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

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

January 18, 2001

January 18, 2001

 

SAN FRANCISCO PLANNING COMMISSION


 

 

SAN FRANCISCO PLANNING COMMISSION


 

Meeting Minutes

 

Commission Chambers - Room 400

City Hall, 1 Dr. Carlton B. Goodlett Place

Thursday, January 18, 2001

1:30 PM

 

Regular Meeting

 

 

 

PRESENT: Baltimore, Chinchilla, Fay, Joe, Mills, Salinas

ABSENT: Theoharis

 

NOTE: The Commission voted to have Commissioner Chinchilla act as Chairperson for today's hearing.

 

THE MEETING WAS CALLED TO ORDER BY COMMISSIONER CHINCHILLA AT 1:40 p.m.

 

STAFF IN ATTENDANCE: Gerald G. Green - Director of Planning; Larry Badiner - Zoning Administrator; Andrea Wong; Thomas Wang; Nora Priego - Transcription Secretary; Isolde Wilson – Acting Commission Secretary

 

A. ITEMS PROPOSED FOR CONTINUANCE

 

1. Election of Officers

(Proposed for Continuance to January 25, 2001)

 

SPEAKER(S): None

ACTION: Continued to January 25, 2001

AYES: Baltimore, Chinchilla, Fay, Joe, Salinas

ABSENT: Theoharis

 

2. 2000.1049DDD (WONG: 558-6381)

85 SYCAMORE STREET - Request for Discretionary Review for 85 Sycamore Street, Lot 045 in Assessor’s Block 3576, on Building Permit Application No. 2000.06.20.2307S - a proposal for the construction of a new 3-unit building in a RH-3 zoning and 50-X height/bulk zoning district. The proposal is to remove the two existing, one-story structures (one two-unit building and one one-unit building) and to construct a new three-unit building with three legally independent parking spaces, accessed from Sycamore Street in a RH-3 zoning and 50-X height/bulk zoning district.

Preliminary Recommendation: Pending

(Proposed for Continuance to January 25, 2001)

 

SPEAKER(S): None

ACTION: Continued to January 25, 2001

AYES: Baltimore, Chinchilla, Fay, Joe, Salinas

ABSENT: Theoharis

 

3. 1999.770DDDDD (WANG: 558‑6335)

567 ‑ 569 SANCHEZ STREET, east side between 19th and Hancock Streets; Lot 032 in Assessor's Block 3585. The proposal is to demolish an existing single‑family dwelling with a detached garage and construct a new three-story plus attic over garage, two‑family dwelling, in an RH‑3 (Residential, House, Three‑Family) District and a 40‑X Height and Bulk District.

Preliminary Recommendation: Pending

(Proposed for Continuance to February 1, 2001)

 

NOTE: Placed in Calendar in Error. No Action Required.

 

4. 2000.654D (YOUNG: 558-6346)

412 LOMBARD STREET, north side between Grant Avenue and Stockton Street, Lot 010 in Assessor’s Block 0062 -- Request for Discretionary Review of Building Permit Application No. 2000/03/03/3468 to construct a two-story vertical addition to an existing one-story over basement single-family dwelling in an RH-3 (Residential, House, Three-Family) District and a 40-X Height and Bulk District.

Preliminary Recommendation: Pending

(Continued from Regular Meeting of December 7, 200)

(Proposed for Continuance to February 1, 2001)

 

SPEAKER(S):

(-) Chuck Thomas

- He requests that this case be continued to February 15, 2001.

- The project sponsor did not provide the plans necessary for him to be prepared for this hearing.

- The poster did not state a change of the hearing date.

(+) Amad Mohazed

- He is the project architect for this project.

- He would like for this hearing to be heard as soon as possible.

- He does not oppose a continuance for this item.

