The new we are seeing is just black buildings completely flat on the street level. And they have a rooftop where you can have a deck or this is their new recreation area. New folks that come into the neighborhood no longer get to experience the community as a whole. So these guidelines our beautiful, Historic Buildings from turning into a moratorium of black. Thank you. Thank you. Next speaker, please. Hello. I am a life resident of the mission. Lived all my life off the corridor of 24th street. And weve seen many changes coming into calle 24. And i would like to ask that you support this new design that we are trying to put in place for the regulations. So thats all i have to say. Thank you very much for your time. Thank you very much. Any other Public Comment on this item . Okay. Public comment is now closed. So i totally support these guidelines. I know folks have been working for many, many years to get there. Thank you to calle 24 and eric specifically and the planning staff for getting it done. So i just wanted to ask dont give me eric, but is every single one of these pictures in talking about the designs, theres ficus trees. I know its a controversial item but it adds so much to the aesthetic and the experience of walking up the street. So do these guidelines at all address that issue about street trees . We do recommend that new street trees be planted by developers and when they do new developments. I think currently a lot of the ficus trees are being removed for some safety issues. But yes. I believe that as well. And so thats why i asked the question about whether our guidelines address that or talk about the aesthetic of trees because what tree and what height and how do they yeah. Thank you. Yes. Thats one of the things that we talked about during the planning sessions is how those trees can be included at least in policy at least to talk about how they are part of the character of the neighborhood and how they are historic with the development of calle 24. So we were hoping to have something in writing. And i think there was a few lines in there that i see. So maybe you want to okay. Thank you. Yeah i mean we certainly recognize the importance that the character that the trees help create on 24th street. Its like its very unique and very special. The particular species of trees the ficus, i know that public works has kind of identified that as a problematic species throughout the city not just on 24th street and the mission because of maintenance issues and actually safety issues with branches coming down and crushing cars and so we didnt recommend necessarily that we replace the trees with ficus trees. But we do there is a guideline in the document that discusses the types of trees and kind of the character of trees that should be considered when they are being replaced, especially by when a development a building is required to install a new street tree. So there is guidelines and recommendations on that. Okay. Thank you very much. Commissioner richards. A few years ago, i read the pink section and i brought in something that i brought in that was really relevant to this specific area of calle 24. In 1990 so 25 years ago in 2015 when i saw it but hernandez said we need to make 24th street some special district to keep its contractor, blah, blah blah character blah, blah, blah. And this is a wonderful addition to the set of urban design guidelines. Its incredible. Really well done. On the ficus tree thing, i have one in front of my house and it fell down and crushed the car. So nobody got hurt but the car got hurt. I move to approve. Second. Adopt. Thank you commissioners on that motion to adopt the calle 24 special area design guidelines. [roll call vote] so moved, commissioners, the motion passes unanimously 50. So folks, that was item 15. And we have 27 items on the agenda. Plus or minus one. The next item is very long. So im going to take the opportunity to give us a little break because we have a long night ahead of us. Forgive us that we are down to five. And so biology dictates that we have to get up a little bit. So i think 15 minutes, if thats okay. Good afternoon and welcome back to the San FranciscoPlanning Commission regular hearing for thursday, november 21st, 2019. The commission does not tolerate any outbursts of any kind. Please silence your mobile devices. When speaking before the commission, if you care to, state your name for the record. Commissioners, we left off on your item calendar sixteens a through 1680 through see. Multiple properties owned or leased by the academy of arts university. You will be considering the adoption of findings for ceqa and recommending the Development Agreement and a master conditional use authorization. Good afternoon commissioners scott sanchez, Planning Department. We are pleased to bring you this package to resolve the longstanding enforcement issue. This dates back to 2006 when we first got our first draft of an into douche institutional master plan. During our review of that document we found there were numerous properties that were in violation of the planning code and subsequently proceeded to have enforcement action on those properties beginning in 2007. It was a lengthy process that resulted in Environmental Impact report as well as an existing memorandum, which we are which was reviewed in 2016. The existing technical memorandum is a unique document. The commissioner who [indiscernible] also in 2016, the