thank you. >> commissioner antonini. >> mr. frye, thank you for your report. this is kind of a general question, but i think it particularly is important when you deal with historic structures. permitting has to be gained for any kind of restoration work ~ obviously. and is there a time period for permits? it's often seen projects are begun and sit in limbo for years and they're eyesores. do we have any i don'txv on those type of things? >> we do. a certificate of appropriateness generally has a three-year validity to it until it expires and -- the sponsor would have to go back to the hpc for review. in case of the bellie buildings, [speaker not understood]s have been obtained during the course of the project both of which have expired and why c of a would be required to resume the current work. >> thank you.

. >> commissioner antonini? >> present. >> commissioner borden? >> here. >> commissioner hillis? >> here. >> commissioner moore? >> here. >> and commissioner sugaya? >> here. >> commissioner fong is expected to join us late. first up, commissioners, are items proposed for continuance. items 1a and b for case nos. 2011.0430e and x - 480 potrero avenue, appeal of a preliminary mitigated negative declaration and request for large project authorization are proposed for continuance to july 18, 2013. i have no other items proposed for continuance and i have no speaker cards. >> is there any public comment on items proposed for continuance? seeing none, public comment is closed. commissioner antonini. >> move to continue items 1a and 1b to july 18th. >> second. >> commissioner borden. >> i'm confused. i thought this was the one that we continued last week to the 11th. >> right. >> oh, i see. thanks for clarifying. thank you. on that motion to continue items 1a and b, commissioner antonini? >> aye. >> commissioner borden? >> aye. >> commissioner hillis? >> aye. >> commissioner moore? >>

so i am supportive. >> commissioner antonini? >> well, i think that we also have to look at things and not a popularity contest and the case of chipotle, they were a lot of people including the merchants and groups that came out in support it was not unanimous by any means. and just because nobody is contesting this does not mean that it is an automatic approval. you have to look at its appropriateness. i think that is a problem on clement you are seeing more and more of one type of eating establishment at the expense of some of the other smaller businesses and even a variety *f places to go, especially when you go passed the first blocks and then there is some variety there. but, you know is there is really nothing further down and that is any different. so at least we are getting a sushi place is some what of a change and i think that it is going to be fine and put in a viable business and replacing a vacantcy which has been there quite a while and i think that i am in favor of the motion. >> commissioners there is a motion, th

. >> commissioner antonini? >> i agree, i think that we have to look at this denuvo even though i do understand the issue of the previous agreement and there were many parts to that and the place was being renovate and there were issues dealing with the historic nature of the building that were included and really we were right down to the deck now and we are talking about the size of the deck if i could ask the project sponsor, and i am looking at your correspondence and the legalization of the deck that you are proposing to do. to go from 14 x 13, ten inches to 24, 4, so a 24, 4, does it come all the way to the parapit. >> yes. it does. and then if you look at it, there is also very, very extended quantifies, that is above 30 inches that just beyond the parapit. and so that is why, the proposal, when you ask this, and to qualify to it and the planter, you are pretty much almost five feet from you, know in terms of being able to... >> we may be accomplishing what the motion says by your actual proposal. because

. >> commissioner antonini? >> my only question is i think that they are bringing it back a little too far, the present deck is 14 x 13. and the proposing to go to 14 by 24. and now, we are already back two feet and so, i guess that if you are saying, commissioner is that your net is going to be five feet back and it is going to be probably 21. but, it only gives them some what of an expansion but not all the way out there. because there are... it is acknowledged that the because of the planters being there, they are two feet from the parapit as it is and so you want a five foot separation, and i wanted a three foot. >> yeah. >> the deck has 18 feet. >> yeah. >> and it is going to be less than 18 because there is a few foot separation even with the 24, i can that you are going to 21. >> i think that we have to look at the drawings and it is not just looking at numbers. you need to see the effects on the roof. i personally do not believe that a planter against a history being parapit is the right answer because y

