Committee to send Cloud Kitchens liquor-license denial resolution to full board after public opposition

The Public Safety and Neighborhood Services Committee on June 28 moved to send a resolution to the full San Francisco Board of Supervisors finding that granting a Type 21 off‑sale liquor license to Cloud Kitchens at 475 Sixth Street "does not meet public convenience and necessity." The committee took the action after public testimony raising safety and neighborhood impacts and a brief report from the San Francisco Police Department’s Alcohol Liaison Unit.

The SFPD ALU told the committee the applicant had applied for a Type 21 license (off‑sale beer, wine and distilled spirits), noted there were zero letters of protest and zero letters of support, and described the location as Plot 260 (characterized in the report as a low‑crime area) but within a Census Tract identified as high saturation for liquor licenses; Southern Station said it had no opposition. The ALU recommended approval with conditions, including that the petitioner "shall actively monitor the area under their control in an effort to prevent the loitering of persons on any property adjacent to the premises" and other conditions memorialized in the ABC‑253 form and signed by the applicant earlier in the month.

Multiple members of the public urged the committee to withhold the finding of public convenience and necessity. Brian Sheehy, a small‑business owner and member of the San Francisco Independent Business Alliance, said the proposed use "is a very unusual use of a type 21 license" and warned that allowing Cloud Kitchens to hold an off‑sale license could permit widespread alcohol deliveries via gig drivers who are not trained to verify IDs or prevent overservice. A Teamsters representative also urged denial, saying unrestricted delivery would undercut brick‑and‑mortar stores and citing venture backing behind Cloud Kitchens.

Louie Connor, a consultant for the applicant, and Ravi Leer, a Cloud Kitchens representative, appeared before the committee and offered to answer questions; there were no substantive follow‑up questions from supervisors during the item.

After public comment closed, Chair Rafael Mandelmann directed the clerk to prepare a resolution that granting the license "does not meet public convenience and necessity," and Supervisor Walton moved to forward that resolution to the full board. Vice Chair Stephanie seconded; the committee moved the measure to the Board of Supervisors with a positive recommendation. No roll‑call vote or formal tally appears in the transcript; the clerk noted items acted upon at the committee will appear on the July 9, 2019 Board of Supervisors agenda.

The committee’s action leaves the ultimate decision to the full Board of Supervisors. If and when the board takes up the resolution, it will consider the ALU’s conditions, the public testimony and any additional materials the applicant submits.