this is a view on the inside looking back towards the rear of the restaurant, towards the patio. here you're on the interior looking the opposite direction towards the front of the restaurant towards the entry at sutter street. then here you can see a very typical evening dining experience. here's the inside dining area at the rear looking out towards the back patio in question. and here we are on the back patio looking towards the east. it's quite notable that the owners have allowed foliage and vinage to grow along this portion of the patio to, a, increase privacy and absorb noise for the neighbor towards the east who has been the primary neighbor expressing concern throughout this process. the new fences along the south and west side which is what you see on the right-hand side of

the photo, this was initially designed and built with outdoor seating in mind. so, we selected a height of 6 foot 6 to be above the height of any standing patron to allow for privacy while still allowing natural light to come over the top of the fence into the patio. the east side that you're looking at there, the foliage is actually the original fence. it's about 10 inches lower than the rest of the fence around the patio, but with the foliage it stands up about as tall as the rest of the fences you can see there. there's been some conversation about raising the fence height but we feel pretty strongly raising this won't add any more privacy or prevent noise from going outside of the patio. instead, we are suggesting that as a better noise mitigation option, that we install umbrellas over the patios, large umbrellas. this will be much more effective, we think, for

containing noise from conversation than raising the fence height. and the other reason we are suggesting umbrellas, not raising the fence, because the patio is so small. it's only eight-foot deep. but the large umbrellas standing on the ground if we're raising the patio we're going to have conflicts with the umbrellas and the fence. so, really encouraging you to consider that we install umbrellas as a way to contain the noise. the last point about that is that the landlord also is more in favor of umbrellas over any kind of raising of the fence. this is a view the opposite side looking towards the west. this picture was taken a couple months ago. the foliage you saw in the left side of the photograph is continuing to grow along -- on the left side is the south edge of the fence. so, it's continuing to grow along there to beautify and add [inaudible] noise absorption.

here's an aerial view looking towards sutter street. and i think this really says a lot. the building in question is an a-shaped building on the right hand portion of it is the red rectangle where we have the restaurant. and then there is a dashed red line showing the actual patio itself. you can see there is a large common parking lot, which is tree lined in the southern border, this is to the south of the patio. abutting the open parking lot is yet another quite large open parking lot and open space which is a part of the golden gate apartments. there are three buildings and 10 to the east and the south. the large tan colored buildings comprise the golden gate apartments where a majority of the residents who have expressed concerns and opposition on the petition dated september 21st live. most of these units are quite a long ways away from the actual

patio which you'll see on the next slide. third thing i want to point out is there are quite a lot of trees and ground cover, shrubbery lining in front of the golden gate building. and also between the two parking lots that are abutting. so, this view -- and i apologize, the slide seems to have gotten switched a bit. it's circled showing a radius of 1100 feet, close tore to the patio of the neighboring building. * 100 feet block 684 fall outside the 600-foot radius. the green circles provide visual and audio buffering. the northwest corner of the block, that would be lot 40, 41, 27 39, the western wing of

the restaurant, the subject property building actually blocks sound and visually the view between the patio and those buildings. so, of the three golden gate apartments buildings, buildings 2 and 3 are well outside the 100-foot radius ring. most residents who live here are quite further than 150 feet. these residents, it is important to point out, also the block it is an nc-3 zoning area. so, there is quite a bit of noise on fillmore, really all those streets. fillmore street, post, webster and sutter due to buses, cars, pedestrian traffic and we feel that, you know, with the fence, with the umbrellas, with the small size of the patio, the overwhelming majority of the residents who live on this block won't even know there are people dining here. this is a panorama looking

north toward the back patio. you can see what you have of the subject building in the center. the patio is on the right-hand side. : the photograph was taken at about 36 feet from the back patio. there is another 114 feet between where the photographer is standing and the building, the next building behind it. * so, we're looking at a lot of space here. this is kind of the reverse view where the photographer is standing outside of the back patio and then looking south ward, panning towards the east to the west. so, building 2 of the golden gate apartments is shown on the left way in the distance. the dimensions of that building are between 95 feet and 310 feet. so, each unit falls within that range of distance from the patio. building 3 at the south, their units are between 150 feet and 250 feet from the patio. and then looking to the right towards the west, the closest

