this business stays around for a long time. because if it doesn't, the conditional use still there and another operator can come in and make it a regular type bar whatever that, however we want to characterize that, hard liquor or whatever. i suppose they would have to get a different abc license. to staff, how closely can we tie this conditional use, could you describe the kind of liquor license or maybe the project sponsor can describe the exact type of liquor license that you are getting from abc? >> part of the conditions of approval is limited to a 42 liquor license to sell beer and wine only. if they wanted to get a general license, they would have to come back to this

commission. >> so we can limit it to the type of liquor license that he's already obtained? >> he's in the process of obtaining. >> that gives me a little bit of confidence that, hopefully you won't fail, but if another establishment come in they can be limited to just beer and wine. i was generally in the beginning not favorable towards it based on the concentration within polk street area and i know within 100 feet it's a different percentage, but generally there is a lot of bars around here and there are ones that are close by and there is also off sale liquor right nearby too and across the street. but i will think about it some more.

>> commissioner moore? >> i think i'm generally in support of it. it was a business description is somewhat different and i'm comfortable with the presentings that was made and i also do not hear those people very regarding in front of the neighborhood standing in front of us saying no no. i'm in support of it and look forward to specifically spell out any additional conditions regarding time and opening hours. >> commissioner antonini? >> yeah, i did note it's a beer and wine but it's also retail stores because they can sell products. they have off and on-site. >> that 42 license it permits the sale of beer and wine for

consumption. >> commissioner borden? >> i was going make a motion to approve with conditions. i don't know if -- it looks like it's already been decided to 12:00 a.m. during the week and 1:00 a.m. friday and saturday which seem acceptable to me and maybe we can just also ask for a report back in a year just on how things are going and pictures of what it looks like on the inside and basic report back so we can get a sense of what the project is like. >> can you please reconfirm the hours? >> the hours are until 1:00 a.m. friday and saturday and 12 midnight during the week. >> i second the motion.

>> commissioners on that motion and that has been seconded to approve with conditions adding that the subject matter be returned in 1 years times with a full report to the commission. >> it doesn't have to be a hearing. just a report back. >> on that motion, [roll call vote taken], antonini, hillis, moore, sugaya, wu. that passes unanimously 6-0.

>> all right. welcome back to san francisco planning commission meeting for december 12, 2013, >> please turn off all cellphones and electronic devices. >> commissioners you left off on item 13. 13. 2013.0663c m. smith; 4155 558-63222 333 dolores street - east side between 16th and 17th streets; lot 057 in assessor's block 3567 - request for conditional use authorization, pursuant to planning code sections 303, to amend motion no. 16683 which authorized children's day school to install three temporary classroom structures on the property. the conditions of approval contained in the motion stated that the structures must be removed within 10 years from the date of occupancy 20144. children's day school is requesting to retain the structures on the site for an additional 10.5 years 20244. the property is located within a rm-1 residential, mixed, low-densityy district, and 40-x height and bulk district. this action constitutes the approval action for the project for purposes of ceqa, pursuant to section 31.044hh of the san francisco administrative code. preliminary recommendation: approve with conditions 12341234 >> good afternoon commissioners, michael smith department planning staff. you have a conditional use request for 333 dolores street. the

school is asking to retain the structures for another until 2024. no physical work is proposed and no increased school enrollment as part of this project. we received one response in opposition. we received 90 plus e-mails from parents in support. over the past proximately 10 years tdf has been working with department on a permanent solution to removing these structures to come up with a more permanent structure when

in 2011 the school purchases the church at 601 dolores. a few blocks away after the conversion of this school in 2012. the school will begin construction on the conversion this spring. the school has submitted a 10-year capital improvement plan for both sites. the plan begins with 601 dolores which is the other one they purchased. the department recommends approval with conditions on the project and it would improve the addition of the neighboring school. however so that the structures do not become permit, there is monitoring by the department with written progress report to the report every 2 years and after 5 years. this concludes my presentation. i'm available for any questions or comments that you may have. >> thank you. >> project sponsor?

>> hi. my name is valerie varone. i'm with the project manager. i want to add what michael said about the last 10 years because the question out of everybody's mind is how come it took you ten 10 years to get to this point. the school did a fair amount of study. there was a way to expand the facility there to account for, to accommodate the school's population. because it's a landmark site, it very difficult to figure out how to do that. there are many things on that site that we do not want to tamper with and the space that is available there is a block with the current

playground. it would eliminate the playground for the kids. that is the main reason it took us so long to get the solution going. we tried to make it work and it wasn't feasible. we purchased that and now that project will start construction in the spring. i'm going to let molly talk about this. the way this is, the end of the cue because they hold into the preschool to 333 dolores which has to be modified. they have to have a special exiting out of the building and will require special exiting improvements to the third step in the sequence. >> so maybe we should just answer questions. >> you can give your presentation and we may ask questions later. >> we asked for the 10 1/2

