which is a quality a.d.u. , on like some that you see. there have been a few neighbor concerns stated. sunlight, privacy, views and as best as shingles. the neighbor to the north is concerned about shadow on his hypothetical future unbilled solar panels. we don't see any impact on these northern nonexistent solar panels, but to the extent that there could be in the future, my clients have committed to paying up to $5,000 of the cost to elevate the solar panel so they catch more sunlight. on the privacy issue, they are concerned about decks looking -- a deck in the rear looking backwards into the adjacent homes, but if i can have a computer, please, you will see here this is the d.r. requester 's deck, which extends beyond the project sponsor site and looks into the adjacent neighbor's homes. so we happen though she is complaining about something that he already does. you can see the second photo, this is looking into our windows the other neighborhood that spoke has the same thing and has a deck that beyond stage extends beyond the number

ru thus, the a.d.u. activities which are occurring. the by-product and inclusive of that, the city department and planning are aware that parking may be sacrificed for a.d.u.s. am i going in the right direction at this point. okay. so from a planning standpoint, a -- a building owner has the right to terminate parking for a.d.u.s from a planning standpoint. >> yeah. >> vice president swig: all right. so that's that. and i'm really sympathetic to anyone that does a lease, to the appellants. i'm very sensitive to your concerns. i'm just trying to figure out a jurisdiction issue here. so from a planning standpoint, this seems to be an okay thing to do. from a contractual standpoint, this is clearly a conflict between a landlord and a tenant with regards to promises made in their lease. so is this -- this argument about taking away a parking place because it is in a tenant's lease, is it now or may have been before, is this now in our jurisdiction as it's in the appeals sector or is it not and should it go to the rent board? >> i think thi

could that be an a.d.u. when you get four units in this building with no park are or could you combine it with the upper units and get more equal-sized units. >> and the answer is yes, presumably, you can add an a.d.u., one up to five units or less, one a.d.u. >> president hillis: but can you add an a.d.u. in commercial space? >> cory teague, zoning administrator. you can't take commercial space in a neighborhood district or in chinatown, but out here in these spaces, you can convert l.c.u. space to an a.d.u., so that is a possibility. >> president hillis: right. so i think we just -- i mean, i think the biggest question is what's happening, is this being done, and a tenant is being evicted. and then, i think if we can get an answer to that question, we can look at the unit seismics and make it seem not so much like one master -- you know, monster unit. it's not huge. it's a 2,000-square-foot unit. mr. teague? >> thank you. i just wanted to address the specifics of the variance briefly. i do think when it co

some were the a.d.u. process went forward, and the garages are to be replaced with a.d.u.s, and the building seismically retrofitted, and in buildings that were granted variances, in some -- >> ma'am, can i respond to that, please? >> commissioner lazarus: yes. >>> so the current rules are there, you may replace with a.d.u. if the greater good would like us to provide parking in some units, we will do that. but the current rules that we're operating under are you may replace parking with a.d.u.s, and again, it's the greater good clause. and that's what we're doing. >> commissioner lazarus: thank you. >> clerk: thank you very much. mr. sanchez? >> thank you. scott sanchez, planning department. because the architect just clarified there are multiple properties in various planning stages, 2230 and 2210 did not require any variances as part of their plan to generate a.d.u.s. 2220 i think did also have a varian variance which was appeal today this board, which was actually withdrawn. i believe 2230 turk is the

down here, then, i wouldn't object to it, but there is no a.d.u. for this. there's no a.d.u. that's been applied for, and there's no a.d.u. that's been given. moreover, even if he's doing this to humor himself, it's next to the garbage, and there's no exit down here. the point is it's in the basement, which is okay, you could get an a.d.u. permit to do that. but you have another problem here because everywhere on the city and on these permit and blueprint applications, it says this is a three story building, and this is a three story building. well, all of a sudden with no permission from the city, he has a four-story building, and he only has one entrance. it's past the garbage, and none of this is legal unless it's done properly, so all we're worried as residents of this building is to make sure that the city is watching, that these plans comport with the reality on the ground, and that you or the commissioners and our other representatives are watching out for us and making sure that the rule of law is obeyed and it is done, if it's done at all, in a safe and healthy manne

