building should look like the pdr owners are looking to make a profit knowing it was a pdr building and converting it into office space we have to close this loophole please don't let this conversion happen thank you very much for your time >> (clapping) >> we have a board rule that we don't allow clapping boeing and cheering it disrecipients the hearing if you want to do a thumps up and down or jazz fingers or whatever so. >> next speaker >> good afternoon. i live in the neighborhood right down the street from the showcase i'm a member of dog patch katrero hill association i work in the neighborhood and i really feel if we've been negatively portrayed the many media has misrepresented us there be great for your neighborhood. we've lost great educates e assets to other cities ii ask the board not to lose another one >> to the. >> next speaker. >> i'll call the last names (calling names) go ahead. >> i'm a tenant in 2 henry adams the designer center t is no the commercial resident the loss will effect the entire city it provides a diversity of blue and white collar jobs. it's an indi

i represent several owns of building in pdr g not pdr d. i'm asking you that consider one amendment to item 4 on page 3 line 21 right now line 21 says that excited uses of an existing uses bandit for 90 days you lose that use in the pdr use >> can you tell me what line. >> hold only. >> on item 4. if i may take a moment i have an updated legislation i want to circulate to you. >> so hopefully, we'll resolve this issue simply that 90 days increased to one hundred and 80 days. the current period is one hundred and 80 days to make that consistent >> is there any additional public comment on item 3 or item 4? supervisor cohen how do you want to handle were you going to have the project sponsor come back up >> i'll be brief i want to clear up the leasing numbers at times we refer to the design center as two buildings to be specific henry adams there's 77 leases in place and 31 are month to month. since our last hearing and subsequent to meeting with supervisor cohen we've been able to convert those to longer leases now have the 31 there's 15 rem

will be clear how the pdr space is located and allocated. and, secondly, there's an existing pdr on the ground floor that's not being affected the ground floor is not changing in nirment and those office uses have sustained we're legalizing them through the 179 process and now the 321 allocation. that's it for me, i'm valuable for questions we have a representative from allied coke >> opening open this up for public comment. >> so basically one part of this or i'm not sure essentially approve 7 thousand square feet in excess of the 25 thousand under the that we have to take guess action otherwise will they'll continue with offense space? correct and okay. and i don't think the commission will do this but if the motion is denied they still retain the second floor office use correct? and can they retain the - all the office space minus 7 thousand square feet and correct the third floor is pretty much done so the third floor is set and any reduction in the allocation will likely be pulled from the second story >> thank you. >> commissioner moor

one d and g zoning district it pay attentions to that of displacement for pdr tenants that require a tenant relocation plan as of component of conditional use requirement this is an addressed layer for the certainty in an uncertain area like our former anywhere described this is a continued pull from property owners and tenants this on a commercial front as opposed to a residential. i have two amendments to the resolution that i understand are non-substantive the first one is on page 3 and in the further resolve closing clause i'm going to change for the time for address time to see whether or not their office space was abandoned additionally, the second amendment is the counterfeiting applies only to landmark buildings so colleagues, i ask you support those are two amendments today so we can have a robust public process in place for pdr spaces. it's important to note that the conditional use will note that all the stakeholders will have a say but the conversation the conversion of buildings into office space so i make a motion to amend >> ; right with respect to item 4 supervisor co

but selective about it. >> why is there signature square footage available so close i know that the pdr zoning is a complicated thing why is this a desireable area why is it. >> this neighborhood is distinctly different there's pdr units that come up about the creation of now pdr space this is very specifically specific to show rooms and wholesale so there are many traditionally pdr makers bus that's a much more industrial fabric they're not housed here as martha was saying most of the rents are in the 2 and a half to 3 and a half dollar range this recession occupied with the age of the intersect has retracted this industry that's one of the reasons there's so much vacancy in the neighborhood martha has reached out and touched the neighbors we've met with those landlords on multiple occasions and there's good quality tenants that maybe dislocated as part of the project that should be able to find good homes in the adjacent properties we're using our o those relationships to make sure those tenants can find a home in their neighborhood. >> thank you so public comment. >> public comment y