point to the building on lot 37 is 85 feet. as you go north , the distance gets -- increases. i wanted to address a few quick points about the petition that was circulated in opposition to the project. * i think sharon has already clarified that that was circulated before we had this conversation and reduced the hours down to 10:00 p.m. so, we're asking for 10:00 p.m. 7 days a week. also originally communicated that music will be provided on the patio. we clarified that and said there would be no music or amplified sound of any kind. and also we did some pretty detailed analysis of each of the signs and where the units are in the golden gate apartments and where they actually live. there is one person who signed up outside the 300-foot radius, 22 people outside the 150-foot radius, 24 outside the 100-foot

radius and five within 100 feet of the patio. so, just a couple more slides. this one talks about the outreach that we've done. we did have a pre-application meeting. we invited 250 -- 215 invite es including all the residents. beyond what is required for the abutting properties. we had four attendees. three of these were close, one and two doors down neighbors and there was one representative of those neighbors. we had quite a bit of meetings. i won't list these out, but pacific heights residents, association, i think sharon listed those earlier. we did have another meeting with ms. yamada the abutting neighbor to the east and the opposition to clarify where we

stood with the conditions. and we sent an outreach letter to all the people who signed the petition, clarifying where we stood. so, i think that sharon has pretty much touched on all of these, so, i won't repeat anything here, but basically tracy and gerard are committed to, you know, keeping the neighbors happy and they're going to train the employees well so that they [inaudible]. >> i think your time is close to up. okay. i'll finish by saying this is [speaker not understood] because its was raised regarding pests and vermin. they had three inspections -- >> i think your time is really up now. if we have any questions, we'll be sure to ask, especially

about pests and vermim. i'm opening it up for public comment. i have one speaker card, marianne hoyt, yeah. good afternoon, commissioners. my name is marianne hory. my family has lived in golden gate apartments for about 30 years. golden gate apartment is an affordable housing complex owned by chinatown community development center. i'm here to ask the planning commission to decline the request by rooster tail restaurant at 1963 sutter street to add an outdoor activity area for 18 restaurant patron use which is open every day from 11:30 a.m. in the morning until 10:00 p.m. at night in the japantown special use district. the outdoor area faces approximately 60 bedrooms in

the interior courtyard area and currently there is no written provision for an acoustic mechanism to contain the noise from the restaurant. the outdoor patio is simply surrounded by a six-foot six-inch fence. the trees and shrubbery do not mitigate surrounding neighborhood noise. thank you very much for your consideration in this quality of life matter. >> thank you. i'm going to interrupt public comment just for a second. commissioner wu. >> although i serve on this commission as an individual town cdc is my employer and, so, i think for public transparency, to avoid any sense of conflict, i will recuse myself from the item. ask to be recused. >> so moved. >> second. >> on that motion to recuse, commissioner wu, commissioner antonini? >> aye. >> commissioner borden? >> aye.

he commissioner hillis? >> aye. >> commissioner moore? >> aye. >> commissioner sugaya? >> aye. >> commissioner wu? >> aye. >> and commission president fong? >> aye. >> commissioner wu, you are here by recused. >> okay, continuing on with public comment, i think, jonas, there is one on the rail there. if there is any other public comment, if you would like to come up. all right. nichiko yamada. good afternoon, commissioners. my name is nichiko yamada and i live at 1959 sutter street adjacent to rooster tail restaurant. i grew up in the western addition jay town area and my

parents owned a small japanese confectionery store in this neighborhood for 36 years. my parents believed that they were able to be in business for so long because of the good will and support of this neighborhood and community. i am proud of their achievement. our neighborhood is a diverse neighborhood with a culturally rich history. people here are friendly, supportive and welcoming of businesses. many are long-term residents who have lived here for 20, 30 years. in times of need such as during the 1989 earthquake or during heavy storms, the neighbors came together to help one another. we are fortunate to be a member of this community where residents are committed to creating a safe, thriving and respectful environment. when rooster tail restaurant informed us that they were proposing to expand and have an outdoor dining room patio, we became very concerned.

since there were noise and pre-existing pests and rodent issues in the area. residents had valid concerns about noise, sanitation, and cleanliness. our four-block area is made up of three-fourth residences and one-fourth businesses. because we felt our concerns were not being adequately addressed a petition was started. people who lived on sutter, webster post and fillmore signed an opposition and collect $5 5 signatures. we appreciate rooster tail restaurants support of our concerns, putting up signage, and to hose and clean the outdoor patio nightly and maintain cleanliness. since this past monday i have been informing all the petition signees of these recent changes and inquiring whether they agree to these changes or wish

to continue opposing. as of today, 26 signees have responded, but there has not been a consensus since some are still opposed. our actions have always been motivated by our sincere wish to protect our neighborhood, our homes, and the quality of life of everyone who lives and does business here. we look forward to working with rooster tail restaurant for the betterment of our neighborhood and community. thank you very much. >> thank you. is there any additional public comment? public comment portion is closed. commissioner antonini. >> yeah, ms. young, are you in agreement with the project sponsor as far as the distances that have been presented in the report? it looks like they're fairly extensive between the patio area, the closest being 85 feet, many of them over 100 feet.

