>> i'll call in the order you gave them. john broderick, carol broderick. [inaudible] charles. gus her nan dez, tess [inaudible] richard [inaudible] and kevin welsh. >> good afternoon and thank you for giving us the opportunity to voice our concerns. one by one by one they are disappearing or being destroyed. they survived the earthquake and fires in 1906 but not sure they will be able to escape this crisis. my name is cairbl broderick and live at 367 jersey street. my house is a queen an house built in 1889. next door is another vick torier, the mirror image

of ours. thaes are not large housing, they are appreciately 2 thousand square feet and are disappearing. beautiful victorians are gutted and replaced with 3, 4 and 5 story houses. we were invited to view the house next to us tfs scheduled to increase from 2 thousand square feet to 2800 square feet. several mupths later on the advise of people that had graun through a process we had a architect go to had plang department to review the latest plans and shocked to learn the square footage in a new revision increased to all most 5500 square foot. we were stunned to learn that after the preapplication meeting with the neighbors architect he was able to increase the square footage and make substantial changes from the

original design without notification to the neighbors until final plans approved by the planning deparchlt the developer and the architect have a chanss to meet with a planning department employ aiz with no feedback from had neighbors. in this case from us. neighbors who share a wall and foundation with the owners of the project at hand. with our neighbors and the hoech a organization called, protect noe charm we are beginning to fight back. the 4th revision of the plan shows 3 storys, a thourt story star deck and pent house, a second unit and under ground garage comprising 4 thousand square feet. the negotiations have turned ugy but we'll fight to preserve the butteo of those homes. i ask for your help to do this. give the preservation committee more say

in the design of the treasure jz yes both houses are designated historic resources and not let development destroy or unique and wonderful neighborhood. thank you. >> good afternoon commissioners. my name is john broderick. you just heard from my wife, carol. we have been residence of noe valley for 22 years and live at 367 jersey. i'm a member of protect noe's charm. i be came a member because of our experiences with the project proposed at 363 jersey street. fast forwards from what carol said to november 20s 15. the developer is back time and time and presented

plan number 4. the planning department asked the developer to revice plan 4. he is preparing plan number 5. the developer continues to try to get plans approved which don't conform to the planning departments comnlts or requirements of the planning departments preservation team. some developers abuse the planning departments approval process. here is what they are doing, developers submit massively out of scale plans and when the planning departments asks them to make changes they submit the same plans with minor modifications. they are allow to do this over and over. the hard working planning staff has to devote more and more time to the project. developers have no fear of disapproval because they know the worst that can happen is submit revised plans. why is this behavior acceptable? there must be something the planning department can do. can

the plan department charge for each revision? is it possible to impose sanctions or fines for repeat offenders? the planning department scuteinized the massive revision that are visible. we are grateful to the preservation team and planning department for doing is, but what about the rear yard? why are projects allowed to go up in the back of a lot at the expense of adjacent and rear neighbors who lose light and priferbacy? why is the height limit so often open to interpretation with so many loop holes? these projects are about vertical and horizontal additions with maximum square footage. can the planning department make the plan approval process more transtarant and require the developers to

supply revisions to the adjacent owners? keeping effected neighbors informed of change is a win win for the developer and planning department and neighbors. it is often said a picture is worth a thousand words. picture was taken today from my year yard nob nobble [inaudible] nob >> thank you, next speaker. chaps [inaudible] rez dent of north of pan handle and devirs dairy [inaudible] speak on behalf of a couple projeblths happening on our street. when the rezoning happened june and july and

approved january and july we felt as a coalition there was little outreach to the community. we believe thit this rezoning on divirs dareo will impact significantly or neighbors in accordance to affordable, transit and neighborhood character. as a coalition we are here to pronounce ourselves and we feel that there should be more outreach and more work with the community to get feedback and opinions when it comes to something so significant. i introduce to you [inaudible] >> neighbor counsel land use and housing chair. the approval by this commission and by the board of supervisors of the are zoning of divisadero from basically market street to van ness increasing density

