Was. They were super friendly. They were super excited to be here. I spoke to a couple of them and im sad we were not able to get them on the record here tonight but i want to acknowledge they are here. Huge accomplishment commissioner moore id like to give a shout out to the architect who did a stellar plan [inaudible] and going back and forth in the beginning and standing by the project. Commissioners, theres been a motion seconded to adopt environment so findings in an overriding consideration adopting findings of consistency, a recommendation for approval for general plan amendment, recommendation for approval to the planning Code Amendment by Design Standards approval, Development Agreement recommendation for approval and findings adopting shadow finance. On that motion commissioner hillis aye johnson aye koppel aye melgar aye moore aye which is aye the motion passes unanimously 60. [applause] commissioners, that will place us on items 20 a and b for items 2016 conditional use authorization Zoning Administrator will consider case number 2016001512 at the same address. Please, note on august 4, 2016 after hearing this matter in closing Public Comment you continue this matter indefinitely. At that time, commissioners melgar and koppel you were not seated. Commissioner johnson and fong were both absent. My understands commissioner koppel and melgar have not been able to review the previous hearing but commissioner johnson, you have. Which will leave us with the quorum of four required for this. Commissioners koppel and melgar youre welcome to stay be happy with jews participate in the hearing itself were active on the matter we need a motion to recuse both commissioner . Can i entertain a motion . Second. Think. On a motion to recuse commissioners koppel and vanover hillis aye johnson aye koppel aye melgar aye moore aye richards. Thank you that motion passes unanimously 60. Speed is good evening house and Bank Departments that. The item before you is a conditional use authorization request without the renovation of a two unit building cant allow to demolition and the development of residential units and a density of one unit per every 1500 ft. 2 of lot area. The scope of the project has changed since the Commission Last observed it in august. The project sponsors no longer proposing a merger of the two existing dwelling units and said is proposing to reconstruct the two dwelling units approximately the same location. As it existed and then expand and convert the garage into the new third dwelling units. A variance is required for the additions and conversion of the detached garage into a dwelling units as the garage is a noncomplying structure in the rear yard. Since the august hearing the Planning Department has received one letter of support so for a total of 35 letters of support of the project. With that said the Department Finds the project necessary desirable and compatible with the surrounding neighborhoods as will result in an increase of one dwelling units on the property. The two units weve replaced with units of comparable or larger sizes. The density and massing of the replacement buildings is in keeping with the Development Pattern of the neighborhood and on the residents being displaced. This includes staff presentation. Im happy to answer questions at the project sponsor is also here to answer any questions. Thank you thank you. Project sponsor. Good evening commissioners get my name is richard miller. I am the Property Owner and project sponsor. I bought the property in the process began about 2. 5 years ago. I recognize it as vacant and run down an opportunity to create quality housing. Ive done this a number of times over the past 10 years or so finding obsolete rundown sometimes vacant properties. Modernizing them make them comfortable make them desirable and thats what my intention was with this project as well. As ms. Said weve altered the proposal to rebuild the existing two units, plus, add a third units in the structure that is currently the garage building. We look forward to adding the units good im very familiar with the neighborhood. I live just a 10 min. Walk away. I spend every morning at Corona Heights park with a group of neighbors who have become friends could i talk to a lot of neighbors. I have not heard any opposition to the project. As a matter of fact one neighbor was here earlier and asked me to present a letter to the commission from him supporting the project. I have been in the city many years. I dont property since 1977, renovated my own homes and other properties in the city, and hope to do that again this time. Certainly available for any questions and i want to turn it over to williamof the pelosi [inaudible] good evening just want to be real quick. Closing law Group Representing the project sponsor and just want to say we have revised the application and with this revision we took the project does meet the standards the criteria for the demolition and city housing policies and freeways. One, were adding a third unit and storing the existing two and journaling the same location at the project doesnt displace any temp. Was vacant when purchase is been Owner Occupied for 40 years prior and the second unit had been as far as we know not rented for at least 10 years. Finally its doing its infill location thats consistent with the neighborhood and in general same massing and adding a third unit. With that i hope you would approve it. I give a Little Information a letter i sent you and i like to turnover to our architect to talk about the design a bit. Good evening commissioners director rahaim,we worked about