Minutes of Planning Commission Calendars

December 2000

Presented below are Minutes of the Planning Commission. The top of the this page lists Commission meeting dates for the month. Click on the date and you will reach the minutes for that that week. The minutes present a summary of actions taken at the Planning Commission hearing and provides a Motion or Resolution number for that action.

With most browsers you will be able to search for any text item by using the Ctrl-F keys. It is recommended you search by case number and suffix, if you know it, as that will always be a unique item. You may search by any identifying phrase, including project addresses.

(Please note, commission minutes generally are approved and finalized two weeks following the hearing date.)

 

 

SAN FRANCISCO

PLANNING COMMISSION

 

 Meeting Minutes

 

Board of Supervisors Chambers - Room 250

City Hall, 1 Dr. Carlton B. Goodlett Place

Thursday, December 7, 2000

3:35 PM

 

Regular Meeting

 

 

 

PRESENT:               Baltimore, Chinchilla, Fay, Joe, Mills, Salinas, Theoharis

 

THE MEETING WAS CALLED TO ORDER BY PRESIDENT THEOHARIS AT 3:35 P.M.

 

STAFF IN ATTENDANCE: Gerald G. Green - Director of Planning; Larry Badiner - Zoning Administrator; Patricia Gerber, Executive Secretary; Andrea Green - Acting Commission Secretary

 

 

A.          ITEMS PROPOSED FOR CONTINUANCE

 

1.       2000.385C                                                                         (SANCHEZ: 558-6679)

2001 UNION STREET, southwest corner at Buchanan Street; Lot 024 in Assessor’s Block 0541:   Request for Conditional Use authorization pursuant to Section 725.83 of the Planning Code to install a total of eight antennas on the existing rooftop penthouses and an equipment shelter on the second-floor of the existing six-story mixed-use building as part of Nextel’s wireless telecommunications network within the Union Street Neighborhood Commercial District (NCD) and a 40-X Height and Bulk District.  As per the City & County of San Francisco’s Wireless Transmission Services (WTS) Facilities Siting Guidelines the proposal is a Preference 2 (co-location site).

Preliminary Recommendation: None

(Proposed for Continuance to December 14, 2000)

 

SPEAKER(S) None

ACTION:          Continued as proposed

AYES:              Baltimore, Chinchilla, Fay, Joe, Mills, Salinas, Theoharis

 

2.       2000.270C                                                                 (BRESSANUTTI: 575-6892)


535-537 VALENCIA STREET -  east side between 16th and 17th Streets; Lot 044 in Assessor’s block 3569:  Request for Conditional Use authorization to (1) allow continued operation of an existing large (over 1,000 square feet) fast food restaurant, presently d.b.a. “Cable Car Pizza”, per Section 726.43 of the Planning Code, and (2) to extend the hours of operation from 2:00 a.m. to 3:00 a.m., per Section 726.27, in the Valencia Street Neighborhood Commercial District and a 50-X Height and Bulk District.

Preliminary Recommendation: None

(Continued from Regular Meeting of November 9, 2000)

(Proposed for Continuance to December 14, 2000)

 

SPEAKER(S) None

ACTION:          Continued as proposed

AYES:              Baltimore, Chinchilla, Fay, Joe, Mills, Salinas, Theoharis

 

3.       2000.944C                                                                               (NIKITAS: 5586306)

1527-1533 PINE STREET, south side through to Austin between Polk Street and Van Ness Avenue, Lots 018, 018A, and 019 in Assessor’s Block 0667 -  Request for Conditional Use Authorization under Planning Code Section 121.2 for use size exceeding 3,000 square feet within the Polk Street NC District (Lot 19) and Section 209.8(c) for a commercial establishment located above the ground floor in an RC-4 District (Residential-Commercial High Density) and the Van Ness Special Use District (Lots 18 and 18A). The properties are in 130-V and 65-A Height and Bulk Districts.  The proposal is to convert three interconnected buildings from commercial and industrial uses (Albert Daini Fine Furniture) to business or professional services office space (West Coast Property Management).

Preliminary Recommendation: Approval with conditions

(Proposed for Continuance to December 14, 2000)

 

SPEAKER(S)       None

ACTION:                Continued as proposed

AYES:                    Baltimore, Chinchilla, Fay, Joe, Mills, Salinas, Theoharis

 

4.       2000.996T:                                                                         (HERRERA: 558-6316)

HOURS OF OPERATION - Consideration of amendments to the Planning Code Sections 206.3, 209.8 and to add Section 303 (c)(7) to require Conditional Use Authorization with Good Neighbor Policies per Section 805.5 for hours of operation between 2 a.m. to 6 a.m. in the RC‑3 and RC‑4 Districts for billiard hall, dance hall, nightclub, other amusement enterprise and nighttime entertainment activities, and adult entertainment; and to require Conditional Use Authorization for hours of operation between 2 a.m. to 6 a.m. in the RC‑3 and RC‑4 Districts for bars and various eating establishments (full-service restaurant, large fast-food restaurant, and small self service restaurant); and to amend Sections 210.3 and 221(f) to require Conditional Use Authorization to operate amusement and adult entertainment enterprises in C‑3‑R and C‑3‑G districts between the hours of 2 a.m. to 6 a.m.

Recommendation: Adoption of proposed amendments.

Note: On November 9, 2000, following public testimony, the Commission closed public hearing.  A motion to approve the legislation failed to carry by a vote of +2 -5.  Commissioners Baltimore, Chinchilla, Mills and Theoharis voted against.  The matter was then continued to December 7, 2000.

(Proposed for Continuance to December 14, 2000)

 

SPEAKER(S) None

ACTION:          Continued as proposed

AYES:              Baltimore, Chinchilla, Fay, Joe, Mills, Salinas, Theoharis

 

5.                                                                                                              (RICH: 558-6345)

General Plan Referral for Urban Design aspects of the Third Street Light Rail Project, including, station platforms, street lighting, trackway paving, and other urban design elements.

Preliminary Recommendation: Finding of conformance with the General Plan.


Note: On October 12, 2000, following public testimony, the Commission closed public hearing and continued the matter to October 26, 2000, to explore funding sources by a vote of +7 -0.

(Continued from Regular Meeting of November 9, 2000)

(Proposed for Continuance to January 11, 2001)

 

SPEAKER(S) None

ACTION:          Continued as proposed

AYES:              Baltimore, Chinchilla, Fay, Joe, Mills, Salinas, Theoharis

 

6.       1999.346TZ                                                                         (MALTZER: 558-6391)

ADOPTION OF NEW POLICIES REGARDING OFFICE USE AND CONVERSION OF LIVE/WORK (LOFT HOUSING) WITHIN INTERIM INDUSTRIAL PROTECTION ZONES AND MIXED USE HOUSING ZONES - Consideration of adopting new policies to discourage office development and to further discourage the conversion of live/work to office within the Interim Controls boundary area.  These new policies are to supplement existing policies previously adopted August 5, 1999 (CPC Res. 14861).

Preliminary Recommendation: Adopt Resolution creating new Policies within Interim Zones

(Continued from Regular Meeting of November 16, 2000)

(Proposed for Continuance to December 14, 2000)

 

SPEAKER(S) None

ACTION:          Continued as proposed

AYES:              Baltimore, Chinchilla, Fay, Joe, Mills, Salinas, Theoharis

 

7.       2000.1007T                                                                                (LORD: 558-6311)

LIVE-WORK TO LOFT HOUSING AMENDMENT -Consideration of adoption of  amendments to Part II, Chapter II, of the San Francisco Municipal Code (Planning Code) by amending Sections 102.7 and 102.13 to redefining "live/work" units as "loft housing" and classifying them as residential uses; repealing Section 233 regarding live/work; adding Section 232 to establish requirements for loft housing that would subject it to existing live/work controls except that there would be no restriction on the nature of work which could be performed in the unit so long as the use is permitted in the SSO (Service/Secondary Office) Zoning District and no requirement that the occupant(s) work in the unit, would establish density standards, would require loft housing to comply with existing inclusionary housing policies, would require loft housing in residential areas to comply with all requirements for residential uses including the residential design guidelines, would require loft housing constructed in areas not zoned residential to comply with non-residential design guidelines and all requirements for residential uses except for height, front setback and open space requirements, would establish procedures for converting live/work units to non-residential uses, and would establish loft housing rear yard standards; states that this ordinance supersedes any inconsistent planning commission policies.

Preliminary Recommendation: Adopt the Draft Ordinance

(Continued from Regular Meeting of November 16, 2000)

(Proposed for Continuance to December 14, 2000)

 

SPEAKER(S)      None

ACTION:                      Continued as proposed

AYES:                   Baltimore, Chinchilla, Fay, Joe, Mills, Salinas, Theoharis

 

8a.     2000.863BV                                                                             (WONG: 558-6381)


2712 MISSION STREET - The subject property seeks an authorization for a proposed office development under the smaller building reserve, pursuant to Planning Code Section 321. The proposal is for a change of use from "Retail" to "Office" and for the renovation and expansion of an existing 27,831 gross square foot building into a 30,847 gross square foot building by enlarging an mezzanine within the existing structure.  The subject property falls within a NC-3 (Moderate Scale Commercial District) Zoning District and a 50-X/80-B Height and Bulk District.

Preliminary Recommendation: Disapproval

(Proposed for Continuance to January 11, 2001)

 

SPEAKER(S)      None

ACTION:                      Continued as proposed

AYES:                   Baltimore, Chinchilla, Fay, Joe, Mills, Salinas, Theoharis

 

8b.     2000.863BV                                                                             (WONG: 558-6381)

2712 MISSION STREET - The subject property seeks a parking variance for the reduction of required off-street parking, pursuant to Planning Code Section 151.  The project proposes to provide 5 parking spaces for the conversion of 30,847 gross square feet of office space on a site which presently provides no off-street parking spaces.  The subject property falls within a NC-3 (Moderate Scale Commercial District) Zoning District and a 50-X/80-B Height and Bulk District.

(Proposed for Continuance to January 11, 2001)

 

SPEAKER(S)      None

ACTION:                      Continued as proposed

AYES:                   Baltimore, Chinchilla, Fay, Joe, Mills, Salinas, Theoharis

 

9.       2000.1148C                                                                           (WILSON: 558-6602)

700-740 LE CONTE AVENUE AND 845 MEADE AVENUE, at Jennings Street; Lots 111-116, 133 and 134 in Assessor’s Block 4991: -- Consideration of the possible revocation of conditional use or the possible modification of or placement of additional conditions per Planning Code Section 303(f) of a prior authorization to allow a planned unit development for up to 45 dwelling units, within a RH-1 (House, One-Family) and RH-2 (House, Two-Family), and a 40-X Height and Bulk District.

Preliminary Recommendation: pending

(Proposed for Continuance to January 11,  2001)

 

SPEAKER(S)      None

ACTION:                      Continued as proposed

AYES:                   Baltimore, Chinchilla, Fay, Joe, Mills, Salinas, Theoharis

 

10a.   2000.654D                                                                               (YOUNG: 558-6346)

412 LOMBARD STREET, north side between Grant Avenue and Stockton Street, Lot 010 in Assessor's Block 0062 -- Request for Discretionary Review of Building Permit Application No. 2000/03/03/3468 to construct a two-story vertical addition to an existing one-story over basement single-family dwelling in an RH-3 (Residential, House, Three-Family) District and a 40-X Height and Bulk District.

Preliminary Recommendation:  Pending                            

(Proposed for Continuance to January 18, 2001)

 

SPEAKER(S)      None

ACTION:                                  Continued as proposed

AYES:                   Baltimore, Chinchilla, Fay, Joe, Mills, Salinas, Theoharis

 

10b.   2000.654V                                                                               (YOUNG: 558-6346)


412 LOMBARD STREET, north side between Grant Avenue and Stockton Street, Lot 010 in Assessor's Block 0062, proposing  the construction of a two-story vertical        addition to an existing one-story over basement single-family dwelling in an RH-3 (Residential, House, Three-Family) District and a 40-X Height and Bulk District.  REAR YARD VARIANCES SOUGHT:  Planning Code Section 134(c) requires a 15-foot rear setback for the subject property and the proposed vertical addition extends 3 feet into this 15-foot area.  Planning Code Section 134(c)(1) limits the height of building extensions in the rear 45% of the lot to 30 feet.  The proposed third story exceeds this limit by approximately 8 feet, but does not exceed the absolute limit of 40 feet.

(Proposed for Continuance to January 18, 2001)

 

SPEAKER(S)       None

ACTION:                        Continued as proposed

AYES:                    Baltimore, Chinchilla, Fay, Joe, Mills, Salinas, Theoharis

 

11.     2000.877D                                                                        (DAVIDSON: 558-6363)

240 - 16TH AVENUE, north side between California and Clement Streets, Lot 037 in Assessor's Block 1418.   Request for Discretionary Review for Building Permit Application No.2000/07/25/6060.  The proposal would add a four-story addition to the rear of the existing single family dwelling, and reconfigure the building interior to create a second living unit in an RH-2 (Residential, House, Two-Family) Dwelling and a 40-X Height and Bulk District.

Preliminary Recommendation: Take Discretionary Review and approve the building permit with modifications.

