>> particularly in terms of the health of the commercial corridor toward, the fact that retail is changing and that 340 square foot, that is tiny, but we want that. we want to be able to use that. >> this would be a legally approved project and along with

the sign approval so we would use whatever permits would be associated with it and we would be signing it off. we have opportunities for the building permit and this decision by our commission. >> either way. >> did you have further? >> no. >> i sure commissioner melgar's concerns and i things we should be doing whatever we can to support retail. i would second the motion but would also make a comment it feels like some additional legislation is necessary to get staff a little bit more discussion in this area under circumstances like this so it is not a one-off going forward, but the size of -- of the cost the retailer seems out of whack with what the benefit -- from what the city would get from a smaller sight. i second the motion.

>> the motion is to approve the project as proposed with conditions, not with staff's recommendations. very good. then there is a motion that has been seconded to approve this project as proposed with conditions not including staff's recommended modifications. on that motion... [roll call] >> you said there is two? >> there is one motion but there were several recommendations by staff and my understanding is the maker of the motion is for approval with conditions without staff's modifications. >> and the position and size. >> aye. [roll call] so moved. that motion passes unanimously 6 -0. that will place us in item 16.

one front street. conditional use authorization. >> good afternoon, commissioners i'm with the planning department staff. the item before you is a conditional use authorization request to establish and legalize a 5200 square-foot nonretail sales and service used doing businesses first republic bank located at the ground floor of the existing building located at one front street. office and all other nonretail sales and service uses within the zoning district require a conditional use authorization to locate the current fort. the space would function as first republic's ground-floor employee café and in addition the post proposal would include a 610 square-foot café that would front onto market street and be accessible to the general public. the proposed 5200 square-foot café is an expansion of office use on the ground floor due to

the private nature of the use. at the private café, the use is considered accessory to the principal office use. in the spring of 2016, first republic secured tenant improvement and exterior modification permits for the change of use to the limited restaurant use which is considered a retail sales and service use. however, as the limited restaurant was not acceptable to the general public, it is considered an accessory office use per the planning code. on february 27th, 2017, the department issued a notice of enforcement for the unauthorized use. on july 18th, 2018, a public hearing was held for an application seeking to establish 5200 -- 5800 square feet of nonretail sales and service use of the ground floor. the request was denied by the planning commission under a motion in the planning commission moved to deny the application primarily on the grounds of insufficient street-level activation as required by the downtown area

and general plan. off every 2,016th, 2019, we submitted a new project for a 5200 square-foot private café that includes 610 square-foot public café accessed off of market street. the café occupations two of the five visually prominent window bays facing market street and was determined to be a new project. staff finds the addition of a private café will visually anchor the building and provide a gateway like effect on marking and articulating the existing plaza entrance. it will introduce and activate the street presence for the caée with a public entrance permeating the existing market street frontage and give the impression of street activation along the market street frontage with active uses to public café on the westernmost front and

corner and the public bank and the public bank. there's one staff concerned with the 5200 accessory office being expanded over a time into a principal office use. which is a prohibited use of the ground floor and the zoning district. staff has added a condition of approval with requiring that the proposed ground-floor office remain accessory and character for the life of any approval in this concern aside, a project sponsor has made a number of revisions that have done a big usefully and substantially improved the proposal in front of you today. staff has not received any communications from the public regarding this proposal. we find the proposal adequately activates the street-level and supports retail diversity and creates new jobs which is consistent with the objectives and policies of the downtown area and general plan. for these reasons, staff finds a

proposal desirable, compatible with the neighborhood recommends approval with conditions. i am available for any comments or questions. >> thank you. do we have our presentation from the project sponsor? >> thank you, commissioners. my name is harry and i am here today on behalf of the project sponsor and first republic bank. i appreciate the staff recommendation very much and that details history which saves me some part of my presentation. i wanted to clarify one piece. i want to make it clear that the permits that were issued in 2016 , first republic bank was clear this use was an employee cafeteria and -- there is. this is the planning department sign off on the back of the permit, which specifically

