in 2009, it was adopted by the planning commission and reviewed the restaurant sites. it is a great example of this. who cares? why are we regulating this? these are very hard for the planning commission to regulate. it is hard to go out and have the toaster police. is it like reheating water or a beverage? you have got to create something that is enforceable. it can be hard to comply with. it suddenly violated the planning total. that was a goal of all of these. >> i am not an expert on the issue, but i understand that a lot of small businesses can open up with a convection oven.

this will simplify its. but anything an open flame requires an incredibly expensive hood, and fire equipment system. it is cost prohibitive to a lot of square footage cafes. >> i only know this anecdotally. he is very excited, he will opened this restaurant as part of the beer garden. local zoning did not allow the breakup on the eighteenth street. it will do a lot of deregulation. this is not everything as well. the good news about this is that this was introduced by the supervisor a few months ago. a few commissioners have talked

about what other deregulation we have to do. it is really just the beginning, as it were, of trying to rationalize. i hope it makes some positive steps. secondly, if you have thoughts about further legislation amendments and all of that, i promised to take notes. whenever interest you have in further changes, those are things that could be discussed at the commission. they could be the subject of future ordinances'. with that, i will take questions.

commissioner adams: i want to thank you for bringing this up. we cover these zoning areas in the neighborhood parks that you talked about. i talked to many merchant organizations around the city. this is making it uniform. it is long overdue. it will help the vitality of a lot of neighborhoods. i can't tell you how many new restaurants have come into the area. this is going to help. i hear the complaints about the toaster oven role. -- rule. businesses have been there for

50 or 60 years. restaurants are just the tip of the iceberg. have you look at this stuff that was enacted, this is 2011 now. a lot of the stuff has to change the vitality of these neighborhoods. i think this is a step in the right direction. >> hot formula retail controls, those were passing city-wide a few weeks ago. it has gotten them thinking about -- that will really control the chain's stores. >> mcdonald's will have to go through the whole formula, and in my neighborhood that would

never happen. commissioner adams: it will be kind of the green light for these other businesses. the other question is the video stores. as you probably know, the video store is a dying industry. few of them rented videos anymore. they are in chapter 11 bankruptcy. there are a few neighborhood own to video stores that are hanging around. some combine the video store use with something else. i am not sure if we will revive the video store industry, but we wanted to remove the barrier.

they could survive if they got combined with another use. commissioner dooley: i have seen all of these different things come out. the first one was that i would really like to recommend that any small, self-service restaurant under 1500 square feet or 50 feet could be incentivized to just have that be a neighborhood notification. i feel that these very tiny restaurants that are popping up

all over needed additional break. the impact is very slow. they needed their own special category that gives them much more of a streamlined way to move in and get going. my other reservation, there is such a difference between district about the size or use. i think it would be better to make a set amount, 3000 square feet. i think it would be better to make that more uniform. just because i think some of those areas are 6000 square feet, i'm sorry, that is not a small restaurant. that is by other recommendation.

on the retail coffee stores, i have a lot of experience in this area. i think it should be changed just to say that food preparation, except for that which might be cooked or reheated, using no more than a toaster oven is prohibited. this is why. hull give you a story. we had a business in north beach that was granted to their permanent for a retail coffee store. then they went ahead and added a toaster oven or whatever. no one really cared. it just passed by. soon they have the sign outside that is open for breakfast, lunch, dinner, brunch, and that made me turn into an illegal small self-service restaurants.

