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

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

July 28, 2005

July 28, 2005

SAN FRANCISCO

PLANNING COMMISSION

Meeting Minutes

Commission Chambers - Room 400

City Hall, 1 Dr. Carlton B. Goodlett Place

Thursday, July 28, 2005

2:00 PM

Regular Meeting

 

COMMISSIONERS PRESENT:  Sue Lee; Michael J. Antonini; Shelley Bradford Bell;

                                                Kevin Hughes; William L. Lee; Christina Olague

 

COMMISSIONER ABSENT:       Dwight S. Alexander

 

THE MEETING WAS CALLED TO ORDER BY PRESIDENT SUE LEE AT 2:50 P.M.

 

STAFF IN ATTENDANCE: Dean Macris – Director of Planning; Larry Badiner – Zoning Administrator; Jonathan Purvis; Mathew Snyder; Kate McGee; Paul Maltzer; Rana Ahmadi; Tammy Chan; Linda Avery - 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.         2003.0672EC                                                                     (I. NISHIMURA:  (415) 558-5967)

5800 Third Street Residential and Commercial Mixed-Use Project- Appeals of Preliminary Mitigated Negative Declaration - The proposed project would consist of construction of a residential and commercial mixed-use development after demolition of a defunct bottling plant facility at 5800 Third Street (Assessor’s Block 5431A, Lot 001), at the southwest corner of Third Street and Carroll Avenue in the Bayview neighborhood.  The project would include 355 multi-family residential units in four buildings, 13,000 gross square feet (gsf) of ground floor retail space in two of the buildings that would be along Third Street, and 379 off-street parking spaces in the four buildings. The four buildings would total 641,920 gsf in size, ranging in height from 50 to 60 feet tall (four to five stories) and would be built around a central plaza and a private driveway with two visitor loading spaces, with access from Carroll Avenue.  Sixteen surface parking spaces for the retail uses would be provided on the south side of the project site, with access provided from a right-turn-only driveway on Third Street at the southern boundary of the site.  Twenty surface parking spaces for visitors would be provided along the central private driveway.  Currently, the 5.75-acre site is occupied by a three-story, 103,000-gsf closed Coca-Cola bottling plant constructed in 1966, which would be demolished. Current use of the site is temporary parking of moving company trucks and charter buses.  The site is within an M-1 (Light Industrial) District, the Third Street Special Use District (SUD), a 65-J Height and Bulk District, and the proposed Bayview Hunters Point Redevelopment Projects and Zoning Health Center Activity Node.  The project would require Conditional Use Authorization for a Planned Unit Development and for residential uses in an M-1 District by the Planning Commission, which is a public hearing process.

(Continued from Regular Meeting of July 7, 2005)

(Proposed for Continuance to August 11, 2005)

 

SPEAKERS:     None

ACTION:           Without hearing, item continued to August 11, 2005)

AYES:              S. Lee, Antonini, Bradford-Bell, Hughes, Olague

ABSENT:          Alexander and W. Lee

 

2.         2003.0672EC                                                                        (M. SNYDER:  (415) 575-6891)

5800 Third Street  - currently occupied by the vacant Coca Cola facility, southwest corner of Third Street and Carroll Avenue, Lot 001 in Assessor’s Block 5431A – Request for Conditional Use authorization to allow dwelling units in an M-1 District.  Under Planning Code Sections 303 and to allow a Planned Unit Development under Planning Code Section 304.  Exceptions to the limitation on density (Planning Code Section 215) and the rear yard requirement (Planning Code Section 134) are being requested under the Planned Unit Development.  The subject property is within an M-1 (light industrial) District, the Third Street Special Use District, and a 65-J Height and Bulk District.

(continued from Regular Meeting of July 21, 2005)

(Proposed for Continuance to August 11, 2005)

 

  SPEAKERS:    None

ACTION:           Without hearing, item continued to August 11, 2005)

AYES:              S. Lee, Antonini, Bradford-Bell, Hughes, Olague

ABSENT:          Alexander and W. Lee

 

             3a.      2005.0626D                                                                         (J. PURVIS: (415) 558-6354)

3350 20th   STREET – northwest corner of 20th and Shotwell Streets; Lot 015 in Assessor’s Block 3594 – Request for Discretionary Review of Demolition Permit Application No. 2004.11.19.9724 to demolish a one-story Quonset hut used as a artist’s live-work studio, and replace it with a mixed-use building with six dwelling units over garage and commercial space in an NC-2 (Small-Scale Neighborhood Commercial) Use District and a 50-X Height and Bulk District.

                        Preliminary Recommendation: Do Not Take DR and Approve the Demolition.

                        (Continued from Regular Meeting of July 7, 2005)

                        (Proposed for Continuance to August 4, 2005)

 

SPEAKERS:     None

ACTION:           Without hearing, item continued to August 4, 2005)

AYES:              S. Lee, Antonini, Bradford-Bell, Hughes, Olague

ABSENT:          Alexander and W. Lee

 

            3b.        2004.1022D                                                                           (J. PURVIS: (415) 558-6354)

3350 20th STREET – northwest corner of 20th and Shotwell Streets; Lot 015 in Assessor’s Block 3594 – Request for Discretionary Review of Building Permit Application No. 2004.11.19.9736 to build a five-story building with six dwelling units over garage and commercial space following demolition of a commercial live/work studio in an NC-2 (Small-Scale Neighborhood Commercial) Use District and a 50-X Height and Bulk District.

            Preliminary Recommendation: Do not take Discretionary Review and Approve the New Construction.

            (Continued from Regular Meeting of July 7, 2005)

            (Proposed for Continuance to August 4, 2005)

 

SPEAKERS:     None

ACTION:           Without hearing, item continued to August 4, 2005)

AYES:              S. Lee, Antonini, Bradford-Bell, Hughes, Olague

ABSENT:          Alexander and W. Lee

 

            4.         2005.0459T                                                                          (D. SIDER: (415) 558-6697)

Planning Code Section 260 Amendments - Consideration of an Ordinance amending San Francisco Planning Code by amending section 260 to increase the height exemption for elevator penthouses from 10 to 16 feet, to allow the Zoning Administrator to grant further exemptions for buildings with height limits of more than 65 feet where such an exemption is required to meet state or federal laws or regulations; and making findings of consistency with the priority policies of Planning Code Section 101.1 and the General Plan.

