Andrew Zacks - Attorney for Appellant (Citizens for Better Streets)
- There are several reasons why this item should be continued. One is the pending litigation against the City and County of San Francisco over the right of the City and County of San Francisco to transfer this property to the developer. The matter which is currently pending in court may well result in a determination that the City and County of San Francisco does not have the right to enter into a lease agreement that has been proposed by way of a resolution adopted by the Board of Supervisors.
- This litigation involves a claim under the California Streets and Highway Code that the lease, which calls for a 50 year lease at ten thousand dollars a year to the developer, violates the Streets and Highway Code.
- The developer who has filed an environmental evaluation application and a conditional use application does not have standing under the provisions of the City Planning Code to seek such permits since only an owner has the right and power to file for a conditional use application. It is clear that CCDC (the developer of this case) is not an owner of the property nor have they been authorized by the existing owners (the City and County of San Francisco) to file a permit application.
- If this matter is not continued, the Planning Commission is continuing in a matter where there is no jurisdiction.
(did not state name) - representing Jerlanni, Inc.
- He supports the request for a continuance.
- It is clear that the Mayor's Office of Housing does not have jurisdiction over this parcel. The jurisdiction is under the Department of Public Works. MOH does not have authorization to give to the developer.
- The Deputy City Attorney is not the appropriate person to give advice to the Commission and he objects to her participation in this matter since she is representing the MOH in litigation.
The Zoning Administrator responded:
- This item is in court. There is litigation about whether the transfer is proper however the City prevailed on a request for a temporary restraining order. There was no temporary restraining order. From consultations with the City Attorney, the department believes that it is appropriate and that the hearing should go ahead. The economic issues on whether it was an appropriate transfer under the State Traffic Code is not before the Commission. What is before the Commission is the project. The question about the economic issues and the amount of the lease is not before the Commission either. What is before the Commission is if the environmental impact is adequate, the general plan issues, historic district issues and the conditional use.
- He submitted a letter of authorization from the Mayor's Office of Housing to the project sponsor who filed the Conditional Use and it includes the Real Estate Division authorizing the Chinatown Community Development Center to apply for a Conditional Use. He consulted with the City Attorney on these issues.
The City Attorney responded (Audrey Pearson):
- What is before the Commission is an appeal of a Preliminary Negative Declaration. The litigation and the Negative Declaration have nothing to do with each other.
- The Commission is able to go forward on this project.
- The city can also designate another department to allow the MOH to authorize CCDC to apply for the Conditional Use.
MOTION: Proposed for Continuance
ACTION: The Motion did not receive a second. The Motion died.
RESULT: Item will be heard
Re: Merits of the Case
(-) Andrew Zacks - Attorney for Appellant
- There is no questions that this project involves a major land change for the waterfront district.
- The project is going to affect traffic and air quality in a highly dense urban environment.
- There are other projects which have been proposed that will sit very near this project.
- The negative declaration does not evaluate the cumulative impacts on any of the issues that are required to be evaluated under CEQA.
- There are other projects that have parking issues. There was no specific parking study for this particular project.
- They are concerned about the size of the building because it will block light and air. There is no evaluation on this in the negative declaration.
- The transportation assessment relied on a report that was done for the Embarcadero/Broadway hotel project that he suggests creates a cumulative impact.
- At a minimum, there should have been a parking study.
- There will also be an increase in noise, but the negative declaration does not state that.
- He believes that a full environmental impact report should be issued.
(-) Richard Wall - Representing 100 Broadway Associates
- His building will be surrounded by this project.
- He feels that not having parking is negative to the neighborhood.
(+) Dan Talbot - San Francisco Tomorrow
- He feels that because there are no assigned stalls for the residents that this could actually be good environmentally.
- San Francisco Tomorrow analyses cases on a "case by case" basis.
(-) Erik Foraker - Giurland, Inc.
- His concerns related to the negative declaration are the setbacks and the light and air.
- He feels that there has not been a proper shadow study done.
- Regarding the request for setbacks, the variance should not be approved.
- The setbacks are not appropriate for the upper floors.
(+) Rose Pak - Chinese Chamber of Commerce
- She does not understand what air quality or parking problems people are talking about.
(+) Gordon Jim
- The people he is representing will speak on item 20 only.
(+) Henry Musto - Vice President - Joseph Musto Estate Co.
- He requests that a full environmental impact report be done on this project.
ACTION: Mitigated Negative Declaration Upheld
AYES: Bradford Bell, Feldstein, Hughes, S. Lee, W. Lee
20a. 2002.0388R (M. LUELLEN: (415) 558- 6478)
150 BROADWAY (aka 190 BROADWAY) - "Broadway Family Apartments," north side
between Battery and Front Streets; Lot 011 in Assessors Block 0141 - The proposal is to construct a new mid-rise building that will contain 87 units of affordable housing with retail, childcare, and community spaces, built over an underground parking level accessed from Front Street and containing up to 41 off-street spaces. This project is proposed for land that is owned by the City and County of San Francisco, which is currently under the jurisdiction of the Department of Public Works (DPW) and is partially leased to a parking vendor. The Board of Supervisors previously approved in principle the transfer of the property from DPW to the Mayor's Office of Housing for the development of affordable housing. A General Plan Referral is needed at this time in order for the Board of Supervisors to consider (a) lease disposition and development agreement that will allow the affordable housing developer, Chinatown Community Development Center (Chinatown CDC), to move forward with development activities, and (b) a future ground lease between the City and Chinatown CDC to be entered into at the start of construction. The subject property is zoned C-2 (Community Business), is in the Northern Waterfront S.U.D. No. 3, and in a 84-E Height and Bulk District.