(Continued from Regular Meeting of November 16, 2000)

(Proposed for Continuance to January 18, 2001)

 

SPEAKER(S)             None

ACTION:                Continued as proposed

AYES:                          Baltimore, Chinchilla, Fay, Joe, Mills, Salinas, Theoharis

 

12.     1999.998D                                                                                (WANG: 559-6335)

583-587 CORBETT AVENUE, east side between Iron Alley and Glendale Street, Lots 110 and 111 in Assessor’s Block 2717, proposing to construct a two-story-over-garage and basement single-family dwelling on each of the two vacant lots in an RH-2 (Residential, House, Two-Family) District and a 40-X Height and Bulk District.

Preliminary Recommendation: Do not take Discretionary Review and approve the project as submitted.

(Proposed for Continuance to January 25, 2001)

 

SPEAKER(S) None

ACTION:                            Continued as proposed

AYES:              Baltimore, Chinchilla, Fay, Joe, Mills, Salinas, Theoharis

 

13.     2000.779D                                                                                (WONG: 558-6381)

806-808 RHODE ISLAND STREET, Request for Discretionary Review for Building Permit Application No. 200006213250 for the property at 806-808 Rhode Island Street, Lot 002 in Assessor's Block 4094.  The proposal is to demolish the existing single family residence and to construct a two-dwelling unit building.  The subject property falls within a RH-3 (Residential, Three-family) Zoning District and a 40-X Height / Bulk District.

DISCRETIONARY REVIEW WITHDRAWN

 

14.     1999.690E                                                                                 (CHAN: 558-5982)


3000 THIRD STREET - Appeal of a Preliminary Negative Declaration: Assessor’s Block 3754 Lot 8. The proposal is to demolish the existing 11,000 square feet building and construct a three-story, 225,000 square feet building with 145 parking spaces. The building would consists of approximately 161,900 square feet of light industrial space on the second and third floors, of which up to 24,500 sq.ft. could be accessory office space. The ground floor would consist of about 5,000 square feet of commercial space. The majority of the new building would be at a height of 60 feet with the exception of the 10 x 10 parapet and clock tower on the southwest corner of the building. The highest point of the tower would be approximately 80 feet. The vehicular access to the parking lot would be from Cesar Chavez Street and 26th Street. The project would replace an existing two-story vehicle maintenance and office building. The majority of the site is currently used as equipment storage and parking for buses and vans. The project site is located within the M-2 (Heavy Industrial) zoning district and within the 80-E Height and Bulk district

Preliminary Recommendation: Uphold Negative Declaration.

(Continued from Regular Meeting of November 2, 2000)

APPEAL WITHDRAWN

 

 

B.        COMMISSIONERS’ QUESTIONS AND MATTERS

 

15.     Consideration of Adoption - draft minutes of 10/26/00.

 

SPEAKER(S) None

ACTION:          Approved

AYES:              Baltimore, Chinchilla, Fay, Joe, Mills, Salinas, Theoharis

 

16.     Commission Matters

 

None              

 

C.        DIRECTOR’S REPORT

 

17.     Director’s Announcements.

 

- Reminder of Staff Christmas Party

 

18.     Review of Past Week’s Events at the Board of Supervisors & Board of Appeals.

 

BOS: None

BOA: 1133 Green Street - Denied permit

          135 Carl Street - Overturned CPC decision and approved the permit

 

19.     1999.176BX                                                                        (LeBLANC: 558-6351)

235 SECOND STREET,  Report on revised open space plan.  The original project, including an open space plan, was approved on March 2, 2000 in Motions Nos. 15003 and 15004.  A revised open space plan was presented to the Commission on November 9, 2000.  The current modified plan responds to comments the Commission made on November 9.

(Continued from Regular Meeting of November 9, 2000)

 

SPEAKER(S)       None

ACTION:                Approved

AYES:                    Baltimore, Chinchilla, Fay, Joe, Mills, Salinas, Theoharis

 

 

D.        REGULAR CALENDAR

 

20.                                                                                                       (GREEN: 558-6411)

Planning Commission consideration of adoption  proposed changes to the Rules for the Office Development Annual Limitation Program.

(Continued from Regular Meeting of November 9, 2000)

 

SPEAKER(S) None

ACTION:          Adopted

AYES:              Baltimore, Chinchilla, Fay, Joe, Mills, Salinas, Theoharis

MOTION No:    16043

 

21.     1999.187ET                                                                            (GREEN: 558-6411)


JOBS-HOUSING LINKAGE PROGRAM:  Consideration of adoption of amendments to the Planning Code amending Sections 313 through 313.14 and adding 313.15 to rename the Office Affordable Housing Production Program as the JOBS-HOUSING LINKAGE PROGRAM, to apply the program to all new and expanded hotel space of at least 25,000 square feet, to all new and expanded entertainment space of at least 50,000 square feet, to all new and expanded retail space of at least 100,000 square feet.

Preliminary recommendation: Adopt Resolution amending the Planning Code.

(Continued from the Regular Meeting of November 16, 2000)

 

SPEAKER(S)

(+) Calvin Welch

- Favored this ordinance

- Indexing the fee language in the ordinance. Page 20 seems to change the policy in a way that is conceivable to us.  Seems to take away the indexing.

- Build options - pg. 20, sec. 1513a, it seems to be an error, this document is based upon 1997 Kaiser Morton Study 

 

ACTION:          Adopted

AYES:              Baltimore, Chinchilla, Fay, Joe, Mills, Salinas, Theoharis

MOTION No:    16044

 

22.     2000.1098T                                                                                (LORD: 558-6311)

SUTRO TOWER NOTIFICATION, Consideration of adoption of amendments to Part II, Chapter II of the San Francisco Municipal Code (Planning Code) by adding Section 306.9 to require notice of application for building permits for Sutro Tower to be sent to all property owners within a 1,000 foot radius of the Tower’s site.

Preliminary Recommendation: Adopt the proposed amendment

 

SPEAKER(S)

(+) Jessica Lane

- Representative from Supervisor’s Teng’s Office

- Supervisor Teng encouraged the Commission to adopt this ordinance

(-) Christine Linnebach

- Neighborhood has been working on legislation for the last two years

- This is unreasonable legislation

- Problems with notification

- Seismic study was recently done

(+) Jim Luster

- Concerned about the omission of Section D.  Every single permit would require that notification be sent

- Maintain Section D with the understanding that in no way would it affect the people within the 1000 feet

 

ACTION:          Adopted

AYES:              Baltimore, Chinchilla, Fay, Joe, Mills, Salinas, Theoharis

MOTION No:    16045

 

23.     2000.020T                                                                          (HERRERA: 558-6316)

           LANDMARKS BOARD 60 DAY REVIEW AMENDMENT - Consideration of adoption of an amendment to the Planning Code Section 1004.2 to allow the Landmarks Preservation Advisory Board sixty (60) days instead of thirty (30) days within which to review and report to the San Francisco Planning Commission on proposed landmark designations.

Testimony and Commission considerations could result in recommendations of modifications to the proposed legislation.

Preliminary Recommendation: Adopt the proposed amendment

 

SPEAKER(S) None


ACTION:          Approved

AYES:              Baltimore, Chinchilla, Fay, Joe, Mills, Salinas, Theoharis

MOTION No:    16046

 

24.     2000.024T                                                                         (HERRERA: 558-6316)

HEIGHT LIMIT EXCEPTION - Consideration of adoption of  an amendment to the Planning Code Section 263.1 to make the height limit exception available under Section 263.1 inapplicable to properties located in the Jackson Square Historic District and Assessor’s Block 195, Lots 4 and 16.  Planning Code Section 263.1 permits the San Francisco Planning Commission to approve height exceptions of up to 200 feet for properties in the 65-D-2 Height and Bulk District located at the southern edge of Jackson Square.

Testimony and Commission considerations could result in recommendations of modifications to the proposed legislation.

Preliminary Recommendation: Disapprove proposed amendment with recommendations to  Board of Supervisors

 

SPEAKER(S) None

ACTION:          Continued Indefinitely

AYES:              Baltimore, Chinchilla, Fay, Joe, Mills, Salinas, Theoharis

 

25.     1999.771ET                                                                    (SHOTLAND:  558.6308)

SOUTH OF MARKET BILLBOARD AMENDMENT Consideration of a proposal to adopt an amendment to Part II, Chapter II of the San Francisco Municipal Code (Planning Code) which would amend Articles 6 and 8 to clarify that general advertising signs are not permitted in South of Market Districts, except in the South of Market General Advertising Special Sign District.  Testimony and Commission considerations could result in recommendations to modify the proposed legislation.

Preliminary Recommendation:  Adoption of Draft Resolution Approving the proposed Amendment.

 

SPEAKER(S)

( ) Dick Millett

- Potrero Hill has been invaded by this sign

- Advertising on all new live/work buildings in the Waterfront Area

(+) Dee Dee Workman

- Support the amendment to the Planning Code

- We need to preserve the character of this neighborhood

- The quality of life of this area is very important

- Huge wall ad had gone up in the neighborhood

- Diminish the character

- Urge you to adopt this amendment

(+) Peter Winkelstein

- Support control of general advertising in the City

-Urge in approval of the changes

(+) Jean McClatchy

- Pollution of one the most wonderful City in the world

- Finding building size advertising is very offensive to the citizens of this City

- This is not tolerable; it needs to be controlled, enforced

- Commercialization is just not acceptable to SF

(+) Milo Hanke

- Endorse all the other comments

- Feel like other citizens that SF is being taken away from us

- Deteriorate the quality of the greatest City in the world


- Pass more restrictive legislation

- No regard to the properties values

(+) Francis Rigney

- Watch in the course of many years the destruction of the City with all these billboards all over                         - Abolish this advertising from districts

- This will be a great start

(+) Jim Lazarus

- Technology of the 90s has gotten out of hands

- Urge to pass this amendment

- It is out of control, we’ve  got to take on this issue, give this the highest priority

(+) Jane Winslow

- Endorse all other speakers

- It will assist the Planning Department

- Support this amendment

(-) Michael Alexander

- Advertising is out of Control in San Francisco

                       (-) Marilyn Duffey

- Support amendment as an initial step

- Continuing control the advertisement

(-) Robert Frieze 

- a lot money in the advertisement industry

- Staff should look into the interim control

- Rules are being abused

(-) Unknown Speaker

- This is a first step to stop the proliferation of signs in the City__

- We need to have a more wide restrictions

- This will set precedents for future legislations

(+) Joe O’Donoghue

- In support of the project

(-) Maytee Colorado

- We need to limit the amount of billboards

- We have the largest concentrations of seniors and citizen in the South of Market

- Biggest buyer of advertising space have been liquor and tobacco advertisement

(-) Sue Hestor

- Proliferation of advertisement is destroying the City, especially in the South of Market Area

                       (-) Michael Colbruno

- Proliferation of illegal signs

(-) John Newman - Sailors Union of the Pacific

- This organization is one of many non-profit organizations who would be impacted by the approval of this legislation.

- They are requesting that the legislation be continued for further study.

- It is important that thi Commission has taken testimony

(-) Steven Chin

- There need to be a clarification about this amendment

- Do not understand why the City is doing this

- Proliferation on these three small areas in the City

- Recommend this should be sent back to staff

(-) Dean Arbitt

- Maintain all permits that have been issued properly

- This industry is benefiting the City

 

                       ACTION:               Adopted

AYES:                   Baltimore, Chinchilla, Fay, Joe, Mills, Salinas, Theoharis


RESOLUTION NO.  16047

 

26a.   1999.300BX                                                                        (LeBLANC: 558-6351)

272 MAIN STREET, West side of Main Street between Howard and Folsom Streets,  Lot 006 in Assessor's Block 3739, -- Request under Planning Code Section 309 for Determination of Compliance for the construction of a six-story, 80-foot tall building with a total of approximately 56,320 gross square feet including up to 46,500 square feet of office space, approximately 6,100 square feet of ground floor retail space and 1,360 square feet of open space.  The existing 30-foot tall, approximately 10,000 square-foot office building would be demolished.  The project lies within a C-3-O(SD) (Downtown Office, Special Development) District and an 80-X Height and Bulk District.

Preliminary Recommendation: Approval with conditions

 

SPEAKER(S)

(+) Jim Reuben - Representing Project Sponsor

- Project at this site does not required loading deck

(+) Clark Manus - Project Architect

- Gave a description of the project

(-) Sue Hestor

- What is the working assumption? 

- Would like the Commission to find out what this really means

- This project has a enormous amount of glass

- How is this going to be in the long term

- This is a very unusual project

 

ACTION:          Approved

AYES:              Baltimore, Chinchilla, Fay, Joe, Mills, Salinas, Theoharis

MOTION No:    16048

 

26b.   1999.300BX                                                                        (LeBLANC: 558-6351)

272 MAIN  STREET, West side of Main Street between Howard and Folsom Streets,  Lot 006 in Assessor's Block 3739, -- Request under Planning Code Sections 320-325 (Office Development Limitation Program) for the construction of a six-story, 80-foot tall building with a total of approximately 56,320 gross square feet including up to 46,500 square feet of office space, approximately 6,100 square feet of ground floor retail space and 1,360 square feet of open space.  The existing 30-foot tall, approximately 10,000 square-foot office building would be demolished.  The project lies within a C-3-O(SD) (Downtown Office, Special Development) District and an 80-X Height and Bulk District.

