>> welcome to the san francisco planning commission this is the regular meeting of the for thursday, october 6, 2016, i'd like to remind the members of the audience that the commission does not tolerate disruptions of 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 vice president richards commissioner hillis commissioner koppel commissioner melgar and commissioner moore. >> we do expect commissioner johnson to arrive shortly commissioners, the first item on your agenda is items proposed for continuance items 1 ab on castro street and v at the same address are proposed middle november 10, 2016 two townsend street is proposed until november 16, 2016, and item 3 townsend street is proposed until november 17, 2016, and item 4 lombard street it

proposed for indefinite and further under our regularly calendar a request from supervisor cohen's office regarding items 14 ab thomas melon circle for a continuance for about october 27th i have one speaker card for item 2. >> opening up for public comment for the items proposed for continuance. >> (inaudible). >> yes. thank you. >> great. >> any other is there any additional public comment? >> thank you. >> hi andrea with supervisor

cohen's office the supervisor learned they were on the agenda i had the opportunity to have brief conversation with the project sponsor shield like more time for the final plans and respectfully requests the opportunities and know you video a busy calendar so we'll work around whatever date make sense for that. >> okay. great. >> good afternoon, commissioners michael burk on behalf of the project sponsor we have no problem with the request for the continuance we - we have been working with the supervisor and the community since 2005 i'm embarrassed to say at the last minute appears to be communication problem i think we should take responsibility we're happy to

work with the supervisors in fact, look forward and respectfully request you get us on the calendar as soon as possible because we would like to start construction on this new housing next spring on that ground working hard what your staff and community we think we have a project you'll appreciate and the city be brought out u proud of is there any additional public comment? >> for items proposed for continuance not seeing any, public comment is closed. jonas can you remind me the date we're proposing for - and october 27th and just to clarify we'll hear item 10 which is a background informational item own executive park today. >> i'll recommend you continue to hear that we'll get that backward you'll not have to do

it again in three weeks. >> commissioner vice president richards move one a-2 and 4 and 11 a to october 27th. >> second. >> 14 a b and it is 15. >> 14 ab. >> second. >> thank you, commissioners on that motion to continue commissioner hillis commissioner johnson excuse me - commissioner koppel commissioner melgar commissioner moore commissioner vice president richards and commissioner president fong so moved, commissioners, that motion passes unanimously 6 to zero. >> commissioners that places us on your consent calendar are considered to be routine 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 removed from the consent calendar and considered as a separate item at this or a future hearing. item 5 for case 1116 polk street conditional use authorization i have no speaker cards. >> any public comment on the items on the consent calendar. >> not seeing any, public comment is closed. >> commissioner vice president richards. >> move to approve. >> second. >> thank you, commissioners on that motion to approve items 5 under content commissioner hillis commissioner koppel commissioner melgar commissioner moore commissioner vice president richards and commissioner president fong so moved, commissioners, that motion passes unanimously 6 to zero and places you on item 6 for consideration of adoption draft minutes for september 22, 2016. >> excuse me - mr. irony was remiss in not continuing the variance on item 1-b i'll continue that to the date

specified and that's my fault i believe. >> it is 1-b i apologize thank you very much. >> so commissioner matters adaptation of draft minutes. >> any public comment on the draft minutes not seeing any, public comment is closed. commissioner moore. >> move to approve. >> second. >> thank you, commissioners on that motion to adopt the minutes from september 22nd commissioner hillis commissioner koppel commissioner melgar commissioner moore commissioner vice president richards and commissioner president fong okay. >> so moved, commissioners, that motion passes that motion passes 6 to zero and commissioners questions or comments. >> commissioner moore. >> i'd like to talk about 3790, 24th street. >> do you all remember that

believe we spent a lot of time relieving it mentioning saying something that responsible will i addresses the dwelling unit we spent a lot of time an 1250er8d amount of time on 21st street in noah valley. >> corner of noah and 21st. >> i want to show you go something by consequence that building is on the market for $2.89 million i wanted to inform you have that. >> commissioner vice president richards. >> i guess 3 ways to make money to pair the land and sell it at a higher price and entitled it as you mentioned on that building you sell it at a higher price and the third way to confused the building this is

the case study number two. >> that makes the unit that we had kind of identified as being more affordable defactor out of reach of normal people altogether. >> commissioner vice president richards a couple of meetings g ago i mentioned the affordability and this is not how affordable those divisions really are. >> seeing nufrt further through the chair the items for continuance one more time staff is requesting item 16 for 24 avenue conditional use authorization is continued until 1020th. >> excuse me - october 20th to allow them to investigate

this a little bit further. >> any public comment on item 16 proposed for continuance? not seeing any, public comment is closed. commissioner moore >> move to continue. >> second. >> thank you, commissioners on that motion to continue item 16 to october 20th commissioner hillis commissioner koppel commissioner melgar commissioner moore commissioner vice president richards and commissioner president fong. >> so moved, commissioners, that motion passes 6 to zero i appreciate that commissioners that will now place us under departmental matters director's announcements. >> good afternoon, commissioners no new announcements thanks. >> item 9 review of past event of the board of supervisors board of appeals and historic preservation commission good afternoon aaron starr, manager, legislative affairs. for the planning department another that weeks ago land use hearing heard on ordinance to allow temporarily homeless

shelters in the zoning district districts subject so skrufgs heard the item on september 22nd and voted unanimously to recommend approval sam dodge deputy director give an overhead on the dog patch neighborhood which is the commissions heard one speaker that represented the dog patch and voiced supports for the navigation center after comments the committee forwarded to the the board with a positive recommendation at the full board the amends that was sponsored by supervisor kim passes it's second reading and the zoning amendment for the terrace patsz it's second reading the zoning map for fulsome street passed it's first reading and at the full board hearing the board considered a resolution for the city of brisbane to have housing

in the badlands is development as covered in the news the city is considering 6 hundred and 84 commercial development west of highway 101 without housing the developer asked for housing to be include given the housing crisis the supervisors expressed frustration and considered to have this part of brisbane to make sure housing is built during the public comment the mayor from brisbane read a letter and the city manager spoke in opposition the board didn't vote so for the resolution instead supervisor kim asked the item is referred to the land use committee there were two introductions a request from supervisor wiener asking for the impacts of the use of marijuana act if approved by the

voters including the administrative needs and requesting the cannabis task force to report the planning department is represented by the cannabis state legalization task force and will be part of the hearing a reintroduction the downtown special use district in lieu of the open space supported by supervisor kim to allow for the intercontinental to be a fee of 2 and a half million dollars to remove the open space and that concludes my report. thank you. >> thank you commissioner vice president richards. >> i guess i like to get a sense of the commission to calendar the broiling item to send a letter we're expressing our concerns around going with the housing with that commission i don't know what anyone else thinks but put that on the calendar. >> commissioner moore. >> i would suggest to have a

