>> good afternoon and welcome to the san francisco planning commission hearing for thursday, january 20, 2022. thank you for your patience. if not speaking mute your microphone. sfgovtv is broadcasting and streaming this hearing live. we will receive public comment for each item on the agenda. comments or opportunities to speak are available by calling

415-655-0001. enter access code 24879486468. when we reach the item you are interested in speaking to press star 3 to be added the queue. when your line is unmuted that is your indication to speak. each speaker is allowed up to three minutes. when you have 30 second remaining you will hear a chime indicating your time is up. when your time is up i will take the next person to speak. best practices call from quiet location speak clearly and slowly and mute volume on your television or computer. sfgovtv did notify me the live broadcast may be delayed we are streaming live due to rec park commission going a bit long.

roll at this time. koppel. >> here. >> moore. >> here. >> chan. >> here. >> diamond. >> here. >> funk. >> here. >> imperial. >> here. >> tanner. >> here. >> on the agenda is consideration of items proposed for continuance. 2020-007481 c.u.a. 5367 diamond heights boulevard. conditional use authorization proposed to continue to februar. we received request from the sponsor on the regular calendar for item 8. 2021-00881 c.u.a. at 1520 lions street. conditional use authorization. it is requesting continuance for one month to february 24, 2022.

i have no other items to be continued. we should take public comment. members of the public this is your opportunity to address the commission on either of the two items proposed to be continued. you need to press star 3 when your line is unmuted to begin speaking. you each have two minutes. >> this is sue hester. i am requesting item 4 continued. election of officers. we are in lockdown. we haven't had live meetings for a couple years. the vice president her term is up at the end of june. would it be appropriate to keep in place the current officers and then have the election of officers in july. thank you very much.

>> good afternoon. i agree. i think item 4 election of officers should be continued. at the very least do it when you are back together and last week secretary said you might be back in room 400 in march. maybe so, maybe not. in any event july wouldn't be terrible. they have been on the officers for at least during the whole pandemic. vice president moore and president koppel. i don't see why it would be wrong that they continue in the current positions. i hope you will do that. it would be good for the public to be in the room when you vote on the officers. thank you very much. >> thank you. i will remind members of the public item 4 election of officers is not proposed to be continued. it is not the subject of this

comment period. please limit comments to the two items that have been proposed to be continued. >> this is bruce bowen. i request item 4 continued for the reasons in my letter. thank you. >> this is esther marks. your by-laws provide the option of election of officers anytime after the 15th of january. the commission hearings will remain remote in the near future. i urge you to continue the election of officers. thank you. >> last call for the two items to be continued. seeing no additional requests to speak, public comment on the continuance calendar is closed. it is now before you,

commissioners. >> commissioner diamond. >> why is item 11 continued. -- item 1 is continued. this is outside the purview of the commission. why is this continued and we are not hearing it at this point? >> i have been told from staff this is the last request for continuance. it will be heard february 3 is the new date. that is my understanding, commissioners. the sponsor is trying to workout something that is amenable to the neighbors so that when it does come before you that there is a project approvable without significant opposition. >> is this at request of the

project sponsor? >> it is. >> i would like to have a short explanation why 1520 lions street is continued. we seem to a last commenter request. would you explain to us why? >> this request came from the project sponsor. my understanding they are trying to reach out to the community and the neighbors there so that when it comes before you they are not faced with significant opposition. >> thank you.

>> i move to continue as proposed. >> thank you, commissioners on the motion to continue as proposed. commissioner tanner. >> aye. >> commissioner tan. >> aye. >> commissioner diamond. >> aye. >> commissioner. >> psy. >> that passes unanimously 7-0. it will place us on commission matters. item 2 consideration of adoption draft minutes january 6, 2022. members of the public this is your opportunity to address the commission on the minutes by pressing star 3. no requests from members of the public, public comment on the minutes is closed. they are now before you. >> commissioner moore.

>> move to approve. >> second. >> thank you, commissioners on the motion to adopt. commissioner tanner. >> aye. >> chan. >> aye. >> diamond. >> aye. >> funk. >> aye. >> imperial. >> aye. >> commissioner moore. >> aye. >> commissioner president koppel. >> aye. >> that passes unanimously 7-0. placing us on item 3 commission comments and questions. >> i wanted to recognize this past monday was in honor of martin luther king, junior. i had events that became virtual due to the surge. i hope folks had a chance to reflect on his legacy and the department looking towards equity. even it was many decades agona o

that he was assassinated. we can learn so much. i hope you had a chance to do that and were able to stay safe while doing it. thank you. >> thank you. no additional comments from members of the commission. item 4. election of officers. in accordance with the rules and regulations of this commission the president and vice president shall be elected at the first regular meeting held on or after the 15th day of january, januar. you may move the date and push it further out. if you choose not to, your rules provide for the presiding president to open nominations or accept nominations.

nominations do knot require a second. we will vote on each of the nominations in the order received. i will now open nominations and call on commissioner fung. >> i would nominate commissioner tanner for the role as president of this coming year. >> i will also call on commissioner imperial. >> i would like to nominate vice president commissioner moore as a continued vice president. >> okay. seeing no other requests to speak from members of the commission, and having two nominations we should take public comment on this matter. members of the public who wish to address the commission on the election of officers, you need to press star 3 to be added the

queue. you have two minutes. >> good afternoon, commissioners. land use coalition. i urge you to postpone nominations and election of officers to the planning commission. the reason. four of the current commissioners are up for reappointment. it doesn't make sense at this time to elect officers when four, the majority of the commission is up for reappointment. also i understand that some of the commissioners up for reappointment may not seek reappointment. that is another reason for postponing this because if those commissioners that would not seek reappointment, if they are appointed as president or vice president, then it is basically

a moot point. why don't we wait until june when these four commissioners are going to be up for reappointment and we will find out what the final makeup of the planning commission is before you vote for who shall be the president and the vice president. currently president koppel and vice president moore i don't see why we cannot continue with this may beingup until the time makeup of the commission and who is going to be sitting in those chairs to be decided in june. i appreciate it if you would push this matter to june, july when the final makeup of the planning commission is solidified. thank you.

