>> ok. good afternoon. this is the regular meeting of the san francisco planning commission thursday, june 2, 2011. i want to remind everyone to turn off your cellphone or electronic devices. roll-call.

[roll call] commissioner mike antonini is absent today. item one -- for 660-670 4th street. item two, 455 laguna street, a request for a conditional use authorization until july 7, 2011. item three, 42424 polk street. this is an authorization -- a conditional use authorization until july 14, 2011.

commissioners, there are not any items not calendar being proposed for this meeting. president olague: is there any public comment on items proposed for a continuance? seeing none, the item is closed. commissioner miguel? commissioner miguel: can we move item two to july 14 rather than july 7? i am likely to be out. >> can we move it to later? president olague: because he may not be back. and we have another commissioner out also. >> i think -- that is july 21. and we were closed because of that.

8 washington ave. this is the area? commissioner miguel: we could try it on july 21 if he wants. president olague: that might not be a good idea. how about july 28? >> [unintelligible] >> i will not be here. >> and rodney is out that they, too. >> oh. >> as i recall, this item is to specifically change the conditions. commissioner miguel: it is the only item regarding it. president olague: maybe august 4? because of the -- the 18th, you

will be gone, it will be moved? oh, to august? >> is there a need for this to be moved by a particular date? president olague: is it important to -- it is important to have a full commission, i would think. commissioner miguel: [unintelligible] >> oh, right. commissioner miguel: i guess i would suggest august 14. >> no dates in june? >> there are none that are open. president olague: they will be ready. they said july 7 would work for the project sponsor, but what are you suggesting?

i am sorry. august 4? ok. i do not think we have a choice. commissioner miguel: in that case, i will move item one continuance to july 7, item two to august 4, and in three to july 14. commissioner borden: second. commissioner miguel: thank you. >> commissioners, on the motion for a continuance for items 1 and 3 as proposed on the calendar and in two to august 4, i have the motion. [roll call] thank you, commissioners. the items are continued. commissioners, you are now on your consent calendar. item #4 on your consent calendar is to be acted on by a

single roll call vote by this commission. there'll be no discussion unless requested by staff, and in that event, it would be removed from the consent calendar for a future hearing. it is case number of 2011.0269c, a request for a conditional use authorization to add a bar to 524 valencia st.. it would allow the applicants to apply for a license from the department of alcoholic beverages of san francisco and this would permit the sale of beer, wine, and distilled spirits for on-site consumption in association with the restaurant. the size of the restaurant would not change. commissioners come up following public comment, we would remove

this from the consent calendar. president olague: is there any public comment? seeing none, public comment is closed. commissioner borden? commissioner borden: i move for consent. >> commissioners, on the motion for approval -- [roll call] thank you, commissioners. this item has been approved as proposed. commissioners, you are on commissioners questions and matters. the adoption of the draft meeting, from your regular meeting, and your special meeting of april 21, 2011. following public comment with any modifications, you'll be asked to adopt the draft. president olague: is there any public comment? seeing none, public comment is

closed? commissioner miguel: i move to the adopt the minutes of april 21, special and regular. commissioner fong: second. >> on the motion to adopt the minutes special and regular of april 21 -- [roll call vote] thank you, commissioners. the draft meetings -- the draft minutes have been adopted. commissioner moore: i wanted to show you an exciting e-mail. the administrator for the region nine epa sent out an e-mail yester day and asked -- yesterday, and asked to refurbish the plaza into a new building. they are building a new high- rise, of which we definitely

need many, in downtown. however, they will basically have the building in place, in the way of doing it. this is really, really good news, because at a time when we are concerned that green buildings are not necessarily involve, tearing them down, but reinventing them from the inside out. this is very good news. i will be happy to share the details with you and ford be e- mail's with you -- and forward the e-mails with you. i think this is a good example of what is it possible with contemporary high-rises that are 10 or 15 years old. these are these platinum-raided buildings.

there are five bills this week in sacramento -- five bills this week in sacramento. they are both dealing with winter protection of various kinds. ed we are establishing the ability of cities to enforce housing law that would require affordable rental housing. the something very important in light of the fact that we're struggling with this issue and near -- any clearer guidance on how we should proceed in the last few months. and there is sitting tenants from eviction. until recently, someone could be evicted if they pay their rent 24 to 36 hours late. a reasonable time frame does not

mean -- this is in the protection of renters. there are a couple of others, but those in particular were worthwhile noting. commissioner miguel: during the week, i have met with some people regarding the presidio, as well as a couple of nonprofits, a senior housing and assisted living, and some of the financial problems they are incurring presently because of hud, medical and medicare. it is starting to hurt them quite badly. i had the pleasure of seeing the model featured in the paper this morning. it is an excellent model if people get a chance to look at it. it was things in perspective --

it puts things in perspective. as we know, project change as the golan. it seems like an interesting -- as they go on. it seems like an interesting beginning. commissioner sugaya: last night, i had the pleasure of attending a downtown planning meeting, the first of four periods supervisor mirkarimi was there. the format was to go through three or four topical areas and they are broken up into separate groups, and each group got to spend 20 or 30 minutes addressing each topic. they will be compiling those, that input from last night, and the next meeting in the meeting after that, they will be moving on to three other topics, and the last one will be a summary of all the input they have gathered, and i think -- i do not remember -- they will have

