Skip to main content

tv   BOS Rules Committee  SFGTV  March 7, 2022 10:00am-1:01pm PST

10:00 am
10:01 am
10:02 am
10:03 am
10:04 am
10:05 am
10:06 am
>> good morning and welcome to the rules committee of the san francisco board of supervisors for today monday march 7, 2022. i'm the chair of the committee aaron peskin joined to my right by vice chair supervisor raphael mandelman and to our left is supervisor connie chan. welcome back to our first in-person meeting in two years. first one what hopefully will be
10:07 am
many years to come of in-person meetings. i want to use this moment to thank our clerk mr. young and all of the members of department one, the clerk's office for the incredible work that you have done keeping all together remotely over the last two years. we are going to start with a hybrid meeting or individuals will be able to call in and individuals will be able to testify remotely. at some point, we will return to the old normal. this is still an evolving situation. welcome to our first in-person meeting. mr. young do you have announcements? >> clerk: yes, the board of supervisors are convening hybrid meetings allowed in-person attendance and public comment while supervising remote access by telephone.
10:08 am
the board recognizes equitable public access is essential and will be taking public comment in the following ways. first, public comment will be taken on each item on this agenda. those attending in-person will be allowed to speak person and we will take those who are waiting on the telephone line. for those watching channel 26 or 99 and, the public call in number is streaming across the screen. the number is (415)655-0001. then enter the meeting i.d., which is 2489 671 0734. then press pound and pound again. you will hear the meeting discussions but you are muted and listen mode only. when your item of interest comes up and public comment is called, those joining us in person should line up to speak and those on telephone should dial star 3 to be added to the speaker line. if you are on the telephone, remember to turn down your tv and all listening devices you
10:09 am
may be using. we'll take public comment from those attending in-person first and then we'll go to our public comment telephone line. you may submit public comment in writing either of the following ways. e-mail to myself the rules committee clerk. if you submit public comment by e-mail it will be forwarded to the supervisors aincluded part of the file. items acted upon today's meeting are expected to appear on board of supervisors agenda on march 13, 2022. that concludes my initial announcement. >> supervisor peskin: please read the first item. >> clerk: item number 1 motion approve or rejecting mayor's
10:10 am
nomination for appointment of alex ludlum term expiring >> supervisor peskin: colleagues , we have a nomination by the mayor for the successor agency to the redevelopment agency known as the commission on community investment and infrastructure. which as you may recall, redevelopment in the state of california was dissolved back in the days of governor jerry brown. there are a number of ongoing projects that that agency has. i note that it is now without an executive director. there's an acting executive director in the capable hands of jim morales.
10:11 am
i had the opportunity to personally interview mr. ludlum and want to thank mayor breed for what i think is a very good appointment. this is for the balance of the team that end at the beginning of november this calendar year. mr. ludlum i like to invite you up and have you make some statements. you are clearly very well steeped in real estate and land use matters. i note and appreciate the fact that you as a volunteer are on the board of directors of the people's community benefit district along with an impressive list of things that you do and have done on your resume. the floor is yours. good morning.
10:12 am
>> the first in person testimony in two years. >> thank you chair peskin. thank you supervisors. i'm very honored to be giving the first testimony back in person. i'm very honored to be nominated for this role. this commission is especially appealing to me, i've been working in housing in san francisco for the majority of my career. this office will ultimately have say over the vast majority of affordable housing to be built in this town over the next 10 or 20 years. i've been working in various community groups and this feels like a much more efficient way to contribute to one of the central issues of our city in this time. thank you very much. >> chair peskin: thank you
10:13 am
mr. ludlum. you seem to be clear when we met about the role that a commissioner plays both to support and to interact with question the executive director, not otherwise mettle in the day-to-day affairs of the commission but to give it broad high level oversight and accountability. i appreciated that very fresh understanding that some commissioners do not understand. i want to say that for the record. >> sure. chair peskin made reference to the people's c.b.d. i think it was fairly unique in its origins when we saw the seven member volunteer committee. four of us were in our early 30s late 20s. only two of us owned property in
10:14 am
the district. once we formed we established a proper 25 person board but, there was a learning curve for us. i worked hard to put in policies that the board fulfilled this role, which is monitoring the activity of our executive director and making sure he's doing what he supposed to do but not calling him up to report their thoughts on various entry level employees and that sort of thing. it's been a learning process. i'd be happy to take what i've learned working with board to the commission. >> chair peskin: any questions from colleagues on the rules committee? mr. clerk, -- supervisor chan?
10:15 am
>> supervisor chan: i want to thank mayor's office and thank you so much for this appointment and i know the last one we have quite bit of question about qualification. i think this is more of the type of candidates that we like to see coming forward in the sense where someone actually has done community work and have expertise in the area and being able to provide technical support and advice on the commission that is critical. thank you. >> chair peskin: point understood. well taken supervisor chan. with that, mr. clerk, why don't we open up to public comment. are there any members of the public who are present in these chambers who like to make any comment on item number one >> clerk: members of the public who wish to speak are joining
10:16 am
us, should line up to speak. for those listening remoting please call (415)655-0001, enter the meeting i.d. 2489 671 0734 then press pound pound. once connected you need to press star 3 to enter the speaker line. for those in the queue, please continue to wait until the system indicate you have been unmuted. then you may begin your comment. there does not appear to be in the room to speak at this time. we do have forum listeners and two callers on the line >> chair peskin: first speaker please. >> caller: good morning supervisors. my name is al.
10:17 am
i'm speaking in support of the nomination of alex ludlum to the successor agency commission. i known alex since 2014. he's been active in the real estate industry first in real estate brokerage and then real estate development. we worked with him on the representation of united plans on purchase of its new home. he managed the transaction and helped us close the deal. alex has been active in helping united players not only on raising capital for the current homes but on expansion of its future homes. alex has experience complicated transactionings, has assisted developer on st. joseph art society and has experience with
10:18 am
community benefit agreement working on the market street project. he has board experience. he currently sits on the board of the community benefit district and active member of that organization. i strongly recommend alex as the commissioner for the successor agency commission. thank you. >> chair peskin: thank you former commissioner lowe. big words, they are important for this panel to hear. next speaker. >> caller: good morning. chair peskin, supervisors mandelman and chan. my name christian majority i'm the executive director of the people's community district.
10:19 am
i miss you guys too. chair peskin, supervisor mandelman and chan. i'm calling in support of alex ludlum's appointment to this commission. as the vice president of the benefit district, alex has been instrumental in getting us off the ground. his work on the steering committee really helped us get up and running. his knowledge about all things real estate zoning and planning was invaluable to me as i got things started at the onset of the pandemic. he never missed a meeting. always diligent and prepared, makes useful contributions. no nonsense but respective collaborative and he brings a great heart and value to the discussion. i support his appointment to this commission. i thank you for your time this
10:20 am
morning. >> chair peskin: thank you mr. martin. more important words from another respected member from the community. are there other speakers? >> clerk: that was the last caller for this item. >> chair peskin: all right, public comment is closed. i note that it is weird to have a gavel in my hand again after two years. with that, colleagues if there is no objection or comment i will make a motion to send item one to the full board with positive recommendation. mr. clerk on that motion roll call please. let's make the amendments remove the word rejecting and the word rejects. that is approving and approves. >> clerk: on the motion to amend. [roll call vote].
10:21 am
the motion passes without objection. >> chair peskin: on the motions amended to send it to the full board with recommendation a roll call please. >> clerk: on that motion. [roll call vote] the motion passes without objection. >> chair peskin: next item please. >> clerk: next item is item number two ordinance amending the administrative code to establish office of cybersecurity and position of chief information security officer who in coordination with the department technology professionals is responsible for preventing, detecting the damage to city infrastructure and information resources from cyber-related incidents.
10:22 am
and provide the city administrator with -- members of the public who wish to provide public comment on this item may line up to speak or little -- if you are joining us remotely call the public comment line at (415)655-0001. the meeting i.d. is 2489 671 0734. then press pound and pound again. once connected, you will need to press star 3 to enter the speaker line. the system prompt indicate you have raised your hand. >> chair peskin: thank you mr. young.
10:23 am
colleagues, this is timely given the situation on the planet earth as it relates to cybersecurity. this is pursuant to the executive order by the mayor that codifies existing practices as it relates to our committee on information technology in the administrative code. we are joined by city administrator's office. i do have related comments. this legislation looks fine to me. are there any comments from committee members before we hear. welcome to being our first city department to testify in two years. >> good morning chair peskin, vase chair mandelman. i serve as deputy city administrator. i'm here to provide an overview
10:24 am
of the proposed changes to the administrative code which as chair peskin indicated are to strengthen the cybersecurity efforts. it recognizes the city chief information security officer role and formally creates the office of cybersecurity. i will walk through the few proposed changes. i don't know -- i did provide a presentation to the clerk. proposed ordinance will amend chapter 22 of the administrative code to formally establish the office of cybersecurity and position city chief information security officer. outline responsibility for the department in alignment with existing coit policies and the
10:25 am
mayor's executive director. add the city ciso as member of coit and designate the city manager as chair of coit. when the primary proposed changes is to add section 22i to the administrative code to establish the office of cybersecurity as part of the department of technology and under the leadership of the city's chief information security officer. the office of cybersecurity is designed to coordinate's the city response to cybersecurity threat. the city ciso will continue to reduce the risk of compromise to the city's information resources and lead the city's response to incidents. section 22i detailed several responsibilities for city departments.
