Yes, there is one final caller. I will unmute them now. Clerk thank you and welcome, caller. Caller hi. My name is tom angston and a Small Business owner in the sunset and i have lived here for 20 plus years. Im calling in support of the property at 1420 taraval. I drive by the taraval corridor often and i know that when i go by a building it screams to me what a gorgeous property that should be preserved. I think that putting in a multitenant building fits in with the properties that are around it. I understand the concerns of the other neighbors, but development is common in the city and we want to keep moving the city forward. As someone who is looking to invest in this community currently and conditions that were facing, i see the businesses close left and right in my neighborhood. And so if they want to push this city forward and invest and bring in jobs and construction and bring more housing into the city and modernize the city, im all for that. And im for supporting the local businesses in the city as well. So i wholeheartedly would like to put my support behind this as a business owner. People are going to object to whatever we try and do in this city but we need to keep moving this city forward and improving it and not constantly living in the past or because Jerry Garcias builder had something to do with it. So, please, take it seriously, lets invest in our neighborhood and keep moving forward. Thank you very much. Clerk thank you for your comments. I understand that theres one other caller in the queue. Welcome, caller, you have up to two minutes. Caller hello, i am a private citizen. I have been in the sunset for almost 25 years. Can you hear me . Hello . Clerk yes, yes, we hear you. Caller im sorry. Sorry, sorry. And i thought that i was muted there. I am Seamus Okelly and i have been in the sunset district for the last 25 years. Im calling in support of this project. I think that the current climate going around that we need more jobs in the neighborhood, more construction jobs. I think that if this home is not done, i dont think that it would survive another architect. So i think its time to fix it up and make more homes available for kids. I have two kids myself and we hopefully one day could buy a property. This would be the perfect location. I think that the revitalization of the street is well underway. I think that it needs more help for projects like this so that people can afford to buy. I also think that its very good for the city for more taxpayers. Right now the city is really hurting after this covid, and im scared that there will be more tax money coming into the city. And they also think that this project is very well designed. I think that has really put a lot of thought into the neighborhood with the zoning of the building. And the neighbors privacy with the building. So i honestly think that this should move forward. I think that its a success for the sunset, for the neighborhood. Thank you. Clerk thank you for your comments, sir. Operations, another caller in the queue . No, madam clerk, that completes the queue. Clerk okay, i thank you all of the callers and thank you for your patience. Mr. President . President yee thank you, thank you for the comments. And i just lastly would like to invite the appellant to present a rebuttal argument. You will have up to three minutes. Thank you. I would start out, that i was at both of the Planning Commission meets and that the Planning Commission supposedly balanced the competing interests. I would challenge that. They showed really a lack of interest in any of the issues that were brought before them. And i think that it was a timing issue. The issues resulted from the executive search. And the commissioner turnover and a leave of absence and with maintaining a quorum. This was a unanimous vote but there were only four voting members there. Mr. Rosen . Supervisors, there are two Property Owners of 1420 taraval but we only heard from one. And zucker says that he represents mr. Mandel. And theres another that owns another 50 and we havent heard anything from her. Peter mandel wants us to believe that the city he said that the city needs more Affordable Housing. How misleading. What hes failed to say is that he wants to build market rate housing. We know nothing about the financing on this selfdeveloped project and whether we would end up with an empty lot and an economic downturn. This project smacks of elitism in a city that could use less elitism. How would mr. Zucker feel if a neighbor covered his windows and if mr. Mandel had his windows covered in st. Francis wood . How would any of us feel . Its not the job of the Building Code to protect tenants. It is the responsibility of this body to protect tenants under rent control, to prevent their windows from being covered, and to exercise its oversight role over the Planning Commission. Part of that oversight role is a common sense reality check. Covering windows of rentcontrol units with marketrate units doesnt pass the smell test. Did the flawed project make it through planning . Its hard to believe, but you bet it did. This project is full of flaws. Falsified affidavit of the preapplication meeting giving rise to the project, according to two people who were there. Replacing naturally affording housing, with marketrate housing clerk one minute left. Is not consistent with the code element. And covering the windows of next door at 1414 taraval, these tenants are under rent control. Do wes have a city want to block their light and air with marketrate housing . What do this body and this government stand for . We have an item today to protect the tenants due to covid. Should we protect rent controlled 10ants with a false affidavit and a flawed project . And desmollishing one of the resources that our middleclass neighborhood has that is part of the neighborhood character is outrageous. Again, elitism. Inconsistent with the general plan Housing Element and planning code section 101. 