the extension. on that motion, commissioner antonini? >> aye. >> commoditier has stepped away. commissioner hillis? >> aye. >> commissioner moore? >> aye. >> commissioner sugaya? >> aye. >> commissioner wu? >> aye. >> commissioner fong? >> aye. >> thank you, commissioners, that is a unanimous vote for approval. commissioners, you are now on item number 9. case no. 2011.075 2c for 1830 ocean avenue. >> good afternoon, president fong and commissioners. i'm rick crawford of department staff. this case is -- excuse me. this case is to establish a 17,300 square foot formula retail grocery store doing business as fresh and easy neighborhood market in a space formerly occupied by rite aid pharmacy, a formula retail drugstore at 1830 ocean avenue within the ocean ave. nct district. the project will involve some

modest interior modification to the exterior entries and windows of the building and new signage for the proposed store. the project would retain 130 existing off-street parking spaces at the property of which 46 are allocated to the grocery store. the store would seek to create a new on street loading zone along ocean avenue and will seek approval of the small curb cut similar in scale to a disabled access ramp to assess this loading corridor fronting on ocean ave.. this area was used for the former rite aid. it does not include off-street loading and it is not required to provide such as the retail space would not be expanded by this project. currently neighborhoodes are debts have nearby optionses for this grocery needs. a new whole foods grocery store opened a couple months ago. seven blocks to the east. fresh and easy would be the second grocery store in this neighborhood and it serves a

different demographic than whole foods. the projects would provide a wider choice of grocery goods for neighborhood residents. the existing concentration of formula retail uses in this area is relatively low compared to other neighborhood commercial districts with only 10 formula retail uses in the approximately eight-foot 10 mile long district. in addition two formula retail uses, rite aid that this will take the place of, and a block buster video have closed in recent years so the establishing -- establishment of a fresh and easy will not increase the number of formula retail uses in this neighborhood district above the historic level. the ocean avenue nct currently contains nine vacant store fronts so the life of available retail space was not an issue. lack of it will revise the appearance of property and provide a new tenant. the department has received one letter of support from a neighbor and one letter of support from the ocean avenue

association. the department recommends approval of the use with conditions as the proposal complies with the planning code. the advances and objectives and policies of the general plan and provides new neighborhood serving grocery store in the area. i'm available if you have any questions. thank you very much. >> thank you. project sponsor, please. good afternoon, members of the commission, director ram, commission secretary avery. my name is larry badiner of badiner urban planning and i am here representing fresh and easy. i do is a representative of fresh and ease knit audience if you have any questions. not much i have to add to rick's excellent presentation. i think he covered it pretty well. this is a simple project. tenant improvement actually essentially occupying a vacant store with fresh and easy grocery. it requires a conditional use for formula retail and occupies

a former rite aid site. so, we are a formula retail replacing a formula retail and it will not increase the overall number of formula retail uses in the area. grocery stores are recognized by the city as highly desirable uses. they are declared priority projects by the director of planning, the city actually requires a conditional use to eliminate a grocery store. so, you need a conditional use to do a new grocery store and you need a conditional use to eliminate one. kind of a planning conundrum, damned if you do, damned if you don't in planning terms. the grocery store's anchor neighborhood districts. they promote other retail to bring shoppers to a district regularly and repeatedly. with fresh and easy at one end, whole foods at the other end, ocean avenue will have two knew anchors which should reduce vacancies and encourage other necessary services to surrounding residents. the benefits of the property would be to eliminate a vacant store front, to provide 25 to

30 direct current jobs and numerous construction jobs, to provide a needed food service and to include the physical appearance of the building and the surrounding area. we have done extensive outreach. we have contacted over 15 neighborhood groups and other resident groups and city college. we have met with the ocean avenue association in west wood park, both of whom support the project. we have two letters of support. one which starts with yes, yes, yes. you can't get much better than that, yes, yes, yes. there is no neighborhood opposition that we're aware of. the neighborhood strongly supports this. we would ask your support also. a couple of minor points. in reviewing the motion for a 1245 south van ness which is another fresh and easy the commission approved, we recognized there were two conditions that are not in this

motion. we felt they would be good conditions to add to this. related to local hiring and the women infant and children program, w-i-c. i have draft condition of the approval i will hand up to linda avery. i have given them to rick crawford and he has reviewed them also. they are essentially the same conditions of approval that were in 1245 south van ness adjusted to reflect this property. i'm happy to answer any questions. also representatives are of fresh and easy are here to answer any questions if you have them. >> thank you. opening it up for public comment on this item. i'm not sure if these names are for this, but i'll call them anyway if they're for this particular item. edward gani, if this is for this item. yes. >> and red rand -- i'm sorry, the last name is ben.

