On april 3, 2020, the Planning Commission received authorization from the Mayors Office to reconvene through the end of the shelterinplace order. Recogniseing that the commissions consideration of certain projects is an essential government operation, and that the authorization directs the commission to prioritize consideration of action items pertaining to infrastructure housing and small business. I will also remind everyone that the platform that we are operating on is not perfect. And will be clumsy. There worrytherefore, we requesr patience. In event the at t bridge fails us, we may need to recess in order to log out and log back into the system, at which time we will notify members of the public to call back in. To enable public participation, we are broadcasting and streaming this hearing live and we will receive Public Comment for each item on todays agenda. Sf gov tv is streaming across the bottom of the screen and comments or opportunities to speak are available via phone by calling the 888 2733658 number and entering the access code of 3107452, pressing pound and pound again. When you want to speak to an item, you need to press 10 to get into the cue. Each speaker will be allowed up to three minutes and when you have 30 seconds left, youll hear the first chime and at the end, ill notify you your time is up and we will proceed to the next speaker. Best practises are to call from a quiet location, to speak clearly and lowly an slowly and alternatively, as always, you may submit Public Comment by email to commissions. Secretar commissions. Secretary. Gov. And i will ask you to ask staff to mute microphones when not speaking and before you start speaking, you need to unmute your microphone. Ok, i would like to take role. role call . Commissioners, first is items proposed for a continuance, items 1a and b on lombard street, review and variances, it was proposed to may 24, 2020 and they were proposed to june 18th, 2020. Item 2, number 201910421 at 657 mississippi street, discretionary review to may 21, 2020 and 3, 1042 drp and discretionary review to may 21, 2020, 4, 2016003164 gpa for the Healthcare Services matte mat n and item 5, 1769 lombard street proposed for continu continue w. And item number 6 and a variance and item 7 and 8, 0039 drp at masonic avenue for review and proposed to continuance for june chair, commissioners, we have received a request from the Supervisors Office to continue item 17, but again, through the chair, we will take up that matter of continuance when the item is called under the regular calendar. I have no other items proposed for continuance. Chan, any members of the public in cue . If you wish to speak to continuance, this would be your opportunity to press 10 to get into the cue. Operator your conference is in question and answer mode. You have three questions remaining. Question good afternoon. This is ty sullivan representing the project sponsor on item number 1 at 526 lombard street. We worked hard to revise and we have met with them and the neighbors have opined. However, we remain open to additional meetings with them, as well inaudible we are amenable to an extend th extended continuano june 1st to do continued outreach. Available for questions. Thank you. Operator you have are three questions remaining. Question im with the Neighborhood Council and coalition. Good afternoon, commissioners. I would like to request and support the request for continuance. I believe that the office of supervisor mendelman has requested a 30day continuance for the item and number 17, i believe, which is 3118 31s 3118 31st street. Were not considering that matter right now and well take that when its called under the regular calendar. Question im sorry, i thought the request for continuance is issued at the beginning of the meeting. I had no idea this wasnt requested at the beginning of the meeting. Im sorry. We shall wait until the item comes up before you. Thank you. Operator you have two questions remaining. Question good afternoon, president kop particular el and memberper, im speakingon items0 lombard street. I represent the dr requester who is the neighbor of the project. I sent out a letter asking for the continuance last night and hopefully everyone was able to look at it. We, too, support the continuance and im not sure that june 18th is enough time because the Zoning Administrator issued a ruling this morning at 8 30 and im not sure miss sullivan has seen it, determining that the new plans will have to be produced and that the project as it stands is in violation of the planning code and thats why we need more time. So im in support the continuance, was hoping it would be june 25th or maybe into july because of the need for new plans and, perhaps, need for new notification. But we can probably take that up in june if we dont make any progress. Thank you for your support. Operator you have zero questions remaining. Very good, commissioners. The items proposed for continuance are now before you. Commissiocommissioner johnson. I would like staff to talk about item 1a and b and tha. Im the staff architect. Can you hear me . Yes. So, yes, this morning we finally received a determination on the correct measurement of height for a narrow street on a condition that was being contested by the dr requester. And that information was forwarded to the project architects team. I think need time to reconcile that with the current design and two months from now or six weeks from now is probably sufficient time. If it isnt, we can certainly continue the item further to accommodate the desires of the community process. Im prepared to take that advisement and to continue items a and b for six weeks and continue items 28 to the date specified. So june 18th is ok . Yes. Very good. Second. Fine. Very good, then, commissioners, seeing nothing further, we can move on well, theres been a motion to continue items as proposed on that motion. role call . Thank you, commissioners. That motion passed unanimously 60. As acting Zoning Administrator, i would continue item 1b to the date specified. And you need to continue 7. 