>> like to welcome everyone to san francisco's planning commission regular hearing for thursday, april 25th, 2013. please note that the commission does not tolerate any disruption or outbursts of any kind. please silence any mobile devices that may sound off during the proceedings, and when speaking before the commission please do state your name for the record. i'd like to take roll at this time.

commission president fong? >> here. >> commission vice president lu? >> here. >> commissioner antonini? >> present. >> commissioner hillis? >> here. >> commissioner moore? >> for the benefit of the pub, commissioners borden and sugaya are expected to be absent. commissioners, first are consideration of items proposed for continuance. item 1, case no. 2010.1034 c, 4216 california street. request for conditional use authorization. your calendars indicate a proposed continuance date of may 2nd. we're modifying that to may 9th. >> okay. >> item 2, case no. 2012.0231c for 758 divisadero street, request for conditional use authorization is also proposed for continuance to may 9th. item 3, case no. 2011.0397t, bicycle parking ordinance is proposed for continuance to may 16th. item 4, case no. 2012 .0 95 t

and z, amendments to the planning code to establish difficult visadero neighborhood commercial district is proposed pour continuance to june 13th as is item 5 for case no. 2012.1 183 t and z amendments to the planning code to establish the fillmore street neighborhood commercial district , is also proposed for continuance to june 13th, 2013. i have no other continuances and i have no speaker cards. >> is there any public comment on the five items proposed for continuance? seeing none, public comment is closed. commissioner moore. >> move to continue items 1 through 5 to the dates as noted. >> second. >> thank you, commissioners. on that motion to continue as proposed, commissioner antonini? >> aye. >> commissioner hillis? >> aye. >> commissioner moore? >> aye. >> commissioner wu? >> aye. >> and commission president fong? >> aye. >> so moved, commissioners.

that motion passes unanimously 5 to 0. it places you under commission matters, item 6, consideration of adoption draft minutes for april 11, 2013. >> sly any public comment on the draft minutes? ~ is there any public comment on the draft minutes? seeing none, public comment is closed. commissioner wu? >> move to approve. >> second. >> on that motion to approve the draft minutes from april 11, 2013, commissioner antonini? >> aye. >> commissioner hillis? >> aye. >> commissioner moore? >> aye. >> commissioner wu? >> aye. >> and commission president fong? >> aye. >> so moved, commissioners, that motion passes unanimously. and places you under item 7, commission comments and questions. >> do we have notes? >> just a moved minutes. commissioner antonini. >> yeah, a couple of things i

wanted to mention. first of all, that gar ~ commissioner moore and i took part in a presentation yesterday about a couple projects that will be coming before us in the future. they involve kaiser outpatient facility near potrero hill as well as the housing development , they're married, the two projects are being planned together. and was very interesting and it's good to see those things ahead of time, particularly in regards to design issues and other things that the projects improved before the time they even get to the commission because of public comment and comments of commissioners, i think. i met with john al berling from todd co-regarding the central corridor issue as well as pedestrian access around

moscone ~ and i think its was a very good meeting. and also yesterday we had a meeting of the secretary search subcommittee and part of it was in closed session, but, you know, of which we do not reveal the actions. there were no actions, in fact. so, i can say that we are considering the candidates who have gone through the testing process and it appears we have an adequate number of applicants and we're going to continue to work on this in subsequent weeks. and finally, i must report i'm not a real frequent muni rider, but i did get a citation today riding muni metro and i would admonish you to make sure that when you board muni and you're not boarding at one of the stations where you automatically punch your thing on, make sure as soon as you get on your card to log your card onto the thing, if you don't do that, you know, it

could be an expensive problem afterwards. [laughter] >> but, you know, i'm glad to see they're doing that and i appreciate it and i appreciate what you have to do, but it's easy to be absent minded sometimes and that's what happened. >> thank you, commissioner antonini. commissioner moore. >> commissioner antonini, why don't you share the hit you got . >> oh, i think it's 103 if i'm not mistaken is what the citation is. there are not warnings. so, it's first time you get a citation probably. >> any additional commissioner couldn'ttionv ~ comments, questions? okay, thank you. >> commissioners, staff report item 8, director's report. >> commissioners, actually i don't have anything to report this week. so, i will pass unless you have any questions for me. >> item 9, review of past week's events at the board of supervisors, board of appeals, and the historic preservation commission.

