Thursday, march 5, 2020. I would like to remind members of the public to silence your mobile devices that may sound off. When speaking before the commission, state your name for the record. I would like to take roll call at this time. [roll call] commission richards has first under your, on your agenda, is consideration of ims proposed for continuance. Item 1, case 2019001455cua, 1750 wawona street, conditional use authorization proposed for continuance. Item 2, 2019003900drp, 1526 masonic avenue proposed for continuance. Item 3, 2019017837prj proposed for indefinite continuance, and item 4, 20154109, 33 12th street has been withdrawn. Item 12, the Hazardous MaterialsManagement Procedures informational presentation is proposed for continuance to march 19, 2020. Items 13a and b for case numbers 201913cuavar proposed for continuance to april 30, 2020. Under your discretionary review calendar, items 15a and b, case numbers 2825drp at 780 kansas street has been withdrawn. And the variance component of that project is being proposed for continuance to march 25 to the Zoning Administrators variance hearing agenda. I have no other items proposed for continuance. I did have one speaker card from mr. Dr atler on item 13a if he wishes no, he does not wish to speak to the continuance. So that is all i have. Would anyone else like to publicly comment on the items proposed for continuance . Come on up. Ryan patterson representing the project sponsor for items 13a and b. This is a cu for section 317. We are, its a section 317cu trying to preserve an existing unit that was reconfigured with permits about 15 years ago. This unit is tenantoccupied, and while we have recently received concerns from planning, we would like to work with planning staff to try to resolve those and to support a continuance, request a continuance to april 30 to do that. Thank you very much. Commissioner moore. Im sorry, so one more time. Anyone else for Public Comment . Seeing none, Public Comment is closed. Commissioner moore. Move to continue items as indicated in addition with item 12, 13, 15, with dates in the record. Second. Thank you, commissioners. On that motion to continue items as proposed then. [roll call vote] so moved, that motion passes unanimously 60. If the Zoning Administrator could opine on items 13b and 15b. Sure. Item 13b, variance will be continued to april 30, joint hearing of Planning Commission, and item 15b will be continued to the regular variance hearing on march 25. Thank you. Commissioners, that will place us under your consent calendar. All matters listed here under 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 the 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. 49 missouri street and item 6, case 022530cua, 4 west portal avenue, conditional use authorization. I have no speaker cards. Would any members of the public like to comment on the consent calendar . Seeing none, Public Comment is closed. Commissioner johnson. Move to approve items 5 and 6 with conditions. Second. Thank you, commissioners. On that motion to approve items 5 and 6 under your consent calendar, [roll call vote] so moved, that motion passes unanimously 60 placing us under commission matters, item 7, consideration of Adoption Draft minutes for february 20, 2020. I have no speaker cards. Would anyone from the public like to comment on the draft minutes . Seeing none, Public Comment is closed. Commissioner diamond. Second. On that motion to adopt the minutes for february 20, [roll call vote] so moved, commissioners. That motion passes unanimously 60. Item 8, commission comments and questions. Seeing none, commissioners, department matters. Commissioner moore. I would like to thank commissioner richards for his service. And i will miss him as a colleague and an effective person being on this commission with us. Thank you, commissioner richards. If there are no other comments, we can move onto department matters, item 9, directors announcements. Commissioners, good afternoon. With the Department Staff here in a unique week as we bid farewell to director ram and await director hilli say. Director hillis. Item 10, review of past events at the board of supervisors, board of appeals and Historic Preservation commission did not meet yesterday this weeks Land Use Committee heard the in length occupancy. The ilo ordinance proposes to regulate occupancies and dwelling units between 30 and 365 days. You heard this item twice, back on january 30 when you voted to recommend approval with modifications. Those modifications include enacting interim controls on new i. L. O. S, collecting data on the scale and clarifying admin amendments for nonprofit organizations. Monday was the second time the ordinance was heard at the Land Use Committee. This week at the beginning of the hearing, supervisor peskin announced another continuance to give him time to meet with representatives and advocates. He invited planning staff to co. Staff expressed concerns over the Unanswered Questions in the ordinance. Supervisor peskin moved to continue the hearing to march 9. The ordinance that would amenity bay windows and horizontal projections passed its first read. The appeal for the environmental termination of 1581 Howard Street was continued to april 14. Thats all i have for you