if your comment or question or comments are about this item, please approach. good afternoon, commissioners. my name is edward alganai. i bring you greetings from local [speaker not understood]. michael sharp is the president. welcome [speaker not understood], welcome san francisco community. >> can you address the commission, please? thank you. but at the same time, fresh and easy has a record in this city of trying to comply with certain commissional things that we brought up in the other meetings. and one of the reasons that i'm supporting them in the sense that they did have an infant and wic program that was established in 3rd street. so, they are to be commended on that. but what we are concerned about is the consumption of alcohol

and sale of alcohol in this city. on ocean street, a lot of skills, city college is there and they have self-check out stands, so, we are concerned about that. * schools as a result of that i can conclude and say welcome, fresh and easy, but please comply to the standards that san francisco and this commission have set forward. thank you. >> thank you. good afternoon, reverend carol ben. i'm with the justice tach ka is with lutheran evangelical church of america. i've done a lot of work around alcohol and food justice. i'd say yes to fresh and easy, but there is a problem with their definition of and their business model in terms of how they sell alcohol, which ends up being dangerous for our

community. and i stand here, i wish i had the many, many clergy on letters that we've done in the past to you to say we want a restriction on fresh and easy's ability to sell alcohol, if at all, since we know that even the uc store -- the store down in southern california doesn't sell any alcohol. this is near san francisco state. i know you have a planning staff recommendation. unfortunately fresh and easy is really slippery around language, it seems like, and, so, the language in that recommendation is weak and allows for loopholes. and what we really want to make sure is that stores are required to have a fully staffed, fully serviced sale for alcohol, a check-out stand devoted to that. recently the commission, you know, i applaud them imposing a stronger standard on south van ness store which clearly restricts self-check out for alcohol. the state law is clear on this

already. i urge you to impose a condition on this permit that allows the spirit and the letter of the state law to be applied. and that for those of us who are with families and members who suffer with kids getting access to alcohol, young people and knowing how easily they can break systems, we need you to help protect our children and our community from all of the side effects of alcohol abuse and easy access to alcohol in an illegal way. and i really thank you for your time and your thoughtful consideration. >> is there any additional public comment on this item? seeing none, the public comment portion is closed. commissioners? commissioner wu. >> lied like to ask staff a question.

so, three topics. the first topic is the one about alcohol sales. is the language in these conditions the same as the south van ness store? >> yes, the condition that relates to alcohol sales is the same condition that you imposed on that project. >> that condition is that any alcohol that's sold must be sold at a register that's staffed? >> that is correct, commissioner. >> the other comment i wanted to make, i'm happy to see the addition of the local hiring goal and the wic goal. i see in particular, i think this is also pulled from the south van ness location, the commitment to work with the local hiring goal, i think that may be different depending on the neighborhood. i'm wondering if that's [speaker not understood] in my neighborhood, but i think there may be other work force representatives in that neighborhood. otherwise, i am supportive of bringing more food to places where there are not as many groceries, but i do think it is important for us to consider these neighborhood by neighborhood and look at what's

appropriate. >> commissioner antonini. >> thank you. i think it's a very good project. i don't live too far away from this in lakeside village and often remember the history. and i remember when the project was originally built, the housing and the retail at that site, el dorado court, and there was a safeway there that did not succeed originally. and after that a variety of other things, most recently, i think it was the rite aid pharmacy. so, i welcome the addition of another grocery store and very encouraged by the whole foods which has been pointed out, first of all, geographically is at the eastern end of the corridor, number two, different price point. so, it will be good to have a fresh and easy. and i think that they have addressed the issues that were raised with the local hire and of course the wic is not anything that will be in effect until the state moratorium so they have really no control.

but if that is lifted, then that would be in place. and, of course, the conditions on the alcohol check out which is same as south van ness is a good one. realistically, any store to be competitive is going to have to have alcohol sales. trader joe's even has it. tower market has it. almost anywhere that you can buy food, it makes it difficult. people will sometimes stray away from a place that doesn't offer those because people do consume alcoholic beverages and sometimes that's part of their shopping run. and if they have to make a separate stop somewhere else to buy beer or wine or other, it makes it impractical and often discourages shopping at a particular store. so, i think they've done everything right and i'm supportive. >> commissioner hillis. >> just a question for staff, if you know. there was a reference to the state law around kind of the

staff check out of alcohol. do you know the status of that? >> no, i'm not aware of any change in that. >> all right. i would just echo commissioner antonini's thoughts. i'm supportive of this project. just a second question, sorry. whole foods on the other end of ocean avenue, does this condition -- was this included in their approval? >> i don't believe it was, but i don't believe that they have -- they have staffed check-out counters. so, they have -- these are self-check out and i believe they have more staff check out at whole foods. as far as i know, this condition was not imposed on them. >> i'm generally supportive and would move for approval with the additions for local hiring and wic that were presented by the project sponsor. >> is there a second? >> second. >> commissioner moore. >> the only question i would ask mr. crawford and perhaps that requires a little bit of research as to whether or not