10:26 am
since 2016, committee on information technology, known as coit has adopted policies, requirement and standards to help provide a consistent city wide foundation for cybersecurity in the city. the responsibility set forth in section 22i reflect responsibilities set forth through coit policies. each department needs to designate a departmental information security officer to coordinate cybersecurities with the ciso. the department need to conduct cybersecurity risk assessment and maintain a cybersecurity emergency response plan. which should be shared and review by the office of cybersecurity. the ciso will support cybersecurity. in addition to the new language added in section 22i the ordinance revises other sections
10:27 am
of chapter 22 to add city see co as a permanent member. the current code language provides for the possibility of different chairs every two years but this change reflects the way coit has been operating for the past 10 years. section 22a4 is updated to have the city's chief information officer to be promoted to the city administrator by the mayor. but the change along more reflect the way past appointments have been done for this position. that concludes my overview presentation. i'm available for questions. also the city's information security officers are available to help address questions as needed. >> chair peskin: thank you. one question i had relative to the composition of coit in so
10:28 am
far as all the designated appointees under the administrative code have the authority both in the existing legislation as well as the proposed legislation to send designees as a matter of practice, who actually attends? >> from the department? >> chair peskin: from the eight permanent members, who appears in person and who appears with the designee? >> it varies by meeting and by department. each of the departments have the department head listed as the member and they have to submit a designee letter if there are individuals who will attend coit in their place. often times it's a mix of department heads and their designees at any given meeting. it depends on the particular meeting where we might be
10:29 am
talking about specific high level topics. >> chair peskin: in terms of functionality and consistency, does that work well enough? >> it seems as though it has been working. we have not heard complaints about it. we have to follow-up with the department head as needed. often times, the designees are individuals most responsible for implementing the policies. that's beneficial, they can most directly speak how the policies will impact the department. >> chair peskin: on a related matter and may be this is more in the wheel house of d.t., there was talk a year or two back in the wake of 19b
10:30 am
surveillance oversight legislation of a chiefly privacy -- chief privacy officer. can you tell us what the status of that is and whether you're still seeking that and not for today but whether that will be an appropriate person if that position were come to exist to add to the coit membership? >> the creation of a privacy officer with the chiefly privacy officer was discussed within the city administrator's office. couple of budget cycles ago. ultimately it was cut during the board budget process. currently there's no staffing for chiefly privacy officer position or any support staff and any related work under 19b or other privacy work related to the privacy charter amendment is being done by a staff member of coit currently.
10:31 am
>> chair peskin: there was a staff member who was doing that, i believe that staff member took a job with the state of california. >> that was the director of coit. that individual did take a job with the state and there's a new coit director has started. she has begun doing some of that work in addition to her other work, which is be responsible for the day-to-day activities of coit as a whole. >> chair peskin: may be that is a conversation to have as our budget is formulated in advance of may and june. i will take that offline with you. i can see a parallel piece of legislation that may be worth policy consideration with regard to that position and the role that plays in our government given our overarching concerns about focusing on privacy throughout our departments and through coit. with that, are there any comments or questions from
10:32 am
committee members? seeing none. why don't we open up to public comment? are there any members in the chambers who like to comment. mr. pollock, do you have anything you like to add sir? [ indiscernible ] okay. are you still at d.t. or lafco now? our new local agency formation commission executive director is in the chambers. jeremy pollock welcome. with that, mr. young -- >> clerk: members of the public who wish to speak on this item should line up to speak along the windows. for those listening remotely call (415)655-0001. enter the meeting i.d. 2489 671
10:33 am
0734 then press pound pound. once connected, you will need to press star 3 to enter the speaker line. for those in the queue, continue to wait until the system indicate you have been unmuted and that will be your cue to begin your comment. there does not appear to be anybody in the meeting room for public comment at this time. we can move ton to our retote call in speakers. we have three people on the line. >> caller: this is david pilpel. good morning. it's weird to be calling into a room meeting like this. on the ordinance on page 3 line
10:34 am
20 i believe that should be section 2. there are two section threes and no section two. i believe that should be section 2 on page 3 line 22, i believe at the end, cybersecurity, and, should have a space between security. on page 5 line 4, i'm wondering if it should be the responsibility of the m.t.a. board or if it can be the m.t.a. director or simply the m.t.a. shall provide rather than charging the m.t.a. board with that responsibility. on page 7 line 4, i believe it should read be appointed by the chief information officer. i would add the word officer. other than those technical edits. i support the legislation it is
10:35 am
straightforward and make sense given what's going on in the world and the city. >> chair peskin: thank you for those comments. are there any other members for public comment on this item 2. >> clerk: that completes our remote callers. there are no additional callers. >> chair peskin: public comment is closed. madam deputy city attorney pearson for the first in person publicly access i believe meeting. welcome. as to the caller's suggestions.most of them made g. that will be fixing on page 3, the 22 reference at line 20. do you agree? >> yes. change section 3 to section 2.
10:36 am
>> chair peskin: then adding a space at line 22 between security and the word and. >> i agree. >> chair peskin: if we want to have a parallel construction between the m.t.a. provision and their charter authorities and autonomy as we have in subsection d, relative to the public utilities commission, where it seems to say the p.u.c. commission actually there's a parallel construction. we would reject that comment i assume. then i do agree that on page 7 at line 4 the word officer should be inserted. >> i do. >> chair peskin: we will make the amendments on page 3 and on page 7 will not change anything on page number 5. i will make that motion to amend
10:37 am
on that motion, a roll call please. >> clerk: on that motion. [roll call vote] the motion passes without objection. >> chair peskin: thank you to mr. pilpel for reading that so carefully. on the item as amended, i will make a motion to send it to the full board with a positive recommendation on that motion, a roll call please. >> clerk: yes. [roll call vote] the motion passes without objection. >> chair peskin: we are adjourned.
10:38 am
10:39 am
10:40 am
>> the city has undertaken a pilot program to hook up private privately -- owned hotels. >> the community members say this is helpful for them especially for the seniors and families with kids from seniors being able to connect with the family during the pandemic and too watch the news has been really helpful during this time where they are stuck inside and are not able to go outside. for families it is important to
10:41 am
stay connected to go to school, to get connected so they can submit resumes to find jobs during the pandemic. [speaking foreign language] >> challenges that might seem for the fiber in chinatown is pretty congested. the fiber team found ways around that. they would have to do things such as overnight work in the manholes to get across through busy intersections, and i think the last challenge is a lot of buildings we worked on were built in the early 1900s and they are not fitted with the typical infrastructure you would put in a new building.
10:42 am
we overcame that with creative ideas, and we continue to connect more sites like this. >> high-speed internet has become a lifesaver in the modern era. i am delighted that we completed three buildings or in the process of completing two more. i want to thank our department of technology that has done this by themselves. it is not contracted out. it is done by city employees. i am proud and i want to take a moment to celebrate what we are doing.
10:43 am
>> welcome to our city's newest park, the park at 5m. welcome to our city's newest hub of creativity, commerce, and community. welcome, everyone, to 5m.
