. >> and commissioner sugaya? >> here. >> first on your calendar, commissioners, are consideration of items proposed for continuance. item 1, case no. case no. 2011.0430e at 4 08 potrero avenue, appeal of preliminary mitigated negative declaration proposed for continuance to january 17, 2013. i have no other items proposed for continuance. >> is there any public comment on the item proposed for continuance? seeing none, commissioners? commissioner wu. >> i move to continue item number 1 to january 17th. >> second. >> on that motion to continue, commissioner antonini? >> aye. >> commissioner moore? >> aye. >> commissioner sugaya? >> aye. >> commissioner wu? >> aye. >> commissioner fong? >> aye. >> so moved unanimously, commissioners, that motion passes 5 to 0. next up is your consent calendar. all matters listed here under constitute a consent calendar are considered to be routine by the planning commission and will be acted upon by a single roll call vote of the commission. there will be no separate discussionvv o

. >> commissioner sugaya. >> yes, i have a question for project sponsor. the west side in the photograph that we have in front of us shows that there is no fence. can you explain that, please? >> >>> it's mainly because the vines haven't grown to that side yet. it is sort of an organic thing. >> i was talking about this side. >>> yes, is there a way to switch back to this? yes, that's it, that's the one, and there it is. no,ing we haven't planted anything at this stage. >> i was wondering why isn't it enclosed. >> oh, it will be enclosed. * >>> that was actually right after scrubtionthv. construction. and when the restaurant first opened. we're planning at that area to place planters so that no one can walk. because if you continue up the west side, you're actually in the interstitial area between the wings of the two buildings. we definitely don't want customers going out there. and we will have a pretty solid and heavy planter that is going to prevent anyone from walking through there. and also provide, you know, something more attractive than looking ou

commissioner sugaya. >> yes. i can i get the reason yet the date was chosen? it's right after thanksgiving. >> that date was proposed by super wiener. >> isn't there a time limit? >> >> it is and it's for the san francisco administrative code and doesn't have as long. we consider planning code amendments and have 90 days. these items don't have that 90 day hold and only at a 30 day hold at the board and the board can schedule hearings. in this case if you continue it to the 29th he would hold off hearings at the board until you consider this on the 29th. >> so that then -- is he then contemplating scheduling meetings at christmas time. >> i didn't ask when the meeting was. previously it would be after this meeting and i assume it's the same case. >> because in essence wasn't this issued by 16 of october and today is the scheduled date. is that right? >> that's right. >>i would like to extend the time period out to december 6. >> commissioner antonini. >> l i would speak against that extension. this is an administrative code matter which is under the province o

. >> and commissioner sugaya? >> here. >> commissioners, first on your item items proposed for continuance. item 1, case no. 2012.1381t, inclusionary housing updates, it is proposed for continuance december 30 13th, 2012. item 2, 2012.1306tz, review of two ordinances (planning code text amendment and zoning map amendment) that would rezone parcels in the upper market ncd to the upper market nct, planning code and zoning map amendments, proposed for continuance to february 21st, 2013. item 3, case no. 2012.1168c, 793 south van ness avenue, request for conditional use authorization is proposed for continuance to january 24th, 2013. items 4a, b and c for case numbers 2009.0 724 d, 2012.0 888 d, and 2009.0 724 v at 2833 through 2835 fillmore street, mandatory discretionary reviews and variance have been withdrawn. further on your -- under your regular calendar, commissioners, item 15, case no. 2012.1 183 t and z, the amendments to planning code to establish the fillmore street ncd, there is a request from the sponsor

>> aye. >> commissioner sugaya? >> no. >> and commission president fong? >> aye. >> so moved, commissioners, that motion passes 5 to 1 with commissioner sugaya voting against. commissioners, that will place you under your final agendized item, public comment. i have no speaker cards. >> is there any public, general public comment? okay, seeing none, the meeting is adjourned. [adjourned] >> okay, if we can have everybody take their seats. okay, good morning. we're going to get warm because you're all together. but we really want to welcome all of you today to the opening of our new city, new bridge hiv research facility. let's give it a hand. [cheering and applauding] >> one of the greatest honors that i have

