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

Skip to page body
  • go to google translator
  • contact us

January 08, 2004

January 08, 2004

SAN FRANCISCO
PLANNING COMMISSION

Meeting Minutes

Commission Chambers - Room 400
City Hall, 1 Dr. Carlton B. Goodlett Place

Thursday, January 8, 2004
1:30 3:30 PM

Regular Meeting

COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Michael J. Antonini, Shelley Bradford Bell, Edgar E. Boyd, Lisa Feldstein, Kevin Hughes, Sue Lee, William L. Lee

COMMISSIONERS ABSENT: None

THE MEETING WAS CALLED TO ORDER BY PRESIDENT BRADFORD BELL AT 3:35 p.m.

STAFF IN ATTENDANCE: Larry Badiner - Acting Director of Planning; Jim Nixon - Acting Zoning Administrator; Rick Crawford; Isolde Wilson; Dan Sirois; Ben Fu; Paul Lord; 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.

      1a. 2003.1141DDDDV (B . FU: (415) 558-6613)

          1218 MARIPOSA STREET - north side, between Missouri and Texas Streets; Lot 013 in Assessor's Block 3985, in a RH-2 (Residential, Two-Family House) District with a 40-X Height and Bulk Designation. Mandatory Discretionary Review, under the Planning Commission's policy requiring review of housing demolition, of Demolition Permit Application No. 2003.04.10.2000 to demolish an existing single-family dwelling (the project also proposes the construction of a new single-family dwelling) in an RH-2 (Residential, House, Two-Family) District and a 40-X Height and Bulk District.

          (Proposed for Continuance to February 12, 2004)

          SPEAKER(S): None

          ACTION: Without hearing, item continued to February 12, 2004

          AYES: Antonini, Bradford Bell, Feldstein, Hughes, S. Lee, W. Lee

          ABSENT: Boyd

      1b. 2003.1141DDDDV (B . FU: (415) 558-6613)

          1218 MARIPOSA STREET - north side, between Missouri and Texas Streets; Lot 013 in Assessor's Block 3985, in a RH-2 (Residential, Two-Family House) District with a 40-X Height and Bulk Designation. Three Discretionary Review requests for Building Permit Application No. 2003.04.10.1998 have been filed for the construction of a replacement single-family dwelling in an RH-2 (Residential, House, Two-Family) District and a 40-X Height and Bulk District.

          (Proposed for Continuance to February 12, 2004)

          SPEAKER(S): None

          ACTION: Without hearing, item continued to February 12, 2004

          AYES: Antonini, Bradford Bell, Feldstein, Hughes, S. Lee, W. Lee

          ABSENT: Boyd

      1c. 2003.1141DDDDV (B . FU: (415) 558-6613)

          1218 MARIPOSA STREET - north side, between Missouri and Texas Streets; Lot 013 in Assessor's Block 3985, in a RH-2 (Residential, Two-Family House) District with a 40-X Height and Bulk Designation. A front setback Variance is requested to reconstruct an existing garage within the front setback.

          (Proposed for Continuance to February 12, 2004)

          SPEAKER(S): None

          ACTION: Without hearing, item continued to February 12, 2004

          AYES: Antonini, Bradford Bell, Feldstein, Hughes, S. Lee, W. Lee

          ABSENT: Boyd

      2. 2003.1142D (J. PURVIS: (415) 558-6354)

          1611 WALLACE AVENUE - south side between 3rd and Keith Streets; Lot 041 in Assessor's Block 5413 - Mandatory Discretionary Review pursuant to 1943 Planning Commission Resolution No. 2797 on the proposed 2-story horizontal rear addition to a single-family dwelling under Building Permit Application No. 2003.08.20.2646. The addition would extend the building by 24 feet in the rear, including 18 feet of interior space and a 6-foot rear deck. The site is in an RH-1 (Residential, House, One-Family) Use District and a 40-X Height and Bulk District.

          Preliminary Recommendation: Pending

          (Proposed for Continuance to February 12, 2004)

          SPEAKER(S): None

          ACTION: Without hearing, item continued to February 12, 2004

          AYES: Antonini, Bradford Bell, Feldstein, Hughes, S. Lee, W. Lee

          ABSENT: Boyd

          3. 2003.0873D (G. CABREROS: (415) 558-6169)

          2524-2540 ANZA STREET - north side between 16th and 17th Avenues; Lot 023 in Assessor's Block 1528 - Request for Discretionary Review of Building Permit Application No. 2002.12.10.3209, proposing to add a new fourth floor to the existing three-story, four-unit building in an RM-1 (Residential, Mixed, Low-Density) District and a 40-X Height and Bulk District.

          Preliminary Recommendation: Pending

                (Continued from Regular Meeting of November 6, 2003)

                (Proposed for Continuance to February 19, 2004) February 26, 2004

          SPEAKER(S): None

          ACTION: Without hearing, item continued to February 26, 2004

          AYES: Antonini, Bradford Bell, Feldstein, Hughes, S. Lee, W. Lee

          ABSENT: Boyd

      4. 2003.0700DD (R. CRAWFORD: (415) 558-6358)

          565 CLIPPER STREET - south side between Douglass and Diamond Streets. Assessor's Block 6556 Lot 021 - Request for Discretionary Review of Building Permit Application No. 2003 03.07.9076, to construct a new third floor and a three story rear addition to the existing two story single family dwelling in an RH-2 (Residential House, Two Family) District, and a 40-X Height and Bulk District.

