[gavel] supervisor mar: the afternoon. this is the monday, april 2, 2012, meeting of the land use meeting for the san francisco board of supervisors. i am eric mar. ms. miller, are there any things to say? clerk miller: police and that things to the clerk. items to be on today's agenda

unless otherwise stated. supervisor mar: colleagues, we have five things on the agenda, and, ms. miller, could you please call item no. 1? clerk miller: item number one, a planning code for eating and drinking establishments definitions and controls. supervisor mar: the sponsors are supervisors wiener, olague, and chu. supervisor wiener? supervisor wiener: thank you. tate day -- today before the committee is something long overdue, with dysfunctional eating and drinking controls. this simplifies the planning could, with 13 different

definitions, reducing that number to three. either a full-service restaurant or bar. this is a piece of legislation that allows new businesses to start and allows existing businesses to adapt to changing demands instead of micromanaging them. this legislation is neighbor and friendly. it maintains and even strengthens the carefully tailored controls for the city's various commercial corridors to ensure that they remain unique, balanced, and neighborhood specific and that vacancies will be filled in those neighborhoods. the legislation's would make the city controls more flexible, allowing for new ideas and for businesses to improve and adapt over time.

it is currently so overly specific that they do things like regulate whether a café can have a toaster or not. whether it can only be served in a cup, whether they can have 10 shares or 11 shares, whether a bagel must be served cold or plastic. this legislation will encourage job growth and economic investment in the districts. it would allow food and drink establishments to be flexible and dynamic instead of under strict, -- , and often outdated controls. the legislation has been pending for about one year, and recommended unanimously by the planning commission and unanimously by the small

business commission. today, introducing amendments to the legislation. i have been advised by the city attorney that these amendments -- i will ask that the amendment be adopted, and then i'll ask that the committee continued the item for one week. in general, just to describe the amendments, this resulted in a meeting with planning department staff, and i want to thank them for enormous legislation over time, and my aide, who i think basically spent the entire weekend trying to get amendments

incorporated and get everything in shape. these amendments resulted from various neighborhoods and specifically from and north beach and chided him, and we have been able to work closely with president -- from north beach and chinatown, and we have been able to closely work with president chiu. the abc definition, so we do not put restaurants in a position where there are classified as a bar by one of us in a restaurant by the other. it will make enforcement easier, as well. it will strengthen or put in place the requirements that a

restaurant be a bona fide eating place as defined by the abc. there would be some minor changes to various neighborhood commercial districts based on feedback, and in some situation changing a conditional use to a non conditional use or vice versa. in several other minor changes as well. in terms of some of the specific neighborhoods that are affected by the amendments, i will not go through all of them, but in terms of those that have been most active, i want to call out a few. on polk street we are adding language for when a liquor license is requested. on broadway, we are adding a prohibition on formula retail to those restaurants and limited restaurants. in addition to language

requiring a cu when there is a liquor license being requested, among other changes, and in north beach, there are some changes related to a basic category and how this category goes. based on feedback from the chinatown merchants, we are eliminating the requirement for conditional use, for limited restaurants, as requested by the neighborhood. there are other amendments as well, and folks will have an opportunity over the next week to review those changes. but i will say that these amendments make an already strong piece of legislation even stronger, and, colleagues, i look forward to having your support, so are there any comments, colleagues? supervisor mar: supervisor wiener, i want to thank you for

your work on this along with supervisors olague and chu in your openness to amendments, and i am glad this will have a little bit more time for people to give input, and i am looking forward to those amendments. i really appreciate the hard work that you and mr. power and other separate into this, as well as supervisor olague. supervisor wiener thank you, president chu. -- mar. if there are no comments, i would like to ask for others to come out. >> good afternoon, supervisors. at the request of the supervisor, i was sure you the video that was shown. i am supposed to let people know

that they should switch over to the video. >> hello, a city planner. i am a small business with an exciting new restaurant concept. either and planning issues i should be aware of? >> great. san francisco wants new business entrepreneurs to open new businesses to keep our city dynamic and unique. what type of restaurant and where? >> i would like to open in my neighbor. what do you mean what type of restaurant? >> to sort out the applicable rules, i need to ask for some questions. will the customers come to the counter or order at the table? >> i guess they would come to the counter. >> with the food be served at the counter or at the table? >> i guess by a waiter, like a cafe. >> the planning code has a more -- is more like a fast-food

restaurant. will you be serving disposable rappers? >> no. why does the planning committee care if i use disposable rappers? >> because if it is disposable wrappers, it is a fast-food restaurant. since you are using plates, you are a full-service restaurant. it allows full-service restaurants, but only with conditional use, which takes about four to six months and $4,000 in fees. >> that is an longtime and expensive. i do not think i could afford the rent on an empty space for that long. what if i were self serve? >> to be self-serving, you will have to have the customers pick up the food from the counter. >> ok, i will have the customers pick up the food at the counter and served in disposable wrappers. >> and what is the size?

