Us that they do not care. This Management Company is the reason we need laws protecting renters. The information and examples given today paint a clear picture of centrons pattern of neglect and their abdive abdication of their responsibilities. Heathers stove, its who are identifying to me that they would neglect Safety Measures around gas lines. They do not care. Several of us have had repeated leaks from overhead pipes and plumbing. When they finally did send their inhouse handyman to help with the water bubble on my ceiling, they refused to address the under lying issue as, quote, water was no longer gushing from the ceiling. They do not care. Ive alerted them to mold that has been in my bathroom that has been there since i moved in. Ive repeatedly asked them to replace the caulking to prevent water damage to the wall behind my tub, and theyve ignored follow up. During inspection, nancy mar had said this is how bathrooms look, and that they painted over the mold, which is a ridiculous solution. For years, i was unable to use the stove without setting off the smoke detector. Answer from centron was to tape a plastic bag over the bag when i want to use the stove. Years later, i was finally able to convince them to replace the detector. Kreprons behavior is unlikely to change with the addition of new units. They have faith to ask us that the work on the new ubts will not be shoddy, but the repairs they have made are shoddy. Construction plans show extensive destruction of historical features. We taesh our building. Please help us protect our home and deny this permit application. Thank you. Next speaker, please. Good evening, commissioners. My name is michelle exo, and my home for the past seven years has been 1440 clay street. Ive always loved the feel of my apartment, so much so that we decided to keep my apartment after we got married. The managers contempt for us as residents, the safety, health and wellbeing, in my time living here ive experienced firsthand pest related issues, including bed bugs, mice, and generations of pigeons breedtion, nesting and defecating on my patios all seven years. Windows that dont lock and never have, including the one leading to my fire escape. My living room radiator blasted steam up my wall over six years ago, resulting and the resulting damage was never fixed, though it was reported and inspected at the time. I was accused of tuchgs the heat valve, because when i moved in, i was told not to others have had the same issue, got fed up, and after waiting for repairs, they painted it themselves. Embarrassingly, i got used to it, and its still like this. Ive had large water blisters appear in my bathroom ceiling multiple times over the years. Each time ive bp asked to wait to see if they drain or go down, or burst. The maintenance opened up my ceiling and replaced a pipe. Approximately two weeks later, a i noticed a leak. The recent visit by the Housing Department told me this work should absolutely have been carried out by a qualify plumber. This is not a petty list of maintenance items or desired improvement. These appear in a majority of other apartments in our building, especially the basement ground level, where excessive daily water run roof from the steam boiler has ro rotted the underside of the building. This is in a storage unit. The grossest complaints have been taken care of only after repeated threats and threatening to go to the city. How can i trust my own Management Company when they Say Something is fixed or no fix is legal. Its clear beyond a doubt that the owners are not concerned with the safety or wellbeing of the tenants. Given the track record its safe to say the new construction would cause more legal and administrative issues for the city. Thank you for listening and thank you for your time. Thank you. Good evening, commissioners. My name is nicholas price, and ive lived at 1440 clay since 2009. The openers of thwners of this should not be rewarded with two new units when they cant currently maintain the 15 currently in the building. When we all want is to live in a clean, safe well maintained building that were all paying for. Right now with no new units. We well come a seismic retrofit as long as it does not displace us. We want the lasting repairs our units so badly need, and ultimately, we want the Building Owners to show some respect, not contempt for the build and tenants themselves. Thank you. Jennifer fever with the San FranciscoTenants Union. So according to the Planning Departments fax sheet on adu dated june 11th, 2017, adus cannot take space from an existing residential unit except for in a singlefamily ho home. And if you read the rent ordinance, section 37. 2 r, it defines a rent a residential unit as all residential dwelling units in approximate the city and county of San Francisco together with all Housing Services, privileges, furnishings and facilities supplied in connection with the use of occupancy there of including garage and parking facilities, so garages, storage units, basic lockers, guard areas are all considered part of the individual tenants rental unit, and therefore, a landlord needs a just cause to evict a tenant from these areas. I would ask, would you allow an owner to remove a bedroom to turn it into an adu, so this is the same context of remaining design Housing Services from these tenants units, and im pretty sure you have a mandate to preserve and not diminish rent controlled Housing Units as theyre currently defined. These garages and Storage Spaces are all part of their current leases and rental units, so i ask you to take discretionary review and honestly, i feel the City Attorney should get involved in this building. Good evening, commissioners. Id like to point out many problems with this project, and one of them is the elimination of the bike parking. I dont believe you can approve a project that removes bike parking. Allow me to explain, please, and bear with me. Parking is required in the rm3 zoning district. Removal of parking, even when it does