and she said to me, you know what? this is going up 50 percent. and so it does help with the process to bring business in and also that it was better for the community at large because the people together while the city and the person can sit outside and while to i want to mention that a daughter who is 23 years old and does not drive or ride a bike she takes the public transport everywhere, this is the younger generation, they do not necessarily drive. i am all for parklets. and because they will not do it in the park and i am for it in the situational at polk street with the setting up of the bike lanes and i am for it now and hope that you would approve this. >> thank you. >> is there any apublic comment on this item? >> seeing none, and we will move into rebuttal. you have 6 minutes of rebuttal.

>> you know what? i am just going to let this rest as far as rebuttal goes, our arguments have all been heard and i am starving. so i can't help it. so i am just going to sit back down. >> that is why we take the

break. >> would anyone else like to defer the time. >> the permit holder has 6 minutes. >> you already have my card. you do. >> okay. so just a bit about the design. my name is jonathan and we designed the parklet and we were mid permit process when the new guidelines came out about the parklet manual that planning mentioned earlier and we redesigned to fit in the requirements even though we did not. it is ada accessible for table and benches. as you can see there is a lot of planting that is a very green space and a lot of public space to sit down and also would like to add that the client opted to do bike parking and there was a permit issued for that in 2011 and the client adopted to pay for this

themselves which we think is better. and i would also like to add that this whole thing the design is modular and we mentioned having to remove the parklets in case of improvements to the streets and the work on the pavement. and all of these pieces are modular and both fit together on the site and if we need the work done it would have to be destroyed and as will happen with every other one that we have seen, thank you. >> good evening, commissioners, my name is jacob and i am another co-owner of other avenues i like to clarify a few points. i would like to draw your attention to the aden um to our brief reflecting the size of the parklet and there is no confusion over the length of it, it is 50 feet long.

and during the approval process we foupd out that is not an entire parking space, the parklet will only take up two parking spaces and change. i would also like to speak to the issue of over saturation, we are talking about over saturation of a civic space. much like say, golden gate park of which there is no discussion of over saturation, we are talking about open space, for a public use. which the city can always use more of. finally i would like to draw your attention to the issue of double parking as proof or evidence of lack of parking. when in fact all that is a certain driver behavior of perhaps laziness.

but at the very least, lack of interest in working to find the appropriate parking for which the driver is responsible and we encourage our delivery drivers to park appropriately. a business that goes four times a week, and properly parks their vehicles on 44 thing and 45th avenue, and behaving appropriately as you would hope, all drivers and residents of the area would do i have a final statement. throughout this hearing we are confident that those present have come into the conclusion that the park will be beneficial for the outer sunset this is an element that will further expand the space for interpersonal interaction and commuting with the neighbors and appreciatesing the microclimate. the park that we are sponsoring is not something that you should have undertaken and although the commercial activity resulting from it is

absolutely welcome. instead as the community members of the outer sunset for 40 years, it is a further investment in the future that we are making, the future of the neighborhood and the investment in the neighbors who have invested so much in us. the community support that this parklet has already received from so many makes it evident that we are not alone in our conviction that this is a sound and a wise investment. not only to the residents and businesses of the outer sunset but the support city wide for the organizations dedicated for making the people friendly as well as car friendly, sure the passionate and city wide support makes it clear that the investment that we wish to make is something champions at many levels of community and an investment that will be fruitful for the community by enriching and promoting the recent blossoming of the outer sunset. and once again, thank you, commissioners for your time and your character consideration and your incredible patience in

listening to us. >> do you correct all of drivers not to double park. >> and we ask them to park appropriately and some of the actions that we take are to have to have our drivers deliver at times that our largest delivery which we get three times a week shows up at our doorstep around 7:00 in the morning. 8:00 in the morning. that is a large container truck >> my concern is that is a line and that is quite a large vehicle and a large delivery truck and this definitely is going to more than likely going to enhance the business and so if the drivers are double