7, as well. Thank you, acting Zoning Administrator. That will place us under item 9, the Adoption Draft for april 9, 20. Commissioner diamond. Move to approve. Operator there was no Public Comment. Was there anyone in cue . We need to activate. Operator your question is s now in question and answer mode. Press 1 and then 0. No Public Comment. On the motion to adopt for april 9, 2020. role call . So moved, commissioners and that motion passes 60. Item 10, questions and comments. Seeing no requests to speak, i will move on to department matters, item 11, directors announcements. Good afternoon, commissioners. I wanted to give you an update. I mentioned the mayor had established an Economic Recovery Task force that work is starting this week and the task force has been put together, i think, and there are close to 100 people or more on it and i will serve on it former commissioner fong as well as mr. Chu are on the cochairs and well come back to the item to update you on the task forces work is our staff will be involved, as well. I wanted to thank that mary annf our staff are working and we have about 20 or more employees serving now who have served in various capacities from frontline staff to helping with the Planning Efforts and i wanted to recognise and thank them and thats my report. Very good. There are no questions, we can move on to the board of supervisors and board of appeals. There was no board of Commission Hearing yesterday. Good afternoon. Im aaron star, manager of legislative affairs. At this Land Use Committee meeting, there was no hearing. The chair plan station mixed use project, general plan, planning code, zoning map and agreement passed the second read. Also, the bayvie bayview triange passed their special read and the masonic passed its second read and the ocean avenue sponsored by supervisor yee passed the second read and thats all i have for you today. If there are no questions, the board of appeals met last night and conducted their first remote hearing using a zoom is broadcast the sf spaw gv tv usie conference line. Everything went smoothly and the boards next hearing is on may may 6th. It was a permit for horizonal condition and removable of a bay window that was remove without permit. The Planning Commission her this as a dr in july of 2019 and at this hearing, the Planning Commission took dr and required restoration of the bay window. At that hearing, the Planning Commission also heard a dr for the proposed construction of the adjacent lot off proving the project with modifications for the restored bay. However, the permit has not yet been issue thed and not the be subject of appeal. In approving this, they allowed the sponsor to remove windows from the restored bay that face on the new construction to be consistent with the residential Design Guidelines. The appellants argued the decision required that all windows be restored. The board of appeals and heard the matter upheld that by the Planning Department and the proposal was cocomplaint and c. I have nothing further. If there are no questions, we can move on to general Public Comment, where at this time, members of the comment will address the commission. With respect to agenda items, the opportunity to address the commission will be afforded when its reached in the meeting and each member of the public may address the commission for up to three minutes and when the number of speakers exceed the 15minute limit, general Public Comment may be moved to the end of the agenda. And through the chair, we will be holding a strict policy restricting general Public Comment at this time to 15 minutes. When we exceed 15 minutes, general comment will be moved to the end of the agenda. Chan, lets open the answer and question through the at t bridge conference line and i will remind members of the public at this time, if you wish to submit testimony on items that are not on our agenda, this would be the opportunity to dial 888 toll free number entering the access codes and hitting pound, pound and 10. Any members of the public in cue. Operator your conference is now in question and answer mode. To summon each question press 1 and then 0. You have four questions remaining. Question just wanted to comment on the board of appeals hearing last night, wanted to compliment the Planning Department staff that represented the department at the board. I thought they did an excellent job of explaining to the commissioners how they reviewed the Planning Commissions decision back in july, the fact that the decision was not as clear as it could have been and that they felt they had an adequate compromise to allow the project to proceed forward. Thank you, commissioners, and if you for continuing city business virtually. Operator you have three questions remaining. Question hello, commissioners. Nami called in last week about a project on the mixeduse project to add a new building on the site that had a lot merger. I know you cant change a decision and i dont want you to change a discussion, but i have an issue with the way you deliberated it. When i sent the letter in and there was no acknowledgement from the board you received a letter and i was in general support of the project, but when you talked about it, you talked about it as, well, maybe we can consider an adu on the property. And the project th is addinga mixeduse project and im in full support but you didnt acknowledge the fact its commercial corridor expect storefronts are valuable to the neighborhood. You actually kind of suggested that, maybe, one of the commercial buildings be taken away and made into a residential unit. I hope thats not a policy that on commercial corridors, commercial storefronts can be converted without any notification. So again, thank you for hearing the item and moving it forward but it is an asset to the community but storyfronts are also an asset and for that, yes, we