To view graphic version of this page, refresh this page (F5)

Skip to page body
SFGovAccessibility
Seal of the City and County of San Francisco
City and County of San Francisco

February 21, 2002

February 21, 2002

 

SAN FRANCISCO PLANNING COMMISSION


Meeting Minutes

Commission Chambers - Room 400
City Hall, 1 Dr. Carlton B. Goodlett Place
Thursday, February 21, 2002
1:30 PM
Regular Meeting


PRESENT:          Baltimore, Chinchilla, Joe, Lim, Salinas, Theoharis
ABSENT:          Fay

THE MEETING WAS CALLED TO ORDER BY PRESIDENT CHINCHILLA AT 1:45 p.m.

STAFF IN ATTENDANCE: Gerald G. Green - Director of Planning; Larry Badiner -Zoning Administrator; Michael Li, Jamilla Vollman; Paul Lord; Amit Ghosh; Dario Jones; Tina Tam; Nora Priego – Transcription Secretary; Linda Avery - Commission Secretary

A.          CONSIDERATION OF ITEMS PROPOSED FOR CONTINUANCE

The Commission will consider a request for continuance to a later date. The Commission may choose to continue the item to the date proposed below, to continue the item to another date, or to hear the item on this calendar.

          1.          2001.0062E          (CHAN: 558-5982)
                    491 BAYSHORE BOULEVARD - Assessor's Block 5598, Lots 8, 9, 11, 13, 15, 16, 18, 21, and 28. Appeal of Preliminary Mitigated Negative Declaration. The proposed project would demolish the vacant buildings, totaling 107,372 square feet (sq.ft.) and construct a home improvement store (Home Depot). The main store would be two stories, approximately 129,581 sq.ft. with a 10,088-sq.-ft. enclosed green house. The proposed project also includes an 8,550-sq.-ft. outdoor-garden center. The total project size would be approximately 148,219 sq.ft. The building would be approximately 40 feet in height. A parking garage consisting of three-levels of parking totaling 550 parking spaces would also be constructed on this 5.73-acre site. Vehicular access to the parking garage would be from Bayshore Blvd., where Cortland Ave. dead-ends into Bayshore Blvd. The site is within the Planning Commission's adopted Industrial Protection Zone (IPZ) and is located in a M-1 (Light Industrial) zoning district and within a 65-J height and bulk district.
                    Preliminary Recommendation: Pending
                    (Continued from Regular Meeting of January 24, 2002)
                    (Proposed for Continuance to February 28, 2002)

SPEAKER(S):          None
ACTION:          Continued to February 28, 2002
AYES:          Baltimore, Chinchilla, Joe, Lim, Salinas
ABSENT:          Fay and Theoharis

          2a.          1999.813ECD          (SIDER: 558-6697)
                    131 MISSOURI STREET - east side between 17th and Mariposa Streets; Lot 024 in Assessor's Block 3985 - Request for Conditional Use Authorization to allow the construction of dwelling units pursuant to Planning Code Section 215(a) in an M-1 (Light Industrial) Zoning District. The proposal is to demolish an existing industrial building and construct a three and four-story building containing approximately 3,000 square feet of commercial space on the ground level and 9 dwelling units on upper levels. 9 parking spaces would be provided in a ground level garage. The property is within an M-1 Zoning District, an IPZ (Industrial Protection Zone), and a 40-X Height and Bulk District.
                    Preliminary Recommendation: Approval with conditions.
                    (Proposed for Continuance to March 21, 2002)

SPEAKER(S):
Re: Continuance
(+) David Hern
- He hopes that the Commission approves the continuance to allow for the developer to get a fair return, but also to address the concerns of the neighbors.
(+) Rod Minott
- He is also in favor of the continuance since he hopes that during the continued time, they will be able to reach an agreement.
(+) Kepa Askenasy
- She works near the proposed site. They are working on a solution to address everyone's concerns.

