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

Skip to page body
SFGovAccessibility
Seal of the City and County of San Francisco
City and County of San Francisco

August 13, 2009

August 13, 2009

SAN FRANCISCO

PLANNING COMMISSION

Meeting Minutes

Commission Chambers - Room 400

City Hall, 1 Dr. Carlton B. Goodlett Place

Thursday, August 13, 2009

1:30 PM

Regular Meeting

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

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, Kevin Guy, Rick Crawford, Scott Sanchez, Aaron Hollister, Abigail Keifer, Adrian Putra, Corey Teague, AnMarie Rodgers, Elizabeth Watty, Glenn Cabreros, Mary Woods, 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. 2008.1106D (g. cabreros: (415) 558-6169)

2626 FILBERT STREET - north side between Broderick and Divisadero Streets, Lot 003B in Assessor's Block 0943 - Request for Discretionary Review of Demolition Permit Application No. 2007.12.24.1235 and Building Permit Application No. 2007.12.24.1234 proposing demolition of a four-story, single-family residence and new construction of a three-story, single-family residence in an RH-1 (Residential, House, One-Family) Zoning District and a 40-X Height and Bulk District.

(Proposed for continuance to October 22, 2009)

SPEAKERS: None

ACTION: Continued as proposed

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

B. CONSENT CALENDAR

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

2. 2009.0630C (K. Guy: (415) 558-6163)

1217 Polk Street - between Sutter and Bush Streets, Lot 005 of Assessor's Block 0670 - Request for Conditional Use Authorization to allow the relocation of an existing bar (d.b.a. "Lush Lounge") from 1092 Post Street (Lot 012 of Assessor's Block 0692) to 1217 Polk Street, within the Polk Street Neighborhood Commercial District and the 65-A Height and Bulk District. Interior and exterior tenant improvements are proposed for the space at 1217 Polk Street.

Preliminary Recommendation: Approval with Conditions

SPEAKERS: None

ACTION: Approved

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

MOTION: 17936

3. 2009.0373D (R. CRAWFORD: (415) 558-6358)

1333 Jones Street - west side between Clay and Washington Streets Lots 067 and 068, of Assessor's Block 0215C - Mandatory Discretionary Review of a proposed Dwelling Unit Merger. The proposal is to merge two owner occupied dwelling units in a condominium building into one owner occupied unit and reduce the number of units in the building from 130 to 129. Both units are now and will remain occupied on a full-time basis by the owner and her family in the RM-4, Residential Mixed High Density District and 40X Height and Bulk District.

Preliminary Recommendation: Do Not Take Discretionary Review and Approve the Permit

SPEAKERS: Jeremy Paul – Representing the Project Sponsor

ACTION: The Commission did not take discretionary review and approved the merger

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

NAYES: Sugaya

DRA: 0097

C. COMMISSIONERS' QUESTIONS AND MATTERS

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

4. Consideration of Adoption:

  • Draft Minutes of Regular Meeting of September 4, 2008.
  • Draft Minutes of Regular Meeting of September 18, 2008.
  • Draft Minutes of Special Meeting of September 25, 2008.
  • Draft Minutes of Regular Meeting of September 25, 2008.
  • Draft Minutes of Regular Meeting of October 23, 2008.
  • Draft Minutes of Special Meeting of October 30, 2008.

SPEAKERS: None

ACTION: Approved

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

5. Commission Comments/Questions

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

Commissioner Antonini:

From an article in the Examiner regarding a system of pods – a monorail type of system that is being utilized and I think it is certainly worth us examining that kind of transportation mode. Particularly in places like Geary or Van Ness or other areas. To build light rail or to build bus rapid transit, you have to take something away. With this kind of system it allows you to add something above surface. It may not be the right system exactly because it's only pods of two people, but Seattle has monorail and it's a more aesthetic system and one that can add additional ability to move people that doesn't disrupt the existing streets or parking or transit along those areas.

The other area also deals with transit. I wanted to comment on the fact that one of the benefits of the T-line is that it ends within .8 of a mile of Candlestick, so it is another method to get to 49er games and it's an easy walk from there or they have a shuttle bus.

Commissioner Lee:

Just a couple of questions: the first has to do with the Small Business Commission. I think in April I asked for a joint hearing. Given the vote early this week from the Small Business Commission regarding a new pet store going in the Marina which was in today's paper; I think we need to make sure we are all on the same page. Even though the application for the Pet Express has not been officially applied for, the Small Business Commission has voted to recommend that the Planning Commission deny it. Besides that issue, last April I remember there were some other issues between Planning and the Small Business. I'd like to know when we plan to have that.