today. Thanks. Seeing no question, 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. I have two speaker cards. [calling names] i have three minutes, please, sir . Thank you. Good afternoon, commissioners. I second Vice President moores comments about commissioner richards, and i totally agree with them. Anyway, i looked on your website for roof deck policy and you cant find it there on the website. And so i think the official roof deck policy installed since 2018. So something last spring that was tried but i dont think that went ahead. And i have a handout but i cant find that on the website. So i think that roof decks should be defined as the following open space on the uppermost area of a structure requiring a stair penthouse or hatch for access. I think the plans often conflate this type of roof deck with the access required at the top with a roof deck that is off living space, created by setbacks that reduce the mass, particularly setbacks overlooking rear yards, and i told these should be called terraces because that matches the definition in the dictionary. Roof decks that require stair penthouses or a hatch should not be permitted on smaller projects if the open space requirement can be met through preservation of natural carboncapturing rear yards. Here are the negative issues as i see them with roof decks that require a stair penthouse or a hatch. They add hundreds of thousands of dollars to Construction Cost and sales price of one to threeunit buildings and that decreases relative affordability. They increase the mass. I mean even if you have the glass, when you see them, its mass, and people put couches from Restoration Hardware up there, and that makes mass. I think theyre also used for the marketing of the projects by capturing views and my favorite mantra is no one entitled to a view. I dont think they should be up there for that reason. And finally, theyre really not viable in a windy, foggy city like San Francisco. So thats my comment on that. And heres the 150 words for the minutes. Thank you all very much. Thank you. Next speaker, please. Can i get the overhead, please . Great. Commissioners, my name is joe butler. Im an architect here any city. Im here about 526 lombard street which is on your agenda for next week. Only recently hired by aquaintances of 20 years who live near the project but were traveling during the period of 311 notice. Several things are missing. And several things are incorrect in the application that was submitted by the project sponsor and their architect, second architect on the job. First on the permit application, you can see that the new construction, and im talking about the rear building which will be wholly new construction on a required year yard for which variances will be sought, you can see that a site survey done by a Civil Engineer as required, we dont have a site survey. Second, it fronts on two streets or more precisely, a street and an ally, at the back of the property is fielding street. The back of the property is fielding street, at the front is lombard street and if one reads the code carefully you have to use the street to measure. So in the back, they are reducing the required rear yard by adding a new building where theres currently lawn. And its at least 34 feet high from grade. But thats not where we measured. We measured from the top of the curb, at the midpoint of the two on the up and the low ends of the lot, on its main frontage. Also when we reduce the rear yard, the last 30 feet, the last 10 feet of the building is supposed to be reduced to 30 feet in height. So that we dont have a big, shady yard. In this case, there is no such setback, but we think two things. One that 261 should apply, and the sun point should be observed. You can see what happens to the third floor. There we go. If, however, the project sponsor were to drop that to 30 feet above grade or the midpoint of the top of the curb, maybe four or five feet as ive shown here, the sun plane wouldnt interfere with the 30 height thats required for the last 10 feet of averaging. You go down a longer list. Heres the Planning Department submittal guidelines which call for the site survey. Heres the fee schedule. This one is rich. The first architect put 300,000 for a 3800 square foot new house. Its really over a million. That means that the Planning Department has lost down on about 12,000 in fees. Thank you. Next speaker, please. Good afternoon, president koppel and members of the Planning Commission. My name is kathleen cortney. Russian Hill Community association. Two years ago, the russian Hill Community association sent a letter of support for the reappointment of rich hillis as a commissioner sitting on the Planning Commission at that time we noted that there were a couple of things that we disagreed with the commissioner about, but we appreciated his comments. Now, you more than anyone else knows that theres a difference between the skill set required of a Planning Commissioner and a skill set required of a planning director. Youre also well aware of the concerns Many Community members have expressed about the appointment. But more than this, youre complicit in the decision of the reappointment or the appointment of rich hillis as Planning Commissioner, because you are the commission