considered to be a dwelling unit. staff found no violation of the planning code on the property. in conclusion, staff recommends approval of the proposal. that includes my presentation. i am available for any questions. president olague: thank you. project sponsor? >> good afternoon, commissioners. we were currently located at 1100 van ness boulevard for 20 years. we had to leave the location back in august of 2010. unfortunately we did have a conditional use for 1007 bush street granted in 2005. because of a dispute with the contractor, we were not able to complete the project. we are here to complete the project. we were able to complete almost

90% of our projects. we have the financial goods to complete the project. we've worked closely with the neighborhoods and continue to work closely with them and we want to continue to be in this particular neighborhood. if you of questions, please let me know. president olague: thank you. i have three speaker cards. linda chapman. >> good afternoon, commissioners. my name is john. the issues with this project -- the project sponsor came before you december 16, 2005.

the project sponsor has an abc license for 1100 van ness, they received a 10-day extension for multiple violations. in the package today, u.s. 14 letters in support for nearby business only. no community meetings, which were checked off on your thing -- it never happened. i ask that you continue this item until the community is aware of the project. this is the second business this property owner sponsored -- the same, by the way -- tried to open in the storefront this year. for 43 months, the project sponsor has known to relocate their business, has given them -- abc has given them guidelines to follow, and for relocation

expenses, they have a 50-mile radius to look relocate -- to relocate. this restaurant has been closed for least seven months. i urge the commission to continue this item. if you were not going to continue this item, then i ask that a restriction on alcohol license be put on the rest from. for operating hours. thank you. president olague: thank you. >> linda chapman from knobb hill. while i am not opposed to restaurants moving into the area, i have the same reservations expressed a minute ago. ion concerned about the alcohol licenses, -- i am concerned about the of all licenses.

as you probably know, we need to explore this further. the operations which are approved to be restaurants turn into bars or clubs or after a meal hours they continue. and we have a perfect example on sutter st. next to the mosque. the people from the mosque told me they checked with the abc and they were disregarded. when i walked by on friday night, there was a huge party scene going on. next door there is the mosque with its doors open. as you know, we have a conflict going on their. it is our restaurant, sort of, ostensibly anyway. bier, lots of pierre. signs everywhere. beer, beer, beer. abc was so impressed by the 42 protests that the elders at leland senior housing put in

against togo -- against coco moving in, and they decided that they should not be serving of the hall until 2:00 a.m. i would consider the impact on the neighborhood. many years ago, i had to come in and fight highrises one by one. i had to gather 5000 signatures. the most ever gathered. i hope we do not have to do the same thing with bars. you have is going case by case by case on the abc. that just happen. it happened with cmmt. the masonic auditorium. this is a burden on the neighborhood. this is a burden on the state process. they are still scheduled. i do not know they're going to continue having these are not, but you know, they started in december and they are scheduled

through october in that one place. in this case, but traditions on it at least. to continue would be a good idea because the neighbors to find out something about its. at least they would have conditions, no alcohol served after 11:00. it is a difficult system. it is inaccessible to neighbors. i will be talking about that more with you on another occasion. >> hi, my name is michael knolt. all these letters have come from businesses.

if they can do out reached two businesses and not to neighborhood organizations -- and they do exist, we do have several organizations in the polk street . , it becomes a problem of residents having knowledge of these venues. we are hearing about, there is going to be an item on the agenda of the planning commission. so, i guess, again, i would make the same request, that we continue the item until adequate community outreach is done, the existing organizations have within their boundaries at this location and go through their vetting process of listening to this proposal. president olague: thank you. is there any additional public comment? commissioner borden? commissioner borden: i have been

very familiar with is the establishment. it has been around for 20 years. it has never been a party sort of location. very much a family restaurant. is actually a very mellow atmosphere. i could understand if we were talking about a business that had a little bit more party or, you know, lively sort of involvement -- environment, but it is not the sort of atmosphere. it has been around 20 years, 20 years of a track record, and it is basically moving around the corner. i do not hear little polk neighbors protesting. if they have an issue with the stress from coming to the neighborhood, i would think they would be here. i was wondering myself when at this property was going to open. it is not as though it should be a surprise, because the awning has been present for some time. and we have so many businesses writing letters in support.