Preliminary Recommendation: Approval with conditions

 

SPEAKER(S)

(+) Jim Reuben - Representing Project Sponsor

- Project at this site does not required loading deck

(+) Clark Manus - Project Architect

- Gave a description of the project

(-) Sue Hestor

- what is the working assumption? 

- Would like the Commission to find out what this really means?

- This project has a enormous amount of glass

- How is this going to be in the long term

- This is a very unusual project

 

ACTION:          Approved

AYES:              Baltimore, Chinchilla, Fay, Joe, Mills, Salinas, Theoharis


MOTION No:    16049

 

27a.   2000.987CV                                                                            (MILLER: 558-6344)

530 FOLSOM STREET, (aka 41 Clementina Street), northeast corner at Ecker Street, between First and Second Streets, Lot 17 in Assessor’s Block 3736 - Request for authorization of a CONDITIONAL USE for approximately 6,000 square feet of OFFICE SPACE AT OR BELLOW THE GROUND FLOOR and not offering on-site services to the general public and for OFF-STREET PARKING EXCEEDING ACCESSORY AMOUNTS (20 spaces when 15 are permitted), in conjunction with conversion of live/work units to approximately 46,000 square feet of office space, having been reviewed and approved by the Planning Commission on November 2, 2000, under Planning Code Sections 309 and 321 (also requiring a Variance of Planning Code standards for open space) in a C-3-S (Downtown Support) District and a 200-S Height and Bulk District.

Preliminary Recommendation: Approval with conditions

 

SPEAKER(S)        

(+) Steve Atkinson, Project Sponsor

(-) Sue Hestor

- Suggested at the time, tenant moves out

ACTION:                  Approved

AYES:                      Baltimore,  Fay, Joe, Mills, Salinas, Theoharis

ABSENT:                Chinchilla

MOTION No:           16050

 

27b.   2000.987CV                                                                            (MILLER: 558-6344)

530 FOLSOM STREET , (aka 41 Clementina Street), northeast corner at Ecker Street, between First and Second Streets, Lot 17 in Assessor’s Block 3736 - in a C-3-S (Downtown Support) District and a 200-SD Height and Bulk District (Lots 61 and 62).  DOWNTOWN OPEN SPACE VARIANCE SOUGHT: The proposal is to substitute an in lieu monetary contribution to the City’s Folsom Boulevard streetscape project for usable open space improvements along Folsom Street approved (but not yet emplaced) as part of the live/work project currently under construction of the site (and approved for conversion to office space).

 

SPEAKER(S)         None

ACTION:                  Approved

AYES:                      Baltimore,  Fay, Joe, Mills, Salinas, Theoharis

ABSENT:                Chinchilla

MOTION NO.          16051

 

28.     2000.824C                                                                               (YOUNG: 558-6346)

1351 GRANT AVENUE, west side between Vallejo and Green Streets; Lot 002 in Assessor's Block 0131: -- Consideration of the possible revocation of conditional use or the possible modification of or placement of additional conditions per Planning Code Section 303(f) of a prior authorization to allow the establishment of a full-service restaurant and bar, approximately 3,400 square feet in floor area, within the North Beach Neighborhood Commercial District and 40-X Height and Bulk District.  The proposal is to consider revocation, modification,  or  placement  of  additional  conditions on a conditional use authorization approved on December 17, 1998, for the conversion of a vacant commercial space,  the former Figoni Hardware Store,  into a full-service restaurant and bar, per Planning Code Sections 722.41 and 722.42.  The proposed full-service restaurant and bar is located on the ground floor level of an existing three-story residential over commercial building.  The proposal was approved under Building Permit Application No. 9912999.  There have been unresolved complaints from the community in relation to the construction and operation of the facilities and the possible eviction of residential tenants within the building. 


Preliminary Recommendation: Planning Commission to schedule a subsequent hearing to consider the revocation, modification, or placement of additional conditions on the conditional use authorized in Motion No. 14785 under Case No. 1998.243C.

(Continued from Regular Meeting of October 26, 2000)

 

SPEAKER(S)   None

ACTION:            Continued to February 8, 2001

AYES:                Baltimore, Chinchilla, Fay, Joe, Mills, Salinas, Theoharis

 

29.     2000.429C                                                                                 (LIGHT: 558-6254)

1060-1062 GEARY STREET, north side of street between Van Ness Avenue and Polk Street, Lots 9 and 9a in Assessor’s Block 694: -- Request for Conditional Use authorization to construct a 130-foot high mixed use building containing  approximately 6,000 square feet of retail use, 6 live/work units, artist gallery space and 27 residential units, and accessory parking, in an RC-4 (Residential-Commercial Combined, High Density) District, the Van Ness Special Use District, and a 130-V Height and Bulk District.

Preliminary Recommendation: Approval with conditions and a modification to change 6 live/work units to dwelling units and reduce building square footage by 2,150 square feet to meet F.A.R.

 

SPEAKER(S):

(+) Hahn Phan, Representing Project Sponsor

(+)Mr.  Gardner, Architect

- Gave an overall description about the project      

ACTION:                Approved as amended

AYES:                Baltimore, Fay, Joe, Mills, Salinas, Theoharis

ABSENT:               Chinchilla

MOTION No:     16052

 

30.     1999.217C                                                                             (WOODS; 558-6315)

2222 BROADWAY, north side, between Webster and Fillmore Streets, with additional frontage on Vallejo Street, Lots 1, 23 and 24 in Assessor’s Block 564 -Request for Conditional Use Authorization under Sections 209.3(g), 209.3(h), 303 and 304 of the Planning Code to permit a Planned Unit Development (PUD) for the expansion of the Schools of the Sacred Heart. The site consists of two private elementary schools and one private secondary school. The proposal is to demolish and remove the outdoor play yard and the two-story wood framed classroom building on the southwest corner of Vallejo and Webster Streets, behind the existing Grant Building, and to construct a new five-story 32,000 square-foot Fine Arts and Science building serving the existing elementary and secondary schools.  The proposal would require modification of rear yard requirements, pursuant to Section 134 of the Planning Code, in an RH-2 (Residential, House, Two-Family) District and a 40-X Height and Bulk District

Preliminary Recommendation: Approval with conditions

 

SPEAKER(S)   None

ACTION:            Continued to January 25, 2001

AYES:                Baltimore, Fay, Joe, Mills, Salinas, Theoharis

ABSENT:          Chinchilla

 

31a.   2000.299E                                                                                  (CHAN 558‑5982)

690 DE HARO STREET, Appeal of a Preliminary Negative Declaration.  The proposed project would demolish an existing single family house, and construct four two‑unit residential buildings in the Potrero Hill neighborhood.  The project site is zoned RH‑2 (Residential, House ‑Two Family), and is currently identified as Assessor’s Block 4031, Lots 26 and 27.  Lot 27 has been proposed for subdivision into three lots. 


Preliminary Recommendation: Uphold Negative Declaration

(Continued from Regular Meeting of November 2, 2000)

 

SPEAKER(S)  

(+) Christopher Cole

- This appeal is not about resolving this matter today

- It is whether we have meet the CEQA requirements that requires that an EIR be prepared

- It may cause significant impact to the environment

- Legal argument are stated that it will severe environmental damages

- The reason that the State of California encourage EIRs in all situations, the State wants us to have EIR when there is a significant environmental impact

- Experts disagree , we have the records of Timothy Kelly, that gives a detail historical significance of this property

- There is not mitigation in destroying a property that had been around for 100 years

- Neighbors would like to save this property

(+) Christopher Ver Plancke

- historical significance of the property

- research has been done in the dog patch neighborhood

- lack a good transportation

- emerge in Potrero Hill no single family houses

(+) Barbara Deutsch

- Environmental review is necessary

(+) Gloria Ferra

- Long time resident

- Potrero Hill is a place of quite beauty

(+) Elizabeth Deutsch

- concerned about traffic, parking

(+) Kevin Del

- concerned about density

(+) Unknown speaker

- Sit on brick foundation

- Not significant work has been done on the property

- support plan to be built

- best use of the property now is  new housing

- strongly support this project

(+) Ron Miguel

- EIR would hardly recommend upholding the negative declaration

- No EIR is necessary

- It is a natural area     

(+) Kathy Del

- No objection to the  project

(+) Barbara Preston

- SF needs more open space

(-) Joe O’Donoghue

- EIR is not necessary

- Accumulative impact , there will be a negative impact if we stop building

- Negative declaration should be upheld                  

(-) Babett Refky

- Neighbor was not notified properly

(-) Guy Crystal

- concerned about open space                     

(-) Josh Blume

- Is there substantial evidence?


- speculation and, evidences that are not substantial

- concerned about whether a property is eligible

ACTION:            Uphold Negative Declaration

AYES:                Baltimore, Fay, Joe, Mills, Salinas, Theoharis

ABSENT:          Chinchilla

MOTION No:    

 

E.       SPECIAL DISCRETIONARY REVIEW HEARING

 

At Approximately 7:46 P.M. the Planning Commission convened into a Special Discretionary Review (DR) Hearing to hear and act on Discretionary Review matters.

 

31b.   2000.299D                                                                        (M.SNYDER: 575-6891)

690 DeHARO STREET, northwest corner of DeHaro Street and 19th Street Right-of-Way, Lots 026 (to be subdivided) and 027 in Assessor’s Block 4031, proposing to demolish the existing single-family house and construct four duplexes in a RH-2 (Residential, House, Two-Family) District and a 40-X Height and Bulk District.

Preliminary Recommendation: Do not  take Discretionary Review and approve the project as submitted.

 

SPEAKER(S)

(-) Chris Cole, Representing project sponsor

- CEQA also are grounds for this Commission to turn down this project

(-) Kevin Del, Project Sponsor

- building is not habitable

- significantly no code compliance

(-) John Warner

- inspected property and conclude with the report that the original facade of the building

was kept

- in conclusion conditions of the bldg is such that everything would have to be remodeled to be code compliance

 

ACTION:          Do not take Discretionary Review and approve project

AYES:              Baltimore,  Fay, Joe, Mills, Salinas, Theoharis

ABSENT:         Chinchilla

 

 

32a.   2000.779D                                                                        (S.SNYDER: 558-6543)

746 CAROLINA STREET, on the west side of Carolina Street, between 20th and 22nd Streets, on Lot 5 of Assessor's block 4096, proposing to construct a new two-family dwelling on a vacant lot in an RH-2 (Residential, House, Two-family) District, and a 40-X Height and Bulk District.

Preliminary Recommendation: Approval

Note: On November 16, 2000, following public testimony the Commission continued the matter to 12/7/00 instructing Staff to provide the Residential Design Checklist and explain any concerns and analyses.  The vote was +7 -0 for the continuance.  Public Hearing to remain open.

(Continued from Regular Meeting of November 16, 2000)

DISCRETIONARY REVIEW WITHDRAWN

 

32b.   2000.779V                                                                         (S.SNYDER: 558-6543)

746 CAROLINA STREET, on the west side of Carolina Street between 20th and 22nd  Streets, on Lot 5 of Assessor's Block 4096 in an RH-2 (Residential House, Two-Family) District. FRONT SETBACK VARIANCE SOUGHT: The proposal is to construct a new two-family dwelling on a vacant lot.


(Continued from Regular Meeting of November 16, 2000)

WITHDRAWN

 

33.     2000.049DDDD                                                            (CRAWFORD: 558-6358)

1021 FRANCISCO STREET, between Larkin and Polk Streets, Lot 023 in Assessor’s Block 0477, proposing to construct vertical and horizontal additions to the existing two-family dwelling consisting of two stories of living space above a garage.  A new story of living space with a rear projecting deck and stairs is proposed above the existing living space and a portion of the existing building envelope will be extended to the rear in an RH-2 (Residential, House, Two-Family) District and a 40-X Height and Bulk District.

Preliminary Recommendation: Do not take Discretionary Review and approve the project as per the revised plans submitted on September 20,2000.

 

 

SPEAKER(S)

(+) John Larkin, D.R. Requestor

- No dialogue with neighbors

- concerned abut cubic footage of the 4th floor

- 14 feet above our roof line

- the air and light will change dramatically

- Excessive size of the ceiling

- Won’t have any privacy

- In addition there is a bay window

- DR packet dated November 15

- new material that was not sent on time to them

- from 2 unit to 1, square footage changes

(+) Jeanny Loughran

-   This plan will impact their home and lifestyle

- is not a 2 family dwelling

- we share sunlight and view

- 24 foot above our house

- pleading for a DR

- asked the Commission to reject this plans          

(+) Kate Black

- asked for a 18 inch height reduction

(+) Jack Scott, representing owner

- bulk of building is really an Issue

- keeping residential guidelines

- is not a five story building,

- privacy issue

(+) Joe O’Donoghue

- 18 inches reduction, it will destruct the project

 

ACTION:          Do not take DR and approved project as amended

AYES:                         Baltimore, Chinchilla, Fay, Joe, Mills, Salinas, Theoharis

ABSENT:         Chinchilla

 

34.                                                                                                          2000.1034D            (JONES: 558-6477)

220 MAGELLAN , northwest side between Pacheco Street and Sola Avenue, Lot 005 in Assessor’s Block 2863, proposing to construct a two-story horizontal addition at the rear of the property in a RH-1(D) (Residential, House, One-Family, Detached) District and a 40-X Height and Bulk District.

