sfgovtv is streaming this live. we will receive public comment for each item on the agenda. for those persons attending remotely can call 415-655-0001 and entering 2483 224 1786. when we reach the item you are interested in speaking to, press *3 to be added to the queue. for those persons in the chamber, line up on the screen side of the chamber and we will take you in that order. each speaker will have three minutes and when there is 30 seconds left, i will alert you. as previously stated, we will be taking those persons in the chamber first and then members of the public calling in remotely. best practices for those calling are to call from a quiet location, speak clearly and slowly and please mute the volume on your television or computer. for those in the chamber, i will ask that we mute our mobile devices that may sound off during these proceedings. when speaking before the commission, if you do care, state your name for the record. [ roll call ]. >> clerk: first on your agenda, commissioners, is consideration of items proposed for continuance. number 2019-022830 ahl, 3055 clement street. i have no other items proposed to be continued, so we should open up the continuance calendar. seeing no requests to speak, public comment is closed and your continuance calendar is before you, commissioners. commissioner imperial. >> move to continue as proposed. >> clerk: motion to continue. [ roll call ]. >> clerk: unfortunately i do not see commissioner tanner back with us. that passes unanimously. that will place us under your consent calendar. this item constitutes your consent calendar and is considered routine by the planning commission and will be acted on by a single roll call vote. there will be no separate discussion of these items unless a member of the commission, the public or staff so requests, in which event the matter shall be removed from the consent calendar and considered as a separate item. remote callers, you need to press *3. seeing no requests to speak from any member of the public, that is closed and your consent calendar is now before you, commissioners. commissioner imperial. >> i'll leave it to commissioner diamond. >> clerk: commissioner diamond. >> move to approve. >> second. >> clerk: thank you, commissioners. on that motion then to approve item 2 on your consent calendars. [ roll call ]. >> clerk: that motion passes unanimously 7-0. we'll place this under commission matters, item 3, consideration of adoption draft minutes for april 7, 2022. members of the public, this is your opportunity to address the commission on the minutes by pressing *3 or for those in the chamber, come forward. seeing no request to speak, public comment is closed and the minutes are now before you, commissioners. >> move to adopt the minutes. >> second. [ roll call ]. >> clerk: that will place us under commission comments and questions. >> i don't have any comments or questions. i miss being in the chamber. under the weather and glad to be joining zoom and glad everyone is doing wll. >> clerk: if there are no requests to speak, we can move on to department matters. director's announcements. >> just one announcement i wanted to let you know that the draft eir was issued yesterday. i'll make sure it was on the front page. we will have this before you for comment by you as well as the -- >> this week's planned use was a quickie. there is a new definition of adult sex menus. you heard this item on april 7 and recommended approval with modifications. those included to, one, expand the venue in which the sex menus are allowed [indiscernible] -- and clarify the definition of adult sex menus to make sure these are operate. and also changing businesses from permitted to not permitted. there were about three public speakers in the hearing, all in support. the committee made a motion to approve all of the commission's modifications and continue one week because there were amendments deemed substantive. at the full board this week, the designation passed. that's all i have for you today. >> clerk: there is no report from the board of appeal or the historic preservation commission did meet yesterday and they actually received an informational presentation on the housing element, a 2022 update as well as an informational presentation from staff related to the san francisco survey and community engagement framework. and finally extended the certificate of appropriateness for the band shell use of the stage as for outdoor lighting and sound system. if there are no questions, commissioners, we should move on to general public comment. at this time, members of the public may address the commission on items of interest to the public that are within the subject matter of the jurisdiction of the commission except agenda items. with respect to the agenda items, your opportunity to driveways the commission will be afforded when the item is reached in the meeting. of the united states of america, and to the republic for which it stands one nation under god indivisible with liberty and justice for all. each member of the public may address the commission for up to three minutes. when the number of speak ers exceed the 15-minute limit, general public comment may be moved to the end of the agenda. >> i'm going to show where developers exceeded their limits. i presented this at the building inspection meeting yesterday. the first is for a three-storey construction of a bay without a construction unit at 2017 avenue. the bay was reattached to 25-17 avenue that was reattached to 25-17th avenue was actually constructed at 27th avenue [indiscernible] and this is illegally straddled two lots. [indiscernible] dpi and planning approved an administrative permit authorizing the reconstruction at 27-17 avenue, not 25-17 avenue. mr. brown should have filed a building permit to reconstruct the bay. he did not file any building permit. there were false claims of the -- the illogical conclusion left me no alternative but a whistle-blower complaint. i also submitted a whistle-blower complaint on another property. i checked this morning and there is no complaint in the system. there should be. thank you. >> we have lost 125 parking places before the parklets and 175 with the parklets. we cannot have a white zone. we cannot lose one place. they also decided to change all of our yellow meters that went from 8:00 to 1:00 p.m. to 8:00 to 6:00 p.m., so my retail merchants are suffering badly. we must consider retail. i'm seeing a trend in the city of everything for the restaurants. i small retail on chestnut and lumbar and union are very important and i want to let you know this. we also