conversation with the correct thought how he sees it that would be helpful before we do that there are certain things i think at least to the planning process that we should ask him to guide us. >> sounds like - and obviously i can't do it here but have we could have a hearing or do a memo to the commission outlining with the in front of the brisbane and the decisions made and best how best to proceed 3re7 a memo first? >> you could bring that into the larger context of our role in the regional discussions helpful to all of us. >> commissioners no board of appeals report the historic preservation commission met yesterday there were a few not worthy items the first is the

historic preservation commission initiated landmarked designation for the parish a church school and convent building they approved 90 sarcastic contract and adopted the legacy business applications include the escape from new york pizza the gypsy rose lee establishment and the oddball films archive if no questions we'll move on to general public comment time, members of the public may address the commission on items of interest to the public that are within the subject matter jurisdiction of the commission except agenda items. with respect to agenda items, opportunity to address the commission will be afforded when the item is reached in the meeting. each member of the public may address the commission up to three minutes. there are no speaker cards. >> commissioners, i would like

to take this opportunity to welcome joel koppel and mel a debar i've known he will for some time and get to know commissioner melgar in the future from my experience you will be serving in the most of the interesting position that you could possibly do in san francisco without pay (laughter) but you will enjoy it (laughter). >> sue hester hard to follow up on the planning commission planning commission precedent you have the opportunity and the

responsibility as planning commissioners to dig into the housing area that in san francisco at a level that is unique to the city you had real opportunities to deal with student housing and you'll have even more the planning commission didn't have jurisdiction over the state institutions that are really important city ucsf he and hastings and sfmade you do have the ability to regulate them their outside of the san francisco code the only people that can say anything is the state but for profit institutions and nonprofit institutions you have an enormous role at the beginning of this calendar you continued

two items to the academy of art and other items two weeks ago the institutional master plan provision is unique to san francisco and was hard fought in - when i was going to law school that is how old it is and energies you to say to for profit and nonprofit institutions what you have to do in order to serve your students and the city by building housing and it has not been done you have an academic institution coming for housing later on in the calendar i'll, back on that one because the academic institutions are they have been very uneven in providing housing student housing to san francisco

san francisco coached along for a long time without addressing it is come to a head right now so you have no regulatory power over usf even though ucsf right now is planning on building housing in dog patch part of eastern neighborhoods eastern neighborhoods plan never ever figured out they'll have to be a priority in dog patch and showcase square housing to meet the need of ucsf and ucsf will only deal with that starting with the planning commission the city says you have to deal with that. >> when you have for profit institution like the academy of art you got to deal with that as

well thank you. >> is there any additional general public comment? not seeing any, general public comment is closed. >> very good under our regular calendar for item 10 the executive park background and the informational

presentation. >> good afternoon commissioner president fong and members of the commission i'm nationally schmidt of department staff we're here to give us a background on the market-rate approvals your informational presentation on the streetscape market-rate plan thomas circle had been on our calendar later this calendar i understand is continued we want to come before you and provide backward and history and context and do the last bit of business very quickly executive park on the southeast part of san francisco it is kind of squashed to candle

stick point to the east and looking at a little bit more closely it is bounded by 101 on its west the bayview park towards the north and candle stick on the bay to the south the full executive park is the full area that you see in the picture the portion that we will be focusing on the portion kind of in the center to the south you have office buildings right now in totality executive park is entitled in several stages by property owners they kind of happened in 4 major steps the northern was approved in the mid

2000s at the time they called themselves signature parks now candle stick cove and included one and 50 townhomes and other buildings one of which has been constructed and to not constructed to the east the project of pop vision development four or five residential structures that you kind of see when you drive into towns perched on the ledge as you drive into san francisco and the portion we'll focus on owned by the universal paragon corporation an old graphic had been known by the corporation and for quick history prior to its contemplated it was from 1964 and essentially was

comprised of housing in similar to what we see in the housing authority sites a inquiry the recreational area not designated and as you can see on the peninsula used as parking for the stadium this rendering is one of the originally by george in the san jose to construct an office park we'll describe it in planning as somewhat of a suburban style office park with components of housing this is a later rendition of executive park comprised of office the 3 office buildings that are there currently much more dense on the ridge line to the north and housing where we see housing

and then some of the - those buildings that center part we'll focus three hundred square feet of office constructed currently. >> over time entitlements so if 19 san jose to the mid 80s we planned the first memorialtion through the sub area plan the south bay plan over time entitlements were updated and refreshed with indiscriminately changes and subsidized in 2005 it was originally entitled for $1.3 million square feet of officer for the heavy demand of housing as signature pursued their entitlements the property owners notably george and puc with a wish to change their

office uses to mixed use residential staff thought that was a good idea and together we embarked on creating the updates to the executive park the update had two components the sub area plan of the area plan we look at this framework and continued on with a complete recession and introduced new zoning specifically for the office portion of the park to create are fraction for the residential mixed use development so just quickly i indicated the sub area plan was corporate in the 80s as part of south bay shore plan again, the site plan that was unusual for our general plan the site plan was impersonated within the plan memorializing the development and again of those structures the office buildings were

constructed in looking at from looking at kind of revising this you're looking at expansive parking with one building the first one we need to do is look at the parceltion from a large parcels bringing it up to fine grains and typical residential patterns and introducing streets within the fraction to make it more easy for pedestrians and bicyclists we had an interest in continuity coming if visitacion valley and little hollywood down lincoln to get to the candle stick point recreational area the area plan the area plan took that framework and applied the tip lolgz created by the better streets plan we applied it to them and executive park sits

sort of within a larger open space framework most notable the candle stick point recreational area you know arguably an underutilized resources and i forgot to mention earlier on the entitlement processes a large chunk of the site was set aside 80 acres for natural areas with an understanding that will not be developed and will be maintained amongst the property owners. >> all right. now kind of run circle trot zones that kind of frames the project that you'll be reviewing what we're looking at to do with the zoning we want to again convert the used to mixed use residential and deal with a large lot configuration we wanted to create pubically open space and another thing we needed to do we're going through the process we started this in