City Attorney s office initiated a lawsuit against the academy of art university. We entered into settlement discussions. During the course of those discussions, which lasted several months, it resulted in the term sheet for goal resolution, which the Commission Reviewed back in late 2016 or early 2017. That set forth significant benefits for the city and for its residents to resolve these enforcement issues. We happen working diligently with the academy to implement to that, and that is what is before you today. It is to implement what has been agreed upon in the term sheet for resolution. That document was subsequently updated a few months ago, as well as the e. I. R. Addendum last month. Yesterday we were at the Historic Preservation commission where they considered the d. A. The developing to agreement that is also before you, as well as master permit to alter and master certificate of appropriateness to allow for exterior changes to the buildings to legalize those properties. We also initiated and adopted ceqa findings yesterday. That was unanimous approval. We are here today after a long time also a lot of hard work by the entire city family. This has been a contribution from many city agencies, not only the Planning Department, obviously the Mayors Office of housing and community development, and the department in the department of building inspection and the office of the City Attorney. We couldnt have done this without their support and the assistance of the City Attorney. There are too many people here to mention that have contributed to this, but i would like to single out a few of those. Versus andrew perry who will be giving you the presentation today. It is hard enough to thoughtfully and diligently reveal one project let alone dozens of them and one entitlement. Andrew has done an exemplary job in preparing for this hearing and taking over and mastering the subject. Also Kristin Jensen who has been our lead in the City Attorneys office. Without her support we never could have achieved this. I am tremendously impressed by the staff at all levels that have worked on this item who couldnt we couldnt be here without all the hard work of the staff. We have a large contingent if you are available if you need to answer questions. Andrew will give the presentation outlining the Settlement Agreement and the Entitlement Centre before you today. We do have rick cooper and our Environmental Planning staff. We also have dan adams from m. O. C. D. And joe barber from the department of Building Inspections who can answer any questions. We have Planning Department staff who are planning and preservation specialist who helped us get over the line yesterday. I would like to thank the contributions of Chelsea Fordham in getting the Environmental Impact review prepared. But without her significant contributions, we never could have gotten to this point as well. With that, ill turn it over to andrew perry for the presentation. Thank you. Thank you scott. Good afternoon commissioners. Andrew perry with department staff. Mr. Sanchez provided you with a background and understanding of the projects history and how we arrived to this point today. I will spend a few moments discussing the actions that are before the commission in order to move this project and lawsuit towards final resolution. Prior to any other action, the Commission Must adopt ceqa findings including a statement of overriding considerations, for which you have a draft motion in your packet. The e. I. R. Was certified in 2016 and an addendum was published in october of this year. Second, the Commission Must act on a resolution with a recommendation to the board of supervisors regarding the proposed ordinance, which includes the adoption of a Development Agreement as well as the planning code amendments that are necessary to implement the project. On the Development Agreement this is between the city and the academy of art university. Provides the mechanism for city approvals consistent with the Settlement Agreement and term sheet. The basic elements of the development include the legalization of academy uses as 34 properties throughout the city. The 34 properties that would be used include three new properties that have not previously been used by the academy. It also represents the withdrawal of the academy use at Nine Properties. In legalizing these pieces, the academy will be required to obtain all necessary permits to bring the properties into compliance with relevant city code. Second to develop and agreement calls for the legalization or the corrected modification of past building alterations that has been made without permit, especially in cases of Historic Buildings. Third, payment by the academy and its l. L. C. To the city of an estimated 58 million this includes an Affordable Housing benefit of approximately 37. 6 million to be used solely for Affordable Housing purposes and an estimated 8. 228. 