you don't have any restricted use districts in your district either. eliminating the buffer around use districts will not impact you at all. >> accept the tip for lower polk. >> that is correct. >> would only be if the buffer overlapped with an nc-one. because it doesn't do that, or an lc you and because it doesn't do that. the only impact that this would have on district 6 for example are on the lc use, which is fairly limited number, in which ncd would be referencing. it looks like it's about equidistant. >> on the bona fide eating places currently is the restricted? >> the goal here is to strengthen live music venues on support venues by restricting burdensome requirements. the goal here is to support all ages and entertainment. with what we know to be the operations of entertainment spaces to get currently as a bit of background, entertainment venue that wants to admit patrons of all ages has a restaurant license. in getting a restaurant liquor license they have to operate as a restaurant. under the local code, operating as a restaurant means opera

i think there are ten restricted use districts in the city, since of which are alcohol restricted use districts. the other four are different. i happen to have one that's been around in north beach since the creation of time. i think it was 1984 or '85. that was long before my first time on the board, my friend, which was for actually preventing ground-floor financial and office. >> right, ok. >> there's another one on chestnut that's a financial service's one and on gerry, that's a formula retail pet store restricted use. >> i would like what your argument is. i heard what supervisor brown said but i would like to hear what you have to say. to me, when i look at the map, i see that -- let's look at the mission. it looks like two. there's one restricted area and another and i can understand why that might because they have a district where far away from the commercial corridors, you have corner retail transitioning into restaurants or other things and they want control over that for this larger conversation. that makes sense to me, but some of the other ones, just would have a buffer

district 8 has 20 mc one, and the highest number of lc use. 945. i highly doubt if the people in district 8 are going to go for this, particularly this corridor or overhead, please area - - please. this is only part of district 8. you can see those little boxes that are actually lc use area not to mention the pink ones all throughout the church corridor. this is going to be a huge impact not only on the residence, but also on the merchants on 20 fourth street. imagine a restaurant on 20 fourth street that serves alcohol and food. if you're going to have more competition, obviously this is not going to look good. i am sure the merchants on 20 fourth feet were not consulted about this area i am sure the residents were not consulted about this area i am absolutely surprised for a bill that is going to have a huge impact on the entire city of san francisco has been basically on a very dormant stage, not any outreach and here we are discussing, you know, the same name about storefront. this has nothing to do with the storefronts being empty as supervisor

to reduce the zoning buffer for uses operating as certain retail uses in the nc1 district from a quarter file from any ncd to 30h restricted controls to support a reduction in the measurement of the restricting buffer for limited commercial uses in rhrm, to delete amusement accor amuse. no alcohol would be served. thank you. put. >> thank you. >> bruce livingston, the executive director of justice. we've found this to be some of the most confusing legislature we've seen. this is the first time i've seen this map. how does the public comment on something with no maps on stoning for a giant city-wide streamlining process? it's kind of upsetting. we oppose this legislation. , especially the changes on the alcohol-restricted use of districts because as you have said, supervisor peskin, those were put in place very meticulous list by the board and through a neighborhood process. it should go back to the neighborhoods. there has not been a process of going to neighborhood organizations that are near these, either neighborhood commercial stricts or the special use subdistrict. we would like to

various walks down the hallway, should we task the city attorney with finding the named restricted use districts and other commercial districts in the aforemention aforementioned d 1, d 2, d 10, d 3. i have not heard from d 7, but d 8. can we task the city attorney with that? >> supervisor brown: yes. and i just want to say that i checked in with every single office and with the supervisors and their staff. and one of the things that we did, chair peskin, is we -- every single districts is we gave the impacts -- we let the supervisors and their staff know what the impacts of this legislation would be on their district. and i would love if city attorney jon givner can speak to retaining some of the buffers and taking some away, too. >> mr. givner: deputy city attorney jon givner. last week, when we discussed this specific approach, my department and the building department objected to approach by supervisorial district. that's exactly not the approach you're doing here. we redraw the supervisorial districts every ten years. another reason is supervisorial districts are drawn based on a number of

amending the planning code to revise the nct-3 district controls to allow arts activities, philanthropic administrative services, and public facilities as a principal useall stories, revise the upper market neighborhood commercial transit district controls to allow arts activities and institutional uses as a principal use on the first and second stories and as a conditional use on the third story and above and to allow general entertainment as a principal use on the first and second stories, modify the requirements for liquor stores and bars in the nct-3 and upper market street nct districts, add additional conditional use criteria for liquor stores and require liquor stores to comply with standard location and operating conditions, and add additional uses to the definition of open air sales; affirming the planning department's determination under the california environmental quality act; making findings of consistency with the general plan, and the eight priority policies of planning code, section 101.1; and adopting findings of public necessity, convenience, and general welfare under planning code, section 302. >> repent several forward last week. at