The second one has to do with the Entertainment Commission. As you know there have been a lot of issues with entertainment – setting hours, the liquor licenses, etc. and I think we should also have a joint hearing with the Entertainment Commission to make sure that we are very clear regarding our roles and responsibilities and also the complaint system.

Commissioner Miguel:

If I may follow with Commissioner Antonini's comment on the article on the monorail, I personally – not as a commissioner – replied to that reporter that it was shades of Robert Moses because it's nothing new whatsoever. This also brings me up to a new publication that recently came out – Wrestling with Moses - a book by Anthony Quinn regarding the Robert Moses/Jane Jacob history. I felt it was a rather good read. When I saw that article in the paper, it just stood out all the more.

In addition, I met with CPMC and I think Linda is going to have an actual date for the joint meeting with the Health Commission and CPMC knows that we will not hear their Institutional Master Plan until after that meeting.

The article that appeared a little over a week ago and the discussion that happened at the Commission last week and the comments regarding student housing – I happened to chair the Housing Action Coalition when we first brought colleges together to have a joint meeting and were amazed that the housing executives from the various colleges in San Francisco had never even talked to each other. In fact, at that meeting was the first time some of them had ever met each other. So the fact that a little something is happening might be good.

I have made note with AnMarie's comments to us and others, as far as I can see, and I haven't kept a statistical array, but when legislation comes particularly from the Board of Supervisors regarding Planning and comes to the Department first and then the Commission, the Department has often recommended certain changes to that legislation and the Commission has gone along and sometimes added even more changes to the legislation. If I were keeping records I would swear that the Board of Supervisors has endorsed well over 90% of those changes. It has become quite rare for the Board of Supervisors to take a different view even though in many instances they are the originator of the legislation. For that I would like to thank the Department for the detailed work that they do regarding legislation that comes eventually before this Commission. They are obviously doing a good job if not only this Commission and the Board of Supervisors goes along with those recommended changes. I think that is very important and it becomes a very important position within the city for the Department and the Commission regarding that legislation.

I noticed in yesterday's Examiner, in their 3-minute interview column was with Craig Nikitas, Urban Planner and avid bird watcher. I'll pass this around. I thought it was just great. I've had a chance to talk to Craig about his avocation regarding birds.

The other thing I'd like to mention that is a bit more personal and a bit more serious: I watched last week's commission hearing and fully appreciated all the comments that were made regarding the passing of Debra Stein. I know next week there will be a memorial for her but I would like to say publicly now, because I was not here last week, that I too have very very fond and close memories of Debra. I didn't know her a real long time. I met her when I was doing some things prior to being on the commission. She was always very personable and very helpful to me. Soon after I was appointed to the commission I received a call from her. We got together and she presented to me in written form a virtual library of things that a Planning Commissioner should know about. An amazing collection of books and documents that I probably could have found if I did a tremendous amount or research, but she had it there at her fingertips. It was an extremely good library and a good educational background for planning and planning commission work. As I got to know her better, I thoroughly appreciated the sense of humor she brought to really great work. She knew I came out of a lot of years of neighborhood work and her work on NIMBYism and neighborhoods; we had a lot in common. I have one story about her sense of humor and her sense of wanting to be sure that no matter what she was doing everything was set in place and done correctly. I was going to meet her at her husband Jeff's office because she wanted to show me something on that large model he has in the office which is a wonderful tool to work with. My granddaughter who is now back in San Francisco from New York is a project manager and she has been involved in building work both here and in New York, and I wanted to show her that model because it's something that doesn't exist normally. So I emailed Debra and said is it all right, my granddaughter is in town, if I bring her with me and she said of course. So we get there; get out of the elevator; Debra meets us and immediately starts laughing. She had asked her staff there whether or not since Rom was bringing his granddaughter they should have some toys. My granddaughter is 29 years old. We hadn't mentioned age. But it just is typical of her that she would want to make sure everything was correctly in place. To me it just goes to the type of individual she was. Of course my granddaughter loves the story and has been telling it ever sense. I find it a tremendous loss. But the fact that I have along with the normal memories we have of Debra, this one particular incident, I find it easing to the mind to be able to smile when you think of someone. And that is how I think of Debra.

