>>day, june 2, thursday, june 2, any kind. proceedings. and when speaking before the commission, if you care to, do state your name for the record. i'd like to call roll at this time. commissioner president fong commissioner antonini commissioner hillis and commissioner wu we do expect commissioner vice president richards, commissioner johnson and commissioner moore to arrive shortly commissioners, the first item on your agenda is consideration of items proposed for continuance item one under

your regular calendar case at green street conditional use authorization we've received a request from the project manager to continue this to june 30th, 2016, there the discretionary review you calendar cases at grant avenue and 12 through 16 conditional use and variance we've received a request from the project sponsor and the dr requester to continue it matter until june 30th i have no speaker cards. >> for items proposed for continuance. >> any public comment on the

items property items proposed for continuance not seeing any, public comment is closed. >> commissioner antonini. >> move to continue item one to june 30th and also continue items 13 and 15 a and b to june 30th. >> second. >> thank you, commissioners commissioners, if there's nothing further, we'll move on to there's a there is a motion that has been seconded to continue items as proposed commissioner antonini commissioner hillis commissioner moore commissioner wu commissioner vice president richards and commissioner president fong so moved, commissioners, that motion passes unanimously 6 to zero and places on the consent calendar calendar, are considered to be routine and may be acted upon by a single roll call vote of the commission. there will be no separate

discussion of these items unless a member of the commission, the public, or staff so requests in which event the matter shall be removed from the consent calendar and considered as a separate item at this or a future hearing. item two at castro after the in violation of the zoning maps to correct an error in section map we have received a speaker card for item 3 that will be removed from content shall we hear that at the beginning. >> thank you yes. >> for your consideration on the item under consent. >> okay any public comment? for the one item on the consent calendar i don't see any public comment is closed. >> commissioner vice president richards. >> move to you approve. >> second thank you, commissioners on that motion from the consent calendar

commissioner antonini commissioner hillis commissioner moore commissioner wu commissioner vice president richards and commissioner president fong so moved, commissioners, that motion passes unanimously 6 to zero item that will be heard at the beginning of regular calendar commissioners that places us in commissioner matters item 4 consideration of approval of the draft minutes for may 12th and the may 19, 2016, hearing i do have one speaker card. >> okay. >> ms. hester. >> this san francisco arts institution master plan is part of this calendar i'm asking a correction to make it very clear in the minutes

that the imp was not accepted allergy the planning commission and that a function the planning commission within i am going you have no right to approve you have a right to accept i refer you to the myriad on the academy of art university that continued for more information and more information. the planning commission has the right to direct the institution to do certain work and amendments and the mechanism that was that i understood i've talked to the planner and asked him the status is that can't come back to a private memo to the commission at least has to be on the consent calendar all i'm asking is if it is on the consent calendar the public will get the

retailers have the ability to have the text rather than a private e-mail the imp is a public document and treated as an important public document so i would ask you to make it clear that you deferred action on it until the planning commission was present with the additional information and i sent a memo to the president and vice president at the central and just all i'm asking is to follow the imagination imp /* imp for all institutions basically, she have to present it to the public sent out and you have consent items for on the advanced calendar for several imps and i want to see that on the advanced calendar not a controversial request just

make sure that it comes back as as consent item to the planning commission when they made the changes that were requested thank you very much >> commissioners - okay. >> is there any other public comment on the minutes i want to close that. >> public comment is closed. thank you so commissioners the minutes for the imp state that your action was you directed staff to continue working with the project sponsor on improvements to the imp and provide the planning commission with an update memo section 304 e states hearing an acceptance of the plan and institutional master

plan shall be considered accepted when the planning commission meeting was closed i'll defer to our preference by any change to the minutes my recommendation simply to note the hearing was closed and the commission directed the staff to work with the project sponsor on improvements you didn't ask for the imp to come back only an update my understanding if you want to modify that it is an informational item essentially, however, there was in action to accept but by closing the hearing according to the planning code you in their accepted the institutional master plan. >> if i could add i totally agree with ms. hester the documents are publicly the question is what you did the quicker of the master plan you don't have to take an action to

accept it up never have it is if you don't want to accept it you continue the hearing more information but you didn't into do that i'll be happy to make the documents public or whatever to make that available to the public thank you. >> commissioner moore. >> for clarification i think once the presentation was made by the academy of art we all understood it better, however, the documents that is part of public record was distinguish the consent presented we we asked for the submitted documents in line or better description of what was veshlg presented i don't know i can't that is not part of the public record that's why we're here why

you're giving us this the tint of the solution not to make that a private memo so there will be a document a corrected document. >> nothing that comes to the commission is private. >> inc. i think that that is clear this particular revised document could be accepted by us as a consent item and therefore people can look at it and read it and do whatever. >> commissioner antonini. >> yeah. i was going to bring up the same point the director brought up in my experience once we closed the hearing the imps is deemed accepted even though we take no action but closing the hearing in this case we do want some just wants and additions and want to come back

as a memo and, of course, the memo is public i don't know it need to be an agenda item the mocha come back and be available for the public if there is a desire at this point for any hearing the commission can certainly direct another hearing this might add to the process it is budget committee labored a long time and to have the changes made and the memo come back to us i'm move to approve the memo with the additions upgraded by secretary. >> i want on interpretation of the way ms. hester presented we have a legal obligation to recycle and as a consent item

back we're formerly at least accepting the revised form of imp. >> commissioners deputy city attorney kate stacy my understanding is that ms. hester asked the commission to calendar whatever follow-up there is on the institutional master plan the commission is ready to do that the code usual secretary read is clear once the commission closes the public hearings the institutional master plan is shall be considered accepted but my understanding it was different as articulated to have a hearing and allow public access to those documents is certainly one the purview of the planning commission. >> i personally believe the shortcomings how is it was presented is like a memo that was gave us no ability to

approve it by basically saying you're okay just you put it together in a better are format and for that reason it shouldn't basically be prior as a consent item so be that. >> commissioner wu. >> for me the minutes themselves can have the corrections of the secretary read into the record to state we closed the hearing as to the memo either it could be a consent item or be do we have a place on the wednesday night for that all information. >> commissioners you can add it a memo as an agenda item there the director's report this is where we commonly do things like that. >> there needs to be another presentation a different presentation to the memo. >> a section on the website that has the master man's plans.