 

ACTION: Continued to February 8, 2001

AYES: Baltimore, Chinchilla, Fay, Joe, Salinas

ABSENT: Theoharis

 

5. 2000.877D (NIKITAS: 558-6306)

240 - 16TH AVENUE - north side between California and Clement Streets, Lot 037 in Assessor’s Block 1418. Request for Discretionary Review for Building Permit Application No.2000/07/25/6060. The proposal would add a four-story extension to the rear of the existing single family dwelling, and would reconfigure the building interior to create a second dwelling unit in an RH-2 (Residential, House, Two-Family) Dwelling and a 40-X Height and Bulk District.

Preliminary Recommendation: pending.

(Continued from Regular Meeting of December 7, 2000)

(Proposed for Continuance to February 8, 2001)

 

SPEAKER(S): None

ACTION: Continued to February 8, 2001

AYES: Baltimore, Chinchilla, Fay, Joe, Salinas

ABSENT: Theoharis

 

6. 2000.677C (CHIN: 575-6897)

373 BROADWAY STREET - southeast corner of Broadway Street and Bartol Street; Lot 018 in Assessor's Block 0164: -- Request for Conditional Use authorization pursuant to Section 714.83 of the Planning Code to install a total of twelve antennas and a base transceiver station on an existing four-story over basement building, as part of AT&T's wireless cellular network in the Broadway (Neighborhood Commercial) District and a 65-A Height and Bulk District.

Preliminary Recommendation: Approval with Conditions

(Continued from Regular Meeting of January 11, 2001)

(Proposed for Continuance to February 8, 2001)

 

SPEAKER(S): None

ACTION: Continued to February 8, 2001

AYES: Baltimore, Chinchilla, Fay, Joe, Salinas

ABSENT: Theoharis

 

7. 2000.1026C (WOODS: 558‑6315)

4314 CALIFORNIA STREET - north side, between Fifth and Sixth Avenues, Lot 14 in Assessor's Block 1365 ‑‑ Request for Conditional Use Authorization under Sections 303 and 710.27 of the Planning Code to extend the bar hours of an existing bar and restaurant establishment (the V Pub Bar and Grill) from 11:00 p.m. to 2:00 a.m. in an NC‑1 (Neighborhood Commercial Cluster District) Zoning District and 40‑X Height and Bulk District.

Preliminary Recommendation: Pending

(Proposed for Continuance to February 22, 2001)

 

SPEAKER(S): None

ACTION: Continued to February 8, 2001

AYES: Baltimore, Chinchilla, Fay, Joe, Salinas

ABSENT: Theoharis

 

8. 2000.739E (BLOMGREN: 558‑5979)

298 SHIPLEY STREET - northeast corner of Shipley and Sixth Street, Assessor's Block 3753, Lots 122 ‑‑ Appeal of a Preliminary Negative Declaration. Proposed construction of a three‑story building containing a total of 32 live/work units and 32 off‑street parking spaces. The site currently has a vacant one‑story auto sales building, which would be demolished. The new building would reach a maximum height of 45 feet in a 40‑X height/bulk district. The site is with a South of Market RSD (Residential/Service) Mixed Use District, an MUHZ (Mixed Use Housing Zone) interim zoning district, and a 40‑X Height and Bulk District.

Preliminary Recommendation: Uphold Preliminary Recommendation

(Proposed for Continuance to March 8, 2001)

 

SPEAKER(S): None

ACTION: Continued to March 8, 2001

AYES: Baltimore, Chinchilla, Fay, Joe, Salinas

ABSENT: Theoharis

 

B. COMMISSIONERS' QUESTIONS AND MATTERS

 

9. Consideration of Adoption - draft minutes of December 7 and 14, 2000

 

ACTION: Approved with correction advised by Commissioner Joe.

