even a sketch of some alternatives six months ago angelo and behold, we get this dropped in our lap with nothing, you know, it is like the commission has no voice, ants that actually, i have the highest respect for staff, but i feel their pain, you know, i am at a loss for words. i absolutely will not support this. especially when the supervisor's office called me this morning and wanted to have a conversation around rezoning. we have to move this thing forward to. we cannot wait another 1212 weeks for conversation. come on. >> we were all here six months ago listening to the commission's input and ideas. i think they are very constructive. we did a quick study the following two weeks and if you kept the building. we had to opened light wells. we had about 18 studio units

without parking that would have to require, you know, as cutting the building. and the numbers you see under the preservation would drop a little bit more because you had to open areas for exposure for the 18 units. those units were probably around 400 or 380 square feet. they were studio units. that's all they were. we are trying to see how many units we could get into that building's p8 and those are the type of units my neighborhood needs. >> we did a full preservation approach which was one of those alternatives and we would add two stories to the centre part of the building which is allowed to. you would have a 40-foot building in the centre with a bout may be eight units in those two stories and remaining other units within the existing structure's p8 i think the neighborhood winds. it is a structure -- to just want to demolish and not look at

the alternative, i get where the staff are looking at it. a small conversation with the supervisor's office to see what can go on here for two weeks. it is not asking a lot. if you were to come back and you wanted us to do a statement of overriding consideration, i want to see a feasibility analysis with a peer review. just like we did on the fifth church of christ scientist. there you are already. i don't know if you have it. >> yes, we did another peer review. it is important to keep in mind where we are in the process. just certifying it, is saying the e.i.r. complies with state law. that is all you are saying. you don't have to approve the project today. you can allow us more time to consider your thoughts when we do get back here for a project approval request, you have the ability to approve the project or approve the alternatives. >> president hillis: as long as it does come back here's p8 i think no matter what happens, it will be back.

i cannot push this project into a d.r. all i am saying is the prep question before you is that is the document sufficient under state law? that is a question. >> vice-president melgar: i wanted to ask commissioner richards, since you had the conversation with the supervis supervisor, p8. >> commissioner richards: they called me. i did not call them. >> vice-president melgar: what is it that you would rather have today? is it a continuance of this item so that we have more conversation and also to have to rest staff? >> commissioner richards: to look at the alternatives with higher densification should the supervisor be able to fast-track that. when we spot those parcels almost weekly here. this whole thing about, you know, w we had one from supervir tang just now, that because of environmental, it fell from the sky. it was six big parcels.

so this whole idea, this mystification around we don't spot zone, we do it almost every week. come on, folks,. >> president hillis: commissioner koppel? >> commissioner koppel: there was even more to this project. i'm trying to expedite this but i don't want to do something that we will really regret. >> hello i'm here from the planning staff. that was an issue and it has been incorporated into the revised mitigation measure. as per the comments that we received throughout the e.i.r. >> president hillis: commissioner richards? >> commissioner richards: i move to continue this two weeks. >> president hillis: second. are we asking to look at a

different zoning for this to? >> commissioner richards: i think the department on the project sponsor need to have a conversation with a supervisor's office and say they have expressed interest in this. they have heard from the neighborhood. i have not heard from the neighborhood. i was surprised that the call came in saying we are hearing from that neighborhood on this project. it is a conversation on whether or not this can be a different zone or app is owned and then the number of units and how to conserve the community. it is a historical resource. >> president hillis: are we asking to preserve the building? i think those are two different things. the last thing i heard, the other commissioner was here and she asked you up stone. but, you know, i don't think she was against the demolition of the structure. but again there is the issue of preserving the building and somehow reusing its. those two things aren't necessarily the same. >> commissioner richards: on page 58 and 59 where you have

the alternatives, add two more columns. he said it. on this partial preservation alternative, we get 18 studios and it is this many square feet and this much open space. we just want to see it. that is all we are asking for. whether you call it a technical memorandum or attach it to the e.i.r., it helps us understand and make a better informed decision. i have the highest amount of respect for the staff there. do not take any of this personally. this is near and dear to my heart as a member of this community. >> commissioners there is a motion that has been set to continue this matter until july 26. shall i call that question? on that motion to continue to july 26th? [roll call] >> clerk: thathat motion passes unanimously 6-0. commissioners, that will place us in item 14.

