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

Skip to page body
  • go to google translator
  • contact us
May 21, 2009

SAN FRANCISCO

PLANNING COMMISSION

Meeting Minutes

Commission Chambers - Room 400

City Hall, 1 Dr. Carlton B. Goodlett Place

Thursday, May 21, 2009

1:30 PM

Regular Meeting

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

COMMISSIONERS ABSENT: Lee

THE MEETING WAS CALLED TO ORDER BY PRESIDENT MIGUEL AT 1:40 P.M.

STAFF IN ATTENDANCE: John Rahaim – Director of Planning, Larry Badiner – Zoning Administrator, AnMarie Rodgers, Joshua Switzky, Lily Langlois, Michael Smith, and 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. 2008.1008T (T. SULLIVAN: (415) 558-6257)

Amendments to Planning Code by amending Appendix K of Article 10: Bush Street/Cottage Row Historic District[Board File No. 08-1251]. Ordinance introduced by Supervisor Mirkarimi to amend to Appendix K of Article 10 of San Francisco Planning Code: Bush Street/Cottage Row Historic District, by adding a new Section 7 to set forth additional requirements for Certificates of Appropriateness; and adopting findings, including Section 302 findings, and findings of consistency with the General Plan and the Priority Policies of Planning Code Section 101.1.

Preliminary Recommendation: Approval.

(Continued from Regular Meeting of May 7, 2009)

(Proposed for Continuance to May 28, 2009)

SPEAKERS: None

ACTION: Continued as proposed

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

ABSENT: Lee

2a. 2006.1431ECV (J. IONIN: (415) 558-6309)

1960-1998 MARKET STREET - northeast corner at Buchanan Street, Assessor's Block 0872, Lots 005, 006 and 007 - Consideration of Adoption of CEQA Findings and Request for Conditional Use Authorization under Planning Code Sections 228 (Service Station Conversion), 731.11 (Development Lot Size) and 731.94 (Residential Off-street Parking) for the conversion of a service station and construction of a U-shaped mixed-use development with up to 115 residential units over ground floor commercial and subterranean parking below for up to 91 off-street parking spaces. The project lies within an NCT-3 (Neighborhood Commercial Transit, Moderate-Scale) District, an 85-X Height and Bulk District and the recently adopted Market & Octavia Plan Area.

Preliminary Recommendation: Approval with Modifications and Conditions

(Continued from Regular Meeting of April 16, 2009)

NOTE: On April 16, 2009, following public testimony, the commission continued this item to 5/21/09 with instructions to Project Sponsor to reach out to the neighborhood more and continue working with staff on the design. Public hearing remains open (+7 -0).

(Proposed for Continuance to June 4, 2009)

SPEAKERS: Steve Williams – requesting continuance to 6/11/09; Brian Spears – opposing request for further continuance beyond 6/4/09

ACTION: Continued as proposed

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

ABSENT: Lee

2b. 2006.1431ECV (J. IONIN: (415) 558-6309)

1960-1998 MARKET STREET - northeast corner at Buchanan Street, Assessor's Block 0872, Lots 005, 006 and 007, located in an NCT-3 (Neighborhood Commercial Transit, Moderate-Scale) District, an 85-X Height and Bulk District and the recently adopted Market & Octavia Plan Area. REAR YARD, USABLE OPEN SPACE, AND EXPOSURE VARIANCES SOUGHT: The proposal is to demolish the service station and construct a U-shaped mixed-use development with up to 115 residential units over ground floor commercial and subterranean parking for up to 91 off-street parking spaces.

(Continued from Regular Meeting of April 16, 2009)

(Proposed for Continuance to June 4, 2009)

SPEAKERS: Same as those listed for item 2a.

ACTION: Continued as proposed

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

ABSENT: Lee

3. 2006.0430E (J. RANGE: (415) 575-9018)

870 Harrison Street - north side of Harrison Street between 4th and 5th Streets; Lot 019 of Assessor's Block 3752 - Appeal of Preliminary Mitigated Negative Declaration for the proposed demolition of an existing vacant industrial building and construction of a 65-foot tall mixed use Production Distribution and Repair (PDR) and residential building. The approximately 26,385 square foot (sf) building would include either 4,050 sf of ground floor PDR space or 2,560 sf of ground floor PDR space to accommodate a 25 percent at grade rear yard. The project would also include 26 dwelling units, with a total of 16 parking spaces. The project is located within the West South of Market neighborhood and is within a Residential/ Service District (RSD) and a 40-X/85-B height and bulk district.