>> good afternoon, commissioners. ann marie rodgers, planning department staff here to give you your weekly board report. the land use committee this week was where most of the action took place. we had both supervisor wiener and cpiv's proposed ordinances that would amend chapter 31 to address our local implementation of c-e-q-a. ~ supervisor kim although both were called together on the committee, supervisor wiener's could be called for action because supervisor kim's ordinance would affect the historic preservation commission, and that commission can't hear it until may 15th. as you will recall, both this commission and the hpc supported supervisor wiener's proposal. when you heard it with two requested mod ifications. the supervisor did respond and incorporate both of those suggestions. this week at committee, supervisor campos joined in for the hearing and he stated that c-e-q-a is an important tool to give voice to the public and that this opportunity results

in better process. he he said the leverage the city had over cpmc as an example . ~ cited. supervisor wiener said had i does not change state law but only rules for appeals. he stated supervisor kim's ordinance does more and a less clear process. supervisor kim clarified that her ordinance did not intend to allow for multiple appeals of one action nor did it intend for the planning commission to approve each exemption and that she is open to changing her proposal for the portion of the ordinance which would remove the ero's ability to delegate c-e-q-a decisions to other city agencies. supervisor chiu said that he now considers c-e-q-a to be his favorite four-letter word. he stated that he had met with concerned community members and has crafted nine amendments that he would like to make to supervisor wiener's proposal. later in today's hearing under item in number 11, i will give

this commission a supplemental memo with the full language of his proposal. but for now i'd just like summarize the nine amendments he discussed in committee. number one he'd like to require that all hearings on c-e-q-a appeals heard before the full board instead of at committee. two, he'd like to minimize changes to the e-i-r process, which is already codified. number three, he added fair argument language throughout the ordinance in more places. number four, he'd like to require that the department provide notice for all exemptions on our website prior to the ordinance taking effect. and number five, he'd like to keep the status quo on submitting documents. number six, like to require that the department identify the first approval, which is kind of the hinge point for supervisor wiener's proposal for each and every c-e-q-a document that we publish. number seven, he'd like to allow appeals of exemption and negative declarations to be filed earlier in the process. so, this would be immediately after the c-e-q-a determination

instead of waiting until after the first approval. and number 8, he'd like to require that project mod ifications be re-referred to the ero and where the project no longer matches the original skilled, a new c-e-q-a review would be required. lastly, he'd like to require the electronic notices be provided in hard copy upon request. after a couple hours of this public hearing, supervisor kim stated she would be inclined to add staffing to the planning department if that's what's needed for the type of subscriber based e-mail notification system she's envisioning. supervisor chiu moved to amend the ordinance as i just described, and supervisor wiener seconded that motion. the committee then continued this item for two weeks until may 6. at the full board of supervisors, a much less controversial ordinance was there, this is from supervisor wiener, the upper market zoning ordinance which would convert most of the parcels from ncd to

nct. i'll change the height on one parcel and allow food processing as an accessory use in a very limited manner. on february 21st of this year, the commission recommended approval with two mod ifications and you did, in fact, recommend modifying every ncd thats was upper market ncd to the new upper market nct and a technical mod ification. supervisor wiener revised the ordinance to incorporate the technical mod ification, but the one remaining parcel that is ncd was not rezoned so the department will be asking this commission to initiate an ordinance that would rezone that last remaining parcel later this month. and then there was one item that was adopted on final read this month. it was the coke street tobacco and alcohol control passed on final reading. there were two new introductions i'd like to share with you that may affect this commission. the first proposed by

supervisor cohen would be an ordinance to create a 3rd street formula retail restricted use district for properties on 3rd street between williams and egbert avenue and this item will be scheduled for hearing before you within 90 days. the second mayor lee introduced an ordinance that would amend the building code, the public works code, and the health code to expand the boundaries and types of projects for which soil testing is required, and to require the testing of groundwater under certain circumstances. the department has assisted with the mayor on this legislative work and although this item does not amend the planning code, we will likely bring this before you in the near term. and i did want to let you know that i saw the zoning administrator and he had nothing to report from the board of appeals hearing this week. so, that concludes my report unless there are questions. >> thank you. commissioner antonini. >> yeah, thank you for your report, ms. rodgers. this was not part of your report, but i am -- understand

that there is some legislation that has bearing on land use in asmuch as the accelerating the possibility of tic owners to condo convert for a fee if they're already in the pipeline. and i understand it was originally induced -- introduced by supervisor farrell, but it's been greatly modified and to the point where i believe the original sponsor may not be supporting it any more, i'm not sure. i know you probably don't have the details of that. i could always get that -- you do, okay, thank you. >> i do have the details of this. this is an item that our department has not been staffing. the commission chose not to weigh in on this item. so, what i have is a summary of the amendments to that ordinance. this is from -- the summary has been provided by supervisor farrell and staff has not confirmed any of the content in here, but i could either report this to you or give it to the commission secretary for you to review during the hearing. >> that would be a good review