AYES: Baltimore, Chinchilla, Fay, Joe, Salinas

ABSENT: Theoharis

 

10. Proposed adoption of Planning Commission hearing schedule for 2001

 

SPEAKER(S): None

ACTION: Approved as amended

AYES: Baltimore, Chinchilla, Fay, Joe, Salinas

ABSENT: Theoharis

 

11. Commission Matters

None

 

C. DIRECTOR'S REPORT

 

12. Director's Announcements

None

 

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

BOA None

 

BOS

Re: Live/Work to Loft Housing Legislation

- The Board considered legislation by Supervisors' Daly, Amiano and Maxwell that would establish a 6-month moratorium on the consideration of live/work units. A companion piece would prohibit any action on these applications and would create a retroactive period of 60 days. Any applications that were before the Commission that have not been approved cannot be approved within that period of time.

- This legislation was just referred to the Department yesterday (1/17/01).

- This legislation affects item 16 on today's calendar.

- He would like to have the Commission consider continuing item 16 to allow the director and the Zoning Administrator to consider this legislation.

 

D.                  REGULAR CALENDAR

 

14. (WILSON: 558-6602)

DWELLING UNIT MERGER POLICY

Policy discussion on the removal of dwelling units. Consider adopting criteria for Discretionary Review of building permit applications to remove a legal dwelling unit.

 

SPEAKER(S):

(-) Dean and Catherine Akazawa

- They purchased a property on Bush Street last year.

- They would like for the Commissioners not to penalize projects that are in the pipeline.

- Their project would allow for a family of six to live as one family by merging units.

- They have spent considerable time and resources to merge the units. They are not doing this for business purposes. They have not displaced anyone.

- They were supposed to have started their project in September. Their contractor advised them that the project would last about 3 months but because of this new policy, they haven't been able to even start their project.

- His wife is expecting twins and this is causing a lot of hardship and stress to their lives.

(-) Susanne Beilicke – Sanger and Olson

- They have not had an opportunity to review the criteria.

- She would like to request that this matter is continued for two weeks to allow for through revision of the criteria and allow for a presentation.

(-) Jeremy Paul

- He represents small property owners.

- He would like to alert this Commission of the consequences if this policy is approved.

- The courts, City Attorney and BOA are clear that they will not prevent Ellis Acted properties from being merged.

- There will be a substantial loss of housing because of this kind of action.

- Please consider a way to avoid the loss of housing.

(-) Randy Shaw – Director of the Tenderloin Housing Clinic

- Housing is lost with mergers.

- Homes should remain with the original configuration.

- There is a scarcity of rental housing.

(-) Kim Stryker

- She is one of two-co chairs of

- She is amazed at the amount of interference the City puts for homeowners.

- They supply 1/3 of the City's rental housing.

- They end of taking their units off the market because of all the policies that need to be adhered to.

- Homeowners should be able to use their homes for growing families.

- Homeowners would like to merge illegal units in order to make them legal.

- It's not of the City's business how much these rental units are.

- She would like the Commission to reevaluate the policy and not put so many burdens on property owners.

(-) Courtney Clarkson

- She purchased a 2-unit building recently which was originally a 1 unit home and her intention was to make as it was before.

- It seems like the Commission is making it difficult for a small amount of people to merge rental housing.

- At the corner of Fillmore and Lombard there was a gas station, a 1-story building was constructed there. Enormous volume spaces are being built as lofts instead of rental housing units.

(-) Andrew Zaks

- He is an attorney for small property owners.

- There will be unintended affects that this policy will produce.

- There will be more Ellic Act cases.

- He would like the Commission to reconsider this policy.

- He believes that this policy is a bad policy.

(-) J.B. Alijani

- He is a small property owner.

- This policy gives the reason to not add rental units in a house.

- He agrees with the previous speaker that homeowners Ellis Acts units.

- It will be bad for San Francisco to have all these Ellis Act buildings.

- Ways should be looked for so people can have rental housing.

(-) Will Spritzma

- He is upset that he has to take time out of his life to come here and protect his property.

- If these types of policies are going to be implemented, properties who were started from a certain date should not qualify for Discretionary Review.

(-) Joe O'Donahue

- He sympathizes with families who want to merge units because their family is growing.