          Preliminary Recommendation: Take Discretionary Review and Approve the Project with Modifications.

          NOTE: On September 11, 2003 following public testimony the Commission closed the public hearing and continued this item to November 6, 2003 requesting plans from the Project Sponsor.

                (Continued from Regular Meeting of November 6, 2003)

                (Proposed for Continuance to March 11, 2004)

          SPEAKER(S): None

          ACTION: Without hearing, item continued to March 11, 2004

          AYES: Antonini, Bradford Bell, Feldstein, Hughes, S. Lee, W. Lee

          ABSENT: Boyd

          5. 2003.0908D (E. TOPE: (415) 558-6316)

          461 CHENERY STREET - south side between Roanoke and Mateo Streets; Lot 022 in Assessor's Block 6718 - Mandatory Discretionary Review, pursuant to the Planning Commission's policy requiring review of housing demolition, of Demolition Permit Application No. 2003.04.04.1533, proposing to demolish an existing single-family dwelling. A new two-family dwelling unit would be constructed under a separate Building Permit Application, No. 2003.04.04.1536s. The project is located in a RH-2 (House, Two-Family) District and 40-X Height and Bulk District. Preliminary Recommendation: Do not take Discretionary Review and approve the project as proposed.

          PROJECT WITHDRAWN

B. COMMISSIONERS' QUESTIONS AND MATTERS

      6. Consideration of Adoption - Draft Minutes of November 20, 2003, and December 4, 2003, (Continued from December 18, 2003).

          SPEAKER(S): None

          ACTION: Approved

          AYES: Antonini, Bradford Bell, Feldstein, Hughes, S. Lee, W. Lee

          ABSENT: Boyd

      7. Commission Comments/Questions

          Commissioner Bell:

          Re: Acting Director

          - Wished him a happy birthday.

          Re: Inauguration of new Mayor

          - She is looking forward to working with the new administration.

          Re: New Year

          - She mentioned that the Commission will continue to work with staff to try to streamline the calendar, making sure people are heard, and that the public gets an opportunity to go home to their families without staying here all night.

          Re: Director

          - She welcomed the Director of Planning (Gerald Green) at this hearing.

          Commissioner Antonini:

          Re: Time it Takes to Schedule Cases

          - He is concerned that there are projects that are filed and they don't get to the Commission for six months or more.

          Commissioner W. Lee:

          Re: Article in the Open Forum Section of the San Francisco Chronicle

          - Mike Berkowitz, of staff, wrote an editorial.

          - He invited Mr. Berkowitz to come to the Commission and discuss the issues stated in the article.

          Commissioner Bradford Bell

          Re: Article in the Open Forum Section of the San Francisco Chronicle

          - If Mr. Berkowitz would like to come before the Commission under Public Comment--fine, but is concerned with scheduling a discussion of a staff person's personal opinion.

          - She requested information from Lisa Feldstein, from a union standpoint.

          Commissioner Lisa Feldstein:

          Re: Article in the Open Forum Section of the San Francisco Chronicle

          - She is not prepared to address the labor component of staff appearing before them with regards to comments made in a public forum.

          Commissioner Bradford Bell:

          Re: Article in the Open Forum Section of the San Francisco Chronicle

          - She stated that she would talk to the Director off-line about this.

          Commissioner William Lee:

          Re: Article in the Open Forum Section of the San Francisco Chronicle

          - He would rather debate issues during the Planning Commission hearings and in the public eye.

          - He is just suggesting this and will leave it to the vote of the Commission.

          Commissioner Bradford Bell:

          Re: Article in the Open Forum Section of the San Francisco Chronicle

          - She does not want to be involved in issues that should be dealt with by the Planning Director.

          - If one member of staff is invited then she invites all staff to come before the Commission and speak during public comment.

          Planning Director Responded:

          Re: Article in the Open Forum Section of the San Francisco Chronicle

          - The same individual of staff filed a grievance so the Planning Commission should be able to deal with the other underlying issues that are related to this opinion.

          Commissioner Feldstein:

          Re: Article in the Open Forum Section of the San Francisco Chronicle

          - She stated, for the record, that she works part time for the labor organization that represents the planner who wrote the article.

          - She wants to make it clear that Commissioners are not involved in personnel matters.

          - She is not involved in any issues that relate to the planners that they represent.

C. DIRECTOR'S REPORT

      8. Director's Announcements

          Director Gerald Green stated:

          Re: Various

          - He is glad to be back.

          - He congratulated the new Mayor and District Attorney.

          - He is looking forward to working with the new administration.

          - Mr. Badiner and he have sat down with the Neighborhood Revitalization and Planning Workshop Group of the Transition Committee. This was a good experience for both of them. He will read the report published by this committee.

          - He wished everyone a happy new year.

          Acting Director Badiner Stated:

          Re: Various

          - He looks forward to working with the new administration as well.