mentions the fact that it is approving an employee cafeteria in the space. the space -- this permit was issued, the bank then improves the employee cafeteria at a cost of several million dollars and literally the month after it was opened received a notice of enforcement indicating a conditional use was required. we have spent a lot of time since a prior hearing, at least a couple of the commissioners were at that prior hearing and we did get the message that this space -- that the bank should do more to activate this space and incorporate some public facing features to it. this is a rendering of what the entrance to the café would be as carolyn mentioned. it will frame the entrance to the building facing out onto the monument plaza as the signage on the window to make clear that this is a public café and as i

said, it will reduce the size of the employee cafeteria by about 600 feet, 610 feet. i don't know if we can pull back on that a little bit. this shows the length of the retail frontage in this building here at the corner of market and at the front is that the existing bank branch. that is the front street frontage there. it turns around the corner onto market and there is five bays on market street. the continued retail use of the bank branch they're establishing a new public café in the retail space and these two bays at the other end and then the employee cafeteria, the last two bays will look into the employee cafeteria witches, itself got a very transparent and active,

engaging use. and then the fill's coffee space frames the other side of the building entrance. we had some -- i know there was questions in another case recently about sidewalk lighting so we wanted to speak very briefly to that. this is a very glassy front along market street. these are chairs from either end of the street at night. there is a lot of light into the sidewalk from the interior light they were left on until -- accepts between 11 at night and 6:00 a.m. in the morning when the building, the landlord requires that be turned off for energy conservation purposes. that is l.e.d. lighting that i think makes a sidewalk environment very safe.

i would like to introduce chris o'bryant of first republic bank to tell you more about the nonprofit use of the employee cafeteria and some other information about the bank proposed as part of this. >> good afternoon. my name is krystal. i am deputy chief administrative officer at first republic bank. i have been with the company over 13 years. first republic is a california chartered bank. we were founded in 1985 and have been continuously headquartered in and committed to the city of san francisco. at our founding we have 10 employees. today we have grown to almost 5,000 employees nationwide. we're very proud to be the 12 th largest employer in the city of san francisco. with approximately 2700 employees. most of them are located in our corporate headquarters which consists of over 700,000 square feet of space across four buildings in the financial district.

first republic actively supports our community through investment , lending, volunteerism, philanthropy and sponsorship as well as through our service to our nonprofit banking client. we support affordable housing and community development. we have originated a total of $4.7 billion in community development loans. we have committed a total of $1.6 billion in low income housing tax credit, we also maintain a community advisory board comprised of six recognize community leaders but offer strategic guidance on initiatives related to affordable housing and small business and economic development. >> thank you. your time is up. >> thank you. do we have any public comment on this item? i have a few speaker cards. [calling names] please line up

on my left. and everybody else, if i did not call your name and you want to speak, you may do so now. >> hello, commissioners. my name is meghan smith and i work at enterprise for youth. you have been a remarkable supporter of us. they have helped us in their training and in the internship programs. they host interns every summer and our interns often speak about having the food and how much they love it. they had meetings with their supervisors down there and we also have several first republic employees who are mentors in the program which is a separate element of the volunteerism and they will meet with their mentee

groups in their café. i think it is a really lovely opportunity to expand it to the broader community. thank you. >> thank you next speaker, please. >> good afternoon. i am the c.e.o. of the pomeroy center. we have been -- we are nonprofit that serves developmentally disabled adults and children. relocated in the southern side of the city. most people think we are in san mateo county but i can assure you we are in the city. we have been a long partner with first republic bank. they talked about allowing us to use as a nonprofit this café after hours. we serve a lot of families at and 500 families in san francisco. many of them in areas that are far, far away from where our office is. having a downtown location would be fantastic for us for family meetings, board meetings and other uses. we support its.

