Sf [inaudible] rising, democratic socialists of america, california, faculty association, ace, among other groups. We really urge the board of supervisors to move swiftly, work closely with the task force and the office of the treasurer to create a San Francisco Municipal Bank. We would like to see the banks charter be grounded in principles of equity, social, racial and economic and environmental justice. San francisco has a 10 billion budget but currently apart from all the reasons why we shouldnt be investing in large commercial banks, we also are facing unprecedented housing crisis, homelessness crisis, despite our very large city budget. So we would like to see a public bank that would really invest in our local communities, especially most marginalized and vulnerable communities that are underserved by our current Banking System and the city would invest in Affordable Housing. Thank you. Thank you. Next speaker. Thank you, and good afternoon all my relations, my name is Tony Gonzalez and im with the American Indian movement. And im the director of a. I. M. West here in San Francisco. I come here to encourage this discussion on behalf of the international, or intertribal community, i believe most of us are in support of this effort and i would like to also commend former Supervisor John Avalos for having the foresight to having initiate this process in 2011. And also, its rather ironic that north dakota has the public bank and this is where we have seen in the last two years, the Standing Rock people, community and no daple organizing that took place there and from there many of us returned to our communities and began to more enthusiastically begin the divestment process. So i believe this public banking process is very much a part of that. So on behalf of the indian community, i wholeheartedly support this effort. Thank you very much. It is in keeping with the values that San Francisco has been emanating and i think it will be a great model for the rest of the cities and the country across. Thank you very much. Thank you, tony. Next speaker, please. Good afternoon. My name is jesse fernandez, im here with support of sf rising, people organizing to demand economic and environmental rights. Im here in support for a public bank that will move us in a direction to achieve Sustainable Community investments. From new development, to acquisition of existing housing stock, time and again our tools and resources are to create and retain Affordable Housing are spread too thin and fall too short of the Affordable Housing goals and commitments we have as a city. A public bank would increase our local control and allow us to support as well our cherished mom and pop businesses, for example, the chicken coop that had to close its doors because they couldnt afford the prohibitive costs of seismic retrofitting or newly designated businesses like besitas bakery which is experiencing unreasonable rent increases. That came to a halt. In the resession it was the same private institutions that were unaccountable and ripped families from their homes. My own family struggled with this. As federal tax reforms are beginning to limit or will limit Affordable Housing, financing in our sanctuary cities targeted for servicing and being committed to our immigrant community, we need a Municipal Bank now to protect and advance our San Francisco values. Thank you. Hi, my name is otto pipinger, i want to remind the board this endorsement represents all 800 of our members, or approaching 800 that we have. Democratic socialists endorses because we believe it ought to be governed democratically as well. I would like to take a moment to address the conflict with San Francisco social issues these banks have addressed and remind you 9. 6 billion in the hands of these banks is a tacit endorsement tantamount to overtly giving millions a year to the private prison industry, the modern face of slavery. To the subject of public banks, however, its essential, the next time the market tanks, the banks that have invested in our businesses provided loans for our homes view our community the same way we do and are willing to hold onto these assets even in the face of liability which a private bank will never do. A bank, as every child understands or believes is a place that keeps your money safe and that ought to be true for san franciscans. Too risky to outright subsidize such as providing lowinterest loans for colleges and businesses that benefit us collectively as well as providing a partner for projects too risky to accept a loan from a predatory lender. The Federal Reserve has a dual mandate to stabilize prices. Bank of america has no mandate other than maximizing profits. The people of San Francisco are entitled to a bank with the same degree of respect that we do. Thank you for your time, i will cede the rest. Thank you, next speerk, please. Speaker, please. Thank you very much and i commend you. As residents of San Francisco, who pay taxes and fines into the citys coffers, we want to know the city officials invest our funds wisely, with a city not only ends highinterest but also where investments contribute to quality of life for all san franciscans. A private bank can do this. Other communities are realizing the best way for Government Funds to work efficiently and responsibly is to deposit them in a public bank. A public bank that will allow us explicit inclusion of a broad range