base levels for many of the fees for planning and for d.b.i. and so the department will scope out a project similar to that in nature that will more comprehensively review the fees. so the 50% cap on the end safety that i mentioned earlier we feel is a necessary first step in comprehensively reviewing the schedule with fees. it will allow us to gain a number of months of actual data to see how -- how it's going, how, you know, applicants are, you know, pleased with this, if it's encouraging. applicants being filed, many fees may need to be adjusted based on more accurate cost of services in the past five years. we've just been applying c.p.i. indexing to the fees year after year. maybe it's time to more comprehensively review. there still is the issue of stacking of fees issue where a

project may have multiple entitlements and that's an issue we would like to address when we more comprehensively review the schedule. this 50% cap is addressing the issue that's kind of the beginning of addressing that issue where we're capping the initial fee but we would like to look at the stacking of fee issues as well. i would like to say yesterday afternoon i delivered this presentation to the historic preservation commission, and they unanimously approved the motion on this -- on these topics with some added language that said -- that said the commission appreciates the direction the department is taking with re-evaluating the fee structure to be more equitable. we just wanted to make sure you're aware of that. and the city attorney's office provided a few nonsubstantive changes to the ordinance that's are in your packets for your approval in regards to some formatting and some minor

language changes to the 50% intake fee language. just want to make sure that was clear. i would be happy to take any questions you might have. president olague: thank you. did you have something? >> i want to thank keith for his work and getting up to speed with the department's work very, very quickly. on the 50% issue, i think bears a tad more decision. we had been receiving some concerns for certain types of small projects, feet was actually greater than the value of the project. so we asked staff to look at that and in fact for very small projects this 50% number is a benefit to the small projects and does almost nothing to hurt the department's revenues. continue just makes a lot of -- and it just makes a lot of sense. it may help bring projects in because the fee will be more affordable. so it makes sense. and i think secondly, i just wanted to mention in terms of looking at the entire fee schedule for the first time in five years, it seems like a good

time to do that. now we're finally for the first time since i have been here, we have a full compliment of finance staff in the department. we have the staff to do it. i think we have the resources to do it. i would like to move ahead with that in the coming year as well. president olague: any public comment on this item? seeing none public comment is closed. commission are borden? commissioner borden: i want to thank the department for working on this. i was having a conversation with someone doing a bathroom remodel about the fees and just how they're saying that the cost -- not only is the fee cost high initially but just in general if you're doing code compliant work it's more expensive in the construction process, and if it's not code compliance. it's really a scary thing. people who recognize that these codes protect them, that this is a good thing. so i think helping bring more projects to come to us to actually get the permits because we see quite a bit of projects that come before us without the benefit of permits, as we often

say in a very kind of nice you've nix. hopefully with a step in this direction, people will seek those necessary permits and we will actually achieve more revenue as opposeed to a loss because we're making it affordable for people to do so. i think this is a step in the right direction and i move to approve. president olague: commissioner moore? commissioner moore: i just want to say it's clear transferance and quite logical. what i hope you will find if you're indeed starting to gain permit, there is a certain kind of break on cause, for example, if you go to, let's say a hairdresser as a strange example. i'm sorry, but have you several thing -- you have several things done, you have your hair cut and your hair shampooed and whatever, it starts to be a sliding scale and they explain that to you because you're not really coming back for

completely new appointment and new service. and there's some lodge nick that. i don't know how it staps but it must be something and i think it would be an encouragement to have people think comprehensively of how they engage you and have the fee structure reflect that. i think to be discouraged of the sequential permitting , for example, there might be a benefit for everybody in there. president olague: commissioner sugaya? commissioner sugaya: thank you. just for the edification of the public either on tv or here, although there was in public testimony, i think that you have to understand that the planning department is basically an enterprise department and has to raise its own fees, so to speak, in order to pay for the department's work. the department, i think, receives 5% from the jefrpbl fund -- general fund. >> i think it's 6%.

commissioner sugaya: if you compare that to years ago when the city actually ran off its general fund at some point, i think people should understand that the fees are kind of what they are because various departments, including planning and probably d.b.i., i don't know how much of theirs is but it's probably equally applicable here. have to generate revenues in that fashion in order to provide the services that they do. i was going to say something else, but i'm not going to go there. president olague: commissioners, the motion on the floor and i'm assuming the motion is for both resolutions? >> yes. president olague: thank you. the motion on the floor is for approval on that motion. commissioner antonini stepped out. >> make sure with the revised language. >> yes, with the revised language. >> right. >> section 302 environmental -- all of that stuff. >> actually, the motion that was