the conditions regarding staffed alcohol check out resemble in language the intent of what the state is trying to do. otherwise, i think we are creating like a split vote. i would be interested in having what we are asking be consistent in intent with what the state is suggesting because they have taken it a step further and i don't think i would like to have something which is less clear than what the state is asking for. >> i will look into that. >> and would we then say, if that language is clearer, i think it should become a condition for this particular project. this is an evolving discussion and i think it would help all of us to have an equal understanding of what's implied. >> great. commissioner antonini. >> i would assume, commissioner moore, that if state law which has precedent takes effect,

then to be compliant, the project would have to make whatever changes are necessary. and i think our approval would automatically involve any kind of restrictionseses that might come forth in the future that are consistent. i think this would be true of almost any facility even if approvals were granted long ago, if new legislation comes into effect, oftentimes it's effective retroactively for facilities that are already in operation. it would depend on the nature of the legislation, but i think that's fine with me. it makes sense. >> i appreciate your clarifying that. i am not an expert on retroactive. i think some people call it grandfathering in conditions which were before. so, i'd rather be safe and say we are crafting the language to follow that what the state is trying to do. >> would the maker of the motion concur? >> yes, he did.

>> commissioner hillis made the motion. >> i agree with commissioner antonini. i think state law would apply if it was here. so, i would assume, not knowing what the state law is, let state law apply. kind of like bag ordinance here. when we impose conditions on someone to not have -- to charge for bags, it didn't matter if the city passed an ordinance that included everybody. everybody would have to charge for bag bags. and i think this is kind of a similar issue. it probably should be applied -- i think it's better that this issue be grappled with at the board and apply to all grocery stores instead of kind of -- which is kind of your point. doing it piece by piece with new grocery stores. i think it's a city issue whether alcohol statewide how alcohol gets sold. i mean, i think state law would apply. >> we all agree.

>> commissioner sugaya. >> i think what commissioner moore was trying to say was to have staff take a look at what state language is and to see whether or not if it has more clear or more definitive way of defining what check out stands are and that kind of thing. >> happy to do that. i don't have that language in front of us, so -- >> right. it would certainly apply because it's a state law, but we can bring that language back to you so in future motions you can get the language better. >> the other thing is are we going to strike [speaker not understood] and substitute something -- project sponsor will continue to work with, i think that language is not exactly correct as commissioner wu was pointing out. [speaker not understood]. >> commissioner, we're happy to take direction. my understanding is ariba works throughout the city. perhaps on reflection, the planning commission and the

condition of approval shouldn't say this particular one, but that and other similar agency. >> community based organization. that's a better word. >> that's fine. >> yes, that will work. >> thank you. was that your question? >> no. >> commissioner antonini. >> just trying to clarify on this motion. my understanding, and correct me if i'm wrong, commissioner hillis, the motion is to approve based upon the conditions that are in here in regard to alcohol sales. and if there is a state legislation that preempts this particular condition and has jurisdiction over it, then it would automatically have to comply. if for some reason the conditions of the approval were such that they were grandfathered and they don't have to follow it, then i -- i would not think approval is null and void.

whatever we approve today is whatever the condition and whatever state law will be, it will be. and if it includes this particular situation, fine. they've taken a lot of steps to make sure that alcoholic beverages are the subject of manual check out, which is what we're trying to gain overall and have some supervision on sale. so, i'm happy with the motion as it is, but i'm happy to put in language that it will, of course -- if applicable, it will conform to state law. but if it's not applicable, that's really -- we can't foresee that ahead of time. >> commissioner moore. >> i felt that director ram was summarizing it properly, that indeed you would look at the two languageses and make sure that is consistent in intent. you are the expert on that one. >> call the question, please. >> commissioners, the motion is for approval with the understanding that staff will

look at the language relative to sell alcohol and the proposed state legislation that might be coming forward and see if -- make sure that -- >> consistent. >> consistent. and with the two conditions that were offered by the project sponsor on -- one on local hiring, the amendment would be to continue to work with ariba juntos or any other community based organization on that program. on that motion, commissioner antonini? >> aye. >> commissioner hillis? >> aye. >> commissioner moore? >> aye. >> commissioner sugaya? >> aye. >> commissioner wu? >> aye. >> commissioner fong? >> aye. >> thank you, commissioners, that motion passed unanimously. commissioners, you are now on item number 10, case no. 2012.1