          - He thanked everyone for their birthday wishes.

          Re: Craig Nikitas

          - He will be the Acting Zoning Administrator for the next two to four months while Mr. Nixon is out for health reasons.

          Re: Housing Element Negative Declaration

          - On December 18, he mentioned that this had been recently issued and that because of the holidays, the appeal period was going to close on January 20, 2004. The Department sent the required ad to the Independent Newspaper stating this, but it was never published. He is trying to find out why. As a result, this coming Saturday, there will an add in the Independent Newspaper stating that the appeal period will be extended to 5:00 p.m., January 30, 2004

          SPEAKER(S):

          Marilyn Amini

          - She submitted a letter stating that there were two dates published in the newspaper.

          - The date initially given in the Independent Newspaper was consistent with Chapter 31 of the administrative code which sets forth requirements for CEQA.

          - The other notification gave a longer period than CEQA requires.

          - She contacted Mr. Rick Cooper about this and he mentioned that he would fix that.

      9. Review of Past Week's Events at the Board of Supervisors and Board of Appeals

          BOS

          Monday, January 12, 2004

          Land Use Committee

          - There will be a presentation on the Eastern Neighborhoods.

          - Amendments to the Planning Code and General Plan on Rincon Hill Projects.

          Tuesday, January 13, 2004

          Board of Supervisors

          - 899 North Point - The Commission was going to hear this but wasn't able to because an appeal was filed.

          BOA - None

          SPEAKER(S):

          Jeremy Paul

          - Wished the Acting Director a happy birthday.

          - Congratulated Craig Nikitas on temporarily being appointed Acting Zoning Administrator.

          - On the Board of Appeals report given at the Planning Commission hearing on December 18, 2003, Commissioner Hughes had a questions on a demolition on 8th Avenue. There was a fully new demolition report prepared after the action of the Commission. Mr. Buskovitch prepared the report that was reviewed by Chief Inspector Kornfield who determined that the building was in a dangerous condition. A resolution was reached that met the criteria sought by the department.

D. PUBLIC COMMENT ON AGENDA ITEMS WHERE THE PUBLIC HEARING HAS BEEN CLOSED

      At this time, members of the public who wish to address the Commission on agenda items that have already been reviewed in a public hearing at which members of the public were allowed to testify and the public hearing has been closed, must do so at this time. Each member of the public may address the Commission for up to three minutes.

      SPEAKER(S):

      Richard Nockles - Toby Long Design

      Re: 1127 Filbert Street

      - This project is a merger for a growing family.

      - It is located in a three unit per building neighborhood.

      - There is no change in the actual number of bedrooms.

E. CONSIDERATION OF FINDINGS AND FINAL ACTION - PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED

          10. 2003.1027D (M. WOODS; (415) 558- 6315)

                1127 FILBERT STREET - south side between Leavenworth and Hyde Streets; Lot 037 in Assessor's Block 0097 - Mandatory Discretionary Review, under the Planning Commission's policy requiring review of all dwelling unit mergers, of Building Permit Application No. 2003.05.01.3561, proposing to merge one unit on the third floor with a unit on the fourth floor in an existing 4-unit building in an RH-3 (Residential, House, Three-Family) District and 40-X Height and Bulk District.

                Preliminary Recommendation: Take Discretionary Review and disapprove the proposed dwelling unit merger.

                      (Continued from Regular Meeting of November 6, 2003)

            NOTE: On November 6, 2003, following public testimony, the Commission closed the public hearing and continued the matter to January 8, 2004, by a vote of +4 -0. Commissioners Bradford Bell, Boyd, W. Lee were absent.

          SPEAKER(S): None

          ACTION: Took Discretionary Review and disapproved the merger.

          AYES: Antonini, Bradford Bell, Boyd, Feldstein, Hughes, S. Lee, W. Lee

D. REGULAR CALENDAR

      11a. 2002.1290DDDDV (R. CRAWFORD: (415) 558-6358)

          949 SANCHEZ STREET - east side between 23rd and 22nd Streets. Assessor's Block 3627 Lot 031A - Request for Discretionary Review of Building Permit Application No. 2002.0718.1767 to construct a new three story one family dwelling on the front portion of the property in an RH-2 (Residential House, Two Family) District, and a 40-X Height and Bulk District.

          Preliminary Recommendation: Take Discretionary Review, and modify the Building Permit.

          SPEAKER(S):

          (-) Paul Mayfield - Discretionary Review Requestor

          - There were four Discretionary Review applications filed.

          - He is the spokesperson for all four Discretionary Review requestors.

          - If the terms are agreed to and met by the Project Sponsor, the Discretionary Review requestors will withdraw their requests.

          (+) David Silverman - Reuben and Alter - Representing Project Sponsor

          - He can confirm the agreement as described by Mr. Mayfield, he is very pleased that they were able to reach this agreement.

          - He is available for questions.

          ACTION: Took Discretionary Review and approved the project consistent with the December 8, 2003 drawings.

