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 submitted, we received nine letters in opposition. eight from the san francisco buddhist center and one from former neighbor, seeking concerns regarding noise. and eight letters in support of the project, predominantly from people associated with the parent teachers association. that concludes my presentation. staff is available for questions. >> thank you. project sponsor. >> commissioners and director and president, my name is victor marquez and i will be speaking

on behalf of the project sponsor. by way of introduction, since i have not been here in some time, i used to come regularly, several commissions ago. i wanted to briefly give you a bit of my background. i am the former president, national president of the hispanic national bar association, the first openly gay president, and i've worked across the country as the former white house liaison for that organization. i was the executive director of san francisco la raza for five years and i am the general counsel for the mexican museum here in san francisco as well as for the la raza lawyers association where i had to terms of the president. i also served on the board of the lgbt center and was the

first latino on the board. i'm working to develop a community center that will house a child care program as well as a foster homes program for young girls in the mission district on 24th street coupled with senior housing, with mission neighborhood centers and mercy charities as the developing sponsors. i am working to rehabilitate the new mission theater. last, but not least, and terms of relevance, i'm also heading up a development of the san francisco de laborprogram. i say all of this to you to share with you that i thought about this when i was approached to represent this project. i decided to take it. for me, this is in line with the

kind of work i do. i want to thank the staff for all their diligence and hard work in this project, giving it before you. i am here representing the workers and their families. staffas done a thorough job. this is not only a restaurant. it is an icon. it has not forgotten to give back to the people who were there prior to coming on board. it has contributed to the revitalization of a section of the community. i have submitted along with eight letters of support about

70 signatures from local residents and businesses within a 300 foot radius from the establishment. it is family run and operated. it is one of the largest employers in the area. a truly diverse workforce. it provides a safe, healthy environment for workers, guests, and local residents, as well as neighboring businesses. you will hear from local representatives in the categories. since it opened in 2004, it has had zero fire department violations, zero police violations. there have been no stabbings or killings inside or outside its parameters. i have very tight security enforcement. furthermore, this is not one of the projects that has added to the gentrification of the mr. district, but the opposite.