Street, conditional use authorization is proposed for continue wants to february 8, 2018. Item three, at 1713 yosemite avenue, conditional use authorization is proposed for continue wants to march 1. Item four, at 479 28th street. Conditional use authorization is proposed to continue continuance to march 1, 2018. And case number five at 1815 mission street. Large project authorization has been withdrawn. I have no other items proposed for continuance and i have no speaker cards. Great. Thank you, jonas. Any Public Comment on the items being proposed for continuance . On sfgov tv overhead, please . Hello. Frank gladstone. This is regarding four, 28th street. I represent the Property Owner. Were requesting continuance until march 1. Im pleased to tell you that the adjacent neighbour whos most opposed to this by the name of annemarie zabala was kind enough to write this email to the staff. And its here on the overhead, indicating her agreement to a march 1 continuance. The plans were shown to her. The plans arent totally final. She would like to see them in final. We havent seen them to the planning staff. I think there is a possibility with a monthss continuance that there is some settlement on the design with the next door neighbour and know that the Commission Hopes to have these things taken off their calendar. And were hoping we can do so. My client, who is the homeowner who lives there and is the architect and she got this email from planner nancy tran which indicates, quote, that the march 1 hearing date is confirmed. She took that to mean that it doesnt need to go to commission as it is today. There was funeral back in tennessee. She went to it this week. She is not available today. We we finally have some design changes were talking to staff about and we look forward to getting the plans back to them to see if staff and we can come to an agreement. There is no staff report out. We havent seen one. It is not on your agenda. And so we would appreciate if that date works, we could have that continuance to march 1. Thank you very much. Thank you. Any additional Public Comment on the items being proposed for continuance . Seeing none, commissioner . Move to continue items one through four to the dates specified. Second. Thank you, commissioners. On that motion to continue, item as proposed [roll call] so moved, commission kerrs. That motion passes unanimous 4ri60. Commissioners, that will place us under commission matters, item six. Commission comments and questions. Seeing none, jonas can we have the election of officers . I know commissioner johnson is on her way. Can we hold off on that until she arrives and take the next item out of order. Very good. That will place us under department matters. Item eight, directors noumentzes. Good afternoon, commissioners. I wanted to make a few comments related to the condo conversion rules in light of the hearing last week. And kind of talk to you a little bit about what we do and dont do with arent to condo conversion analysis, if you will. In general, when we do the analysis with public works and know of an eviction or buyout, that can, in itself, cause the project not to move forward before it even gets to you. As a reminder, you review only a five and sixunit condominium conversions. So, and it depends on the type of tenant evicted when the tenant was evicted and so on and so forth. We just, as a reminder, were whats called the referral agency. D. P. W. Is the lead. The d. P. W. Accepts the application and we receive that referral from the department of public works when they determine that they that the application is the project is eligible for conversion. Now under current procedures, the referral does not include the eviction history per se. But it does include an affidavit from the owner stating that there have been no evictions. This is similar to any application where the applicant signs that everything is correct and true and all that good stuff. So, as you know, for the subdivision code, the commission, quote, shall deny the application if there is elderly or permanent disabled tenants displaced or discriminated against in leasing the units or evictions have occurred for preparation to preparing the building. The challenge is the it doesnt define what an eviction is. Its clear it goes beyond what the rent board sees. As you learned last week, the definition of when an eviction actually occurs, can be a little bit of an undefined. So, we are working with public works to try to see if what we can do to correct this, to prevent the kind of situation we had last week from even geting to you to begin with. And what were going to do is, first of all, work with public works to see if we can dig dig deeper into the actual eviction history rather than only relying on the affidavit. And number two, we will include a copy of the actual application affidavit in your report so that you can see the actual information thats submitted. Because that was the crux of the issue last week where there was a concern that the that there was a discrepancy in the application from actually had happened. So, ill continue to report to this on this issue as we move forward. The good news is this hasnt come up very often with the condo conversion process. But i dont think any of us want a repeat of what happened last week. So, well do our best to prevents that from happening. Thank you. Thank you. Commissioner richards . At some point, director haram, if you can let us know why we approve if its some holdover from some prior law. Im not understanding why its just that very specific five and sixunit building. I can get you that information. It had to do with the