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

June 25, 2009

June 25, 2009

SAN FRANCISCO

PLANNING COMMISSION

Meeting Minutes

Commission Chambers - Room 400

City Hall, 1 Dr. Carlton B. Goodlett Place

Thursday, June 25, 2009

1:30 PM

Regular Meeting

COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Miguel, Antonini, Borden, Olague and Sugaya

COMMISSIONERS ABSENT: Lee and Moore

THE MEETING WAS CALLED TO ORDER BY PRESIDENT MIGUEL AT 1: 45 P.M.

STAFF IN ATTENDANCE: John Rahaim – Director of Planning, Larry Badiner – Zoning Administrator, AnMarie Rodgers, Sharon Lai, Michael Smith, Rosemary Dudley, Elaine Forbes, Debra Dwyer, Stephen Shotland, and Jonas Ionin – Acting Commission Secretary.

  • 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. 2007.0231D (G. CABREROS: (415) 558-6169)

2750 VALLEJO STREET - north side between Broderick and Divisadero Streets, Lot 006 in Assessor Block 0954 - Request for Discretionary Review of Building Permit Application No. 2008.08.14.9201 proposing facade alterations and rear and side horizontal additions to the existing three-story, single-family residence in an RH-1(D) (Residential House, One Family, Detached) Zoning District and a 40-X Height and Bulk District.

Preliminary Recommendation: Do not take Discretionary Review and Approve

(Proposed for Continuance to July 23, 2009)

SPEAKERS: None

ACTION: Continued as proposed

AYES: Miguel, Antonini, Borden, Olague and Sugaya

ABSENT: Lee and Moore

B. CONSENT CALENDAR

All matters listed hereunder constitute a Consent Calendar, are considered to be routine by the Planning Commission, and will be acted upon by a single roll call vote of the Commission. There will be no separate discussion of these items unless a member of the Commission, the public, or staff so requests, in which event the matter shall be removed from the Consent Calendar and considered as a separate item at this or a future hearing

2. 2009.0295C (S. LAI: (415) 575-9087)

2045 IRVING STREET (AKA 2031 IRVING STREET - south side between 21st and 22nd Avenues; Lot 011B of Assessor's Block 1776 - Request for Conditional Use Authorization, pursuant to Planning Code Sections, 711.44 and 303, to convert a retail commercial space to a small self-service restaurant (dba  Tuttimelon ), within the Irving Street Special Use NC-2 (Neighborhood Commercial, Small Scale District) and a 105-A Height and Bulk District.

Preliminary Recommendation: Approval with Conditions

SPEAKERS: None

ACTION: Approved

AYES: Miguel, Antonini, Borden, Olague and Sugaya

ABSENT: Lee and Moore

MOTION: 17909

C. COMMISSIONERS' QUESTIONS AND MATTERS

Adoption of Commission Minutes– Charter Section 4.104 requires all commissioners to vote yes or no on all matters unless that commissioner is excused by a vote of the Commission. Commissioners may not be automatically excluded from a vote on the minutes because they did not attend the meeting.

3. Consideration of Adoption:

  • Draft Minutes of Regular Meeting of June 11, 2009.

SPEAKERS: None

ACTION: Approved

AYES: Miguel, Antonini, Borden, Olague and Sugaya

ABSENT: Lee and Moore

4. Commission Comments/Questions

  • Inquiries/Announcements. Without discussion, at this time Commissioners may make announcements or inquiries of staff regarding various matters of interest to the Commissioner(s).
  • Future Meetings/Agendas. At this time, the Commission may discuss and take action to set the date of a Special Meeting and/or determine those items that could be placed on the agenda of the next meeting and other future meetings of the Planning Commission.

