commissioner antonini. >> thank you. a few things. number one, just acknowledging that the american dental association is meeting in san francisco beginning today through sunday and it's a large convention and we're happy to have it and we're one of a rotation of three or four cities that is able to host that throughout the country. secondly, the secretary search subcommittee met last week and will meet again this coming wednesday on the 24th to move forward, and we will, you know, discuss that when we can. the body as a whole, it's actually going to be calendar in the future if i'm not mistaken en. >> it's actually following this item. >> it is on the calendar, great. and thirdly, i always wonder why we've been so fortunate in san francisco to be the origin of so many innovative projects, inventions, concepts and businesses. everywhere you go, you see things that were invented here. you see businesses that began here worldwide, not in the region, but specifically in the 49 square miles of san francisco. and, of course, you know, obvi

seeing none, commissioner antonini. >> commissioner antonini: move to continue items 1, 2, 3, 4 -- 1, 2, and 4 to the dates on the calendar but 3 will be to october 25, 2012. then, also, item 13 to september 20, 2012. >> second. >> president fong: on that motion, commission i can't, aye, commission bored en, eye. commission lilis, eye. commissioner moore, eye, commissioner fong, aye. that passes unanimously. which places you under the consent calendar, 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 discussion of these items unless a member of the commission or staff makes such a request in which it will be considered as a separate item at this or a future item. case no. 5 at 1098 harrison street request for office development authorize. item 6, at 1195 eefns avenue request for conditional use authorization. items 7(a) and b, for case -- at 180 jones street, 181 turk street request for amend to conditions of apreschool for conditional use authorization in planning code section 161(h), 25

on that motion, commissioner antonini? >> aye. >> commoditier has stepped away. commissioner hillis? >> aye. >> commissioner moore? >> aye. >> commissioner sugaya? >> aye. >> commissioner wu? >> aye. >> commissioner fong? >> aye. >> thank you, commissioners, that is a unanimous vote for approval. commissioners, you are now on item number 9. case no. 2011.075 2c for 1830 ocean avenue. >> good afternoon, president fong and commissioners. i'm rick crawford of department staff. this case is -- excuse me. this case is to establish a 17,300 square foot formula retail grocery store doing business as fresh and easy neighborhood market in a space formerly occupied by rite aid pharmacy, a formula retail drugstore at 1830 ocean avenue within the ocean ave. nct district. the project will involve some modest interior modification to the exterior entries and windows of the building and new signage for the proposed store. the project would retain 130 existing off-street parking spaces at the property of which 46 are allocated to the grocery store. the store would seek to create

on that motion, commissioner antonini? >> aye. >> commissioner borden? >> aye. >> commissioner moore? >> no. >> commissioner sugaya? >> aye. >> commissioner wu? >> aye. >> commissioner fong? >> aye. >> thank you, commissioners, the motion passed 6 to 1 with commissioner moore voting against. >> second, adopt findings that new shadows and the project, that the project would cast on eight open spaces would not be adverse to those spaces, allocate the absolute cumulative shadow limits to the project. >> second. >> six open spaces. >> commissioner moore? >> i think it might be appropriate for me to repeat my objections to the specific aspect of the project based on how i voted last week. and for those people who were not here last week the planning commission and park and rec together considered shadows cast by this project, however simultaneously we considered shadows cast by 11 other potential building which will not come based on their own merit in front of this commission and can reach a cumulative approval motion for 12 buildings casting shadows on 7 of

. >> commissioner antonini. >> thank you. i have a few comments. first of all, i think this is a very elegant building and the other day i was running up mission street and wondering why i like 560 mission so much, which is commonly the tenant now is chase j.p. morgan. and it gives a kind of greenish, rich greenish hugh, but actually much of that hue takes its color from the super structure. and the glass itself may be clear, i'm not sure. and these other buildings have tried to find the right glass and they almost always have glass that is not nearly as elegant as that building which probably has clear glass. i'm not sure what's planned for the glass color, but in looking at the color of the metal work, i am led to believe that the glass will reflect what comes from the metal work in there and that might be the best solution of all. i don't know if mr. clark wanted to comment on that or not, but it's important part of the whole picture. >> we have the glass here. it's a version of the glass that you see on 560 mission, but glass technology has imp

on that motion, commissioner antonini? >> aye. >> commissioner hillis? >> aye. >> commissioner moore? >> aye. >> commissioner sugaya? >> aye. >> commissioner wu? >> aye. >> commissioner fong? >> aye. >> thank you, commissioners, that motion passed unanimously. commissioners, you are now on item number 10, case no. 2012.1 196 u, board review of the affordable housing trust fund. >> good afternoon, president and commissioners. the item before you today is an ordinance sponsored by supervisor david chiu which would require monitoring reports for the housing trust fund. before i give my presentation i would like to introduce amy chen from supervisor chiu's office who would like to [speaker not understood]. >> good afternoon, president fong and commissioners. my name is amy chen and i'm a legislative aid representing david chiu. i'd like to take a few minutes and provide an overview for the affordable trust fund charter amendment. i should start by saying the supervisor is very supportive of the housing trust fund. he recognizes the importance of creating a d