Preliminary Recommendation: Uphold Preliminary Negative Declaration

(Proposed for Continuance to June 18, 2009)

SPEAKERS: None

ACTION: Continued as proposed

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

ABSENT: Lee

4a. 2008.0788CV (A. Starr: (415) 558-6362)

50-52 GRENARD TERRACE - located in the middle of the block bounded by Van Ness Avenue, Lombard Street, Polk Street and Greenwich Street, Lot 009, in Assessor's Block 0502 - Request for Conditional Use Authorization under Planning Code Sections 253, 303 and 317 to construct a building higher than 40' in height and to demolish the two-unit, two-story over garage building with four bedrooms, and to construct a two-unit, three-story over garage with penthouse building with 5 bedrooms in a RH-3 (Residential, House, Three-Family) District and a 65-A Height and Bulk District.

Preliminary Recommendation: Disapprove

(Proposed for Continuance to June 4 2009)

SPEAKERS: None

ACTION: Continued as proposed

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

ABSENT: Lee

4b. 2008.0788CV (A. Starr: (415) 558-6362)

50-52 GRENARD TERRACE - located in the middle of the block bounded by Van Ness Avenue, Lombard Street, Polk Street and Greenwich Street, Lot 009, in Assessor's Block 0502 - Request for Variances from the front setback and rear yard requirements pursuant to Sections 132 and 134 of the Planning Code, to allow the proposed building to be located within the required 6' front setback and to be located within the required 15' rear yard setback within an RH-3 (Residential, House, Three-Family) District and a 65-A Height and Bulk District.

(Proposed for Continuance to June 4, 2009)

SPEAKERS: None

ACTION: Continued as proposed

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

ABSENT: Lee

5. 20092009.0262T (A. RODGERS: (415) 558-6395)

Amendments to the Planning Code Sections 263.20, 711.1, and 712.1: Special Height Exemption in District 11 along Randolph and Broad Streets. [Board File No. 090319]. Ordinance amending the San Francisco Planning Code by amending Section 263.20 to provide for a special height exception for ground floor uses in the NC-2 and NC-3 designated parcels along Randolph and Broad Streets, from 19th Avenue to San Jose Avenue; amending Sections 711.1 and 712.1, to refer to this special height exception; adopting findings, including environmental findings and findings of consistency with the priority policies of Planning Code Section 101.1 and the General Plan.

(Proposed for Indefinite Continuance)

SPEAKERS: None

ACTION: Continued as proposed

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

ABSENT: Lee

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

6. 2008.0479C (B. FU: (415) 558-6322)

1075 EVANS STREET - west side of Hunters Point Blvd., Lot 005, Assessor's Block 4603A - Request for Conditional Use Authorization under Planning Code Sections 711.83 and 790.80 to install a wireless telecommunications facility on a Location Preference 1 (Preferred Location – Publicly-used structures) according to the Wireless Telecommunications Services (WTS) Siting Guidelines and consist of two panel antennas on an existing 90'-7 tall lattice tower and related equipment on the ground as part of AT&T's wireless telecommunications network within a NC-2 (Small-Scale Neighborhood Commercial) Zoning District and a 40-X Height and Bulk District.

Preliminary Recommendation: Approval with Conditions.

SPEAKERS: None

ACTION: Approved

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

ABSENT: Lee

MOTION: 17881

B. COMMISSIONERS' QUESTIONS AND MATTERS

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

7. Consideration of Adoption:

  • Draft Minutes of Regular Meeting of April 2, 2009.
  • Draft Minutes of Regular Meeting of April 16, 2009.
  • Draft Minutes of Regular Meeting of April 23, 2009.
  • Draft Minutes of Regular Meeting of May 7, 2009.