of policy goals and purposes. Purposes such as Public Welfare. Public welfare through equitable Public Investments to overcome the harmful impacts of extractive economies, unlike a commercial bank it stands on the principle that Public Welfare is the priority rather than profit for private shareholders. Public bank will provide credit and Financial Services to local communities underserved by mainstream commercial banks and lenders and by limited Public Investment to undue the historical legacy of wealth disparities and harmful economic environments or social housing and transportation impacts on these communities. Community wealth building. A public bank shall seek to promote generative economy that holds social justice and ecological sustainability. Community socially owned, social owned enterprises, Community Cooperatives [bell] next speaker. Hi, my name is francis collins. Im a member of a. C. E. , i volunteer for the tenants united. I stand for veterans for peace. Ive been a renter since 1970. Im currently on section 8. If my building got sold and a nonprofit would buy out my building, instead of giving money to their shareholders like wells fargo or b. Of a. , they could reinvest in their community. We need a bank that will support marginalized people in San Francisco. People of color, low income families, the homeless, youth, small business, immigrants, public money for public good. Thank you. Thank you very much. Next. Thank you, supervisors my name is julian dahl. An organizer with a. C. E. We have been on the front lines of dealing with the banks since about 2010. We had a number of members, quite a few actually in the bayview and excelsior who were forced to fight tooth and nail during the height of the foreclosure crisis to take back their homes and actually came up with make shift Financing Solutions to be able to buy back those homes. Working with socially responsible investors to buy back homes from speculators and put them back in hands of the community and back in the hands of our members. But obviously these solutions were the best we could do, but theyre inadequate. Since around that time, we worked with supervisor avalos at the time to find out if the creation of a public bank would be possible. It was really exciting to hear the results of the b. L. A. Report that showed that finally it could be possible. To have a bank that could create things like Revolving Loan funds, to buy back homes, to buy back buildings where tenants live. And keep people who were most affected by our housing crisis in their homes is something that would be really exciting to our members. Theres lots of reasons to support public bank. Cannabis banking is just one of them. Theres many, many reasons. I hope we could make this happen. Thank you. Thank you. Next speaker, please. Good afternoon, supervisors my name is curtis [inaudible] with [inaudible] public bank sf coalition. I think the main goal for the task force should be to get to a point where you can provide a blueprint to the treasurer and say this is how you create a public bank. Thats the main goal. Anything short of that is a failure. Its not going to be easy but its absolutely doable. I think the task force needs to follow some key principles. Such as factoring externalities and hidden costs. These are some things often never considered with wall street banks. Shortterm losses versus longterm gains and redefining what it means to have an economy, false narrative that you need to put profit over people. Even the narrative you have to put people over profit, i dont think they are mutually exclusive, i think you could have both. I think the question is who gets that profit. Most importantly, i think, for the force is to make sure the public input, that theres a process for public input. This is a public bank. So if you dont have a public input process, it delegitimizes this task force. We need a public bank, we can no longer afford our current relationship with wall street bank, with bank of america, simply put they use our money against us. Its been mentioned sub prime Mortgage Loans displace people. Pipeline, fossil fuel industry literally using our money to fund our own extinction. We are currently in a crisis but the good news is whenever theres a crisis theres a great opportunity. So sf has a great opportunity to send a message to lay the blueprint for the rest of the country on how to actually break up with these big banks. If our federal government cant break up with the big banks, we will have to do it for them. Thank you. Hi. My name is julie. Im a registered nurse. And im with the california nurses association. We are here to support San Francisco public bank. San francisco is a city which prides itself on progressive values such as equality and justice. Yes, San Francisco banks with corporations that fund the exportation of Indigenous People and their land. Banks that fund the destruction of our planet. Banks that fund climate change, which is the biggest threat to human life. Banks that fund weapons manufacturing, big tobacco and have predatory lending practices which specifically target people of color and marginalized communities. Overall corporations and banks put profit over people. We are living in a dangerous time where we have an extreme president and g. O. P. Who is hell bent on further deregulating banks, corporations and wall street for the profit of the few. California, more