i feel confident moving forward and i move to approve. >> second. commissioner antonini: i totally agree. there is no net increase. this is merely a business being displaced. it has already been granted a conditional use that has expired. is a vacant space. we are in receipt among one of the letters -- this is from the community leadership alliance, which is at the edge of the district, but apparently they did talk to him. i am not sure, i cannot say they talk to others because we do not have letters, but that does not mean they did not do outreach. this is the review and -- this is a renewal of their cu, not a new cu, although technically is. i am in total support. president olague: i am also in total support. i know there has been a

nightmare around contractor. i wish we could set to result in not. also, along with what ms. borden said, i found it to be more family-oriented and a nice dining space. could look for your -- good luck with your new home. >> on the motion to approve -- commissioner antonini: aye. commissioner moore: aye. commissioner borden: aye. president olague: aye. >> the motion passes 6-0. which places to under the following matters. president olague: is there any

public comment on this item? seeing none, public comment is closed. president miguel: i move adoption of the draft minutes of the regular meeting. >> second. >> on a motion to approve -- commissioner antonini: aye. commissioner sugaya: aye. president olague: aye. . >> that motion passes unanimously. president olague commissioner antonini? commissioner antonini: there was a really good article in the sunday's "examiner," and it analyzes why many families are leaving san francisco.

you think gabriels when it was the largest school west of the mississippi. and what we found were people with families are not far away in the san mateo county and marin county. the pacific has a lot of previous residence for the sunset. what is interesting is he talks about many of these same issues we talk about here all the time -- difficulty with condo conversions for your own use, difficulty getting unit mergers. of course, the school system. it is not a planning issue or has a relationship to a. -- relationship to it.

so, very interesting that you have hit upon these things. i think there are a lot of reasons, although we always talk about cost. cost is a factor. these residents in san mateo county are paying just as much. they can get housing with conditions that are more acceptable to their families. we have to look at the process, what we're doing to drive families away. president olague: i just wanted to welcome jose campos. i do not know if you have a few words force at this time? go ahead, please. tell us a little bit more about yourself. >> thank you, president olague. my name is jose campos. i am new to staff.

i am coming from spain where i was the last six years, but prior to that, i was a member of the san francisco planning agency for eight years. president olague: welcome. i also want to acknowledge that we will of the chinatown urban institute with us today. i do not know if you want to stand up for wave or something? if you are here. [laughter] so, if you have any questions, feel free to contact us through the directors of this, if you want to elaborate more, understand more about the workings of city planning. thank you. we will spend the time with that. i wanted to knowledge former

commissioner sue lee is here. sadly, three members of san francisco planning family have passed away this week, in the past two weeks actually. 1 being secretary linda avery's sister. and anthony urbina, he used to help us set up the meetings here. he does the wide. and finally robert pinder, who was very active in the park merced organization . finally, i wanted to mention i was nominated jan 21st. that had to do with local manufacturing.

there's a lot of potential there. so, maybe at some point, we can engage in more conversation about that. and finally, it yes, i think that sometimes -- the articles i have read on the exodus of families tend not to be very cost conscious, actually. they do not focus enough on the working class families, the challenges they face, to certain pressures, especially the mission and other neighborhoods were u.s. seen an exodus of the latino families. -- where you have seen an exodus of latino families. it is important that we're not just limited to a certain sector of those who are leaving. i think it is important that we keep all families here, middle-

class, above and below, and i think it is important that we have a conversation that covers all of the above. commissioner sugaya: the conversation around families leaving the city is complicated. there was a recent "new yorker" article, actually a long book review, talking about people leaving cities. for decades people and leaving cities. not just san francisco, but all around the country, and moving to the suburbs. there are people moving back to san francisco. they are different population. that kind of thing is universally happening, so it is not just here a long. i have not read the book that was given to us a couple weeks ago, but that was one of the books that was mentioned, along

with a few others. in context, it is really not an isolated problem at all. president olague: i think the same thing goes for manufacturing families and a lot of other issues. it is not simply -- you know, it is not that simple. commissioner sugaya: i am not saying we shouldn't do something about it. it is just more complicated. president olague: no, no. ok, i think we are good. >> commissioners, this places us under the director's report, item five, director's announcements. >> i want to pass my condolences on to linda avery for the loss of her sister, and also the department felt condolences for the family of anthony anthony. he was a member of the city

family for a very long time. he passed away two weeks ago, before your break. several members of the staff were able to attend the funeral. last week. i also wanted to welcome back president miguel. it is good to have you back, looking good and healthy as always. i also want to welcome jose campos. thank you and welcome. a couple of things i wanted to report to you. the governor did indeed signed two bills last week related to redevelopment's, senate bill 26 and 27. those bills did take effect immediately upon his signature. in summary, just where we are today, 26 prohibits

