others commissioners ideas on peppering in my mind i don't think this changes things the same level of analysis anyone can pull something off the consent calendar when we pull things off the consent calendar it is the same discussion that is to happy i'm supportive of what will help us to have a policy for this time this hearing time to discuss the issues. >> commissioner hillis. >> i don't see a huge problem i want to clarify if you recognize that the staff is - something it controversial this is otherwise part of the policy the director can exempt the policy and the community works so at any level

this can happen that's correct. >> yeah. at the directors suggestion it could be unenrolled. >> in the same case it's on consent calendar anyone can pull it off and continue past the 90 days mechanisms to pull it off okay. >> and then i'm less concerned about the restaurant i mean, if it's its liability restaurant i'm less concerned with that but i get the point we add those that are controversial cu for a large north korea residential uses what's the defines. >> a non-residential use in 2,

3, 4 or 5 in particular, the residential district will require the conditional use authorization so it don't understand where it is. >> correct. >> on the formula retail i mean, i look back to the facts of what happened then and we've had some over the 20 number we waved them so we like our coffee you're a great guy it's not controversial i don't have having a problem it's under 20 it will come off and have a full hearing it might be number 2 to change from one formula retail to another i mean, i could see it being controversial this can be a starbuck's i mean how we get under this rule because i think all formula retail are not

created equal the small ones get through here but i mean, i would pull that one of that would say the one commissioner wu i'll take number 2 off the list that's the only change i'll make otherwise it's fairly straightforward we saw the budget presentation how long it takes people through the process so we can try to speed that up for non-controversial items we should. >> commissioner richards. >> we met a couple of days google commissioner paskin-jordan i have one issue the bar issue we had a restaurant around the corner we had a permit and we've struggled with this i believe

the bar unless it's beer and wine the formula retail the two formula retails i'm trying to avoid the jack spades of the world over 20 at this point maybe the san francisco companies it's not a small business but a subsidize of a major con enrollment and i agree with the commissioner we have walgreenss and one hundred and 50 walgreenss so i'll not support the bar. >> commissioner moore. >> i would agree with what commissioner wu's and what you said the bar be a wine issue as well as a small formula retail hard for me, i received a number of letters from community activists that no one is patrolling in the discussion

that's counter to the broad-based support this the legislation itself has actually supervisor mar's office weighed in with a letter asking permission consider k4r5r7b9d this partially because just a weeks ago we started with the formula retail subsidize working group which is to exempt, if any, the legislation mr. taylor looking at what small formula retail means those two timelines could be more closely coordinated then i'll be comfortable having mr. sideer and all the good suggests on the other ends be an integral part of what comes out of the working group up to the time 10

to 12 people that pretty much is composed of the same people the broadest representation but they're all activity players in the formula retail legislation i think this stepped on their toes they're only starting for the second round i think this would be well served to have those two goes up come together all in one and the transparency and the authoritativeness as the first step they had as well. >> commissioner antonini. >> yeah. i'm going to be make a motion to support ♪ the following manner i would modify number one so we eliminate numbers two and three we only have number one of one

with formula retail chance with fortune 20 establishments would be expedite through this process whether or not the exemplification of formula retail we're 2k3w50gd to call it if the committee changes with the definition this policy will include that also and 2 will remain the same and 3 the same sound like the commissions is generally not favorable i'd like to see that on both liquor store but i'll leave it the way it is and anybody that has an establishment that has an liquor license for all that 47 could still come forward it wouldn't be expelled and all the rest of it remains the same in my motion and also including the second

recommendation that messenger not be allowed i think that was something that had been added on by suggestions there were to things they suggested can't remember what >> the small business commission. >> the small business commission yeah. the two recommendations recommended to alcohol and to the reverse grandfathering >> each year i'll include the reverse grandfathering in my motion. >> what do did you do with number 4. >> left it the way it is now not including the liquor only eligible for beer and wine it remains the same. >> commissioner richards. >> i struggle with the just a

second spade example if we leave it under 20 that's why i'll not support a vote today over and over from me. >> commissioner johnson. >> thank you just real quick in terms of are we also expecting the expansion. >> all the rest is in keeping with what of the presented. >> excellent. >> commissioner hillis. >> just to clarify the jack spade is not a formula retail its k5ub9 u caught up in the subsidize that's a problem if we try to fix that. >> absolutely maybe a bad example i'm targeting the concept stores that change the launch. >> but it will still be. >> if they have 11 of them. >> it happens.