specifically, San Francisco, can be a leader. And show that we will not tolerate banks and corporations that exploit people and exploit our planet. We want a bank that is diverse, inclusive, and that represents all of its community members. As the saying goes, if you dont have a seat at the table, you are probably on the menu. We want a bank that puts its community first. One that invests in Affordable Housing, education and child care, Public Transit and infrastructure, small and local businesses, and Renewable Energy just for starters. San francisco has great opportunity to be a leader and San Francisco can be a great leader on public banking. Thank you. Thank you. Next speaker. Good afternoon, supervisors. Thank you for bringing this to the attention of San Francisco. This is a really important issue. And i also want to commend everyone else thats spoken. Because im very proud to be part of this group. Everyone has covered everything i would have covered. So i only have one small thing to talk about, that is my next door neighbor. Ive lived in San Francisco for 40 years. Ive taught in San Francisco public schools. Galileo and [inaudible] for 30 years. Ive seen the city change in ways that are not so pleasant. And one is my next door neighbor stephanie hellman, who is an African American woman, who has a family, has three generations living in her home. Her husband was a custodian for San Francisco. She actually worked at a bank, stephanie. They saved their money and bought a home. And owned their home for 40 years in bernal heights. Last year the bank foreclosed on her and forced her and her family out of San Francisco. They had no sympathy for her and her situation, her husband just died. She was suffering from senility. Her family was forced out of the city. We need a public bank that has a heart. And i commend you and all the people speaking in favor of that to make that a reality. Thank you. Thank you. Next speaker, please. My name is alan fisher. I retired a couple years ago but for a few decades a fought for financial justice and pushed banks to do more for communities and i think this is a great effort you are undertaking and i will try to be short, partly because im really hungry. [chuckles] also i just want to support all of the other san franciscans here. You cant be Ground Breaking if you allow yourself to be hemmed by whats risky. Seems you need to be focused on doing things that are not happening from commercial banks, or maybe even Credit Unions and really serving the needs of those communities and those people. In particular, whoever leads this needs to be a Community Development banker. Too often in these situations that ive been around, a banker gets hired. And then they do what a banker does and then its the same thing as a bank. So i just think those are things to look out for. And one part of this, i hope, will be Community Development lending. So that you are really answering those problems. Everything else, i think, has been covered so thank you for doing this. Hello supervisors cohen and fewer. Thank you for bringing this up and fighting for this cause. I think this is really important to a lot of people in San Francisco and a lot of people who dont know its important to them yet will soon learn, i think. I think this will be really incredible. Ive heard a lot tonight, or today about questions about marijuana. And how we can potentially use marijuana money in this public bank. And a lot of concerns about the legality and risks of doing so. I think that right now we should focus on just moving forward on a public bank. Not worry about the marijuana element. I think that is going to get cleared up on a federal level. Theres a lot of push on both the right and the left politically to do that right now. If you put the bank in place, it will be there at the time that federal and other legislations come through to our aid. Thank you. Are there any other members of the public that would like to speak on this item . Please lineup. Thank you. Hello, supervisors, thank you so much for putting this hearing on and being champions of the public banking issue right now. Too bad we didnt move forward a little sooner when Matt Gonzalez actually put this forward in 2001, something the city should be pursuing. And then john avalos really put effort into it and fewer and cohen thank you for doing that work as well. I got activated in local politics about an issue with chase bank because i just graduated sf state with my masters degree, i didnt have much money and chase bank started charging me for being poor. So i was thinking about it from a personal level at first. And then i started to do the research into glass stegall and i started to understand that chase bank is responsible for supporting predatory lending and its also responsible for investing in fossil fuels and things that we dont believe in and so do the other big banks. So its so important for us to have an alternative that will give back to the community and it sounds like its really just an issue of getting down to brass tax like you were talking about and the speakers were talking about. Do we do something shortterm with the existing charters of the credit union or commercial banking charter or get in the formation of something entirely new and work at the state level. And theres a lot of issues right now we are having to parse that out because they are statelevel issue thats