my story is a little different, because it is out of the special use district. i am fully in support of this ordinance. primarily because in our district we do have a lot of people who move in and remodel their houses. for instance next door to me last year, a house sold for $1.4 million and the day after it closed, memorial day, day after memorial day of 2018 the person who was taking care of my house when i was in paris e-mailed me and told me what was going on. with the bathroom and kitchen permit he gutted the whole house after nine over the counter permits later he was fined $750,000. he reapplied for his building permit and in september of 2018, we sued them, he being represented by an attorney, i represented the neighbor, and we settled out of court. moving nine bedrooms to five bedrooms and six plus bathrooms down to four without paving over the front yard or the backyard, or the side yard and keeping the house in the shape that it is. we cannot have that in our district. it's not feasible, it is not safe. i agree with supervisor safai it doesn't make sen

these are limited to the alcohol restrictive use district. this interpretation does not, so for red that is not alcohol that is partly overlapping with a neighborhood commercial district, or not. it is lack of who you get at the planning desk, this point. this is confusing stuff that gets more confusing the more you look into it. which is why i think bringing clarity to it is critical. >> let me restate this. as to ones who track, the quarter-mile does apply. as to those that don't, the quarter-mile does not apply. it does not apply to third street. it does not apply to the mission, but it does apply, he references here, the three most recent, 2009 interpretation. in those cases we would be taking away the quarter-mile buffer; correct? >> in the three most recent - >> this is as of july, 2009, a decade ago. >> i am hesitant to say how to treat those other ones. again, given what the boundaries look like. i don't know how the zoning administrator would apply this interpretation to those other ones. for the ones where the conclusion, because the

thrust of the neighborhood commercial district ordinances and the thrust of various restricted use districts are really about neighbors and neighborhoods and the body politic honoring the needs and aspirations of those districts. to the extent that a supervisor, whether it is a district 5 supervisor or a district 6 supervisor says hey, i've constructed with my people and they want to get rid of constricted use districts whether it's for alcohol, other things, or we would like to as supervisor mandelman just did, change what is permitted on first, second and third floors, or deal with provision. i don't think any of us were alive when the arcade amusement game provisions were stuck in the code and have been outdated since probably i was in college. that makes sense. i guess - making the cities processes more user-friendly is important. also, listen, this happens from time to time which is somebody goes into a space knowing full well that there are certain uses in certain districts, that are prohibited as a matter of law and prohibited for a reason. whether it's oversaturation of liquor licens

three district, consider arts activities and liquor stories at their first story as active uses in both the zoning district and eliminate zones for administrative uses for the planning code and include health service -- public comment was in support of the ordinance and there is an emphasis on how they could increase storefronts. the committee hearing proposed eight amendments to the amendments. because the amendments were deemed substantial by the city attorney, it was continued. next was the mayor and supervisor brown's small business. this would expand the types of liquor store licenses allowed with our -- commissioners, you heard this item on march 7th and voted to approve with modifications. your proposed modification was to retain the conditional use authorization requirement for outdoor activity areas associated with the bard use. during the hearing, the committee members discuss whether to eliminate the quarter-mile boundary around restricted use districts. this also discuss whether a business that holds both a nighttime entertainment and full-service restaurant permit should be

which is to add residential mix use districts of which i know there are a lot. e city commonly known as district three, as well as other districts. i think it is a good change to section 26, 261.1, applying standards to second-story setbacks along alleyways and narrow streets. i would ask that page 16, lines 4-16 section b, subsection 2, subsection b, that any frontage reinsert rm and make that same corresponding change. also on page 16, subsection c, the controls in this section shall apply, et cetera. that would be my motion which i have discussed with the maker and is acceptable to him. . >> supervisor yee: okay. >> thank you. i just wanted to thank supervisor mandleman making an exception for bernal heights. it is one of the neighborhoods with the highest concentration of narrow streets. for that reason had a special sed. i want to thank you for taking that into consideration and thank you for agreeing to do that. . >> supervisor yee: i want to thank supervisor mandleman for this legislation. while i support the general intent of this legislation, i would lik