- This policy should be addressed at the Board of Supervisors.

- This Commission should not try to solve this problem.

(-) Robin Levit

- He owns property just a few blocks from here.

- He purchased the property with the intention of merging the units.

- His parents are very old and they saw this as providing housing for them.

- People, who have bought these buildings, purchased them with the idea of merging the units.

- Small property owners should not be penalized.

(-) Andy Esparza

- He owns property. He purchased the property after renting it for a few years.

- These types of regulations are causing him to get education on how these policies work.

- He will find out what the Ellis Act means to him and what the implications are.

- He has tenants that have lived in the property for many years. He won't hesitate to Ellis Act the tenants he has currently.

(-) Lou Lecnito

- This is terrible to have such hard restrictions on small people that can help their children.

(-) Brett Gladstone

- He is an attorney. He has had a number of calls from homeowners so he can represent them.

- The costs for people to go through a Discretionary Review is quite high.

- People get nervous and have a hard time speaking before the Commission.

- He would like the Commission to consider this policy.

(-) Craig Lipton

- He is a small property owner.

- He is affected by this policy.

- He understands that there is a housing crisis map.

(-) Linda Allen

- She is a small property owner.

- She is confused and uncertain to question the intelligence of this policy or the sincerity of the Commissioners.

- This new rule will cause more Ellis Acts and not apply to the Commission at all. There will be more illegal units created.

(-) John Bardis

- The people who have spoken today have all mentioned that there is a housing crisis.

- The existing housing stock is the more affordable housing stock in the City.

- What is the better solution? Maybe the City has not been clear in the way the City has developed this policy.

- This is something that should be followed up by the Board.

- A clear solution, in ordinance form, should be established.

- People, who purchased prior to adoption of first policy, should receive priority to go before the Commission.

- Staff should provide help to property owners to fill out forms, get information, etc.

 

ACTION: Approved with modifications. Staff to report on January 25, 2001 on the status of DR's, which are in the pipeline for dwelling unit mergers. A special hearing would probably be scheduled just for these types of cases in order to expedite these cases.

AYES: Baltimore, Chinchilla, Fay, Joe, Salinas

ABSENT: Theoharis

 

15. 1999.346TZ (MALTZER: 558-6391)

ADOPTION OF NEW POLICIES REGARDING OFFICE USE AND CONVERSION OF LIVE/WORK (LOFT HOUSING) WITHIN INTERIM INDUSTRIAL PROTECTION ZONES AND MIXED USE HOUSING ZONES - Consideration of adopting new policies to discourage office development and to further discourage the conversion of live/work to office within the Interim Controls boundary area. These new policies are to supplement existing policies previously adopted August 5, 1999 (CPC Res. 14861).

Preliminary Recommendation: Adopt Resolution creating new policies within Interim Zones

(Continued from Regular Meeting of December 14, 2000)

 

SPEAKER(S):

(-) Art Evans

- He showed a map of a property on King and Berry Streets (AKA 601 King Street).

- In 1998 they were approved to build these housing units.

- They have spent millions of dollars on this project.

- Had there not been this backup of these allocations, they would have received an allocation.

- Their project would have received a permit before December 31, 2000.

- There is no opposition to this project.

(-) Arthur Chan

- He is the owner of properties of 7th and King Streets.

- They bought a warehouse about 30 years ago to provide for their import/export business.

- The property is set for retirement since it's in poor physical condition.

- It is not good economic sense to renovate the property.

- Although they might relocate to another part of the Bay Area since their business requires it be located on a pier.

- E.F. Evans has agreed to purchase the site.

- He has been a loyal businessman of San Francisco and it's not fare that this decision will have a tremendous impact on him.

(-) Steve Vettel

- This is a rather unusual case.

- The EIR of this project was certified in August. The project sponsor was not able to develop this property because the office allocation had run out so they had to wait for this year in order to qualify.

- He submitted a paragraph, which he would like to have the Commission consider as an amendment.

