i do said your concern we'll add those to the motion >> what modifications will that unit have to undergo to get the merger have a full kitchen or other things that could apply there is a reserve possible. >> perhaps the architect can discuss the actual changes but in terms of how we ref review that and to prevent any future conversion for an illegal unit we have an assurance that there's an internal stair or no external access to the street. >> i appreciate your distributing e describing it pro

and con is a difficult one. i have to see the drawings before i fully step in and vote for this because we do this for everybody else. this creates for the first family a better living situation than what they're currently experienced. >> does the architect have a response? >> so we also have provided the internal access to the ground floor. so i don't know what else you know we can - >> that's the proposed bill. >> that's the access from the - >> but do you have drawings of the building that exists today.

>> we're not - the existing building we're not doing any construction on it we're just redoing the kitching on the ground floor. >> those are materially access to the ground floor. >> maybe staff could clarify? >> there was a building application that was noticed to all building opulence that described to include a roof desk for the existing lot and nobody filed a discretionary review. we - section 375 said if i meet those thresholds you could be prfld >> that doesn't mean the drawings and a i didn't include

the drawings that was a different project it was a for a conditional use to move that and a neighbor didn't file a discretionary review and if you approve the discretionary review we'll move this next door. >> i mean, if you feel more comfortable we'll get the drawings to you. >> those are the drawings but. >> i understand what commissioner moore is getting at the desire to see what's happening the remove of kitchen but that's no within our jurisdiction right now it's not before us. >> we decided we made the decision it met the administration approval so it's not part of your necessary

finding. >> it's hairsplitting because obviously of new construction involving the merger it's in a gray zone which we rarely never have and including some how it's tied by an umbilical code. it's a curious it on my part >> okay commissioner. >> i think i understand it. what we're saying is staff has administratively prfld the merger on the other building. they met all the criteria on the 4 of the 5 and that's been approved but not done >> well commissioners that building permit i've been issued because they don't want to lose the dwelling and so their

holding it in awe benefits but i'll move this forward as long as we have the restrictions and the floors that is a any exterior exist has to be closed off. the bathroom we try to go with a half bathed and, of course, the kitchen is removed so making sure we don't end up 20 with three or four dwelling units instead of 2. the present project it seems to be adequate even though the space of 23 feet is small. and on this one i expect the plans we see we're going to end up with. i noticed the exit on the new floors obviously no kitchen and a game room i'm not sure what

that is it's a family room it's in an unusual position where you go to the two bedrooms. it's an enlarged foyer. so i want to make sure what we see is what we get otherwise the design is okay. and the idea to have two separate homes there are two front doors make sense to me >> yes. to staff. good to see you back at the commissioner >> thanks pleasure. >> in terms of approvals if we go ahead and approval the project with whatever conditions there are. the project as it moves through building and whatnot the

internal floor plan can still change >> yes. >> it doesn't have to come back to us. >> i would say - >> yeah. >> the new believe. >> i have to say that i think the floor plan it's terrible. i don't know if the designer understands but the 3 bathrooms don't line up with each other and there's no plumbing so how do you run the planning up to the third floor but it's obviously going to cost a lot of money if there's not tweaks made to the floor plan but i don't want it come back here. so if that's okay. we're fine

>> yeah. >> okay. fine and a commissioners and i just wanted to say one thing that's not clear here is they could still subdivide the lot without removing the unit in the first block they're not necessarily related. they could choice to they choose this approach but they don't necessarily need to make a merger to allocate 3 unit next door and it's an rh one district. but this is a question for scott >> it's a separate lot. >> yes. >> but i think there's an argument you can't subdivide it

because there's one lot and you have the two units. >> okay - >> but the larger point those are two separate lots there's no connection between the two buildings. >> she can't yes, but - and it was approved by staff administratively you're looking at a new anchor on describe standard lot. >> commissioner. >> so if i'm clear if we approve this it's contingent upon the removal of existing building otherwise they don't get it and that's okay with me and a commissioner moore. >> i want to repeat that point i'm considering approving it to building on a smaller lot in exchange for a substandard two