with no increase in affordability requirements, i think is characterized by your staff is not the planning departments greatest moment and perhaps you dropped the ball. we are here to pick up the ball and invite your participation in us picking up the ball. the same supervisor who rezoned divisadero with no increase in affordability requirements at all was the author of a measure to require neighborhood pref rchbs for affordable housing. a preference for nothing is nothing. what we have in our effort to redo this first of not to process projects, this violates you own proposed affordable housing density program and

represents we think an agregious error and would like to invite you to participate with us and correcting that error. >> good afternoon. my name is richard k and i lived in the divirs dee [inaudible] city planner who ever saw our quaunderant anded to meet with neighbors and walk around the area and get to know sth area and understand the concerns that we had and get a first hand account of what we liked about our neighborhood. i recall her meeting at my place with other neighbors addressing concerns and asking questions about the neighborhood. i recall we walked the area

exstense ivly so the planning get a better understanding of the historic and less understood part of the city. this seems to be in sharp contrast how information is gathered or communicated by planning today. the nct rezoning is perhaps the most significant change to effect our area in the many years i lived there, but thrrfs no effort made to reach out to the community to solicit input. we ask planners spends more time with the community to listen to our concerns about the nct rezoning. with that in mind, we urge you to attend our workshop on december 5 from 10 to 2. weal 'll provide more information about that in the

coming week. thank you. >> thank you >> good afternoon, commissioners. gus her nan dez with the affordable deviz coalition and lived in the neighborhood for about 10 years thmpt are zoning of divirs dareo neighborhood commercial transit district, we were notified but not really vaurfbed involved in the process of the rezoning and so over night for example, there is a project at devirs dareo and grove [inaudible] cl previously was a 16 unit project propolesh and now it is 60 units. because they have taken advantage of the rezoning. so, we feel that this is going to have pretty significant impacts in our community. the neighborhood will become less affordable with the surge of

more expensive condos. the units won't be affordable to neighborhood residence. commercial rents will rise which threaten the locally owned neighborhood serving businesses and the impacts on transit will be significant, so this is the point i want to focus on. i think it is easy to call a neighborhood a transit district as i heard just earlier that ocean avenue to [inaudible] the realty is that we are-diverse dareo isn't near a bart station or muni station and are not a major transit artery. we are one the minor lines on the map. there is one line, 24. we are no more transit district than the dozens of

other districts. [inaudible] is a recipe for disaster. affordable de ivisadero we asked supervisor breed to reverse the rezoning and she said nee. she said prop c prevents higher ifordability requirements when are zoning a neighborhood. however, prop c allows for higher affordsability mandates when up zoning neighborhoods and we ask that you listen to our community and as richards mentioned we are hosting a community drirfben neighborhood planning process saturday december 5, 10 a.m. totwo p.m. you are invited to participate and hope the outcome is a community focused plan for our

neighborhood. >> thank you, next speaker. >> tess well born with affordable deviz rchlt we believe the community should have a voice. affordable divisadero hosted 2 community meetings about large scale development. over 100 residence ateneded and there chss strong upsition to the the rezonejug concern about large market rate development in this neighborhood. hundreds more have signed petitions saying they are unhappy with the nct, unhappy with the massive rezoning until the neighborhood has a good chance for input. we host the community planning workshop december 5 at 10 a.m. at independent on devirs dareo and invite

planning commissionsism we ask you wait fl completion thorf planning process before you go forwards with request for approval that take advantsage of the density increase. we'll report the results of the process to the commission and encourage anyone who wishes to get involved to attend the workshop or [inaudible] >> i think we can move to had regular calendar. we'll do public comment continued at item h. >> very good commissioners. [inaudible] >> i think the good neighbor meeting that is a requirement that we have for major alterations and remodels in houses gets under mind when you submit a set of plans 2 thousand square feet

and goes through the 5 thousand square feet. i ask planning staff to consider a multiplying if the project does 100 percent of what it originally was there should be a neighborhood meeting required brf the notification goes out. it can prevent drs and may stop the process so just a thought. >> thank you. >> nothing further we can move to regular calen deer for item 8. [inaudible] 2014 informational presentation. >> good afternoon. my name is

