Child Care Planning and advisory council. I am here to speak in favor of the child care facilities because there is a huge requirement in the city. We have currently just on the citys low income list 3,000 children who we have no space for. We have no facilities for. It is one of the Biggest Challenges that the city is facing in terms of being able to provide adequate child care. One of the things that is especially desirable about this facility that it is on the ground floor. That means we would be our people would be able to serve infants and young toddlers who would be about three months probably to 18 months. Currently in two of our facilities and we are opening up another one in the fall, but we cannot serve infants and toddlers because they are not on the ground floor. There is a very big need just within our program. We have 110 children on the wait list for infants and young toddlers. You can see that there is a great need and kind of one of my mottos we can never do enough for
Able to get folks downtown quickly on the t, then the need for parking wouldnt be there. We understand that the lots there are full. Like many San Francisco neighborhoods to get a parking spot in this area you need to drive around. I have that situation. I had a car until three years ago when i said it is a pain in the butt. Finding parking is hard. I was fortunate to be in a situation to get rid of the car. A lot of folks dont have that. We are also looking at a situation that goes what do we want to prioritize . Parking spots are homes for people. At the end of the day it does frankly suck that is a tradeoff we have to figure out because parking does take up space. When trying to figure out these crazy priorities in the city, there is a lot of give and take. We absolutely understand that the desire for more parking at the site, but when looking at everything and looking at the big picture, we would argue building more homes should take priority over those requests. We ask that you do
So the restaurant has no protection from a food truck outside of the building where the restaurant is essentially. You are saying its completely outside of the scope. Because its further inside the building. Okay. And theres a gap. Im not convinced thats what this means but thats how you are saying you interpret it thats fine but i dont think thats what this means. I think this means that the primary entrance is the way you get to the restaurant. And if that entrance is more than doesnt have direct street access then this doesnt apply. Does that make sense . So you know the big double doors at Cheesecake Factory thats the primary entrance. Doesnt have direct street access so it doesnt apply. As i read this, thats what these words mean. I agree. Might want to go back and talk to whoever at public works drafted it. I agree. Its in the ordinance . Yeah, i mean so. Anyway. Probably none of that matters. The ordinance is different. So why is the language different between these two things b
Legislation. As you all know, we have the first educator Housing Project in our district. So were really excited by the results of prop e the overwhelming support to streamline both educator housing and 100 Affordable Housing. In the past year, weve been working really closely with mid penn, the Affordable Housing developer, and really closely with the community. Weve really seen a cultural shift and really support for this kind of housing thats just gotten so urgent. We are also, you know been following the lead of educators and trust in the educators that they know what kind of housing is needed. So weve been in close communications with uasf particularly on this project. We really support this legislation. We want to ensure that this Francis Scott key project qualifies for this prop e streamlining were excited to bring the Housing Projects online in many months, if not a year earlier. As my colleague ian mentioned well continue our commitment to find the funding to secure the fundin
Is proposed for continuance. Items 3a and b for case numbers 2018007725var the variance at 244 douglass street is proposed for continuance december 5, 2019 for the variance agenda. Further, commissioners, item 17 for case number 2018012337 saturn street, conditional use authorization proposed for continuance to december 19. Im pleased to inform you on your discretionary review calendar at 1299 sanchez street discretionary review has been withdrawn. I apologize welcome commissioner diamond. Thats what i was going to say. We really welcome you, commissioner diamond. I think we are going to do really good work on this commission. Does any member of the public have comment on the items for the items proposed for continuance . If you do, please give Public Comment now. Public comment is closed. Do i hear a motion . Move to continue second. Thank you commissioners, on that motion to continue items as positive proposed. [roll call vote] so moved. That motion passes unanimously 50. If the Zoni