requirement in order to really focus in on the nighttime entertainment and the bar uses, those use that is we see having a real potential for negative externalities and allowing bona fide restaurants that choose to serve hard liquor to the participate in the program. and no. 9, lastly, we have added in three more out of the ordinary uses uses we think just because of their nature should probably not be handled under the sb4p drive up facilities, fringe financial services and xwroupbd floor office uses that are closed to the public. now, commissioners, because of the potentially widening scope here we are proposing that the sb4p be retitled and yes of course there is a new acronym to come with it, the community business priority processing program, slightly less wordy,

the sb3p >> star wars acronym. >> despite all of this, despite all these proposed changes, there's a lot of the program that remains intact, remains just as it has been. i want to focus on that for a second because we shouldn't lose track of that. the sb4p said the applicant conduct a preapplication meeting with their neighbors. that worked and we have retained it. in a lot of these cases there's an extra pre-application meeting thrown in just to participate and we think that's a good thing. the same neighborhood notice that applied to sb4p previously and applies to every conditional ai plies here. the planning department must find the application is necessary or desirable. that doesn't change.

and lastly the commission rule, the planning commission rule that any consent calendar item upon request by a member of the public or a commissioner automatically come off and automatically be put on the regular calendar. that rule is left unchanged as well. this last item is one of two checks on the program that i want to wrap up with. just in case we do see a cd3b application that is suggestive of a more exhaustive approval document, we beefed up the checks and balances in the program. in addition to what we just talked about, we are proposing that the director of planning, the president of the planning commission and the vice president of the planning commission all have the ability at any point in the process to disqualify a project from the cd3b owing to their feeling it

would be objectionable. so that's an important check that i want you to all, i suggest we all keep in mind as we contemplate these proposed changes. commissioners, that's all i've got. thank you for being so generous with your time. i do appreciate it i'm happy to answer any questions, i'm very happy to hear your thoughts. kanisha is as all. >> commissioner dooley. >> thanks, guys, i think you've done a great job. i think it will be really helpful. i have to say i still have my reservations on the one item which is restaurants with liquor permits just because the experience i have seen is that there can be an intensification of use with full bar versus beer and wine. that would just really my only comment. >> despite your love of bourbon and branch. >> despite that. but that's

my only comment is that clearly wine and beer in a restaurant implies that it's primarily a restaurant, whereas we see a lot of folks these days saying, you know, claiming to be a restaurant when actually their primary source of income is the bar section. so that would be my only one i would just not to have it in this program is restaurants with full bars, maybe not that they serve liquor, but that they have a full bar rather than table service with their food. >> yeah, i think some accommodation for liquor should be made. we've got, we have some cultural issues like, you know, if you want to go to a restaurant where hard liquor is iman important component to, you know, margaritas, we have

wine margaritas but not alcohol margaritas. >> a full bar almost separate from the restaurant. if we can just parse that a little bit, i think that would be a --. >> also a lot of restaurants that don't have full bars are serving after dinner drinks that would not qualify as wine and beer. aperitifs. >> ortiz-cartagena. >> i have a question regarding empowering the directors of planning to disqualify. >> c3pio >> thank you for having that

question, it's a good one. the thinking behind it is these changes would represent a broadening of the program. i don't want to mischaracterize it, it is a significant broadening. we think it's a great program bus we didn't have a dhoopbs see it flourish because the criteria were so restrictive. we think the way we're broadening it is the right thing to do but we acknowledge the possibility there will be a particular use in a particular context that shouldn't be handled this way so we want to provide the city a way to deal with that. there was arrived at i think the most simple and best way. to the second part of your question, there are no criteria. i think the draft language says in their sole opinion the matter would be

objectionable or controversial. they do enjoy a great deal of discretion. but if you're not happy with that language we're happy to pass it along. >> that's generally the way it is anyway, planning commission, they will decide on their own discretion collectively whether they think something is or not. >> correct. >> just to be clear, this doesn't mean that the item, the application would just not be eligible for the expedited, they would have to go through the full conditional use process. right? >> uh-huh. >> so they would have to have the hearing. the criteria is probably the guess is this is an item that will be called off the agenda by the public ear something, but it merits some sort of circumstances that it needs to go through the full conditional use process. just because they don't qualify for the cb3p doesn't mean they can't go through the full conditional use process. >> that's a very good point.