[inaudible] with the information and analysis group in the city wide division. today i'm briefly present background and highlights from the 2014 commerce and industry inventory and i'll be available for questions and comments. just for background, the commerce and invenitation inventory is produced annually. it covers a range of economic data and gathered from a variety of different sources. or goals with the engentory are in the short term to just make the data available tothe public and other

interesting party and in the longer term to establish a consistent time series that hopefully serves as background information when we do updates of the element of the general plan. the biggest story is jod which grew my 5 percent to over 640 thousand which is a new record high for san francisco for employment. job growth continues about the same pace as it did in 2013 and the city added 27, 700 unemployment tell fell to 4.4 percent which is lower in the region, the state and nation. the average wage sales tax collections and

city revenues have all continued to increase this year or last year and then you can see that our city expenditureerize up but they are less than the city brought in in revenue. building actirfbty which we measure by the number of permits that are filed were up 4 percent to 28, 170 permits which is higher than the previous high which was in 2007. even though the number of purnlts increase in 2014 the construction value went down 13 percent to 4.8,000,000,000 dollars. i feel like i'm presenting you day old news. some of the data came out last month so it takes a while to compile a

full year of data. aprieveia what is going on since then, the state now estimates the unemployment rate at 3.2 percent, which is typically we think around 4 percent is full employment, so our unemployment rate is quite low. as always, the report and data are available on our website, sf planning.org and with that i'm happy to take questions or comments after public comment. thank you >> thank you. open for public comment. going once, going twice. okay. public comment is closed. commissioner antonini, i did have a question to maybe i'll ask the question first. you may have heard my voice message. as i went through page 34 you showed the history of the population of san francisco and there were a

couple places where i think it is a error because it shows a population of 856,000 and the year before 845,000 which i dont remember happening and i think it is the highest population we have ever had at 845.6 in 2014. >> i did look into that and-the state department of finance-we are fortunate in california that that department does a separate count of population of all the states counties, so we have the u.s. census and then the state and typically we trust the states numbers more because the state accounts for all types of people we thipg the census misses. these are the states numbers by year and in 2008 and 09, i

think these are the numbers that they reported as being the cities population. then you see it fell dramatly in 2010. we think the state captures the people who move here for job during boom times and maybe leave when the jobs go away where the census so takes a longer term view of what the trend is and then-- >> it doesn't seem to agree with what just i seem to observe, but is that being a really high population time oppose today the present time it seems like there are more people here now but that [inaudible] but your figures were consistently the state numbers, you didn't jump from one to the other? >> that is correct. >> a lot of very good things here and the one thing that you pointed

out and didn't say in your presentation, we only have a population that is 11 percent of the bay area, we represent 18 percent the bay areas jobs which is typically always the case with san francisco and should be more because we are the center for business and we have the infrastructure to support that and makes a lot of sense. you did point out the avenueerage rage of 91 thousand dollars which is quite impressive i think and a lot of good things in the report and it is good to hear positive news and especially the unemploymenterate being lower at 3.2 percent. those are my main comments. i think also you pointed out in the transportation 53, 500 per day, to 38 geary which is a call for rapid

transit tothe richmond district where people can be in a subway or other means of travel uninterrupted which is the way bart does things. people drive their cars less if they have that available so that is very good. the other point i want to show is we have the largest number it seems of employees in san francisco are office employees by quite a large amount. 261,000 and cultural institutional and educational are the second largest at 158 -we have discussions and people say most of our employees are in certain things, but at least this particular documents shows where the real employment

numbers are. thank you very much for a interesting report. >> commissioner moore >> this reports are becoming more and more interesting. they are consistently published, the content varies over the years and when you open them next to each other it becomes interesting about the strong dynamics of the city. to take the report as a positive message is one thing and bring it into the context oaf what we are taxed to do here such as affordable and [inaudible] i'm smiling out of one side of my mouth while i keep the other side of my mouth very much in question mark and hope we are able to find a bigger balance between this very positive and darker sides of our success. >> commissioner richards >> there is a lot of amamazing

things in here and can spend days looking at this. honestly. as i look at this and the job types by number of people, land dedicated and look at san francisco versus the bay area and other cities in the u.s., what is the right mix of job types to create a whole city enyour mind? >> in my mind? >> what is the idea-what is the percentage? these are great, but if i put them into context what do you think we should be seeing? are we light on something? [inaudible] if we are-heavy on something maybe we allocate mixed use space to something that is more complimentary to the city economy. you don't have to answer that if it is too complicated.