2006 and sort of hallway through candle stick that project kind of got kicked into gear in the middle of what we're doing we realized another facility b ot facility contemplated as part of that and accommodate that we had the mechanisms written to the zoning to make sure it was understood that portions the site not the 5 circle site will have to be kind of left unbuilt to make sure that the development they would otherwise realize can you realized other places on the site and rezone the heights to provide more dense housing the planning code that larger configured the site the requirements the streets be buy out and the plazas as the projects come forward

again, we have a mechanism we take this we know that needs to be used for the brt and make sure it is understood that density will be realized elsewhere and provided for thaurl heights in essentially the strategy i'll go over that a little bit more when i talk about the design guidelines so as an extension to the sud we created the guidelines a couple of things outside of the purview the first thing is create an urban design framework so going back to health we're starting at a base height of 65 to 68 feet sort of lower mid-rise we wanted portions to be into custody we wanted to have a strong street wall along honey and loudly the building 85 feet and the

executive park is compiled as as town center we require the town code that location we're looking at within this portion of site 3 towers one of which you'll review and two other towers and this is you may realize this is an old graphic we've moved one of the towers eastbound but have a one plus one and 40 feet tower to provide variation one the tower heights and set forth we want to make sure did streets are proportional they provide that guidelines the one thing we didn't get do 5 years ago we wanted to translate the street requirements we and so forth in the guidelines so set of streetscape requirements to make

sure the two property owners and the city i should say a common understanding how the streets will be build out and had two developers wanted to make sure this document is completed so this document takes what i described in terms of of the street network and makes it more specific and ties down the property lines if key elevation and key slopes so everyone is looking at the same thing and provides a palate of landscaping street furniture - street trees under the story landscaping and hard escape requirements i know most specifically street lamps for each seethe of the executive park lays out specifically what we expect to see built on the street in terms of where the curving will go and the operation of the streets and so

forth and we call it the streetscape master plan but it is a public realm market-rate plan with the open spaces that are also kind of between the two property owners one with which two of which will be included in the entitlement all the way down be looking at later on and this one our extravagant for the open space key locates where public views were the best and across the bay and so in the often a little bit higher elevation that it would think south of unoccupied buildings c of the ocean landing proposal and to the east of the u pc building before i go further i want to mention to you you know, i indicated we understand that the harey intersections will be

redesigned and rethought for the candle stick project we always understood this document will not solve the problem but provided disclaimers to make sure it is understood those particular streetscapes or configuration of strapdz streetscapes - this ocean landscaping that will be - that concludes my presentation. i'll be happy to answer any questions you may have. >> about the background the history or the streetscape master plan. >> thank you. >> opening up for public comment on this item i have - i

have no speaker cards. >> any public comment on the item seeing none, public comment is closed. opening up for commissioner questions or comments. >> commissioner moore. >> let me press the bottom mr. schneider the city didn't have enough leverage for the park into something that is more relevant i appreciate all the work that went into this in 2005 and following you're showing graphics you're referencing the building location that was challenged by the commission in 2011 and 2012 has not been jaufltd any question is who has the institutional memento guide that building will appear in the correct spot the position the commission took was quite

explicit where that building should and shouldn't be for the community at large coming on the 101 if the north to the south. >> we moved it building in the graphic he can show the graphic the far most western purple star, if you will, commissioner moore and the expirations felt not a good place for the tower we moved is one block east that is, in fact, a part of the proposal that is now going to be before you. >> i'm just saying the institutional memory and the department i'm happy when you showed the drawings this is the illicit and don't understand the

subpoetlet subtlety. >> sorry, sir i'll recognize you - >> mr. schneider i appreciate the authorness and want to thank you for the well preparation of the department and don't have any questions for mr. burke. >> project sponsor. >> there is no project sponsor. >> i welcome our comments. >> i represent the one of the property owners within the area plan and i want to say that commissioner moore in you 2011 mad an excellent suggestion to relocate to the east one block and in fact, she asks the

question where to the institutional memory memorialized and in fact, it is memorialized in the you special use district zoning that location this, to the east so again, it has been memorialized we appreciated the suggestion by exposure and everything has been planned to accommodate it including the sud zoning thank you. >> and actually, it is - i'll give you later the figure in the sud zoning that locked the building on the parcel to which commissioner moore refers. >> maybe through under schneider can give that to us appreciate the additional color.

>> commissioner hillis. >> thank you for the background and the history on that obviously some of us were not on the commission it is great to see this area transform. >> and i think that the urban design guidelines we have in front of us are great in looking at this and what is proposed i know we're talking about that in a couple of weeks one comment kind of open design we got the opportunity with diversity buildings and different blocks we often try to accomplish this but we have different buildings in the proposal there is some similarity in the buildings bruce before you on 5 melon it is all designed at the same time by a similar architect i'll just you know indication those caution as as and move forward different developers but each

developer has their identity as and go forward. >> the last time we heard something similar was i'm blanking - down by san francisco state block merced different architects and the buildings reflected that a little bit more than what we're seeing here that's my only comment. >> commissioner melgar. >> hi so i'm new here and in the master plan documents you provided i can't find the page you talked about how the streetscape now and the new street design accommodate the connection of little hollywood and like in you know trying to get folks to take public

transportation and i'm not sure i see that maybe if you can explain a little bit more about the public transportation aspect of it i know we printed the melon resident there were seven hundred and some parking spaces on the street i see the easy which car traffic will move in little hollywood but not seeing the parking aspect if i can you talk a little bit about you well, i'll say the one big thing for public transportation is that we are providing land for the brt that's the big move this particular thing we know we had to accommodate we had a major transportation facility it goes in front of that site not contemplated when we started the process but make sure the zoning

explicitly indicated that land had to be reserved for brt in terms of this other transportation you know the sort of our incline by breaking up the block and pedestrians for example, you have to go completely around the site and also i should - i know there are topographic kind of aspects the site you don't capture not seeing by looking at a flat plan i cannot but if you - i don't know if so on your screen or not but sort of the 1 first street for example, the first street just south we call alley a we created that to add a starting point as on the option side of lincoln that can more easily get

pedestrians directly through the site down to the state park similarly, we thought where will people want to go coming from and design the streetscape we wanted to focus only kearny and directly across the street from the state park and corner of harey also across the street if what will be a regional bike facility as i indicated i indicated we you know we put the property owners they understand the design of harey will happen addressed mta is looking at creating a bike federal court if lincoln to the major bike facility on harey not been solved but looking at to working with mta to make sure the site

accommodates that as well. >> thank you. >> any additional commissioner questions or comments. >> not seeing any. >> that places us on the next case the commerce element general plan amendment. >> good afternoon, commissioners i'm monique mohan planning department staff the item before you before you will adopt the commerce and industry the guidelines specifically to drinking and eating establishment the commission loudly this on

june 30th, 2015, it is required by the state of california but are more importantly it is the provisions for san francisco the general plan was adopt by the planning commission and adopted by the board and the plan didn't change the planning code the planning code can only change with legislative action a separate provision and the code is the tool. >> the commerce and industry element is one eliminate a comprehensive guide for public and private sector for impacts in san francisco. >> the element is divided into industry, maritime and neighborhood commerce and government health and education and this amendment will impact the commerce the element as well as the general plan can be fined