>> it is georgia. i wouldn't have called in at the beginning. i do think as people have said this item should be continued. the election should be continued. she made good points and everyone else. i wrote a letter and a stand by the letter. these are remote hearings. i will add not everyone knows how to stream. i don't. i am looking at rec and park on hold on my computer. the problem is a lot of people look at the computer or tv for the phone number and access code. if they don't have it downloaded or made a copy of agenda they can't weigh in on this issue. maybe it is a couple people but maybe it isn't. that is a problem and another reason why you should continue the election of the officers because people may not be able to figure out how to talk to you

remotely and again remote hearings. this is something that should happen in the room so please put this off when you are back together in the room 400 and the public can be there safely or in the summertime. thank you. >> last call for public comment on the election of officers. seeing no additional requests to speak from members of the public public comment is closed. i will state yes there are a number of you that have terms that expire on june 30th. if one of the officers is not reappointed then you simply hold an election to fill that vacancy.

even though your terms expire on june 30th, if the mayor or board president doesn't make an appointment immediately you are allowed by the charter to sit in your seat for 60 days after your term expires. there is the possibility if you do continue these elections to wait for the final commission for the rest of the year you may not hold an election until september. seeing no requests to speak from members of the -- i take that back. commissioner tanner. >> thank you. it is truly that we have to be flexible. we don't somewhat is going to happen in the future.

i am up for reappointment. i hope i will be reappointed. no guarantee. we can cross that bridge when we get there and have new officers if that is needed. we have been conducting business two years remotely. no reason certain elements of the planning commission business can't be conducted in remote environment. they have these challenges in any hearings and that is something we want to keep addressing. second, i want to thank commissioner fung for his nomination for me as president. i hope other commissioners will support that. it would be my honor to serve in that role. thank you, president koppel for showing what a great presidency lookis like. i will bring my experience from the board of appels and would happy to serve with vice

president moore. i know any and all of us would be great in these roles and keep the tradition of rotating so each person can run their service and expertise. >> okay. seeing no additional requests to speak from members of the commission. we have two nominations. one for commissioner tanner to be president. on that nomination, commissioner tankner. >> aye. >> chan. >> aye. >> diamond. >> aye. >> fung. >> aye. >> imperial. >> aye. >> moore. >> aye. >> commissioner koppel. >> aye. >> so moved. that passes unanimously 7-0. congratulations commission president tanner. on nomination of commissioner moore to occupy seat of vice president. commissioner tanner.

>> aye. >> chan. >> aye. >> diamond. >> aye. >> fung. >> aye. >> commissioner imperial. >> aye. >> commissioner moore. >> aye. >> commissioner koppel. >> aye. >> so moved, commissioners. that passes unanimously 7-0. congratulations, commission vice president moore. >> thank you for that, commissioners. we will move to department matters. item 5 director's announcements. >> i think commissioner moore wanted to add something. >> sorry. >> congratulations to president tanner. looking forward to serving together. ir believe continuity and using this fragile time for institutional knowledge and continuity is extremely

important. i look forward to both of us to serve. thank you. >> commissioners, we can move to department matters. item 5. director's announcements. >> no announcements today. congratulations president and vice president. i look forward to continuing with us and thank you, commissioner koppel for your leadership over the last two years and before that. this has been an a typical couple of years with unique challenges re-opening the department and how to keep the commission meetings going and giving the public a voice. it is invaluable during that time. thank you very much for your

service. >> i would echo that. it is a pleasure working with you, commissioner koppel. >> president tanner. thank you director. thank you to director koppel. i apologize for not catching that. commissioner koppel if you are there thank you. it is great serving with you. >> i would add my voice to that. >> any other questions for directors? >> we will move on. item 6. review of past events.

at the historic preservation commission. i don't have a report from the board of supervisors or board of appels. if anyone has a report from the board of appels, feel free. if not, then i will report that the historic preservation did meet yesterday. they had their election of officers where they elected commissioners matsuda and nag sworn for a second term. the only other item of interest to the commissioners they adopted air recommendation for land mark designation of the clay theatre on fillmore street. there are no comments or questions related to board reports. we can move on to gyp rallying

public comment. at this time members of the public may address the commission to items except agenda items. your opportunity to address the commission will be afforded when the item is reached. each member may address for three minutes. when it exceeds 15 minutes it may be moved to the end of the agenda. you have two minutes. >> good afternoon. georgia. congratulations to the officers, past, present and future. i sent an e-mail. i asked if a picture could be on the screen. can i ask you before i start. >> it is there. >> you see it. one picture was subject of my e-mail. i sent two e-mails. what am i trying to say? look at that and see what you think and look at the other

pictures and forecast and the project across the street. it goes back. there were three sets of demos for the past six years. one noey valley project. i am not saying this is wrong. it is 3 point $2 million teardown. when i start talking about this the pretend alterations were under $1 million. then over a million dollars. this is $3.2 million. look at the plans. it is very interesting. not family friendly, but that is the person's choice. this is america people can do what they want with their property except when they don't follow the rules. the question is are the democrats strong enough for the

rules and intention of 317 to work? i don't think this property as well as the other 40 i talked about works. maybe this isn't a spec project. please look at the e-mails and make a judgment. to have three demos one to collect enforcement is strange. i will leave it at that. take camp. good-bye. >> last call for general public comment. press star 3. no additional requests to speak. general public comment is closed. regular calendar. item 7. 2021-005183 c.u.a. 2040 chess nut street. conditional use authorization. are you prepared to make your

presentation? >> thank you. good afternoon, commissioners, department staff. the item before you is conditional use authorization request. from commercial use to formula restaurant used being business at 2040 chestnut in the small scale dining district. since departure the subject property has remained vacant. this restaurant will occupy 34885 square feet of the ground floor. southwest corner of chestnut street and make use of existing street take saw for an outdoor seating area. aside from the signage no expansion of the -- it requires

