i think there is too many -- they should be allowed whatever briefing they need. >> we should set a page limit. >> five pages? >> you are right. if they can't describe it in that amount, it is not going to work. >> and if they can't reach agreement, would you ask that they submit their briefs on the same day, the thursday prior to the hear hearing? are your yes >> so the motion is to 2i7b this matter to october 13 to i a how parties to discuss sayslement. if settlement is not reach, each party may submit a five-page maxwell number double spaced brief. on that motion, vice president? aye. >> commissioner dwars gentleman? >> aye. >> president peterson? >> yes. the motion carries 4-0. thank you.

>> we have no further business, thank you.

>> could afternoon, this is is the meeting of the planning commission for september 16th, 2010. when speaking before the commission, please state your name. also speak of approximately 3-6 inches away from the microphone. if you feel the need to engage in a secondary discussion, please take them outside because

those are extremely disruptive to the process. >> item 1 is a case number 2009.0288 before an authorization to convert an existing tourist residential hotel to a full tourist hotel. item number two, 2010.0054u to

establish a record for personal wireless service facility and site permits. also, the proposal for a continuance to october 13th. with that, i am not aware of any other items on the calendar for items proposed for a continuance. >> is there any other item? -- is there any public comment for the items proposed for continuance?

>> i have this letter from the coalition for san francisco neighborhoods. this is in regards to deep in a kind agreement. >> this is items proposed for a continuance. this is public comment on items proposed for a continuance. >> this is a request for a continuance. >> it would come up at the call of that item. other than what i announced, these cannot be discussed now. >> one of the items called. is there any public comment on items proposed for continuance? >> i am the attorney for the dr

requester. we hope that there will be six commissioners by the 14th of october. this needs the attention of more than four commissioners. >> thank you. is any further public comment? >> i am the project sponsor and one of the owners. the attorney would like a continuance. we have been waiting for approximately two months for this particular hearing. you have on your calendar for three other hearings and if we have more to look at, there's

nothing particularly special about this project. you do have a quorum to hear this matter. i urge you to not take continuance and let this go forward because this is proposes another delay. furthermore, there is no need to say that even in a month that there will be more than four commissioners present at that hearing. thank you. >> is there further public comment on items proposed for continuance? >> hello, commissioners. i am one of the three petitioners on this particular case.

we did not receive notice of this particular hearing until september 3rd when the entire group of neighbors received that. we have had a very difficult time working with the planning department in terms of getting the materials and the full packet of materials. we strongly urge you to -- >> neighbors have had complete access to the file and all documents to make their evaluations of the project. within the planning code as far as what is discretionary

review, "this is a special power of the commission to be used only when there are exceptional and extraordinary circumstances associated with a proposed project. this is sensitive and must be exercised with the utmost restraint." i hope that this body takes the constraint necessary and it does feel that this is a proper forum to make that decision. i would urge you to move forward with this project. thank you. >> is there further public comment? if not, public comment disclosed. >> the one that actually requested the continuance because i requested information a staff that i never received. usually when a commission requests something and this is not received in time to consider

the information before a hearing, then we ask for a continuance. this is not for any other reasons. i am continuing this because i did not receive certain information that was requested. when i receive that information and certain things are terrified or clarified to me, then i think that i should have that. october 14th and i will be ready to hear whether there is four of us or six of us. also, -- it is that simple. if there were other dr's and i requested permission and i don't receive it before a hearing, i would be asking for a continuance whether this is a cu, dr, legislation, whatever.

i will move that we continue the item number 1 2 october 30th and number 22 on -- november 7th. >> is there a second? >> second. >> i would be happy to support the request for a continuance. right now, our commission consists of the commissioners. we have things that might be controversial and we try to take each case as it comes forward and deal with what we have.

today, i am supportive of this sense there are materials not received. >> commissioners, the motion on the floor is for a continuance of items one and two. on that motion. >> aye. >> aye. >> aye. >> aye. >> you are now on the consent calendar. this is item 3, 4, 5. they're considered to be routine and would be acted upon by a single roll call vote. there would be no separate discussion unless a member of the commission, public, or staff makes the request. that matter or matters would be removed and the considered for a future hearing.

item number3 is 2010.0337c and this is a request for a conditional use authorization to include massage services for a proposed service. this would establish four 80 square foot massage treatment rooms and three treatment rooms on the fifth floor of the subject building. item number4 2010.0442c is a request for a conditional use authorization. this is to convert the second floor of an existing building to its business or professional service use. item 5 is case number 2010.0620z

and is a request to amend the zoning height map sheet 8. commissioners, barring any public comment, these matters are before you. >> is there any public comment on items on the consent calendar? >> i was just informed by the city attorney that for item number five, we need to close a loophole which is on one of the documents. this will change the document but she requested more time to

come back to you. >> i would like to move to approve three and four. >> second. >> thanks you, commissioners. the motion on the floor is for approvals of item three and four as they have been presented. on the motion -- sfgov.org aye -- >> aye. >> aye. >> aye. >> aye. >> you are now at commissioners questions and matters. >> this is not necessarily a land use issue but this is a comment, how about those giants. there is nothing like a pennant race that can unite a city and there is a lot of fun.