this is followed by the creation of the 24 special use district which established a set of commercialontrols that are intended to support the economic vitality of latino cultural districts. it specifically calls for the adoption of a set of design guidelines that would further support the policy goals and objectives articulated in the cultural district and in the area related to the preservation of neighborhood character and recognition of latino cultural heritage. i would also note that the intent behind the cultural district dovetails closely with the mission action plan 2020 which was endorsed by the commission in 2017. it is being and plummeted by the planning department in coordination with the community and other city agencies to address the challenges of displacement that have disproportionately impacted the mission, latino, and working-class communities. the special area design guidelines are also intended to supplement the city's urban design guidelines adopted in 2018 by providing an additional layer of neighborhood specific design guidelines. the urban design guidelines wou

use. currently there are two zoning districts in this area. n.c.t., and c3 tee. and for the most part, the uses that are allowed in these districts are pretty similar. the biggest difference is the c3 district is also within the special use district that has a fee associated with it that generates money for both infrastructure and affordable housing. we are proposing to rezone the whole area and make some amendments to really meet some of the goals that we have been talking about. a little bit more flexibility for nonresidential uses, lower parking requirements not allowing a conditional use for additional parking, and then requirements or micro- retail consistent with what we did in central soma. the next topic is height. part of this proposal is looking at locations where we think adding a little bit more height makes sense from both an urban form standpoint and a feasibility standpoint. we are proposing to raise heights on 18 different sites. today, towers are between 250 feet and 400 feet and are allowed at market and venice. most of the remaining heights are

at this location, the mission alcoholic beverage special use district prohibits those uses fully. ditionally, controls have been added recently to the district to limit restaurant uses within the corridor, setting a firm cap to retain the corner statuses a retail corridor rather then an entertainment corridor. second criteria development developed whether there are immediately adjacent public open spaces which maybe impacted by smoking or vaporizing which may otherwise occur on-site. that's her -- there is a small park which is located around the block from the subject property, and the 16th street bart plaza is about a block north of the site, but there are no spaces immediately adjacent to the proposed site. the third and final criteria is community feedback so that we are tailoring our recommendation to the specific needs of each neighborhood. in this regard, we -- it is a mixed bag. we received immense general comment expressing support for our consumption lounge from the general public. we also specifically reached out to united to save the mission, which expressed opposition

the way we drew this special use district also includes part of president yee's district and we worked with his office on that. and the intent actually is for the first time when you're doing development and you're putting forward proposals into the city, that you're actually using a florida area ratio when building a family home. and we came up with the proposal that encourages more accessory dwelling units. we actually want that to happen in these instances and we give what we think is a fair amount of square footage. if there is not going to be an accessory dwelling unit, but you must go beyond that, then we encourage and promote an accessory dwelling unit being added. this is something that was done in strong coordination and consideration with many stakeholders in my district. my neighbors in action, heights leaders, many of the folks over in the lakeview area, because this was ground zero. we had it for a larger portion of the district, but we scaled it back to look at how this will play out in the portion of the neighborhood. we believe it's a fair way. we believe it will allow

when you created south beach, you created a special use district that is layered on top of all other layers of empowerment and entitlements that the project supports. and the categorical exemption for environmental review that you are planning department has given to you, it is not spoken to, it is not talked about, it is not identified. that is a violation under the california environmental quality act. this categorical exemption that the planning department has issued to allow this project to move forward is in violation of ceqa. it does not make the proper determinations, it does not discuss the overlying issues of zoning, a special use districts and other areas that encumber this parcel. there is a history on this parcel that goes back to the 1960s, and in the rush by the executive branch to move forward with this parcel, nobody did, and spent the time and effort to make sure this was correct. you need to correct it and send it back for further environmental review and create a probert document. i would put it to you that a categorical exemption of environmental review is not the

i would just like to note that the new zoning district that was created by central selma uses a centralized definition of format. the commission heard this item on may 9 and recommended two of -- approve. we do have one proposed amendment today. . >> supervisor peskin: which was discussed by the commission and does not require re- referral? >> it narrows what the commission approve so it does not need a throwback. . >> supervisor peskin: before we open it up for public comments, i want to explain to my colleagues, and the public, what that small amendment does on page three, which is to accept from the maximum use size abandonment provision, a change of use for legacy business or institutional use, or legacy business or institutional use after -- after the abandonment timeframe. that is set forth on page three. with that, why don't we open this up to public comment. first speaker, please. >> this is a good way for me to get my point across to you. i want all of you to pay close attention to this. you set rules and regulations that gives preferential treatment to yourselves, and people in th