>> the disorderly conduct can refer it is there. >> once posted anybody in general public comment can make a comment on it very good commissioners there is a motion that has been seconded to adopt the minutes as amended commissioner antonini commissioner hillis commissioner moore commissioner wu commissioner vice president richards and commissioner president fong so moved, commissioners, that motion passes unanimously 6 to zero and commissioners places us on item 5 commissioners questions or comments. >> commissioner antonini. >> yeah. today on my way into planning i drove but as almost every week the former commerce high school across van ness avenue in my opinion a beautiful building needs a lot of repairs but in the same mission rival style mission high school and

galileo high school it was probably built the same time maybe a little bit earlier a report from the commerce maybe a earlier rendition was moved from the site of city hall to be built on this site but in any case a plan some years ago for that to be the school of the arts that was a wonderful plan unfortunately, the funding was not there when the time came for it to happen and school of the arts is now on portola drive a long ways from the after the original plan was a good one i hope the city reverses that building it was talk about tearing some of that do you thing this is a beautiful architectural remarks and as

john cain crafts some of the newer buildings with not a lot of the style like the oldest buildings so, anyway hoping we'll see something done in that regards with very historic building a perfect site for an educational institution for the arts. >> commissioners, if there's nothing further, we'll move on to general public comment not to exceed excuse me - drourments. >> good afternoon, commissioners just a couple of announcements one i want to let you you know that i drove down the peninsula to testify at the the mountain council meeting a hearing on the proposed bayshore area the area where google is they're considering 10 thousand units of

new housing been a site that's been considered a while ago but not a year ago they moved with the eir i testified to thank them and talked about that site i thought was probably a dozen regionally that have help move forward with the housing in the region they asked me to send back a message which was that and first of all, they thanked me and secondly, they wanted to the counseled members asked i send a message to the elected officials to stop beating up on them i offered a point i'll accept that and that task from them i also offered and will move forward to have a meeting around the city that has sites closed to job to be supportive in moving forward, and, secondly, a

lot of the news i know there a discussion about the governors proposal for the development it is happening quickly we are looking at it right now we are considering a comment on it frankly it is very happening quickly a trailing piece of legislation to the governs budget and so we will inform you as was moved forward with the progress we are simply digging through that ourselves and we will let you know the details of the unmeeting thank you that concludes my report. >> commissioner moore. >> director rahaim can you give us a presentation for the density dealing with parking and some of those questions which we struggle are appropriate and the housing types in the communities, etc. because this

large swatch of land depending on still have been large low rice community and accepting the identities didn't come easily either. >> commissioners, if there's nothing further, we'll move on to through the chair reopen the items proposed for continuance and director rahaim and the zoning administrator you can continue item 15 b. >> sure item 15 b to june 30th. >> commissioners past events by the board of supervisors and the board of appeals and the historic preservation commission in board of appeals report. >> good afternoon, commissioners aaron starr, manager, legislative affairs. for the planning department the board was on break $4 million holiday but meet last

week with the sporntdz ordinance with the rooftop mechanic equipment and applies in district where middle-income alleys are required that was heard this year and voted unanimously to recommend approval staff present an overall no public comment and no questions from the board the item was referred to the full board with a positive recommendation at the full board last week the board heard the landmarking suppression and this was sponsored by supervisor avalos and the item passed first reading there were 3 introductions of note the first one were the in zoning controls that was sponsored by supervisor peskin and supervisor kim there was also an ordinance introduced by supervisor farrell and supervisor wiener that are the planning and administrative

code to conduct codes citywide and similar to supervisor peskin ordinance and a planning amendment that deals with medical services that amended the planning code for change of use from a business or professional service to medical on the first floor below on the sacramento commercial district that concludes my remarks but like to thank the director for coming to any hometown there are thirty thousand units and adding 10 thousand more so - >> thank you good afternoon tim frye here to share a couple of things from the historic preservation commission the commission healed the second hearing on the landmarking for the moore's gift

shop and lloyd wr50ig9 building on the current designation on the interior is protected under the planning code the proposal to amend the landmarking designation to include the interior representatives from the ownership were on hand at the hearing and are supportive of the landmarking designation which will be forwarded to the board of supervisors for consideration the commission also forwarded a positive representation for the landmarking designation of 1345 ocean avenue the presbyterian church that includes designating the collage by referenced borden titled the great witnesses that is a mural that extends beyond the exterior of the church except the sanctuary the

commission was supportive of that designations and referenced borden was there in support of project and the members of the public and finally, the commission provided a comment on the code amendment that commission will review regarding the wireless facilities and our review of the wireless facilities and in particular, the commission was reviewing changes to the process for wireless facilities on buildings designated to articles 10 through 11 of the planning code and overall supportive of staff's recommendation those amendments that concludes any comments unless questions. >> commissioner family for members of the public those of you standing will need to find a seat an overflow room that is on the north light court on the

first floor until 5:00 p.m. than than overflow room 216 north light court right now thank you commissioners that places us in general public comment not to exceed a period of 15 minutes at this time, members of the public may address the commission to the public that are within the subject matter jurisdiction of the commission except agenda items. with respect to agenda items, your opportunity to address the commission will be afforded when reached in the meeting. each member of the public may address the commission up to three minutes. i have no speaker cards. >> any general public comment today. >> okay not seeing any, general public comment is closed. and next item, please. >> >> very good under our regular calendar for item 8. >> jonas aren't we hearing. >> i apologize. i apologize

commissioner we're on item 3 for case taylor street a conditional use authorization please note that on may 12th after hearing and close public comment the commission disapproved and continued to june 2nd by a vote and commissioner president fong you were a little bit in other words, to participate you have to reviewed the materials. >> i've reviewed and ready to take action. >> good afternoon planning department staff the the item before you is a conditional use authorization for a between on taylor street on the east side of taylor been green and vallejo the project requires a conditional use authorization to merge the dwelling units for the planning code

the project will merge within royal towers 72 co-opt the project will reconfigure the hallways to create one thousand plus 4 bedroom unit occupied by the owners family just for give you a little bit of background it was heard and the commission heard public comment and adopted a motion of intent and continued this to today, the draft motion for the consideration of the commission thank you i'm available to answer any questions if you have any. >> project sponsor please i'm sorry did you - did you. >> well, was requested to pull off consent by sue hester. >> so generally not a project presentation. >> okay. >> so are we open to public comment this is the second time.

