415 6550001 and entering access code 146 738 6789. When we reach your item, and you would like to submit your Public Comment, press star and 3 to be added to the queue. When i have 30 seconds remaining, youll hear a chime indicating your time is almost up. And we will be testing a new chime today. Ill take the next person queued to speak. Call from a quiet location, speak clearly and slowly, and please mute the volume on your television. Id like to take roll at this time. Commission president koppel . Here. Commissioner fung. Here. Commissioner imperial . Here. I do see one person requesting to speak. Well take that caller now. Caller, youll have two minutes. Caller, are you prepared to submit your testimony regarding the continuances . Okay. That caller has left. So, commissioners, that concludes Public Comment on matters proposed for continuance. The matters are now before you. Commissioner imperial. As noted. Second. Clerk thank you, commissioners. On the notion to continue matter as proposed, commissioner chan. Aye. [roll call]. So moved. The motion passes unanimously. 60. Ill continue item 1b for 526 lombard to november 19th. Clerk thank you. Commissioners that will place this under the consent calendar. We have one matter on consent. And it is considered to be routine by the Planning Commission. It may be acted upon by a single roll call vote. No separate discussion, unless a member of the commission, public or staff requests. In which event, it will be remove from the consent calendar and considered as a separate item at this or a future hearing. Item 3, case number 2020. We should ask members of the public if anyone would like to speak to this or take it off of consent. The mar is now before you, commissioners in commissioner mar. I love to approve. Second. [roll call] clerk so moved, commissioners. That motion passes unanimously, placing under commission matters. Item 4. Consideration of adoption minutes of september 24th, 2020. We should take Public Comment. I do see one member of the public. You will have for two minutes. Caller im sorry. I think i jumped the gun. I want to comment on a later item. Clerk okay then. Press star 3 when that item comes up, sir. Commissioners, i see no other persons requesting to speak to the minutes. The matter is now before you. Imperial. I adopt the minutes. Second. Second. Clerk thank you, commissioners. On that motion to adopt the minutes. [roll call] clerk so moved, commissioners. That passes unanimously 60, placing us on item 5, commission comments and questions. If there are no comments or questions from commissioners, we can move on to department matters. Item 6. Directors announcements. Good afternoon, commissioners. I just wanted to make one announcement. Youve been getting some emails and Public Comment about 317 and our demo. Obviously a topic weve talked about over the years, where weve had proposals and the board has proposals. But i just wanted to let you know, we are working on it, both coming up with our own potential changes to 317, as well as working with supervisors who are also working on this issue. Well be bringing it before you. I dont necessarily have a timeline yet. But either through a board proposal or our own, this issue, you know, we intend to bring back to you. Thanks. Clerk sorry, commissioners. I was muted. If that concludes the directors report. We can move on to item 7, review of past events of the board of supervisors, board of appeals aned Historic Preservation commission. Good afternoon. Planning Department Staff. The Landuse Committee was however, the full board that were a few appeals. First up the appeal for the conditional use authorization that this commission deny the project of 552 to 554 hill street. The project sponsor, who is also the appellant, requested that the time be continued for one month. The board ablamed and continued the item to november 10th. Next up was the ceqa appeal for the four 90foot tall light poles at the st. Ignatius school. The project also includes the installation of the Verizon Wireless facility on one of the poles. This commission heard this item on july 23rd of this year, and approved the condition. The conditions approval limited the schools use at certain times of the day and a limit on the total number of days a year. The decision constituted the approval action for the purposes of ceqa. For the appeal, the project does not meet the necessary and desirable threshold required for approval. That the Verizon Wireless project does not meet the requirements of the siting guidelines and the height of the light holes and the wireless facility should not be exempt under the planning code. The primary concern with the ceqa appeal was that the project did for the nit within the class one or class three exemption. And the project presented unusual circumstances that could result in a significant environmental impact. Public comment went on for several hours and enough time enough time to roast a chicken with, many neighbors call in to support the appeal and significant number of students and alumni of st. Ageny husband is supporting the project. St. Ignatius supporting the project. They found the project was entirely to the community at large. We also corrected the misinterpretation of the siting guidelines and the planning codes height limits. The ceqa appeal the departments defense was that the proposed alterations facility is an a category exemption and did not represent an unusual circumstance under ceqa. The substantive to substantiate the former point, the department identified 18 athletic fields in residential neighborhoods in San Francisco, that have evening lighting. That can explain that evening light hadding noise from athletic events near residential areas is not unusual for ceqa. Supervisor mar questioned the actually necessitate and desirability to the neighborhood and community. It seemed initially like he was going to make a motion