Commissioner Antonini:

There are a couple of articles of interest. One is in today's Examiner dealing with the deferral of fees. This is an issue I brought up and is being explored in other jurisdictions. The item from the press – More Jurisdictions in California slash housing impact fees. The quote is  when the housing recovery comes, it will be the cities with the lowest fees that will benefit first. I don't know if that is always true or not but it is certainly something that some people are stating. Another item from today's Chronicle and it talked about the town I was born in – Pleasanton. Pleasanton is being sued by the state over a limit on housing. This is an interesting situation. They passed legislation in 1996 that the door is closed at 29,000 housing units. They are up to 27,000 now and the population is about 66,000. They are pretty much maxed out. The justification was they wanted to spare farm land and open space in that area, of course they are probably a few decades late in doing that because much of it is built out already. And the other bad part about it is that there are business there so those who work there are increasingly forced to commute from someplace else. It will be interesting to see what the outcome will be in view of ABAG suggestions that various cities and counties have as far as housing units and how this is decided in the courts.

Commissioner Miguel:

The June 14th Sunday issue of the New York Time's Magazine had articles devoted to infrastructure. There are at least two and probably three very interesting articles of more national import in that regard. They are well worth reading. In addition to that, the meeting I had this week was with people at 2655 Bush Street.

D. DIRECTOR'S REPORT

5. Director's Announcements

Director Rahaim:

I believe you should have in your packet today a draft of the India Basin Report. This is the first complete draft of that Plan that is being issued. This is collaboration between the Redevelopment Agency and the Planning Department. This is a draft that will be distributed for public comment over the next few months. We will be having a community workshop this evening at the Bayview Opera House to release this draft to the community and receive initial comments on this. This is a planning process that builds on the 2002 Bayview Hunters Point concept plan that was prepared by the Bayview PAC. It includes a wide variety of new mixed use development including new access to the water. The next steps are: there is a formal 60-day comment period and we will have office hours in the Bayview to receive comments from the public; and we will probably be coming to the Commission later in July or early August for preparation of amendments to the Bayview Hunters Point Redevelopment Plan. Then we will probably have a more formal hearing on this Plan after we assemble public comment in the fall. The thought being that it would be good for you to hear not only staff's proposed draft plan, but what the community is saying about that Plan in the next few months. So we will plan to do that in August or more likely in September. The second thing to call to your attention is the budget memo that I think is in your packets that will be sent out to you today as well. The Budget Committee did approve the Department's budget yesterday with the provision that the $500,000 in question that was added to the budget for the Department to work on additional long-range planning efforts was put on reserve with the Budget Committee. What that means is that we will continue to work with the Board Budget Committee on the specific uses for that money. In a nutshell, our budget as submitted in February totaled $20.8 million, which is a reduction of 12% from this year's budget. The projections for our budget for the year were done in February and presumed a little more revenue than is coming in. The Department's revenue cycles are interesting because we typically get  bumps in fee activity and applications in the spring and the fall. Our projections made in February were assuming that we would get a spring bump, which essentially didn't happen. So our projections are a little higher than what we actually have coming in for 2009. We have revised our fee estimates and are continuing to work on what happens if that doesn't increase for the coming year. We are assuming that our applications will not decrease below this year, but we'll need tor recognize that the revenues are a little bit less as of now than we had projected going into the budget season. The other item that was approved in our budget and in DBI's budget was the funding for the permit tracking system. We are very pleased about that. We are in the early stages of negotiations with the preferred vendor on that. It will be very important for the long-term work of both departments. Later on today there is an item on your agenda related to some minor additional fees that we're proposing, but those will be covered at the 5:00 agenda time.

6. Review of Past Week's Events at the Board of Supervisors, Board of Appeals, and Historic Preservation Commission.

BOARD OF SUPREVISORS:

Land Use:

  • Philanthropic Administrative Service Use; Zoning Map Amendment. (forwarded to the full Board as amended by the Planning Commission)

Full Board:

  • Supervisor Chu's legislation for new controls for Massage Establishments (passed on final reading)
  • India Basin Industrial Park trailing legislation (passed on final reading)
  • Amend Sec 309.1 for height modifications in the Rincon Hill DPR district (passed on final reading)

BOARD OF APPEALS:

The Board did not meet this week

HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION:

The Commission did not meet this week

7. (M. SMITH: (415) 558-6322)

4024 26th Street - Informational presentation on the status of the project.

SPEAKERS: David Marlat – Project Architect, Pierre Loewe, Ed Buzinky, Sue Hestor

ACTION: None – the item is informational/discussion only

E. GENERAL PUBLIC COMMENT – 15 MINUTES

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. Each member of the public may address the Commission for up to three minutes.

