size -- say you're going to go above the allowed footprint, but you would probably have to go through a conditional use process, i would assume, to do that. >> right, to go above that size, you need a non conditional use. >commissioner antonini: any changeup category notwithstanding what the abc is going to do, but some neighborhoods would require a cu to go from beer and wine to full alcohol. >> that is correct. others may not. and others prohibit it entirely. commissioner antonini: ok. that seems to answer most of my questions. i think it is good. i do agree with commissioner miguel that i think this has to be city-wide. when you start carving out parts of the city to have different categories for them, then i think it defeats the purpose of the legislation. and i do not quite see anything

as a problem here. all existing uses are presumably permitted. you're not going to be moved to denver category. you will be categorized differently, but you're permitting you will not be changed. >> correct. commissioner antonini: thank you. >> commissioners, thank you for your comments. i want to thank everybody for their excellent work on this. this is a very focused peas and eating and drinking uses. there is the elimination of the video circuit court, which is probably not necessary. but there could be corresponding amendments to section 312, 303, and is dealing with the formula retail uses. currently, the controls apply to these types of uses. perhaps there will be a motion

adopting the changes. i would also add in that the section 312 notification in formula retail use control would still apply. there's been no changes in that because the socks is on the eating and drinking uses the not want to make it clear that we're making these other changes. commissioner fong: i am overall supportive of it. i think we can simplified language in the process. as it was explained for new business operator coming in, really try to calculate the risks of going into business if we can simplify and streamline, all the better. related to chinatown, i can understand. i think i would need to learn a little bit more. the supervisor level, there is an opportunity to make that change. at this point, i think we're better off going city-wide and studying it a little bit further. i would be willing to make a motion to approve with recommendation of staff. >> second. president olague: i just wanted

to also thank staff for all your work. also, thank the small business commission for taking time to review it. we do not always get input for other commissions that have closer dealings with some of these issues than we do here. i am grateful for that. as for chinatown, i would support -- i would like to -- i do not know if the needs to be added to the motion or not, but to instruct the staff to encourage the board of supervisors to continue engaging in discussions with the chinatown merchants. because if it -- kind of cliche, if it works, do not fix it. something like that. if something has been working for the past, you know, 30 years, then maybe we do see exemptions occasionally to codes. maybe not a full exemption, but maybe some, you know, obvious

tweaks. it may be that they want to update what they have going on in their community, business community also. so i would not say just throw it all out, but it may be that there are other considerations or changes to make. i fully support this. commissioner moore: i just wanted to thank mr. starr and ms. rogers. i hope that mr. starr will do a sequel to his cartoon. [laughter] the two together would probably read very well on youtube with what can be done in the city. thank you. we all know that there is the ability and open doors with the supervisors to really prepare and hone down on some of those little things and what they need or do not need. i am very confident that by

bringing it to everybody's attention that there will be further discussions. it was left wide open the there will be tweaks, and perhaps cctc will not be the only one. it needs tweaking to be as responsive as it is basically set up to be. president olague: yes, it is a good start. >> commissioners, the motion is for approval with staff recommendation with the added language from the zoning administrator. on that motion, commissioner antonini? >> yes. >> commissioner fong. commissioner moore. commissioner sugaya. vice president miguel. president olague. thank you, commissioners. it passes. >> someone to talk a legislative actions. i think there is confusion about that. the vast majority of legislation that your reviewing this commission is introduced by the

board of supervisors. the first time we hear that, that is almost always when it is introduced. when it is introduced and send to you, there's a 90-day clock you have to comment on that legislation the issue a public process is very interesting. they're 40 to 50 pieces of legislation that are created for the planning code every year, more than any other department code. we have a very seriously consider how and under what circumstances the additional public process would take. i would argue that in an ideal world, that would be long before it is introduced. again, that legislation comes to you already having been introduced in the vast majority of cases. president olague: ok, thank you. commissioners, you're now on item number 11, case number 2005.0233c, for 49 julian avenue. request a conditional use authorization.