10:44 am
[applause] >> this is an exciting day that has been more than a decade in the making, but it's just the start of great things to come for the people who live, work, and spend time here at 5m. when we broke ground, we were surrounded by four acres of mostly parking lots. today, brookfield properties is proud to announce the completion of its development commitment. the first is the parks at 5m. about the size of five basketball courts, this is the city's largest privately owned open space. it has been wonderful to see just the immediate reaction that we've had to this open space from the neighbors that have come in today. this stage directly connects to the dempster building. children from all ages will be
10:45 am
able to play in our play area, which is right behind the camline building, and our lawn areas, as well. dog owners used to walk their dogs here in the parking lot because there were so few places to go. now, they can chase their tails in an area made just for them. this here is 415 natoma. it is a 25-story office building designed by k.t.f. 5m opens into a courtyard of terrace spaces. to my left, right here, is the george apartment building, with 302 rental units, which is now
10:46 am
leasing. it includes 98 middle-income units, including housing units for seniors and formerly homeless individuals. finally, the two historic buildings were also renovated: the camline building that is earmarked for retail and nonprofit uses, and the dempster building. new tenants, programming, and residents will bring energy to the site. beginning this spring, community programming for the parks at 5m will feature a mix of events, performances, art, and food curated by brookfield properties. our long-standing community members will be on this property. off the grid will return with
10:47 am
popular weekday lunch markets. cast will take its programming outside of the walls through that door and host a series of arts and cultural programming featuring its tenants and partners. we are incredibly proud to have worked with so many individuals and organizations to help create this transformation. this is a testament to our sponsors and collaborators, and we are very, very happy to have completed this project without a delay through the pandemic, and it's a great testament to the tenacity of our team that we were able to do that. residents are moving into the george. we have some residents right now. the dempcenter is now home to push dance company and women's
10:48 am
audio commission, and soon, we'll be home to restauranteurs, nonprofits, and community. i'd also like to thank ann topier, judson true, former supervisor jane kim, and laura cressemata, and the architects for their incredible design of 415 natoma, among others. and of course, i'd like to thank our incredible team,
10:49 am
current and past. a special thank you to mayor breed for your support of 5m, your leadership and relentless efforts to create more housing for all income levels in the city. we appreciate your efforts to help all people of ages, background, and income in the city. please welcome mayor london breed. [applause] >> the hon. london breed: hello, everyone. i am so happy to be here, to see the almost completion of this beautiful project, 5m, which has been going on, jack told me, for 14 years, and we just broke ground in 2019, and here we are, just a few years later, and look at the magic that can be created as a result of us coming together to push projects like this in san
10:50 am
francisco. i can't even believe it. i was here for the topping off ceremony of the george. not the george in washington, d.c., the george in san francisco, and when i think about what this project means to this community, the fact that we have this open space, this building that supports artists, and artists performing here, the community, the people, this project and what it will do for this community will be something that we can all be proud of. we've worked really hard to ensure that this project, we worked hard to make sure that we implemented neighborhood preference. now, when i was on the board of supervisors, we got neighborhood preference passed. it's been very challenging to implement because of other state and federal laws, but we
10:51 am
got it done, and as a result of our work, 40% of the affordable units built in this project will go to people who live here first. [applause] >> the hon. london breed: and before neighborhood preference, that was not happening, and the community was asked to support projects like this, and they fought for projects like this, and now, they're a part of projects like this. and i see rudy walking through the crowd from united playas, like they're coming to do something on the stage. they put in a lot of blood, sweat, and tears in this project, facing opposition to this community, and united playas fought to make sure this
10:52 am
happened. and none of us could have thought that the pandemic would set us back, but the 1200 people who helped to make this project possible, their jobs continued as a result of our work, and they got this project done. just imagine if we didn't do that. just imagine the number of people who would not have housing because we delayed it due to the pandemic. we knew that we could build housing safely, and that's exactly what we did. and now, as a result of waiting five years, this project, after breaking ground in 2019, is done. what year is this? i keep forgetting, because i don't count 2020 anymore. i stip that year, but the work
10:53 am
that we're continuing to do and to revitalize this downtown corridor, we are trying to make this feel like a neighborhood, that there's a dog run and there's open space, and there's family that can interact with our senior. there's so much amazing things that is happening in san francisco, and this is a testament to what happens when we work together with the private sector, with nonprofits, with the board of supervisors, with my office. anything is possible, and my commitment to eliminate bureaucracy is someone that i
10:54 am
will continue to push for so that bureaucracies do not stop projects like this. people are counting on us to make it easier to do business in san francisco. to cass, to united playas, and i know that rudy is going to work hard to make sure that filipino seniors are going to get in this housing. they said mayor, don't forget about us. when we get through down the street with that housing, we are going to make sure that
10:55 am
they are up there. last but not least, before i leave, i want to take a moment to really recognize someone who has been in the news world for over 30 years. i remember watching him on ktvu when i was a kid. today is rob ross' last day on ktvu, and we just want to let you know how much we appreciate you, your objective reporting, your commitment to san francisco, sending your kids through the public school system, your love for the city, but also, your ability to bring the news to us in a way that we would understand and sometimes be concerned, but more importantly, be excited and feeling good about san francisco, so we appreciate your reporting. we wish you a wonderful
10:56 am
retirement. thank you so much, rob, for your work in san francisco. and with that, thank you so much all for being here, and i think i want to turn it over to -- i'll turn it back -- okay. supervisor haney? i'll introduce supervisor haney. so supervisor haney and i have been working around the clock, sometimes fighting with each other, but more importantly, making sure when the time comes to do the important work, that we are aligned, that we work together, because we know that people are counting on us to deliver for them. so i really enjoyed working with them on this project, but a number of housing in his district. ladies and gentlemen, please welcome the supervisor for
10:57 am
district 6, matt haney. [applause] >> supervisor haney: all right. it's on. well, first of all, welcome, everyone. this is a beautiful day to open what is an incredible beautiful space, and i want to thank mayor breed and her team. she has been working so hard to get more housing built in our city. she has a piece of legislation called cars to houses, which turns areas like what used to be a parking lot, like what we have here, into housing, and seeing this transformed into a beautiful form of housing, this is what can happen when we listen to the community.
10:58 am
thank you, brookfield, for the way that you've gone about this. we are here in the middle of the filipino cultural district, for a long time, the home of filipinos here in our city, and to be able to sit here and say that the filipino community, united playas, were a part of this since the beginning and helped to shape it is a huge testament to what is possible in our city. contrary to what people may say, san franciscans want more housing. they want more housing. they just want to make sure it's housing they can access. they want to make sure it's housing that includes community and open space. they want to make sure when we build housing, that we do it with them and for them, and that's what we've done in this project. this is a very happy day in our city when we're building more
10:59 am
housing. it's an even happier day for our city when we're building more housing, and for the south of market neighborhood, you deserve to have more housing in your communities, but you deserve to have open space, you deserve to have places for young people to come and grow, and know this is a place that they can live here and thrive here for many years to come. i don't see her here, but i want to thank my predecessor, jane kim, for her leadership. she really stormed this through the process, and i get to be here to espouse what it would mean for our future, so thank you to everyone who was a part of that, to our city departments, rudy's here, to all of the architects, the
11:00 am
funders, to the hearst corporation, thank you. the future of this neighborhood will be bright, and this will be an important central part of what makes it so. thank you. >> thank you so much. i'm jocelyn, community engager for brookfield properties, and i grew up just a block away from 5m. 5m was created from a decade of partnerships with the community and the city, including organizations that truly make a difference in soma, and those partnerships made this project possible. those partnerships made 5m better. they are relationships steeped in the history of this neighborhood, especially the
11:01 am
filipino community, and because of community participate, we learned what was important to the neighborhood. it's why there's a playground right around the corner, adorned with screens inspired by filipino textile patterns. it's why we provided support for the filipino cultural heritage district. neighborhood incubators, senior housing, women's programs, and youth in arts and cultural programs. 5ms community d.n.a. was created by groups like united playas and cass, and for those members of the open space advisory board, which was created to ensure that we rely on community input, thank you. we built a park that made sense for the neighborhood now and in the future.
11:02 am
this is a special day. these relationships will continue to help us provide programming for the parks and ideas moving forward. thank you to our partners for your passion, commitment, and per severance, and your continued partnership. one of our great partners, cass, the community arts stabilization trust, and you see the building right behind me, they are housed right there, each day, they make it possible for more arts and artists, creative entrepreneurs, and arts and cultural organizations to continue to inspire us here in the city and the bay area. their inspiration of arts and culture in the dempster
11:03 am
building is critical to the development of arts in the building. so please welcome their executive director. [applause] >> i have to put on these sexy reading glasses. thank you, jocelyn. as she said in her introduction, her very kind introduction, i'm the executive director of community arts stabilization trust, otherwise known as c.a.s.t. i want to thank the mayor, supervisor haney, brookfield properties, and the entire neighborhood for your support. c.a.s.t. is a living laboratory that creates permanent, i said permanent, affordable space for artists, creative
11:04 am
entrepreneurs, and arts and culture organizations in one of the most expensive regions to live and work in the u.s. we use financing and structural models to make and steward space to secure opportunities for the future and the present. we believe, as i think do you, arts and culture play a role in preserving the fabric of a neighborhood. arts and culture such as women's audio mission, w.a.m., push dance, who you just saw open the ceremonies, have a new home right behind you in the dempster building. they are pushing the boundaries of creativity and equity while also creating community
11:05 am
cohesion. c.a.s.t. wants to make sure that artists have an opportunity to grow in the community. now you may be thinking, what additional new programs are happening, so let me give you a little preview. among the prospective developments this year are a community mural for the building's exterior and a chance for the arts and culture neighborhood to create a new name that captures the resilience and energy of the region. we want to thank hewlett, foundation for the arts, start small, mobile coin foundation.
11:06 am
it is this day that reinforces all of our commitment to the arts, to bolster our commitment to this area, the bay area. thank you. [applause] >> and now, another community partner that we have. i'd like to introduce rudy corpus, jr., a long time leader for youth advocacy and has been a resident of soma, whose whole family has been here for decades. an organization that is rooted into ensuring safe places for youth and young children to shine. >> we here, y'all. first of all, i would like to
11:07 am
say thank you to 5m, brookfield, the hearst family, london breed. you know, i'm from the city just like you from the city. i'm born and raised in this neighborhood, so when they asked us to come, we walked here. and when we're done, we going to walk back because guess what? we belong here. this is our neighborhood, this is our community. our motto is it takes the hood to save the hood. what does that mean? that means all of us collectively, the mayor, the homeless people, the drug dealers, everyone in this community makes collectively this neighborhood happen. now, one important thing that i want to say is the mayor -- the late mayor, ed lee, who was a
11:08 am
big -- who made a big impact in this process of happening, may he rest in peace. he was there and fought, and if there's one thing we like, you know that, london, we like to fight. one thing that i understand and i know about community building with one another, that we can only be stronger when we work together, so when you see all of us as part of coming together, these are the things that happen. this right here was a parking lot that was dilapidated. it had rats, it had homelessness, it had nothing up in here. so for the project to be built and be full of people that you see in front of you now is a win-win situation, so i want to see this lastly. what made this project happen was the tremendous women that made this happen.