SPEAKERS:

Francisco Da Costa

Re: Senate Bill 792 introduced by Mark Leno that adversely impacts a large area of Candlestick Point, Hunters Point and beyond.

Eula Walters

Re: Ferry Park – Do not authorize $1.7 million from the Downtown Park funds to fix a park that does not need fixing.

Un-named Speaker

Re: permit number 200811045823 (2650-52 Hyde Street) that is intended to create a full basement from a crawl space. This change of use is being ignored by the Planning Department.

Un-named Speaker

Re: [permit number 200811045823 (2650-52 Hyde Street)] Why does staff of planning get allowed to lie before the Boards and Commissions and there is no consequences to them. The Board believes them even when we prove that they are lying. They still support them and we (the public) always get shut down. They are public servants. They are there to serve us and not to fight us and to discredit us, but that is what they keep doing. Please give us some help to stop this corruption that is going on in the city.

  1. REGULAR CALENDAR

8. 2004.0130CV (J. MILLER: (415) 558-6344)

1353 Bush Street - south side between Larkin and Polk Streets, Lot 013 in Assessor's Block 0669 - Informational discussion for direction from the Commission whether a hearing should be held to revoke a Conditional Use authorization or whether an extension should be granted. The project was approved on July 14, 2005, in Motion No. 17063, for a use size in excess of 3,000 square feet for a music training facility ("Music City"). A condition of that Motion requires construction to commence within three years of the approval date. Although progress has been made, construction on the authorized project has not begun. The site is located in the Polk Street Neighborhood Commercial District and a 65-A Height and Bulk District.

SPEAKERS: Jim Reuben – Representing the Project Sponsor, Sue Hestor

ACTION: Although there was no Commission action required because this item is only for informational discussion, each commissioner who spoke indicated their support for granting the extension.

9. 2008.0996C (A. HOLLISTER: (415) 575-9078)

1040 COLUMBUS AVENUE - east side between Francisco and Chestnut Streets, Lot 001 in Assessor's Block 0050 - Request for Conditional Use authorization to add a bar use (Type 47 ABC Liquor License) to an existing restaurant (DBA  Cable Car Restaurant ) and to legalize entertainment uses already found at the existing restaurant such as billiard tables. No construction is proposed under this application. This site is within the North Beach Neighborhood Commercial District, and a 40-X Height and Bulk District.

Preliminary Recommendation: Approval with Conditions

SPEAKERS: None

ACTION: Without hearing, continued to July 23, 2009

AYES: Miguel, Antonini, Borden, Olague and Sugaya

ABSENT: Lee and Moore

10. 2005.1106E (J. BATTIS (415) 575-9022)

2655 BUSH STREET - Appeal of Preliminary Mitigated Negative Declaration. Lot 024 of Assessor's Block 1052, is located at the southwest corner of Divisadero and Bush Streets within the block bounded by Bush Street to the north, Divisadero Street to the east, Sutter Street to the south, and Broderick Street to the west, in the Western Addition neighborhood. The project is the demolition of the existing vacant two-story, 20-foot-high, approximately 48,000-square-foot, 116-bed convalescent facility with approximately 1,000 square feet of commercial space and a below-grade 22-space parking garage, and construction of a new four-to-six-story, 40-to-65-foot-high, 108,000-square-foot building with about 4,500 square feet of ground-level retail space and about 83 dwelling units above, and a below-grade parking garage for up to 99 vehicles. The 33,522-square-foot project site is within a NC-3 (Moderate-Scale Neighborhood Commercial) zoning district and a 40-X/65A height and bulk district.

(Continued from Regular Meeting of June 4, 2009)

SPEAKERS: None

ACTION: Without hearing, continued to July 16, 2009

AYES: Miguel, Antonini, Borden, Olague and Sugaya

ABSENT: Lee and Moore

11. 2005.1106C (A. STARR: (415) 558-6362)

2655 BUSH STREET - southwest corner of Bush and Divisadero Streets, Lot 024 in Assessor's Block 1052 -Request for Conditional Use Authorization under Planning Code Sections 303 and 304 to allow a Planned Unit Development for the construction of a new four-to-six story building that contains 81 residential units, 99 parking spaces and approximately 4180 sq. ft. of commercial space in an NC-3 (Medium Scale Neighborhood Commercial) District and a combination of 40-X and 65-A Height and Bulk Districts. The project also includes the demolition of the vacant two-story convalescent facility that currently occupies the site.