ACTION:          Continued to March 21, 2002
AYES:          Baltimore, Chinchilla, Joe, Lim, Salinas
ABSENT:          Fay and Theoharis

          2b.          1999.813ECD          (SIDER: 558-6697)
                    131 MISSOURI STREET - east side between 17th and Mariposa Streets; Lot 024 in Assessor's Block 3985 - Mandatory Discretionary Review of a proposal demolish a 3,000 square foot existing industrial building and construct a new building containing approximately 3,000 square feet of commercial space and 9 dwelling units. Planning Commission IPZ Policy (Resolution Number 16202) discourages the development of housing within an IPZ. The property is within an M-1 (Light Industrial) Zoning District, an IPZ (Industrial Protection Zone), and a 40-X Height and Bulk District.
                    Preliminary Recommendation: Do not take D.R. and approve the project as proposed.
                    (Proposed for Continuance to March 21, 2002)

SPEAKER(S):          Same as those listed in item 2a.
ACTION:          Continued to March 21, 2002
AYES:          Baltimore, Chinchilla, Joe, Lim, Salinas
ABSENT:          Fay and Theoharis

          3.          2001.1168D          (SMITH: 558-6322)
                    138 WHITNEY STREET - west side of the street between Fairmount and Randall Streets, Lot 007 in Assessor's Block 6664 - Request for Discretionary Review of Building Permit Application No. 2000/12/19/8292, proposing to enlarge the existing detached garage to accommodate two cars and construct a two-story addition located partially on the roof of the garage, located in a RH-2 (Residential, House, Two-Family) District and a 40-X Height and Bulk District.
                    Preliminary Recommendation: Take Discretionary Review and Disapprove the Project
                    (Proposed for Continuance to April 25, 2002)

SPEAKER(S):          None
ACTION:          Continued to April 25, 2002
AYES:          Baltimore, Chinchilla, Joe, Lim, Salinas
ABSENT:          Fay and Theoharis

4.          1999.598D          (CHIN: 575-6897)
135 JORDAN AVENUE - west side of the street between Geary Blvd. and Euclid Street, Lot 008 in Assessor’s Block 1062 - Request for Discretionary Review of Building Permit Application No. 9905431, proposing to add a new story and approximately 75 square feet to the basement and second floor at the rear side of the building on a single-family dwelling, located in a RH-1 (D) (Residential, Detached, Single-Family) District and a 40-X Height and Bulk District.
Preliminary Recommendation: Pending
          (Continued from Regular Meeting of February 7, 2002)
          DISCRETIONARY REVIEW WITHDRAWN

SPEAKER(S):          None
ACTION:          None – the Discretionary Review Request was Withdrawn

B.          COMMISSIONERS' QUESTIONS AND MATTERS

          5.          Consideration of Adoption - draft minutes of February 7, 2002.

SPEAKER(S):          None
ACTION:          Approved
AYES:          Baltimore, Chinchilla, Joe, Lim, Salinas
ABSENT:          Fay and Theoharis

          6.          Commission Matters

Commissioner Salinas: He would like to get a clarification from staff regarding public comment last week. He is under the impression that Public Comment is not the place to speak about continuances.

C.          DIRECTOR'S REPORT

7.          Director's Announcements

Re: Commissioner Salinas' Concern
The matter that was discussed under last week's Public Comment category was a follow-up to a written request for a continuance that was made prior to that hearing. The appropriate way to ask for a continuance is to provide a written request in advance so that the matter can be placed on the calendar as an item proposed for continuance to a date that staff and all parties involved have agreed to.

Re: Work Program and Budget for Fiscal Year 2002-2003
- Tnis matter will be discussed during the hearing of February 28, 2002.
- This document (he held up the document) will be placed in Commissioner's packets for next week's hearing.

Re: Community Planning Workshops
- Last night, the Department held the third in a series of five introductory workshops in the South of Market community plan area.
- Mayor Brown attended and the Planning staff co-facilitated with Supervisor Daly.
- It was a very successful event.
- The next date to meet regarding South of Market will be April 6, 2002 at the South of Market Recreation Center.
- Tonight will be the fourth in the series of five community workshops. This one will be held in the Bay View.
- This workshop will be unique because it will be a part of the Redevelopment process working hand in hand with the Bay View PAC.
- The last of these workshops will be in Visitation Valley.

          8.          Review of Past Week's Events at the Board of Supervisors and Board of Appeals
BOS – None

BOA
Re: 240 San Fernando Drive
- This was a Discretionary Review for an addition of a third story.
- The Planning Commission took Discretionary Review to modify the design.
- The building's redesign was appealed to the Board of Appeals -- they upheld the Commission +5 -0.

Re: 50 Mason Street
- This item was not before the Commission but is important to mention.
- There was a complaint that someone was doing work without a permit, it appeared to be some kind of adult oriented entertainment. The owner came in to get a permit for an adult bookstore. This was not approved. Then the owner came in to get a permit for retail apparel, and because this is a permitted use, the permit was approved. Apparently this turned out to be an establishment for modeling negligee. The permit was suspended. The suspension of the permit was upheld by the Board of Appeals +5 -0.