SPEAKERS: None

ACTION: Approved as drafted

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

ABSENT: Lee

8. Commission Comments/Questions

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

Commissioner Moore:

She wanted to bring to the Commission's attention an article from the San Francisco Business Times. It talks about the value of entitled land plummeting dramatically in San Francisco. It contains a number of projects that were recently approved. One is 1285 Sutter Street. That is the one that has the Costco on the bottom. There is 45 Lansing and 375-399 Fremont. I am very concerned about what that does with our ability to be prepared for growth. And more importantly what that means for projects that are in front of us, which we are continuing to approve, being pressured by labor and by the construction industry to approve, approve, approve. And when it comes to waiting for [beginning] points, these deals are not being delivered. Not that people don't try, but it seems to be an economically unfavorably climate. I am concerned how we are continuing to approve in an environment when there is no [value].

Commissioner Borden:

I too saw that article, and I'm asking Zoning Administrator Badiner about it because some of the properties listed are on our continuance calendar next week. Maybe Zoning Administrator can explain that.

Zoning Administrator Badiner responds:

I have asked if they intend to pursue their entitlement extensions, which is different than their building permit which they have withdrawn. In theory and legally, they can ask for an extension on their entitlement. When they informed us that they were withdrawing their building permit, I was under the impression that they would not pursue the entitlement extension, but we are trying to ascertain whether they still want to.

Commissioner Borden:

Also, what was interesting about that article is they talked about the difference in cost between steel-frame and wood-frame buildings, and the fact that the plummeting land values makes holding entitlements for steel-frame buildings not valuable. So the extensions won't be sought is they don't really plan to build because it's not as valuable these days. Another point I want to bring us is maybe we can have a hearing on grocery stores. We're going to have a project later where we talk about having a grocery store on the ground level. We had a project recently, TNDC that wants to do a grocery store. I just talked to a developer that is working on the site at California and Hyde where CALA is going to be leaving and they are hoping to do some sort of store there. I know in the Richmond District by Lincoln Park, there was a grocery store there that is now vacant. There is the old Bell Market at Post and Franklin that is now vacant. Maybe we can bring in some representatives of some of the grocery stores like Safeway, Whole Foods, Molly Stone, Trader Joes and look at the economic development issues and strategy. Some of our projects are setting up to have groceries stores because there is a desire for them, but there is also a concern that grocery stores are making different decisions about whether or not they locate. It would be interesting to have a hearing and get to the bottom of this issue.

Commissioner Antonini:

I would agree. I think that would be very instructive because there may be a lot of factors that are involved that have nothing to do with the current economic situation. On a more positive note, the May 15 - 21 San Francisco Business Times article talks about Bay Area Economy Shows Signs of Life. Spike in condo sales makes come back. It goes on to note the Infinity had 90 contracts signed in 90 days, which isn't too bad. The 114 unit Blue on Folsom had eight units in a month. The SOMA Grand had 12 units this month and they are 75% sold out. And even Candlestick Point had nine units sold in four weeks. The bad side of it was that most of these sales came at a price reduction at or below the cost of the unit. But it is an encouraging sign that hopefully will continue. In terms of our approval of projects,, I think we have to look at it in terms of whether or we think it is a good project or not. No project gets built that we don't approve, but a fairly high percentage of the projects approved since I've been on the Commission have actually come to fruition, although some of them take a couple of years to get going.

Commissioner Sugaya:

In the Work Program for the Department, you are undertaking a study of 4th Street. Could we get a update on that at some point? Secondly, I'd like to get an informational hearing what is going on with the Mid-Market revitalization efforts. I've seen some drawings that have been prepared for a property owner named Mr. Addington. I think he is trying to revitalize the theatre district. I believe the presentation was being made to the San Francisco Architectural Heritage Issues Committee. I'm not sure, but I'd like an informational hearing on that.

Commissioner Miguel:

I had the pleasure last week of spending some time with a Mr. Takashi Oda, a gentleman from Japan here finishing up his Fulbright. I met him at the Japantown meeting in which he's been very involved. It's been very interesting comparing how governmental bodies work Japan to the United States and to San Francisco in particular. We went over some of the cultural history as well as some of the planning history. I've met with people this last week regarding Fox Plaza, California/Hyde, 10th and Market, and 10th and Mission, with the Prada Group regarding future projects. There was a meeting at the Department yesterday on the Universal Planning Notification, which was not well attended by the general public in spite of notification. The Department did a very good job of putting forth what is on paper so far, but that is a work in progress. I had a meeting with others of the Department and Eric Mar regarding DR Reform to bring his up to date on it. I'd like Commissioners to weigh in on whether or not we should take a holiday from our hearing on July 2nd.