>> [inaudible] reporting on the data. i think you are raising a larger issue about the cities economic plan and strategy. [inaudible] any city prefers to have a diverse economy, what the right percentage is i'm not sure. as with any other region there tends to be a cluster of certain types of industries that cluster together and drive the economy over a region and each region varies. la is about entertainment and we are about technology so those things tend to cluster. >> i would say these kind of conversations are exactly what our department would enjoying have when i think if you look at our commerce and industry inventory it hasn't been update td in quite some while so maybe the next update is a way to

frame what type of city do we want to be as far as the commerce that happens here and how do we make that happen and plan for that. >> we mention pdr space and have projects always coming where we have housing or pdr and potentially office, when i look that statistic here the pdr by number of firms, the state is the same over the past 10 years it just everything else has grown much higher. my worry is we have pdr space which drives pdr job jz everything else grows around it, we should try to preserve some pdr space because it keeps the employment stable. st. is decreasing, but if we eliminate pdr space that number will keep going down. i have a question and probably should

have left you a e-mail in this. on page 16 if you could-- >>the rates of change on employment on land use type in the bottom hand. if you can do the first line if you don't mind? >> basically it says in 200530 percent the city jobs were office jobs. 2014, 31 percent. from 2005 to 14 office jobs grew by 34 percent and in the last year they grow by 7 percent. if you compare those to the overall growth, so office jobs grew much faster than jobs in general >> thank you very much because that illustrates a point where pdr

jobs have fallen or gone up and everything else is exceeding >> we think pdr jobs are stabilizing. if you look at pdr jobs as a percent of total jobs it declined. it rises and fallwise the rest of the conomy but as a proportion of total kwraubs it is a long term decline and now we think it is stabilized, so it goes up and down with the economy but it held steady at i think around 12 or 13 percent. >> i read in one of the infographics you have house hold employees as a category. two questions, if i am a person and do short term rentings 360 days a year am i considered a hotel? >> you are not. >> you have pdr, transportation, if i

am aubeer driver do i get counted? >> i don't because of the way urber- >> there may be other things in here that would ampify the economic activity that are more stealth. i think commissioner moores point this with the housing pupidate and economic strategy could start a robust discussion and help inform policy discussion on what we want to see in the future, versus what we see today and could can be reflected in how we use the land so welcome that in the future. good report. >> commissioner johnson >> thank you very much while i turn my microphone on. thank you very much. fantastic report. fantastic data. commissioner richards brings up goods

points. it is great to know if there is hidden economic activity. when i read it i think of shared economy workers probably being work from home or in their primary occupation if they have one, so it is interesting to see if they are in that or totally dropped out. just a couple other points, one on commissioner richards also brought up, the idea of using land use as a way to do economic planning and i'm 95 percent positive if we had ty [inaudible] it is a chicken and egg tail wag and dog problem where there are many places that tried to use land use to encourage economic activity and sometimes it works and sometimes it doesn't. it is awesome to have

todd or something from oewd to talk about that because of my limited understanding how they do the future planning it is clear there are aspects they like to leave as market driven. you can limit uses for the land and encourage orts that encourage businesses to knh here because the ability to have physical locationicize a one factor in one what type of economic actirfbty cities have. the other thing is follow up on commissioner antonini and his comment on the transit ridership, transit use and how it impacts the land use. i like subways and think those areas that are packed trabzt corridors we need to fine a way to move people along faster and more efficiently because they will be more desirable and people

that are passed because it takes forever and they are crowded like sardines in a bus. the one thing i would bring up is related to the transit planning going oen and know we are doing work on transit management programs and how they can be integrated to the approval process and i noted 41 percent are taken by car and assume people use shared ride like uber and lift and the other ones like how i got here today. it would be interesting to think about whether or not we can sort of increase that discussion around community shuttles or integrated the idea of shared rides more closely to transportation demand programs. i think that is something people are beaming accustom to see why not

