Remarks by Lydia So
112 remarks on the record, newest first · Page 1 of 5
- Play at 29:49
“Thank you. Is this gentleman completed? Oh, OK. Thank you. I have a question to Corey or his team. Hi, Corey. Thanks for being here. I'm pretty happy to see that we're in action to actually continue to clarify and get deeper into defining what kind of category of violations. I remember I sit here We've been baffled with some of the projects that came through us and what are they trying to do and also get to take care of some of these chronic terrible bad players. I have two questions. So would this be retroactively looking at in the past of these, I'm focusing on specifically on these really…”
Planning Commission · Sep 17, 2026
- Play at 31:57
“OK, so for example, some other previous cases where we saw a new property owner purchase these property and not aware if they were illegally merged, and those would not be subject to these penalties.”
Planning Commission · Sep 17, 2026
- Play at 32:53
“That's really helpful for everyone to know about the time. Sure. The line in the sand where you draw, right? My second question relating to now we, as a planning commission, we are now talking about enforcement penalty guidelines on planning co-violations. So how are we in sync with building co-violations? Because usually when you see these situation. They're not only violating planning code. Some of them we see the really terrible situation is like I forgot the address but that property on San Bruno Avenue they literally didn't even build a second egress. So how are we, are we, so what I'm…”
Planning Commission · Sep 17, 2026
- Play at 35:52
“Right. So I would highly recommend to have your team to work really closely with the DBI team to clarify and also identify this whole penalty guidelines. So then people are really truly aware of there are consequences of violating both planning code and building code. So I'm supportive of today's report. Recommendation. I agree with everything you said. I just wanted to move to the next step to actually looking at both. Because usually when they're violating things like this, it's planning and DBI. And it's more importantly so about tenancy, tenancy right, but also the life and safety of…”
Planning Commission · Sep 17, 2026
- Play at 58:38
“Commissioner So? I'd like to have some clarification so my understanding is clear. I mean, I like this building and it's a historic landmark, number 157. So looking at this floor plan here, what was previously approved for the office, And then it's in blue, and then what is proposed for the expansion of Google occupying the ground floor. What are the gray area that has been highlighted in the plan? Are they all also Google offices? I'm looking at the floor plan PRJ-005.”
Planning Commission · Sep 17, 2026
- Play at 1:00:07
“I'm looking at in general, wanted to clarify in public on public record whether ground floor occupants are all Google or there are other”
Planning Commission · Sep 17, 2026
- Play at 1:00:28
“OK, thank you. So I'm just going to re-illiterate what I'm hearing from is that”
Planning Commission · Sep 17, 2026
- Play at 1:00:38
“JOY HUNTINGTON- Existing office space on the ground floor already occupied Google and allocated to Google. And then now Google is applying to get more space on the ground floor. And then the other potential vacant spaces now, there's no tenants in there. So everyone is Google on ground floor.”
Planning Commission · Sep 17, 2026
- Play at 1:01:05
“Let's answer my question. Thank you, Amy. So my other question is, maybe Monica, can you explain to, I'm asking this question, I think Paul Peck also needs to know, what is the historic significance of this building?”
Planning Commission · Sep 17, 2026
- Play at 1:01:50
“I see. And then the plaza right now is just really open, right? It's not really part of this tenant ranch or lease. This is just open space?”
Planning Commission · Sep 17, 2026
- Play at 1:02:05
“Okay. All right. I guess, well, colleagues, I'm not objecting this, but I want to make sure that this is the first project that actually utilizing this new section in planning code as is really detail-y explained by staff and also project sponsor, but I also wanted to make sure that we have our, we do our due diligence to make sure that we do this fairly, right? part of it is this is an anchor to the corner of the waterfront and I also want to make sure that this actually really have the equitable public access and use of the space as part of something people experience a historic landmark…”
Planning Commission · Sep 17, 2026
- Play at 1:03:55
“So Amy, thank you for saying that. So this is a program that has been happening?”
Planning Commission · Sep 17, 2026
- Play at 1:04:06
“May I know what is your commitment on how often the public can use and how many people can use it? Because it would sound really a bit self-serving if there's only happened to be one for one year.”
Planning Commission · Sep 17, 2026
- Play at 1:04:50
“OK, well, I would like to support this motion if colleague will allow me to add a recommendation for Google to commit on a certain amount of number of times of access to the public. And it's making that easily available, accessible to people.”
Planning Commission · Sep 17, 2026
- Play at 1:05:18
“Well, I just want to make sure it doesn't just become a lip service.”
Planning Commission · Sep 17, 2026
- Play at 1:05:24
“Would whoever motioned this, would you, I would like to add that recommendation.”
Planning Commission · Sep 17, 2026
- Play at 1:05:47
“As a finding? Yeah, to really engage and allow public use and clear access to nonprofit or organization that doesn't necessarily have to do direct business with Google have a way to access some of these space.”
Planning Commission · Sep 17, 2026
- Play at 1:06:33
“Oh, a commitment to open some access space on the ground floor for a nonprofit to be able to, like what the project sponsor said, book it and have their meetings there. And I'd like to see it more than just one or five times. I don't want to impose a particular number, but I think it needs to be something that is equitable. And I kind of leave it to staff to determine what that means, because one nonprofit for an hour in a year sounds very like a lip service. So.”
Planning Commission · Sep 17, 2026
- Play at 1:07:43
“But my issue is not about a website is there or not. My issue is really about making sure that commitment to have public access beyond just the plaza, like what you mentioned before, that people actually, nonprofit, can have access to book some of these offices for meetings. And then I think I heard an answer, it's like, you don't know it yet. So that's why I want to put it in the finding to make sure that it's not a fluff.”
Planning Commission · Sep 17, 2026
- Play at 1:10:42
“Do you need to repeat it, or you got it, Jonas?”
Planning Commission · Sep 17, 2026
- Play at 1:10:46
“You got it? Thank you. All right. I'm done. OK.”
Planning Commission · Sep 17, 2026
- Play at 2:01:55
“Okay. Thank you. Okay. Well, this is like a long progress or process, and I really I think I agree with a lot of my fellow commissioners' sentiment about there's a lot that needs to be done to work with your neighbors on this project. But I also think that the architect's team had done the best they can to what they were hired to do. But I do have some questions to the architect. Can you come forward, please?”
Planning Commission · Sep 17, 2026
- Play at 2:02:40
“We used to be in different room. But it's OK. You don't need to see me. You just need to hear me. So I would touch on your response to one of my fellow commissioners mentioning about the three-foot setback that was previously agree between your client and some of the neighbors. And you mentioned that it's actually you have it. And do you mind show us where it is? Because I was looking at your first ground floor plan. I don't really see how it's being illustrated. It might be perhaps just the graphical nature.”
Planning Commission · Sep 17, 2026
- Play at 2:04:09
“OK, so your three foot setback is actually just kind of like a notch.”
Planning Commission · Sep 17, 2026
- Play at 2:04:14
“Of the back. Okay. All right. Thank you. And do you mind, I was trying to look through my entire packet. I have not seen, I saw the total square footage of the entire project, which is the total of five lots. What is the breakdown of each unit of housing that you're proposing?”
Planning Commission · Sep 17, 2026