          AYES: Antonini, Bradford Bell, Boyd, Feldstein, Hughes, S. Lee, W. Lee

      11b. 2002.1290DDDDV (R. CRAWFORD: (415) 558-6358)

          949 SANCHEZ STREET - East side between 23rd and 22nd Streets. Assessor's Block 3627 Lot 031 Request for a Variance from Planning Code Section 188 to expand a non-complying building, the rear building on the property, located entirely within the required rear yard, so as to increase its degree of noncompliance, in an RH-2 (Residential House, Two Family) District, and a 40-X Height and Bulk District.

          SPEAKER(S): Same as those listed for item 11a.

          ACTION: Zoning Administrator closed the public hearing and has taken the matter under advisement.

      12. 2002.1291DDDD (R. CRAWFORD: (415) 558-6358)

          949 SANCHEZ STREET - East side between 23rd and 22nd Streets. Assessor's Block 3627 Lot 031A - Discretionary Review, of Building Permit Application No. 2002.09.04.5569, to modify the existing one family house located at the rear of the property in an RH-2 (Residential House, Two Family) District, and a 40-X Height and Bulk District.

          Preliminary Recommendation: Take Discretionary Review, and modify the Building Permit.

          SPEAKER(S): Same as those listed for item 11a.

          ACTION: Took Discretionary Review and approved the project consistent with the December 8, 2003 drawings.

          AYES: Antonini, Bradford Bell, Boyd, Feldstein, Hughes, S. Lee, W. Lee

          13. 2003.0193D (R. CRAWFORD: (415) 558-6358)

          244 GRANADA AVENUE - east side between Ocean and Holloway Avenues in Assessor's Block 6942 Lot 039 - Mandatory Discretionary Review, under the Planning Commission's policy requiring review of housing demolition of Demolition Permit Application No. 2002.10.28.0113, to demolish the existing one family house, in an RH-2 (Residential House, Two Family) District and a 40-X Height and Bulk district. There is a related proposal to construct a new two-family building.

          Preliminary Recommendation: Do Not Take Discretionary Review and Approve the Demolition Permit.

            (Continued from Regular Meeting of November 6, 2003)

          SPEAKER(S):

          William Abend - Project Architect

          - He submitted photographs and documents with information on previous approvals from the Planning Commission.

          - The only thing that has changed is the valuation of the basement.

          - He is available for questions.

          (name not understood)

          - She is available for questions.

          - She hopes that the Commission will approve the demolition.

          ACTION: Did not take Discretionary Review and approved the demolition.

          AYES: Antonini, Bradford Bell, Boyd, Feldstein, Hughes, S. Lee, W. Lee

          14. 2003.1079D (R. CRAWFORD: (415) 558-6358)

          3344 MARKET STREET - northeast side between Glendale and Clayton Streets. Assessor's Block 2717 Lot 004F. Mandatory Discretionary Review, under the Planning Commission's policy requiring review of housing demolition of Demolition Permit Application No. 2003.06.26.8149, to demolish the existing one family house and construct a new one family house 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 Demolition Permit.

      (Continued from Regular Meeting of November 6, 2003)

          SPEAKER(S): None

          ACTION: Without hearing, item continued to February 26, 2004.

          AYES: Antonini, Bradford Bell, Feldstein, Hughes, S. Lee, W. Lee

          ABSENT: Boyd

      15. 2003.1249D (I. WILSON: (415) 558-6163)

          3715 BALBOA STREET - south side between 38th Avenue and 39th Avenue; Lot 046 in Assessor's Block 1606 - Discretionary Review of Building Permit Application No. 2003.07.17.9708 proposing the change of use of the retail space to Personal Service (beauty salon). The subject property is located 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 Building Permit Application.

          SPEAKER(S):

          (-) David Chiu, Translator for Joanne Key (Discretionary Review Requestor)

          - The permit should be denied because the owner of the business is not Gary Chiu.

          - The project sponsor has mentioned that she owns a business but has never presented a physical address.

          (+) Gary Chiu - Project Sponsor

          - He is the owner of 3715 Balboa Street.

          - The business he is opening up is for his girlfriend. Maggie Lee is just a friend of the contractor and she is not in the lease. The lease is under his name.

          ACTION: Did not take Discretionary Review and approved the project.

          AYES: Antonini, Bradford Bell, Boyd, Feldstein, Hughes, S. Lee, W. Lee

      16. 2003.0913D (D. SIROIS; (415) 558-6313)

          3906 JUDAH STREET - north side of Judah Street, between 44th and 45th Avenues, Lot 016, Assessor's Block 1799--Request for Discretionary Review of Building Permit Application 2003.05.02.3719, that seeks authorization to establish a coffee store (Starbucks) in a vacant commercial space located in an NC-1 (Neighborhood Commercial Cluster) District and in a 40-X Height and Bulk District.

          Preliminary Recommendation: Do not take Discretionary Review and approve the change of use.

          SPEAKER(S):

          (-) Brennan Murphy - Discretionary Review Requestor - Sunset Neighbors for Action

          - There have been 4,200 signatures against this project.

          - The project sits at the edge of a small commercial zone.

          - This would be the first national corporate run store in the area.

          - Starbuck's signed the agreement without having any sort of community input.

