>> good afternoon. this is the regular meeting op the planning commission for august 16, 20126789 prior to taking role, if you would silence your cell phones. i'll do the same. also, the room is a little crowded and seems that a lot of you know each other. secondary discussions while the hearing is going on can prove to be extremely disruptive.

we ask that if you feel the need to talk to your friends and neighbors that you go outside. and have those conversations and not in the room while we're trying to have the hearing. thank you very much for that. roll call, commissioner cat roon moore. >> here. sugaya. >> here. >> commissioner rodney fund? >> here. >> commissioner in cindy? >> here. >> commissioner boarden is absent today. the first item is item one case number 2012 .192000-t. it's proposed to continue august 6th 2012. request for discretionary review proposed for continuance to september 13, 2012. item number three, case number 2012 .0084 dd for 2735 to 2737

baker street. request for discretionary review. i'm very happy to report that both requests for d.r. have been withdrawn and this matter is no longer before you for your consideration. commissioners i'm not aware of any other item on calendar being proposed for continuance. >> is there any public comment on the three items proposed for continuance? >> two. >> two. sorry. seeing none, commissioner sugaya? >> moved to continue to the dates cited in the agenda. >> second. >> commissioners continuance of items one and two as ro posed oen your calendar. on that motion, commissioner antonini? >> aye. >> commissioner hillard? >> eye. >> sugaya? >> aye. >> thank you. commissioners that motion passed unanimously. commissioners you're now at

your consent calendars. items four, five, and six make up the consent calendar. these items are considered to be routine and will be a single roll call vote. there will be no separate discussions unless a member of the commission, the public or staff requests. in that etcht the matters would be removed from -- and be in a future hearing. item 12 for 3235 sacramento street. previously occupied by retail store into a children's hair salon of a commercial building within the sacramento zoning district. item five is case number 2012.0822 c for poe street. it's a dd a new use size as

another entertainment use to an existing restaurant within the nc-3, mo rat skill zoning district and a 50-x. the proposal would add live and amplified music during the restaurant's operating hours. item six, .0404 b. the 183rd street. office development authorization of office use which results in a total of 834,422 square feet on the sight. 492,000 square feet at 9 83rd street. and 422,000 at 185 gerry street.

commissioners following any public comment on these items would which would automatically remove the items from consent, these matters are before you for your consideration. >> is there any public comment on these yteps on the consent calendar? >> i do have -- i'm sorry. i have two -- [inaudible] >> ok. there are two speaker cards for item number five. nancy grip ler. >> mr. president, the indication of those speaker cards would pull this off consent and i would recommend that you take up these items as the first item of your regular calendar. >> thank you. >> item four and six. >> take a vote on that one, ok. great. is there a motion to approve items four and six? commissioner moore? >> moved to approve items four and six as described. >> second.

>> ok. >> the city attorney has suggested that we make sure that the -- the requests we're speaking on item number five that those speakers understand that they do indicate that they're opposed to the project that when they come to speak they have pulled us off the consent calendar. and i'm not sure who they are. you might want to call their names again. >> nancy grip ler and -- >> you want to pull that item off consent? >> so we're going to -- >> do you want us to pull the item off consent so that you can speak to the item? thank you. >> thank you. >> commissioners a motion on the floor for items four and six for approval as proposed on that motion commissioner antonini? >> aye. >> commissioner hillis?

>> moore? >> aye. >> commissioner antonini >> aye? those a'ms have been approved as proposed. you're not at commissioner's questions and matters. item number eight is consideration of draft minutes from your regular meetings of july 12th and august 2nd, 2012 following public comment and any corrections you may have on these, we ask that you don't the draft minutes. i will sigh that for july 12th, the -- there were some corrections sent out. apologize that i did not review those corrections but again if you have questions on them, let me know and we'll make further corrections. >> is there any public comment on meeting minutes. -- minutes? seeing none, commissioners, commissioner antonini?

>> thank you for the corrections that were made and i would move to approve both sets of minutes. is there a second? >> second. >> thank you. commissioners. on the motion to approve the draft minutes from the regular meetings of july 12 and august 2nd, commissioner antonini? >> aye, commissioner hillis? >> aye. >> commissioner moore? aye. >> commissioner antonini? >> aye. >> commissioner fine? >> aye. >> you want to check if we lost sfgtv. >> we'll take just a short technical recess.

