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

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

January 20, 2011

New Page 1

SAN FRANCISCO

PLANNING COMMISSION

Meeting Minutes

Commission Chambers - Room 400

City Hall, 1 Dr. Carlton B. Goodlett Place

Thursday, January 20, 2011

1:30 PM

Regular Meeting

 

 

COMMISSIONERS PRESENT:  Olague, Antonini, Borden, Fong, Moore and Sugaya

COMMISSIONERS ABSENT:  Miguel,

 

THE MEETING WAS CALLED TO ORDER BY VICE PRESIDENT OLAGUE AT 1:40 PM

 

STAFF IN ATTENDANCE: John Rahaim – Planning Director; Sara Vellve, Tom Disanto, Diane Sokolove, Ilaria Salvadori, Rick Crawford, Michael Smith, Mary Woods, Elizabeth Watty, Shelley Caltagirone, Jonas Ionin – Acting 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.         2009.0912C                                                                   (G. CABREROS: (415) 558-6169)

1268 LOMBARD STREET - north side between Polk and Larkin Streets; Lot 015 of Assessor’s Block 0500 - Request for Conditional Use Authorization, pursuant to Planning Code Sections 209.1 and 303, to allow the construction of four dwelling units on the subject lot at a dwelling unit density ratio up to one unit per each 1,000 square feet of lot area within the RH-3 (Residential, House, Three Family) Zoning District and 40-X Height and Bulk District.  The project includes new construction of a four-story, four-unit building on a vacant lot approximately 4,700 square feet in area.

Preliminary Recommendation:  Approval with Conditions

(Proposed for Continuance to February 3, 2011 February 17, 2011)

 

SPEAKERS:     None

ACTION:           Continued as amended

AYES:              Olague, Antonini, Borden, Fong, Moore, Sugaya

ABSENT:          Miguel

 

2a.        2010.0001D                                                                  (G. CABREROS: (415) 558-6169)

45 GRATTAN STREET - south side between Cole and Belvedere Streets; Lot 028 in Assessor’s Block 1280 - Mandatory Discretionary Review, pursuant to Planning Code Section 317(d), of Demolition Permit Application No. 2010.01.08.4446, proposing to demolish a two-story, single-family residence within the RH-2 (Residential, House, Two-Family) Zoning District and 40-X Height and Bulk District.

Staff Analysis:  Full Discretionary Review

Preliminary Recommendation:  Do not take Discretionary Review and approve

(Proposed for Continuance to February 17, 2011)

 

SPEAKERS:     None

ACTION:           Continued as proposed

AYES:              Olague, Antonini, Borden, Fong, Moore, Sugaya

ABSENT:          Miguel

 

2b.       2010.1152DDDD                                                         (G. CABREROS: (415) 558-6169)

45 GRATTAN STREET - south side between Cole and Belvedere Streets; Lot 028 in Assessor’s Block 1280 - Mandatory Discretionary Review, pursuant to Planning Code Section 317(d), of Building Permit Application No. 2010.01.08.4443, proposing to construct a new four-story, two-unit building within the RH-2 (Residential, House, Two-Family) Zoning District and 40-X Height and Bulk District.  Three separate requests for Discretionary Review have also been filed by members of the public against the replacement project.

Staff Analysis:  Full Discretionary Review

Preliminary Recommendation:  Take Discretionary Review and approve with modifications

                        (Proposed for Continuance to February 17, 2011)

 

SPEAKERS:     None

ACTION:           Continued as proposed

AYES:              Olague, Antonini, Borden, Fong, Moore, Sugaya

ABSENT:          Miguel

 

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

 

            3.         2010.0912C                                                                       (S. Vellve:  (415) 558-6263)

813 – 815 COLE STREET - west side between Frederick and Carl Streets; Lot 003 in Assessor’s Block 1267 - Request for Conditional Use Authorization, pursuant to Planning Code Sections 186, 303 and 719.42 to convert a vacant commercial space (previously occupied by Cole Foods) to  a  Full-Service Restaurant (a soda fountain, dba The Ice Cream Bar) within the RH-3 (Residential, House, Three-Family) District and 40-X Height and Bulk District. The site is within a ¼ mile radius of the Haight Street Neighborhood Commercial District, and the commercial space is designated as a Limited Commercial Use (LCU) and is subject to Planning Code Section 186.

