played a huge cultural role. the plan in several respects i think is not sufficiently supportive of night life and entertainment. i do -- i am appreciative that we have resolved a number of issues around 11th street and that is a major positive. thank you again, supervisor kim, for that. but the plan is basically designed to reduce the number of entertainment venues over time by, for example, if there is a night club that no longer qualifies under the new zoning, if it's not used at a night club for three years it would be permanently banned for becoming a night life night club again. i also believe that the restrictions around limited live performance permits in the plan area are too restrictive, allowing them on some streets but not others in what i believe even though i know that there is a rationale for it, appears arbitrary when you look at it, you can have it on 11th street, but you can't have it

on ninth or 10th street if you have a cafe there and you want to have a guitar player and get a lp, live performance permit. these are concerns that i have that will not allow me to support the plan today. i do want to acknowledge the people who have worked on the community process leading up to this plan. i know a lot of people put a lot of work into it and i'm very appreciative of that. i do know there are people who were not part of the process and some people who felt that they had to leave the process because of what they viewed as at times a my way or the highway perspective in terms of who could participate and what kind of views could really be a meaningful part of the process. but i do know that a lot of people spent time on this plan and i'm very appreciative of that, our disagreements notwithstanding. so, those are my perspective, and again, thank you, supervisor kim. >> thank you.

supervisor campos. >> thank you, mr. president. you know, these kind of plans take a great deal of work and unfortunately they do take a long time. and i know that it's been many years in the making and i want to echo the comments and thank all the community members that have been involved, and in particular mr. meko who has been leading this effort for many years. and i know that he's watching. i also want to thank the staff of supervisor kim and her office. as a district supervisor, any time you're dealing with a project as massive as this, you know that at the end of the day the work product is going to be something where not everyone is going to be completely happy with every aspect and facet of the plan, but i do think that supervisor kim and her office deserve a great deal of credit

because they stepped into the process once the process had already started. and i think in a very short period of time were able to bring people together. and even though i don't know that i'm 100% thrilled with every piece of this plan, i do think that as a body there should be some deference given to the district supervisor who ultimately has been working on this for many years. and with respect to issues of night life, i'm very supportive of night life, very supportive of making sure that we do not harm our entertainment industry. and what i'm appreciative about what we have before us is that i know that supervisor kim has worked very closely with the entertainment industry to address their concerns. and i think that the work that, that, that has been done goes far enough to, to strike a

balance that allows the concerns of the neighborhood to be taken into account without undermining the industry which plays a very important part of not only the economy of that neighborhood, but also the identity of that neighborhood. so, with that understanding, i am happy to support this. i know that a lot of work went into this and there may be differences of opinion, but i do think that ultimately with this kind of a plan, the deference should be given to the district supervisor. so, i'm happy to support this. >> supervisor breed. >> thank you. so, i'm familiar with the length of this plan and i think it's really great for the area. and i just want to commend supervisor kim for her hard work on bringing a number of parties together to try and come up with a reasonable agreement for this particular area. i do my best as a supervisor

who represents a specific district to try and show respect and support to the supervisor who is housed with the responsibility of taking care of a particular area. however, there are just a few concerns that supervisor wiener brought up and i wanted to know specifically if minor changes could possibly be made, and i guess i would probably await to hear what the feedback is in terms of what those particular issues are. one of the things that i'm concerned about as someone who is a big supporter of the arts, is the fact that there are limited live performance areas in the particular plan. and one of the things that happens with many small businesses and cafe and places that these places tend to hire local artists, just a real

quick fun entertaining, very organic kind of thing. and this particular limitation in certain areas concerns me. and i was hoping to be able to -- i was hoping that consideration could be taken for other areas or clarity around that particular issue could be given so that i can understand, and i apologize that i wasn't able to figure this out earlier enough to talk about it before the meeting, but i'd like some clarity on whether or not or why this conclusion was drawn to limit certain areas for live performance opportunities and small businesses around the soma area. >> supervisor, is that a question? >> it is a question, and i'm not sure who it should be addressed to maybe other than supervisor kim or -- i don't know who is in charge of kind

of coordinating this whole project area. >> supervisor kim, you have the option to -- i know you're on the roster, but if you'd like to respond directly to that issue. >> sure, i'm happy to answer the issue about the limited live permits. so, there's was a suggestion that was made to our office, really actually on friday, that we permit limited live permits in the rcd within western soma plan which primarily encompasses ninth and 10th street. our response is that we need to do, a, neighborhood outreach to that area to get feedback, and also listen to the concerns of the residents because it is an increasingly residential area. but second, that limited live permit policy is coming back to us as a full board in a couple of months and so that we can look at that issue then. this is not close%back%back -- this does not close that issue. if we are going to permit it in western some a it should be a city-wide policy. we should permit it in the rcd city-wide and not just