this goes on every day. >> i attended briefly an open house that was held for the general public. last evening, commissioners to guyana -- commissioner sugaya was there for the reception of the san francisco association of architectural heritage.

the other thing that i would like to mention is that during the break i was in your city in had been visiting family. we took their opportunity to take some time to look at their process of turning some streets into parks and plazas into the rerouting of traffic and the instigation of bicycle lanes. we have talked to a lot of new yorkers in differing capacities. it seems pretty good for tourists. this seems pretty good for pedestrians. it is impossible for cabdrivers which is a major transit use.

the biggest consternation is the fact elimination of vehicle lanes is not stopped the constant constant double parking for loading and unloading of commercial vehicles. those of you who know manhattan, much of the area we are talking about is along broadway. there are deliveries anywhere from two in the morning until 2:00 the next morning. the throughput that has been acclaimed by a the new york transit authority. this is a very interesting experiment.

the plazas are well used. the bike lanes are much more used. this seems to be more bikers or least they are more apparent. >> i have met with the project's sponsors and spoke with a couple of the d.r. requesters. >> mr. president, i have been informed that the city attorney has obtained the signatures needed for item number five. >> [inaudible] >> second. >> is any public comment >> item

5? >> aye. >> aye. >> aye. >> aye. >> we are now at directors report, directors announcements. >> welcome back from break. i guess the only thing have to do is look could be barred from the summer hiatus. fall is already coming on with a vengeance. it is pretty intense for the next few weeks will be will be best to balance the calendar in the coming months. >> thank you. >> item number7 is the review of the past week's events of the

board of supervisors, board of appeals, and historic preservation commission. >> of afternoon, commissioners. at the land use committee, they heard an ordinance that would amend the tdr controls in general. also this would amend the controls for the city parcel at old st. mary's church. this ordinance would further amend the general plan and this zoning map. the property would be rezoned from china talent retail to office. the plant code amendment would add a clause that any individual land york -- landmark located within the c- three district to transfer their rights to any property within the district except within

redevelopment agency controlled areas. it would also add that -- a clause that would require a property owner to use the money to fix any outstanding violations or severe maintenance issues and provide the zoning in administrator for upkeep of the facility. the historic preservation commission consider this ordinance on june 2nd and recommended approval. this monday, the board president voted to recommend this to the full board of supervisors. on tuesday, they finally passed the reading that would amend the castro controls to allow most russia wants to be permitted with a conditional use authorization.

the board also gave the city authorization to apply for a grant focusing on the gaming and storm water features for the cesar chavez redesign project. this is a grant we are pursuing. we have been extremely successful in augmenting our services. the department has applied for and received funding for more than four million dollars worth of grants. the full board herridge that the development a key stimulation -- the development legislation.

we are going to study the infrastructure districts. the other resolution would apply to the committee facility districts and at this july hearing, you recommended approval. to date, only the maximum resolution as been heard at the full board. we ask for the committee and the long-term effects from the general fund. the committee should analyze the potential fiscal impact to the general fund and there are some minor modifications and this week fell whole board adopted it. we also had two appeals before the full board, one was an appeal for city place. the other was the appeal of a conditional use authorization.

this is authorized by the signatures of four members of the border supervisor's. maybe you can -- you consider this on july 8th. at that time, we recommended approval of the form of a retail. at the hearing, the appellants concern was the approval of independent pet stores. the initial vote to approve your decision failed on a vote of 4- 7. the board would have needed six votes in order to appeal the decision. they would have needed a super majority to overturn your decision. the board unanimously voted to table the item and by tabling

the appeal, your conditional use authorization stands. you are approved the environmental impact report on august 31st of this year. this consists of the demolition of three buildings and retail based shopping. the primary issues were with traffic and pedestrian concerns and preservation of the theater. prior to the hearing, the developer agreed to provide additional funding at a rate of 20 cents per vehicle and to work with the department on revising the design. at the hearing, the board voted to uphold the environmental impact report. the mayor introduced an ordinance that would establish a policy requiring the city

departments to make data available to the public. the building commission introduced a host of ordnances. an ordinance was introduced that would amend the planning code which would add a section in the presidio special use district. also the acting is on the administrator as the main to convey the there was nothing at the board of appeals this week but last week -- did an

excellent job of defending the variants. >> i pretty much know the answer but for the benefit the public, if there is a matter before the supervisors in regards to an appeal of an environmental document, six votes would except the appeal. is that correct? if this is to overturn a conditional use, this would require a supermajority. >> ok, thank you. >> thank you. >> historic preservation commission did meet yesterday and before them was the ada complaint rams for the board

changers. it will go on in whatever other actions that they have to. they have continuing discussions. and i will say that there was the possibility of special meetings so that they can move these along at different dates. they have decided that they would like to have one special hearing for all day so that they can finally get through it. they are in agreement and having a joint