- He would like cases to be considered which were ready to be considered by the Commission before the policy was enacted.

(-) Robert Meyers

- He is an architect and a city-planning consultant.

- He would like to place an operative date of November 7 so projects before this date should be exempt.

(-) Joe O'Donahue

- There are cases, which should be exempt of this policy.

- Many cases have been at the Planning Department for many years.

- If an exemption is made, the Commission will not set a precedent.

- He agrees with the Director of the Planning Department on this policy.

(-) Sue Hestor

- This approval of this policy is ridiculous based on the history of the department.

- There have been huge controversies on Industrial Zones.

- The Department is discouraging offices in the Mixed Use Housing Zones.

- The language of Potrero Hill was totally eliminated.

- She does not think that this is such a great thing.

 

ACTION: Approve project with the exception of the Evans Project.

AYES: Baltimore

NAYES: Chinchilla, Joe, Fay, Salinas

ABSENT: Theoharis

 

ACTION: Approved as per staff recommendation

AYES: Baltimore, Chinchilla, Joe, Fay, Salinas

ABSENT: Thoharis

MOTION: 16079

 

16. 2000.1007T (LORD: 558-6311)

LIVE-WORK TO LOFT HOUSING AMENDMENT - Consideration of adoption of amendments to Part II, Chapter II, of the San Francisco Municipal Code (Planning Code) by amending Sections 102.7 and 102.13 redefining "live/work" units as "loft housing" and classifying them as residential uses; repealing Section 233 regarding live/work; adding Section 232 to establish requirements for loft housing that would subject it to some existing live/work controls except that there would be no restriction on the nature of work which could be performed in the unit so long as the use is permitted in the SSO (Service/Secondary Office) Zoning District and no requirement that the occupant(s) work in the unit, would require loft housing to comply with existing inclusionary housing policies, would require loft housing in residential areas to comply with all requirements for residential uses including the residential design guidelines, would require loft housing constructed in areas not zoned residential to comply with non-residential design guidelines and all requirements for residential uses except for front setback and open space requirements, would establish procedures for converting live/work units to non-residential uses, and would establish loft housing, rear yard exposure requirements. This ordinance supersedes any inconsistent Planning Commission policies.

Preliminary Recommendation: Adopt the Draft Ordinance

(Continued from Regular Meeting of January 11, 2001)

 

Item taken out of order. Followed item 13.

SPEAKER(S):

Joe O'Donahue

- He would suggest that item 15 be looked at also and considered to be continued as well since both items are related.

 

ACTION: Continued Indefinitely

AYES: Baltimore, Chinchilla, Fay, Salinas

NAYES: Joe

 

17a. 2000.265CV (WONG: 558-6381)

2940 FOLSOM STREET - west side, between 25th and 26th Streets; Lot 008 in Assessor’s block 6525: Request for Conditional Use Authorization for a Community Facility (kitchen incubator program) in a RH-2 (Residential, House, Two-Family) Zoning District, under Planning Code Section 209.4 (a), and for the creation of three new dwelling units at a density not to exceed 1 unit per 1,500 square feet of lot area in a RH-2 Zoning District, under Planning Code Section 209.1 (g). The subject property also falls within a 40-X Height/Bulk District. The proposal is to renovate the existing commercial property into a kitchen incubator program, run by the Women’s Initiative for Self-Employment. This 4,270 gross square foot community facility will run programs to assist participants with starting and operating catering/food production micro enterprise businesses. Three new dwelling units are proposed for construction at the rear of the property. Each new unit will provide a required parking space, accessed from Horace Street.

Preliminary Recommendation: Approval with Conditions

SPEAKER(S):

(+) Jane Seagal – Project Sponsor

- She purchased this property about a year and a half ago.

- This project would help women begin their own catering business.

- She is not motivated solely by profit.

- She would like to have the Commission consider approving this project.