          - There is no need to have this type of business here because there are already two independently owned coffee shops.

          - Starbucks would also occupy space that could be used for a neighborhood owned retail use.

          - Starbucks does not provide any sort of opportunity for resident ownership. Instead of preserving neighborhood retail use it would probably cause the other coffee shops to close.

          - The project would also cause traffic problems as well as pedestrian traffic because they plan to have many tables on the sidewalk.

          - Starbuck's is not a modest coffee retail use.

          (-) Nan Radich

          - She is a very concerned teacher and resident.

          - The Sunset is the City's best kept secret and this Seattle based company will disrupt the peace in the neighborhood.

          - The neighborhood cannot hold on to its diversity if Starbucks is allowed.

          - The Neighbors of the Sunset are not in support of this project.

          - Starbucks did not even have the consideration to speak to the community before signing a contract.

          (-) Mary Spoerer

          - She lives in the inner sunset and shops there.

          - She appreciates the character of the neighborhood. This is why she does not support this project.

          (-) Amrah Johnson - Associated Students of CCSF Ocean Campus

          - The students of City College are not in support of this project. Many of the students are enrolled in the Restaurant and Hospitality program and one day would like to open their own small businesses.

          - Students should have the ability to pursue their dream.

          (-) Michael Crotty

          - He lives in the Sunset District, one block away from the proposed project.

          - He is outraged that Starbucks is trying to destroy the many years of hard work that one of the café's in the neighborhood has tried to obtain.

          - If Starbucks opens, it will crush this café as well as other independently owned retail stores.

          (-) D.J. Canepa - Assemblyman Leland Yee's Office

          - He read a letter dated September 2, 2003, from Leland Yee who is opposed to this chain store. He is in support of independently owned small businesses.

          (-) Amanda Janes - Sunset Neighbors for Action

          - She lives about five blocks from the proposed site.

          - She is opposed to the project.

          - Starbucks is a global corporation and a small business owner cannot compete with them.

          - Starbucks has stated that if they do not open a coffee shop there, someone else will. Although this might be true, Starbucks would totally impede the opportunity for small entrepreneurs.

          (-) Patrick McGuire - Sunset Neighbors for Action

          - He was born in the neighborhood and now owns a small business there.

          - Even people who do patronize Starbucks, would not like to have a store open there.

          - Parking will become a problem because the infrastructure of the location does not support that type of store there.

          - It will be more than likely that people will double park and cause problems for the "N" Judah MUNI line.

          - If this use is allowed, it will give a "green light" for other chain stores to open and totally change the character of the neighborhood.

          (-) Ron Dudum - Westside Democratic Club

          - He was born in the neighborhood.

          - 4,000 neighborhoods have identified that their neighborhood character is threatened with this project.

          - Perhaps another coffee shop can open in the neighborhood but not a nationally owned chain store.

          (-) Joel Ventresca -SPEAK

          - This project will endanger independently owned businesses.

          - This project will violate proposition M.

          - Starbucks is the type of company that does not promote fair hiring.

          (-) Ralf Lane

          - He is a fifth generation San Franciscan.

          - He cares about the character of the neighborhood.

          - He is the commercial landlord next door to the proposed project.

          - Bringing in an international chain is not a lifesaver for more rent in the neighborhood.

          - The neighborhood is doing just fine with the small businesses there.

          (-) Tess Manola-Ventresca - Coordinator for the Sunset Neighbors for Action

          - Starbucks has very little use at this location.

          - The independently owned businesses can hire local musicians and singers.

          (-) Carlo Grunfeld - Sunset Neighbors for Action

          - He is here representing the various people who could not be here.

          - There are already several excellent coffee Stores.

          - Parking in the avenues is already at full capacity.

          - He would like the Commission to take Discretionary Review and disapprove the project.

          (-) Nicky Trasviña - Sunset Neighbors for Action

          - She was born in San Francisco and through the years she has seen the invasion of chain stores "creeping" into neighborhoods. These have caused small businesses to close and have closed the door on old fashion customer service.

          - She is also a member of the Saint Paul's Presbyterian Church, located one block away from the project site. She has found that the neighborhood is made up of working class people that are not the type to go to Starbucks.

          (-) Rick Young

          - It is very clear how the residents feel. The hearing room is full of people who oppose Starbuck's and there have been so many signatures from others who are also against it.

          - Would the Commission, if they were residents of the Sunset, open a restaurant if there was going to be a Starbucks?

          - The area is better served by not having a Starbuck's there.

          (-) Bernard Crotty

          - He was a member of the Commission on Aging for both Mayors Willie Brown and Frank Jordan.

          - He has always had a great working relationship with the neighborhood merchants association.

          - He hopes that the Commission will not approve this project and support the small business community of this city.

          (-) Stacey McCann

          - She was born and raised in the neighborhood.

          - The lower sunset is a special community. It remains untouched by commercialism.

          - If the City allows these types of businesses in the neighborhood, the community will forever be tarnished.

          (-) (name unclear)

          - She moved to San Francisco because of its uniqueness and diversity.

          - She likes the community feel of the neighborhood because she is from a small town.

          - She would like to preserve small businesses in the area.

