Transcripts For SFGTV Planning Commission 20240711

To speak via couple comment are available by calling 4156550001 and entering access code 1461951064. When we reach the item that you want to speak on that we are discussing, press star, three to enter the queue. Each speaker will be allowed three minutes to speak. When you have 30 seconds remaining, you will hear a chime indicating that you have 30 seconds left. Be when your time is up, i will indicate that your time has allotted to speak. Best practices are to call from a quiet location, speak slowly and clearly, and turn down your volume. Id like to call roll now. [roll call] clerk we do expect commissioner moore to join us shortly. She is experiencing some technical difficulties, so hopefully, shell be able to resolve those soon. Commissioners, first on your agenda is consideration of items proposed for continuance. Item 1, case number 2020002743d 2020002743drp at 1555 oak street, proposed for continuance to december 3, 2020, item 2, 2019015984 cua, at 590 second avenue, proposed for continuance to december 10, 2020. Items three, 2019021010 cua, the Zoning Administrator will need to comment on the pending continuance date. Further, commissioners, under your consent calendar, item 7, case 2014. 0243d rd02, 3997 throu through 3927 to 3929 19 street, and item 14, 1145 Mission Street, and item 15, 628 shotwell street, have also been proposed for continuance. Before we entertain a motion to continue, we should also take Public Comment on these items. This is for the item at 19 street. The address is 3927 to 3929 19 street. My name is vivian. Were the neighboring homeowners. We only recently moved into the neighborhood and have not had time to sufficiently review the proposed Development Next door and get an independent review of what the project would mean for the preservation of our home and the culture of the neighborhood in particular. In order to provide or consent for the project, we need additional time to have a structural expert review the proposed construction plans and to validate that it does not pose any construction danger to our home. Two, theres a tree on the property that contributes to the beauty of the neighborhood and should be eligible or significant for landmark tree designation. This species is noted as a rare species by the california native plant society. The proposed development would require removing the tree, but given the status, we believe there should be additional work done to see if this tree meets the significance of the z designation of a landmark or significant tree. David wu with soma filipinas. I support the continuance for 1145 Mission Street until i have continued conversations between the community and the project sponsor, and i also just want to raise concerns of this project with the housing element. Thank you. My name is jeffrey quinto, and i live down the street clerk hello, caller. We can hear you. Hello . Hello . Clerk we can hear you. Did you Say Something . Clerk yes, we can. Were just speaking to the continuances. Hello clerk yes, sir, we can. Yeah, i just have concerns about hello . I didnt hear that, im sorry. Okay. Clerk i dont know whos speaking, but we hear you. Theres been so much luxury housing developed in the neighborhood lately, and thats been, i guess, that had a fire, but it seems like getting rid of that, you know, and just being, like, oh, sure, fine, well get into more condos doesnt seem like a great addition to the neighborhood when we should be having so many other thinks. Thats all. Thank you. Director hillis jonas, just so you know, youre sounding a little [inaudible] clerk oh, delayed in like, my audios coming in late or director hillis you were speaking, and he was clerk can people hear me . Director hillis yes, thank you. Are others hearing that . I can hear you, but i think youre delayed because you were answering his question, it seemed, later. Clerk yeah, i guess so. Director hillis maybe you should turnoff your camera for now. [inaudible] clerk is this any better . Director hillis jonas, can you hear us . Jonas, can you hear us . Clerk i can hear you, yes, i can hear you. Okay. Well director hillis youre answering is delayed. Youre answering several seconds after we ask the question. Clerk chan right, so let me do this. Chan, if you could take over as host, and director hillis, if you could take over for the motio motions and rich, if you could take over for the motions for staff . Good afternoon, commissioners. This is rich sucre, aPlanning Department staff. Commissioner imperial . Commissioner imperial move to continue items as appropriate. Commissioner diamond second. Okay. We have a second from commissioner diamond. All right, commissioners. Okay. So we have a motion to continue the items as proposed from commissioner imperial and a second from commissioner diamond. Going through the roll [roll call] okay. That motion passes 70. Zoning administrator, what say you on item 3b . I will continue that item for 526 lombard street [inaudible] yeah, theres definitely a sync issue between the video and the audio. Clerk members of the public for members of the public okay. So i just got off the phone rich, i got it now. I think were all delayed, to some extent, so if everyone could bear with me for one moment, what i think were going to try to do is end this event and then restart it, and hopefully, that will eliminate the lag. So why dont we all log out and then log back in. Lets try using the original invitation so that we dont have to send out and create a brandnew one. I think thatll be difficult for members of the public, and so for members of the public, hopefully, you can stay on if you just called in as an attendee, and well, were going to end the event and restart the event. So chan, if you can hear that, lets end the event and then restart it and have everybody log back in. So commissioners and staff can log back out, and then give us, clerk without any kind of a broadcast delay, and for the record, we took up the matter of continuances, and all those matters were continued as proposed unanimously, 70. I think what was remaining when we recessed was for the Zoning Administrator to opine his matter. So Zoning Administrator teague, if you could opine item 3b 12 . Sure. I will opine and continue the matter at 717 california street. Clerk okay. Commissioners, that brings us to your consent calendar. All matters listed hereunder constitute a consent calendar, are considered to be routine by the Planning Commission, and may be acted upon by a single roll call vote of the commission. There will be no separate discussion of these items unless a member of the commission, the public, or staff so requests, in which event the matter shall be removed from the consent calendar and considered as a separate item at this or a future hearing. Item 5, at 2765 16 street and item 6, 1465 donner avenue. Members of the public, this is your opportunity to comment on the items on the consent calendar. I just wanted to make sure that item 7 was continued to december 10. Clerk that was the date of the continuance, and i appreciate. President koppel commissioner moore . Clerk just one moment. Caller, are you calling to comment on the items for consent . Yes. Im calling to see when item 7 was continued . Clerk it was continued to december 17. Were going to combine that item with the variance hearing on december 17. Were combining the two matters so they can be heard concurrently. Okay. Got it. Thank you. Clerk all right. Thank you. Okay. So i dont believe any member of the public is actually speaking to any of the consent matters, so Public Comment is closed, and the two items on consent are now before you. Commissioners . President koppel commissioner moore . Clerk commissioner moore, youre muted. Vice president moore i move to approve items five and six. Commissioner fung second. Clerk thank you, commissioners. On that motion to approve items five and six on your consent calendar [roll call] clerk so moved. That motion passes unanimously, 70. And looks like were out of the woods, so under which will place us under commission matters, item 8. Condition of adoption of draft minutes for november 5, 2020. We should take Public Comment. If any member of the public would like to public on the item, please press star, three to enter the queue. Seeing no Public Comment, Public Comment is now closed. Commissioners, the item is now before you. President koppel commissioner diamond . Commissioner diamond move to approve the minutes. President koppel second. Clerk thank you, commissioners. On that motion to adopt the minutes [roll call] clerk so moved, commissioners. That motion passes unanimously, 70. Item 9, commission comments and questions. President koppel commissioner moore . Vice president moore i was reading the paper this morning, and something struck me as a very, very bright idea. Im not sure if its possible, but somebody asked with schools closing again with the uptick of the coronavirus as to whether or not parks could not also be adapted as possible classrooms for students. I think it would be a great idea. I would like to hear from someone at planning not tonight, but at some point in the future as to whether that would be a feasible idea. President koppel commissioner tanner . Commissioner tanner thank you. Thank you, commissioners, for the warm welcome and to staff for the welcome to the commission. I was able to meet with leadership at the Planning Department this last week to get reacquainted, and i want to thank commissioner hillis and everyone for making themselves available. I also want to encourage folks to rethink my thanksgiving plans. I know just this morning, myself and my household decided to cancel the plans that we had for thanksgiving and just decided to do thanksgiving with our household. We need to do everything we can to listen to our Public Health officials. I want to encourage people to think about not only the safety of themselves but the safety of others before they decide to do something for the holidays. President koppel commissioner imperial . Commissioner imperial just in the light of like, i know this is a struggle for all of us in terms of the public hearings, but whenever we have these kind of issues, im always worried about the public participation, and i wonder if we could do some sort of whether before the hearing and especially on the live, of how were going to because it can be frustrating especially if we have these kinds of issues, and we may deentter so comments. So just for the next hearing, i would be open to some kind of faster session, live session, but thats it. Clerk seeing no further requests to speak from commissioners, we can move onto department matters. Item 10, directors announcements. Director hillis thank you, jonas, and thank you, commissioners, and we will follow up on the items that you brought up. Number one, thank you for those that attended the call on monday. I think it was a productive conversation, and thank you for suggesting it, commissioner moore. It was well received by staff. I want to introduce you to [inaudible] accepting my offer to be the director of citywide planning. She has been acting in that role, she was acting director i mean Deputy Director for seven years. Shes been with the department 15 years, started as an intern and moved her way up to planner one, two, and three and now director, so im sure you recognize her work, and we look forward to continuing to work with her. One of the first things shes tackling and something she was tackling, even as Deputy Director, is expanding our services working with d. B. I. , so were working to expand our permit services, both inperson and to the extent that we can, to follow, and as you know, our revenues are going to continue to suffer both from the permits and fines, and we will continue to update you on that. I just wanted to let you know that the mayor issued an executive directive this morning for related to implementation of stoppage related to the city working together for us to issue permits related to Small Business. So for us, the department of building inspection, the health department, fire department, and others to Work Together to come up with a plan to make sure we can implement the voter mandates in prop h, but youll hear more about that in the informational session. So thank you, that concludes my report. President koppel commissioner diamond . Commissioner diamond yes, i have a question for director hi hillis, and perhaps hes going to address this in regards to the informational discussion. But john king wrote a good article in the chronicle about winterizing resources that were seeing with entertainment and restaurants, and i was curious where the Economic Recovery Team is in helping to expedite and do whatever is necessary in order to allow for that winterization. Director hillis good question, and we will address that as part of the informational discussion, as well. Commissioner diamond great. Thank you. Clerk sorry. I was muted. That will place us on item 11, items passed at the land use, Historic Preservation commission, and the board of supervisors. Good morning, commissioners. The project proposed a new whole Foods Grocery store with a restaurant and coffee shop to move into the vacant 5,000 area foot retail space. You heard and approved this commercial use authorization on september 5 of this year. The project sponsor submitted a consultant prepared loading demand analysis which confirmed the departments calculations of loading demand. The project sponsor and the appellant both submitted consultant prepared air quality study. The appellant conducted his own study and Environmental Impacts. During the hearing, Public Comment in support of the project was focused on the benefits the Grocery Store would have in this location. Public comment in support of the appeal were focused on the Business Practices of whole food market and in particular amazon. Others sites the potential of traffic and air quality impacts. One of the things that came up was the department rescinded its class 32 exemption and issued a commonsense exemption. During the hearing, supervisor peskin opined that rescinding the class 32 should have invalidated the c. U. In issuing a commonsense exemption, the Department Found that there was no possibility that a significant Environmental Impact could occur. Several supervisors were unconvinced of this, citing the volume of trips to the site and the conflicting items in the air quality report. The department awaits the final motion to determine whether this actually results in implications to our ceqa review that are beyond this project, and that concludes my report for today. Thank you. Director hillis okay, jonas, i just wanted to clarify because i did not want to [inaudible] of citywide planning. [inaudible]. Clerk thank you. I think everybody understood what you meant. Commissioners, the board of appeals did meet, and theres actually a tardy report from the assistant Zoning Administrator. He wanted to convey that on november 4, 2020, the board of appeals met and heard an appeal of a rear yard variance for 1222 tungsten avenue. The variance is required because the project does not maintain 25 between the dwelling and an existing noncomplying structure at the rear of the lot. The Planning Commission heard an associated d. R. For this project on july 23 and voted to not take d. R. The board of appeals upheld the Zoning Administrators approval of the variance but required an additional condition that no further decks be added to the new building. On november 18, 2020, the board heard a jurisdictional request for 2622 greenwich street. This permit revised a previous permit that was heard as a d. R. On march 25, 2018. This permit legalized additional excavation that was performed by the permit holder without benefit of a permit. The excavation undermined the foundations of the adjacent properties and resulted in the issuances of notices of violation. The board found that the city did not cause the requester to miss the appeal period and denied the jurisdiction request. The department of building inspection did note that the enforcement case remains open, and they are working with the parties to achieve a resolution. The Historic Preservation commission met yesterday, and they did adopt a recommendation for approval for landmark designation of the japanese ywca east bay womens building at 1834 sutter street for landma landmark designation, and they heard from staff regarding the Citywide Services survey and were excited that this is gaining momentum, and staff will be actually conducting surveys throughout the city. If there are no questions, commissioners, we can move onto general Public Comment. At this time, members of the public may address the commission on items of interest to the public that are within the subject matter jurisdiction of the commission except agenda items. With respect to agenda items, your opportunity to address the commission will be afforded when the item is reached in the meeting. Each member of the public may address the commission for up to three minutes. When the number of speakers exceed the 15minute limit, general Public Comment may be moved to the end of the agenda. Members of the public, this is your opportunity to speak to matters that are not on todays jaent by pressing star and three and agenda by pressing star and three to enter the queue. Okay, last call, members of the public to press star and three to submit general Public Comment on matters not on todays agenda. Seeing none, commissioners, general Public Comment is closed, and we can move onto your regular calendar for item 12, case 2020014033 oth, proposition h, save our Small Businesses initiative, an informational presentation. Is staff prepared to make their presentation . We are. Clerk okay. I will pass bridget the ball. Great, slides look good. Okay. So good afternoon, commissioners. Bridget will be going over the details of proposition h, but i wanted to provide you some background on how the proposition came to be and the thinking behind the changes its make. So as soon as shelter in place order was issued back in march, and we fully identified the issues that were happening, almost immediately, we were approached by the Mayors Office and oewd to come up with a list of amendments to the code or procedures that would help Small Businesses and maintain vitality of our neighborhood commercial districts. Keep in mind at the time none of us knew what the future would bring and how the crisis would unfold. Theres also a lot we still dont know. What was clear was that many Small Businesses were not going to survive the shutdown. Before the pandemic, they were already facing various challenges. Often, these individuals are immigrants or individuals with not a lot of financial or technical resources. Proposition h removes many but not all of those barriers. It relaxes controls or destination type businesses or what we refer to internally as amazon proof businesses. It gives flexibility to existing businesses to adapt to current market or to switch to temporary uses until the pandemic is over. It gives deference to impacts missions in mission and south of market in the challenges. As the voters have recognized, this is an important step in our recovery. Its also not the only effort. We have our very successful shared i say Spaces Program, which youll hear a lot about, and of course the incredible effort that our department of public works has done to keep ourselves healthy and safe during this pandemic, and with that, ill turn it over to bridget. Good afternoon, commissioners. Bridget hicks, Planning Department staff. Im here today to share a informational presentation on how this ordinance will affect our work here at the Planning Department. The Initiative Ordinance calls on the city to coordinate and streamline permit processing amongst all permittingtion as. As you heard mentioned earlier, it has permitting agencies. As you heard mentioned earlier, it has affected all of us. Were currently working with the department of building inspection, the Mayors Office of economic and Workforce Development, the Small Business commission, department of Public Health, Small Business commission, and others to i implement these new regulations. Previously, meal service was permitted in public parklets, but they may also continue to be used by members of the public who are not a patron of the business. And within the first three years, this Initiative Ordinance can only be liberalized. One that period has ended, any changes may be made. So one of the big changes is that the Initiative Ordinance removes neighborhood notification requirements, so principlely permitted uses in neighborhood commercial districts, and for limited commercial uses, unlimited corner commercial uses. Previously, many of these principlely permitted uses required a 30day neighborhood notice. All principally permitted uses required a 30day neighborhood notice. All of the commercial districts have been updated, except for the ones listed. Otherwise, theyve all been updated to relax controls. Nonretail sales and service uses are now principally permitted on the second floor. General entertain being. Movie theaters, community facilities, restaurants, limited restaurants, an monthly hospitals, and retail professional services, such as realers, accountants, and Insurance Agents are liberalized throughout the district. Heres an example of one of the slides. This is the nc1 district, which is kind of our baseline neighborhood commercial district, and you can see almost all of the uses have been shifted, so if its previously n. P. , its been permitted or conditionally permitted, and all of the tables are available in the ordinance itself, and we will be updating those tables in our code. It also allowed for limited coworking to existing, so it would happen in addition to existing restaurant and limited restaurant uses. Bars and Entertainment Venues are now able to switch to another use and lose their original use as a bar venue. This gives them four years of use. Previously, if a bar or other use switched to another use, after three years, it would be considered abandoned, and theyd have to go through the permitting of being permitted as a bar and entertainment venue again, which is a lengthy process. This will provide a way for those Business Owners and space to provide that space with a use that is more covid friendly during this time and then go back to the original use. Another change is that popup retail can be placed in vacant storefronts. Some other changes, we used to have an interesting way of figuring out how a limited commercial use and a limited corner commercial use, what types of uses were allowed. These are uses that are, you know, say a corner store thats always existed in a residential district, and so now, theyre only subject to the restrictions of the n. C. 1 district, which is our neighborhood commercial district. Another change is the Outdoor Activity area. This is what we most commonly see as a patio dining area. Previously, most of these required a