it s noted, during the additional design review process that happens when a d.r. is filed, staff, the team looks at the d.r. application and sees if any additional changes need to be made to the project based on new information and staff did a request of additional changes to the project which were made that s why the planning commission approved the project this year. project is completely code compliant and noted by staff and the residential design guidelines. the applicant has put forward a revision regarding the garage and having, rather than two parking spaces, an additional bedroom at that floor that would appear to comply with the planning code and any issues with that revision and that the board supported could be adopted as a revision here. generally interior revisions, such as that, can be done under the addenda process and addenda or not appeal able to this board but i think in spirit of transparent z. it trancetranspae applicant has put forward that change because
adversely effect the a pel apartment appellant saccess to e the quality of their life but the feeling of being in. for all these reasons i strongly recommend that your board approve the appellant s appeal. however, should your board be inclined to approve the project, i would recommend that that approval be conditioned to require a redesigned that would increase the side yard setback to the next to the appellant s property to five feet. my understanding is the original proposal was zero setback the city had required three feet. my proposal is should you be inclined to approve this project, move it to five feet. the side setback a jays end to the appellant s property. thank you again for the opportunity to speak and that would conclude my comments. thank you, next speaker, please. my name is wendy and i m a homeowner around the corner. into the microphone, please. i m sorry? speak into the microphone. my name is wendy beck man, i ve been a homeowner in the neighbor
wall will loom too close to the appellant s property and will adversely effect the a pel apartment appellant saccess to e the quality of their life but the feeling of being in. for all these reasons i strongly recommend that your board approve the appellant s appeal. however, should your board be inclined to approve the project, i would recommend that that approval be conditioned to require a redesigned that would increase the side yard setback to the next to the appellant s property to five feet. my understanding is the original proposal was zero setback the city had required three feet. my proposal is should you be inclined to approve this project, move it to five feet. the side setback a jays end to the appellant s property. thank you again for the opportunity to speak and that would conclude my comments. thank you, next speaker, please. my name is wendy and i m a homeowner around the corner. into the microphone, please. i m sorry? speak into the microphone. my
more presentation. i m going to struggle with this. can we keep it brief. teresa who is the chief of the advisory board. good evening. again, thank you all for this incredible effort and necessary and needed change for san francisco drawing all of our attention to public safety ety and all of our citizens safety. my name is is tracy and i m a mother and small business owner in the san francisco district in a police distract. i m in the city of heights and last year i became cochair of an advisory board and at the time my cochair now commander, sharon. so when we started our meeting last january, we wanted to start the meeting by addressing public safety and mention this idea of a well known program in northern california called street smarts. so we began to investigate street smarts and look at would it be feasible to bring street smarts to san francisco. i m happy to share with you tonight, we re ready to kick start san francisco street smart this spring. many of the
reached my hand up and there was blood coming out and covering in my hands and i can hear her going, oh my gosh. it s all my fault. it was really horrific. i couldn t move my neck or anywhere else. i was a lot of pain and on morphines and i couldn t stop throwing up. jakyala lost the hospital with social anxiety and lost of taste and a lost of motor skills and she sought out legal representation that was told by lawyers that she couldn t sue because the person had no assets to sue for. this had her to sort through papers to pay for an accident. the person said that i didn t have the green light. and it wasn t investigating. she wasn t ticketed and unless they see someone hit you and although everyone around says they hit you, they still don t get a ticket, so while being in the hospital or going back for appointments and speaking with the doctors or nurses and people go, so what happened and i go i got hit by a car in a crosswalk and i go, that person is in a lot of troub