on the website and those can be found in the element section of the guidelines. >> currently the general place specific that the balance of commercial use maybe threatened had eating and drinking establishments occupy more than 20 percent of the frontage in any district the general plan includes a robust 25 percent for a larger concentration of restaurant in the north neighborhood turning to the planning code in particular section 303 o our conditional use this recollects our drinking and eating establishments for the eating and drinking not to exceed 25 percent is measured in linear feet please note this ordinance effects the general plan and no

impact on the planning code 303. >> those two percentages require the planners to make to calculations more importantly they don't result in more useful data this is more precise it laborers look at the immediate area as a reminder the jean plan should say the general statement and the code the tool the planning code meets the intent of the general plan so let's look at how this impacts two different districts for example, n judah is only a quarter of a mile and the calculations of 20 percent looks different from the zoning district and to the tara value the 20 percent of the eating and

drinking establishment in the terry valley may not matter how along the district is, however, the planning code section 303 o is not changing the calculation is three hundred linear feet from the description of the code is determines the eating and drinking code of the established area. >> so the property changes - in the general plan and replies the general policy statement, however, the concentration in section 303 o will remain since we initiated those amendment in june the department present those changes to the coalition of san francisco neighborhood on july 19th and to the small business commission and neither has substantial comments with that, we ask you adopt the amendment that will adopt the element.

>> that concludes my presentation. okay. >> great opening up for public comme comment. >> great. >> be paul weber. >> good afternoon. i'm paul weber and here on behalf of telegraph hill dwellers we have two points the first is that the amendment being sought ultimately will end up in the reorganization of article 7 and we urge you to put this off until the reorganization has been considered and hashed out before this commission and with the staff we believe it is premature to basically spot items especially,

since the staff recommended to the community that the reorganization of article 7 is not substantive. >> our second point involves the impact to the general plan as a result of the proposed changes under the current general plan the import of the limits on eating and drinking establishes is that there be a relatively small portion of businesses in the commercial areas with the exception of those business is relied on more than the neighborhoods an example, of course, would be north beach which gets a tremendous amount of tourist traffic what the staff is proposing is

to completely reverse the impact of that general plan element to state that the reference the 20 percent which is the current element will be changed to say and high percentage of commercial use i don't believe there is a good explanation why it is done i understand the planning code is not proposed to be amended currently but really didn't seems like to be a reason to change the general plan if this is an issue of convenience are a question of calculations those don't seem to be public policy reasons for changing a general plan and for that reason and the reason he mentioned earlier we urge you to reject

the proposals regarding the general plan amendments thank you. >> thank you. is there any additional public comment okay not seeing any, public comment is closed. director rahaim. >> thank you, commissioners just to clarify this is a change to because an inconsistencycy between the general plan and the planning code and as minica said that is inappropriate for the specification of this calculation to reside in the general plan it should reside in the planning code and the general plan for whatever reason is specific over the years and it is inconsistent so the proposal for more general language excuse me - more general language in the general plan, and, secondly, no, this has not effect an article 7 i mean this is a general plan amendment we're not proposing any changes to the planning code

with respect to that so just to clarify this is the item before you you to correct an inconsistency because the general plan is more detailed than it should be and creating an inconsistency with the planning code. >> okay commissioner vice president richards. >> staff please. i guess the question will be as we're getting our case report for your establishment and an ncd somewhere how does the general plan relate to what is from us we'll pub see not a high number. >> it will reference the general plan but right now you see them in your staff report a reference to 303 o for the conditional use and the planner will do that calculation and a reprehensive to the general plan they're doing a different

calculation they're looking at the whole zoning district but instead you'll say it needs to be the intent of the mediated the intent of the high percentage or not. >> where is the high percentage from definition. >> we can change to not high percentage did idea with the general plan when i read the intent of this section it shouldn't have an over concentration - that's where this should live. >> i completely get the intent of what you're seeing saying i know we've had restaurant fees and north beach is 75 or 74 percent we're 574.5 and so many

restaurant it is over concentration is a saturation yet in other places 17 percent like in our example i'm trying to said what we will use to gage the difference. >> commissioner, i think that that percentage within 3 hundred feet will will within the planning code all we're doing it taking it out of the general plan you can do the calculations. >> so let's take north beach for example, overall 74 percent and whatever ncd we're looking i can't recall off the top of my head but i'm going to open up a restaurant and for some reason one three hundred feet no restaurants my addition into that ncd may look different with that many

restaurants my adding that restaurant and the broad scope of ncds make is 75.5 edges it outdo you see a down fall. >> i don't because the planning code the three hundred feet gets to what the neighborhoods concern was when the restaurant was done in 2011 so that three hundred feet is i believe in the ncd planner worked on the restaurant ordinance a better measure in an the entire district because the desire district various in length some have small some are large and it captures it in the planning code. >> any ncds that there was a cap you have to go to the entire ncd and say we've 0 above the

capita. >> yeah. a couple of neighborhood district saying there is a cap or add two or three more and we're supposed to track that we prefer the cap over that the commercial districts have put that in there this will allow for more flexibility for neighborhoods commercial district for more controls for their district right now, we're sort of hamstrung by the specific percentage in the is general plan so if we make changes in the planning code to address the neighborhood concerns we're creating more inconsistent the numbers shouldn't urban design in the general plan and if a neighborhood district wants to put a cap they can. >> i guess mr. weber can you talk a little bit about the general concerns any additional concerns given what you've heard. >> (inaudible).

>> okay. thank you. >> commissioner melgar. >> i just had a question about the process is totally get what you're trying to do but i'm wondering if you work with telegraph hill neighborhood. >> we i'm happy to meet with them separately we met with the san francisco coalition of neighborhood i believe a representative there and didn't hear any comment at that meeting and presented to the small business commission and no comment either. >> it seems if there is no time crunch for it and just clean up why not get everybody on board. >> it's up to you. >> commissioner hillis. >> so i think this is make sense i mean the 20 percent in the code. >> in the general plan sorry. >> i agree give us the

opportunity gives telegraph hill or others to tailor this. >> in the code yes. >> so along those lines two questions one you kept that at least one hundred feet apart the same logic will apply. >> the reason he kept it the word generally was in front of that. >> obviously in every commercial district put two examples not 2 hundred feet apart not bad but whatever i don't think we have to go and you know try to mock this you but make sense details where we want them to be in the planning code so i'm comfortable the only other question the high percentage that struck me as you're going from 20 to 50 plus high percentage i don't know if