Preliminary Recommendation:  Approval with Modifications

                        (Continued from Regular Meeting of June 23,  2005)

NOTE: On June 16, 2005, following public testimony, the Commission closed the public hearing, and continued the matter to June 23, 2005 by vote +6 –0.  Commissioner William Lee was absent.  Public hearing remains open for any new information. 

            (Proposed for Continuance to August 4, 2005)

 

SPEAKERS:     None

ACTION:           Without hearing, item continued to August 4, 2005)

AYES:              S. Lee, Antonini, Bradford-Bell, Hughes, Olague

            ABSENT:          Alexander and W. Lee

 

            5a.        2003.0295CDV                                                                       (I. WILSON: (415) 558-6163)

899 NORTH POINT STREET - southeast corner of North Point and Larkin Streets; Lot 020 in Assessor’s Block 0026 - Request for Conditional Use authorization pursuant to Sections 209.1 and 228.3 of the Planning Code to convert a service station use to residential use and to construct an approximately 40-foot tall, 4-story, 5-unit residential structure containing 7 off-street parking spaces in an RH-3 (Residential, House, Three-family) District, the Waterfront Special Use District No. 2 and a 40-X Height and Bulk District.  The project site was formerly a service station and is now vacant.  This project is also seeking a Variance from the Planning Code, and is the subject of a request for Discretionary Review. 

Preliminary Recommendation: Approval with conditions

                        (Continued from Regular Meeting of June 23, 2005)

            (Proposed for Continuance to August 4, 2005 August 11, 2005)

 

SPEAKERS:     None

ACTION:           Without hearing, item continued to August 11, 2005)

AYES:              S. Lee, Antonini, Bradford-Bell, Hughes, Olague

ABSENT:          Alexander and W. Lee

 

            5b.        2003.0295CDV                                                                    (I. WILSON: (415) 558-6163)

899 NORTH POINT STREET - southeast corner of North Point and Larkin Streets; Lot 020 in Assessor’s Block 0026 - Request for Discretionary Review of Building Permit Application No. 2003.04.25.3201, proposing to construct an approximately 40-foot tall, 4-story, 5-unit residential structure containing 7 off-street parking spaces in an RH-3 (Residential, House, Three-family) District, the Waterfront Special Use District No. 2 and a 40-X Height and Bulk District.  This project is also seeking a Variance from the Planning Code, and requires Conditional Use authorization.

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

                        (Continued from Regular Meeting of June 23, 2005)

            (Proposed for Continuance to August 4, 2005 August 11, 2005)

 

SPEAKERS:     None

ACTION:           Without hearing, item continued to August 11, 2005)

AYES:              S. Lee, Antonini, Bradford-Bell, Hughes, Olague

ABSENT:          Alexander and W. Lee

 

            5c.        2003.0295CDV                                                                    (I. WILSON: (415) 558-6163)

899 NORTH POINT STREET - southeast corner of North Point and Larkin Streets; Lot 020 in Assessor’s Block 0026 - Request for Variance from the rear yard requirements of Planning Code Section 134.  The proposal is to construct an approximately 40-foot tall, 4-story, 5-unit residential structure containing 7 off-street parking spaces in an RH-3 (Residential, House, Three-family) District, the Waterfront Special Use District No. 2 and a 40-X Height and Bulk District. A Variance is required to construct an approximately 40’ X 22’ portion of the project fully into the rear yard along North Point Street, leaving a comparable rear yard to the interior corner of the lot of approximately 1,480 square feet.  This project also requires Conditional Use authorization, and is the subject of a request for Discretionary Review.

            (Proposed for Continuance to August 4, 2005 August 11, 2005)

 

SPEAKERS:     None

ACTION:           Without hearing, item continued to August11, 2005)

AYES:              S. Lee, Antonini, Bradford-Bell, Hughes, Olague

ABSENT:          Alexander and W. Lee

 

  6.        2004.0545DDDDD                                                                 (S. VELLVE: (415) 558-6263)

2707 LARKIN STREET - west side between Chestnut and Francisco Streets; Lot 003 in Assessor's Block 0477 - Requests for Discretionary Review of Building Permit Application No. 2003.06.22.7592 proposing to construct a one-story vertical addition above an existing three-story, single-family dwelling in an RH-2 (Residential, House, Two-Family) District and 40-X Height and Bulk District.

            Preliminary Recommendation: Pending

                (Proposed for Continuance to September 1, 2005)

 

SPEAKERS:     None

ACTION:           Without hearing, item continued to September 1, 2005)

AYES:              S. Lee, Antonini, Bradford-Bell, Hughes, Olague

ABSENT:          Alexander and W. Lee

 

7a.        2004.1266CDZ                                                                   (S. VELLVE: (415) 558-6263)

301–323 – 14TH AVENUE (aka 1301 Clement Street) - southwest corner of 14th Avenue and Clement Street, Lot 054 (formerly Lots 001, 004, 006, 053) in Assessor's Block 1446:   Request for Conditional Use authorization for a Planned Unit Development (PUD) pursuant to Planning Code Sections 209.3 and 304 to demolish two religious institutional structures (Congregation Beth Sholom), and the construction of a new 24,000-square foot, 40-foot high synagogue structure, requiring exceptions to the Planning Code's rear yard, front setback and parking requirements.

Preliminary Recommendation: Pending

            (Proposed for Continuance to September 1, 2005)

SPEAKERS:     None

ACTION:           Without hearing, item continued to September 1, 2005)

AYES:              S. Lee, Antonini, Bradford-Bell, Hughes, Olague

ABSENT:          Alexander and W. Lee

 

7b.        2004.1266CDZ                                                                     (S. VELLVE: (415) 558-6263)

323 - 14TH AVENUE - west side between Clement Street and Geary Boulevard, Lot 054 (formerly Lots 001, 004, 006, 053) in Assessor's Block 1446 - Mandatory Discretionary Review under the Planning Commission policy requiring review of all housing demolition permits, of Demolition Permit Application No. 2005.06.15.5144, proposing to demolish a 3-story, single-family structure currently used as a meditation center within an RH-3 (House, Three Family) Use District and a 40-X Height and Bulk District. The structure will be replaced by a new structure for Congregation Beth Sholom.