>> commissioner antonini. >> couple items in the news. the first was in today's "c francisco for the top city, i guess doing business, which comes as a surprise to many commenters and somewhat as a surprise to me. we will certainly take it. it might be based upon part of what was written in another article but carl nulte sunday when he talks about the sales force and good things we are seeing. however it was entitled, ignoring a beautiful and ugly city is crazy. i agree with carl. i believe he's made good statements. his comments, not mine, he talked about some of the people on the street. he felt they weren't just foreclosed homeowners but people who have long-term serious problems. yet everybody ignores this, has been for decades. i think he makes good points and ends his article by saying we pretend this doesn't exist. san francisco needs a psychiatrist, which is a well-written article. part of this, there is a positive note, however. there is legislation introduced and i believe passed on first reading to ban our vehicles over night.

i was very much along the lines of commissioner antonini. i thought they were relatively fixed at the 60% or in that range for rentals and about 100%, you know, for the for sale. that's the base. that's what we understand, make that representation right now. >> okay, thank you. >> commissioner antonini. >> yeah, without getting into details on that, i think that is an important point. i'm not quite off the top of my head sure, but i believe that for sale units, it might be the 100th percentile, might be up to 120. i'm not sure what the latest inclusionary law in san francisco. it always was the 100th percentile. and i'm guessing for a single person because they're studios, it can't be more than around 75,000, income would be about the top that you could have and then -- or 80,000. and for the rental unit, which would be at the 60th percentile, 40 to 45,000. i'm just throwing those numbers out as somewhere in the ballpark. so, obviously a lot less than any would be affordable to anyplace else to pacific heights. i think the flexibility is goo

seeing none, commissioner antonini. >> yeah, thank you. we have a number of other neighborhoods and i think this is really good legislation. as has been pointed out, what it does, it allows an additional 5 foot bonus. the bonus can only be used on the lower floor. and it makes a more gracious ground floor which is in keeping with what was the case when buildings were built historically in san francisco and in recent years. ground floors were compressed in an effort to get as many floors in as possible and is much more welcoming, safer, because i think you have more windows, you have more light. there is more of a presence and identification with the indoors. so, i would be supportive and would move to approve. >> commissioner hillis. >> i second. my only question is why don't we take this up and do it everywhere in neighborhood commercial districts instead of piecemeal? >> [speaker not understood]. >> you would? >> yes. >> neighborhoods are getting used to it. it would be less controversial. >> yes, supervisor sandoval tried this after the

commissioner antonini. >> thank you for the report. with the project design for the warriors and the piers 30 and 32 would we have a hearing also to see some of that? i know it's a portland, but i know the supervisors are asking to have some sort of a presentation. >> commissioner, yeah, you will be seeing that project in multiple capacities both in terms of the eir as well as -- assuming it moves forward any potential zoning changes. we could at some point schedule an informational hearing as well if you would like an informational hearing prior to the zoning and the eir. >> i think in some nances it's good for projects that we have informational hearing before we get into the environmental and see the scope of it. i think it's a good way to handle things if that is possible and the other commissioners are favorable to that. i would be interested in that happening. >> no further questions. thank you. >> mr. president, just for the record historic preservation commission didn't meet this week. >> thank you. >> with that commissioners w

>> commissioner antonini. >> thank you. a couple of things and first of the all and not to throw water on the giants and i was there for gave seven and it was a terrific night but i took muni back that night and after riding public transportation in many cities we need to have clean secure trips for passengers. some of the tunnels are long and people were in there with the belongings and blocking the area and aggressive panhandling and when you go to the stockton street and by yourself on the narrow tunnel and hard to get through and people are occupying areas, and i hope that we can look into this. muni i understand got additional funding and one of the first things they should use it for in conjunction for bart is better security in their stations if they want riders to feel safe when they ride it at evening or any other time but other than that everything has been great. i do want to mention a couple of other things. first of all subcommittee for secretary search, the two chairs or presidents of that subcommittee, myself