(Continued from Regular Meeting of May 8, 2003)
(+) Gordon Chin - Executive Director for the Chinatown Community Development Center
- This project will be very important for San Francisco, especially for working families.
- Two thirds of the units will house families earning up to $46,000 a year. This means teachers, nurses, hotel and restaurant workers, etc.
- There was a very thorough community input process and a very good and diligent citizen's advisory committee.
(+) Daniel Solomon - Project Architect
- He gave a PowerPoint presentation on the architectural aspects of the project.
(+) Tai Ann Know - Chinatown CDC
- There are numerous supporters here and there are about 40 letters of support for this project.
- She asked all the supporters in the audience to stand up. Most everyone in the room stood up.
- There are several members of community groups in the audience.
(-) Andrew Zacks - Attorney for Citizens for Better Streets
- He is not against affordable housing.
- This particular project has a lot of problems from a legal stand point.
- The property that the developer proposes to build housing on is not owned by the developer.
- There was an appeal filed today on this project.
- This particular piece of property has serious legal problems.
- There are problems with this process, there are problems with this project, and he asks that the Commission take this into account when considering the project.
(+) Li, Shao Zhen
- She hopes that the Commission will approve this project.
- The Broadway Family Housing has the support of many neighborhood and business organizations.
- This project will be near downtown and civil service agencies.
- This project will alleviate many of the housing problems in San Francisco.
- Children will be able to move into affordable housing.
(+) Araceli Lara
- She would like to thank the Commission for allowing the community to speak.
- She lives in a small apartment with her family and other people. Although conditions are not good, it is at least a place to live.
- She understands the needs for immigrant families to find dignified housing.
- She works as a coordinator of Mission Agenda who helps low income families.
- There is a strong need for housing in various communities in San Francisco.
- She would like to have the project on Broadway be approved to allow people to live in affordable housing.
(+) Jim Haas
- It is sad that it has taken so long for this project to come forward.
- This is a very good project for this location because there hare many amenities near by and people do not have to use their vehicles.
- He hopes that the Commission will approve this project.
(+) Flor Ramos
- She is a community worker.
- She works with the immigrant community. One of the main problems immigrants have are affordable housing and high rents.
- It would be very beneficial for many people if this project would be approved.
- She is not a lawyer or an architect but she is the voice of many people who would benefit from this project.
- Please take immigrant people into account as this project is considered.
(+) Kate White - Housing Action Coalition
- There are very few opportunities to build housing that people really need.
- This parcel provides a unique opportunity for low-income housing.
- Mixed income neighborhoods are good locations.
- Chinatown Community Neighborhood Association is a wonderful manager for affordable housing.
- This location is perfect for people to walk to various amenities.
- She is a founding member of City Car Share. The project sponsor approached them and has gone the extra mile so that car sharing is a key component of this project.
(+) Ted Dienstfrey - Gerson Baker & Associates
- Gerson Baker and Associates is one of the many organizations who support this project.
- Almost all of the affordable housing projects that come before the Commission come with a certain amount of controversy. Yet when the projects are approved, the neighbors do not have any problems.
- He hopes that the Commission will approve this project.
(+) Keith Saggers - Transportation for a Livable City
- This is a great affordable housing project for the community that is close to public transportation.
(+) Jackie Chang and Evelyn Pang
- Evelyn's mom could not stay.
- She read a letter from her mom stating the benefits of this project and hoping that the Commission will approve this project.
(+) did not state name
- He read a letter from Sister Bernie of the Religious Witness for Homeless People.
- This is the opportunity to do something about homelessness.
- He hopes that the Commission will not make them jump through hoops and allow this project to go forward.
(+) did not state name
- She is here to support this project on behalf of many, many low-income families.
(+) Wayne Hu
- He was one of the founding directors of this non-profit housing development corporation. It has been a long time that they have produced a lot of housing.
He urges the Commission to approve this project since it is desirable and necessary to the neighborhood.
(-) Paul Utrecht - Giudani, Inc.
- The exceptions that this project is asking for are not justified by it's affordable housing character.
- Affordable housing is not bad, it's just that affordable housing should play by the rules that everyone else plays by.
- The project sponsor wants to get things that directly affect the neighbors. Things like a rear yard variance and an exception from the parking requirements.
- Assuming that the residents will not have cars is a very serious assumption.
(+) Joel Lipsky - Housing Development Director - Mayor's Office of Housing
- He is here to respond if there are any questions regarding any issues related to the Mayor's Office of Housing.
- He supports the kind of action that the Commission is asked to take. Low income housing is desperately needed.
AYES: Antonini, Bradford Bell, Feldstein, Hughes, S. Lee, W. Lee
20b. 2002.0065KAC (M. LUELLEN: (415) 558- 6478)
150 BROADWAY (aka 190 BROADWAY) - Broadway Family Apartments, north side of Broadway between Battery and Front Streets. Assessors Block 141, Lot 11. The subject property is zoned C-2 (Community Business) and is in a 40-X Height and Bulk District. The project requests a Certificate of Appropriateness for new construction within the Northeast Waterfront Historic District. The proposed project is a Planned Unit Development that will consists of three mid-rise buildings that will contain 87 units of affordable housing with retail, childcare, and community spaces, built over an underground parking level accessed from Front Street and containing 41 off-street parking spaces.