specifically to soma. so, when that comes to us in a couple months, our office is very open to looking at that suggestion. ~ i'm a big supporter of llp. i come from the small arts nonprofit community background where we actually did thing without permits. i now realize years later probably had a lot of events i shouldn't have had, so, i'm very sympathetic to what our emerging artists face here in the city. but this is something that we can address in a couple months and does not need to be addressed today. >> supervisor, do you want to add anything? >> yes, that's very helpful. thank you for that feedback, supervisor kim. the other concern i had was the limitation on office space. and i just -- i agree that is somewhat micro managing and to basically say no more office space or the inability to expand in term of office space especially with the fact that we are increasing transportation efforts in the area. i'm very concerned about the

long-term impacts and the limitations that we're placing on the area as it relates to office space and i know that other members of the board may have some other comments, so i look forward to hearing feedback from other colleagues to get some sort of suggestions or to find out if these are concerns that you all have as well because i prefer not to limit the area in that capacity. and finally, i just want to say something about the academy of art college. i support this plan as a whole, although there are a few issues that i clearly have. and one of the things that i want to be clear about as a major supporter of the arts is that, you know, academy of art has been, you know, a bit of a problem in the city in general and i'm very concerned about the way that they've been doing byness and their impacts on residential neighborhoods in particular. i know that we're looking at

carving out a, i guess, grandfathering in the academy of art college in this particular case because there was a mistake that they made regarding their permits with planning. and i'm willing to do that. mostly because the fact that this is their architectural school. it is an activated area. i like the idea of having this particular area, which is the more industrial, more night life specific. i like the idea of having it activated rather than being used as a warehouse or storage center, and that's really the reason why i'm prepared to support this. but unfortunately i'm not really happy about the need to do this and i would hope that in the future with the millions of dollars and the property that academy of art has all over the city that they would

do a better job in terms of following the appropriate city procedures when it comes to dealing with their property in san francisco. so, i just wanted to make that comment and i look forward to hearing feedback from my colleagues about this particular matter. >> before we go to our next supervisor, i know supervisor kim wanted to just respond to that specific question. >> i did want to respond to the office question in the sally and i also wanted to offer planning an opportunity to respond as well. the sally is really intended to be a refuge for pdr production, distribution and arts activity. also accommodating nighttime entertainment. everyone is aware that our real estate market is hot right now for office space. it is unfortunately pushing out many of our pdr activities and arts organizations that cannot afford to stay in the south of market and, frankly, throughout most of the city. zoning is an important tool that we use to ensure that there is a balance. otherwise everything will turn into office in the south of market. so, in many ways western soma

was trying to ensure that we did increase office space, which we did in western soma, where we also protected certain market street, south of harrison as places where pdr and arts can still thrive. so, planning is a tool. it's a balancing act really. and i think if we remove pdr from western some a we'll hear from other folk, manufacturing and other folks who feel like they're getting priced out of the city. eastern neighborhoods as an entirety plan did push a lot of pdr out of west soma so we did actually decrease pdr usage in western soma and push it more into the southeast sector particularly in supervisor campos and supervisor cohen's district. but we still watch to maintain some. again, it's a balancing act. i did want to try and address the question about the architecture offices because i know that's slightly a different case. i was somewhat neutral on this issue, but i defer to planning because i'm really -- it's an enforcement question and i don't know if mr. [speaker not understood] wanted to respond to that particular issue. >> if we can hear from our planning department. i know the director of

planning, mr. ram is here. thank you for being here. >> good afternoon, cory teague for staff. just to back up a second to echo what you were saying about the larger pdr versus office issue. the creation of this sally is a continuation of the larger city strategy that was started in the bayview, but then also in eastern neighborhoods in terms of creating these spaces for pdr and arts areas where they don't have to compete with office and residential development, which drives the land value and rent and essentially pushes them eager out of the neighborhood or out of the city. ~ either it is a very strategic decision made part of the plan and important part of the plan. the preservation of pdr and encouragement and presser vation of arts activities and the allowance of nighttime entertainment uses as a right within the sally were all very much on purpose. specifically to the issue of work space and design

professionals, this has come up because in much of -- well, almost all of western soma for the last 23 years since it was rezoned in 1990, there has essentially been a prohibition on office space except in a very small district down near fourth street. the one caveat was some districts allowed work space of design professionals which is essentially for architects, landscape architects, engineers, but it was a very -- the criteria you had to meet to be approved as such use was very high, a high threshold. it was only permitted on the third floor and above, maximum of 3,000 square feet per office. so, to our knowledge, no one actually came -- there were actually no projects designed as such that were ever approved in western soma. there may be design professionals in western soma now that are in office space that has been, you know, legal long before the rezoning in 1990 and there may have be some