include it as a part of the planning process and it may take aif the pressure having to have major infrastructure commitments like a subway or other types of ways you would increase traffic in transit corridors. the last point i wanted to make is about the paragraph in here on wages and the data about wages. clearly we have seen a up tick in higher income jobs typically in office type environments in san francisco. one thing that i want to wonder is whether or not that data jives with how we consider our affordability needs today. i think we need more affordability and that is a chicken and egg prm. if you have more affordable housing maybe that percentage will change over time but i'm thinking about the lower

income positions and wonder if what we are considering as revised or increased affordability requirements, if it is jiving with the level of affordable needed in the city. if you have one percent of the people or 7 percent making 35 thousand a year, we want to try to make our city more equitable and increase that population over time but even right now does the level of affordability we are talking about cover that 7 percent the population? i'm not sure that it does and it seems this is a example where you want to take data and not just say that is fascinating but actually use it. i hope that over time we can actually start to integrate this type of data into our discussions because now i feel like the affordability discussions are somewhat qualitative and it is

great to match it up with the population proportion are we thinking about with increasing affordability? what percentage of the population do we want or can we support being different level of income. thank you. >> thank you. just want to add a couple comments. thank you for the work. i am hearing a theme from commissioners around wanting to incorporate the data into a decision making or larger decision. it would help to have the list or time line of the reports mandated by city legislation or state or federal regulations. i think it is helpful to have it ovover laid with the annual work plan or longer work plan. i know [inaudible] i think the commission is open to more ideas about how to have these conversations outside just these

ajnda itedms which we know are the ones no one gives public comment. commissioner antonini >> another look that pdr pictures on page 52 and while as a percentage of total jobs, pdr jobs have fallen over the last few years between 2011 and 2014 pdr jobs are up over 9 thousand from 72,000 to 81,000500. 3500 of that is in construction which you may say it is because the construction but a jump is in whole sale and other categories. there is a increase in pdr jobs in the city and have to encourage that and make the most efficient use of our pdr zoned areas, particularly the core areas that are best designed to process that kind of work

because we get caught in individual small projects and it is a important issue and have to look at the big picture and find how we can best promote those jobs in the best sites possible and keep this growth. it probably will never reach historic levels when we were a manufacturing city in the early first half the 20th century but we can probably continue to support those pdr jobs that are appropriate and can sur vive and thrive in san francisco. >> just one other comments i should have brought up. we had a discussion here and had discussions arounds the polk and north beach. [inaudible] as i read low the figures i know we have added a lot of square footage the last decade in retail space which includes all that stuff. the conclusion

i grew from the data was the number of firms of retail establishments we call traditional retailers that sell goods rather than food or drink hasn't gone up or down it is all this new square footage allowed more eating and drinking establishments. we look that policy discussions on what is the right mix, 20 percent to low 75 percent is too high but it looks like a lot of retail space is eating and drinking. in my neighborhood the retail space is eating and drinking. no traditional retailers go in. >> director [inaudible] >> i appreciate your interest and discussion. i think it is very interesting. a couple things i herds is have a discondition with oewd about the report and i'll talk to

todd about that. one thing i like about this work and enjoyed about be agplanner and thinking about the relationship between the aspects of were work and this work and the housing work and affordable housing is very important and it is hards togather all the data and see it all in one place but talk about re lationships is important. the issue about land use and effect on local economy is fascinating to me. there is a chicken and egg issue. the economy is based on supply and demand and the growth of certain industries and changes in other industries, but i say one thing land u.s. use does is timper that over time. when i arrived 8 years ago we were trying to determine

how much industrial zoned lantd and pdr land we should keep and got bombarded from all side. people who said get rid of all the pdr land and those that said don't use a square foot and we split it down the middle and ended up with 7 percent of the pdr which is a low percentage for a american city but we are also gegraphly small. at that point the manufacturing jobs were quite on the decline and in the 8 years since there is a substantial change. it hasn't grown as other industries but there appears to be some growth thanks to organizations like sf [inaudible] and interest in small scale manufacturing so it-if we had given up that pdr land 8 years ago like some wanted we would be in a much

different situation. land use tends to be long term in how it effects our economic conditions of the city. having said that, i think it is great to have a discussion about this with oewd and will try to get something organized when you have a free moment on your calendar which i don't know what point that will be. >> thank you. >> commissioner, if there is nothing further we can move to items 10 a and b [inaudible] 616 divisadero and 1282 hayes. this is conditional use authorization [inaudible] will be considering the variances.