Preliminary Recommendation: Do not take Discretionary Review and approve the project as submitted.

DISCRETIONARY REVIEW WITHDRAWN

 


35.     2000.884D                                                                              (PURVIS: 558-6354)

688 POWHATTAN AVENUE, Appeal of a determination of compatibility, pursuant to Planning Code Section 242(e)(6)(B), of Building Permit Application No. 2000/04/04/6293, to construct a 3-story, single-family dwelling at a height of 30 feet and with two off-street parking spaces.  The project site is within an RH-1 (Residential, House, One-Family) District, with a 40-X Height and Bulk designation and is within the Bernal Heights Special Use District.

Preliminary Recommendation: Take Discretionary Review and approve project with modifications                         

(Continued from Regular Meeting of November 16, 2000)

DISCRETIONARY REVIEW WITHDRAWN

 

F.       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 jurisdiction of the Commission except agenda items.  With respect to agenda items, your opportunity to address the Commission will be afforded when the item is reached in the meeting with one exception.  When the agenda item has already been reviewed in a public hearing at which members of the public were allowed to testify and the Commission has closed the public hearing, your opportunity to address the Commission must be exercised during the Public Comment portion of the Calendar.  Each member of the public may address the Commission for up to three minutes.

 

“The Brown Act forbids a commission from taking action or discussing any item not appearing on the posted agenda, including those items raised at public comment.  In response to public comment, the commission is limited to:

 

 

(1)  responding to statements made or questions posed by members of the public; or

(2)  requesting staff to report back on a matter at a subsequent meeting; or

(3)  directing staff to place the item on a future agenda.  (Government Code Section 54954.2(a))

 

Adjournment: 9:58 P.M.

 

 

THE DRAFT MINUTES ARE PROPOSED FOR ADOPTION AT THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION ON THURSDAY, JANUARY 18, 2001.

 

 

 

 

Back to top

 

SAN FRANCISCO

PLANNING COMMISSION

 

 Meeting Minutes

 

Commission Chambers - Room 400

City Hall, 1 Dr. Carlton B. Goodlett Place

Thursday, December 14, 2000

2:00 PM

 

Regular Meeting

 

 

PRESENT:               Baltimore, Chinchilla, Fay, Joe, Mills, Salinas, Theoharis

ABSENT:                  None

 

THE MEETING WAS CALLED TO ORDER BY PRESIDENT THEOHARIS AT 2:15 P.M.

 

STAFF IN ATTENDANCE: Gerald G. Green - Director of Planning; Larry Badiner - Zoning Administrator; Isolde Wilson; Paul Lord; Samuel Assefa; Stephen Shotland; Maltzer; Navarrete; Elizabeth Gordon; Cecilia Jaroslawsky; Ellen Miramontes; Craig Nikitas; Sharon Young; Judy Martin; Andrea Wong; Matt Snyder; Patricia Gerber - Executive Secretary; Nora Priego - Transcription Secretary; Andrea Green - Acting Commission Secretary

 

A.        ITEMS PROPOSED FOR CONTINUANCE

 

1.         2000.436C                                                                               (SMITH: 558-6322)

1594 - 43RD AVENUE - northeast corner of the intersection of Lawton Street and 43rd Avenue; Lot 017 in Assessor's Block 1888 --  Request for Conditional Use Authorization under Planning Code Section 710.83 to install three antennas in a canister on the roof and two equipment cabinets and one battery cabinet in the garage of a mixed-use building located in a (NC-1) Neighborhood Commercial Cluster District and a 40-X Height and Bulk District.  The subject site is a Limited Preference 6 site according to Wireless Telecommunications Services (WTS) Siting Guidelines, 1996.

Preliminary Recommendation:

(Proposed for Continuance to January 11, 2001)

 

SPEAKER(S):           None

ACTION:         Continued to January 11, 2001

AYES:             Baltimore, Chinchilla, Fay, Joe, Mills, Salinas, Theoharis


 

2.         2000.270C                                                                (BRESSANUTTI: 575-6892)

535-537 VALENCIA STREET -  east side between 16th and 17th Streets; Lot 044 in Assessor’s Block 3569 - Request for Conditional Use Authorization to (1) allow continued operation of an existing large (over 1,000 square feet) fast food restaurant, presently d.b.a. “Cable Car Pizza,” per Section 726.43 of the Planning Code, and (2) to extend the hours of operation from 2:00 a.m. to 3:00 a.m., per Section 726.27, in the Valencia Street Neighborhood Commercial District and a 50-X Height and Bulk District.

Preliminary Recommendation: Approval of Large Fast Food Restaurant use; disapproval of extended hours.

(Continued from Regular Meeting of December 7, 2000)

(Proposed for Continuance to January 11, 2001)

 

SPEAKER(S):           None

ACTION:         Continued to January 11, 2001

AYES:             Baltimore, Chinchilla, Fay, Joe, Mills, Salinas, Theoharis

 

3.         2000.985C                                                                                  (CHIN: 558-6897)

1176 SUTTER STREET (AKA, 1214 POLK STREET) - northeast corner at Polk Street; Lot 011 in Assessor's Block 0669 --  Request for Conditional Use authorization to allow amplified live and recorded music (defined as “Other Entertainment” by Planning Code Section 790.38) in an existing bar, d.b.a. An Sibin, as required by Planning Code Section 723.48, in the Polk Street Neighborhood Commercial Zoning District and a 65-A Height and Bulk District.

Preliminary Recommendation:

(Proposed for Continuance to January 11, 2001)

 

SPEAKER(S):           None

ACTION:         Continued to January 11, 2001

AYES:             Baltimore, Chinchilla, Fay, Joe, Mills, Salinas, Theoharis

 

4.         2000.1007T                                                                              (LORD: 558-6311)

LIVE-WORK TO LOFT HOUSING AMENDMENT - Consideration of adoption of  amendments to Part II, Chapter II, of the San Francisco Municipal Code (Planning Code) by amending Sections 102.7 and 102.13 to redefining "live/work" units as "loft housing" and classifying them as residential uses; repealing Section 233 regarding live/work; adding Section 232 to establish requirements for loft housing that would subject it to existing live/work controls except that there would be no restriction on the nature of work which could be performed in the unit so long as the use is permitted in the SSO (Service/Secondary Office) Zoning District and no requirement that the occupant(s) work in the unit, would establish density standards, would require loft housing to comply with existing inclusionary housing policies, would require loft housing in residential areas to comply with all requirements for residential uses including the residential design guidelines, would require loft housing constructed in areas not zoned residential to comply with non-residential design guidelines and all requirements for residential uses except for height, front setback and open space requirements, would establish procedures for converting live/work units to non-residential uses, and would establish loft housing rear yard standards; states that this ordinance supersedes any inconsistent Planning Commission policies.

Preliminary Recommendation: Adopt the Draft Ordinance

(Continued from Regular Meeting of December 7, 2000)

(Proposed for Continuance to January 11, 2001)

 

SPEAKER(S):           None

ACTION:         Continued to January 11, 2001

AYES:             Baltimore, Chinchilla, Fay, Joe, Mills, Salinas, Theoharis

 

5.         2000.1026C                                                                         (WOODS: 558-6315)


                                    4314 CALIFORNIA STREET - north side, between Fifth and Sixth Avenues, Lot 14 in Assessor’s Block 1365 -- Request for Conditional Use Authorization under Sections 303 and 710.27 of the Planning Code to extend the bar hours of an existing bar and restaurant establishment (the V Pub Bar and Grill) from 11:00 p.m. to 2:00 a.m. in an NC-1 (Neighborhood Commercial Cluster District) Zoning District and 40-X Height and Bulk District.

Preliminary Recommendation: Pending

(Proposed for Continuance to January 18, 2001)

 

SPEAKER(S):           None

ACTION:         Continued to January 18, 2001

AYES:             Baltimore, Chinchilla, Fay, Joe, Mills, Salinas, Theoharis

 

6.         2000.1118DDDD                                                                 (NIKITAS: 558-6306)

33 WALNUT STREET - between Pacific and Jackson Streets, Lot 002 in Assessor’s Block 0972 - proposing to demolish existing rear deck and bay, and to add a rear expansion 19'-10"+ deep at the first floor and crawl space and 15'-10" deep at the second-story with a roof deck above and a new attic level dormer in front in an RH-1 (Residential, House, One-Family) District and a 40-X Height and Bulk District.

Preliminary Recommendation: Do not take DR and approve project as submitted

(Proposed for Continuance to January 18, 2001)

 

SPEAKER(S):           None

ACTION:         Continued to January 18, 2001

AYES:             Baltimore, Chinchilla, Fay, Joe, Mills, Salinas, Theoharis

 

7.         2000.856C                                                                            (FALLAY: 558-6367)

                                    445 BURNETT AVENUE - southeast corner of Burnett and Dixie Avenues,  Lot 024 in Assessor's Block 2756 -- Request for a Conditional Use Authorization under Planning Code Section 209.1(h) to allow an additional single family dwelling unit on the subject property for a total of thirteen units in an RH-3 (Residential, House, Three-Family) District and 40-X Height and Bulk District.

PROJECT HAS CHANGED FROM ORIGINAL NOTICE.  A NEW NOTICE WILL BE ISSUED.  THE PROJECT AS DESCRIBED ABOVE IS NO LONGER BEFORE THE COMMISSION FOR CONSIDERATION.

 

SPEAKER(S):           None

ACTION:         Case Withdrawn

AYES:             Baltimore, Chinchilla, Fay, Joe, Mills, Salinas, Theoharis

 

8.         2000.385C                                                                        (SANCHEZ: 558-6679)

2001 UNION STREET - southwest corner at Buchanan Street; Lot 024 in Assessor’s Block 0541:   Request for Conditional Use Authorization pursuant to Section 725.83 of the Planning Code to install a total of eight antennas on the existing rooftop penthouses and an equipment shelter on the second floor of the existing six-story mixed-use building as part of Nextel’s wireless telecommunications network within the Union Street Neighborhood Commercial District (NCD) and a 40-X Height and Bulk District.  As per the City & County of San Francisco’s Wireless Transmission Services (WTS) Facilities Siting Guidelines the proposal is a Preference 2 (co-location site).

Preliminary Recommendation: Pending

(Continued from Regular Meeting of December 7, 2000)

(Proposed for Continuance to February 1, 2001)

 

SPEAKER(S):           None

ACTION:         Continued to February 1, 2001

AYES:             Baltimore, Chinchilla, Fay, Joe, Mills, Salinas, Theoharis


 

B.        COMMISSIONERS’ QUESTIONS AND MATTERS

 

9.       Consideration of Adoption - draft minutes of November 2, and 9, 2000.

SPEAKER(S):            None

ACTION:          Continued to January 11, 2001

AYES:              Baltimore, Chinchilla, Fay, Joe, Mills, Salinas, Theoharis

 

 

10.     Commission Matters

 

Commissioner Theoharis:

Would like for Commissioners to receive a copy of the case report for Item 17 at least 15 days in advance.

 

C.        DIRECTOR’S REPORT

 

11.     Director’s Announcements.

None

 

12.     Review of Past Week’s Events at the Board of Supervisors & Board of Appeals.

 

Larry Badiner:

He will be putting his interpretations on the City Web Page so the public can have immediate access to the information, therefore, submit their comments and/or questions.

 

D.        REGULAR CALENDAR

 

13.       DWELLING UNIT MERGER POLICY                                (WILSON: 558-6602)

Policy discussion on the removal of dwelling units. Consideration for adopting a policy of Discretionary Review of all permit applications that result in the removal of a legal dwelling unit.

 

SPEAKER(S):

(-) Andrew Zucki

 - He is an attorney and counsels small property owners.

-  He is in opposition to this policy.

- There is a housing study which is going on at City Hall and he believes that this policy should  wait to be voted on until those results are in.

(-) Duane Danielsen

- He is a third generation San Franciscan.

- He is surprised that this policy has come to the Commission so quickly.

- This policy is punitive to small property owners.

- He is starting a family and when he is ready to expand to his house he disagrees that he will have to go through a Discretionary Review.

- He has a tenant which left recently who was not evicted.

(-) Dean and Catherine Akazawa

- They have a unit which is pending a merger.

- They recently bought a duplex which was originally a single family home.

- The merger is being done because he is starting a family.  His wife’s sister is living with them currently because she can’t afford a place to live.  When their babies are born (twins) his mother will also come to live with them.

- They will not be taking any additional space.


- Since their project is in the “pipe line” he would like for his project to be exempt from Discretionary Review.

- He was shocked to find out that this policy would be voted on at the Commission.

(-) Michael Vanni

- He and his wife started a project to merge units since more family members will be moving in.

- They are almost half way through the project and have spent thousands of dollars.