>> ok. i apologize for that. sfgtv will pick us up. we are being -- in progress.

commissioners, we're now at any other commission matter. item number nine on your calendar. >> commissioner hoar? >> i would like to ask that -- >> commissioner moore? >> i would like to ask if there is more information that there might be a developer. that disappeared. we were all very, very disapointed. i read like one or two liner that there might be somebody expressing interest with some end that he might be repackaging the project but if you have information at whatever time, i would love to hear from you. >> commissioner antonini? >> thank you. a couple of weeks ago, there was a thought i well-written article in "the chronicle" and it had -- the columnist was talking about the general state of appearance in dress in san francisco and was not really complimentary, for good reason having been a child being from

the east bay and in downtown was a little different. she did comment particularly how the women dressed. there were some letters that were really good and i thought it was humorous but with a certain amount of truth. and the land use angle of this as we hope as the dress may improve, design also continues to improve not that previous design has all been bad but certainly there's always room for improvement. i hope that's a trend of things to come. >> any additional comment? >> thank you, commissioners we are now at director's report, direct tor's announcement and a review of the past evens fromw'o announcement, for the historic preservation committee. >> good afternoon, commissioners. i would like to introduce you to the new director of current

planning in the department. he joins us from the fair city of portland, but of course he has found religion and is moving south. jeffrey has a great range of experience. 20 years of experience. he managed the urban design team and specifically projects that would be for the design commission and the historic preservation commission. the next three or four years he has a working as a consultant with the urban design consultant. the fact he is a registered architect, there is the largest single staff of the department.

we'll have jeff on board and he will start in this position, on october 9. he will be here for some time before then. jeffrey, great. and that concludes my report today. >> commissioners, just before he comes up, with the board of supervisors, the board of appeals did meet last night. my understanding from mr. sanchez is that there were no items before then pertaining to the planning commission. >> the department's staff, a couple of items.

with the historic preservation commission, my report will be a little bit longer than normal. the architectural review committee met before the regular hearing, with design advice before the project. this is a series of life safety upgrades. for the new assembly. the architectural review committee was impressed with a level of sensitivity taken, with much of the historic interior. this is currently going through sequa review and will move through this fall. the historic preservation commission initiated the first landmark district, and the

initiation, for 2003 and the city of san francisco. the commission initiated the landmark designation of the continuous district, with the building's clad and bricks across the mid market area identified as part of the market plan. planning staff has conducted an extensive public outreach, with each of those buildings owners and we have support except for one building that we are still trying to contact for the landmark designation. because this is the initiation of a landmark district, a recommendation by this commission is required before it goes to the board of supervisors. we hope to have this for you by late september. we also improved to several entitlements, and one of them

was 1355 market street. the twitter building at the old sf mart. there were a series of storefront operations and -- and outdoor space along stevenson alley. we also review this project, but the project design team with the june 6 hearing. this was to procure entitlements. and we complied with the recommendations of the department's staff and the architectural review committee. and there was the ground floor storefront alterations along market street, and the h pc voted to approve the project with minor revisions to the condition. proposed by the staff.

and we have the bayview opera house. there was a series of upgrades including a new outdoor stage and landscape improvements surrounding the opera house. this project was funded through the redevelopment agency and the remains from the former redevelopment agency, including a very elevated walkway to provide access along the entire site. there was a great deal of discussion about the contemporary design of the elevated walkway. they did approve the project with some modifications to the walkway, to allow for a stronger performance with the interior standards and some of the items found here. this is a turn-of-the-century

structure and some of this could be softened by introducing more would materials to the elevated portions of the war where. finally, the h pc previewed a veterans memorial, which has been proposed since the original design of the war memorial court between the opera house and the war memorial building. thomas church intended for this to be included at this location but for many reasons, political and financial, nothing had been designed. after a great deal of discussion about some of the modifications, which include the of grades and the configurations of historic hedges, they did improve this project -- for the installation

of the new veterans memorial. that concludes my report unless you have any questions about yesterday's hearing. thank you. commissioner antonini: an excellent report, as always. a question about the district, if i am stating the title correctly. i assume that as we move forward, restoration of these buildings would have to honor their historic status and keep them as they are. >> the buildings were designated as as but any future alterations would have to be in compliance with the historic character. one of the key points that i have been working on his decided she and the store from improvement program for each of