>> it is pdr. >> how many tenants -- >> there are 100 tenants in the one that's been sold. then you can say that represents each business has anywhere from 2 to 20 employees. these are all fairly well paid middle class positions. apparently the japanese market is teetering on whether they will be sold. the last part of the market is zoned by the sabatinis and they already said they want to sell their property and build an office building. so, we're looking at hundreds and hundreds of jobs. and not only that, as i say, an industry where i know myself as a florist, we go there every day. we don't just go there at 2 o'clock in the morning. it's the type of on-demand business that you go when you need something. and, you know, there's a lot of concerns. this is an industry we do not want to see leaving san francisco. >> so, maybe we can -- is there some -- is there someone who would be informed enough to come present to us about what the -- what's happening there and what the likely scenarios are? >> right now not yet, but i just wanted to bring this to the attention, that ever

properties there's a plan to eliminate parking on the side of the side where the pdr businesses are if that happens they'll basically be out of business because they are not ambition eligible enough to have he loading he zones and the customers have to bring their goods to the businesses and the supplies they need to produce their products so i think no decision has been made but they're trying to 4 a transit lane down 16 but one of the choices is to eliminate the traffic lanes and another the lanes they said yell zones are not enough because the customers are not necessarily commercial vehicles so 38 they will be unable to use the lanes so mta considers the nature of the businesses where they maybe thinking of eliminating parking from transit. >> commissioners, if there's nothing further department matters item 4 directors announcements. >> thank you good afternoon, commissioners i want to welcome commissioner johnson on behalf of the department that, please call on us to understand the very lengthy i complex processes we have we'll try to minimize the amount of paper. commissioner

based on a survey there's approximately 14 other buildings in the pdr one d and g areas that could be eligible for landmark designation those buildings are allowed to convert one hundred percent of their space to office. eir respect of whatever whether or not they displace the tenants this limits the number of stories they can limit by establishing now controls i believe this legislation strikes the right balances between higher revenue balances such office space to support the maintenance of those historic buildings without displacing tenants or can only obligating a whole pdr building. you've heard me time and time again stress the value of pdr and the value it brings to our city it provides blue-collar jobs and diversity to our economy 0. not addressing this issue will lead us down a path of undercutting all issue to support a growing local manufacturing industry next to give voice to what's happening in san francisco a number of gun violence across thecy in the south eastern part of the city this year alone they've stolen the lives of 20 individuals prematuring and scaring countle

the 2 henry adams issue is a pdr space. the conversion the designation of that building as a landmark would have loud it to be converted to office it's a different situation >> thank you. and commissioners that places you on item 9 at 22 second street an informational preservation public update >> good afternoon, commissioners i'm kevin with the plaintiff i'm going to keep my statement brief this is 22 second and the progress on two specific points first, the arts proposal as well as the reinstatements to the exterior design for the post entitlements just to recap in august of 2010 it is a 6 story office building as well as ground floor retail and an interior open space. the item was preapproved in february of 2013 with minor provisions with the footprint as well as the configuration of the uses. the project is currently under construction. so in terms of the art proposal the spokesperson proposes to deal with the public art by providing 3 artworks specifically the project sponsor will install the pieces in the howard wall

>> it is pdr. >> how many tenants -- >> there are 100 tenants in the one that's been sold. then you can say that represents each business has anywhere from 2 to 20 employees. these are all fairly well

i think that the debate about using historic preservation incentives to convert pdr is that a to office really needs a lot of ira in the city given the potential for a loss especially south of market. and that comes from someone that's been in the historic preservation for 40 years. i applauded the efforts on the part of the city and other communities around the country to include incentives for preserving historic resources in their communities. but because they're really were not very many incentives available to owners and tenants but i think that sometimes there are larger issues that need to be addressed so i hope we can have a conversation about this especially with the historic preservation commission >> commissioner moore. >> thank you commissioner borden. her experience goes beyond the 6 years we've been sitting here together and shining through the times there are a political matter about what's in front of this commission i've learned a lot about you're positive spirit when i looked at across the room there's a a fabulous smile to look at you so thanks your insensitive and i