another word like significant that may. >> like concentration. >> it seemed a little bit general but specific i don't know but i think the intent of this is great generally in support. >> commissioner moore. >> i am interested this expand our own discussion in distinguishing when commercial nauseated commercial district are some are linear some streets like ocean avenue and fillmore and chestnut street, however, more like small towns themselves like chinatown, and this is definitely north beach where the percentages when you apply them in the three hundred foot way of looking at it and really capture what the issues are but i believe that the over

concentration is better expressed in percentages and how you calculate them i want to see us make the physical distinction between corridors and radius of three hundred feet versus what is in itself the small village district multi dimensional for that reason i'll appreciate and support what commissioner melgar said that we extend the conversation that you have the opportunity to talk with the north beach telegraph hill people and sort of relative because in the end applying it equally is where the two neighbors i've mentioned will be in conflict. >> commissioner vice president richards. >> so let me ask another question another way so you

stopped populating rations and pass that right and two years down the road or 5 years down the road a restaurant opens up and there's an over concentration the department didn't know what the concentration is in the ncd we stop keeping track of that is there a database we know what the concentration levels are. >> the concentration numbers that's the thing we're proposing to take them out of the general plan. >> we'll provide a packet to the neighborhood. >> in the 3 hundred foot radius. >> that's why the radius is better than the proposal in the way the general plan works if there are multiply streets like in chinatown they'll capture that. >> the hole for me we have no

reference to over concentration means we don't know what concentration will be in the future so it is open to interpretation last week the neighborhood goes out and canvases. >> to respond so that the over concentration is a more useful number in a three hundred foot radius if their longs or short knowing how many restaurants something mr. terryville is not a super michael to know if so that an over concentration a preemptors amount of work and and provide a number in determining is an analysis of a restaurant that can be approved on that corridor. >> completely understand but not create another issue another

neighborhood same side we're over contained with no number. >> if they feel that they can do the legislation to their commercial district we're trying to make the general plan general for the entire city and if a corridor want a corridor specific number can talk with mile-an-hour periphery to have planning legislation to alter the code. >> i'm on board but worry about the next project if a neighborhood says we're over concentrated what did that mean we don't know no number that's what i'm saying i'm from removing if the planning. >> jean plan. >> absolutely but see pitfalls in the future if we don't

measure the offer concentration. >> you're concerned with the district as a whole compared to the 3 hundred feet. >> if someone says an over concentration i get it but if we don't know what the concentration is how do we know if so 2 over concentrated terryville could say this and that that's all i'm saying love to see a database we get an idea for restaurants we have benchmarks. >> i'd like to see that database every time a planner he

or she has to count all the routine but go up and down the geary boulevard to that do that and perhaps add that to our program. >> the over concentration in the code if this was removed 25 percent within 200 feet that's what we'll look at we find that a more useful number. >> for whatever reason on an option of a restaurant and staff will kindly go out and count as a courtesy for push back i'm all for this but i see pitfalls we have to respond to them. >> i'll say i read several staff reports that meow for routine ray understands some are over the 25 percent and when necessary come to the commission their 65 percent and get

approved that is often based on neighborhood input and comes to the commission and oftentimes the restaurant are approved even if their offer the threshold based on the neighborhood so the calculation is an insight within three hundred feet but not prohibited. >> great thanks. >> i'll add to that i understand you're wanting to measure things and look at it but every neighborhood in san francisco is different i don't think we should proscribe a prescription of what we hear that's not what this body is for to hear when and if it is offer but i see your forecasting problem but in the past if it becomes a serious problem that will come to this level. >> we agree. >> commissioner hillis. >> so just to follow up on

that comment so - again, i think this works and to discuss that the city should be in the planning code if have somewhere like terryville or polk street that is long i agree looking at this in its totality didn't make sense but you could put those in the planning code two tiered way you can have one three hundred percent x and y percent for the whole district or someone beyond the three hundred feet. >> that happens throughout article 7. >> so i think this totally make sense i will move to approve. >> second. >> commissioner moore. >> oh, i'm sorry no. >> very good commissioners there is a motion that has been seconded to adopt a recommendation for approval on that motion commissioner hillis

commissioner koppel commissioner melgar. >> so i had a question i thought you would work with the community more i was going to interrupt and say that we're happy to continue the item i mean, if i vote yes can you still do that okay. >> so if that's the case if we take action on that today and commissioner melgar further discussion can you come back with a memo updating that process. >> that activity. >> yes. i can do that. >> commissioner moore. >> there are two things either we let the community discussion at least forefront their particular concerns north beach are the most endangered

community i'm prepared to continue it 80 actually, i get informed feedback of those two groups have been resist to the implementation it is harder we don't dive into the address of the code and zoning to understand what is being done i prefer this will be discussed further before we consider it i'm prepared to support it either way but i need those neighbors particularly both of them to be active participant. >> commissioner hillis. >> i mean, i agree you could make the argument for every neighborhood but that consultation happens is changes to the planning code you, you know, you say in chinatown and this district you have you know you need a cu for over experts he will imagine both in

chinatown we exceed the 20 percent you know commercial frontage and north beach and very specific language in the code i think inconsistent i'm happy to consider it but i think what we'll see those changes will happen in the planning code this make sense but if people feel better about continuing it but 3 make sense to move forward again, you can make that agreement for physics the tenderloin nob hill and on and on those neighborhoods should get involved in the changes but the changes to the planning code. >> and when we have a lot of the them in the planning code already. >> commissioner moore. >> commissioner hillis you may be correct in what you're saying i feel obligated to have those

neighborhoods in the threat of more entertainment centers than diverse neighborhood participate more activity in that discussion and let us know their discussions we're taking the attractive parts of the city and promoting a singular name use taking over the functions of the neighborhood that's where it the need for some percentage of saying and again, they, discuss that and come back i don't feel comfortable making that decision here today. >> and just as a staff working on it i'll prefer a continuance to reach out and also a reminder the general plan are up and down at the board make sure we have the language correct before we move on to the board of supervisors. >> commissioner hillis. >> can you consider rescinding our motion and second to

approve. >> so based on if there is a motion to continue - >> commissioner vice president richards. >> i'll move to continue to what date staff will be - >> jonas is giving me a look what is good on the calendar i think december is a good date sometime in december. >> like december- >> how about december 1st. >> third. >> move to continue to december 1st. >> i want to commend staff for taking a pro-active role to move it i want to acknowledge you for holding the line. >> thank you. >> commissioner vice president richards. >> no further. >> commissioners as the previous motion was republicans sending and continue to december 1st has been there is a

motion that has been seconded commissioner hillis commissioner koppel commissioner melgar commissioner moore commissioner vice president richards and commissioner president fong so moved, commissioners, that motion passes unanimously 6 to zero and commissioners that places us on item 12 the special use district. >> good afternoon. welcome commissioner melgar and commissioner koppel tina chang this is a request for a general plan only to consider the documentation of the amendment for the sud and downtown project authorization on or after october 27th no proposal, however, the commission must adopt an ordinance for the general plan associated project before us my understanding

