Expanded and more broadly applied. The proposed ordinance would create a path to legalize what appears to be an illegal accessory kitchen located at 2601 2 noe street, which supports the very small kitchen at cafe floor. And as proposed, this provision would sunset after one year. And during that one year the operator could obtain all necessary permits, go through 312 notification, and then that use when the provision when the ordinance sunsets would become a legal nonconforming use. The Department Recommends that the commission recommend a modification that it would expand the provision in very specific ways and that would, first, it would remove the sunset provision. Secondly, it would require that Food Processing as an accessory use either be very active and visible to the street front consistent with planning code section 145. Or that it be completely screened from view behind an active use so that the active street frontage is maintained. Next, we also recommend that the ordinance
Parcel that are mistakenly zoned as 6065 x we [speaker not understood] rezoned back to 65 b. And two mistakenly zoned as 5055 x that should be 50. Right, just to reiterate, the convention is to zone the parcel for a base of 10, 30, or 50 feet and offer to five foot height bonus via the requirements of 263. 20. That concludes my presentation, but for the Public Comment section i wanted to add that i included most of the correspondence in your packets. However, since the publication of our packets i received approximately 100 additional letters and emails in support of the proposed amendment that would address issues associated with cafe floor. Ive also received one petition and two letters in opposition which i believe were forwarded to you directly, but i have copies of them here today. Im also certainly available for questions. Thank you. Thank you very much. Opening up to Public Comment, a couple of speaker cards. Gary weiss, eric honda, raymond patterson, and adriana elio. Good afte
Vibrant and strong. Community you know better than i do in term of the number of planning code amendments that move through this commission and through the board. I assume probably perhaps more than any other code. We routinely amend our planning code, including for some very specific Geographic Areas when the planning code is not reflecting the reality of whats best for our community. Now, i understand the planning staff is recommending support of this legislation and also allowing potentially offsite kitchens in the city as a whole. While this may be something that should be considered, and i am very happy to work with planning staff to see if there is support for that in the city, thats a pretty significant step and its a new way of approaching our neighborhood commercial district. It might be a very good idea, but i think that will require quite a bit of dialogue with various neighborhoods to see what people think and to see if people think this is a good idea or not. Im open to pa
Hi, im dina plotkin. I just moved back to San Francisco after being gone for 11 years, and ive been here for a couple decades before that. And a lot of change in 11 years coming home. And i moved back into the duboce area so we go to cafe floor. And there has been a lot of, like a lot of places that were here for a long time when i moved here are not here any more. So seeing cafe floor there when i got back was really nice and seeing how theyve worked and been a part of the community is really nice. So, i think they have to be away to recognize that their growth is good for the Larger Community because it helped they put it back into the community. So, 1850sing away to allow them to grow and give back to the community and be there would be great. Thank you. A couple more speakers. Kyle devrios, Michael Phillips, j. D. Petras. Hi, high name is dianne amos. Thank you for your time today. Im one of those people that started in my late teens. Ive done my four years at floor. When mr. Petra
2601 2 noe street, which supports the very small kitchen at cafe floor. And as proposed, this provision would sunset after one year. And during that one year the operator could obtain all necessary permits, go through 312 notification, and then that use when the provision when the ordinance sunsets would become a legal nonconforming use. The Department Recommends that the commission recommend a modification that it would expand the provision in very specific ways and that would, first, it would remove the sunset provision. Secondly, it would require that Food Processing as an accessory use either be very active and visible to the street front consistent with planning code section 145. Or that it be completely screened from view behind an active use so that the active street frontage is maintained. Next, we also recommend that the ordinance explicitly prohibit serving the public in any way within that accessory food prep area. So, that would be the intent there would be to prevent the s