>> this is the second hearing certainly. >> so public comment on this item please. >> sue hester i'm supporting the motion before you which is to deny the merge er we have struggles every week at the planning commission about building more housing when we lose housing we're not paying attention a lot of middle-income people don't think on housing and condos. >> don't think on units that are like this one, two units and three bedrooms they buy the housing and stay in the city there is no possibility by

merging the units well, there is a possibility can be unmerged but if a temporary situation people a lot of times have two units one for their parents and one for the rest of the parents they don't merge to occupy them but if you merge this enormous unit you're basically saying that is going to be high-end housing because what you think is going to be a result what is the price those units will go for i bought my house or bought any part of my house in 1987 i'm by all middle-income person i'm not a high-end person lawyers are mostly high-end not me your regulating the supply of

the low income housing when this building was built not trumpeted as extremely hi end housing that was creating if you allow this merger i'm asking the planning commission how hard to build two units that are basically high-end market-rate. >> how much effort do how put in how much money is there to create if you desolate a decimation of high-end hours to extremely high-end luxury housing what are we are doing that's a sad statement to say to the rest of the city and i'm hoping you go through with results that you had advertised which is to deny the

merge thank you. >> i'm sure you'll hear from ms. barkley. >> okay is there any additional public comment on this item. >> no. >> any other. okay public comment is closed. exposure >> move to disapprove the reasons stand while those units are not being prototyped if being together nothing that commission will say against it merging them is very much against the policies that we all have received if the mayor's office very much in line with the ever dwindling amount of housing available in all forms and shapes and i basically building since we've denied

other mergers one the very close vicinity of this building what we are doing to consistent with the provision we'll taken before i move to disapprove. >> second. >> commissioner antonini. >> i disagree there is the mayor's office directive and interpret to the letter or the purpose to protect availability none of those units their valued at 3 in the million dollars and the larger unit had been worth a little bit more not that much more than 3. $5 million and the other thing that is interrupting with the board the co-op as asked and people decisions the owners of this building since 1964 i don't think the city is you know well, we, legally do

this this is the right we should be prevent them from legalizing what the the existing situation we did 24 a few years ago with the member of the burns family new deceased unfortunately and hills plaza in this case there were condos and they merged two units this is a cooperative a percentage ownership a little bit different situation and the other thing that can happen and certainly be supportive an approval of that with the caveat we'll encourage the possibility of revefrt to a percentage that the ownership what about split to allow the sales of the two units with the consent of the board at such time the owners might vacant did unit a they've been there since 1964 and it

will allow when we're really trying to protect future affordability it has nothing to do with had is happening now has to do with but in the future if those were opted out by something else it will be eligible to be split i think we have to respective people individual property rights i'll not vote to discuss. >> >> i completely disagree with commissioner antonini i don't know the vehicle argument is matters i'll take it it one i own two building and between the two entryways to create a single-family house this is akin to me taking that further the tint of the approval the commission the board of supervisors passed was necessary

and desirable and compatible is this creating a $5 million from a 3. $7 million unit necessary and desirable and compatible and last time i checked for the chronicle no shortage of $10 million and $5 million homes let's get real this $1.7 million is available for some maybe the top 6 or 7 percent but top 2 percent by creating a unit this large at that value only makes the affordability to the top of half percent that is everything i stand for on the commission i think that the owner wants to have that many square footage please consider buying another one and let two families move in i'll vote to disapprove.

>> commissioner hillis. >> so be consistent with any position i think we're getting way into the weeds we see projects ms. hester opposes come before us to build new housing and consistently shack off the units if we maximize the number of unit in the city that's great but not what we do the merger not losing a rental unit we've done this this is akin i'm against the motion. >> if i may i believe i may have mislead it was only pulled off consent because ms. hester has a card the project sponsor has an opportunity to speak i don't know if you want to

provide that opportunity to her. >> i don't have any comment but from the commission has a comment i'll be happy to answer. >> commissioner antonini. >> i also talk about how huge this unit been 3200 square feet big but not enormous compared to the single-family homes it contains four bedrooms that represents 6. 6 percent of the housing units in san francisco and one reason why we see people with lots of children leaving san francisco they can't often find a place they can accumulate the entire family with enough bedrooms because they're not around percentage wise and an

stent family an multi generalization all they will remain there only have to you can have the separate unit makes it a lot less convenient we're inconveniently someone but has to measure the approval with the built on sale to split it into two units to we accomplish both things. >> commissioner moore. >> i do believe we have to do some soul searching how most recently we have disapproved mergers of similar kind in a neighborhood i want to remind us of consistency matter i believe this was an issue i do believe the aspects meeting touched on are real issues i hope they'll

surface as we take a stronger look at how we losing housing and what form didn't matter it is about unit count how are we adding units not simultaneously subtracting that's in any reminder to all of us commissioner vice president richards. >> one question for the project sponsor mrs. barkley please can you help me out i don't have any original packet a cut off between the two units whether it is access to each unit internally. >> it is a door that connects the two units the problem the door is such when the project sponsor 89-year-old mother literally go out - she as difficulty negotiating basically have to go from one unit to the

next unit and figure out. >> is that akin to a hotel room a double room. >> no a hotel room they want to merge the units to so the extent family can live as a as a family shares one kitchen and living room it is designed that the mergers is for a extended family that comes down to two children that comes home and also his partners mother who is spends a lot of time. >> so the issue they'll be taking out the second kitchen if it is a merged unit. >> correct. >> and enhancing the doorway it is there already. >> and providing more divided units and create a wider corridor so they won't be -

>> thank you very much. >> you know i mentioned this in the last hearing thank you very much ms. barkley we have been wrapped around an axiliary irving we don't want to take it off the market and rent-controlled unit not saying it wouldn't be rented out but go to continue that item it was withdrawn and gave those concerns to the project sponsor and i honestly don't see the difference between this and any other one we've disapproved regardless. >> commissioner hillis. >> we're speaking about units we should keep it in mind we quickly will - we have a project later this afternoon and get it shaved off our goal to build for units keep in mind not only on the mergers but this

didn't protect the affordable housing or that is merging to no non-affordable uses. >> commissioner johnson. >> yes. this is a tough one i remain on the fence as i was with the last hearing on the on one hand i agree the unit does matter and as a commissioner i'll always fight for more unions e units rather than less and so for that reason i'm not on the side of supporting this that adds a single residence as the day may be and frankly another case today where we approved the merger when it came back we'll continue it again so you know for the sake of consistency i kind of want to

say i'll support that idea and again use the units they continue to own them maybe not an issue in the future but right now the wrong time on the other hand, it operationally is potatoes we have hundreds of other units we're looking at in the pipeline and two units in a co-op kind of functions like a medicaid waiver commission they have the discussion what to do with the units in the building that is as well i'd like to continue to hear out commissioner vice president richards and commissioner moore i am definitely on the fence and definitely can support it we have manipulative bigger fish to fry but at the same time, we have another case on docket today where we will approve the merger and latter ask the same properties to be split again

into two units. >> commissioner vice president richards. >> so the parallel drawn to the project i don't think is quite relevant the reason the merging of those unite is not shaving a church or creating additional guests for anyone else it is taking down a wall and removing a unit i call the commission to task we are all over the map a 6 bedroom or whatever is 8 thousand square feet it is all over the map and really use a number of bedrooms to serve whatever purpose the cove open agreement commissioner johnson there are two condos and a condo association; right? i'm president and my girlfriend is vice president and we decided to get married and with the association writes a letter and