conditional use to establish retail use. it would increase concentration of retail use within the haven't from 17 to 20% as measured by the total fronttage. there are currently 21 restaurant uses, two formula and three greenwood increases to three. november 4, 2021 this commission conducted a duly noticed public hearing on the conditional use authorization before you today. continued to today's hearing at the request of the sponsor for additional public outreach. to date we have received 51 letters in oppossess and 60 letters in support. we recommend approving the project will film a vacant structure and enhance the

economic viwilt of the neighborhood district. the project adheres to the general plan is compliance with all applicable requirements of the planning code. i am available for further questions. the sponsor is here today and has prepared a presentation which i can now share. >> thank you, sylvia. that concludes staff presentation. sponsor are you here with us? >> we are here. >> your presentation slides are up and you have five minutes. >> good afternoon, commissioners. on behalf of sweet green to have occupy the gap store vacant for over a year. approval will alloy sweet green

to refurbish the historic run reactivating the corner and adding family friendly to to neighborhood. they provide 50. jobs with real opportunities for advancement. formula retail project proposing restaurant use with substantial neighborhood and merchant support. many letters didn't have addresses. i am going to pass it off to eric. he will walk you through the details. >> good afternoon. we intend to achieve this by

building a new restaurant from this beautiful art deco building on chestnut. we are adding our signage to make sure the building is ada accessible. sweet green is a restaurant followed. [indiscernable] it is transparency. they are highlighted by open kitchen that allows them to dine in the restaurant. food made from scratch every day. sourdough bread is from berkeley. we are passionate about sustainability and carbon neutral by 2027. each partners has a local nonprofit to give back to the

community. in san francisco we give together ourself and employees and pack dates to volunteer. during the time of covid we were in the hospital with 8,000 from the workers in san francisco alone. we don't have a prototype. we spent 10 years looking for the right location on chestnut street. we needed a larger dining room and local art and a kitchen so they can see how we make it. we will be spending $2 million for the restaurant. this location is to be a community gathering restaurant.

focus on in store dining. we have a shared community table to give folks the opportunity to work, hang out, have lunch with a friend. we have large group dining and the windows near chestnut street and tables to activate this corner. it is an inviting environment for our guests. it allows customers to walk into the restaurant and receive service from employees, walk down the line with employees pointing to the ingredients they want in the bowl. we have 36 on the inside and the sidewalk. personal note this is near and dear to my heart. i went to school at berkeley and moved to san francisco after college. lived on chestnut street for five years.

i would have loved to share a meal with friends. i am humbled to ask for your approval today. >> good afternoon, commissioners. public affairs on behalf of street green. pleased to recap the significance of the project. first thank you to the residents and community organizations that worked with our team. they conversations 60 letters of support. petition from 17 businesses on chestnut street and the building association that represents over 200 residents. we are available to answer your questions. thank you. >> thank you. that concludes the sponsor presentation we will take public

comment. this is your opportunity to address the commission by pressing star 3. you each have two minutes. when your line is unmuted begin speaking. >> hello, commissioners. i am leslie silver glide. owner of next green. we are a local restaurant group with a restaurant two blocks away and i live in this area. it is very disingenuous that we are bringing something new and different to the neighborhood. this could not be further from the truth. sweet greens is a direct knock off of mixed greens founded in 2005. i run this today. to say they are unique on their focus is false. compare our menu or the asian

box. they are offering food widely available in the neighborhood. multiple restaurants thrive in our wonderful city. this needs to be done on equal playing field. sweet green is in a different league of restaurant companies. it is public restaurant companies like mcdonalds and dominoes with billons of dollars to put smaller restaurants out of business. they have raised over $1 billion to open 150 restaurants. if you letted that sing in they have $7 million for each restaurant they open. they will send $2 million to build this restaurant. $5 million for them toio use in acquiring customers who are delivery customers that don't live in the neighborhood.

in the past two years we each have photo keep restaurants open and support the community and keep customers happy this is unnecessary as there are already many of us local restaurant in the marina. we don't have any chains on chestnut. two that were mentioned were coffee shops. if you allow sweet greens what stops jack in the box and wendy's. don't allow a national chain to come ruin the local food culture. thank you very much. >> your time is up.

>> this is david. i am a resident in the neighborhood. thank you for your time today. this would be like letting amazon distribution open in the marina. 75% of the sales through digital channels resulting in delivery and pick up orders. 600 to 800 extra vehicles on chestnut every day. double parking is so bad at second street location the city has to pay for traffic enforcement to keep vehicles moving. sweet green has said this is a flagship restaurant and we expect limited delivery orders. contradict everything in the s-1 filing. i will recite exact language planning for future growth we

built capacity for more digital revenue. all but one location has been built with secondary lines to order more volume without adding more square footage to take advantage of the ehappened for off premises dining. it is double the square footage of the line used to serve customers. under 36 feet yet 100 feet for delivery. the convenience of the approach results in 75% of the revenue off premises. 75% of customers will never step foot in the center and zero benefit to the neighborhood with all the negative baggage, noise, congestion and baggage. someone is not getting the story, the residents in the marina. i strongly remember you to

reject. let them open a restaurant not distribution order, no additional ordering. thank you for your time. >> i am indicate. 375 clay street. i support this store. i love the building as is and there be room for outdoor seating. this store will be more convenient to my home. we do have this as part of our daily routine. i feel that this would benefit us to have this on the street. i support this project. >> good afternoon. i am ashley mckaffree. i work at the restaurant on

restaurant street. i would like to strongly oppose sweet greens to chestnut street. main reason on going issues in street parks, trafficking congestion, public safety issues. marina is saturated with similar dining options in fixed salads in bowls. the list goes on. we serve the marina with existing out post. 2453 filmore. half a mile away. robust city-wide delivery service. this neighborhood is completely adequately serviced by sweet greens and unnecessary. thank you for your time. >> this is jason.