have a case of a formula retail that came in and opened up without any hearing. don't know how it happened. and we have one to five small businesses that have been chased out by a major developer and every single one of them formula retails. we must keep our balance. and i have -- my group has fought for 30 years to make chestnut successful and right now i'm seeing a trend that will make us empty like union street. please listen to our pleas. i would like each and every one of you to come out. you will be getting a letter to come and visit with us. thank you. >> clerk: seeing no other persons in the chambers requesting to speak, we will go to remote call -- well, come forward then, ma'am. this is more general public comment, right? as long as it's not on the agenda, come forward. you have two minutes. >> okay. 119 el camino del mar and it is a proposal -- >> clerk: 119 or 110? >> maybe 110. >> clerk: that's the discretionary review on the agenda. so we will take that up when that is discussed. >> sorry. >> clerk: that's quite all right. any other member in the chamber wishing to speak under general public comment for items not on today's agenda? okay. we will move to remote callers. when you hear your line is unmuted, it's your time to start speaking. >> i sent a follow-up letter after last week's hearing for the conditional use on 144 lahey. i hope the commission doesn't feel like it was rude, but i felt like the real issues had been not really discussed and that was the superb condition and the complete livability of the house. there was a distraction with the tenancy. and between the architect and the owner. and the architect explained the constraints of the site and the huge excavation necessary. the point i tried to make in the letter, even though the commission had two votes on it, the thought was the city would be getting four units and i still think that's the case. regardless of whatever size the a.u.s are, whether it's 600 or 800 or 1,000, those a.u.s are not going to hit the market. logically those homes are going to pay for $4 million to $5 million each. if someone can afford that, they don't need the reprehensible fee to pay the mortgage. there are only two expensive units. i don't think the excavation was explored enough. it is 2,000 cubic yards. that is going to be a lot of cement retaining walls and there are all kinds of issues environmentally with cement. with that, i hope you read the letter and hope i didn't think it was rude -- >> clerk: thank you, that is your time. >> oh, my time ran? i can't even hear that on the phone. thank you and have a nice -- >> this is sue hester. i'm in a curious space because the president is not in the room. i'm asking the president to preside at the meeting and when she hears that we have one or two minutes of comment, for the planning commission, it is usually three minutes. take responsibility as a president to impose limits. do not let the secretary do it. this is very distressing when a case comes back and is amended and there is a one-minute time limit. that should not be the normal procedure. so preston, tanner, impose responsibility. >> clerk: last call for public comment. seeing no additional request to speak, general public comment is closed. we can move on to your regular calendar, commissioners, for item 7 -- i'm sorry, commissioner koppel. >> can someone help us out and address dr. draddler's concern? >> [indiscernible] -- >> clerk: we can move on to item 7 for the shared spaces program informational presentation. >> good afternoon, commissioners and the chamber. my name is robin -- [indiscernible] we prepared a few slides for you today which are up on the laptop. just a quick presentation today updating you all on the implications of recent legislation, an amendment to the shared spaces ordinance that the board passed last month. we would also like to answer some questions about when those provisions go into effect, how they impact operators. we would like to marry who is involved in the shared spaces program, who participates, how do they benefit, how does the program materially impact their lives as well as those that they serve. and a little bit on our equity strategy, specifically on your grants program. as a quick reminder, this program is open to commercial and non-commercial uses in a variety of different settings and in a variety of different parts of the public realm from sidewalks all the way on to vacant parcels. we would like to highlight our shared spaces sf heroes stories. we would like to encourage people to nominate the heroes. there is the commitment of small businesses and commitment of retail organizations for committing and stewarding their organizations. so please e-mail us with any nominations you have. for small businesses, 86% have indicated they dependenous for survival. another 70% depend on residents to survive. just to give a sense of scale. of those who operate shared spaces, whether a parklet or a shared tyning facility, for example, just over half are women-owned business. another third identify as immigrant-owned businesses. and over a third of businesses identify as minority-owned. after the last two years of the pandemic, this is the hope and expectation that small businesses have continued to operate out of shared spaces. since the program launched in july, there has been a huge adoption in the city. we have seen in the last 12 months a levelling off in the program, a trend which we anticipate will continue. most of the types of shared spaces out there being operated are mostly parklets, in the curbside lane happening and other parts of the right of way. we will talk a little bit about how this is built into the fee structure that will come online next year. one of those key interim strategies is assistance by way of grants. shared spaces is amongst a number of different grant programs that we coordinate in cooperation with the office of economic and workforce development. we do have a compliance grant development program closing on the 30th. this is bringing shared spaces into compliance with regulations for access for people with disabilities and fire safety. monica with talk about that. we also have arts grants as well as technical assistance grants coming online. we like to be transparent about how the equity strategy is framed up and how we prioritize awards selections. we are looking at strategies that were more vulnerable before covid and due to covid have experienced hardships more deeply in the pandemic than other geographies. the ordinance the board of supervisors just passed extends the program placed from 2020 to 2023. this