their support of two units so i'm still on board with denying this is a maybe small potatoes but strikes to the hearted of a bigger policy issue. >> commissioner moore. >> since condo associations and co-op associations operate under a different set of rules they're not necessarily supportive of the policies but mifrtdz in a form that clearly avoids conflict of interest or finding the larger good as a principle i think commissioner vice president richards gave a very good example because even with a condo or there is a conflict of interest by which merge's occur and the ownership is expensive those projects have to be rerecorded it is complicated i don't want to get into the details it is our

responsibility to uphold the larger city policies that - and do what we have been asked to do on green between taylor and leavenworth we denied a condo merger about 9 months ago we need to be consistent otherwise i think we could be looked as not particularly capital plan capable of being xhventh with the directs given to us i understand them clearly as do everything you can too preserve the unit count that's the message i've clearly heard did you doesn't matter what form in the underpinning the secondary condo or co-op boards doesn't matter. >> commissioner antonini. >> yeah. i've never really

favored the policy that was before it was a discretionary review on unit merger it involves a single-family that owned two units and so far their own purposes wanted to combine the units i think that is an innovation to some degree and i could see it applied when there are many units being merged or investment type of situation where someone is taking a number of units off but we've seen lots of instances families went out and bought two unit and as time went on they had children and needed to merge to stay there couldn't sell and buy at a higher tax basis and many reasons this is not the situation here but the same kind of principle an invasive and particularly bad it is conditional use now that allows

between the city so part of it i'm afraid that you know it is sending a message rather than looking at all individual instances this instance is it so to the applicable with the affordability not a reason to deny but some members of the city family are trying to do with the supervisors some supervisors to send a message don't think about merging units and as rich said in the scope of things we're building hundreds of new units and should be building thousand dollars and thousand dollars but the same people are arguing about the merger are opposing the projects that proposed to build many, many new units for a variety of reasons so i think we need to be consistent and against the motion. >> commissioner vice president richards. >> i promise my last comment

ms. barkley one other comment how many square feet will be - >> combined. >> combined i'm sorry 23, thirty, 3 three hundred; right? >> around that. >> in the entire building what's the largest unit. >> let me have the mr. drake that lives - >> nope just answer the question. >> hello commissioners, i want to put a human face on this you have a letter from me i want to answer our question commissioner vice president richards my mom is 89 in assistant living and she's confused and the way the unit is now she literally gets lost it is extremely difficult had i bought the second unit the mayor's legislation was in

place. >> pull up the mike a little bit. >> my mom truly gets lost and confused and typically there when the kids are there and sometimes his mother and sometimes his four siblings or other family members we're on extended family and desire to live together i bought a flat one unit specifically with any elderly mom and at the i can't understand members there are 5 bedrooms and only their multi stories a clear intent on my part to be ♪ building when i purposed the second letter and followed the guidelines and the prevail came in the amount that had about this remarkably imposed with the affordability at this time there was a subsequent change by the

interim legislation that was effected and derailed this i'm sorry commissioner vice president richards i forgot the specific question >> i was letting you go on that's the largest unit in the building. >> the largest unit and there are 12 of them are the size of what mine would be with the merger the top half the building was built with the unit at this size the bottom half the first 10 floors were two units that was the developers plan and over the years all of them have been marked except for my own mine is the last ones and the stakeholders deciding that mergers will not only be allowed by encouraged i purposed the

first unit it was empty i was encouraged when the time came up to pretty much it and merge them as six months window in the gridlocks to complete the merger nevertheless, i'm behind because the rules of the legislation that pretty much put a blanket stop to mine. >> okay. thank you. >> this is an interesting situation it is a small and in the weeds situation compared to some of the things we've seen in the past and some of the things today but supportive of building more housing and finding and protecting against loss of housing units this one thank you for the process coming up and answered some questions about that believe i've been inside it is a beautiful building with double units on this the upper

floor and those are merged today, i'm a huge supporter of aging in place i think outside the box as huge future success and the past success for the generations of families being here i applaud this family for bringing the mother and future mother-in-law and as we get older the amenities are important to us and parents and grandparents i hope this situation is different i'll not be supportive of the current motion on the floor to disapprove that's not to say if we had another flat in another situation that i would go the another way this is a tower building all the towers we've approved in the city be ready for more our families will grow

and start off in a one bedroom or two bedrooms unit our parents an aging and to merge the units or leave san francisco and you know laeshlg double our income and find another unit. >> sorry. >> commissioner johnson. >> thank you thank you, everyone for your comments and the understanding you don't always have to come it is appreciated i've talked about consistency i can't support this merger eerie want everyone to remember the conversation every time we see a conversation for a setback a unit and make things smaller so we can preserve characters a characteristics of the proermgsz of san francisco i want you all to remember this conversation for this i feel

we've heard stories on top are larger this is not out of character with the building and the lower floors are many of them seem to merge the owners are not the official record of the building that's seems to be the case so i'll supporting this mergerer is in the inconsistent with the other discussions and practices. >> commissioners, if there's nothing further, we'll move on to to disapprove the merger. >> commissioner antonini no commissioner hillis no commissioner johnson no commissioner moore. >> commissioner wu commissioner vice president richards and commissioner president fong no that motion fastens three to four with commissioner antonini commissioner hillis and commissioner johnson and commissioner president fong voting against is an alternate motion commissioners. >> commissioner antonini.

>> yeah. i'd like to make a motion to approve the merger with the condition that contingent on approval by the cooperate board at such time the unit or percentage ownership was being sold the consideration could be given to selling it as two separate units not necessarily to parallel the breakdown of the units as now but ms. barkley can you comment i see you moving around. >> i know that is the kind of condition that would normal condo and building or apartment buildings that is this commission was posted before my on this problem with the condition is not the concept but legally he can't go ahead and do it he has to go and get the

boards approval any kind of condition he'll have to have language. >> ms. barkley you're correct it would be encouraged to have two units at such time as the occupancy changed or the sale to take place the ownership. >> commissioner antonini. >> maybe i could suggest we shouldn't make the condition contestant upon another action by another body the planning commission has to allow the merger but potentially add a finding to encourage that at the from the owner could look at separating the units. >> let's move to approve the merger with the finding the commission encourages the owner

as the board of the cooperative to advocate for reestablishment of the two units at some future time of sale commissioners if i may the motion to approve you'll have to defer to the finding in front of you, i don't know 3 weeks ago. >> that's the original plan before the planning commission. >> that's included in - >> second. >> thank you, commissioner. >> commissioners, if there's nothing further, we'll move on to there is a motion that has been seconded to approve the merger with the finding that were before you in the original motion for approval adding or amending to encourage the merged unit into two commissioner antonini commissioner hillis commissioner johnson commissioner moore no