D.          REGULAR CALENDAR

          9.          2001.1173C           (LI: 558-6396)
                    637-639 VALLEJO STREET - southeast corner at Stockton Street; Lot 016 in Assessor’s Block 0146 - Request for Conditional Use Authorization to establish a full-service restaurant of approximately 1,700 square feet within the North Beach Neighborhood Commercial District and a 40-X Height and Bulk District. The proposal is to allow Caffé Sempione to occupy a vacant commercial space previously occupied by another full-service restaurant (Kamal Palace). There will be no physical expansion of the existing building.
                    Preliminary Recommendation: Approval with conditions

SPEAKER(S):
(+)Janie Angeleri – Project Sponsor
- She and her husband have been a part of the community for many years.
- They decided to start their own business.
- They will improve the block with renovations to the building.
- She hopes that the Commission will approve the application.
ACTION:          Approved
AYES:          Baltimore, Chinchilla, Joe, Lim, Salinas
ABSENT:          Fay and Theoharis
MOTION:          16347

          10.          2001.0954C          (J.VOLLMANN: 558-6612)
                    420 - 29TH AVENUE - east side between Clement Street and Geary Boulevard, Lot 015 in Assessor’s Block 1460 - Request for Conditional Use Authorization pursuant to Planning Code Section 209.3(f) to provide a child-care facility for 13 or more children. The project proposes to provide child-care for up to 24 children within St. Peter’s Episcopal Church, which currently provides child-care for 12 children. The project site is located within an RH-2 (Residential, House, Two-Family) District and a 40-X Height and Bulk District.
                    Preliminary Recommendation: Approval with conditions

SPEAKER(S):
(+) Father David Rickey
- The drop off situation is addressed by a double length white strip as well as the timing of the children's arrival and departure will have little impact on the street.
(+) Ron Miguel
- This is a very long and established church in the neighborhood.
- He is pleased that the church wants to expand.
- He hopes that the Commission will approve this project.
ACTION:          Approved with the following condition: a staff person will be required to be stationed out front during drop off and pick up to ensure that there is no double parking.
AYES:          Baltimore, Chinchilla, Joe, Lim, Salinas
ABSENT:          Fay and Theoharis
MOTION:          16348

          11.          2001.1129T           (LORD: 558-6311)
                    SCHOOL SHADOWS - Consideration of adoption of recommendations for an ordinance adding Section 296 to the Planning Code to review all building permit applications for new structures which will cast shade or shadow upon the site of a pubic or private elementary or secondary school.
                    Preliminary Recommendation: Approval with modifications.
                    (Continued from Regular Meeting of February 14, 2002)

SPEAKER(S):
(+) Bill Barns
- It is Supervisor Daly's intent to balance the concerns from groups in the community with groups who want to build market-rate housing, affordable housing and other uses.
- It is his hope that this legislation will require staff review prior to projects moving far along in the pipeline so that the concerns can be mitigated.
- He submitted a letter of support from the San Francisco Green School Yards Alliance.
(-) Bob Passmore
- The modifications submitted today have improved the legislation.
- He still believes that this is a superfluous piece of legislation.
- All new schools would have to go through the normal review process (that included shadow review).
(-) Joe O'Donaghue
- This piece of legislation is still very paradoxical.
- Shadow studies are expensive.
- This legislation should not proceed until an analysis is done on what public harm or what public good this will do.
(-) Phillip Smith – Director of Real Estate, San Francisco Unified School District
- The School District would like to be able to give their opinion on this. They would like to do an analysis, and would like to be allowed to comment on it.
- It would be nice to have some dialogue with the DCA as well as others involved in this.
(-) Tim Tosta – Steffel, Levitt and Weiss
- As a person who has had an on-going battle with skin cancer for over ten years, you should consider the real danger in exposing children to (direct) sunlight.
ACTION:          Disapproved
AYES:          Baltimore, Chinchilla, Joe, Salinas, Theoharis
NAYES:          Lim
ABSENT:          Fay
RESOLUTION:          16349

          12.                    (GHOSH: 558-6275)
                    Consideration of adoption of amendments to the existing Planning Commission Inclusionary Housing Policies
                    (Continued from Regular Meeting of February 14, 2002)
                    NOTE: On February 7, 2002, following public testimony, the Commission closed public hearing and continued the matter to February 14, 2002 for final action. Public hearing will remain open on any new recommendations for approval.