Commissioner Antonini:

I want to also note that I too spoke with the project sponsor for Fox Plaza. In regards to the 2nd, you know that I am always willing to go along with whatever the will of the Commission is, but given a choice I would rather have an extra session than be here until midnight especially when we start early. So if there is any chance to move any calendared item from the future or things that might get continued to that day. I'm perfectly fine with meeting. If the holiday is on the Friday, I don't see the conflict with the Thursday, but I may be missing something.

Commission Secretary Avery responds:

From a personal point of view: The holiday is on Friday and that is the day I get your calendars out for the following week. It's a holiday. Everybody will be gone and I'd like to also be gone. If I observe the holiday, I won't be here to get a calendar out for the following week. If you cancel the hearing for the 2nd I would be able to get your calendar for the following week out on the 2nd. You can have a hearing on the 2nd, but it would probably mean that you would not be able to have a hearing on [the 9th] because I would be unable to get a legal calendar out.

Commissioner Antonini:

Thank you for that explanation. Now it makes sense. I think it would probably be better to have the hearing on the 9th instead of the 2nd given the choice.

Commissioner Moore:

Thank you Commissioner Antonini. I thing in terms of overall resource conservation and staff, I think it's a great idea. I think one of the requests we could make if we do have two meetings on a day would be that the meetings are balanced out so that we don't sit here until midnight. I don't mind coming in at 10:30 [a.m.] using the day efficiently and the afternoon is not burdened with very difficult cases.

Commissioner Miguel:

If there is no objection. That is censuses.

Commission Secretary Avery:

Thank you. For the record and for the public, the hearing for July 2nd has been canceled.

C. DIRECTOR'S REPORT

9. Director's Announcements

Zoning Administrator Badiner:

Director Rahaim is speaking downtown and should be here very soon. There are two things I want to bring to your attention. The first is we held the first meeting on our universal planning notice this past Tuesday. It was attended by six of seven people This was the first meeting to discuss simplifying our noticing process; standardizing our noticing process; cutting down from 40 to 45 different kinds of notices to something that is a little more constrained. There were a lot of good ideas. People want to take advantage of electronics, email where possible. People were concerned about consistency. President Miguel was there also. I thought it was a useful kickoff to the discussion. We hope more people join us in that process. We will have another meeting soon. We hope to have something before the Commission in August. The other thing I want to bring to your attention is I had received a request for an extension on a project and I have granted that. It is a case at 324 Courtland Street. The Commission had a CU on May 25, 2006 and I had a variance. The project was demolition and new construction. It was a new 3-story building with ground floor retail space and two residential townhouse units. The extension was from the three year performance requirement. DBI has had in recent years a new acoustic report requirement and they have been going back and forth internally on how to implement that report and when and where it's required. I granted them a six month extension. They believe the permit will be granted within the next few months. This was the classic case where the city has delayed the implementation of a project. The extension seemed to make sense.

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

Board of Supervisors

Land Use:

  • Union Street NCD – This ordinance would amend the Planning Code to provide for up to 12 new small, self-service restaurants and/or self-service specialty food uses subject to conditional use authorization. This Commission recommended approval of this ordinance on April 23rd of this year. This week the Committee recommended approval of the ordinance.

Full Board:

  • Eastern Neighborhoods CAC – Keith Goldstein, seat 1, by District 10; Eric Smith, seat 2, new appointment, by District 10; Susan Eslick, seat 3, new appointment, by District 10; Jared Doumani, seat 4, new appointment, by District 10; Chris Durazo, seat 5, new appointment, by District 6, David ho, seat 6, new appointment, by District 6; Chris Block, seat 7, new appointment, by District 6; Eric Quezada, seat 8, new appointment, by District 9.

Legislation Introduced:

  • Support for citywide bicycle improvements ( by Chiu/Dufty)
  • Two Charter Amendments with fiscal implications were introduced:
  • Dufty: would create an office of Management & Budget led by a Director that would serve a 10 year term and institute a two year budget cycle with a five year financial plan.
  • Chiu: would institute a two year rolling budget cycle that could be converted into a fixed two year cycle, allow the Controller to certify the availability of funds based on the exception that those funds would become available during the budget cycle; and replace newspaper notices with online notices.