Preliminary Recommendation: Approval with Conditions

 

SPEAKERS:     None

ACTION:           Approved

AYES:              Olague, Antonini, Borden, Fong, Moore, Sugaya

ABSENT:          Miguel

MOTION:           18256

 

 

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.

 

4.         Consideration of Adoption:

                       

·         Draft Minutes of Regular Meeting of February 18, 2010

            (Continued from Regular Meeting of January 13, 2011)

·         Draft Minutes of Regular Special Meeting of October 21, 2010

            (Continued from Regular Meeting of January 13, 2011)

·         Draft Minutes of Regular Meeting of December 9, 2010

                        (Continued from Regular Meeting of January 13, 2011)

 

SPEAKERS:     None

ACTION:           Continued as proposed

AYES:              Olague, Antonini, Borden, Fong, Moore

NAYES:            Sugaya

ABSENT:          Miguel

 

5.             Consideration of Adoption: 2011 Planning Commission hearing schedule

 

SPEAKERS:     None

ACTION:           Approved

AYES:              Olague, Antonini, Borden, Fong, Moore, Sugaya

            ABSENT:          Miguel

 

6.         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 Moore:  

I wanted to express my appreciation for a different way of organizing this presentation. The fact that you really are laying out the basic elements of how the department of works is helpful to me and I also appreciate the zoning administration becomes more clearly delineated for us and I am sure in your communication with the public it will be significantly easier to understand what that entails. So I made several question marks during the course of the presentation that we cannot take in everything, I would like to ask the Director, is there a time and it might not be today, where we would get an overview of the nature of plans, and how they were originated and what the product are which are expected when obviously they are not just additional ways to deliver something? I'm kind of curious how you are threading that into your programs and a very innovative way of getting grants and I would love to hear what we can expect as the next side benefit out of keeping the department at full strength and also seeing creative work which May not occur.

Planning Director:

We have a spread sheet that outlines the grants that we have received and that can be updated. Why don't we plan to attach that to the next memo as well.  Most of the grants, not all of them, but urban design and public works on the projects and we can go over that with you.

Commissioner Moore:  Thank you, director. That would be very helpful. My second point is directed towards to  Mr. Alubaugh, is there any room and you are commanding a reasonably large number of people, to see the city design that we are spending a little bit more time on residential design guidelines? I think the nature of some of the curiosity that we really need to expand and elevate the discussion on the design guidelines might find very good place in your department under this particular item. I am proposing to express that to see the department take on a neighborhood, to be determined, and perhaps through a hybrid form base of code set up guidelines by which we test new ways of helping particularly strong neighborhoods to be more clear about changes can and shouldn't be and help with streamlining that process, I don't know, but I would like to see some experimentation in that direction.

David Alumbaugh:

Before I answer that one, I wanted to point out that the mission streetscape plan you see today is funded by the State and that is an example of some of the products we get from our grant and some of the exciting work we're doing. In terms of the questions you have asked, there are two. One the design guidelines and residential guidelines in particular and the Department as part of the reorganization has or the of solidified this design review process, and we are depending on those person who is help us with all kinds of guidelines including residential guidelines as an important portion of that work and you will see that included in the city wide section. It certainly is work that happens throughout all the Department and as well in terms of creative thought for certain neighborhoods, that was the idea behind what we are calling the better neighborhoods, and the existing neighborhoods program is really going out to some neighborhoods to see if there's some things we can do to make things work better for folks. I don't think we know how that will be articulated. It will further come about as we start this discussion, but certainly that is one of the interests that we have as well.

Commissioner Moore:  I appreciate your explaining that to us, next one is Mr. Wycko and item 2b and negative declarations and is the E.I.R. Under that item or is that fully funded?
Planning Director:

As I said, we have about a quarter million dollars of actual money that comes for general fund money and things that don't have dedicated funds. That is roughly 2.4 of that item and the other 4 F.T.E.
Commissioner Moore:  

That doesn't get you far if I remember the cost of the E.I.R., is that correct? $450,000 doesn't get you very far.