Preliminary Recommendation: Pending

            (Proposed for Continuance to September 1, 2005)

 

SPEAKERS:     None

ACTION:           Without hearing, item continued to September 1, 2005)

AYES:              S. Lee, Antonini, Bradford-Bell, Hughes, Olague

ABSENT:          Alexander and W. Lee

 

7c.        2004.1266CDZ                                                                    (S. VELLVE: (415) 558-6263)

301–323 – 14TH AVENUE - southwest corner of 14th Avenue and Clement Street, Lot 054 (formerly Lots 001, 004, 006, 053) in Assessor's Block 1446 - Request for Zoning Reclassification to abolish a 35-foot long, 10-foot deep legislated front setback along the southeastern portion of the lot (formerly Lots 004 and 006) pursuant to Planning Code Sections 131 and 302. The elimination of the setback is being sought to allow construction of the new Beth Sholom Synagogue to the front property line. (An alteration to Block Book Map # 1446 in Volume 12 will graphically reflect the change, rather than the Zoning Map as indicated in previous notices).

Preliminary Recommendation: Pending

            (Proposed for Continuance to September 1, 2005)      

 

SPEAKERS:     None

ACTION:           Without hearing, item continued to September 1, 2005)

AYES:              S. Lee, Antonini, Bradford-Bell, Hughes, Olague

ABSENT:          Alexander and W. Lee

 

B.         COMMISSIONERS’ QUESTIONS AND MATTERS

 

            8.         Commission Comments/Questions

 

Commissioner Olague:

Re: To get a better understanding of First Source Hiring, she requested an informational hearing.

 

      Zoning Administrator – Larry Badiner responded:

  1. We’ll be happy to do that.

                              -     The Department needs to deal with the implementation of First Source Hiring and some issues have been brought to our attention.

  1. A hearing on this issue from the administrator of the program, Don Haza, would be very useful.

 

 

Commissioners Olague:

  1. Spoke briefly with the Mayor’s Office of Community Development and they have some pilot programs in the works.  It might be good to also have them present to give us some information about these programs.

 

Re: Article in the Chronicle July 21, 2005, “City 5000 units behind Affordable Housing Goal “

  1. Based on report, how can the Department be part of the solution instead of constantly hearing about the problem?

 

            Dean Macris – Director of Planning responded:

  1. If the Commission really wants an end to this, we probably should have Matt Franklin come to the Commission and explain the approach that the Mayor’s Office is using on this.

                      

                       Re: Octavia-Market Plan

  1. Would like to talk to the City Attorney or member of staff regarding density bonuses.

                                   

                                     Dean Macris – Director of Planning responded:

  1. Asked her to come by the Department to have an informal discussion about.

 

                       Commissioner W. Lee:

  1. Thanked Marshall Foster regarding his presentation to the San Francisco Business Times, which discusses affordable housing.

    -      Agreed with facts that this Planning Commission actually approved more affordable housing units than any other Commission that we can remember.

  1. We are creating more affordable housing.  The public needs to understand that before this Commission was formed, we were only producing 1000 units a year.  It is very difficult to get 5000 affordable housing units.                 
  2. Strongly recommended that Mathew Franklin, Mayor’s Office of Community Development come to the Commission and explain the funding he has available to promote more affordable housing.

 

Commissioner Bradford-Bell:

  1. Asked Director Macris to schedule Eastern Neighborhoods on September 8 because she is not going to be attending the meeting of September 1.

 

      Dean Macris – Director of Planning responded:

  1. The Department’s plan was to make a presentation on the Eastern Neighborhoods Interim Controls, on September 8, 2005

 

                        Commissioner Antonini:

         -     In terms of comments by Commissioner Olague, I agree it would be interesting to see what part--not in terms of the affordable /inclusion component but at the market rate housing--what part of the process is responsible for the cost.

  1. Hotel/Condo conversion issue:  there are couple of projects today that are coming to us that involve a change of usage, which is really common.  This seems to be a change of usage issue and it seems to be a Planning issue.  Now at the Land Use Committee there was a discussion and a ruling, or at least an illusion to a ruling by the City Attorney, that it was proper for the Board of Supervisors to by-pass the planning process and the Board to be able to put through legislation that would prohibit this type of conversion.
  2. Would like to hear or get something in writing regarding this issue.

 

 

                                                Susan Cleveland-Knowles – Deputy City Attorney’s Office responded:

  1. Will report to the Commission next week (August 4, 2005)

                      

                       Commissioner Olague:

-     In a lot of the issue brought here, we hear frequently that the more housing that’s built will bring the cost of housing down in the City.  Are there any studies available that give credit to that theory?

 

Dean Macris – Director of Planning responded:

-   We’ll be glad to look into it.

 

Commissioner W. Lee:

  1. Regarding following Commissioner Antonini’s comments about the conversion of the Fairmont Hotel, I sit on the Convention Visitors Bureau and represent the City. There was accurate information by Supervisor Peskin’s office where he estimated that about 61,300 jobs are associated with hotel rooms.  We have about 32, 000 hotel rooms, but the data is not totally relevant because only about 25 percent of our work force is tied to the hotel industry.
  2. An email was sent to Supervisor Peskin yesterday by the Convention and Visitor’s Bureau to clarify that it is not two workers per hotel room but a lot less than that.

 

C.         DIRECTOR’S REPORT

 

9.         Director’s Announcements

           

  1. Re. Work Program scheduling will have to be moved to a September date
  1. Review of Past Week’s Events at the Board of Supervisors and Board of Appeals

BOS – None

 

BOA

  1. Rincon Hill General Plan was adopted on its first reading. 
  2. Board is still discussing the fees that are going to be applied.
  3. 899 North Point – The categorically exemption that was continued at the request of both project sponsors is why you are not hearing it today.
  4. Land Use Committee yesterday held a discussion on the proposed ordinance prohibiting conversion of hotels.

 

D.         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.

 

            Jim Salinas

            Re: Army Armory in the Mission District

           

E.         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.

 

ITEM #11 HEARD OUT OF ORDER.  FOLLOWED ITEM # 12:

 

11.        2004.0533C                                                                       (J. Purvis:  (415) 558-6354)

737 TEHAMA STREET - south side between 8th and 9th Streets; Lot 065 in Assessor’s Block 3729 - Request for Conditional Use Authorization under Planning Code Section 803.5(b) to demolish a one-story, single-family dwelling and construct a four-story-over-garage, three-family dwelling.  The site is within the SLR (Service/Light Industrial/Residential) Mixed-Use District, a 50-X Height and Bulk District, and is within the Mixed-Use/Housing Zone under Planning Commission Resolution No. 16202, where maximum housing is encouraged.