thank you. >> thank you. next speaker, please. >> good afternoon. i am the senior director at enterprise for youth and i want to speak to the work we have been doing with first republic bank and the trend we are seeing downtown with companies opening of these community spaces. first republic has been very gracious connecting as to mentors, as meghan mentioned, but also opening up their doors for young people to see the possibilities that they can have professionally in san francisco. they have been a great partner. i figured i would do my part by vouching for them here and i hope you approve it. have a good day. >> thank you. next speaker, please. >> good afternoon. i am the executive director of meals on wheels san francisco. we ensure that 5,000 seniors across the city are not hungry and not alone. we have been a partner with first republic for a long time. we consider them a gold standard

from board leadership all the way down to hundreds of volunteers and philanthropy. of particular note, we're building a 35,000 square-foot kitchen in the bayview on gerald avenue. and first republic has led the effort to finance and bridge that project. they are a big partner with us. we need space in off hours for volunteer activations and trainings and we support this application. thank you. >> thank you. next speaker, please. >> good afternoon. i am the assistant branch manager at our embarcadero one branch. i grew up in san francisco and i live in san francisco. i have worked at first republic bank for six years now. i use the café several times a week. it is not only a way to save money, but connect with other first republic employees. by having a restaurant just for employees, were able to connect and meet in a more relaxed setting.

we are able to see each other and come up with new ideas. we are also able to meet with clients and have one-on-one meetings with them were other people okay overhearing us. is a really nice way to connect with clients. the café is also part of our culture to have fun. i urge you to say yes on this. thank you. >> thank you. next speaker, please. >> hello, commissioners. my name is julia and i have been working at first republic bank for about two years. i work on student loan refinancing. i am a longtime bay area native and loyal bay area native. i grew up in the east bay and went to stanford and have resided in the mission ever since. i love working at first republic , which are promise you get bankers do not say about their jobs. when i first got my job, my grandfather was so excited. he is 89 and he took bart over

from oakland to meet for lunch and the place that i decided to take him was our cafeteria. it was part of my job that i was really excited to show and share with him. when he walked in, is that only god, this is amazing. then we paid and it was only $7 for the subsidy and he was really flowing away. i work on california street so i walk two blocks to get. i café about three times a week and other times i go to a local eatery. i would say from a practical standpoint the cafeteria is by far the most affordable option within my department. there's about 100 junior folks all about the average age of 25 and for the folks only team. they would say that is a financial necessity for them to have this benefit. and then from another perspective, i think the café represents first republic's culture, which sums cheesy to say, but if you have ever walked into our branches, you are greeted with a smile and often fresh-baked cookies from that morning by our bakers.

it is really collegial and it was the place. so when i have hired forever people this year every time on their first day we meet at 8:30 a.m. for breakfast at the cafeteria because i think it is the best introduction for what it will be like to work at first republic. for all these reasons, i encourage the committee to accept this proposal. thank you. >> thank you. next speaker, please. >> hello. i am sarah and i have worked at first republic for the last five years and i am also a resident of san francisco i personally use the café several times a week. along with my colleagues who also really enjoyed the space. it is by far one of the most affordable lunch options in the area, but even though this is a great place to get lunch or breakfast, it doesn't stop me from going to starbucks and "-- other local cafés and restaurants in the area.

overall the café is a really wonderful benefit for our employees, especially folks like me who are looking for affordable spots to eat. i encourage you to approve this item. thank you. >> thank you. next speaker, please. >> hello. my name is kimberley and i am the vice president at the american heart association here at our local chapter. first republic bank is one of the largest corporate supporters of the american heart association and has been a significant and meaningful catalyst in driving our mission to be a real it was forced for longer and healthier lives. they had played a significant role in many of our proudest accomplishments over the past few years and our work in our local communities should not be possible without their support. in addition to the bank's general corporate his contributions to the aha, they have engaged their employees and seemed to have leadership in our mission. their c.f.o. chaired our heart walk in 2018 and 2019 and this