          (-) Barbara Laily

          - She lives in the neighborhood and is opposed to the project.

          - There are three coffee shops independently owned and there is no need for this type of corporate chain.

          - If this project is allowed, it will bring other chain stores, causing other small businesses to close.

          (-) Amy Laitinen - Supervisor Gonzalez's Office

          - There is a letter from the Supervisor supporting of the residents of the Sunset. He does not support allowing this type of use in the area.

          (-) Lucy Quacinella

          - She was lucky enough to buy a home in the Sunset District.

          - This area does have a small town feel.

          - She urges the Commission to listen to the many eloquent voices that have expressed their opposition.

          - The residents also have the right to be listened to so they can preserve the quality of life in their neighborhoods.

          (-) Luis Granados - Mission Economic Development Corporation

          - He is here to request that the Commission take Discretionary Review and not approve the change of use.

          - This project meets all the uses, so the issue is not about that. The issue is about what the community wants and what they want to preserve.

          - The Commission needs to decide what they are basing their decision on.

          - The Planning staff made a wrong decision.

          - The Commission can rectify this mistake and not approve the project.

          (+) Tim Tosta - Steefel, Levitt and Weiss - Representing Starbucks

          - He gave a PowerPoint type of presentation regarding the aspects of the project.

          - The neighborhood has a number of small scale stores and is adjacent to a residential neighborhood.

          - The store which Starbuck's intends to occupy has been vacant for over a year. It is a modest store in character.

          - It is not anticipated to have a large number of cars travel to this location. There will be more pedestrian traffic.

          - He displayed a map of where other Starbuck's businesses are near the neighborhood.

          - The other smaller coffee shops are a lot larger in square footage than the location where the Starbuck's is intended.

          (+) Ave Montague

          - She is a public relations and event manager and founder of the San Francisco Black Film Festival. She resides in the Fillmore District. She cannot speak on the issues of the Sunset District but she can speak about her experience with Starbuck's in the Fillmore District.

          - She organized an event for young people in December but did not have toys or food. She spoke to a representative from Starbucks and was able to receive food and beverages for this event for 300 kids. Starbucks also donated toys for these kids.

          - Starbucks also sponsored the Hamilton Family shelter and staged a blanket drive.

          - She has been able to receive a lot of support from Starbucks with food, donations, and other volunteer help for many of her fundraising events.

          (+) Ryan Dong - Starbuck's Coffee Co.

          - He has been working for Starbuck's for about six years now.

          - He read a letter from residents of the Sunset District who were not able to come to the hearing and are in support of Starbuck's opening a coffee shop at the proposed location.

          (+) Nicole Hauscarriague - CB Richard Ellis, Inc.

          - She lives in the Sunset District.

          - She did a lot of advertising to lease the space at this location.

          - Many of her friends that live in the area go to Starbuck's at the 9th and Irving location.

          - It is very important to point out that Starbuck's is not paying more for the space than any other tenant would have if they had leased the space.

          (+) Elizabeth McFarland

          - She is the store manager of the Starbuck's store located on 9th and Irving.

          - She started working for Starbucks nine years ago.

          (+) Greg Pree - Starbuck's Coffee Company

          - Starbucks donates more than seven million dollars in cash annually to support the arts, the environment and other causes.

          - Starbucks is a wonderful company that does a lot of good things for the community.

          (+) Bill Shamieh - Shamco Investments

          - He owns the building where Starbucks is proposed.

          - The location was in a very bad condition.

          - He spent about $85,000 dollars to improve the locale.

          - The main argument was that the businesses did not want Starbucks there.

          - He has a petition from businesses around the area that supports a Starbucks there.

          (+) Yoosef Shamieh - Shamco Investments

          - He went store to store in the area to survey whether or not people were opposed to a Starbucks coffee store. Most all of them stated that in this difficult economy, they could use the help.

          (+) Rami Shamieh

          - He went with Yoosef to do this survey.

          - Most of the businesses stated that opening a Starbucks would improve the area.

          (+) Karen Vance - Starbucks Coffee Company

          - She has been with Starbucks since October of 2000.

          - Starbucks conducted a phone survey of the residents of the Sunset. The purpose of this survey was to better understand the desires of the Sunset community. It is important for them to know how people feel about Starbucks.

          - The majority of those surveyed supported a Starbucks coffee store.

          - She read letters from residents of the area who support the proposal.

          (+) Mike Tufo - General Contractor

          - He is a native San Franciscan.

          - One of the things that is unique about Starbucks is the money that they spend in the detailing of their stores and the quality of the products that they present to the public.

          - They always conform to the words "qualifications" and "requirements" to the community.

          - Once they open a store, the spend a lot of money maintaining it.

          - Starbucks also go through a great deal of care to select contractors and work with unions.

          (+) Martin Malchow

          - He owns the building adjoining the proposed coffee shop.

          - He is the closest to the whole project.

          - He has no objection to Starbucks going in since it is not a Walmart or a Costco.

          - People are still going to patronize the other stores.

          - He does not believe that people will double park because the Judah line goes by there about 40 mph.

          - Starbucks is a good company. He has not seen a store that has not been clean on the outside and on the inside.