are hard. But i want to echo what ben becker just said about cannabis being something we should put off to the side when we are focusing on the shortterm and figure out how to move forward with this task force. Im curious, maybe you could respond to this what the process is going to be for the task force and selection and how fast its going to move forward. [bell] thank you. Are there any other members of the public that would like to speak on this item . All right, seeing none. Public comment is closed. Thank you, to the members of the public for voicing your support. Articulating your concerns. And most importantly, kind of raising questions on the direction you would like the task force to go in that you would like the city to be going in. Thats actually very helpful. Supervisor fewer, i think that we have completed this hearing. I dont have any other questions that i would like to raise. I would like to take a motion to file the hearing as heard. Yes. And chair, if i may just add, that i thank you again to our presenters. And i want to also thank my colleague supervisor cohen for her sponsorship and cosponsorship of this hearing and partnership. And thank you to the public for coming out today. And thank you to mr. Brussow because i think you address a lot of the negative comments that we have heard about it being too risky. But quite frankly, hearing today and looking at what these banks invest in, i would say its too risky not to do. So i think we have heard loud and clear from the public also, this is something we directionally want to go in. I want to thank you all for giving us hope and actually strength to go on. And i think it will be an expensive process, but quite frankly, i think after this hearing, i am super excited to do it. So with that, supervisor cohen, you would like for me to make a motion to move this or . Continue it or . I was going to say file it as heard. Supervisor fewer before i gavel down ive been truly inspired by the conversations not only in this chamber but conversations we have had on twitter and facebook and other social media and at events in the public. Its been an incredibly wellreceived idea. Not only here in San Francisco but across the entire country. People are paying attention and people are curious to know what San Francisco is going to do. I know my friend said she is interested in oakland being first. But i think we are going to beat you on this. [laughter] a little friendly competition never hurt anyone, right . Hopefully San Francisco will be the first so its a privilege to continue to move forward. Thank you to everyone who has contributed to this discussion. [gavel] [applause] madam clerk, is there any other business before this body . Theres no further business. Supervisor fewer all right, we are adjourned. Thank you. [gavel] welcome to the january 31, 2018 meeting of the San Francisco board of appeals. The presiding officer this evening is board president hon darryl honda joined by frank fung, commissioner lazarus, and commission eer wilson and commissioner swig. We have the attorney and the boards legal assistant, and i am cynthia goldstein. We will be joined shortly by Scott Sanchez who is the Zoning Administrator who will be representing the Planning Department and the Planning Commission. The board requests you turn off cell phones and Electronic Devices and carry on conversations in the hallway. The rule of presentation is as follows. There are 7 minutes to present the case and 3 minutes for rebuttal. People affiliated with the parties must include the comments within the seven or three minute periods. Members not affiliated have 3 minutes to address the board but no eare rebuttal. We ask that you provide us a speaker card or Business Card if you are willing so that board staff can have the accurate spelling of your name. We have paper cards to the left side of the podium for your use. We welcome feedback and customer surveys as well. If you have a question about the boards rules, speak to board staff during a break or come to the office or give us a call. Were located at 1650 Mission Street in room 304. This meeting is broadcast live on sfgov tv and will be rebroadcast on friday at 4 00 on channel 26 and dvds of this meeting are available for purchase from sfgovtv. We will now swear in or affirm all those who intend to testify. Please note any member of the public may speak without taking the oath under the sunshine ordinance. If you intend to testify and have the board give your testimony evidentiary weight, please stand. Raise your right hand and say i do when you have been sworn in or affirmed. You do solemnly swear or affirm that the testimony you are about to give will be the truth, whole truth, and nothing but the truth. Thank you very much. Commissioner, we have one housekeeping item, item 5. We received a withdrawal request for that item, and we will not hear it. This is the jurisdiction request regarding an alteration permit at 2101 Mission Street. Item one is general Public Comment. Is there anyone here who would like to speak on a matter within the boards subject matter jurisdiction but not on tonights calendar . Seeing none, commissioner, item two is the election of officers. The boards rules state that elections take place this time each year. And of course, i want to take this opportunity, first, to thank president honda for the lath two years pfb for the last two years. You have