Commissioner Olague:

I had a brief conversation with Supervisor Mirkarimi this week because I wanted to understand a little bit more his comments when it came to redevelopment in relationship to the Drew School. I think his point may be, even though it was hard to decipher from his comments, is that he was concerned with what is City Planning thinking around the redevelopment areas and the land use in those areas? I think we are done with redevelopment aren't we and that ended about a year or two ago. I think his question is a valid one. At some point I would like to understand a little bit more – are we working with Redevelopment, or how are we moving forward on this?

Zoning Administrator Badiner:

Commissioner we had a program in this last fiscal year led by Mr. Sider to work on transitions with expiring plans. I believe we made a presentation to the Planning Commission, I'm not certain about it, and we were analyzing the existing controls that underlie the Redevelopment Agency. In some cases we made some tweaks and brought them to you. I think India Basin had one tweak. We found in Western Addition there was a fairly good match between the underlying zoning, the Redevelopment area, and the development. We analyzed it and we can report back to you. We are not proposing a broad planning process because we think that in fact the underlying zoning is appropriate. What we don't have, and I know Supervisor Mirkarimi's concern is that Redevelopment goes beyond land use, economic development, social programs and things like that; and that is the missing piece that we in the Planning Department can't really provide. But the underlying controls are fairly good, not perfect, but good.

Commissioner Olague:

I know that we are bombarded with hearings and such, but at some point I would like to start there. And maybe some of those other questions that have to do with the areas that Redevelopment would &

Zoning Administrator Badiner:

Can I start with a memo to the Commission and then we can take it from there?

Commissioner Olague:

Yes, that sounds good. I would like to start there.

I attended an informational hearing yesterday. It was really pretty interesting. I think at some point it might be good to have the streetscape and stuff that they are planning in Eastern Neighborhoods. I don't know if other commissioners are interested, but it was a really good hearing.

Finally, Eastern Neighborhoods CAC - where are we with that?

Director Rahaim:

It is my understanding that the appointments that are the responsibility of the Board of Supervisors have been made. The Mayor's Office is just now submitting its names. I can't remember the total numbers. Eight and five I think. The Board submitted eight and the Mayor has five.

Commissioner Borden:

Commissioner Lee brought up the issue of the Pet Food Express that the Small Business Commission took up at its last meeting. It extends to a bigger issue that when I was at the Marina Merchants Association they wanted to have some input or wondered if we were going to have a hearing on the NC@20 Report. I think that all of this dovetails into that for them. I'm wondering when that might happen?

Zoning Administrator Badiner:

I believe that Mr. Sider is scheduling it for mid September. I don't know if he has talked to Linda, but I think that is what he is aiming for.

Director Rahaim:

I think the idea is that would be the subject of a joint hearing.

Commissioner Borden:

Great. The Director of the Small Business Commission was as this meeting and I know that is her preference that we could all have it as one joint meeting and make sure we reach out to all the different merchants associations in the various NC &

Zoning Administrator Badiner:

That's fine. I think what we had originally intended was two separate hearings. One to the Planning Commission and one to the Small Business Commission; allow you some time to review it; then the opportunity for commission comments on that would be in a joint hearing. We can change that if you want. That would mean that the joint hearing would be a little further. That is why Ms. Avery looked a little surprised because I don't think we had requested a joint hearing in September, but merely we were going to do serial meetings at the commissions and say  here is the report, here is what's in it, and we look forward to hearing your comments at the subsequent joint hearing.'

Commissioner Borden:

Okay, whatever we do just make sure all the neighborhood groups know about it. Let's give them plenty of time and make sure they have the report.

Commissioner Lee:

I want to follow up on Commissioner Olague's question on Redevelopment. I just want to get a sense of what our roles and responsibilities are under land use. There are certain covenants that were produced by Redevelopment – the number of affordable housing units and the percentage of AMI for those units. What happens as time moves on? Can any of those change? Can you sell the units after this? From my perspective I just don't even know how to frame the question. I know we have the responsibility of land use, but are we even allowed to make any zoning changes there or merge units, or take units off of for sale or make them into condos? Can you give us a general sketch of what our authority is or isn't. Also, this is not presumptive that Redevelopment can not still say give funding to commercial businesses if they are in the economic zone even though we control the planning. But if there is a land use change there, I assume we have final say – not the Redevelopment Agency.