Planning Director:

This is staff time, not counting -- this is over and above all that. We show in our budget the staff
time, not showing the consultant time. We are not the only city department that has those costs and we are showing it currently as an unfunded project not because we don't think it will be funded but because we currently don't know the funding source but there is a whole program for the city to raise funds through the private sector to fund the city's costs. The E.I.R. Consultants will be provided by the core budget and we don't have to show the consultant for the E.I.R. In the budget.

Commissioner Moore:   I'm not trying to put you on the spot. i just wanted to understand how you line that item and this is item three that you answered is communications and who communicates, who is it, and about what?

Planning Director:

This was an item that was approved in last year's budget and we have not yet been able to fill this position. But the idea was that the Department, we felt, and I have felt particularly strongly that the Department needs a Communications Manager that covers a whole series of activities including conduct public meetings, the website, how we have connection with the media, all those various functions that come under the rubric of communication and we have never had an information officer and we have never had that in the Department. I think it's long overdue and I think there's inconsistent messages that go from the Department that is very important for us to correct.

Commissioner Moore:  

 I think. I appreciate all answers by everybody.

Commissioner  Borden:

I have a few questions and we are told we're adding money back for -- we're not going to be able to do that?, it looks like we're not getting the money for japan town?

Planning Director:

Commissioner, you are talking about the chart on the front page?

Commissioner Borden:   correct.

Planning Director:

Japantown 50 grand was an add back and that is well on time and that will be stripped out of our budget. I show that as coming out both on the revenue and on the expenditure side.

Commissioner Borden:

I wasn't aware, did we work on Japantown? I wasn't aware -- we hadn't heard about that in a while. I guess I wasn't aware of that. I had a question, and we talked about this planner technician, but I am not sure what that is, so maybe you could tell me how that's different – the Planner Technician is something that was kind of conceived by the Support Staff, by the Administrative staff of the Department to reflect that many of them do work beyond the normal administrative functions and promote the opportunity for the administrative staff. So it's both between the position that is between administrative staff and a planner I. and it essentially some of what will happen -- it has little budget impact because the administrative staff will be converted into that position.

Commissioner Borden:   and I was really interested in hearing about the better neighborhoods program strengthening the existing neighborhoods program. When is that -- when do we think we're going to be doing workshops on that? The better neighborhoods program strengthening neighborhoods in community discussions in established neighborhoods. Can you talk about the timeline for that and what you kind of envision?

Planning Director:

I can. I also maybe as they responded to the earlier part of the question, but in the work
program they do staff the Japantown effort. So I don't know who was around when we started the better neighborhoods planning process some years ago, but the real purpose of that is to go out and both to listen to communities and talk to communities about what it is that makes them
thrive as neighborhoods. And there are elements, eight elements of a great neighborhood and all that.
We just thought we would, having done a lot of planning and a lot of serious growth dialogue in
several areas of the City, we have other areas functioning and could function more strongly and better neighborhood commercial districts and all that And we have no preconceived notion of what we try to do there and can be a dialogue to ask them what's working and not working and what they would like to see us do that we can have in the bag of tools. we would start that if it stays in the budget, we'll start if t fiscal year and probably come to you once we have a few discussions with the community about what that might mean and present it to you and go from there.

Commissioner Borden:   would you select specific neighborhoods or public input determine the established neighborhoods we would focus on?

Planning Director:

I don't think we know how we'll find out does anybody want to do the first place, but have that dialogue and are there folks that would like that kind of dialogue with planning department.
Commissioner Borden:

My next question is about the level of service impact analysis and I know you have mentioned we're getting closer. I wanted to find out where we were with that analysis.

Planning Director:

The task force set up with other agencies and consultants that were hired that worked last
year and are now starting at the second date. It culminated in the development fee and set the plate for that level of service, but I think there's some misdirection going around that I think we have learned differently after this year and the expectation is that  the work is starting now will culminate in a recommendation by the summer and there would be an ordinance that would basically, the concept, not the specifics, because the specifics still need to be worked out, that there would be a fee and whereby you would pay into a fund for transportation improvements that would offset affects of development and that would serve as a fully mitigated substitute for the level of service analysis. That's the concept. and subsequent to the ordinance, there would be environment reviews, so not this calendar year for the change that puts everything in place so there is really not just we're going to get doing it, but a legally defensible avenue to deal with the impacts.