eight years on several projects and i will quickly refresh her memory of this current project. Looking down on the lot from above you can see the two buildings existing bottom left. It is the two units residential structure upper right is the garage structure. The blue nine represents the setback line and upper left in the drawing is that rise. [inaudible] as it exists. Thats two off Street Parking spaces that we intend to maintain two off street spaces will be one of them into the two units dwelling which is at the bottom of this diagram. Over all, are extensions of the buildings are modest. The front two unit building generally within the setback fall within the setback, they windows, light well and filled in this is an existing photo did well it was existing a while ago. Looking at the property from a crossroads the garage building bottom left of residential upper right and superimposed on top of that are the expansions to the garage building to mimic the overall language of the existing two unit building. The one parking space will remain in the garage building and one parking space will be moved to the two unit dwelling. This is the garage and its immediate context and the addition of the glowing unit on top same thing with the two unit building on roosevelt and the addition minor additions and rearrangement of t facade elements. Thank you. Opening up to Public Comment. Any speakers for this item . Seeing none, Public Comment is closed. [gavel] commissioner moore its a rather large site because it has to frontages. It almost look at it its intentional. If the law were subdivided wouldve one building on 15th i think is the address and the other one would be on was about. Given the constraints on the side of the rear yard their hands while the variance i dont use consequential because the building itself holds itself way within that of dividing line of you joining why not 15th should get i think its a good project. And im in full support of its tiered i led the charge way back when i think i can either member on this project because of the demolition some alteration permits. Working on be defining what demolition is so thats really crystal clear. If all the architects come in and talk like that going into departments with members of the Planning Department trading one set of definitions for both organizations so that it even simpler. I think a valuable Lesson Learned here is if theres a doubt on what it is ask. I support this. Rate cuts of occasion were reducing the parking ratio. Its contextual. Its great. So good job. Think good commissioner hillis moved to approve width seconds the was on a motion, to approve this matter with conditions from hillis aye johnson aye moore aye richards aye so moved that motion passes unanimously 40. Sony administrator, would save i will close the variance hearing and [inaudible] thank you. Commissioners that are placed on the item 21 per case number 2015011529 2525 16th st. This is an Office Development allocation. Good evening commissioners kimberlyPlanning Department staff. You have before you a request for an Office Development authorization and 2525 16th st. Located on the Southern Side of 16th st. Between florida and alabama street. Within the production and distribution and repair one general zoning district. N a 68 height and bulk district. Authorization for allocation of office space is required pursuant to planning code section 179. 1 221 and 322. The project proposes to allow the legal conversion of 43,569 gross square feet of industrial or pdr used to office. The proposal is utilizing planning code 179. 1 which is the legitimization of uses which was a timelimited program offered to Property Owners who were affected by the user neighborhood zoning control in 2008. The program provided Property Owners to legalize existing uses that would no longer be allowed such as office but were previously permitted and had been operating without the benefit of a permits. The Zoning Administrator determine the propose office space of 43,569 screws square feet to be eligible for legalize nation under this program in january of 2016. The project also includes installation of 10 class i and two class to bicycle parking spaces, showers, lockers will be located on the fourth floor. No exterior alterations are proposed in all work will be done as tenant improvements. During that the public the department has received approximately for inquiries regarding the proposal. The Department Recommends approval for the following reasons. The project maintains existing pdr uses within the building. Preserves historic resource. Complies with applicable planning code requirements. Represents an allocation of 4 of the smallcap Office Currently available for allocation. It also authorizes sorry excuse me the requested authorization will require the least Office Spaces to continue their Economic Activity and the project will to generate fees that will benefit the city. And it is consistent with the planning code missionary plan and the general planted that concludes my presentation thank you i am available for questions thank you very much. Project sponsor. Good evening commissioners Rick Gladstone rubbers in the building owners. This legitimization program you just heard about was actually a concept from one of the building owners, victormany years ago when she asked me to get involved in and which was then brought to the commission and the board and unanimously approved as part of the eastern neighborhoods. Esther veblen proposes legislation because he learned the Planning Department would not recognize the validity of many of the