Also a follow up on another commissioner's comment: Last week or two weeks ago we had the whole issue of District 3 and the liquor licenses. Since the Police Department testified here that they don't have enough staff to handle that what I'd like to see is a listing of all the ABC licenses we have city wide. Maybe we should start addressing the issue of do we have too many liquor licenses in San Francisco? If the police feel so strongly about it and given what we've seen with some entertainment issues done in the Bayview, which Supervisor Maxwell sort of took of control of some of the criminal element, I think we should start taking a look at should we have anymore liquor licenses approved. Do we have enough? What is the impact going to be on small business? Especially in District 3, and I think I asked this a couple of weeks ago, I'd like to see in the last five to six years all of the applications that these businesses put in – who got approval, who didn't get approval and the reasons for that between the ABC and our Police Department. I think I'd like to put everything on the table, not just with District 3, but with the whole city – to investigate that given there so many issues right now with alcohol and crime especially as specified by the Police Department. I would even like to have a joint hearing with the Police Commission and what we are doing regarding hours and approval of liquor licenses in special types of ABC 40, 47, on or off, sale or not sales with my understanding that some chain stores may want to start selling liquor throughout the city. I think we should take a look at it.

Commissioner Olague:

I'm pretty satisfied with the way we approach liquor licenses right now at the commission. I'm kind of happy with the way things are going and if other commissioners are interested, that's fine. But I wouldn't say this is something that I think we need to change too much how we approach.

Commission Secretary Avery:

Commissioners if you are through with your comments I would like to report that I have gotten confirmation that we will have a joint hearing with the Health Commission on Thursday, September 17 at 10 a.m. We are working to confirm a joint hearing with Rec/Park Commission for Thursday, September 3, also at 10 or 10:30 a.m. That one is not confirmed yet. I have not started working on a joint hearing with the Small Business Commission because I didn't anticipate it happening in September. I did anticipate something for October. So I will start working on that but I have to be honest with that I won't start working on that until after I come back from vacation, which is the 2nd of September.

Commissioner Miguel:

I presume we will re-set the date for the actual hearing for the Institutional Master Plan

Commission Secretary Avery:

Yes we will.

Commissioner Olague:

I just wanted to ask if the Health Commission hearing would be televised.

Commission Secretary Avery:

It will be in this room so yes, it will.

Commissioner Olague:

One last little comment on the alcohol: I'm just concerned if I were to get a list of all these licenses etc., etc., I just don't know what I'd do with it. I think frequently the Supervisors, like Supervisor Maxwell would get calls from her constituents. I just think the way we're doing it now is just an intelligent way of doing it that's all.

Commissioner Miguel:

I'd just like to mention that if any of the commissioners have particular individuals that they wish to hear from during the joint hearing with the Health Commission, if they can make sure that staff knows so that those people are contacted.

Director Rahaim:

Commissioner on that item, you had previously requested that Catharine Dodd attend that hearing. I believe that she will be back from vacation at that point in time. I will confirm that. And then we've also asked Dr. Katz to come as well. If there are other, please do let us know and we will make sure that they attend.

Commissioner Miguel:

Certainly some others from the blue ribbon committee should attend.

Commission Secretary Avery:

And I can confirm that Dr. Katz will attend the joint hearing.

D. DIRECTOR'S REPORT

6. Director's Announcements

Director Rahaim:

Just a couple of additional things: I was going to tell you that we were working on the Small Business Commission joint hearing and I had forgotten that our proposal was to have separate hearings on the report and then a joint hearing. Dan Sider has been working with that commission staff on that.

I want to thank Commissioner Olague for attending the Mission Streetscape public meeting last night we had in the Mission. It was the fourth in a series of meetings on the Streetscape Plan for the Mission where the staff presented some concepts for priority improvement projects in the Mission. I will ask that staff come and brief the commission on that work in the next couple of months. I think they've done some really great work on that and there was maybe 40 to 50 people in attendance there last night. It was a pretty healthy turnout.

I wanted to report also that we had a meeting this week of the Department's advisory committee on our Action Plan. And we had a very interesting and robust discussion about a proposal that we had and that we will brief you on in the next month of two to create what we are calling a Preliminary Project Assessment – an early review of projects. It should give project proponents and communities a kind of early take on the project. It's intended to help streamline the process as we go forward. We had a very interesting and positive discussion about our proposal at the Action Advisory Committee yesterday morning.

Finally, many of you know that the Urban Land Institute National Convention is in San Francisco this year. It is on the 3rd through the 6th of November. The Department submitted proposals for three sessions and two were accepted. One will be on downtown growth and the other will be on reuse of industrial land. As part of those sessions we have invited some of my colleagues, other Planning Directors, from west cost cities to attend and we will be organizing some discussions with my colleagues and you all during that time as well. I will give you more information as we move forward. We are happy to do that to take advantage of their time while they are in town.