11:09 am
this is women's month, right? march 1. like misha, like carla, like jocelyn, like jane kim. there's so many women -- like alexa, who used to work for 5m. there's so many women who helped make this happen, that you should see the strength of the women that helped make this right here? we're here, and we're going to continue to be here. thank you. [applause] >> thank you, rudy, and thank you to all of our speakers. we're looking forward to seeing all of you on thursday, march 3, at 4:00, for our larger grand opening celebration event. i'd like to call my fellow
11:10 am
speakers up to the stage in order for our ceremonial ribbon cutting photo. if i could have my colleague jocelyn step up to the stage, and then moi and rudy. supervisor matt haney, as soon as he's done with the photo, and then, mayor london breed, as well.
11:11 am
>> my name is alan schumer. i am a fourth generation san franciscan. in december, this building will be 103 years of age. it is an incredibly rich, rich history. [♪♪♪] >> my core responsibility as
11:12 am
city hall historian is to keep the history of this building alive. i am also the tour program manager, and i chair the city advisory commission. i have two ways of looking at my life. i want it to be -- i wanted to be a fashion designer for the movies, and the other one, a political figure because i had some force from family members, so it was a constant battle between both. i ended up, for many years, doing the fashion, not for the movies, but for for san franciscan his and then in turn, big changes, and now i am here.
11:13 am
the work that i do at city hall makes my life a broader, a richer, more fulfilling than if i was doing something in the garment industry. i had the opportunity to develop relationships with my docents. it is almost like an extended family. i have formed incredible relationships with them, and also some of the people that come to take a tour. she was a dressmaker of the first order. i would go visit her, and it was a special treat. i was a tiny little girl. i would go with my wool coat on and my special little dress because at that period in time, girls did not wear pants. the garment industry had the --
11:14 am
at the time that i was in it and i was a retailer, as well as the designer, was not particularly favourable to women. you will see the predominant designers, owners of huge complexes are huge stores were all male. women were sort of relegated to a lesser position, so that, you reached a point where it was a difficult to survive and survive financially. there was a woman by the name of diana. she was editor of the bazaar, and evoke, and went on and she was a miraculous individual, but she had something that was a very unique. she classified it as a third i. will lewis brown junior, who was
11:15 am
mayor of san francisco, and was the champion of reopening this building on january 5th of 1999. i believe he has not a third eye , but some kind of antenna attached to his head because he had the ability to go through this building almost on a daily basis during the restoration and corrects everything so that it would appear as it was when it opened in december of 1915. >> the board of supervisors approved that, i signed it into law. jeffrey heller, the city and county of san francisco oh, and and your band of architects a great thing, just a great thing. >> to impart to the history of this building is remarkable. to see a person who comes in with a gloomy look on their face , and all of a sudden you
11:16 am
start talking about this building, the gloomy look disappears and a smile registers across their face. with children, and i do mainly all of the children's tours, that is a totally different feeling because you are imparting knowledge that they have no idea where it came from, how it was developed, and you can start talking about how things were before we had computer screens, cell phones, lake in 1915, the mayor of san francisco used to answer the telephone and he would say, good morning, this is the mayor. >> at times, my clothes make me
11:17 am
feel powerful. powerful in a different sense. i am not the biggest person in the world, so therefore, i have to have something that would draw your eye to me. usually i do that through color, or just the simplicity of the look, or sometimes the complication of the look. i have had people say, do those shoes really match that outfit? retirement to me is a very strange words. i don't really ever want to retire because i would like to be able to impart the knowledge that i have, the knowledge that i have learned and the ongoing honor of working in the people's palace. you want a long-term career, and
11:18 am
you truly want to give something to do whatever you do, so long as you know that you are giving to someone or something you're then yourself. follow your passion and learn how to enrich the feelings along the way. >> clerk: good afternoon and welcome to the san francisco planning commission remote meeting for march 3, 2022. remote hearings require everyone's attention and, most of all, their patience. sfgovtv is broadcasting and streaming this hearing live,
11:19 am
and we will receive public comment for every item on this agenda. opportunities for public comment are available by calling 415-655-0001 and then entering access code 2484-237-3068. when we reach your item of interest, press star, three to enter the queue. when you hear your line has been unmuted, that is your time to begin your comments. best practices are to speak slowly and clearly, call from a
11:20 am
quiet location, and turn down any speakers. i'd like to take roll at this time. [roll call] >> clerk: commissioners, first on your agenda is consideration of items proposed for continuance. item 2, 2019-022850-env at 1101-1123 sutter street -- and cua for 1101-1123 sutter
11:21 am
street, and item 2022-00457-cwp, updates to the planning commission policy, procedures for in-kind agreements. also, your short calendar today is getting shorter. item 11, 2021-001049-drp at 1548-1550 leavenworth street. we will take public comment.
11:22 am
seeing no one lined up to speak, public comment is closed. >> commissioner koppel: i move we continue the items as proposed. >> commissioner imperial: second. >> clerk: on that motion -- [roll call] >> clerk: so moved, commissioners. that motion passes 7-0, and we are now on item 4, commission comments and questions. >> president tanner: i'm seeing
11:23 am
if there's any commissioner comments or questions? i'd just like to wish everyone a happy women's history month. >> clerk: if there are no commission comments or questions, commissioners, if you'll indulge me, i wanted to suggest that, in recognition of the recent events in eastern europe, i wonder if we might adjourn in opposition to the unnecessary and tragic loss of life and a wish for peace between two sister nations. >> president tanner: an excellent idea. the tragic events that are
11:24 am
unfolding in ukraine. commissioner moore? >> vice president moore: i'd like to support that motion. city hall is lit up in support of ukraine. i'm not sure if you saw it last night, but the color of the ukrainian flags are completely engulfing city hall, and i would fully support that. >> clerk: thank you for that. commissioners, item 5, 2021-009977-crv, remote hearings. we've received an updated resolution which was forwarded to you last night, so that is what is now before you,
11:25 am
commissioners, which recognizes the in-person hybrid meeting when we do return to city hall, and the resolution allows remote meeting, if need be, to continue. members of the public, this is your opportunity to speak. >> this is sue hester. the last item was really hard to understand. a notice last week was given in the newspaper, or a newspaper notice. are you slated to be back at city hall on the 24? that is my question, and if
11:26 am
you're not slated to be back on the 24, i ask you to put an item on your next meeting, a calendared item for next week, so the people who get calendars understand that they can talk and not just the commissioners. live hearings have much better participation by the public because we can hear each other, we can see who's speaking. we can't see who's speaking right now, and we're very frustrated. i'm very frustrated with remote hearings. you get that fact. thank you very much. please clarify what's going on. thank you. >> oh, hi. good afternoon, it's georgia schiutish. last night, the board of appeals also decided doing
11:27 am
hybrid meetings, and it's a good things. i appreciate last week the comments made by the commission about sitting in the room. i just want to comment how close the seats are when we sit next to each other. there's not much space, shared armrests, and if someone really sneezes or coughs behind you, you really know it. the time for public comment, i hope that when the meetings are in person, i hope the traditional time returns. today, i plan to speak on one of the d.r.s, and one minute of
11:28 am
public comment is not really enough. i'd be happy with two, and really happy with three. as you know, most of the planning issues before you have a lot of details, and they're complex and require a lot of words that the public needs to share so they believe they're being heard. plus, people get nervous, and they need a little time in case they fumble their words. i know the commission doesn't listen, but the public needs to believe that you listen, and that's harder with those covid time limits. thank you very much. >> clerk: thank you. last chance for public comment on remote hearings and turning to in-person hybrid hearings. for members of the public,
11:29 am
public comment is closed, and this matter is now before you. >> president tanner: great. jonas, and for members of the public, this is the time that has been requested and that has been provided to you. maybe, director hillis, could you share a -- maybe, mr. ionin, could you share with us your trip to city hall? >> clerk: sure. room 400 has been equipped with
11:30 am
a merv filtration system, so in my visit, it was simply getting trained on the new equipment, collaborating and organizing with sfgovtv and other media services folks as to how the meeting will be run, my role in things. i don't think too much will change for members of the commission or members of the public, for that matter. to georgia schiutish's point, i appreciate that comment, and i think we need to discuss logistics if and when we do return to room 400 as to appropriate distancing, and my suggestion, as georgia astutely pointed out, would simply be to rope off every other row so that people aren't sitting
11:31 am
directly behind each other, and then, some natural spacing would occur if people were to not sit in groups and separate by one or two chairs. i know the city is dropping many masking mandates, many distancing mandates, but my understanding right now is. >> supervisor stefani: haul will be requiring all persons, commissioners, staff, members of the public, vaccinated or not, to wear masks. there is no specific type of mask that will be required of people, but masking, for now at least -- this changes every day -- is, for now, required. so the ventilation system should be improved? there are no windows in our chambers, unfortunately, but it is a fairly voluminous space.
11:32 am
other than that, there really are no changes to the room at all. >> president tanner: thank you. and i'll just ask that i did have some conversations with staff, and i just looked into what we could do. i think as secretary ionin is suggest, we could see some spacing requirements. it's already tight in there even if there wasn't covid, so perhaps roping off every other row would be a great way to perhaps have more room. folks are going to have masks on. we could also have higher quality masks at the attendee's discretion, but it would be a courtesy to provide that. we could do social distancing. we did look at requiring vaccinations to enter, and that's not something that we're going to be able to implement for coming into the chambers, and i think that ventilation was another concern.