Commissioner Borden:

Maybe when it gets closer to the time of having hearings on it and I know a lot of people in the public have been worried about where we are. So another hearing at another time maybe closer to the time where there are recommendations would be great.

Planning Director:

I would think that probably would be sometime this summer.

Commissioner Olague:   A quick question for staff that has to do with the cultural survey. Just wondering and I guess it could be the Historic Preservation Commission that would be looking at that and a lot of question about cultural surveys and Japantown and Manila and that area.

Planning Director:

The E.I.R. Process is still well underway and those -- the question about the nature of the survey and what is the coastal resource survey.

Commissioner Olague: That work program it belongs in there and we are distinguishing between it and the historic, pure traditional work that goes on.

Commissioner Olague:   There is something obviously allocated to that.

Commissioner Antonini:

This has to do with Citywide Planning and one of the things mentioned was the Cesar Chavez improvements east and I assume that this is done with coordination between the State because that interchange happened to take it going northbound off Cesar Chavez and I am assuming sometime in the future they plan to make that a clover leaf and I would expect they're going to do our beautification in keeping with the future changes that ay be taking place with that roadway which is probably going to be changed a lot especially with developments occurring to the east of there.

Commissioner Moore:   Director, I have one quick question and you can tell me we can talk about this some other time. The functional organizational chart which was in our packet here here, does that talk about work flow and communication?

Planning Director:

It really is just a chart to show reporting structure and how the Department is organized relative to reporting. For example, that I report to the Commission and then who reports to me and so on.
That is really all it's suppose to show. A very broad organizational structure, not really about work load.
Commissioner Moore:  The work flow communications chart, I am concerned about the Historic Preservation Commission and the dashed line and how we communicate with them or not and you are saying it is not really.

Planning Director:

The question is not very clear. The reason for the dash line is because I technically report to this Commission, technically you are my boss and not the HPC, and that is the dashed line other than the solid line. That is the only reason for that.

Commissioner moore:   We will bring that up in some other discussion.

 

D.         DIRECTOR’S REPORT

 

7.         Director’s Announcements

           

            None

 

            8.                                                                                                 (T.DiSanto: (415) 575-9113)

                        FY 2011-2012 Planning Department Work Program and Budget - Informational Presentation. 

 

SPEAKERS:     None

ACTION:           Informational only – no action required

 

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

 

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS:

No meeting

 

BOARD OF APPEALS:

The Board of Appeals did meet and there are three items that the Commission might be interested. The first was Election of Officers. The Vice President was elevated to the office of President and Commissioner Michael Garcia was elevated to the position of Vice President and they wish them well in their new position. The second item was a rehearing request for 10 Lyndall Lane. It was the subject of a .CEQA appeal to Board of Supervisors last week and that was unanimously upheld and the determination was unanimously upheld. Last night the Board voted 5-0 to not grant the rehearing request and that decision is now final. The final item of notice of violation of penalty for 468 Green Street. This is a business and service office which began operating in 1991. There were no complaints received until 2007 when there

was also a permit application of the same building for a workshop called Honey Do and that was for this Commission and this Commission approved it as a conditional use. Just to note that they did go out of business eight months after it opened.

And so this came to our attention at that time. They filed the conditional use application to legalize the use that was subsequently in legislation that was adopted in 2008 and that use was prohibited on the ground floor and they were not able to pursue the C.E.U. to legalize the continued enforcement and last year the Zoning Administrator hearing to hear their argument, we upheld the notice of a violation and appealed to the Board of Appeals. The Board of Appeals considered all the facts, including relatively new information about how they operate, and their management firm for the building it. And they had agreed they would not manage any other properties   and only manage that building and the Board found that that would be considered as an accessory use and therefore allowed, so they will be allowed to maintain an operation there. However, the business and professional service office could not go in there in the future because they are acting as an accessory use in managing the functions of the building itself. And there was testimony from tenants of the building expressing their support for the business there. So the board will adopt findings on that matter for a later date. And that is all.