35338 california street. thi.this is a conditional use authorization. >> good afternoon commissioners. i'm with the department staff. the item before you is a request for conditional use authorization to enlarge an existing formula retail use at 35338 california street. doing business at first public bank into the adjacent a vacant storefront at 3533 a california street which was last occupied by a retail kitchen accessories shop. the subject property is located within the laurel village shopping centre at currently first public bank occupies approximately 4700 -- 4700 square feet. the proposed enlargement is 1,000 square feet which would bring it to 5700 square feet. first public bank as a retail

financial services use which has 69 locations worldwide with 12 of those located in san francisco. the proposed project will allow first republic to expand into a small vacant commercial space to serve their going customer service bays without having to leave a location they have occupied since 1998. the project proposes minimal alterations to the façade of the building. mainly signage with small changes to the entryway. the department has not received any public comment in support or opposition to this project. the department finds this project is necessary and desirable and compatible with the surrounding neighborhood as it supports a bank branch which specifically focuses on the area it resides in. it will result in a lower vacancy rate as it does on balance the objectives of the plan. the department recommends approval of this project with conditions. this concludes my presentation and i am available for questions. >> president hillis: thank you. project sponsor?

>> thank you for your time. i am of the architect for the bank. the project is self, as we mentioned, as a minor expansion to the existing space that we built in 1998 which was the first branch and the laurel village plaza. wwe eventually moved into the space beside. the changes to the exterior are minor. we will try to tie at the elevation back together. it was divided. so we will clean it up and the space itself is simply expandi expanding. the centre space of the building to a more usable layout. we are not really adding anything particularly new as far as services. we are just accommodating the initial need for the volume of customers we have.

we will include a new community-based space in the back. the 33 space will be a community room that would be open to the public and local use for events or a conference room type of space. we are open to answer any questions. >> president hillis: thank you. any public comment on this item? seeing none, we will close public comment. commissioners more? >> commissioner moore: i always regret where commissioner banks -- banks and/or frontage are taken up by former retail expanding into a small retail space. and understand that retail has it's problems. changing an active kitchen supply store into a branch bank raises questions for me. i've seen this and other places.

it exists at 2800 square feet which is a large space. and adding an additional expanding to 3800 square feet is something i find a little bit troublesome. the shopping centre is a small scale neighborhood serving setting with active frontage on california street i am curious about the other -- about what the other commissioners have to say. i have my questions about this expansion. >> president hillis: the way i view the formula retail debates any questions we have. it is an opportunity for the businesses in the area and the neighbors to weigh in. it is more about the character to me than about size. i get it that this seems a little bigger at a time when

most banks are actually stringing -- shrinking in size oare becoming somewhat dense. the public is a bit different and they are actually expanding in places and have a more active frontage. given that we actually have no opposition from the businesses they are or any neighborhood, i generally am supportive of it. i want to leave the formula retail after the neighborhood. >> commissioner moore: you are making a good point. the neighborhood is rapidly changing with the new housing potential occurring behind it with cp mc moving into california street and van ness street. this area is not on the radar of many people at the moment. so i hear you. i just wanted to voice my concerns and again, and occupied space is better than an empty

space. but i am concerned about banks being not particularly active spaces. not particularly contributing toward the ground floor animations that we are looking for in all locations of the ci city. >> president hillis: i agree with that. i think banks have become less active and they have converted a lot of their space into office space. it is unusual for a bank to expand. i don't bank they are, but i know they are a bit more active than some of the other banks where we see just offices. commissioner richards? >> commissioner richards: i am on the line on this one. approved the bank of the west and it is an absolute dead zone day and night. absolutely dead. it is huge. i don't even know if they will stay there. >> president hillis: commissioner moore?

