based on what has been approved as a new residential construction, this is going to meet the standards. this is a totally modern look, done within the context of the existing building. we're doing it in an economical way. i can guarantee you that when it is done you will notice that building on the block. it is similar to what some other people are doing with commercial facades on the same block. as far as a rendering those, that is no problem. we can do a rendering and make that a lot more understandable. a three week -- although we do not want a continuance, and would like it settled today if possible -- if there is still a chance that could happen, we would like that to move forward. having said that, we can make the design a lot clearer,

through renderings and other ways, material samples, if that is your request. vice president miguel: thank you. that would be a motion, if there is a second, for a continuance to three weeks. >> the next hearing is october 20. vice president miguel: that would probably be it, if the commission feels so inclined. commissioner antonini: october 22, cpmc is coming up. >> we could get the rendering in a week. >> we would need to get something to the commission before, in their pocket. -- packet. commissioner moore: the

discussion we are having here is not about whether or not young people like smaller or larger unit sizes. if the city moves into reconsidering unit sizes based on densifying the city and encouraging creative design of smaller units, a reconsideration of how we use space -- america has a larger square foot per person in the world. that would be wonderful. i think the city is well poised to do that. i have a hard time. this project is so aggressive that it would ask for 70% of all units to basically be noncompliant to code. the sun, like, and their exposure, even with smaller units -- the sun, like to --

sun, light, and air exposure still have to be considered with smaller units, or we're moving to the industrial age. we have spoken to sponsors of projects that have done that. this project falls short of doing it. 70% of the units are asking to be noncompliant. i am not able to do that. it does not set a new standard for living. it asks us to make an exception. it will haunt us later on. that is all i am saying. commissioner sugaya: i might second the continuance, but i do not think the facade is the issue. i kind of liked it. it continues to look like an industrial building. they have not tried to make the windows and the bigger or smaller. -- any bigger or smaller.

for me, the issue is a larger one that other commissioners have voiced. i do not think that can be addressed with renderings. if we do not have the votes, it will have to be addressed through floor plan changes. commissioner antonini: just to clarify, if obviously we have a possibility now for a continuance of five weeks, if i am reading it right -- that might be time for project sponsors to address the concerns about exposure, and see other things that were brought up today. perhaps there might be a way to modify some of the plans a little. maybe a few less units. perhaps some others that are compliant with exposure. certainly, that would be out there. i do not know if that would be a possibility. we could instruct project

sponsors look at the design, and perhaps address the fact that we have so many noncompliant units. perhaps we could figure out a way to make that a lower number. commissioner sugaya: that is fine. president olague: is that a motion? commissioner moore: i appreciate what you're saying. that is a challenge. all of us are excited by adaptive reuse. we have an interesting project later today which tears a building down and put something interesting in its place. there are many ways. there are combinations of the measures which we have seen a number of architects show us quite well how it can be done. other situations in which you have an industrial building which has a front and back on that large of a lot is a challenge. but this is done in the most simplistic way prepared -- the most simplistic way. we need to guide the project to

do a little bit more. commissioner antonini: that is my motion. it is a motion for a continuance to october 20, with project sponsor to address concerns about the number of units that have exposure problems, and perhaps a redesign, to some degree, and also to look at a better rendering of the facade. i am not saying it has to be changed, but if we could have something that shows a little more detail of how it will look when it is finished. that would be my motion. commissioner sugaya: we always have a discussion ahead of the zoning administrator's consideration of the variances. is it not proper to ask the zoning administrator what kind of action he might take? or is he basing it on our

deliberations? scott sanchez: i find i am always well-informed by the discussions and deliberations this commission has. the variance required would be a result of the commission action on the rear yard modification. if the commission were to deny the rear yard modification, it required them to provide a code- complying rear yard, they would not have exposure issues. the exposure, in this case, even though both the alleys are narrow -- they are more than 25 feet in width. it is those units which face onto the rear yard, in this case the courtyard, the require the variance. commissioner sugaya: but with the building facing two streets, in essence, the interiors would

all have to face some kind of courtyard. scott sanchez: exactly. one of the potential arguments for a hardship is the configuration. even though it is a through lot, it is key shaped. that does cause hardship for the property in terms of being able to provide a code compliant courtyard between the habitable segments of the building. vice president miguel: if it is all right with commissioner antonini, would you include in the motion a discussion as to the 210 square foot commercial space that can barely contain a coffee shop? having been in retail, that does not work. commissioner antonini: certainly

i think, and maybe you could comment on that, mr. silberman -- we are saying project sponsors could address all of these, including that concern. part of the redesign might include a slightly larger commercial space to make it more viable as a retail outlet. >> i just wanted to ask a point of clarification. i will cut to commercial after that. i just want to make sure i understand what the commission wants, so we can come back and address your concerns. we have a building that is what line to line -- lot line to lot line, located on two alleyways. in terms of providing the normal rear yard or open space, clearly we cannot do that with the existing building. the only way we can provide access to light and air is but providing an interior courtyard,