during the hearing at this point , in the interest of time. but i think it's important. >> thank you. >> commissioner wu. >> i have a question for direct r ram on a slightly different topic. plan bay area is out now from the mtc. it's been in the paper ~. i saw an article about how the extension and article on displace many. i wanted to understand what role planning department staff is playing in the process or what kind of analysis staff had been doing regarding the plan. >> surely. we had been involved a couple of years with abag and mtc on the formation of the plan. we commented several times particularly around the issues of the projections for housing and job development in the region and obviously in the city. some of those comments were -- affected the outcome, some didn't. and, so, what we are doing now is reviewing the plan in more detail and we would be

preparing a set of comments. i also have -- i think we had talked to the commission sometime ago about when the plan was released we would have an informational hearing here about the plan and about our potential response. so, i've been talking to sarah dennis phillips who is organizing that. and we're happy -- we don't have it on the calendar yet, but we can do that over the next few weeks. >> great, that's very helpful. and i think it would be helpful to have that presentation before the end of comments. i can't remember when that is, but it's pretty soon. and also maybe some ability to review the comments. thanks. >> commissioners, if there's nothing else, we can move on to general public comment. at this time members of the public may address the commission on items of interest to the public that are within the subject matter jurisdiction of the commission except agenda items. with respect to agenda items, your opportunity to address the commission will be afforded when the item is reached in the meeting. i have a couple of speaker cards. >> okay.

adinaa adelfio and he espinola jackson. good afternoon, commissioners. dean adelfio. thanks for hosting us, thanks for listening. we brought this big red ball out of the california lottery which placed a display like these in our subway a couple weeks ago. we brought this to take a little stress off your ears as a visual display and the display encompasses this entire room. what it is is a measure of volume. it's a measure of gcp which we'll call our gross city product and we all work to take part of the share in filling up the volume. we might one a small business, we might run a larger business. maybe you work for the government or a nonprofit organization paying property taxes, buying lunch, whatever it is. this red ball is going to

represent cpmc and cpmc is pretty noticeable. they're pretty big. and they play a large space in the market. and they came to us and said, well, we want to move a little bit down, a little bit over here, and we said, well, that's fantastic. it looks pretty good. we got to move some things around. it's not as easy as it looks. we've got to move a little infrastructure. we've got to move a little roads around. we have to move some jobs around. we have to move some housing. we packaged the deal up, we put everything together. they said, that looks good, we'd love to pay to play, we'd love to be part of the market. let's see if we can sign that up and make a deal happen. so, we had everything on the table and they signed the deal. and there's some other organizations that aren't as large and aren't as noticeable as cpmc that pull a much smaller role in our market.

~ play and maybe if we're looking at this entire room in a sense of volume, is they don't add value . they don't even show up. they're hardly even there. we can hardly even see it on the screen. but there's a dot there and it's not just a dot, it's a hole. and is it sucks value from what we have here. we just want to focus on it in two ways. number one is they're registered as a nonprofit organization, a religious nonprofit organization. their articles are incorporated on faith-based healing dedicated to literature and drug-free. and second, our police are there registering offense on the premises once every three days. it's more so than the organization maintains the exterior as their own property. they come to our neighbor's

house. the police do it every three days, and right the fence. presumably 700 times over the last six years and 350 times over the next three years from today we look forward to no longer affording 474 o'farrell street. thanks for your support. >> thank you. good morning -- it's afternoon, i'm sorry. dr. he is espinola jackson, bayview hunters point. i would like to say when i registered to vote -- and i've been voting for 55 years now -- i would like to think that when i do vote for an ordinance that it counts in the city and county of san francisco. when i received in the mail --

i hope i got it right here, you can see it. i got this yesterday. i was very upset because i remember it was either 1974 or '76 that sue hester put together an ordinance and the citizens of san francisco voted for it and it passed dealing with the height limits to be built here in san francisco. the height limit was 60 feet. after that was done, we came back, there was another ordinance put together by sue hester, because we were in the planning for the executive park. and i wanted a hotel, and i knew it was going to be more than 60 feet. but we supported the first one as well as the only area in san francisco is the executive park, bayview hunters point, that can be built over 60 feet. and when people o