commissioner wu no commissioner vice president richards no and commissioner president fong so moved, commissioners, that motion passes passes 34 to 3 with commissioner moore commissioner wu and commissioner vice president richards voting against commissioners now we are back under the regular calendar for item 8 first street mission street otherwise known as the ocean light center this is administrative and planning code amendments. >> oh, commissioner wu sorry. >> i ask to be recused following the fact i was recused on the related items. >> motion to recuse commissioner wu. >> second. >> thank you, commissioners on that motion to recuse commissioner wu. >> commissioner antonini commissioner hillis commissioner johnson commissioner moore

commissioner wu and commissioner vice president richards and commissioner president fong so moved, commissioners, that motion passes navel 67 to zero good afternoon. this is a request for a conditional use authorization for the ocean wide project kate hartley with the mayor's office of housing and community development is here to answer any questions about the affordable housing delays and robin the project sponsor with oewd is here to answer questions on the street ordinance it was presented before you most recently on may '57 for the commission to take action for the background on may 20th an appeal for the downtown conditional use authorization to the board of appeals today is request for the condition review of the planning code amendments the

administrative code proposes a new downtown preservation funded more affordable housing the planning code waves approximately 27 million for the planning code but will require the project to save affordable housing requirements by redirecting the approximately 27 and an additional $13 million included in the pretty much for the street vacation for no less than $40 million studying the requirements and still has to flu the impact fees in section of the planning code the department recommends approval that concludes my presentation. i'm available to answer any questions as well as kate hartley and robin i believe the project sponsor is also here for any questions. >> okay. thank you. >> thank you.

>> project sponsor please. >> good afternoon commissioners displacing with reuben, junius & rose ocean wide center we've presented this project several times most recently you may 5 particularly hearing not prepared for today but on the specific matters before you when the prong was approved last month we told you about the package of community benefits comprised of voluntary contributions and impact fees briefly the overall public benefits are substantial and significantly advances the transit center for the public improvements i'm not going to mention each

and everyone one that generates one hundred and 17 wanted $6 million in impact fees and 6 hundred plus in special takes for community facilities over thirty years and 28 plus in the general fund those are the required funds on top of ocean wide will create open space in chinatown administrative code by a community another piece of the benefits page addressed this the ordinance simplifying the technical details the ordinance will accomplish two things illustrated in the graph if i could get the overhead please. so first, the ordinance will

memorialize to voluntary have $13 million no affordable housing above and beyond required and secondly, the contribution and $27 million ocean wide affordable housing and jobs housing fees to a new downtown neighborhood preservation fund in total the project will pay $30 million which is used more affordable housing within a one mile radius to offset the long-standing problems with chinatown and south of market with the avalos unlike the downtown fund it can be used for new construction and rehab for permanent and affordable housing another $18 million to the citywide affordable housing fund to direct the funds i've described tell the jury needs to waive the affordable housing fee and part

of jobs housing fee shins since their directed to the citywide fund and in place of the fees a larger amount $58 million in total versus $45 million will be more affordable housing between the downtown and citywide uses you will receive a letter today on behalf of the chinatown based community-based organizations a few of the representatives are here to speak i'll talk about the need more affordable housing in the area immediately surrounded the project and their support for the proposal before you we're grateful into to the mayor's office and supervisor kim for their sponsorship of this proposal and for your staffs work and recommendation for approval we hope you'll recommend thought board of supervisors approve and thank you for your time and i'll be happy to answer any questions you may have. >> opening up for public

comme comment. (calling names) >> okay. thank you. >> good afternoon commissioners my name is malcolm young with the chinatown community development center i'm here in support of this item we're very gratified and excited to see the creation of this downtown preservation funds it is going to address some long-standing issues around preserving naturally affordable housing in the neighborhood which now is starting to price out residents of these neighborhoods we've seen rents in sro buildings in chinatown double at the past

year and this give us an opportunity to stabilize those buildings through rehab and ultimate preserving those units as permanently affordable this is a good example how a project move forward and for that reason we are supporting this and urge you to as well thank you. >> good afternoon, commissioners phil chin from the better parks and recreation in chinatown i support the item and strongly support the downtown neighborhoods preservation fund rather than go into a long discussion what i want to say i'll submit a letter from the committee for better parks thank you very much.

>> thank you okay. any additional speakers on this item? >> (speaking foreign language.) >> good afternoon commissioners i'm representing community tenants association today as long as the ct a the largest grassroots in the city we represent a lot of of the voices and concerns of residents in the chinatown area.

>> (speaking foreign language.) >> today, i brought 20 members of the association 20 people standing outside to show our support for the first mix community of funds in lieu the affordable housing requirements. >> (speaking foreign language.) >> a recent developments in the downtown and surrounding area brought negative impact a lot of residents into the

neighborhood but i don't think that still has provided enough funding and resources to provide facilities for those new residents. >> (speaking foreign language.) >> and also a lot of development in the neighborhood is gentrifying the neighborhood and this community the preservation fund will help stop prevent a lot of low income residents being evicted in the neighborhood because of the development in the area.

>> (speaking foreign language.) >> so i urge the commissioner today to put the proposal into the board of supervisors and provide a positive recommendation to the board of supervisors thank you very much. >> okay. any is there any additional public comment? >> speakers on this item. >> okay not seeing any, public comment is closed. >> commissioner antonini. >> i'm supportive this is well drafted and does two important things number one it contributed more to affordable housing in terms of gross dollars and also targeted it in a situation within a mile i believe of the

project so and thirdly, it allows for rehabilitation that is brought up having people housed in unsafe conditions is not what we want because we've seen the fires and the tragedies that occurred in many parts of city and many within a mile of this particular project so not only can we do tings that will help some of the existing residents to stay in those areas but we also can make their housing safer and more useful for them so very, very well done and this project is a large one but responded with a very large type of benefit and i think the restructuring make sense i'll move to recommend approval by the board of supervisors. >> second. >> commissioner johnson.

