we work closely with the planning department to ensure implementation measures are consistent with the department of public health's ongoing work to mitigate and analyze the impact on air pollution on uses such as child care facilities. we are pleased by the extent to which our health-based recommendations were incorporated into the western soma plan to protect and promote the health of current and future residences and employees. we're happy that the collaboration has been successful and reflects a model of collaboration between the government agency and community members, as well as the planning department. we and understand that the planet is the beginning of creating a healthy western 730 polk street, and being -- we understand this will create a healthy western soma. we looked forward to implementation. thank you for the opportunity to speak today. i would like to turn this over to paul.

>> good afternoon, commissioners. my name ispaul lord from the planning department staff. it has been a long but very fruitful process working with this citizens group has established by the board of supervisors. a couple of points, i do not have a formal presentation for you today. this is a community-based planning effort, and i think you have heard generally the highlights of the plan that has been presented to you in detail as a proposal for adoption. in terms of our returning to you for that action, it will probably be sometime early next year when we are considering certification of an environmental review document. but there are going to be a number of component pieces associated with this plan. what i transmitted to you earlier was not only the plan itself, but i also transmitted

to you in a very elaborate matrix that had to do with implementing actions that were tied to the objectives and policies in the plan. i originally when the plan was prepared, those implementing actions were embedded within the document itself. but by formatting needs and following the particles that were established by eastern neighborhoods, those implementing actions were removed and will be considered as part of an administrative code amendment for the plan on the heels of the plan adoption. in the course of developing that matrix, i took the time to contact every department that had been identified as a possible player in the implementation of those recommendations and discussed with them and modify those implementing actions to the greatest extent possible to meet as various departmental needs, whether that be the department of the environment, sfnpa, a

whole host of city agencies were contacted and are reviewing those implementing actions, and it will come back to you as an administrative code amendment, similar to what was done in the eastern neighborhoods. to highlight a couple of things, even though it was emphasized of the importance of the automobile in this neighborhood, or at least its prominent influence in the neighborhood, i want to stress that this neighborhood, more than any other san francisco neighborhood, has modal splits that favor pedestrian, bicycle, and transit use over automobile use. much of the transit automobile domination is not by the people who live and work in this neighborhood, but it is by people who travel through this neighborhood to get to other places in a san francisco as a result of that freeway constellation that is in the

neighborhood. one of the things, going back to a point that has been raised, about the large parcels. when we held our town hall meetings, which president olague attended at least one of those and possibly two, one of the things that we heard repeatedly from the neighborhood was -- we will accept height, but we do not like the idea of the whole area be a upzoned uniformly. the task force looked carefully at where they could really achieves some of the neighborhood goals in terms of development to serve the city and region and create when it comes to the community benefit programs, we would like to see perhaps some greater flexibility than and the policy

adopted back in october of last year as relates to in kind provision of community benefits only on those large lots. smaller parcels, pay your fee, provided a kind of you want to, but when it comes to these half acre or 3 acres sites, we would like to see that reflect an opportunity to build more community benefits on site. i don't know how many of you have ever been to savannah, in the old part of savannah, every single bloc has a park square. we know through the nexus study that there is never going to be enough money that we could economically unviable the fund through a community benefits program to provide as much part space as is needed in this neighborhood to serve this

residential population. if we were to impose those fees, the nexus analysis would have given as a legal justification for, we would have had no development. it was a balancing act. the only way we can see to deal with that issue at meet the needs that have been identified in help the -- helped the development and control the flooding in the neighborhood and have permeability so the neighborhood does not fly all the time when we have the 100- year storm in the neighborhood is to try to create more park space. we have seen a tremendous opportunity on these large parcels to provide on site, in kind part space, community facilities. in many cases, as was referred to from the county

transportation authority, there is the opportunity to do improvements in the public realm as well. that's another real opportunity that we have. i wanted to stress those points and i hope if we come back to u.s. some point down the road, considering possible amendments or modifications of in kind benefits that you adopted last october, for these large sites, you would consider that and give it its due consideration in this special context. i am really hear more to try to answer your questions in collaboration with the people i've been working with since 2005 on the task force that are represented here today. if you were to ask them to make a presentation about planning

in 2004 when the legislation was first adopted, they would have had a lot of questions but they would not have nearly the understanding of nuanced planning issues they have today. i'm proud of that i was able to work with them to achieve that planning expertise in a collaborative manner. it has been a very rewarding experience, although one that has tried patients and at times brought in all the sorts of dynamics you would expect in a family from love to hate to a variety of emotions expressed over the years. it has ultimately been a very rewarding experience and possibly an experience that the city and county of san francisco could see handle the probably as a process that deviated from standard processes but had very fruitful and positive outcomes as a result.