what i am struggling with here sweet green is deceptive or evasive to the public and commission in the application and signed affidavit. in at least four ways, lied about the units in san francisco, lied about if unit count and formula and lied about men on you focus and lack of similar uses in the neighborhood. this is an attempt to defeat the public to seem smaller rather than a public traded company to stomp outcome petition. they said one in san francisco. they have one on fulton and second street. they have hundreds through out san francisco including filmore operating illegally. 2.

application states 125 restaurants nationwide. at the times of applications they are 140 restaurants, 13% under statement. there must be dozens more. they operate over 1,000 out post locations. these are locations with the same menu and signs total unit to 1200. the number of locations they said they operate. three. they do not have standard uniform apparel. all employees wear the same branded t-shirts. 4. they said although there are a number of small similar retail uses in the district. this is unique in the focus in grain bowls and salads and locally sourced dishes. that is false. according to their filing they may being up the majority of

sales. similar retail uses blue barn and mix two blocks away have nearly identical menus. i feel they did not make honest mistakes on the application but attempting to enter the community in bad faith. >> i have lived here for three years now. 100 feet away from this proposed location. i urge you to reject this. we have restaurants and for that. [indiscernable] the parking and the trash. thank you.

>> i am david upton. i first started working in the marina in 2014. there are many others on this line that have done extensive homework from the years that they are speaking of. i will keep it short and sweet without digging into that. from my knowledge, there are no restaurants, public restaurants on chestnut street. inviting sweet green in would contradict the nature and culture of the street. i also have concerns of parking, traffic congestion leading to

public safety issues. again, my main concern is that sweet green has been publicly traded company. deceptive in aspects of filing here and inviting to operate on chestnut street would be contradictory to the culture that has been established by the restaurants that already exist. thank you. >> hello. i am julio. san francisco residents over 15 years and licensed architect. coming to the marina neighborhood regularly. one of the beautiful aspects is every neighborhood has a different feel. the retail process has created this unique opportunity for neighborhoods to develop and specifically related to

restaurants and food service locations. the study and plans provided 33485 square feet location, it appears set up for pickup and delivery and not community meeting like the remaining restaurants. with the congestion with the addition of the park along chestnut. allowing the kitchen would create congestion and traffic noise there. are plenty of other locations in san francisco for this use instead of causing a nuisance to the neighborhood. the formula retail is to permit cookie cutter versions. we urge you to reject this proposal. thank you. >> good afternoon. i am shawn scales. i live in the neighborhood.

i live one block away from shake shack on filmore and filbert. double parking and the trash created by this chain restaurant would make people in the neighborhood more vocal trying to come home. when i heard about sweet green and did investigation. i found out it was a company with deep pockets. they delivery focused business. this is terrible. there is going to be a lot of traffic on chestnut street now. you have a middle school one block away, a lot of elder he people and people with strollers walking around chestnut street. i walk five times a week.

i think it is a bad idea. i feel badly for the building owner. he wants to collect represent for his property or her property. that has to take a back seat to the well-being of the neighborhood. us neighbors that live in the neighborhood. like the last caller said there are plenty of other place this n francisco to accommodate this type of business. i have sept many e-mails. please look at my e-mails. thank you for your time. >> i am a 30 year resident of the marina. i go to many of the competing restaurants. i think this is a nice addition

to the neighborhood. they are keeping integrity of the building, adding to the integrity of the street by adding in the high end casual restaurant. there are tons of traffic on chestnut and another restaurant. they have stated their intention is to create a community restaurant. plans clearly show that with the inviting tables inside and out. the street can handle multiple similar restaurants. it already does. there are three wine bars, three coffee shops, three healthy salad places. three mexican and three italian restaurants, three grocery stores. community needs more investment on the street to fill the vacant rental properties. it is a good healthy restaurant. if they do have deep pockets, good for them. they can pay employees good

benefits. our community needs that. thank you very much. >> i am courtroomia. i live down the street on chest -- julia. i personal love this store. they are keeping the building as is as it has been vacant so long. i am a huge supporter of the project. i really enjoy sweet green. it would save money in delivery cost for myself and others. there are similar vendors in the area it would be great to have one more. you can never have enough real healthy food. i support this. i hope to encourage you to approve this project.

>> i am frank. i songly oppose sweet green on chestnut street. i own and operate three restaurants on chestnut streets. we do not need another concept with deliveries, more traffic, less parking. we do not need more delivery drivers. we do not need to drive up over saturations of similar restaurants. let the locals keep the neighborhood local. thank you very much. >> last call for public comment on this item. press star 3. to be recognized. you have two minutes.

>> i am a long-time resident. the addition of sweet greens l have a negative impact in a couple ways. no question it is a heavy focus on delivery and increased couriers. the street is saturated with traffic and lack of parking. it will be a complete nightmare to find parking and dodge couriers. this is not only frustrating to the community but dangerous with drivers trying to maneuver around the couriers. pedestrians will be impacted to cross the streets or enjoy a meal or drink. what i am more passionate about is the fact it is a massive company with 120 locations to

disrupt local businesses that worked so hard to establish themselves through the community and stay open throughout an incredibly challenging pandemic. if we would like to maintain the character and charm of chestnut street we must keep large corporations like street greens out of the neighborhood. please keep sweet greens out of the marina. thank you. >> that concludes public comment. public comment is closed. this matter is now before you. >> vice president moore. >> i have a quick question for staff for baseline understanding. my understanding is that the gap is a formula retail. why does this have to go through

formula approval if it is a formula retail? >> good question. gap does qualify as formula retail. we were unable to find evidence that the gap was ever established as formula retail. it doesn't seem that they obtained the proper permits, entitlements to operate such as formula retail. that is why this business coming in would be the opportunity to do that. >> thank you for explaining that. i will let the other commissioners weigh in. thank you for explaining. >> could sweet greens respond be