parking now then the deliveries are going to be on a more frequent basis and then double parking and so creating a safety issue. it looked like it was parked in front of your business. more than likely, like you said laziness and you are not going to park in front of the business four doors down and that was a delivery for your company? >> yes, sir. >> again, so you can instruct the clients not to park or double park in front of the property? >> or on the street. >> well, i can't attest to the fact that the client is always correct. we as i mentioned do encourage our drivers to park respo

with the approval of this parklet would take further measures to insure that the delivery drivers are taking responsible steps to prevent obstruction >> that is primarily my main concern is the safety of the residents and not so much the parking but for the safety of the residents. and i remember when the auto shop that is not there, eugene's used to be on norega. and to judah and it was at one time a working photo mat and then a dilapidated for like 25 years but where devil's teeth is cars were parked at a 45-degree angle and so there is a lot more parking available and the street is a little bit wider and so that is my main concern is that and that is part of my decision making, is that if you as a business owner, can tell me that you are

going to have your drivers not double park that would make me feel better. >> i can assure you that with the approval of the parklet we will take what measures we are able to take as a business that is doing business with another business to ask them as our associates to act responsibly in their parking behavior. >> okay. that does not answer my question, but that is okay. >> i guess that perhaps, your question and maybe you could restate it for me. >> so my concern is definitely the safety because the trucks that deliver are relatively large and the car as it goes by and the people that are trying to navigate around a truck and potentially another coming up the street is potentially a really bad situation. and so as a merchant as i was a

merchant in the sunset for 16 plus years have some control as to the people that you are doing business with. they are supplying you goods but i am sure that they are not the only companies that will supply you tomatoes and apples and so you know, in fairness to the rest of the residents, that if a parklet is to make it a safer block by asking them not to double park. >> in that sense, we would and we would like to clarify something about a business that we are a business that as was mentioned earlier works very hard to work with local merchants as a result, many of our deliveries come not from the large container trucks and in fact surprisingly few do. many of them come from mini vans and sedan and not even all of our deliveries are as large or maybe you are imagining.

>> but i am just thinking of what was supplied to us flt >> in someone trying to walk to the parklet or you are going to have a lot more pedestrian and that is the goal. and more people walking to the business. and the two street cars that is a bad situation. >> are we in deliberation? >> no. >> thank you. >> thank you. >> thank you. >> anything from the department as far as rebuttal? >> no. then commissioners the matter is submitted. >> you don't have to hear it twice? >> no. >> commissioner fung set you off, i didn't want that to

happen. >> not at all. >> okay. any other comments? >> well, actually i will, so the outer sunset has become extremely vibrant. in the last ten years. in the amount of people i am a realtor and i live in the sunset and i have had business in the sunset for a long time and just closed on a property on 46 and kirkam and they own a bicycle shop go and figure. with the coffee shop at the end and the dem graphics have sincerely changed in the sunset. and i do believe that the parklet that is installed in front of devil's teeth was a plus to the neighborhood, and i think that it this can beat but my own concern is the safety issue and there are two greater cars and a big delivery truck that is sometimes the double staff and i don't think that the parklet would be a good idea. >> my opinion to that is that

the proper remedy for no one who is concerned about the double parking call dpt if people are not going to cooperate with the do not park in front of the business and you call and those tickets will serve as a deterrent and as they do for all of us who don't double park. are redeliberating? >> yes. >> sorry. no problem. >> so i quickly state, in my opinion the benefits clearly out weigh any speculative negative effects. i have heard no evidence that commerce will be negatively impacted, in fact i have heard the opposite. from this studies that were cited. and to us, and in terms of the public transportation, coming to this area, and the bike traffic and the foot traffic and all of it actually points in the direction of actually encouraging more commerce which i think will be more desirable for the businesss in this area