11:33 am
i think it was just how closely we sit to each other, and i don't think the dais has been arranged differently. i hope the folks would consider some of these measures that we can do to consider returning to in-person meetings in the next few weeks. >> clerk: commissioner tanner, in that matter related to the dais, if all members come and attend, we could create some additional spacing between commissioners. traditionally, staff has sat up on the dais with you, but there is availability to sit sort of behind and across from me where the city attorneys have sat before, so there is availability for additional distancing to be accommodated
11:34 am
for the commissioners up on the dais. >> president tanner: oh, that's a great thing. that's a good solution to create a little more elbow room on the dais, especially if we have a full seat of commissioners. so again, just want to make an invitation of questions by staff or each other, make any suggestions on the kind of returning to city hall. commissioner imperial? >> commissioner imperial: i have a question. making an announcement when there's going to be an in-person hearing, i assume it's already out or it's not already out? how would people -- like, say there will be commissioners who are doing an in-person, how will they be informed?
11:35 am
>> president tanner: yeah, if you could tell us how the noticing is going to go out or how it's going to be either remote or hybrid? >> clerk: right now, the noticing states it may be an in-person hearing in city hall or it may be remote. it directs people for our website for direction on how and when it will occur. commissioners, it will be entirely up to you as to when we resume in-person hearings, and the city mandate directs if one commissioner chooses to be in person, then the hearing will be in city hall and open to the public. >> president tanner: okay. thank you. and then, maybe kind of related question, but really in the weeds. in city hall, let's say it's a situation where some of us are not in person, some of us are there. will we need to bring our own
11:36 am
computers so i can see other commissioners or people who want to speak? >> clerk: you'll certainly need to bring your own laptops because otherwise, we'll get the reverberation in the room, that sound broadcast over the sfgov stream or broadcast. having said that, i -- for some reason, i thought all of the monitors were also updated so they were going to be, like, these images sitting up on the dais for commissioners who opt out of the in-person and witch witch -- wish to remain remote. essentially, it'll be very similar to this. when someone is speaking, their image will then be on the screens in the room and visible, so i think that will
11:37 am
be the most important thing to remember is to turn your mic on when you're speaking when you're remote. obviously, there are other solutions outside of here, but i think that's the one that we're looking at. >> president tanner: thank you. commissioner imperial? >> commissioner imperial: i have another question in terms of the public access. so the public access, from my understanding, people can come into the city hall, but there's also a call-in option. how will that work in that room? let's say a commissioner is in there. just trying to understand how we'll hear them. >> clerk: yeah, no, absolutely. it's not going to be maybe the nightmare i had anticipated because i'm so familiar with the webex platform, and it's
11:38 am
been so successful for us, so we're going to continue to use this webex platform. for members of the public, there will be no difference if you wish to call in to provide your public comment. it'll be the exact same way. we'll be issuing our agendas with the call-in number, with the access i.d. number. and probably, whatever the chair prefers, but when it comes time for public comment, we would request all members of the public in the room lineup to submit their public comment. when that sort of in-person comment period concludes, we would then open it up to people who call in to speak so that we go through those in an orderly manner. >> president tanner: and then, their voices would be piped in through the speakers?
11:39 am
>> clerk: yes. we tested it with my staff on wednesday to make sure that it did work well. we did have an issue with the chime. it was not very audible, especially when you're speaking on the phone, so we may have issues with people going over that time, but i will verbally remind people that their time is up. >> president tanner: we'll be entering more territory when we return. >> commissioner imperial: i have another question because miss schiutish brought it up, different requirements for the hybrid. i am kind of curious, also for the other commissioners to chime in on this, where if a call-in public comment, should we apply the -- you know, what we're doing with the hybrid or the remote, and then, if
11:40 am
there's an in-person public, should we apply [indiscernible] in the city hall? i think that's also kind of a logistic thing, but i would like to hear what other commissioners hear about that. >> clerk: commissioner imperial, we could not differentiate time between those speaking in city hall and those calling in. each person speaking would receive the same amount of time. >> president tanner: we're opening to revisiting some of our practices that we've adopted on-line as we go into hybrid. we're really, again, cutting into a new phase, and we have new approaches that we might find that work best for everyone. i don't see any other comments
11:41 am
from folks who want to speak, so if there's anyone who would like to make a motion on the resolution, we can entertain that now. commissioner diamond? >> commissioner diamond: move to approve the motion. >> president tanner: second? >> commissioner imperial: second. >> clerk: thank you, commissioners. just for clarity, it is the resolution that was forwarded to all of you last night and made available to the public at the same time. on that motion, commissioners -- [roll call] >> clerk: so moved, commissioners. that motion passes unanimously 6-0, and just an aside, if any of you or group of you would like to tour the room and see what it feels like, i'd be
11:42 am
happy to arrange that for you. commissioners, that places us under item 6, director's announcements. >> director hillis: good afternoon, commissioners. as you know, staff are headed back to the office next week, most of us a minimum of two days a week. that will be happening starting monday. i just wanted to highlight those coming into the office the past two years because a handful of our staff have been doing that throughout the pandemic. our office management team, folks from the enforcement team and doing mail, and staff that provide the public with information, and i just want to
11:43 am
thank them for all of their work over these past two years. i know it's been challenging but relatively successful, so thanks to our team for doing that, and that's all i have. >> president tanner: i don't have any questions, but i'll just second that folks have performed admirably, and it's so great to seeing so many employees and industries coming back in march, and i hope it's for the best for our city and businesses. thank you so much for all of your hard work. >> clerk: indeed. review of past events at the board of supervisors -- >> president tanner: sorry, jonas. i think i see commissioner moore with her hand up, as well.
11:44 am
>> vice president moore: i just wanted to say that two years ago, there was another herculean effort by planning department staff because two years ago, they packed up and changed locations. >> starting next monday, since we will all be coming back to the office, we are also updating our preapplication procedures. as you all know, when we went into sheltering from home, we asked our applicants to preapply remotely, and we've
11:45 am
heard from residents and applicants that they want to get back to business, so we'll be going back to in-person. starting next monday, we are allowing applicants to do either, either remote, in-person, or a hybrid system. should they choose to do any element of remote, they'll need to follow all the remote requirements that we've had the last two years, including a toll free or 800 number to call in. starting july 1, our plan is back to fully in person preapplication meetings, so i just wanted to let the public know that we'll be easing back in on monday with a full requirement in-person back on july 1. >> president tanner: can i ask for that requirement to come
11:46 am
back in person? maybe it's just the apparatus to host the virtual is challenging. >> a lot of the feedback that we've had from community folks is that they really miss having that in-person interaction, typically at the project site, which is the requirement at the project site or in the close proximity, so that's the direction that we have. the preapplication is a policy. it's not codified, so as we approach july, if this is commission that the commission wants to adopt a hybrid approach temporarily or in perpetuity, but it's been a struggle with folks identifying
11:47 am
what is a local phone number, etc., so being able to kind of take that off the table and requiring people to just show up in person seems like a streamlined way to maintain this requirement, but again, it's your policy. >> president tanner: yeah, i think it's something that we can take a look at. i'm thinking of a neighbor that cannot come at that specific time. how is the option for recording or i'm think of an option for the working community if they're commuting home or something like that. certainly, the option to be in person, i am happy that it would go in that direction to have that option. vice president moore? you're on mute, i think. >> vice president moore: the one thing i would add, also, in terms of social equity and
11:48 am
accessibility, technology in particular, you need to have a reasonably well functioning computer to participate on-line. and again, i have not been in that situation, but we need to keep that in the mind of how we'll move forward. >> president tanner: thank you for the idea. >> clerk: okay. commissioners, if there's nothing further, we can move onto item 7. there was no historic preservation commission. >> good afternoon, commissioners. aaron starr, director of public affairs. first up was the consideration
11:49 am
for the golden gate carnegie library. specifically, the carnegie library grant program. it's also an example of an institutional building designed by a master architect. the building displays distinctive characteristics of the neoclassical style as associated with the city's work beautiful movement. this city has been on the historic site list since 1999, when six other libraries were added. at the hearing this week, there was only one public commenters who expressed concern over the language using to design character defining -- describe character defining features of the property. at the end of the hearing, the
11:50 am
committee unanimously voted to recommend approval of the landmark designation to the full board. the committee also considered the landmark designation for 447 battery street. solicitors of the board report will remember that this was originally heard at the landmark committee last year when it was tabled by commissioner peskin. the h.p.c. recommended landmark designation. the h.p.c. found 447 battery street, constructed in 1907, was culturally significant with the reconstruction of downtown san francisco following the 1906 earthquake and fires. the h.p.c. also found that the building was not architecturally significant and recommended that the
11:51 am
three-story height and roughly rectangular footprint description be removed from the list of character defining features. after peskin reactivated the land use designation, it was brought back before the committee and unanimously recommended for approval consistent approximate the h.p.c.s recommendation. next, the land use committee heard a hearing on supervisor mar's resolution to develop an incentive program for homeowners. the purpose of the program is to help middle, moderate, and low-income houses expand their homes to duplexes, triplexes, and fourplexes, including a.d.u.s. this is intended to be commercial and technical assistance and free access to design and technical professionals. a representative from asian,
11:52 am