yunt unit arrangement who wants to be next to each other on a substandard now lot i'm t-bone that but the two buildings goes back to rh one. >> to address your concern we can add that condition to basically is a in the conditions of approval that the two unit building will be converted to one building bow to america lists it we can conclude that in the condition. >> putting other people on notice this is not some kind of deal. >> in the future it would be hard to track. >> only a single-family

building would be approved. >> i'm going to add another condition that there are n s rs on both lots. >> second. >> second. >> i'm fine with that. >> commissioners there is a motion and a second to approve it to amend to include that the n s r be record on both lots. >> yes. the existing. >> one lot is being subdivided into two lots. >> there's a motion and a second (calling names)

so moved 3, 4, 5 that passes unanimously and places you on item on columbus avenue. >> good afternoon kate planning staff. you have before you a conditional request to establish a 25 hundred square feet business restaurants. previously they were solely a bar use but to convert it within the broadway commercial district. costa mesa a has been operating for 94 years in this location. it was established as a bar and was quickly changed into a restaurant. the kitchen has remained operable but that not for the

public. the proposal is for any reason improvements to the kitchen area but the commercial space wouldn't be enlarged. the project retains an exist historic resource and doesn't contain any construction. the planning starch surveyed the property within 3 hundred feet and the total amount of footage that was given to the eating starnt was 41 percent although this exceeds the conversion both are counted toward the transmission. as of this writing there has been 9 letters of support 8 are excluded in your packets.

the project is individually antidepressant and is compatible with the neighborhood. this that includes may presentation and any public comment oh, project sponsor, please >> hello good afternoon. i'm jamie i'm the general manager the cost can cafe. my boss has the tennis of keeping the history alive and hopefully opened o open for another one hundred years. we've been working closely with the previous owner to maintain it's integrity. our goal is not to change this restaurants but to enhance to honor history and part of that

is food services. however, food has not been served to the public 19 since the 1950s. it's our intention to convert it 80 from a bar to an eating establishment. at permit does not hinder our ability to serve the public but it includes certain population like under 21. all citizens of san francisco and all visitors will be able to enjoy the cafe. thank you >> thank you. any public comment on this item? >> good afternoon. i am janet the former previous

whatever owner. of the cafe and i'm here to support the new owners. and to ask you to approve conditional use 48 to 47. ; is that right? and i think transferring the liquor license to a restaurant benefits the neighborhood. and families and patrons of all ages are going to be able to come there. and what?

let's see. oh, jobs. jobs. because with the kitchen you're going to have more jobs. and i have to tell you it's an amazing kitchen the state of the arc. so thank you for listening to me >> hope you do this because i love that bar. it's been the neighborhood bar for the city and it's the entire city. thank you. thank you >> and thank you for running that establishment for all those years. >> okay. thank you. any additional public comment.

okay public comment is closed >> i hope you'll extend our wisdom as this moves into the next generation of management. it's been written in the paper a lot including the negotiations of the give and takes i'm extremely comfortable to support this and i hope the historic california community will support this >> i want to thank you for maintaining a wonderful place and welcoming the owners and i've had many fond memories and i think the addition of the food will be a great thing for the neighborhood. >> i'm supportive so long as you keep the jukebox.