if we can add something saying what they were allowed to do, that will be helpful. it is easier to get a retail coffee store permit, perhaps. and i think it would be better to say that that would be allowed. i see these folks start with one little thing and add, add, add. the even applied for alcohol permits. i would just suggest doing it the other way around, what is ok? >> the existing definition of the retail coffee store doesn't say that they will serve pastries or similar birds. -- goods. hopefully, even if we remove the

rule on food prep, that part will stay. it could be the basis of an enforcement action. have you have moved from a regional coffee store to a self service. there is no mention about whether you can get an alcohol permits for those uses. commissioner dooley: my point is that the threshold keeps jumping up. for folks that are abiding by their category, i would like to say that of course you can have a toaster oven or a microwave oven. add them to the code, saying that is fine, but leave it at that. >> as for the set amount, we looked at that and ultimately

decided against it. let's say it is 3000 square feet for a self service use. it is 4,000 feet, or a small edition. we wanted the rules to be the same. as you are dividing up commercial spaces, and know that this commercial space can be leased to anybody versus this one can't. if you have the use limits different from the other ones, it is good for leasing agents or landlords to stumble over that period lesley, the idea of the small self-service being in neighborhood identification in

most districts, where all restaurant uses or self-service restaurants will see of those restaurants -- those are conversations he wanted to have with individual neighborhoods. 1500 sq. ft., whenever the limit is will allow them with a notification. that will be a good change. what we didn't get into was trying to get into the neighborhoods where you live senate. we figure that is the conversation for the neighborhood. i would love to have it. as we hear from merchant groups about what they would like to see, we can incorporate those. we didn't want to change a rule that a lot of neighborhoods had

a lot of investment in. consulting with them. commissioner dooley: and will this negate or change their permit process of the neighborhood needs or wants its? how much change will this make in commercial districts? gosh, the only change it will make is the size of the business as either large or small. that will increase in most cases to the use size limit in the neighborhood. that is the only change. if every food and beverage use is now a c.u., it will be in the

future. we will see them go or take on the controls. there is a proposal. the mission where i live, looking at the fast-food subdistrict, the conversations are beginning to have it at a neighborhood level. every restaurant will continue to be a c.u. it is the difference between small and large. a retail coffee store can only have those limited and goods. but they will be able to do minor food preparation. that is the only change you will see in north beach.

commissioner kasselman: i wanted to see where you were with the health department. even a convection oven or appliance that generates he, regardless of whether it was electrical or through gas means, but still requires ventilation. it would be unfortunate if someone spent $3,000, or may toaster convection oven -- or more on a toaster convection oven because they were not properly following protocol. >> anything that would require the health department or building department to look at will still require the appropriate permits. that is a good buyer beware question. that same thing might go for a

certain amount of equipment to heat coffee. they might want to comply with equipment that is already permitted. and of course comply with all of the safety requirements. within those limits, have a little bit more flexibility. president o'brien: thank you for your presentation and on behalf of all the people that can benefit from any change of the ease of the permit rules. the justification for this, the increased size on the ada makes me inclined to support it.

the fact that it does not supersede a local neighborhood controls that can be very specific for the historic neighborhoods, they all have their different dynamic. i believe that an open flame should be permitted pretty well. but i hope we don't have the tangle of reservations. a lot of this is really cleaning up years and years of different rules, going one on top of the other without the corresponding weeding of those rules. i also believe that the government should follow the people, the government is the servant of the people. the people are developing

business plans and business models, responding to this economy. they are responding to this society. we have young people coming in and working 14 hours a day. they don't cook for themselves anymore, and there are all kinds of places springing out just to take care of the population. we have this need it that the business community is responding to. i really believe our government should be responding to the people. this is good legislation on that, i believe. not only for the small business people, but also for the city employees. the regulations are very confusing. even for the planners and the permit people to untangle. one will say one thing, one will say another thing. it is not really that apartments

faults, it is just the interpretation of hundreds of regulations that govern a restaurant or a small business. it can be confusing. i am inclined to support this because it does not take away the input of the neighbors. and it also is responding to the way that people are working now. >> when those controls were devised, the idea that a restaurant other than a traditional sit-down restaurant where you could get quality, fresh, locally produced and healthy food, restaurants were different then. a good deal of what we are doing is catching up with the changes on how people live. you raise an excellent point, thank you. >> on that example that you

gave, increasing what they were given, did they go from being within the law to being outside of the law? commissioner dooley: they continually increased the intensity. i would say all this was great, but there is no enforcement, no matter how egregious your violations are generally. why i speak about it, i get people that are running the same type of business, how come this person is increasing, selling alcohol, doing all of this? i was asking in terms of trying to clarify what is ok, and

microwave is fine. the toaster oven is fine. at least a draw a line there. even though the enforcement is virtually zero. >> it sounds like it is really an enforcement issue. commissioner dooley: i emeline o'leary -- i am a little leery. we don't have the money or the inspections. even when complaints are filed, nothing is done. i will hear from other small restaurants or retail coffee stores. they feel that that is not fair. i am just recommending to a least put in paper what is ok.