>> good afternoon, commissioners. planning board staff. the project at 49 julian avenue proposes to demolish an existing one-story industrial building and construct an approximately 10,500 square foot residential beating containing a dwelling units and eight ground for parking spaces, utilizing the eastern neighborhoods pipelines dennis -- status. the ground floor will have the parts played lee 2,100 feet -- 2,100 feet for the parking garage to the will be eight parking spaces and at least four class one bicycle parking spaces. the second true for its store will have a two-bedroom drilling units. it has planning code section 175.6e.

it is a heavy commercial zoning district and a 50-foot height and bulk district. while confirming to1 articles 1to.2, 1.5, and 2.5, we're requesting additional double- conditional use authorization to seek relief from the amended articles. the project is in the urban mixed use district and a 45-foot height and bulk district. the project is consistent with the objectives and policies of the general plan. the project will provide eight two-bedroom dwelling units. it will convert in non-use said into a productive residential use development. it is consistent with the neighborhood character. it is appropriate development and complements existing patterns. therefore, the department

recommends approval for the project with conditions peter i am available for questions. thank you. president olague: thank you. project sponsor? >> good afternoon. my name is tony, representing the project sponsor. i have three pertinent topics. i will conclude by giving you a concise timeline of what my clients have been doing the last six years. my first point, neighborhood outreach and public notification. a public notice of this project receiving environmental review was mailed out by your staff in 2006 and again in 2010. and as of this hearing in 2011. i personally went door to door to the immediate neighbors to introduce myself and the project details. we met with peter and the are rebuilding on five different occasions. we met with richard, represents

another group. we requested several meetings with their executive director and board members. we also met with garcia. we provided a thorough notification and conducted an informational never been meeting on saturday, august 20. neighbors and attended the meeting. the subject building is not a historical resources or significant in any way. however, the project was reviewed by the historic preservation commission. the commission is in general support of this application. they have made two suggestions. i believe my clients have responded effectively by incorporating significant audit -- modifications to the building on below, by removing and reducing all rooftop projections, and providing a site said back along the south side of the armory building. those allow greater sun angle and light corridor for the

south-facing windows for the of rebuilding. we have enclosed a draft copy of the supplemental disclosures. i encourage you to you toe in our information packet. -- i encourage you to go over exhibit e. all legal uses and activities of the armory building. we intend to add all the fine details of the activities associated with the friendship house, directly across the street from the subject property. my clients are ready to execute and record these disclosures as part of a notice of special restrictions and conditions of approval. the application before you is a request for conditional used for residential use in the former cm zoning classification. i would like to present our findings of why we believe the proposed project is necessary and desirable and is consistent and compatible with the established neighborhood. since 2003, the planning

commission has approved over 360 residential units on the subject blog and directly across the street from the armory building. of the 360 units, 230 are under construction today. if i may have the overhead, please -- this vicinity map is exhibit d. it shows the immediate general area that contains residential uses in the parcels. all the orange parcels contain a residential use. of those, most of them are multi-unit, similar to the project before you. as many of you know, a 194-unit mixed use the building is under construction at 1880 mission street, also known as the

mission gardens. unless there have been some drastic changes to the program, there are 46 veterans on six level -- bedrooms on six levels of occupancy. only 58 feet away from our property, directly abutting another unit. residential use is it principally permitted use. for those reasons, i believe that the infilled project is necessary, reliable, and consistent with a mixed used development pattern of the area and compatible with the other residential units under construction. my client bought the property in 2004. they submitted their first publication in 2005. in 2006, they were instructed to wait for the rezoning of the eastern neighborhoods plan. in 2009, three years later, the plan was finally adopted, and residential uses -- again, it