Board of Appeals

  • 1450 Franklin Street and 1581 Bush Street – The appellant argued that a rehearing of this item was justified because the Board must apply the current zoning requirements (Planning Code), not the controls in effect at the time the permit was issued (redevelopment Project Area – Western Addition A-2). The appellant argued that the Board's findings misapplied the law in Russian Hill Improvement Association v. Board of Permit Appeals (1967) requiring the Board to apply the law in effect at the time the Board decides an appeal. The Permit holder argued that a rehearing request should be denied because no new information was presented to the Board. Per Board rules,  except in extraordinary cases, and to prevent manifest injustice, motions for rehearing shall not be made by the Board except where it is shown that new or different material facts or circumstances have arisen, where such facts or circumstances, if known at the time, could have affected the outcome of the original hearing. Commissioner Garcia stated that the permit holder did not meet the requirements for a rehearing. Commissioners Goh and Mandelman stated that the Board had erred in its application of Russian Hill and would support a rehearing request. The Board voted 3 – 2 (Commissioners Goh and Mandelman opposed) to deny the rehearing request.

Historic Preservation Commission

  • Amendments to Planning Code by amending Appendix K of Article 10: Bush Street/Cottage Row Historic District – The Commission voted 5 to 0 to approve this.
  • 1648 Pacific Avenue This is a request for a certificate of appropriateness to allow the rehabilitation of an old firehouse. The consultants are Carey & Co. and the proposed rehabilitation is just lovely. The Commission voted 5 to 0 to grant the certificate of appropriateness.

11. (K. AMDUR: (415) 558-6351)

Egon Terplan, Economic Development and Governance Policy Director with SPUR, will give a presentation on "The Future of Downtown."

PRESENTERS:

Egon Terplan – SPUR, Tony Bruzzone – Arup, and George Williams – SPUR gave a presentation on Recentering Work: The Future of Jobs in Downtown San Francisco

The focus was on regional trends and where do jobs go; Downtown San Francisco's capacity including transit constraints; and the options we see throughout greater downtown.

SPEAKERS:

Sue Hestor – Attorney for San Franciscans for Reasonable Growth

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.

SPEAKERS:

Louise Williams, Miguel Gomez, and Jim Salinas, Sr. spoke on City Build and how they are not in compliance with their commitment to employ San Franciscan's on many of these construction jobs.

Starchild spoke on the process today. The planning process increases the animosity between citizens or groups. We would be much better served by a process in which people or if a person has legitimate title to a piece of property, they can do whatever they want with that property as long as they don't infringe on the life, liberty or property of anyone else. People shouldn't have veto power over a project just because they happen to live in the neighborhood. This process is destroying our economy.

Sue Hestor - The Fox Plaza project that is scheduled to come before the Commission next week. Fox Plaza is the most notorious intersection for winds in the city. This is regarding the timing of staff reports. When the Downtown Plan was adopted, there was an explicit requirement in section 309 that says that if you are requesting exceptions, the staff report has to be available 10 days in advance. The 10 day requirement applies to all C-3 projects and all Rincon Hill projects that request exceptions. I called the Department on it yesterday. Not only should the staff report be available, but it must be physically in the notice that the staff report is available 10 days in advance. I told staff that they could not have a hearing [on Fox Plaza] because that requirement was not met. If the hearing goes forward next week, I am prepared to go to court about the lack of compliance.

Director Rahaim responded that the Department would put in memo form what the Department's practices are for the Commission's review and schedule for general discussion in a couple of weeks. From that discussion, if you [the Commission] feel it necessary to calendar a review of your Rules and Regulations, you can do so at that time.

E. REGULAR CALENDAR

12. 2009.0314T (L. LANGLOIS: (415) 575-9063)

Amendments relating to Planning Code Section 249.42 of the India Basin Industrial Park Special Use District. - Ordinance introduced by Supervisor Maxwell amending Planning Code Sections 249.42 of the India Basin Industrial Park Special Use District to exempt certain parcels within the Special Use District from all minimum off-street parking requirements, while leaving existing accessory parking limits unchanged; making environmental findings and findings of consistency with the General Plan and priority policies of Planning Code Section 101.1.

Preliminary Recommendation: Approval.