policy or a.d.u.'s, we allow developers to build bicycle parking instead. this feels pro forma but still is a very important policy step and if passed we will be the first major city to eliminate minimum parking requirements in north america. a pretty big accomplishment for our city. but we will be the second city in the u.s. to do it after another small city and i forget the name of that. we have mr. chathan here to provide a presentation. >> thank you, i imagine this is part of your presentation but just to let you know from the last land use meeting to now, what kind of community outreach you have done and what feedback. >> yes, thank you, supervisors, for having me. my name is paul khasen. to your point, supervisor tang, a summary how we got here, this grew out of another piece of legislation that went through the board process and amendment. at the last hearing at the land use committee, there was -- the conversation, much of the public comment were about parking removal amendments. the last time we came to the committee were specifically with these am

are you aware if they are planning to -- do they have a.d.u. his -- a.d.u. his? >> would planning have any more information regarding that question? thank you. >> it's party time. [laughter] >> okay. we are now moving on to public comment. >> i think the zoning administrator has further comments to add. >> okay. >> thank you for inviting me back up. i want to clarify since there was questions about a kitchen. i apologize. it was not clear through the permit and through our system that the permit on appeal was effectively for the purpose of this in some parts. so i wasn't interested until this evening if that was the case. again, in august of last year, we received a referral from the city poston his attorney his office that this was being used as a business office. there was an expansion -- inspection. they confirmed that and they conferred with d.b.i. and they did access it. they determines there was a location at that time. kitchen was installed by july 13 th of this year. but in august of this year, additional complaints were received that even though the kitc

our a.d.u. numbers are on the rise. i think we reviewed 80 a.d.u. applications last month, but those are the challenge, affordable housing programs, and staffing those are a priority without sacrificing other departments in the -- >> president cleaveland: so you meet with d.b.i. >> yes. we meet with d.b.i. every week monday, tuesday, and wednesday just to address a.d.u.s. >> president cleaveland: thank you very much. i also had a question for chief molloy. we're switching from morphine to fentanyl, but you hear about fentanyl killing people all across the country. it's a dangerous drugs. how does it match with morphine in terms of it being a dangerous drug? >> well, they're both opioids, which is the problem. what we give them for is pain medication, and the dose we give is considerably less than what people are taking and overdosing on. whenever you give an opioid, you have to continue to monitor the patient and monitor their vital signs to make sure everything stays stable. that said, we aren't giving them the large doses. we are regulated by the

meanwhile people who just have a house where they want to convert their garage to an a.d.u. say, wait i have to have a parking space, where am i going to put that? they don't know there's a loophole to put in a bike parking space and you don't have to have a parking space. i applaud this of the planning code and this effort to make our cities less car-centric. that's another reason the building was able to be built the way it was in 1928 because cars weren't the thing that they could build at the time. and honestly cities are better for it. thank you. >> good afternoon, supervisors. i hope supervisor safai comes back soon because i want him to hear this. i was actually on the phone with one of his legislative aide's recently and she was telling me how she wants her kids to be able to live in san francisco, and i know a hurdle for myself and others are housing costs and one of the biggest drivers of housing costs happens to be parking, that's incredibly expensive to build. this is a moment where i feel we need to be politically expedient, we need to be brave and climate leade

two years ago this house would have been perfect for the a.d.u.because of the entrance and garage space. things changed. no one on the street. let me put it this way. most people on the street do not use the garage. they park on the street. it is dead end. we don't have been street cleaning. i shouldn't say that. everyone will park there. it is reality. you could put a really nice level apartment on that second level using the trades man entrance and not create a unit with questionable live ability. i think the way it is now, my fear is the second unit will be staged. it is a speculative project. that is fine, you know. when it is sold, it would be staged to be part of this a 4,000 square foot house. i am looking for affordability. no roof deck, which will be visible, contrary to the rdgs on duncan street. it adds to the cost. the open space in the rear yard. preserving the faÇade because it does have value and merit. it is a very particular san francisco style of architecture. i think 90 years old at some point you have to start considering them