Preliminary Recommendation: Approval with Conditions

SPEAKERS: None

ACTION: Without hearing, continued to July 16, 2009

AYES: Miguel, Antonini, Borden, Olague and Sugaya

ABSENT: Lee and Moore

5:00 PM.

12. 2009.0227U. (R. DUDLEY: (415) 575-9068)

JAPANTOWN BETTER NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN - This two year community planning process has produced a draft plan which will be before the Commission for their consideration and possible acknowledgment by the Commission on June 25th. Two previous informational presentations provided an overview of the planning process and the Draft Plan's recommendations for community and economic development, community heritage, land use, built form, and Japan Center. Today's presentation will address public realm, transportation, next steps and additional matters as requested by the Commission. There will be opportunity for further public comment on all topics and for Commission consideration of the Resolution drafted by Staff and the Steering Committee.

Preliminary Recommendation: Approve Acknowledgment Resolution for the Draft Japantown Better Neighborhood Plan.

SPEAKERS: Bert, Marc Brandt, Casey Allen, Rachel Ebora, Caryl, Paul Osaki, Michael Nakamura, Alyssa Koho, Michelle Chan, Ali Kagawa, Ken Maeshiro, Lori Matoba, Jeffrey Chin, Courtney Okuhara, Greg Johnson, Ann Cheng, Florence Dobashi, Lisa Watada, Paul Wermer, Richard Hashimoto, and Roy Ikeda spoke in favor of project. Leslie Hennesy Jr., Bernie Choden, and Hiroshi Fukuda are opposed; and Joy Iwasa was neutral.

ACTION: Approved as amended on Pages 4 and 5:

NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the Planning Commission acknowledges that the Draft Better Neighborhoods Japantown Plan is a significant milestone marking years of broad community planning efforts, and represents many of the community's goals for the area at this point in time; and be it

(the first) FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Planning Commission acknowledges public comment that been received regarding concerns over different aspects of the Draft Plan – including but limited to cultural preservation, the provision of mixed-income housing, the retention of existing merchants in the malls, structural analysis on Japan Center garage, mitigation of neighborhood impacts during potential construction, proposed tower heights, and the need to provide more direction for the implementing organization, and directs the Department to continue to work with the community on these issues prior to initiating environmental review; and be it

(the second) FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Planning Commission urges requests the Mayor and the Board of Supervisors to consider funding the further modification and study of the Draft Plan in a community process, including environmental review, when considering the city's budget, and be it

(add the fifth) FURTHER RESOLVED that this acknowledgement of the draft plan does not endorse any parcel-specific rezoning or parcel-specific height limit; and be it

(add the sixth) FURTHER RESOLVED that the Planning Commission requests the Planning Department staff and the Office of Economic and Workforce Development prepare a Business Retention Plan and Cultural Resource Plan for Japantown as part of the ongoing planning process; now be it

AYES: Miguel, Antonini, Borden, Olague and Sugaya

ABSENT: Lee and Moore

RESOLUTION: 17911

13. 2009.0453T (E. Forbes: (415) 558-6417)

Fee Revisions and Adjustments - Consideration of amendments to Planning Code Article 3.5 to charge fees for monitoring conditions of approval and abatement of code enforcement violations; increase the annual inventory fee for the General Advertising Sign Program; modify refund procedures and indigent fee waiver provision; clarify phased collections and payment deferment; and establish a new processing fee for phased payments.

Preliminary Recommendation: Approval

SPEAKERS: Ryan Brooks – CBS Outdoor, Michael Colbruno – Clear Channel Outdoor

ACTION: Approved

AYES: Miguel, Antonini, Borden, Olague and Sugaya

ABSENT: Lee and Moore

RESOLUTION: 17910

14. 2009.0454T (E. Forbes: (415) 558-6417)

General Advertizing Program Cost Recovery - Consideration of amendments to Planning Code Sections 303, 358 and 604.2, and Administrative Code Section 10.100-166 to increase the annual inventory fee for cost recovery; expand the Planning Department's Code Enforcement Fund sources and uses to enforcement of all Planning Code violations; and to make clarifications to the program.