- Now they become aware that this policy will be voted on at the Commission.

- Since he started his project in February of this year and many permits have been issued, he believes that this is unfair since he would have to go through Discretionary Review.

(-) Tamsin Randlett

- She and her husband bought  property which is going through the “pipeline” right now.

- They have spend a lot of money and have had to borrow in order to pay for their merger project.

- They are not changing the footprint of the project.

- They would like have project s that are in the “pipeline” be exempt from this policy.

(-) Erin Day

- She and her husband own a property.

- Her project is in the “pipe line” as well.

- In August of this year, they applied for a dwelling merger, what through all the paperwork and now become aware of this policy which would cause problems to their project.

- Although she is sympathetic to the reason for this policy, she doesn’t believe that projects which have been started should have to go through Discretionary Reviews.

- This policy will cause a tremendous burden to them.

(-) Erin Oberly

- She is glad she doesn’t have a project at the Planning Department right now.

- Yet, she is sympathetic to the people who have spoken previously which will be affected by this policy.

- This policy will cause a tremendous burden on small property owners who wish to expand because their families are growing and instead of buying a bigger house (because they can’t afford it) would rather expand their homes and merge dwelling units for more space.

- Large properties and/or projects should go through

(-) Robert Celso

- He received an e-mail today of someone who told him about this meeting.  He wishes he would have had more time to prepare.

- He does not agree with this policy since the Commission is so interested in not loosing rentals that they are not taking into consideration the families who own small properties and need to expand since their families are growing.

(-) Will Sprietsma

- He owns a small property

- There are no tenants involved.

- He has been saving money to make this property into a single-family home.

- Right now, he has to go outside to get to the other part of the house.

- There are no tenants involved so he doesn’t think it’s fair that he would have to go through Discretionary Reviews.

(-) Jim Fabris

- He is opposed to this policy.

- A legal dwelling unit is removed when two units are merged.  A long time ago, many of the multiple unit properties were single-family homes yet they started splitting.  Now because society is changing, many of these properties are becoming single-family homes.

- This policy is inappropriate.

(-) Siesel Maibach

- She will not repeat what everyone has said, but is in opposition to this policy.

- Her plans for her project have been in the Planning Department for many months now.

(-) Donald Gibbs


- He grew up in the Mission District and had to leave the City he loves because he can’t afford it.

- Now he has moved back and has a project which will merge units.

- He would like to have a second bedroom in his 1 bedroom unit.

- He objects to the design review since it’s an erosion of property rights.

- The department needs to be more creative in finding a solution.

(-) Robert Rosenbaum

- He lives in a unit which was converted.

- He is not trying to merge units yet is sympathetic to the speakers who have merger projects.

- In the future he might want to merge units and thinks it’s not fair to have to go through Discretionary Review.

(-) David Grossman

- He has a 2 unit building.

- He learned that his tenants are moving out of state.

- He is starting a family and would like to merge the units since there will be no evictions.

- He echoes the sympathy what the Department is trying to do yet his hear goes out to the people who have dwelling merger projects.

(-) Ted Loewenberg

- He heard about this policy through the Small Property Owners Organization.

- He pays mortgage, taxes, repair costs, etc to his own property and now the Department is telling him what he  has to do with his property.

- He finds it unfair that there is a recommendation to adopt the policy after public speakers.  In any court, the public has a right to speak and then a vote is conducted.  Input should be considered first and not just make decisions by what the Director has recommended.

(-) Mary Lis

- She owns a property which is going through the Planning Department right now.

- She and her husband have a daughter and are expecting another baby.  So, they would like to expand their home.

- If this policy is passed they will not be able to merge their 2 units into 1.

(-) Elizabeth Airheart

- She is an attorney and she is representing a family who has a project right now in the Planning Department.

- She would like to request that these type of project should be exempt from this policy.

(-) Joe O’Donahue

- He recommends that this policy should be continued and brought to the attention of the Board of Supervisors.

- This policy is an intrusion on people rights.

- This policy is also forcing people buy properties with more than one unit and spend money on merging these units.

- He also recommends that properties that have started projects to have them continue and go through the process.

(-) John (last name unclear)

- He is here for another matter but decided to speak because his property was never approved as a single-family home, yet the two units house 1 family.

- Having units merged would create less parking problems.

 

ACTION:         Policy Adopted.   Guidelines to this policy will be elaborated and presented to the Commission on January 18, 2001.

AYES:             Chinchilla, Mills, Salinas, Theoharis

NAYES:          Baltimore, Joe, Fay

MOTION:        16053

 

14.       2000.996T                                                                        (HERRERA: 558-6316)


HOURS OF OPERATION - Consideration of amendments to the Planning Code Sections 206.3, 209.8 and to add Section 303 (c)(7) to require Conditional Use Authorization with Good Neighbor Policies per Section 805.5 for hours of operation between 2 a.m. to 6 a.m. in the RC‑3 and RC‑4 Districts for billiard hall, dance hall, nightclub, other amusement enterprise and nighttime entertainment activities, and adult entertainment; and to require Conditional Use Authorization for hours of operation between 2 a.m. to 6 a.m. in the RC‑3 and RC‑4 Districts for bars and various eating establishments (full-service restaurant, large fast-food restaurant, and small self service restaurant); and to amend Sections 210.3 and 221(f) to require Conditional Use Authorization to operate amusement and adult entertainment enterprises in C‑3‑R and C‑3‑G districts between the hours of 2 a.m. to 6 a.m.

Recommendation: Adoption of proposed amendments.

Note: On November 9, 2000, following public testimony, the Commission closed public hearing.  A motion to approve the legislation failed to carry by a vote of +2 -5.  Commissioners Baltimore, Chinchilla, Mills and Theoharis voted against.  The matter was then continued to December 7, 2000.

(Continued from Regular Meeting of December 7, 2000)

 

SPEAKER(S):

(+) Daniel Emerson

- This issue seems to be complicated but it’s actually very simple.

- He attends church in the Tenderloin

- There are families that live in the Tenderloin as well as various churches and YMCA.  This community is asking for support to control it’s destiny.

- They are not against restaurants or businesses that bring value to the community yet there needs to be control in order to grow the neighborhood.

- CU allows the community to work with the Police Department.

(+) Robert Garcia

- He would like Commission to adopt this policy since neighborhoods need protection.

- People who work in the Downtown Area, Civic Center and Financial Area will be the first victims of gentrification.  Gentrification is need necessary to clean up the neighborhoods.

- People need to be protected especially between the hours of 2 a.m. and 6 a.m.

- He is not against restaurants.

- Neighborhoods need this projection.

(+) Phillip Faight

- Displaced a map of extended hours permit locations.

- Residential neighborhoods are protected so why aren’t downtown people not protected as well.

- This neighborhood needs the same type of controls as other neighborhoods.

- People need to be able to sleep between 2 a.m. and 6 a.m.

- Conditional Use and controls are required for this area.

(+) Linda Mjellem

- She represents the Union Square Business Association.

- There are many fine restaurants in this area as well as hotels and stores.

- In the hotel rooms of the square, there are people who seek entertainment but also who would like a good-night’s sleep.

- A conditional use would have control on late-night entertainment.

(+) Bob Begley

- He is a native of this city and works for the hotel association.

- The hotel association has experienced very good business during the last couple of years.

- People have choices of place to go.  People might decide to not come to San Francisco because they can’t get a good night’s sleep or have problems on the street.

(-) Terrance Alan

- San Francisco Late Night Coalition

- There is no gentrification plan for the downtown area.

- The media took a statement that he made.


- After hours is being called evil.  Something that happens after 2 a.m. becomes a problem.

- There has been a moratorium in certain areas already.

- The police department has a process to issue late-night permits.

- There has been an intense pressure to after-hours establishments.  These pressures have caused many establishments to close.

(-) Kathleen Harrington

- President of the Golden Gate Restaurant Association

- She is thankful to Supervisor Becerril.

- She doesn’t agree that this conditional use be imposed on restaurants.

- For restaurants, they still need to obtain a permit from the police department.

- She supports the notification and not the conditional use.

(+) Dick Millet

- He has an area in his neighborhood (Potrero) which has a number one use of loft housing and number two use are late night establishments.

- The police policy of notification is not good enough.

- He worries about creating character in neighborhoods have late night establishments there.

- There are good late night establishments and there are bad ones.

(+) David Overdorf

- He lives, works and owns property in San Francisco.

- There has been a lot of work put into establishing legislation and a compromise.

- The situation is that a moratorium is expiring soon.

- He is supportive to the Planning Department’s recommendation.

- He is asking the Commission to give the same protection as other neighborhoods and approve a conditional use.

 

ACTION:         Legislation will go back to the BOS on Monday, December 18, 2001.  No Action Required.

AYES:             Baltimore, Chinchilla, Fay, Joe, Mills, Salinas, Theoharis

 

15.       2000.324R                                                                           (ASSEFA: 558-6625)

COLIN COURT (AKA COLIN PLACE) STREET VACATION - easterly of Jones Street between Post and Geary Streets on Assessor's Block 305 - Consideration of a proposal to vacate Colin Court (AKA Colin Place) and install a steel gate at its entrance.

Preliminary Recommendation: Finding proposal not in conformity with the General Plan.

 

SPEAKER(S):

(+) Cy Szpyrka

- He is trying to clean up his neighborhood.

- This would be between 2 a.m. and 4 am.

- This alley is a problem.

- A gate would assist in eliminating all these problems.

(+) Michael Goldstein

- He is a friend of a person who couldn’t make it to the meeting.

- There is no parking except through the alley. 

- Who will have a key to that gate?

- There is a safety issue as well.

- He didn’t know that this case would be heard.

 

ACTION:         Project Disapproved

AYES:             Baltimore, Chinchilla, Fay, Joe, Mills, Salinas, Theoharis

MOTION:        16054

 

16.       2000.994ET                                                                   (SHOTLAND: 558-6308)


INCREASING PENALTIES FOR VIOLATION OF REGULATIONS GOVERNING GENERAL ADVERTISING SIGNS - Consideration of a proposal to Adopt an Amendment to Part II, Chapter II of the San Francisco Municipal Code (Planning Code) by amending Section 176 and adding Section 610 to substantially increase the penalties for violation of regulations governing general advertising signs.  Fees and administrative penalties collected pursuant to Section 610 would be used to establish and fund a Planning Code Special Account which would be used to fund sign regulation enforcement activities and graffiti removal.  The proposed Planning Code amendment was introduced by Supervisor Leno at a Board of Supervisors hearing on July 31, 2000 (Board of Supervisors File No. 001391).  Testimony and Commission considerations could result in recommendations to modify the proposed legislation. 

Preliminary Recommendation: Adopt the Draft Ordinance.

 

SPEAKER(S):

(+) Didi Workman - San Francisco Beautiful

- Assessing significant fines for erecting non-permit signs should be enforced.

- These fees would back to continue the enforcement.

- She urges the Commission to adopt this ordinance and enforce it.

(+) Peter  Winkelstein - SPUR

- SPUR supports this legislation.

- If the legislation passes, he would like to make some conditions:  1) make an inventory of all the signs.  When this goes back to BOS, he would like to s

- The Commission may want to do the inventory through a contract.

(+) Dr. Francis Rigney

- He supports the motion of not mixing “apples and oranges”. In other words, not mixing billboard regulations with graffiti.

(+) Did not state name

- She is concerned with the way this City looks.

- There is a lot of pollution in this City: air, graffiti and now billboards.

- She is thankful to Supervisor Leno for initiating this legislation.

- She agrees with not mixing billboards and graffitti.

? - Board of Directors of Union Square Association

- They are in support of this legislation.

- He would like the billboards which are not legal to be taken down.

- 90% of the billboards are illegal.

- Some of the billboards are interesting yet they are illegal and should be taken down.

(+) Milo Hankey - Member of San Francisco Beautiful

- This legislation is very important.

- This signage has reached a critical point.

- Billboards are ugly and will still be ugly.

- He would like the Commission to consider a moratorium of any new signage.

- An additional revenue source would be to impose taxes on signage since it’s encroaching on public space.

(+) Robert Freese - Member of San Francisco Beautiful

- This is an alternative of an already banned proposal.

- This policy should be adopted.

(+) Did not state name

- San Franciscans are trying very hard to preserve the cityscape of this City.

- These billboards add to the visual clutter of the streets.

- In the past sign companies have showed up to Planning Commission hearings.

- Do not be persuaded by these comments.

(+) Steve Shinn

- He supports the City’s efforts to enforce the billboard regulations

- He would like the Director of the department

(+) Dick Millet - Potrero Boosters Association


- Many billboards could be prevented if this legislation is approved.

- He agrees with the Director’s explanation that we are not mixing “apples and oranges”

- Many of the companies who have billboards will run away.

(+) Patricia Reynolds - National Association of Realtors

- This legislation will only make San Francisco more beautiful and more valuable.

 

ACTION:         Draft Ordinance Adopted with Recommendations from Planning Director:  Any reference to ? will be taken out.