is a principally permitted use in the new zoning district. in 2010, we received a letter from planning staff encouraging us to proceed with securing our entitlements. it is 2011. six years since my client submitted his first publication. this concludes my presentation. i respectfully request that you approve this conditional use authorization. the project architect is in the audience and available for any questions. thank you very much. president olague: thank you. i would like to open it up for public comment at this time. victor, rick, michaela, antonio, ricardo. >> president olague, i am actually here on three different items that happen to be back-to- back. i am speaking -- we are in a couple of different hats on this

item. i am victor, the former executive director just up the street from this project. long-term supporter of the organizations, most of the organizations i have worked with that have submitted letters of opposition on at one in particular, history of over 20 years working with them. ycd, ldc, and cyc. the groups that are coming before you to oppose represent african-american, asian american, latino, youth programs, and they are opposing pretty vehemently, as you can see by the youth in the background here. they are opposing this project from going forward.

there is obviously a disconnect between the local community and this project going forward. what i want to basically encouraged that there be further dialogue between the local community and the project sponsor. it appears from some of the material that i have reviewed, that there still needs to be some of that the question is going to be whether that is going to happen before you take a final vote on this item or whether it is going to happen at the board of supervisors, which i think, if it moves through this commission, that it will end up at the board of supervisors. and i think that there is, from what i gather and what little due diligence i have done, as a community advocate and leader, is that there is support to bring this item before the board of supervisors. all that i am here to advocate

for, on behalf of these various groups, particularly the youth that you're going to hear about their programs, a violence prevention and everything that is going on in and around the area. obviously this is something that is a phenomenal issue in our committee, in the latino community. i just ask that you listen very carefully. obviously vote your conscience. but i would advocate, as a former civil rights lawyer of five years in the latino community, african-american community, and other communities of color, that this item be continued and further dialogue take place by the project sponsor and the local community groups that are asking for that to happen. thank you. president olague: thank you. i will keep reading of names. gloria, bruna, sylvia.

>> my name greater thanrick. president of devine inc.. a member of the advisory board. i am associated with this organization since 1982. that is when it was above mcdonald's on the 16th and mission. our firm has provided technical assistance in matters dealing with real estate, financing, and the affordable housing project. they have asked me to speak today, representing the board of directors and the advisory board. i would direct your attention to one of the statements made by mr. kim in his report to the commission. he said the project promotes public welfare, convenience, and necessity. we believe very strongly that this project promotes private gain at the expense of public

welfare. and it developed, has absolutely nothing to contribute to the particular community or the area in which it is located in. there are some very significant and fundamental differences between 1880 and this particular project. one is rental. one provides affordable housing. one has first source hiring requirements. one provides labor, job opportunities at prevailing rate should -- prevailing wage to residents of sentences go. anybody that is dissatisfied with the activities that occur in arriba juntos can essentially terminate their lease and move. because somebody is buying a condominium at 49 julian avenue for half a million dollars or

$550,000, that will be difficult to do that particular time. i did meet with mr. kim. it was a rather long meeting. i told him very clearly the sentiments of the board staff in the executive director. he just did not want to hear it. there is not one property owner on julian avenue that we know of that supports this project. not friendship house. not the owner of 1880 mission. not the armory. [bell rings] and certainly not arriba juntos. i direct your attention, please, to the letter sent to you which is outlining what the position of arriba juntos is. we believe there is no justification whatsoever in the planning code for this conditional use permit to be approved.

it is in the inert -- and neither necessary, desirable, or compatible with the neighborhoods and the community. [bell rings] president olague: thank you. you can keep coming up. whatever order. >> good afternoon, a commission. thank you for your time this afternoon. i am the program director of the northwest region of the san francisco community response networks. arriba juntos serves as our fiscal agent since 2003. we provide a regional violence prevention model that covers half of san francisco. our hub of service and central location is that 1850 mission in arriba juntos. we serve over 145 clients a year. from the surrounding areas.