(+) Barbara Johnson – Co-Founder and Executive Director of the Womens Initiative for Self-Employment.

- Womens Initiative will lease the commercial kitchen space from Jane Seagal.

- This project is referred to as MIKI (Mission Kitchen) and will help low-income women receive self-employment, industry-specific training and be able to start their own businesses.

- In 1990, Womens Initiative started ALAS (Alternativas para Latinas en Autosuficiencia).

(+) Paula Artager – Project Architect

- They have met with neighbors and neighborhood groups regarding this project.

- Displayed a model of the proposed project.

(+) Elizabeth Milos

- She works with ALAS.

- She has two clients who are in support of the project and live near the project site.

(+) Etelina Sanchez

- Spoke in Spanish

- She is a member of ALAS.

- Submitted a translation of her statement to the Commissioners.

(+) Guadalupe Avila

- Spoke in Spanish

- She is also a member of ALAS.

- She believes that this is a very important project for the community.

- She has tried many times to establish her own catering business but has not had the opportunity to do so.

- This site is perfect because it's close to her family.

- Submitted a translation of her statement to the Commissioners.

(+) Patty Chan

- President of the Women's Foundation

- The Women's Foundation has provided funds of various projects in the Mission District.

- This project will provide a great opportunity for women of Latino descent to be able to start their own businesses.

- She urges the Commission to approve this project.

(+) Julie Dorff

- She has lived in the Mission District for many years.

- Her main point is that the neighborhood is healthier and safer.

- She would be proud to have the incubator project on her block.

- This is a great opportunity for Latino women to start their own business and survive in this economy.

- She agrees to have this project in her back yard.

(+) Wilma Espinoza – Board Member of Womens Initiative

- She has participated in the ALAS project since it's initiation.

- This is such a wonderful project for providing economic opportunities for Latino Women.

(-) Luisa Bradley

- The area is a residential area and she would like to keep it that way.

- Although the idea is a good one, it should be constructed in another place.

(-) Agustin Acedo

- This is the first time he speaks in public so he is a little nervous.

- This area is not good for a project, which involves cooking.

- This area could be done in any other place.

(+) Brett Gladstone

- He won't speak unless the Commission has any questions.

 

ACTION: Approved

AYES: Baltimore, Chinchilla, Fay, Joe, Salinas

ABSENT: Theoharis

MOTION: 16080

 

17b. 2000.265CV (WONG: 558-6381)

2940 FOLSOM STREET - west side, between 25th and 26th Streets; Lot 008 in Assessor’s block 6525: Request for a rear yard variance to construct three new dwelling units in the required rear yard, under Planning Code Section 134 (a) (2).

 

SPEAKER(S): See Item 17a.

ACTION: Variance taken under advisement by Zoning Administrator

 

18. 1997.433A (KOMETANI: 558-6478)

22 ALTA STREET - north side between Montgomery and Sansome Streets. Lot 34A in Assessor’s Block 106 -- Request for Certificate of Appropriateness authorization, under Article 10 of the Planning Code, to construct a new, one-unit, residential building, two-stories at the front (Alta Street) elevation and five-stories at the rear in the Telegraph Hill Historic District. The subject property is zoned RH-3 (House, Three-Family) District and is in a 40-X Height and Bulk District.

Preliminary Recommendation: Approval with Conditions

(Continued from Regular Meeting of November 16, 2000)

 

ACTION: Continued to February 8, 2001

AYES: Baltimore, Chinchilla, Fay, Joe, Salinas

ABSENT: Theoharis

 

E.                  SPECIAL DISCRETIONARY REVIEW HEARING

 

At Approximately 5:00 PM the Planning Commission will convene into a Special Discretionary Review (DR) Hearing to hear and act on Discretionary Review matters. Procedures governing Special DR Hearings are as follow: DR Requestor(s) are provided with up to five (5) minutes for a presentation and those in support of the DR Requestor(s) are provided with up to three (3) minutes each. The Project Sponsor is then provided with up to five (5) minutes for a presentation and those in support of the project are provided with up to three (3) minutes each. At the conclusion, each side (not each person) is provided with 2 minutes for a rebuttal. Those cases that are scheduled on this calendar prior to 5:00 PM, but have not been called or heard by 5:00 PM, could be continued to a later time or date as determined by the Commission.

