am going to move that this permit be upheld. president goh: vice president garcia, another way to do it would be to allow commissioner fung to make his motion. vice president garcia: i really do not care. the one vote that moots his, and then we have to go upon the process of placing conditions on the permit. if this fails, there is no need for anything else either. director goldstein: i would say that one of these might conflict with what you are suggesting, which is the first one. the firm is planning commission condition is about the doors remain closed, one remaining open, and then the other two remaining open if weather permits. which seems to conflict. vice president garcia: thank you for bringing that up. i think condition a is more stringent than that, so i would replace the first condition with this condition. director goldstein: ok. commissioner hwang: 4 point of clarification, are you suggesting that proposal a the condition? vice president garcia: yes. commissioner hwang: so no hinge on the door. vice president garcia: i would absolutely entertain that. commissioner hwang: i am just asking if that was part of your condition. i am not adding to it, just asking. vice president garcia: whether it was going to be permanently closed and work, or some device on the door to ascertain, or make certain rather that it is closed as much as possible. commissioner fung: commissioners, adding conditions requires four votes. vice president garcia: true. president goh: that is why i suggested may be entertaining commissioner fung's motion. vice president garcia: then i'd agree with you. commissioner fung: i would like to move to revoke the permit. secretary pacheco: so we have a motion from commissioner fung to revoke the permit. director goldstein: on the basis that it does not adequately address the noise affecting the neighbors? ok. secretary pacheco: to revoke its permit on the basis that the neighbors' noise concerns are not adequately addressed. on that motion to revoke, president goh, vice president garcia, commissioner peterson, commissioner hwang. thank you. the vote is 3-2 to revoke the permit. the city charter requires four votes to overturn any department item, so without motion, this would be upheld as is with no new conditions. vice president garcia: the motion would be what was discussed earlier, with the exception of a first condition, which i do not have in front of me, from the planning department, and requiring, and i would ask even though he is against having this permit go forward, i would ask commissioner fung, who is an architect, to say which door, even though it may not be effective, which door would be the most effective. which type of door. commissioner fung: a solid door. vice president garcia: how would it open and close? commissioner fung: you know, i am sure that the bar and restaurant operation would like a door that operates, a double acting door, one that swings both ways. the problem with the those is that the type of hardware for the self closing on that is very limited, in terms of just being a combination hinge and closer, and those are very weak and how they'd use the door. president goh: commissioner fung, what about the idea that was raised about a vestibule door? the two-sided door, a door that has some space in between it, once it opens. commissioner fung: that is creating a vestibule, and in that case, it acts as a sound track. i think they use them in the zoo, do they not? commissioner fung: i do not know. commissioner garcia's motion. vice president garcia: i think that would take space from inside the bar. i do not know how much of the concern is that. how about the handicapped doors, where you press a button to enter or go out. commissioner fung: those only open in one direction. vice president garcia: i understand that, but you could still press from each side to have it open in one direction. commissioner fung: those also close very slowly. the longer the door stays open, the more there will be potential noise problems. if -- if you would, commissioner garcia, accept the modification of condition one, to the point where one door is operable -- vice president garcia: which sorta has some aspect of compromise a. commissioner fung: yes, and that door whenever a closer built into it which is adjustable to the point -- there are certain codes related to the pressure, the resistance that a door has an opening and closing. and i would recommend then that the door that is most westerly be that operable door, with self closers, with it is in a double acting position or not. vice president garcia: and could replace some sort of restriction such that -- it would be so hard to enforce, but it will still have the language of their, maybe a notice of special restriction or something, that when people are not coming in and out of that door, that door is to be closed, and -- commissioner fung: we did state that if there is no hold-open device on it. vice president garcia: you are not allowed to propping open. do you need greater clarification for the motion, victor? mr. pacheco? director goldstein: i just want to make sure that the department of building inspection and understand that as far as the self closing door and hinges, they are the ones to be enforcing that, so i just want to make sure that they'll understand what it is that would be required. vice president garcia: commissioner fung, i do not want to put words in his mouth. these are apparently pressurized, so you can vary the rate at which they close. >> department of building inspection. there are several requirements for doors, depending on what purpose they serve. there is maximum and minimum force, and depending on the location of the door, it may be self closing or automatic closing. those are generally terms that we use for fire doors, off