>> commissioner moore: we may want to expand that into a special discussion that we have among ourselves. i see the deadening effect of change at the corner of powell and post, where they are used to be disney animation for many years and something else before. it is actually empty and i think we need to start talking about how we want to deal with this. i am not taking a side of the particular applicant to, but i have my concerns. in the absence of the neighborhood not being here to participate in this conversation, i make a move to approve this, yet i would ask that we, as a commission cannot continue our own conversations on this matter. >> president hillis: we can add that. >> commissioner richards: second. >> clerk: i'm sorry, who made the motion? commissioner richard -- commissioner richards. on the motion to approve this matter. [roll call]

>> clerk: th the motion passes unanimously 5-0. this is item 1 15 for case number 2017. one front street to. a conditional use authorization. >> good afternoon president tillis and commissioners. i am with the department staff. the hmo for you is a request for conditional use authorization to establish and legalize a nonretail sale and service use of the ground floor of the subject building located at one front street. specifically the ground-floor space is 5800 square feet and is intended for use as an employee café for a first republic bank. it has offices in the subject building as well as in other offices nearby. officially this is considered an expansion of the office used to the ground floor with the café considered an accessory use. office and nonretail sale service use -- within the c3 oat district at a long market

street. prior to occupancy by first republic bank, this space had been utilized as a retail banking branch for bank of the west. first republic had pulled permits in the spring of 2016 for interior tenant improvements and ground-floor exterior storefront modifications. however, this permit and the subsequent permit referral have characterized the use of a restaurant that which would be principally permitted. as the employee café is not open to the public however, it is not a retail use in the same way a restaurant would be. consistent with how the department has reviewed other employer cafeterias, these uses are considered to be access rate nonretail sales and service uses. the conditional use authorization today is therefore to abate the active enforcement violation and legalize the activity. during review of this project, staff is received one communication from the public regarding the proposal in which there were concerns about the conversion of the space to private use and how this exacerbates safety and lighting concerns around market street and around downtown generally.

commissioners scent via e-mail this week, you should have received additional comments from us clarifying the safety concerns as well as other concerns about the project. additionally that you should have received a letter submitted on behalf of the project sponsor. i have additional copies of both letters today should anyone need those. during review, staff did have concerns about the project proposal, and in particular staff asked the project sponsor to consider opening the project up in part to project -- public use. with a public facing retail element, the space could be considered a retail use and would be permitted. however,, the republic indicated this could not be achieved. the café had been designed to handle the demand from employees only and would not have spare capacity to serve additional customers. staff had concerns that once authorized per office use of the ground-floor, base may again be developed in the future to accommodate a true office use and not just an employee café and in an accessory manner.

the condition of approval has been added to require that this space remain accessory in nature. any proposed -- to a standalone nonretail sales and service use or additional office which require a conditional office use off -- authorization. does not result in a public facing retail basis -- business, but it is consistent with the objectives and policies of the planet downtown plan area. the prior retail banking branch, although principally permitted by code was arguably a far code was arguably a far less active use than the employee café. it would be open primarily during workday hours. this is not inconsistent with other food serving businesses in the financial district. some of which cater to the daytime needs of downtown workers. they have very limited evening and weekend service. additionally, first republic bank has told employees -- has employees in the vicinity as well including the adjacent 111

pine street building to the north, two '01 california and four '05 howard. employees walk into the café from these other sites foster pedestrian activity along market street in the downtown. it occupies a large portion of the ground floor and there are also other retail uses retained at this level. two other limited restaurants and fills coffee at the front door café, as well as a retail banking branch for first republic. obviously this is much smaller than the planning bank of the west branch that occupied that sight. the employee café would still be required to comply with all transparency requirements along the market street frontage. for these reasons, the department finds the proposal is desirable at compatible with the surrounding neighborhood and recommends approval of the project with conditions. i am available for any questions you may have. >> president hillis: thank you. project sponsor? >> thank you.

good afternoon. i am here from duffy and bass on behalf of the project sponsor first republic bank. we appreciate the recommendation that the commissioner approve the conditional use. the bank is a san francisco-based bank started in 1985. over 2,000 employees in san francisco. the employee café, we want to reiterate went through a full city permitting process in 2016 and has been open for a full year and a half. keeping the café open is critical to first republic and it's business objectives. it is important gathering place for employees and a critical employee retention and recruitment tool as well. we think this is an excellent use of a roger lard -- rather large tenant space that was vacant for some time. before that it had been, as andrew suggested, a large and underutilized bank of the west branch. currently the café serving over 900 -- at 900 meals per day to employees and their guests. employees from many first republic offices, not just from

the subject building, and from branches across town by meals at the café each and every day. the bank estimates that fewer than half of the employee's, of the customers at the bank, customers at the café, come from the one front street building. 500 plus first was -- first republic bank employees are walking to and from the bank every day buying meals and returning to their offices. a couple of photos to give you all a sense of what the space looks like. this is a photo of the interior of the café. another one. and then just to give you a sense of the difference between the café and the prior bank of the west branch use, i have another photo here.