that recommended reviewed applicants, that gutted them, that looked at the minimum requirements and recommended the recommended names to the mayor. So i call to your attention, and i urge you, and i really request that you be aware of your responsibility, because starting now, your responsibility extends beyond the idea of simply looking at what comes before you at the Planning Commission. Your responsibility also is to the Planning Department. It is up to you now to make sure that the qualifications, the protocols, the mentoring, the education of our planners is really disciplined and professional, because if we dont have a professional architect or urban planner in charge of the Planning Department, may i respectfully request that that responsibility now falls to you. Thank you for your consideration. Thank you. Next speaker, please. Hi, everyone. My name is anna and im a resident and artist at 221 11 street, also known as the dovetail community. At dovetail we house artists and their workspaces at affordable rates. We are being threatened with eviction despite working with the landlord in good faith to legalize our space. We need the Planning Department to accept our application for conditional use of our space under the act. We are one of the last communities in San Francisco of offering space for movement arts, visual arts, live workspaces at below market rate. As a dancer and Movement Artist personally dovetail represents to me a haven. The availability of affordable indoor practice spaces and the possibility of hosting Creative Community gatherings are rarities in San Francisco. Spaces like dovetail make it possible for me and many others like me to pursue the arts and foster Strong Communities around the arts. We want to be in good graces with the neighbors and landlord. We support the success of the restaurant downstairs from us in many ways like encouraging the patronization, being conscious of noise, especially during their Business Hours, and offering other forms of assistance throughout the years. Sadly, the landlord has blocked two times our notarized permit request and trying to evict us on the platform that we are not doing the work. City ordinance requires this to proceed and obligated to provide codecompliant housing. Planning allowed the withdrawal of conditional use application by the property owner. The legislation which you read into the last meeting is clear, the owner should not have a discussion to withdraw legally filed conditional use application. Instead they are required to bring the building into compliance with residential code and legalize the space. Please help protect dovetail and the artists of San Francisco. Thank you. Thank you. Next speaker, please. My name is brittney, and im also a tenant at 221 first street. Im a Mental Health counselor. We work with people struggling with housing and im also a student in the urban studies and Planning Program at s. F. State with a focus on homelessness and Affordable Housing. The dovetail Community Means a lot to me as it provides a space for me to live affordbly as im working and going to school. It is also a place for hosting activism events around topics like Affordable Housing and encouraging people to participant politically such as voting parties to inform people about ballot measures. It is critical to me to maintain currentlyexisting Affordable Housing in the city so students and social workers like myself and avarices can live, work and study in a home that offers secure and Affordable Housing and encourages participation in the greater community. This is our home, and it would mean a tremendous amount if you would support the Planning Department to accept our conditional use permit as it is required by the act and your applications that we can move forward in the legalization process to become residents. Thank you. Thank you. Anyone else . Come on up. Good afternoon, president koppel, fellow commissioners. With no neighborhood counsel and San Francisco coalition. Im here to echo what ms. Cortney brought to your attention and our basically total surprise from the outcome of who you recommended as part of the roster for the planning director. We have brought up issues in terms of mr. Hillis qualifications, thats not new. But one thing we have not talked enough about is his outlook on what neighborhoods are supposed to be transformed in light of all this push for denseification. We really look to you to make sure that something that is going to come out of the Planning Department that most likely is going to reflect that is going to be equitable and just. As an example, i know that director hillis used to often time bring up the residential expansion threshold and would oftentimes bring up that maybe we should bring it back. As some of the speakers here mentioned, that program was kneecapped, guilty as charged, i was one of those people that worked very hard to make sure it was kneecapped. The reason it was kneecapped was because it was unjust. You cannot go and up zone well, up zone in a sense, of the Square Footage of the entire city of San Francisco to come up with a Floor Area Ratio that is virtually covering maybe 5 of San Francisco would live up to that. So thats an example that we are looking to you to look into these programs t