SPEAKER(S):
(-) Tim Tosta – Steffel, Levitt and Weiss
- He ran a comparison of a rental project.
- Fourteen percent will always be more than 12 percent.
(-) Steve Vettel – Morrison and Forrester
- The owner occupied imposition at 14 percent does not work.
- The rental project at 14 percent seems to be ok.
- The ownership units should be at 12 percent at 100 percent of median income.
- What the department is proposing is significantly more burdensome to developers.
(-) Rev. Arnold Townsed
- He would rather have percentages dropped.
- Staff still states a preference for on site.
- He would rather see no preference and let the Commission decide on each proposal without staff coming in with the preference.
(-) Bob Meyers
- He is here to speak for Bill Poland, who could not attend the hearing.
- Mr. Poland supports the needs of affordable housing and would like to commend staff in developing these policies. These policies and the proposal heard last week are very well intentioned yet his project cannot meet the level of affordability.
(-) Joe O'Donaghue
- Conditional Uses are a deterrent
- This needs to be looked at more closely.
(-) John Bardis
- This City does not need something more complex.
- It's better that the City focuses on building affordable housing.
- He hopes that the Commission will let the policy stand as it is.
(-) Bob Passmore
- He does not understand the economics of this or whether this policy will work or not. But given what Dr. Ghosh said several weeks ago about the type of housing that is being built, there should be a policy that would require affordable housing across the board.
- He is concerned that the risk factor for a developer has not been taken into consideration.
- There is very little incentive here for developers.

ACTION:          Approved with the following modifications: The policy applies to all projects with 10 or more units with the following requirements:
Rental
As-of-Right: 10% inclusionary requirement at 60 % of Area Median Income (AMI)
CU or Section 309: 12% at a rotating basis of 80%, 100%, 120% of AMI (See explanation of rotating basis on page 8 of the resolution.)
Owner-Occupied (Condo)
As-of-Right: 10% at a rotating basis of 80%, 100%, 120% of AMI          
CU or Section 309: 12% at a rotating basis of 80%, 100%, 120% of AMI
AYES:                    Baltimore, Chinchilla, Joe, Lim, Salinas
ABSENT:          Fay and Theoharis
MOTION:           16350

E.          DISCRETIONARY REVIEW HEARING

At Approximately 4:08 PM the Planning Commission convened into a Discretionary Review (DR) Hearing to hear and act on Discretionary Review matters.


          13.          2001.1013D          (JONES 558-6477)
                    451 OAK PARK DRIVE - west side of Oak Park Drive between Devonshire Way and Christopher Drive , Lot 022 in Assessor’s Block 2677 - Request for Discretionary Review of Building Permit Application No. 2001/07/26/4641, proposing to construct a third story vertical addition to the existing two story, single-family dwelling, located in a RH-1 (D) (Residential, Detached, Single-Family) District and a 40-X Height and Bulk District.
                    Preliminary Recommendation: Do not take Discretionary Review and approve the building permit as submitted

SPEAKER(S):          None
ACTION:          This property was not legally posted. Therefore the matter is not before the Commission at this time. The item will be re-calendared for a future hearing.

          14.          2001.1083D           (TAM: 558-6325)
                    200-202 FAIR OAKS STREET - southwest corner of Fair Oaks and 23rd Street; Lot 1 in Assessor’s Block 3648 - Staff-initiated Discretionary Review request for Building Permit No. 2001/09/05/7610 to reduce the total number of legal dwelling units on the subject property, from 3 to 2 units. The property is a designated City Landmark (The Oakley Residence and Flats, Landmark No. 191) and is located in the RH-3 (Residential, House, Three-Family) District and a 40-X Height and Bulk District.
                    Preliminary Recommendation: Disapproval
                    (Continued from Regular Meeting of February 14, 2002)

SPEAKER(S):
(+) Kim Stryke – Project Sponsor
- She and her husband live in this property.
- Although this property is a landmark, they would like to merge it since they have been restoring it for many years.
- There has been a constant turnover of renters in the units. The units are quite small and tenants end up moving because of that.
- She has been doing some research and found out there is no history on file related to permits for the units and/or for a kitchen.
- She would like the Commission to approve the project so it can go back to its original configuration.
(+) Ted Loewenberg
- He is a friend of the family but also is a member of the Victorian Alliance.
- The project sponsor wants to preserve the character of the neighborhood.
- Although it appears that there is one unit being taken off the market, this merger will allow for large families to live there.
(+) Duane Danielsen
- He supports the project sponsors
(+) Mark Anderson
- He is here for any questions.
ACTION:          Take Discretionary Review and Disapprove Project
AYES:          Salinas, Theoharis
NAYES:          Baltimore, Chinchilla, Joe, Lim
RESULT:          The motion failed.