to concerns raised about the focus of this business being delivery and the number of drivers and runners swamping the neighborhood? >> applicant. >> question, this is eric. like i stated in my presentation. we spent 10 years looking for a location to build a restaurant. that is why we chose this location. we looked at data to see where we have customers. there is a demand in this area. we plan to build this to get closer to customers for sustainability. this is not an attempt to get close to customers and build a delivery kitchen. i have been trying to reiterate we are getting closer to

customers to come in and order at our restaurant. >> did i understand that you have built a facility that is aimed specifically at dellivery elsewhere in the city? >> we have two other locations in san francisco wounsecond street. they serve different purposes. they are much larger. much bigger kitchens that serve an office population. they are able to handle the delivery demand. if there is delivery demand in this store it is focused on the neighborhood. i want to clarify digital and delivery. we give customers the opportunity to order in advance and pick up at the store. if someone is taking the book

home and knows when they get off at chestnut and filmore and wants torrider in advance they can pick up the food and go back to their house. there is a very, very big difference between digital and delivery. people will order in advance and pick up food. folks are time constrained today. >> i think that is very important. do you have a sense -- how do your calls get routed. if somebody orders online, how do you know which store? how do you decide which store is filling it if it is for delivery service as opposed to pick up service? >> if someone wants to order at chestnut street store they will choose this location.

>> that would allow for pick up. if it is delivery that somebody selects, which store does that order get filled at? >> repeat the question. >> if somebody orders online for a delivery service to bring food to their house. which locations does that order filled at? >> the delivery one. [indiscernable] >> i am not understanding. where do they go? how do they decide where to pick it up? i am trying to respond the concerns raised by the neighborhood this will be the location where delivery companies come to pick up the food, put in vans and drive it elsewhere in the city.

>> again, this store is not delivery kitchen. we have sore stores with a radius to cover the entire city of san francisco. if there are delivery orders we have other stores to handle it. we do not choose where the delivery orders go. >> i am generally in support of this. i believe we have the formula retail a concern. chestnuts street at this point in the pandemic i am more concerned about retail vacancies. i am inclined to go with staff's recommendation. i would like to hear what the other commissioners have to say. >> before i call on commissioner koppel i want to clarify the response. if the order for delivery goes

to sweet greens you can route to your delivery-based location. if it comes through third-party platform you are not able to control what restaurant the use earn chooses to get food delivered from. is that correct? >> delivery runs their own business, correct. >> you don't have cromover grubb hub and their choices. commissioner koppel. >> someone who made a living delivering pizzas. i am not seeing anything to make me disapprove. i make a motion to approve. >> second. >> i will call on commissioner chan. >> i did have a question for the

project sponsor. [indiscernable] the proposed site plan for the area designated for pick up. designated as such. could i confirm this is the intended zone for pick up? >> can you repeat the question? >> in the staff packet the site plan indicates there is an area designated for pick up. it looks like in the slide presentation on slide 7. the title says for pick up. i am trying to understand the discrepancy is that area

designated for pick up the window where people will go to pick up their order? >> there is parking spaces. that is not a pickup area. san francisco does not have a pick up window. no availability to get your food from the outsider unless you go inside the restaurant. >> just to clarify. there have been early discussion of pick up window. making the decision to maintain the beautiful façade that is there and that aspect so there is no additional pick up window existing in the commercial loading zone on chestnut. no separate zone. >> thank you for clarifying.

>> the customers to pick up. [indiscernable] >> to pick up. [indiscernable] >> do you have a sense where the customers might be coming. a neighborhood based location. coming on foot, bicycle, transit, vehicles? >> we expect them to show up on foot. pedestrian-focused area.

is there a way to see how the traffic conditions are going a need for a temporary loading zone or 15 minutes green stone for customers. i don't know if there is a way to have that in the conditions to have the information so you can always have awareness of the traffic situation when the restaurant is in operation. >> that is interesting. i wonder if staff would respond. such loading zone is the purview of the mta and that would be a application the sponsor would need to put forward.

could you elaborate on what that might look like? >> there is a yellow loading zone on the chestnut street side. i think it is helpful in terms of delivery. any enforcement of that would fall under the purview of m.t.a. anything in addition to that that may be proposed by the sponsor would be enforced by that. >> i don't know if that answers your question. there is one loading zone there. maybe loading and unloading at the curb is what it states.

>> i would be interested to make sure we are not creating unfair advantage for this restaurant. having location with nearby loading zone is very advantageous for anybody in the restaurant business and should have equal access. monitor the third-party delivery needs unfortunately. [ inaudible ] chestnut is a neighborhood. i would prefer to see that third-party pick up in a certain way that onlitic zip codes or near this location would be allowed to do pick up for other

types of ordering. i know that is hard to implement. that would be the kind that i would like to see this does not come more delivery focused business than what other people observed. they are being told the kitchen isn't large enough. ultimately the third-party deliveries if you grab the business you can. i think in the effort of creating sustainable businesses i would like to see the radius for delivery in a reasonable proximity to the food. >> thank you. any other commissioners who want to add their voice?

>> i certainly understand the challenges facing our retailers. in addition to the comments that the staff report noted 11 and 18 we have received an enormous amount of correspondence on sweet greens supporting the location and opposing the location. i think what is still concerning me is the vacancy rate overall in the visit. this would bring it down to 13%. anything at or near 10 is poor. i am concerned about getting rid of vacancies with a business that has some good eight shows in terms of sourcing. i hope it will compliment and not out compete with the local businesses here andrew more people here. i share the idea about the

radius limit. this would be something beyond the boundaries of this commission or topic. i don't think it is a bad idea. many neighbors would welcome not having double parking when they are picking up food and dropping it off. we are ready for calling the roll. >> motion seconded to approve conditions. on that motion commissioner chan. >> eye. >> diamond. >> aye. >> funk. >> aye. >> imperial. >> aye. >> koppel. >> aye. >> moore. >> no. >> commission president tanner. >> aye. >> so moved. that passes 6-1 with commissioner moore voting against. item 8 is continued to february 24. placing us on item 9.