1b2 that existing housing and neighborhood character be conserved and protected to preserve the cultural and Economic Diversity of our neighborhoods. The story from the project sponsor keeps changing. He said that he wanted to help to solve the housing crisis at the Planning Commission. And then he said that he wanted to build housing for his children. Clerk thank you, mr. Rosen, that concludes your threeminute rebuttal. President yee thank you very much. I guess now that the public hearing has been held and this will be filed. We will now reconvene as the board of supervisors. As previously discussed, we will take consideration of the conditional use authorization, which involves an analysis whether the Planning Commissions determination to authorize the project was appropriate. To reverse the planning departments decision, or to authorize the conditional use with additional conditions. Theres eight votes of the board. So supervisor, do you have any comments to make . Supervisor mar thank you, president yee and madam clerk, for facilitating the hearing. I did have a few questions for planning staff. Mr. Starr, the other planning staff that are with us, more about the historic the determination around historic significance for this property. Yeah, this property is in an historically workingclass residential neighborhood. The homes and other buildings in the parkside were built to serve the Housing Needs of working families in the decades following the 1906 earthquake. So they understandably lack obvious architectural or design details that appear in homes in other neighborhoods originally created for the wealthy and the elite in our city. So i just have a question how do our preservation standards account for workingclass neighborhoods like the parkside, where buildings have few architectural characteristic as a matter of the economy . Sure. I can just say that the building was determined to be a resource, just not retaining integrity. But ill let stephanie, who is a preservation expert, to take over the response to that. Good afternoon, president yee and the board. I just want to make sure that you can hear me okay. President yee yes. Okay, great. Yes, so i can talk a little bit to kind of the preservation process and kind of looking at these more modestly designed workingclass residential structures. When we are completing an historic determination to see if a property is a resource, we rely on the four criteria that is outlined. So properties that are significant for their associations with events or with people or for their architecture or for archaeological resources. And with regards to specifically looking at this type of building, we do look at the Development Patterns in the neighborhood to try to figure out, you know, where it was potentially early Residential Development in relation to either earlier or later commercial development and kind of how does it work with each other. And with the understanding that the designs were a bit more of a modest of a style, and not exactly your highstyle architecture. We do we look at that and, you know, while they might not be buildings that are significant specifically for highstyle architecture, we consider them as potential Historic Resources with the working class or middleclass neighborhoods. In regard to looking at significant im sorry in regard to looking at integrity, integrity sewhat we take into consideration when we have identified that there is an Historical Resource and we want to look at whether or not we are able to portray or illustrate that potential significance. So we, you know, with an understanding that theres not really applied architectural features. We do rely on the conditions versus what the condition was for the construction. So features such as window patterns and window types, window designs, in this specific instance the front porch, looking at siding material. Things that would be considered, you know, just as part of the architectural fabric, we rely a little bit more heavily on the analysis of the conditions and those features to determine whether or not significance is still portrayed through those features. With the understanding that its not highstyle building. In this particular instance, looking at items alterations that have taken place, with windows taken out and the front clearance to accommodate for that kind of garage and or commercial space. Looking at elements related to the porch. Those, you know, alterations that have taken place further diminish the level of integrity that the resource has. Thank you. I had a followup question. So regarding your determination that the you know, that the modifications or alterations to the building are significant enough that to lead to the determination that its not an historic resource. Can you respond to the points made by the appellant and others that these alterations are relatively minor and can be easily be restored, you know, just replacing windows, rereplacing the windows, and the siding and the railing on the porch, for example. Sure. Supervisor mar im sorry. And is this a consideration or the ability to restore the property to more of its original state. Is that a consideration in the determination of historic significance . Sure. So for the second part of the question first. Whether or not the property could be potentially restored is not something that we have considered when were looking at determinations. Just to backtrack a little bit, the department did agree that the alterations that have taken place are minor. We feel that theyre substantial enough to cause the property to no longer maintain that integrity. And with review under the act, we look at the existing conditions of the potential historical preservation, to make the call. And so while it might be reversible in nature, thats not the existing condition. The existing condition incorporates all of these alterations with our