inc. presented on the a.d.u. pilot program that was sponsored by supervisor mar in partnership with asian, inc. there was not a lot of public comment, but some of the commenters suggested that the programs should be granted, not loans. the committee then voted to recommend the resolution to the full board. next, the board considered supervisor peskin's motion to amend the ordinance to include
11:53 am
the [indiscernible] during public comment, there were a lot of speakers, and their testimony was like that the planning commission heard at their hearing. some commenters talked about the need to -- for the proposed amendments while others expressed concern that this would eliminate a viable housing model from the city. at the end, the committee did vote to amend the ordinance to include supervisor peskin's modifications, however, they needed to continue the item because the amendments were deemed substantive. lastly, the committee discovered the mayor's [indiscernible], cleverly named [indiscernible] -- automobiles
11:54 am
to offices. prior to the hearing, the sponsor included most of the commission's recommendations except the admission shorthand title and the rh-1 zoning. during the hearing, the supervisors had questioned about adding rent control and increasing the inclusionary amount. supervisor peskin had proposed amendments intended to insure
11:55 am
his [indiscernible] would not be impacted by this ordinance. supervisor melgar's comments were mostly supportive and said she had hoped this program would bring more inclusionary programs to the ready. the committee continued the items to the call of the chair, as next week's calendar is too full to continue it one week. at the full board this week, the-passed its first reading. supervisor mandelman's ordinance that we create the large home initiative in his district passed. and the massage controls for --
11:56 am
sponsored by supervisor manned will han -- mandelman also passed its first reading. [indiscernible] to establish a cannabis retail business with no on-site smoking. the project would not include any structural work to the existing building. concerns by the appellant was the amount and type of retail on the site, the possibility of odor. members of the public in support of the appeal expressed concern about the potential odor impacts and that the ceqa review was not good enough
11:57 am
notably, there were no comments or questions from the supervisors during the hearing, and once public comment was over, they quickly voted to uphold the ceqa determination and deny the appeal. lastly, the supervisor housing incentive program was adopted this week, and that concludes my presentation and i'm happy to take any questions that you have. >> clerk: okay. if there are no questions, mr. starr, there is a report from the board of appeals. they met last evening and heard an appeal of the cannabis retail establishment at 2000 oakdale avenue. you heard this matter as a d.r. on december 9 of 2021, and the
11:58 am
d.r. requester basically cited concerns about odor impacts. after hearing, the commission voted unanimously not to take discretionary review and approve the project. a ceqa review was heard on march 1. the appellant cited the same environmental impacts and lack of public review. after hearing, the board of supervisors unanimously voted 10-0 to deny the appeal and uphold the ceqa exemption. last night at the hearing, the appellant voiced his concerns about odor impacts, and the board voted 4-0 on the basis that the department properly reviewed the permit. if there are no questions,
11:59 am
commissioners, 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 substance 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. when the number of speakers exceed the 15-minute limit, general public comment may be moved to the end of the agenda. when you hear your line has been unmuted, that is your time to begin your comments. >> oh, hi. it's georgia schiutish. mr. ionin, your comments about ukraine were appropriate. i didn't want to send a public comment because i was
12:00 pm
distressed about the whole thing, but i did. i sent you some things previously. read it if you want, don't read it -- i mean, i sent it before, and you need to read it. the article from from 2012, that article could have been written any time in the past ten years. the planning commission does have a tool to close the loophole that is spotlighted in the article, and that tool to close the loophole of 317, and that is 317-b-2-d, and that is reducing the demo calcs.
12:01 pm
thank you. bye. >> this is sue hester. preapp meetings are being used by developers to basically force people to call in or attend using zoom, and zoom only has a place to call in from san jose, which is a long distance call for everyone that has a landline. so unless you do totally on-line from a cell phone u -- cell phone, you don't have the availability for an hour of the meeting. i was told they're changing instructions on-line, and
12:02 pm
changing instructions on-line are not going to change the problems. this is discriminating to low-income people and people who depend on landlines, so i'm asking the board to look at planning department meetings. one of the things that they should do is look at the [indiscernible] thank you. >> clerk: seeing no additional requests to speak from members
12:03 pm
of the public, public comment is closed, and we can move onto your regular calendar. item 8, 2014-001272-dva-03, the pier 70 development. this is a request for an amendment to the design for development. staff, are you ready to make your presentation? >> i am, jonas. >> good afternoon, commissioners. michael christiansen, permit center staff. the item before you, on august 24, 2017, through motion number 19980, the planning commission
12:04 pm
approved the design for development to establish control standards and guidelines specific to the pier 70 mixed use development. at the same hearing, the commission approved general plan amendments, zoning map amendments, planning code text amendments, and amendments for development. on february 20, the planning commission approved an amendment for this design to development to contain up to nine floors where previously were limited to seven floors, with no changes to the maximum height or bulk. since the amendment, the master developer, brookfield, has obtained permits for two
12:05 pm
buildings, one residential building and a nonresidential building that was 365,000 square feet in size. the response hectare has received approval for rehabilitation of multiple historic buildings of the site. the current proposed amendment to the d4d would amendment the retail and office use for the project. the retail use definition change is purely technical in nature and would clarify that the multiple ways we describe retail within the d4d all correlate to the retail use's definition in the d4d. our implementation of the project is already in line with this, and this change would only resolve inconsistent use
12:06 pm
of the terminology. it would serve two purposes, first, it would resolve similar inconsistencies in the d4d. in the document, we use the terms office, commercial-office, office-space, and space all interchangeably. additionally, the amendment would establish the parcel designated for office use may be developed with design professional, life science, or laboratory uses. the department reviewed the terms, and establishing clear definitions is a best practice.
12:07 pm
additionally, there was no intention in the d4d to preclude the use of parcels as laboratory projects. the only parcel affected by this change would be parcels that are already designated for office uses, and the change does not affect the overall development capacity of the site. additionally, our environmental review team reviewed the requested amendment, and found that the amended definition do not create any new or existing environmental impacts as described in the existing environmental impact report. there is some concern generally citywide about lab uses encroaching into areas for p.d.r. uses, however, this only affects portions of the pier 70 site or portions of buildings
12:08 pm
within the site that are already designated for use as office uses, including the ground floors of building 12, 21, and 24. establishing a design professional laboratory and life science uses are considered office uses in pier 70 would establish where in the project site those uses are permissible while also clearly defining where those uses are be permissible. currently, the design for development lacks clear direction on where those uses are not permissible. if this commission approves
12:09 pm
this use, it would go back to the port commission for review. staff recommends approval as proposed. this concludes my presentation and i'm happy to answer any questions. a representative from brookfield is also available for questions. >> clerk: thank you, mr. christiansen. if there's no immediate questions from the members of the commission, members of the public, this is your chance to provide public comment. >> good afternoon, commissioners. [indiscernible] i'm here today speaking in support of amending the pier 70 design for development agreement. the first part of our support is a historic support. we went through a very lengthy process with pier 70, at times contentious, other times very friendly, and we always understood that that
12:10 pm
versatility, the ability for life sciences to be in that development was there, and if it's not there because of the technical drafting of the d4d, then let's, by all means, fix that. but the second thing that mr. christiansen referred to is the need for life sciences. we see marketing for what we would consider p.d.r. for life sciences all the time, and it's needed for a very diverse set of jobs in the city. we highly support building life sciences spaces along the waterfront and would like to see that at pier 70, so we request that you approve this amendment of the d4d. thank you very much for your
12:11 pm
time. >> clerk: thank you. last call for public comment. you need to press star, three. seeing no additional requests to speak from members of the public, public comment is closed, and this matter is now before you, commissioners. >> president tanner: call on commissioner diamond? >> commissioner diamond: yes, thank you for that staff report. i have a question for environmental review staff if they're available. >> commissioner diamond, i don't believe we have environmental review staff available, but i'm happy to try to answer your question. >> commissioner diamond: okay. i just want to make sure that i understand the environmental review that took place concerning these uses. i'm not concerned about the
12:12 pm
environmental impact that comes from the people that are there, traffic, etc., i'm more concerned about the practices that go on in the labs. do we have limits on the kind of labs that can be there, biosafety levels in particular? what do we do about the materials that are used in the experiments, the fume hoods, all of the issues that come up when we are looking at projects that are permitted primarily for laboratory [indiscernible]. >> president tanner: maybe i can answer this as i share the concerns, so as i just wonder, those life science uses, as they are realized, as we are
12:13 pm
able to have those mitigations in place and keep the other uses, outdoor spaces accessible while keeping in compliance with life science uses? >> sure. so there's a couple of topics there. first, in terms of general separation, the project does not include parcels that are combining residential and life science uses.
12:14 pm
it is a separate definition, so they will be on separate parcels. we did discuss this with staff. when it comes to a mission of [indiscernible] so there is an existing regulatory structure that governs this. the existing e.i.r. contains numerous mitigation measures
12:15 pm
for air quality. most of them identified certain project features, construction, of course, but also generators on the site as being the main area where there may be potential for emissions and contains measures for those, and those measures still would ally -- apply for those uses. as i stated, the bay area water quality district has measures to measure impacts from those. >> commissioner diamond: are you allowing any kind of laboratory use or are you seeking permission for any kind of laboratory use in the space?