you can see that the shades were often drawn at the bank of the west branch. no relationship between the street and the interior. as opposed to the first republic bank employee café where there is a lot more interaction between the street and the café. soka? also wanted to say that we heard and considered the concerns that were expressed in the letter from miss hester that we received this week and the bank is willing to immediately begin keeping the blinds pulled up outside of regular business hours. that would allow the light that is inside the café space to eliminate market street. that would go a long way toward addressing some of the concerns about the lack of light on market street. and we wanted to note that there are approximately 2-3 bank events per month that are held in the evening at the employee café. it is not always closed in the evening. there are approximately one event per week. and and we are here to answer

any questions you may have. thank you. [please stand by]bril

encouraging side to walk around, front street. i will use this. this is market street frontage. these are all in your staff report. these one, two, three, four, five, and they're going to be occupying two through five at this cafe, and the other one is a bank office. i am very well aware from myself that you have a hard time feeling safe walking around downtown with the amount of closed retail spaces. closing this off to pedestrian

activity in and out in the evenings makes it threatening. i went to law school a block to the west and across the street, so i'm very well familiar with this area and participated, i think, in the approval process of this project in 1985. it was the alioto administration, and it was my second year of law school, and i was paying attention to downtown office buildings. and because they didn't construct it within three years. they needed to go back in '75 when a new mayor was elected, had been elected, moscone, to get permission to build the project. there's conditions -- and i put it in my brief. that's conditions dealing with activating the ground floors, not as offices but as retail.

condition two, ground floor windows clear, not tinted. sidewalk area landscaping, leasing of the ground floor, condition five, to active uses, so there are people going in and out. i'm not dredging up these conditions from my mind. it's there in 1975. so i think the offers from project sponsor are interesting. i'm hearing them for the first time, but i think there needs to be more than the office closes at 5:00, the cafe closes at 5:00. thank you. >> president hillis: thank you. mr. buss. >> didn't mean to bump my head.

>> again, steven buss from mission yimby still. i sympathize with what she was saying. we should have street level activation, but what's there currently doesn't activate the street. and i feel like this is just a net improvement over what it currently is. at least this way, there will be a nice ground level cafe for the employees there, and i -- i just don't see why -- i feel like this process is wasting your time. like, this is not a big deal. the ground floor cafe, you have much more important things to deal with, and i think we should just approve it and move on. like, no one's going to really be upset to have a ground floor cafe that they can look into. yeah, it's not public, but a

lot of cafes downtown are not public. it's just the nature of our public. just approve it and move on. >> president hillis: any other public comment? seeing no other public comment, we'll close public comment. commissioner moore? >> commissioner moore: what's in front of us is an abatement and conditional use, and i think this is worth some discussion based on what we do when we sit here and are tasked with what we do. i am disappointed to see us go backward with what was spelled out in the use of a building in 1975. to privatize an already quite

internally focused use to me exactly is the opposite of what we do. in the bank of the -- participation of the bank itself with desks close to the street frontage was far more exciting than what i approved when first federal moved in who basically have a tinted-type window covering but which you can hardly look in. the addition of an a.t.m., which i never have seen anything that came forward as a request for approval through the really -- it takes the active ground floor use into a language that reminds me of shopping centers rather than of what we like to do with our downtown buildings. this comes actually, on top the fact if you walk the block, you come to the corner of pine and front, and all of a sudden, you're really quite aware of

the very visual presence of first federal, which uses, from my perspective, at least -- i'm sorry? >> commissioner richards: first republic. >> commissioner moore: first republic. okay. first republic, uses a significant amount of signage. i call it the chase phenomenon. it was used first quite extensively by chase bank. you wrap the entire frontage coming down front street all the way to the corner of what actually used to be called 444 mark market street. the open space, which was an obligation of the project approval in 1975 always spoke to a small plaza, active