SPEAKERS: None

ACTION: Approved

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

ABSENT: Lee

RESOLUTION: 17883

13. 2009.0277T (A. RODGERS: (415) 558-6395)

AMEND PLANNING CODE SECTION 218, 303, 790.60 AND 890.60 Ordinance introduced by Supervisor Chu Creating New Controls for Massage: Amendments to Planning Code Sections 218, 303, 790.60, and 890.60 and Zoning Control Tables 218.1, 714.1, 715.1, 810.1, 811.1, and 812.1. [Board File No. 090402]. Ordinance amending Planning Code Sections 790.60, 890.60 and 218.1 to restrict permitted accessory massage uses and to make all other massage establishments, except chair massage in plain view of the public, subject to a conditional use permit; amending Planning Code Section 303 to list additional criteria for the Planning Commission to consider when analyzing conditional use applications for massage establishments; amending the tables at Sections 218.1, 714.1, 715.1, 810.1, 811.1, and 812.1, to change massage establishments from a permitted use to a conditional use in the PDR 1, or Light Industrial Buffer, and PDR 2, or Production, Distribution, and Repair Districts, and in the Broadway Neighborhood Commercial District, the Castro Neighborhood Commercial District, and the Chinatown Mixed Use Districts.

Preliminary Recommendation: Approval

SPEAKERS:

Supervisor Carmen Chu – author of this proposed legislation, (+)Mollie Ring – SAGE Project, (+)Annie Fukushima – SAGE Project, (+)Wei Liu – Parent of child at Dianne Feinstein School, (+)Matt Mitguard – Parent of child at Dianne Feinstein School, (-)Maxine Duggan – Erotic Service Providers union, (-)Rachel West – US Prostitutes Collective, (-)Lori Narine – Legal Action for Women, (-)Slava Osowska, (+)Shakari Byerly – San Francisco Women's Political Committee, (+)Cindy Liou – Asian Anti-Trafficking Collaborative, (-)Starchild, (+)Steven currier – OMMRA, (+)Francine Braine – Co-Executive Director of the SAGE Project

ACTION: Approved

AYES: Miguel, Antonini, Borden, and Moore

NAYES: Olague, and Sugaya

ABSENT: Lee

RESOLUTION: 17882

14. 2009.0261T (A. RODGERS: (415) 558-6395)

Amendments to Planning Code Sections 803.4 and 815: Massage Services in South of Market Residential/Service Mixed Use District. [Board File No. 09-0321] - Ordinance introduced by Supervisor Dufty amending San Francisco Planning Code by amending Section 803.4 Uses Prohibited in SoMa Districts, Section 815 Residential/Service Mixed Use District, and Table 815 to allow a business operating as a full-service spa to provide massage services with a Conditional Use authorization; defining a  full-service spa and adopting findings, including environmental findings and findings of consistency with the General Plan and the Priority Policies of Planning Code Section 101.1.

Preliminary Recommendation: Approval with modification.

(Continued from Regular Meeting of May 14, 2009)

SPEAKERS: None

ACTION: Approved

AYES: Miguel, Antonini, Borden, and Moore

NAYES: Olague, and Sugaya

ABSENT: Lee

RESOLUTION: 17884

15a. 2006.0884CEU (M. SMITH: (415) 558-6322)

1150 OCEAN AVENUE- north side between Phelan and Plymouth Avenues, Lot 003 in Assessor's Block 3180 – Request for Conditional Use Authorization pursuant to Planning Code Sections: 737.11, for development of a lot that is greater than 9,999 square-feet; 737.21, for development of a non-residential use size that is greater than 3,999 square-feet; 703.4, for a formula retail grocery store; 737.22, for parking at a ratio of 1:250 square-feet for a retail grocery store; and Planning Code Sections 303 and 304 to allow a Planned Unit Development (PUD) with a request for exceptions from Planning Code Sections: 134 (rear yard); 135 (open space dimensions); 136 (permitted obstructions over streets and alleys); and 145.4(c) (for a nonresidential use to occupy more than 75 contiguous linear feet along Ocean Avenue), for a project proposing the demolition of an existing commercial building and surface parking lot and the construction of two new mixed-use, five-story, 55-foot-tall buildings totaling approximately 318,300 gross square feet (gsf) with 237 off-street parking spaces. The project would include 173 dwelling units, approximately 29,205 gsf of ground-floor commercial uses that includes a formula retail grocery store (tenant not yet determined). The existing commercial building on the project site proposed for demolition is occupied by a retail automotive parts store (D.B.A.  Kragen ) and an automotive service station (D.B.A.  Wheel Works ). The project site is located within the Ocean Avenue NC-T (Neighborhood Commercial Transit) District and a 55-X Height and Bulk District.

