a great way to get out and play. >> for more information,

>> commissioner antonini? >> move to continue items 1 through 4 to the data signed. >> second. >> on that motion to continue, commissioner antonini? >> aye. >> commissioner borden? >> aye. >> commissioner hillis? >> aye. >> commissioner moore? >> aye. >> commissioner sugaya? >> aye. >> commissioner wu? >> aye. >> and commission president fong? tea aye. >> so moved, commissioners. that passiones 7 to 0 and places you under your consent calendar. all matters listed here under constitute a consent calendar are considered to be routine by the planning commission and will be acted upon by a single roll call vote of the commission. there will be no separate discussion of these items unless a member of the commission, the public or staff so requests, in which event the matter shall be removed from the consent calendar and

considered as a separate item at this or a future hearing. we do have a request from the commission to take item 6 separately, so, we won't be considering that and it's not being pulled off of the consent calendar per se, but it will be voted on separately. so, commissioners, for the first matter under your consent calendar, item 5, case no. 2013.0282c for 2701 - 2703 folsom street, request for conditional use authorization. and items 7a and b for case no. 2011.0053cv for 25 elgin park, request for conditional use authorization and the zoning administrator will consider request for variances. >> is there any public comment on the three items proposed for continuance or sorry, consent? seeing none, public comment is closed.

commissioner moore. >> move to approve item 5 and 7a and b on the consent calendar. >> second. >> on that motion to approve items 5 and 7a, commissioner antonini? >> aye. >> commissioner borden? >> aye. >> commissioner hillis? >> aye. >> commissioner moore? >> aye. >> commissioner sugaya? >> aye. >> commissioner wu? >> aye. >> and commission president fong? >> aye. >> so moved, commissioners, that motion passes unanimously 7 to 0 and will take up the second matter under consent for item number 6, case no. 2013.0128c for 2460 lombard street (a.k.a. 2444 lombard street), request for conditional use authorization. please note that on august 8, 2013 the commission adopted a motion of intent to disapprove and to continue the matter to september 12, 2013 by a vote of 6 to 1 with commissioner antonini voting against. please note that on september 12, 2013 the commission will consider a draft motion to disapprove prepared by staff.

i have no speaker cards. >> is there any public comment on this item? >> okay, appears to be none. public comment is closed. commissioner sugaya. >> move to adopt the findings as prepared by staff. >> second. >> on that motion to disapprove and adopt the findings prepared by staff, commissioner antonini? >> no. >> commissioner borden? >> aye. >> commissioner hillis? >> aye. >> commissioner moore? >> aye. >> commissioner sugaya? >> aye. >> commissioner wu? >> aye. >> and commission president fong? >> aye. >> so moved, commissioners, that motion passes 6 to 1 with commissioner antonini voting against. >> president fong, i have a question. >> sure. >> i'd like to ask the city attorney as to whether or not procedurally we did this correctly.

>> deputy city attorney susan cleveland noel. i don't know of anything in your rules that prohibits you from voting on consent item separately. ~ knolls i think it's unusual from your normal course, but i don't think that it's prohibited by the rules. >> since this project has been very difficult for all of us, very controversial, is and two major cycles over the years, i just want to make sure that we're doing it in a manner that we do not have to revisit it because it is indeed an exception to how we're dealing with this. i've never seen a split in the consent calendar approval and, so, i'm asking you to basically assure us that we are doing this correctly. >> again, deputy city attorney susan cleveland knowles. the commission secretary is usually the entity in the city

that has jurisdiction over your rules. we can consult and advise you in the future about whether this is the appropriate course of action. >> if i may, there are times when you pull items off consent and vote on them separately as well. so, i would suggest it's not dissimilar from that and that this separate vote or that the commissioners choose to vote differently. >> as long as we hold that as a consistent interpretation i'm comfortable. thank you for assuring we are doing the correct thing. thank you. >> thank you. >> item 7b, the variance, close the public hearing inclined to grant the requested variance. thank you. >> thank you, zoning administrator. commissioners, if there's nothing else we can move on to commission matters. item 8, consideration of adoption of draft minutes for august 8, 2013 and draft minutes for august 15, 2013.