Preliminary Recommendation: Approval

SPEAKERS: Ryan Brooks – CBS Outdoor, Michael Colbruno – Clear Channel Outdoor

ACTION: Continued to July 9, 2009 – The public hearing remains open

AYES: Miguel, Antonini, and Borden

NAYES: Olague and Sugaya

ABSENT: Lee and Moore

6:30 PM.

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.

SPEAKERS: The following speakers spoke regarding item 15, Certification of the final EIR for the 2009 San Francisco Bicycle Plan: Lea Sheehan, Jamie Whitaker, Waye Clifford, Brook Hills, Rachel Ebora, Mark Brandt, Casey Allen, Hiroshi Fukuda, Cheryl Blinkman, Susan King, Andy Thornley, John Paolini, Richard Tilles, Lean Shahum, Brandon Beau Bakhtiar, Greg Hayes, Adam Block, Marilyn Amini, Mary Miles, Katy Liddell, Phillip Hwee, Jamie Whitaker, Leslie Hennessy Jr.

15. 2007.0347E (D. DWYER: (415) 575-9031)

San FranciscoBicycle Plan Project - 2009 San Francisco Bicycle Plan - Certification of the Final Environmental Impact Report. The project site is located throughout the City primarily within the street right-of-way and on some park land - The proposed project includes an update of the goals, objectives and actions of the 2009 San Francisco Bicycle Plan, including amendments to the San Francisco General Plan and Planning Code to reflect the 2009 San Francisco Bicycle Plan. The 2009 San Francisco Bicycle Plan includes improvements to the City's existing bicycle route network including 60 near-term improvement projects, minor improvements and long-term improvements to the bicycle route network. The proposed project would require approval by the San Francisco Municipal Transportation Agency Board of Directors as well as the Board of Supervisors.

Preliminary Recommendation: Certify the Final EIR

Please note: The public hearing on the Draft EIR is closed. The public comment period for the Draft EIR ended on January 13, 2009. The Planning Commission does not conduct public review of Final EIRs. Public comments on the certification may be presented to the Planning Commission during the Public Comment portion of the Commission calendar.

SPEAKERS: None

ACTION: Approved certification of the Final EIR

AYES: Miguel, Antonini, Borden, Olague and Sugaya

ABSENT: Lee and Moore

MOTION: 17912

16a. 2007.0347EMT (D. Dwyer/ S. Shotland: (415) 575-9031/558-6308)

SAN FRANCISCOBICYCLE PLAN PROJECT - The 2009 San Francisco Bicycle Plan – Adopt California Environmental Quality Act Findings. The project site is located throughout the City primarily within the street right-of-way and on some park land – The proposed project includes an update of the goals, objectives and actions of the 2009 San Francisco Bicycle Plan, including amendments to the San Francisco General Plan and Planning Code to reflect the 2009 San Francisco Bicycle Plan. The 2009 San Francisco Bicycle Plan includes improvements to the City's existing bicycle route network including 60 near-term improvement projects, minor improvements and long-term improvements to the bicycle route network. The proposed project would require approval by the San Francisco Municipal Transportation Agency Board of Directors as well as the Board of Supervisors.

The CEQA Findings include a statement of overriding benefits and a mitigation monitoring and reporting program (MMRP) associated with approving the proposed General Plan and Planning Code amendments and implementation of the 2009 Bicycle Plan. They include a rationale for rejecting alternatives identified in the EIR, and a statement of overriding considerations that lists technical, social and economic reasons for adopting the amendments and implementing the 2009 Bicycle Plan despite identified significant, adverse environmental impacts.