>> thank you supportive of this as well as commissioner antonini mentioned i'm supportive of having this support a small rehab within the area i think this is probably way more opportunities for that type of work than potentially for developing housing so i have a quick question i see ms. barkley here speaking of within a mile of potentially new hours is there sites in the pipeline within a mile of this site. >> that are new housing. >> yeah. so are there sites in the pipeline that can utilize those funds the preservation funds $33 million and there are many, many buildings so we'll use that really fast and great we strongly support it we have fulsome which is a new

construction coming along so we'll gladly dedicate that to this site. >> thank you so much and another question for staff probably not for your thank you so the project sponsor hands up this slide called the $13 million that are going targeted the neighborhood the payment actually for the sale of the easement on jesse street. >> the payment part of pretty much agreement for the street vacation. >> can you go into that a little bit more and explain exactly what that means the vacation allows for the pedestrians and this assess can you discuss any changes that a person may have to the project or circulation anything like that. >> i can speak generally about

the project but others to speak about the ordinance in more detail for the project on may 5th a plan referral that reviewed the consistency portions of jesse street and elm alley for this project they'll be incorporated into the project, however, it will be twenty-four hour 7 days per week public assess jesse street vacation is a portion referred to incorporated into the urban room will have access for fire and as well as large - elm alley has pedestrian assess does that answer your question. >> if i could add a point of clarification the street vacation has two components there are a purchase price the assessed market-rate of the land that the city is selling to

ocean wide center the value of the operated value was $23 million that funding was not addressed in this presentation and goes to the judy once the those funds are paid then the $13 million was an additional payment more affordable housing exclusively not typical what you see in a street vacation business transaction which is usually bans the market-rate. >> thank you second question especially for mr. grattan my first question is that what are the funds for it pretty much and sale on top of the value of the land for the general fund any second question we approved that vacation as part of looking at the project a

couple months ago and so at the time this underlying mechanism behind that was not a pretty much and sale of that street footage for vacation now i'm wonderinging any material changes. >> the board has to approve the actual vacation. >> right. >> but the vacation wasn't a pretty mucurchase sale. >> you approved that sale it was basically a vacation. >> i i get it thank you very much. >> commissioner antonini. >> with an other thing i wanted to mention and ms.

bartley brought up we have plans that called more affordable housing it is a high percentage not nestle matt haney it will automatically happen i believe fund from this project could be applicable to some of the sites either for acquisition or actual construction of the affordable housing portion of the transbay that needs to be built this is other beneficial use of this. >> commissioner moore. >> ms. bartley would you mind recapping when those funds are due and how they are coming to the city and i'm going to defer to planning but i know we can spend this quickly when it comes in. >> typically inclusionary housing fees are the first

documents i assume that's the case here as well. >> that is still the case the fees under section 4015 are required to be paid under the document and that's remaining the case. >> the issuance of a building permit or sited permit whatever is first. >> the project consists of a lot of pieces. >> they're first permit. >> then all the money comes in. >> built in pieces. >> a definition generally, the building permit or first site permit. >> the newly affordable payments when it this due. >> i believe the same time. >> at the same time thank you.

>> i'm sorry. >> was there a motion and be seconded. >> i do apologize commissioners, if there's nothing further, we'll move on to there is a motion that has been seconded to adopt a recommendation for approval on that motion commissioner antonini commissioner hillis commissioner johnson commissioner moore commissioner vice president richards and commissioner president fong so moved, commissioners, that motion passes unanimously 6 to zero those persons standing unfortunately, your causing a fire hazard and you'll need to find a seat if there are any other people outside that you may know that who want to watch those procedures we've arrange for an overflow room room you can watch and listen when our turn comes up to speak you'll be

afforded to return to the room for public testimony anyone here for item 10, 11 a and b 12, 14 and so on i've got a large number of speaker cards for the next item you'll have plenty of time before item 10 actually is even heard okay. just for your advise item 13, item 15 ab have been continued to june 30th commissioners that places us on tome 9 for case this is prohibiting formula retail in the poublgz commercial district a planning code amendment again before you start mr. sanchez oversee persons standing can find a seat that would be great in not for example, your item is

540 hall i suggest suggest you use the light court to watch overseeing procedures that will be while those persons standing i'll ask you find a seat or make your way to the light court. >> good afternoon. diego this prohibits the nct, however, before i continue i'd like to provide supervisor peskin with time to present to you. >> okay. thank you. >> hi good afternoon commissioners

sunny legislative staff to supervisor peskin thank you for giving me time to hear the budgets work to mitigate the displacement and support the preservation of our neighborhood character in district 3 in 2005 supervisor peskin leg at that time successful policies and push to preserve the character of chinatown a decade ago neighborhood grounds like the polk association enhance organizing efforts for neighborhood district to connect neighbors around public safety and small business support we're appreciative of their combined leadership more than ever as several transportation projects a major hospital project and potential for a new - >> sunny wait a second until

we get a transition. >> people can you, you do so quietly you if can't find a seat you'll nobody be loudly to sacrifice in the room an overflow room use the north light court there will be a lot of people to speak to this item in particular. >> jonas maybe someone to manage the outdoor door sorry sunny. >> as i was saying we have a lot going on in the polk street a it is macro an exciting and challenging times for the residents and our neighborhoods merchant in february after an initial meeting with the stakeholders supervisor peskin introduced the formula retail use for the unique needs and

challenges the poublgz nct intended to be a tool in the planning process for this violent neighborhood called the san francisco top 10 charming neighborhoods one of the last neighborhood that has a diverse mix of low income seniors and ethic stores and pedestrians boutiques and legacy businesses as well as a lgbt heritage district people want to live here in the fabric that is attracted to chain stores as the project brt more pedestrian traffic in the neighborhood with many of the small and local businesses struggling to compete with the non-restricted local long time uses their small businesses need our support and help when i served with supervisor kim's office we passed the sdpmz in a neighborhood not money for the

small business charm but they compete we saw the success of those for the merging from entertaining and emptying into negotiations with large-scale corporate contenders they levels the playing field and we have a fighting chance for the commercial landlords enjoying a red hot market they were successful and went to noah valley and worked in chinatown i was recently at a monthly community clean up by a local grocery stores in downtown joe the owner has been operated since 1986 knows every resident and the police advisory board and hires neighborhood and sponsors events and he is an international part of the fabric of this neighborhood that is the

kind of small business owner he was unable to extradite in a neighborhood with grocery stores we - small business owners look out for each other and engaged in the day to day neighborhood this is what our residents love about their neighborhood in district court 3 although this legislation is not targeting one emptied we've heard from the constituents about the grocery store this is within the polk street nct and a potential for a grocery store i'll say on the record on on behalf of finding supervisor peskin we've heard from the constituency loud and clear this legislation is intended to grandfather the existing applications and the whole foods project will definitely get a day before the process i want to thank the broad coalition as neighborhood leaders brought this to the

board and we'll take into it is time if you'll allow me i'll play you guys a brief video that shows you what i'm talking about when i say the polk street neighborhood fabric. >> (inaudible) and i know a

lot of the young people and the staff like to have a business so

it is really important they have the opportunities and support it and landlords support it and the community supports by not making it attractive to hold out for restaurant or bar with the improvements and than that we can't - . >> okay commissioners as outlined in the staff report the poublz to note the character for concentration. >> is that the background music. >> it sounds like an elevator (laughter) okay staff saw a polk street with

residential uses but found from the retail concentration are well below city averages this supports an earlier bvkd the regulation of formula retail use and maine the city process is working and maybe adjusted to better serve residents need and the department to recommend to prohibit the formula retail use over 5 thousand skweeblg unless their 3 to one and staff believes this recommendation about direct the larger formula retail uses to be in the prevailing planning and help with the housing and allows the retail uses to - certain neighborhoods needs are met and lastly residences the