supervisor kim had this to be october 4th the proposed general plan will change the height to two hundred x the general plan planning code zoning map will create a mission and 9 special use district the 21 and a half percentage will be made affordable for - those earning 55 percent of ami or less and 4 percent affordable to low income households earning 75 percent of ami or less and 40 percent of unit will be made affordable to those earning 90 percent of ami in excess of the planning code that requires that 13 and a half percent of onsite dwelling unit made affordable

for environmental are accepted evaluation applications filed prior to january 2016 this met the deadline and grandfathered under the 13 and a half percent the staff recommends an additional 3 and a half onsite constructed unit for ami of 100 percent the sud includes other planning amendment the adaptation of the zoning map amendments and the downtown project authorizations will come before the commission on or after october and consider it in its cyber it's the construction of 200 plus 21 story and in the combination of studios 1 and 2 and three bedrooms to date the

department has no public comment aside from, however, the project sponsor has provided a package in the case report for for october 27th and letters of recommendation from organizations the project sponsor has reached out to the environmental review and the department ask you adopt the commission to consider approval the proposed ordinance and entitlements on or after october 27, 2016, my presentation. i'll be happy to answer any questions you may have. >> okay. thank you. >> there is no project sponsor on this; correct opening it up for public comment. >> sue hester when i read the newspaper ads

yesterday and found out this period has been move forward up 3 months - three weeks - it was kind of a shock to me i'm used to suds i'm not used to suds more affordable housing that are initiated before a thorough constitution of what the nature of the affordable housing is the planning commission happens been doing affordable housing suds so for thirty years they're all over the code and their usual is a discussion about the quality that has intend to be really good but interest is a discussion of it before you do the suds this is kind of flipped backwards so like i said, i had

in my calendar that will be on the calendar at the november 17th of the legal add says 10 slash 27 is different and 11, 17 you understand this proposal your initiating the controls before you i think that is risky i've no objection to affordable housing just how it is done in the city if we're going to do a new method i think you should be - we're doing that so i'm just raising questions about how is this case accelerated three weeks and what level of comfort do you as the commission have with the nature of the housing that you

expediting thank you. >> okay is there any additional public comment? >> okay not seeing any, public comment is closed. commissioner moore. >> i had a question which is actually similar to what ms. hester hinted suds are typically paired are actual projects or actual projects are introduced before they come into the sud discussion the ones i reluctant particularly important are park merced 5 m and we had a number of proving presentations as those designs and particulars on the agreement in the sud were development and pulled of the

commission helping to physically shape the project but also then have so and so comments drift into consideration for the development agreement and the guidelines that are part of the agreement and in this case those two functions are not happening and we never had a preliminary introduction to the total outlet of this project so this particular site i'll be interested in a unit design of unoccupied buildings separation, of the whole issue of liveability particularly we ask onsite affordable there are certain issues i'd like to see prior to this but perhaps director rahaim could spend a minute and explain why this is done definitely and i talked with supervisor kim's office that was a strong support and

comfortable with that being split but i'll ask the director for guidance. >> commissioners you're not voting on it until three weeks the item before you an initiation like to initiate the general plan amendment and take up the amendments and the sud at a later date you'll see it three weeks from now depend on what you want to do the reason the supervisor has put forward the legislation to change the zoneing and that changes the scoping requires a general plan amendment so and only you can - the initiation process is only to start the process of considering

the project the sud will be in front of you on october 27th you'll see the plans and the specific language of sud. >> thank you for explaining that so just for no other reason we if we don't like the project it is 0 no-go. >> you can say yes or no. >> i'm trying to be playful if it is the first step this is just helping getting the discussion going thank you. >> commissioner hillis. >> just to clarify if when we hear the project we can disapprove the project or the general plan amendment. >> and then again, this is creative work we're trying to get additional affordable housing by increasing or

changing the zoning and - the question i guess the height we're increasing it to i, see by the height map not a 40 feet height zone throughout the neighborhood and increasing it to 60 feet or whatever a wide variation of height and your take on the 2 hundred foot height and why we think this is appropriate i'm sure we'll hear plo more about it in the actual amendment. >> thanks for the question when we received the proposal from the project sponsor they asked for a higher height and look at the type of and height of the buildings in the surrounding area and felt the building was appropriate we required, however, a 15 foot segment above the stadium and

that is a need at the existing neighborhood fabric we considered the context. >> we'll see that all in action. >> absolutely. >> commissioner melgar. >> no. >> commissioner vice president richards. >> i guess i'll move to initiate on the 27 i want an informational on the project and have the actual come together on the 17 of november as we plan so we have an informational and direct the staff and . >> can i clarify, of course, a if you want to hold the - change the dates around it - the dates that - october 27th is the scheduled date for the mission we held a november 17th date in the event that supervisor kim- we heard we did that's - >> we can continue it we have

issues with the plan as i move. >> and schedule the hearing phone number for october 27. >> yes. >> thank you. >> on that motion commissioners to initiate the amendment to the general plan and schedule the hearing on or after october 27. >> commissioner hillis commissioner koppel commissioner melgar commissioner moore commissioner vice president richards. >> commissioner president fong so moved, commissioners, that motion passes 6 to zero. >> commissioners that places us on item 13. >> jonas i think we will take a little bit of a break we have a short calendar but let commissioner johnson arrive we'll thank you. >> good morning welcome back

to the planning commission this is the regular meeting remind the members of the audience that the commission does not tolerate disruptions of any kind. commissioners, we left off under our regular calendar for case powell street conditional use authorization. >> good afternoon commissioner president fong and members of the commission carli grove the item before you the request for a conditional use authorization to establish a restaurant on powell street the conditional use authorization is required for 3 components of a project first to establish restaurant use within the north beach ncd and establish 2000 square feet and 3 thousand and an outdoor area for an existing roof deck the property restaurant will -

currently in use as the sheet metal works and restaurants will occupy 3 thousand plus square feet of - the concept of the prompted restaurant will be around the aesthetics of the says that the owner proposes a higher dining with american dishes and craft beers for brunch and diner from 11:00 a.m. to midnight and 8:00 a.m. to 2:00 a.m. the hours of operation will be limited to the outdoor activity with the deck closings earlier than the restaurant the project sponsor is public defender a license that allows for beer and others components to serve patrons an absence absent is awarded to eating establishments the project

didn't include by physical alteration with a role up door and internal 5 letters in opposition and 2 of the individuals called the staff to owl their concerns each the letters share to primary concerns the first that each in and about has experienced drunk people they spoke loudly the second concern for vehicular traffic from the operation of restaurant those were received after the packets were printed to distribute to you the sponsors have tried to address the neighbors concerns and the project team will speak to that further if you have questions the department buildings the necessary and desirable for the following reasons to activate

the ground floor and reduce the non-restricted compliant as you and will continue the uses in the basement the project will not displace an existing retail tenants for the services to the neighborhood with the proposed bar the immediate area eating and drinking use concentration from 7 to 18 plus well below the threshold and meets all the applicable code requirement and have desirable goods and services to the surrounding neighbor that concludes my presentation. i'll be happy to answer any questions you may have. >> project sponsor please.