2017-00794 c.u.a. 46-66 deming street. conditional use authorization. katie are you preparerd for the presentation? >> yes, i am. >> good afternoon, commissioners. planning department staff. before you 64-66 deming street seeks to remove an existing three story garage dwelling unit within the rh-2 district. special use district and ho-x height and bulk district. the request removal of 468 square foot unauthorized dwelling unit from the second floor above the garage so the floor to ceiling height 6-foot two inches. it is proposed to convert back to tenant storage be. the building retains the

existing dwelling units on the second and third floor. two windows inside. the project requires response to planning enforcement case. no known evidence of evictions or buyouts on the properties from records from the rent board. it has come to my attention there is a typographical error in the draft motion provided to you. i ask it to be corrected to authorized unit proposed is subject to the rent stabilization and arbitration. the packet is incorrect. correct date of vacancy is apri. department has not received any public comment. department finds the project

unbalanced. with the residents. the general plan. it results in removal unauthorized zone unit. the property in compliance with the building code and maintains the two existing legal units. which is the goal of the city. the department finds projectness for the neighborhood and the ad adjacent properties in the vicinity. this concludes my presentation. i am available for questions. thank you. >> project sponsor.

>> thank you. commissioners i am with the architects. we prepared plans for removal of the unit. we have with us on another phone the niece of the owner of the property. brandy and we are both to answer questions you might have. we are just looking to remove the unit and get things back to saturdayisfacton. we are remaining the two units remain parking units. no further changes there. if you have any questions. we are here to help. >> that concludes the presentation. we should take public comment. members of the public your

opportunity to address the commission. press star 3. no request to speak from members of the public. public comment is closed. this is before you, commissioners. >> i had a quick question for staff. the definition of full bath is somewhat confusing to me because what is proposed is toilet and sink. full bath means shower or bathtub to me. could you clarify that for me. >> i don't have the plans. >> i don't see a shower in the proposed. >> there is proposed a full bath. i apologize for not including the definition of the full bath

within the commission packet. >> could you project that plan so we all know what you mean. what i thought is proposed was only a sink and toilet. >> can you see the plans? >> yes, we can see that. >> great. here are the three plans showing existing space. as of now there is a sink, toilet and shower. the existing storage is what was previously approved which does not include the full bath. this is what is proposed. it includes the shower, sink and toilet. >> then i would like to ask the project sponsor i understand the

issue of ceiling light and workshop would be fine. why would a shower be necessary? >> commissioner, moore. the minimum height for bathroom is 7-foot. the space has a 7-foot 2-inch height. our intention was not so much for use of the how were. it was the added cost to remove it. that was our main concern. >> thank you for explaining that. i hear you. thank you so much for explaining that. i am comfortable with that explanation and support the project as it is. thank you. >> commissioner diamond. >> i, too, had a question about

the bathroom. the minimum floor to ceiling height for living space is how many feet? >> the minimum ceiling light is 7-foot 6-inch. the bat room is allowed 7-foot. the bathroom would be allowed permitted with the 7-foot head height. >> you haven't independently tracked that with the building department, is that correct? >> unfortunately i do not have that knowledge under be the code. >> if we approve it but it turns out the building department says it is not seven feet it is

higher than that for which there is not room, what happens to the bathroom? >> they would need -- it would need removed. >> there is pay mechanism for independent verification from the building department bathroom? >> for the complete removal of unauthorized dwelling unit. it if they are not able to approve the plans. [indiscernable] >> i am supportive of the staff recommendation. >> is that a motion? >> yes. it is a motion. >> yes. >> second. >> commissioner koppel.

>> second. did you want to say anything else? >> great. no further deliberation. motion to approve with conditions. on that motion commissioner chan. >> aye. >> diamond. >> aye. >> fung. >> aye. >> imperial. >> aye. >> koppel. >> aye. >> moore. >> aye. >> commission president tanner. >> aye. >> so moved. that passes unanimously 7-10. we are under the discretionary review calendar item 10. 1019-022419drp. 312 utah street. mr. winslow. >> congratulations, president tanner and vice president moore. staff architect. before you is a publish initiated request for

discretionary review of permit am application 2019-022419drp for a vacant 23-foot wide by 11-foot deep sloping slot. there was an existing two story single family home built in 1900 demolished by the department of building inspection in 2018. the d.r. requester of 2007 16th street owner of the entertainment establishment north of the project is concerned it will impact privacy of patrons from 2 and 4 floor decks over the patio. the separation between new and existing buildings is not enough

to mitigate noise transmission to the new building residents. d.r. requester claims excavation and shoring and waterproofs has not been sufficient. the department has received no letters in support and no letters in opposition of the project. planning department review deemed measures are necessary to ensure mutual privacy to the pairtrons and future residents of the subject building. abatement of the noise from the cr requester is not within the planning department to regulate, monitor or even force. nor within the purview to review regulate and approve the design or means and methods of construction of the foundation and waterproofing system. department of inspection review plans were submitted after

planning. the project sponsor modified the deck. the privacy issues. staff recommends taking discretion snare rereview with a privacy screen and both decks on the north as well as depicted in the revised plans. this concludes my presentation. i am happy to answer any questions. thank you. >> thank you. d.r. requester are you with us? >> yes, i am. >> you have three minutes. >> thank you for your time, commissioners. i am representing my family who own the bar and restaurant at 2007 16th street. a place of entertainment and

license. we have been in business 28 years. in a couple months receiving the san francisco legacy status. building 113 years old. we are adjacent to the project site. there are several concerns that we have about the proposed project over the potential of noise and privacy complaints from residents as well as structural impacts to the building. during the covid-19 pandemic we have worked very hard to survive in these times. it has added new challenges of a good time. we look forward to continuing to serve our neighborhood as one of the very last family owned businesses in lower potrero hill. the project sponsor is proposing a space of 1.5 inches.