if i can just add to it one example might be, for example, a restaurant in north beach with a history of violations with respect to alcohol coming in and seeking to do the right thing even though that might otherwise be a application that could be handled under the cb3p if there was a history of code violations, if there was a history of complaints or concern from the neighborhood i can imagine one of the three parties there, especially if you are concerned having that not be enrolled in the program. >> commissioner tour-sarkissian. >> i see highly objectionable, so i think the standard of exercising the discretion should be when there is a highly objectionable -- is that your understanding? highly objectionable. >> commissioner, you are right, that is the language.

again, just in the interest of transparency while you are absolutely correct what might be highly objectionable to me polite not be the same thing that the commission president considers to be highly objectionable. >> sure. >> but you just mentioned that if it could be triggered to the tossed out of this back to regular cu based on -- how does that work if one neighbor decides they don't like it, is that enough to kick it out? >> the current commission rules, pre-sb4p right now and under the cb3p could be unchanged. any item on the calendar if there's any concern from the commission or the public automatically comes off the calendar for a full discussion and so forth. >> i have one more a little bit off question, but i feel like a lot of people didn't know about the earlier program so i'm hoping as this rolls out

there could be some kind of outreach to let more people know that they might be eligible for these programs. i think that would be really helpful. >> great comment, thank you. if i can just add to that, we did receive a fair amount of interest in the last program. i don't have the numbers with me, i'm sorry, of folks that did want to participate and came close to but they were outside of the neighborhood area, for example, or they wanted to serve alcohol. but i think you are right, we need to reach out to the business community and let them know about this. >> is this primarily new business? >> it's a range. our experience so half is about half and half but it's certainly open to anyone. >> it's part of your information package when you are going in to find out about new business that this is available to you. >> commissioner yee riley. >> i want to know if you have

an outreach plan for this new program. >> we don't have a plan yet because it's just a proposal but i think what i'm hearing today is we will. we will develop one, we have an in house information team, if you will, that we're going to put to use. once we are getting toward approval of this, should that be the planning commission's desire, we will absolutely do that. >> and when would planning hear this? >> the thursday, the intent, president adams, is to hear this not this thursday, not next thursday but the following thursday. i'm not sure of the date offhand. the 12th, maybe? >> do you want to take public -- any more questions before we take public comment? do we have any members of the public who would like to make a comment on item no. 8? seeing none, public comment is closed. do we have a motion to approve? >> i move. >> so, commissioners, i know

that commissioner dooley had made a comment. so if we take a motion right now to approve it as is and i can add that some commissioners had some concerns around the alcohol or i don't know if you want to take a separate motion to make a specific direction for consideration around that end or just --. >> does commissioner dooley want to propose the motion? >> sure. i would like to propose that we approve this new legislation with one suggestion, which would be to allow restaurants which serve liquor but do not have a full bar to be eligible for this program. >> i'm sorry, before we finalize, i had -- something just popped in my head. if there's a business that didn't

qualify under sb4p because the criteria with regard to the district did not -- and then cb3p passes, do they have the option -- at some point when it sunsets and the new one starts that could be a business that could benefit by switching over. although i had to go back and see because i didn't qualify under the old program. does that make sense? will there be any option for businesses if they don't qualify now? >> commissioner, that makes a great deal of sense. currently it's one we haven't thought about. the one mechanical thing that might play in is presume a cu filed under the old rules wouldn't have had it done up front. but let us do some thinking on that. >> financially it could be six

months for small businesses. >> can you withdraw a cu >> you can. you have to pay to withdraw and refile. you have to consider how would someone get off the cu track which they've been channeled on to because they didn't qualify can they rechannel themselves if they make the cost benefit analysis that canceling and reapplying made sense. >> it seems like a lot of brain damage. the goal of the policy is to encourage small business and help them out. i'm sure we can find a way to help them out if they are willing to go out and fill out the application, even though it might be pre-application. >> do you want to read back the motion? >> the motion that's on the, the motion that's before the commission -- we got a second, commissioner --. >> no, i don't think we seconded it. >> waiting for you to read it. >> the motion commissioner dooley has made is to recommend to the planning department the