the building. when there is a new tenant there is the understanding of what kind of changes are acceptable at the ground-floor level. >> i would assume that they have oversight of the buildings that filled the discontinuous portions, that's not deemed to be historical buildings. and they would still have some input about when they would improve this construction? >> this commission would have the review approval of those designs. the unique aspects of this district, is that each of these buildings is designated, so the borders of the district are just the perimeter of the footprint of each building. as a new building requires the entitlement, we will have this in your packet at this time. >> they will have a comment on

those buildings. my thought is that they could be as contextual as possible. to bring in some continuous nature. >> that is the intention. all of these are exemplary buildings that were identified as part of the market plan. >> thank you. commissioner moore: i thank you for your update. the owner -- >> there is no intent at this time but they're trying to provide life safety upgrades for the assembly use. there was discussion about the bank teller counter. the planning staff has come up with a compromise to keep portions of that so that they can provide a large assembly space, and they felt that this

was a very reasonable compromise. >> and forever young -- those are uses in the buildings that are hard to manage? this sounds like a very appropriate way of going through this. >> thank you. >> commissioners, before we go further, all of the surrounding the door, you create a fire hazard. i need you to move over to the other side of the room, or find a seat, if there is one available. thank you. commissioners, this is the 15- minute general public comment category, where members of the public can talk about things that fall within the

jurisdiction with regard to agenda items. each member of the public may address you for three minutes each. i do not have any speaker cards. >> is there any general public comment on items not on today's calendar? president fung, i was there and it took a lot to get that two- run home run. i would like to thank the mayor for his appointment of rich ellis to the planning commission. i have worked with him in the past and look forward to a continued relationship. the preservation fund committee will miss you, sorely. thank you very much. for the record, joe butler. thank you.

>> commissioners, are there no other speakers for public comment? >> good afternoon, commissioners, members of the public. i represent the efficient co. i would like to use the overhead. i brought you guys a blank page here, and what this says it represents a nice picture as opposed to 407 ferrel street. i am not sure if you've passed this -- it is not a pretty picture. a lot of homeless live outside the building. crack and fights and heroin and dancing in the street, things like this we can't house in the

city. we wllook for answers to mid- market problems. the building is vacant. the owenrner is 5th church of christ science. this is stapled up with plywood and there are also a pair of illegal signs above this and i would like to invite everyone to join us for an hour of reading, to promote a drug-free community and also, any pressure on them to house something besides this could only be beneficial. thank you. >> for those two people who are standing on either side of the door, please go to the other side of the room, you create a fire hazard.

>> next on general public comment -- >> i am linda chapman. i want to speak about the knob hill neighborhood. i really feel out of turn, commissioners. i see some signals that may encourage people to feel that they should come forward to speak for the community. this is what the community wants, whether or not they know what the community wants. why went for training and community organizing 101, they said that this is typical. people feel that there is a need, and they organize for the community, they feel they speak for the community. they said, find out what the community wants and have the

community speak for itself, if possible. i have heard some signals that encourage that. i asked that the coalition for san francisco neighborhoods, what happened? several groups at nob hill have done this. they say that things change and i said, no, except over there. what could be the reason? is this a supervisor? or maybe it is things from here. when you see two people telling you they represent the community, or one person, and then you don't see the community, or you see a bunch of people who saw the notice and came in here, you should ask yourself, is this a group of well-intended people or maybe

not? and my doing something that maybe encouraging that? this is a concern i wanted to express. >> and is there any additional public comment? seeing none, the next item. >> commissioners, we go back to item number five that was taken off of the consent calendar. this is case 2012, for 1865 post st., and the conditional use authorization. >> good afternoon. the item before you is a request for a conditional use authorization for 1665 post street. this is for the use of 4000 square feet for entertainment use in a lounge and restaurant

of approximately 5000 square feet on the ground floor of the two-story commercial building. this would have live, why in jazz music and cover bands. currently, the restaurant is open from tuesday until thursday, friday, -- saturday and sunday to 11:00 p.m.. music would be offered during active hours. prior to this, this was vacant for approximately one year after being occupied by restaurant doing business -- and the project site is on the south side between fillmore and webster street. this is approximately 1000 square feet in size, in the japan town special use district.