and i am persuaded by the overcoming support for this in terms of the letters that were submitted to us as well as the testimony that we have heard here tonight in finally in terms of the parking situation, i sympathize with that and all of our neighborhoods are impacted by so many cars and i think that these parklets will actually encourage people to take other forms of transportation especially in this area where there are a lot of options for transportation and you need the businesses and etc., and i think that it is actually, and it is actually a way to get people to get out of their cars and i like the solution offered. and regarding the parking meters and i think of the community feels and that it becomes an issue where there is not enough parking and there seems to be a close knit community that we can all come together and petition for

parking meters which will reduce the amount of time that people park on this street. so that is what i have to say. >> may i quickly associate myself with everything articulated by my fellow commissioner. >> i will be a little different then. >> for the following reason, you know, my thoughts on this are not necessarily on the benefits or non-benefits of a parklet. the in contrary to what the last speaker in public comment, you know, that is that neighborhood has three parklets and the restaurants at the front are very proprietary about the parklets and they don't treat it like open space. however that is not either here or there and the issue here is one that is interesting, because the opposition to the permit did not occur at the

original hearing. and the departments when they get opposition at their hearings and they will usually tend to disapprove. and we have seen that happen over and over, when it did not occur there, it then gathers steam outside of that particular venue and it came here. and the question in my mind is not necessarily then that the nature of whether they should be less cars or whether there should be more walking or there should be all of these other things the question here is that this is public land. and i would have expected a greater consensus. and i can't support this when there is that much division in the thinking over the public resource. >> i am generally, in support of the parklets, and i live close to valencia street and it has encouraged me to get out and leave my car, at home, even

though my home is more than a mile away, it makes me leave that carat car, at home. and on a personal note and as far as the public resources, i think. the air is an important resource that we need to think about here and the space you know, congregating, however we do, i think that is an... i think that it offers, you know, i agree, to some extent that the businesses who that have that parklet in front of it will benefit probably more than the others. and but it is in the existence and i think that it does increase the vitality of the neighborhood and everyone does come up together and for those reasons that i recognized that there are issue especially the people who have challenges

walking to get to a store that enables them to walk better and i think that is an important point to consider and i think that maybe there may be some other forms of the green strip and the different strips to address that type of issue, to give, more access to those people that actually need to get in and out of a space that they can't access very easily on foot. or other means. but for those reasons, i would support the parklet. or the permit. >> i will make a motion then to deny the appeal. and up hold the permit on the basis that it was properly issued. >> we have a motion from commissioner hurtado? >> do we need to hear from the city attorney? >> just to clarify the proper

issue and it is the public works code and i could site those and it complies with the gpw order number 1 80, 921 in the criteria outlined under subsection 3 c. >> dash two. >> we have a motion from commissioner hurtado to up hold the permit. on the basis that it was properly issued and code compliant as referenced with that dpw order number. >> on that motion, commissioner fung? >> no. >> president hwang. >> aye. >> lazarus. >> aye. >> commissioner honda. >> aye. >> and the vote is 4-1, this permit is upheld on that basis, >> quiet. >> please if you could all exit

the room as quietly as possible so that we can continue with the board business. >> >> as the people are leaving the room i will call the next item, which is item number 1 1, and 10 has already been heard and decided. 13-038. slovenian progressive home incorporated, appellant(s) vs. zoning administrator, respondent.2101 mariposa street. appealing a letter of determination dated march 22, 2013, addressed to robin talmadge / slovenian progressive home inc., regarding whether the slovenian hall is a legal non-conforming entertainment use and commercial kitchen under the

planning code n >> thank you for your patience and you have been waiting for this matter to be called and you have seven minutes. >> thank you. >> we do have thank you so much, you did we did get our entertainment permit and happy with that. the thing is the hall is completely a commercial building and a commercial kitchen inside of the hall and we are actually asking to become bringing the kitchen into compliance and the commission to verify the kitchen as determined in the march letter in paragraph one. and we are in compliance with the entertainment permit that we received last no month as well. >> we are not adding anything or expanding anything and we are leaving it alone. the building has been there since 1929. and i think that i gave all-you a packet and at the end of the packet, you can see the kitchen