forthcoming recommendations for what the plan should have and that will be letter -- and that will be later in the year, i believe. president olague: -- >> thank you. commissioners, we can move forward to the director's report. we have reports from the board of supervisors, board of appeals, and historic preservation commission. >> thank you. i do not have much to report. i was going to give it the same report that commissioner sugaya did on the downtown meeting. we will be looking at what type of environmental review will be needed for planning. and if the plan does not come forward with major zoning changes, we are hoping we will be able to do something less than any eir, -- less than the

eir, but we are waiting. i do not have anything to report this week that i've not reported before. the board of appeals and the full board did not meet this week. >> commissioners, the historic preservation commission did meet. the only item of interest would be the historic resources survey before them before the preservation and -- before them for preservation and possible action. they continued at. -- continued it. i did not bring my notes to tell you what it was all about. commissioner miguel: if i may interrupt, i was at the meeting. they looked at two or three of the district's proposed, being reconsidered to look at whether

some buildings that were not born were noted to be outside the district could be outside the district. most important were the ones on the east side of the lower st.. it asked that those be added to the mission survey, rather than the separate district on their own. >> thank you. the only other item -- that was a public hearing. the item will come back at the next meeting for action. with that, commissioners, that completes my reports. commissioners, we can now move on to item number nine, case number 2011.0118i, 2 harrison streets. this is an abbreviated master plan. >> thank you, commissioners. in with department staff. i am here to report on the

wharton school of business, university of pennsylvania institutional master plan. we are currently leasing approximately 20,000 feet of space and the school is looking to relocate to a facility with 35,000 square feet. the school offers an m.b.a. program for executives who wish to pursue an nba while continuing a career. the second is the executive program that is tailored to meet the needs of a specific firm. the third is the alumni function, where these actions are offered. supposed secondary institutions have to have an institutional master plan on file with the department. part of the review of the abbreviated i.m.p., planning has

the discretion to hold or not hold a hearing on the abbreviated i.m.p. staff concludes that all the necessary requirements are included and recommends that the commission not hold a hearing. commissioners, this concludes my reporting. i am available to answer any questions. president olague: thank you. project sponsor? ok, is there any public comment on this item? seeing none, public comment is closed. commissioners? >> no action. president olague: there is no need for an action here. the hearing is closed. >> thank you, commissioners. commissioners, you're now at

general public comment. we have a time limit of 15 minutes. at this time, members of the public me address you on items of interest to the public that are within the subject matter jurisdiction of the planning commission, except agenda items which may only be addressed at their place on the calendar. with respect to agenda items, it is your opportunity to address the commission when the item is reached in the meeting. i have no speaker cards. president olague: is there any member of the public who would like to have general public comment? seeing none, the item is closed. >> thank you. we're now on item number 10, our request for a conditional use authorization for 2 harrison street. >> thank you. in with the planning staff. i am here to request a conditional use authorization to establish for the wharton school of business for the university

of pennsylvania in excess of the space permitted for usage. the project is located at 2 her sister. the border sponsor is seeking conditional use authorization, principally permitted for residential use this -- residential uses. the department has received no public comment on this case, either in support or opposition. we believe that this project is desirable for the following reasons. the project will contain a post secondary education institution in san francisco. it is adequately equipped to handle such a use.

the project is an area well served by transit. it meets all the requirements of the planning code and conditional use authorization. this concludes my presentation. i am available for questions. thank you. president olague: project sponsor? >> good afternoon, commissioners periods i just -- good afternoon commissioners. i just want you to know we do not have questions and we are here for the staff report. president olague: thank you. is there any public comment? seeing none, public comment is closed. commissioner borden: my mother is from philadelphia. i have stayed at the towers. i am very familiar with this. i think it is the perfect location downtown for the transit, walking distance to a

lot of the core office facilities. with that, a move to approve. -- i move to approve. >> commissioners, on the motion for approval -- [roll call vote] thank you, commissioners. that item passes unanimously. and sooner than i thought. we could have kept to our original time. yes. do you want to take a brief recess? president olague: no. will take a five-minute recess will take a five-minute recess at this time. >> ok, the planning commission is back in session. commissioners, you're now nearing item number 11, the

hearing of an ordinance introduced by supervisor campos. supervisor campos: -- >> good afternoon, commissioners. the recommendation is by supervisor campos that allows signs that contribute to the visual identity and historic character of a neighborhood, in addition to the city as double -- a whole. and forge a link, i do not have a video presentation, but i have something better. supervisor campos is here. currently, signs are permitted if they do not visually obstruct

or detract from the city landmark, are not larger or appear to be more visually prominent than any sign that previously existed in is maintained in good condition. the proposed legislation would change these rules by deleting the requirement that the proposed signs be located in the historic signing district, and they would allow the signs to contribute to the identity of the neighborhoods in addition to the city as a whole. the planning department recommends that the planning commission approved the resolution with modifications. these include changing the name from his direct sign to commemorative sign, remove the sentence from the proposed legislation that says the department meet refer the application for and advising -- for an advisory opinion, and specify that the proposed

ordinance, that designation under the section of the planning code does not by itself protected from being obscured or removed from future development projects. the reason for the proposed changes is the department sees a clear distinction between buildings or objects designated as historic under ceqa, and the landmark is given special access under the conditional use process. the department recommends maintaining a clear distinction between the authority of the planning and historic preservation committee. the department anticipates instances where it might be appropriate to relocate commemorative signs, and it makes sense to put that in the legislation now. legislation now. also, under sections of the code