 

HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION:

No report

 

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:  None

 

F.         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:  None

 

G.            CONSIDERATION OF FINDINGS AND FINAL ACTION – PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED

 

10.        2006.1388E                                                                   (D. Sokolove: (415) 575-9046)

Seismic Upgrade of Bay Division Pipelines Nos. 3 and 4 at the Hayward Fault Project–City of Fremont - Certification of the Final Environmental Impact Report - The proposed project would improve seismic and delivery reliability of Bay Division Pipelines Nos. 3 and 4 where three fault traces of the Hayward fault bisect the pipelines near the intersection of I-680 and Mission Boulevard in the City of Fremont. The proposed project includes construction of a new parallel pipeline, referred to as BDPL No. 3X, and improvements to the existing BDPL No. 4 to increase delivery reliability where these pipelines cross the Hayward fault. The project would be located on City and County of San Francisco (CCSF) owned right-of-way (ROW). The project is sponsored by the San Francisco Public Utilities Commission.

NOTE: The public hearing on the Draft EIR is closed. The public comment period for the Draft EIR ended on February 8, 2010. 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.

Preliminary Recommendation: Certify the Final EIR

 

SPEAKERS:     None

ACTION:           Approved

AYES:              Olague, Antonini, Borden, Fong, Moore, Sugaya

ABSENT:          Miguel

MOTION:           18257

 

H.            REGULAR CALENDAR 

 

11.        2010.0878EMR                                                               (I. SALVADORI: (415) 575-9086)

MISSION DISTRICT STREETSCAPE AREA PLAN - Consideration of Adopting a Resolution Amending the General Plan - Adopting CEQA Findings on the Mission District Streetscape Plan and associated actions including adopting amendments to the General Plan and Finding the Mission Streetscape Plan and associated approval actions in conformity with the General Plan, as it is proposed to be amended. 

Preliminary recommendation: Approval

 

SPEAKERS:     None

ACTION:           Approved

AYES:              Olague, Antonini, Borden, Fong, Moore, Sugaya

ABSENT:          Miguel

MOTION:           18259

 

12.        2010.0969C                                                                  (R. Crawford:  (415) 558-6358)

90 TURK STREET (aka 116 Taylor Street - northeast corner of Turk and Taylor Streets Lot 012, of Assessor’s Block 0340 - Request for Conditional Use Authorization under Planning Code Section 249.5(d) to relocate on existing Off-Sale Liquor Establishment (Liquor Store) at 67 Turk Street (dba Grand Liquor) to 90 Turk Street (dba Tip-Top Market).  Planning Code Section 249.5(d) requires conditional use authorization for such a transfer within the North of Market Residential Special Use District.  This project lies within the RC-4 (Residential Commercial Combined, High Density) District, the North of Market Residential Special Use District and within the 80-120 T Height and Bulk District.

Preliminary Recommendation: Disapproval

 

SPEAKERS:     Michael Nulty, Davy Jones, Karim Rantisi, Terry Bass, Mousa, Shannon Brookland “Rhoads”, Gilma, Joseph Brown, Ed Ivey, Illya Fee, Dalalrantit, Walter Paulson, Rodney Crawford, Sylvester Guard Jr. Mike Williams, Regi Meadows, Richard Price, Saseen Daniel, Mathew Zibilittt, Jeak, John Nulty, Susan Baya, David Elliott Lewis, Glendon Hyde, Edward Evans, Hani Kailen, Dina Hilliard, Chris Schulman, David Addington, Randy Shaw, Stephen Berezin,

ACTION:           Approved with Conditions

AYES:              Olague, Borden, Fong, Moore

NAYES:            Antonini and Sugaya

ABSENT:          Miguel

MOTION:           18258

 

13.        2010.0902C                                                                 (R. Crawford:  (415) 558-6358)

449 Powell Street - southwest corner of Powell and Sutter Streets Lot 001, of Assessor’s Block 0296 - Request for Conditional Use Authorization under Planning Code Section 219(b) and 219 (c) to convert vacant space on the second through fourth floors of the building to approximately 20,500 square feet of general office use.  The space has been vacant for many years but had formerly been used for retail, Place of Assembly and Tourist Hotel uses.  This project lies within the C-3-R (Downtown, Retail) District, and the 80-130 F Height and Bulk District.