conditional use authorization in order to operate. Weve seen many businesses take advantage of this Outdoor Dining through these shared Spaces Program, so in response to that, this provision will remove that conditional use authorization requirement or Outdoor Activity areas located in neighborhood commercial zoning districts. [inaudible] previously, we just had to make a majority of their sales come from food or nonalcoholic beverage sales so upon certification of the election, which we expect to happen in late december, we will begin to process these applications in accordance in accordance with the Initiative Ordinance. We expect a lot more permits to qualify for over the counter review. We expect to see less conditional authorization reviews to come before you for Small Businesses, and in addition, we expect storefronts to change ntheir operations or uses in response to the covid19 pandemic and use this as a way to make ends meet. Were currently working with city agencies to review the 30day process and meet the mayors directive. Commissioners, im on special detail, according our shared spaces city program. We last came before you about a couple months ago to give you an update on the status and felt that it would be an opportune moment. This is anything from Service Parking lots to, as bridget had mentioned, internal yards and rear courtyards. Next slide, please, bridget. So a variety of uses that are allowed through share spaces, predominantly and most visibly, of course, Outdoor Dining. Both commissioner moore and commissioner diamond brought up parklets, which i can bring up later in the presentation, as well. And potentially, as we move forward in the next few months with possible and legislative analysis for making the program permanent, it is possible that we are contemplating arts culture for institutional uses. This relates to the commissioners question earlier commissioner moores question earlier about educational uses out of doors and potentially in the public rightofway. Next slide, please. So just a quick update on stats. We have seen over 2400 applications in the short time since july 1, since this Emergency Program has been in existence. A majority of these do involve Outdoor Dining. Next slide, please. So there was some questions about winterization and how the city is supporting and helping our neighborhood merchants operate during the colder rainier winter months. Were continuing to update our design guidance. This has been the most recent version of it here that, you know, lays out a. D. A. And other provisions for having a safe and accessible site, but more importantly, provisions for protecting against weather and making these facilities more comfortable and habitable during the winter months. Not included in this presentation are some of the latest results that weve gotten from our shared spaces impact survey. This has been administered to all of those program applicants, over 2400, and of the respondents so far, march over 85 have indicated that if allowed, they would operate a shared space yearround, cold or fog or wind or no, so its, you know, underscored the need for the city to continually update its guidance to build these facilities in a manner thats compatible with city requirements and public safety. Mayor breed, based on the successes that weve seen in the few short months of shared spaces operating and the positive feedback that weve gotten through our impact survey, announced that we will be making the shared Spaces Program permanent. So related to that earlier this month, the mayor also announced the shared spaces equity grants program. This is especially pertinent questions how around questions how the availability will perform and merchants purchasing fixtures and other items to make those spaces more habitable. Sorry bridget, just a couple more bullets on the last slide. We will be spending the next couple months, the Mayors Office will be leading a process to launch a new version of the program 2021. So we hope to maintain a lot of the innovation and the streamlining that we have seen in the program so far. We cut a lot of red tape. This is very much, you know, sort of on brand, on theme with what the provisions of proposition h were promu promulgating. Next slide next and final slide, please, bridget. As well as the larger projects that weve seen in chinatown, bayview, the mission, excelsior, and so on. I think thats all for me. Thank you, bridget. Clerk that concludes staffs presentation, and there are no immediate questions to staff. We should go to Public Comment. Members of the public, this is your opportunity to press star and three in order to get into the queue. I do have several callers online, and through the chair, you will each have two minutes for Public Comment. Go ahead, caller. Caller, are you prepared to submit your public testimony . All right. Well try you back later. Yes, hi. This is kristin evans, and i serve as the president of the haightashbury merchants association. Precovid, our neighborhood had a Record Number of vacancies, 20 of 150 storefronts, and at the current rate, we are seeing many more businesses shutter, consolidate locations, and move online, and we appear to be on track to double the number of vacancies on haight street once we reach the anniversary of shelter in place. Im skeptical that h will do much to fill those spaces, as its primarily carrots and does not do much to prioritize spaces that could be filled currently. We have another vacancy problem that h does not address at all, and thats absentee landlords. A full third of the spaces are not even listed available for rent, including three next to our book store, a formerly shoe repair shop and a Kids Clothing store space included. Both of those spaces have remain remained vacant for more than four years and are not available for rent. What is the commission doing to implement a vacancy tax, and what will staff do to define a neighborhood serving businesses and things that they will do to attract tourist oriented retail as well as Small Businesses . Thank you. Yes, hello. This is david penn, and i had a question or a comment around how the 30day expedited processing for now principally permitted used in n. C. D. S will occur when there is an entitlement required, for example, for use by that is now associated with a business that has become principally permitted under prop h . Good afternoon, commissioners. This is peter papadapoulos with Mission Economic agency, and i want to say with regards to prop h, we really appreciate the very constructive conversation weve had with regard to this measure with the authors of the bill, the Planning Department, and also the supervisors office. I do want to clarify that this measure applies broadly to the mission. It is excluded from one portion, which has to do with n. C. Tables. Im here today because im really asking for this commissions commitment to help roll out the measure in a way that will help ensure that were assisting our Small Businesses and helping them take advantage of some of the portions of the measure, like speeding up permitting while at the same time were strengthening our cultural corridors, like Mission Street, which we all know is very fragile right now. Trition stre trition Mission Street, as you know, is on its way to joining calle 24 and its cultural district. We want to make sure were remaining diligent and continuing to Work Together. I think we all agree, for example, that Mission Street is not a good target to turn into a second valencia street. Weve been working long and hard together, and id ask that we continue that Work Together and make sure that this rolls out in a healthy and equitable pay and paves the way for the new cultural district. So thank you for your support and your willingness to Work Together on these issues. Yes, good afternoon, commissioners. My name is glen mousay. Im an organizer in the mission, calling to share my thoughts about prop h. Prop h was passed earlier this month, has positive aspects about helping maSmall Business compete. This onesizefitsall solution fails to properly take into account the uniqueness and diversity of the cultural universe here in San Francisco. We need to take the parts of this measure that are best applied to neighborhoods like the mission, you know, just like what peter mentioned, city officials are committed to collaborate with the Mission Community [inaudible] and creation of the special use district that will help stabilize the Community Based businesses in our cultural corridor. Lets continue to work with each other in creating ideas that will help the economic ecosystems of our neighborhoods not only stabilize but thrive in the next coming years. Thank you so much. Good afternoon, commissioners. My name is carlos bocanegra, and i am an attorney and a resident of the mission, and im calling to submit my comments on proposition h. Immigran this one size fits all solution i believe undermines the efforts of vulnerable communities and fails to take into account the diversity of the cultural and economic systems that exist here in San Franciscome franciscome franciscoment San Francisco. Many businesses will not have the technical and business knowledge and resources to equitably participate and take advantage of this measure as other groups will. Let us not live in ignorance, and let us admit that this measure which has many positive aspects to it will have unintentional, harmful, unequitable and ultimately racist impacts on vulnerable communities. In the spirit of the resolution that was signed at the commission a few months back, let us work with each other to helping the economic systems of our neighborhoods to not only stabilize them been allow them to thrive in the coming years. Thank you very much. Hello. Good afternoon, commissioners. My name is luis avalos. I am a current copresident of the young democrats. We decided to not endorse proposition h for the ballot this time around because we believe while the intention might seem to be helping businesses in terms of a pandemic era, there are a lot of unintended consequences, and some of these consequences in particular that we felt needed to be addressed is first and foremost, if the [inaudible] if these very counter productive, and we think that Community Members should be able to given put based on the needs of the neighborhood and as the residents, and another unintended consequence is while it might allow businesses to profit, others might create loopholes, and Business Space will be able to use the legislation to enact certain policies that will take over spaces, so we believe this will be harmful for the economic climate of the mission, and if there is to be a legislation for this to be resolved, where is it and when it can be expected . Thank you. Good afternoon, commissioners. My name is araceli, and i am a member of the latinx young democrats. What does prop h mean for the Community Services businesses when they cannot be converted to more highly profitable businesses, for example, laundromats or Community Stores . We are seeing laundromats close down across San Francisco. We have all the data to support that these businesses primarily serve lower income communities in San Francisco who do not have inhome washers or dryers. What tools do we have to incentivize this use . What is planning staff doing now to create the tools needed to implement the storefront vacancy tax seamlessly . Thank you. Hi. Thanks for giving me a chance to speak, commissioners. My name is ben terrell. Im the secretary of the red stone tenants association, the secretary of the association of the tenants of the red stone building, which as been at 16 has been at 16 street near cap for over 100 years. I am representing my fellow tenants in opposition to prop h as it stands now because were concerned about, whether internally or not, the language of it preferencing people who are in tech or who have more sophistication with with going through the technical and business aspects of the the the materials they would have to match, which myself and my colleagues would not be expert at, either. So the point is that were worried about longterm latinx businesses and momandpop stores being especially vulnerable, and we do not see prop h as being helpful in that regard, so thats it. Thank you. Hi. My name is sharky laguana. Im the president of the San Francisco Small Business commission. It was an honor and a privilege to work on behalf of the prop h campaign. I have been listening to the Public Comments, and i wanted to acknowledge and express my shared concerns about the possible negative impacts, however, i do want to say that i have heard from countless businesses that have not been able to navigate the thicket of regulations, and that most of our business loss has been in the food and beverage and leisure and travel industry, and its resulted in over 130,000 jobs lost, which is predominantly which has predominantly affected vulnerable populations, and prop h is something that helps sustain and support our restaurants and other businesses and helps get new businesses up and going at a time when weve lost more businesses than ever before. So i think, on balance, that prop h is extraordinarily helpful. Its my understanding that there are carveouts for culturally sensitive districts, and i think it will ultimately be a positive and helpful force for the city. But the commission as a whole im speaking here as i look forward to working with all of you, and happy to help you any way i can. Thank you. Good afternoon, commissioners. My name is robert sutton, and i live in district five. Im really happy to see prop h pass. At least in my neighborhood, im seeing a lot of businesses close. Most recently, love and hate, a ve vegetarian sandwich store, closed after 21 years. I dont think theres a need of expanded knowledge of the planning code. On balance, it reduces the need to understand the planning code by exempting businesses from having to hire a lawyer, having to hire some permit expediters. Permit expediters cost tens of thousands of dollars, and to understand the conditional use authorization process, to understand the discretionary review [inaudible] thats all a tremendous financial burden on not just financial, but also a knowledge burden on anyone who needs to go through that. You know, i really look forward to seeing how the Planning Commission and board of supervisors responds to the concerns raised today, and i think theres definitely more work to be done, but prop h will be a step in the right direction. Thank you. Clerk okay. Members of the public, last call for Public Comment on this matter. Youll need to press star, three to get into the queue, and we do have an additional caller. Hi, good afternoon. My name is carol ruiz, and i am a cofounder and current coshare of [inaudible] i would like to raise some key questions in regard to prop h. So first and foremost, its a [inaudible] to even get an appointment for a Building Permit at d. B. I. , and what is the city doing to follow through on this promise, which was a huge selling point for prop h, even though it didnt have any teeth to it. Also, why are parklets being allowed as expansions of businesses rather than Public Open Space . [inaudible] what will be the nexus for success . It creates havevacancies or [inaudible] ultimately, the city needs a complete Community Strategy for measuring the success of neighborhoods [inaudible] or these neighborhoods. Thank you. Clerk okay. Members of the public, last call. Seeing none, commissioners, Public Comment is closed, and the matter is now before you. This is not an action item. President koppel commissioner fung . Commissioner fung i had a couple of questions for staff. The first is related to the process. Traditionally, these type of applications and permits are handled sequentially. The attempt to do it concurrently has not worked. The overthecounter, is that being proposed to be with people or is it still handled on an online basis, giv . Given the situation with the pandemic, what is the department proposing to do for that . So for overthecounter permits, were currently doing it in the way that applicants make an appointment and they drop off the permit, and then, it is reviewed by all available agencies there, so the applicant doesnt stay with the permit. Its not the usual process where the applicant can carry around the permit to all the different agencies. We do it internally, but it is a quick turnaround with the overthecounter permits. We are also [inaudible] some permits via the electronic plan review. That has mostly been to prioritize the larger scale housing and affordable projects, but we expect most of these to happen through the overthecounter permits. Commissioner fung when they turn in, is there also an avenue where they did get the approval right there and then, in certain instances . Yeah, not currently, just because of covid precautions. What weve been doing is having them drop off the permit, and then, we review it, but that process continues to be set up with internal review. Commissioner fung last comment is to the intent of the legislation, and i had raised this question but was not able to get a response. Are you aware or was staff aware, was there any discussion to liberalize residential and groundfloor storefronts . So some of the liberalization has happened on the limited commercial uses and the limited corner commercial uses, which are located in the residential district, by i think aaron can best address the intent . Yeah, sure. So this was intentionally supposed to be a very narrow focus on Small Businesses in our neighborhood commercial districts, and primarily, that was because it was going towards the voters, so it had to have a clear message and a clear focus. We are still looking at ways to make it easier to prove housing in San Francisco, but that would have to come through another ordinance process. So, you know, housing it pretty much permit housing is pretty much permitted everywhere in San Francisco except p. D. R. Districts, and there arent many barriers to it other than cost and if youre going over density and seeking some special exemption. The one area where thats not necessarily true is allowing a. D. U. S to take over commercial spaces, and that area was talked about in formulating prop h, but it wasnt ultimately included in this proposition. Commissioner fung okay. Thank you. President koppel commissioner tanner . Commissioner tanner thank you, and thank you, satisfy, for the presentation staff, for the presentation to the public. Thank you, colleagues, for good questions. I want to kind of continue on commissioner fungs question on the process, and i believe someone else also asked, 30 days sounds great, sounds really fast, which is awesome, but is really difficult to implement. When do you think that will be operational, and what do you think are the remedies there . Overthecounter, someone brings it in, and they review it, which is great, but im curious how were going to meet the demand of the 30 days and what the process is for that . Sure. So as director hillis pointed out, a mayororal executive director was just issued right before this hearing, requiring us to meet that 30 days. We have been already working with other agencies, mostly, the department of building inexspeak, but were currently working with all the different agencies to see where are points where we can expedite this process. Were working on ways to separate out prop h permits that qualify for this to kind of expedite that process once they get submitted over the counter. Yeah, i think theres Different Things of play. Weve got department of Public Health referrals, weve got all of these different agencies, so were going to take the next month to hopefully figure this out. It becomes effective at the end of the month, and then, the 30day clock is the next month, so weve got a little bit of time to figure that out. But yeah, i dont know at this time of any ideas, of any plans to have the applicants stick with that permit. [inaudible] just because of covid precautions. I think keeping that physical barrier between staff and the public has been the utmost priority. But we are looking at many, many different ways to try and speed up this process, and were definitely open to suggestions. Commissioner tanner well, the only suggestion i have is to continue to explore the online permitting programs, and i know the departments doing that. I think that can be a time saver, although with any new system overall, theres the overhead with implementing that, so its certainly not a silv silver bullet, by any means, but i know youll figure it out, and its good to see the departments working together because its an interdepartmental project to implement this. Some people were talking about changes to the legislation, and i dont know who wants to address that, you know, how an initiative thats been passed by the voters such as this would be amended in the future, as it seems that thats a topic of interest to the public. Mr. Stark would probably be best to answer this. Sure. So the normally, with initiatives, there has to be changed by a vote of the voters again, but in this, it had a clause that froze the controls, and after that threeyear time, the board can come in and implement the provisions as they see fit. So they could prohibit the Retail Office space provision that the commission has concerns over and exclude it from those areas. But until then, you can only liberalize the controls, you cant actually make them more restrictive. Commissioner tanner great. Thank you for retating that. And thinking restating that. And thinking about the other plans, i know the plan is to get the 30daewoo sey window s what would you want to track . What data can we obtain at the permit issuance time point, which is our greatest opportunity to obtain data, could we get from applicants in order to understand some of the impacts of this program . Yeah. So i think so we are working with our data team right now to sort of identify those things that we want to track. Obviously, we want to see if liberalizing these controls, just has more of these businesses open, seeing what effect removing 311 has. Does that create more of a demand that more people come in, or c. E. U. S, sort of what th impact that has so at the end of three years, we know what has worked and what hasnt. Commissioner tanner great. And i think my last question, covid and the way its been guiding us to prevent spread in outdoor activities, when it comes to noise that are emanating from these areas, i assume that those same laws would be applied to those areas. Yeah, that is correct. The enforcement procedures are the same as they are now. Any member of the public can file an anonymous complaint with either planning, department of building inspection, or a whole host of other agencies, and i think were going to continue to rely on the interdepartmental connections weve established during the shared Spaces Program in different sorts of avenues. Commissioner tanner great. Thank you very much. Colleagues, if i may, i just want to address one