>> good afternoon commissioner president fong and members of the commission i'm e line less than design architect for this project the project is located on powell street between green our client purchased this building in 1986 along with the sheet metal and managed this business for over thirty years the sheet metal business as downsized that is my clients wish to seek this opportunity our client has owned this business on columbus avenue highlighted on the map this project there authoritative establish a second location foreign a location when the lease is up in 2018

since 126 powell is listed as historic resource we working closely with our clients to develop the design around the building existing infrastructure and blow the facade this project is strictly an remodel with no extension proposed we'll convert the existing deck in the back of the building to an outdoor dining it is highlighted in yellow surrounded by the vallejo central station and the nonprofit cafe post street 84 the green street more i can't remember and residential apartments on the northwest as mentioned by carli we are converting a total of 3 thousand

plus square feet of the buildings for the restaurant and the remaining 5 thousand plus will remain to be used by deluca sheet metal work both businesses will be operated by the property owner and included in the package a set of photos will describe the outdoor of the building and the surrounding area so in the plans that were september to you guys previously we organized the comparison of before and after so the whole basement plan we're not proposing any modifications except a one corridor to provide a second means of egress the ground floor plans doesn't comparison we're taking up almost all the exterior jeej square footage for the

restaurant and keeping the building calibrations in the front on the third plan which is the second floor wear we're converting getting rid of the walk walk that contexts the plan that's where the division happens we're keeping the remaining floor plate for the dining on room on the right highlighted in red. >> the facade will be fully preserved the garage roll up door replaced with a pair of swing doors and have the same panels from the original factory with the help of our clients the original new education the pair doors recess from the entry doors on the right the space will convert the

machinery into dining furniture the new design elements that continue as industrial aesthetics with a contemporary touch together the intent for this restaurant modeled after a dining room tallying hall to an industrial warehouse from the previous era it is undercover officer important for us and the clients to preserve and embrace the characteristic of the community. >> on to the last slide a local restaurant for local folks and tourists in the area we have 3 bicycle ranks on the sidewalk no parking space or loading zone are necessary in this map we're able to

document the total of the nine hundred 62 parking spaces distributed amongst 6 public placing within a radius and 84 metered parking spaces within 5 minutes of walking distance lastly we have built 28 experimental projects throughout the bay area in the last 40 navy years with a unique design concept rated bans their food menu we firmly believe that 1526 powell will be another significant piece i'll have the property owner of the building present his stand point on this project. >> thank you. >> thank you. >> good afternoon my name is richard john's thirty years ago i purchased the sheet

metal and the property so for thirty years we paraded a sheet metal out of there 7 or 8 trucks many times worked into the evening or we understand because because of some of the projects 16 years ago i acquired the property on columbus to lease the space to put a cafe in that's below the residential hotel for ages i bring this up to emphasize the fact that in the thirty years the shop and the 16 years the sheet metal cafe not one time a noise complaint or a complaint about the type of operation i had or too crowded on the street so to verify that i was unsure how to

do that i got a letter of support from captain lazarus at the central station he backs part of property so - >> thank you for your time. >> thank you okay. if that concludes the project sponsors presentation opening up for public comment one speaker card edwin chu. >> hi my name is ed chiu, i live actually a building away from the project housed i have a couple of concerns one of them the potential i guess the operation of the procurey and how much noise it will emit and what is done to control that

secondly, concerned about the parking whether knowledgeable of the cafe posts next door will rent out it's auditorium for meetings or whatever that will take up a lot of the parking spaces and the third item was if we been also having sewer problems i wonder in the infrastructure will support the additional water usage i guess to make up the beers and cause sewer lines to back up more than they have been so those are just 3 concerns i have and also the once again the hours of operation i guess cumber had the north star cafe

and the reefrlt get a lot of singing and that will add to that that's a few of the concerns i'm not against opening the business want to make sure they address those concerns thank you. >> okay. thank you. >> any is there any additional public comment? >> come on up. >> hi my name is rose g and i'm concerned about the quality of life in the area with the new restaurant the areas is congested along with parking issues and police and fire sirens and can say stopping and going at the corner of powell and galileo no quiet

time it will bring more cars both customers and employee cars i milk there will be two shifts and many employees running the operation as it is now, when one car leaves another is waiting for the spot although the architect cited there are garages available realistically how many people will pay for garage space garage parking not 80 too many they'll circle many laps for a parking space so what parking space is then left with the resident that hold residential parking permit few so the hours of operation is unacceptable for me you know we have bedrooms that face the streets and resident need to put up with the car and the noise

and the people until midnight and 2:00 a.m. that is totally unacceptable for someone trying to live a normal life and there are already plenty of restaurant in the area and drinking establishments so this addition will make this area highly urban desirable for renters because of the noise and the park think about the property owners it is difficult to rent in this area with this issue i also want to bring up the break rooms for the employees will they be allotting in front of the establishment like they do at original joe's it was

stayed there are no loading area so where will the trucks come and go? and is there someone to control the outside crowd that's all i need to say >> thank you. is there any additional public comment okay public comment is closed. let me just offer a few thoughts and questions with regards to parking this area is pretty well sufficient by the look of the design a very nice high-end restaurant not a night club not exiting at a particular time we have to from the show is done and everyone leaves at the same time i believe in uber this

clinic tell a an uber savvy clinic tell and folks might get dropped off rather than circling around for parking first class a central station that is vacated at night no experience i agree or more expensive than a street space that serves as an outlet for folks coming to the restaurant i might request a white or yellow zone in front of the establishment for uber to pick up and drop of that is a hugely traffic street it is a dead end street so double parking i'm sure will not be appreciated by the neighbors or the rest of the neighborhood i'm curious for sure a beer and wine licensee think breweryy falls

into a different path by will you get a type 75. >> a type 75 includes beer, wine and other. >> the hours of operation if that is something we want to take a look at or not in that area it is fine there are many bars and restaurants computing beach blanket and they let out late at night at the get go a cocktail it is property for this area in general i'm supportive of the project, i happened to look at the site two years ago and got a chap to tour a beautiful building just the wooden rafters i'm hoping you get to exposure that great design and things like