1000 square feet or less would be a small fast-food restaurant. above that, you would be a fast food -- beat a larger. >> neither is allowed. >> less than 1000 square feet of >> small require conditional use in the upper market neighborhood, but you can open a coffee shop. >> can i sell sandwiches and bagels at a coffee shop? >> yes, as long as they are prepackaged and not tested. >> if i do not cream cheese on them or put sandwiches and a sandwich press? >> yes, that would violate the planning code, and we would have to send in enforcement to confiscate your toaster. >> can i serve ice-cream at my

coffee shop. >> only if it is served in a cup and not a coach. otherwise, we would have to send an enforcement officer to confiscate your ice cream cones. >> of their tether roles we have to follow? >> yes, your coffee shop can have 15 seats with no more than a certain square footage to limited to receiving. it must have a limited menu, served as the customer service menu counter. >> thank you. this has been very informative. perhaps i should keep my job as a cater waiter. >> thank you. i am glad i could help. >> that killed at the planning commission, by the way.

[laughter] as the video shows, our current reston definitions are confusing, and they do not make kids. it has thousands of hits on youtube, so it seems to obstruct it could, not only in san francisco but around the country. while it may seem absurd, many small businesses have set similar conversations with planners, some of which i have been a part of. there has been frustration with the definitions for many years, but the drive to rewrite them was 20 years after adoption. and there was a report. and this report suggested an overhaul of the restaurant controls, partially because new, more effective regulations had been added to the code since the controls were adopted. we still controls, a neighborhood notification, and active controls. the planning commission also wanted the restaurant controls to be examined in told the

department's to kobold when reviewing the definitions, so we did. we were able to distill the existing 13 definitions down to three use categories and consolidate them to one section of the code and still maintain most of the specific controls for most of the neighborhood districts. with a vote of 7-0, the planning commission unanimously voted to send this to the board with a recommendation for approval. since that time, several tweaks and amendments have been made, and this process has made the proposed registration stronger and more comprehensive. they have still been able to control this with the three categories. the department is extremely appreciative of supervisor wiener, olague, and chu, who have signed on as co-sponsors. what you are seeing is legislation that will simplify

the code, help small businesses, spur innovation, maintain the uniqueness of the city neighborhoods, and reduce unnecessary regulation and enforcement actions, and i am here to answer any questions you may have. thanks. w -- supervisor wiener: thank you. ms. tang, from supervisor chu's office is here, and would you like to say something? >> as you stated, it is long overdue legislation, and as the video clearly showed, our current planning goods are very unclear as to all the regulations that people who want to start restaurants or drinking establishments, all of the different rules that they have to abide by. when we talk about making commercial corridors vibrant and

things that people want to visit, many drinking and eating establishments that serve as anchors to the city. for example, in the outer sunset, people come from all over the city just to eat there, and so we think this this is a really good government efficiency legislation that also benefits people who want to start drinking and eating establishments here in san francisco. we have done quite a bit of outreach, and the merchants are very supportive. supervisor chu has also gone out to other parts of the city for support, so we think the planning department. we think this is a great piece of legislation, and the city has worked very hard to incorporate a lot of the feedback from the various merchants associations, so we do urge the land use to approve this. supervisor wiener: thank you very much. miss? >> good afternoon, supervisors. the office of small business

opened in may 2008 the assistance center, and food establishment businesses are one of the top business sectors that my office provides business assistance to. assisting these businesses through the labyrinth of definitions of eating and drinking establishments, it was clear that we needed to do something. not only the planning department, but our office, we have these conversations with business owners on a daily basis. and it was clear that these definitions needed to being refined and simplified, especially since we now have the formula retail control definitions. understanding the complexities of the current code as it is is difficult in english, but imagine what it is lead for business owners where english is not their first language, and we have had to