of the questions that commissioner tanner brought up about collecting data at the permit point and thats one of our best chances to get information, particularly about the demographic, background, or the identity of the business proprietor. [please stand by] how this is working in preparing to make adjustments. And as you alluded to, that discussion was happening as this was being developed and its been ongoing, even when it was on the ballot, especially in the missions, along 24th street. And we will continue to do that. President koppel commissioner diamond. Commissioner diamond thank you. So to me this is really a lemon story with respect to one of the single aspect of covid that has resulted in something positive for the city and im excited to see that were exploring making it permanent and that the staff is working on how to deal with the winterizing questions that are all important in order to keep these spaces open during the wetter, colder months. But i did have a couple of implementation questions about that. The first is that although the map that showed the locations where people have applied to do, you know, to use the streets, it was flashed very quickly on the screen. It did look to me, even with that brief look, that there were not as many retail spaces taking advantage of it in the southeastern and the more southerly regions of the city. And so im wondering what the department is doing to get the word out that there is this process available and there is equity assistance available. Rather than waiting for them to come to the department, im wondering what the department is doing proactively to get the word out about this new program. Yes, thank you, commissioner diamond, for that question. And something that we didnt talk today talk about today is the shared spaces equity strategy. So the equity strategy has been a key part of the Program Design and engineering as well as implementation. So it has a few different layers and a few different prongs, not the least of which is targeted resources. For example, city staff here and at the office of Workforce Development have been detailed to our equity neighborhoods. Those are neighborhoods that we have, you know, historically are comprised of demographics that were more vulnerable, even before the covid pandemic. So we really do see this program as an opportunity to squarely and explicitly address the structural inequities that persist through the pandemic and are exacerbated by the pandemic. So it looks like targeted assistance, deeper Technical Assistance and design, support, and as i have alluded to earlier, an actual grants program. So we are shortly next week the grants portal will be open for folks to apply for, you know, reimbursement to purchase the materials that we have referenced before. And it is true that when we look at the, you know, the spatial pattern of where the shared spaces are, theyre denser in other places. And thats reflective of the inequities and the preexisting and historic inequities where neighborhoods in the city were more deeply invested in, and places where it was from an economic point of view. Or less connected to transit, etc. So we really are targeting those places with the support. Its great to hear that. It seems like an opportunity, not just to get a level Playing Field but to actually actively moving the needle so were using shared spaces. Its a methodology that we didnt previously have available to us. And to increase the retail activity in some of those neighborhoods that might historically not had as much. So the second question is that in some respect its s who e geographic lottery. Some restaurants are on corners and quiet streets that make it easier to move out on to the sidewalk and the street. And others are on major boulevards. What efforts is the department engaging in to try to reach out to those restaurants that when they rented the spaces, they didnt think about parlets and e streetside dining and to see how we can work with them to make this opportunity work better when their gee ro geography maye as amenable as streetside dining . Absolutely, i think that you rightly point out that not all physical environments are going to be make this solution feasible, right. It is something that a merchant or a restaurateur could immediately access. They might have a very narrow sidewalk and be on a very steep street. And so its perhaps a larger and bigger issue. Shared spaces has a strategy. So thats why measures like proposition h o is so important because we need to respond with a range of sort of the opportunities and tools and loosening of the regulations and controls to try and to make the overall environment whether, you know, if not physical at least the operating and the regulatory environment, you know, more open. So, you know, i think that in some places whats been successful, you know, where a fulltime sidewalk or curbside Dining Facility hasnt been possible, we have seen certain neighborhoods opt to close the entire street. Like, have a roadway closure and more of a Farmers Market feel. Those are more intermittent and not persistent, you know, 24 7 kind of environments. But there are different ways that the provisions of shared spaces have been adapted to at least give everyone some opportunity to operate out of doors, even if its not every evening of the week. Right, thank you very much, and its helpful to see how they are working sidebyside with each other. And the last question is really just a shortterm implementation question during covid. Which is the need to ensure that its not the tables that are six feet apart, but when people are actually seated at the tables theyre remaining six feet apart. Especially with heat lamp there is and dealing with dividers. What department is responsible for, you know, are you relying on the customers to call in, i hope not, to monitor that if thats an issue . Or which department is really looking seriously at that issue . Yes, thank you, thats also another really great question. It actually is a very deep interdepartmental partnership that we have around ensuring compliance. Not only with the Public Health directives, but, you know, other requirements a. D. A. Accessibility, and the emergency access. So there are a few different arms to this not to get into too much detail but the Community Engagement Response Team or the cert was a special compliance and Ambassador Program that was spun up during the covid pandemic. So very much like the shared Spaces Program with a new function that the city created, and its explicit purpose was to enforce around particular Public Health compliance with the Public Health, you know, distancing and face coverings, and so the cert is our frontline kind of educational and Ambassador Group that has the first touch with it might be a merchant operating a curbside Dining Facility or like a roadway closure. Perhaps at night and they have gotten too rowdy or festive. The cert will be the first to sort of go out and to interact with the project sponsor and the operator and just make sure that were pulling everything back into balance. From there, if issues do persist, we do have a path of escalation that either goes through the department of public works and in some cases its a noise or a sound or entertainment revelry kind of issue, it goes through the entertainment commissions enforcement kind of escalation path of escalation. And so, yeah, theres a system in place to kind of ensure that everyone is on their best behavior, and it is a big cooperative effort between many different jurisdictions to have compliance and enforcement. Commissioner diamond great. Thank you very much. President koppel commissioner imperial. Commissioner imperial thank you. Those are really Great Questions, commissioners. I still have questions for you. I hope that you dont mind. But i do have a question in terms of the shared spaces Equity Program. Because we also want to make sure that, of course, that its the vulnerable population, our vulnerable businesses that are benefitting the most as well. So do you have an idea of how much it is rent, and how much if you build out a parklet, how much does it cost . I have a different understanding, but maybe you can let me know so that really, you know, the Small Businesses are going to want to take advantage of it. Yes, thank you. So in total the portfolio at the moment is somewhere between 1. 6 million and 2. 1 million for the current fiscal year. This is funded by a variety of sources, not the least of which is the s. F. Shines program, which is a program that existed before the covid pandemic. And shared spaces. But it has pivoted to support to obviously the Small Businesses in this crisis. So traditionally that Program Helps with things like facade improvements and, you know, interior layouts and work like that. Another half a Million Dollars is coming from a variety of supervisors, ads, and from the office of economic and Workforce Development to fund a variety of things. There are two main types of assistance that were providing with that. About 2. 1 million. One are materials and sort of capital grants. And the other is Technical Assistance. So folks could leverage this, for example, to buy movable tables and chairs or other furnishings, like enclosures for their curbside dining facilities. For Technical Assistance, were offering, you know, some design and architectural services, Procurement Services and Technical Expertise to develop management operations and safety plans which are often required for these larger shared spaces like the roadway closures and our group operated in parking lots. The costs kind of per unit kind of range, but to give a ballpark, you know, a traditional precovid parklet for one parking spot, you know, averaged about 20,000. And they were quite expensive for private investments in the public realm. Because our funding is relatively limited, i mean, we are trying to have to emphasize with the materials and the grants or the grants and reimbursements are movable fixtures, materials acquired in this season but continue to be at the merchants disposal for many future operating seasons. It gets a lot more complicated when you are trying to build engineer a very expensive parklet that has to weather many different seasons. So the grants are capped at about 5k per merchant. When we think about, you know, trying to spread it out as much as possible. Commissioner imperial it doesnt sound that much in terms of the grant, especially it sounds like still out of the pocket that will come from the main businesses. Which is, you know, about 12,000 or 15,000. So, again, i mean, of course, here in planning were only our jurisdiction indiscernible but for us to have things incentivized and to have equitable and we want to make sure that, you know, the cultural districts are actually taking advantage of the Equity Programs. And also im aware that especially, you know, whether in the local district or for the heritage district, actually many of the those communities, especially our committee, we are struggling when they dont have the capacity or the Technical Knowledge even setting up the business. So that is something, you know, that i just want to make that as a comment. And hopefully to take that into consideration how this Equity Program is really accessible. And my other comment as well is as the shared spaces, it will be permanent by next year, and how it will coincide with prop 8 . Can you give me an idea on the kind of discussions that youre going to have in terms of legislative development on this . Yeah. Theres not too much detail at the moment. But the Mayors Office will be leading Stakeholder Engagement as i had mentioned earlier. Definitely with this commission and our department, the city Planning Department, as well as outreach with the Industry Groups and, you know, our coalition of merchants associations and the like. So that will be you know, i think that it will transpire through the First Quarter of the calendar year, its safe to say. And we might even start earlier with that. You know, there are the new, you know, huge experiment with how we leverage our public realm for the Economic Development and social and psychological wellbeing has pushed the envelope and allowed us to demonstrate at real scale a lot of the ideas that we had but never been able to realize with this magnitude. So theres a lot of conversation to be had, certainly, to make sure that as we codify this that it really reflects our values and is looking the way that we need it to work commissioner imperial i have another question, a question about the prop h. I know that the planning the Planning Department is committing in working with the cultural district to prioritize this, however, im aware i have read the prop h legislation and it doesnt specifically prioritize the cultural district. So in terms of our commitment in the Planning Department and in the Planning Commission, the cultural district, especially in the Technical Assistance, you know, thats something that i think that we should commit to. And i just want to put that in the record for us in the Planning Department that is something that we should prioritize. Another thing is the there was one caller that talked about the vacant spaces precovid19. And then at the same time how do we track the different uses or the disirnt kind different kindf businesses in regards to prop h. Doe we have some sort of a metrics system or are we thinking about looking into the corridors and how do we balance the different kinds of businesses and, you know, something i dont know if you guys are thinking about it, but we should think in balancing the different uses of the businesses in a corridor. I dont know if miss hicks would answer yeah, sure. So to kind of get back to this, all of these ideas then will be overthecounter. So well have an expedited review, regardless who the applicant is. I think that were going to look into as many ways as we can to track. Because were curious to see, this is quite a substantial change for planning to now do these overthecounter without the neighborhood notice. So were going to find a way to track this internally to kind of see what we see happening most often. And if there are certain neighborhood districts that have limitations on the amount of uses, and still with the conditional use, that would still apply. So i think theres kind of like, theres an additional layer of what the neighborhood has already put in place. We would have to move forward and work with them. Commissioner imperial okay. In terms of the vacant commercial spaces that i remember that theres something that we had talked about with in particular theres a lot of vacant commercial spaces in there. How i mean and now theres going to be more vacant commercial spaces. Whats the success rate in term its because there was a vacancy pact that was passed back then. Do you have any idea so the spaces tax has not taken effect because covid kind of hit into it. So the board of supervisors paused that tax because they felt that it would be another burden to people at this stage. Because the Small Businesses are struggling and the landlords are also struggling. So the board of supervisors have paused that and it has not resumed. But a big portion of prop h is allowing these businesses to do something temporarily. So were filling in with the spaces and fill in with the popup gallery for a month or two months and they can make supplemental income, and if they cant find a longterm tenant they can fill the space on the short term. And ways to supplement the space and do more. And so, yeah, thats what were hoping to see is this kind of just decreases the barriers to adding that flexibility to the businesses, yeah. Well, thank you, miss hicks. Again, my comments, you know, were anticipating vacancy and this prop h is, you know, especially for the cultural district, you know, how to impprove or, you know, how to improve and to also provide more Technical Assistance for the cultural district, but at the same time, you know, the prop h is a streamlining mechanisms for Small Businesses while cultural districts are still struggling and we dont have enough, you know, Small Businesses in cultural districts. And its that leveraging, you know, that these are these things that are going to happen but we want to make sure that the cultural districts are still protected. So, you know, i want to make that comment that cultural districts in terms of prioritizing them and how to prioritize and uplift them. Thank you. President koppel commissioner moore. Vicepresident moore Great Questions both from the public and from our commissioners. And following up with miss hicks right away on what commissioner imperial just asked you, do you have any kind of way of tracking that we will not be getting just the same kind of applications. I. E. , are there maximum thresholds that can be taken, including seeing the same people apply for the same thing in multiple forums. And the checks and balances the type of use as well as the user . Yeah, so i think that a lot of that has shifted. Its neighborhood specific. So in neighborhoods that felt like they could handle, you know, many different types of uses. They are sometimes having a change to a conditional use or wasnt changed at all. So we needed that balance. But, yeah, i think that the idea is that theres flexibility to have those options, and one of the controllers in place so we wont change the way that it will be, with Small Businesses taking advantage of this program. Vicepresident moore thank you for saying that. As you were making these changes or adjustments, was the Small Business commission at all consulted . I did not hear anyone mention . Sure, yes, they have been consulted and i am actually doing a similar presentation to them next monday. But our idea is that well work with all of the different city agencies so that each agency is empowered to share the new resources and flexibility under prop h and that its not just planning that holds the knowledge. I think that is kind of the intention in prop h in that getting all of the different agencies to Work Together. So i think that the idea is that an applicant knew they had to go to Public Health to open up a restaurant, they would have a greater understanding of their increased flexibility during this time. Vicepresident moore let me throw you another question while i have you. But when you talk about Outdoor Activity areas, primarily focused on shared space, public rightofway activity, you did not comment on anybody who would want to expand their Outdoor Activity area into the rear yard, which the Planning Commission has also dealt with because theres interference in residential neighborhoods in areas that residents are nearby. This is only addressing the shared space component, is that correct . So the Outdoor Activity areas becoming permi permitted of as f right now is any retail use. Planning and implementation of the shared spaces has most often been seen as an Outdoor Activity area because thats its essentially our existing version of having a use outside. So we have authorized a substantial amount of restaurants to operate in their backyards or front yards, you know, specific catch, and those are on a private lot it would be a planning jurisdiction, and i think that the idea of prop h is that right now a lot of the businesses wont have to do a temporary shared spaces permit, or that the shared spaces are permanent, but now theyll go in for an Outdoor Activity area. And i do understand that we often see a lot of Outdoor Activity in front of the commission and questions and neighborhood comments. So thats why, you know, the legislation started with all of those controls about the timing and the noise and things like that, but well continue to keep our options, you know, all of the existing options open for enforcement. To work with the neighbors still being out to have a block notice to see when the permits are coming through. I think that were definitely, you know, we understand that this is very different for a lot of neighbors than what we normally have seen as a process. Vicepresident moore i hope that the Public Health component is an issue in that discussion, because aside from noise, which at this time more people are at home and having to be at home, people are also using their own open space and not necessarily having it right next to gatherings of a larger number of people. Its kind of like contradicting what the Public Health component is in your own garden. So i hope that you will consider that when you are moving forward. Another question from me, do you include a indiscernible hesitant to put on ground floors, as well as for Financial Institutions and the offices that are not necessarily contributing towards the neighborhood corridors and you are now saying they could occur on the ground floor. That is not necessarily a benefit to what we want in our regional corridors but i wanted you to comment if theres another idea that you have. Sure. I think that the legislation tried to focus on allowing more nonprofit uses and smallscale businesses, like Real Estate Agent, which yeah, in traditional a traditional planning approach has not been seen as a very active use there. But outright offices and nonretail professional services will also be on the second floor. And a lot of these changes are specific for each neighborhood commercial district and not across the board. But, yes, they have gotten more permissive than they previously were. Vicepresident moore we want to have indiscernible at the edge of chinatown. I would like to ask the staff, erin, who has been around longer than you are, not older but longer in the department i want to be clear here the neighborhood commercial district and the legislation which regulates that were established to protect the communityserving businesses. We are always seeing that this could potentially interfere or overturn or challenge that particular type of legislative protection what do you see on how to balance that with prop h . Well, with prop h we were very sort of conscious of that like, the neighbor commercial districts needing to serve, in the immediate neighborhood or more regional or city wide serving. But so just to go back to the office question the offices just beyond offices are not allowed in commercial districts and they were not allowed before and not allowed now. This is where the code gets very fine grained and somewhat confusing, are professional services. Someone that provides a service to the community. So, like, a Real Estate Agent or a stockbroker or a lawyer, Something Like that. So you can see the differentiation is pretty minute at this point. Those are allowed in neighbor commercial districts. But if theyre not open to the public, so they dont allow people to walk in and they have to be on the second floor. So theyre not occupying the ground floor spaces and that. But what we really have tried to do in the ordinance is to get those uses that are sort of destination uses. Those use uses that bring peoplt like restaurants and limited restaurants and entertainment uses, things that