4 million to the citys small sights fund. The balance of the monetary payment includes Civil Penalties reimbursement for planning enforcement cost, unfair competition law penalties and payment of impact fees. Although it is not a payment to the city, the developed agreement requires the academy to provide munimobile passes to students and staff and limit shuttles to routes that are not readily served by transit. Fourth the agreement includes a Student Housing metering agreement, by which the academy agrees to provide Student Housing based on specific percentages of their fulltime on Campus Student body, with those percentages being subject to increases over time. Student enrolment is tied to housing availability and importantly, when providing additional Housing Resources in the future, the academy may not do this through the conversion of existing residential housing. Some conversion of nonresidential buildings are permitted options but would primarily come from new construction in areas zoned for such uses. Fifth, through the permit process, a proposed swapper Residential Hotel rooms subject to an ministry of code chapter 41 which works as follows. Academy properties are located at 1080 and 1153 bush street. There are Residential Hotel rooms between the two buildings. Another academy property contains an existing mix of hotel rooms and 39 Tourist Hotel rooms. Through the legalization of the academys use at the Center Street property, the tourist rooms are being converted to Residential Use Group Housing and then under the proposed permit to convert application, those rooms will take on the chapter 41 designation as replacement units while the designation is removed from the rooms at the bush street properties. The result is that the city will gain Residential Hotel rooms at the 860 centre property. Lastly a developed agreement includes various timing and enforcement provisions, setting deadlines for one the various other elements of the d. A. Must be carried out and the citys recourse should they not occur. So that is the Development Agreement, but then also included in the proposed ordinance are amendments to the planning code that facilitate implementation of the project. Procedurally, the amendments create a consolidated improvements project for large postsecondary Educational Institutions such as the academy , which is referred to as a master conditional use authorization. Yesterday, as was mentioned the Historic Preservation commission considered and approved similar applications in the master certificate of appropriateness and master permit to alter. Effectively any number of individual conditional uses and also Building Permits can be socked together under the single master conditional use. So its important to note that things that may otherwise have only required a Building Permit are being elevated for Commission Review here today. Additionally, through the amended the amendment allows for the Planning Commission to grant exceptions through the process. At that may be necessary to implement the project. They are discussed in table one of the draft conditional use motion and are listed on the property summary sheets, which is exhibit e of your packet. Many of the exceptions needed are for bike parking be at the required number of spaces at a given property, exceptions, the access path requires navigation of a few steps. Or provide vertical racks instead of standard class one spaces. The department went through a rigorous look at each building to see where bike parking could reasonably be provided and the department supports the spaces that are being proposed along with the exceptions needed. Where sites are deficient in bike parking the d. A. Calls for payment of an in lieu fee. Other common exceptions being requested are from open space and rear yard requirements which typically occurs when a building is changing use from a nonresidential use, typically a Tourist Hotel, which doesnt have open space or rear yard requirements and changing to a residential use which does. Many of these buildings are legal noncompliance with respect to rear yard setbacks and the only way these properties can provide open space would be through new roof deck construction. And then there are two last things to point out as part of the planning code amendments. First, where the city is compensated for the loss of specific residential units through a Development Agreement the restrictions of section 317 e. , which is the conversion of existing residential units to Student Housing may be waived through the process. It is worth noting this code section was added in 2012 prior to which the coach did not differentiate Student Housing and also this is after when the academy had already occupied these buildings. Given that space code applies to the project, this would need to be lifted at the sites to allow for conversion and legalization of Student Housing today. Second, where the development authorizes the conversion of no more than one building subject to section 202. 8 of the code, institutional used, the requirement of that section could be matched through the master conditional use. [please stand by] for commercial Storage Private parking at 2225 jerrold avenue in the bayview. The two primary cultures also have campus buildings in the financial district and south of market areas. The proposed uses are principally permitted within their zoning districts. In other districts properties may require conditional use for the Postsecondary Institutional use or for residential property, conditional use may be needed for group house affiliated with Postsecondary Institution or Group Housing generally as is the case in the hh2 district. Certainly residential properties, conditional use is being requested for private parking use. There is the case of 950 van ness which was just discussed which is private parking for the classic vehicle collection. But for most other sites the private parking requested is parking that already