have a lot of vacancies, but those are potentials, that they become residential or take away to fill the commercial corridor. But thank you again and hopefully in the future commercial corridors are looked at and thought of as commercial corridors and not potential adu units. Thank you. Operator you have three questions remaining. Question good afternoon. Im with the new neighborhoods council. I have a question for the commission. I just noticed that a project that will be before you next week, then this is a conditional use authorization for the demolition of two units. The plans do not include drawings for the existing property that already is situated on site. So my question is, is this ok for planning procedures and planning code to not have any drawings of the existing structure on the property. Particularly for the commission, i suppose it is important because if you are looking at whether or not this property should be demolished, you certainly would want to see the current and existing structure on this lot. But no such drawings, as of now, exist for this property and as for the public, as you know, the planning does not send these drawings as part of the packet, as part of the neighborhood notification packet. And instead, the public will have to log onto the website of the planning to withdraw the plans, to download the plans. I did check this yesterday and the plans that were submitted on accela, they do not have drawings of the existing condition, either. My question to the commission if this is a oneoff, if this is an anomaly or if this is a standard operating procedure. Thank you. Operator you have two questions remaining. Good afternoon, commissioners. This is georgia shudish and i hope youre all doing ok. I want to make two points today, if i can and one involves the rear yard expect ability to capture carbon and i think as you proceed with plans, particularly in the rh and were seeing these lot excavations of the entire site, tha i hope you consider looking at the plans holistically for the entire lot and to make sure when a project, especially when its a demolition, that the rear yards are not, basically, sanitized and become extensions of the structure and that the removing of the soil and the natural growth does not happen. You think of the rare yard open space and given what were going through now, beyond the carbon capture, theres a potential for the farms. And i think thats something you should look at as either an individual or policy. And similarly, individual projects or policy, i would hope that you would consider getting reports back when theres an increase in density in the rh and all of the rs, whether its a cua or lpa, to understand vacancy, occupancy and i think it would be useful to the staff and commission and the public and neighbors alike that within six months, a checklist is sent back to the city. It could be done as a commission of approval. I dont think its a burden. And i think that it would be Important Information because people are concerned about housing and occupancy and how housing is used, if its being used. Weve heard all of these stories about zombie buildings downtown in the eastern neighborhoods and certainly in the valley, were seeing an increase in cuas. You had 1099 deloris and last week, the sanchez and then youve got one today that you may or may not continue where theres increase would be nice to know what the outcome is once the project has been completed within six months of the csc. These are two policy ideas, backyards, preserving in a holistic look at sites that are being developed and the report back and whether you do it individually or as a policy. That was my suggestion and thank you very much and take care. Goodbye. Operator you have two questions remaining. Question hi commissioners. Im calling regarding the project that was discussed last week in your agenda, 9397 leeland and, case number 2018 201800191cua. Im calling the discussions last week where there was talk about converting the new construction commercial space into adus and thats a nonstarter for our community. Like was stated, our commercial district is compromised of only three blocks and now the buildings have storefronts. So its paramount not to view this commercial space and its a nonstarter. With mr. Marinis letter to high lihighlight of the angle wy compartment located behind the commercial space, removing precious space. And thats where our objective was, to highlight all of the list of items that was making the new development compatible for any new entrepreneur or merchant to open up a vibrant commercial business. And theres other elements in that new development that was borderline not a good element. Im losing words here. Theres items from this development that need to be addressed. I apologize for not conveying that properly and clearly last week in my email. So im not sure, commissioners, if you can follow up with the project sponsor and the Planning Department about these issues, because these are glaring issues that need to be address. Since we dont have the ability to enforce that to the project sponsor, that if you can follow that up with the, like i said, i the project sponsor and Planning Department. The commercial spaces, new development and the existing commercial the Historic Building that we highlighted in our email and letter. I really appreciate it if that could be done and reiterate removing a commercial space in our community is a nonstarter. Thank you, commissioners, for your time and stay safe. You have two questions remaining. Question im calling to see if the Planning Commission can explore making something that is buyright. In these times when people are stuck inside, its becoming more obvious how important it is that everybody have access to open space and you guys, every week, probably, you yourselves, you may have seen thousands of steps get shut down by opposition. This is an opportunity to make sure that people have access to sunlight and its a lot harder