with that, i will turn over to you and your questions and any public comment. >> thank you. let's open it up for public comment. seeing none, public comment is closed. >> thank you for an excellent presentation. i just have some questions. there was the point about the generational shift and, extremely fortunate to have, which was not the case 30 or 40 years ago where you have a group of people in the next generation that want to invest here and live here and bring their businesses here. i also really like to use that about it developing what is best for the area, not just what ever

is fashionable at time. what ever is bringing in revenue. although we could take advantage, we have to have a plan that looks forward for many years and doesn't mean it's always the status quo. beginning with the alleys makes a lot of sense because you preserve what's most sought after and most historical and what would be most pleasant about the area. make your changes in the areas that are larger that were huge blocks of our largely industrial and can be changed. starting with was historical and make the changes and other way, there would have been a better situation there. perhaps eventually having

funding to put utilities underground and put historic street lamps and things in there that make that area more pleasant, lightening the sidewalks, which was mentioned and when we build new buildings, make them as contextualize possible. there is no one context in debt -- some of these broader streets are very pedestrian and safe. if there's a way to create a park way of the semi freeway we have and putting a median is helpful and in some instance moving when we do develop public transportation in the form of rapid transit, just having buses charging down all the different lanes of these big streets.

the ideas about the freeway situations and off ramps, although it's difficult for the state of california, are we locked in to the rams we have? is there a way we could modify the ramps and directed traffic? , saying that could happen, but it's something we might want to look at in conjunction with the state. they have arbitrarily capped at -- crept up over the years. the idea about the parks was really good. i have been to savannah and i think it is a long way from western soma, but you have these

availability and making an open space makes a lot of sense and also the idea of splitting some of these blocks by having mid block connectors so that you break up what were all industrial blocks and i did -- by design wanted them to be very long. two other final things -- trees. i think there are fewer trees there than anywhere in san francisco. any kind of water features, if there is a way we could put something along those lines, i think it would soften things. those are some of my reflections and assured the other commissioners will have other ideas. >> i do not have any questions, but i want to extend my heartfelt congratulations to all. this is the most mature piece of work i have seen in a long time because it was done comprehensively and is based on

consensus. it shows a the best of what san francisco neighborhood planning has to offer when it comes from the bottom up. i recommend you put yourself out for whatever award you can get. its a peace and -- any plan would be to challenge -- i'm sure you are all well prepared to take this challenges on and i hope will be smooth sailing and congratulations. >> i know it has been years and i was wondering where a was for a while because we had some informational presentations a number of years ago and i'm glad it is moving ahead. i'm sorry it has not gone faster because i think the people in

japan town who have been working on their own neighborhood plan. it could have been and i know the leadership has been asked to address neighborhood planning issues, which they have done. that plan will be coming back to the commission early next year, but as long as i have the transportation planner here. >> he's in the back. >> this is a little bit of subjects, but in the presentation, it was mentioned that you guys are possibly considering making several streets 2-way. folsom was mentioned and the seventh and a him, -- and at

seventh and eighth. >> there is a separate effort called the eastern neighborhood transportation study. looking at the general circulation and we could do to improve the situation, converting howard and a fulsome into two-way streets, in general, reducing the number of lanes for just a vehicle travel. we could rededicate that space to things like bicycle lanes

that is putting the larger scale changes. the focus is on the alleys. is not looking at directionality changes. >> to your knowledge -- that's a dumb way to introduce that. is your organization also looking at two-way streets in other eastern neighborhoods? >> there is not a blanket effort to do so, but it is happening where the agency's see some benefit to it. for instance, there are plans for -- >> i'm thinking more of downtown. >> apart from bush and pine, the

more southern streets, i personally live around there, and i cannot see why they are all one-way streets. it doesn't make any sense to me at all. >> if you have any ideas, we are open. >> there are efforts going on to look at 1-way to 2-way conversions. you probably remember the market and octavia plan. one of our main ideas was to increase the legibility of transit. you catch the bus, it lets you off on the street and if it's a one-way street, where do you go to catch the bus and the other direction? it helps the bus make more sense.

there have been a number of 1- way to 2-way conversions recently. mcallister, just behind the old federal building. there is a proposal for a two- way haight street. leavenworth and jones -- they also recommended the mcalester project. we are seeing more and more of these one-way to 2-way conversions. they are being implemented one by one. if you have ideas, let the mta or transportation authority know. >> i have a list of streets. >> i would like to thank everyone for their work on this. it has been years.