conditional use and residence the community project and the late item the staff get the following letters from the public regarding the after the publication of staff report and it is here for you pursue that concludes my presentation. i'm available to answer any questions thank you. >> okay. thank you. >> okay opening up for public comment stan hayes. (calling names) >> thank you very much i'm sam the president of the telegraph hill and thank you for having me. >> oh, these names if it you

want to line up on that side of the room. >> tndc support of city's retail erratically since 2004 there are crucial protections for the diverse for thanks that come with chain stories i'm here on behalf of t hd for the important ban on chain stores in preserving the identified how it helps us to protect the unique character of north beach not only for those who live there but everyone that joys and celebrates the charm of north beach so we've seen first hand how important formula retail use protections that's why we urge to support supervisor peskin legislation extending similar further

protections to polk street now understand and sympathize would those as seeing this is as a single grocery store not about a grooshs as that issue is fortunately separated out this is a much bigger issue the future of poublz and the preservation of what makes it unique we don't get too many changes to do it right this is one of those times we urge you to support this legislation and send to the board of supervisors with our favorable recommendation thank you very much. >> next speaker, please. >> good afternoon commissioners my name is richard i've lived on rooufb and chair the rufb design zoning and land use committee i'm here to speak

against the ban on formula retail use on polk street the sponsor stated that surprise introduction of this proposed legislation was motivated to stop the application progress of a specific project the whole foods 365 grocery store on jackson street and polk street the russian hill neighbors you conducted a poll they need a point a neighborhoods negotiates and support it at the location for the sports site on polk street it is suggested that that ban will not apply to the 365 with the conditional use for the approval process but i i don't believe that any of the official documents go approves that presumes and cause all of us to to be weary of clever language

to combraishth in this project like it might be tied to other conditions that may not be possible for example the demolition of the building and building a new building that would maybe house a future grocery store. >> seller we appreciate and cherish the long established buzz businesses we support them they've been supportive of us we welcome new businesses that chansz the quality of life in our neighborhood and what is sponsor we have a mix ever vendors with goods and services by residents and visitors alike the existing mcd is an adequate means for the current applications of large businesses hoping to operates along

policies of r policies and it is too important an issue to consider at this time that was heaviestly designed to stop the project the communities wants more time should be available to consider the implications of banning polk street and much more community outreach on polk we look forward to working with district 3 supervisor peskin to create the best possible solution to our neighborhood thank you for your time and consideration. >> thank you >> next speaker, please. >> good afternoon. my name is sarah i've also on russian hill in and out for 18 years and on the board of the land use committee also i'm against the kur7b89 current

proposal i personally feel they're enough protections have to go to a review progress anytime the retail goes through a long rigorous process that process allows for neighborhood input and this ban will not allow for that there are a lot of empty stores on polk street that formula retail use will make that worse you should walk on polk street i shop there and this is you know my neighborhood it is where i live and quite frankly two of the formula retail stores where i do most of my shopping and go to cold hardware and i go to walgreens because i need drugs and groceries and this ban was

largely set up to avoid the 365 store which is an eminent large grocery store i can walk to and not drive to we're told not to use our cars i can't ride the bus and carry the groceries this not forever i'm getting older and 68 years old i'll be getting older we have to consider a wide mix the neighborhood shops are wonderful but i will also mention that the survey when richard alluded to we got over 200 plus responses and most felt they're growing under served for a grocery and against formula

retail ban thank you. >> thank you. >> next speaker, please. >> my name is laurie live on jackson which is at the corner have been polk and jackson i'm on the board of directors of the jackson plaza neighborhood association which by the way, is one hundred in favor of 365 but i am really a concerned by the fact that it seems to me the conditional use allows supervisor peskin doesn't live in our neighborhood we have to shop all the time and we walk up and down the street not sit in our cars within a block of where i live there are 3 large corners storefront that are empty one of

them is 16 hundred jackson but what i would argue for that we should not have a ban on formula retail i began to figure that out brand new i didn't see has with ace hardware now a chance a new one listened be able to make that conversion out of closet not having another out of the closet but a good store to have if it is 11 stores that make a formula retail they have over 11 so i just would like to continue to have the city pay attention to the residents on polk street thank you. >> thank you. >> next speaker, please. >> hello, i'm minnie boxer i'm strongly opted to the ban the people that live in the

neighborhood should have more of a say the formula 1 on polk street to hold a hearing if there is strongest supports store the store it sports a community need let if open personally i'm concerned this blinded ban didn't take into account the needs of ellis acted and moderate income people in the neighborhood i'm opposed because it is two inflexible and not take into account the changing need of the neighborhoods it disempowers the people in the neighborhood. >> thank you. >> next speaker, please. >> good afternoon. i'm john rich i'm. >> resident on jackson at jackson and polk just to add to what is said two things one oh, i'm a senior and have been

there for 25 years you should know that i'm in favor of stores local businesses as barbara lead us to the fact i frequent local businesses but against the proposed ban on formula retail two major reasons in addition to the what is stated first any blanket ban in this day and age 2016 blanket anything has not worked things are changing too fast for a blanket anything to work and second to add to that formula retail can have very, very con subsequence for the work that is available that note

all formula retail add to property values over and above the trends in the neighborhood therefore i urge you to leave things as is nothing is broken and i urge you to not recommend the proposed ban an formula retail thank you very much. >> thank you. >> next speaker, please. >> good afternoon my name is ann brubaker i'm a member of russian hill and land use committee and i have watched with growing concern as the battle congruity to stop 365 foods if opening a store on policies through the ban of formula retail

i'm also a retired seamstress and sole proprietor that know the formula retail years my direct come territory was california foods a enormously beneficial relationship for both of us did i have to differentiate any services from theirs absolutely while my prices were notedly higher any business thrived and grew any customers know the finished product and any ability to create out of the box i believe that fillmore and chestnut street attest to the formula retail and sole proprietors to co-exist in san francisco a blanket rule of relationships is short sided at best there are currently conditional use rules that ably

allows the neighborhood and city to vet such applications relative to a grocery i understand the formula retail mrs. pay attention to the word hill in any area russian hill we residents must haul our purposes uphill and upstairs we need a store that is conveniently located did you city of san francisco has collectively determined that we need more housing and we shouldn't use our cars please note our own section 302 states public net conveniences and welfare are part of general code presumably this refers to the residents at least has much as the merchants

limiting reasonably priced core groceries while forcing us to travel uphill and down daily flies in the face of a stated goal realty and common sense in closing i'm reminded you there are agents myself as well as young parents 6 ways from sunday so doing the shopping locally is important 85 percent of the residents want that store he know that competition makes us stronger any impression the goal to promote local shopping and banning formula retail is the opposite thank you. >> thank you. >> next speaker, please. >> i'm greg carr been living up from parking control officer for over 40 years and on the board of merchant i'm speaking in opposition to the proposed formula retail ban