>> am i in agreement? >> do you agree with the accuracy of that, what we saw? >> i'd say roughly it should be from that radius. i didn't have a map to scale that was presented to me, but based on that, i mean, even going, i guess on a site, there is some distance as far as like the large parking lot, common area. >> right, that's my key point. we have had a number of different patio situations and almost all of them are much closer to adjoining neighbors and these are i would say huge distances, with parking lots in between. and it sounds to me like they've modified their usage to go only to 10 o'clock at night, is that correct? >> yes. just to clarify, with the neighbors came in, [speaker not understood] the restaurant was closed at 10:00 and patrons were outside finishing up, cleaning up, what have you. we are trying to clarify all

restaurant operations, everyone should basically be out. everything should be closed by then. >> yeah, it sounds like they've agreed to that. and they also have responded from what was presented to the last speaker to concerns about cleaning the area and all those other things. >> yeah. i think between -- from the correspondence or what was provide today me, there is some back and forth and trying to make some concessions, you know. there seems to be some acknowledgment of the concerns, where they're at. they're trying to work together, both parties. >> thank you very much. yeah, i'm also in receipt of quite a few letters of support for this patio, including some from the merchants as well as a lot of individuals. so, based upon those findings, i really don't see any reason why we shouldn't approve this. i'm happy to make a -- see a lot of speakers are going to be

speaking first. but i still would make a motion to approve and see what everybody else -- >> second. >> i'll just quickly offer some thoughts. i've been there. it's a beautiful restaurant. all the fixtures in there are very nice. the proximity of the complaints i think are far enough away, opens up to a parking lot. this is a former cafe location, right? a restaurant has been in existence there for a number of years. i thank you for agreeing to a 10:00 p.m. closure and no amplified music. i am supportive along with commissioner antonini. commissioner borden. >> yeah, i was just going to pretty much acquiesce the same way and say that i notice that the things itemized that mr. amato discussed are in the motion, the busing and the 10:00 p.m. closure. if that's a parking lot, double parking lot, i would think the

parking lot has a potential to be noisier. i just wanted to understand, was there -- maybe ms. yamada or someone from golden gate apartments. was there a language issue maybe? i don't know if that was kind of an issue that people didn't -- maybe if you can come up. was there a communication breakdown, i think? yes, there is. there are 72 units in golden gate apartments. the majority of the tenants are korean speakers or chinese speakers. excuse me, those are the primary languages. they received an updated letter on monday. it wasn't enough time. a lot of these people are in their 70s or 80s and that was not enough time to get a translator. ms. yamada was able to find aye translator, but also to ask

people if they would be willing to come out. * some had doctors appointments and other plans for thursday, so. >> do you think that -- it sounds like for the most part ms. yamada said people who were reached were okay with things. will someone be able to communicate back to the residents after this process so they can understand? well, we have some other residents here. they speak korean and japanese. they don't want to -- >> speak? -- speak. >> i just want you to know your concerns have been heard and embedded in the motion, give you the security there will not be the concerns of the noise, the music, people out too late. it's already been included and addressed. i just wanted to make sure that was communicated. and i guess if you can work with ms. young to make sure that the residents understand that their concerns were heard

and that the project sponsor has made, you know, arrangements to help alleviate their concerns. i think often sometimes there is a misunderstanding because people can't communicate and then there is fear because when you don't understand it can be very upsetting. so, maybe, ms. young, if you can work with -- i'm sorry, i forget your name. marianne. >> to work with the building and i guess they probably must have translation services there. maybe there is a notice of some sort can go to everyone so they can be aware. >> thank you very much. >> commissioner sugaya. >> yes, i have a question for project sponsor. the west side in the photograph that we have in front of us shows that there is no fence. can you explain that, please? >> it's mainly because the vines haven't grown to that side yet. it is sort of an organic thing.