chris, if you want to hold on >> i want to introduce you to oorlt planner, this is chris may who began with the department in september and a member the northwest team. he is new to the bay area from toronto with tern years experience in the lands use and public sector. prior to coming to san francisco he served as a planner for the city of toronto for 7 years where he reviewed complex applications for commercial and mixed use and conducted land use studies in association with several plan subway expansions in toronto. he held a masters in city planning and from the ohio state university and a bs in physical geography in gis from barack university in ontario.

>> good afternoon, chris may of planning department staff. you have before you a rerequest for conditional use to permit repurpose the [inaudible] for use as a bar amusement game arcade retail and other entertainment and movie use and construction of 7 unit 5 story residential building frontsing hayes street within the divisadero street commercial district and [inaudible] the former harding theater building one of 23 nob nub movie theater non contig ws multiple property historic district. the property was evil waited which involved the removal the fly loft portion that rear the bilgding and determined to be a rehistoric resource. the building was eligible for listing on the

california register baugz of association with the location of single screen muchby theaters in san francisco and nblshly for the association with prominants san francisco movie theater developer samuel leaven as a work of master architects the read brother jz type and period of construction the early 20th century neighborhood combination movie theaters. the most recent use is a church but it is vacant for many years. the proposal would repurpose the builds frg use as a bar, game and amusement use to be operated by the emporium while [inaudible] two small retail spaces would flank had entrance. [inaudible] these features being the mechanical room on the south

side thf building which isn't require fl use as a theater. one feature the fixed theater seating is proposed to be removed to facilitate teared flooring plat forms. most the seating dates from after the construction the theater and doesn't hold a primary level of historic value in and of itself. many of the original seats have been removed during the use as a church and the furnishings are nearing the ends of useabout and replacement would be necessary for continued use. the bar and arcade use will not preclude the use the building as a live performance or film issue now or in the future. [inaudible] of the california environmental quality act. the

proposem involves the construction of a new 5 story rez dejs building on the vacant norfgz lot fronting hayes street. the new building will contain 51 bedroom unit ranging from 705 square feet to 755 square feet and 2, 3 bedroom units of 1784 square foot in size. 7 bike parking spaces will be provided in the basement with ramp access to hayes street as well as 2 staffed parking spaces on the ground floor. these 2 spaces require a variance for being located within the first 25 feet in front the main wall. planning staff doesn't support this variance as residential off street parking isn't required in the devirs dareo nct district and doesn't contribute to the active streetscape. this space [inaudible] dwelling

unit would contribute more pause trfbtyly to the public. the project also requires a rear yard modification which is to be considered concurrently by the zoning administrator. the subject lot is appreciately 13, 285 square feet and bar and amusement game will have 14, 618 square feet upon completion. for sites within this district planning section 303, 74611 and [inaudible] require conditional youth authorization for change of use, development of lots greater than nob nub the department received public comment from 4 individuals who supported the application. one whos letter of support is in the packet and one from the alamo square neighborhood association, one from the

presidentf osan francisco theater foundation and one from the north of pan handle association and i have these here. those came in within the last couple days. staff also received one telephone call from a member the public who doesn't support the repurposing opthe space for any use other than a independent muby theater. in conclusion, the department rmds the commission approve the project with conditions on the basis the project allows for the reuse of historic resource. the tenet is a family run business and not a formula retail use. the new business would provide goods and services to the immediate neighborhood and create 25 jobs for residence. the residential building represents a infill of the lot

and [inaudible] and other than those requirements the project meets all requirements of the planning code and propose land use that are in conformity with the planning code. this concludes my presentation and available if questions. >> opening to public sponsor. >> good afternoon presents fong and commissioners, david silver man work wg the project sponsor. i have done so since 2004. the former harding theater closed 43 years ago. the project before you preserves the building for reuse and has entertainment value. there is a very intensive and