exists but would no longer be used in an accessory manner so conditional use is required to establish it as its own distinct use. The policy doesnt allow students to park in those spaces. They are reserved for faculty and staff that are not residing at these residential build. The last type of conditional use you would otherwise see as part of the project is for the removal of the dwelling unit under section 317. And this is unrelate to the waiving of 317e provision i discussed earlier. Is we pavel happens at 560 powell and 680 sutter. At powell the additional unit was perhaps a clerical error. Its difficult to see where within the building a unit was eliminated. And at 680 sutter the unit removed was located at the ground floor and was converted by the academy in 2003 to create space for an Academy Art Gallery which has operated there since. As i mentioned the 34 resulting Properties Include three new properties to be added for academy use al these are along the van ness corridor with two for institutional use and the other for Student Housing. Going from south to north they are 1142 van ness a private community facility, 1948 van ness former retail and 2550 former a hotel. And just to reiterate that there are Nine Properties being withdrawn from academy use. Perhaps notable of which is 1055 pine street which contains residential rooms and cannot be used as Student Housing moving forward. I know that is a brief overview of the properties involved and the work to be performed. So if there are any questions about specific properties you may have myself and other members of the department are happy to answer those. Very quickly, i want to touch on the you Public Comment that has been received with regard to the Development Agreement and applications. Commissioners i provided you with copies of via email and a hard copy. Largely received after publishing of the staff report. Staff received 51 emails from neighbors in the vicinity of 1900 jackson street opposed to the finance of this building. Staff received a letter from the van ness corridor neighborhood coalition, specifically commenting on the proposed uses along the corridor including objection to the proposed private parking use. Lastly staff received correspondence from three other individuals with concerns the project does not address building requirements for those with disabilities and comments with regard to the overarching elements of the agreement. In closing, just a brief context for where we are in the process as was mentioned yesterday they unanimously adopted ceqa findings and a resolution recommending approval of the da and planning code amendments and approved the cta applications. Today you will consider similar approvals with exceptions and conditions. Then the proposed ordinance including the Development Agreement will go before the board of supervisors for approval with the target of having all project approvals secured and effective by the end of february next year. Then pursuant to the schedule of performance the academy would be responsible for committing the various scopes of work at each property over the course of the following two years. So the Department Finds the project is consistent with the objectives and policies of the general plan and recommends approval of its constituent parts. That concludes staffs presentation. We are certainly available for questions. Thank you. Is there another presentation or is this it . Okay. So we will now take Public Comment on this item. Im sorry. Yep. Come on up. How long is your presentation . Shouldnt be more than five minutes okay. Good evening commission. President melgar. Im jim abrams, Land Use Council to the academy of art university. We are pleased to be here tonight. This has been a lot of work from everybody who has been working on this. And we are very pleased to be here. If i could have the screen the presentation. There it goes. So, again, we are here tonight to discuss the global resolution of the lawsuit that was filed against the academy of arts. And there are a few components of that resolution that we wanted to bring to your attention. First theres a Settlement Agreement thats resolving the litigation that will be heard by the board of supervisors. Theres the Development Agreement before you tonight that approves and regulates the 34 plan sets that would be authorized by the conditional use authorization you have. Theres also a stipulated injunction that gives the city enforcement rights against the academy of arts that are different than the citys standard enforcement rights. So if the academy had a future violation the city would have special rights to go to court and enforce those violations against the academy. In addition theres a guarantee that provides a monetary guarantee to the city so the city is ensured it will receive the benefits ill discuss related to a monetary payments. So as andrew mentioned before the commission tonight theres a Development Agreement, theres also a master cu and ceqa findings associated with both. But the core of the work and are these 34 building plan sets. And this is the result of five years of work and negotiation. Theyve been prepared by the academys architect tef, the City Attorneys office, Planning Development and the court has been involved in the preparation. All the buildings must meet ada requirements when they are submitted to the building department. And all filled Building Code requirements. We are required