>> i was talking about this side. yes, is there a way to switch back to this? yes, that's it, that's the one, and there it is. no,ing we haven't planted anything at this stage. >> i was wondering why isn't it enclosed. >> oh, it will be enclosed. * that was actually right after scrubtionthv. construction. and when the restaurant first opened. we're planning at that area to place planters so that no one can walk. because if you continue up the west side, you're actually in the interstitial area between the wings of the two buildings. we definitely don't want customers going out there. and we will have a pretty solid and heavy planter that is going to prevent anyone from walking through there. and also provide, you know, something more attractive than looking out the other side of the yard.

and we're happy to put that in the condition if you'd like. >> yeah, i'd be happier if we did that. also, i'd be happier if this fence were solid instead of having -- instead of having it open like this. i think it would help a ten wait the noise. and i would like to add that as a condition also. also, i'd like to note from project sponsor, how do you reconcile your argument that a higher fence, perhaps 8 or 10 feet, would interfere with sunlight and into the patio and now you're proposing to use umbrellas? even under a patio there is still the perception of sunlight and it's not in total shade. we do want some sunlight coming through the umbrellas. it's not going to be an air tight umbrella situation, but we can have two large circular

umbrellas. we think that's more effective than raising up the wall, so to say, as a way of keeping the noise in. if you raise up a wall, the noise can still flow out the top. we think it makes a lot more sense, it would make the building owner happier. and the owners have incurred quite a bit of expense just through this process, time and energy, and raising up the fence would be a cost issue for them to be honest. >> commissioner moore. >> mr. lindsay, don't we have a restriction or code about height of fence between adjoining properties? i think it has to be at a certain height; is that correct? >> this would be in the required rear yard of this property. >> yes. >> the height is limited to 10

feet. >> since the patio is so small, though, i think the ability of having it feel more like part of the sky given the parking lot is behind, a much more desirable patio environment. i also do not believe a solid fence is the right response here because from the parking lot, this looks more like a garden and it should not look like a rear wall of some whatever. so, i think the proper garden treatment of the fence i think is important from the inside as well as from the outside looking back. i thought the presentation was sensitive to the details you have in order to fully respond to the neighbors' concerns. i think the distance from this particular small patio to the affected residents by far exceeds anything we have ever seen because we have rear door patios which are five to seven

feet away from the applicants. this is like in the range of 100 to 300 plus feet. i do think the communication is a big issue as commissioner borden indicated. and i think i sense that this commission is tending towards approving. the question has already been asked. it would be in the interest of the restaurant owner, all participants, to stay and dialogue and deliver this project in a very positive way to the community. it has all of the ingredients of what we sub poderth, what we feel is right for the neighborhood commercial corridor. so, i think for all of you to bring this over in a positive way would be very essential. >> commissioner hillis. >> i would just echo that. continue to work. it sound like the restaurant owner is working with the neighbors and continue to do that as this is implemented. i would agree the fence as is seems to work especially in that small space. it is fine and i'm supportive.

>> commissioner antonini. >> i, too, agree. the only thing i would change in my motion, i would be fine with making a contingency with what is already planned to extend that fence with the planter to block that as a possible means of egress if that's okay with the project sponsor. but my motion would remain because the smallest of the patio and the lattice work is fine. with the vines it's going to be pretty impermeable to sound. and i think the height is appropriate given the size of that patio. >> call the question, please. >> may i have the question. >> i'm sorry, commissioner sugaya. >> am i to understand the planting is going to be along the entire length of the fence as well or just at the end? >> being you proposed a planter, it would close the open area. >> is there going to be a fence in back of it or no? >> no, there is no fence planned behind it. >> thank you.

>> commissioners, the motion and the second before you, adding a condition of approval for a sizeable or substantial planter along the open fenced area, commissioner antonini? >> aye. >> commissioner borden? >> aye. >> commissioner hillis? >> aye. >> commissioner moore? >> aye. >> commissioner sugaya? >> no. >> and commission president fong? >> aye. >> so moved, commissioners, that motion passes 5 to 1 with commissioner sugaya voting against. commissioners, that will place you under your final agendized item, public comment. i have no speaker cards. >> is there any public, general public comment? okay, seeing none, the meeting is adjourned. [adjourned]

>> okay, if we can have everybody take their seats. okay, good morning. we're going to get warm because you're all together. but we really want to welcome all of you today to the opening of our new city, new bridge hiv research facility. let's give it a hand. [cheering and applauding] >> one of the greatest honors that i have