>> yeah. >> oh, sorry commissioner wu. >> in substance i agree but i will vote against it it i want to see the continuance. >> commissioners oh, commissioner moore. >> i think the supervisor it is doing the work to vaps the legislation it is something we should pay attention to. >> commissioners there is a motion and a second to dot this program policy as recommended, however eliminating sub educators two and three of item one allowing

item 4 to remain the same and eliminating number 4; right? i want to be clear on the language. >> correct it is leaving the program unchanged. >> amending the program to item 4. >> and reverseing the grandfather. >> on that motion commissioner antonini. >> commissioner hillis commissioner johnson commissioner moore no. >> commissioner richards. >> no commissioner wu no. >> commissioner president fong so moved, commissioners, that motion passes 4 to 3 commissioners that will place you on item 13 for clemente

street. >> good afternoon, commissioners department staff the project before you is a conditional use authorization to legalize the formula retail financial service known as cafe bank with an within the enter clemente neighborhood commercial district the planning code requires the conditional use authorization for formula retail use within any neighborhood district sub property is located opening at the corner of clemente and tenth avenue r with 4 ground floors that tenant spaces it was previously occupied by a simple

service the cafe bank specialize in the chinese-american community and has one other branch in san francisco the branch started on july 21st, 2014, under the name of general bank which the definition of cafe bank and has full-time employees operates monday through saturday and no changes other than the signs proposed for the site staff would like to clarify for the record did actual number of formula retail within the strict is 12 and the concentration of formula retail is 5 percent it's mentioned in the report i wanted to reiterate again there are 4 similar uses in the district department received a complaint

will the operation of the bank back in december of 2014 but other public comments to date is 21 letters of support of the project from san francisco resident and business owners that concludes any brief presentation staff recommendation approval of that conditional use authorization and the spokesperson be is here and wants to address the commission thank you very much. >> i'm on for questions. >> project sponsor. >> good afternoon, commissioners john with reuben, junius & rose here on behalf of the project sponsor cafe bank so the project before you authorized the operation of a new bank on clemente street a bank is operated 83 at the

location most recently doing business as as cafe bank gateway purchased it and took over their customers due to the banking restrictions they couldn't shut down the bank so since july 2014 thankful operated as this kind of general bank actually has a sign that says general bank cafe bank was established in la in 1952 providing financial services to the chinese-american community thankful expanded to other states and one other location in san francisco at 540 montgomery street it has seen the bank is located in an area with chinese-american merchant that relies on a bank that

relies on the languages and coveting has hired the same manager who is here today and no physical altercations to the building are proposed those the only thing the signages will be co-sponsoring to the planning code we have 6 letters under you current customers and 1414 from residents and self-help for the elderly that runs a senior center in the neighborhood they'll continue to provide the services we ask your approval for the conditional use authorization we have the cafe bank personnel here. >> any public comment on this item? seeing none, public comment is closed. commissioner richards. >> i i guess i'm generally more skeptical of formula retail than

our anchorage person reading the case report and understanding who is going on i move to approve this with the conditions outlined. >> commissioner antonini. >> yeah. i had a question on the signage it's hard to tell whether it's not drawing it looks like it is going to be cafe bank and going to be in red i guess it looks like two colors and not sure i would ask that the project sponsor continue to work with the staff that is fine if you can answer the question. >> there are two halo list signs on the walls and one projecting sign that is on the edge or will be on the edge of the building. >> i'm trying to fought the color scheme. >> the reproduction.

>> that should be fine as long as you can see what's there that's fine. >> the bank on suggestion of the planning department did modify the sign. >> okay. thank you. >> made them smaller and halos. >> commissioner there is a motion and a second to approve that with conditions. >> commissioner antonini. >> commissioner hillis commissioner johnson commissioner moore commissioner richards is commissioner wu. >> so moved, commissioners, that motion passes unanimously have to zero and places you under our discretionary review calendar for the benefit of the public that was continued to march 12 and places you on the next item on fulsome street