because we are a small non-profit trying to raise millions of dollars trying to retrofit dolores. that needs republican variations -- republican variations -- renovations. and the last part needs approval. >> thank you. any public comment on this item? >> hi, my name is mark tanner. i reside at the residence at the back of the building. i have lived there for 25 years. i remember when it was put in. there was a beautiful carriage house. i remember fighting against it at the time. you didn't find the historical

significant sigs and -- significance. it was taken down and now these ugly modular buildings were put up that i have to look at from my living room. i realize i'm 1 person and i don't want to be selfish here. i think the school is a great thing in the neighborhood. i don't even mind the noise of the kids so much. it's become white noise over the years. what i object to is the use of the space between the back of the building and my building which is a junk spot for them. it is a dumping ground for all the extra equipment and whatever there is extra gets dump back there and containers that collect water when it does rain over the years cause a proliferation of mosquitos and it's hard to open the windows sometimes and i have seen rats there. there is

a tarp struck that is to the attached and i'm not sure why that's allowed anyway. i did get a chance to talk to them. so i'm going to take it in good faith with them that they are going to address these issues and they will stop using that as a dumping ground for their stuff. i'm happy to hear that the end goal is to get rid of these things and put an open space there which i would greatly support. thank you for your time. >> thank you. any further public comment? okay. seeing none. commissioners? >> commissioner moore? >> i'm in support of extending the request for keeping these

temporary structures for 10.5 years. i will ask that there is some reference to keeping the property around and front and back of these structures free of any storage space or on-site that would visually impact neighbors. i can imagine when it's like when it's for people that live nearby and they have stored items which are not supposed to be there. i think it can be a friendly reminder that we condition this with that comment. whatever form of standing water does create mosquitos, i know that from my own experience, that is something we should be very cognizant about. otherwise i would say move this. >> second. >> commissioner antonini? >> yeah, can i ask the project

sponsor a question? >> i think it's been asked and answers. your school would consist of st. joseph and 601 and this would remain as a playground and open space? >> yes. >> okay. i agree with commissioner moore to make sure the condition stays sanitary out there and afterwards when it's a playground. thank you. commissioners there is a motion and second and i want to clarify that motion included the extra condition? >> yes. >> okay. on the motion then, commissioners to approve with conditions as amend ed the

include the sponsor remove the black and white -- blight and remain free and clear. [roll call vote taken] that passes unanimously 6-0. >> the clerk: that places you at 14 a and b. 14a. 2011.1385cev m. smith; 4155 558-63222 651 dolores street - southeast corner at cumberland street; lot 028 in assessor's block 3598 - request for conditional use authorization, pursuant to planning code sections 303 and 209.11hh to construct dwellings at a density ratio up to one dwelling unit for each 1,000 square feet of lot area, for a project proposing to convert a vacant church into four dwellings units. the project also requires a rear yard variance pursuant to section 134 of the planning code for the construction of a stair penthouse on the southeast corner of the roof. the property is located within a rh-3 residential, house, three-familyy district, and 40-x height and bulk district. the commission will also adopt ceqa findings as part of the project approval. preliminary recommendation: approve with conditions 12341234 14b. 2011.1385cev m. smith; 4155 558-63222 651 dolores street - southeast corner at cumberland street; lot 028 in assessor's block 3598 - request for a rear yard

variance, pursuant to planning code sections 134 to construct a stair penthouse on the southeast corner of the roof of a vacant church that is proposed for conversion to a residential building containing four dwelling units. the property is located within a rh-3 residential, house, three-familyy district, and 40-x height and bulk district. 12341234 good afternoon, the project before you is a proposal to convert a church into four dwelling units at 641 dolores street pursuant to develop a density of one dwelling per square feet of lot area. it's to upgrade a building which has been red tag abide -- by the city and requires and adopted ceqa finding. the property is a category a pursuant to ceqa. the mitigated report was prepared. the project requires a variance for the construction of a stair slash elevator penthouse on the southeast corner of the roof and the parking area to a garden. staff has not received any opposition to the project at this point. if you do decide to approve the project it would be pursuant to the ceqa and san francisco

administrative code and you will be adopting the mmrp as well. the department is recommending approval with conditions for an adaptive reuse of a building type that is difficult to adaptive reuse. it would seismically retro fit a building that is red tagged and add four dwellings to this unit. this concludes my presentation and i'm available for any comments. >> thank you. project sponsor? >> ladies and gentlemen, commissioners, i'm from the lighthouse development. i don't have a lot to say beyond what michael smith already told you and we submitted materials. we are taking a beautiful structural and architectural jem. we are going to restore it as much as possible. much of it

has been saved. whatever we can preserve and adapt for our project we are doing. we are going to be also seismically retrofitting it. it's a u and b with very very complicated structures. we hope to create a very beautiful building and convert a parking a lot into an open garden space on the side. and add four dwelling units to this property. if you have any questions, i will be happy to answer. >> thank you. is there any additional public comment? seeing none, public comment is closed. >> commissioner borden? >> i think this is a really interesting project. i walk by this building all the time on the way to dolores park. i

