Immediately justify this variance, but for me, a couple factors here. The building, as we know is historic, which can generally, as you know, restrict or direct development on the lot. There is a pretty large front set back of about 10 feet. This is a much shorter lot than normal, about 75 feet deep. Just if seeing this project without context, my response was negative, that, you know, just encroaching all the way to the rear property line, but looking in the context here, and i think it is what in my mind is unprecedented as the Development Pattern on this block, and the number of buildings that are developed in this manner, including extensions that go to the rear property line, so that, to me, allows me to support a variance that they are seeking here. I think a code compliant alternative would probably be more harmful to the pattern here, which i think has some unique character to this block, so for those reasons, i could be supportive of the variance theyre seeking here. Thank you. Thank you. Any other questions here . So do we have a motion. I move that we approve it. Second. Secretary ionin thank you, commissioners. If theres nothing further, theres been a motion to approve that with a second. [ roll call. ] secretary ionin so moved. That motion passes unanimously. Close public hearing and grant the public variance for the reasons noted in my public testimony. Secretary ionin thank you. Commissioners, thatll place us on item 9 for at 56 mason street. This is a minor permit to alter. Good afternoon, commissioners. Alexander kirbi with department staff. The item before you is a request to alter for window replacement and storefront additions. The subject building was oenchly constructoenc originally constructed in 1908 as the Bristol Hotel and is located as a contributing building under article 11 of the planning code as well as a contributor to the uptown tenderloin Historic District on the National Register of historic places. Of building is a four story masonry Apartment Hotel typical of the surrounding neighborhood. The proposed scope of work is for the restoration of 75 existing windows on the upper three floors of the two primary facades along mason and eddy streets and a replacement of the nonhistoric storefront along eddy street. Based upon information provided there are 68 window sashes that appear to be sound enough to be repaired and rehabilitated, and only seven that require either that require total replacement. Seven new windows, the seven new windows will match the original windows in size, material, configuration and profile. The project additionally proposes to introduce a new storefront design that will create a more cohesive ground story and simplify the mason street facade. The new storefront window system will consist of powder coat the aluminum frames with a tr transom to match the window frames in the existing photographs and will blend with the neighborhood. A vent at the far south end of the storefront will be coated with a minute maximum powder coat coated minimum powder coated grill. As the proposed work will not damage or destroy original distinguishing qualities or characters of the original building. Staff finds the original character of the building will be retained and not removed. Staff recommends approval with the following conditions that prior to the issuance of the site permit, submitted plans including a bulkhead section, material sample of the proposed grill and transom details shall require Department Planning and staff approval, and that prior to issuance of the site permit, an onsite mock up of the storefront transom and grill shall be required by Planning Department preservation staff. The project was submitted to the commission as a minor permit to alter for review on august 27, 2017 however a request for public hearing was requested on august 28, 2017. The hearing for this item was requested due to concerns surrounding the use of the hotel in its single room occupancy or sro units. The subject permit does not propose to amend the use of the exiting units, nor do any prior building permits. Further, the use of the subject building is not under purview of the hpc, but rather the department of Building InspectionsHousing Inspection Division which makes annual inspections of all properties for compliance. The subject building has 41 legal sro units and 16 legal Tourist Hotel rooms. These unit counts are not under consideration under this permit. Both a Court Statement of decision dated january 4th, 2017 and a receivership order dated january 12, 2017 provide further information concerning this history and this displaced sro tenants of the property and these are included in your pactets. Please note that minor revisions have been made to the draft motion including a new section within the preamble on page 2 describing a request for hearing and a condition to read that all conditions shall be pursuant to the architectural site permit. Staff has been in contact with the tenderloin Building Commission and no Public Comment has been received to the proposed scope of work. Im available if you have any questions. Thank you. Commissioner pearlman. Miss kirby, i do have a question. Im looking at the date of march 4th, 2014, which is more than four years ago, and im wondering why it has taken so long . So this case was inherited by me just in 2016 so im not entirely clear on the early history of the case; however, its my understanding that they initially came in for wholesale window replacement, and there was a lot of back and forth, and the time frame for getting the conditions assessment for such a long building kind of added up. Additionally there were a number of other site permits for the interior of the building, and i think this may have gotten kind of lost in the fray for some time, so weve been treating it almost as an enforcement issue and kind of moving forward with it for a few more deadlines. Its shocking to see 4. 