Zoning Administrator Badiner:

You had asked last week about 851California – the supper dorm. We have done some research on that and in fact the existing building was an 85-room tourist hotel. We believe it is a permitted use to use it as a dorm. It would be considered group housing and it could be legalized but the project sponsor needs to file the proper permits and we will be talking to him about doing that. It needs a building permit application to change from a tourist hotel to group housing. We need to check to make sure that both parking and useable open space requirements are met and we also believe the inclusionary housing requirement would be triggered by this. We will be pursuing it and we appreciate you bring it to our attention. We have done a fair amount of research over the last week and I appreciate both Mark Luellen and Scott Sanchez and their work on that.

I'd like to thank you for your compliments to the legislative division. I think they have done a great job, both AnMarie Rodgers and Tara Sullivan. It is something we put together, or reformed, about three years ago and bolstered with some staffing and I think they've been doing a great job and we appreciate you recognizing that.

Commissioner Lee:

If they convert from a tourist hotel to student housing, do they have to do an EIR regarding tourism if they do rent buses?

Zoning Administrator Badiner:

Commissioners, I don't know whether the original hotel had any buses coming to it and I suspect, without knowing a lot, this is a developer who is renting to students that come from a variety of different institutions. I don't think that he has a bus service that is going on, but we will look into that.

Commissioner Antonini:

On the Urban Land Use Conference: I request that if possible we get a calendar of events; where they are going to be held; which ones we can attend; and any evening functions – when it's available.

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

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS:

Land Use Committee:

  • BuildingCode Vacant BuildingOrdinance: The Planning Commission, HPC and the BIC heard this in early June. The commissions recommended several modifications to the proposed ordinance that have largely been incorporated into the ordinance – a clear definition of a vacant/abandoned building; administrative processes; maintenance requirements strengthened; and security issues have been amended to be more flexible. Further, partially vacant buildings have been incorporated (per Commissioner Moore's request); property owners must tell DBI what they intend to do with their property when they register; and other blight codes have been cited. This week the Committee lowered the fee that DBI would assess and forwarded the item to the Board as a committee report. At the Full Board, Supervisor Mar signed on as a sponsor and the ordinance passed its first reading.

Full Board:

  • Bicycle Plan – Planning Code amendments for 2009 Bicycle Plan and Bike Plan and Plan adoption and related General Plan amendments: This Commission certified the FEIR and approved the related amendments to the General Plan and Planning Code on June 25th. Last week the Board rejected two appeals on the Bicycle Plan EIR. After affirming the EIR, the Board adopted the Bicycle Plan, the General Amendments and the Planning Code amendments. The Board did make one change to the Planning Code, choosing to strike the limited enforcement procedures and instead enable the Zoning Administrator to weld the more powerful enforcement procedures outlined in Sections 176 & 176.1 for Administrative penalties. This week the Board finally passed both the General Plan and the Planning Code ordinance as amended.
  • Appeal of Cat EX for 717 Battery Street/350 Pacific Avenue: The appeal was filed and dropped as the project sponsor withdrew the project and requested for the Cat Ex to be rescinded.

Introductions:

  • 091014 – Nail Salons West Portal: Supervisor Elsbernd introduced legislation that would create a new definition for  nail salons that would be applicable only in the West Portal NCD. The legislation would also require CU for salons in this district.

BOARD OF APPEALS:

2829 Green Street: This was a staff initiated DR on a proposal to in-fill the courtyard that was provided under a previous application. That courtyard was a mitigation measure for the expansion into the rear yard and addresses some preservation concerns. The project sponsor submitted a revision to his original proposal last week which expanded what he was willing to accommodate to in terms of preserving a little bit of the courtyard. This commission did not have the opportunity to consider this proposal. A motion was made to overturn the Commission and adopt the revised plans. The vote was 2 -3 and the motion failed. It takes four votes to overturn the Planning Commission, so the Commission's decision was upheld.

HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION:

No report – The Commission did not have a meeting

8. (S. SANCHEZ: (415) 558-6326)

UNIVERSAL PLANNING NOTIFICATION (UPN) PROJECT - Informational presentation to introduce the UPN Project (the Department's efforts to streamline notification standards and processes), provide an overview of current notification processes, outline proposed changes and receive input about the draft proposal.