condo conversion ordinance that was passed i think about three years ago. And it specified that number. I cant remember the rationale behind it, butly get that for you. Thank you. If there is nothing further, commissioners, we can move on to item nine. Review of past venezuelas at the Historic Preservation commission. There is no board of appeals report today. Good afternoon, commissioners. Tim frye, department staff, here to share with you a couple of items from yesterdays Historic Preservation commission hearing. Notably the commission proud review and comment on three National Register nominations. One was to amount the coit tower National Register nomination to clarify its national significance, primarily under criterion c for art as the largest or the single largest public works art project in the country. Also pekt aspects of life in california from 1934. The Commission Also provided a positive recommendation for the National Register nomination of the womens building. That is listed to the National Register specifically as for its association of second wave femininism in one of the late 20th centurys most consequencial social movements and as a location for where the struggle for womens rights was linked to Additional Community struggles including those of marginalized, racial and ethnic communities, lgbtq people, imgrands and others. And then finally the commission provided a positive recommendation for the National Register nomination of 220 golden gate avenue, also known as the historic ymca. This is in completion of a 2012 tax credit project. Where the National Register listing is a final requirement of that project. The ymca is significant as the area of education for its association with the golden gate university. One of the few universities to grow out of the educational programmes offered by the ymca. And as a fine example of renaissance revivalstyle architecture. Other than that, the commission decided to continue its election of officers to its february 7 hearing. That concludes my comments. Unless you have any questions. I think commissioner richards has a question. One quick question, mr. Frye. National register nomination, or actually on the register versus local landmark, if you can very briefly, what is the difference in terms of level of protection that the resource has. Great question. The National Register doesnt provide any sort of local binding protection other than through the ceqa process. However, as a certified local government, our Historic Preservation commission provides review and comment to changes to those buildings. Or to list those buildings on the National Register. We send our comments to the state commission for review and comment. So, is one of these buildings, the womens building, eligible for the state register now because it is on the National Register . That is correct. Well, once a building is listed on the National Register, it is automatically listed on the california register. Ok. And those are protected well, through ceqa and through the federal and state regulatory processes. A local entitlement would not be required such as a certificate of appropriateness until theyre designated at the local level. Ok. And that was like housing accountability, density, all of those kind of laws exempt california register properties. Correct. Yep. And if i could, just to follow up, there are controls that would come into play if there were federal or state dollars used for the project, right . Not that often. For example, if it is a public building, we might have federal or state dollars attached and there is a level of review that would kick in. Correct. Commissioner . I was going to just correct me if im wrong, doesnt this being on the federal register also make them eligible for certain types of funding . Absolutely. All right. Commissioners, that places us on general Public Comment. At this time, members of the public can address the commission on items of interest to the public that are within the squli, of the commission, except with agenda items. With respect to the agenda items, your opportunity 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. I have no speaker cards. [inaudible]. Go ahe. Ds you are certainly welcomed to speak. I have a schedule id like handed out, please. Good afternoon. My name is jerry dradler. I handed out a schedule that cites Code Violations by Rodrigo Santos and two significant demolitions by a single developer, tim brown. The small box at the top of the first page shows the three Rodrigo Santo projects forwarded to the city attorney. 214 state street is one of those projects. The purpose of the schedule is to illustrate that there are serious code violators who commit serious violations and the Planning Commission needs to address the problem. The Planning Departments weak Code Enforcement emboldens developers. Developer tim brown removed a threestory bay without a per nit in 2016. Permit in 2016. And in 2017, he demolished 49 hopkins avenue, a house designed by prominent architect richard nutra. What will mr. Brown demolish in 2018 unless Code Enforcement is changed . They submitted false architectural plans to the city. They are not disciplined or fined. Why does the Planning Department not assess financial penalties for submitting false architectural plans . The statement frequently made by d. B. I. And Planning Department employees that the time delay a Developer Experience says in getting their project approved because of their illegal actions is penalty enough is nonsense. This is like saying a drunk driver who crashes their car should not be ticketed and fined because the loss of their car is penalty enough. It