5 years for a window repair and replacement project. Yeah, but i wouldnt given what i know. Given all the other issues yeah, yeah, no, i guess that. Yeah. I just wanted to make sure that it wasnt because it was stuck in planning for 4. 5 years. Okay. At this time well take Public Comment does the sponsor want to make a statement . Yeah. Hi. Weve been working since 2013 on this project, so i would submit before we submitted as window replacement, and we were communicating with the another planner, and we were it was a little difficult to get through the whole process until we have alexandra to came and help us out really good, and then, she suggests the surveyor of the windows, and that report saying that we have to restore the windows, so we had to provide all the information to alexandra, and we have everything and oh, before that, we had a do you want to know the Bristol Hotel, they had to replace, just for front of the next door facade, which is same building, so we provide all the information, too, so were ready. Were just waiting for the addendum to get the approvals from planning and fire department. Okay. Thank you. I have the elevations here. I guess you guys have it, too. Yes, we do. Thank you. At this time well take Public Comment on this item. Does any member of the public wish to speak on this item . If so, please come forward. Sue hesser. Im the one that forced a hearing. It became clear to me, from your comments, that one has seen the court decision. It outlines the outrageous behavior of the developer by attempting to evict the tenants, convert to a Tourist Hotel, all kinds of repeated things, so your staff has the decision called and its in the superior court of california. The decision was dated january of 2017. I am asking that this be put into the file. Its in your the case record for the Department Already because the outrageous behavior of the developer has caused this whole mess. He evicted tenants, they became homeless, they were entitled under San Francisco law to go back. He evicted them for enormous repairs, and he didnt have anan any i dont want to say intenti intention. He didnt show he was taking it seriously. He emptied out the building, caused all kinds of grief. I was hoping that mr. Sanchez was still here because you dont have jurisdiction to dale with a building that is being transformed in violation of the administrative code and the planning code, and the Planning Commission should hear this case. We want, really a lot to have the developer do the work that allows the tenants to come back. At the same time, were in a catch 22, where theres no ability to have the Planning Commission, which has the power to say more than you do effectively saying this is not a Tourist Hotel. Signage has gone up illegal signage has gone up, marketing this as a Tourist Hotel on the building in the past month. The wifi all kinds of things that Tourist Hotels have. This is an sro, and because the law allows an sro for a couple months of the year to rent vacant units to tourists its in the administrative code they are using that to eliminate sro tenants. I didnt want to speak first, but i thought someone should frame the issues right now, and i would encourage the two people that are in attendance to standup here and talk. Thank you. Thank you. And youll have three minutes, and theres a warning buzzer 30 seconds before your time is up. Hello. My name is laura, landowners and city of San Francisco are forcing people of low income out of their homes. We demand that you keep the 56 mason building as housing for people of low income in the tenderloin. Do not convert this building to high Income Housing. The original tenants must return to their homes. Far too many people are forced out of their homes and have become homeless. Dont let this happen. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Next speaker, please. Good afternoon, commissioners. My name is alexandra goldman. I work with the Tenderloin Neighborhood Development corporation. Just want to say that we acknowledge this is an imperfect venue for raising these issues, however, we have been concerned about the trend of taking Single Room Occupancy Hotels and turning them into a venue for other people. According to the general plan, changes like this are supposed to support the change of Affordable Housing in the city. We also just want to remind people about the Historical Context of the tenderloin as a neighborhood for low income people and the challenges of low income people to find housing elsewhere, and weve watched single occupancy places being turned into high income hotels, and we feel it compromises the significancy of the tenderloin. Weve watched this happen at other places, and in both situations, landowners removes tenants from their property by various means, and then proceeded to upgrade the building and market the building towards high income people, so we have a concern this is happening in this hotel, and weve seen this happen in other areas such as chinatown and the mission and south of market, and so we just want to raise the profile of this, of this particular issue and really express the concern that the supply of housing thats available and affordable for low income people in the city is rapidly doeteriorating a in the market. My name is joe wilson. Im with the hospitality house. I have a copy of our original request for a hearing on this matter, and in response to the commissioners question about why this took so long, you know, displacement of poor people is timeconsuming, and i think this is not only the incorrect venue, its the wrong one. The issue is gentrification and displacement of a low income neighborhood, a neighborhood that has the highest concentration of renter households in the city, and almost twice the number of Homeless People in our district as the other ten districts combined. This project is