on that motion, commissioner antonini? >> aye. >> commissioner borden. >> aye. >> commissioner hillis. >> aye. >> commissioner moore? >> aye. >> commissioner sugaya? >> aye. >> commissioner wu is absent. commissioner fong. >> aye. >> commissioners, that motion passes with 6 votes in the affirmative. so, commissioners, we will be moving on, then, to item number 18. >> good afternoon, commissioners. this is gavin washington, southwest team leader. i want to present the commission a discretionary review for 84 sea view way. the proposal is to construct an additional story on a two-story residence. [speaker not understood]. the addition gross floor area of 8 57 square feet, including two bedrooms and one half bath and a study area on this top level. the project is located on a site with 34 feet of frontage along cityview way, and average depth of 96 feet. the current residence is about 1,144 square feet, 45 feet deep. with an average froth setback of 7-1/2 fight. ~ feet. and rear deck of 42 feet. the [speaker not understood] w

. >> commissioner antonini? >> i had some of the same thoughts here when i read the considerations and i, you know, generally, i am more supportive of being probusiness and allowing this landlord and the establishment to go into here. and there seemed to be no objections and even though the concentrations seemed to be a lot higher than what they should be, you know, i am willing to overlook it, you know, and i think that you have to look at this whether it is beneficial or not just because it is a privately owned or locally owned establishment does not mean that it is beneficial and if it is formula retail it isn't, i am glad that commissioner sugaya looked that up to say that we don't want to be hypocritical but i am going to vote for this to make the point that this does not seem to make a difference maybe you can explain why the staff is recommending it. >> sure, i believe that the... well, in the past, there has been an over concentration of eating and drinking uses. we have already supported it if it proved

commissioner antonini? >> well, thank you, very interesting discussion. i have a few thoughts on this issue a number of things that were pointed out and there are a few comments that this would be the formula retail and the signage will be like everything else and the project sponsor made it clear that it is understated and custom built squ not be in the same mode as all of the other chipotles i think that is an important issue for me. it seems to be understated and there is another speaker that talked about the parking and the parking existed since it began and chipotle is eliminating three parking places so it is less parking and so i think that there is a need for parking in this particular situation because it is the kind of restaurant that i don't prefer, i like to go into a place and sit down and relax, and maybe have a drink and at least spent a few minutes looking over a menu and then leisurely order and be served and eat there. there are instances that i do take out food, that happens. but i don't often go to swat and gobble for the same ren that

as long as the buffer is preserved. >> thank you. >> on that motion, commissioners, commissioner antonini? >> aye. >> commissioner hillis? >> aye. >> commissioner moore? >> aye. >> commissioner sugaya? >> aye. >> commissioner wu? >> aye. >> and commission president fong in >> aye. >> commissioners, that motion passes 7 po 0 unanimously. >> on the variance close the public hearing as well as commissioner sugaya's concerns about the project, i would be inclined to grant your requested variance and there is no way to have any commercial lease orthctionv property without granting a variance. with no subsidy letter appealable of the board of appeals within 10 days of the issuance of the [speaker not understood]. contact mr. beale. thank you. >> commissioners, next on your calendar is item 14 for case no. 2012.1356c - 2100 market street, request for conditional use authorization. >> good afternoon, president fong, and members of the commission. [speaker not understood] planning department staff. before you is a request for conditional use authorization to establish a formula retail restaurant w

commissioner antonini. >> yeah. the other question, the other thing that came up, i think, what do we have, 25 foot frontage? what's the frontage on this house? hyde is this house? -- how wide is this house? >> i believe it's -- it's 34 feet. >> 34 wide. it's a little wider than most. but adding to the rear, you come up with the idea -- it was pointed out about the windows would have to be replaced, but then you also have the instance of adding hallways unless you make these rooms like sun rooms where you have to walk through one room to get into the other room. so, it's a little bit difficult sometimes to do that kind of an addition. so, i see there are other commissioners that have some comments. i was going to move to not take d-r and approve the project. >> commissioner hillis. >> i just have a couple comments. i think we've got a high bar here on d-r, exceptional extraordinary circumstances, which is hard to reach. some comment on the design, though, and you showed a lot of projects of like 3-story buildings in