to file them within 60 days. The plan sets that andrew discussed theres the installation of 500 bike racks, class one and two bike racks. Theres a reduction of 28 percent of the academys off street parking. There are facade alterations the housing benefits again theres the 37 million payment. Theres 83 rooms of sro units that will remain at pine street that the academy is vacating that building will remain an sro building and theres the addition of eight units the academy is creating by consolidating its sro units into the sutter building. In addition there are specific procedural requirements and moratorium that are implemented through the Development Agreement. There would be a moratorium on new Development Agreements by aau from one year of the Development Agreement to give the the city a pause on any Development Activity other than thats contemplated by this deal. Theres a moratorium on signage proposals for two years after the scheduled performance is completed so two years after the work is done, there would be a ban on proposing new signs to its properties that are subject to this Development Agreement. Theres a 30day Development Agreement. There are several system improvements. Im almost done. Theres a payment of 1. 5 million fee to the sfmta. All this i think goes towards the academys policy of not allowing students to park anywhere. Or not to have parking spaces. So all students dont have parking provided by the academy and the shuttle system is there for them to use. The academys campus as andrew mentioned, we are consolidating the campus, reducing the number of buildings from 40 to 34. We are vacating nine academy sites. And there are three buildings that well be renovating. Two are beautiful Historic Buildings. The Concordia Club and 1946 van ness. They will be used by the academy. The academy has to complete all this work per a scheduled performance that is identified in a Development Agreement. And finally weve read the comments received by the commission as well and we take them extremely seriously. We understand the concerns about the signage on the jackson street property. We note the signs proposed are about a quarter of the size thats permitted so both on frontages per the code you can have a sign thats bigger than what is proposed. However, we understand that this is an issue the community will want to have neighbors that are happy with au. So we would like to work out an arrangement that would result in signage proposal that is more minimal to the neighbors. We understand that theres concerns about the lighting in particular and we can discuss the hours of operation of the lighting which we open could be a good way of reaching common ground. So im here and thank you very much. Thank you very much. So with that we will take up Public Comment. Do we have speaker cards . Okay. We have chris schafer, chris martin, peter clark and marlene morgans. Hi. Pull down your mic please. I will. Hello commissioners. And i might need to introduce myself to those who dont know who i am for example commissioner diamond. Im probably the only person in this room who is an expert at living in the midst of a university and understanding the impact that a universe has on its neighbors. I live right in the middle of usf. And the University Terrace association is the only neighborhood in america that is totally surrounded on all four sides by a university. So thats one point to be made. And ive spoken here many times using the university of San Francisco as a model for being a good actor as a university. So for example right now they are building 606 student units right on their campus. They are not taking away housing from anybody else in the city. Student housing is actually Affordable Housing. And if a university does not build their own housing, they are taking that Housing Stock away. And theres approximately 50,000 students who live in San Francisco in some way. Now, we know they try to pack them in. And there are two situations. As a matter of fact, last year the Planning Commission in one of the few times you ever had a supervisor speak to you, they were speaking about a building that had been converted near the college. And the supervisors actually came because the neighbors were so upset which leads to the issue of student behavior. I realize that what we are here, we are doing a bunch of things about the building. But you are not attending to the people who are in about that building and what is a College Student . We actually a freshman is a student a College Freshman is a person who is learning how to drink. And you can understand all the socialization thats taking place as these people live next door to you. So first thing im going to say is the student is not a resident. A student bugs the residents. Students come and every this is for example the movein welcome day every august they move in, every january you have a new semester so you have a constant turnover in Students Learning how to behave which leads to another thing, onCampus Students should have a code of conduct. This is what u sf requires, that whether they live on or off campus, there is the same code of conduct. They are clear. It is a contract made with the student. And there are consequences when students dont behave. Out at 10 00, et cetera. So you can understand that. So what i would request because we havent gone far enough in dealing with the behavior of students is that you have the resident advisor