commissioner antonini. >> mr. crawford just a couple of questions. i assume what this particular establishment has and will have is a type 42 and beer and wine only. >> that's correct. >> so that isn't changing and i guess the distinction and i remember 2005 and these are tricky and subtle. you have what i guess was a retail establishment accessory liquor sales. that is beer and wine sales and now we're saying we're moving it to a category of bar -- >> well, it was approved to be bar and retail store and accessory of tasting but the motion recognizes that what they're asking for is a bar. that the cu that had to be granted under the planning code was the same as for a bar, but all through the motion the findings discussed the fact it's not a bar. it's a tasting room. that the commission is doing this exceptional granting of a permit for a bar because that's the only mechanism to allow tastings within the abc -- excuse me, the alcohol beverage commissioner's licensing scheme. the conditions of approval state that it's for tastings only, but that was t

first of all, thank you to the committee members, commoditier, moore, and antonini for serving on this. it's difficult and we started the discussion about a year ago knowing that it was going to be a tight time frame if we didn't hit any glitches and here we are with a little bit of a hurdle. i want to stress, and again, i wrote that in my letter to the subcommittee to try to expedite this process as best as possible so it doesn'tant become a detriment to the staff who are filling in for linda. i appreciate linda's -- all her years, and also appreciate and respect her desire to retire. so, i think it would be great if we needed her and she was available, but i don't think we should as a commission depend on that and we should try to expedite this process as soon as possible. commoditier. >> i just thought maybe ms. avery could speak to -- because i know she had offered to be a resource, but i think it was clear she wouldn't be doing commission secretary duties and find out what is her willingness to do that in the future if necessary. and then also have director ram fill us in on the c

. >> commissioner antonini. >> i am supportive. i think it is necessary and desirable. however i agree with those who say that it would be more necessary and more desirable were fewer units, larger units; the argument is not just for families with children but for tracking residents who are here in a more permanent basis. i think we are seeing lots of units being built are being converted as would be the case with the aaa building and others, into small units to address the workforce; a workforce that won't be here for a long period of time. they likely don't want to be cramped into smaller unit. it's too bad this is not more like 50 units, i'm just throwing a number out there. two bedrooms, 750-sq. ft., will be small; the rooms will be small even if it is a couple or a single individual. i am familiar with a lot of units and the square footage is, and i have been through them. the one good thing is, and may take pressure off the existing housing stock. we have a lot of housing units that were built as victorians, single-family homes, divided into smaller units over the

seeing none, commissioner antonini. >> i have a few questions for whoever is most able to answer these. i noticed the projections show around 191,000 new jobs by 2014, but only 92,000 housing units but one assumes that each housing unit is averaging at least two people;it looks like there is balance there. it does work out if you do the math to about 4,000 per year, the projection of wherever you are at this year, 3200, is probably a little lower. they will be years where maybe we can produced a few most. my question for staff is, of these projections based on what we think is going to happen or are these goals we are trying to promote the growth in the areas not projected to have jobs and housing starts? >> fax to the questionthere is a level of black-boxness to some projections; we try to be more involved in the projections. at some point it is based on where growth should go; at some point it should be based on the policies of the cities themselves. some points are based where growth wants to go based on economics. all of those are being considered; it is not a clear model per se, b

. >> commissioner antonini. >> thank you, my understanding and this was presented quite well by staff is there was an environmental analysis of buildings that are proposed for the area in consideration and based upon their design and i can tell you that they have not just the transit tower but a number of them have been sculpted and working with staff and others to make sure that their impacts are minimized but given the plans that have been brought forth, although they are not specifically before us, we were able to figure out what these impacts would be and given that impact collectively, you've brought forth an increase in the shadow allotment and as we go forward with the individual projects, we have to agree we will approve them and will allot to each of these their share of the shadow impact, is that a fair assessment? >> yes. the budget -- creating the budgets doesn't preclude the commission's further discretion in evaluating the specific shadows and entitling the specific projects but it sets the sort of maximum envelope of what can be considered in the future and sets the qua

. >> commissioner antonini. >> maybe i can ask project sponsor a little bit about the reason why the cu is before us. you probably realized that your use might have been out of compliance. is that how this came about? >> on my 2005 permit it does state -- it says "authorizing the establishment of retail wine store with wine tasting room defined as liquor store and bar" is what it says on the description, so probably my naivety. i am taking ownership of it. i came to the board to make the changes on my own volition. i wasn't forced. the police didn't come in and say you have a violation against you. i willing applied to do the changes when i realized i was in violation. when it's described liquor store and bar and that's my understanding what the license was for. >> what brought you to seek the cu at this time? >> i came to the planning department to change the hours of operation and at that time speaking to the planner he informed he "well, we had look at this as well" and at that time i withdraw that request and requested to legalize my business. >> and continue the same operation a