been so responsive and supportive and i appreciate that and the opportunity we had to work together. Thank you for your service and support. Starting with the office of president , are there any members of the board who would like to nominate a colleague or themselves for this office . An i would like to nominate Vice President frank fung. I woue president frank fung. Are there any other nominations . I will take that as a motion. Any Public Comment on this motion to elevate Vice President fung . Vice president fung, do you accept that nomination, i should ask . I do. Very good. So we have a motion from current president honda to elevate Vice President fung to the office of president. On that motion, i will start with the nominee himself. Yes. Thank you. Commissioner lazarus. Absolutely. Commissioner wilson. Hmm. Does it take four or three votes . Im going to go on a limb here. Yes. Commissioner swig . Aye. Great. The motion passes with a unanimous vote. Congratulations, president fung. Thank you. We then need to move on to the office of Vice President. Are there any nominations for this office . An i would like to nominate commissioner rick swig. Okay. I would like to nominat commissioner rick swig. Okay. Do you accept that nomination . With pleasure. Any other nomination for office of Vice President . On commissioner hondas motion to nominate rick swig as the Vice President , any Public Comment . Thank you. Okay. President fung. Aye. Commissioner lazarus. Aye. Commissioner wilson. Aye. Commissioner swig. Ill accept. Thank you very much and congratulations to you both. Thank you. The next item is item three is commissioner comments and questions. Anything, commissioners . Just to thank commissioner honda for his service, and also thank commissioner swig for accepting the vice. The vice. The vice. And i, too, would like to the last two years has been nice working with our director has been just fantastic and make this is board so efficient. It is going to be very sad in a few months we will have a new director. But the last two years has been pleasant. And in this body that i work with, all my fellow commissioners are absolutely awesome. Including you, too, brad. Thank you. I agree, kudos to our executive director, although i would be remiss with my fellow commissioners if i did not tell you i have a plan to clone her. Im keeping myself. Senator is there any Public Comment on item three . Is there on item three . Seeing none, we move on to item four. The adoption of minutes. Any additions, modifications or corrections . Nope. If not, i will entertain a motion to accept. So moved. Thank you. Any Public Comment on the minutes . Okay. Seeing none, on commissioner lazarus motion to accept the minutes. President fung. Aye. A commissioner honda. Aye. Commissioner wilson. Aye. Commissioner swig. Aye. Item five is withdrawn and we will move on to item six. Appeal 17158 Patricia Hayes versus the Zoning Administrator at 21 brompton avenue appealing the issuance on september 1, 2017, with the letter of determination regarding whether the vacant lot at the subject property currently being used for parking and could be developed with a surface paid Public Parking lot. Hearing was held on december 13. It is on for further consideration today. The board voted 32 with commissioner lazarus and commissioner wilson dissenting to grant the appeal and overturn the letter of determination on the basis the Zoning Administrator erred because the legal nonconforming use was established for parking and the use of the property as a paid parking lot after it was sold by the city to the apell lanlts. Lacking four votes needed to pass, the motion failed and upon further motion, they voted 50 to continue this matter to tonight to allow the parties to submit Additional Information to the board related to the citys authorized use of the subject property. Commissioner, president fung, we can give each side an additional three minutes. That will be fine. We can hear three more minutes starting with the appellant. Okay. On behalf of the hayes family, we thank the members of the appeals board for the additional opportunity to review and consider the appeal for the property at 21 brompton in the glenn park village. We also thank the Zoning Administrator and the Planning Team for their guidance and advice over the past year. Again, my name is Patricia Hayes and i am here tonight with my brother dan and sisters and our mother is watching on tv. I would like to read the brief that we submitted last week for the record, and it includes some additional comments as well. Since we met on december 13, 2017, weve received and reviewed the citys Historical Files for our property at 21 brompton avenue. A memorandum drafted be i the city Planning Department in june of 71 discussed the potential uses of 21 brompton. The memorandum cited the use at the time as unauthorized parking, and in a subsequent memo from the then planning director in december of 71, he stated its use as informal free parking lot. Even though it was zoned as nctnrh2. There was also a report submitted by the City Planning Commission in march of 1970 that stated the remainder, which was our lot, should be reserved for a Public Parking lot under the citys neighborhood parking program. We know that the Parking Authority at that time did not show interest in doing so. So we do know that the city and our family has continuously used