i am here today because, you know, we're dealing with the most marginalized youth in san francisco. of those 145 youth that we serve, we constantly, every friday night, have youth utilize the space as a safe haven. given the magnitude of our services and the high-profile classification of our clients, we really do urge the commission to look into this a little further. we strongly urge the commission to deny this conditional use application, as there has not been any meaningful dialogue with our leadership body, with our advisory board that is made up of a key stakeholders in all these neighborhoods in which we operate, and we will lead to further discuss and possibly coordinate with -- what the budget impact would be on our services and our ability to save lives as well. again, this dialogue has not happened yet. so we are very concerned about

what the ramifications may be of this project moves forward. as stated, it really is our belief, and there have been many letters submitted it as well from our stakeholders. again, urging the board to really realize that this is not necessary, nor desirable. obviously, it is not compatible with the wishes of the community. thank you. >> hello, again afternoon. my name is gloria, the youth services director with a mission neighborhood center, the nonprofit agency providing services to families for over half -- for over half a century now. i am here to share work on behalf of our executive director of admission neighborhood center. we respectfully request a postponement of any action on your behalf regarding the 49 julian avenue project.

we have a longstanding relationship arriba juntos, and mission community nonprofit organization established in 1955, dedicated to economic and occupational training and employment opportunities. it complements the above program with the violence prevention programs. as well as weekly food pantries services that attract over 300 per disciplines. these community-based core services are provided from 1850 mission street, a property owned by arriba juntos. is evident on any given day that services attract a significant number of individuals to both 1850 mission street as well as the surrounding space. we're quite concerned that the absence of dialogue in a coordinated community engagement process by the developers of 49 julian avenue will lead to discord between the new owners of the condominiums and the staff and clients of arriba

juntos. this is what we strongly maintained that this project is not compatible with the community services that are currently provided by aj in their community-based partners. a respectful request for delay in the approval process until significant dialogue has insisted in the realistic community benefits plan is in place. we urge you to meet the arriba juntos leadership to better understand the significant additions to their constituency and our committee of this project is approved in its current form. this will not only affect aj and their clients, but we partner with them. we refer families and engage in collaborating projects. it is critical and essential for our community violence prevention effort that the youth, the highest risk youth, have a welcome, accessible, safe, and supportive environment for us to engage in violence prevention efforts.

thank you. >> if i call your name, fell free to walk up to the light. >> get afternoon. i am case manager ad arriba juntos. thank you for your time and for hearing a sow. i am here because i am representing bilingual clients in modeling " -- and monolingual clients. i work with the client to come to our center and they try to learn english and participate in evens to improve themselves in the lives of their families. i would like to specifically talk about the activities we hold outside and the parking lot, the one near the construction. if we push through -- if they push through with construction, it is going to disrupt the activities and the full range of

services that we serve to 1000 clients that we have a much as for those community events. in the year, we probably have more than 30,000 people benefiting from that. aj serves 85,000 annually, and most of those people come to our community evens, such as the refugee awareness month, where people share their heritage and culture, learn more, and promote the community. we also have the jobs fair. we invite employers and job- seekers. the last time, job-seekers came in connected with employers and found opportunities for them, for their own growth, and for the improvement of their families' lives. we also have, every christmas, we have toy drives. we have a fund-raising for kids

than for families, for them to celebrate the spirit of christmas, despite their difficulties. they have a life. they also -- will also hold even slight fund-raisers, so we can get financial support for the funded programs like the after- school programs where hundreds of kids from the day care benefit, and also after school and home help training students. -- home health training students. we hope you listen to us and consider postponing the construction are the approval of the construction for the building. thank you. >> distinguished commissioners. i am a teacher for the refugees

program. i teach english to them. arriba juntos has helped a great number of people over the years. as you have heard from my colleague, we provide them a lot of opportunities. we help them not only to learn the language, which is absolutely essential for them to be able to enter this new world, but all so we offer them the ability to learn how to look for work and be able to become active members of the society. and productive members of the society. we also have the food distribution program, which is really important to them. they need to be able to receive that kind of assistance every week, because they do not have much income. they do not have anything. so they just receive the cash so they just receive the cash assistance.