mr. sanchez. >> thank you scott sanchez planning department the subject at 826-828 does allow for three dwelling units in 2016 the property owner sought a letter of determination to remove the notice of special restrictions since that time planning code requirements have changed to be less burdensome for dwelling units and one of the reasons was that a third unit added would have to provide accessible parki ng place and while that provision exists does allow that to be satisfied with bicycle parking. when you are adding one new unit you don't trigger the requirem ent, now it's two or more units in the subject's zoning district. we issued the letter of determination and released the special restrictions to remove that restriction from the property and must meet all planning and zoning requirements . in march of 2017, the appellant filed the subject variance application because the proposeed third dwelling unit does not meet feasible open space of the planning code subject for hearing in august of last year. as we review the cases about a month ahead of the hearing date, staff brought the item to

mr. sanchez. >> clerk: okay. with the change in the verbiage suggested by scott sanchez. >> scott sanchez. >> clerk: all right. so on that motion by vise -- vice president swig -- [roll call] >> clerk: okay. so that motion passes, and the proposed findings are adopted. >> next case. >> clerk: we will now move onto item number seven. this is appeal number 17-055, mahar mamarzadei versus san francisco department of urban forestry. [agenda item read] >> clerk: note on february 28, 2018, the board voted 5-0 to continue the appeal to allow time for the parties to discuss settlement. so we've had a hearing on this matter, and so each party will get three minutes each total, no rebuttal, and we will hear first from the appellant. >> good evening. francisco gutierrez, attorney for the appellant. before cutting into the time, i would have a request. we do have three speakers, but the way we have postponed the hearing and continued it to this date was to meet and try to settle this matter with bureau of urban forestry. we d

mr sanchez? >> nothing to say. >> oh, but i have lots to say. >> it was moved to the full board with positive recommendation. >> the recommendation on this item is the board approved board policy. physical education and activity. >> just for the sake of the public, is this the biggest change on the screen. >> the only change on this is to remove the temporary nature of the provision and make permanent alternative means to earn physical education credits, and the purpose of that is to serve students who are in different pathways. >> thank you. the policy received a positive recommendation. >> ok. so did the last one. [laughter] >> ok. i don't have any public comment on this. we are going out -- going to go onto item number 3. high school graduation requirements. >> also, a positive recommendation from the full board. >> any major changes? >> there was no discussion at all. >> no discussion, and no changes. >> we gave this a positive recommendation. it is simply as several groups of students, cultu

mr. sanchez, maybe we could restate the recommendation. >> supervisor safai: yeah. i need to have a conversation about that. >> diego sanchez, planning department staff. the second recommendation was to permit a set of institutional uses that are being proposed in the ordinance to require canal use authorizization or prohibit them and that list was community facilities, private community facilities, job training uses, religious institutions, social service uses. >> supervisor safai: and the recommendation from the planning department was -- >> from the planning commission, to permit uses on all floors like they were before. >> supervisor safai: i know we had some back and forth with staff. we're not ameanable to those. that's probably why i didn't have them. we want to see the -- we want to drive certain uses that are there. we have a significant number of those. some of which have popped up without any authorizization in the areas that we have to revitalize. we will not accept those amendments at this time, but we'll look at it if it's a problem going forward. >> s

mr. sanchez, and i understand this hearing is just to adopt the findings. the project sponsor mentioned several upgrades. how many stories is the project now? >> they can address that readily. i don't have it off the top of my heads. >> he said -- is it three? it's four now? >> three. >> three. >> so adding the -- it's one unit, that doesn't automatically trigger soft story retrofit or anything like that, does it? i'll get them in the rebuttal then, thank you. >> i think mr. duffy can answer those questions. thank you. >> thank you. mr. duffy? we'll now hear from the department of building inspection. >> before we start, we did miss you during last week's hearing. >> so i heard. >> yeah. >> joe duffy. d.b.i. i'll be here in august. the soft story retrofit -- >> well, i was just wondering if that next upgrade triggered the soft story. i would imagine if they did the next improvement, it would trigger it, correct? >> correct, but it looks like it's not part of the soft story, i don't think. >> thank you. >> thank you. is there any public comment on this item?

mr. sanchez did not even remotely attempt to persuade you that you are bound to follow his decision. i'm not going to say anything about the substantial evidence argument that verizon raises. the homeowners have already done enough to take care of that. what i'm going to do is turn to the last couple of paragraphs of verizon's submission to you, and i'll respond in the order. first of all, there is substantial evidence to support the denial. the homeowners have already discussed that here this evening. number two, there's absolutely no record evidence that the light pole at 3512 clay streeted is least aesthetically intrusive alternative, there's only counsel's self-serving argument to that effect, and a lawyer's argument is argument, it's not evidence. number three, there's no unreasonable discrimination against verizon. article 25 applies to all wireless companies, and no other chiropractorless provider has been given preference. two courts, the superior court in san francisco and the first appellate district have already ruled against the wireless companies on this very issue. and

mr. sanchez? >> commissioner sanchez: yez, thank you. so this policy has to do with students whose assignments are revoked due to residency fraud, and the committee had taken it up earlier and staff had asked the committee to come back with more information. we had a longer discussion about it last week. director rosina tom came and addressed the committee requesting a period of time for students to stay out of school that they had found to be fraudulently enrolled in right now. so we had kind of a little disagreement in committee about the time. we landed on essentially a month, so after a student has been deemed to be in the school fraudulently, the student will have about a month to depart the school. and the discussion really focused around really -- essentially, it's punishing -- dr. merase, you might want to chime in, too, punishing students for the miss deeds of their parents. so we really struggled with that. but at the end of the day, we came to the conclusion that they'll have a 14-day appeal process and then a 15-daytime to le