bring foot traffic to neighborhoods. So we have really looked at the uses not competing sort of with Online Stores right now, that can help to keep our neighborhood commercial district vibrant. That was the main thrust of what was put in the ordinance or the Initiative Ordinance when passed. So there was a conscious effort to do that. Vicepresident moore that addresses my question partially. Again, you are still trying to avoid oversaturation, particularly in those corridors where theres a specific provision about what constitutes saturation. Right. So, like, north beachs restaurant controls were not touched at all because they had such a complicated but also a nuanced way of regulating restaurants and the restaurants and bars. And also a lot of the concern over overconcentration with barl havent been touched through this ordinance. So those sort of alcohol concerns arent individual neighborhoods arent overridden by proposition h either. Vicepresident moore did you see the finding with the checks and balances with tracking numbers as youre trying to see it implemented, indiscernible well, i dont think that its going to thrust forward the floofloodgates much of anything. In the next three years when this is in effect and cant be changed, i think that as a city well be struggling with our economy. Well be struggling to make sure that Small Businesses stay open. And if someone wants to open up a Small Business in San Francisco, this makes it a lot easier for them to do that. So in other times when the economy is going great and were concerned about a lot of displacement, i would have agreed with you that, you know, Something Like this was more of a concern. But, i mean, we dont know whats going to happen in the next three years. But based on what were seeing in the news right now and how covid is spiking and we cant go home for thanksgiving and the sorry not the virus we wont be able to get, you know, any shots vaccinations delivered until may, and i think that its going to be hard to see this opening up any floodgates whatsoever while its in place for the next three years. Vicepresident moore i think that you can prop up, but i think that youre keeping a close eye on how it develops and well have to see. In the meantime we have to try something. Yeah, what this conversation is doing is really bringing home the point that we need to understand what this does and who this benefits in the next three years. And we are working with our information staff. We had a meeting yesterday. We are coordinating with the department of building inspection. We had a meeting earlier this week with them. To try to make sure that its implemented properly and that we can track the things that we need to track and to be able to say, well, it happened at the end of three years. Vicepresident moore thank you so much for your answering all of those questions. I appreciate it. Youre welcome. President koppel thank you, mr. Starr and thank you miss hicks and all of the staff. And honorable mayor breed has done a lot to ensure, not only the survival of these businesses, but the reassurances that our residents will have somewhat still a quality of life to deal with throughout this pandemic. Vicepresident moore thank you for saying that president koppel. Clerk that concludes, commissioners, questioning for this matter. We can move on to items 13 a and b. For cases 201814057g. P. R. , and 0f. A. For the Mission Bay South redevelopment plan amendments. And general plan conformity findings. And Office Development authorization. Staff, are you prepared to make a presentation . I am. Clerk okay, matt, let me make you the presenter so that you can share your screen. Good afternoon, commissioners, im matt snyder, department staff. Two actions with the 1450 owen street and they are findings in association with the amendments to the Mission Bay South redevelopment plan to enable the project and then an authorization to allow us for 4,999squarefeet allocated from the small office cap. 1450 owen street is located within the Mission Bay South redevelopment project area. More specifically it is located on its western side just east of the i280 freeway and west of Mission Bay Campus of ucsf. The project itself is a life science facility. It will be 109feet tall and seven stories. And the uses include 139,000squarefeet of Laboratory Use. Under 50,000squarefeet of office that include a 2,600squarefeet ground retail space with a ground plaza. And ground floor uses include bike parking and lockers and showers. And along with others such as loading, second story would cll include a Laboratory Use. Parking would not be included as part of this construction but would be available in a parking garage immediate south across from astreet. The project site as i had mentioned is within the Mission Bay South redevelopment project area. As such, the office of Community Investment and infrastructure, the Successor Agency to the San Francisco Redevelopment Agency and its commission, largely holds jurisdiction over land use and entitlement for this area. There are amendments regarding the redevelopment plan that are required to enable this project. The redevelopment plan amendments, including increasing the cap across the entire project area, but would be only available to this particular site by 170,000 square feet. I did send you yesterday, there was a typo but i want to read it into the record. The existing cap is 5 million square feet and 93,500. And we had it differently in our material. The other amendment required for redevelopment plan is to enable the project is increase the f. A. R. In the commercial industrial zone. And other amendments that are required are within the design for development, again, the design for Development Document essentially acts as the planning code for the redevelopment project area. This was approved by the commission on Community Investment and infrastructure this last tuesday. This is not before you but just to give you context of what amendments are being considered for this project. The design for the Development Amendments include increasing the height at the subject site from 39 feet, which is the same site as the adjacent freeway to 109 feet. And exclusive of mechanical. Including increasing the allowed bulk through several controls, including the increasing the percentage size of the Square Footage and increasing the floor place above the base height of 90 feet. So this only applies to the stop story of a proposed project. And theres other minor adjustments made, including the street level requirement which currently requires a certain street build to, and owen street theres an easement that cannot be built upon that allows the entry plaza, but at the same time that requirement needs to be met at the back indiscernible . And as i had just mentioned the Community Commission the commission on Community Investment and infrastructure this last tuesday approved and took several actions that approved the development. Included approvals of the redevelopment plan amendments, also changes to the ownership excuse me the ownership participation agreement, which sort of acts as a d. A. , requires the project sponsors to participate in creating the infrastructure for mission bay. And then amendments to the application. So, again, before you are simply making general plan findings for the Mission Bay South redevelopment plan amendments that are required before the board of supervisors, to take action. And approval of the Office Development authorization. And when we looked to formulate our recommendation to you, staff looks to plan code section 321b and those findings for the authorization and, of course, the general plan in general for the redevelopment plan amendments. We are recommending approval of this project for the reasons that we have stated in our staff report, and in the draft motions. And in general we believe that this is an appropriate location for the office and Laboratory Use and its located in a cluster of similar uses and buildings of the same size. This is across the street from Mission Bay Campus. As a project within Mission Bay South, the developer excuse me its developed in a context that is in anticipated r growth, and it levers new infrastructure in association with that new growth. And of course, mission bay is rich with amenities, both for transportation, all kinds of transportation opportunities for its workers and visitors. And a robust Robust Network of open space and public realm. Ultimately planned 41 acres for the project. The project sponsor will pay fees for transportation sustainability, job linkage housing and for child care and the Laboratory Use. And the Current Laboratory rates are lower but theyre paying the full office rate. And theyll also be contributing more to the district for the ongoing maintenance of the operation and maintenance of the open space beyond what is currently required. Other project sponsors also have reached out to the San Francisco Unified School District contributing to a new school that is planned near site and this is above and beyond what they pay in school fees. The staff supports the amendments to increase the allowed Square Footage with the d. A. R. And without this Mission Bay South would be left with what we believe is an empty lot and a prime location for this laboratory and office use. This concludes my presentation and im happy to answer any questions. The project sponsor is here on behalf of the project sponsor and is available to make a presentation. Thank you. Clerk do you have slides to share for the project sponsor . I do, yes. Clerk okay, so why dont we let him get those up and when he does ill let you know and you will have five minutes to make your presentation. Im going to start resharing again. Clerk its up, matt, just a little small. If you could expand it. There you go. All right, public sponsor, you have five minutes. Thank you, secretary. Commissioners, director, staff, mim the executive vice presidet with alexandria Real Estate Equities. I have been before you many times before, but never in this weird way where you cant see my face. So hopefully you can remember what i look like. I have been working on this mission bay project for quite some time. We at alexandria have been Building Laboratory buildings here and hoping to create a Life Science Community that is vibrant and active. And we are at a can say 100 of fully leased and have been for a number of years. So this is a very timely project for us to bring to you to be able to provide additional Laboratory Use for the life science industry. And this particularly relevant, given the condition that were all living through with this virus, because it is exactly these companies that will help us to get past this. So what i wanted to show here is that we have a pretty diverse project team and it includes Small Businesses in San Francisco. And its compliant with the redevelopment plan as set forth. Next. So the site is part of blocks 41 to 43 at mission bay and its one shown here in the blue and it does get the benefit of existing parking structures that were built as part of that larger land area that you can see here along the freeway. That is why were not needing any additional parking. Next. And the site as was pointed out is on owen street but is set back very significantly from owen street because of a no build easement that is there, so were taking advantage of that for a nice entry and open space but also that will have retail use fronting it, so well be able to do the kinds of outdoor facilities that you were just discussing. Next. And so in terms of the design of the building and, unfortunately, we couldnt have the architect present [broken audio] and the design architect, she they worked very hard to create a building that had some liveliness to it that presents itself on the future park space as a very vibrant and interesting structure and not just as a block thing. So the shifting of volumes that you can see happening here have created shadow patterns and create more interest than would otherwise be there. Next. This is a view coming down Nelson Rising way, and the u. C. F. Campus coming down and actually on the right of where this gentleman is walking is the future school, which is on block 14. That has been mentioned. And what this also indicates in this image is some of the uniqueness of the building, which is that were incorporating at some key corners, as you can see here, two and threestory volumes. Those will actually be able to have landscape within the building to, again, to create a more interesting shape of patterns. Next. And this is just a final view of that entry courtyard that sets the Building Back. But allows the possibility of having chairs and outdoor space for a retail, hop hopefully a ee will be able to be there and this image shows the two or threestory volumes that i have described earlier. That concludes my presentation in the interest of being brief. And im free to answer questions. Clerk great, thank you. There are no immediate questions from the commission to the sponsor, we should open up Public Comment. Members of the public, this is your opportunity to submit for public testimony by pressing star, 3, to enter the queue. Through the chair, each member of the public will be provided with two minutes. Good afternoon, commissioners. Im Allison Heath speaking on behalf of the boosters in support of owen street project. Alexandria did an extraordinary job of outreach to our neighborhood. Height has been an early concern for us and we were concerned about the buildings potential shadowing of the park. The project sponsor responded with a proposal for reduced height. Thanks to i will acknowledge the result was an airy design that addressed our concerns while simultaneously meeting the program attic objectives. Theyre so willing to consider our interests and rarer still to work with the development that is not in our immediate neighborhood. In june we asked the project team to present their plans to the full boosters membership, where it was well received. We put the matter to a vote and as a result, the boosters can offer our formal and enthusiastic endorsement. Thank you. Good afternoon, my name is Timothy Wright and im a field representative at carpenters local 22, and also a native San Francisco. Were happy to support this important life science project. The project will continue to grow the life science industry in San Francisco. And the life science industry is at the forefront of the lifesaving Research Work to address the illnesses, affecting humanity, such as the pandemic that were experiencing now. Because of this, the timing is critical that this project get passed. We also have a long history working with alexandria. The project means many jobs for our members and the industry provides highquality permanent jobs in addition to construction jobs and in addition to the jobs, this project is a clear benefit to the surrounding mission bay community. The project includes contributions to the Mission Bay Parks and other feature mission bay school. We look forward to your support for jobs and the Community Benefits to the Mission Bay Neighborhood. This is a great project. We need the jobs. Please, support this project. Thank you. Good afternoon, this is the regional director for government afires for biocom, the statewide association with the life sciences. San francisco as you know and especially in mission bay, is home to a robust Life Science Community. Boston, cambridge and the bay area are the nations life science sectors. Even during the pandemic the industry wants to locate and grow in San Francisco. Top talent wants to be here. Our essential employees continue their aroundtheclock work to address the pandemic. Lab work cannot be done remotely. We dont anticipate an exodus of Life Science Companies as we have seen in other sectors. The industry continues to prove its Economic Resilience and to help the city to maintain a diverse tax base. Alexandria Real Estate Equities is important in preserving and developing the life science industry in San Francisco. And our industry is running out of space to build new facilities. As evidenced by this being the final commercial developable parcel in Mission Bay South. As such, biocomsupports the efforts to expand on this parcel as a need to increase the industry capacity. Alexandria continues to see the demand for more life science space and this project reflects several years of Thoughtful Development with the Community Input and amenities to serve the surrounding area. Along with the extensive develop pent fees, alexandra has a contribution to child care and park maintenance. Theyre also providing a School Endowment to have a Pathways Program to have hands on land experience and internships and tours of local companies. And its viable to the long term stability and the Industry Growth and this project will create good jobs for san franciscans during a turbulent time. Thank you. Good afternoon, chair, and members of the San Francisco Planning Commission. My name is Dante Johnson and im a resident of San Francisco and a 14year member excuse me of carpenters local 22. Im here in support of the 1450 owen street project. Not only will it grow the life science industry in San Francisco, but it also is a clear benefit to the Mission Bay Neighborhood because it will project and create permanent jobs and living wages. As a carpenter, i look forward to the opportunity to work in the community where i live, so close to home, so i can spend more time with my family. As a resident of San Francisco, i encourage you to move quickly with this project, as quick as possible. Thank you for your time. Good afternoon, president koppel and fellow commissioners. Thank you for allowing me to speak today. My name is zaur and im a local resident. And im privileged as a member much carpenters local 22. And im speaking in favor of 1450 owen development. This life science project will provide me with an opportunity for the change that i will need to advance my career to become a gentleman carpenter. It will help me to continue my career as a carpenter, and working towards retirement, will provide me with the necessary benefits and the income to provide for myself and my family. I am in full support of the 1450 owen development. And i hope that the commission will support the development as well. Thank you for your time. Clerk members of the public, last call for Public Comment. And heres one. Caller good afternoon, commissioners. My name is mike chen and im a resident of San Francisco and i hope that you speedily approve this. Thank you so much. Caller hello, good afternoon. I am felipe nuno, a member of local 22 since 16 years ago. And i am in full support of the project at 1450 owens, the life science project. Its really important because we could be leading the way in future technologies and life sciences, especially with everything thats going on right now with the covid19. We could use these facilities like this to figure out some ways to prevent future disasters like the one that were experiencing now. And it would also be great for other businesses to work in a business like this and to keep their careers going. Thank you very much for your time. I appreciate it. Clerk okay, one more time. The last call, this is your opportunity to give public testimony by pressing star, 3. Commissioners, i see no members of the public wishing to speak, so the Public Comment is closed and the matter is now before you. President koppel commissioner moore. Vicepresident moore i wanted to express my full support for both the mission bay amenitimenamendment as well fors street. Both of them are great moves forward, particularly the owens Street Building is a creative way of dealing with a very difficult parcel. And, again, im in full support of both. President koppel commissioner khan . Commissioner chan and on a commission that a project sponsor has focused on Community Outreach and incorporated feed back from the community on the final design. And i appreciate that the project sponsor is thinking about building out a whole neighborhood and a community and making those intentions clear through the maintenance of the Mission Bay Park for the perpetuity of the project. And voluntary paying a higher child care fee and committing to a future school. Theres a lot to like about this project, with the flexibility with the amount of office space. And i am in full support of this project. President koppel commissioner . I am trying to think of a creative way to deal with an awkward site and i think that the use is correct. Theyre supportive of the project, and i did have a couple of followup questions. One is for the project sponsor. And it is a desire to know more about the status of the negotiations with the School District and in the absence of a signed deal with them, this isnt more subjected to more appropriate for the discussions than where we are in our conversation right now and the entitlements that we have been asked to grant the project. So if i could get the project sponsor to fill me in on that subject, that would be great. Well, thank you, commissioner diamond. Our discussions with the Unified School District are very positive. We essentially have met with them several times over the course of almost a year now. Where we have focused our support of their project around what we can best bring which is a support on the life science effort that theyre trying to bring in their pathway program, to incorporate into the school. So what theyve asked to us do is to work collaboratively with them to define what that program would be. To provide a financial contribution towards an endowment to support that pathway program. And going to become essentially a Clearing House for them to create an opportunity for students to have potentially internships and learning experiences in the life science industry. That discussion has been well underway as you know that theres a requirement for those School Boards to take action. So the staff hasnt wanted to get ahead of the school board. And they have been working with us and we will have an m. O. U. , some letter of understanding shortly, but then the staff will take to the School District before we get to the board of supervisors. Will. Commissioner imperial thank you very much. And a question for staff on the ceqa analysis on the project. If i understood the traffic section of the addendum correctly, theres less and less area than had been anticipated in the underlying e. I. R. , and the additional footage from this building will not take it to a level of significance. But im curious how the staff thinks about the changes that might exist now or in the future as a result of the different driving patterns due to covid and how people use space and public transportation. Is that simply too speculative to be ceqa . You know, what are your thoughts about that . Ill answer this question. Good afternoon, planning staff. You bring up some excellent questions and i dont know that any of us will know the answers. We are finding the department and other transportation agencies in the city and the