and just for clarification, it closes upon activation of a smoke detector or alarm. the self closing door is normally closed, and it would close automatically, so it is in a normally closed position, and then they have the hardware. and just to clarify, a double at the door, which will swing in 180 degrees, we see them a lot in restaurants, but there is a limitation with a certain occupant load, like around 150 or something, for safety. director goldstein: so just to restate this, to uphold a permit and that the planning department conditions remain in effect except for item a, that the permit holders proposal a in the brief most recently submitted, dated september 15, be implemented, and that is that the most westerly door be the offer will door and be home with self closing hinges. is that accurate? commissioner fung: yes. director goldstein: -- president goh: director goldstein, i do not have -- director goldstein: i can provide you with a copy of that. commissioner hwang: the last page. president goh: i have got it. on the front. president goh: and then, item d, the patio door would close at 10:00 p.m., and the bifold doors shall remain fully closed, and that should include the door we are speaking about now. right? vice president garcia: yes, i cannot find those conditions. do you want to just read them? does any other commissioner want to review that? president goh: would you like made it -- like me to read them? i can read them into the record, if you want. vice president garcia: does anybody want that? commissioner fung: i think in your motion, that there is one operable door, so wherever there is reference to multiple bifold doors, that would be modified. vice president garcia: right. president goh: i think that is in a, because it talks about the open door, but i think that item d is inconsistent with your motion. vice president garcia: yes, so we would just strike the second sentence of d. secretary pacheco: is the board ordering the sealing of these doors? commissioner fung: permanently shut. vice president garcia: i am glad we are doing this. i think at some point in these various hearings we have had on this issue, item h, commissioners, has language to do with the liaison office, and i think at some point, supervisor farrell's office offer to be that liaison. i am sure they are not going to want to hear from -- without putting a lot of pressure on the brickyard and the gentleman, so if we can incorporate some type of language that would incorporate having that liaison office person being from supervisor farrell's office? they have already said they would do that. director goldstein: i do not know if we have the authority to do that. vice president garcia: then i will leave it to the good faith of the gentleman. director goldstein: you can put it there that there be such a person. commissioner fung: it is already in there. vice president garcia: i always had a problem with that. director goldstein: it could be someone other than that person. vice president garcia: without specifying that it could be somebody in commissioner farrell"s office. ok, someone other than any owner of the brickyard president goh: -- of the brickyard. president goh: i have a question. what happens if the door is left open? what is it going to be? mr. sanchez, do you have any thoughts? >> thank you. scott sanchez, planning department. any violations better authorized in required by this board would be a violation, and we would do our best to enforce that, including issuing notices of violation and penalty, which could then be appealed back to this board. president goh: we started this evening in public comment with somebody who claimed that a condition of this commission was violated. ok. vice president garcia: and before the roll was called on the motion, i do not know exactly how to do this, but i think we have done things like this before. i would request that if it has not already been done so that any violations in the past that should have resulted in a fine to the brickyard be looked into and strictly enforced. been like having started the debt without profit permitting. i am sure they are the have taken care of that, but just to be sure. director goldstein: commissioners, do you need the motion restated? president goh: yes, please. director goldstein: i believe the motion is to uphold a permit on the condition that the planning department conditions of approval be upheld except for item a and the second sentence of item d, that the permit holder's pose of a, in his brief from september 15, 2 delfín 11, be implemented, and that the westernmost door be operable door and hong with self closing hinges, and then finally, the person be someone other than the owner of the brickyard or an owner of the brickyard -- september 15, 2007. my apologies. planning commission. call the roll. secretary pacheco: on that motion with all of the conditions as read into the record, and it was commissioner fung's motion -- vice president garcia's motion, on that motion, commissioner fung, president goh, commissioner peterson, commissioner hwang, and thinking. the vote is 5-0. the permit is upheld with all of those conditions. director goldstein: thank you. president goh, there is no further business. president goh: we are adjourned. [gavel] captioned by the national captioning institute --www.ncicap.org-- >> thank you very much. thank you, everybody for attending. it is approximately 3:30, 3:40. i want to thank you for your service. thank you very much. we have supervisor chu, we have commissioner norton and supervisor avalos. it has been a while. it is like the first day back at school. we are back in business. clerk, please read our first agenda item. >> the hearing to review and discuss the ongoing partnership between the san francisco unified school district