alteration permits for office that he and his Business Partners had obtained starting in the 1950s for conversion of the warehouse suite by suite two office. What is being converted is only about a third of the building into thirds of the building will remain what it is today as pdr. As you know, when he received those permits office was allowed as a matter right as was industrial. No longer true today. One example of his concerns was because some Building Permits and shown you one of them, this is the talk pagebut the most important is the back of the page where you see the box commonly signed off by planning there you gothis box from planning has initials of a planner that i dont know who it is, but the upper boxes approved, but not all permits were this clear, my new but this is one of the clear ones that it was approved but the Zoning Administrator is taken the position that because there was an further language in here indicating it had we been thoroughly looked at, that the Zoning Administrator chose not to recognize that is about permits and hence because permits like this we have the legitimize it should program for this particular building. Anyway my client was concerned about that. He asked me to draft legislation that after much compromise and meeting with the eastern neighborhoods concerned about pdr we worked out a gym i stationed legislation. Which is what we have in the code today. Of course, this Program Allows owners who thought they were getting the right permits before the zoning change to allow pdr too now actually have those permits finally at knowledge by the Planning Department and by your commission. Like all the legitimize nation buildings this produces a good deal of fees for the city. This particular building as you can see in the overhead produces over 525,000 in fees of which 87,000 crossley goes to transit in that. About 370,000 goes to the job housing linkage feet and about 68,000 goes to the childcare fee. Because many of these office uses a been in the neighborhood for decades and because of that he program its been nice to see that the community has generally not opposed these office which in my stations. To our knowledge no letters of opposition or cause the coming just up as uptodate just several in. Its important to know your client excuse me your staff did two conference of site visits this year with photographs and they confirmed there is no planned conversion of any existing pdr in the building to office as a result of this approval. As stated in your staff report the office uses have existed in this building without complaint from either pdr tenants in the building were neighbors. Your staff check that with the Planning DepartmentEnforcement Division and staff correctly has told you today that it feels the office legitimization Program Shows no incompatibility with existing pdr tenants or with existing uses including pdr surrounding the building. We agree with the staff report statement that the approval would quote augment Public Service through the payment of the various development and pack fees. As you see your its about 525,000. I was one point out theres a great need for Office Space Users of the kind that exist in this building today. 7500 ft. 215,000 ft. 2. Should the approval not be granted those Office Tenants there today would have to vacate of course and the good news is when these Office Tenants may vacate on their own accord it brings back into the market some much needed smaller office space. Outside downtown. This kind of space given the configuration and the floor plans attract the kind of Office Tenants that we dont see downtown. You will not find here insurance companies, law firms, commercial brokers, outoftown corporate office. Mainly Small Business starting out and businesses with the needs for smaller square footage. Again the existing Office Tenants who spaces would be legalized by you tonight are Small Business who been displaced otherwise and one example and a good example of one of the Office Tenants that the city would not want to displace from here is called event management. His better known as the calls catering and if any of you been to any of the big events in city all but the one tonight you probably have to dump their being catered by the calls catering known as events management. The office in this building is office space and sample china, sample glassware that the customers take a look at the for they get put into the fancier events and the importance of that location for their office and their display is that their kitchen the pdr uses right across the street. Of course, convenience. Lastly, the site is in a special kind of pdr disappeared this is the only pdr district in the city which is called the special use retail pdr district and it was done to create more retail space on the street. This is important corridor 16th st. Which will connect Mission Bay Hospital and the mission and opposed . We value as an important transit line and the idea was encourage more retail in the pdr on the ground floor. We believe that the continuation of often space here will continue to encourage that retail to grow and expand on this special retail corridor pdr. This site has great location for transportation point of view. Its on the 16th st. Bus line. With the city plans an enormous improvement to make transportation between mission bay and the mission much much better. With the strict prop m limits it you have for spaces of 50,000 and greaterthere is prediction in jobs may be concerned therefore jobs under 50,000 represents an important safety valve for the city that can allow job growth