>> is there any public comment on the two draft minutes? seeing none, public comment is closed. commissioner borden. >> yeah, i'm looking at the minutes from the eighth. i believe that item 16 is incorrect. that was the one that was 1865 to 18 67 greenwich street. [speaker not understood] we approved the merger, but i recall that commissioners fong, ant anyone i and hillis were not in support of that, phil orlando correctly. if i recall correctly. >> i believe that is correct. >> indeed you are correct, commissioner. i'm looking at my hearing results from the 8th and that correction would be -- is noted. >> great. and i have some other small like editing errors or names and things. i'll submit those to you for --

to fix. >> thank you, commissioner borden. >> commissioner moore. >> i wanted to actually comment on you probably commenting on small editing errors. i would like to ask that in the audio translation of what we say into meeting minutes, there are a lot of omissions on commas and punctuation so that the meaning of what we say often becomes, for lack of better word, gibberish and why we might speak fast and sometimes the microphone might not pick up what we're saying, the transcript cannot be at the expense of it making sense. i see in my own replication of what i said omissions of words and because of the omission of commas and punctuation, it doesn't make any sense at all. so, for the future, should anybody ever sit down and read this, they'll be saying we are

really talking gibberish. i ask that there is an editorial, at least intent looking at the minutes. for example, page 5 on august 8th, line 3 under my comments, there is on the third line -- it says, really using trend. the word is people using transit. [speaker not understood] it really doesn't make any sense at all. as i go on, particularly with commissioner borden who speaks very well and very eloquently on top of me, i'm saying what she's saying doesn't make any sense either. so, i kindly would like to suggest that somebody take a quick glimpse that at least the sentences are complete. even if you have to invent a word, please do so in order to make -- to have these minutes make sense. >> i did that in a couple spaces, too. same thing was repeated --

[multiple voices] >> commissioner moore, if i may, this would be the opportunity to correct anything that was not transcribed correctly. i would hesitate to insert words that you don't actually use because then i would be putting words into your mouth. and i don't feel that would be appropriate. it is a struggle to sometimes transcribe what is being said, but my staff does their best job. and then i do my best job actually to relisten to your comments and make the corrections that i feel necessary. but it is difficult, hardly perfect, and i would encourage you to simply, when you receive these draft minutes, to make those edits or corrections to them and i'd be happy to make those corrections now. >> perhaps commissioner borden and i will kind of meet and find some solution of how to do it. we'll take it in stride and obviously want to work with you to make this correct.

>> [speaker not understood] opportunities to send out the audio to an official transcriber to actually do the minutes so that it is actually done very well, but we have to find the resources in order to do that, but it is an option that i've been looking into. >> thank you. >> thank you. commissioner sugaya. >> no, nothing. beat it to death. >> did we approve this? we didn't approve -- >> we still need a motion -- >> we still need a motion for the minutes. >> commissioner antonini. >> i'll move to approve the minutes -- >> amended minutes? >> minutes before us two dates. >> as corrected? >> as corrected. >> second. >> second. >> commissioners, on that motion to adopt draft minutes for august 8 and august 15 as corrected, commissioner antonini? >> aye. >> commissioner borden? >> aye. >> commissioner hillis? >> aye. >> commissioner moore? >> aye. >> commissioner sugaya? >> aye. >> commissioner wu? >> aye. >> and commission president fong? >> aye. >> so moved, commissioners, that motion passes unanimously 7 to 0.

and places you under item 9 for commission comments and questions. >> commissioner antonini. >> thanks. a couple of things. i'm in receipt of a report from the office of economic and work force development and happy to report that there were some good news. and one of the items was that san francisco is the fastest growing county in private sector job rate growth of 6.1 between 2011-2012. and also that the tech industry in and of itself had created 20,000 jobs in san francisco since 2010. and unemployment rate was down 1.8% from the previous year in july of this year. so, anyway, these are all very good information and there's more in the report, more detail, and it's welcome news.

however, there's one discrepancy that i find in that report based upon other sources. that report stated the employment totals, those employed in san francisco at about 4 86,000 people. in the san francisco business times, with their source being abag, reported the number at 580,000. so, that's a big discrepancy, so, i would ask that, you know, perhaps we can have some research done to find out what, in fact, the total employment in san francisco is at the date that's referenced in that article and establish a little bit more of a accurate figure. secondly, i do want the to report that the subcommittee secretary search subcommittee met yesterday and action was taken to recommend a candidate.

and the presidents of the two commissions have been informed, and they will have to take action to schedule a hearing for the two commissionses to independently vote to accept or reject our recommendations. so, it's been a long process, and i'm happy that it appears that it's headed towards its finish. and i will tell you in more detail about all the things that this subcommittee did over the year plus that we worked on this particular thing and we continue to do more. thank you. >> commissioner borden. >> so, two things. i don't know that anyone saw in the paper today, san jose mercury news there is an article that the california supreme court is going to rehear the case that was filed against the city of san jose inclusionary housing ordinance. and i would just like to ask the director, you know, if the city is going to be doing an