living onsite. Thank you maam. Your time is up. And aau neighborhood contact and to expand the benefits they make to their community. Thank you very much. Thank you. Next speaker, please. Good evening commissioners. My name is chris martin. In written testimony submitted earlier professor tom jones states the cannery located at 2801 leavenworth street is a considerable distance from any of the other core academy clusters. In fact, the cannery is the only parcel in the Fishermans Wharf cluster. I agree with professor jones, the cannery is a not a convenient location for students for transportation and should not be converted to academy uses. I have firsthand knowledge of the cannery. My family originally developed and operated the cannery for 40 years. I managed the cannery for most of that time and filled it with businesses that attracted locals as well as tourists. We put in nonchain retail stories movie theaters, museums, comedy clubs, sidewalk cafes and restaurants. For years the cannery accommodated street performers including Robin Williams and held lively free events including film festivals and Music Festivals and a farmers market. In 2007 we sold the cannery to a Real Estate Entity that had a San Francisco partner 2011 that entity forfeited the cannery to their lender thus allowing the Stevens Family to buy the property despite instruction from the department of planning not to purchase any additional properties. Today under Academy Management the cannery is a dead zone. No trespass sewn signs greet you when you enter. Access to the building is limited. Public restrooms are closed. Nearly all retail and restaurant spaces are vacant. Even the Academy Galleries have closed most of the time. It is tragic. A once vibrant complex that was designed for people to enjoy is bleak and empty. Its clear to me the academy is not capable of running the cannery as it was intended to operate. Inactive storefronts along jefferson and beach street create a dead zone. Reducing foot traffic and hurting businesses in the area. Further academy uses on the first and second levels of the cannery are contrary to the department of plannings Fishermans Wharf public realm plan and the architects vision to invigorate fisher marchs wharf with inviting acttivity. I spent years working to maintain the fishing industry and instill a sense of planning and authenticity in the wharf area. Your staff recommended it not as a academy use property. Preserve it in its intended use as a lively Retail Restaurant and entertainment landmark. Thank you. Thank you mr. Martin. Next speaker, please. Hello. Marlene morgans, neighborhood coalition. Yes. We are a neighborhood that is basically a good location for an Educational Institution. The proposal to concentrate a lot of the Institutional Uses onto van ness is a good idea. We believe that most of the activities of the academy can be conducted in the t zone going from new montgomery through sutter up to van ness. Thats the core. And its a good core. Its because its a major transportation corridor as well as being a good housing mix and major Institutional Uses. The problem with the academy of art if you look at what they have done over the last decade is theyve ended up instead of creating as the previous speaker has said a vibrant connection with the community, they just warehouse buildings particularly at the ground level. So theres no interaction with the community. When you look at van ness, right now we have three proposed uses for storing automobiles on van ness. No museum license no plan for any way for the community to go in and view the collection like you can at stanford and uc berkeley or other places that have university museums. But simply to warehouse them. So our first request is there should only be one licensed museum. And it doesnt even have a license. There should be a Program Students should be trained, Community Members should be trained. They should be open to the community. This can create a vibrant street for use. This other two proposals for the existing bakery it doesnt need to be additional car storage and another paint shop. I dont know how many students can be painting automobiles. Two automobile paint shops on van ness is ridiculous. That should be classrooms. It is a historic building. 950 van ness does not need to remain car storage. And when you consider 950 van ness is across the street from a hospital that has 2200 employees has no staff parking none. They have a vibrant for the academy to say they have to have a private parking garage for their faculty when we have 2200 hospital workers expected to get to work on transit is a slap in the face. Thats unacceptable. The plan for the development of 2550 van ness into 306 Student Housing units is a good plan. In general, some of the small outlying, small buildings like 1900 jackson. Okay. Thank you. Next speaker, please. Commissioners. My name is peter clark. Im a resident of 1880 jackson in Pacific Heights and have been for over 30 years. I live across the street from 1900 jackson. We pretty much found out about their plans by accident. They certainly took no steps to advise us of what they intended to do. We heard about the Planning Commission about this meeting. I and i couple others did you go through the documents and you have to go down three or four levels to find hidden in the fine print the proposal by the au to put signage on this building 6foot by 2foot illuminated signs on the