working with supervisor mar and planners. we came to some discussions on this area i want to give you a little bit of background. on how i finally came to a conclusion that -- originally, my conclusion was from palm to emerson, there is a special enclave that is below laurel heights and there is a long history that i discussed with supervisor mar. there was a history that goes all the way back to the spanish-american war and the cemetery history. people do not like to talk about that, but it was there. i wanted to have all the way of to emerson, to help -- to have the single-family homes protected there. when supervisor mar took out the scott st. to masonic, i was looking at the height in both districts and how it could be

contiguous. if it is split up from masonic and suddenly jordan part is not allowed, i do not know how that is contiguous, but i will take whatever i can. that is what i have come up with. jordan part, the box that he mentioned, i appreciate very much the effort they put into have respect for unique characteristic neighborhood and the unique area of jordan park. president miguel: is there any additional public comment on this item? if not, public comment is closed. i would like to thank regina for coming. this is something we have discussed in other districts before. i would like to thank the department very much for working with the supervisors in order to include the clement and balboa areas. i particularly mention of balboa

because that is often forgotten as a commercial district in richmond. this is going to work. i have full confidence that the entire area will, over years, nothing is going to happen tomorrow, but over years, improved itself from some of the very low rise one-story, sometimes to stories, but a low ground floor that make it very difficult for retail establishments to deal with their patients -- with their patrons. i am very pleased with this. commissioner fong: i think this is a great area to promote activation, pedestrian priority, to get folks on the street. spending more money. they have done a great job

there. there will help activate that on the sidewalks. i am supportive of this and i think, from a small business and large business perspective, this is something we should look after the rest of the city and. i'm glad we are tackling these one at a time. i am supportive of this, particularly the proposed legislation. commissioner antonini: i am also very supportive and. by doing this, it might tend to attract businesses or at existing businesses and live in their presence a little bit more, -- enliven their presence a little bit more and everyone will gain because i think it will attract more business and it will be helpful for all concerned because geary is a very visible street. it has had its challenges to. i think it will help. i understand the jordan park.

i am familiar with the district. it was built after words because it had another usage. it is almost exclusively single- family homes that is not as high. i can understand their interest in keeping the buildings on the front of geary to a certain height. one of the provisions of this allows a five-foot bonus at the top. it has more of an impact on them. it also keeps the buildings to be sort of what they are now. it does not change the distribution of those particular buildings. i can understand that. this sounds like we could compromise. i think the other parts that are included will work. commissioner moore: very much in support of the ordnance and i'm very happy that, from working with some of the neighborhood input, and those sensitivities were reflected in the way this is in front of us. whenever we were talking about

ground floor-, it has all the positive attributes of pedestrian activity and retail which is street-friendly. but i ask that the buildings are also buildings that are some of the laudable -- subdividable. most buildings that provide retail only allow small space without allowing space for smaller tenants. particularly on balboa and large parts of geary, there are small- scale entrepreneurial. when the buildings come in, we mostly built larger buildings. that is the nature of how it goes these days. they are aggregated and create a larger building footprint where

it is very easy to have one lobby and one or two spaces that are too large for the entrepreneurial merchants which characterized the strength of san francisco's commercial environment in these areas and other areas. i strongly ask that that be built in when we encourage this legislation. i can not create the verbiage which would correctly addressed that without -- but would ask planning to step in and guarantee that we are allowing for that to be a basic foundation when we are looking at 12-foot ground floor height. president miguel: do we have a motion? >> i moved to approve with modifications. commissioner moore: could i ask the city attorney of the

particular phrase as how to write a particular phrase as applicable to this particular legislation? >> this piece of legislation is already introduced to the board by supervisor mar so you are merely providing review and comment of this legislation. you can either provide specific language about a topic or you can request that the supervisory look further into an issue or provide general recommendation. commissioner moore: thank you for clarifying that. i will ask the supervisors to consider that we have talked about it many times before. it might have gotten not look that -- not looked at so i would just pass this on for your consideration. president miguel: commissioner

sugaya. commissioner sugaya: never mind. commissioner antonini: i'm fine with the spirit of what commissioner moore is saying. we are only talking about the height increase, not designation as to what they're going to do with the frontage and how it is going to be divided up. sometimes it is advantageous to have a larger and sometimes it's better to add to or three smaller businesses. >> the way you at the architecture, this is not just the subdivided phase. obviously you could rent the entire space. >> second emotion. -- the motion. >> commissioners, you have a

motion for approval. with that motion -- >> aye. >> aye. >> aye. >> aye. >> aye. >> aye. >> i believe that we go back now to item number 9. hot h >> going back to item number one. this item was removed from the

consent calendar. this is case number 2010.1038c. >> good afternoon. this is a request for a conditional use authorization to develop a full-service restaurant with limited to beer and wine service in an existing vacant commercial space within the commercial district. this is not a formula retail. this is to be occupied by the red shot and this is located but -- this is occupied by the restaurant. the hours would be restricted from 8:00 a.m. to 11:00 p.m.

