5 ms·

The issue seems to be the combination of more than 30% of the floor space being dedicated to reserved seating, and the Cafe charging for those reservations. Wh

by wtracy 7y ago

The issue seems to be the combination of more than 30% of the floor space being dedicated to reserved seating, and the Cafe charging for those reservations. What's more surprising to me is that an area zoned for retail restaurants is not zoned for office use. I see shop fronts in strip malls converted to ad-hoc office space all the time. I assume this is a zooming regulation specific to SF? What would be the rationale behind it?

mlyle 7y ago
> I assume this is a zooming regulation specific to SF? What would be the rationale behind it? Preventing tech converting all the retail and restaurant space to offices.
- brudgers 7y ago
  Right, but a bit more subtle. The Cafe was invited to apply for conditional use. It appears (from my limited research) that within the Financial District (and whatever overlays might apply) ground floor office use is not allowed by right. Conditional use means that office use on the ground floor requires approval based on what is actually proposed. The Cafe might readily be approved as a conditional use or might be approved after a few adjustments. It's just not approved by right. For what it's worth, reading the appeal reminds me why its worth paying a high dollar real-estate lawyer who deals with the planning department all the time. The Cafe's appeal didn't address the basis of the complaint: supplemental versus primary use in terms of floor area. Basically, there was no basis for overturning the zoning official's determination because the appeal did not address the basis for the zoning official's determination.
  - kapuasuite 7y ago
    Does by right even exist in San Francisco? My understanding is all land use is subject to review and approval at the discretion of the Board of Supervisors.
    - mlyle 7y ago
      What he's saying is that you can use land according to existing zoning code requirements without explicit zoning approval... Or you can convince the local Planning Commission to approve another use.
    - brudgers 7y ago
      From reading the appeal, it appears a restaurant use is by right in that location.
      - Decade 7y ago
        You would imagine so, but every permit that does not have a state-level override (for example, SB-35 of 2017) is subject to discretion of the Planning Commission. Which is an unelected commission with members appointed by the mayor or the Board of Supervisors. Most permits go through anyway, because the Commission chooses not to involve itself in everything, but every permit can be appealed with an application for Discretionary Review. https://sf.curbed.com/2013/4/17/10252934/what-the-heck-is-discretionary-review https://sf.curbed.com/2013/4/17/10252934/what-the-heck-is-di...
        brudgers 7y ago
        The Commission website is https://sfplanning.org/resource/discretionary-review https://sfplanning.org/resource/discretionary-review From my experience as a planner and subsequent experience as an architect, I infer that the discretionary review process tends to prevent injunctive delays via the courts. Conclusion of the quasi judicial discretionary review process exhausts due process while direct decision by the board makes overturn by a court highly unlikely because the board has statutory authority to make the decision to issue the permit. From a project development standpoint, the timeline is predictable so long as it accounts for the discretionary review process. If discretionary review doesn’t happen then the project will be ahead of schedule. To put it another way, discretionary review tends to benefit professionals but will tend to upset those attending their first rodeo. As I mentioned elsewhere it’s often worth hiring a local real estate attorney experienced at working with the planning department.
  - mlyle 7y ago
    Yah, I agree that a conditional use permit might be granted. The person just asked the rationale behind disallowing office use (by default).
jschwartzi 7y ago
I would guess that it's more about antiquated attitudes about how cities should be centrally-planned and heavily segregated by use. Some zoning control is necessary to keep chemical plants and steel refineries from blowing up in your backyard, but the notion that there needs to be clear delineation between "office use," EG clerking, and restaurant/bar use is why central business districts are all crime-ridden dead zones after about 7 pm. And it's also why there are traffic jams between 11am and 1 pm where I live.
- wtracy 7y ago
  Seeing "office use" be more tightly restricted than general commercial use still seems strange to me. I can understand restricting retail use in areas otherwise zoned commercial if the area can't support traffic from, or doesn't have enough amenities for, the general public. But what impact would an office have on a neighborhood that a restaurant wouldn't?

by wtracy 7y ago

mlyle 7y ago

> I assume this is a zooming regulation specific to SF? What would be the rationale behind it? Preventing tech converting all the retail and restaurant space to offices.

brudgers 7y ago
Right, but a bit more subtle. The Cafe was invited to apply for conditional use. It appears (from my limited research) that within the Financial District (and whatever overlays might apply) ground floor office use is not allowed by right. Conditional use means that office use on the ground floor requires approval based on what is actually proposed. The Cafe might readily be approved as a conditional use or might be approved after a few adjustments. It's just not approved by right. For what it's worth, reading the appeal reminds me why its worth paying a high dollar real-estate lawyer who deals with the planning department all the time. The Cafe's appeal didn't address the basis of the complaint: supplemental versus primary use in terms of floor area. Basically, there was no basis for overturning the zoning official's determination because the appeal did not address the basis for the zoning official's determination.
- kapuasuite 7y ago
  Does by right even exist in San Francisco? My understanding is all land use is subject to review and approval at the discretion of the Board of Supervisors.
  - mlyle 7y ago
    What he's saying is that you can use land according to existing zoning code requirements without explicit zoning approval... Or you can convince the local Planning Commission to approve another use.
  - brudgers 7y ago
    From reading the appeal, it appears a restaurant use is by right in that location.
    - Decade 7y ago
      You would imagine so, but every permit that does not have a state-level override (for example, SB-35 of 2017) is subject to discretion of the Planning Commission. Which is an unelected commission with members appointed by the mayor or the Board of Supervisors. Most permits go through anyway, because the Commission chooses not to involve itself in everything, but every permit can be appealed with an application for Discretionary Review. https://sf.curbed.com/2013/4/17/10252934/what-the-heck-is-discretionary-review https://sf.curbed.com/2013/4/17/10252934/what-the-heck-is-di...
      - brudgers 7y ago
        The Commission website is https://sfplanning.org/resource/discretionary-review https://sfplanning.org/resource/discretionary-review From my experience as a planner and subsequent experience as an architect, I infer that the discretionary review process tends to prevent injunctive delays via the courts. Conclusion of the quasi judicial discretionary review process exhausts due process while direct decision by the board makes overturn by a court highly unlikely because the board has statutory authority to make the decision to issue the permit. From a project development standpoint, the timeline is predictable so long as it accounts for the discretionary review process. If discretionary review doesn’t happen then the project will be ahead of schedule. To put it another way, discretionary review tends to benefit professionals but will tend to upset those attending their first rodeo. As I mentioned elsewhere it’s often worth hiring a local real estate attorney experienced at working with the planning department.
- mlyle 7y ago
  Yah, I agree that a conditional use permit might be granted. The person just asked the rationale behind disallowing office use (by default).

jschwartzi 7y ago

I would guess that it's more about antiquated attitudes about how cities should be centrally-planned and heavily segregated by use. Some zoning control is necessary to keep chemical plants and steel refineries from blowing up in your backyard, but the notion that there needs to be clear delineation between "office use," EG clerking, and restaurant/bar use is why central business districts are all crime-ridden dead zones after about 7 pm. And it's also why there are traffic jams between 11am and 1 pm where I live.

wtracy 7y ago
Seeing "office use" be more tightly restricted than general commercial use still seems strange to me. I can understand restricting retail use in areas otherwise zoned commercial if the area can't support traffic from, or doesn't have enough amenities for, the general public. But what impact would an office have on a neighborhood that a restaurant wouldn't?