i could see there is one place commissioner antonini sees where i can draw it rather than going, unstacking. if staff has a better solution -- >> then dints it's amending to that, leaving it up to staff. no more additional. the hours have been changed from 7:00 a.m. to 9:00 p.m. for the car wash. so, i'm supportive of that. >> the maker of the motion -- okay. commissioner sugaya. >> let's face it, cars are going to park where they're going to park. i do at a gas station. [laughter] >> even if it's not [speaker not understood], i park wherever and run in the store or just leave it at the pump station and walk in, as commissioner moore was talking about. but i'm not too worried about it. it will just add to the congestion. it's an awfully congested intersection to be adding, i think attraction, more attractive stuff like the convenience store and the car wash. not too enamored making it worse than it is especially since there are two [speaker not understood] in froth of the station. can i ask the project sponsor a question? in your experience -- how long have you run the station? so far? ~ >>

. >> commissioner antonini. >> i agree with the other commissioners. you'd think third time would be the charm because we've had hearings in december and february and now it's june 6th and we're not really getting any closer. you know, it's a very respected group of leaders in the japanese community and also the actual ownership of the japantown itself are objecting. so, that's fairly significant for me. so, i'm inclined not to support. i would hope that this could be worked out in the future, as someone said, and perhaps a year from now if some of the issues are resolved with the limited entertainment, then they might be able to go to the full night club use and everybody is on board. >> commissioner moore. >> i would fully support what the other commissioners are observing. [speaker not understood] i regret after this length of time and the support we have tried to inject into making this work that it just doesn't seem to be coming together as of this moment. so, i cannot indeed support the cu at this moment. however, in the future should there not c

commissioner antonini. >> thank you. well, this is an issue that there's been a lot of comment on and i can kind of reflect upon my experience with this type of car wash. we only have i believe only one other one in san francisco of this nature. there may be another one they spoke about, the one at mission and san jose avenue. but i have frequently used on some occasions, one out in the east bay at the intersection of 680 and 580 which is a pretty busy place. hop yard road is there also, a major artery between [speaker not understood] has yen da business park. ~ hasienda [speaker not understood], everybody driesv. my experience is whenever i go there to get the car wash, i'm the first one there. ~ there is nobody waiting for the car wash. maybe they have some other somewhere in the valley. i don't know of any. i don't see there being a huge demand for car wash at this place. there will be some people that will go there, but i don't see it being an issue. i do see the possibility of parking for the convenience store and s

commissioner antonini. >> just a couple other thoughts. i don't think office demand is a sum zero game. if this area is true -- it was commented on by one of the public speakers, using the figured and saying only a certain amount of demand is going to exist, this area might be more attractive. it isv' true, but it is not only competing with uses like the transit district or other districts that we're contemplating. it's competing with suburban areas. and this would be an attractive area and we could attract business that might not come to san francisco. but we could bring them here if we had broad floor plates and had office space competitive with south san francisco and other areas that would come to this area. i think that may be the business future of this area because you can't zone demand or success. just because you zone it for industrial uses doesn't mean they're going to be successful and there are a lot of things against continued industrial uses. some pdr uses might survive depending on what they do. i'm not saying they can't, bu

. >> commissioner antonini. >> mr. starr, i have a question for you. i really like the 1948 book and i kind of think it's what we should try to go back to. it actually has, in terms of industrial or manufacture, it has light and heavy, which is sort of what we have now in terms of pdr. and it has the basic things, residential, commercial, and i would think public is probably in there, maybe it isn't, but those would be the categories i could think of. i don't quite understand when we went to article 7 with neighborhood commercial districts. why couldn't they have been a subcategory of types of commercial district under article 2, which existed before, i guess? >> the way article 2 is structured, the use definitions are integrated into the chart. it's hard to explain without going through it, but it's divided up, even the industrial uses. it's not simply light industrial or heavy industrial. it lists every type of use and whether that use is permitted in the districts. a lot of it is redundant. so, i think the idea was to get rid of some of that redunda