Preliminary Recommendation: Approval with Conditions

 

SPEAKERS:     None

ACTION:           Approved

AYES:              Olague, Antonini, Borden, Fong, Moore, and Sugaya

ABSENT:          Miguel

MOTION:           18260

 

14a.      2009.0906CV                                                              (R. CRAWFORD: (415) 558-6358)

34-36 PLEASANT STREET - north side between Taylor and Jones Streets; Lot 020 in Assessor’s Block 0221 - Request for Conditional Use Authorization, pursuant to Planning Code Sections 253 and 303 to allow to construction of a two story addition to the existing two stories over garage dwelling.  The addition will increase height of the building to approximately 49 feet 9 inches and increase the number of dwelling units in the building from 2 to 3. The project site is located within the RM-3 (Residential Mixed, Medium Density) District, and the 65 A Height and Bulk District.

Preliminary Recommendation:  Approval with Conditions

 

SPEAKERS:     Steve Jarvis, Irene Faustino, Harrison Lazarus, Christy Smith, Mike Martusello, Elsa Dixon, Austin  Hills, Susan Crossley, Jennifer Solomon, Ellen Bermingham, Deepa Thomas, Tim Culler, Timothy Collins, Johnathan Powk, Alka Jarvis, Ellen Innis

ACTION:           Continued to March 10, 2011; public hearing remains open

AYES:              Olague, Borden, Fong, Sugaya

ABSENT:          Antonini and Miguel

RECUSED:       Moore

 

14b.      2009.0906CV                                                                 (R. CRAWFORD: (415) 558-6358)

34-36 PLEASANT STREET - north side between Taylor and Jones Streets; Lot 020 in Assessor’s Block 0221 - Request for Variances, pursuant to Planning Code Sections 134 to modify the rear yard requirement in the Van Ness Special Use District, to allow an 11 foot deep rear yard where 15 feet is required. The project proposes to construct a two story addition to the existing two stories over garage dwelling.  The addition will increase the number of dwelling units in the building from 2 to 3. The project site is located within the RM-3 (Residential Mixed, Medium Density) District, and the 65 A Height and Bulk District.

 

SPEAKERS:     Same as those listed for item 14a

ACTION:           Continued to March 10, 2011; Zoning Administrator kept public hearing                           open

                                                      

15.        2010.1006D                                                                (R. Crawford:  (415) 558-6358)

1 LA AVANZADA STREET (AKA 1 PALO ALTO DRIVE), SUTRO TOWER - Assessor’s Block 2724 (Lot 003) - Mandatory Discretionary Review, pursuant to Planning Code Section 306.9 for installation of 15 antennas at various locations on Sutro Tower for Clearwire, a wireless data service provider, to provide high speed and mobile Internet Services at the SUTRO TOWER Broadcast Facility within the RH-1 (Residential, House, One-Family) Zoning District and 40-X Height and Bulk District.

Staff Analysis:  Full Discretionary Review

Preliminary Recommendation:  Do not take Discretionary Review and approve

 

SPEAKERS:     Shaw-Lin Chen

ACTION:           Continued to January 27, 2011; public hearing closed

AYES:              Olague, Antonini, Borden, Fong, Moore, Sugaya

ABSENT:          Miguel

 

            16.        2009.0155DDDDDD                                                              (M. SMITH: (415 558-6322)

3987 20TH STREET - south side between Sanchez and Church Streets; Lot 055A in Assessor's Block 3605 - Requests for Discretionary Review of Building Permit Application No. 2010.07.06.6032, proposing to construct a roof deck and a three-story horizontal addition at the rear of a single-family dwelling, located in a RH-1 (Residential, House, One-Family) District, the Dolores Heights Special Use District, and a 40-X Height and Bulk District.

Staff Analysis:  Full Discretionary Review

Preliminary Recommendation:  Do not take Discretionary Review and approve

 

ACTION:           Continued to February 3, 2011

AYES:              Borden, Fong, Moore Sugaya

NAYES:            Antonini and Olague

ABSENT:          Miguel

 

17.        2010.0805D                                                                      (M. WOODS: (415) 558-6315)

1787 UNION STREET - south side between Octavia and Gough Streets; Lot 017 in Assessor’s Block 0544 - Request for Discretionary Review of Building Permit Application No. 2010.06.04.3920, proposing to legalize the removal of a sunroom enclosure and to establish an open patio (an “outdoor activity area,” as defined in Planning Code Section 790.70) at the front of the building for an existing full-service restaurant and bar (dba “The Brick Yard”) in the Union Street Neighborhood Commercial District and 40-X Height and Bulk District.