we are asking for 9 inches of space to prevent noise issues and complaints. 1.5 inches will cause noise conflicts, impose serious threat to our business in the future. unfortunately small businesses with live entertainment in san francisco become more endangered every day. the preexistingen betertainment license is provided missouri sound related complaints and compatibility issues from new development as declared from san francisco administrative code chapter 116. >> does that conclude your presentation? >> not at all. the decks we covered and that was cleared up by david. i did have further concerns.

we built a story poll which is helpful. it came to some new things came to light. the front of the railing we may need to address apcreate privacy. that will be directly down as well. we have the space and obviously the structural excavation is a major concern. potential for damage to the foundation or property due to the building process is very concerning. as of today the foundation is not fully evaluated. in the technical investigation may 2019. it states beneficial to understand the types and depths of the ad jays senting foundations prior to design of support system. we had damage from the dig and

so far. it is something of great concern that is already created damage. it is very serious. >> thank you, sir. that is your time. you will have a one minute rebuttal. we should allow the project sponsor three minutes. mr. patterson. are you with us? >> i am. thank you. >> you have three minutes. >> thank you very much. good afternoon.

>> i will restart here. good afternoon, commissioners. this is ryan patterson, attorney for the project sponsor. the proposed project is 100% code compliant. bringing housing with a mix of one, two, three bedroom units. the d.r. requester owns add adjacent nightclub which operates on the residential block. the requester sold the project site to the sponsor. they could have required concessions answer as condition of sale. they chose not to. we tried very hard to work with them to make concessions anyway.

unfortunately d.r. requestery fused to negotiate unless the project sponsor performed construction work onnary property for free -- on their property for free. they claimed earlier demolition work caused damage. it was clearly dry rot caused by failure to maintain property. the project sponsor did work to try to move this process forward. now the d.r. request erases three concerns. first is noise. concern about the noise from the d.r. requester's own nightclub. project sponsor has retained the city's leading engineer charles salter to ensure proper sound insulation. the 9-inch gap between the buildings is neither needed nor recommended. second. concern about excavation on the

property line. this is not a planning code issue. sponsor has given assurances excavation will be done properly in accord dance with building code. lastly they are concerned the project's rear decks will intrude on business and property. they are not licensed for outdoor entertainment. it is absurd. we are willing to compromise anyway. we will agree to pull the decks bath five feet south, add five feet tall privacy screens. this is the department staff's recommendation. it should resolve the concerns. you can see in the rendering the decks being pulled back and privacy screens. we will use roofing in those

deck areas. happy to answer any questions or concerns. appreciate your time. >> that concludes the presentation. public comment. members of the public this is your opportunity to address the commission by pressing star 3. when your line is unmuted begin speaking. you will each have one minute. >> hello. i am judy west. i own and live property in the back opposite the address is on potrero. we touch this property a little bit. i have a couple concerns. visually i am concerned about the penthouses that create a

totally 50-foot high building instead of 40-foot high building. i don't believe both of these penthouses need to be covered. my request is the one in the rear be reduced so that it doesn't stick up way over the roofline. my real concern. that is a big concern. the o thing that is serious is that this five-story building is described as three units. yet the third and fourth floor are to be unit three there is no access from one floor to the other. this is five independent units marketed as three. the third floor has a huge bathroom and another small bathroom where the kitchen is

above. >> that is your time. >> it is georgia. i don't know if you are following. they met yesterday talking about information sheet ego2 relating to egresses on the three o'clock you pan sees. i have been following that because i am concerned aboutiticly with excavations and bedrooms. it is three units. r this 3 is great. there is ex alaska situation. what building code covers this? i think the question is this going to meet the building code? we will get the interpretation eg013 for a building with r 2:00 you pandency three stories. this is four stories over basement. the basement is a unit be with the bedrooms in the excavation.

it is a question that is planning department and commission need to look at when you approval the excavation. are you approving something that is illegal. >> press star three for public comment. no additional requests to speak from members of the public. you have a one minute rebuttal. >> it was several things that were untrue that ryan spoke about. we have always operated in the confines of our permits. outdoor space we are able to congregate out there, have dinners and things. no live music in there. a lot of those things were misleading and untrue. during the course of the demolition of the building they had a truck smash the corner of the building that wrecked the

door, created dry rot in the back of the building. unattended three and a half years creating a lot of damage we didn't even uncover. i wanted to set a lot of those things straight. we are a vital part of the community. we serve the community. we want to be good neighbors. i want to be proactive in planning designing is this building for long-term solutions in place. both new tenants will be covered and safe. issues won't be a big problem in the future that is our goal. >> thank you. mr. patterson. one minute rebuttal. >> thank you very much. ryan patterson for project

sponsor. i will address two points. the first is the first caller mentioned no adequate connection between different stories of the various units. we heard that concern. we submitted very slightly revised plans that clearly delineate the openings in the unit. make that perfectly clear and totally acceptable. second the d.r. request's note about operating in the backyard. there was a temporary covid program to allow nighttime entertainment uses outback. that has since ended. in any event, it is really a concern about the d.r. request's own business noise. we will do what we need to do in the project to make sure the dr's business is not overly burden some to the project.

>> that concludes the rebuttals. the public portion of the meeting is closed. it now before you commissioners. >> i am in support of the project. i would like to ask mr. winslow to clarify the door reflected the rendition of the stairs in connection. very confusing. as of yesterday 4:00 p.m. the correct set showed how that is acceptable. the public comment is that he looked at what was shown there. do you want to make the

connection here and we can move forward in support? >> indeed. thank you, commissioner moore for observing that. previously the 311 included drawings that indicated two common stairwells which the caller indicated correctly would have made it quite cumbersome for two inner connected floors without going through a common stairwell. however, the floor plans for each of the floors are not separate units. one has bedrooms the other as a kitchen. drawings were corrected yesterday. they reflect the stair

internally connects to two units that are two stories and one common stairwell. that is corrected. >> just to follow up on that. i am in support of taking this and approving the modification. >> second. >> commissioner koppel did you want a second or to add? >> you may be muted. >> commissioners if there is no further deliberation there is a motion and second to take the modifications recommended by staff. commissioner staff. >> aye. >> diamond. >> aye. >> fung. >> aye. >> imperial. >> aye. >> koppel.