to overturn the Planning Commissions decision. He said hed like to continue to work with the two parties to try to come to a resolution before then. Lastly, the board considered the appeal for the evaluation for the proposed project at 1080 Howard Street. The project is to merge two lots, demolish a singlestory industrial building and constructing the sevenstory mixeduse commercial and residential building with 24 units and 2500 square feet of commercial space. The Planning Commission heard this item on june 4th this year as a discretionary review and voted to take d. R. And approve the project with modifications. The modification was that the proposed building wall be set back 1 foot from the western interior Property Line to allow adjacent Property Line windows to function. The project site and neighboring parcel are within the air pollutant exposure zone. The neighbors appealed over fewer capacity once the building is constructed. Staff addressed the effectiveness of the eastern neighborhoods construction air quality and noise mitigation measures. Staff also explained why the project would not change sewer conditions at the neighboring property. In the end, the board did not feel that the appeal had merits and upheld the determination. That concludes my report and im happy to answer any questions. Great. Thank you, mr. Star. Administrators, the report from the board of appeals. Theres no report. Clerk okay. The Historic Preservation commission did meet yesterday. And after approving a permit to alter 1035 Howard Street for the restoration of an artdeco building and the and a rear addition, they adopted resolutions recommending nominations for the Mission Cultural center for latino arts, centro at Mission Street, as well as 535 green street, at the sausage factory. After which they considered the preservation alternatives for Draft Environmental Impact report for property of 2500 mariposa street, charlie coach division, maintenance and operations facility. Commissioners, if there are no questions, we can move on to general Public Comment. At this time, members of the public may address the board within the subject matter jurisdiction of the commission. Except agenda items, with respect to agenda items, the opportunity to address the commission 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, when the number of speakers exceeds the 15minute limit, general Public Comment may be moved to the end of the agenda. I do see one person requesting two people. Go ahead, caller. You have three minutes. Go ahead, caller. Caller good afternoon, commissioners. San francisco coalition. Im calling in response to the announcement that director hillis just made regarding changes that are in the works for section 317. I just wanted to comment on that, because in the past, us activists, the neighborhood activists, have been involved in trying to reform the demolition laws in the city, so we would safeguard against sound homes, sound homes that are relatively more affordable to be maintained and save them from demolition. But i have to confess we havent been too successful. And one thing that i just want to bring to your attention, is that when it comes to demo calculations, i am so sorry to bring this up. But in reality, it hasnt helped. I know that keeps bringing this up week after week that you need to change the demo calculations so more homes, more remodels could be qualified as demolition, which is what they are. But it just doesnt help anything, because even if we change the demo calculations, the project is going to be before you. As history has shown, the commission never rejects any demolition. So we might have nip and tucks here and there, on these projects, but in reality the demolition is never going to be disapproved. And its going to be business as usual. One thing that weve had in the past was was an illfated program called the residential expansion threshold or as we called it, the red, and we were vehemently opposed to that we are still opposed to that. We dont believe we should replace section 17 with something that is going to be awarding developers more Square Footage for more units. That is not how its suppose to work. If you want to actually save sound housing from demolition, it would be best if you would have some concrete numbers and some concrete measures for saving them, such as what senator wiener delivered from corona heights. A blanket 3,000 square feet of limits for any development in that part of the city. And that has been put in place permanently. And ever since that happened, the developer and speculators trickling preapplication meetings basically stopped. Were not against development, but were against speculators. If we want to stop the speculations and save our relatively Affordable Housing stock, lets stop working, you know, towards something that is going to be [bell dings] just another coma that leads to more fundamental solutions. Thank you. Caller oh, hi. Its georgia. Yes. Hi. I was just going to call to ask you to hopefully read the emails that i sent on the 3rd of october, the evening of saturday. It was kind of a dense email. And in the one i sent this morning, the followup. But since i heard director hillis and i was grateful for that and their plan and plans to change 317, i just want to go back to something that former director rand said back in january, which was they were working on it. Thats nine months ago. 2017 the rent disappea disappead section 317 has been around since 2008 and worked on for five, seven, eight years before that. You have the demo calculations. Theyre imperfect. But the commission can change them. You can adjust them. Is it the perfect solution, i dont know. Its never been done. Id be curious to see what the impact was, if it was adjusted. I just know that the demo calculations now are either very, very close to the thresholds or theyre gotten around during demolition. I mean, you cant catch