the property for parking for nearly half a century. We do understand from the board that there does not appear to be a legal basis to overturn the Zoning Administrators decision to allow for paid parking, but we continue to believe that the Zoning Administrator erred in his decision. In his letter dated september 1, 2017, he states that although evidence demonstrates that the property has been used for pa parking since the 70s, it was never permitted as a Public Parking lot. We assert that it was both implicitly and explicitly permitted. The city used it for parking, and cited the parking in several published planning documents. The planning staff argumented that the documents were simply stating the current use of the property and not as any legal description. Our intent and effort since we purchased the property is to find a prague t maic a pragmatic, workable approach for the parking needs to monetize and clean the area to yield a better lit and safer, secure area in the neighborhood. This would allow us to work sooner towards the longer Term Development plan that would incorporate some parking. We focused on the facts and history of the property. Its not about a feelgood story of a San Francisco family clinging to nostalgic family property. We have spent a lot of time, effort, and expenses to explore options that would benefit not just our family but the community, merchant, and city Planning Department goals. In some ways it would have been easier after we purchased the property last year to close it off and leave it sometime down the road, maybe the next generation of family to develop. But the reality is we know the adverse impact that this would create in our community, and i would think most people would be shocked that its even a private property. They think its Public Parking. We understand from the Zoning Administrator that we can pursue a conditional use permit for parking on the nct portion, but there is no Legal Mechanism to allow conditional use on the rh2 portion. And we wish to emphasize that there is no discernible Boundary Line from where the nct and rh2 piece meet. If the board cannot overturn the Zoning Administrators decision, and then we request that the board recommend that the Zoning Administrator or planning director use the Administrative Discretion or by temporary order to allow us to proceed with the conditional use permit for the rh2 portion of the lot. So we can incorporate both parts i need you to wrap up. So we believe this is a unique situation that requires a common sense approach. There needs to be some flexibility in discretion in finding a workable solution. We live in the most innovative city in the world and it is not just the private sector but extends to the public government as well that we urge that the board and planning use some administrative flexibility to proceed with paid parking. Without it we cant continue the way it is. And we have had breakins. Thank you for your time. Commissioner, any comments or questions with ms. Hayes . I had a question. Where we left this is were you able to do any research into any documentation from the city . Was there, as an example, the issue for the request of proposal on the sale of the lot. Anything like that . No. The one i referred to was from the planning the then planning director that just stated its use at the time as informal free park iing, and in the same memo they referred to a report submitted be i the Planning Commission at the time that did state the lot or our portion 21 brompton should be reserved for the city parking lot under the zoning, and that is what we found. U a thank you. Mr. Sanchez. Thank you. Congratulations, president fung and Vice President swig. Apologies i wasnt here at the last item. When reviewing the letter of determination request, it did approach it and review the historical information. Is there any way that this is possibly a legal use under the planning code . And that was what i tried to find. Unfortunately, what i did find in the records and the knowledge that i have under the planning code in effect at that time is there was no authorization for this. Back in the early 60s this was developed with homes on this block in the early 60s. They sought a p. U. D. , a planned unit development, to reconfigure those and i a lou for the sale of portions of the properties to widen bosworth. There were actually homes on this block that were demolished as a result of this, and subsequent to that, the lots became vacant. At that time the property was zoned c2 and r2, and there is a very clear Boundary Line that shows on the planning and zoning map which portion is zoned which. At that time a parking lot would have required a minimal conditional use authorization. There is no record of conditional use authorization. In 1971 when there was discussion about the sale of the portion and put on the overhead. This is a report from the summer can i have the overhead please . The overhead. The overhead. It does state that the Parking Authority does not see need to develop subject city owned lot for parking and unauthorized parking and then there was the referenced letter stating again that it was not developed by the city or had not been developed for informal parking. In 1974 there was an environmental application as part of the sale, and also looking at the proposed residential uses on the property and that described the present use of the site