Preliminary Recommendation: Approval with Conditions

                        (Continued from Regular Meeting of July 7, 2005)

 

SPEAKERS:     None

ACTION:           Approved

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

NAYES:            Olague

ABSENT:          Alexander

MOTION:           17068

 

            12.        2005.0579C                                                                      (M. SNYDER: (415) 575-6891)            

1119 MISSION STREET - currently occupied by PAWS, south side between 7th Street and 8th Street, Lot 130 in Assessor’s Block 3727 - Request for Conditional Use authorization to allow a change of use to “Institutions, Other - Assembly and Social Service” under Planning Code Sections 816.21 and 890.50(a) The subject property is within an SLR (Service/Light Industrial/Residential) District, and a 65-X Height and Bulk District.  The proposal is to make tenant improvements to the existing 5,000 square foot, two-story structure so that it could be used for Asian Pacific Islander Legal Outreach, a non-profit organization that provides community outreach services.

                        Preliminary Recommendation: Approval with Conditions

 

SPEAKERS:     None

ACTION:           Approved

AYES:              S. Lee, Antonini, Bradford-Bell, Hughes, Olague, W. Lee

ABSENT:          Alexander

                        MOTION:           17067

 

F.         REGULAR CALENDAR 

           

            13a.      2005.0106BCK                                                                     (K. McGee:   (415) 558-6367)

185 Berry Street - south side between 3rd and 4th Streets; Lot 005 in Assessor’s Block 3803 (a.k.a. “China Basin Landing”) - Request for Conditional Use Authorization under Planning Code Section 227(m) and 304 to construct a fourth and fifth floor vertical addition of approximately 45 feet as a Planned Unit Development including an exception from off-street parking requirements of Section 151.  The two floors would accommodate 49,000 square feet for office space and 101,982 square feet for Research and Development space, intended for bioscience use.   The site is within an M-2 (Heavy Industrial) Zoning District, and a 90-X Height and Bulk District and is within the Housing/Mixed Use policy area under Planning Commission Resolution No. 16727. 

Preliminary Recommendation:  Approval with Conditions

 

 

SPEAKERS:    

Jim Ruben – Representing Project Sponsor

  1. We have been working with the sponsor for a number a years regarding these buildings.
  2. As you by now are aware, the proposal was to modify a two-story addition to the existing three-story Berry Street Building.  The goal was to accommodate the rapidly developing science industry.
  3. With the increasing demand and excitement developed by the Stem Cell Research Center across the street, we are confident this is the right project at the right time.

Paul Wolfer – Project Architect

-   Gave an overall description of the project

Jeffrey Leibovitz – Rincon Point South Beach Advisory Committee

  1. Commended the developer/project sponsor for agreeing to move the imposing gates on Third and Fourth Streets.  And also agreeing that if for security reasons they find the necessity to put the gates back up, they agree to notify the neighborhoods at least 3 – 12 months in advance so we [the neighborhoods] can be involved.

                        Corrine Woods

  1. Extremely concerned about the parking exemption this Project Sponsor wants.
  2. Suggested that the Project Sponsor be required to periodically survey China Basin Landing tenants to update the demand analysis contained in the Wilbur Smith China Basin Landing Parking Study and provide the community with studies reflecting current conditions.
  3. Another issue is environmental health and safety.

Greg Cosko

  1. This is a great commercial building opportunity for the City of San Francisco.

Jim Salinas

  1. This project would impact the City in a very positive way.

 

ACTION:           Approved with modified amendments:

19.  According to Planning Code Section 313.3(a) where an environmental evaluation application for the development project is filed on or after January 1, 1999, the required fees shall apply.  The environmental application for the subject property was filed on April 20, 1998, and the EIR was certified on Feb. 17, 2000.  The project is grandfathered under Section 313.3(a) and S.F. Administrative Code Section 38.3(E)(5), and the Project Sponsor is not required to pay the Jobs-Housing Linkage fee or the Transit Impact fee.

 

However, the Project Sponsor shall make a voluntary contribution of a portion of the fees that would otherwise apply if the project was not exempt.

 

According to the standards for a new project, the required fee would be:

Transit Impact

49,000 square feet of office space X $10.21 = $500,290

101,982 square feet of R & D space X $10.21 = $1,041,236.20

Total amount for a new project = $1,541,526.20
Proposed amount = $652,568

 

Jobs-Housing Linkage Fee

49,000 square feet of office space X $14.96 = $733,040

101,982 square feet of R & D space X $9.97 = $1,016,760.50

Total amount for a new project = $1,749,800.50

Proposed amount = $874,900.25

 

Total proposed amount = $1,527,468.20

 

The Project Sponsor shall remove the existing gates at each end of the wharf prior to issuance of a building permit for the subject property.  In the event that the gates must be installed for security purposes, the Project Sponsor shall give notice of the request to all owners and neighborhood organizations within a 300-foot radius of the subject property, and the proposal must be approved by the Zoning Administrator by a letter of determination.

AYES:              Sue Lee, Antonini, Bradford-Bell, Hughes, Olague, W. Lee

ABSENT:          Alexander

                        MOTION:           17069

 

            13b.      2005.0106BC                                                                       (K. McGee:  (415) 558-6367)

185 Berry Street - south side between 3rd and 4th Streets; Lot 005 in Assessor’s Block 3803 (a.k.a. “China Basin Landing”) - Approval by the Planning Commission of up to 49,000 square feet of Office Space under the annual allocation of small cap office space, pursuant to Planning Code Section 321.  The project also includes a proposal for 101,982 square feet of Research and Development space all located in a new fourth and fifth floor of the Berry Building and intended for bioscience use.   The site is within an M-2 (Heavy Industrial) Zoning District, and a 90-X Height and Bulk District and is within the Housing/Mixed-Use policy area under Planning Commission Resolution No. 16727.