 

19. 2000.923DD (WANG: 558‑6335)

575 VALLEY STREET - south side between Castro and Diamond Streets; Lot 019 in Assessor's Block 7536. The proposal is to demolish an existing single‑family dwelling and construct a new two‑story over garage and basement, single‑family dwelling, in an RH‑1 (Residential, House, Single‑Family) District and a 40‑X Height and Bulk District.

Preliminary Recommendation: Do not take Discretionary Review and approve the project as submitted.

 

SPEAKER(S):

(-) Allan Kessler - DR Requestor

- The proposed structure is larger than the other homes in the neighborhood.

- The design of the structure makes it appealing yet it is too large for this neighborhood.

- He showed a diagram of the homes, which have a rear deck.

- He has lived in this neighborhood for many years and has seen the neighborhood change throughout the years, yet this house is just too large.

- The DR requestors spent time with the developers. The revisions made to the original plans are merely cosmetic and not related to the bulk of the house.

- Showed an image of a shadow study made.

(-) Richard Peterson

- The proposed project is totally out-of-scale in comparison to the rest of the houses.

- This house will have 6 bathrooms, where the rest of the houses in the neighborhood only have one.

- Revisions made to the plans are only cosmetic.

- An area in the house where a bar is planned could easily be converted into a kitchen. There are other areas of the house, which could easily be converted to other things; therefore, the property could be converted into an apartment building.

- The height of this house will impact the public open space.

- This is the perfect example of a mega mansion.

(-) Richard Estes Richardson

- He is one of a few people who object to this project.

- He lives down the hill of the proposed project.

- He has lived there for about 30 years

- This project will change the character of the neighborhood.

- The height of the house will be intrusive.

- He supports the design review.

- He would have liked to have more neighbors receive notification of this project.

(-) Harvey Rudman

- He lives in the neighborhood.

- He feels that the developers have address some of his concerns.

- The building will create a wall, which will run across most of the property.

- There was no attempt to contact homeowners regarding this project.

- The homeowners and not the developers requested the meetings that were set up.

(+) Brett Gladstone

- There were a total of 5 meetings with the neighbors. Two were formal and 3 were informal.

- Most of the cut backs were on the side of the project.

- Bay windows were removed

- Many people are coming to him because they can't seem to find a house that is large enough for growing families.

(+) Steve Antenaros - Project Architect

- December 21 (Winter Solstice) would be the worst-case scenario which is when the sun is at its lowest therefore shadows at anytime during the day are the worst that it would be during any other day of the year.

- All the revisions of the original plan were taken into consideration in regards to impact to the neighbors.

(+) Joe O'Donahue

- Every building this architect has designed has been good to the neighborhood.

- This building does not max out.

- This project should be approved.

 

ACTION: Do not take DR and approve project as submitted.

AYES: Baltimore, Chinchilla, Fay, Salinas

NAYES: Joe

ABSENT: Theoharis

 

20. 2000.1029D (WONG: 558-6381)

481 ARKANSAS STREET, Request for Discretionary Review for Building Permit Application No. 200003245373 for the property at 481 Arkansas Street, Lot 012A in Assessor’s Block 4068. The proposal is to add one dwelling unit to an existing single family, two-story residence by constructing a one floor plus penthouse vertical addition. The subject property falls within a RH-2 (Residential, Two-family) Zoning District and a 40-X Height / Bulk District.

Preliminary Recommendation: Take Discretionary Review and approve the project with modifications.

 

SPEAKER(S):

(-) Tom Davie

- He lives on the block of the proposed construction.

- He read a timeline of events since September of 2000.