ami cuss brief or anything to get involved in that case because obviously we have a vested interest in the outcome of it. so, maybe we can look into that. and if the city isn't going to take a position, maybe this commission could send a letter ~ [speaker not understood] to the case. the other thing is last week i got to go along -- i actually saw director ram from planning staff neil hashowi, and i went to a launch of [speaker not understood] zone which is a new project [speaker not understood] create kind of the innovation in the public space and looking at market street, in particular the site kind of in between yerba buena alley, market, between fourth and sixth -- fourth and third actually. and it's actually really interesting, the exploratorium is there, looking at all the different kinds of unique kind of interactive experiences and activities that we could create

and many people may not be aware they actually launched a campaign [speaker not understood] for the renovation zone so it wouldn't cost the city any money to put some fun, innovative interactive activities in the public space. but i do encourage people who are interested in that to learn more about what's called live, or living innovation zone. and i think it's livsf.org if i'm not mistaken. i thought it was really fascinating and it's a great way to kind of activate public space. it's a really kind of brings the fore, kind of innovation we talk about the city is known for, make it part of the experience that everyday citizens and tourists will embrace. >> commissioner moore. >> it was on the back pages of the chronicle, but a few days ago i read that fresh and easy has been bought by the yukaipa company, which is one of the supermarket chains in california and i was very

unhappy to hear that the 3rd street, bayview hunters point food store will be closed. i find that a very unfortunate move. all others, except a few stores in sacramento, [speaker not understood] will be retained, but it's just for this city very difficult to see that store be closed. and i'm not sure what recourse we have. i don't have any idea, but it is of great concern to me that the neighborhood which really needs this type of store is the first one to be affected. >> commissioner sugaya. >> yeah, a couple things. first, on the secretary search, are we -- president, are we thinking of having a joint hearing or no? >> likely to be a joint hearing. >> okay. i think that would be important to hear comments back and forth from the other commissioners.

secondly, a new exhibit has opened up at the california historical society spur, the san francisco public library, the college of environmental design archives in berkeley, maybe one other venue. it's called unbuilt san francisco and it's an exhibit of those kinds of visionary or maybe not so visionary projects that have been proposed for san francisco and the bay area. there is a really interesting and gorgeous model at california historical society of a project that was proposed in marin called the marin cello and it was -- if you're driving to marin from the city and you go through the tunnel, if you can vision everything from that hillside over to the ocean was proposed for development. and i don't know how long -- i don't know who kept the model.

it's at least 8 by 8 or some huge dimension like that. but it's been kept all these years since i guess the '50s is maybe when it was proposed, in the '60s. and i think it's now in the possession of ggnra, but i'm not sure. there wasn't a label on it that said who was in possession of it, but it's really interesting to see. there are other visions for the ferry building area. of course, models of the jewish museum that's part of the jesse street substation, a ballet building that was proposed for where the four seasons is now. and over at spur, there are more planning oriented exhibits. so, it's well worth going and it's free, so, that's all i have. >> okay, thank you. i think that's it.

>> commissioners, that will place you under department matters, item 10, director's announcements. >> thank you, joan austria. nas. an ~ jonas. commissioners, welcome back from break, busy fall. just want to let you know pleased to let you know corey teague is the new assistant. he will be working directly under scott sanchez as the za and will fill in for scott as scott is away or as other needs arise. and as you know dan sider has accepted a different position in the department as well. so, cory fills in for dan or takes over the position that dan sider had in that role. secondly, i think you all got a memo from me yesterday, copy of a memo i sent to the board regarding some new public outreach we're doing related to development projects. we're happy to talk about that in more detail, but i did want to let you know that -- and i will give you more details as we -- as they are developed. but on october 2nd and october 5th we will be having a series

of meetings in the potrero hill and dogpatch neighborhoods in the development on that part of time. supervisor cohen is sponsoring those meetings. that's a wednesday evening and saturday morning. we will be talking about development in that area and talking kind of a refresher, if you will, about eastern neighborhoods, which is now five years since it's been adopted. and talking about that plan and how these projects are or are not consistent with that plan and giving more information to the community about how they can get involved in the process. so, those are coming up on the second and the fifth of october. and that concludes my presentation. thank you. >> thank you. >> commissioners, item 11, review of past week's events at the board of supervisors, board of appeals and historic preservation commission. well, there was no historic preservation commission. >> good afternoon, commissioners, ann marie rodgers planning department staff. this is the first week the board is back with their full schedule of hearings so i'm here to report on those that pertain to planning and land

use. at monday's land use committee, the committee heard supervisor cohen's ordinance which would create a formula retail restricted use district for 3rd street. this commission considered that ordinance on july 25th and unanimously voted for approval with certain modifications. you'll be pleased to know that supervisor cohen incorporated all of the commission's policy recommendations. she did not, however, expand the rud to include a few properties along main street. on this matter the commission merely requested that the supervisor consider this change. and because some of these substantive amendments were made at the committee this week, they amended it and continued it so it's expected to be heard again and recommended for approval next week. also the land use committee, they considered the planning commission initiated ordinance for hotels in certain soma districts. this ordinance would amend the planning code to allow a