that have gone in since that time and didn't realize they needed to get permits. we are reluctant to try to break out subsets of office and regulate them differently. we hope that we learned some from the dot-com era that when you try to take out -- when you try to pull out one subset of office and regulate it differently than the rest of office it is very difficult to do and enforce. this is an issue with the business services during the dot-com era. we stopped doing that. eastern neighborhoods kind of took the step formally when that plan was adopted several years ago to basically say that all office is office. we can define subsets, but essentially the way we regulate office, if you sit at a desk generally and work at a computer, no matter what you're doing it's essentially office. so, whether it's a work space or design professional, if the tech start up or some other type of administrative office from a land use perspective, it has the same potential impacts on the neighborhood and the potential impacts for competition. so, when it comes to

potentially permitting work spaces of design professionals in the sally, first and foremost it kind of goes against the concept of the plan which is preserve sally from any office in any residential. and second it becomes a very difficult enforcement issue for the department because if you're talking about small office spaces on the third floor and above, it's very difficult to see inside these buildings and know when tenants change and to understand it is still a design professional or if it's changed to some other office space that you may not want in there. so, generally it's been our preference to not regulate subsets of office separately. >> thank you very much. why don't we hear now from supervisor yee. >> thank you. i want to thank supervisor breed for her questions. several of them were questions on my mind. thank you, supervisor kim, for your answers. it clarifies much for me. first of all, i want to really

thank your effort, supervisor kim, in bringing this forth and working with the diverse community. i'm looking at the list of the task force and it includes not only community folks, but a diverse grouping of people and people from the departments. and i've been involved personally with large-scale, you know, plans and when you have more than two persons in the room trying to figure out what you should be doing, it gets very complicated. but to have the number that was in this task force, i'm surprised that you're even able to come forward with anything. and what i've seen, what i've read, my understanding of this plan is it's a balanced plan. any time when you have a balance, you're going to have issues with specific people that may have more interest or more understanding of one issue than the other. and the feeling would be that, oh, my goodness, you didn't

address this. but again, when you're involved with large-scale task forces that need to look at all perspectives, then you realize it probably got addressed, but maybe not the way one would like to have it. if you were the only person in that room. and i agree with you, supervisor kim, that zoning, the zoning piece is really important. and as a native san franciscan, i've seen things change over and over again. and if you don't put control on certain thing that's market force at the time, it's going to drive a community into a direction that becomes an entirely different type of community. and when it comes to entertainment, it is the highest concentration down there. but then again, there is entertainment in many other districts and in some other districts probably should have

more entertainment so that we could reduce the carbon footprint and not be leaving our districts and just staying where we are. but i think partially, my comment is that i'm going to be supporting this because i understand the difficulty of doing this and there's going to be some tweaks that we be able to do, as you mentioned, supervisor kim, around the entertainment issue. and the other -- my last comment is this is a plan, this is a snapshot of a vision by a group of people for now. and it was 20 something years ago that they had a different vision. so, this is not forever. and i fully support it. >> president chiu. >> thank you, mr. chair. first, i also want to start by echoing the thanks that we have already heard from many of our colleagues of the community that has worked for the better

part of a decade on moving this forward. and i want to say to jim meko who is i understand watching this via television, godspeed with your recovery. thank you for the years of your service as well as to all the other community groups that were involved. i also want to thank supervisor kim. i think we all understand how difficult these tasks are in trying to balance the incredibly diverse and competing needs within neighborhoods and districts and i think we all appreciate your work in getting us to the stage to deal with the issues within district 6. there was one issue in this legislation that involved and impacted a city-wide concern that i raised in committee which has to do with the academy of art university, which colleagues, as you know, aau has had significant issues involving allegations of long-standing violations of the planning code and numerous code enforcement violation and other zoning issues. a majority of the committee of the land use committee

amendededth western soma plan to grandfather controls owned by aau within this western soma area. that was an amendment that i did not support in part because both the planning commission and the city attorney believe that that amendment to grandfather aau should not have been in this legislation. that being said, i want to just make two points. one, because i see our planning director here, i want to say as you've heard, from supervisor breed and myself and potentially others how important it is, hopefully the work that you are doing to wrap up a larger settlement of all these issues with the city attorney's office is something many of us want to see as quickly as possible. from my perspective, i have many aau properties and concerns raised by constituents. i do understand that even with the grandfathering amendment that exists in here, there are many other frivolous controls that are in your hands at the planning department. we want to make sure this gets