Staff Analysis:  Full Discretionary Review

Preliminary Recommendation:  Take Discretionary Review and approve the project with conditions

 

SPEAKERS:     Patricia Vaughey, Sam Landrum, Jerry Czember, Robert Bardell, Serana Bardell, JoAnn Hamilton, Jack Branning, Donna Morrison, Melinda Cardwell, Mark Marmowski, John Gavin, Roman Alpert, Bill Barnes, Bryan Lichtenstein, Kevin Lyman, Josh Peterson, Kamyar Vaghar, Logan Sheed, Joshia Speigelman, Dina Eppley, Ben Stafford, Cameron Baird, Harry Kenning, David Spurgeon, Anne Castro, Megan Chechile, Skye Czember, Gloria Smith

ACTION:           Took Discretionary Review and approve the project with conditions

AYES:              Olague, Antonini, Borden, Fong, Moore, Sugaya

ABSENT:          Miguel

            DRA:                0186

 

18.        2010.0782DD                                                                      (E. WATTY: (415) 558-6620)

916 ORTEGA STREET - north side between 16th and 17th Avenues; Lot 018 in Assessor's Block 2053 - Requests for Discretionary Review of Building Permit Application No. 2008.08.27.0197 proposing to construct vertical addition and horizontal rear additions, and to alter the front façade of an existing two-story, one-unit detached dwelling within the RH-1(D) [Residential, House, One-Family (Detached)] Zoning District and 40-X Height and Bulk District.

Staff Analysis:  Abbreviated Discretionary Review

Preliminary Recommendation:  Do not take Discretionary Review and approve

 

SPEAKERS:     Tracy Thompson, Lenard Pond, Francis Choy, Dominic Chan

ACTION:           Did not take Discretionary Review and approved

AYES:              Olague, Antonini, Borden, Fong, Moore, Sugaya

            ABSENT:          Miguel

            DRA:                0187

 

19.        2010.0911D                                                            (S. Caltagirone:  (415) 558-6625)

2507 PACIFIC AVENUE - south side between Pierce and Steiner Streets; Lot 017 in Assessor’s Block 0586 - Request for Discretionary Review of Building Permit Application No. 2010.0423.0985, proposing to construct a garage in the front setback area beneath a new entry stair and to construct a rear addition at the existing three-story, single-family house located within the RH-1 (Residential, House, Single-Family) Zoning District and 40-X Height and Bulk District.

Staff Analysis: Abbreviated Discretionary Review

Preliminary Recommendation:  Do not take Discretionary Review and approve.

(Continued from Regular Meeting of November 18, 2010)

 

SPEAKERS:     None

ACTION:           Without hearing, continued to February 3, 2011

AYES:              Borden, Fong, Moore Sugaya, Antonini, Olague

ABSENT:          Miguel


20.        2010.0372DD                                                                        (M. SMITH: (415 558-6322)

479 DOUGLASS STREET - east side between 21st and 22nd Streets; Lot 026 in Assessor's Block 2749 - Requests for Discretionary Review of Building Permit Application No. 2010.04.20.0625 proposing to raise the building approximately two-feet and construct a three-story addition at the rear of a single-family dwelling, located in a RH-2 (Residential, House, Two-Family) District and a 40-X Height and Bulk District.

Staff Analysis:  Abbreviated Discretionary Review

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

 

SPEAKERS:     Stephen Fowler, Arnie Lerner, Willliam Pashelinsky, Michael Murray, Joe Marko, Rafael Acevedo, Renee Stephens

1) ACTION:        Did not take Discretionary Review and approved

AYES:              Miguel, Antonini, Fong,

NAYES:            Borden, Moore, Sugaya, Olague

ABSENT:          Miguel

RESULT:           Motion failed

 

2) ACTION:        Took Discretionary Review and approved with staff recommendations

AYES:              Antonini, Fong,             Borden, Moore, Sugaya, Olague

ABSENT:          Miguel

            DRA:                0188

 

I.          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))

 

None

 

Adjournment: 11:15 pm

 

Adopted:       April 7, 2011

Last updated: 4/8/2011 1:51:00 PM