12:16 pm
>> thank you, commissioner diamond. kelley [indiscernible] from brookfield properties here. we are -- in keeping consistency with the planning code, using the planning code definition of laboratory and the uses that are allowed under that definition, so it's not any broader than would already be included in the planning code, no. >> president tanner: i don't see any other names in the back -- commissioner imperial. >> commissioner imperial: thank you for that. i'll make a motion to approve as proposed. >> commissioner koppel: second. >> clerk: thank you, commissioners. there's a motion that has been seconded to approve the amendments as proposed. on that motion -- [roll call]
12:17 pm
>> clerk: so moved, commissioners. that motion passes unanimously, 6-0, placing us under your discretionary review calendar, item 9, 2021-001932-drp, at 649 28 street. mr. winslow? >> thank you, jonas. david winslow, planning staff architect. this is a request for discretionary review of building permit scrub 2021.0201.3744 to construct a
12:18 pm
rear horizontal and vertical addition to a two-story, one-family residential building within an rh-1 zoning district and 40-k height and bulk district. a neighborhood is concerned that the project does not match the existing setbacks from the planning commission in order to maintain the scale and topography at the street. further, that the project will block light and cast shadows into the rear yard of the main home and the accessory dwelling unit, and further that the project would invade the privacy with direct views of
12:19 pm
the windows. to date, the department has received no letters of opposition and one letter in support of the project. the planning department's review of this proposal recommends approval. this project has a three-story downhill neighbor fronting the street to its immediate east. the d.r. filer has a third story set back 15 feet. the upper floor of the proposed project has a proposed set back of 5'10" including setbacks that includes the neighbor's property line windows.
12:20 pm
with this setting, the upper floor of this project balances the scale at the street and meets the guideline related following the topography. additionally, the upper floor is mitigated to minimize impacts to light and air. as designed, the rear extension with a three-foot side set back ensures capability with the side development open space and therefore, staff recommends not taking d.r. and approving. this concludes my presentation, and i'm happy to answer
12:21 pm
questions. thank you. >> clerk: thank you. mr. mcmann, you have three minutes. >> okay. i'd like to share my screen -- thank you. >> clerk: it's being done. >> my name is chris mcmann, representing the homeowner who purchased the home last year. he was aware of the proposal to build a house downhill adjacent to his. he actually has a two-unit building. the a.d.u. is quite large.
12:22 pm
it's 1400 square feet, i believe, so the main things we wanted to point out, and mr. pearlman, who's the representative architect applicant, he has, in his 67 or 70-page summary, is he has many false comments and false measurements and so forth. the main reason that we're very concerned about this is because the applicant's project, the single-family home, 4300 or 4400 square feet doesn't respect the set back that we were -- that his house was required to conform to, and mainly, that would be the height limit. in fact, my client's house was limited to 29.5 feet high, measured from the centerline of the lot from curb, and the
12:23 pm
front of the top floor, third floor, was required to be 15-foot set back, and that was after telling us that 12 feet was okay and then redesigning it for 15. we were also excluded from having any deck on the third floor, and this was by a commissioner in the transcript of a commission meeting on june 8, 2017. no balconies or decks on the third floor. but one of the things is we have an a.d.u. that is somewhat subterranean facing the side of the house. we have a five-foot set back at the rear, and this is not mr. pearlman's design at 649. it does not respect this at all. in fact, he's only got 3 feet as if it was a lightwell, but
12:24 pm
we're required to do that five-foot set back at that time. this is where the only two windows of the accessory dwelling unit are, and again, they're below grade, so his house, moving over it is just -- oversized and would block so much light and air. thank you. >> clerk: okay. you still have a few seconds left. >> okay. very good. >> clerk: you will have a one-minute rebuttal after public comment, so we should go to the project sponsor, mr. pearlman. you will have three minutes. >> thank you.
12:25 pm
i'd like to go over the d.r. filer's claim that was in their application. they talk specifically about light, air, and privacy to their a.d.u. at 653 28, and that somehow we weren't respecting that. this is a forever home with my client with a very young family. this will allow three bedrooms on the top floor, and on the lower floor behind the garage, an additional two bedrooms for a couple who work from home so they can each have an office or future parents living on the site. this project was designed to be neighborly stepping back. next slide, please.
12:26 pm
according to the guidelines, some reduction of light is always expected with a building expansion, and it was recommended that we provide setbacks on the third floors and a sloped roof. all of these mitigations were included in our original design. you can see from the diagram on the bottom right that the setbacks are increased along the property line on the front, and then, we meet the residential design guidelines on the rear portion. but given the orientation that these properties are north-south, so the back of the house faces south, it's physically impossible for the project to have any impact on the light quality on 653, and
12:27 pm
virtually no impact to air as a whole. these slides are of the d.r. filer's home. you can see that the a.d.u. is the lower two floors. the d.r. filer dug a hole 16 feet from the rear yard, the original rear yard height down, and on the right of the top right picture, you can see there's a four-foot wide staircase that goes down to a pit where he put the bedrooms on the lower floor of this a.d.u., which he then put an 18-foot-high fence, which i believe is beyond what is allowed, so it's basically impossible to get light into that pit. in this lower left-hand, you can see that it's physically impossible to actually see into
12:28 pm
the rear yard from our second floor deck, and it's actually in reverse. the privacy is really from the other house, the issues are from the other house. slide, please. so in summary, the d.r. filer has proposed outlandish ideas for problems that do not exist. there are no extraordinary impacts from the project that exists. thank you. >> clerk: thank you, mr. pearlman, and as stated to the d.r. requester, you will have one minute of rebuttal. members of the public, this is your opportunity to address the commission by pressing star, three, and when you hear that your line has been unmuted, that is your indication to begin your public comment. >> hi, georgia schiutish.
12:29 pm
one minute. they decided to go for the [indiscernible] unaffordable, which was [indiscernible] at the time. they needed two appraisals, and even then, it was really close. the deep excavation, which contains this a.d.u., which seems to be the focus of the thing, was planned by the requester to be a single-family home. i don't think that's something you can avoid looking at, and the depth of the excavation was obvious because it would create liveability issues. i don't know that those bedrooms down there, and if they are part of one unit or two, it's hard to tell from the pictures, but those bedrooms are not kosher.
12:30 pm
i wish i had more time because this project has an amazing history. thanks a lot. take care. bye. >> hello. my name is george [indiscernible] and i'm a neighbor of the family that owns 649 28 street. i'm calling in support of the project and respectfully ask that the commission take d.r. we are looking forward to the mollers as neighbors for many years in their beautiful new home, so thank you in advance. >> hi. this is the d.r. filer, ravi
12:31 pm
[indiscernible]. am i allowed to speak during public time? >> clerk: actually, you are not, but you can use the one minute rebuttal time. >> hi. i'm jenna, and i'm also a neighbor who lives around the corner at 32 newberg street, and i'm calling in to express support for the renovation taking place at 649 28 street. the moller family's plan is going to improve a family house, which is going to benefit everybody in the community. we found the mollers to be kind and honest neighbors, and they are exactly the kind of hard working family we should be supporting to improve their home, particularly when compared with speculative developers who are looking to
12:32 pm
maximize profits. >> clerk: okay. last call for public comment. seeing no additional requests to speak from members of the public, we should take rebuttal. mr. mcmann. >> i'm here. can you hear me okay? >> clerk: we can. you have one minute. >> excellent. i would just like to correct, my client is a hard working family, as well, no different than the muellers, and he's living in a smaller space because of an a.d.u. i didn't catch the last name, georgia, she talks about every project in the city. she's got sour grapes against every project in the city. i am trying to right a wrong here. please lower the house a few
12:33 pm
feet, takeoff the ridiculous gable roofs that are unnecessary, and i don't care about the subproperty's line windows. we are happy to close those off. just have the same sight lines that we were required to have along the back and the front. >> clerk: okay. if that concludes d.r., mr. pearlman? >> thank you very much. i think the d.r. is utilizing this by asking us and my client to redesign our project to essentially get out of his way to not block his big views from his property line windows. he has cynically offered
12:34 pm
catered meals, yes, catered meals, to try to bribe. please approve the project as designed. thank you. >> clerk: thank you. if that concludes rebuttals, the public hearing portion is closed, and commissioners, this d.r. is now before you. >> president tanner: thank you. call on vice president moore. >> vice president moore: president tanner, are you there? i can't hear you. >> president tanner: thank you. i keep taking my head phones off. >> vice president moore: thank you. i think that the project is a
12:35 pm
sensitively designed project. when the adjoining project was designed a number of years ago, there was requests made to bring the project into line with the projects that existed, so the challenge for mr. pearlman is to find that context in the presence of his large building, and i found that protecting the large windows very convincing. i am in full support and do not see the need for doing any modifications for this project.
12:36 pm
curious what our other commissioners have to say. >> president tanner: commissioner koppel? >> commissioner koppel: barring no other comments, i just wanted to support vice president moore and make a motion to approve. >> vice president moore: second. >> clerk: thank you, commissioners. if there's no further comments from the commission, there is a motion and a second to not take d.r. and approve the project as proposed. on that motion -- [roll call] >> clerk: that motion passes unanimously 6-0, and will place us on item 10 for case number 2021-003638-drp at 450 myra way. this is also a discretionary view. >> thank you, mr. ionin.