Preliminary Recommendation:  Approval with Conditions

 

SPEAKERS:     See Item 13a

ACTION:           Approved with modified amendments:

19.  According to Planning Code Section 313.3(a) where an environmental evaluation application for the development project is filed on or after January 1, 1999, the required fees shall apply.  The environmental application for the subject property was filed on April 20, 1998, and the EIR was certified on Feb. 17, 2000.  The project is grandfathered under Section 313.3(a) and S.F. Administrative Code Section 38.3(E)(5), and the Project Sponsor is not required to pay the Jobs-Housing Linkage fee or the Transit Impact fee.

 

However, the Project Sponsor shall make a voluntary contribution of a portion of the fees that would otherwise apply if the project was not exempt.

 

According to the standards for a new project, the required fee would be:

Transit Impact

49,000 square feet of office space X $10.21 = $500,290

101,982 square feet of R & D space X $10.21 = $1,041,236.20

Total amount for a new project = $1,541,526.20
Proposed amount = $652,568

 

Jobs-Housing Linkage Fee

49,000 square feet of office space X $14.96 = $733,040

101,982 square feet of R & D space X $9.97 = $1,016,760.50

Total amount for a new project = $1,749,800.50

Proposed amount = $874,900.25

 

Total proposed amount = $1,527,468.20

 

The Project Sponsor shall remove the existing gates at each end of the wharf prior to issuance of a building permit for the subject property.  In the event that the gates must be installed for security purposes, the Project Sponsor shall give notice of the request to all owners and neighborhood organizations within a 300-foot radius of the subject property, and the proposal must be approved by the Zoning Administrator by a letter of determination.

AYES:              Lee, Antonini, Bradford-Bell, Hughes, Olague, W. Lee

ABSENT:          Alexander

MOTION:           17070

 

14.        2000.1164E                                                                   (P. MALTZER: (415) 558-5977)

1880 Mission Street -Public Hearing to receive comments on the Draft Environmental Impact Report.  The project site on Assessor’s Block 3547, on Lots 2A, 3, 4, and 29 is approximately 51,888 sf in size and contains two existing buildings containing warehouse use and printing plant with offices.  The project site is located at 1880-1886 Mission Street at 15th Street (northwest corner) bordered by 14th Street to the north, Mission Street to the east, 15th Street to the south and Julian Street to the west, within the Mission District neighborhood.  The project site is located in a Heavy Commercial (C-M) zoning district, within a 65-B/50-X Height and Bulk district, as well as the Mission District Interim Controls district. The proposal is to demolish the two existing buildings and construct one seven-story plus basement building containing 194 dwelling units, including 39 affordable units, and 8,536 square feet (sf) of retail space.  The basement and ground floor levels would contain 181 parking spaces with ingress and egress from 15th Street.  The proposed project would require conditional use authorization by the Planning Commission pursuant to San Francisco Planning Code Section 303. 

NOTE:   The Draft Environmental Impact Report (EIR) was published on June 25, 2005.  This Planning Commission hearing is to receive comments on the adequacy, accuracy, objectivity and completeness of information in the Draft EIR.  Written comments on the Draft EIR will be accepted at the Planning Department until 5:00 p.m. on Monday, August 1, 2005.

           

SPEAKERS:    

Brett Gladstone – Representing Project Sponsor

  1. Landmarks Board had no sentiments about keeping this building and had no problem with its demolition.

Toby Levine

  1. She sees absolutely no reason to not approve it and go forward.

Jose Moreno

  1. Strongly urged the Commission to certify the findings of the Draft Environmental Impact Report.

Roberta Gabino

  1. Supports the project

My Do

- Supports the project

Oscar Grande - MAC

  1. . One of the other areas that we feel should be addressed is land use—specifically, the character of the vicinity.

Chris Selig - MAC

  1. Talked about the historical significance of the building.  Not in the sense that was already referred to.  Nor in the façade or the architectural design.  But in terms of the actually use.
  2. There is very limited number of large floor palate units in San Francisco right along the Mission left.  And there is the kind of industry that needs this kind of space in order to function.  And we continue to demolish these spaces for primarily market rate housing.  It doesn’t do anybody any good.  It doesn’t provide living space for people with working class jobs.

William Smith

  1. Preserving this building will not preserve jobs.  The jobs are already gone.

Frank Martin del Campo

  1. Spoke in favor of this project

Phillip Lesser

  1. This is going to be a transformational project for the Mission District.

Ruben Santana

  1. Is in favor of this project

Azalea Mero

  1. Supports this project

ACTION:           Meeting held.  No Action

                       

            15.        2003.0347E                                                                       (R. AHMADI:  (415) 558-5966)

Market & Octavia Neighborhood Plan - Public Hearing on Draft Environmental Impact Report:  The project area is located in the central city neighborhoods along Market Street from about 9th Street to the east to Noe Street to the west, north along the former Central Freeway alignment at Turk Street, and south along Howard and Sixteenth Streets.  The project site encompasses about 85 city blocks.  The proposed neighborhood plan would reclassify the existing zoning from Residential (R), Neighborhood Commercial Districts (NCD’s), Heavy Commercial (C-M), and Downtown General Commercial (C-3-G) Districts to Residential Transit Oriented (RTO), Neighborhood Commercial Transit (NCT), and Downtown Residential (DTR) Districts. It would also increase height limits in certain areas and reduce the existing height limits in other areas.  The proposed zoning and height reclassifications would increase the potential for residential development in the area.

Note: Written comments will be received at the Planning Department until 5:00 p.m. on August 9th, 2005.

Preliminary Recommendation:  No action required.

 

SPEAKERS:    

James Haas – Civic Pride

  1. Concerned about parking issues

Christopher Pederson

  1.   Supports the project

Bonnie Jones

  1. Concerned about the removal of 100 off-street parking spaces near Civic Center in order     to build housing.

Paul Olsen

  1. Strongly supports the plan and urged the Commission to support the transportation improvement within the plan.

Pamela Duffy

  1. The Market Octavia Plan showed different height limits than those shown in the draft       EIR.

Kate White

-  Asked the Commission to certify the EIR.

 

ACTION:           Meeting held. No Action

 

6:00 P.M. 6:15 P.M.

