I am erin. I am a neighbor of the project. I live directly next door. I wonder if you can just i can show you. Please speak into the microphone. Sorry. I am short. That is my house and the red dot is their house. I live directly next door which i think is fairly relevant here because i want to share my enthusiastic support for the project and the people next door share my view. It is a good project for the community. It will make it easier for the mcgraths to raise kids in San Francisco which is hard enough. Third reason many of my neighbors are in support of it. I have taken a look at the plans, and, of course, i will be impacted by construction and the building itself. Thank you, maam, your time is up. Sorry the opposition got five minutes and the rest of us did not. That is not fair. Next speaker, please. I am pat. 2008 my partner and myself bought two rundown units on ord and fixed them up. One historic. We didnt need to make it huge. The last 10 years is the block to make huge houses. Do we need huge houses on what was a quantity little stairs . I dont know the answer but we are pricing ourself out of our own homes. Thank you. Next speaker, please. Good afternoon. David salem at 59 state street in the neighborhood. With me is another neighbor. Mindful of the time i want to particularly commend the staff for what i thought was an outstanding and sensitive review of the particular project. The best summary is at the bottom of page 7 of the draft motion which summarizes why this is fully appropriate to the neighborhood including the fact the neighborhood is in the special district. In assessing the project what particularly comes to mind besides welldone is the large backyard, the fact we needed the diversity of homes to satisfy the diverse needs of the San Francisco family. Next speaker, please. Good afternoon, commissioners, i am mary ann. I have lived at ord court since before 1980. I have been walking the neighborhood almost every day i am in the area. The corporate heights special use district has been in place since the current owners of 42ord court purchased their property. Allowing these owners to ignore those rules by saying that it doesnt apply to this project is saying the rules dont apply to them. I am asking you not to allow this development. In 107 other neighbors signed the petition. Mr. Horn was slightly incorrect it was 108. There is 108 people that were not in support of this project. Thank you. Next speaker, please. Good afternoon. I am charles attics. I am owner of 4 41 ord court directly across the project. I lived there since 1997 and have seen changes. I can acknowledge from both sides the passion that our neighborhood has. That is also an attractive feature, attractive to families. That is one thing that i love about this project. The plan not only is organic to the lot from ord to state but will bring more families, hopefully, like the mcgraths who plan to be here for generations to come. Thank you. Anyone else for a comment . Seeing none, Public Comment is closed. Commissioner richards mr. Ho rn when we had the initial hearing in april did you contact the rent board . We have a form we submit to the rent board and that come back with no neated evictions on the property. The date of the buyout agreement was prior to the rent board changing policy. They do now require buyouts to be recorded with the rent board. This happened to occur prior to that date. Officially there is no evictions of any type associated with this property. The question mr. Mcgrath as project sponsor, come up, please. How many developments have you done . Four. You purchased the property and there was a tenant in it . No. We have conflicting information that the tenancy lasted past your october purchase date to december. It was a tent fennent in it. There was tenant in it. Nobody living in it. You mentioned the december date or am i confused, mr. Horn . It is hard for staff to give concrete information on who and what and how they were using the unit. In terms of dates, the sponsor took ownership prior to the closure of the october or agreed upon move out date december 31, 2015. Question for you. You mentioned the buyout registered with the rent board. Do you have any idea when that was introduced at the board . The reason i am asks is i will ask mr. Mcgrath. Did you or the prior owner were you aware there was a buyout . We were aware there was a buyout that was one of the reasons we purchased the home we believed they came to a agreement and both parties were happy. Did you ask the tenant to sign a nondisclosure agreement . No. Did you know there was one that existed. We knew there was a buyout agreement. Your neighbor was in support of the project said he was aware there was a nondisclosure agreement with the tenant that would have prevented her from saying i was bought out. That is what i thin i think s for. Had the house been positioned as two units even if it is illegal and i know we have this buyout. It could have been announced at the board and you might have known or the prior owner might have known about it, the nda was signed. There was a financial incentive to not have that occur or be registered or have an nda. Now you cant create condos where there was a buyout. We have no desire to condo convert. The one issue i have is how this was represented as a Single Family house when clearly there were two units and your architect is a professional, you are a developer, you submit plans, you are the project sponsor and registered agent this was Single Family house and really wasnt. I am not inclined to support your project. I am inclined to you legalizing the second unit. Commissioner fong. Commissioner fong i am supportive of their project. You can sit down. Commissioner fong i am not supportive of the fourth floor. It is too large for that area, therefore, i would if we were to approval this i would apply a condition to remove the fourth floor. Thank you, commissioner hillis. Mr. Horn, can i ask you about discussions with supervisor mandelman. You said he was close to that . Yes, either the members of the corporate heights neighbors also can give background