past september, 800 public public bank employees joined us at the plaza to walk and fundraising honor those affected by heart disease and stroke. first republic bank has hosted a number of our local board of directors meetings which typically include 20 plus influential bay area at leaders coming from all over the bay area. the bank also hosts young professional board meetings which bring together professionals that are early on in their philanthropic careers but dedicated to the mission. if the front café were open later we would have the ability to more easily host board meetings as well as parties, networking, and donor recognition events. this would be a significant benefit given the bank's convenient location in downtown san francisco. i urge you to approve this proposal. thank you. >> thank you. next speaker, please. >> good afternoon. my name is mohammed. i am the regional managing

director of first republic in san francisco. i have been with the bank for 16 years and i am a very proud san franciscan. i just want to emphasize the café has a significant cultural component to the company. i actually don't eat at the caée is frequently, but i know that my team members view it as an essential component in a benefit to have an affordable, safe place for them to meet, congregate, discuss client events and be able to discuss things that they wouldn't be able to discuss any public restaurant. i do frequent most of the restaurants that are within the two or three block radius as well as the coffee shops around because i believe it is an essential component that is part of our culture. i would urge you to approve this measure. >> thank you. any other public comment on this item? okay. public comment is closed. commissioner moore?

>> i would like staff to explain how the café in contrast to the cafeteria works. the café being the public component, how does it work, his merchandise brought to the facility, one is it open, how does it advertise itself to the street? i would like to have a short narrative to understand the design. >> sure. included in the application is 610 square feet in the first two bays. >> could you speak into the microphone louder please? >> yes. is that better? they haven't stipulated their hours. we have a condition that is floating around that could stipulate the hours for the public café. i don't know if you can see that , but it is 610 square feet in these two bays here.

so how that would function is open ended. it is meant to be a retail sales and service use and it is described as being a café. that would be a limited restaurant, potentially a coffee shop. they haven't said who the tenant would be or whether it would be first republic. >> perhaps it would be helpful to have the project sponsor speak to those questions. >> commissioner, the café would share the kitchen with the cafeteria. it would serve premade sandwiches and salads that are made in the kitchen and they would also serve the same lunch specials that are available each day to the employees in the cafeteria. and in response to a question that we had heard earlier, we have proposed a condition. i think it got passed up earlier saying that -- basically the

employee café is open for breakfast and lunch now. between 7:00 a.m. and 9:30 a.m. and then 11:30 a.m. to 4:00 p.m. the café would be open substantially the same hours and that was not captured in the original approval motion but this is a proposed condition of approval that we passed up a moment ago that the bank is proposing to be added to the condition. we also proposed another condition to make clear the bank 's commitment to the nonprofit program that you heard some of the nonprofits speak about. >> i will focus might question a little bit more before getting to the other explanations. cafés are basically serving an active population and the public portion of this café i hope

would do the same because i really like the sandwiches that come out of your kitchen. i really like the coffee or your bakeries. i would like to be able to go there other than in a specific hours that you are identifying, which would mean the café, at least during business hours is open for you to sell what seems to be a very well-established menu. my second question is, how do you establish a price point for what you are selling when the material that you are giving to your own employees is basically, as i heard someone say, somewhat subsidized. how do you establish a price for what the rest of us will pay for it? [please stand by]

>> than the rest of the office population than than than than snrchlt! disbl rkts rks whenl had a. >> test the last question is in columns i hope but iteds hot. >> that atm doesn't t

then i wanted to make sure that, in fact, the public café -- that that employee café couldn't operate unless we had the public café. so i don't know whether or not staff has had a chance to review that first condition and would suggest -- is it fine with that, does that accomplish that, or are there any changes. before staff responds, i want to get to, first, they do a fine