. >> okay the public hearing is then closed and opening up to commissioners, commissioner antonini? >> the dr requestor, i know that if you could answer some questions. you know, that you have this agreement that was or took place with the previous owners and it is apparent that is the agreement does not have unlike a conditional use which goes with the property, i guess is agreement does not have the status that it remains with the property after it is sold. however, you are hoping that the owners will implement parts of the agreement. and i guess that what i am interested in knowing is what are the issues that are really key here because there were some concern about the historic nature of the building but, this is the size of the deck a key part of it? because it seems like if they enlarged their deck, it might not interfere with the building appearance that much. >> well there is a change, say the owners moved in and they moved the wind screen to where it was not visible from the street. and back to the edge and that was like shocking and i mean in a way. because as planning dep

on that motion, commissioner antonini? >> aye. >> commissioner borden? >> aye. >> commissioner hillis? >> aye. >> commissioner moore? >> aye. >> commissioner sugaya? >> aye. >> commissioner wu? >> aye. >> and commission president fong? >> aye. >> so moved, commissioners, that motion passes unanimously 7 to zero and places you on items 13 a and b for case numbers 2011.0099c and v - 1759 lincoln way. request for conditional use authorization and variance. >> good afternoon, commissioner president fong and fellow commissioners. doug vu, department staff. the request is for [speaker not understood] to demolish building at the shell gas station located at 17 59 lincoln way and construct a new [speaker not understood] convenience store and 1327 square foot mechanical car wash. the proposed car wash encroaches up to 45 feet into the required rear yard and would require the approval of the variance. no work is proposed for the eight existing gasoline service bays and underground storage tanks, but it cannot be above will be relocated and provided signage. the pr

the picture, and let's look at the entire district, in fact, in our last discussion, commission antonini when we were talking about the starbucks you were talking about 300 feet being such a very small area to look at and we ought to look at the entire district and take a broader view. if we do that, the formula retail concentration right now, it is closer to 43 percent and so we are talking about establishing a balance. and setting a balance and this point that we established of 20 percent, we ought to be saying, no to a lot of formula retail for a while and getting the small businesses in to establish that balance. right now, we are out of balance and it is not time to consider giving away, this prime corner to yet another formula retailer. so for all of these reasons, i do hope that you will follow the recommendation and deny this request. >> good afternoon, commissioners. my name is michael and i am a member of the emta and the sf nono and all in the upper market district and i am also the business business church hill, adjacent to this project at 2100 market. vy been in this locatio

commissioner antonini. >> yeah, it seems like we always hear our cases and we have three cases that are all in elevated areas of the city in a row here. just a coincidence that it came out that way. but it's been pointed out that the ccnrs for midtown terrace, there are some situations in certain neighborhoods where the city -- the neighborhoods were able to codify their -- certain parts of their ccnrs. they're fairly limited, bernal heights, west wood are a couple that come to mind, but these are not. there are many instances where the city has allowed a third floor addition, as was mentioned, 25 of them over the years. the other thing that's interesting is a lot of these streets are on hills and what happens in this instance is if the additional floor is added, then it brings the height of the structure even or close to the height of the house that's on the uphill side. but those of us ho live on flat land are faced with this instance all the time because we derive our light from the front of the house and the rear of the house, even if our houses are detached. so, it's sort of a bonu

. >> commissioner antonini. >> thank you for your report. i think you're moving in the right direction. but in general terms, it doesn't come as a surprise to me that the time of transit miles per hour in new york is twice as fast approximately as what we have here. and even in chicago. i mean, almost all the lines in those cities are either elevated subways or have separate right-of-way. so, it's very pleasant to ride on it because you get on and you don't stop moving until you get to a tunnel or get to a station, rather. and i think as a result, you see it being used by all segments of the population at all hours. you have people dressed up at night going out to social functions and stuff which you don't see as much of in san francisco because they know they're going to get off relatively close to where they're going. so, i think overall you have to look at some kind of long range philosophy. you're only working on the efficiency of what they've got now. but to that point, the dedicated lanes are fine with me. i think it makes total sense.