jackson street faces. As andrew indicated over 50 of us have written in registering our complaint and our opposition to this move by the au. It is completely inconsistent with the character of the neighborhood. And i dont think there should be any reason why Pacific Heights cant be a neighborhood which will retain its character in the same way the mission must retain its character or the castro wants to retain its character. It is true that the aau has put forth an argument that they are operating a business at 1900 jackson, renting rooms to students they view to be a business. As such, if you read without interpretation the planning code, it would be compliance to have a 2foot by 6foot sign. I think in reality, though, what that planning code means is if you have a Small Business like small store or small dry cleaning business in the neighborhood providing services to the neighborhood such a sign would be appropriate. This sign is not. This is blatant commercial advertising, nothing more nothing less. And that sign should not be allowed to go up. We would be happy to meet with you. You should have met with us before. This is more evidence that the aau is not a Good Neighbor to the city. Thank you very much. Thank you. Next speaker please. Hello, my name is terry maguire. Im with the Pacific HeightsResident Association board, but im speaking on my own behalf. Microphone please. My name is terry maguire. Im on the Pacific HeightsResident Association board, but im speaking on behalf of myself today, mainly because i really just something occurred to me that i think is very important. And maybe its been addressed already. But id like to make sure that it is. And that is these nine vacated properties. Were they adequately reviewed and included in this process or were they vacated and they are going to go to the benefit of the stevens totally marketrate possibly housing . This is an opportunity. Those vacated properties need to be focused on. Hopefully they are looked at looked upon as opportunities for the highest and best use for lowincome housing possibly within the city. As that occurred, maybe it has . Maybe it hasnt. But i would like to make sure it does occur. So i encourage you to make sure that it does occur. Thank you. Thank you mr. Maguire. Next speaker, please. Good afternoon, commissioners. Still afternoon isnt it . The board of supervisors i served on the Land Use Committee for seven years. I was the chair for most of those years. 12, 13 14, 15 years ago we got this list of violations. A decade and a half ago here we are. Years later. How long did this operation continue . Did it start before getting the list which we asked the department to deal with. And by the way welcome back former administrator scott schafer. I know you are stuck with this. Thank you to all the members of the city who have tried to work with this issue and with these criminal activities. These are criminal activities. White collar criminals, budgetary things you have to consider but its criminal activity. Mrs. Stevens and her operation have been allowed to continue for all this time. And im not enough money because this is really all about money. Its about property its about the fact that this Educational Institution is a real estate operation. Its a visaissuing operation. Schools and colleges, aaccredittation acredation could pull the accreditation. I know plenty of people who have taught there. I know they resisted unionization. I was the president for the union at usf. I know what its like to fight for decent quality kind of people to come in and decent quality benefits for faculty. You know what usf, what weve done up there at usf and what we are doing through a real campus. This phony idea of a campus where you spread out and buy property and draw different shapes and say thats a campus, again i go back to your resume, mit i visited the harvard campus. I could barely walk, it was such a big campus. I know what mit looks like. Those are campuses. Usf is a campus. Even the property during that had to be sold during the depression because usf almost closed. They sold that land in between the Lone Mountain campus and the main campus. Please put 20 million more dollars. To me jones who was the former head of the housing some years ago has given you the document here showing you what the current calculation should be for recovering money for the 1843 beds being lost in 15 buildings. The calculation could be done. Ten buildings. They were low income apartments. Sro hotels and we already suffered 40 years ago with the loss of sro hotels that hurt the working class people. We know about that history going back. Thank you,. Bucks more is what we need to get. You received tom jones documents. Please go for the 20 million. Get it. Thank you very much. I appreciate it. Thank you. Next speaker, please. Hi im bobby coalman. It is an honor to follow the testimony of the former supervisor jake. And i was also struck by the direct observations of chris martin of the cannery. I am a graduate of columbia and stanford. And ive been active on land use issues since 1987 here in San Francisco. And i sympathize with the Planning Commission as you are asked to play a part in the approval process of a Settlement Agreement and Development Agreement under these circumstances. For those of us who have had experience of decades and look at the long view if you try to take a Restorative Justice approach to the academy of art