just passed before you, which has all of the revised language in it, that is the motion you're voting on. commissioner board snean >> aye. >> commissioner fong? >> aye. >> commissioner moore? >> aye. >> commissioner sugaya? >> aye. >> commissioner miguel? >> aye. >> commissioner olague/ >> aye. >> thank you, commissioners. the vote passes unanimously. we can go back to item 13 on your calendar, case 213-2011 -- 2011.o 255c for 995 walesa street. >> good afternoon, commissioners. president olague and members of the commission. kimberly durandet, department staff. you have before you request for

additional use authorization to add a type 47 a.d.c. license which would allow the sale of distilled spirits to an exist full-service restaurant which currently serves beer and wine. in the valencia district in planning code section 726.41. staff recommends approval with conditions. the bases for this recommendation is that the project promotes small business ownership, its neighborhood serving use, it's well served by transit, it means all of the applicable mr. clintonning code section, and it consistent with the intent of the valencia street district and the general plan. it's also an existing restaurant so there would be no expansion to the percentage of eating and drinking establishments in the n.c.t.

staff received two letters in opposition, one which was received after your commission packet, and i have that here for your review. and that's all i have. so if you have any questions, i will be available. >> thank you. project sponsor? >> hello, commissioners, i'm emily and here with my husband john. we are the owners of dosia, owners and operators of dosa. i want to tell you a little about ourselves and our request. i'm sure you have seen a number of clients like us but this is our first time going through this process. so thank you for your patience. one is i wanted to tell you dosa is a family owned and operated business. we're family owners, husband and wife and owned and operating dosa since 2005. we have two children, 6-month-old and 6-year-old, so this is business that supports our family.

we have been serving our neighborhood, miss district, the location before you is our original location. we have been serving this location in a socially responsible and conscious manner since we opened. we have currently a type 41 license for beer and wine. we're open dinner nightly in this location with the weekend brunch and our audience is very diverse, as is san francisco at large. we cater to and have a very -- we have a south indian community as well as indian community in general come to see us from all over the bay area. and we also have the san francisco and local audience. we have been given many accolades but some of the most important include people's polls awards. just yesterday poem chose to vote us as their favorite indian restaurant in "sf weekly." i don't say that to brag but to note we have been serving our community in a way we have been able to measure in some ways.

we hire about 85% of our staff from within about mile of this location or less. so it's a very much locally staffed and that's -- we do that intentionally. we were fortunate enough to open a second location, which you may have heard of. it's called dose indian fillmore. we opened this in 2008. that location does have a type 47 license. it has a full bar and it did not require a c.u.p. i bring that up because it's in that bar that that we have been pioneers in the bar program space and have begun creating cocktails as with our food, we're using our expert team of indians in our kitchen as well as really experienced bartenders to use fresh, seasonal local fruits, local spirits whenever possible, and we combine these to make really exciting cocktails that people of the city have come to really enjoy

and it's really helped our business to be much more successful. so these drinks have made the offering more successful and to such an extent with what's happened now is in our original location, i'm seeing these restaurants are the same restaurant. they're both called dosa. what's happened is we have found that our customers would like same lar offering. we have inconsistencies in one location has products people would like to have and then the other location doesn't, and it's primarily tied to our bar program. i just wanted to mention tpwhever received any complaints about noise, hours of operation. we have never, ever desired nor do we in the future to be a bar, even though i understand how the code is looking at us as a bar, we are very much a full-service restaurant and our hours and business only support people drinking at our bar while the restaurant is open. we stay open until 10:00 at night currently but we would like to be able to stay open until as late as midnight but

not later than that. and that's strictly to serve our customers who are dining again. so we will never become a lounge. we have no interest in doing anything that would separate the full-service restaurant from the bar. we consistently score high on our health inspection. we currently have 100 points at our 995 valencia location, which is something we're proud of. we're responsible in how we manage our restaurant and would be as far as how we manage a full bar. we have approval signatures from all of the owners of businesses right next to 995 valencia. i went to each of the owners and within 20 minutes they all signed off an approval for us to have this license knowing that we simply want to sell spirits in our existing bar so we can remain successful over time. the landlord approved us to go

after a type 47 license, which was submitted with our c.u.p. application. we will not be changing the size of our location. capacity will remain at 49. we are only planning to make an a.d.a. compliant bar, removing a barrier which we were approved for and given a permit by the planning department already. and we do have some conditions which we have agreed to with the police department. back in december of 2010, we had been moving along this process to acquire the license didn't not know at that time we required a c.u.p., so we were actually approved to transfer this license with the abc department and met with the police department about similarly wanted to know about the business and what our intent was. so we have agree to that list of conditions, which is part of your packet. we are fine with all of those. we did have the approval of the local police department and the abc department.

so we're asking for your support today with the support of these other organizations. and i just wanted to stress that we feel like this license will allow us to continue in business in that area and be competitive with some of the best practices we've discovered really work well for our business. we hope you will look at our track record and see that we are honestly just looking to enhance our offering for our existing customers and that you will support us and finalizing this process and acquiring the type 47 license that is waiting for us. if you have any questions, i will be happy to respond. >> thank you. i would like to open it up for public comment at this time. is there any public comment on this item? seeing none, public comment is closed.