 

G.         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.

 

 

            16.        2001.0062E                                                                             (T. CHAN: (415) 558-5990)

491 BAYSHORE BOULEVARD - HOME DEPOT   - Certification of a Final Environmental Impact Report - Subsequent to the publication of the Draft EIR the project sponsor identified a new preferred project. The revised project re-orients the location of the parking garage and the store itself, so that the parking garage is located on the southern end of the project site and the store is located on the northern end of the project site, but the effects would be similar to those analyzed for the original project in the Draft EIR.  The home improvement center would be approximately 153,089 square feet, the same size as the original project. The store would include approximately 95,600 square feet of retail on the main floor, approximately 37,700 square feet of retail on the second floor, approximately 9,900 square feet of enclosed greenhouse space, and approximately 9,900 square feet of open garden center space. The separate parking garage would consist of two levels plus rooftop parking, totaling approximately 247,800 square feet and would include 555 parking spaces. 

The proposed project consists of demolition of two vacant buildings, totaling 107,346 square feet on this 5.73-acre site. The proposed buildings would be approximately 40 feet in height. Vehicular access to the parking garage would be from Bayshore Boulevard with secondary access on Loomis Street. The project is located within the Bayview Hunters Point neighborhood. The proposed project would not require a conditional use authorization, however a staff-initiated discretionary review is before the Planning Commission. The site is within the adopted Industrial Protection Zone (IPZ) Special Use District and is located in a M-1 (Light Industrial) zoning district and within a 65-J height and bulk district.

Preliminary Recommendation: Certify the Final Environmental Impact Report.

                        NOTE: The public review period for the Draft Environmental Impact Report ended at 5:00 pm, July 11, 2005.

 

SPEAKERS:    

Steve St. Denny

  1. Urged the Commission to certify the EIR.

Eric Terreri

  1. Supports the EIR certification.

Royce Schumacher

  1. Supports EIR

Amy Trachtenberg

  1. Concerned about the traffic and air pollution.

Eugene Marek

  1. Concerned about the traffic.

Jay Ach

  1. Deeply concerned about the traffic impact of this proposed development.  It will adversely impact our community and these impacts have not been adequately addressed in the final EIR.

 

Ron Morgan

  1. Concerned about traffic.

Steven Cornell

  1. Concerned about the impact this large business would have on the whole entire neighborhood.

Barbara Paley

  1.   Opposed to this project coming to the foot of Bernal Heights Neighborhoods.
  2.   Asked the Commission to conduct more studies on this project.

                        Shannon Dash

  1. Referred to the EIR’s unsatisfactory response to comment  #91 regarding the parking garage.
  2. The store is too big for this size garage.
  3. Traffic will overflow out onto the neighborhood streets.

Mike Larson

                        -  Concerned about air pollution.

                           Nic Griffin

  1. EIR does not address the concern that more traffic would be created by the probable closure of neighborhood home-supply stores due to Home Depot competition.

                        Rick Gerharter

                        -  Concerned about the increase in traffic congestion.

                        -   Urged the Commission to reject the EIR.

Thompson Chambers

  1. Concerned about parking. 

                        Elizabeth Stephens

  1. It is very obvious to anyone who lives in Bernal Heights that this would cause a huge traffic congestion.

Susan Hershey

  1. Concerned about traffic

Vicki Legion

  1. Concerned about the health consequences and asked the Commission to uphold the EIR.           

Gina Solomon

  1. Urged the Commission not to certify the EIR.

Deborah Levy

  1. Responses to our comments are unsatisfactory and specifically to the responses to comments regarding commercial growth and land use on Bayshore Blvd.

                        Lynne Eggers

  1. Concerned about traffic.

Sophia Green

-  This project would clearly increase the automobile traffic within the City.  Therefore, based on its stated policy, this project at this site should be shut down.

                        Mike Boss

  1. Concerned about the EIR’s unsatisfactory responses to comment 48, which addressed the morning commute hours and has not been analyzed in the traffic study.

Rosanne Liggett

- EIR should be rejected on a number of issues, including the off-ramp freeway congestion.

  1. Concerned about air pollution.

                        Larry Lowenthil

                        -  Concerned about the economic impact on small businesses in the area.

                        Patricia Flores-Lacson

-  Opposed to this project because our quality of life would decrease because of the increase in traffic.

Laurel Muniz

  -  Concerned about traffic.

Charlie Walker

-  Asked the Commission to take into consideration that this area of the City needs some type of economic growth.  40% of our people in the community are unemployed.

-  Certify the EIR.

Barbara Kyle

-  Concerned about the EIR’s response to #41, which did not adequately answer concerns about trip generation statistics.

Kevin Sheppard

-  Concerned about traffic

Jerry Path

-  Opposed to this project

Karen Garrison

-  Concerned about traffic.

Ken Lai

-  Concerned about traffic and pollution.

Amy Kyle

-  Concerned about the adequacy of the EIR with regard to assessment and mitigation of air quality impacts.

Julie Walcer

-  Against the certification of the EIR.

-  Concerned about air quality and traffic congestion.

Bill Nieto

                        Joseph Smooke 

-   Urged the Commission not to pass the EIR.

Dave Karp

-  Concerned about traffic

Bob Heacock

-  Urged the Commission to certify this EIR becauseHome Depot has made very significant changes from the plans brought to you in 1983.

-  With respects to air pollution in San Francisco:  as we all know, the wind blows from the west to the east.  All that pollution would not be affecting, settling or blowing over Bernal Heights.  It will be going to the east.

John Blackburn

-  Strongly urged the Commission to certify the EIR.

Gretchen Mokry

-  The EIR has not adequately portrayed the new traffic load.

-  It minimizes the impact of traffic on Cortland and Bayshore and the danger of all this additional traffic on pedestrians.

Steven Neuberger

-   Opposed to the EIR.

Bruce Livingston

-  Concerned about the pedestrian safety implications.

Anna Shimko

-  In favor of the EIR.

Chris Witteman

-  Concerned about traffic.

Jeff Hauffman

-  Asked the Commission to reject the EIR.

                        Dave Karp

-  Opposed to the certification of the EIR.

Kevin Kitchingham

-   Urged the Commission not to certify the EIR

Liz Garcia

-  Opposed to the EIR

Unclear Name

-  Urged that the EIR be rejected.

Will Doherty

-  Concerned about traffic and pedestrian safety.

Michael Hammond

-  In favor of the EIR.

Jose Morales

-  Traffic is going to be an enormous nightmare.