as vacant, at the bottom you can see present use of site vacant. And there were photos accompanying that request. I have on the overhead showing the use of it. It was there were cars there, but also didnt have wheels and didnt seem to be used much as parking. Beginning in 1978, the use of Public Parking wouldnt have been allowed and since that time it wouldnt have been allowed. Private parking lot is allowed with conditional use authorization, but not Public Parking and the residentially soerned portion of the lot. The residentially zoned portion of the lot. I am available for any questions. Questions . Sure. So it seemed that the choices here are to consider, one, how to advise the owner of the lot to get this done legally, and im not sure i am still hazy on whether this body can do that. And two, just fence off the place to build residential. And how would they go about this. And it serves the community and is a busy parking lot and breakins and use and the residual impact and people do nasty things, but what is the process if and well have to discuss our Legal Options here, whether we can do this or not, or override you and do it. What is the other option for the owner to legalize this property as a private paid parking lot . So just the fact that it is going from something that may be informal to a paid public lot would be a change of use under the planning code. What has been there for some decades and i believe that the current owners have had some ownership involvement or interest in the property for some time for a number of decades from what i can see from the records. They would need to rezone the property. Keep in mind, too, this is not an enforcement action that we are bringing forth as part of the Planning Department. Which is an application sought to make physical improvements to the site, to pave the site, stripe it, to put in machines to collect money. What is that unless you do it legally . And so its no good unless you can do it legally. But it would need a rezoning. They do want to make substantial improvements to the property that would use it and very formalize the use as parking, and i think some of the commissioners raised at the last hearing what does that do to the development or future development of the site . This has been proposed for Residential Development since the 70s. And since this Environmental Review in the early 70s, but has not yet been used. Its been used i ges guess as informal parking lot, but when we approve a parking lot, how often do they get converted to residential use . It does occur although very long process through the Planning Department. But it does does it become less likely or more likely it gets developed if it converted to paid parking . I cant say. We would like to say this developed into residential as soon as possible. That would be in everyones interest in fulfilling the requirements of the planning code. What is the path of least resistance . Sh is this going to the board of supes and getting theis this supes and getting the District Supervisor to give it continuity with the land and the other part of the land that already seems to be titled for this . An it could be a rezoning. That may not make the most sense becausesensebecaubecauseit coul. That may not make the most sensbecauseit could be a rezoni. That may not make the most sensbecauebecausesense because the properties closer are all residential. I dont know that converting this to all commercial zoning would be the best solution, but some planning code, could be a text amendment that does allow for the property to be converted to Public Parking lot even though it is zoned residential. Once you push over that dm domino and get that done, lets say, aened 10 years from now family finally wants to build that apartment complex, what is the complexity, every pun intended, about reversing that situation or is that bundled into a residential parking lot with paid parking . It wouldnt effect anything under the planning code. Certainly we prefer and the zoning generally prefers to be residential uses and whether this is raised at the last hearing and if there is going to be Community Concern over the h loss of the parking. Whether that would be more of a concern or issue raised by the public, but in terms of planning, no, that wouldnt change anything under the planning code. If you have a good income stream from the property, it may be less likely that you would seek to convert that to residential, but certainly there are we do see parking lots converted to residential. So the closer question is, is the path of least resistance as were fooling around, not fooling around, sorry, but as were considering this opportunity presented to us tonight, is the path of least resistance rather than us adjudicating on this and kicking it back and recommending that supervisor sheehy take this and get it done . Yes, i think that is the appropriate way to address the planning code compliance issues. Thanks. Questions . I have a couple, scott. Just to confirm, the original zoning c2 and r2, are they exactly in correlation with the current zoning in terms of the property for nct and rh1 . Yes t the boundaries are in the same location. Boundaries are the same. The rezoning that youre talking about is applicable to the rh portion. Correct. They would need to rezone the rh2 portion of the lot, and it may be a planning Code Amendment that i a lous for conditional