region are engaged in a lot of longrange thinking, even precovid. We happened to be engaged in a onceina generation planning exercise through connect s. F. And other Regional Planning to look at the citys longterm future. Covid hit, you know, in the midst of this, and we dont know what the long term trends are and we keep our eyes on what is happening around the world. For instance, the rebound of transit ridership, even amid the pandemic in europe and asia and places like that. And looking at ways to cope and theres a confidence that once theres a vaccine and covid is behind us that transit ridership and sense will rebound strongly. You know, even before covid, the region and the city were looking at how to ramp up our transportation infrastructure to meet the demand that was sort of burgeoning at the seams. Clearly, you know, traffic during the pandemic is reaching almost prepandemic levels as people drive more. And so everyone is following what is happening, and at this point the longterm projections that i had mentioned in the premises and the extensions for the long term arent changing at the moment, but, certainly, the world is changing quickly and all of our longrange planning is keeping an eye on it, if that answers your question. Thank you. Its helpful to have thoughts around how we are moving forward with that uncertainty that is in front of us. But as i have said, it doesnt change my view on this project. I think that its a really creative situation to this awkwardly shaped parcel and im supportive. President koppel commissioner . Move to adopt the finding of consistency and the small office cap allocation. Second. President koppel thank you, commissioners. Clerk on that motion then to adopt findings and approve the Office Allocation [roll call vote] so moved, commissioners, that motion passes unanimously, 70. Commissioners, it places us on item 16. As items 14 and 15 have both been continued. For case 2015015950cua at 955 post street. Conditional use authorization. Is staff prepared to make a presentation . Yes, jonas, hello. Clerk hello, mr. Perry. You need to present . I do not have any slides but i have a sponsor slide after i am done my presentation. Good afternoon president koppel and commissions, andrew perry, staff board. And this is a conditional use authorization at 955 post street on the southside of post street between larkin and hyde streets. And the north of market residential s. U. D. And the proposed project would demolish the twostory commercial building and construct a new eightstory over basement 80foot Tall Building with 69 dwelling units and 1500 square feet of ground floor commercial space. The projects would include 80 class one bicycle Parking Spaces within the building and spaces along the sidewalk frontage. And eight proposed offstreet Parking Spaces. And it requires authorization pursuant to section 253, for the construction of a Building Greater than 40 feet in height on the lot with more than 50 feet of frontage. And as well as pursuant to section 271 to allow the project to exceed the maximum bulk dimension of 125 feet within the district. The project is subject to section 415 inclusionary housing projects and because of the location in the north of market, we are required to provide 25 of the units with onsite affordable units for 17 of the projects 69 total proposed units. As a rental project, its 55 55 m. A. I. And to date theres a letter of support from San Francisco Housing Coalition and a petition of support for the project submitted by the s. F. Housing Action Coalition signed by 30 individuals. Staff has also received three comments in opposition to the project in addition to general inquiries. Concerns about the project focused on the loss of the parking. As one person who currently parks their car in the existing structure. And as well as the concern about the projects lack of postparking for new residents. Additional concerns about the impacts from noise and construction and project scale. And then a comment was received yesterday evening from the property manager of the building at 860 gary street to the rear of the project site. And the email stated concerns about loss of revenue and moving costs to residents of their building, impacts to their building from construction noise and dust and demolition activities. And the safety and the Security Issues during that time period when the building is demolished and the concerns about impacts from construction on the building plumbing system. And the Department Finds that the proposed project is on balance, consistent with the objectives and the policies of the general plan, and it was necessary, and desirable and compatible with the surrounding neighborhood. The project provides infill housing to the Housing Stock, including a percentage of Affordable Housing and having approximately 65 of the units containing two or more bedrooms. The area surrounding the site is well served by transit and providing a small amount of parking and while it requires a bulk exception, its well articulates and it incorporates a variety of materials to lessen the impacts of the project massing while creating a more engaging pedestrian realm. And a green space for retail and commercial business. As from its original submittal, its now an lshaped design to proceed without any barriers and to create a setback area that can integrate the buildings with the rest of the block open space with the future development scenarios. For these reasons the Department Recommends approval with conditions. That concludes that presentation but im available for questions. Thank you. Clerk thank you, mr. Perry. Project sponnor, are yo sponsoru prepared to make a presentation . I am. Clerk it looks like your slides are up. So you have five minutes. Perfect, thank you. Im going to go quickly here. On the call with me is the project sponsor, and the brothers in the khan development and the construction company. And on the call is the project counsel. And also the principal in charge of the project, and good afternoon, commissioners. I am steven iaola and im the project architect. Next slide, please. So im not going to hit every bullet that i have on every page but ill try to do what i can in the five minutes available. So one thing to note is that were using a five bay rhythm on this project for a five unit design module. That references the existing five bay module of the existing building. These are intended to be middleclass modest starter unit apartments. As mentioned theres 69 of them. And all of the units in the building are one, and two and three bedrooms. So we have a total of 123 total bedrooms in the project. And that equates to essentially an all twobedroom project for the building. We have 25 onsite exclusionary and this is a lead gold project and it is proposed to be an all Electric Building in advance of the new requirements that are coming next year. We do have a retail space at the ground floor to accommodate one or two tenants. And we have been in conversations with local neighborhood favorite bob donuts. We had 80 staff bicycle Parking Spaces in class 1 bike parking. 1. B. 16 spaces per dwelling unit. And only nine auto spaces with one car share and that is about 1. 3 parking ratio. Next slide, please. The project is in the historic district. The hrer that was performed years back said that it would not cause any impacts to the districts integrity but the design of a new building could impact the district integrity if not done correctly. The existing building was built in 1919 and it has 100 lot coverage with what is a twostory wall at the Property Line. You can see that in pink on the righthand side. Next slide, please. Just to show what the previous incompatibility was, you can see the image on the left, the project had multiple variances and 100 lot coverage. And several years later in the design of the project, on the righthand side with our lshaped footprint, we are a compatible project with a preservation staff and the team. No variance has been needed for this project. Next slide, please. So one of the major features of the project is that were anticipating that there would be redevelopment of the two adjacent rear parcels. You can see that in the dashed green lines. Those are low intensity and one and twostory commercial buildings. And we expect them to be redeveloped. And so the lshaped footprint of our building integrates with the lshaped rear yard, composed of two items. A full 25 required rear yard. Plus a voluntary outer court. And i also note that our neighbor at 806 geary right now, that existing wall is 12. 5 feet away from the lower portion of their building. And now our new rear of building will be about 47 feet away. Next slide, please. And this is a closer view of our site plan and we do have a 15foot front setback at level six, and that is to align with the predominant street wall space. I talked already about the outer court. The outer Court Reduces our buildable area across all floors of the building by a little over 10,000 square feet. And the outer court also balances out what were asking for from the bulk limit exception. The dashed red line on the drawing, you can see on the righthand side where the upper floors at the building at levels six, seven and eight go beyond that red line. Thats the exception that were asking for. That allows us to maintain those rear units as two bedroom reunts anunitsand everything up that ls balancing out the Square Footage. Additionally just quickly on the site plan, we are using white walls to break up the Property Line wall volume and the apparent mass. And we also have a center court in the building that although its not required for light and vent laitionz for thventilatione are using that to illowm nate the light in the buildings. The apartments are to be modest finishes and fixtures. Because of the highly efficient layoffs and the 20foot design module for the units we think that they will be considered starter units which we believe that will appeal to a Broad Community of diverse units. And couples and roommates, students and even single professionals with a home office. And we do clerk your time is out. I ran into someone last week and i gave someone extra time and everyone asked for extra time after that, so to be fair i have to take care of you right there. We may have questions for you when we get to the commissioners. But just want to be fair to everyone. Understood, president koppel. I think that we said everything that is important to say and if theres questions we have conditional use sheets and we are ready to answer questions. President koppel very good. That concludes the presentation. Clerk members of the public, this is your opportunity to share your testimony by pressing star and then 3. We have one caller and then he disappeared and it looks like hes back. Through the chair, you have two minutes. Caller hello . Can you hear me okay . Clerk we can hear you just fine. Caller that in and of itself is a bit a miracle. Okay, first of all, i do to mr. Perry for reading the content of the letter they sent. I am speaking on behalf of the manager of 860 geary and she raised a number of concerns that we have discussed in the past. The demolition is going to cause considerable hardship to many of the the occupants of the 860 address, those facing the back wall which is about 12. 5 feet away. Her dwelling, unit 100, is at ground level within 10, 15 feet of the property. She feels that its only reasonable to assume that shed be complicated for any moving costs because she could not live there during the work. Thats completely impossible. And, of course, associated rent during the course. Shes made an investment with the garden and the landscaping and its only reasonable to assume in the process of demolishing the property that any damage that would be done she would be reimbursed for. Theres going to be an income loss from noise as the property as well as Ground Level Properties are used for production work, video and film production, during covid times as everything is virtualized for our production company. Again, we are looking at compensation with that and any and all legal fees associated with it. Now the big issue, probably the largest issue is the subject of is the property is still functioning theres an abundance of toxic material and other toxic materials as part of the old building. Her living quarters are in close proximity to the building being taken down. Additionally its clear that the attendants of the building are not sensitive to safety issues. Theres a hose draining with an unknown liquid that is coming out and we dont know what the liquid is. We are concerned about security as the building is demolished and after its gone we need assurances that security measures [bell ringing] and were concerned about the jackhammering clerk thank you, sir. That is your time. I thought that we had three minutes, did we not . Clerk i announced early on that you have two minutes. Caller good afternoon, commissioners. My name is dan doitch and im an s. F. Resident living in district 8. And i am just calling in support of this project. Thinking about what is currently there versus the possibility of building over 60 units of housing, but a significant number of those being affordable inclusionary units and it really feels like a nobrainer and once you add in the fact that its just 15 minutes away from the Civic Center Bart and muni metro and that theres very little parking and most of the parking that is there is bike parking, this is definitely a sustainable environmentally friendly project that we should be encouraging. And i am very excited to see this project as well. It looks really nice. And i think that it will be a great addition to the neighborhood. And it will add further density to one of the most transit rich parts of San Francisco. So no complaints from me and i hope that this building is approved and built. Thank you. Caller good afternoon, commissioners. My name is sarah ogilvy and i live in San Francisco and i used to live very close to the area. And im in full support of the project. What i really like are the environmental features. I think that its awesome that it will satisfy the requirements of San Francisco Green Building code. And it complies with the better Roof Initiative with a solar intellation on the roof space. I also was excited to hear about bob donuts possibly owning the bottom space. Thats a wonderful opportunity for a local business to find fresh blood. And its such a dense area. And i dont think that it would be too far of a swing from where its currently located on polk and it would be exciting to see that grow. And also i wanted to point out that the hospital is extremely close to this location. And it would be wonderful if the staff that are currently and probably making very long commutes, traveling by car and other ways to get to their job, it would be great if a few people could live really close to work. I think would be wonderful. And i think that the varying degrees of affordability are really wonderful for a location where i know that it is extremely diverse. And definitely needs more housing opportunities. Perhaps to have a chance to grow. Perhaps a chance to downsize. As it were, its an overall great project. Please approve. Hi, i am a neighbor and im excited to see this project. I walk my dog past it several times a day and so im very excited to see some new developments from here. And i am really excited to have more neighbors. So please approve the project. Thank you. Caller hello, hi, im Adam Bookbinder and a Planning Commissioner for the city of campbell and im only speaking here for myself. I am speaking in support of the project. As everyone knows theres a terrible housing crisis going on. So to deny a project you would have to have a tremendously good reason. It would have to be a terrible idea. This is not only not a bad idea, this seems like a great project. It achieves density and affordability and it works for both its a good location for this kind of housing. I fully support this project and i think that we should have more like this. Thank you. Have a nice day and i yield my time. Good afternoon, this is nico with the Housing Coalition and i will keep it brief for many of the reasons that folks have just said that we are absolutely in support of this project and we support moving it forward. Caller i am mike chen and im in district 2. Speaking in support of the project as Little Something that is really good and having more housing. And what we think what covid has shown us is that crowding is not so great so having more units and more places for people to go and better ventilation systems. Because our Housing Stock is becoming older and older and, you know, we need you know, we need newer units and stuff that is better for our health. So i urge you to support this project. Thank you. Clerk okay, members of the public. Last call for Public Comment on this matter. Seeing no additional requests to speak, commissioners, Public Comment is closed. And the matter is now before you. President koppel commissioner moore. Vicepresident moore is it at all possible that i would like the architect to have a couple more minutes to take us through the typical plans with this project distinguishes itself by creating a large building and creating an interior layout of common corridors and that creates a strong massing that distinguishes itself in quality from many other projects of like size, and it would be far more innovative and creative. If the architect wouldnt mind to continue to give us a few minutes to take us through the typical floor plans, i would greatly appreciate it. Certainly, Vice President moore. Can everybody hear me . Im assuming so. So the typical unit is a twobedroom unit. That is the module that the rest of the units are based on for that 20foot unit rip. And we have one accessible bathroom in these units and one bathroom that doesnt meet the a. D. A. Requirements. And were using a galley kitchen and you can see from this floor kitchen that the there are no corridors. Everything is meant to bea all circulation is to flow around the furniture and were not showing the furniture in this plan, but showing at least where the beds, the major closet elements would be, and where the kitchen elements would be. Out toward the front is our little box that you can see left of the bay window, is the magic pack heating and cooling ventilation unit that will air condition the space. I think that actuallly appendix, page 28 and then we can see the unit floor plans. You might have gone past it. There we go. There it is. So you can see on the left is a typical onebedroom unit. And, you know, very tightly compacted and that one does break the 20foot module. But the onebedroom alternate unit, this is a level six unit, the second from the left. Again, you know, highly efficient layout. The furtherest from the left is the twobedroom that we just looked at and on the far righthand side is the threebedroom unit. Where we are using that back corner of the building on the rear yard to get two spaces of dwelling unit exposure. And we are using a nested bedroom strategy. So, andrew, if you go to i think page the best floor plan to look at are on page lets see page 10. Yeah. Lets go to page 10 first. Toward the front. One more, please. There we go. So on the left is the basement level plan. And we do have two dwelling units down at that level. The upper gray is the parking area. And then down that sort of light gray block on the righthand side of the blue is the bike parking. And then everything around those units is a rear yard. And when we get up a level, the red that we see at the top of the page on the righthand image is the retail space. We have residential entry to the lefthand side and the garage entry to the righthand side. And bullet is where you see the units at the back of the building. And at the back l corner of the building is a three bedroom. And then a middle twobedroom with a nested bedroom. And the far righthand is also a two bedroom. But that one because of the light walls that we have designed in have windows on the interior bedrooms. So if you go up one more level one more page, sorry. Next page. Vicepresident moore could we see this space for a moment . Just explain how the courtyard and with the units and then indiscernible we see double loaded corridors without a courtyard which has a indiscernible with this particular project makes it really much more personalized. Absolutely. Right in the middle of this plan on the left lefthand side is the light green area, that is the floor of the courtyard. And that rises up and its fully glazed around that element so that the corner it get some light from the rooftop level all the way down. And the elsay thor bank is to the left of that. please stand by [indiscernible] i had couple of questions for the architect and the staff relating to the im wondering if i can speak with the architect and if you can put the patriots of the pictures of the rendering up that shows the building in the staff package. I dont know what number that is. When you look at the front rendering, it looks like its more of brick facade and not a stucco facade. We look at that rendering, it looks like flat. Im assuming thats the way the rendering is. I like the architect to firm that finish on the front goes around the building. That correct . That is correct. We have the same units on the front of the building that wrap all exterior walls in the building. Th commissioner diamond second question relates to the coloring on the front, its more of a tote color and on the back its yellow. Im wondering if its a rendering issue and thats a design detail youll work on with staff as plans get more refined . Yes. If you wanted to go to page 23 in the appendix, that will show the truest color that we can up there on the upper left, represents our swatch what we anticipate the brick color to be. It will have a tote tannish color. The yellow color was because we had a very Late Afternoon sun light that was brightly illuminating all the surrounding buildings. Commissioner diamond thank you. Third and final question if you go back to the back rendering again, it will be helpful if you could explain what the thought process having two vertical bays of dark blue. They stand out in the sea of beige. Im wondering why you chose such a const tra contrasting color and what you trying to accomplish here . We had explored several different design relation to the front facade. We thought that confining the blue to the ground floor base only and then making all of the projecting bay elements is the right move for the front of the building. The back of the building, the blue shown there was the remnants of that approach that was around the rear of the building. We do have continuous bricks at the top that connects the bay. The blue thats there was remnant of the front facade. When i look at this in the cityscape, i hear what youre saying it might be jarring. We want to have something there that actually had a little bit of distinction. If detail is too much distinction, were happy to work with staff on that. Commissioner diamond i found the front of the building extreming pleasing. When i looked at the back, i was struck by the navy blue stripes, vertical stripes. I feel like thats the detail i will leave to you and staff to work out. This is a great project. I have couple of questions. One is about the bike parking. I noticed the bike parking is there at the basement level. 