negotiated and mediated and resolved appropriately. and, so, i just wanted to mention that because we don't have an opportunity to discuss this particular issue and look forward to further conversation. but that being said, i think on balance given how much work this remits and how important it is to move forward on western soma plan, i look forward to supporting this. >> thank you. supervisor mar. >> thank you. i wanted to also say that i'm supportive of this plan. i wanted to thank supervisor kim for the hard work with a diverse group of informations, the nine years of work from cory teague to josh switsky, and [speaker not understood], south of market, action network, many of the task force over the past nine years, i'm supportive because i think as

supervisor yee mentioned, it strikes a careful balance, protecting our small businesses and communities, residents, and proposing a approach that's development without displacement a carefully as we can. and i think it's a very sensitive effort to try to ballet thriving night life district, which i think many of us want western soma to be with strong late night entertainment. and as the city-wide discussions on limited live permits and deejayses go forward, i'm looking forward to a lively discussion on that. i also wanted to agree with supervisor breed. i also have serious concerns about the academy of art university and supervisor and president chiu as well, and am concerned about the grandfathering in about that one parcel. i do know when i chaired the land use committee over the past couple of years, we had numerous hearings over the many notices of violation and the

lack of follow through, whether it's with the academy of art university and the planning department's inability to get them to use the properties for the proper use and not take away residential buildings that seem to be the trend. so, i'm hoping that even though i'm supportive of this, i want to raise those concerns and hope that we all pay close attention as the planning staff continue to follow-up to make sure the academy of art university is following the law as well. but i'll be supportive. thank you, supervisor kim. >> supervisor campos. >> thank you, mr. president. i just wanted to add a couple of points. i think on the academy of art university, i certainly echo the comments that supervisor mar made, but i do believe that that's the larger issue that needs a resolution that goes beyond this particular item. we want everyone to follow the law and to make sure that they get equal treatment. and, so, that's very important. but i also want to chime in on the issue of, you know, what's

the right balance between office space and pdr. the fact is that it's really hard to know what that should be and i think that you ask one of the 850,000 san franciscans what that balance should be and you probably will end up with 850,000 answers. the reality is that we as a city have rightly made a priority of protecting production distribution and repair businesses. they are businesses that have been in the city for many years and they do provide so many services that make life in this city possible. and they provide opportunities to many san franciscans who would otherwise not have employment without access to pdr. so, i think it's really appropriate for a district supervisor to try to strike what they believe is the right balance between office space and pdr. and i know that i have a better sense of, you know, what that balance should be in district 9

than i do in district 6 and i'm going to respect supervisor kim's judgment with respect to that. but i do think it's important for us to make sure that we continue to make the protection of pdr businesses a priority. >> supervisor cohen. >> thank you very much. good afternoon, colleagues. first i want to just acknowledge the hard work that everyone's put in. thank you. everyone should consider themselves acknowledged. and also want to make us make note that the academy of art is -- with the western soma community plan is much larger than a academy of art issue. as a point of clarification, i appreciate if the planning staff could just speak to -- a point to clarify. i'm under the impression academy of art grandfathering clause is actually allowing the academy of art to continue through the conditional use

permit that they started late last year. so, it's not necessarily meaning a yes or no on the project. it's just allowing them to continue. >> cory teague planning staff. that is correct, the grandfathering provision will allow the application filed in may of last year to continue forward when the environmental impact report is completed for the entire scope of work around the city. then that conditional use authorization application along with others can move through the planning commission and it would be up to the planning commission to approve or deny that application. >> okay, good. there will be a day of reckoning one way or the other for the academy of art. the other thing is i wanted to willtion many speak to supervisor campos's points about pdr. that's production, distribution

and repair. places inside district 10, i have to tell you we go back and forth as to do we need that much, do we need that, do we need little, do we need more, icon li. -- ironically. ~ it's an interesting conversation. i think as we continue to mature as a city and mature around what pdr is looking like, it's changing. yesterday's pdr is not the same pdr we're dealing with today. i encourage those members to definitely check in with kate at sf made. she has a very interesting perspective of what pdr, what the demands are as well as a good -- her finger on the pulse to where these demands are coming from. and an explanation as to the direction that the city should be going in as it relates to pdr. thank you. >> supervisor wiener. >> thank you. and i appreciate the discussion. just a couple points i want to make.

first, pointed out, supervisor campos and others, about deference to the district supervisor. that's something i take very seriously and i always, when there is something that's in another supervisor's district, of course we all have to exercise our own independent judgment. but i, and i know others, give great weight to a supervisor's view about something happening in his or her district. but there are times when this board does not vote the same way as the district supervisor. president chiu can testify to that in the 8 washington project. there have been two very, very small items in my district where this board did approve what i was proposing, but by a 6 to 5 vote. five colleague in the jane harvey milk [speaker not understood], 6