long term effort to find an operator for this venue. the sponsor has found that operator in emporium and you will hear from dan marks who is the owner of that business. they operate several locations in chicago. the use includes several bar areas, stage for live entertainment and arcade games. a screen is available for movies. the praiject is located on a l shaped lot with a small parking area that fronts on hayes street. the vacant portion will be developed with 7 dwelling units. sfgovtv-thank you. this is the theater building. you can see here. this is the vacant portion of

the lot fronting on hayes. with reference to the parking variance, the issue is where the parking is on the lot . there is a section in the code which states the parking should be set back 25 feet in order to allow for active street uses. however, that section i believe is intended for commercial areas such as devirs dareo, so the use will be here. this is a residential street. there is no need for active use on a residential use, in fact no one wants active use there. this next photo shows what hayes looks like. a lot of old victorians, some have added garages in front. you see here a garage, a garage. there are no active

commercial uses here, so we believe the variance is well justified. there are also 2 family size units in this building. they will of course need a parking space each so that is 2 spaces which is what the proposal includes, so we urge you to recommend approval the parking variance. this project represents a opportunity to bring back to life the long dormant theater and we believe this will provide significant benefits from the community which received this project very positively. i believe chris may mentioned the letter from aelfy felter whoperticipated in this since 2004 mpth he is the president of the san francisco theater

foundation. he states the restored harding snob nob we hope you will approve the conditional use for this project and look forward to seeing the harding reopen to the public as soon as possible. one thing i would like to mention, a note about the draft approval motion on page 31, item number 22, it provides hours of operation. you would like to-if the project is approved we would like to make that uniformly open at noon every day rather than what is stated there. i would like to introduce to you now dan marks who is here to say a few words about the operations of the emporium and i'll be available for questions. thank you. >> good afternoon. my name is

dan marks and own emporium in chicago with my brother who is in the back row. emporium is a as david said a venue that hosts a combination of a variety of events and we have a large assortment of arcade games, pen ball, fooz ball, other fun game options. we also have a bar program with a strong emphasis on local and regional breweries and other craft distillers and things like that. our environment is well suited towards groups and a variety of groups from fund raiser tooz

corporate events, to birthday parties and other types of things. we have been very well received in chicago since we opened. our family history is actually in the amusement industry specific with old movie theaters. our family opened our grands father and great uncle opens a movie theater in chicago in the 60's and it grew from 10 to 15 movie theaters in chicago before they sold that chain in the early 1990's. the harding theater is a logical type of venue for what we like to do. the space itself is really an amazing space and the community is well knhing to us. we presented at the alamo square neighborhood

association in may and at the north of pan handle neighborhood association in september. in both cases received generally positive report and good suggestions for those that 1 hundred percent positive but for the most part we were well received. we are excited to come to san francisco which is a amazing city wree excite td to be a part of especially this specific neighborhood. i-that's pretty much i think the project was well detailed by mr. silverman and if anyone has questions i'm available. thank you for your consideration. have a nice day. >> thank you. we have a few minutes left. mark [inaudible] is

here, the project architect. >> thank you commissioners. it is nice to be here today with a project that finally involves and brings the harding theater back to the public realmism as you know it is closed for 43 years as was stated. most reentsly used as a church as which departmented in 2004 and i think the effort that we have worked on for so many years is finally hopefully going to pay off. the savings of the theater, the interior is primarily preserved, we will do restoration of some the damaged architectural features on the interior. very minimal intervention of leveling off the floor area to promote the entertainment use the arcade, bars-as for the new biltding that is constructed on the open portion the lot it is a area that is appreciately 45

feet by 45 feet so fairly small. we are able to provide 7 new housing units, two of which are stated will be 3 bedroom family size units and what we feel is necessary for those units to be effectively a family unit is to also have the off street parking and again, we are looking at providing 2 off street parking spaces. by use of a car stacker it does not preclude or dus not require any further widening of garage door to had street, so whether there was a garage for 1 or 7 cars, the same curb space is taken at the front the building, the garage door remains a single door of approximately 9 feet in length which allows access for the 2 cars independently to use the car stacking device. because