landscaping, etcetera, which for many years, failed. and now with the city's really incredible effort, there is a lovely outdoor space with seating and a lot of activity, except for what we're doing now. we're pulling the building back and making the building basically a completely closed off private use behind the ground floor facing. i think that is a step backward, and i would actually -- i would have thought that in the past, in this particular building, there was a cafeteria. it was on the fourth floor. it was used by blue shield-blue cross, and other people who worked in the building could actually use that cafeteria. i personally do not see any benefit that eve when -- if the bank has blanch -- even when the bank was branchs nearby that all we're doing is

tracting them to the ground level floor in this location. activated by having people walk and explore and go to different places. as we're now adding the transbay center to it, this building was actually becoming the goal post for leaving the financial district and transitioning into the trans bay center. should be a prominent pedestrian friendly highly visible corner with a restaurant or other active retail uses where people come and go in and out of the building, and it should not be a completely privatized shade style type of 8:0005:00 use that does not participate in further enhancing the street

life. i am very much not in support of this particular application and could go on and on. i used to work in this building for many years. i hope for its transformation which happened with the open space. was partially better with the bank of the west on the ground floor, but i think this particular proposal makes the building go backwards, and i cannot support that. >> president hillis: commissioner koppel? >> commissioner koppel: i'm going to agree with commissioner moore on this. there's a lot of historic monuments and gathering places, more than you think there are downtown, and if -- they're a

still civic and public part of the city even if there are mostly public buildings. somewhere else i would be supportive of this. i'm not supportive of this at this location. this is a very heavily gathered part of downtown, and also, i was going to make a point that there's often a lot of tourists in this neighborhood that may be getting off at the transbay terminal or may just be visiting. whenever i run into tourists, i tell them to walk up and down market street and all up and down the embarcadero and fisherman's wharf and north beach. i wouldn't want to steer these people in the direction of provide for only certain people used of cafes on the ground floor visible on market street. >> commissioner richards? >> commissioner richards: so i guess to the project sponsor. is there i away to have the public access any part of this even for just a takeout so that we can still have your cafeteria but still have access

for the public? >> i'm in charge of the cafes for the bank. during the day, it's not possible. we're willing to open it at night for private functions, for benefits, for whatever it's needed at night, but during the day, it's not feasible. >> commissioner richards: i think -- >> we're willing to open the shades and adding more lights if that's a concern, but operationally, it's not feasible to bring in people from the outside. >> commissioner richards: okay. thank you. i used to work at 111 pine, and i stood -- when i would go down to the embarcadero, the muni stop to go down underground, i'd walk down front street. and the one front building with that kind of recessed entry is foreboding. when you look at that building across the street there's that 1980's kind of reddish granite building, and there's a driveway or a back on it. it's a really foreboding street, and i think this actually makes it even more

foreboding, but i worked at salesforce. our cafeteria was on whatever floor at 17th. i think this is an amenity that belongs somewhere up on another floor, not on the ground floor. >> president hillis: commissioner moore? >> commissioner moore: i want to make one more comment, and that is now the presence of what would now be internally folks cafeteria punctuated by an a.t.m., and another a.t.m. literally 100 feet from another one. it gets so suburban that the corner will even be worse. the corner is complicated because of the geomeetry of -- geometry of how you come up. it's a very difficult

transportation corner, but it's further exacerbated by basically dead facades, and this -- this particular thing together with these two branch banks and an entrance -- garage entrance into the 111 pine street, first republic bank garage there is just not doing it. so i just wanted to add that for a description for those that are not as familiar with that sequence on that particular corner and the block. >> president hillis: commissioner melgar? >> i have another comment to make. during bank of the west's time in that space, there were approximately five employees. >> president hillis: yeah. so we -- we've got to -- we'll -- if we have questions, we'll ask. i think we get the prior use, but thank you. all right. >> president hillis: so commissioner melgar? >> vice president melgar: so i just had a question about what

we're doing. right now, it's retail financial services, so if we leave it like that, you know every bank i know, they close at 6:00 -- 5:00 or 6:00. so if we leave it as retail financial, are we not kind of shooting ourselves in the foot in terms of, like, what we're trying to achieve for that corner because it'll just stay a place that closes at 6:00. maybe the lights can remain on, you know, but -- so i'm wondering -- i agree that this particular proposal to have the cafeteria be on the ground floor is not great. it should -- it belongs someplace higher. i'm a big fan of employee cafeterias. when i worked for the city, we used to go to the state building cafeteria, and i tell you, it was going on. they expanded it for its other government workers, and that's a great thing, but this is not

open. it's not a place of great traffic for folks coming in and out, and that's what we want for this space. i'm wondering if we deny this conditional use, and we leave it as such, we will still have the same problem that miss hester has brought up. so i'm wondering what are the commission's thoughts about that issue. >> president hillis: that's a good question. could we ask mr. perry. could a cafe -- could a restaurant -- >> sure. so it could be -- if the conditional use were denied today, the space would revert to the last legal use for the building, which would be a retail financial service. but within the c-3, there are certainly a host of other retail sales and service uses that could go in that space. a retail notice is not required. it would be an over the counter permit to change of limits use to a restaurant.