>> hello commissioners. >> staff first; right? >> right. >> can i sit down. >> yeah. sit sir and commissioners i'll be presenting this abbreviated this the request for discretionary review our the vertical and horizon drawings it is subject to the variance for raked set back and fraishgd front yard and compliend to grant it the drs concerns are for the rear windows and the proposed deck didn't go beyond the building go and has provided a matching 3 ftd foot set back relate with the dr requesters property and

the concerns are generally not cause for dr it didn't rise to the level of exceptional in the - recommend you not take dr and approve the project. >> thank you dr requester. >> are you the dr requester your team as 5 minutes. >> we've been doing this for 2 analyses years we received a notice in august everything looked fine except for the roof deck they'll be looking into our master bedroom and apart from the noise it is the main thing the applicant the applicant is here and the developer shawn i invite them to my house they sat

on any bed and understood there's a problem if you can imagine you guys were in our master bedroom that is the level of someone looking at ten feet away from where you're sitting that's essentially it so, anyway jerry rum and shawn understood theres a problem came up with solutions one a per goal la type of arrangement can i put that here. >> yep. >> so if someone was - okay so let's say this is our master bedroom up here this is somebody standing on the proposed deck he

even with the electrically list someone can look at our master bred bedroom i asked the architect why he proposed a deck he said he didn't realize this window is into our master bedroom i heard you say i shouldn't be here as part of the conditional use because this doesn't enter into if the privacy; is that correct. >> usually this is not a responded time let me say it's not the intent you filed the dr so - >> basically what happened with the microphone and jerry rum and shawn they came up with this solution or two the solutions two work and we came to the end of the expiration date at the

end of september and i was advised by planning department to file a dr rather than an appeal that's why i'm here i'm surprised the planning department hadn't harder any point of view and chimneys in that's amazing like putting the cart before the horse. >> generally, we're banking a recommendation based on our review of the plan but the point of the dr to have you be able to speak which is what you know here allowed to do now and then commissioner can ask questions you know based on our response. >> okay. >> so it is normal procedure that the department provides a representation to the commission and the commission hears the public comment and makes a decision.

>> you know the developer and the architect agreed this is a problem and tried to come up with the solutions as you can see from this this is just it's not workable if someone is standing up against the electrically list some place can see into our master bedroom no one can dispute ifdispute if. >> are through any members of the public in support of dr requester? okay project sponsor your team has 5 minutes

>> commissioners i'm the architect and the owners shawn and jane kindergarten who live down the street and this is the contractor which is being remodeled for their needs this is a view of the house currently with the property next door and the kennedy purchased the property in 2012 with the intention of remolding it is a small house at 14 hundred mosquitos and small rear yard it has limited possibilities for expansion and improvements

we took advantage of the planning code for the set back line as mentioned which shown here in the rear of the first floor to take advantage of the averaging the adjacent neighbors behind the second line the basic theme of the first story to provide for space and the second-story to provide a roof deck which is off the master bedroom and additional outdoor spice which is badly needed in this small home the vaccine of the detect is a view to the north i'll show you in a minute this is the current rear yard logan to the south towards the

dr requesters property this is a view taken approximately where the roof deck is and it will be in a space here you can barely see the windows of the master bedroom it is an obscure bedroom this is the same view with a deck new deck being superimposed and the floor deck is 5 and a half deck blood the windowsill of the doris bedroom in the trees were eliminated we'll be looking up to the ceiling this is a view to the north and it

will be open to the deck and dora mentioned we proposed a privacy screen this is the drawings we presented that is in the corner facing his window which is right here our analysis the site line this is shown by this drawing with the proposed screen will secureobscure this makes the screen high enough to block the view into the bedroom this is the view of his window shown in the spur imposed over the screen dora rejected this solution we've proposed it in our design and

decided not to do it requires an additional surveillance to allow it to happy because of the rear yard projection and it creates a shadow being in the south side of the deck this is a plan the property the kennedy property is right here and dora's property to the south his loot it 27 and a half foot wide he has extensive outdoor space his bedroom overlooks the kennedy's rear yard and he gets a view over the rear yard of the adjacent properties we think it's unfair to eliminate part of our open space he can mitigate

that with a window shade thank you. >> are there members of the public in support of the project sponsor? okay dr requester you have a 2 minute rebuttal if you choose >> so the sidelines they are not clear in that drawings but essentially those are taken from the drawings you've seen them they don't address the problem you know it's a descent effort not adding the problem i went into this with good faith we- it didn't happy again, that's why we're here i need someone to understand what we're looking at here it's if someone