196 u, board review of the affordable housing trust fund. >> good afternoon, president and commissioners. the item before you today is an ordinance sponsored by supervisor david chiu which would require monitoring reports for the housing trust fund. before i give my presentation i would like to introduce amy chen from supervisor chiu's office who would like to [speaker not understood]. >> good afternoon, president fong and commissioners. my name is amy chen and i'm a legislative aid representing david chiu. i'd like to take a few minutes and provide an overview for the affordable trust fund charter amendment. i should start by saying the supervisor is very supportive of the housing trust fund. he recognizes the importance of creating a dedicated source of funding for affordable housing development in the city,

especially in light of the solution of the redevelopment agency. that being said, should the voters approve the trust fund measure when it goes to the ballot in november, a number of policies that are created through the charter amendment and companion legislation will be in place for 30 years. these policy include the decrease of inclusionary housing requirement rates by 20% and increasing the threshold for the inclusionary programs in 5 to 10 units. supervisor chiu's legislate ace would create an opportunity for the city to evaluate the impact of these policies on affordable housing development by requiring the mayor's office of housing to work with the planning department to report on the policies in five years of the 30 years that the charter amendment would be in place. the legislation would allow the board of supervisors to take appropriate legislative action should it be necessary to achieve the city's affordable housing development goals. the supervisor who [speaker not understood] the commission today will accept this legislation. our office is supportive of the

mot if i indications recommended by the planning department in their report. i understand that the mayor's office of housing also has an additional language suggestions which we also support. so, i'm happy to take any questions and thank you so much for your time. >> thank you. opening it up for public comment on this -- sorry. staff? >> i just had a brief presentation. so, just a little background on the housing trust fund in november 2012, the voters will be considering [speaker not understood] and this would be a major source for affordable housing. [speaker not understood]. the monitoring proposals will include two reports, one by the mayor's office of housing and one by us, the planning department and we work with the mayor's office of housing and

they had some comments and i'm just going to briefly mention where the change will go. it's on exhibit a where it says subsection a and b where it says, based on income categories of below 120% ami [speaker not understood] substituted to say based on different income categories including very low, low, and moderate income. and daniel adams from the mayor's office of housing is here in case you guy have any questions. thank you. >> opening it up for public comment. seeing none, commissioner antonini? >> thank you. some comments, maybe a question. i think this sounds good. it's good to have oversight. we're starting something new. we want reporting as to how

things are going. i think there's nothing wrong with that, that makes a lot of sense. however, in terms of the housing, affordable housing goals that we have both regionally and locally, i mean, these are not quotas, say or goals, what is desired, but certainly, you know, that's what they are and they may or may not be achieved. but where it's knowledgeable to go see where they're going. i guess there's mention on page 2 of this report, they talk about these changes that, part of which is part of the legislation or rather the charter amendment, prop c. and the other part is a companion ordinance which has been approved by the board of supervisors. my understanding is that the companion legislation gives the supervisorses the ability to change it in the future should they desire that. but i would think in regards to

the language that decreases the on-site inclusionary housing by 20% for on-site inclusionary, that's part of legislation that our charter amendments and any changes would have to go back to a vote of the people, in my estimation. so, i think there's limits to what -- while that's interesting to look at that, there's different avenues for any kind of future revisions. plus, i understand that part of the language in prop c says these changes are what we're voting on and they're in place and the city is not allowed to put more restrictions in terms of inclusionary housing and higher fordable housing standards on builders in the future. there may be some exceptions, but i think that's what is in the language. * affordable perhaps somebody in the mayor's office can comment on that to see if i've summarized it correctly.

>> hi, this is dan adams with the mayor's office of housing. and yes, you summarized that correctly. >> okay, great. i just want to make it clear what this is. and i think as i say, it's no -- and there was also a call in some places where they wanted to also monitor -- i think this is more what supervisor weaner is talking about at the board now, to have monitoring including what would be a higher income group what would be above the 120th percentile. this is notedth language here, but all of us are concerned about the gap between affordable housing and market rate housing. it would always be good in future think about that sort of monitoring if we're really looking at what we're building to draw a line at the 120th percentile and say everything else is, you know, extraordinarily expensive and there is a middle ground there that, you know, we have to look at, too, and see what we're doing in that regard. just a suggestion. if you wanted to comment, that's fine.

>> commissioner wu. >> i'm happy to see the monitoring supports put forward. i want to know whether meeting our goals and where we're at if the voters pass prop c in november. move to approve. >> second. >> okay, commissioners. on that motion to approve, that would be with the modifications recommended by staff and the mayor's office of housing. roll call vote. commissioner moore? >> aye. >> commissioner sugaya? >> aye. >> commissioner antonini? >> aye. >> commissioner hillis? >> aye. >> president fong? >> aye. >> vice president wu? >> aye. >> commoditier? >> aye. >> that item passes unanimously. >> good job.