123 bedrooms and i think its about 80 bike Parking Spaces, is there any opportunity to increase the amount of bike parking on class one by parking available to the residents of the building . We do have a second bike area right adjacent to the residential entry. Thats that grayish area to the lower left of the red area. We could always expand that more into the retail space to get additional bike Parking Spaces. The other area that are available to ground floor to the purple bicycle parking will be our trash area. Were planning on doing on site laundry unit and design the projects where we could end up with a washer and drier unit in each of the units themselves. I think theres opportunity to get some more bike parking there. The more retail space, the less attractive that might be. Thats something to consider. Commissioner tanner the other question i have, if you can define what starter rent looks like. What are the anticipate rents for the one bedroom to two bedroom. Can you help us get color what a starter unit looks like and what the cost associated are. I would ask pierre to come off mute to answer commissioner tanners questions please. This is pierre. Thank you again for having us here. The units that were having here, were trik trying to maket efficient as possible. We trying to get close to market as possible. We dont want to overbill them. We can probably go towards the bottom end of the market rates. Whether or not the actual rental rates that were going to be charging is little bit hard for us to tell now because its few years until we actually build the building and with covid all the things happening now, its hard to say what the rents will be. We are trying to make them as efficient as possible so we dont have to charge the high luxury rates you see in San Francisco. Commissioner tanner i hope youre able to achieve that. Market rates are often not affordable even for middle income families, that can satisfy the needs of the building. We want to support. It does seem like a great project youre providing. Hopefully we can also provide housing for those folks who dont qualify but important part of aer city. Last question is current use of the building is a garage. We did hear from Public Comment about remediation for the site, potential contamination. Are there any concerns you have about excavation for the garage . Do you feel like youll be able to take care of contaminates through that process. I will be glad to address some of these. We have looked into some of the things. One of the things a stuck out to me with regards to there was a comment about a hose and that hose actually was taking some roof drainage that was unfortunately, an old building and the water was leaking inside. There was a roof drain bag installed inside just to prevent water from doing more damage to interior. It was just runoff rain water. No contamination what so ever. We have been aware of the concerns of the neighbors and we are prepared to perform the necessary mitigation and remediation in a form that is acceptable by the city within regulation. We will do our best to have amicable relationship with all of those around us before we start while were working and through the project to completion. I think as project progresses, well reach out to those who do have these concerns. We havent had too much discussion about the project demolition as of late. Weve been more excited about getting our project to this point. As we progress, i think we will very happy to work with the city, building officials and any one and everyone who has any interest in making sure that this project moves forward in a safe and timely manner. Thank you. Vice president moore im prepared to make while the conditions about blue or kind of blue, i believe the introduction of a small stripe of color at that corner identify the strong massing of that building which is the strength. If you only have are the seams on the rear of the building, those will look like a massing that is not distinguished. Whatever color there is, i am in support of retaining a color on that bay. Im making a motion to approve with conditions. Second. Commissioner imperial im in support of this project and second it. I want to make a comment to project sponsor. You mentioned theres percent for low income. It ranges from 50 to 8 80person a. M. I. I would like to recommend to make the low income a. M. I. To be 50 or 60 a. M. I. Its higher than other counties. I want to have that. President koppel if theres nothing further. O[roll call vote] to motion passes unanimously 70. That will place us on final item on todays general. Number 17a and b for case numbers 4300, 17th street, conditional use authorization while other administration consider request for variance. We did receive a request for organized opposition. We granted that request. The project sponsor will have six minutes to make their presentation followed by organized opposition with six minutes and three speakers and well go to Public Comment for two minutes each. Staff be prepared to make your presentation. Thank you very much. Good afternoon president koppel, members of the commission and building administrator. Request for conditional use authorization and for variances to the planning code for project at 4300 17th street. Built in 1953 and expanded in 1960. The structure occupies eastern half. The residential entrances to the building are located on 17 street and one car garage on located on ord street. Theres an existing storage area that is no internal connection. Surrounding neighborhoods consist of slopes both of individual lots. The neighborhood has been developed over many decades and mixture of architectural adjacent to the west. Theres a three story two unit condominium structure and to the north, which is sloping threestory Single Family home. Project seeks variance to the planning code, sections 121, lot size for both of the new lot, section 134 and section 135 open space for the lower unit within the new development. The existing 4000 square foot like located on the ragedder of the original lot. A 500 square foot roof deck is proposed to be added to the existing two family dwelling. New building will reach a height of 40 feet. Grounsecond floor would provide2 gross square foot two bedroom unit and upper two floors approximately 2000 square feet with private open space. Total of two accessory dwelling units are proposed. 607 square foot to be added to the existing two family dwelling and 475 square foot to be included in the new two family dwelling proposed. Under this program, adu will be rent controlled. However the new construction project will not be eligible for a. D. U. Under this section. The project sponsor has stated intent to designate both of the projects proposed dwelling units, Housing Units under section 415 and the city and county of San Francisco and Affordable Housing program. To date the department received 55 letters in support of the project. 43 letters in opposition to the project have been received. The support for the project centered on the addition of Housing Units and the addition of affordable unit and out opposition is centered on the compliance with the planning code. The proposal is not consistent with the guidelines. By eliminating the subject project yard, it will negative impact to neighboring property. The Department Recommends that proposal of the site be redesigned that maintains adjacent property access to light and air by providing adequate set back and yards. The first sponsor consider department comments and brought before a hearing. The Department Found that the project is not consistent with with the objective and policy of the general plan and does not mean that all applicable requirements of the planning code including the residential guidelines. The Department Priority is to maximize the development of housing and applicable sustaining quality of life. The department does not support the intensity of noncompliance, the proposal seeks to achieve the higher density at the site. The Department Finds project is not to be necessary desirable with surrounding neighborhoods and to be detrimental to persons within the vicinity. This concludes staffs recommendation. President koppel thank you mr. Horn. Is the project sponsor prepare to make their presentation . I will be sharing. I will let you know when your slides are up. Can you hear me . Yes. You will have six minutes. Thank you president koppel, members of the commission. Thank you for the opportunity to present my project today. Thank you to senior planner jeff horn for his assistance over the last 18 months. My project will add one Affordable Housing unit on the vacant land center of this picture. The new building will contain the second permanent Affordable Housing unit that will subsidize to affordable unit. Several Affordable Housing nonprofits that i spoke to said theres no viable model for building Affordable Housing 86 of San Franciscos neighborhood. Before starting this project, i sought to understand how guarantees has been applied in the past. These decisions felt about ironclad as it gets. Reliance on these decisions by start of of this project. Before the Planning Commission today, however, is the fact that my home is located in the special used district. What happens if the subject property is cut off from big lot space as this slide shows my property is. In each of the five times the situation presented itself to the Zoning Administrator for the last 20 years in exception to 134 was granted. There isnt another half vacant corcorner lot adjacent public rightofway. I acknowledge that asking the city to eliminate the rear yard is a big ask. The small point that i am making, underlying principle of section 134 is applicable here. The corner lot that im proposing is 100 consistent with this neighborhood. I understand that a project like this will attract opposition. I dont begrudge anyone for opposing this project on the merit. From day one, this was a mixed Affordable Housing project. Lastly, im not building two level luxury penthouse for myself. The fact of the the meter matter is, the only way for a lower modest income person to live in this neighborhood is Affordable Housing which we have zero. While i understand that you received 43 letters in opposition, i received 55 in support. 93 thousands people who werent celebritied for Affordable Housing will be in favor of a project today. This is a city of innovation. Thank you very much for your time. Thank you. If that concludes project sponsor presentation there are no immediate questions from the commission, we should go to organized opposition for six minutes. I am president of corporate height neighbors. We have been around for 17 years. Presented to the Planning Commission on numerous occasions, our group represents an area of about 1000 households. Our involvement with this project starts in the summer of 2019 three members of our committee went to the three application meetings. Feedback from all three, it was not well received, everyone was opposed. That was that. The people who attended that meeting brought nothing to the developer. Looking forward, there has been no community discussion, no input and the reason is, like always, were waiting for the Planning Department approval. We dont move on anything until the Planning Department approves it. We particularly let down our guard because in the april plan check that was published, there were eight significant concerns and followup requests. The next thing we knew, we hav e received this proposed Commission Meeting and then we had to scramble to address it. Its important to clarify that in some of the documents, theres a reference to a meeting with our organization october 26th. That didnt happen. Going on to the next slide, we just want to say that we completely we are in complete support of the Planning Commission. We issued two documents. The first is november 10th exhibit f the second is novembef report was published. We totally support their issues and concerns because they are issues and concerns. Numerous planning code violations, not compatible and desirable for the neighborhood, no environmental review, dramatic reduction in open space, light and air flow, lack of set backs, complete destruction of side yards, two proposed a. D. U. S. We believe, like the Planning Commission can be incorporate into the existing structure. Just looking at this image, i think its important to understand all the structures in the neighborhood. When you look at the image on the right, the yellow building on the left will be covered in darkness. The existing build oning on the right will go dark. The next slide shows what happens to the building on the north side. This is a very recent photograph. The proposed building will come up to our higher than the yellow building on the right. We did a photo shop to show you what that looks like afterwards. This is like living next to the berlin wall and i once saw the wall in action and i would say the berlin wall is higher. You its important to focus on the doughnut and not the hole. The doughnut is 82 of the Square Footage market rate. The hole are the two a. D. U. S 18 of the Square Footage. The original submission by the developer is priority for residents and secondly for Affordable Housing. To say the least, we oppose this project from beginning to end and the process and dont understand why were here even though the Planning Department submitted a very negative report. I will turn it over to paul allen who is the secretary and will finish up the presentation. [indiscernible] [background noises] [indiscernible] i can barely hear that presentation at this point. [indiscernible] you did have a strong echo in your background. Something wasnt muted. Commissioners, we should now go to Public Comment. This is your opportunity to submit your testimony and get into queue by star 3. Youll have two minutes. Take the first caller now. Thank you for the opportunity to express strong opposition to the plan and developer and what the developer is proposed in his backyard. My husband and greg and i have live here for 20 years. The plans will have severe and impact on us. We request that the commission reject the proposal thats before you. Not only because of the impact on us because its inconsistent with the residential Design Guidelines and the Corona Heights large resident special use district. If this project is constructed, we will lose all light and air on the side of our house. The developer would have entire floor above our house. We would lose very large amount of Natural Light in our backyard. Our neighbors downstairs will lose light. The owners of 90 ord will lose light and back of their house. In addition the developer would have seven windows currently planned on our Property Line. We will be looking their neighbors and neighbors will look into their windows and we will be looking into developer tenants home also. We chose to live in the neighborhood not because of Investment Opportunity because we were part of the community. I think the developer forgets he lives four blocks of rain blow flag when he talks about diversity. They let down their guard. Our neighborhood neighborhoods n guarded by the people who happen to already live there. Neighborhoods without Affordable Housing are less vibrant and less inclusive. I dont think thats the kind of San Francisco that any of us want to live in. Please support this project. Its a great model that can be replicated across the city and it will be good for people who need it the most. Hi. Im the executive director of Mission Housing development corporation. We build 100 low income housing. Im calling today in my personal capacity. From our industrys perspective, having people that are willing to go affordable, its a god send. Im in favor of of this project. The purpose of a variance is for you the Planning Commission to be able to give that variance when someone goes above and beyond, which is what is happening. Im sorry that some people still care about their view and the light more than low income humans having a home. If you feel like you cant give a variance for this amount of above and beyond, i hope as a commission, you take a look at why that is as well. Thank you very much. Im resident of San Francisco in district 6. Im calling in support of this project. Two friends of mine got engaged, congratulations to them. They decided to buy a house in this very neighborhood. If you havent been paying attention to the Housing Market there. Modest home first time home buyers is 2 million for a small home. Thats the kind of neighborhood were talking about. I want you to really think about the equity consequences of denying a project that brings two Affordable Homes to the neighborhood at zero cost to the city. I told them about this project because im excited about it. Like totally normal people, they said okay, sounds nice. Normal people do not oppose this project. Normal people simply do not care. They know housin housing is goo. Only people that want you to say no are the ones that want to build a wall and keep who live in those affordable b. M. R. Units out. I have to point out its appalling. Berlin wall separated families that murdered and disappeared low income people. I urge the Planning Commission to approve this project which brings two desperately needed units to the neighborhood. Thank you. Hi commissioners. I appreciate the opportunity to speak. I own a home in Corona Heights where i live with my wife and two kids. Were located on 17th street just up the block from 4300, 17th street. As a black man in San Francisco, im aware of how black people has been pushed out of certain areas of the city. One significant driver is resistance adding new housing and Affordable Housing specifically. As such, im strongly in favor of this project. Which has four units, including two below market rate units. Our neighborhood, Corona Heights ought to be welcoming people of all income levels. Im asking the commission to please approve this project. Thank you. Good afternoon members of the Planning Commission. My name is sarah hoffman. Live a few blocks from the project site. I strongly support this project. It creates much needed housing including Affordable Housing in my neighborhood. People who lived here for decades property taxes to criticize change. As an immigrant to this country, i find it offensive when project departments suggest that they have vested interest this anythings never changing. The reality is San Francisco is changing. Its losing its diversity and its losing its young because its not affordable to live here. Im tired of friends moving away because its more affordable to leave the city. It project adds four new units and it should be approved. Only five minute walk from the muni station. Conditional use authorization only required for this project because its in the Corona Heights large resident special use district. This district was primarily created to restrict the creation of mega mansions that is the aggressive expansion of Single Family homes. However in its own word, the district also aims to encourage new housing. This project should be approved. Hello. Im speaking here for myself. This project is the increase in density which neighborhoods prefer. I love to see projects like this in my own city. It will replace unusable space with needed homes. Half of which will be below market rate. Hi. My name is andy. I live on douglas just around the corner from the project. We lived here 17 years. I always wondered why there was unused vacant lot . It would build Affordable Housing in my neighborhood where we currently have none. Whats the opposition to that . I was thinking to myself, what have these guys done to build Affordable Housing in the city. So critical for any Affordable Housing units. They speak of the berlin wall. They are the ones perpetuating the wall. Our city, my neighbor and Police Officers understand the neighborhood that care about the neighborhood like their own. Not simply a job all these folks screaming at this guy trying to build Affordable Housing, they are looking out more themselves their fear of living next to poor people. Our city needs the support and small steps forward. Bravo to the Planning Commission for coming up ways to do it. Tear down that wall. Clerk caller are are you prepared to submit your public testimony . Okay, well take the next caller. Hi. Good evening commissioner. Im a renter. I strongly support this project. I think for a project like this, i generally support more housing, i believe thats part of the reason San Francisco has expensive rent. We have severely built less housing. If you look at this project, this is one of the best projects ive seen. Looking at from the street, its going to be beautiful. Its going to be in context with the rest of the neighborhood. Its in a neighborhood that Corona Heights over 70 white. The Median Household Income is around 200,000 and youre less than a 10 minute walk away from muni market. If there muni metro. For thind environmental benefit, its no brainer. Its a fantastic project. Furthermore, given how good this project is, i worry if it isnt built, the stay lawmakers who see theres housing crises in california will look at things like this, common sense housing that gets denied and they will put their foot down and force by right the city to build more housing in places like this. If we were just housing here, it will be abdication of our duty to make San Francisco a better place. The state will notice. Thank you. Good afternoon. Im resident of district 2. People said before, this is a really creative use of a rear lot that is fronting a street. Its a shame that, i think, our plans are we want to build more housing in the neighborhood. Some of these policies that we created, are Affordable Homes. We need to reexamine how this is made. The fact that when recently elected forming Planning Commission president stated, she is wanting to look at neighborhoods like Corona Heights and think about how to add density. This is a great way to do that. I really urge you to think about this project and start thinking about what it can mean for the future of San Francisco and how san franciscans can become more diverse, how San Francisco can add more housing to its most Single Family neighborhoods and think of this as a possible blueprint for the future. Thank you very much. My name is lauren. Im a neighbor at the Corona Heights neighborhood. I walk by 4300, 17th street house. Im calling in support of this project. I think its an Excellent Way to bring more individuals into our community and support all different economic possibilities for this neighborhood. I think of this project sponsor has been incredibly