redevelopment agencies from taking on new actions, including incurring new debt or making new loans or making new contracts or amending or adopting new redevelopment areas. they are subject to a number of new responsibilities. is the agencies do not comply with that -- if the agencies do not comply with that provision -- a.b. 27 provides an exception to that. actions primarily require them to -- for the city -- to adopt an ordinance saying it will volunteer to participate in the program, and that will require the city to make payments to the

county for distribution to schools, fire protection agencies, transit agencies. a previously thought it was just schools, but it was three different entities that would normally be the recipients of the funds. that ordinance, if the city chooses to take this path, that has to be adopted by november 1 of this year. said the city and the redevelopment agency -- so the city and the redevelopment agency are looking at that. the cost is to be around $25 million. whether the agency would be able to do that. that would have to occur before november 1 of this year. is also, as you know, there has been a lot of discussion the past few months. there are but agency is considering legal action. the week of california cities and the california redevelopment association, both of whom have claimed the bill is

in conflict with prop. 22, which the voters bus last year. -- passed last year. it prohibits the state from diverting funds from local development. there's an interesting discussion to be had over the coming months about the impact going forward. the governor did sign that legislation jan 29. it is effective immediately. the city has until november 1 to make a decision about the alternative measure. the next thing i wanted to mention -- as you know, there are couple of ballot measures the board has based on the ballot. i sent a memo to staff, just reminding all of us the measure is on the ballot. staff is not allowed to use

sudeep resources or spend city time -- to use city resources or spin city time. we can certainly -- and we have often been i asked -- to provide our analysis of the ballot measure, as long is it is impartial and does not advocate one way or another. one measure that is of interest to you, the proposal to prohibit demolition of 15 or more units on a single property except under certain conditions. that ballot measure is one of 3. 1 of those more pertinent to our work. the one exception to our taking the position is we are allowed to attend the hearing next week at the board to talk about the department felt beliefs about the ballot measure. the board has asked us to attend

that hearing next week which is the same time as this hearing. i will probably be attending that meeting next week next thursday afternoon. the way the timing works is the board -- there were four sponsors. if one of the sponsors -- and i cannot remember the date, within a couple of weeks -- will surname from being a sponsor, they pull their name from the ballot. but it cannot be changed. it can only be removed from the ballot. and finally, i just want to say that next wednesday, there is our ribbon cutting on powell street for another one of our parks projects that staff has or jury -- that staff has worked very heavily on. it is between the bloc or the

cable car turns and the two blocks he bent to widen the sidewalks. it affects -- effectively extends that first block through the streets and creates some much more pedestrian-oriented area. staff does waited -- has worked on this for a long time. that ribbon cutting is next wednesday at 10:00 a.m. on powell street. that concludes my presentation. thank you. president olague: commissioner antonini? commissioner antonini: thank you, director. a question on the legislation. all line is drawn on projects that are already under discussion that would continue, but where would the line be drawn as to future projects that

might have been approved as part of redevelopment agency is. >> it depends on the contractual arrangements in place. the agency is not allowed to enter into new contracts at this point. it depends on the actual point in the process. commissioner antonini: if it was not part of a construction contract, then it would be subject -- >> actually, i think it would be sooner than that. i think it would have a legally- binding contract in place. commissioner antonini: ok. i think the governor was going to talk about the appropriateness of certain redevelopment. he brings us back to the alternative. he insensate more for projects within the original this -- he

intends it more for projects within the original scope for redevelopment. >> my reading of the bill, there are not other reform provisions. at least as far as i can tell. maybe there are some provisions relating to actions entities must take, but i was led to believe there were no reform measures. in my reading of the bill. commissioner antonini: thank you. president olague: will staff have a written analysis of the legislation regarding demolition? >> we're working on that now. if you would like us to provide that to you. president olague: great. >> commissioners, that places us on item six, review of the past week at the board of supervisors and the historic preservation commission. president olague: we will just wait then.

>> i am sorry. they did me yesterday. there were several -- they did meet yesterday. >> at this time, members of the public may address the commission. with respect to agenda items, your opportunity will be addressed and union. inregards. president olague: if people can come back to the mike. >> we had an impromptu

discussion yesterday. awhile back staff was working on a universal plan notification project. i would urge that to be restarted. today, we have an agenda item which i discovered by chance. it is a legislative item. it is an example of a case where we are doing a very good job of following the legal minimum requirements, but that does not necessarily process that is working well to communicate with the community. i think the process was started, was encouraging, would be a wonderful way to identify how to make communication work better for us. >> my name is ernestine white.