AYES:             Baltimore, Chinchilla, Fay, Joe, Mills, Salinas, Theoharis

MOTION:        16055

 

17.       1999.346TZ                                                                       (MALTZER: 558-6391)

ADOPTION OF NEW POLICIES REGARDING OFFICE USE AND CONVERSION OF LIVE/WORK (LOFT HOUSING) WITHIN INTERIM INDUSTRIAL PROTECTION ZONES AND MIXED USE HOUSING ZONES - Consideration of adopting new policies to discourage office development and to further discourage the conversion of live/work to office within the Interim Controls boundary area.  These new policies are to supplement existing policies previously adopted August 5, 1999 (CPC Res. 14861).

Preliminary Recommendation: Adopt Resolution creating new policies within Interim Zones

(Continued from Regular Meeting of December 7, 2000)

 

SPEAKER(S):           None

ACTION:         Continued to January 18, 2001

AYES:             Baltimore, Chinchilla, Fay, Joe, Mills, Salinas, Theoharis

 

18a.    1999.849E                                                                    (NAVARRETE 558-5975)

809-821 FOLSOM STREET - 78 RESIDENTIAL UNITS - Appeal of a Negative Declaration. Assessor's Block 3752 Lots 92, 93, and 94, at 809-821 Folsom Street. The proposal is the new construction of 78 residential units (32 one-bedroom and 46 two-bedroom) in a five-story plus basement, 56-foot tall, approximately 108,100-gross-square-foot building covering a 28,875 square foot site.  The project site is currently occupied by a 58-car public parking lot and two-story concrete buildings totaling approximately 14,600 square feet, which would be demolished.  The project would include about 76 parking spaces located in a basement parking garage with entrance and exit both on Folsom Street.  The project site is in the South of Market Residential/Service District (SOM RSD) and the 40-X/85-B Height and Bulk District.  The site lies within the Mixed-Use Housing District of the Industrial Protection Zone (IPZ).

(Continued from Regular Meeting of November 2, 2000)

Preliminary Recommendation: Uphold Preliminary Recommendation

 

SPEAKER(S):           None

ACTION:         Appeal Withdrawn

AYES:             Baltimore, Chinchilla, Fay, Joe, Mills, Salinas, Theoharis

 

18b.    1999.849VC                                                                       (GORDON: 558-6309)

                                    821 FOLSOM STREET, on the south side, a through lot to Shipley Street between Fourth and Fifth Streets, Lots 92, 93, 94 in Assessor’s Block 3572 -- Request for Conditional Use Authorization to: (1) allow a 56-foot tall structure above the 40‑foot base height  under Planning Code Section 263.11(b) and (e); and (2) allow exceptions to bulk limit of the 85-B bulk district above 50‑feet in height as stated in Planning Code Section 270 and pursuant to Planning Code Section 271(b) and (c); and (3) provide off-street parking in excess of the accessory amounts as defined in Planning Code Section 204.5 pursuant to Planning Code Section 157(a), (b), and (d).  The site is within the RSD (Residential/Service Mixed Use) District and the Mixed‑Use Housing Area of the Industrial Protection Zone.  The site is also within a 40‑X/85‑B Height and Bulk District.

Preliminary Recommendation: Approval with Conditions.


SPEAKER(S):

(+) Chris Maney

- The concept is to develop a 78-unit residential unit with subterranean parking.

- The building will have an open courtyard.

(+) Ken Iremonger

- He would like to see the Shipley Street elevation.

 

ACTION:         Approved

AYES:             Baltimore, Chinchilla, Fay, Joe, Mills, Salinas, Theoharis

MOTION:        16056

 

18c.     1999.849VC                                                                       (GORDON: 558-6309)

821 FOLSOM STREET -  south side, a through lot to Shipley Street between Fourth and Fifth Streets, Lots 92, 93, 94 in Assessor's Block 3572.  Request for a rear yard exception under Planning Code Sections 134(e) and 307(g). Planning Code Section 134(a)(1), requires the minimum rear yard of the subject site to be 41.25 feet in depth (equal to 25 percent of the total depth of the lot), from the Shipley Street property line -- occupying about 7,219-square feet in area.  The Project Sponsor proposes to replace the required rear yard with a central courtyard of approximately 6,200-square feet, and other roof deck open areas of approximately 1,760-square feet.  The site is within the RSD (Residential/Service Mixed Use) District, a 40-X/85-B Height and Bulk District and the Mixed-Use Housing Area of the Industrial Protection Zone. 

 

SPEAKER(S):           None

ACTION:         Zoning Administrator has taken Variance under Advisement.

AYES:             Baltimore, Chinchilla, Fay, Joe, Mills, Salinas, Theoharis

 

 

19a.    2000.052E                                                             (JAROSLAWSKY: 558‑5970)

14, 20, 26, 32, 38, 50, and 56 ARCO WAY and three additional vacant lots Appeal of a Preliminary Negative Declaration.  The vacant project site is located on lots 024 through 028, lot 032,  lots 037 through 039 and lot 051 located on block 3154 within the Outer Mission District of the City of San Francisco.  The address of the project site is 14, 20, 26, 32, 38,  50, and 56 Arco Way and three additional vacant lots.  The proposed project includes the rezoning of the lots from Public (P) to Residential House‑One Family (RH‑1) with a 40‑X Height and Bulk Designation and the construction of one, single‑family structure on each legal lot.  Each structure would be approximately 2,000 square feet, contain a two‑car garage and be a maximum of 30 feet in height.  The lots are along the northern side of Arco Way and range from 1,973 square feet to 9,900 square feet and abut the Bay Area Rapid Transit tracks to the north.

Preliminary Recommendation: Uphold Preliminary Negative Declaration

(Continued from Regular Meeting of November 9, 2000)

 

SPEAKER(S):

(-) Nazario Bernardo

- He objects to the

- He and some of the neighbors have prepared a video which was shown to the public.

(-) David Hooper - Mission Terrace Improvement Association

- He would like to point out that 1873 is a mistake.  The smallest lot is 1150 square feet.  This item is a question of how you read the property lines.

- These lots are averaging about 25 x 53 feet.

- These lots are quite small.

(-) Jose Hernandez

- On page 14, item 8 - states that the site does not have any vegetation yet the video shows vegetation and would like to have further study done on the site.


(+) Jim Reuben - Reuben and Alter - Project Sponsor

- Most of the comments on the tape were regarding the project and not the environmental impact.

- The neg dec does not show any significant impact.  Staff’s work is adequate.

- This site used to contain houses then BART purchased the property and demolished the property. 

- Housing is necessary and this site will develop housing.

 

ACTION:         Negative Declaration Upheld

AYES:             Baltimore, Chinchilla, Fay, Joe, Mills, Salinas, Theoharis

MOTION:        16057

 

19b.    2000.052EZ                                                                        (BORDEN: 558-6321)

14, 20, 26, 32, 38, 50, and 56 ARCO WAY and three additional vacant Lots, north side of Arco Way, abutting the Bay Area Rapid Transit tracks; Lots 024, 025, 026, 027, 028, 032, 037, 038, 039, and 051 in Assessor's Block 3154 -- Request to reclassify the subject property from P (Public District) to RH-1(Residential, House, One-Family District) with a 40-X Height and Bulk District designation. The rezoning of these parcels is related to building permit applications on file with the Department  to construct ten single-family structures on the ten existing vacant lots. Each single-family dwelling will require separate approval under the building permit application process.

Preliminary Recommendation: Adoption of the Zoning Map Amendment.

(Continued from Regular Meeting of November 9, 2000)

 

SPEAKER(S):

(-) Cecile Lozano

- Project should not be approved.

-These lots are not the same size as they used to be, before BART bought the property.

- There is a lots of noise, can’t even open windows

(-) Angela Olson

- She lives in the neighborhood.

- The lots are on a lope and are very small.

- She will be impacted with this development.

- She agrees with homes being built there but not 9.

(-) David Hooper - Mission Terrace Neighborhood Association

- There has been no effort to work with the context of the neighborhood.

- There will be no back yards on these houses.

- The lots are extremely narrow.

- Nine buildings on narrow, short blocks should be analyzed.

(-) Gene Bernardo

- She and her husband live on Arco Way.

- She realizes that there is a housing shortage but these many houses are too much.

- A smaller number of houses would be more appropriate.

(-) Jose Hernandez

- The point of the video is to show that the site is not appropriate for housing.

- This project should be denied.

- Housing is needed but not these type of housing.

- The lots have been on the market for a long time but no one has come forward to purchase the lots and construct anything -- until now.

 

ACTION:         Map Rezoning Approved

AYES:             Baltimore, Chinchilla, Fay, Joe, Mills, Salinas, Theoharis

MOTION:        16058

 


20a.    2000.656CV                                                              (MIRAMONTES: 558-6348)

1988 (formerly 1946) VAN NESS AVENUE, east side between Washington  and Jackson Streets, Lot 10A in Assessor’s Block 598 ‑‑Request for Conditional Use Authorization under Planning Code Section 209.8(d) for the provision of 14,910 square feet of office space located above the ground floor on a site located within an RC‑4 (Residential‑Commercial Combined, High Density) District, 80‑D Height and Bulk District,  the Van Ness Special Use District and the Van Ness Special Sign District.  Conditional Use Authorization is also required under Planning Code Section 253.2 for alteration which causes the structure to exceed 40 feet in height.  The proposal is to add two new stories plus a top‑floor mezzanine to an existing three‑story building.

Preliminary Recommendation:  Approve with conditions

 

SPEAKER(S):

(+) ?

- He is a native San Franciscan.

- He is an attorney and is very blessed to be able to present this project to the Commission.

- He has contacted the various neighbors especially those who would be affected by the project.

(+) May Yu - Project Sponsor

- Many of the neighbors have submitted support letters to the Department.

- Recently they met with the condominium Association.  They are appreciative of their support to this project.

(+) Tom Harry - Project Architect

- The project would refurbish an older building and build condominiums.

- He gave a detailed description of the building and the project.

(-) Ann Miller

- She is a natural health practitioner.

- Although May stated that she tried to contact all the neighbors, Ms. Miller was not notified and  yet she lives very close.

- The reasons she is against the project for two reasons: parking and noise when construction is going on.

- Her patients need peace since she treats people who have problems with stress and cancer.

- Parking is an “endangered species” in San Francisco.

- She has various petitions of neighbors who are against the project.

(-) Mrs. Pavlov

- She fears that their house will be impacted with this construction.

- She like the project sponsors but are quite concerned. 

- She project architect has not made himself available to them.

- Her house will loose light and air yet the project supposedly will have a garden and therefore will not create a problem.  Yet the sponsors will not be living there, the Pavlov’s will.

- She hopes that some modifications will be made.

- She has been promised a lot but there have been no actions.

(-) Mr. Pavlov

- In addition to parking problems, this project will be mixed residential and commercial.  He doesn’t know who people are going to get to this project.

- His building is quite high.

- His objection is the height and the increase in people who will travel there.

 

ACTION:         Approve with added condition that 3 signs come down(?).

AYES:             Baltimore, Chinchilla, Joe, Mills, Salinas, Theoharis

ABSENT:       Fay

MOTION:        16059

 


20b.    2000.656CV                                                              (MIRAMONTES: 558-6348)

1988 (formerly 1946) VAN NESS AVENUE, east side between Washington  and Jackson Streets, Lot 10A in Assessor's Block 598 ‑‑Request for a rear yard variance under Planning Code Sections 134 and 243(c)(6) on a site located within an RC‑4 (Residential‑Commercial Combined, High Density) District, 80‑D Height and Bulk District,  the Van Ness Special Use District and the Van Ness Special Sign District.  Section 134 of the Planning Code requires a minimum rear yard depth equal to 25 percent of the total depth of the subject lot.  Section 134 further specifies that the rear yard shall be provided at the lowest story containing a dwelling unit and at each succeeding story of the building.  The proposed project would provide a rear yard on the fifth level but not on the fourth level which would contain two residential units.  Section  243(c)(6) allows for the rear yard requirement to be modified or waived by the Zoning Administrator if specific conditions outlined in Section 243(c)(6) are met.

 

SPEAKER(S):           None

ACTION:         Zoning Administrator has taken variance under advisement.

AYES:             Baltimore, Chinchilla, Joe, Mills, Salinas, Theoharis

ABSENT:       Fay

 

21.       2000.944C                                                                            (NIKITAS: 558-6306)

1527-1533 PINE STREET - south side through to Austin between Polk Street and Van Ness Avenue, Lots 018, 018A, and 019 in Assessor’s Block 0667 -  Request for Conditional Use Authorization under Planning Code Section 121.2 for use size exceeding 3,000 square feet within the Polk Street NC District (Lot 19) and Section 209.8(c) for a commercial establishment located above the ground floor in an RC-4 District (Residential-Commercial High Density) and the Van Ness Special Use District (Lots 18 and 18A). The properties are in 130-V and 65-A Height and Bulk Districts.  The proposal is to convert three interconnected buildings from commercial and industrial uses (Albert Daini Fine Furniture) to business or professional services office space (West Coast Property Management).

Preliminary Recommendation: Approval with conditions

(Continued from Regular Meeting of December 7, 2000)

 

SPEAKER(S):

(+) Erick Cangracing

- West Coast is very well noted in the district.

- He is looking forward to continue working in the neighborhood he grew up in.