job in the community of financing. i think it's wonderful that they want to provide their space on a regular basis to non-profit organizations, but i think that in order to make sure that happens, that should be constructed as a condition of approval as well, if that's part of the basis upon which we're granting this. i don't know whether the language they have approved is language they're happy with or would staff want to see any changes. >> if i could speak to your first question, i'm not sure this first condition captures what you -- that's a distinct difference, that there's a public café that is different from the cafeteria. am i capturing what you said? >> i think it mostly gets there. i just wanted to make sure they didn't say there was a public café and then it goes dark and they don't operate it. >> i do think this makes a distinction between the public and the cafeteria. also, plans are part of a

conditional approval, so those get recorded as well. i do want to clarify that the second condition can't be incorporated as a condition. it can be a finding. we've been advised by our city attorney that that's -- we can make a finding and say -- make a statement to that effect one of the reasons why we are in support of the project is that they intend to do this, but we can't condition it on that. >> ms. stacey, can you please explain. >> president, kate stacey in the city attorney's office. i recommend that the second proposal be a finding that the project sponsor intends to make the employee cafeteria on a regular basis to non-profit organizations for meetings and events. it raises a couple of legal issues as a condition of approval, both as to takings and i'm not really sure what the intent of that condition is, if

it's meant to be free space to non-profit organizations or reduced rent, but there may also be some commercial rent conditions raised. so i think the commission could certainly note it as an important part of the project, that the project sponsor has indicated this intent. but i think for the city to enforce it, we would have to take a pause and make sure we can defend it as a regulatory requirement. >> may i ask a follow-up question, which is, so if they don't rent the space, if we do it as a finding and then they don't allow non-profits to use the space or if successors don't allow non-profits to use the space, is there anything the city can do to enforce that if it's not a condition of approval? >> i think without some conditions and findings, this

cafeteria caused the need for this non-profit space to be available. the city would not be able to enforce that condition. >> so as we're considering whether or not to approve the c.u.p., we shouldn't assume that the non-profit space -- that it will be used as non-profit space. it might be nice and great if they did it as a community gesture, but we shouldn't make our decision on that basis because we have no way of enforcing it? >> that's correct. >> and are you fine with the language in the first condition? >> i think, this is kate spacey, i think staff was going to propose some changes. i think as it reads, it's clear that the public café must operate with the employee café. >> thank you. commissioner moore. >> this is a question to

ms. asgod. doesn't public mean opening hours has to conform to what generally is a public use and opening hours is in that definition? >> so that's something that's up to the business operator. if they want to operate -- so we have the district standards for hours of operation. if an operator wants to operate in all those hours, they're entitled to. if they want to operate in a limited amount of time, they're also entitled to do that. so this is what they've proposed. they've proposed that they want their public café to be open at the same time that they're operating the cafeteria. does that answer the question correctly? >> yes, it does. >> commissioner johnson. >> so i was having coffee the other day right next to this

café. and i turned over and i was remembering the hearing that we had before about the potential of this café and the conversation about detonating this street. right now while you can see into that space, while it's awkward to see the tops of heads and torso torsos in the streetway, and there is this really sweet little plaza where the opening to the building is that could be well served by this café and really kind of completing the streetscape. i really appreciated the adding of the conditions that we can add. it's great that you plan to use it for a non-profit space. i hope that you do continue to do that. i am comfortable -- i appreciate wanting to make sure that it would have been great if a small business could operate it and it were open for more hours.

i think the hours that you stated, working in the financial district, those hours are hours that i would be picking up breakfast. you can go to phil's for coffee between the close and the open and after 4:00 a lot of things actually close in the financial district. so i personally feel comfortable with the hours. so i would move to approve with conditions, including the findings that were specified around making sure that the space is in general conformance and should be open to the public consistent with an employee café. >> commissioner diamond. >> so i would second that, but i want to make clear that the first condition is approved -- that it's subject to the first condition and the language about the non-profits is included. >> very good, then,