means permit and business license fees will be waved through march of 2023. this means folks will have more time to fix any a.d.a. and fire accessibility issues at their site. the due date for a post-pandemic permit is currently set at november 21, 2022. with that, i'll hand the mic over to monica. >> thank you, robin. good afternoon, commissioners. i will start off my part of the presentation to share with what's on the screen that shows our single bill of health. a wonderful milestone that was several months in the making. all the departments pulled this together where all compliance is summarized in one location. a business would receive this one document to show the compliance of the departments that has jurisdiction in a one-stop-shop and show in a design manual where you can learn that. this is what's coming forward where we're speakering with business and specifically around enforcement. our design guidelines are the shared spaces design manual available only and has the specific details for parklets and shared spaces. we won't be talking about them all with you today, but i did want to call out a few in particular, those enforceable right now as part of the board of supervisors amendment that was recently passed around accessibility, fire safety, and sight line visibility at intersections. these are the three categories where we will not wait until the codified program until next spring. i'll share a little bit of those in detail on this slide. i really wanted to highlight those three categories on the ground. that's 6' pass of travel. 8 foot where necessary. 3-foot gaps important for emergency personnel. sidewalk conditions and success to building. as well as 42 inches sight line. reflective materials and address on the outside of parklets. flakable materials, requirements around that and the distance from a structure as well as crosswalks and visibility and day lighting. what that means is vision zero in sfik, committed to delivering on that program, daylighting on delivering on that program, daylighting on -- on the other side, day lighting is required. we will be noting those and working with those businesses that have those conditions to bring those into compliance. now, i'll just briefly share a few that are waiting and are not enforceable at this moment and will be new aspects of the program. one of them is around public seating to call out. obviously the legislation has specific requirements around a new public bench or equivalent facility in the footprint of the parklet available at any time even when the business is operating. something new for our sponsors and to expect for spring of next year. the fees are not until next spring, but that is a $1,000 application fee for public parklets, $2,000 for movable parklets, and $3,000 for the rest of the parklets. and a half off for businesses at $2 million and less for sfgov receipts. before wrap up, i would like to speak to one or two requirements that wait until the beginning of next year, the cap requirement, two-space cap which is important. i'll wrap up here to stabilize and meet the competing demands. this is a wonderful framework that lays out all the priorities and figures out where shared spaces figures into the mix. that completes my presentation. thank you so much, commissioners. we're here and available to answer any questions you have. >> thank you very much for your presentation. i'll open the floor to commissioners. and i would like to thank the commissioner for calling the commissioners. >> clerk: members of the public, you can address the commission on this matter by coming forward. [indiscernible] -- >> the enforcement of this must be written better. the other issue is currently as of this morning, i have a business whiching hands and in the interim it's become a camp for the homeless. i don't know what my legal stance is for this and i'm looking into it, but i'm going to make sure that it's cleaned up and cordoned off if possible. i'm going to try to write you something in detail about this because i've done a detailed study. thank you. i've got 13 seconds. great. i want to compliment the fire department. i have not met the predecessor i worked approximate. thank you. >> clerk: thank you. last call for public comment. members of the public, come comment. seeing no requests to speak, public comment is closed. this matter is before you. it is just an informational presentation. okay. if there are no -- commissioner imperial. >> i have a question to staff. it looks like there will be fines for edas. will there be site visits or complaints when it comes to -- >> thanks for the question, commissioner imperial. i couldn't hear you correctly, but you want to confirm how the departments are confirming and assessing the needs for compliance and also how we would be citing fees as part of our joint enforcement work? >> yes. >> thank you for verifying. on slide 17 of your presentation which was that chart, agencies have been inspecting and assessing commercial corridors throughout the entire city. these are joint operations between the the fire department, the department of public works, and the municipal transportation issue. looking at the deficiencies of recording those, we are in the process of issuing formal issuance of notices, like a single bill of health that explains all of the design issues at your site. our joint task force interagency team is working with the sites with the most complex issues and have identified the most intense or hazardous conditions. we're starting with those and slowly working through the rest of the city and the rest of the commercial corridors, noticing issues that may need to be ameliorated or abated. those that do involve infractions for access for persons with disabilities, those that impede the fire department or first responders to respond effective, they may have associated fines with them. the legislation passed in march does specify for those specific issues, the departments do have discretion to charge fees as part of the alert of escalation to gain enforcement. >> is there a process to fix it before going to penalty? >> absolutely, yes. so penalties and fees are one step. one of the highest and the ultimate or penultimate step in a ladder of escalation. our focus is first and foremost engagement, education, we have found that especially with regards to design issues related to accessibility for people with disabilities, that sponsors have been very responsive. they want to do the right thing and be good neighbors and serve their communities. it is up to the discretion of the department and the jurisdiction responsible for t