that will not be built again so hopefully, you'll celebrate that acrely. >> commissioner hillis. >> in general agreement with commissioner president fong comments just a couple of questions for the project team i mean this is a good reuse of this site and good our keeping on with the sheet metal operation at the same time trying to reuse the building in a historically and appropriate way just on the hours of operation do you anticipate what we're propping in the cu to be your actual hours of operation. >> yeah. >> probably close when i was asked the question of hours of operation not knowing anything about the restaurant

business at the time i was instructed by someone that - >> talk into mike. >> put the woifrs you're fine but no going the another way my hope is that - yeah might we close earlier 12 is pushing it i wanted to leave myself a leeway with a beach blanket let's out earlier and they want to get a desert or cocktail i was not trying to limit myself and that make sense this neighborhood you could you know have those hours and make that more convenient and on the back - how many feet totally in the restaurant space. >> two hundred and 36 total

with what is allowed but based on the floor plans that were indicated we can see 87 total and on the patio. >> what about sound mitigation on the noise on the patio. >> we looked at being so creating a sound barrier by proposing planters along the outer edge of the patio and umbrellas patio fortune is one of our considerations. >> all right. thank you. >> uh-huh. >> as long as you're up there is there a coast guard in the back and how do you plan to

treat that as far as noise it is a chimney effect because of the neighboring buildings could say echoes how do you plan on treating that has bar space or really sit down restaurant space that might be quieter at night. >> designed for sit down type of dining experience but as far as how to create some layers of soundproofing open the outside it's beyond my expertise but then at the doorway to the patio that also a garage d.b.a. door and looking at sliding doors versus swing doors and the doors can be expect closed to stop the noise from bleeding out. >> my question is more to the

neighbors to the south if any memory serves me i want to make sure that space is not use for night club am first day party scene restaurant rather than a party scene. >> definite not and my client made it clear no plans to get entertainment license for that type of function. >> very good thank you. >> commissioner koppel. >> yeah. in general like the design of the project and the readapt use of sheet metal previous use what is speaking to me the most is the letter of support from captain lazarus i think the north beach central station is by far the busiest police station in the city are they signing off on supporting this but from the general public that voiced their concerns to

address my issues in the future with that letter here so i hope slightly mitigates the issues knowing the police department is aware up front this is coming to town. >> commissioner moore. >> i like to look at it from a slightly broader perspective if you walk up jackson and walk up washington street close within walking distance the majority of those restaurant because it is surrounded by identical and the particular block we're talking about with small children seeing them early in the morning i want to be sensitive the outdoor space has a limited time of being used at night because the echo effect in its space like

that is disruptive to joining resident i live on a block a number of years ago one restaurant they need to make a special arrangement with the neighbors that is easily 20 or thirty years ago to have all the patrons out by 10 o'clock nobody can sit outside even waiting until after whatever shortly before 10 and everyone had to be begun because in a quiet residential neighborhood the age phil ginsberg effect is phenomenal and they - i want to make sure the metal shop is an actual 7:30 to whatever be 5:30 business with its own noise but that the transition to another way is not a burden i love the design a lovely lovely adaptive reuse it

is exemplar but we want to make sure we are not creating a problem that will haunt us so i'd like to see us be more clear of how the outdoor space is different from the indoor space and shave the hours back to midnight. >> commissioner moore one psychiatrist note the hours of operation for the decks are limited to 10:00 p.m. monday through thursday. >> 11:00 p.m. on thursday and midnight on friday and that's community in your packet right after the category of exceptions. >> i didn't look at the detail to you for explaining the peak hours are the most important and sunday because of the presence of a lot of small children i see

them everyday and i'm still a little bit concerned that 2 o'clock is too long. >> okay. any additional comment you guys help me what's the bar restaurant we approved on bush street. >> that has this kind of chimney effect jones yes zoning district e jones on geary. >> this a dense area i don't want to set ourselves up but any other measures we can do we want this business to be successful. >> we had previously limited jones to hours of operation to

midnight by purchased the property with that condition without knowing so we extended the hours to 2:00 a.m. weekend days fridays and saturday and a couple of specified holidays this is a downtown dense residential you know - surrounded by residential hotel a standard condition you cocoon hours of operation both indoors and outdoor we did an comboergs of soundproofing as well that's something we followed up with a quick memo to you and kind of outlined some of the measures that the project sponsors took to incorporate for soundproofing on the outdoor area. >> i want to say we try 0s

that add up to - at the closing however, the restaurant or bar all the bottles end up cling cling cling into a recycled bin they end up in the courtyard but build a room towards the middle of the building. >> commissioner hillis. >> on the hours of operation the outside i share the concerns of ousted doors may be one - have a provision to work with staff operational thing to keep the windows and doors so the sounded like that doesn't plead and outside on saturday seems late for how small maybe pushing

that back to 11 on saturday and sunday and 10 throughout the week that can be a motion. >> friday and saturday to 11, and 10 on the other days i mean, if you want to comment on that i'll be happy to hear from you the outdoors is a smaller is component and going to midnight. >> you know it is a pretty cool spot if it was me on a pleasant evening i'd like to be out there at 11 o'clock if this is a deal breaker i'm good were 11. >> it is hard we'd like to see that work and obviously you have a good track record in the neighborhood there is a little bit of guesswork at the

beginning. >> i'm really fan at california miff i love being in north beach i'll make the modifications necessary to satisfactory any reasonable complaint thanks. >> maybe i'll make is a motion to approve with the condition that staff work on sequences to keep the inside and outside side separated during business hours and a report back after one year to see if there are complaints. >> i'll second that motion and particularly commissioner hillis to your commit and report back will hopefully, all for the positive changing use with the

necessary communication and feedback for whatever reasons the bottles clanking too much or whatever. >> thank you commissioner hillis did those modified hours of operation were they also part of your - >> thank you, sir for staff to continue to work with the project sponsor on separating the interior and exterior and a written report back in one year okay. thank you. >> on that motion commissioner hillis commissioner johnson commissioner koppel commissioner melgar commissioner moore and commissioner president fong so moved, commissioners, that motion passes unanimously 6 to zero commissioners that item 14 ab were continued to october 27th

which places us on items 15 ab arkansas street adoption of shadow finding and large project authorization. >> good afternoon commissioiner fong and members of the commission commissioners commissioner koppel and commissioner melgar welcome department staff in a nut shell is a request for a large project authorization pursuant to planning code section to allow an exemption to the rear yard requirements as stipulated in the planning code to demolish an existing warehouse and allow a 4 story mixed use misrepresent family building to accommodate student housing for the academy of art and four ground floor units to provide 7 thousand plus square feet of commercial use locate at arkansas