow for this entire meeting. but today is the office of economic and workforce development confirmed. madam ch t