12:37 pm
good afternoon again, president tanner, vice president moore, and members of the planning commission. the item before you is an initiated request for discretionary review of building permit number 2021.0324.7216 to construction a rear horizontal addition to a two-story over basement, one-family residential building within an rh-1 zoning district and 40-k height and bulk district. the proposed facade is also inconsistent with the clearly defined character of the block face. her proposed alternative is to reduce the depth and redistribution the massing to the existing side yard to the north. to date, the department has received five letters in opposition and 11 letters in
12:38 pm
support of the project. the proposed addition aligns with the existing properties.
12:39 pm
the staff sees no exceptional or extraordinary circumstances and recommends not taking discretionary review and approving. this concludes my presentation, and i'm happy to answer questions. thanks. >> clerk: thank you, david. d.r. requester, you have three minutes. >> hello? >> clerk: yes. >> thank you. i'm mary fitzpatrick, and i do live at 444 myra way, adjacent to the south at 450 myra. thank you for your time today. also with me is steven whitney, who represents me and may speak later. there are five key points that i'd like to make. there are neighbors in support of me who filed letters in
12:40 pm
support of this project. i also want to acknowledge that the owner of 450 has made project changes to help address my concerns about openness. the set back of the proposed addition of my property was increased, and i very much appreciate that. yet the seven neighbors and i have concerns about the open space and secondarily about the design of the facade. as slide number one shows, it does not address the shallow depth of 460 myra to the north. this image shows the open space boundary that would fit with the adjacent houses the large northside yard at 450 myra
12:41 pm
proposes to make the addition shallower in the back with only part of it in the side yard. this would minimize impact on mid block open space, and we ask that this alternative approach design be required. slide number three, please. our issue request this proposed facade design is about the sizes and horizontal orientation of the windows. they don't fit with the sizes and vertical orientation of windows to the south of 450 myra, as shown here. last, i'd like to point out that one of the concerned neighbors who filed with me cowrote the [indiscernible] park designed giet lines. he noted that the proposed depth and facade design doesn't conform to those guidelines. we consider him an authority on
12:42 pm
those guidelines, and it shows the validity of our issues with it. finally, i'd like to point out that the d.r. analysis shows 11 supporters for the project, but none of them are knowledgeable on the subject law. we think this is significant and ask that you take note of this in considering the design request. thank you very much for your time. >> clerk: okay. if that concludes d.r. requester's presentation, we can go to the applicant. >> [indiscernible] working from home since the pandemic started and work taking care of two
12:43 pm
children has not been easy. [indiscernible] on this page, we can see [indiscernible] next slide, please. the mid block open space was also taken into consideration. i [indiscernible] rear elevation alignment. regardless of the [indiscernible], the building depth is the same as around 60 feet. our proposed building depth is 36 feet at the ground floor and
12:44 pm
36.5 feet at the first floor and [indiscernible] next slide, please. regarding the block space -- next slide. regarding the block space, i took photos of the house down the street. stucco and siding were commonly used, and the window size varies. [indiscernible] next slide
12:45 pm
[indiscernible] yeah. >> clerk: okay. that concludes your presentation, then we should open up public comment. members of the public, you need to press star, three to be added to the queue, and through the chair, you'll each receive one minute. when you hear that your line has been unmuted, that's your indication to begin speaking.
12:46 pm
you have one minute, caller. >> my name is debra atkins, and i live directly across the street from 450, at 435 myra. thank you for allowing this forum so that neighbors could have the opportunity to express their concerns. the 400 block of myra way consists of 34 homes. 450 myra, being semi detached, has the exceptional circumstance of abutting a narrow mid block open space and having a large open side yard, as has been explained. i would request that an alternative design be required which would make the addition shallower by utilizing a portion of that very rare
12:47 pm
commodity: a side yard. thank you. >> good evening, commissioners, or good afternoon, commissioners. my name is bryan, and i've lived in the area for 40 years. i generally support the project as it has been proposed. in the five years that i've lived in this area, the building at 450 myra has fallen into disrepair, and the previous owners did not take care of it. i support the new design although it is slightly larger from the street. there have been numerous homes
12:48 pm
in the immediate area that have undergone similar scale remodel and expansions, generally with success. i am happy to see the lee family in the neighborhood and would like to see the project move forward. [please stand by]
12:49 pm
>> clerk: project sponsor you have you have one minute rebuttal. >> we blocked open space, it's not a clear line. analyzing the surrounding neighbors, i believe we -- we respect open space. >> clerk: okay. that concludes project sponsor's rebuttal, commissioners, this matter is now before you. >> thank you, vice president
12:50 pm
moore. >> vice president moore: i have looked over multiple projects including the design guide. i find that this project very sensively designed. it's a modest project. i believe it is not trying to advertise itself being new and different to the contrary. i don't find merit in questioning the choice of windows. i actually welcome and relatively calm street expression. there's little bit of variety when the window is just suddenly different. it's a shift in shape which is appropriate which is a larger horizontal expansion of the project. i'm in full support of it.
12:51 pm
>> president tanner: commissione r imperial? >> commissioner imperial: i do believe the disrespect block open space is what the d.r. filer trying to suggest. i like to make a not take the d.r. and approve. >> vice president moore: second. >> clerk: very good commissioners. seeing no further request to deliberate from members of the commission. there's a motion that has been seconded to not take the project as proposed [roll call vote] so moved. that motion passes unanimously 6-0. your next item has been continued indefinitely. this concludes your hearing
12:52 pm
today. thank you very much. >> thank you very much. we like to adjourn for peace between ukraine and russia. we hope that transpires. >> clerk: thank you for in president tanner.
12:53 pm
12:54 pm
you're watching san francisco rising. today's special guest is monique gray. >> hi. i'm chris mannis and you're watching san francisco rising. the our guest today is marquise gray. he runs out of the office of the mayor in the city and county of san francisco. and he's with us today to talk about the recent progress of the sunnidale hope sf housing project. welcome to the show. >> good morning. thank you for having me today. >> let's start by talking about the existing residents of sunnydale and their history. >> so sunnydale was built in the 1940s for a workers. it's the largest public housing community west of the mississippi. it's about 50 acres.
12:55 pm
pretty huge. about 760 single story units one to four bedrooms. >> i understand it's an ambitious rethinking of the residences. can you briefly describe the scope of the program and hope sf's involvement? >> yeah. the work of hope sf is this idea of more than housing. that acknowledging that our public housing community, the levels of violence and poverty that are in these communities are not by accident. you know, it's our opportunity to address a system issue, you know, that people need more than housing. they need health services. resources. economic investment opportunities, jobs and things of that nature. and so hope sf strives to work with our city systems to better serve our public housing communities. >> so recently, mayor breed and
12:56 pm
speaker pelosi toured the site to both put focus on a national housing initiative and also to highlight the completion of the first new building. how many units does it contain and when will people start moving in? >> yeah. it was an amazing event. honored to have the secretary here with us as well in our community. it's 167 units. it's about 75% going back to the original families that currently live on site. so the replacement. so i did forget to mention i want to say real quick, the beauty of hope sf is housing development, new development without displacements or anti-displacement initiatives. so, for example, the building is 167 units. 75% of those units going to families that have lived there in the community for generationings and the other 25% are tax credit units adding to the affordable housing stock here in san francisco and those units are up and running now.
12:57 pm
they're leasing them as we speak. people are picking their units each week until they're filled up. >> so was this particular building put on a new plot of land or did people have to move out so it could be constructed? >> that's a good question. our first building was vacant which you may have saw across the street from this building and then this plot of land is the way we kind of do it, we do it in phases. once one goes in, we're able to move families into the new unit and where they previously were occupying, able to demolish old buildings to build the new. so this area had some older units that were demolished. >> it's impressive that construction has been able to continue during the covid-19 pandemic. can you talk about some of the challenges that needed to be overcome and how the community has managed during the crisis? >> that's a great question. you know, in san francisco, if i understand it correctly, i
12:58 pm
could be wrong, i believe housing was an essential service. the mayor made a strong commitment early on in the pandemic that we would continue to build housing as housing has been a critical issue in our city. so the housing part hasn't impacted us too much. 67 units have been going on its current time line. the bigger challenge for us was showing the families in our communities, low income families had the resources we need to survive the pandemic. many of our families didn't have the luxury of working from home, working in the zone and things of that nature. making sure they had access to covid testing and things of that nature. so i want to give a big shout out to our resident leaders, our service providers across all four sites. for those that don't know, hope sf is four sites.
12:59 pm
sunnydale is one of the four sites. and so across those four sites, the most critical thing was making sure folks in these neighborhoods which have historically have been disconnected from resources have the things that they need to remain healthy, to, you know, survive the pandemic as we all had to survive the pandemic and we did pretty well. we were able to bring back scenes and covid testing on site. food distribution was happening all throughout the week. wellness services and things of that nature were all happening on site thanks to our resident leaders and our service providers across the sites. >> so, finally, when could we expect the next set of residents to be ready? despite -- i guess we just said covid doesn't have an impact on the schedule. when will the next residences be ready? >> yeah. things are rolling. we have block a3 and block b3
1:00 pm
to the building we were referring to earlier. and things are on pace. things are going really well. so we're looking at starting construction spring of 2022 and that will be 170 units and the goal is to have that lease up around 2024. >> well, thank you so much. i really appreciate you coming on the show, mr. gray. thank you for giving us the time today. >> thank you, chris, and i really appreciate your time as well. >> and that's it with this episode. you've been watching san francisco rising for sfgov tv i'm chris manners. thanks so much for watching. >> you're watching quick bites, the show