commissioners. if there's nothing further, there is a motion that has been seconded to approve this matter with conditions as have been amended, including the first statement in the conditions of approval and the second as a finding that were submitted into the record. on that motion, commissioner diamond. [ roll call ]. >> so moved. that motion passes. that brings us to number 17. 40 12th street - southwest corner of 12th street at stevenson street, lot 004 of assessor's block 3505 (district 6) - request for a conditional use authorization, pursuant to planning code sections 202.2 and 752 for the establishment of a cannabis dispensary on the first floor and mezzanine of an existing two-story building. the proposal will involve interior tenant improvements with no expansion of the building envelope. the project includes a request for authorization of on-site cannabis consumption, including the smoking and vaporizing of cannabis. 2,634 square feet is proposed for

cannabis sales, 1,195 square feet is proposed for consumption, and 1,720 square feet is proposed for accessory office use. the site is located within a nct-3 (moderate scale neighborhood commercial transit district) zoning district, and 85-x height and bulk district. this action constitutes the approval action for the project for the purposes of ceqa, pursuant to san francisco administrative code section 31.04(h). >> this is alex strouder. he's held public sector planning positions for over a decade with experien experience. he has experience in climate resiliency and more. previously he worked for the moren agency development for five years and prior to that for the delta protection commission for seven years. he mastered in landscape planning and architecture from u.c. berkeley. >> thank you for the introduction. alex westoff, department staff. the item before you is a request for conditional use authorization pursuant to planning code sections 202.2, 303, and 754 to establish a cannabis retail use measuring approximately 5,549 square feet

in an scpising two-storey building. this site is located at 4012 street which is within the nct3 moderate scale commercial transit district and an 85x height district. the upper storey is currently occupied by offices, while the lower storey served as retail commercial. the project includes cannabis sales on the lower storey and on-site consumption as well, cannabis sales on the mezzanine, and accessory office use. unpermitted facade alt vasings occurred circa 2011. the project includes interior tenant improvements in addition to facade restoration to more closely match the property's

1938 deco character. upon submission of the application, the subject project was considered a historic resource as part of the historic district. however, only recently was the property reclassified to a c resource upon completion of the hub eir. the work had been completed while it was an a resource, and the facade is still required as the subject property is not an article 10 or 11 landmark property or landmark district, historic preservation review is not required. the applicant is a qualified equity applicant. mr. born and mr. draper have prepared a presentation on the intent of the facility which they will present after my presentation. in terms of sensitive uses, there are no schools or other cannabis or medical cannabis retailers within 600 feet of their parcel.

as such, the project was found to meet the 600-foot rule found in planning code section 202.2. the project also includes a request for on-site consumption and the floor plans include an on-site consumption lounge. we have received no comment from the general public on this matter. as the proposed use activates a store front, supports the city's equity cannabis program, and provides employment and economic opportunity for the district, the department recommends approval of the application. thank you. >> thank you. project sponsor. >> my name is kevin born. thank you for taking the time to review this project located at 4012 street which is in the nct3

district. the project proposes a productive change of use to the ground floor storage to cannabis retail and on-site consumption. the second floor will remain unchanged. the existing envelope will be changed except -- will not be changed except to restore the historic elements. under this zoning these are permitted by conditional use authorization. by restoring the architect, this is in line with the objective 3.2. policy 3.25, preserve landmarks and other buildings of historic value and invaluable neighborhood assets.

we have exceeded our outreach requirements besides our neighborhood mediums, we have reached out to our neighbors at 10 south n.s. and shared our plans with them. we have reached out to their tenant and they're also in support of the project. we have a navigation center next to us, the civic center hotel. we had a meeting with their site manager and a number of tenants with limited mobility who are excited about the prospect. the project proposes a new cannabis retail and on-site consumption on the ground floor. further policy 114 of the market octavia plan which supports a residential population. 1500 mission street with 550 units, 30 otis street with 360 new residential units, these are