- He objects to the side yard entrance to the proposed lower unit.

- People who will be coming up and down the stairs will be able to look into his kitchen and dining room.

- Even if the stairs were enclosed, the design would just not fit in that space.

- Most of the new houses on this street are two-stories over garage.

- He does not feel that he is incorrect in quoting something that Mr. De La Cruz sent to him.

(-) Craig Forrestor

- He has lived in Potrero Hill since 1989.

- He has objections about this project: this will cause a negative affect on the look of the neighborhood; the construction is too large for the neighborhood; the structure will impact sunlight; privacy of adjacent neighbors.

- He strongly believes in wanting to keep the look of the neighborhood.

- The conversion of two units will be a loss of dwelling for San Francisco.

- Because of the fact that the new construction is about double compared to the other houses, it will impact the sunlight to these houses.

(-) Heather Fitzgibons

- This project will not add any positive value to the other homes in this neighborhood.

- This large structure will change the feeling of the neighborhood.

- She works at home and spends a lot of time there; this construction will invade her privacy and block the sunlight coming into her home.

(-) Alain Demour

- He lives in the neighborhood.

- He purchased his property there because of the look of the neighborhood.

- The construction will invade his privacy.

(+) Phil De la Cruz

- He owns the property with his son.

- Staff has requested that this project be modified.

- Since November of 2000, he hasn't been able to come before the Commission because of family emergencies.

- The construction would add value to the other properties.

- Displaced a diagram comparing the height of the adjacent homes.

 

ACTION: Take DR and approve project with modifications proposed by staff.

AYES: Baltimore, Chinchilla, Fay, Joe, Salinas

ABSENT: Theoharis

 

21. 2000.1118DDDD (NIKITAS: 558-6306)

33 WALNUT STREET, between Pacific Avenue and Jackson Streets, Lot 002 in Assessor’s Block 0972, Request for Discretionary Review of Building Permit Application No. 2000/05/01/9654, proposing to demolish existing rear deck and bay window, and to add a rear extension 19’-10" deep at the first floor and crawl space level below and extending 15’-10" deep at the second-story with a roof deck above and a new attic level dormer at the front of the house, in an RH-1 (Residential, House, One-Family) District and a 40-X Height and Bulk District.

Preliminary Recommendation: Do not take Discretionary Review and approve project as submitted

 

ACTION: Continued to February 8, 2001

AYES: Baltimore, Chinchilla, Fay, Joe, Salinas

ABSENT: Theoharis

 

F. PUBLIC COMMENT

 

At this time, members of the public may address the Commission on items of interest to the public that are within the subject matter jurisdiction of the Commission except agenda items. With respect to agenda items, your opportunity to address the Commission will be afforded when the item is reached in the meeting with one exception. When the agenda item has already been reviewed in a public hearing at which members of the public were allowed to testify and the Commission has closed the public hearing, your opportunity to address the Commission must be exercised during the Public Comment portion of the Calendar. Each member of the public may address the Commission for up to three minutes.

 

The Brown Act forbids a commission from taking action or discussing any item not appearing on the posted agenda, including those items raised at public comment. In response to public comment, the commission is limited to:

 

(1) responding to statements made or questions posed by members of the public; or

(2) requesting staff to report back on a matter at a subsequent meeting; or

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

 

Abdalla Megahed

Re: Homelessness and a new San Francisco Flea Market

- He is of American-Egyptian descent.

- He has spent various years as a human rights activist.

- He has become the strongest advocate of the homeless.

- He is thankful to President Clinton for giving this City 1 billion dollars to help the homeless.

- His plan is to start a flea market where people would pay $25.00 for a space; therefore, he would be able to raise money for the homeless.

 

Adjournment: 6:18 p.m.

 

THE DRAFT MINUTES ARE PROPOSED FOR ADOPTION AT THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION ON THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 1, 2001.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Last updated: 11/17/2009 10:00:09 PM