Really burdensome and negatively impactful and we are in the process of trying to use remind and simplify the code to support a variety of uses to support, you know, vibrant overheads. That this seems like an opportunity to just smoothed around the edges without throwing out the concept without obliterating it entirely. Im on clear, let me take a step back. I think the notion that you just said which it was to differentiate a restaurant from a bar. The notion is people who consume alcohol while they are also consuming food become less problematical to society because they are less hammered, is that a fair statement as to why we differentiate between restaurants and bars . Im not going to eat to two, thats farther than i can speak to on the intent. I think defining uses is about segmenting one thing from the other thing. Again section 102, the definitions are full of uses that are trying to segment out when used from the next. An entertainment venue that also operates as a restaurant by
Privately owned public open spaces and investments in the transportation infrastructure. Through the central summer plan we are planning for Additional Office and housing capacity and focusing that growth particularly near transit so we can continue to work towards our transportation and sustainability goals. The full report is available on our website and we will publish data tables as well both on our website. With that that concludes my presentation and im happy to take questions. We will take Public Comments on this item i have another little handout. I have no idea what you are handed by ms. Harris, she may have talked about the changes that are on here, sue hester, i was san franciscans growth and i attended every single hearing on the downtown plan with three engineers that worked with me on dealing with what became the office limits in the housing fee, and the transit fee. They all came from a lot of work. Years of work from the people in the city. I want to point out a couple
Ourselves. We are not scientists. For us to review a bible like this or to review thats nice, ill accept the data. I dont know. Maybe youre suggestion is correct one. As we sit right now with the advice that you are projecting to us, im not dismissing your advice and counsel. I know the law because we experience on a weekly basis. We might as well save the public the filing fee for the appeals if its the appeal includes any identifications as health is an issue. We can just dismiss it because wash our hands and by saying, f. E. C. , were not in control. My personal conscious wont allow me to do that. Again, we can tell the chances are slim or none because San Francisco Health Department, this is not an attack, does not want to take up this issue and does not want to fight federal statute. You can understand the position. Sure. President swig we want to protect people. I hear what youre coming from. I will take issue with your statement that the Health Department doesnt want to take on
Some of the largest concerns are about the undefined terms and unaccessible day that we need to have to implement this code section. Were also concerned about the entirety of the penalties being collected, except for our time and material costs being diverted away from our Code Enforcement fund. Thats a fund that our department relies on to continue our Code Enforcement work in the first place. Most importantly, not being able to seek a permit for five years, if youre found to be in violation, we worry that may lead to buildings falling into disreplayer or Property Owners abandoning those buildings all together, if they determine the cost to legalize the work and wait to go through the new approval process isnt going to pencil. So going into all other violations of the planning code, which are handled through section 176. So it would increase the daily fine from up to 250 a day to up to 1,000 im sorry, to 1,000 a day. There would be no discretion, a straight 1,000 fine. And the board o
Foin. Just interesting where this project is going. And i think its important that your neighbors know at some point where this project is going. And probably make your life a lot more friendly with them. Did you have a second question . I want clarification on one thing. Thank you very much for volunteering that the privacy screen will be more elaborate with opaque windows. It was it was mentioned three property lines and one is scheduled to be opaque at this point. And the other two are not, but is there would you volunteer to make all three opaque and that would take that issue away . As an issue of the appellant. One second here. An i am trying to make issues go away for you. An appreciate that. Perhaps i could answer in rebuttal. Sure. Thank you. Give my client a chance to confirm. Sure. Thanks very much. Okay. Give them a moment, i guess. No, they will do in it rebuttal. They volunteered to address it in rebuttal. Lets let mr. Current speak first. Did you have questions you wante