sunday through thursday and 8:00 a.m. to midnight on friday and saturday. alcohol service would be limited to beer and wine. conditions of approval we are recommending deal with issues that are often a nuisance with restaurants such as noise from fans and odor. the department has not received any comment and recommends approval with conditions as the project would not contribute to any overconcentration of eating and drinking establishments and would not be open after midnight and applies with the requirements of the planning code. >> good afternoon. i am representing the living room. i have a few good recipes that i want to share.

i have a bone in short ribs and it has been raised for four hours. after that, we pull off the meat and we serve it over a bed of arugula over a slice of french bread. we also have an all-star -- in oyster plao-boy. at the same time, we also have this vacant retail space and it used to be a noodle factory and it is just sitting there vacant and we want to open this up because we think this will enhance the street and bring a

lot of new business over there. it will create jobs. we do plan to serve beer and wine with a great food needs a great beverage to go along with it. i'm hoping to see everyone out there in the next year or so. >> thank you. >> i only have one public comment. >> is there any additional public comment on this? public comment is closed. >> the applicant did not realize that some of us have not eaten lunch. >> move to approve.

>> second with conditions. >> the motion on the floor is for approval with conditions as proposed. >> aye. >> aye. >> aye. >> aye. >> aye. >> that item has been approved. commissioners, you are now on item number nine. an informational presentation on the department fiscal year 2012- 2013 budget. >> thank you. today, we are presenting the proposed revenue and expenditure budget of the last time, we talked about the work plan and we say you memos regarding the existing status with regard to the budget and in a nutshell, as a halfway through the year, we are standing -- we are seeing

flat growth. this was not a surprise to see some major revenue increases throughout the rest of this fiscal year because we have seen some big projects going forward. this does not reflect any changes with respect to the development and the elimination of the redevelopment agency's that would come to you subsequently. i am very pleased with the fact that the second year and a row we're not recommending any fear increases other than what the consumer price index allows which is 2.2%. we believe that the projection of about 3% revenue growth next year combined with the cpi increase is sufficient for us to meet our budget target.

>> good afternoon, commissioners. it is my pleasure to be here to present the fiscal year 2012, 2013-2014 budget. i provided copies to members of the public if they would like to follow as well. today i will expand on why the director has mentioned as far as recent volume trends and are cases and i will go into some more detail about the department's revenue and expenditure budget and talk about the grants budget. some capital and technology budget requests that we will be submitting. i will have a brief overview of every cent initiative completed by the department in performing its performance measures and some reminders on the remaining calendar items. let me start with a recent

volume trends and expanding on what the grant has mentioned. the applications which includes our review of building permits and planning applications have stabilized over the past four fiscal years. this does represent a majority of the volume at over 81% of the total volume for the department. the department experienced a significant decline in permit and application volume of approximately 18% from the prior year during the economic recession. this represented the most significant decline in volume over the prior 8 fiscal years. last year, the department anticipated that volume will increase by 3% in this current year with six months of data complete during the year. volume through december is relatively flat year on year. although that a volume increase has not yet materialized, we are

experiencing some rapid growth in volume in the more recent months, in november and december, particularly in the environmental cases. this is a sign of increased activity that we anticipate seeing through the remainder of the year that will hopefully flow through the remaining budget years. the premise that is anticipating a 3% volume increase in fiscal year 12-13. moving into the revenue budget to more than 80% of the revenue comes from the fees that we generate from our project sponsors and there are three main assumptions to the growth that we anticipate in the upcoming budget years. first is the automatic consumer price index or the cpi adjustment of just over 2%. second is we are anticipating the volume growth of the

application which will result in increased revenue. third, we are anticipating implementing the recommendations from the comprehensive study that is currently under way. that process is going right now. we have those in the upcoming 8 years. revenue is expected to slightly increase and the department will receive a small percentage of impact fee revenue. this is an honor to recover costs associated with the programs. the department's expenditure rate for services that we provide to other city agencies is anticipated to decline slightly. this is mainly due to the completion of some major projects such as the america's cup 34 project. the general fund is 1.8 million