[speaker not understood] hotel of any size on muo parcels if they have a height district designation of 105 or higher, but only via conditional use authorization. under the existing controls, this sort of cu approval can only occur for hotel with fewer than 75 units. after a brief presentation by the attorney representing the project that is proposed for 144 king street, the committee forwarded this item with the recommendation of approval. this week at the full board, there were three pieces of legislation introduced and i'd like to share with you the first is a resolution that would recognize the devastating effect of the foreclosure crisis on local communities. it would also support the city of richmond strategy to assist homeowners at risk of foreclosure and remain in their homes and declare san francisco's intention to study

whether it should embark on a similar strategy. this included supervisor campos, mar, and cohen. secondly, supervisor yee introduced an ordinance [speaker not understood] proposed child care facility oversight from the department of children and youth and their families to the office of early education and care. and strangely, it is the planning code that kind of talks about that sort of monitoring and facility oversight requirement. and lastly, supervisor campos introduced an ordinance that would amend the planning code to allow a choice hotel to rent rooms to the homeless veterans for a period of time without abandoning a designated tourist hotel use clarification. so, those last two ordinances will be scheduled for you before you for hearings in the next three months. and that concludes my report this week unless there are any questions.

>> commissioner sugaya. >> yes, one comment on the eminent domain in the city of richmond. it's been reported that actually the city council doesn't have a super majority to actually pass that legislation. so, at the moment i think it's in limbo, so to speak. so, it may not actually move forward. >> thank you for the update. >> thank you. >> commissioners, if there's nothing further, we can move on -- >> excuse me, the board of appeals did meet last night. they had two hearings since the commission went on recess and last night they met. nothing of interest, nothing to report, but at the hearing on august 21st there were two items. the first being 86 5 el camino del mar also known as 132nd avenue and it was the d-r that the planning commission has heard several times over the course of the years. this was -- this item had been heard previously but continued to allow additional time to

have compliance with the height. the board on that item unanimously upheld the issuance of the permit and the hearing the planning commission did not take d-r on this item. the second item, 31 66 16th street, which is a building permit application to establish a retail use known as shack spade. this item had lengthy hearing. it was a jurisdiction request on a letter of determination. the previous week which the board had denied on this one, the board voted 3 to 2 to overturn the permit, to deny the permit. however, four votes are required super majority to overturn a permit so the permit was in effect granted. there has been a rehearing request filed on this permit and i believe that's scheduled for hearing on october 9th. >> commissioner antonini. >> yeah, just procedural question. when you talk about a rehearing, i wasn't aware that the board of appeals people can have it heard a second time.

>> yes, there is a process, any appeal that is heard by the board within 10 days you can file a rehearing request. and if you can show that there is either new information that was not available at the time of the previous hearing or manifest injustice, the board can vote to allow a new hearing on the item and it will be scheduled for a brand-new hearing with new briefing and that is a possibility. >> okay, thank you for that information. >> commissioner antonini. >> i already asked. >> thank you. >> there is nothing further, commissioners, we can move on to general public comment not to exceed a period of 15 minutes. at this time members of the public may address the commission on items of interest to the public that are within the subject matter jurisdiction of the commission except agenda items. with respect to agenda items, your opportunity to address the commission will be afforded when the item is reached in the meeting. each member of the public may address the commission for up to three minutes. i do have a couple of speaker cards. >> jeremy whitaker and linda

chapman. good afternoon supervisors -- commissioner. my name is jamie whitaker and i live in the rincon hill neighborhood. i have some public comment about the warrior's arena. i sit on piers 30-32 advisory committee under the port. on january 7th, 2013, we had a meeting at the cac to discuss scoping for the e-i-r. piers 30-32 arena and the very first item that i mentioned in minutes is that the department of public health's sustainable community index should be used to assess the community health impacts of the proposed project. as you probably know, article 38 is written and helps to protect new buildings with ventilation and filters from air quality issues. but thousands of residents already live in the area and have no such protection.

this week on monday, the south beach rincon mission neighborhood association was very happy to host jessica range and [speaker not understood] from the planning department. karen cohen who manages the group that does the healthy development measurement tool. at that time i took the opportunity to ask karen, has your department been contacted about analyzing the air quality and other health impacts on the community by the proposed warriors arena. the answer was no. so, i'm very concerned that the health impacts are not being evaluated for the warrior's arena. and i have a map that i received monday on the overhead. in blue shows the air pollution problematic areas that i believe the planning department is trying to help protect ev