proposed cb3p to recommend as proposed with one modification for consideration and that is to allow only restaurants the full liquor license if they do not include a bar is kind of how i --. >> yeah, perhaps we can add the williams suggestion that -- and also to consider accommodating businesses that previously were rejected from the prior program and are now in the cu process to possibly reapply under the new program. >> right. >> switch tracks, basically. >> i'm sorry to interrupt, but president adams, can i ask a clarifying question? >> yes. >> the motion on the floor, the word bar, does that refer to the physical bar or a liquor license that allows for the sale of hard liquor? >> no, a physical bar. >> thank you. >> so i think per your intent

commissioner dooley, that restaurants who are opening a restaurant that has a bar and a restaurant would not be eligible for the cb3p >> how about a liquor cart? >> yes. >> a hard liquor cart. >> i've actually seen that. >> then allowing, then making recommendation to the planning commission to --. >> consider. >> to consider a process that allows current applications to be eligible to enroll. >> right. >> that would be eligible for the cb3p to enroll in that program. >> all right, so is there a second on that motion? >> second. >> all right, so roll call.

commissioner adams, yes. commissioner dooley, yes. commissioner dwight, yes. commissioner ortiz-cartagena, yes. commissioner yee riley, yes. commissioner tour-sarkissian, yes. all right, so that passes 6-0. >> great. >> next item, please. >> item no. 9 --. >> go away, dan. >> a presentation on the planning commission small projects team. thank you, kanishka, for being here. the planning department has established a team of planners dedicated to small projects only. this is something

director rand just announced to the commission yesterday. i thought we would take the opportunity, since mr. sider is here, to have him present to the commissioner on this. >> what's going around is not pleasant. thank you again, commissioners. for the record, dan sider with the planning department. i promise to be quick this time, commissioners, i have 5 slides. i'm here just to give you, as your executive director reported, a very brief update on the planning department small project team and like everything else coming out of our shop these days, this, too, has an acronym. so let's talk

about the sprot >> you guys are creative. >> commissioners, the sprot is a program that's largely in response to -- tough to see here on the board right now -- but frankly some startling numbers about permit volumes. they are exciting but they are also a little intimidating, frankly. last year, last fiscal year the city issued more than 25,000 building permits. about a third of them, a little over 7,000, needed to be reviewed by our department and of course 1300 were subject to more non-over the counter review. 1300 permits. now what's important is that just because we had those permits routed upstairs for a more detailed review, it doesn't mean they were necessarily large projects or complex projects. it could be things that are minor additions or neighborhood notice, something that just couldn't quite be handled at our

information counter. so what do these 1300 permits translate to in terms of time? six months to get assigned to a ceqa planner, two to four months if you are lucky to get assigned to our planner that handles entitlements and this does disproportionately impact small projects that don't have the financial backing to cover the carrying costs for that kind of delay. obviously commissioners they very far from ideal. our response to this, commissioners, has been to hire people but not only to hire people but to hire them

strategickally. we'll talk about what the sprot is in just a second, but right now we have 5 planners assigned to it with another 3 likely over the next several months. so the sprot is this sort of unique approach to dealing with the particular part of our backlog, projects that don't require a planning commission action or a zoning administrator hearing, these are generally what we call our small projects. they could be residential additions or changes of use, certain kinds of new construction. i think very importantly for this group, perhaps, the fourth kind of sub-bullet there which is interagency permit referrals, this is when the police department or the health department or the abc sends a referral to us saying, hey, we're about to issue a liquor license, is it consistent with the planning code. often times they comes at the very final stage of the permitting process for one of those agencies so a

30 or 60 or 90 day delay is very impactful. it's catastrophic sometimes for small businesses. the team is unique in our department because our current planning division, those that handle entitlements, are structured geographickly. so this is a city-wide triage team that gains some efficiencies that aren't found in the department. unlike other sections of the department we have made an effort to fully staff this so this is up and running now and since the middle of december it's been really producing some good work which you will see on this final slide here. by any measure we are satisfied with the sprot outcomes thus far. we have dramatically decreased processing times for both small and conventional projects. small projects typically get assigned in 3 business days, work begins within a week.