mr. sanchez? >> diego sanchez, planning department staff. i would like to reiterate the planning commission's recommendation. it was very much in support of this ordinance. voted anonymously to supervisor report this with the modifications that supervisor stefani had mentioned. and they did this because they thought these modifications would help to improve the legalization process and implementation going forward. so that concludes my presentation. as mentioned, i'm here for questions. thank you. >> supervisor tang: thank you very much. all right. seeing no other comments, questions. we'll open up item 4 to public comment. any members of the public that wish to speak? okay. seeing none, public comment is closed on item 4. supervisor stefani, if you want to make a motion. >> supervisor stefani: thank you, supervisor tang. i would like to move this forward to the full board with positive recommendation. >> supervisor tang: john givner. >> this will trigger a continuance in land use. so the committee should continue it and send it out next wee

mr. sanchez and say this is a comprehensive and reasonable plan to deal with all issues. my feelings are that not everything necessarily has to go back to what 1961 was. this is something that has been in use for the past owners, the current owners and it would appear to me that the comprehensive package is the best way to move forward and. you know, two years, if i'm here, i may regret that because we may be hearing something again, but it does seem this is just an issue that things do change. removing this walkway, having a good access from the ground level of the home to the rear garden and a reasonable access to the roof garage deck appears good. so i would support planning's judgment, confirmed by our staff that this is a viable course to move forward and get a good resolution to this project. >> so your motion would be? maybe -- or, in order to allow that to happen, we would actually uphold the appeal. or we would continue this. >> brad russi, city attorney's office. are you intending to hold it in abeyance for a period of time to allow the planning department to ap

mr. sanchez? mr. sanchez votes yes. mr. boeck -- buck? mr. radcliffe votes yes. mr. robie? mr. gates? mr. gates votes yes. mr. johnson votes yes. mr. big yes. mr. westford votes yes. mishandle votes yes. mr. roth third, mr. not there? mr. nadler votes no. mr. locklin votes no. ms. jaclyn the votes no. mr. cohen votes no. mr. johnson of georgia votes no. mr. deutsch votes no. mr. gutierrez influence this is votes no. mr. richman votes no. mr. jeffries, mr. sicily? mr. sicily me about snow. mr. lu? mr. lu votes no. mr. raskin votes no. mr. schneider votes no. ms. deming votes no. >> mr. gowda? mr. gaudi passes. mr. duncan? mr. duncan votes yes. mr. isa? mr. isa votes yes. mr. jordan? mr. jordan votes yes. mr. stanford? mr. stanford votes yes. mr. go start? mr. goes are votes yes. ms. fox? mr. massey? mr. massey votes yes. mr. meadows? mr. meadows about yes. mr. ross? mr. ross votes yes. mr. walker? mr. walker votes yes. mr. blom? mr. blom about yes. mr. heights? mr. heights votes yes. mr. russell? mr. russell votes yes. mr. grossman? mr. grossman votes yes. mr. palmer? mr. palmer votes

mr. sanchez has raised the number three times. you as a commission have the right to make an adjustment. here's the three sheets. wish i had three hands. i don't know what will happen with any new demo legislation, but i suggest that maybe you think about it and could at least raise it three times. thank you very much. have a nice afternoon. i wrote your names on it. you don't have to get them out. they know who they are. >> clerk: thank you. any other public comment? with that, public comment is closed. >> president hillis: we'll move on to regular calendar. item 6, 2017-014010crv, fees for certain permit and transportation analysis. >> good afternoon, commissioners. deborah landis, deputy director of administration with the planning department. you may recall in january and february we came to you with the budget for the fiscal year that just began a couple of weeks ago. as part of that budget, we had two pieces of hege -- legislation. one aaron starr mentioned is at the full board and went through. the second is this one here t

mr. sanchez expressed a first commitment to being a good neighbor and working with the cultural district to advance our goals and cultural celebration and visibility, community development and economic and social justice. we are happy to support a filipino business that is community-minded and has committed to working and creating opportunities for local organizations to create entry level job opportunities in the district. and there's an interest to work with our arts and culture committee to create additional art pieces in the space to celebrate filipino culture. we're excited that the executive order bar and lounge has committed to hosting six annual pop-up dinner for aspiring filipino food businesses and to explore the commissary for the kitchen for growing food businesses and the hopes for our pastry chefs to provide baked goods for his daily coffee program. we're hopeful that the executive order lounge will continue to contribute to creating a lively commercial corridor for the cultural district and creating commercial corridors is one of our top challenges for the cultural distric

mr. chan says, and all -- sanchez, and all the board's help in the resolution of this appeal. i'm happy to answer any questions you may have. i also have the permit holder here, as well. >> basically, the windows -- the windows are in question are shown on elevation four, on sheet a-7. they're two windows that adjoin a set of stairs. they will also address a notice of violation in this, and those windows are the two windows to the south of the elevation. >> and i'm matt dusanic, and i'm in agreement of the removal of the two windows on the south end of the eastern elevation. >> president fong: do you have revised drawings? >> we basically have a verbiage -- >> president fong: that's not my question. do you have revised drawings? >> not yet. we can show just -- submit something and cross off the two windows, come back in a week if that works for you. we're deleting windows, not an elevation. we can just cross it off. >> president fong: we'll need some documentation. we're going to need some documentation. >> we're happy to provide that. >> clerk: okay. so any questions, commiss