being built now with completion scheduled sometime in the next 12 months. that's 172 units come in online. 1699 market has just been completed with 160 units. 2224 franklin street was completed with 35 units. 1 franklin was completed a year ago with 30 units. another 1500 units will be added between 10 south n.s., that's close to 3,000 units within a block of this site. this conforms to the market octavia policy. this project will be eliminating two curb pads. this supports market octavia plan policy 512, restrict curb cuts and eliminate on-street

parking. this will minimize the negative impact of parking. we will be installing bicycle parking. market and venice sits at the crossroads of some of the busiest transit hubs. in addition, part is three blocks away which offers hundreds of thousands of possibilities to access transit throughout the i. city. there are no services of any kind on this side of market. you have to cross market and

access services in hays valley. this has been a dead zone for years, which this hopes to address. along with new planning codes, there is going to be additional retail space. grocery stores, gyms, drycleaners. cannabis retail could be challenging. for their approval, crescent heights on market street has struggled with 8,000 square feet of retail space. i think it just got leased recently. it's been like four and a half years. we believe that activating our space beyond the completion will help drive developers in the air. with hundreds of thousands of san franciscans traversing the intersection per day, it will be better to get off here than to access other retailers.

is that my time? >> that's your time. >> thanks. >> would anyone from the public like to comment on this item? okay. seeing none -- come on up. >> i think it's really exciting. the cannabis industry has been doing a lot for the community of san francisco. it's a great place for people to come together. it's a great, great add to any community. i think it's super brave and i approve it. i don't know. thank you. >> thank you. any more members of the public wish to come in on this item? seeing none, public comment is closed. commissioners. commissioner moore. >> i have a question. on the corner of 12th and otis there is a large site on which a

ballet school is being added. i wonder whether or not that falls under the consideration of school schools. it's under construction. >> i can say this much, that i think based on the current regulations and how we analyze it, we would be looking at a site and the school radius relative to active and open schools. so not knowing what the construction would be or the date of opening for the school, this site isn't currently precluded from the radius, since we have to analyze a proposal based on the activity of the day. >> all i know, it's a generic question, the project is under construction, has been for quite a few months now. i'm not quite sure how you analyze approved projects that will, indeed, have a school on site. >> sorry, commissioner moore,

just as a point of clarification, are you thinking of the ballet school? >> yes. >> so that's a little different in terms of what we define as a school. so a school generally has to be certified by the -- basically by the state. most of the ballet schools are considered a different kind of model in terms of the school. more of a personal service rather than a school. >> that's a good answer. thank you so much. >> i'm supportive of the retail use. i'm not supportive of consumption on site. >> commissioner johnson. >> so in thinking about the consumption on site, i know often we think about the space, the surrounding community,

whether use might spill out onto the space. i actually personally think that the location of the site could support a lounge. just thinking about this area and the businesses there, i think there wouldn't be as much impact as some of the other projects we've seen. so i'd just be curious to hear your opine a little bit more about your thoughts on consumption on site in this site. >> i think it's -- yes, there's obviously historically a general feeling i've had on that basis. you note that there's an architectural office on the second floor next to this building. maybe they act high all the time. but the question is not so much what some people have thought. my rationale is that people will

party there and do those kinds of things. i think the issue is it's very difficult to make any space air-tight. i don't care what the health department says. i know what they go through. i know their standards. they're not all that good about enforcement anyway. so the fact is it's very difficult to make spaces air-tight. if that's the case, at some point, and maybe not to everybody, at some point potentially it could have an impact on somebody else. i'm just trying to avoid that. >> question for the project sponsor. do you guys have a -- like, a proposed set of ground rules or how would you operate if it were granted a consumption lounge. how do those usually operate?