1 in pdr districts, that they have to go through conditional use currently not. so and also to report that the land use committee did not recommend to move out of committee the legislation that would have done the mark designation for henry adams. if there was more that you would like to, we can discuss now or off line if there is more that you would like to see the commission discuss, give consideration here on the matter? >> no. i think it go the the appropriate level of attention and i think we'll continue to i think, i'm glad that that particular situation worked out the way it did rather than it did visor verse because it put it's in a better place rather than scrambling what to do. while i'm a huge fan, displacing all of those existing tennants would have been very problematic. so i think it raised the awareness of the issues to the public as well as city hall. i think we'll just monitor where it goes from here and weigh in if we have to. >> all right. that is the update for that item. and so, the interim zoning controls for the office conversion in landmar

a pdr to be trumped, pdr zoning to be trumped by historic zoning legislation. [speaker not understood]. it is a fantastically old building. with that, will allow the building to evict all of its tenants and convert the building to a office location for a pinterest. pinterest has publicly expressed their desire to be in that building because of its proximity to the design community, which is somewhat ironic. offers have been made to assist financially in the relocation of these businesses, but we all know that to break all this up and then hope that these small businesses get replaced, especially in the market that we are currently involved in, i can't even fathom finding a new place today for my business and what that would, you know, portend financially. i think we need to get educated on this one. this is an interesting -- you know, this has legislative -- some legislative implications as well. >> i would agree with commissioner dwight on this one, especially the design district. it's very -- it's important to the san francisco economy and it's part of the ci

and control showplace square to prohibit displacement of pdr non-profit arts and small business. we'll be looking at policy to loosen restrictions on commercial districts and limit the second floor to non-profit office use to pursue additional square footage that non-profits can compete for that would potentially be a lower cost and a policy to provide affordable ground floor space in finance projects such as affordable housing. establishing a citywide neighborhood advisory body with neighborhood base subgroups to help identify sites for acquisition for the stabilization fund and the soma area plan will enable 43 percent of new housing will be affordable which might include an isd to help meet that goal. finally we'll be looking to perform an economic placement study for redevelopment and recommend practical solutions to move forward. i'm looking at development in sensitive areas, these ground floor space to community non-profits, looking handout you to require new developments to provide low cost space to pdr, non-profits and arts and finally looking to require new development f

and a private off-street parking it has pdr institutional and office used on the two and three stories. on february 10, 2013, we were issued a letter for the square footage of office space on the third floor the proposal recognized the and designates 2 hundred and plus square feet as principally permitted office space and objected space on the grandfather to account for the ground area the combination exceeds the 25 thousand 24er8d and thereby requires the conditional use authorization the total request represents 2.5 percent of the office space that's available for projects that include between 25 and 50 square feet of office. since the publication of case report we've gotten two letters no support and i'll pass those out now. the department recommends the approval the project is in consistent has a mixed uses and permits office uses and has 2 hundred 5 percent of office space and the office space conversion will help save lively activity within the neighborhood and has pdr space and a currently it appraise fees that will benefit the c

i got a question on the proposed legislation by supervisor kim and pdr, pdr in twro districts regarding office conversionser. part of eastern neighborhoods which i assume includes those districts too allows for legalization of existing office units, office uses and i'm not sure, is this consistent with this or how is this different than what we already have in eastern neighborhoods? >> i haven't had a chance to look at the ordinance in depth, i believe when you landmark a build, it allows to convert as office as a right, so this would put an 18 month interim control that requires conversion for landmarks to go through the cup process. >> it seemed to me the overarching allowance for uses that were already in place and had been office but they had to be legalized were allowed rather it was a landmark building or not, i don't know, we'd have to get the clarification. i know this speaks only to landmark buildings but the other legislation, part of eastern neighborhoods i think deals with any uses that were of that category rather they're landmark or not. >> i believe you're correct on tha.

public utilities commission at the gerp golden gate park and lincoln park and purchased something called pdr pg&e technology h that allows us to measure water contestant we've prioritizing all repairs of irrigation issues we're moving forward with the puc replacing our systems next up is the irrigation system at the element park as commissioner president buell alluded to with the demand of soccer increasing our synthetic turf they reduce water and the synthetic project projected to save 4 million gallons of water every year we've contributed $100,000 for installing the low flow fixtures it's one of the areas where we can improve the most it required a significant exam investment but many of our stand alone restrooms are old and rely on more water than needed. and lastly we think it have upgraded shaping and the public utilities commission has asked to up workshop those and we'll keep you posted we're planning some additional measures to marry we are helping lead the way in the city's conservation efforts. on a more upbeat to missouri note that month is is national recreation and park commiss