>> i like the history of this and this lady was responsible for keeping it from being closed before. i read the story here >> i am interested in are there any plans is there a vacancies it's not part of todd's but does missouri any of the staff know where the loose thank you lady was vacant and a i'm not aware of anything. >> all right. it won't have any bearing on that it's close to the cafe and a valuable place to be. >> commissioners there's a motion and a second to approve

this. on that motion (calling names) so moved commissioners that motion passes unanimously 7 to zero and will place you on the next item 17. request for conditional use. good afternoon sharon young department staff. the authorization to legal lists the floor aerospace with the merger of two commercial based on clement street currently occupied by another business within the clemente commercial district. the two commercial districts was approximately 3 thousand 5 hundred feet of floor area and

it was murder in the third degree with the exterior wall without the permit changes and the space currently contains 17 thousand square feet of the area. no commercial changes are prepared for the building. the existing store is individually owned. and the tenant spaces will have 15 parking spaces. and the project sponsor has requested that the off street parking by having the parking reduction request for the project. the merger of the ground floor commercial space is about commercial use authorization has been part of the planning staff

review for a number of years with the property owners with the commercial space. previously it was also a supermarket and a gift store. so far as clarification in 2004 there was a building permit for the internal he modifications for the opening but commercial use authorization was not sought for the merger. if the - and also a consideration was from the previous tenants to close the opening and possible apply for it later with the conditional use authorization but since then there's been a number of tenant occupancy changes so they're seeking approval of the spaces.

so the commercial space will be closed and to date the planning department has not received any letters in opposition or approvals. so the conditions are there and this concludes my presentation >> project sponsor, please. >> good afternoon. i'm joyce khan. i'm the project sponsor for this project. in 20045 to the building department the owner sent me there and the building vice president approved the plan. they murder in the third degree the two stores together and the

plan was approved and the construction was finished, you know, and business had been opened almost 10 years and all of a sudden we received a letter from the building person say they get a letter from the city and we need to apply the conditional use to legal lists the use. so i hope you - approve the project and we don't close our business >> any public comment on this item. okay public comment is closed >> i've bought stuff from there so i move for approval. >> at summer with 3 kids i like

this place better than the restaurants (laughter). >> it looks like a proximity street sale is there any plans to clean up the front of that so it's more presentable (laughter). >> commissioners if there's nothing further there's a motion to approve (calling names) so moved commissioners that motion passes unanimously and places you on item 18. at 1285 sutter street >> good afternoon from the department staff. the item before you is to stash a form of retail use on a ground floor of a newly constructed building and for it to be

operated 24 hours, 7 days a week. at the time of the permit it contains 1 hundred and 7 units. it contained 1 thousand square feet of pharmaceutical property. it will be dedicated to acholic beverages. in 2008 the hours of operation were from 8:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m. this limitation was strashd because those with are the operating hours of trader joe's. and we having ask that planning code section it says the hours are not limited. since the packet last week we've

received 5 letters in support one from the community leadership alliance and 4 from the community. opposition letters have long been from the cathedral hill organization. at this time the department recommends approval and the change of operating hours so they comply with the plan as articulated in our motions. that concludes my presentation and i'm available for any questions or comments. >> thank you project sponsor, please. >> thank you, john on behalf of the project sponsor. it proposes the new retail space on sutter street. for those of you who have not

been by yet if we could get the proernl. as you know this is the site of the former galaxy that is right. originally the approval was to include a 17 thousand foot tape recorder jose by trader joe's has passed on this space and the developer has reduced the size of the retail spaces to 95 hundred secret. much smaller. the promise is a form of retail cbs would replace a former trader joe's. they have similar products but the cvs would be providing a pharmacy which is a benefit to the neighborhood. so i want to focus on the fact this is extremely an appropriate

location for cvs. within - 2010 within a half-mile radius there were many resident but it's a fast growing neighborhood. it's one block north of the future c nshlgs mc hill place so it's going to provide a great opportunity for the folks who will be going into the hospital there. it fills a space that is hard to occupy by others evidenced by a large number of the vacancies this is a block away on van ness and this one is 12 hundred van

ness the old circuit city. it's going to be the only 24 hour pharmacy in the neighborhood so that's a benefit especially with the c mc campus. so it won't significantly alter the balance. we have the outreach for the neighborhood i'd like to have our colleague say a if you words about that >> good afternoon president fong and members of the board. i had the opportunity to work with cvs gathering support for their project. over the last 8 months cvs has reached it out to the merchant