which is how the building is designed. if i am given the assignment of providing more light and air, i am not sure what that means. the courtyard is there. it is there for that purpose. we're not going to be able to -- because the building is lot line to lot line, we're not going to provide a yard. the alleyways are narrow. they have always been that way. they do not meet the code as far as units facing out onto alleys. i am asking for clarification. what are you really asking for, so that we can respond to it? i am hearing what the concerns are, but we have some severe limitations on this property that we are dealing with, as the zoning administrator mentioned. we are dealing with some constraints. we would like to address your concerns, and i would like to get a better idea of how you

expect that to happen, since the courtyards, pretty large courtyards, have already been designed into the building. president olague: i am sorry, but we need to hear from the commissioners to give you the clarity you're seeking. commissioner antonini: we realize, given the constraints of the building, and the courtyard cannot be changed in size and is fairly large -- perhaps if you were to decrease the number of units somewhat, and make some of the units a little larger, i do not think any of us expected drastic change in the number of units that satisfy the exposure. there will be exceptions. maybe there will be fewer exceptions with a slight redesign of the unit configuration. maybe a few units are a little bit larger. maybe you could figure out a way that more of them will avail themselves of exposure either to

the courtyard or through the rear or front of the building. i think that is maybe what the other commissioners are looking for, in my estimation. in terms of providing a rear yard, i don't think that is going to happen. i do not know if you have access for the roof to satisfy part of it on a roof or not. that might be another possibility. but those are some of the ideas. commissioner moore: i am not sure who the architect is, but i believe there are a number of ways of how this could be examined. in many projects of a similar kind, we do not have much more than seven to nine units which are exceptions. you can remember what it is like. i do not know who the architect is. i would expect to see a number of alternatives which we would look at depending on their merit. there are different massing ideas.

but this is not thought through. >> i actually wanted to get clarity on that as well. what i think i am hearing from you, with respect to the issue of the units, and please correct me if i am wrong, is it is not necessarily the size of the units, but the exposure, the layout of the building, that is of concern. i do think we have taken to you and recommended approval of a number of buildings with very small units like this. our assumption is that the size of the units is not the problem. it is the layout, the exposure, as well as the rendering issues and concern about the exterior. i wanted to makecorrect. it seems there are a number of ways the courtyard could be laid out, in large, or reconfigured so more units could get a better light and air. in terms of direction, i think

that is what we are talking about. president olague: even in small units, there should be some light and air. it makes sense to me. commissioner sugaya: one suggestion might be, in terms of layout -- you have five units facing on to the alleys. i don't know the code requirements for building exposure and what rooms need to be facing the public street, and that kind of thing. but instead of five, maybe you could consider a reconfiguration of layout that put something like seven to the front, thereby reducing the number of units that need an actual variance or exception to exposure. you could do that, i think in the other direction you have

three units facing another alley. you could have four. that is the kind of direction we would be looking for. >> thank you. i appreciate those comments. >> if you looked at the plans, the way the building is laid out, there are columns that go through the whole building. the courtyard spans the column widths. that is the reason why it is the width is. to ask us to widen that is going to require another structural component that would add a tremendous amount of expense to the project. commissioner sugaya: i do not think we said you needed to expand the courtyard. >> great. that is all i need to know. we can move units around. we can combine columns bases to make different units. we can add a larger commercial

space. there is quite a bit we can do. we can add a little bit to the passat, give you a better rendering. president olague: i think if the quality of life is not taken into consideration, my concern is that people would not use these as primary units. they might be reluctant to do so. if we want to encourage people to live and work here -- >> this is 25 feet wide. president olague: i am just talking light and air. >> that wall is open totally to the sky, one floor. there is quite a bit of open area. we can do some unit reconfiguration. i think we have some good direction now. >> thank you. i just wanted to respond on the question of commercial. i do not want to unnecessarily

raise expectations about the commercial. the property is located, as i said before, on two alleyways. president olague: for what it is worth, sometimes -- if you go to the blue bottle in haight valley, they were one of the few commercial spaces along that alley, aside from a course of shot -- a corset shop that has been there for a million years. it has created a lot of vitality in that area. a larger commercial space could encourage the positive transformation of a quiet area. that is all. >> i appreciate that. it might be possible, something like a coffee shop. but it is not suitable for a walgreen's. president olague: not at all.

we are thinking of a small local proprietor. commissioner antonini: we are not necessarily instructing that you have to diminish the number of units. however, in my opinion, if you do find some of these things are correctable by decreasing the number of units by a few to make the exposure better, that would certainly be amenable to me. commissioner moore: is this mr. gardner? could you come to the lectern? would you mind -- you have an office in the city in that general location. he could show you some of the things you're talking about. these are simple little touches to existing industrial buildings. just walking around -- >> i do not understand. i have lived and worked in san

francisco for over 30 years, so i understand. san francisco is not the only place in the world. we look beyond this. there are other areas where they are doing design. commissioner moore: we're very proud of what we're doing, and i think this group tries to open up the door for you to give an extra touch to this building. >> that is what we are trying to do. president olague: i think we are good. call the question. >> the motion is to continue to october 20, with instructions to project sponsored to continue trying to address exposure and layout issues of the unit, to look at design, and to improve and produce renderings, and to look at commercial space on the ground floor. on that motion? commissioner antonini: aye. commissioner fong: aye. commissioner moore: aye. commissioner sugaya: aye.