SPEAKERS: David Pilpel, Michael Colbruno, Paul Wermer, Peter Cohen, Sue Hestor, David Tornheim, Hiroshi Fukuda, Michael Williams

ACTION: None – Informational only

E. GENERAL PUBLIC COMMENT – 15 MINUTES

At this time, members of the public may address the Commission on items of interest to the public that are within the subject matter jurisdiction of the Commission except agenda items. With respect to agenda items, your opportunity to address the Commission will be afforded when the item is reached in the meeting. Each member of the public may address the Commission for up to three minutes.

SPEAKERS:

Joan Wood re: North Branch Library

David Pilpel re: - I also morns the loss of Debra Stein

- Requested that the Department invite Inge Horton and Lori Yamauchi to participate in the discussion of the NC@20 Report

F. PUBLIC COMMENT ON AGENDA ITEMS WHERE THE PUBLIC HEARING HAS BEEN CLOSED

At this time, members of the public who wish to address the Commission on agenda items that have already been reviewed in a public hearing at which members of the public were allowed to testify and the public hearing has been closed, must do so at this time. Each member of the public may address the Commission for up to three minutes.

SPEAKERS REGARDING ITEM 9, 1040 Columbus Avenue:

Joan Wood, Ok Nam Ho, Zack Steward, Officer Games

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

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

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

Preliminary Recommendation: Approval with Conditions

(Continued from Regular Meeting of June 25, 2009)

Note: On July 23, 2009, following a failed motion to approve legalizing entertainment uses already found at the existing restaurant such as billiard tables and to disapprove adding a bar use – Type 47 ABC Liquor License (on a +3 -3 vote with Antonini, Borden & Lee voting against), the Commission continued this matter to August 13, 2009 to allow the absent commissioner the opportunity to participate in the final action, by a vote +5 -1. Commissioner Moore voted no. Commissioner Sugaya was absent. The public hearing remains closed.

SPEAKERS: None

ACTION: Approved legalizing entertainment uses already found at the existing restaurant such as billiard tables and disapproved adding a bar use – Type 47 ABC Liquor License

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

MOTION: 17937

  1. REGULAR CALENDAR

10. 2009.0707MZ (A. Kiefer: (415) 575-9065)

Market & Octavia Historic Area Plan Level Historic Survey Integration - Initiate Amendments to the Market and Octavia Area Plan of the General Plan and Zoning Map to integrate Market and Octavia Area Plan Level Historic Survey prepared by Page and Turnbull and make Clarifications and Technical Amendments. Earlier this year the Planning Commission endorsed the Page and Turnbull Area Plan level survey of the Market and Octavia Area Plan with some modifications. Following this endorsement staff in coordination with the community, have developed a recommendation for the integration of these findings into the Market and Octavia Plan as required by the Planning Commission and Board of Supervisors. Staff will provide an informational presentation and an overview of proposed amendments.

Preliminary Recommendation: Initiate Amendments to the General Plan and Zoning Map, refer portions of the Amendments to the Historic Preservation Commission.

SPEAKERS: Peter Lewis – Mission Dolores Neighborhood Association, Curt Holzinger

ACTION: Approved initiation

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

MOTION: 17938

11. 2007.0953C (A. Hollister: (415) 575-9078)

1684-1698 Market Street - northeast corner of Gough Street, Lot 006 in Assessor's Block 0854 - Request for Conditional Use Authorization to legalize the expansion of an existing full-service restaurant (d.b.a. Espetus Churrascaria) into an adjacent commercial storefront occupying the ground and mezzanine-level of the storefront. The expansion would increase the restaurant's floor area from approximately 9,990 gross square feet to approximately 11,790 gross square feet. No physical expansion of the existing building would occur. This site is within a NCT-3 (Moderate-Scale Neighborhood Commercial Transit) District, and an 85-X Height and Bulk District.

Preliminary Recommendation: Approval with Conditions

SPEAKERS: Amanda – Project Sponsor, Michael O'Connor

ACTION: Approved

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

MOTION: 17939

12. 2009.0114C (A. Putra: (415) 575-9079)

1042 Taraval Street (1026-1042 Taraval Street) - north side of Taraval Street between 20th and 21st Avenues; Lot 018 in Assessor's Block 2349 - Request for Conditional Use Authorization, pursuant to Planning Code Sections 711.42, 781.1, and 303 to establish a full-service restaurant (d.b.a.  Katoyama Ramen ) in an NC-2 (Small Scale, Neighborhood Commercial) District, within the Taraval Street Restaurant and Fast-food Subdistrict, and a 65-A Height and Bulk District.