thoughtful. Has followed through with different guidelines and i completely support this project to move forward. Thank you. Im against this project as it is presented. I was there at the preplanning meeting over a year ago. The plan just did not have the impact or feedback from the neighbors. This is really impacting the immediate neighbors beyond anybodys expectations. Imagine you guys probably in San Francisco, you have no idea whats going to happen. You cant count on any of the setback rules any more for the building next to you. The developer really trying to upset neighbors as much as he could throughout the process. There needs to be some mediation here in working with the neighborhood or getting a project manager. Its going to be a long project. Lets Work Together on it. Theres been very little working together on this from early on. Hi, what we havent had the time to review the project through the project review committee and have official endorsement. This is certainly the type of new housing in San Francisco that we need to house every San Francisco. This is not the highrise demonize. This is a utilizing land to provide homes for people who desperately need them. Lets not forget the context of this project is the most housing shortage bay area ever seen. This is small project that cant solve all ills but making the best possible attempt. Thank you. Good afternoon commissioners. This is sarah oglevy. I live in 9. San franciscan has right to speak about housing and their neighborhood. My concern with this Planning Commission staffs findings and draft motion, number 11, the project does not consistent will not purposes of the code. As designed the project would not contribute to the character and stability of the neighborhood and would not constitute a beneficial development. My concern with that language, its very troubling, the neighborhood character as of now is 84 white. Thats overwhelming. The Median Household Income is very high. What exactly are you saying when you want to preserve and stabilized neighborhood character when you have somebody who is actually trying to break the mold and open up the neighborhood to more diverse neighborhood character. I was present at the commissions meeting when we all agreed to racial and social equity resolution. I was there and i gave comment. My concern is that, i didnt see any language relating to the racial and social equity statement in the motion in any of the paperwork except for the project developer. I did see that he wrote the word equitable and he spoke of these things. Please consider that, you have a resolution. You need to view things through the Racial Equity lens. Please support this project. This is an opportunity to actually live those valleys right here and now. Thank you. Im calling in to strongly support 1400 17th. Our neighborhood needs improved diversity and inclusion and especially affordable unit. I dont want to live down the street from an ugly overgrown lot. I want people to beky as i am to call this home. It is a transit project and sets up new neighbors well to take advantage of mass transit. This project will further our citys goal of addressing the housing crises, mitigating Climate Change and for the Planning Commission very racial and social equity resolution. I hope you will approve it. Thank you. Hello. I live adjacent to 4300 17th street. Im calling to oppose this planning. I was there during the preapplication process. Not once was anything involving race was brought up. The income of people also that was possibly applied to be living in these two units. I dont really see how anything relating to the two units will solve the problem thats been ongoing within the city for a long time and how that would change truthfully anything. I grew up in Affordable Housing and i understand the process thats involved. I understand just because you get Affordable Housing, does not mean you will stay within Affordable Housing. I watched my mother struggle work three jobs and still coming up afforcouldnt afford affordae housing. It plan is starting to come in effect. I find it interesting lot of people are also wanting to approve this planning situation here but its easier for them to do that when its not them next door or having homes being built next to them. I call to oppose this planning process. My name is jared. I live about a block away from the proposed project. I have not been aware of the twist and turns of the project until i received a notice from the city two weeks ago. I think the Corona Heights special use district wall was enacted three years ago. The law reflects the communitys current collective view how we want to grow. Perhaps theres a way that the builder can adjust their plans to fit those guidelines or seek to adjust those guidelines through the standard legislative process. Thank you. Hi, i live next door to the project when we we met with the developer, when he first moved to this neighborhood, there was no mention of any below market rate units, no equity. I believe that the developer is acting in not in good faith. I believe that he went to the Planning Department with his project for the fourstory, 12,000 square foot building. Got refused, now hes coming back with these equity issues and trying to get his building built like that. The number of below market rates units have gone from zero to now two. Will they be forever below market rate . No one can say that. This is for Profit Development for the developer. I dont want to construed i any other form. He is making money off this project off the back of his neighbors. Thank you for your time. Hello, im a neighbor. I want the Planning Commissioners to understand that 85 of the proposed project is market rate new construction. As the proceeding speaker stated the sponsor most recently markets project mainly about Affordable Housing. But the project is also about and has a higher percentage of its occupancy about market rate housing and about a luxury unit for the developer. This is not about exclusion of any particular type of individuals from our neighborhood. This is about maintaining our neighborhood character. It is not appropriate for people who dont live in the neighborhood to discuss this and its also it is a bit of a sham to state that this is all about included people that have been disadvantaged to our neighborhood. This is about profit and a unit for the developer. Theres nothing that requires this to remain Affordable Housing and theres no definition of whats an Affordable Housing. Thank you. Good afternoon commissioners. Thank you for your time. My name is eric murphy. Im just a normal person. I happen to be the owner of 4304 17th street. Thats that yellow house right next door. Quite people described the impact this will have on us. I want to reiterate. This project substantially exceeds lot size restrictions. It eliminates all rear yard pace. It reduces open space. It was found to be unacceptable by the residential design advisory team. I command the owner for his desire to promote social equity. I want to be clear about the context with this. The anchored dwelling of this project is that two story penthouse. 2100 square feet. Its two stories with a private balcony. Lets juxtapose to the square feet for one of the Affordable Housing units. Regardless of who lives there, the sponsor personally told me he was planning to live there. Maybe that changed. Regardless of that, this one penthouse dominates the Square Footage. It eliminates backdoor space and i have to say the most important point here, if he was truly focused on social equity and Affordable Housing, why has he not he attempted to respond to prior advisement and revise the project to apply to code. Compliance and Affordable Housing are not mutually exclusive. I would love to have more Affordable Housing in our neighborhood. I believe that any attempts to do that should at least try to adhere to zoning and the planning code. I urge you to disapprove this project. Good evening supervisors. I live in district 5. Corona heights is extremely gentrified neighborhood. Some are accumulated Property Value in the last decade. Which is enormous. This is a great location to build subsidized photograp ae housing or rent control housing. Consider Corona Heights has Median Income to 150,000 per person, that speaks to how Corona Heights is in great need of more Affordable Housing. The fact that much of it is low density really speaks to neighborhoods history of exclusion which not be totally rectified by this project, its a good step forward. If were going to prioritize Affordable Housing city wide, we need to prioritize Affordable Housing in the backyard. My name is myra. Live in the castro and i walk up 17th street. Im calling to voice my opposition. I happen to know one of the neighbors whos lives will be impacted by this. As i listen to the arguments today, i understand the concern isnt in opposition to Affordable Housing. I believe the concern is it entirely consumes the backyard open space of the existing structure. The proposed project leaves no open space for the inhabitants of the existing structure. Given how much our lives changed, within the last year because of the pandemic, one thing as weve come to treasure in the city is access to open space. Whether its in our own backya backyards. The goal of adding Affordable Housing on this project is noble but in reality, the amount of Square Footage in the new structure is well below the scale of a new building. If the goal is to provide Affordable Housing, then 50 of this goal can be achieved with minimal impact if they focus on the current structure. Im curious where this project sponsor hasnt made modification to bring the project more in line with the neighborhood. Thank you. My name is jessica. I live next door, im a renter in the yellow building. Im pretty familiar with this project. In the summer of 2019 the developer hosted a preapplication meeting at his property. Which i attended. Other neighbors were there and we all opposed the project. Mentioned would go back drawing board and make changes. I never heard from him. Eventually, the sf Planning Department issued a plan check. The memo cited eight areas of concern. I feel like this project is not actually trying to solve San Franciscos Affordable Housing crises, for someone whos riding on current event to building luxury of the expense of the neighborhood. I strongly oppose that you reject this project. Clerk members of the public, last call for public testimony. You need to press star 3 to enter the queue. Thank you so much for your time. I realize its been a long day. Ill be quick. Im a teacher and an artist. I live Corona Heights i care deeply about Affordable Housing personally and i agree with lot of the sentiments that have been stressed expressed tonight. Im concerned theres been misconception of this project. I think its really important that we look at the small percentage of this project that would actually be affordable. I think its been misrepresent misrepresented. I strongly urge you to oppose this project as it is currently. Thank you. My name is joe. Im a resident in noe valley. I like to support this project. I desperately need more housing in San Francisco. It seem like a reasonable proposal. With housing cost continuing to go up overall, only recently gone little bit down due to pandemic, we need more units in the city. Obstructing sensible proposals like this one is part of the problem and frankly rampant homelessness. I appreciate your time. Hi. Im laura foot. I dont normally call in anymore, i miss you guys terribly. I wanted to point out, especially to people who spoken in opposition to this project. Actually what has happen to this project where theyve decided to add to affordable unit is the pressure that San Francisco has been trying to put on people who might be proposing luxury development. They are proposing something expensive new housing. San francisco says, we want to get Something Back from you. Were going to push you below market rate units. The fact that this project changed and added those units, is actually something that the Planning Commission should be quite happy about. I hope that we can this is the for me i like the rules to be the rules and all of us follow the rules. The incentive structure that San Francisco set up is to make these long hearings the way we push people to add more affordable units. If we say no to this project, were saying, even if you go above and beyond and add what i think sort of level of Affordable Housing to your project, its nice but its not scalable. Im calling to ask you to approve this project. Im familiar with the neighborhood because i used to live up the hill. I know this is an area where theres not a lot of new housing getting built, especially not lot of Affordable Housing getting built. I think its really cool that this project is managing to provide two out of four new homes as affordable. Thats all, thank you. Clerk final call for Public Comment. Seeing no additional request to speak from members of the public. Public comment is now closed. The matter is now before you. President koppel Zoning Administrator, do you like to start off . Sure. I like to consider that variances fundamental to be overall. I want to reiterate a point that mr. Horn noted in the staff report in his presentation. Which is the newly constructed building is proposed on the new lot, is propose to contain an a. D. U. On the ground floor. If you will do new construction, that building has to be code compliant. Just under the provision of the code today, we would not able to permit that a. D. U. There are people who are very supportive of a project because it adds more housing and maybe more Affordable Housing. We all agree theres housing crises and we all support more housing. Especially Affordable Housing. For variance especially, they are intended for something specific, when you have a specific property that has something physical going on with that property and creates exceptional circumstance, that results in hardship that you need to overcome in a reasonable way. Thats where i think this proposal has a number of challenges based on the existing zoning structure that we have today. Were working with the rules that we have in place now. The project sponsor kind of called out that there were lot of situations where property are split. Rear yard variance is granted and i agree that rear yard perspective, corner lots disconnected from the block open space are good candidates for year yard variances as long as the proposal is designed contextually. The bigger challenge, you have a fairly standard rh2 property with existing residential and the option to do more residential under the a. D. U. Program and the proposal is to create two substandard lots and build a building that is substandard in terms of rear yard and open space. Such a case, you have couple of issues. One, hardship created by the applicant himself. Theres germane of this property that creates any kind of exceptional circumstance or hardship to Reasonable Development of the property. The other issue is, planning code says, you cant grant a variance that will effectively reclassify the zoning of a property. When you take a standard property like rh2 and you propose to divide it in two substandard lots for the purpose of maximize density, to some degree, its a form of detack do rezoning of the property. Thats a bit of a challenge. We actually get a lot split subdivision variances in the rh2 from time to time p. P. P. The. When we grant those, we condition them that they only be for Single Family homes plus permitted a. D. U. S on those lo lots to divide the lot to increase the density. I want to raise those issues and clarify why its challenging from a variance perspective to approve this project. Lastly, this doesnt get discussed a lot in variance cases, especially under the covid context, i do think we are going to look at open space variances more closely and the need to make sure that dwelling unit have yet or minimal open space provided on the site. Thats also another issue i think thats a bit of a challenge here, especially when its new construction. Were not talking about trying to adapt to an existing building on a tough lot. This is new construction where the design can be done in a way that is appropriate and contex contextual. Clerk thank you. Commissioner tanner you are here, if you can answer a few questions about the things you just discussed and make sure i understood them correctly. I talked about not being able to amend a. D. U. In the new building because New Buildings must be code compliance for the a. D. U. Is that under the current law thats in place today for a. D. U. S . Yes, thats correct. For the a. D. U. S, they have to be within an existing building. If you have a legal noncompliant building, if off rear garage or some kind of accessory building that was legal nonconforming you want to convert that to an a. D. U. , you can. You couldnt take an existing building and do a rear addition and get a variance to add all a. D. U. Same thing for new construction. The code says, it has to be within the permitted envelope. Commissioner tanner with this building is to have an a. D. U. In the new building. Would that provision still apply to this case . Do you mean the legislation to implement new state law around a. D. U. S . Commissioner tanner yes, that has any bearing on this construction . It does this is kind of our local program thats being used. We do require that it be permitted. , theres provision that would allow a rear yard cottage. There will be an opportunity here to do a rear yard cottage a. D. U. A would potentially limit how many other a. D. U. S on the side. Commissioner tanner the applicant in his brief stated that if the lot it will be about roughly 42 square feet reduced from the required lot size. Do you find that to be accurate amount . Is that large difference or small difference between these code compliance lot size . We can look at the case record if do. Doe i believe its more 200 to 300 square feet. The standard lot size requirement for rh2 district for most residential districts is 2500 square feet. If youre within a corner context, you cant go down to 1750. I believe these lots are more in the 1400 range. Commissioner tanner thats correct. Than sounded right to me. I was curious, i can ask project sponsor how he did his math to get to that. Thats my questions for you, thank you mr. Teague. I have couple of questions for mr. Horn if youre available. [please stand by] director hillis i think miss stacey is here yeah, miss stacey is here. Good evening, Planning Commissioners. Kate stacey from the city attorneys office. I think mr. Horn has articulated the difficult situation we have here. We have a project sponsor who has volunteered to designate units as affordable units, but theres no requirement in city code that those units be designated below market rate units. There is also a requirement that when the city provide or impose a condition on a project, that there is a connection or a nexus justifying the particular condition. Here, i think commissioner tanner, what youre asking is if somebody offered these units to the city and said i would like to make these units below market rate units, and i would like them to be part of mohcds program, we could figure out a way that the project sponsor could sort of offer those to mohcds program, and then mohcd would take them into the program. Im not sure what kind of market rate or what condition they want to impose here, but the difficulty here is that it is voluntary, and so it is up to the project sponsor to figure out what what they would like to do with these units and what the city is, in turn, able to do with imposing a longterm requirement on those units. Commissioner tanner okay. Thats a great question, miss stacey. Thank you, miss stacey, and thank you, mr. Horn. Just one thing to go over, jack, is the a. D. U. Units [inaudible] to rent control, but the other a. D. U. Would not be able to be eligible in that program. Is that correct . Correct. That is my understanding of how the a. D. U. Within the existing building, instruction 1951, would be subject to rent control. Director hillis i believe its when its new construction. Yeah. Commissioner tanner and then, i think the other unit thats already in the existing building would already be controlled as is. Correct. The two existing units within 4300 17 street are rent controlled units. Commissioner tanner great. Thank you so much. And then, if i can speak with the project sponsor, if youre available. Are you there and able to respond . Clerk no, i just needed to unmute him. Can you hear me now . Commissioner tanner yes, we can. Were all in, like, a verizon commercial that never ends. Okay. So thank you for bringing this project before us. Can you talk a little bit about the collaboration or somehow suggested the lack there of between yourself and your neighbors in the community regarding the design and development of the project . What does that design and collaboration look like . Sure, and thank you for that question. So when i moved in about 1. 