>> well, the consumption lounge is buried at the back corner of the building, unadvisable from the street. i think it mitigates the problem of people buying retail products at that space and going out onto the street. it gives them a place to use it. there is a negative hvac system going through filters. >> are they allowed to stay there all day? can they stay there for eight hours? >> there is no time limit, right. >> i might ask if the applicant could clarify what type of consumption permit are you going to plan on seeking, since d.p.h. has kind of three that they view. >> yeah, i think it's a, b, and c, correct? it's c. >> okay. >> can you explain what c is. >> c would allow for smoking and

vaping. a is the consumption of the cannabis products on site. b is both consumption of the products on site as well as packaging of it. >> i'll go for it. i'm going to make a motion to approve with the consumption lounge. >> second. >> seeing nothing further, commissioners, there is a motion that has been seconded to approve this matter with conditions on that motion. [roll call vote]. >> that motion passes 5-1. that will place us under 18a cases 3847-3849 18th street - between

you will consider the discretionary review. please note that on may 9, 2019, after hearing and closing public comment, you continued this matter to july 18 by a vote of 5-0. commissioner diamond had yet to be seated. on july 18, 2019, you adopted a motion of intent to take d.r. and approve with two flats and a third ground floor unit and continued again by a vote of 5-0. commissioners fung and hillis were absent. on august 29, after hearing and closing public comment, you continued the matter with direction by the commission of a vote of 5-2. on october 24, 2019, you continued the matter to today's

date by a vote of 4-1. commissioner melgar was absent. commissioners johnson, fung, and diamond, in order to participate today, you need to acknowledge you reviewed the previous materials. >> i have. >> i have. >> actually, i think i was at one of the meetings. i was at one of the meetings. >> you were at one of the meetings, but you need to have reviewed all of the previous materials. >> planning department staff presenting the case request for conditional use -- sorry, discretionary review and a variance at 3847 and 3849-18th street. a reminder that i am before you

proposing to legalize work that has already occurred in order to abate an outstanding enforcement case exceeding the scope of work of a series of permits issued on the property, most of which were issued over the counter. as a reminder at the august 29, 2019, hearing the commission continued the item to allow the applicant to simplify the drawings and to have a pre-application review meeting to ensure the feasibility of the proposed plans. the project was continued to october 24, and at that date it was continued without being heard. in response to the commission's requests at the august 29, 2019 hearing, they worked with d.b.i. and other departments to explore adding a third unit to the project. after a pre-application held on

september 24, 2019, it was confirmed that the building classification would need to change from r3 to r2 to accommodate the additional unit, which would in turn require new building system, new fire ratings, elevators, two elevators, dry stand pipes, et cetera, in other words to comply with the standards of an r2 building. i have provided the commission with a copy of the minutes from the pre-application meeting. this includes alterations that are required to bring the structure up to the standards of an r2 building, signed and confirmed by d.b.i. and fire department. it also includes a set of plans that are hand marked to include all the changes that would need to be made as well. there are two sets of full-sized plans in the commission's packets. the one on december 5 is for the existing two-unit structure and

the second set is dated august 29, including three unit proposed buildings. that plan would need to be updated to include all the changes noted for the hand-marked preapplication minutes. this is the staff presentation. i'm available for any questions. >> commission president melgar, this is like the third or fourth hearing. >> i know, but i think i'm going to give them the full presentation time to both the d.r. requester and to the project sponsor. okay. public comment is minimal. >> five in one? >> yeah. >> very good. d.r. requester.

>> who is to be blamed for the predicament of the project sponsor? the financial hardship on the development company, employees, and their family. is it the money lender who initiated for closure, the broken permit system necessitating choke cuts and expediters. the whistle-blowers that filed complaints that went untouched, or planning commissioners and their conflicts of interest. the party sponsor is disingenuous. in their brief they say, please note that none of our scope of

work would have been properly allowed if the proper procedures had been followed. none of these violations would have married had the violations not been caught and proper permits obtained. that argument can be used for any violations forced to get a new permit documenting all corrections to existing violations. should any accommodations be given to project sponsor? project sponsor claims financial and construction challenges to this unit. they also request a variance to the front and rear yards. are there any exceptional circumstances that warrant giving of some accommodation to project sponsor? project sponsor caused his own hardships. no one else is to be blamed. what is to be approved? the proposed plans dated