Hello, im an social architect at architect nation, inc, and second slide, please. And im a resident for the past ten years and while in sorry, can you hear me now. We can, but weve already allowed the project sponsor to go forward so youll have to wait until his presentation is done. Understood. Next slide. Were on the chronology of ep engagement slide. We held a preapplication meeting wit neighbors to discussion the proposed project and the dr requester, brian fabian attended and provided a letter outlining his primary concerns and we emailed him copies of the drawings and offered to sketch a photograph from his yard and on april 17th, we received three photos from mr. Fabian and following on the 25th, mr. Fabian, we sent mr. Fabian a handdrawn sketch for the location of the proposed addition and on december 16th, 2020 excuse me, on may 6th, 2019, mr. Fabian responded. We provided all letters to the Planning Department for review and on may 20th, 2020, we confirmed with David Winslow
Also wanted to read for the public, due to the covid19 Health Emergency and to protect commissioners, the employees and the public, the building inspection hearing room is closed. However, members will be participating in the meeting it remotely. This precaution is taken pursuant to the stayathome order, and all proceeding and proceeding local and state and federal orders, declarations and directives. Committee members will attend the meeting through Video Conference or by telephone, if the video fails. And participate in the meeting to the same extent as if they were physically present. Public comment will be available on each item on this agenda. Both channel 78 and sfgovtv. Org are streaming the number at the top of the screen. Each speaker will be allowed two minutes to speak. Comments or opportunities to speak during Public Comment period are available via phone by calling 408 4189388, 146 632 7982. Best practices are to call from a quiet location, speak clearly and slowly and tur
We do as a city, as you all know, have an obligation for affirmatively fair housing. This developers have bottom lines to deliver for investors. They can be pressured to provide affordable minutes to make concessions regarding labor practices. At the end of the day it is this balance and this discussion that is at the heart of whether we are furthering fair housing or not. When we are having the neighborhood around 80 of the units unaffordable to working class units disproportionatesly available to white folks. We are taking steps backwards. I appreciate your work on this. We are in a point of urgency on so many fronts. Thank you for your time put into this. I appreciate it. This is one of the most robust discussions i have had and i want to thank Planning Department staff for signaling a new direction. Thank you, miriam and your colleagues. I want to say a couple things. One of them is a policy desire. I think it is low hanging fruit. I mentioned it earlier. Historically when we wante
U process, i believe that we also could have some discretion in how quickly we would process that perm mit permit removed. Im going to refer to the Zoning Administrator on this. the tenant issue is always chachallenging because obviously its allowing it out side the purview of the code. If its not legalized if it is required to be removed and theres an existing tenant that does become an enforcement situation if we have an unauthorized unpermitted unit that may have life safety deficiencies. We generally want that unit to be vacated. Aobviously theres challenges with an existing tenant. We want to be open to options there. We dont have an open ended option to allow residency in an unauthorized unit and it may be something that the City Attorney wants to speak to further in terms of this issue and conflicts between our codes and other City Ordinances relating to renting units and occupancy. commissioner johnson. one second. I thought i heard them asking what happens if we do approve thi
Can we have the next caller. Caller good evening, supervisors. Todd snyder for district 5. I thank you for amending this measure next week and supporting it thus far. I ask that you continue to support it today. And i want to point out that an arbitrary number of Sworn Police Officers provides no flexibility to adapt to the changing needs of our city. And this came from a Consent Decree entered into in 1979. And lifted in 1998. It has no relevance to the city today. So i urge you to continue to support this measure and to put it before the voters on the ballot in november. Thank you. Clerk thank you. Can we have the next caller, please. Caller i already spoke once and i have been unmuted. Clerk i believe this person has already spoken before per their comment. Can we have the next caller, please. Caller yes, im a native san franciscan, and im in my 60s. I want to express that changing the charter to minimal staffing is a deadly Public Policy decision on your part. No doubt that crimina