ACTION:          Did not take Discretionary Review and approved the merger
AYES:          Baltimore, Chinchilla, Joe, Lim,
NAYES:          Salinas and Theoharis
ABSENT:          Fay



          15.          2001.1102D           (TAM: 558-6325)
                    1323 - 41ST AVENUE - between Irving Street and Lincoln Way, Lot 3 in Assessor’s Block 1796 - Staff-initiated Discretionary Review request for Building Permit No. 2001/01/24/0455 and 2001/01/24/0457 to demolish an existing two-story, single-family dwelling and construct a new four-story, two-family dwelling. The property is located in the RH-2 (Residential, House, Two-Family) District and 40-X Height and Bulk District.
                    Preliminary Recommendation: Take Discretionary Review and approve the project with staff modifications.

SPEAKER(S):
Re: Continuance
Dennis Chow
- He is the son of the project sponsor.
- His father has not had much time to fully review the plans. The architect has also not had much time to review the information.
- He believes that there is more information that he can provide for this project that is why he would like to have this case continued.
Audrey Buckley
- If the project sponsor wants to reduce the size of the project, then she would agree to the continuance. But, if the project sponsor wants to leave the project as is, then she does not agree to a continuance since she took time off from work to attend the hearing.

Re: Merits of the Project
(-) Audrew Buckley – DR Requestor
- She lives behind the project sponsor's home.
- She is worried about her privacy and light being blocked by the new construction.
(+) Dennis Chow – Project Sponsor
- He is concerned about making the residence only three floors since this will be his residence and place of work.
- The penthouse, which is being proposed, would be for his office.
- If and when he gets married he will need space for the family he plans to have.
(+) Jeff Chen
- This project is basically for a homeowner to bring his son back to the city and be able to work in his own home.
- There are other penthouses being built around the city since people are requiring more space.
(+) Stanley Chan
- Steven Chu read a letter written by Mr. Stanley Chan.
- Many of the buildings in the neighborhood are about the same height as his house.
- The design of the 4th floor unit is designed so that it will not block the view of the adjacent neighbors.
- He presented photographs of houses in the surrounding area.
- The design of the building will allow 4 cars to be parked there so the proposed construction will not cause traffic or parking problems.
- He also read a letter from Marianne Arata who is an adjacent property owner and is in support of the project.
(+) Steven Chu
- He is a retired structural engineer
- The extension of the house will allow a family to live together.
- He hopes the Commission will approve the project.
ACTION:          Take Discretionary Review and approve the project with the following modifications: (1) Obtain demolition clearance before approving any building permits to demolish and reconstruct a building on the subject property; (2) Reduce the total number of stories from four to three, and match the overall building height of the adjacent three-story building to the south; (3) Reduce the overall total building depth from 70 feet to 63 feet, matching the existing rear yard depth of the property to the south; (4) Provide landscaping at the required front setback area pursuant to Planning Code Sections 132 and 143; and (5) Work with Planning staff to improve the overall building design to ensure compatibility with the existing architectural character of the neighboring buildings, i.e., window size and proportions, exterior building finishes, vehicular and pedestrian openings, and roof lines. 1) Remove the 4th floor and match the building height of the adjacent building to the south; 2) cut depth of building back to match the existing rear yard depth of the adjacent building to the south; and 3) add landscaping in the required front setback.
AYES:          Baltimore, Chinchilla, Joe, Lim, Salinas, Theoharis
ABSENT:          Fay

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))

Joe O'Donaghue
Re: Leno Legislation
- He resents one Commissioner's comments about her endorsement of this legislation and her opinion of others who do not endorse it.


Adjournment: 5:08 p.m.


THE DRAFT MINUTES ARE PROPOSED FOR ADOPTION AT THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION ON THURSDAY, MARCH 7, 2002
ACTION:          Approved
AYES:                    Baltimore, Chinchilla, Fay, Joe, Theoharis, Salinas
ABSENT:          Lim

Last updated: 11/17/2009 10:00:07 PM