>> president hillis: so it would not have to come back to this commission for a restaurant, but they could take it being back -- >> it they were to open the cafe back up to the public, it would be operating in a manner consistent with a restaurant or limited restaurant. it would be principlely permitted under code, and there would be no need for a conditional use authorization. >> president hillis: commissioner moore? >> commissioner moore: i think we would support that because that was the original use. if the branch bank would become smaller because it does what it does and there are lots of other spaces around there, all the other rules about transparency are already on the books. so basically we're just saying that the abatement action to a private nonpublic cafeteria is not what we want to basically support here. so everything else is on the books, so it can change the use of the ground floor, depending on them being a smaller bank and letting the rest go to a small restaurant. so with that, i'd like a motion

to disapprove. >> president hillis: does it have to be an intent to disapprove at this point? >> commissioner moore: cause i didn't intend? >> and if the city attorney can correct me, but i believe, commissioners, you did not have a motion of disapproval in your packets today. >> so i would suggest that commissioner moore, that in your motion, that you maybe reiterate why you want to disapprove the project and in doing so, perhaps you could point to the objectives that are listed in the packet and say why it is not supporting that, and then, it would not be need to be an intent to disapprove, it would be a disapproval. >> commissioner moore: i spoke extensively, much longer than normal, about the issues that come into play here. is there anybody else who could please -- >> so commissioner koppel mentioned that he didn't believe he could support the

conditional use because it's not supportive of the downtown, perhaps the downtown policies related to enhancing city and living and the environment of downtown as well as it doesn't support the economic plan of the downtown area? >> commissioner moore: it would -- the building itself, it's encouraged the condition of leasing to ground floor retail to attract retail activities such as restaurants and convenience stores that will provide goods and services needed by building occupants, etcetera. >> correct. >> commissioner moore: that will be part of the original conditions. so the way that the building was conditioned in 1975 would be pretty much the same objectives, and they express themselves reinforced in the downtown plan, in the general plan, in our retail element, etcetera, etcetera. so all of those factors that we repeat over and over again, and after careful consideration, would apply to this condition, as well. particularly, this is a strategic location, it's strategic particularly with the

location of the transbay center, so we're expecting even more from this building than before. >> okay. >> president hillis: quickly. >> if i may, i think the bank would be very amenable to opening a door to allow those 500 folks who come every day to walk in from the pedestrian ground floor entrance. i think that would go a long way towards the concerns about activating the street. i understand that doesn't make it a public use, but it would function very simile to a public open restaurant space. >> president hillis: okay. >> clerk: i heard a motion. is there a second? >> second. >> clerk: very good. commissioners, so if i heard that correctly, there is a motion that has been seconded to disapprove this conditional use authorization with findings as articulated by commissioner moore. on that motion -- [roll call] >> clerk: so moved,

commissioners, that motion passes unanimously, 6-0. commissioners, that'll place us on item 16 for case number 2018-003300 cua at 600 south vanness avenue. conditional use authorization. >> good afternoon, president hillis and members of the commission. mooik will christiansen -- michael christensen, department staff. the subject property is located within the urban mixed use zoning district. the mission alcoholic beverage special use district, and a 58-x height and bulk district. the subject property is also located within the area subject to the mission interim controls which require a conditional use authorization for projects proposing to establish new restaurant uses. the subject tenant space is already approved as a limited restaurant use.