actually there are the plans that my father that draw the kitchen. >> are you finished? >> pardon me? >> are you finished with your presentation? >> yes, i am. >> in your packet, i did not see much information on the original permit. which would have, you know, the described the uses of the hall, and its anxillary spaces do you have additional information on the original history of the buildings. all of the records have been either destroyed or not there any more at all. and the only thing that i did have was the kitchen that was redone in 1971 and that is the only thing that i have for you

to see. >> any evidence? >> let me rephrase that. anything that shows the originate of the clubhouse that it was used for other functions? that it was rented out at those previous times? >> i can bring you back rental agreements if you want. we have been renting out since a long time ago. >> give me an approximately year. >> i just became president of the last and i would say probably 19, or 1960s.

>> no other questions and we can hear from the zoning administrator unless you have something further to add. >> thank you so much. >> good evening, president, and members of the board, scott sanchez the planning department, 2101, mariposa and it is in the rh 3 and residential three family zoning district. the request was two-fold, first whether or not the building was a legal non-conforming use and that it offered as its space a commercial venue and that is where the events could be held and the weddings and the like and the second portion is whether or not it can be used as a commercial kitchen and you could make the twinkies there and sell them in the stores. which are now in the stores and they are smaller though. >> so the results, and there was a history of the venue being used for these

activities, and so, to the first question, we responded in the affirmative and yes, we believed that it was a legal non-conforming use and that the use could remain and that the second portion is the portion in which i believe is really the only portion in question by the appellant here and that is whether or not it is a legal commercial kitchen and could be used for preparation, and we have no evidence that it served as a use in the past and the non-conforming use provisions you have to show that it was used in the last three years, and there is nothing in the evidence to show ha it was a separate commercial kitchen. and they have not provided us that information. they site other restaurant and the neighborhood goes down on connecticut and 18th. and it should be noted that that is actually within an nc2 which does allow the restaurant and that is why we do see the restaurants in that location,

also sights some changes to the state law. and that allow the cottage food industry and this is the thing that we are amending to address as a use in the dwelling units to allow the small manufacturing and that is a permit that is also issued by the department of public hel and this that is very much different from a full commercial kitchen which i believe that they are seeking here and that would limit limited amount of types of food products that could be prepared out of the cottage food kitchens. this is a residential zoning district and we have already, this is allowed as a commercial venue and i think that came about because of the concerns that were raised as they went for an entertainment license which they have obtained from the entertainment commission to allow the events and in addition to that, there is a request for a commercial kitchen and for catering and no limiters i think in what could be allowed there and that is

the concern that we have. we would see that as a historic use not, but as a new use that is not allowed with a new commercial use and a zoning district which would not allow that. that led to our determination and i am available for any questions. >> so you are saying that they can hold events that has cooking but they can't use it specifically as a come smer shall kitchen to produce. >> without the party. >> there has to be a party. >> the kitchen itself is accessory to the event venue and as you can see, even on the plans that were provided you can see the swing doors and to the banquet hall and there is no it sounds like there is machinery in there for bottling or packaging and that is in more of line of the commercial kitchen and the concerns that we would have there and it would be tied and 24/7. it would not be tied to when there are those events at the

venue but take on a life of its own and we would see that as intensefiation that would not be allowed. >> you feel that would be more reflective of a conditional use process. >> it is something that we would see more in a commercial or a pdr district and that kind of catering kitchen and so we would not see that as a use that is consistent here. i don't see that there is a ceu process to allow it. >> okay. >> the use itself is not allowed. >> and in your research, was this a membership based or... usage when it first opened? >> so, what we have found was

that it was and it seems that that has been used on a broader publicly accessible event scale and that is what our determination found. >> and i have a question. what, what is the significant of the permit, or the appellants, argument that there are other establishments that are zoned residential with the full commercial kitchens and then she sites, sun flower