5 years ago, within a few weeks, i had a vision of what i wanted to do. I had 30 handwritten notes that i distributed to my neighbors. I put posts on next door. As a couple of people mentioned, i had a meeting here at my home, which i have the hosted. I didnt have the architect or anyone. I was the face to answer questions. Ive tracked a lot of these projects. Im a novice, but ive tried to be as engaging as possible with everyone, and frankly, you know, theres kind of two sets of folks. Some had constructive feedback, which i took, so the railing got changed, theres a light on the left. Made a whole bunch of changes, but just to be frankly honest, a lot of the people who called in today never reached out to me even though they had my Contact Information to solicit information. Commissioner tanner no, thats cool for me to understand. Thats very helpful. And then, youve got toen he h the conversation that we just had about the below market rate units. Thats something that i want to see because that can be part of our housing crisis solution. I thi when it comes to a deed restriction or a notice of special restrictions, theres some other way to codify whether its permanent whatever or a period of years, 25 years or whatever, is that something youd be willing to entertain that discussion, as willing to record this as a below market rate unit or something that could be withdrawn at any time . So the answers yes, and again, this is in the slide. Thank you for reading my brief. I put a lot of time into that, and i appreciate you getting into the weeds. When i started the project two years ago, i had two a. D. U. S. I started to learn a distinction, so i actually have emails to jeff horn last february, where i said jeff, could you introduce me to two members of your team that could speak to me about Affordable Housing, and they were fantastic. I reached out to the city attorney, and i filled out an application, what do i do . Everywhere in my paperwork, i put these would be deed restricted. My understanding is this would be 70 years. I have no problem putting deeds on both problems, with property restrictions keeping both of these in the program. One of the challenges, when i reached out, no one has ever seen this before, and folks have said, why do you want to do this . Its been a bit of a challenge trying to figure out. Commissioner tanner as a professional bureaucrat, we see that it can be a challenge, so thank you for thinking about it, and i know that perhaps with some time, the city can figure out what that looks like and how to potentially develop that into a new program. So i just want to make a few comments before hearing from my fellow commissioners. I spent a lot of time looking at this report and these briefs, and i looked at the spac spaces of the property and in the rear regard. As i looked at what it would provide, for the specific location of this property on a corner lot, to me, this seems like an ideal location to use our variances and to allow a variance in order to facilitate this project. I think it is consistent with design and development we see in this neighborhood. I feel that it is consistent with past decisions that weve made, even though mr. Teague doesnt feel quite the same way, but i feel its certainly consistent with our general plan and the goals that we continue to set as a city and continue to talk about. We have a lot of rh2 and rh3 properties, and we need to help them reach their full potential, and i know that planning and mohcd can figure out how to make that work and make it manageable. Managing these type of distributed units it be a challenge. It does take some time and some thought, which i still think needs to be put into this project, quite frankly, to meet the parameters that we have. And then lastly, figuring out how to do projects like this is what will allow San Francisco to keep its vocal control and meet our Housing Needs on our terms. These are my thoughts and what im thinking about at this moment. I do think it needs some more work on how the housing affordable would work and how its going to ensure in perpetuity, and id be curiosoy comments, and im looking forward to what my fellow commissioners have to say. President koppel commissioner imperial. Commissioner imperial thank you, and thank you, commissioner tanner, for those questions andme comments, as well. And for mr. Teagues introduction, as i look into this development, as well, im you know and weve had this previous discussion when were looking into the a. D. U. Legislative proposal and how we all had a discussion in terms of the midblock open space. And i do find the findings of the Planning Department valid and in compliance with our general plan. Again, when we talk about variance requirement and with this particular project, it will impact the rezoning, which is not going to be a good process for us in terms of were trying to look into community planning. I think that a rezoning will definitely need to have a different kind of planning process, as well. In terms of the, you know, the a. D. U. As being presented as Affordable Housing, again, thats something that, you know the a. D. U. Program that we right now is appropriate, but this a. D. U. Proposal thats being at the same time having to require variance, as well, again, it does not meet the compliance. Im you know, im kind i do appreciate the project sponsors application of Affordable Housing. At the same time [inaudible] for me, for this particular project is the open space and the liveability of this. Even if you put the a. D. U. , it will still not be code compliant and liveable for the people that will be living here, so i do find so i am more leaning to more for the Planning Departments recommendation in this approval. President koppel commissioner moore . Vice president moore thank you to staff, thank you to the public, and thank you to commissioner tanner for sharing her views. I believe that there is an imbalance thats hard to accept in light of the fact that the project, given current conditions, does not meet the possibility for an a. D. U. On the substandard subdivided lot, and a. D. U. S on noncompliant lots will not be possible but further reduces any contribution of new affordable to the project at hand. What surprises me is if the applicant has worked with small, as i said, on [inaudible] issue, why nobody has helped him to understand the Code Provisions that apply to a corner lot in rh2 together with a rear yard requirement. Its a long time between february and today, when those the understanding of those restrictions could have easily brought this project in a redesign, which may be appro approvable if it would have been approached a different way. I am in support of all the provisions that the department has identified, from eliminating, completely eliminating rear yards to not being compliant with the [inaudible] to being not consistent with the general plan provisions to not being in compliance with residential Design Guidelines, so i am in support of the departments recommendation of denial, but i would be interested in pursuing the applicant to make a second tack at how to identify the project in a manner that meets our current code requirements, and im also curious to support commissioner tanner to see us develop, not in response to a particular project, affordability and below market wages using the metrics for smaller Residential Projects below the number to which were currently responding. Sorry. Im losing my voice. Thank you. President koppel commissioner diamond . Commissioner diamond so i i would like to comment both on the substantive and procedural aspects of this application. From a substantive perspective, i could see supporting the increased density on the west side of the city and in our neighborhoods, and this project certainly does that, although perhaps a little too much of it, but it certainly does propose increased density, but im also not in favor of eliminating backyards entirely, especially when the market rate unit gets to have the upstairs deck, but the rest of the units end up having no outdoor space whatever. On a procedural level, even if we wanted to increase the density, i dont think this is the way we could do it, through multiple variances and a conditional use permit. I think we should be looking to increase density on corner lots through policy changes; that i dont like the idea of ad hoc oneoff negotiations at what level of viability, how were going to do the b. M. R. S and have this be negotiation on every parcel thats brought to us. I think it makes a great deal of sense to think about increasing density and having affordable died together and doing it on corner lots, but at a policy level first so we can implement it with consistency and predictability so that neighbors know this could happen. I am interested in knowing from director hillis whether there is the kind of policy change that might already be in the works or that youre considering or if you would consider. If you could weighin on that, that would be great help. Director hillis yeah, and commissioners, thank you for the robust discussion because i think, like you, we spent a lot of time thinking about this because it does present some interesting opportunities like you talked about, like increasing densities on corner lots. We are definitely kicking around it was a recommendation in the citys Economic Recovery Task force. It provides b. M. R. S in smaller scale projects as commissioner imperial and moore talked about, which we havent seen it would be to figure out a vehicle to do. I think weve seen historically that corner lots have been built out throughout the high with higher density. Either taller buildings or projects like that which can expand on the facing front open space on a corner lot. So absolutely, this is kind of our look at future housing opportunities as we look to develop effectively in the city and look to neighborhoods that we havent especially developed in, especially Affordable Housing. Commissioner diamond thats true. Well, im delighted to know that youre looking at the policy changes. I think theyre important, and we should be adopting them as policy or legislation, so that its not done on an ad hoc basis. I am also okay if the developer wants to continue to work with the developer on a project that is more code compliant, retains more open space and tries to expand the density in a way that doesnt obtain the significant number of variances that this project would require. President koppel i am leaning towards agreeing requewith commissioner diamond on this, along with agreeing with director hillis that corner lots can be more developed for visual appearance. I do want to see more units where we can have them, so i dont think this project is worth shooting down, and i do believe this with some more careful work with the department, we could maybe get somewhere that more people are comfortable with. Commissioner moore . Vice president moore mr. Teague, could you give us a moment and guide us through whats in front of us is a c. U. Would this project basically expand on its existing footprint, still kind of expanding on rear yard requirements, and expand if it would not require a c. U. Is there neighborhood [inaudible] into a d. R. , correct . Im not sure i understood the question at the end. Could you restate that . If the project would expand in its current envelope, it would not be a c. U. , it would become, if neighbors object, a d. R. , correct . Potentially, yes. Theres still triggers, but yes, if it stayed within the parameters of the code, it would not trigger the site, and it would be open for discretionary review from the neighbors. Vice president moore the reason that im asking is because we would deny whats in front of us and have the project sponsor independently work on what he sees necessary for a compliant project and get more affordable units she decide thats the way to go forward. Director hillis just if i could add in the Corona Heights special use district, one thing thats tricky is the 3,000 square foot limit applies to any building, so its kind of regardless of the units, so, you know, it applies to a singlefamily home or a threeunit building or a twounit building with an a. D. U. So it would be difficult to even do something on the existing building and not trigger that c. U. Vice president moore just because the existing already has that limit at 2960 square foot. Director hillis i believe so, yes. Vice president moore i think the only possibility we have with this project is to basically disapprove the project and send it on its way, whatever it tries to do in the future. President koppel commissioner diamond . Commissioner diamond if we trim the project down, are there limitations on how long the project sponsor has to wait before submitting a different project . Director hillis i think its a year. Its a year before they can come back with essentially the same project. Theres no limit on the time for them to come back with a project that is not essentially the same project. So if they come back with something that is substantially different, there would be no time limit. Commissioner diamond so if we turned it down, they could apply next week for a project that expanded the existing building, had a cottage in the back, went taller, basically, anything that would get increasing density . Yeah, correct. Director hillis yeah, but i think that also, the case on that would be one, if they in essence, they need to split the lot to get you know, to go beyond whats, in essence, its the rh2 zoning. They could add an a. D. U. To the building and perhaps expand, but you couldnt get four units or more if you didnt do a variance on this lot, and it would also entail additional noticing, so i think if were interested in looking at a variation of the lot, its best to continue. Commissioner diamond okay. So if he wanted to come back with a much smaller project compared to what he has now, we could do that either through a continuance or through another application . Is that what im hearing . Director hillis correct, although id recommend if itwe continue it with direction. President koppel commissioner tanner . Commissioner tanner i think the idea to continue it makes some sense. One of the things that i want thinking about, if there was a subdivision to get greater density, and they did build another building on the resulting subdivided lot that was compliant with rear yards, i dont know if the sense if the 1200 square foot rear cottage still allows . Would there be any time limitation between when the primary units are built and when that type of rear yard cottage could be applied for . If im understanding your question, if they were to propose this and i guess this could go for any project, but if you propose a project that includes a rear yard, at what point could you apply for the permitted rear cottage a. D. U. , and thats a good question. Commissioner tanner right. I dont know that there would be a limit on that because its already permitted within that context, so wed have to look into that a little bit more to see if the specific level gets to that level of did he detail getts to that levl or if it would be required to be constructed first. Commissioner tanner to some degree, its not needed because that legislation still needs to go to the board and get passed, so it may not be 1200 square feet, it may be a different designation. But the scare is that could happen here. A lot is split, a new twounit building is built, and sometime later, that rear yart goes away. So trying to work with the department on a building typology here that does add density without some of the negatives that this project brings, maybe there is more open space, useable open space in the property, whether its a combination of roof decks or rear yards, to me, would be definitely desirable and certainly id like to see, but i think a building would it would be a twostep thing where first theres a building and later on its a cottage. I certainly would support a continuance if the department feels that there is work to be done to develop this proposal further. President koppel commissioner imperial . Commissioner imperial thank you. Im more for me, the continuance is, you know, for how long because it looks like he the project sponsor will have to come up with a new project in terms of this development. Im im my hesitation is that it may take more time and, you know, if we are rushing it for a continuance, you know, whats the appropriate timeline for this you know, for this kind of development . And again, the project sponsor will have to work with or have to do outreach with the community again, so thats my hesitation when it comes to continuance. Id rather go through disapproval and have the project sponsor go through the application where the development or the project is actually better presented to us and has also work as well with the community and with our department. President koppel commissioner diamond . Clerk commissioner diamond, youre muted . Commissioner diamond commissioner tanner raised a real point of concern for me, and that is if we do approve a smaller building on this lot, whether or not the board of supervisors passes legislation the state has already indicated that, under state law, he could build a 1200 square foot a. D. U. In the back which would defy the issue which many of us are worried about, which is no backyard, no open space. So i am very worried about that, and i dont know that, in light of that, that a continuance is the right answer. Im really struggling with that because that would completely negate what were trying to accomplish here. President koppel commissioner moore . Vice president moore mr. Horn, i have a question for you. Did i misread a statement in your report that the applicant was aware that the project would need approval and additional work, but that she did not want to do that. Is that correct . I cannot hear you clerk cle. Clerk yeah, youre muted. Correct. In a plan check from the first kind of whole complete review of the project was issued last spring, and actually, this project went through a project review meeting in august 2019 with myself, david winslow, Principal Staff architect, and a member of the a. D. U. Staff. At that plan check and meeting, these concerns about the plan checks, intensity of development and potential impact to rear yard of the adjacent property and rear yard open space have been provided to the project sponsor, which is part of the reason were at todays hearing. With disapproval, we have given alternatives that we feel that could work as a project at this site, and the sponsor, for his own reasons, has not found an alternative that works for the project that he would like to like to develop, which is why he requested to go forward with a hearing, knowing that the conversation between planning staff and the project sponsor was not going to evolve to a place where staff was in support of would be presented to us. Vice president moore id like to state to the commission that [inaudible] by us continuing it, we wont have to ask the project sponsor if what mr. Horn just summarized from august 2019 and the position in general is enough for the project sponsor to reconsider the guidance that we [inaudible] to approve a project thats not in front of us today. Thats a question that id like to ask the applicant. Is the applicant prepared to sit down and work out what is doable or is there basically a resistance to want to go down that path . Can you hear me . Vice president moore yes, i can. So no resistance. So got the plan check letter in april and have spent the last six months, trying to figure something out. One set of designs has the top two floors pulled back 5 feet from the rear yard lot line. My most recent adjustment was to get rid of the fourth floor. Jeff and i worked closely over the last few months. Ultimately, the Planning Department said i could move the Building Back five, 10 feet, and add the two a. D. U. S to the existing building. The problem i have is i cannot financially swing that, but im willing to go work with the Planning Department on something smaller. I just cant do the one that was in the letter, which is just the i think like the fivefoot, tenfoot bump out, which jeff knows better than me. Vice president moore let me just say, the Planning Commission ultimately has the authority to provide a continuance on your project. The Planning Department is pretty much following, with a lot of creativity, the rules that there are. I am prepared to support a continuance with the direction that you use every possible way on your end to work with what the Planning Department can and cannot do, and then, the project will still come back to the Planning Commission, but i still know there is enough banded wi bandwidth and creativity within that department to come back with something that we would approve. So that said, im prepared to continue this project with the provisions that theres a constructive engagement with what the Planning Department can and cannot do. I dont know exactly all the details. 5 feet here, 5 feet there. That is the Planning Departments call, and id just send all of you on the merry journey that meets all of the requirements on affordable, social Racial Equity but also something that is approvable under the code constraints and rules that we have. That is a motion, a continuance with perhaps mr. Ionin giving us a time frame or mr. Horn giving us a timeline. Clerk commissioner moore, it might be worth it to simply continue this matter indefinitely so that it does trigger another notice requirement for the neighborhood, but if you did want to continue it, i would suggest nothing less than three months. Vice president moore no, i am not willing to continue ththi this i am prepared to continue it in the good hands of mr. Horn indefinitely and have him shape the process based on Everything Else that has to come together. Clerk very good. Is that amenable to the seconder . Commissioner tanner that is, yes. Clerk excellent. I did see commissioner tanner and chan still wanting to chime in. Commissioner tanner everything i was going to bring up was what commissioner moore just brought up, which was the timing and how long for the continuance, and that was just discussed. And the only other thing i was thinking is just an idea, and im sure that mr. Horn and the planners could come up with Something Better with an existing design that may have a more open space on the lot that is split. I think the staff are very creative and can work with the applicant for these types of ideas. President koppel commissioner chan . Commissioner chan i just wanted to make the point that i am in support of the indefinite continuance, but i want it to come back to us for a longer conversation of [inaudible]. Vice president moore yes. Commissioner chan, i actually think that that could be an ongoing discussion as we need to get into the weeds of that, any way, so i think thats a great idea. President koppel anything else, Zoning Administrator teague . Sure, thank you. Ive laid out the rationale of why i think this is a challenging project as proposed for a variance. Im happy to follow the commissions lead on a continuance, if thats the path you want to go down. I just want to point out the challenge here, which is the goal seems to be to increase the density, but it is a site of a certain size, and within a certain context, and a lot of the comments that weve heard and i have given, as well, is going to be very tight on this site to be able to provide a certain amount of density while meeting a number of other requirements, whether it be design context, open space, a certain amount of rear yard, etc. , so its definitely possible so get somewhere with some kind of alternative, but you have this conflict between everything just trying to be achieved for this project. Clerk okay. Commissioners. I think weve reached a conclusion. There is a motion that has been seconded to continue this matter indefinitely with a lot of direction to the project applicant. On that motion [roll call] clerk so moved, commissioners. That motion passes unanimously, 70 and concludes your hearing today. Zoning administrator, what say you . Ill also continue the associated variance indefinitely. Clerk thank you, Zoning Administrator, and that is the end of your day today, commissioners. I congratulate you and wish you all a happy thanksgiving. President koppel were adjourn. Vice president moore thank you. Thank you very much. Director hillis everybody have a zoom thanksgiving. Welcome to the San Francisco Historic Preservation remote hearing wednesday, november 18, 2020. On february 25, 2020 the mayor declared a local emergency related to covid19. On may 29, 2020 the Historic Preservation commission was authorized to conduct hearing remotely. If you are not speaking, please mute the microphone and turnoff your video to enable public participation. Sfgovtv is broadcasting and streaming this hearing live. We will receive Public Comment for each item on the agenda. Opportunities to speak are avail