>> i'm here to comment on the next item but as i live a half a block away, i did want to comment that the dosa restaurant is very well beloved in the neighborhood and major contributor to the local restaurant scene. and i think it echoes the opinion of most of my neighbors. just wanted to mention that. president olague: thank you. is there any additional public comment on this item? seeing none, public comment is closed. commissioner antonini? cra i'm very much in support of this. this is an area where perhaps we have to look at the code a little bit because as was explained, it sort of a technicality where when we had distilled spirits, where there was previously just beer and wine, then it is treated the same as if it's a new bar as far as the conditional use is concerned. and that i think is maybe something we may need to look at in the future. of course, it depends upon the n.c.t., which in this particular

case, valencia street has an n.c.t. that makes it a conditional use. so i think that it allows, as was mentioned in the case report, their customers have said, it's not a question of alcohol or not. it's a question of your choice of alcoholic beverages and some people prefer distilled spirits and cocktails as to having a glass of wine or a beer. ky remember back as long as the early '70's when there were two restaurants and under the same name, same food, happen to be mexican restaurant but one had a full bar and the other did not and we always went because we wanted to have -- we usually would like a cocktail before dinner so we went to the one before that had the bar. and it didn't mean we were drinking any more. it's just that was a choice. so i would move to approve the conditional use. president olague: commission are borden? >> i was going to say the same

thing. i have been to the fillmore location. i have to say i love the food and cocktail program is excellent there and goes really well with the spicy flavor and food. kudos, great restaurant. i can say there's never a bunch of people standing outside being rowdy or ruckus. they're very peaceful neighbor on that block. in fact sometimes you can walk by and see if you're open because it's so quiet. for the neighbor who had been concerned about the noise issue, that just doesn't bear out when actually go by the fool more location. i do wish you're open later because sometimes we're coming back late from here and try to get food there. before you shut the kitchen. i'm happy to support this application. i wish you much success. >> commissioner miguel? commissioner moore: i also support the application. i just want to add on to -- oops, the mic wasn't on. add on to commissioner borden's comments that i, too, would like to see you open until midnight.

aall restaurants in san francisco close too early. and there are some of us because of wishes or circumstances end up trying to go at quarter to 10:00 to get something to eat and they don't want you in the place. president olague: commissioner sugaya? commissioner sugaya: you all come down to my namehood and go to shalamar. it's a little more down home than these guys. i support the application but i have one question because it has been raised by someone who opposes you in a letter. he raises a trash issue, trash removal issue. could you enlighten us a little bit more about that particular -- i don't know if it's a problem but he's raying it as an issue. >> we don't have a problem with trash removal. we had conversation before with neighbors as most restaurants do at some point because oftentimes in that neighborhood, it's not uncommon where late at night

people will come and take your bottles, like a truck will pull up and take the -- not the -- knock the lock off your garbage cans and bottles late at night. there was a tomb two years ago that was an issue. so we addressed it. any time we had an issue like that, we addressed it immediately and openly with the neighbors. so if we were to reach out with anyone who commented, i'm sure they would support that. in this case, it was -- we stayed around and went and found out who the people were in this case that were emptying them. they were making a lot of noise emptying all of our bottles in that truck. that was one instance i can think about. another time was when some neighbors were putting their garbage into our garbage cans so what came back to us wa your garbage all over the sidewalk? my chef and i went outside and pulled out cases and said, you know, we don't carry these products. i can't quite remember what they were.

but they were boxes that -- i don't want to put out one of my neighbors but they did go to one of my neighbors who serves food. we went to the neighbor and addressed it. that happened actually twice. so those were issues where people started with us, with dosa, and we, like i said walked through the issue, didn't skirt it. if there was an issue, we would be the first people to take care of it. we would never be complacent with our garbage being an issue in the neighborhood we're working in. >> thanks. president olague: thank you. i think it's an excellent business also. i would encourage you to stay open until midnight also. thank you. >> commissioners, you have a motion on the floor for approval, on that commissioner antonini? >> aye. commissioner sugaya? >> aye. >> commission are miguel? >> aye. >> commissioner olague? >> aye. >> thank you, commissioners the motion is approved unanimously.

president olague: and we will be taking recess until five after 5:00. >> a 15-minute recess. thank you.