 

ACTION:         Approved

AYES:             Baltimore, Chinchilla, Joe, Mills, Salinas, Theoharis

ABSENT:       Fay

MOTION:        16060

 

22.       2000.887C                                                                             (YOUNG: 558-6346)

929 MARKET STREET - south side between 5th  and 6th Streets; Lots 064, 074, 075 in Assessor's Block 3704: -- Request for Conditional Use Authorization pursuant to Section 219(c) of the Planning Code to establish office use, approximately 3,798 square feet in floor area, at  the second story level of an existing commercial building within a C-3-R (Downtown Retail) District and 120-X Height and Bulk District.  

Preliminary Recommendation:  Approval with conditions

(Continued from Regular Meeting of November 16, 2000)

 

SPEAKER(S):

(+) Hanh Pham - Reuben & Alter - Representing Project Sponsor

- The project will convert retail to office.

- The project will not alter the neighborhood.


- This site is appropriate for office since it’s close to transit.

- The project will retain the retail on the ground floor.

(neutral) Sue Hestor

- She doesn’t want Planning staff that this type of forum analysis is good.

- This will not be ok on some of the projects that the Commission has lined up.

- Just because you are close to transit does not mean that office is ok.

- Conversion of retail can be very technical and sensitive.

 

ACTION:         Approved

AYES:             Baltimore, Chinchilla,  Joe, Mills, Salinas, Theoharis

ABSENT:       Fay

MOTION:        16061

 

23.       2000.988C                                                                            (MARTIN: 558-6616)

399 FREMONT STREET - west side between Folsom and Harrison Streets, Lot 002 in Assessor’s Block 3747 --  Request for a Conditional Use Authorization to allow a residential care facility for seven or more persons per Planning Code Section 209.3(c) in the RC-4 (Residential-Commercial Combined Districts, High Density) Zoning District, Rincon Hill Special Use District, and a 250-R Height and Bulk District.

Preliminary Recommendation: Approval with Conditions

 

SPEAKER(S):

(+) Jonathan Brink

- They provide support and treatment who are mentally ill.

- Their organization basically helps people who have been in hospitals and need a transitional place to get back into the real world.

- A few years ago they developed the first detox program.  There have never been any complaints to this organization being located in the avenues.

- The CATS program (which is a shelter program) has 26 adults living there who can come and go freely.  This program lost it’s funding and was closed.

- The net impact with the neighborhood is that they were able to reduce from 26 to 19 people living at 399 Fremont Street.

- There is never less than two staff available.  They have a round-the-clock nurse available.

- People who are living in the program, has been the congregation of people on the outside of the building.

- There will actually be less people gathering outside of the building.

(+) Doug Shoemacker

- He works with the organization and believes they are a very professional organization.

- He Would like to have project approved.

(-) Chano ?

- He is a business owner at 390 Fremont.

- There is a tremendous amount of drug usage in this area.

- There was a major accident at the corner of Fremont and Harrison.

- If this center is approved, there will be traffic and people problems.

- There is a serious issue going on in this neighborhood.

 

ACTION:         Approved

AYES:             Baltimore, Chinchilla, Joe, Mills, Salinas, Theoharis

ABSENT:       Fay

MOTION:        16062

 

24a.    2000.641E                                                                   (NAVARRETE: 558-5975)


1047 MISSISSIPPI STREET -  Appeal of a Negative Declaration - The proposal is to demolish the existing 1,500 square foot one-story structure and construct a 14,500-square- foot, three-story building, with nine live/work units and 11 parking spaces.  The building would be approximately 40 feet in height.  The project site is located in an M-1 zoning district, within a 40-X height/bulk district, as well as within an Industrial Protection Zone (IPZ) Buffer, adopted by the Planning Commission as an interim zoning control. Conditional Use authorization would be required for live/work use in the IPZ Buffer.

Preliminary Recommendation:   Uphold Negative Declaration

(Continued from Regular Meeting of November 16, 2000)

 

SPEAKER(S):

(-) Sue Hestor

- She raises questions about the site since the area is very industrial.

- People who reside in the area do not take transit.

- There is a very steep and windy hill which is not a very nice walking area.

- There are also freeways that don’t have lights so it makes it difficult for people to walk to transit.

(-) Lane Myers

- She has resided in the area for 19 years.

- Mississippi Street feels so isolated because between Pennsylvania and Mississippi the grade is 18%.  This is a very steep hill.

- Every single adult must drive.  There are no amenities near by.  The area is quite dangerous.

- Two years ago condos were built in the area.

(+) Alice Barkley

- The project description in the neg dec describes the project in detail.  Issues related to the Conditional Use and Discretionary Reviews, she will comment at that time.

 

ACTION:         Uphold Negative Declaration

AYES:             Baltimore, Chinchilla, Joe, Mills, Salinas, Theoharis

ABSENT:       Fay

MOTION:        16063

 

24b.    2000.641C                                                                              (WONG: 558-6381)

1047 MISSISSIPPI STREET - east side, between 23rd and 25th Streets; Lot 012 in Assessor’s Block 4224:  Request for Conditional Use Authorization for the construction of nine live/work units in an M-1(Light Industrial) / IPZ (Industrial Protection Zone) buffer Zoning District and a 40-X Height and Bulk District, per Planning Commission Resolution 14861.

Preliminary Recommendation: Approval with conditions.

 

SPEAKER(S):

(+) Alice Barkley

- This project is approprate for live/work since the block is residential.

- The existing structure on the site is an open shed with a small office.  It was used before by a number of difference users.  Because of the steep grade, it makes it difficult for trucks to travel.

(+) Mack Burton

- He takes offence when someone states that this area is a crime area.

- There is a sore spot and this area is being dealt with.

- In the area there are people of every race.

- This project should move forward.

- He is looking forward to having this project in the neighborhood.

- People move their groceries up and down that hill.

- He looks forward to having workers work on this project

(+) Randy Allison

- He is a property owner across the street from subject property.


- He also leases the adjacent building.

- This proposal is a very good use of the property.

- It is important to him on how the building will look and he likes the design of the building.

(+) Joe O’Donahue

- There are 90 letters of support and signatures of neighbors.

- This project is needed.

- A few years ago, neighbors wanted live/work in the area.

- This has been a vacant site for the past several months.

- This is a good live/work project.

- The architecture is very sensibly drawn.

 - This project should be approved.

(-) Max Schmeder

- He is opposed to the project as it is currently planned because it is too dense.

- There are not that many parking spaces left when people come home from work.

- 25th Street is the main thoroughfare to Potrero Hill and it’s very dangerous.

- He has had frightening experiences.  He can no longer walk his dog.

- Please prevent more problems by reducing the density of this project.

(-) Bernie Bermudez

- He lives on the corner of 25th Street and Mississippi

- 4 times a car has hit his car.

- The project sponsor is not going to live there when the project is complete.  He and his family will have to live with all the problems.

- The problem is in the Commissioner’s hand now.

(-) Carmen Bermudez

- She lives on 1500 25th Street for 16 years.

- There have been many apartment projects built in the area and there are no more place to park.

- She and her family belong to a church and when they return there are no places to park.

- Her husband has been assaulted and mugged with a gun.

(-) Elena Myers

- As everyone else has pointed out, everyone on this street will drive.  Parking will be a real issue.

- The area is just too dense.

- Why does the developer expect approval of all these units.

- There is a great deal of crime in the area.

- Please recognize the limitations of the block.

(-) Sue Hestor

- The rendering submitted to the Commissioners is very deceptive.

- There will be another large project which will be at the Commission in January on this same street.  This is just too much for this street.

- The Commission is making people’s lives extremely difficult.

 

ACTION:         Approved

AYES:             Baltimore, Chinchilla,  Mills, Salinas, Theoharis

NAYES:          Joe

ABSENT:       Fay

MOTION:        16064

 

E.        SPECIAL DISCRETIONARY REVIEW HEARING

 

At Approximately 7:39 P.M. the Planning Commission  convened into a Special Discretionary Review (DR) Hearing.

 


24c.     2000.641D                                                                              (WONG: 558-6381)

1047 MISSISSIPPI STREET, east side, between 23rd and 25th Streets; Lot 012 in Assessor's Block 4224:  Staff-initiated discretionary review for removal of a vacant, 2,000 square foot industrial storage shed.  Proposal to construct nine live/work units in a M-1(Light Industrial) / IPZ (Industrial Protection Zone) buffer Zoning District and a 40-X Height and Bulk District, per Planning Commission Resolution 14861.

Preliminary Recommendation: Do not take Discretionary Review and approve as proposed.

 

SPEAKER(S):           See 24b.

ACTION:         No Discretionary Review.  Project Approved

AYES:             Baltimore, Chinchilla,  Mills, Salinas, Theoharis

NAYES:          Joe

ABSENT:       Fay

 

25a.    1997.379E                                                                   (NAVARRETE: 558-5975)

386 ALABAMA STREET: Appeal of a Negative Declaration - The proposal is to construct three buildings on a 49,700 square-foot lot bounded by Alabama, 16th, 17th and Harrison Streets (Assessor's Block 3967, Lot 1).  The site is currently vacant and has several addresses on record: 386 Alabama Street, 2625 16th Street, 2001 Harrison Street, 2051 Harrison Street, and 2095 Harrison Street.  The project would include a total of 64 live/work units, 9 retail/commercial spaces, and parking for 84 cars.  There would be a total of approximately 15,834 square feet of commercial space, about 53,340 square feet of parking, and 83,159 square feet of live/work space.  The total size of the three buildings combined would be approximately 153,400 square feet.  The new buildings would be approximately 50 feet in height and would cover the entire lot.  This proposed project is located in an M-1 (Light Industrial) Zoning District.  It is also within the Industrial Protection Zone (IPZ) adopted by the Planning Commission as an interim zoning control.

Preliminary Recommendation: Uphold Negative Declaration

(Continued from Regular Meeting of November 2, 2000).

 

SPEAKER(S):

(-) Patrick Gogin - Appellant

- Project Artaud provides low cost space to artists.

- This has been known as the gateway to the Mission District.

- There are several artists co-ops as well as theaters.

- This project will not provide any benefit to the district.

- The project is bad for the community.

- There is no real benefit to the neighborhood.

- The project will have problems regarding traffic, chemicals, toxic, etc.

- There has not been any new soils analysis of chemicals that were left behind from previous owners.

- This application is incompatible with zoning areas.

(-) Mathew Francois - Appellant

- His client lives in the area.

- The project will result in environmental impacts: land use impacts; San Francisco SPCA will be impacted; nose impacts; and traffic impacts.

- He is asking for a full Environmental Impact Report.

(-) Sue Hestor - Appellant

- Submitted Resolution No. 13794, adopted on December 15, 1994.  This is a policy for this site which has never been repealed.

- The staff response to this implies that it is discussed in this resolution.

- The discussion of compatibility with policies belongs in this negative declaration.

- She has two issues: a) it’s going to be offices b) policies are not discussed.

(-) Judy West

- This site has a major crossroad to the neighborhood.


- She passed documents to the Commissioners.

- The occupancy was supposed to be low income artists -- this is not what is going on.

- This is a culturally significant site which needs to be addressed further.

(-) Nicole Sowaya

- There are toxic chemicals at the site that is why an Environmental Impact Report is required.

- She has lived in the area for many years and has seen the cement factory when it was open.

(-) Lizzy Spicuzza

- She is a resident and a member of Project Artaud.

- Parking and traffic in the neighborhood is already a problem.

- Few businesses have the luxury to offer valet parking.

- No having a detailed investigation of traffic should not be avoided.

- A project of this size is not appropriate for the neighborhood.

(-) Benjamin Young

- He has lived next to the site for 28 years.

- 16th Street was one of the first streets.

- Two years ago he and his son found some evidence of archeology.

- This is an extraordinary site.

(-) Phil Deal

- He is a resident of Project Artaud for 25 years.

- Traffic congestion is a problem and is quite intense.

- People drive around for 15 to 30 minutes in order to find parking.

- 17th and Harrison is an extremely and hazardous intersection.

- When this project moves in, these problems will only increase.

(-) Victor Vitlin

- He owns a building across from the subject project.

- He does not oppose development yet this particular project is not compatible with the neighborhood.

- There are a number of industrial buildings surrounding the project site.

- In this type of area, residential developments are prohibited.

(-) Doug Shoemacker

- He is here on behalf of MAC (Mission Anti-Displacement Coalition).

- The original negative declaration for live/work stated that it is not anticipated that live/work would have any impact on availability of industrial space in the City.  This is been proven to not be true.

- Will the land use have any substantial impact on the existing character of the vicinity.

- How many times will the Commission tell the public that the Planning policies are not appropriate with specific project levels and never go to the cumulative impact.

- He is looking forward to a new day with new policies.

(-) Maria Gilardin

- Her main concern is the incredible day and night construction going on. 

- There is a lot of soil which goes in and out into the area.

- There are also massive amounts of toxic soil at the site.

(-) Roger Geisler

- He is against this project.

- There is a negative environmental impact to this project.

- He would not be feeling safe living in a development which might become an office building  because there will be more people there.

(-) Cathlene O’Keafe

- She has lived in the area for over 20 years.