>> aye. >> commissioner sugaya? >> no. >> and commission president fong? >> aye. >> so moved, commissioners, that motion passes 5 to 1 with commissioner sugaya voting against. commissioners, that will place you under your final agendized item, public comment. i have no speaker cards. >> is there any public, general public comment? okay, seeing none, the meeting is adjourned. [adjourned]

commissioner sugaya. >> aye. >> commissioner sugaya? >> aye. >> [speaker not understood]. >> and commission president fong? >> so moved, commissioners, that motion passes 5 to 1. commissioners, that places you under item 20 for case no. 2012.1102d, 88 28th street, request for discretionary review. this is an abbreviated dr. >> good evening, planning commission, southwest [speaker not understood]. this would allow the alteration of an existing single-family residence by constructing a rear two-story horizontal addition and any partial third story [speaker not understood] middle residence with [speaker not understood] at the front and rear. the property is located at 88 28th street. the adr was filed by an abutting residence [speaker not understood]. it is still consistent with residential guidelines. [speaker not understood]. the adjacent residents to the east is two stories over a raised basin. this property, the subject property is a key lot in lot three residential properties, real property line above the property line above the subje

>> aye. >> commissioner sugaya? >> aye. >> commissioner wu? >> aye. >> commission president fong? >> aye. >> those items are approved 7 to 0. would you like to hear the 575 eucalyptus now or on the regular calendar? >> we'll hear it as the first item under the regular calendar. >> okay. that takes you under commission comments and -- excuse me, questions and matters. consideration of adoption draft minutes of the regular meeting for october 25th, 2012. >> commissioner antonini. >> move to accept the minutes of the -- the draft minutes of october 25th. >> second. >> motion for draft minutes of october 25th, 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. and places you on item 7. commission comments and questions. >> commissioner antonini. >> thank you. couple items. first of all, in regards to the commission

. >> commissioner sugaya. >> yes, several things. i think in terms of additional information following up on commissioner hillis' request avery -- thank you for that but i think the second part of what i was implying in my email was a comparison of the three -- the two previous attempts and this one, which was mentioned by commissioner moore so that would be the aleato pier and 2006 was the other one and see the provisions and compare the differences between the three. >> i thought that was what the comparison table did and had each ordinance. >> that's not what mine says. my says "what exists now and the various provisions". >> it sounds like you're missing a couple of pages. i will make sure you and the public has access to all three ages and i have a proposal comparing to the 2006 and 10 proposal so i will make sure that is available. >> okay. and i think also there have been -- i received correspondence as commissioner moore and others i am sure have at that point. some of them are specifically mentions certain kinds of ceqa prov

commissioner sugaya. >> yes. i guess the western soma plan takes precedent over anything in the central corridor at the moment. this plan has been underway for years. central corridor has no public participation process quite like western soma, except for developers, i suppose. so, i think that's a fair way to approach it. we're going to adopt this first, central corridor can take its lumps when it comes along. i'm going to move adoption of the initiation for all of the items 13 a, b and c. >> second. >> commissioner antonini. >> well, i have a few questions and haven't had the opportunity to reach the detail of the plan. but mr. cohen mentioned these items concerning metering of affordable housing and metering of jobs. is there anything in the plan that, you know, blocks the possibility of housing unless there's high percentages of affordable housing built as part of them or i think we should be aware of these things before we approve something. >> [speaker not understood] staff. the plan does have a policy that

. >> commissioner sugaya. >> yes, i have a question for project sponsor. the west side in the photograph that we have in front of us shows that there is no fence. can you explain that, please? >> >>> it's mainly because the vines haven't grown to that side yet. it is sort of an organic thing. >> i was talking about this side. >>> yes, is there a way to switch back to this? yes, that's it, that's the one, and there it is. no,ing we haven't planted anything at this stage. >> i was wondering why isn't it enclosed. >> oh, it will be enclosed. *

>> aye. >> commissioner sugaya? >> i would just be surprised if this commission gets into the level of detail that everyone's been talking about that is going to result in talking to the institutions. that kind of thing really takes place after the ordinance is passed and the forms are created and then the real discussion takes place with the institution as to what goes in and out and whether it's appropriate or not appropriate. no. >> commissioner wu. >> aye. >> commission president fong? >> aye. >> so moved, commissioners. that motion passes 6 to 1. commissioners, it will place you on item 14, case no. 2012.09 50 t and z, amendments to the planning code to establish the difficult viz dare owe neighborhood commercial district. >> good afternoon, commissioners. aaron starr, department staff. the item before you is an ordinance proposed by supervisor olague to create a neighborhood commercial district along divisadero street from haight to o'farrell. stephanie tucker from supervisor olague's office is here to speak a