them. You know, i remember Scott Sanchez saying in june 2015, youve got to get it at the right time. And basically inferring that i had to be out there with my camera to get it at the right time, so enforcement could do it. But its too late temperature its too late. I dont think this burden should be on enforcement. Thats why i have stopped filing complaints, because i think it has to be at the beginning. The demo calculationses have to either be better enforced and they should be published on the 311. Or you need to adjust them. I really think that given the fact that 317 has been around since 2008, thats what 12 years now, and theyve never been adjusted. They probably should have been adjusted twice. Would it have done something . I dont know. But id like to think that it would have, because thats what the staff intended when it was written and when it was approved unanimously by the commission at the time and by the board of supervisors and the staff supported it and the neighbors supported and the r. B. A. Supported it. And everybody loved it. [bell dings] so theres the bell. Im going to sign off now. But please read my emails. And please, commissioners, remember that for better or worse, you can adjust the demo calculations. You have that power on your own to do it. Thank you very much. Take good care. Bye. Caller hello, this is jonathan randolph, following up on director hillis and the previous two speakers comments about planning code 317. Id like to say that chronicle 317 is really an imperfect rule, because its unclear about its goals. Theres a difference between a renovation thats updating the bathroom fixtures and knocking down internal walls and a renovation thats updating and adding sprinklers and doing seismic retrofits. Or a third is one thats expanding the number of bedrooms or doing an a. D. U. Or, you know, expanding going upstairs or into the backyard to add more bedrooms that can be rented out. And they all have different effects on affordability. And planning code 317 doesnt really know what to do about them. If youre just updating the interior fixtures, i think walk make a you can say thats a clear case. If youre doing interior changes to knock down the walls, thats probably driving up the price. Its all interior. But if youre doing code updates, thats also likely to increase the represents and prices, in order to recover the renovation costs. But its probably worth it, because its doing safety upgrades that help the future tenant or owner. On the other hand, an expansion that adds bedrooms or adds an a. D. U. And adds to the housing supply, would lower represents. But planning code 317 serves to discourage those kinds of renovations as well. And especially so if we lower the tantamount demolition calculations, were discouraging a. D. U. We should considering how the city can make the best use of what to see what kinds of demolitions were okay with. If you do a demolition, you have to replace it. [bell dings] you have to replace the tenants, protect the tenants. If were okay with those replacements provisions, then we can exempt more of we can except more of the demolitions from the fee requirements. Thank you. Caller hello, commissioners. This is anastasia, district 8 tenant. I tend to agree with. Bob deith ndp y roam. The represent thats stable and in Good Condition, needs to be preserved. So in order to keep this section of the code, section 317 in alignment with the housing policies of the general plan, you need to set goals for section 317. Whats the objective of section 317 . Tennessee what are you trying to do . You dont want to trigger a demolition, if its not a demolition, you want to have a c. U. Hearing. If it exceeds a certain scope. So look to any changes to keep with the general policy. Thank you. Clerk okay. Members of the public, last call for general Public Comment. Commissioners, seeing no additional requests to speak, we can move on to your regular calendar. Through 9 chair, well be taking item 11, in conditional use authorization, out of order first. Is staff prepared to make their presentation . Yes. The item before you is a request for conditional use authorization, pursuant to planning code 302. 203 and 840 to allow the establishment of an 1,855 square foot canvas regional use, within the mixeduse general Zoning District and the central soma specialuse district. No onsite smoking or clarisse is proposed as part of the project. Brannan wanted to establish a dispensary. Subsequently on june 17, etc 20, they filed a request of the Building Permits to establish the mcdus at the site. Part of the case going before the Planning Commission, the city implemented a moratorium on new medical clarisse dispensaries, while new regulations were drafted. This application was put on hold until a referral was received from the citys office of clarisse. Such referral was received on may 27th, 2020. Under section 190 dof the plans code. No other locations exist within 600 feet of that location today, thats i thats not used tn the project. The site is developed with a onestory Automotive Repair facility on a three lot with frontage on brannan, between 4th and 5th street. It includes the site operation, a tenant improvement, removal of the curb along brannan street and improvement to the parking lot of the rear. The area contact is mixed in nature with industrial sites, mixeduse or midrise residential developments and future major Office Developments. The site is located less than a block from the central subway and two blocks from the 4th and King Caltrain station. It meets the 600foot rule. It is not within 100 feet of any school, public or private or any medical cannabis dispensaries or Cannabis Retailers that are approved by this commission and with licenses issued by the office of cannabis. As of the writing of the case report, the department had received 20 letters and 59 petition signatures in support of the application. A