commissioner antonini. >> thank you. this is a wonderful project, and i was greatly appreciative of a visit i had and i got to see this picture of the great white way and it made it to the screen and i don't know if we had technical di.s before that came up and reminded me of years ago and i had my first drive down portolla drive and to get to broadway and not growing up in san francisco and the period of the 50's and the neons and the signs and maybe it can be that again. we were talking the other day for a west coast alternative for new york and have a second theater district in the nation because we have so much interest in theater and a lot of people aren't able to go back east to see the theater and this is a step in that direction and a big one and it will bring many good things to that part of market and perhaps the first step for a district along market and extend into the present theater district of geary street. i think it's a wonderful idea and can be a beginning. i had a couple of things i did want to mention

commissioner antonini. >> yeah, thank you. i appreciate your work, very interesting. just looking at the exterior views of the building, and this doesn't have anything to do with your piece, but there's two different renderings of the colors. one is more of a muted and subtle a pierce and the other is kind of a very bright appearing -- i mean, i'm not sure which one they're going to go with, but that probably doesn't [inaudible] your piece. >> you'd have to come to the microphone. and identify yourself for the record, please. >> hi, i'm with the architects working with the 474 natoma building. i believe that was a rendering scene with the building to highlight the artwork on that one piece that was a straight elevation the colors the building would have. >> okay. i kind of like the muted one better. you know, it's a little more, not quite so shocking. i mean, there's a couple buildings you see from the freeway. some people like them. the color are a little bit too bright and they just don't really -- i don't like that. that's a matter of personal taste. i think the mo

commissioner antonini. >> commissioner antonini: thank you. a few reflections. of course we don't want to do what we did in the 60's although i don't think what we did in the 60's was so bad in terms of form. i think we had the misfortune of that happening at the same time while nationwide, there was a decentralization of inner cities, and the suburbanization which worked to defeat our efforts. by the time the project was finished, which the brick sidewalks and the trees were a big improvement over what was there before but there were no businesses left. it wasn't so much the project itself, but the times it came in. and i think the keys are going to be the attraction of retail, housing, commercial and civic activities, particularly in the most challenged parts of market street. a couple of other things. i mean i think your classifications the financial district in my mind goes all the way to the embarcadero but you can call it whatever you want. it really isn't that important. i think we have to go to school from other cities that have improved situations in tr

. >> commissioner antonini. >> yeah. in looking at this, i see one of these changes has not been accepted. i think it's probably better if it's possible once the legislation is finalized if they could come back to us and we won't set an absolute continuance date because we don't know when that would be, but have a look at it when it's in its final state rather than trying to vote on something that isn't finalized. we all are supportive of the concepts being discussed here, but we want to see what its final form is. that would be my feeling. >> commissioner hillis. >> since we are not required to take action [speaker not understood], can we endorse the general policy and the spirit of the ordinance, the right to return? >> i would move that's correct then. -- that, then. >> to support the policy here to give residents the right to return. >> not necessarily endorse the specifics of the legislation. >> commissioners, you absolutely have the right to endorse the policy that -- the general policy that you believe is before y

. >> commissioner antonini.>> thank you we deal with this chicken and egg situation regarding long-term planning. do we make the plants and then try to get the funding secondary? do we see the funding and then make a plan? you have to have a carrot out there. when you put a carrot people by in. having lived through the development of bart, people were enthusiastic and bond measures were passed, and three county sign in to the visionit was a three-hour trip to san francisco and now it is a 41-min. trip from dublin to montgomery street. one of the things that we need to do inside of san francisco it's some sort of either bart or muni line to the northwest part of san francisco. not many people are enthusiastic about packing up to a 38 bus. that's not a pleasant trip. rather than spending years and years and bus rapid transit, we need to develop a visionary plan and work with all of the agencies and get it done even if the case in a few more years, it is better to have something good. the central subway is a start. the downtown caltrain extension is another start. another thought that come

. >> commissioner antonini. >> when sarah is available i too would like to hear any updates that you may have in the future. >> commissioner -- >> maybe i think it is appropriate if you had a little sidebar that presentation regarding the development going on just south of there in brisbane. universal paragon is the developer. >> yes. >> maybe we could have a little short sidebar on that, and the connection between -- site and brisbane. john -- that would be really great. >> yes. >> commissioner moore. >> it would be helpful to get an update on the transportation improvements in the area>> because connection to a potential station in that area would be part of the discussion, talking about high speeds, modified electrification of the line. how does the plan reflect this possibility? >> as far as the date, october 18th, or nov. 1st. (off mic) >> you would or would not? >> i would recommend later. >> november 1st. >> thank you all. >> commissioners now you are on item number 8, an informational hearing on sustainable community strategy and the regional housing needs allocation. >> good