on this. There were several issues that the two parties spoke about. I think there was an agreement potentially that could have been made between all of the issues, but the fourth floor was the sticking point, i believe with the community. The sponsor had a potential what they feel would be a redesign that could have worked. Unfortunately Planning Department staff did not find that to be consistent with the residential design guidelines. Was the neighborhood in agreement with that . I dont want to speak for them. If someone wants to speak on their behalf i would prefer that. Do you want to . We spent almost three hours with supervisor mandelman. I felt that we were close to an Agreement Regarding a proposal that would have allowed a bump out of the third floor if the roof replicated the current roof so it still had a cottage feel as opposed to a big box feel. The Planning Department didnt want to go any further to ord court, and i understand that. It was something we were looking at favorably. This was moving the mass of the fourth floor down . No, it would have eliminated the fourth floor entirely, the third floor forward with a steepled roof with an angled roof, but the Planning Department didnt want the third floor closer to ord court. Thank you. Mr. Horn, just on that. How much additional Square Footage could you get on the third floor . I am sorry. You are leaning on the handicapped. Thank you. I might want to defer to the sponsor. They have ran the numbers on the potential design alternatives. Again, any additional building volume upfront would increase the variance request for the scone zoning administrator. There is potentially the residential design that did review the project submitted by the sponsor that showed the massing at the front with only the first 15 feet of the building being gabled roof, a Higher Elevation than what you have before you. This project is very visible on the shared southern property line. The department felt that interaction of only 15 feet of gabled roof and boxing out wasnt consistent with the rgg. This was conveyed to the sponsor they can talk about how the shaped roof limits the potential programming they want to get in terms of bedrooms from the fourth floor and putting on the front area. Thank you. Do you know would the tenant be eligible . Did it have rights to move back here . Where is the tenant now . The tenant left . The tenant is not here. I am not sure if there is any interest. Please, please. Okay. Commissioner moore. Commissioner moore i would like to point to an argument we use the lens of unit equity. We have a second unit 932 square feet versus the first unit 3310 square feet. That is concern to me. If i bring that in the context of what commissioner fung said the basic approach to the building which would be more compatible as three story and deals overall with a more modest approach towards overall Square Footage we are dedicated 533 square foot to a car and 933 to a unit. I think the site is what it is together with the guidelines. I would like this project to step back, reflect on more equitable unit sizes and take a fresh look at how we do this. Commissioner hillis. Commissioner hillis just another suggestion. I think i dont quite get the unit equity it is a Single Family home, not a new home. That is going to be two units. It is rh2. I have trouble with the Corona Heights special use district. It applies to two unit or Single Family home. People should be allowed to do larger if they are doing a two unit building instead of Single Family. That is a problem with the special use district. It encourages people to do Single Family homes or unit inequity. I agree with some of the concern about the fourth floor and the fourth floor seems large. I propose cutting the fourth floor. There is a nursery and sitting room and fairly large bathroom. I think you could cut the fourth floor to get the entire Square Footage of the new home 3,000 square feet and have the a. D. U. That would set it back and reduce some of the visibility from the street. The neighbors on both sides are most impacted by the fourth floor. Commissioner richards. Commissioner richards i am looking at mr. Clifford freeds website. The San Francisco board of supervisors regulated disclosure and negotiation and process of buyouts. That was march. I see the buyout agreement was signed september 28, 2015. There is no record at the rent board. Did you say 2014 . That is 2015. That is six months prior. I come back to say we had air tenant bought out that was supposed to be reported who wasnt. Who signed a nondisclosure agreement. It influences the value of the property and it needs disclosed along with the second unit. This is like approving 49 hopkins where something happened in the past that was not correct and we stood up for having submittal documents be correct. If there is an issue with you not being aware of the buyout agreement that would be with the person you purchased the property from in civil court. Cant imagine the commission knowing this would want to approve this. I get the point. The person who had to submit the buyout agreement was the prior owner. Did you buy the home subject to the buyout . Was the buyout in place . Who authored it. Please come speak into the record. The buyout agreement was in place with the previous owner. Did you sign the buyout agreement . No. So prior owner . Yes. Commissioner richards. I think Due Diligence as developer you get these all of the time. There is a new law you have to report these things when you know there is a buyout agreement. Did you report it according to the law . I push it off on the prior owner there was overlap in the tennessee. I find it hard to believe. Commissioner hillis. Commissioner hillis i spoke. Commissioner richards. Commissioner richards i move to not approve this project. I move to approve this project with the existing house only legalizing the nonlegal ny unit. Legalizing the ny unit. I would like to clarify that. The current unit in the configuration cannot be legalized for Building Code at this time. I think as it is noted the violation, i think the interior heights do