not provide the size requirements of the code, requires a variance. Replacement of vehicle parking however is permitted on a 1 1 basis with bike parking. This Apartment Building has no vehicle parking but does have bike parking in the storage unit. If you were to approve the adus which remove existing bike parking, then what is to prevent them from coming back and replacing the bike parking with adus . There will be no point in having a bike parking requirement in the first place. Overhead, please. This is a page from one of the departments own brochures on adus. It clearly states planning code requirements for bike parking must be met. If this is true of the adus, then it would make absolutely no sense that you could remove existing bike parking for existing units in order to install adus. There are just so many problems with the adu legislation, and no one is paying attention to them. Units rooms without windows are ridiculously being labelled as media rooms, a 300 square foot space that will be used illegally as bedroomed. Units that remove adequate space for garbage, that Recovery RoomLaundry Services in a city where laundromats are becoming excontinuation. And while this fails to protect tenants as soon as a permit is issued. It is entirely possible in this case, this landlord may do this, given the extensive new structural work that appear on the plans. I support the creation of housing that provides a livable and protective threshold for new and existing residents, but the current legislation does not do that, and this project does not do that. This is why i urge you to take dr, deny the adu permits, and send a strong statement that this city does not stand for slum housing. I urge you to take this matter seriously, take dr and do not apply permits. Thank you. Any additional comments in support of the dr . Request project sponsor. Good evening, commissioners. My name is serena calhoun. Im going to speak to the items that are related to the project itself, and then let the Property Owner and manager speak to some of the complaints that are related to maintenance and rentlease issues because theyre kind of outside my purview. As it relates to the project, the issues raised by the tenants are related, the majority, to the trash area, and as referenced earlier, we did start out in looking at providing a trash room in the lobby. Okay. So im just going to do a little preliminary plan on the left here, you can see the basement plan, and ive highlighted in red the two trash chutes. You enter at the grade level. The lobby is on the level, and the trash cans are in these two units. You can see that the site slopes really dramatically, so from the street where you enter, theres a full story down where the units are, and so these trash units come down in the basement, and here, you can see the trash chute, and this opening you see behind it is essentially the front door to one of the proposed new units. As an architect, when i started working on the project, its really important to design good space, and seeing the trash chute right outside the door, it seemed to me that relocation of this to a more central area in this building that was adjacent to the lobby where tenants would be coming and going from made some sense. In looking at the building because of the height and the slope and trying to find a place where all the tenants could access, the lobby seemed the logical place. Also because we could ventilate to the exterior from that space. Obviously, when we got the dr, i take these things very seriously. The first thing we did was evaluate another opportunity for the trash area. So sorry, looking back, this is the same light well, and that window up there is goes to become the glass door thats going to be accessed down the stairs to the two new units, just to give you a little context. This is on the other side of the building, on the other trash chute, and right now, another issue with that trash chute, this is how he kolg has dlsh dlsh ecology has to access it. As you can see, the two new upts going down stairs, the trash chute on the left side is directly in front of the unit door. The one on the right side, after speaking with the tenants, we decided not to do anything with. I did meet with the tenants on one occasion. I was in contact with them as soon as we received the 2k r to try to schedule a meeting. I did sit down with them, go over their concerns, and you know, some of the things were okay, they dont want to have to come through the lobby or the common spaces of the building with their trash. Theyre worried about it causing a stink in the hallway, or people dropping things on the way. That made sense, so then, they said theyd prefer to come down the rear stairs of the unit to where the trash already would be, so i had already revised the drawing to access the trash off the lobby on the drawing that you already have, in an area thats covered and not so vezible, so i meet with recology, and scheduled a meeting to confirm that they will carrie carry it out from level. I havent had a chance to speak with them, and i havent heard any feedback on it, but were definitely open to working with the tenants related to the trash issue. If someone is storing a bike in the one unit thats utilizes, my undering is its not part of the lease. Were happy to provide bike parking. Its just we cant conform to bullet nine because everything is on a slope, so there is no 5 foot path on a place you can park your bikes. Were happy to provide some racks in the light well, if thats amenable. Were not relocating laundry or tenants. Somebody mentioned something about a media room and removal of the unit space. I dont know anything about that. We dont have a media room. Thank you for your time all right. Thank you. Dr requester, you have a two minute rebuttal oh, sorry. Public comment in support of the project. You can speak during rebuttal, though. All right. Dr requester. Okay. Thanks. I just listened to some of the comments from the project sponsor, and just wanted