. >> commissioner sugaya. >> no. >> commissioner avery with commissioner with you. >> commissioner. >> aye. >> that passes. all things under the consent calendar are routine by the commission and will be acted upon one roll call vote by the commission. there is no discussion unless the staff or public requests and in that case will be removed from the consent calendar and considered at a future hearing. case dolores terrace and request for condominium conversion. case 343 frederick street and request for condominium conversion. 1830 taraval street and request for continued authorization and 2001 pol ecstreet request for conditional use authorization. item six was continued to december 6. i have no speaker cards. >> is there any public comment on the items on the consent calendar? seeing none commissioner antonini. >> move to approve the consent items before us which are items two, three, four, and five. >> second. >> on that motion commissioner antonini. >> aye. >> commissioner borden. >> aye. >> commissioner moore. >> aye. >> commissioner sugaya. >> aye. >> commissioner with you wu.

. >> sugaya. >> yes, along that line it might be interesting -- i'd be interested to know the cost of the program. * commissioner sugaya within the city there is a cost obviously with staffing and administration. i'm not looking for a number, but some kind of ratio or percent or something that tells us what the program is costing. >> i'm glad you brought that up. we are just completing a financial analysis of the program that we are going to do every five years. so, that will give you some idea of the cost to the sponsors of what's happening. it looks at fee on-site and off-site side by side. comparatively how it impacts them. they can get you information regarding staff [speaker not understood]. >> with respect to the development community, since the program has been running for a while now, do you feel that there's general developer acceptance or -- do you know what i'm trying to say? i'm sure some don't like it, for example, and they're sort of only doing it because they're forced into it, where others i think that have come before us are more accepting and somewhat enthusiastic at

. >> sugaya. >> yes. is there any correlation between what we're calling p-d-r on page 16 and manufacturing which is back on page 40? >> good question. >> because it seems like -- i have to just finish my observation. >> sure. >> because on p-d-r we're down over the 2002-11 years by 26%. it went up slightly in the middle years there, in 2006 and '07. if you go back to page 40 and look at the manufacturing totals, it's pretty surprising that in 2011 we have more information jobs than we did back in 2002. so, you don't have to answer that question now. but if, you know, i don't know if p-d-rs totally -- if manufacturing is a broader category or if it encompasses p-d-r or what the -- >> well, what might be useful now, i look at that number and see if it's a mistake or not because that does look a little odd. the difference between p-d-r and manufacturing and manufacturing is an industrial sector, economic sector. and, i'm sorry, manufacturing is an industrial economic sector. and p-d-r is actually one of our

. >> commissioner sugaya. >> yes, just to clarify. on page 17 you have a table of employment concentration by land use in 2011 and it's by like financial some a north central, southwest. do those terms then correspond to the map 1.1 on page 25 that lays out where these districts are? >> yes. >> okay. and then given that civic center extends quite a bit to the east, do you know if it includes the union square area or is that -- >> civic center is commerce and industry district? >> yes. >> i don't believe it includes union square. i think that's within the financial district. >> then i'm curious as to why civic center has 27% of the hotel concentration. it seems awfully high to me. >> that would be -- >> it runs along the north part of market, but there's a little jog that -- anyway, if you could -- it's not a big thing. >> no, no, it's not. the way to read that is that that district has 17% of all hotel employment. >> oh, okay, all right. >> that's kind of an odd thing. >> another comment following up on commissioner antonini's observa

commissioner sugaya, did you have -- >> yes, we normally don't comment on testimony that's given during public comment, but as the maker of the motion on the case that -- on buena vista, i think there is some different interpretation of what that motion was. and, so, i'd like to have staff get back to at least me, and i don't know of anybody else -- >> commissioner sugaya, i can review the tape and follow-up with you. >> okay, thank you. and as far as michael crowe, i think i'll deal with it next week and perhaps it might be appropriate i'll mention to hpc, they might want to adjourn. >> thank you. commissioner antonini. >> mr. ionin, i also would like to see in regards to the buena vista project. >> absolutely. >> commissioners, it will place you under your regular calendar. item 7, western soma community plan - informational presentation. >> good afternoon, president fong, commissioners. we're going to begin the presentation with a few remarks from the honorable supervisor kim. >> thank you, mr. teetion, and commissioners. good afternoon. i'm excited to be here today because we are fi

