Their conflicts of interest. The Party Sponsor is disingenuous. In their brief they say, please note that none of our scope of work would have been properly allowed if the proper procedures had been followed. None of these violations would have married had the violations not been caught and proper permits obtained. That argument can be used for any violations forced to get a new permit documenting all corrections to existing violations. Should any accommodations be given to project sponsor . Project sponsor claims financial and construction challenges to this unit. They also request a variance to the front and rear yards. Are there any exceptional circumstances that warrant giving of some accommodation to project sponsor . Project sponsor caused his own hardships. No one else is to be blamed. What is to be approved . The proposed plans dated from october 24 are compliant with the Fire Department as presented by planning staff. Thats what the staff report says. Add four wet sprinkler he
Particularly in terms of the health of the commercial corridor toward, the fact that retail is changing and that 340 square foot, that is tiny, but we want that. We want to be able to use that. This would be a legally approved project and along with the sign approval so we would use whatever permits would be associated with it and we would be signing it off. We have opportunities for the Building Permit and this decision by our commission. Either way. Did you have further . No. I sure commissioner melgars concerns and i things we should be doing whatever we can to support retail. I would second the motion but would also make a comment it feels like some additional legislation is necessary to get staff a little bit more discussion in this area under circumstances like this so it is not a oneoff going forward, but the size of of the cost the retailer seems out of whack with what the benefit from what the city would get from a smaller sight. I second the motion. The motion is to approve t
October 24 are compliant with the Fire Department as presented by planning staff. Thats what the staff report says. Add four wet sprinkler heads at the rear facade as a local equivalency from d. B. I. That was a quotation from staff report. How can adding four sprinkler heads to an existing Fire Prevention system be prohibitive . Why should variances be granted . No other adjacent property has similar structures in the front or rear yards to necessitate variances, especially the ones that were selfinflicted. Since the initial hearing in may of this year, the Planning Commission has been consistent in its requirements for the project. Increase density. Other projects, regardless of who is to be blamed, have been subjected to the same decisions by this Planning Commission. 284 roosevelt way, 655 alvarado street. It would be exceedingly unfair and set the wrong precedent to make an exception for this proje project. Thank you. Do we have any Public Comment in support of the d. R. Request .
Commission. President matsuda here. Commission Vice President warren here. Commissioner baldauf here. Commissioner campbell here. Commissioner foley, present. Commissioner vergara here. And commissioner right here. Thank you. Commissioners, first on your agenda is 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. Again if you are. If you wish to speak under general Public Comment, please come forward. Last call. Seeing none, general. Good afternoon. I just preserve everything. Dont touch anything. Historic things. Because its very important for whats coming in the future. Are we going . Sorry. Are we going to change . Basical
This will allow those units now become under the restrictions for health and safety but theyre not required its not requiring anyone to create the unit i favor the staff recommendation islam ill assume the supervisors supervisor wiener is okay with that id like to hear but i it sounds like that make sense to make them uniform and make the numbers that are used to calculate but number of units are the same in district 3 and 8 a beautify zone around the supervisors residents makes sense to me so, yeah im in favor of those this is good legislation and a lot of possibility that could be citywide it could absolutely help us to secure a lot of the problems we have. Commissioner wu. Thanks so ive heard a lot of comments about legal listing inlaw units there is already legislation that is totally separate. Thats correct you can legalize legal units. How many i know that hadnt been that long how many have been created in the castro and how many under the seismic rules. Weve currently received t