and hope sf. is there anything that you would like to say, colleagues? let's get this started. >> good afternoon. thank you for the opportunity to be here, board members as well as board of supervisor members. we have the exciting opportunity to share with you the partnerships that we have put the school district. i will start by giving a general overview of hope sf. we will have the principal at malcolm x, which is a elementary school which is adjacent to our first development site. we will talk about the partnerships we have had with her school. we will have somebody come up to talk about the task force recommendations that have come out. it has come up with education recommendations that we would like to share with you. they are going to share a little bit more about an exciting partnership about our choice neighborhoods grant. with that, i will get started. for those of you who do not kow what hope sf, it is the public housing transportation effort that is aimed at renovating that sites. currently have 8 sites. ultimately, at the end of the revitalization effort, which could be a 20-year process because of the scale of magnitude, we are hoping to create 2500 public housing units. we want to bring those back on line. we are going to create 1000 new affordable housing units and new units. we want to create a mixed in common environment where you have housing at each strata. the thing we but like to bring up is something that is very important to the team. hope sf is guided by a very distinct principles. it was developed by a diverse group of people. that was convened by supervisor maxwell. but that task force consisted of community-based organizations, advocates, residents, the business community, experts on affordable housing. if this is going to be a 20-yr initiative that is going to have an impact on one neighborhood, it could have an impact on other neighborhoods. the impact will be on one neighbor could. this will be on the social and the physical aspect of that. we are going to have very important government principles that we are going to develop over the next 20 years. what we did is we develop those principles, which i will share with you later. in addition to building desk, we wanted to make sure that there was an appropriate structure as well. we located this initiative within the mayor's office of housing. this is in partnership with the housing authority and the redevelopment agency. because there is a physical and human aspect of this, we are trying to it change the lives of this as well. we worked with several different service organizations as well as agencies to create a whole service connection program to the site. we have assembled a development team that is among the best in the business. it is not about physical, it is about the social. we have partnered with a lot of nonprofits as well as for profit organizations. some are partnering with us to raise $25 million for the initiative. what got us here? about five years ago, we looked at the public housing portfolio and realize to bring it up to the point where people cannot live in affordable, decent housing it was going to take a certain amount of money to do that. this was at a time when the housing organization was operating at about 80% of its bubble. it was not operating at the level it needed to in terms of funding. that was unacceptable to us. we decided i would cannot depend on the federal government to do that, we would launch hope sf. that is how we got here. we are serving families that are dealing with some of the most challenging social issues that exist. we took guidance from a seven corners study. if there are seven corners of san francisco that has the largest concentration of folks that interact with their system. four of those are run public housing. it was the confluence of all of those factors that we need to do something. housing is one of our top priorities. we were able to do hope sf and create this mixed in come model. most of these are at a mill or density than most san francisco neighborhoods. we were able to add density which allowed us to add market rate to the equation. the market rate is going to allow us to have the public housing validation. this came together to create a situation that was feasible to us. we are going to have affordable housing, market-rate ownership and below market rate ownership. as i mentioned before, we continue to be guided by these principles. i will not bring you through the list. i want to make sure that my other partners tell you about the great things we are doing with the schools. i wanted to make one thing very clear. we are ensuring that there is no loss of public housing. when we started this initiative, that is what we said we would do. the second thing, i want to make sure it is very clear, we are here to minimize displacement. in previous transformations, what has happened was that section 8 vouchers were given to families. families gets settled where they are. you are lucky to get about 30% of the individuals coming back to the development where that happens. if you like to stay here during construction, you can stay here during construction. you have the opportunity to stay. we want you to come back. that is what we will continue to do, to try to make that happen. we have three distinct goals for hope sf. we thought that it was important to lay out goals from the beginning. we are going to evaluating the ourselves throughout the life of the initiative. to improve the existing conditions of the residents to create a thriving, sustainable neighborhood. and make sure that they receive the benefits of the public housing transformation and to make sure that we create the most sustainable affordable housing that we can. four of our five active sites four of our five active sites are in the bay vi