and situations like this, it is unfortunate when you are asked to approve a piece of it when in the larger context you are actually in a way reinforcing some of the past transaggressive behavior that underlines how we get to this point. So these positions that have been articulated about the underutilizeation of these properties and the inadequacy of the financial settlements, these are in our face. These are actually two experiences that those of us who have been dealing with the issue for years are now looking at and saying really, is that all youve got . Youve got the piece in front of you but its in the context of serious objections to the Settlement Agreement that are going to persist. So my apologies to you as you face that aspect of it. The remedies that have to do with housing and the missed opportunity of the city are kind of a shame for those of us who look at it decade afterdeck aid and see weve after decade and see weve only gotten this far. Thank you. Thank you. Next speaker, please. President melgar members of the commission, kathleen cortney, russian Hill Community association. And welcome, commissioner diamond. This has been going on too long. As the supervisor said, some of us have been looking at this situation for a decade and a half. We are all aware of the adverse impacts of aau on the city. We are all aware of the illegality. And now i think we are pretty aware that the attorneys of aau have really outmatched our own City Attorneys and our own Planning Department. The question is is this settlement that is before you the optimal settlement that you as professionals and as caretakers of the planning process of this city, is this the optimal settlement for this city . Or is this just the best settlement that the guys could pull together . I really think weve raised issues about the stability, weve raised issues about housing. Weve raised issues about sros being taken over. When you vote on this, i really ask you to say to yourself do i feel in good conscience that this settlement is the best settlement that i as a commissioner, on the Planning Commission of San Francisco in 2019, can bring to the citizens of this city. Thank you very much. Thank you ms. Cortney. Next speaker, please. Hi. Sorenson. I think i was one of the first hearing last year, one of the first recent hearings, about the academy of art. And i remember thinking to myself, holy crap, they are getting away with murder. We did a improvement on our Carriage House where we accidentally took down too much of the wall, and the city stopped the construction. We had to stop. And then we had to come before the board to file to be able to continue. The academy of art, as i recall, has had buildings out of compliance for almost 30 years. And yet here we are, we are just trying to rebuild a Carriage House and we are getting slapped down. Let me bring you back to when we were remodeling my unit. And we had the electrical inspector come in who didnt like us. Nonetheless i shouldnt say that because hes probably watching. Well get stung again. [laughter] but he came in and he said he didnt speak. And then i said whats up. I dont like where the conduit is running through the wall. And our electrician who was doing the work there said yes but its legal. Its within the zone. Its specific. Its right. Well i just dont like the way it looks. And he turned around and walked out. So we had have spent i think we have spent my brother figured out close to 10,000 in reinspections because weve had people come in and make arbitrary comments about work thats been legally done and is correct, but they have just arbitrarily said i dont like it. And of course they reinspect and we get it and nonetheless we are spending a lot more money than we have. And then you come to the academy of art which has how many buildings that are illegal . Its absolutely maddening that the city lets them get away with that. Of course now our former illustrious mayor brown is on their board, so of course everything is going to go smooth and we are going to get screwed. But i really would i wish the city would hold them to the fire and make them pay for. They have been out of compliance for so many years. And now theyve decided that they are going to pay . Oh give me a break. Beside, they are not a real school. They are just theyre fleecing kids. Its unfortunate but they are fleecing kids. Anyway, we have a lot of impact in the mission because of this. Thank you. Thank you ms. Sorenson. Next speaker, please. Hi, good afternoon again i run an art center. And i know the Art Community and the business of doing art. And theres just not enough art jobs that these students could possibly find. And to call it just a mill for either immigration purposes or just a fundraiser for aau to just be a Real Estate Rental Agency which fakes classes on the side its infuriates me in the art. Im also like marie a homeowner and i go through the process and pay my permits and do everything legally. And as i said last time this came up, if you let them get away if it, its a signal to me i should be able to get off scotfree as well. Its a bad message. And its fine they are going to pay, it should be the decades of illegal rents that theyve won and use that as a mathematical exercise to figure out how much they actually owe the city in homelessness that theyve caused. Theres aau students all over the mission also taking up housing because they are everywhere. Everywhere you go