          (+) Gina Moreno - Vise President of Starbucks

          - They have heard the concerns of the public about the new store opening.

          - They have also heard from their customers and potential customers who are very excited about the store opening.

          - They are looking forward to working with the Outer Sunset Community and being involved with the local schools, charities and organizations.

          - From today's hearing, she has learned that Starbucks needs to do a better job of putting their face forward.

          MOTION No. 1: Do not take Discretionary Review and approve project.

          AYES: Antonini and Boyd

          NAYES: Bradford Bell, Feldstein, Hughes, S. Lee and W. Lee

          RESULT: Motion Failed

          ACTION: Took Discretionary Review and disapproved the project.

          AYES: Bradford Bell, Feldstein, Hughes, S. Lee and W. Lee

          NAYES: Antonini and Boyd

          17. 2003.1246D (B . FU: (415) 558-6613)

          654 CAROLINA STREET - west side, between 19th and 20th Streets; Lot 009 in Assessor's Block 4071 - Request for Discretionary Review of Building Permit Application No. 2003.04.24.2991, proposing to construct a two-story vertical addition to the existing one-story over garage building in an RH-2 (Residential, House, Two-Family) within a 40-X Height and Bulk Designation.

          Preliminary Recommendation: Do not take Discretionary Review and approve the Building Permit Application.

          SPEAKER(S): None

          ACTION: Discretionary Review Application was withdrawn

          18. 2003.0966T (P. LORD: (415) 558-6311)

          FORMULA RETAIL USES - Consideration of an Ordinance to amend the Planning Code by adding Section 703.3 and by amending Section 182 to make findings as to the need to regulate formula retail uses, to define formula retail uses, prohibit formula retail uses in the Hayes-Gough Neighborhood Commercial District and in the Neighborhood Commercial Cluster Districts at Cole and Carl Streets and Parnassus and Stanyan Streets, to require any building permit application for formula retail use to comply with the notice and design review procedures of Section 312 of the Planning Code, to provide that the burden to prove that a use is not a formula retail use rests with the building permit applicant or holder, and to provide that nonconforming uses in Residential District which are seeking to change in use to retail sales activity or retail sales establishment which is also a formula retail use must comply with the provisions of Section 703.3 , making findings of consistency with the priority policies of Planning Code Section 101.1 and the General Plan.

      (Continued from Regular Meeting of December 18, 2003)

          SPEAKER(S):

          (+) Amy Laitinen - Supervisor Gonzalez's Office

          - She is glad to know that the Commission is in support of the intent of the legislation.

          - This legislation is basically to protect small business, neighborhood character and the local economy.

          - She spoke on the changes that were made and the reasons for them.

          - The number was increased for a variety of reasons. There have been numerous conversations with the Planning Department, merchants associations and the City Attorney. They felt that there were a fair number of businesses that don't fit the "retail formula use" with five or six stores. Once there are more than 10, it starts to fit more like a chain store.

          - One of the main reasons for this legislation is to protect small businesses in San Francisco that are being pushed out by larger businesses.

          - The majority of small businesses are single locations. Of multiple location businesses with only two stores.

          - There is a small amount of businesses that this legislation will affect but these are the ones they are trying to target.

          (-) Steven Sarver

          - He and his wife own a small business. He now has six stores and family members operate all of them.

          - He and his family enjoy working and living in San Francisco.

          - He is concerned with this legislation because there are proposals to open two more stores.

          - There are thousands of people in the financial district that have suggested they open more businesses.

          - This legislation would hinder their growth.

          - He as well as other small business owners should be allowed to open stores throughout San Francisco so long as there is a demand.

          (+) Paul Wermer

          - He is a member of the Neighborhood Network.

          - He supports this legislation.

          - San Francisco is known for district neighborhoods.

          - This ordinance strikes a good balances because it provides opportunities for neighborhoods to decide how they will develop.

          - Although this will add more of a workload to the Planning Department he would like to have this legislation approved.

          (-) Jaime Rossi

          - He understands the purpose of this legislation but he believes that it is a little arbitrary.

          - In bad economic times, things like this are more hurtful than beneficial.

          - He believes that for the economic outlook of this City, there should not be more burden placed on retailers.

          (-) Anna Shimko - Cassidy, Shimko & Dawson on behalf of Safeway

          - She is representing Safeway who is opposed to this legislation.

          - Grocery services are very vital.

          - The legislation would have various impacts on low and moderate-income families.

          - If the legislation should pass, she asked that grocery stores not be included.

          - The legislation does not provide information for appeals.

          - There are many, many reasons she urges the Commission to vote against this legislation.

          (+/-) My Do - MEDA

          - She is a bit confused about how this legislation will impact their small business clients.

          - The question she has is "If the store is considered formula retail, what percentage of the store needs to be formula retail?"

          - Will the legislation have a significant negative impact?

          - She does not oppose the legislation, she would just like to have it further refined to make it more understandable.

          (+/-) Luis Granados - Mission Economic Development Association

          - He has some questions about the legislation.

          - Small businesses would benefit by this legislation.

          - He would ask the planners to do an analysis of this legislation.