under building permit application 201801234978 which was issued bring the department of building inspection on march 14, 2018. subsequently the project sponsor filed this conditional use authorization request to add beer and wine services to the business. as such, the requested authorization does not propose any physical changes to the tenant space or property, only a request for authorization for on-site sale of alcohol. the planning code distinguishes between limited restaurant and full restaurant uses in that a limited restaurant is not permitted to serve alcohol for on-site consumption but may obtain a license to sell alcohol for off-site consumption whereas a full restaurant is authorized for on-site consumption of alcohol. the project sponsor has met with the neighborhood groups and discussed this on several occasions including flying into san francisco to conduct a walk-through of the neighborhood. the project sponsor can discuss further what they've done with the neighborhood groups and the progress they've made. as the project complies with

the planning code and effectively has no change to the space other than the authorization to serve alcohol on-site for consumption, the department recommends approval of the recommended authorization with conditions. this concludes my presentation. i'm available for any questions. >> president hillis: thanks. project sponsor? welcome. >> president and members of the planning commission, my name is cheryl brady, and beside me, is the owner of bite unite. we do support staff's recommendation for approval. we also want to thank mr. christensen for all his help. we are excited to bring bite unite to -- which is a neighborhood restaurant cafe concept to the mission district community. we are committed to supporting and creating a great relationship with the community. we want to make everyone feel welcome when visiting the

restaurant. bite unite's model is considered a cook, create and share community, including a coworking kitchen space. we're going to be offering cooking classes, workshops, and special events. regarding the outreach, in early may, i reached out to various neighborhood groups regarding the project from a list that was provided by mr. christensen. on june 19, both myself and the owner went on a walking tour with mission district -- up in the mission district with community groups. following the walking tour, we had been in contact with the group, trying to address the various concerns on both ends which could be incorporated

into the conditions of approval. we want the mission group to be excited to have bite unite located in their neighborhood as we want to be part of the community. at this point, i am going to have the owner speak about her business plan. >> hi. i'm papa. i'm new to san francisco. i'm originally from thailand. bite unite itself is from outside looks like a full restaurant service, but in a way, in the same time, inside the space it's actually coworking space for chefs. it's really literally a place for anyone who loves to start a small business of food be able

to actually join us, and in a place like san francisco where the rent is so high, it's a barrier. this is a place for them to start their idea about food. at the same time, the space will allow the community to actually have cooking classes. to me, the space is actually the place where people will be engaging through different type of people, through -- actually through food. one thing about this that i wanted to say is that this is a place that i have -- have done sometimes the fund raising to help the community within the -- the areas. sometimes we have cooking class for unfortunate kids, and a lot of times, i met the groups that we're going to meet today, as well. about two weeks ago, they had been really nice, walking me around the mission area, and i

understand what's going on in the missions. i would like to be in communities, and i would like to help as much as i can. obviously, even though the business is hard enough to be with the -- in the area, so the place is open for public. everybody who love to be a chef, bunt to start their small business, i would like to support. but the community, i would like to be able to actually host kitchen communities among people in the local area, but also people outside, true cookings, and i think it would be good opportunity to have the space like that in the ground floor, in the mission, where there's a lot of empty space in the area, and yeah, that will be my message. >> president hillis: okay. >> we're available to answer any questions you might have. >> president hillis: great. thank you very much. we're going to open it up first for public comment.

>> good afternoon, commissioners. larissa petrucelli with united to save the mission. as you heard from pata and her expediter, cheryl. they met a couple weeks ago, and we took them on a tour. in initial conversation it was clear they knew very little about the neighborhood, san francisco itself, issues of gentrification and a history. so in a tour let by myself and eric arguella of calliente 24, we discussed how bite unite might fit into the neighborhood and support the community. at the time, you know, pata seemed very excited, took a lot of video, we talked about very specific things, about having affordable food items on the

menu, having a space that was approachable to the community, having bilingual menus and signage, community events. talked to her about maybe partnering with la cocina on events and supporting one another, and she seemed very excited about this, and we were all really excited. left with some action items, and then, we heard very little. our e-mails got very delayed response, no direct response from pata herself, only her expediter responded, and they were not forth coming with providing the information that they said that they would give to us so that we could start working out an agreement and get a better idea of how they were going to work their business model in san francisco. it's very high end in hong kong, so which is where her other business is, so we wanted

