space that frontsz the streets and the third criteria on your screen relates to last year footprint stores we're suggesting we focus this criteria not on the ray side of the space for example in a building but gear it towards the storefront consolidation we don't want to see that we prefer if you're merging two or more stores not be allowed to participate in the program skipping over the fourth one that remains the same this is the criteria we want to be left punitive towards the stores that provide off-street parking we ask you qualify those applications to provide more parking down to number 8 we're almost at the end of the sheet this relates to restaurant and to

broaden the interests from bona fide restaurant that point the liquor license for f the mexican restaurant it currently serves particular grits they'll not be eligible to participate in the program we're suggesting only bona fide eating places get the liquor licenses i want to skres stress commissioners that bars and places of entertainment would remain ineligible to participate i want to make sure we understand that >> last number 9 we're adding

more out of the ordinary uses that aren't really appropriate to include many the program and drive up the facilities and the ground floor offices for public 3 uses we don't think are appropriate so we significant you make sure those are ineligible so, of course, ear widening the scope and that comes with a new name that is the community business priority process and program or because everything it a acronym it's d b-3 so what are the d b-3 p. meaning over the past years we've seen 10 applications with the sb that's not many those are a number of names of the facilities and under the dp 3-d

if in place we may have seen 40 cases take advantage of the program out of the roughly 2 hundred plus in the year i think what's important much of the program remains unchanged the s bp 3 requests they do a meeting with the neighbors that works and i suggest the remaining part of the program most projects it represents an enhanced represents under this program if you want the priority you need to do the extra work we developed a referral an assistance program with the office of economic workforce development that is something we

ask remain in place it's important to acknowledge the commissioners that with any set of criteria there will be expectation despite meeting our criteria may not be appropriate to include that the program we've built in flexibility to deal with those applications to highlight each d b-3 case a a conditional use that means the same bottom line and the notice for the neighbors and the same standard informative approval with the disability and the same need for action applies as well the same commission rules will apply under which any consent calendar item when requested by any commissioner or members of the public come off the calendar that rule is still in place and

very importantly an application to the program does not come prices enrollment in the program and the director of planning each have the ability to disqualify any application at any stage of the program if any of the folks think it is objectable so commissioners the cb 3 p relates to small businesses pause we've worked with the sb staff and presented it to the small business commission they voted to endorse and ask you approve it they made two recommendations on the genie first a recommendation for the

reverse grandfathering this is essentially to urge you to adapt the policy to apply if retroactively prior to the date of our resolution the small business commission has - we have drafted the language in the resolution this is a particular type of code violation a situation where a restaurant a bona fide eating place goes to the conditional use and the abc and gets the feature for a restaurant having to have mary greets once the conditional use there are instances where the

operator regardless of the approvals will go ahead and stop serving food and function as a bar in the problem and we share the small business commission concerns with that type of activity the smauks suggested we deal with that by excluding from the process not every application that seeks to serve liquor along with a bona fide eating place only those that provide a physical bar so we look at the plans and notice a separate bar space we don't allow that we share the small business commission concerns and think the right way to deal with the monitoring progress an applicant host approval decide to follow the allowing law or

break the law is indepth of the timeline majority of operators are good operators and we suggest they be able to seek enrollment commissioners that is our last slide only comments staff has received about the approval are two e-mails each of those seek a continuance today and reflected some confusion hass as to what the program does and not do i want to recap a couple key points with the understanding the program is a procedural piece it explicit limit any opportunities for public comment rather by virtual of the process

it enhances the notification and outreach stage to the application that are able to enroll the dp 3 automately basing place it on the consent calendar and the straightforwardness of the application and it provides additional notification what the cd b-3 p there's no change to the standards of approval so it is necessary not a change to how you treat this item are regardless of the consent calendar no change to whether or not someone can comment in what way bra or during the hearing and to drive the point home bars can't be

able to move forward forward and enroll in the process bars are not to be included in the program thank you for your time that's all i have commissioner and i'm happy to answer any questions you may have. thank you, thank you opening it up for public comment. >> seeing none, public comment is closed commissioner antonini. >> yeah. a few comments on this i think this is very good legislation and or policy it's not really legislation but there were some concerns some people voiced about the formula retail part of that and i don't believe that just because the supervisors passed a certain parts of formula retail legislation and set the limit for example at 11 or whatever was before you can't - in didn't

mean you can't help the subsets up to the amount of stores for example, those restraining order local firms that are small businesses we should try to expedite them from going through the process and a lot of on that fit the description another one the parking situation i like the fact you're not pun telegraph hill not allowing the sidewalks where parking exists, however small businesses such as a market on the west side of the city would be hard-pressed to open if they can't provide some parking because the demographics is different on that side of town my group of folks and they'd like to support a small

store but not carry groceries on the bus they go shopping they're not going to shop there i think i would say it should be more generous with that particular thing and finally on the suggested fear that a boar restaurant may become a bar and operate as such this is hard to dip whether or not the restaurant has a separate bar area i mean many restaurant have what is considered a bar they serve food and walk ins can eat or reverse those places it is a hard thing to police you're going to have to somehow do it as we do with on the 50 percent rule or some rule make sure it

is a legitimate restaurant but it could be problematic those are any feelings i'm supportive of the legislation the policy. >> commissioner wu. >> so we did receive a request if a supervisor mar's office to continue i mean i'll suggest we have a conversation and see if we want to hold-off on a final vote it's not to open it up to make it a bigger process than it needs to be i hear the point of the policy was to make sure that we kind of expedite the cases that don't caused controversy to that point on the case report item number 4 which is the one around liquor i'll suggest we keep it the way it is instead of

trying to make a distinction between whether or not a restaurant has a bar area or not the liquor to the restaurants can be controversial in some neighborhoods i know we've seen a number of cases in which that's true the intent of the program to expedite those that can have more broad support i suggest we not make that change on the question of formula retail we have been through a lot of discussions on formula retail over the last two years and of this is commission policy i'll suggest we follow along the larger discussion so what i understand is it you know in our formula retail suggestions there's 3 pieces the first piece around this up to formula retail up to 20

establishments this was discussed a lot in the deliberations i understand the larger group of formula retail is okay with when what i understand from supervisor wiener's letter i think the change from one formula retail to another and the second-story of formula retail has not been discussed in that forum i believe the working group is focused on the subsidy issues i feel we should keep only the first piece the possibility to enroll in the program if you have up to 20 establishments. >> sociocommissioner johnson. >> thank you very much i try to push my bottom really quick yeah. i'd be supportive of trying to move something today because we have searched the

backlog and this commission in the past few months said we want to spend more of our time on policy talking about the major issues on the larger projects and the larger zoning so anything we asking can do to get in a place to have those discussions i'm supportive of so i think we should look at ways to limit the discussions on non-controversial issues as much as possible to that end i definitely i will - i struggled with the no alcohol because i do kind of see where the small business commission was going they liked the idea butt but want to limit not miss a potential opportunity to look at a restaurant or get backlash and thinking we're not looking at

something that is happy hour in light of the concerns we don't want to be splitting hairs to make things easier but let's keep things as is no alcohol beer or wine i'm sorry looking at 9 presentation number 4 apologizes and then other than that i support ii want to hear the 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