vice president miguel: aye. president olague: aye. >> will continue the variance to october 20 as well. >> you are now going to item nine, 2962 24th street. president olague: go ahead. >> good afternoon, commissioners. you have before you an application for a conditional use authorization to establish a full-service restaurant doing business as pig and pie within

the 24th street mission neighborhood commercial transit district, a 45-x height and bulk district. the restaurant is approximately 2460 square feet, and will serve handmaid sausages prepared on -- homemade sausages prepared on site, as well as pie and ice cream. the previous business was a record store which vacated in january. there were comments indicating the desire for the community to retain at the disco will sign. the project sponsor has agreed to keep the existing design. we recommend approval with conditions on the basis that the project promote small-business ownership, establishes a neighborhood-serving use on the block with vacant storefronts,

and will not impact traffic. the proposal meets all applicable requirements of the planning code. i am available for further comment. president olague: project sponsor? >> good afternoon, commissioners. my name is miles pickering. i am a san francisco native. i spent most of my formative years in east bay. i came back to san francisco in 91, ended up in the mission in '94, and have made that my home since then. i bought my house in 2002. it was a rougher neighborhoods then than it is now, but i saw the potential and love the neighborhood. about five years ago, i thought

about opening a food service establishment in the neighborhood. i really saw a need and thought i could do something unique. last december, through friends of mine, i met my business partner, who will be running the kitchen. all the pieces seem i am sure you are aware that 24th street is really ideal for this type of use. the location that we are plan suggest right around the corner from my house. i am familiar with the area. i spent a lot of time there. 24th street is a destination for people that are looking for something to eat. it is a great commercial district. i love it. it will fit into the existing neighborhood and will be offering a casual food environment and reasonable

prices. we are not really trying to go upscale. we like the atmosphere of 24th street and we want to be at peace with that. we would like to add to the dining choices that people have there. i know this area has been public comment about signage. i want to address that briefly. yeah. we did some back and forth with the lower 24th street merchant's association about the signage and i think we have come up with a plan that will work. first one of my big concerns is having the ability to establish our identity. but we think that the addition of some other branding stuff

that we will really be able to preserve the existing sign and also establish our identity in the space. yeah. that's about it. we are confident that plan will work. we hope there will not be any hold up on our application. it is a long process getting here. we want to get started. i guess that concludes my comments. i hope you will look favorably on the application and i am happy to answer any questions that you might have. >> is there any public comment on this item? >> good afternoon commissioners. i am with the 24th street merchant's association and speaking in support of pigs and

pie. miles has been very open and has been communicating with us what his intentions are for the business. he hosted a small gathering last sunday and invited all of the neighbors and merchants to come in. the biggest concern for the neighborhood was the sign. that sign is historically and culturally and economically significant to the corridor. we have boxes that are made that are being sold that depict the sign. also on the mural at 24th that depicts the sign. it is a big part of the neighborhood. many great latin starts have come through. culturally it is very significant for the neighborhood. for us to retain that, it has

made a lot of us happy in the neighborhood. so we are just here to support the project and we have talked about the sign. we have come to an agreement how we can preserve the sign and also support the business. so, thank you. >> any additional public comment? seeing none public comment is closed. i just did want to mention that the reason i pulled the item off of the consent calendar is i received several phone calls from members in the community. this sign has a lot of cultural significance to the residents of the mission district and especially to the folks in the latino culture. i am encouraged to hear you are making an effort to preserve and keep that sign there. i think this is something that came up around a coca-cola thing.

more and more we are not just talking in terms of buildings and historical resources but also cultural resources. we have been talking a lot more about how to preserve the culture within a neighborhood. so, i think it is critical that the sign is preserved also. i just wanted to put that out there. thank you for working with the neighborhood to make sure that is kept. so, commissioners. >> i would like to add my support to that comment. i think in the long run it will be a positive for your business. you know, you can just mention to people who come there. anyway, make a motion to approve with conditions. >> second. >> commissioner antonini. >> i am in support of this for the obvious reasons, that it is going to provide jobs. there are a number of vacancies

around the area that has been vacant for quite some time. everybody seems to be on board with preserving the sign and going ahead. >> commissioner miguel. >> i am also in support and fully agree with preserving the sign. one of the big signs that you can see is on mission just south of cesar chaff owes the corner about baby blues has their rib place. and you see this huge sign that says drugs from an old drug store and baby blues is smaller down below. but the fact that they retained it because that was an institution that had been there and served the neighborhood for many, many years. and they did it without any comment at all. it was just the natural thing to do.