- The neighborhood has changed.

- This area was supposed to encourage artists.

- Not that many people are coming into San Francisco because it’s becoming harder to come.


(+) Alice Barkley

- There is a soil management plan in place which has been approved by the Department of Public Health.  There will be a health safety plan for workers.

- Dirt is coming in and out in order to analyze the soil.

- All the soil which has come in will be taken out by the people who put it there.

- When this Commission adopted resolutions in 1999 and early this year, the Commission has considered IPZs.  Projects in this area will be “grandfathered”.

- There is allegations that this project will displace.  The site has been vacant for 8 years.

- The mitigation measure on transportation require the project sponsor to install a signal at the site for traffic and pedestrian protection.

- The plan requires that prior to any excavation, there will be an archeologist on site.  The project sponsor is responsible for all fees.

- An EIR is not required since this project is a mitigated negative declaration.

- An EIR will not provide Commission with any additional information.

- Regarding the actual use of the building

(+) Joe Cassidy

- Regarding the soil, he is an expert on this issue.  The City is installing thousands of miles of fiber optic cable.  The City does testing of soils before a project is developed.

- Line Enterprises uses an industrial building for other uses.

- He finds it hypocritical for this company to come and state comments against this project.

(+) Joe O’Donahue - Residential Builders

- This site has had an intensified use.

- Bode Gravel’s trips and trucks were approximately 4,000 per day.

- There are allegations without historic facts.

- People who live in the City could not afford to live in Walnut Creek, nowadays it is the reversal.

ACTION:         Negative Declaration Upheld

AYES:             Baltimore, Chinchilla, Joe, Mills, Salinas, Theoharis

ABSENT:       Fay

MOTION:        16065

 

25b.    1997.379D                                                                         (GORDON: 558-6309)

386 ALABAMA/2625 16TH STREET - entire block bounded by 16th Street, Alabama Street, 17th Street and Harrison Street. Lot 1 in Assessor's Block 3967.  Staff Initiated Discretionary Review of Building Permit Application Nos. 9801586, 9801587 and 9801588, proposing development of three four-story live/work buildings containing 64 units within the Industrial Protection Zone and the NEMIZ area.  The three proposed buildings will contain 153,333 square feet total.  The project also includes: 84 off-street parking spaces, three loading spaces and a maximum of nine ground-floor level commercial retail spaces, 84 off-street parking spaces and three off-street loading spaces. The proposed buildings would be approximately 50 feet tall.  Per Planning Commission Resolution No. 14861, adopted on August 8, 1999, all live/work projects submitted prior to April 22, 1999 ("pipeline projects") within the Industrial Protection Zone are subject to a mandatory Discretionary Review process before the Planning Commission.  The subject building permit applications were submitted January 29, 1998.   The project site is within the M-1 (Light Industrial) District, the Industrial Protection Zone, the NEMIZ area, and a 50-X Height and Bulk District.

Preliminary Recommendation: Do not take discretionary review, approve building permits as submitted.

(Continued from Regular Meeting of November 16, 2000)

 

SPEAKER(S):

(-) Mary Pellow

- She represents the owners of the Line Building as well as being treasurer of the Northeast Mission Business Association.


- Many of the members of the organization are opposed to the project.  These members work  in the vicinity of the project.

- Her point is that since she manages the project, walks down 16th Street, takes BART, etc., it is a reality that the dogs are loud.

(-) Nicole Sowaya - Project ARTAUD

- Referred to an article on the New York Times regarding artists’ vs. dot.coms.

- This is one of the largest live/work proposals.

- When are the public going to say “enough is enough!”

- She wants non-profits and artists to remain in the Mission.

- This is about preserving the last bit of industrial use in this City.

- Why can’t the Commission have a community-planning process.

(-) Chris Moscone

- He is here to urge the Commission to take DR and approve the project with conditions of approval.

- The project sponsor, Ms. Barkley and he have developed specific conditions of approval.

- The main concern is parking.

- She would like the Commission to review the conditions of approval.

(-) Judy West

- This is a very crucial site for the neighborhood and she would like for the Commission to be very careful to not do the wrong thing.

- To say that this project is exempt from any policies to discourage housing is very disingenuous on the part of the Commission.

- She would really like to see built a very large public plaza -- like a European plaza.  Not something that will compete with Franklin Square but more like something that would be more urban, for the business community, for carnaval, for farmer’s markets.

- This is one of the only sites left in our industrial land that could be something for the public.

(-) Trisha Legocio - Executive Director of Southern Exposure

- There will be great impact if the Commission approves a project of this nature.

- She represents artists and youth.  They serve up to 23,000 annually.

- She urges the Commission to consider not supporting this proposal.

(-) Brian Goggin

- He is a public artist and has lived and worked at project artaud for many years.

- Project Artaud is a low income, affordable housing for artists.

- He urges the Commission to approve more projects which would allow space for artists.

- This area is a gateway to the Mission.

(-) Steven Siegel

- The proposed development will only aggravate matters more.

- The need for affordable and performing space is imperative.

- Artists are being forced to leave areas which they have helped create.

- Venues are being forced to increase their fees which makes it difficult for artists to rent and/or perform there.

(-) Sue Hestor

- There are important items which are not dealt with in the staff report.

- The Commission has never dealt with repealing the resolution.

(+) Alice Barkley

- The project sponsor, the architect and the SPCA conducted meetings regarding the barking dogs.

- The code required that the units have special noise reduction material.

- This live/work project meets all the requirements.

- Regarding parking and traffic and the concern of the neighbors, it was suggested to eliminate commercial spaces, put the parking garage from Alabama Street down to the commercial level.  The only problem is that this would be a conflict of policies.

- The project team came to a conclusion and this is what is being presented to the Commission.

(+) Joe O’Donahue


- Art needs creativity and not money.

- Artists don’t need subsidies, creativity does not need subsidies.

 

ACTION:         Take Discretionary Review to impose conditions recommended by staff.

AYES:             Baltimore, Chinchilla, Mills, Salinas, Theoharis

ABSENT:       Fay

NAYES:          Joe

 

26.       2000.045D                                                                               (WANG: 558-6335)

1117-1125 OCEAN AVENUE - Lots 041 and 042, in Assessor’s Block 6944 -- Request for Discretionary Review - proposing to demolish an existing ground-floor, single-family residence and storefront on Lot 042, demolish an existing storefront and a garage on Lot 041, and construct a new four-story, mixed-use building occupying both lots, in an NC-2 (Small-Scale Neighborhood Commercial) District and a 40-X Height and Bulk District.

Preliminary Recommendation: Do not take Discretionary Review and approve the project as submitted.

(Continued from Regular Meeting of November 9, 2000)

 

SPEAKER(S):           None

ACTION:         Continued to January 11, 2001

AYES:             Baltimore, Chinchilla, Joe, Mills, Salinas, Theoharis

ABSENT:       Fay

 

27.       2000.964DDDD                                                                    (MEHRA: 558-6257)

250 SEA CLIFF AVENUE - Building Permit Application No. 200006213244, Case No. 2000.964D, for the property at Lot 1M on Assessor's Block 1307.  The proposal is to construct a one-story addition--391 sq. ft. in size--on the second floor on an existing deck adjacent to the master bedroom suite, above the garage on the east side of the property.  The addition will accommodate an exercise and dressing room and will not encroach into the required rear or side yards.  This property is in an RH-1(D) (Residential, House, Single-Family Detached) district and a 40-X Height and Bulk District.

Preliminary Recommendation:  Do not take Discretionary Review and approve the project as submitted

(Continued from Regular Meeting of November 16, 2000)

 

SPEAKER(S):           None

ACTION:         Continued to January 25, 2001

AYES:             Baltimore, Chinchilla,  Joe, Mills, Salinas, Theoharis

ABSENT:       Fay

 

28.       2000.1042D                                                                          (M. SNYDER: 575-6891)

261 FAIR OAKS STREET - east side between 23rd and 24th Streets, Lot 023 in Assessor’s Block 3647, proposing to construct a one-story vertical addition at the rear of the house in a RH-3 (Residential, House, Three-Family) District and a 40-X Height and Bulk District.

Preliminary Recommendation: Do not take Discretionary Review and approve the building permit applications as revised. 

 

SPEAKER(S):           None

ACTION:         DR Withdrawn

AYES:             Baltimore, Chinchilla,  Joe, Mills, Salinas, Theoharis

ABSENT:       Fay

 

29.       2000.337D                                                                     (M. SNYDER: 575-6891)


175 RUSS STREET/68 HARRIET STREET - northeast side between Folsom and Howard Streets and fronting on Harriet Street, Lot 089 in Assessor’s Block 3731, proposing to demolish an existing warehouse building and construct 32 live/work units in two 16-unit buildings with 34 off-street parking spaces in a SLR (Service/Light Industrial/Residential Mixed-Use) District and an 50-X Height and Bulk District.

Preliminary Recommendation: Do not take Discretionary Review and approve the project as submitted.

 

SPEAKER(S):

(-) Joanna Sanchez - DR Requestor

- She has an easement right on the site the sponsor wants to develop.

- When she found out about this building, she tried to contact Gary Gee and Joe Cassidy.

- She couldn’t find an attorney in a period of 24 hours.

- She never got a copy of a survey which was supposedly done.

- She has concerns for her tenants since they will loose light and air.

- The value of her property will suffer.  It will also create maintenance costs.

(-) Vladan Djakovic

- He does not think it’s right for the Commission to pick and chose when to imply the code.

- He received notice less than 24 hours about the hearing.

- There are multiple errors and discrepancies in the report.

(-) Marlies Hensel

- Traffic will increase tremendously.

(-) Paul Meyers

- He lives in the neighborhood and has similar concerns as the rest of the speakers.

- He has not had much time to review the report.  Although he has just skimmed through it, he has noticed many errors.

- With the new development, it will be more hazardous and problematic for the people who already live in the neighborhood.

(-) Sue Hestor

- This is one of the most manipulative projects Ms. Barkley has done.

- Many of the documents were sent during the Thanksgiving holidays.

- Sending staff reports a day before the hearing is just not appropriate.

- This case should be continued until January in order to give people the change to review the material and not rush through something before the Christmas holiday and break.

(+) Alice Barkley

- The project will be revised.

- This project does have neighborhood support.

- There were two meetings with the neighbors called by the project sponsor.

- She recommends if there is no easement then the conditions of approval would be the ones she submitted.

(+) Gary Gee

- He had a meeting with the Zoning Administrator regarding the criteria for the shadow study.  The ZA asked him to use a more stricter criteria and since he has gone back and made changes.

(+) Joe Cassidy

- He is one of the project sponsors.  He has had many meetings with the neighbors and has provided practically “the kitchen sink” to try to deal with everyone’s issues.

- The area of this project is a very business area.

(+) Pat McCune

- They print t-shirts.

- They started out with 3 employees and now they have about 50 employees.

- They moved from Shipley to Russ Street a few years ago.

- The Russ building is very ill suited for the expansion of their business.

- They can’t operate the business in two locations.

(+) Ken Watson


- They are under two roofs and have about 50 employees.  They plan on growing and need to be under one roof.

ACTION:         Take Discretionary Review to make amendments recommended by staff.

AYES:             Baltimore, Chinchilla, Joe, Mills, Salinas, Theoharis

ABSENT:       Fay

 

 

G.       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 jurisdiction of the Commission except agenda items.  With respect to agenda items, your opportunity to address the Commission will be afforded when the item is reached in the meeting with one exception.  When the agenda item has already been reviewed in a public hearing at which members of the public were allowed to testify and the Commission has closed the public hearing, your opportunity to address the Commission must be exercised during the Public Comment portion of the Calendar.  Each member of the public may address the Commission for up to three minutes.

 

The Brown Act forbids a commission from taking action or discussing any item not appearing on the posted agenda, including those items raised at public comment.  In response to public comment, the commission is limited to:

 

(1)  responding to statements made or questions posed by members of the public; or

(2)  requesting staff to report back on a matter at a subsequent meeting; or

(3)  directing staff to place the item on a future agenda.  (Government Code Section 54954.2(a))

 

Lidia Fraser

Re: Live/work Loft she owns with Mr. Dwight Doliver.

- She and a partner own a film and arts production studio called Provision Studios.

- They have been in San Francisco for 25 years and in live/work lofts for 15 years.  About 4 years ago they purchased a live/work loft and a bout 1 year ago they purchased another loft and rented it out.

- They are having a problem on the tenants of the 2nd building which is located on 18th Street.

- They are being harassed and they are being persecuted by people who lied to get in there in for first place.

- They have harrazed the other tenants, etc.

Dwight Dolliver

Re: Same as previous speaker

- They feel like they are being harrazed.

Sue Hestor

- She urges the previous speakers to speak at the BOS.

- It is inappropriate to provide information to the public 1 day before the hearing.

Joe O’Donahue

- There are many people who submit information 1 hour before the hearing.

 

Adjournment: 11:00 p.m.

 

 

THE DRAFT MINUTES ARE PROPOSED FOR ADOPTION AT THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION ON THURSDAY, JANUARY 18, 2001

 

 

Back to top

Return to the Planning Department's Home Page. Click here.


San Francisco City and County Links