          - He is generally in support of this legislation but he would recommend that the Commission approach it with caution.

          (+) Alan Martinez

          - All this is about notification.

          - There is also the issue of preserving historical storefronts.

          (+) Ed Bedard - Hayes Valley Neighborhood Association

          - This legislation came out of his neighborhood.

          - They have had several battles with formula retail stores coming into their neighborhood.

          - There have been a lot of people from the community come to various neighborhood meetings on this.

          - The purpose of all this is to protect the assets that this City has.

          (+) Tes Welborn

          - They are very supportive of this type of legislation.

          - She is thrilled that this is on the table.

          - Small businesses and local character is very much needed in neighborhoods.

          - The idea of having to notify the neighborhood and notify the other business about retail that is coming in is not a burdensome thing to do.

          - Local character is very important.

          (+) Flip Sarrow - Haight/Ashbury Neighborhood

          - He represents over 60 merchants on Haight Street and everyone supports this legislation.

          - No all franchises notify the residents.

          - This legislation is important so that the merchants can have some say on what the neighborhood is going to be.

          - People come to the Haight because they want to have a unique shopping experience.

          - This type of legislation that states what types of businesses are going to move into neighborhoods is good legislation.

          (+/-) Joe O'Donaghue - Residential Builders

          - Small businesses are hurt by this so called protectionism legislation.

          - Poor people are hurt when prices are higher.

          - He does not consider a business a character so businesses should be allowed in every neighborhood and not be concerned about changing its character.

          (+) Leigh Stackpole - HVMA - Gimme Shoes

          - She owns a business with three locations in San Francisco.

          - She has worked hard to grow her business.

          - She supports this legislation.

          - Her accountant and graphic artist are located on Hayes Street.

          (+/-) Lorn Dittfeld - Hayes Valley

          - One of the greatest revenue sources is not from any chain store it is from tourism.

          - People do not come to San Francisco to shop at the Gap, Starbucks, etc. Tourists come for the local character that every neighborhood has.

          (+) Jim Siagal - Haight Ashbury Merchants Association

          - He pleads with the Commission to pass this legislation.

          - Residents need to protect the character that each neighborhood has.

          (-) Tim Tosta

          - His principal concern about this legislation is that it really is not intended for just the Hayes Valley or the Haight. It is intended to create a definition for formula retail and get it on the "books."

          - Once this is on the "books," it will be the political father of every district supervisor to protect one or another district.

          - He does not believe that there is the data that equates chains with loss. There is very much confusion with the data.

          (+) Peter Cohen - Hayes Valley Neighborhood Association

          - Chain stores are not evil, yet they have a real impact on small businesses.

          - Neighborhood character is very important to residents of San Francisco. That is why tourists come here.

          - The vast majority of retail businesses are small in scale.

          - Neighborhood notification is very important because it gives the neighborhood the chance to get a "heads up" on what is proposed.

          ACTION: Hearing Held. Item continued to January 22, 2004, to allow staff time to express the Commission's concerns in a draft resolution.

          AYES: Antonini, Bradford Bell, Boyd, Feldstein, Hughes, S. Lee, W. Lee

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))

      SPEAKER(S):

            Joe O'Donaghue - Residential Builders

      Re: Building Department and Planning Commission

      - Early this week, from the Mayor's Office operatives through the press, there was a trial by press done which reflected very poorly on the now Mayor including the staff that operated in the manner in which they did.

      - They ignored protocol. They ignored going before the Commission and also ignored the process of going through department heads.

      - It was stated that a monitor would be implemented. One [monitor] was going to be appointed by Mayor Newsom because of corruption in that department [DBI].

      - He would like to state for the record that the Residential Builders process about 300 permits a year out of 55,000 permits. Of these 55,000 permits, 95 percent are approved within 72 hours.

      - This states that the productivity record is phenomenal.

      Lois Scott

      Re: Meltdown at the Planning Department

      - Over the Christmas Holiday, the Office of Environmental Review lost their server so the people at 30 Van Ness were not able to work on their computers.

      - The OASIS staff were able to fix things with a zero budget.

      - The conservative cost of this meltdown is about $80,000.

      - Tomorrow, four executive offices are going to be moved at the department which will cost about $8,000. There are questions--if at this time of budget problems, this is an appropriate expense?

      - When there is a mismatch of resources against workload it is very difficult to meet the service goals and performance criteria that the Newsom administration wants. She hopes that the Department will meet these goals.

      Merilyn Amini

      Re: Speaker Time

      - She has waited seven hours to mention that earlier her time was shortened. Section 67.15c of the Sunshine Ordinance states that each policy body shall allow a public speaker [the opportunity] to speak up to three minutes. It states "up to" because she is not obligated to speak the full three minutes.

      Adjournment: 11:01 p.m.

      THESE MINUTES ARE PROPOSED FOR ADOPTION AT THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION ON THURSDAY, February 5, 2004.

      SPEAKERS: None

      ACTION: Approved as Corrected

      AYES: Antonini, Bradford Bell, Feldstein, Hughes, S. Lee, W. Lee

      ABSENT: Boyd

Last updated: 11/17/2009 10:00:13 PM