affecting both. Its either displacing low income renters or its entrapment of the existing renter households, and to allow a building to stay vacant in a community that has one of the highest concentrations of Homeless People is egregious on its face, and i think you must, in good conscience, put this matter where it belongs, with the Planning Commission. Its also a legal matter, as attorney hester pointed out. The court case that has been decided is an important issue here. This is not an issue of a minor renovation or a minor permit to alternate, this is an egregious example of circumventing the law or manipulating it to the advantage of a market rate developer. That is something that should concern you, and you should not, under any circumstances, approve this project to go forward without extensive public review of all of the issues that are at hand here, and if you look up you know, gentrification in the dictionary, it would say, see 56 mason, so we urge you to act in good conscience and deny this minor permit to alter. Thank you. Thank you. Next speaker, please. Hello. My name is der he can marcou. I represent the tenderloin peoples congress. My problem with this and i should say our problem with this is this an intentional deliberate action to get rid of the low income tenants they have through delays and other illegal methods to where the people just finally just disappeared, and now hes going to turn it into a boutiqu boutiquey sro, which he can do, but its morally reprehensible, and thats all i have to say. Thank you. Thank you. Hello. My name is donnell boyd, and im with hospitality house. I just want to ask the question, when we all was little kids, and we went to sunday school, and they taught us about the good samaritan, what happened to all of those teachings that we got when we was a little kid . Because im looking at it as like we have got so caught up into money that were not paying attention to the poor. Its a lot of poor people out there on the streets, and they need houses more than the gentrified. The gentrified, they have lots of money. They can live anywhere. But the sro, theyre low income. They help people get off the streets. Help the people thats on Market Street and all over the places thats living in the tents and all that. We need to reach down and help them up and put them in those sros and start giving these over privileged people everything and neglecting the underprivileged, because theyre underprivileged. What we doing actually, this city is doing a robin hood thing in reverse, robbing the poor and passing it onto the rich, and we need to stop that, because a city cant survive passing everything to the superprivileged people. Thank you. Thank you. Next speaker, please. My name is ryan, and im from the tenderloin peoples congress. I have an issue that i want to bring before you that might make sense to all of this. Man, you own your own homes for sure, and you have no problem. Youve been living there for years. You want to payoff your house notes and all the rest of that, but what is, like, the landlords, your realtors turn their clock back and say, well, we can get more money than what you guys are paying. Now, youve been paying a lot of money as you can see, and you dont need to pay no more, but what if they did that to you and take your home away . Would that put you on the street . Would they evict you illegally, made you homeless . What if you were in a position that you were poor and broke and had nothing . How would it be for you, sitting here, right here, doing your jobs, and your home, your landlords deciding against you. A lot of people on the streets right now are only there because people like city hall sorry, Planning Commissions, and all of the rest of you who are living well and good are doing a terrible job. Youre not giving no justice in any of this. The people that come into city hall with big pockets, you give them all the attention. Why do they deserve all the attention . Number one, they dont all live here. Number two, and they are not citizens here and paying taxes here, and three, youre giving them our homes. Youre taking away from us to give to them. The robin hood experience, even worse, because youre not caring about what youre doing. It seems good because the word legal comes into mind. When the city said Affordable Housing, i thought that meant people would get off the streets. It turns out, its not about affordablity for us, so that was a kick in our teeth in the first place. A law by you guys, cause you did nothing about it, nothing, if you was on this side, and you were sitting over there, youd want us to do the right thing, wouldnt you . So its time for you guys now to do the right thing. Youve got to stop this nonsense. You make extra amount of dollars, you feel good about yourself, youve got nice cars, wonderful, but if you got it at the expense of us, and we paying taxes just like you, then youre not doing any justice, youre not doing any good, so what is your point . My point is youve got to change the way you do things. Yeah, to see what makes money. Everybody wants to make money, but when you let people sleep on the streets and live on the streets and pee on the streets and poop on the streets and Everything Else on the streets, you are just kicking us in the head. Thank you. Thank you. Next speaker, please. Hi. My name is jessie johnson. You know whats particularly painful about watching these sros, you know, the owners of the sros take a huge and suddenly decide to kick poor people out of the buildings and try to fix the buildings with some paint and faux marshal, whatever you want to do, it was we, the most poor and vulnerable who were willing to invest in the sros. I remember people were embarrassed if they lived in an sro, but we were willing to live there. You know, we were trying to make it look better. Youre the people that you called the ambulance or so