not meet Building Code as well as overall size. Some expansion of the building digging down or what is needed to legalize it. To legalize the ny unit as needed. Is there a second. Second. I am not quite sure what that motion. What does that do to the upper floor of the house . It is the same house now legal ny unit. Happy to come back in a year. Once the year is over we could talk about a new project. I am not supportive of that motion. Shall i call that question . Yes. From is a motion seconded to approve this project in the current configuration with the exception to whatever modifications need to be made to legalize the second motion. roll call . That motion fails 24 with commissioners fung, hillis and melgar voting against. Commissioner hillis. Commissioner hillis i think the issue is the fourth floor. It seems that was the issue the neighbors had. It sounded like there was some relative push to move some of that Square Footage to the front of the third floor. I actually think to the neighbor that is a worst solution. I agree with planning. We should cut back the fourth floor and push it back to reduce the size of the fourth floor. I would move we cut the size of the fourth floor eliminating the nursery and sitting room from that floor in pushing it back and remove the deck from the top of the fourth floor. Second. Commissioner fung. I am still supportive of eliminating the fourth floor. The maker of the motion accept that . Would you move some of that mass to the front . No. I guess we have to vote on it. You have a motion. Was it seconded . Yes. If there is nothing further there is a motion seconded to approve the project as proposed reducing the mass of the fourth floor by pushing it back and eliminating the deck. You are taking mass off the fourth floor. It is pushing the mass back. It is a reduction in the size of the fourth floor by 2111 and pushing it back and eliminating the deck. roll call . That motion fails 24 with commissioners fung, moore, richards and couple voting against. I move to approve the project on the condition that the fourth floor be eliminated. Second. There is nothing further commissioners there is a motion seconded to approve the project as proposed eliminating the fourth floor. Commissioner fung. roll call . So moved motion passes 42 with commissioners hillis and richards voting against. The public hearing with the standard conditions. That is on item 9. At 300 grant avenue. This is is informational presentation on the public art requirement. I am Christy Alexander with department staff. I am here with an informational item to review condition of approval for project at 300 grant avenue. I will provide a brief overview of the project approval and planning code requirement for public art. Then the public sponsor and artist will provide an overview of the project staff. The project involving new construction of a six story mixed use building which is approximately 94 feet in height contains retail uses on the basement through third floors. 29,703 gross square feet of office use on floors four through six. It will occupy the site with three visible facades. Improvements to heartland place are proposed to create a Public Open Space and streetscape at all three frontages. It is anticipating receiving temporary certificate of occupancy in january of 2020. It required public art component at 1 of the hard Construction Costs. The sponsor has commission in california based artist to develop the proposal. Generally the public heart is 9d artwork on the north side and part of the exterior thus meeting section 429. The project conditions require the final art concept and location be submitted for review by the planning director in consultation with the planning commission. The project sponsor is reporting today to the commission on the progress of the development andy sign of the art concept and welcomes any comments the commission may have. This concludes my presentation. I will turn it over to the project sponsor. Thank you. Hello, i am kevin. I am with the mbh architects in alameda with the project at 300 grant. A few images of the exterior of the project consistent with the description planning shared. One of the unique features with the project as she described the improvements on heartland at the north side of the building will be enhancing the pavement and adding many pedestrian features to be similar in function as what occurs at may den lane. To solidify the vision we have for the plaza the project sponsor commissioned a local artist to create a dynamic art piece to enhance the new mini destination. That will be installed on the face of the building on the outside of the structure and it is anchored to the superstructure at each floor level. With that i would like to introduce ned to speak about the actual piece. I am ned con. I do work with wind, water and light. I was involved with the design team on the project early on. One of the goals as kevin mentioned was to create artwork to kind of be visible from harlan alley and from the streets around here. Here is a rendering of what we hope harlan alley will look like when it is all fixed up. Some trees and places for people to it is. You can see the sculpture on the left side of the image. It is basically a cable system that running the entire height of the building and attached to the cable are hundreds and hundreds of wind animated veins that will constantly change direction based on the wind and basically give you a visual map how the wind changes with the height of the building, how it interacts with the architecture. The moving pieces have a plastic bearing that never needs lubrication. It runs silently and then there is aluminum vein part of it as the wind moves it around it reflects light and color from different parts of the sky so the intent is to continually change responsive element to whatever the atmosphere is doing, whatever the wind and light are that day to create something that kind of announces the entrance to the building and dovetails with the efforts to make this alley into a special place. We are available if you have any questions for us. Thank you very muc