is my hope the Planning Commission in 2018 can develop a work plan to improve Code Enforcement that has specific objectives and due dates. A good first step is to ask the director to identify municipal best practices for Code Enforcement and compare them to the Planning Departments current Code Enforcement process. I presented this schedule at yesterdays Building Inspection Commission meeting and many members expressed interest in a joint meeting with the Planning Commission on this topic. Thank you. Thank you very much. Any additional Public Comment . Seeing none, well close Public Comment. Very good, commissioners. Move back to item seven, jonas. Very good, commissioners. Then well go back to commission matters. Item seven, election of officers. I would like to read into the record a correction to this. Inadvertently cites the rules and regulations commissions but clearly you are not electing the officers of the Historic Preservation commission, but rather the Planning Commission. And president and Vice President shall be members of the commission and should be elected at the first regular meeting of the Commission Held on or after the 15th day of january of each year. Or at subsequent meeting the date of which should be fixed by the commission of the first regular meeting on or after the 15th day of january each year. There any Public Comment on item seven . Commissioner richards . I know the rules call for a separate nomination and vote for both president and v. P. , but i would like to nominate both and if there is no objection, we can do a vote on those as a slate. I served last year under commissioner hillis and im incredibly impressed with his abilities, his experience, deep level of knowledge. We dont always agree, but his sense of humour seems to get us all through that. I absolutely would love to have this commission have rich as our president again next year so i formally nominate him. Second. Second. Great. And i personally have served two years on this commission and i think i mentioned this to somebody who im going to be nominating in a minute a couple of months ago. I dont like to hog everything. For lack of a better term. And it is good to get diversity of opinions and diversity of backgrounds and diversity of experience and diversity of outlooks. To have this commission be more effective. And to that end, im going to step aside and i formally nominate commissioner malgar for v. P. Second. Thank you, commissioner richards. Thank you. Are there any other nominations . Hearing none, ill call that question again on the motion to elect commissioner hillis as president and commissioner melgar as v. P. [roll call] so moved, commissioners. That motion passes unanimously. Thank you. [applause] commissioner fong. Congratulations to all three of you for your past service and for your coming up service. I just want to formally say congratulations. And rich, well done and look forward to another year of your great leadership. Commissioner richards, also well done. And i know that those monday meetings are important and intense and thank you for doing that. And good luck to you. 100 behind. Great. Commissioner melgar . I just wanted to say thank you, commissioner richards, for spending the time talking me through this and i have really enjoyed my year on the commission so far. I like all of you so much. Even when we disagree and i want to strangle you, i so love what effect on this commission brings to the table which is so valuable in the diversity of opinions and also ways of looking at things. And so i want to thank you. For your vote of confidence as the product of a Shithole Country officially. I am really, you know, grateful to be here and be part of this process. You know, when thensupervisor now mayor breed asked me to be on this commission, she was very clear that she wanted to have the perspective of someone who was, you know, in deeply immerse in the neighbourhood that is undergoing gentrification and displacement and the pressure that that brings, you know, to working families in the city. And so ive tried to do that in this commission and i hope to do that more and articulate at that point of view. You know, in sort of a larger context of defending the space that we have for immigrants in this country. I am grateful to her and all of you to be part of this process. So, thank you. Thank you. Commissioner moore . Congratulations, v. P. Thank you commissioner richards. And president hillis, please keep your humour. [laughter] and thank you all. Its been, i think we face complex and thorny and sometimes contentious issues. We dont get any additional vote because were chair or vice chair or president or Vice President so i think weve worked well together and disagreed but representfully and often times got better projects which is most important. Thank you all for the confidence and congratulations commissioner melgar. Looking to toward to the next year. Very good, commissioners. Seeing no other comments, we can move on to your regular calendar item 10. For case number 2017o13096map, burnette avenue and burnette avenue north, the zoning map amendment. On december 21, 2017 after hearing and closing Public Comment, the commission continued this matter to january 18, 2018 by a vote of 43. Commissioners fong, johnson and koeppel, you were against. Good afternoon, commissioners. Planning department. The ordinance would amends a zoning map to amends a portion of a paper street proposed for vacation to our m1. As jonas said, the Planning Commission first heard this item on december 21 and discussed the potential impacts of the sale of the two cityowned parcels to the owner of th