this actually has a spill over effect when it comes to conventional projects because those planners who were handling the small projects now have a smaller backlog so they are freed up to move faster with those complex and in the four-ish weeks since sprot has been fully staffed, we have had 110 building permits that have been reviewed or approved and 55 of those interagency referrals that have been acted on and are out of our shop right now. commissioners, i hope this has been useful or maybe even encouraging. that's all i have for you right now and i'm happy to answer any questions you to answer any questions you may have . >> commissioner dooley. >> those things that aren't needed for public review, who makes that call.

>> it's made by the staff at the information counter and it's generally a very objective decision-making process. if the planning code requires a hearing, if there's a project of a certain scale, we have guidelines, requires design review it will get routed upstairs. >> and once again is there a mechanism for public to tt public note fieed something is going to go through under this, if the next door neighbor doesn't like this? ?oo to a member of the public the process is invisible. >> so the public will still have their possibility of input one way or the other?

>> absolutely, it's the same exact process, just on a more reasonable timeline. >> commissioner dwight. >> i'm just wondering if there are cb3p and sprot tee shirts available in the coffee shop. >> no, but we do have coffee mugs. >> i think this makes sense just like the express line in the supermarkets and banks. not everybody has to wait in line. >> this is awesome. i don't know who came up with this, but this is, again something that just -- it will make life a lot easier and you said some things about the last minute through the police or the -- it can be catastrophic. i've seen that happen when something is going to be approved and all of a sudden it's not and it's another 3, 4 months, especially

when people are paying rent. >> all hired up. >> i want to commend you, this is awesome. great job. >> our team is pretty pleased with it. if we're making the community happy i think we're doing our jobs that much better. >> thank you. just to be on the same side are there any members of the public who would like to make a comment on item no. 9? seeing none, public comment is closed. thank you dan, and thank you for coming. >> thank you, dan. >> we are going to take a break for three minutes. >> okay. >> five minutes. >> five minutes. (brief recess).

. >> mr. president, we have returned from recess. shall i call item no. 5? >> yes, please. >> item no. 5 is the director's report. so week before last was the mayor's state of the city and his major theme for the state of the city was shared prosperity and under that is 5 categories dealing with housing, transportation, women's empowerment and antipowerment and i got these from the mayor's site that outlined these in greater detail. the areas that intersect with small business and that we will likely be engaged with with the office and the commission will be under women's empowerment the mayor plans to host a women empowerment summit so that will

include women empowerment, there is some minimum wage enforcement and i think transportation overlaps. in terms of improving transportation for both -- to help for businesses, employees getting to work easier and on time and also for customers. so those are kind of the three areas that i have highlighted but i will send you the link that outlines the plans in greater detail for the coming year. i want to let you know that small business week is now may 18th through the 23rd. may 23rd or may 24th is the saturday, that's the weekend of memorial day so we will give the merchant corridors the option of doing it on the weekend of memorial day, they may want to take advantage of it, or the saturday before the start of small business week. so the beginning of february is when i begin to reach out to

the merchant's associations to sign up, just to let you know that. then may 19th is the board of supervisors acknowledgement of small business in their district. >> do they know where they're going to hit flavors this year? >> we currently have the metrion reserved. we will be doing the conference like we have done in the years past. we are able to, we are going to be part innering with city college chinatown campus but the conference will be held earlier this year due to their scheduling but we are looking forward to partnering with them. >> that would be like what we did with sf state on market street. >> uh-huh but we still are interested -- the first meeting for the small business week committee is this week. so

we're still interested in doing some textile talk, people did like that and take a look and see if there's other things that we could be doing throughout the week to keep activities going throughout the week. >> great. >> since the conference this year will be on friday. the short term rental legislation, so last week the office of of small business and oewd staff met with the tax and treasurer's office and planning regarding oewd, if you are going to be engaging in short term rentals. the key thing that we will be working -- we have already started to get inquiries about the process on this and the key thing for our, the staff at osb to be communicating with busi