analysis of the integrity. Supervisor mar okay, thank you. I dont have any other questions for the planning staff. I did have one or a couple questions for the project sponsor. Okay. President yee is the project sponsor Still Available . Im turning on my okay. Im here. Can you hear me . Supervisor mar yes, we can, thank you, mr. Mandel and mr. Zucker. More followup on the points raised by the lead or the owners of 144 taraval, you know, the property next door who will have two windows, you know, on the Property Line covered up by the proposed project. And i wanted to see if you would be able to state a little bit more clearly for the record what the mitigation measures that you had offered to the lead family . Yeah, justin, you want to start or you want me to start . Go for it, peter. Well, what we talked about in december 12th is that we would offer to all of the construction to close up the windows permanent and to close up those two windows. And then also to offer on the upper floor a skylight that could open for fresh air. But down on the second floor level, there we were going to offer some more lighting on the interior. They do have two bay windows that, you know, are within a few feet in the front of the building. So they do have plenty of light going in there. But those were the two items that we were going to offer for those two windows. We also there were a couple there are nonproject related building repairs, just being neighborly, and goodfaith efforts to help with consideration. One of them is on the western facade theres one missing piece of siding, and peter had mentioned that hed be happy to repair that, replace that one piece of siding. And if there were any other damage that were to occur that is not anticipated during the demolition and construction that hed obviously take care of that. But, again, not anticipated. And then finally there is a window in the rear of their building that is in severe need of fixing that peter has offered to repaint for them. Thats correct. Supervisor mar great, thank you. President yee thanks to supervisor mar. I actually have clarification question really, and im not sure who wants to answer. But theres a lot of about this being affordable units. So its a little confusing to me. Is it affordable unit . Are we talking about rentcontrolled units . There are two Different Things to me. Go ahead. Im sorry, the existing unit is market rate. It is ol has the ability to be considered rent control so its not an affordable unit by any means. President yee and then in regards to the tenants, are they moved out, theyre still there . That wasnt clear either. Theyre still there, but, you know, they are supportive of the project and thats in writing to supervisor mar. So they know that its coming. Whenever that day is. So theyre living there and theyre paying some rent, three of them. Theyre in their early 30s, i should say. President yee thank you for the clarification, it just wasnt clear. Supervisor mar, would you like to have a last word or whatever . Supervisor mar president yee, i dont have any other questions for the parties. I do have some Closing Remarks. President yee yeah, i dont see any other supervisors on the roster here. So if you would like to do your Closing Remarks now. Supervisor mar thank you, president yee. I wanted to just start by thanking the appellant and the public who commented today and also in writing for raising very important concerns about Historic Preservation and Housing Affordability in the parkside district. Its important to look at this project in context. This early 20th century property is in an historically workingclass residential neighborhood, directly on a major transit line. And in a commercial corridor. The homeowner, as you stated, grew up in this house and proposes to build three familysized units in a commercial and a commercial space in a growing neighborhood. I believe that this is a kind of density and development that is appropriate for this location. And the commercial corridor and neighborhood. While the historic determination is usually adjudicated through the ceqa appeal process, and not the c. U. Process, i do want to speak briefly on my position. And i agree with the Historic Preservation planners assessment that the property does not maintain integrity but also acknowledge that its a significant part and really a rare example of the parkside early Residential Development. The parkside has a rich workingclass history that opened up affordable homeownership opportunities to generations of families. Many of whom were immigrants from europe and more recently asia. We must preserve our history, whether through protecting the most intact examples of singlefamily architecture, or honoring this legacy by continuing to support new generations of working and middleclass families to be able to live in our community. I look forward to continuing Historic Preservation conversations proactively identifying potential Historical Resources and historic districts in the parkside and the sunset neighborhoods and exploring incentives for the Property Owners and other creative ways to respect our neighborhoods rich and workingclass history. And with respect to 1420 taraval, i do agree with the determination by the planning staff that this home is not a significant enough resource to reject the conditionaluse authorization and the Developers Plan to demolish the home and create three new familysized Housing Units that otherwise are a good fit for this site and the neighborhood. I also want to briefly acknowledge the issues raised about Housing Affordability and tenant displacement. The project proposes to replace one threebedroom home where current tenants are paying marketrate rate rent of 4,500 per month, with three marketrate threebedroom flat. So theres a net increase of two familysized Housing Units and no loss of Affordable Housing. The three tenants submitted a project support letter a