Preliminary Recommendation: Approval with Conditions

SPEAKERS: Joyce Chang – Representing the Project Sponsor

ACTION: Approved

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

MOTION: 17940

13. 2008.1354C (c. teague: (415) 575-9081)

201 folsom street (aka 314 main street) -south side between Main and Beale Street, Lot 003 (previously Lot 001) in Assessor's Block 3746 - Request for Conditional Use Authorization pursuant to Planning Code Section 303(e) to modify the performance period condition of Motion No. 16647 for Case No. 2000.1073C to extend the approval period another 3 years from the date of expiration of the original approval of a mixed use project consisting of two residential towers of heights of 350 and 400 feet above an 80-foot podium, with up to 725 dwelling units, 750 off-street parking spaces, 38,000 square feet of commercial space, and 272 replacement off-street parking spaces for the adjacent USPS facility, in a RC-4 (Residential-Commercial Combined, High Density District) and a 400-W Height and Bulk District, and within the Folsom and Main Residential/Commercial Special Use District. No changes are proposed for the existing project as originally approved.

Preliminary Recommendation: Approval with Conditions

SPEAKERS regarding a request for continuance: Andrew Junius – Representing the Project Sponsor, and Sue Hestor

ACTION: without hearing the item, continued to September 3, 2009

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

14. 2009.0408C (E. Watty: (415) 558-6620)

2550 SLOAT BOULEVARD - north side at the northeast corner of 44th Avenue; Lot 005 in Assessor's Block 2512 - Request for a Conditional Use Authorization, pursuant to Planning Code Sections 303, 711.83, 790.80, to install a wireless telecommunications facility consisting of 9 new panel antennas screened inside faux chimneys located on the existing building rooftop and measuring approximately 38'-6 above grade, with 6 equipment cabinets located on the roof of the garage, as part of AT&T's wireless telecommunications network within a NC-2 (Neighborhood Commercial, Small-Scale) Zoning District and 100-A Height and Bulk District.

Preliminary Recommendation: Approval with Conditions

SPEAKERS: None

ACTION: without hearing, continued to September 10, 2009

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

15. 2005.0911CEV (G. CABREROS: (415) 558-6169)

616 DIVISADERO STREET - Informational Item - east side between Hayes and Grove Streets, Lot 002J in Assessor's Block 1202 - Conditional Use Authorization would be required to allow development of a lot greater than 9,999 square feet and to allow non-residential uses greater than 3,999 square feet within the NC-2 (Small-Scale Neighborhood Commercial) District, the Divisadero Street Alcohol Restricted Use District and a 65-A Height and Bulk District. The project proposes the alteration and adaptive re-use of an existing building (the vacant Harding Theater) to retain two existing storefront spaces at the ground floor and to retain the existing levels of the main auditorium and mezzanine as an auditorium space. Replacement of the marquee and blade sign at the front façade is proposed. The existing fly loft/backstage structure is proposed to be removed to allow for the new construction of a five-story, eight-unit building with eight parking spaces fronting Hayes Street.

SPEAKERS: Mark – Project Architect, Judith Ford, Arthur Levy, Michael O'Conner, Jim Bracken, Ellyn Parker, Jim Reuben – Representing the Project Sponsor, David Tornheim, Jonathan Pearlman, Michael Klestoff – Project Sponsor

ACTION: None – informational only

16. 2009.0398C (M. Woods: (415) 558-6315)

3115 FILLMORE STREET- west side between Pixley and Filbert Streets; Lot 008 in Assessor's Block 0515 - Request for Conditional Use Authorization to allow a new full-service restaurant (d.b.a.  Kasa Indian Eatery ) pursuant to Sections 303(c) and 725.42 of the Planning Code, in a vacant retail space within the Union Street Neighborhood Commercial District and a 40-X Height and Bulk District.

Preliminary Recommendation: Approval with Conditions

SPEAKERS: Michael Williams, Jeff Ivarson, Timothy Volkama, Tobee Vanderwall, William Vanderwall, Suresh Khanna, Mathew Wolf, Mika McHenry, Sanmiko, Regan Caponi

ACTION: Approved

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

MOTION: 17941

17. 2009.0556D (M. Woods: (415) 558-6315)

226 - 28th Avenue - east side between Lake and California Streets; Lot 022Q in Assessor's Block 1387 - Request for Discretionary Review of Building Permit Application No. 2009.02.19.2392S, proposing rear and side horizontal additions, and the

replacement of the exterior rear staircase to the existing two-story over garage, single-family residence in an RH-1(D) (Residential, House, One-Family, Detached) Zoning District and a 40-X Height and Bulk District.