use authorization to be sought for Public Parking lots in very limited circumstances. Or you could say if you are in rh2 portion adjacent to nct zone portion that you can seek conditional use authorization. There are ways to make it very tailored so it is not widely applicable. Not quite accessory, is it . No, its not accessory parking. A rezoning process normally takes at least two years unless its done by the legislative branch of the city. By the time they go through all the steps and through planning and board of supervisors, it is probably at least two years. Weve seen rezonings occur in a shorter time. What i would imagine would be a text amendment, not a rezoning, like a not like a mapping change which does ease the process. It reduces notification requirements if you do text amendment rather than rezoning and remapping. What is the possibility of a temporary use . This would not be specified as an allowed temporary use under the current provisions of section 205 of the planning code which govern temporary uses. The parking lot wouldnt be allowed as a temporary use. We did that for the sign one time. For . For the union bank . The headquarters sign downtown. Yeah, that was an action on a Building Permit as well that we had issued an error and sought rectification and the board upheld the determination that it needed to be revoked but with a time limit. With a time limit. Thank you. Thank you. Is there any Public Comment on this item . Mr. Barnes, did you have something . Good evening, members of the board of appeals. Bill barnes on behalf of the city straadministrator. Since the last meeting, we were asked to look at time of sale whether there was any indication in the file. We pulled the documents from 1971 and 1974 when the board acted, and the memo that was referenced by ms. Hayes was written by then planning director alan jacobs describing it as an informal free lot. We cant speak to whether that was authorized at the time by planning, but from the real estate departments perspective, that was the issue. It proceeded to the finance committee which discussed at some length whether or not to buy it for parking and bart was being built at the time and bart declined. When you saw Surplus Property as members know, you have to offer it to other public agencies to see if they are interested in the acquisition of that property. The Real Estate Division offered it to bart, to others, and the Resources Agency at the state level and they said were not interested. At the time other Real Estate Divisions sold it through the adjacent Property Owner which was mr. Hayes. We do have within the file and within the memo that was sent to the Planning Commission some evidence that it was used and informal parking at the time. Whether that use was authorized or not, we wouldnt have those records. That would be the Planning Department. But to the extent that the public paid attention that the property was disposed of through the board of supervisors, up for sale, in 1974, and that was the condition that we found at least in the division of real estates records. Were you able to find a notice for sale . An it appears that the transaction wasnt real estate often sells property to the adjacent Property Owner, so many times in the city where there is a remainder on parcel, and what happened in this instance was that real estate set a minimum price of 30,000 was the price at the time that they thought the property was worth. And that was the price that it was appraised and comps in the files and the board the of supervisors approved the sale. Because the sale was too an adjacent Property Owner, there wasnt the same kind of competitive solicitation in the rfq that you might have on Something Else because the value would be greater to an adjacent owner. Real estate routinely does that. That is in the record. It was appraised at fair market value and sold for that price. Did you have any information on the the supervisors action . So in the file, the director of property was wallace wartman and handwritten notes that described the discussion at the board of supervisors. The Real Estate Division came forward to the finance committee of the board and asked them for their recommendation to sell it. The committee at the time continued the item because they said that they wanted more information on parking. So on august 14, the finance committee would not approve the sale. August 27, the Committee Clerk set it for another hearing. On august 30 of 1974, there was discussion or real estate said they would not present and then on september 10 of 1974, it was approved by the board of supervisors. There was within the notes of real estate staff at the time that there was a delay at the board as they discussed the parking issue, but it wasnt in enough detail for me to offer anything else except to say that bart was contacted to say are you interested in purchasing this because it was adjacent to the bart station. And that is whats in the file. Thats all ive got. An any other Public Comments . Seeing none, commissioners, the matter is submitted. Who would like to start . I think if we keep on putting bandaids on this without clarification, then it will be a hardship for all parties. Im sympathetic to the Property Owner, and i think the Property Owner should be able to maintain a parking lot in a paid format as they desire, but the sitio
comparemela.com © 2020. All Rights Reserved.