Preliminary Recommendation: Approval with Conditions

SPEAKERS:

Meg Sprigs – Avalon Bay Communities – Project Sponsor, Peter Waller – Project Architect, Steve Vettle – Representing the Project Sponsor, (+)Anne Chen – Westwood Park Association, (+)Kate Vavetti – OARC Steering Committee, (+)Richard Reineccius – Excelsior District Improvement Association, (+)Tim Colen – San Francisco Housing Action Coalition, (+)Don Weaver

ACTION: Approved with conditions as modified to require the project sponsor to continue working with staff on the design and explore  greening the wall or consider community participation in developing art work

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

ABSENT: Lee

MOTION: 17885 [The Motion includes approval of CEQA Findings.]

15b. 2006.0884CEU (M. SMITH: (415) 558-6322)

1150 OCEAN AVENUE- north side between Phelan and Plymouth Avenues, Lot 003 in Assessor's Block 3180 - Consideration of Adoption of CEQA Findings for a project proposing the demolition of an existing commercial building and surface parking lot and the construction of two new mixed-use, five-story, 55-foot-tall buildings totaling approximately 318,300 gross square feet (gsf) with 173 dwelling units, 237 off-street parking spaces, and approximately 29,205 gsf of ground-floor commercial uses that includes a formula retail grocery store (tenant not yet determined). The project site is located within the Ocean Avenue NC-T (Neighborhood Commercial Transit) District and a 55-X Height and Bulk District.

Preliminary Recommendation: Approve the Draft Motion Adopting the CEQA Findings.

SPEAKERS: Same as those listed for item 15a

ACTION: Approved CEQA Findings

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

ABSENT: Lee

MOTION: 17885 [The Motion includes approval CU with amended conditions.]

15c. 2006.0884CEU (M. SMITH: (415) 558-6322)

1150 OCEAN AVENUE- north side between Phelan and Plymouth Avenues, Lot 003 in Assessor's Block 3180 - Request for Approval of the In-Kind Agreement between the City and County of San Francisco and the project sponsor pursuant to Section 330.3(f) of Ordinance 61-09 in order to reduce the project's Fee obligation to the Balboa Park Community Improvements Fund for a project proposing the demolition of an existing commercial building and surface parking lot and the construction of two new mixed-use, five-story, 55-foot-tall buildings totaling approximately 318,300 gross square feet (gsf) with 173 dwelling units, 237 off-street parking spaces, and approximately 29,205 gsf of ground-floor commercial uses that includes a formula retail grocery store (tenant not yet determined). Avalon Bay Communities, Inc. and Pacific Resources LLC (collectively the  Project Sponsor ) have requested that the City enter into an In-Kind Agreement relating to a public sidewalk easement (known as the  Brighton Avenue Public Sidewalk Easement ) and the construction of a street (known as the  Lee Avenue Extension ), in order to reduce its fee obligation per the terms of the Ordinance. The project site is located within the Ocean Avenue NC-T (Neighborhood Commercial Transit) District and a 55-X Height and Bulk District.

Preliminary Recommendation: Approve the In-Kind Agreement

SPEAKERS: Same as those listed for item 15a

ACTION: Approved the In-Kind Agreement

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

ABSENT: Lee

MOTION: 17886

16. 2006.0401D (E. WATTY: (415) 558-6620)

395 ATHENS STREET - south side between Brazil and Excelsior Avenues; Lot 014, in Assessor's Block 6022 - Request for Discretionary Review of Building Permit Application No. 2003.12.24.3005, proposing construction of a four-story, two-family dwelling on a vacant lot. The subject property is located within the RH-2 (Residential, House, Two-Family) Zoning District and a 40-X Height and Bulk District.

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

(Continued from Regular Meeting of April 23, 2009)

SPEAKERS: Gus Falley for the Project Sponsor

ACTION: The Commission did not take Discretionary Review and approved the project as proposed.

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

ABSENT: Lee

DRA: 0082

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

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

There were no speakers

Adjournment: 6:09 p.m.

Adopted: June 4, 2009

Last updated: 11/17/2009 10:00:38 PM