to, you know, respond to those. She is right, that there have been a lot of contentious conversations around the way trash is handled, not only currently in the building, but with the current proposal, and the sense that we have always gotten is the project sponsor and the Building Owner originally thought that it was perfectly acceptable to submit plans for putting a garbage room in our lobby. And that, to me, is absurd. And, you know, talking about ways of mitigating that, weve been told, you know, hey, lets negotiate to a winwin solution, and what we have let them know is that we dont win with this at all. If this project takes place, we lose. We lose already over stretched building services. We potentially lose, you know, one of our tenants loses storage. We lose other, you know, common space, and un you know, contrary to what miss calhoun just stated, she you know, to quote her, she said it shouldnt there shouldnt be an impact to us as tenants or a risk of displacement from this project. Thats not a good enough guarantee for us. Given the state of the building, you know, were very concerned that, you know, if they start to excavate underneath it, its going to just fall apart around our ears, and thats unacceptable for us to to consider that risk. Finally, one other thipg, two days ago, we received the latest plans, which she showed for building a strained round stair. That would require, i believe, a permit, and theres no guarantee that thats even possible in that space, so im skeptical on that. Thank you, maam, your time is up. Okay. Yeah. Sure. Okay. Project sponsor, you have a two minute rebuttal. Thank you, commissioners. I just want to talk about i accouple a a couple of things. The trash. The reason we want to centralize the trash is because this building was having problems sorting the trash, and San Francisco is a zero waste city. In 2009, recologs audit showed that 90 of the trash put in the trash could be recycled, so we thought we could improve the trash situation, put it more in a Central Location where sorting to happen. In regards to the tenant claiming a Storage Space, our records show all of the Storage Space is not claimed by anybody. The tenant in number nine is claiming the Storage Space. This is her lease, and it clearly shows that no storage is included with her lease agreement. In addition, in 2014, there was some kind of burglary that occurred in the storage rooms, and all the all of our locks got cut. And part of that, we had reached out to all the tenants to let them know this happened. And part of that communication said, if you do have a Storage Space, let me know. There were no responses, okay . So that confirmed that we did not have any tenants using the Storage Space. And in regards to the multitude of claims that theres that the building was not maintained, theyre using a lot of dated material. This was before and after we cleaned the pigeon droppings. There was a photo of the back yard. This is a current picture of the back yard. Thats two minutes, right . Tr trt. Thank you. Commissioner richards . First, my understanding is adus are for a conditioned space, and it does not take away anybodys rental housing so i would have to understand that thoroughly to approve this. Secondly, mr. Mar, i mean, the documentation on the deferred maintenance its unbelievable to me. Its egregious. To me, adding two Additional Units to a building that you have already have health and safety issues could only compound things and actually create a higher level of health and safety issues, and if we ever got to the point where i vote to approve this, id require a full audit by the City Building inspector that those two units dont add any additional load to your plumbing and electrical that would cause any further health and safety issues. Commissioner johnson . Thank you. Luckily for us, we actually have a former building inspector sitting to my left, so hopefully, she will shed some light on some things, but i will give a couple thoughts here. Unfortunately, our City Attorney left for the evening, but i concur on generally on the direction of the adu statewide and local adu law. The point of it, when youre putting adus in existing multifamily buildings is that youre using unused space, like that half a floor that maybe got walled off and its nothing. Thats what adus are fore. Theyre not for taking the space thats for residents, and when you have multifamily dwelling units, typically, there are common areas that are provided, and sometimes theyre in your lease, and sometimes theyre not. Sometimes theyre provided as the living space in your building. If somethings not in your lease, if youre allowed to use it, it becomes part of your lease, which brings me to my next question. Which is, in the documentation that we received on where these adus are going, it says storage, storage, storage. What we see before multifamily units, itll say open space or unused space or something. And then, the project upon sor himself gave very conflicting testimony on this. If youre the building manager, its eitheror. Its either your residents are allowed to use the Storage Space and put their belongings there or theyre not. I think the way the project sponsor described it is well if they had it there, and then, they had it there, and maybe we informed them you should look at your belongings. That space was either provided for residents or its not. Thats a little concerning to me because it rises the question where are these adus actually going. I thought and i could be wrong that we had some state of good repair laws in terms of buildings having certain levels of not having certain levels of deferred maintenance. That one, i shall raise any eyebrow to myself. I thought there was some level of state of good repair laws or guidelines that we had. And we had some people from Public Comment supporting the dr requester, hand up, some of the deferred maintenance, because theres a lot of it in the packet filed with the building department, and its a lot. Which bri