Preliminary Recommendation: Adopt CEQA Findings motion

SPEAKERS: Same as those who spoke prior to the call of item 15

ACTION: Approved adoption of CEQA Findings

AYES: Miguel, Antonini, Borden, and Olague

NAYES: Sugaya

ABSENT: Lee and Moore

MOTION: 17913

16b. 2007.0347EMT (S. SHOTLAND: (415) 558-6308)

CONSIDERATION OF ADOPTING AMENDMENTS TO THE GENERAL PLAN RELATED TO THE SAN FRANCISCO BICYCLE PLAN - Pursuant to San Francisco Charter Section 4.105, Planning Code § 340(d) and § 306.3, adopt amendments to the General Plan, related to the San Francisco Bicycle Plan. The Planning Commission will consider adoption of amendments to the General Plan, including revisions to the Transportation Element and the Downtown Area Plan, any corresponding revisions to the Land Use Index of the General Plan, making environmental findings and findings of consistency with the General Plan and priority policies of Planning Code Section 101.1.

Preliminary Recommendation: approval

SPEAKERS: Same as those indicated for item 16a

ACTION: Approved

AYES: Miguel, Antonini, Borden, Olague and Sugaya

ABSENT: Lee and Moore

RESOLUTION: 17914

16c. 2007.0347EMT (S. SHOTLAND: (415) 558-6308)

CONSIDERATION OF ADOPTING AMENDMENTS TO THE PLANNING CODE RELATED TO THE SAN FRANCISCO BICYCLE PLAN - Pursuant to Planning Code § 302(c) and § 306.3, Consider adopting a resolution adopting an amendment to Sections 155, 155.1, 155.4, and 155.5 of the Planning Code related to approval of the San Francisco Bicycle Plan, revising requirements for off-street parking, including provisions for secure bicycle parking, among other controls. in City-owned and leased buildings, new housing development with four or more dwelling units, and new commercial buildings, making environmental findings and findings of consistency with the General Plan and priority policies of Planning Code Section 101.1.

Preliminary Recommendation: Approval

SPEAKERS: Same as those indicated for item 16a

ACTION: Approved

AYES: Miguel, Antonini, Borden, Olague and Sugaya

ABSENT: Lee and Moore

RESOLUTION: 17915

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

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

SPEAKERS:

Un-named Speaker

Re: 2650-52 Hyde Street – continuing the tail end of the first un-named speaker's comments on this case. We work very hard to prove our case and it makes us very aggravated when truth and justice is forced to take a back seat to lies and dishonesty. With respect to 2650-52 Hyde Street, the Building and Planning Department staff has pushed this project through with lies and deception to the public and to the Board of Appeals and they will do the same to you if given the chance. They are circumventing many of the code requirements for this project. They are creating a full basement and converting to a garage from a crawl space with a brick foundation. They are replacing this foundation by removing 4,000 cubic feet of soil and replacing the foundation with an eight foot high retaining wall. This is clearly not a $7,000 project. This is a $400,000 construction job. This does not serve the public. Please ask planner Perdue and the Planning Department to enforce the code and collect the required fees for the city and the tax payers. Please have planner Perdue insist on including a third sheet of plans so that the public can be served.

Marilyn Amini

Re: I formally request reconsideration of your action on June 18 of five (5) commissioners to move forward the Discretionary Review Reform Policy and Planning Code Text Amendments with recommendation. Very important materials were not made available to allow a look at a most relevant and critical question, that being in how many instances did the Commission take DR when the Department recommended approve as proposed. Minutes of 22 meetings are not available for review. 16 meetings in '08 have no minutes available and 6 in '09 are not available for a good comprehensive overview. I went to Planning Department the week of June 18 hearing and on a Wednesday and I waited several hours for the binders of the agendas and the minutes. They weren't made available to me. This Tuesday and Wednesday, I reviewed same and I saw that looking at those there are very important facts. On April 2nd and also at the May hearing, I reported that it was clear from the minutes that were available that about one out of four cases the Commission took DR when the Department said approve as proposed. The district for the June 18th hearing developed what they called the  tracking spread sheet, but that only looked at six (6) DR cases as opposed to the full (number) of DR that could have been looked at. When I look at the agendas that didn't have minutes available, it was clear that in those 22 meetings, there were 56 DRs that were showing on the agendas and 34 of those DRs were either mandatory discretionary review or staff initiated or had a recommendation saying take DR with modification.

Adjournment: 9:20 p.m.

Adopted: July 9, 2009

Last updated: 11/17/2009 10:00:39 PM