we'll sign the petition. >> commissioner sugaya. >> a couple things. isn't upc involved in bay lands? the primary developer of that, i assume? given that situation and their continued interest in this one, i guess there's another, not ifc related, but it seems like the only thing in the way in some sense are the city boundaries. and there isn't a way to bridge the two in some fashion. i don't know what i'm talking about here, but it seems like if you have a developer that's already moving ahead in the passion on one side of the line and they're interested in something on the other side of the line, you know, the only thing preventing some cooperation is the city boundary, you know, it's a strange situation to think about from a developer standpoint, i think. but anyway, given that barrier is there. and there could be economies of scale, i assume. i'm not a developer. it's too bad that we have this kind of situation arise. another question is going to be a dumb question. the redevelopment agency did own schlage lock site ; is that correct, no? >> no, ac

>> aye. >> commissioner sugaya? >> aye >> commissioner wu? >> aye. >> and commission president fong in >> congratulations aye. >> so moved, commissioners, that motion passes unanimously. zoning administrator? >> on the variance public hearing being closed, [speaker not understood] the size and phone figure raytion of the lot as justification for the variance. >> okay, next item. >> commissioners, at this time you'll be moving to your 3 o'clock calendar. item 21, for case no. 2012.1329u, the commission will consider a proposed ordinance amending the san francisco administrative code chapter 31 to reflect revisions in the california environmental quality act and to update and clarify certain procedures provided for in chapter 31. >> good afternoon, commissioners. ann marie rodgers. you heard the commission secretary call this item. this is a significant ordinance. we've heard a lot from the public and from you already. in response we've developed an additional me have owe that i'd like to hand out to you today, responds to some of your requests

. >> commissioner sugaya. >> yes, thank you. i think it's a tremendous planning effort. glad to see it finally coming before us. not only me; the community for sure. and just to echo mr. warmer's comments, i think japantown that i've been following, again, for a number of years, i think they thought they could get it done in two, but it's been a number of years now. i think it's benefited greatly from the experience in western soma. and especially i think the concept of addressing cultural resources through the social heritage district concept. senate bill 307 what on the cutting edge of identifying and funding and identifying cultural resources in the three japantowns in california, los angeles, san jose, and san francisco. they might say a lot of the cultural planning work started with that particular bill and implementation of survey efforts through the japantown community and the planning department. that, unfortunately, was not well funded. and although the identification process now i think is contributing tremendously to the japantown planning effort, i think the

so, commissioner sugaya, would you be interested in another hearing possibly? [laughter] >> let me put forth -- >> really. >> let me put forth what my idea would be and let's see if it has support. and parenthetically, there are some additions of things in this. i i understand the negative declarations now would have to be appealed to us first, which was not necessarily the case. so, there's more process added in some of these. i would move that we recommend to the supervisor support, but with these modifications. longer, but clear, clear appeal periods, not to exceed three months from whatever we determine to be the date of the first complete approval document. and what i mean by that is something that you can begin to build on. if you get a plumbing permit, if you get, you know, the very first permit that you're going to be building something that really doesn't give the public much of an input as to what you're going to build. but if you have something that has the plans together and you're basically permitted to go forward with this, i'm not sure if this is

>> aye. >> commissioner sugaya? >> aye. >> commissioner wu? >> aye. >> and commission president fong? >> aye. >> so moved, commissioners, that motion passes unanimously 7 to 0. >> just a quick announcement. a little bit of unusual calendar today. we have a time certain item at 3 o'clock. we're going to take the next item and then after that hear the 3 o'clock. i think it's item number 17, thank you. so, the next one tehama, please. >> commissioners, before you are items 17 a and b, for case numbers 2008.0801e, x and v, 41 tehama street, request for determination of compliance and variance. >> good afternoon, president fong and member of the commission. my name is [speaker not understood]. if i could have the laptop screen on the overhead, please. the request before you today is for several actions regarding the project at 41 tehama street which would construct a 31 story building reaching a roof height of approximately 318 feet. the mechanical enclosure reaching a height of 342 feet. it contains 3 25 dwelling units, 700 square feet of retail s