i have seen too many cases where there are already -- and they have intensified. i would prefer a little bit of a definition there. it might be pointless. >> in alaska enforcement is just a lack of enforcement. -- a lack of enforcement is just a lack of enforcement. for example, if you say, as we do here, limited amounts of prepackaged foods might be sold. attached that you can have equipment for food preparation or heating of those goods. the equipment is for that purpose. commissioner dooley: just a little more definition is what i

am looking for. >> that might be better, speaking to the purpose. i would not want to say that you can have a toaster in the microwave, and because they want a sandwich press or blender. we can't name all of the equipment they will have 20 years from now, but we can give it a little more clarity. >> i can't have a reluctance, notwithstanding the suggestion you are making. decode is beyond comprehension already. -- the code is beyond

comprehension already. i am leery of that. if you attach something without a permit and it is illegal, and somebody calls it, you have to take it out. you will be told to remove the kitchen or the bathroom. there are cases of that. i am surprised that there are situations were we have examples of people turning what is conceived. i would like to keep it simple. i like the way that you have it. i would rather see an emphasis placed on the enforcement. for my input on this, i'd go wholeheartedly along with what everybody here is saying. i think it is part of the report

and what we can do about it. i will remind people again, the planning department had an audit done. i will always keep reminding people of that, because i think it will be a great start just to do that. i would not mind suggesting that these changes reduced the number of sentences and questions and statements so that it becomes less of a book that people can read and a lot simpler. some people are not like that and the legal world, but it would be great for the city. i support this in that direction. >> i call the planning code of the regulatory winchester. there are passages that lead nowhere, all kinds of crazy

editions. supervisor mirkarimi has been a great partner to simplify and clarify. it should be clear to a business owner what i can and can't do. all regulation should have a public purpose. what is the threat to the neighborhood? having a toaster obverses not having a toaster. does it matter? the things we need deregulate are the things that matter the most to the neighborhood knowing that resources are not always going to be limited. that is what we tried to do with legislation, making it simple and clear. if there did not seem to be a public purpose served by the regulation, can we do without it? president o'brien: were you going to say something to commissioner adams? -- something, commissioner adams?

commissioner adams: this is a great starting point. >> if you wish to have a broader discussion and look on legislation, it is certainly something that i would like to keep going with as long as it is compatible with our goals, protecting the neighborhood character. there are a lot of supervisors that are looking into this now. and toss out what ever doesn't make sense. everyone is looking at empty storefronts. we are looking at the commercial district struggling again.

what ever you would like to do, whatever discussions you would like to have, hopefully, we can get the changes made. commissioner clyde: i just wanted to restate in the comment made by the president of this commission about plain language. in all of your drafting, please keep it in plain language. i think it will go a long way. >> i am neither a lawyer or a planner, i hope that qualifies me. president o'brien: that is wonderful, thank you very much for that. any public comment? >> i think this is good legislation in the language to go forward.

he brought up the point that this is a starting point going forward, so look backwards out why some of laws are there. a lot of this regulation was put in because they tried to keep the character of the neighborhoods, thinking about how the neighborhood as a small shopping center. the owner makes sure there are always different kind of businesses to make it attractive. in bars and restaurants were real problem back in the '70s and '80s because the landlord could charge a bar or restaurant a lot more money for the property. a restaurant can be open for breakfast, lunch, dinner, after dinner. they can get more money out of that particular business. to save a lot of the retail businesses that were open so many hours, that is why they put many hours, that is why they put in a lot of these regulations at