lawmakers also voted to limit debate on three us district court judge nominees. confirmation votes are expected for them tomorrow. when the senate returns live coverage right here on c-span2. earlier today senate minority leader chuck schumer and house speaker nancy pelosi along with several democratic lawmakers spoke on the senate staff defending the affordable care act while a circuit court was hearing a challenge to the law. [inaudible conversations] great. all right, i want to thank our great great speaker nancy pelosi and all of our friends from the house for joining the senate democrats here on the steps. we are gathered because this is a critical day for the future of healthcare in america. today new orleans republican attorneys general's supported by president trump and his department of justice. will argue in court that millions americans should lose their healthcare and all the protections included in the aca. the stakes cannot be higher. imagine you are a parent and your child has cancer a deadly form. there's a treatment available but the insurance co

and also later today, lawmakers plan to work on more us district judge nominations. when the senate returns, live coverage on cspan2 . >> we're back with martial artist whose theproduct director for restore america , our pew charitabletrust, thank you for being with us . >> thanks forhaving me . >> first of all, i want to talk about what restore american parts is and what the pew charitable trust is. >> the restoring parts campaign started three years ago at pew and we are focused on protecting national park resources, cultural resources, natural resources by addressing the deferred maintenance backlog at plaguing our national parks system. currently there are $12 billion worth of repairs that needs to be done across our parts nationwide.os have been underfunded the ks entire time or is it something that happened over the past few years suddenly ? >> it's been happening over a number of years, the past edecade or more for another reason, our national parks service is over 100 years old . and he is silly and infrastructure parks are deteriorating, a lot of the infrastr

today, i'm introducing an ordinance to allow a grocery store in the fulton grocery store special use district. i have spent over seven years working to bring a full service affordable grocery store to 555 fulton. i'm introducing this legislation because finally there's a light at the end of this tunnel. a potential tenant will be subject to make sure that the western addition and hayes valley neighborhoods can have access to fresh, affordable, and healthy food. moving forward, the interested tenants will work with the community and my office to make sure the grocery store dream is a reality. the next piece is i am going to be introducing this legislation, and i'm actually calling a hearing with my cosponsor, sandra fewer -- supervisor sandra fewer, to examine the frequent conditions of landlord pass throughs that result in rent increases on san francisco tenants, and i want to thank supervisor peskin for also addressing this issue because i think a lot of us deal with this. this hearing will examine the criteria, regulations and frequency of use or deferral of these pass through charges due t

finally, the move of this market will activate a space in district 5 that is not currently being used on sunday. we should celebrate the success of farmers markets. they promote healthy eating, create community spaces and increase the walkability of our neighborhoods. the code update we're considering today will create additional farmers markets to open in the parking lots of our schools, museums, and public facilities. i hope you will join me today in voting yes on this sensible update that will benefit all san franciscans. >> president yee: can we take this same house, same call? without objection, this ordinance is passed on first reading unanimously. before we go to item 45, supervisor walton? >> supervisor walton: thank you, president yee. if it pleases the chair, i would love for us to go back to the committee -- to the board of supervisors sitting as a committee of the whole so we can rescind the vote on item 52 -- 50. we don't have to sit as committee of the whole. we can just rescind the vote. >> president yee: motion made, seconded and with no objection, then, the vote is re

during the hearing, there was significant debate around whether the restricted use districts in the city should retain their quarter-mile buffers for l.c.u.s and l.c.c.s uses. supervisor peskin recommended going to the individual communities to let them decide whether to retain the buffers. many members of the public came to speak in favor of the legislation, along with neighbors, a few neighborhood advocates who came to speak in opposition. supervisor peskin submitted his proposed changes to the committee. the committee voted to continue the item with all proposed amendments submitted at the hearing by supervisor brown included and with the request for the committee to consider the additional amendments submitted by supervisor peskin at the following hearing on july 8. next, the committee considered supervisor mandelman's amendments on building standards. you heard this item on june 8 with required amendments. the full board only had one planning item this week, which was a ceqa appeal for the safe navigation center at seawall lot 330, which would include 200 beds to serve the city's ho

while the review and approval is the port's jurisdiction the special use district does require an informational presentation to this planning commission prior to their final approval. with that i will turn it over to the project sponsor team you will hear from the san francisco giants and from maggie cook and karl shannon. this concludes my presentation. i am happy to answer any questions. >> president melgar: thank you. hello, mr. bear. >> good afternoon, commissioners. it has been over a year since we were before the planning commission in the process to get entitlement and approval for the mission rock project. i am pleased we made it through that process, through the port, city agencies and the state lands commission. it has been a long a long journey. we started it 12 years ago. the port sent out an r.f.p., we responded, we were selected for negotiation rights. there was an economic slowdown, an election, and then we went through the entitlement process. that brings us to today. we are in the implementation phase. one of the first decisions we needed to make what was going to be phase one?