>> aye. >> moore. >> aye. >> commission president tanner. >> aye. >> so moved. that passes unanimously 7-0. that concludes yet another brief planning commission hearing. >> take care.

>> we have private and public gardens throughout the garden tour. all of the gardens are volunteers. the only requirement is you're willing to show your garden for a day. so we have gardens that vary from all stages of development and all gardens, family gardens, private gardens, some of them as small as postage stamps and others pretty expansive. it's a variety -- all of the world is represented in our gardens here in the portola.

>> i have been coming to the portola garden tour for the past seven or eight years ever since i learned about it because it is the most important event of the neighborhood, and the reason it is so important is because it links this neighborhood back to its history. in the early 1800s the portola was farmland. the region's flowers were grown in this neighborhood. if you wanted flowers anywhere future bay area, you would come to this area to get them. in the past decade, the area has tried to reclaim its roots as the garden district. one of the ways it has done that is through the portola garden tour, where neighbors open their gardens open their gardens to

people of san francisco so they can share that history. >> when i started meeting with the neighbors and seeing their gardens, i came up with this idea that it would be a great idea to fundraise. we started doing this as a fund-raiser. since we established it, we awarded 23 scholarships and six work projects for the students. >> the scholarship programs that we have developed in association with the portola is just a win-win-win situation all around. >> the scholarship program is important because it helps people to be able to tin in their situation and afford to take classes. >> i was not sure how i would stay in san francisco. it is so expensive here. i prayed so i would receive enough so i could stay in san francisco and finish my school,

which is fantastic, because i don't know where else i would have gone to finish. >> the scholarships make the difference between students being able to stay here in the city and take classes and having to go somewhere else. [♪♪♪] [♪♪♪] >> you come into someone's home and it's they're private and personal space. it's all about them and really their garden and in the city and urban environment, the garden is the extension of their indoor environment, their outdoor living room. >> why are you here at this garden core? it's amazing and i volunteer here every year. this is fantastic. it's a beautiful day. you walk around and look at gardens. you meet people that love gardens. it's fantastic. >> the portola garden tour is

the last saturday in september every year. mark your calendars every year.

>> he is a real leader that listens and knows how to bring people together. brought this department together like never before. i am so excited to be swearing in the next chief of the san francisco fire department, ladies and gentlemen, let's welcome, jeanine nicholson. (applause). >> i grew up total tomboy, athlete. i loved a good crisis, a good challenge. i grew up across the street from the fire station. my dad used to take me there to vote. i never saw any female

firefighters because there weren't any in the 1970s. i didn't know i could be a fire fighter. when i moved to san francisco in 1990, some things opened up. i saw women doing things they hadn't been doing when i was growing up. one thing was firefighting. a woman recruited me at the gay-pride parade in 1991. it was a perfect fit. i liked using my brain, body, working as a team, figuring things out, troubleshooting and coming up with different ways to solve a problem. in terms of coming in after another female chief, i don't think anybody says that about men. you are coming in after another man, chief, what is that like. i understand why it is asked. it is unusual to have a woman in this position.

i think san francisco is a trailblazer in that way in terms of showing the world what can happen and what other people who may not look like what you think the fire chief should look like how they can be successful. be asked me about being the first lbgq i have an understands because there are little queer kids that see me. i worked my way up. i came in january of 1994. i built relationships over the years, and i spent 24 years in the field, as we call it. working out of firehouses. the fire department is a family. we live together, eat together, sleep in the same dorm together, go to crazy calls together, dangerous calls and we have to look out for one another. when i was burned in a fire years ago and i felt

responsible, i felt awful. i didn't want to talk to any of my civilian friends. they couldn't understand what i was going through. the firefighters knew, they understood. they had been there. it is a different relationship. we have to rely on one another. in terms of me being the chief of the department, i am really trying to maintain an open relationship with all of our members in the field so myself and my deputy chiefs, one of the priorities i had was for each of us to go around to different fire stations to make sure we hit all within the first three or four months to start a conversation. that hasn't been there for a while. part of the reason that i am getting along well with the field now is because i was there. i worked there. people know me and because i know what we need. i know what they need to be

successful. >> i have known jeanine nicholson since we worked together at station 15. i have always held her in the highest regard. since she is the chief she has infused the department with optimism. she is easy to approach and is concerned with the firefighters and paramedics. i appreciate that she is concerned with the issues relevant to the fire department today. >> there is a retired captain who started the cancer prevention foundation 10 years ago because he had cancer and he noticed fellow firefighters were getting cancer. he started looking into it. in 2012 i was diagnosed with breast canner, and some of my fellow firefighters noticed

there are a lot of women in the san francisco fire department, premenopausal in their 40s getting breast cancer. it was a higher rate than the general population. we were working with workers comp to make it flow more easily for our members so they didn't have to worry about the paper work when they go through chemo. the turnout gear was covered with suit. it was a badge to have that all over your coat and face and helmet. the dirtier you were the harder you worked. that is a cancer causeser. it -- casser. it is not -- cancer causer. there islassic everywhere. we had to reduce our exposure.

we washed our gear more often, we didn't take gear where we were eating or sleeping. we started decontaminating ourselves at the fire scene after the fire was out. going back to the fire station and then taking a shower. i have taught, worked on the decontamination policy to be sure that gets through. it is not if or when. it is who is the next person. it is like a cancer sniper out there. who is going to get it next. one of the things i love about the fire department. it is always a team effort. you are my family. i love the city and department and i love being of service. i vow to work hard -- to work hard to carry out the vision of

the san francisco fire department and to move us forward in a positive way. if i were to give a little advice to women and queer kids, find people to support you. keep putting one foot in front of the other and keep trying. you never know what door is going to open next. you really don't. [cheers and