wonder what is going to be happening here and glad to see it's not turning into a massive home like the church. i think it's a great project and the fact that you can restore it as resource and upgrade it with seismic issues is great. i move to approve with conditions. >> second. >> commissioner antonini? >> it looks like you are doing modifications to make it seismically sound. it looks very nice when it's finished. >> the exterior dome is one of the trust from san francisco. that, nobody can touch it. nobody would alter that. within that dome there is another suspended ceiling, part of that is to recreate the top

unit. that has been substantially dealt with the preservation folks. it's with some minor modifications. >> it looks beautiful when it's completed. >> thank you very much. >> commissioner sugaya? >> to staff, mitigation measure mct 1b on the on-site interpretive display. since this is going to be a series of private residences. where did staff think this was going to be displaced? >> we have not worked out those details yet with the sponsor. a portion of the side of the yard is good for that. the yard is to the south of the building. if a fence is setback a few feet, you can put the

interpretive display on the sidewalk. >> so someone coming down from the sidewalk can visually access whatever is going in there? >> yeah. >> commissioners, there is a motion and second to approve with conditions, commissioner antonini, borden, hillis, moore, sugaya, wu. [roll call vote taken] that motion passes 6-0. >> according to public hearing for the hearing to grant with conditions. >> thank you, commissioners, that will place you on item 15. 15. 2013.0894c c. noel; 4155 575-91255 2016 market street - northwest side between church and dolores streets; lot 001 in assessor's block 3536 - request for conditional use authorization, pursuant to planning code section 303 to allow a formula retail use operating as a specialty grocery d.b.a. see's candies, inc.. within the upper market neighborhood commercial transit district, and 40-x height and bulk district. if

approved, this action would constitute the approval action for the project for purposes of ceqa, pursuant to section 31.044hh of the san francisco administrative code. preliminary recommendation: disapprove 1234 good afternoon. the application for conditional use to a special grocer doing business as see's candies. it's 303. the performed retail store would offer chocolates and candy products. the propose products would use 140 square feet area. although improvements would be made to the interior and exterior and including the installation of new signage. see's is head quartered in san francisco. there is over 200 see's candies

locations. since then the store has received positive support. the castro merchants and gay man's choir. although the department believes this project would not threaten the neighboring character of the upper market, the required recommendation is for disapproval solely due to the upper market formula retail threshold commission policy. the proposing project does not intensify the the formal retail sense and within the formally retail oriented safe way shopping center. the planning department recommends disapproval. i'm available for questions. thank you. >> thank you, project sponsor. >> commissioners, good

afternoon. my name is mamud. i'm here to represent see's candies. i have with me tim curber and robert stern who is available for any questions you might have. i would like to spend a few minutes why we are here and what we have done to bring this to the neighborhood. the reason we are here which see's candies has over 11 locations and formula retail store. in addition the property is located with the retail concentration area which requires the planning department retail use concentration to 20 percent or greater. that's not to say that you can't approve it. that's why you have two draft resolutions in front of you. one is to approve. the center is built around a large parking

lot. the center will never be part of the pedestrian traffic of the neighborhood commercial district who would want to sit in front of a sidewalk cafe at the safe way shopping center. this is meant to compliment safe way. i have yet to talk to anyone who says they don't like see's. this compete with no one in the immediate area with the exception perhaps safe way. see's is the very definition of the word benign. the foremost truism is it does not prohibit the planning commission from it's uses. they are allowed to make their independent for the projects that outweigh the negative effects. see's candies

will provide employment. the city is becoming less and less diverse with high income earners. there is a need for local employment. if there is a benefit to larger employment is they can provide a living wage. see's is such an employer. they are all unionized. this being the headquarters of see's a local store -- a priority. i see this as a source of pride and local business to make good. if mary see were alive she would love to see this. it's here, a building surrounding by a sea of

parking. it doesn't welcome strolling. the formula retail concentration will not be increased boo i this project. by whatever measure is calculated, the number will stay exactly the same. see's candy participates in community organizations routinely and gives to local charitable causes. my latest pet project, the castro country club that i'm the architect of is remodeling. they donate to the gay men's chorus, the aids foundation and you've gotten letters from some of them. at

the onset of the community outreach, we have contacted the market benefit district. we m it with them. dta chose not to take a possession. edna and chose to take the lead and they wrote letters of support. we scheduled a meeting on november 7th. we didn't just invite the neighbors around. we invited the entire 300 feet radius. we had a light attendance and ate chocolate and heard no objection. i have included in our package for you that you see in the dtn a formula retail checklist. they had the foresight to receive between desirable and undesirable retailers. this should be a

template for how we meet for a good desirable formula retailer. see's candy cares about the community it's in and everyone loves chocolate. we feel the neighborhood does too and this should be an approved despite that it's in a retail concentration area. it does not result in increased in formula retail uses and replaces an existing formula retail use. i hope you see through the trees and ask you to approve this application. i have someone from a pet shop across the street and i sent that to kc. here is a letter for you from the model a ford club from america in support. we are available to answer any questions that you might have. >> thank you.

>> is there any public comment on this item? >>