in fiscal 12-13. this is meeting the mayor's target of a reduction by 5% year on year. moving on to the expenditure budget, salary and fringe expenditures for department staff represents the majority of the department's expenditures at approximately 8% per year. salary rates are anticipated to grow year over year. we are expecting some growth in allen on personal services, capital outlay and project expenditures and i want to go more detail into what -- i want to go into more detail about what those are. we are proposing additional staffing proposal. since the economic downturn back in 2008 and the resulting budget deficits, the department reduced its overall position account and made other budget reductions. the department began to

experience some growth in its fee revenues. as a result, the department has been able to leverage this growth in revenue to address some staffing issues to fill some vacant positions. this staffing effort began through the creation of the plan or technician classification series and other support staff additions over the past two years. the department has run civil service examinations for existing planner classifications and has been filling them over the past few years as well. to continue this implementation of the department's staffing savage -- strategy, there are needs in the payroll, technical support function and for a website and permanent tracking system support. moving on to the non personal services item, these include things such as professional

service contracts, advertising and postage. this is increasing mainly due to increased contract authority for the completion of the environmental impact report among various other grant-funded contracts. capital outlay projects are slated to increase in fiscal 12-13 mainly due to increasing storage area equipment which is in line with the department's technology upgrade schedule. also, the department is planning to replace one of its two cars in order to comply with the city's health the air and clean transportation ordinance. there are other initiatives i would like to highlight in the budget in collaboration with the apartment building inspection and the human services agency. they're hoping to consolidate with the other two agencies into one location. this will have some up-front

costs associated with that move though we will experience greater efficiency and cost savings in the long term. i would like to point out that we're hoping to participate with the tax collector's office with implementing an enterprise solution for a point of sales system. this will allow for credit card transactions and on-line payments and potentially wire transfers and it will allow us to provide much-needed customer service to our feet payers. that will require an up-front cost. moving on to the grant but it -- budget. this is anticipated to increase slightly in fiscal 12-13 too 1.5 million and then to about 1.6

million in fiscal 13-14, where we are anticipating that it will stabilize. there will be six new grants in fiscal 12-13. the first two that i listed and the urban forest master plan our current grants that the department has an these represent the remaining appropriation authority that we need in order to complete the project. the department has already submitted three capital budget requests to the capital planning committee, they of the first three items listed here. we have already submitted these to the capital planning committee. we were planning to submit our final request to the committee on information technology for the remaining budget that we

need in order to implement tracking system. this final act will get the department through the necessary funding required for system development, application implementation, software licensing. i am happy to report that we just completed an effort on improving the department's performance measures that we report publicly and in the comptroller's performance measurement system. we have developed a new set of measures that focuses much more on measures of efficiency and outcomes and the customer service that we provide to our stakeholders. in the memo, i detailed the new measures we are proposing to report including the targets for fiscal 12-13 that we will strive to meet. our ability to report this information and track it more

frequently will greatly improve once the new permit tracking system is fully implemented. we will have a much more robust reporting tool in that system and a greater wealth of information and data capabilities. i want to close on this. this will be an intricate process. we will be looking at the performance measures and adjust them as needed as our service levels of all over time. yesterday, i delivered the same presentation to the preservation commission. we will come on the 16th for your approval of the budget so that we can submit it to the mayor's office on february 21st. that concludes my presentation and i am happy to answer any questions that you may have. >> is to any public comment on

this item? public comment is closed. >> this is a difficult question to ask. redevelopment has ceased to exist and you will be taking on a number of functions including doing double duty, filling in in the areas that you described and the cost with revenue. i am concerned that you are covered to take on a large amount of additional responsibility with no provisions with revenue and budgeting. >> this does not reflect that because we don't know that. we will be spending some time working with the comptroller's office to understand the revenue side of that picture and we need to do work to understand what we

need to do to take over what, if any responsibility. we might be coming back to you in the next couple of months with an additional budget revision. we don't know what those numbers are. there has not been enough time to figure that out. >> you are not basically saying that this is what we see? obviously, there is a void in the presence of a budget. those might create holes. >> we have to submit the budget to the mayor by the 21st. we will be coming to you in two weeks to finalize this version. i don't think that we will know the answer to that question. what might happen is that after they go to the mayor, we

will have to work this out and say that the mayor has proposed this change and we will let you know at that time. it takes about two months to go to the board. he submits it on june 1st. there is about a three month gap from the time we give him the budget and the time that he submits the city budget. by june 1st, we will know and we will have an answer to that question more specifically. >> the presentation is totally satisfying and in detail and in depth. i know they are more than just one person. this is like having a carpeted banker talk to you and to say, let's run. i am happy to support it. >> thank you. >>