Mark (unclear last name)

-  Concerned about parking.

Mark Jeffries

-  Opposes the EIR.

Wendy Collins

-   Concerned about traffic and air pollution

Steven Aiello

-  Urged the Commission to certify the EIR.

Charles Katz

-  Supports the EIR.

Johnnie Sacko

-   Supports the EIR.

Jackie (unclear last name)

-  Supports the EIR

Linda Richardson

-  Supports the EIR.

Elizabeth Setrum

-  This project will change the quality and nature of this neighborhood.

Al Norman

-  Supports the EIR.

McKinney Ross

-  Supports the EIR.

Elouise (unclear last name)

-    Supports EIR.

Unclear Nme

  1. Supports EIR

Rev. Egard Boyd

  1. Urged the Commission to certify this EIR
  2. Home Depot will provide a lot of jobs for the community.

Rev. Arnold Thompson

  1. The EIR is an adequate document.
  2. He is really hopeful that when Home Depot goes in some of the other blighted things on Bayshore will take life as well and provide even more jobs.

Marcelo (unclear last name)

  1. Supports the EIR.

Dorothy Brown

  1. Supports the EIR.
  2. This project will be helpful in creating jobs for all the young people in the neighborhood.  It will also cut down on some of the crime in the neighborhood.
  3. Does not see any problems with the traffic.

Sonia Richardson

  1. Supports the EIR
  2. It is time that this blighted site be brought to life.

Francisco DeCosta

  1. Supports the EIR.

Unclear Name

  1. Supports the EIR and project.

Eric Arguello

  1. Supports certifying the EIR.

John Howard

  1. Supports Home Depot and the EIR.

Doris Benson

  1. We need Home Depot.  I support this EIR.

Andrea Elzien

  1. Urged the Commission to certify the EIR.

Unclear Name

  1. We live here.  We want this.  Urged the Commission to certify the EIR.

Allan Jones

  1. This is in our neighborhood.  Please certify the EIR.

Debina Paterson

  1. Spoke in support of the EIR.

Mustafa Abib

  1.           Asked Commission to move forward on the EIR.

Edith Lulie

  1. Urged the Commission to pass the EIR.

Jerome Martin

  1. Strongly supports the EIR.

Sonia Melara

  1. Asked the Commission to support the neighborhood and certify the EIR.

Ann Berry

  1. Certify the EIR.

Joe Bacorro

  1. Stop wasting time and certify the EIR.

Clarence Cummings

  1. If this is the next step in getting Home Depot in our neighborhood, then let’s take it.  Certify the EIR.

Michael Phillips

  1. Spoke in support of certifying the EIR.

Glenn Marks

  1. The EIR is inadequate as written.
  2. Concerned about traffic.

Judy Zito

  1. Asked the Commission to certify the EIR.

Unclear Name

  1. Supports the EIR.

Charles Cleary

  1. Supports certification of the EIR.

Dwyane Yazino

  1. Urged the Commission to certify the EIR.

Charles Kelly

  1. There are some environmental impact issues that have not been resolved.
  2. This document is not ready to be certified.

Michael Miller Quintana

  1. Supports certifying the EIR.

 

ACTION:           Environmental Impact Report Certified

AYES:              Antonini, Bradford-Bell, Olague, W. Lee

NAYES:            Hughes and S. Lee

            ABSENT:          Alexander

            MOTION:           17071

 

 

17a.      2001.0062U                                                                      (M. SNYDER: (415) 575-6891)

491 Bayshore Boulevard - east side between Oakdale and Waterloo, Lots 8, 9, 11, 13, 15, 16, 18, 21, and 28 - Appeal of initial determination of the net floor area that would be subject to the Housing Requirement for Large-scale Development Projects (commonly referred to as the Jobs Linkage Housing Program) under Planning Code Section 313.  Pursuant to Planning Code Section 313.4(b), the Planning Department issued a notice indicating that up to 48,000 square feet of net floor area would be subject to the Jobs Linkage Housing Requirement.  An appeal has been filed under Planning Code Section 313(c) challenging that determination.  The property is within an M-1 (Light Industrial) District, The Industrial Protection Zone Special Use District, and a 65-J Height and Bulk District. 

Preliminary Recommendation:  Pending

 

SPEAKERS:

Joseph Smooke

-     The Primary issue we have with this proposal is the role that Home Depot played in driving a wedge between two neighborhoods

  1. It seems that if they build a smaller store at this location it will certainly go a long way towards bringing our communities together; to actually provide a promise of jobs and mitigate the environmental impacts.
  2. There is also a question about the jobs.  First of all, the First Source Hiring agreement is not enforceable.  There are no penalties if Home Depot does not comply. This is a very bad deal, especially considering the negative environmental impact.
  3. The developers are acting in their own self-interest rather than in the interest of the community. Because if they were acting in the interest of the community, they would make a gesture to reduce the size of the store, which would reduce the environmental impact and provide quality jobs and an enforceable jobs agreement with the City.

Anna Shemko – Cassidy, Shemko and Dobson

  1. This store on Bayshore Boulevard will bring much needed goods and services to City residents.
  2. It will revitalize the Bayshore Commercial Corridor.
  3. It will create hundreds of new jobs in the City and will employ at least 150 entry level employees from the Bayview Hunters Point neighborhood and surrounding areas.
  4. It will help the City with sales tax, property tax, and payroll taxes.
  5. We will pay the housing fee on the entire square footage of the Home Depot proposal.
  6. This project complies with all the physical standards of the code.
  7. We have held numerous meetings with organizations within the Bernal Heights Neighborhood.
  8. Bernal Heights Neighborhood Center and the Cortland Avenue Merchants have refused our recent offers of further briefing or discussions.
  9. There is absolutely no evidences that Home Depot will cause hardware stores in the City to suffer economic loses.
  10. Three separate studies showing that San Francisco is loosing home improvement sales to the tune of over $300,000.000 a year leaves plenty of room for Home Depot and existing and future businesses to thrive.
  11. Home Depot will generate at least $400.000 dollars per year in sales tax revenue and $100,000 dollars per year in payroll taxes.

Frank Kota, Architect for the project

  1. Gave an overall review and description of the project’s design.

Steven Currie

  1. Spoke in favor of the project

Valdez

  1. This project will help our communities.  If we work together it will be valuable and meaningful for all residents and Home Depot.