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

SPEAKERS: Gary Frank – Project Sponsor, William Pagalinsky

ACTION: The Commission did not take discretionary review and approved the project

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

DRA: 0098

18. 2009.0635D (E. Watty: (415) 558-6620)

635 BURNETT AVENUE - east side of Burnett Avenue, where Burnett Avenue intersects Perego Terrace; Lot 041, in Assessor's Block 2826 - Request for Discretionary Review of Building Permit Application No. 2009.04.01.5348, which proposes the construction of a horizontal rear addition to fill-in the void beneath the cantilevered upper three stories. The proposal also includes a one-story deck that will project from the proposed addition. The Subject Property is located within the RM-1 (Residential Mixed, Low-Density) Zoning District and a 40-X Height and Bulk District.

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

SPEAKERS: Frances Lee – representing the project, Zelco Sationi – DR Requestor, Tara – Representing Project Sponsor

ACTION: The Commission did not take discretionary review and approved the project

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

DRA: 0099

19. 2009.0547D (g. cabreros: (415) 558-6169)

225-227 LAGUNA STREET - west side of Laguna Street between Page and Haight Streets; Lot 049 and 050 in Assessor's Block 0851 - Request for Discretionary Review of Building Permit Application No. 2008.12.05.7883 proposing to construct a roof deck on the existing building and to construct exterior stairs within the existing side yard of a two-unit, three-story-over-garage building within an RTO (Residential Transit-Oriented Neighborhood) District and a 40-X Height and Bulk District.

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

SPEAKERS: Joni Canada – DR Requestor, Stephen Liatiouris – Project Sponsor, Tor Meinmeim

ACTION: The Commission took discretionary review and disapproved the project

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

DRA: 0100

20a. 2008.0505DDDV (D. SÁNCHEZ: (415) 575-9082)

1321 DEHARO STREET - east side of DeHaro Street between 24th Street and 25th Street; Lot 036 in Assessor's Block 4218 - Mandatory Discretionary Review, under Planning Code Section 317 requiring review of the demolition of residential buildings and their replacement structures, of Demolition Permit Application No. 2008.04.03.8737 to demolish an existing single family dwelling within an RH-3 (Residential, House, Three Family) District with a 40-X Height and Bulk Designation. Two separate public initiated Discretionary Review requests regarding the replacement structure have also been filed and will be considered at this hearing.

Preliminary Recommendation: Take Discretionary Review and approve replacement structure subject to modifications

(Continued from Regular Meeting of July 23, 2009)

SPEAKERS: None

ACTION: without hearing, continued to October 15, 2009

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

20b. 2008.0505DDDV (D. SÁNCHEZ: (415) 575-9082)

1321 DEHARO STREET - east side of DeHaro Street between 24th Street and 25th Street; Lot 036 in Assessor's Block 4218 - Request for Variance, pursuant to Planning Code Section 134, to allow a rear yard of 10 feet where a rear yard of 28 feet is required within an RH-3 (Residential, House, Three Family) District with a 40-X Height and Bulk Designation.

(Continued from Regular Meeting of July 23, 2009)

SPEAKERS: None

ACTION: Without hearing, continued to October 15, 2009

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

20c. 2009.0107D (D. SÁNCHEZ: (415) 575-9082)

1321 DEHARO STREET - east side of DeHaro Street between 24th Street and 25th Street; Lot 036 in Assessor's Block 4218 - Mandatory Discretionary Review, under Planning Code Section 317 requiring review of the demolition of residential buildings and their replacement structures, of Building Permit Application No. 2008.04.03.8738 to construct a three family dwelling as a replacement structure to the proposed demolition of a single family dwelling within an RH-3 (Residential, House, Three Family) District with a 40-X Height and Bulk Designation.

Preliminary Recommendation: Do not take Discretionary Review and approve demolition

(Continued from Regular Meeting of July 23, 2009)

SPEAKERS: None

ACTION: without hearing, continued to October 15, 2009

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

I. PUBLIC COMMENT

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

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

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

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

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

SPEAKERS: None

Adjournment: 9:30 p.m.

Adopted: September 3, 2009

Last updated: 11/17/2009 10:00:40 PM