there is a process conditional use authorization process that allows for communities participation and the review and discussion of those kinds of projects the legislation proposed prohibit my future input and has specific circumstances in the future policies is different not a historical character of the 3 districts with that kind of ban exists and i think that future projects and involving formula retail might help the street to attract more pedestrian traffic and the economics of the grocery business is a slow margin make it difficult for a small independent grocery store and maybe a whole foods 365 is the way to get a selection in our part of northern polk we should

be able to have it discussion a similar discussion and not be afraid the community our neighborhood survey on the 365 project shows overwhelm support from what our community time and should not be disparaged or shown as a bad project that closes off outline communicate and can't be good for the neighborhood thank you very much. >> thank you. >> next speaker, please. >> >> hi, i'm bryan i've been on the board for the little polk for over 5 years i represent a demographic with 35 without kids we have a fun neighborhood and if we wanted something to be suburban like a

- i think a lot of people will move the young people and people that present any demographic we don't mind it with that said i hope you guys take into consideration thank you. >> thank you. >> next speaker, please. >> >> and while he's coming up to the podium i'll call more names (calling names) and i'm joe i'm on the board of neighborhood polk absorption i'm in favor of the legislation i think it is a pretty simple argument san francisco wants to preserve the uniqueness of its neighborhood not oath chestnut or fillmore street but if we look to examples lifework north

beach and hayes valley and chinatown we see that preserving the nukeness has helped them grow and drive tourism. >> polk street didn't suffer from a lack of traffic i think that by allowing formula retail to come in it will drive up prices of commercial spaces that effects entrepreneurss and there is formula retail on van ness street a block away and so i would strongly urge this commission to vote in favor of the formula retail thank you. >> thank you. >> next speaker, please. >> good afternoon commissioner i'm ms. hernandez represent the local 6 i'm here in support we're in support of supervisor peskin ban on the formula retail

it is clear that a chance store will destroy the character the neighborhoods i've included a whatever for all of you to read in support of ban thank you. >> thank you. >> next speaker, please. >> i'm sorry. i'm speaking out of turn because i have to leave we want to commend be heard. >> go for it. >> i live on pacific avenue between polk and larkin i'm also a member of the russian hill neighbors design zoning and lufbs i'm here to oppose supervisor peskin proposal i'm also here to oppose his video and his characteristic or characterizationtion of polk street nothing like hayes valley or north beach

and any empty storefronts people with spent - i walk from any home to my office that is on the corner ever california and van ness that is what should have been shown here as well it is my neighborhood i love it i like to see that progress and thrive but i think that rather than worrying about the future of policies supervisor peskin is well-advised to worry about now and doing what his job requires him to do and clean up the streets first i know his ban is primarily to stop whole foods from coming to the neighborhood i've debated long and hard whether i want

that store there or not i'm in the vicinity of that location i'd be affected by everything the store brings but i do support it and i think having whole foods there besides the amenities it brings with the shoppers the street needs that would bring merchant to those empty storefronts and it would help get rid of the blight of the street so the neighborhood organization who support supervisor peskin should also be helping to clean up the streets that's the problem with polk street the colonies of homelessness are multiplying liv stores like real

foods that is about the only grocery store on polk street have been quoted to oppose the whole foods they'll fear they're out of busy they are going out of business the cashiers are the first one to tell you their lease is up they're not bringing in inventories and so comprehensive that whole foods is if comparison like a downtown store i don't know they have the best of the neighborhood the majority of neighborhood really wants that store there. >> thank you. >> thank you, ma'am, your time is up. >> hi my name is gail i'm president of the hayes valley neighborhood association and have a letter here for you to look at in 2003, the merchants opted for a stronger comprehensive formula

retail prohibition rather than one that requires a high level of the scrutiny by a developer to be permitted the hayes valley association and our merchants association have long supported the community choice on the scope of formula retail in a neighborhood commercial corridor based on the polk street community support for a full chance street ban in the neighborhood we urge to you to adopt it without administration the proposed administration directing the size of retail use in the polk nct is an attempt to control formula retail, however, the research used seems inflated in 5 thousand square feet will deter formula retail they occupy a variety of spaces blow 5 thousand square feet

viable if there's a legal will that they can pursue the success of the hayes valley ncd is embracing merchants that created a shopping experience permitting formula retail of any square footage would diminish the railway of the ncd let's the retail define itself through the creation and maintenance of the retail spaces and prevent the rashlts from any size to be applicable the few formula retails that have slipped into the ncd have not become a part of neighborhood in part because the managers are transient and remaining in the neighborhood at most two years there's no local management connection plan that benefits the neighborhoods our recent chance store which a b a

and a lost at the board of appeals promised to support local artists and other local businesses none the promises have teller listed and manager that 0 opened the store has left the neighborhood gapped nothing please approve the policies ncd without modifications thank you. >> next item. >> i'll call for speaker (calling names). >> good afternoon, commissioners and staff i'm adam the director for whole foods market in northern california over the past many years i've been involved in the process for opening 5 of the whole food locates in san francisco the currently you conditional use authorization for a formula retail in san francisco is time consuming costly and exhaustive

an important and effective tool to insure that san francisco this is a the unique character for the distinct neighborhood and desires of this process the process works this concludes the process works and the staff reports concludes no evidence that suggests that formula retail is driving out neighborhoods the formula retail not an outside presence and lowering average in san francisco one of the reasons he love any jobs i get do build on the character and respond to the niece of the neighborhoods we serve that starts with the community and listen to the community and what we learned helps us to shape from the store design to services to the consumers the vast majority codify community has made it

clear they're in favor of that the legislation that creates the formula retail as it serves to include the voice of the business owners in the neighborhood please don't support this legislation this is is making process i urge your vote against this and thank you for your time. >> thank you. >> next speaker, please. >> good afternoon commissioner and staff i'm rob the president find whole foods market in northern california whole foods as i understand a lease for the whole foods market this small store will focus on the lower prices and streamlining the selection and bring one hundred jobs to the communities i'm speaking in opposition to the ban the formula retail in the polk direction the lives legislation serves the goals of

this legislation up to and including the authority to deny the development if so it deemed inappropriate in the community and the staff talks about the cu process necessarily includes the opinion of the communities this legislation excludes and denies the community how best to preserve the character off their neighborhoods in this case that will deny the basic needs and affordable healthy grocery store and ford 72 percent of the residents in the neighborhood by bending 7 is percent said the neighborhood is in need of a better grocery store and percent of those polled on the website expressed support for that store that's an overwhelms