to see how we could kind of work together and work through these things and maybe even connect her with some of the resources in the neighborhood, and even phone calls were not responded to. so where we're at right now, we really would like to work with them. we were very excited about it, but we're in a place right now where we really haven't received any response. and as we see the business from the website and from her social media, we don't really feel like this business would work well within the community, and it would create and direct -- and direct impact on the businesses around it. thank you. >> president hillis: thank you. next speaker, please. >> good afternoon, commissioners. i, too, was on the tour as we all added our perpeculiartives to the value -- perspectives on the value and culture of the

mission. it was stressed that having a business that incorporates with and builds relationships with all members of the community only build strength and longevity to the business through all economic cycles. the previous speaker spoke of the specific examples. they weren't very heavy lifts, they were pretty easy to incorporate, and for them to come back and get all this in writing. as they said earlier, their hong kong site, their website and social media, the price point is high and typically accessible to the affluent. seeing the rendering from the packet of this location, it looks high end, like a hypergentrification type of space. it will clearly signal it's not for the residents of the neighborhood. i was also clear as out of towners, she and her permit expediter were unfamiliar with the mission and unaware of the true issues of gentrification

and displacement. they hadn't thought about how they could truly bring specific community benefits to the project. so right now, we're just at a point where we didn't get a lot of communication back, so we're here at the hearing just to see what we can do. thanks. >> president hillis: thank you. next speaker, please. >> buenas tardes, good afternoon. my name is francisco romero. we're we are block from the corner of which we're speaking. i think our -- our business people need to understand that we are actually living the situation of deep trauma there. only one block away, another mysterious fire burned down a local business which totally destroyed a lively hood for six

families, six latino families who were kicked out. the owner has very eventually responded for over 1.5 years where people have been forced to leave. so there's a very intent -- a very clearly intent -- very clear intention to kick out latino and working class families from this neighborhood. in that context, this business, which is very well written and expressed this wonderful idea of cooking classes, but the -- the presentation of it is very clear that it's for -- i don't want to say high end. let's just call it affluent people who have a lot of money to invest and will displace our families even more. great cooking classes, there's great -- there's a multiethnic community that is working class that lives in the s.r.o.'s that are making 30,000, $50,000 a year that would benefit a lot,

but the effort is not directed at these families, who are very hard in working and to beautifying their own neighborhoods, working at the washing -- at the car wash right on the very corner where the 76 station is. so what we need is for you all and the city to support local family small businesses that tend to our families because what's happening right now is we are being very intentionally displaced through money, through other forms of racist wi policies, so what we need is the support of that. if the business is willing to work in that direction with us, we're very happy to work with a business that's going to help our families thrive and beautify our neighborhood. muchas gracias, and thank you

very much. >> president hillis: thank you. next speaker, please. >> hello, commission. my name is avian contreras, and i'm speaking on behalf of the community. that although we do support businesses that are looking to work in the best interest of the community, i am here to oppose this current plan right now because of the lack of actual tangible proof of working with the community. the owner has expressed interest in supporting the community, offering certain cooking classes, what it may be, though, but it does not take into account the immense pressure put on this community by having a very affluent business that does not cater to the needs of the immediate community. there's a lot of auto body shops, s.r.o.'s, people who are on the lower end of the economic scale who this business is clearly not meant to cater to. once again, the owner has

expressed a desire to work with the community, though at this point, nothing's came to fruition. at this point, it's just seeming lip service, so although the community, we're willing to work with them, nothing's came up. so at this point, i cannot support this plan as it is because there's no actual tangible documentation or proof of equity for the community. thank you. >> president hillis: thank you. next speaker, please. >> i am father john jiminez. i was a former pastor at st. charles, 713 south vanness, just about a block away from this project. when francisco mentioned that fire at 16th and shotwell, i know one of those families that got displaced. as we see this gentrification process, when i heard about this business being proposed, it sounds like something that would properly be on valencia

street, and i can think of a few places on that street where they need a tenant. this idea in general, and i think of valencia street kind of spreading to mission. and for me getting involved in these kinds of issues goes back to a few years where you see this kind of process coming down the mission, and then, you had a huge fire around 22nd, a couple fires around 22nd, mission, in that area, and really woke me up to this issue of gentrification. and maybe an overall strategy for our city of a business like this does harm to the neighborhood, which is gentrification. we can be fair in, say, certain areas like valencia or some areas you can allow for this kind of development, but other areas, you have to protect the people that are living there. so this particular spot, i do know a nonprofit that would like to have a soup kitchen. i think that might be a better -- and w