hopefully the fee -- hopefully that will be early next year. i agree with a lot of the thoughts that are shared. i also really appreciate the comprehensive approach to this and involving an groups like the department of public health who worked so hard on the healthy development measurement tool. this is the first plan to ever apply it. unfortunately, i don't think it's easy enough to evaluate projects that come before us and i think it's an underutilized tool and maybe we could look at ways of utilizing it more in relationship to other things that come before us.

the widening of sidewalks and pedestrian safety efforts, even though there's a high demand for parking, i think where it is possible to transform some of those areas to more friendly usage would be good because pedestrian safety is a concern to a lot of residents in that area. food access is something i would like to learn more about. maybe in the next presentation, if we could elaborate on food access in that area, the hyde related to the art spaces is a good idea and d commitment to racially and socially integrated society was good. finally highlight to at some

point speak to mr. lloyd -- mr. lord and about the unkind piece that i know we went over about a year ago, but i think it's time to revisit as applies to this particular plan. we may have to revisit that but we can get to that later or have a short hearing about that thank you. >> i would like to thank everyone for all of their work. this is an excellent piece of work and their flocks of lot of community input. i hope we can get to the point where we can talk about a plan without criticizing other work that has been done whether agencies over time. but i do think this is an excellent piece of work.

are organizing a community discussion for late october and a date has not yet been specified but we will be participating along with supervisor kim who is interested in this policy and that would require a balance between affordable housing and require a balance between jobs at space and housing space. we have had our concerns about that, but is an issue we've discussed on a regional base and we certainly understand why the neighborhood is so interested in this issue and it's something we're trying to get up in the next couple of weeks and we will inform the commission. but thank you to everyone of for all of their hard work on this. thank you. >> we will be taking a 15-minute

recess. >> the planning commission is back in session. if i could remind everyone to turn off their cell phones and any devices that might sound off during the proceedings. commissioners, you are not on item number 13. this is for 2516 mission st., a request for a conditional use authorization. >> good afternoon. i'm from the planning department staff. you have before you a request for a conditional use authorization pursuant to planning code section 303 to legalize an outdoor activity area on the roof of existing outdoor bar, other

entertainment venue within the mission and height and bulk district. the subject property was authorized to construct a tourist hotel with 24 rooms and reconstructed nine residential hotel rooms with a ground floor commercial restaurant. the required open space for the nine residential hotel units through section 135 us build is approximately 958 square feet. it was to be provided either in the rear yard, the ground floor, or a proposed freeze back. on february 10th, 2000, the planning commission disapproved of outdoor activity area associated with the restaurant proposed to be located on a portion of the ground rearguard area. -- or your yard area.

the roof deck began operating and outdoor activity area at some point after 2005. february 20th, 2009, a notice of violation was issued by the department that the illegal commercial activity was occurring on the subject property on the roof. this was followed by another notice of violation and the nile of referral to director for hearing on april -- denial of referral to the director of hearing. the appeal was rejected by project sponsor and on may 4th, 2009, a c.u. was filed to legalize the outdoor activity area. the appeal process continue forward, and during the process, the department considered arguments put forward by the appellant and concluded a c.u. could be sought by the project

sponsor. in 2009, the board of appeals heard the case and the matter was continue to call the chair to allow the property owner to seek conditional use authorization to legalize the outdoor activity area on the roof. this is a matter before you today. the project sponsor will reduce the area of the roof deck as used as an accessory to the restaurant to approximately 2477 square feet. food will be prepared predominately in the main kitchen and we he did in the outdoor area. beverages will be provided to a service bar available only to employees. there'll be no entertainment other than background music that will not exceed noise limits. the proposed hours operations are monday through thursday, 3:00 until o'clock p.m.. saturday from 11:00 a.m. until

1:30 p.m.. all hours of operation are weather-dependent. consider that the project sponsor has installed acoustic pairs and conducted sound testing. the conclusion of the review and sound test were the use of the outdoor activity area resulted in less than significant noise level and it was issued a categorical exemption. the project sponsor has further propose to mitigate or reduce any potential disturbance of neighboring residents by reducing the area of the deck toward the mission street area away from the western residential property. and also including some landscaping as buffers. there will be no entertainment and the outdoor activity area and at the music sound system

has an automatic shut off installed. staff recommends approval with conditions and the basis for that recommendation is the conclusions of the review found less than significant noise levels, the acoustical sound barriers were installed, the deck will be reduced away from the residential portion of a lot, and the project permit the continued operation of its established, locally-owned business that can contribute to the viability of the overall mission street neighborhood, commercial transition zoning district. the plan meets all applicable code requirements and is desirable for the broader surrounding neighborhood, providing a commercially operated open space. after the staff report was su