Mary Harris – President, District 11 Council

  1. Is in favor of this project.

Unclear name

  1. Home Depot will not have a negative impact in our neighborhood when you consider that anything is better than what we got.  It is not out of scale with the neighborhood, and property values will not go down.

Michael Hammond

  1. We want the opportunity to pursue jobs and prosperity the same as they do in every other neighborhood.

Chris Witterman

  1. Opposes the project.

Mike Boss

  1. Against the size of the project. 
  2. This will be a huge store that impacts our neighborhood.
  3. Urged the Commission to give serious consideration to the size of the project.

Jeff Hauffman

  1. Opposes the project.

Judy Berkowitz

  1. Spoke in favor of the project.

Unclear Name (owner of the Old Clam House)

  1. This neighborhood needs this project, and we need to revitalize the neighborhood with it.

Lauren Muniz

  1. Is in favor of the Home Depot project.

Ron Morgan

  1. Inquired about the long term lease that Home Depot will get on this property.

Bob Heacock

  1. Wants the Home Depot project.

Unclear name

  1. Lets preserve our City to stand different from the rest of the country.

Amy Gallo

  1. Lets find a way to address and mitigate as much as possible the environmental impacts and also to address the legitimate interests of the people of the Bayview for the economic development and jobs they are seeking.

Unclear name

  1. This project should be denied.

Doris (unclear last name)

  1. Urged the Commission to approve this project.

Debra Levy

  1. Concerned about traffic issues.
  2. The proposed project is too big.

Steven Aiello

  1. Spoke in favor of the project.

Michael Lions

  1. Opposes the project.

Unclear name

  1. Spoke in opposition to the project.

Richard Jones

  1. Is in favor of the project.

Michael Murphy

  1. Is opposed to the project.

Barbara Kyle

  1. This project would have a huge impact on Bernal Heights.

Rosanne Ligget

  1. Lets find a way for there to be a compromise or half way point among the issues between Bernal Heights and Bayview.

Sue Hestor

  1. This project is hostile from both a neighborhood sense and pedestrians. There are other projects coming through.  This is going to be an anchor for big box heaven.
  2. Home Depot does not belong in San Francisco no matter what jobs are being given initially to a community.

Michael Miller Quintana

  1. Spoke in favor of the Home Depot project.

Calvin Jones

-  Is in favor of this project.

 

ACTION:           Approved

AYES:              S. Lee, Antonini, Bradford-Bell, Olague, W. Lee

NAYES:            Hughes

ABSENT:          Alexander

MOTION:           17072

 

17b.      2001.0062EDD                                                                  (M. SNYDER: (415) 575-6891)

491 Bayshore Boulevard - east side between Oakdale and Waterloo, Lots 8, 9, 11, 13, 15, 16, 18, 21, and 28 - Staff initiated and Requested Discretionary Review of Building Permit Application No. 2001.04.09.6352 and Demolition Permit Nos. 2001.05.08.8645, 2001.05.08.8650, 2001.05.08.8655, 2001.05.08.8660, 2001.05.08.8663, to demolish existing retail and accessory structures equaling approximately 107,372 gross square feet and to construct a new building that would contain up to 155,500 square feet of retail use (inclusive of vestibules and other interior circulation) and up to 550 parking spaces for Home Depot.  The building would be approximately 40-feet tall.     The property is within an M-1 (Light Industrial) District, the Industrial Protection Zone Special Use District, and a 65-J Height and Bulk District.

Preliminary Recommendation:  Take Discretionary Review and approve the project as modified, and with conditions.

 

SPEAKERS:     Same as those listed in item 17a.

 

ACTION:           Took Discretionary Review and approved as modified with the following conditions:

1.   The Project square footage shall be reduced in size to be no greater than 140,000 gross square feet, to correspond with “Alternative E”, as  identified and discussed in the Draft EIR document with “Access Alternative F” as identified and discussed the “Response to Comments” document.  The project sponsor shall be permitted to provide up to 585 parking spaces. 

2.  The Planning Commission has determined that the Project Sponsor is responsible to contributing to the Jobs Linkage Housing Program under Planning Code Section 313 based on the gross square footage of the proposed new floor only; gross square footage of the existing retail structures shall not be subtracted to arrive the gross square footage that would be subject to the provisions of Planning Code Section 313.   For the proposed project, it is estimated that approximately 140,000 gross square feet shall be subject to the Jobs Linkage Housing Fee (an equivalent in-lieu fee of approximately $1,953,000 (Planning Code Section 313.6))  This amount may change slightly, depending on the final square footage of the new structure.

3.  The minimum one-hundred (100) positions that the project sponsor has committed to providing residents of the Bayview Hunters Point area through its First Source Hiring Agreement with the City shall be permanent year-round positions.

4.   Home Depot shall make a good faith effort to work with the City to accommodate a day laborer program in the City of San Francisco.

5.   The project sponsor shall submit a report to the Planning Director on the traffic conditions of the site eighteen months after opening, which shall be made available to the public and the Planning Commission.  At the Commission’s discretion, an informational hearing may be held. 

6.   The design of the project shall include a pedestrian entry at the Garden Center and the Project Sponsor shall work with the Planning Department in accommodating another pedestrian entry along Bayshore Boulevard, if feasible.

 

AYES:              Antonini, Bradford-Bell, Olague, W. Lee

NAYES:            Hughes and S. Lee

ABSENT:          Alexander

 

G.         PUBLIC COMMENT

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

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

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

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

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

 

 

SPEAKERS:

Sue Hestor

-   Suggested that the Commission propose a rule to adjourn meetings by midnight at the latest. This has been an abuse to the public.  

Linda Richardson

-  Commended the Commission for the good job they did tonight.

Michael (unclear last name)

-    Commended the Commission for the great job they did a community.

 

Adjournment:   2:21 A.M.

 

THESE MINUTES WERE PROPOSED FOR ADOPTION AT THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION ON THURSDAY,   MARCH 9, 2006.

 

SPEAKERS:     Sue Hestor

ACTION:           Approved

AYES:              S. Lee, Antonini, Bradford-Bell, Olague, W. Lee

ABSENT:          Alexander, Hughes

 

 

 

 

 

 

Last updated: 11/17/2009 10:00:18 PM