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

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

December 9, 2010

New Page 1



Meeting Minutes

Commission Chambers - Room 400

City Hall, 1 Dr. Carlton B. Goodlett Place

Thursday, December 9, 2010

10:30 AM

Regular Meeting


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





STAFF IN ATTENDANCE:  John Rahaim – Director of Planning, Scott Sanchez – Zoning Administrator, Tom Disanto, Kate McGee, Christine Haw, AnMarie Rodgers, Elizabeth Watty, and Linda Avery – Commission Secretary.




The Commission will consider a request for continuance to a later date.  The Commission may choose to continue the item to the date proposed below, to continue the item to another date, or to hear the item on this calendar.


1.         2009.0649C                                                                   (D. SANCHEZ: (415) 575-9082)
2980 24TH STREET - northeast corner of Harrison and 24th Streets, Lots 039, 040 in Assessor’s Block 4206 - Request for Conditional Use Authorization under Planning Code Sections 727.83 and 303 to install a wireless transmission facility consisting of six panel antennas on an existing mixed use building within the 24th Street - Mission Street Neighborhood Commercial Transit District and a 55-X Height and Bulk District.

Preliminary Recommendation:  Approval with Conditions

(Proposed for Continuance to January 13, 2011)


SPEAKERS:     None

ACTION:           Continued as proposed

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

ABSENT:          Borden




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.


2.         Consideration of Adoption:

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

      (Continued from the Regular meeting of December 2, 2010)


SPEAKERS:     Sue Hestor

ACTION:           without hearing, continued to 1/13/11

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

ABSENT:          Borden


3.         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 Miguel: 

I would like to introduce to everyone our newest Commissioner, the Ports' lost
our gain, Rodney Fong. Many of you worked with him over the years and -- it is a pleasure to have a long time San Francisco family represented here, someone who has – has been active within the city government and has been active within the business interests of the city and understands business and manages the general tourist business that is the
backbone of some of our economy. We welcome you Rodney.


Commissioner Fong:

Thank you so much. I'm absolutely thankful to serve the City, looking forward to working with you and sharing comments, sharing thoughts about shaping San Francisco. So, looking forward to it, honored. Thank you so much.


Commissioner Sugaya:

On November 18th, there was item before this Commission regarding a restaurant that wanted to have amplified music, and it was an Italian restaurant and the music was going to enhance the PRA singing that took place there. We were I believe all in a good mood. It was in that context that I made the remarks that are now is the subject of Supervisor Allioto Pier’s. I supposed that comment was offensive to those with an Italian Heritage. Although it was not meant to be a disparaging comment, I see now it was very inappropriate. For that I apologize to you, to those in the audience at the time and to others who have either heard about what I said oar seen it on S.F.G.T.V. I do not take my responsibilities as a City Commissioner lightly, and in am no stranger to discrimination and the derogatory words of others. We represent the entire City and should treat members of the public with the respect they deserve. I truly regret making my comment and hope you and the community will accept this apology.  This letter was sent to Supervisor Alliot-Pier’s Office, also a copy was delivered to President David Chiu's office as well.


Commissioner Antonini:

I want to mention, I met with project sponsors last week on the project that will be before us next  2201 Market Street, if I'm not mistaken on the address which was the former S.N.C. Ford. It was informative and helpful to get a preview of what will be before us, and I also had meeting with the Bicycle Coalition on their plans for the next number of years.  I have the pleasure of having lunch with the new Supervisor of District 10, mel leah kohn and last night, with the Fire Department, and there was a rather large and well represented group on a discussion chaired by our Director on the Housing Element. That worked out very well.


Commissioner Miguel:

The reason for cancelling the January 6th meeting is because theDepartment will be on hiatus the last week of the year and preparation would be impossible.




4.         Director’s Announcements


Director Rahaim:

I will also on behalf of staff and the department welcome Commissioner Fong to the Commission. We look forward to working with you.

A couple of other announcements, last night, I convened a group of interested parties on the Housing Element as President Miguel mentioned. Thank you for coming to that meeting. It was a lively discussion. There was maybe 20-25 people and we committed to getting out the third draft of the Housing Element in about a month. Convening a group again to have what I hope would be the final discussion on the details of the element in order for your consideration in February and March. That's the current schedule that we're hoping for the element, and this is the 2009 Housing Element and we're three weeks away from 2011 and concerned about getting this thing moved along. A reminder on Saturday morning the Department is hosting a meeting for interested parties on our -- what we call our action plan, kind of the final stage of our reform process and we will be  reviewing in detail our proposed development review process  that was the subject of your memo last week. We have a meeting at 10:00 A.M. Saturday at the Department and we will be putting that on your calendar in January for a public hearing as well.


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



      At the Land Use Committee, two items were heard:

·         Conditional Use (CU) for Other Entertainment in the Van Ness SUD & RC Districts by supervisor Alioto-Pier.  This commission heard this item last week and recommended approval.  Staff also recommended a modification to change the controls that govern uses in RC districts.  Staff recommended using C-2 use controls as had been done prior to 2008.  While you agreed with the Supervisor’s intent to regulate “other entertainment,” you asked for more time to consider the proposed RC change.  Coincidentally, we have a second ordinance before you this week sponsored by Supervisor Mirkarimi that amends these two sections and this will allow us to consider that change again this week.  At the Land use hearing on Monday, Supervisor Alioto-Pier modified her ordinance to require public notice under Section 312 for “other entertainment” uses in this area.  Supervisor Alioto-Pier and the Land Use Committee agreed to sever the ordinance so that the additional controls for “other entertainment” could move forward to the full Board but would allow the committee to wait on the decision about the governing use controls in the RC district until you had your discussion today.

·         CEQA Appeal Reform.  The Land Use Committee also considered an ordinance to add regulations to the Administrative Code that would specify procedures for appeals of neg decs and exemptions.  The proposed ordinance was considered by this Commission on 6/24/10.  At that time you recommended 11 modifications.  The HPC considered the legislation on 6/16 and 7/7 at which point they concurred with your recommendations and added 4 additional considerations.  This was the fourth hearing of the item and continued at the Land Use Committee.  This week the item was continued again.  The ordinance had been amended to address the concerns of this commission and the Historic Preservation Commission.  Since you’ve heard the ordinance, it has been amended such that appellants are not required to have “prior participation” in order to maintain appeal rights.  Some of the major features of the ordinance as currently drafted include the following:  Appeal Deadlines:  for EIR – 20 days after certification; for appeals of a neg dec – 20 days after adoption by the Planning Commission; for exemptions – 20 days after each noticed opportunity OR if no notice is provided, within 20 days of final discretionary permit.  This last question of setting the appeal deadline at 20 days after final discretionary permit is raising concern that appeals could be valid with the addition of a minor permit, well after construction is underway for the project.  Appeal Procedures:  The City may not approve or issue permits during an appeal (except to mitigate a hazard); the Board must hold an appeal hearing within 30 days and act on an appeal within 30 days of the hearing; a briefing schedule would be established to ensure that the Board has materials in a timely manner; no requirement to have appealed at the Planning Commission prior to an appeal to the Board; the Board may affirm or reverse the determination with 6 votes; a tie vote is a disapproval.  Public Notice:  Expands public notice of exemptions, requires exemption notice be in writing, posted on website and mailed to interested parties; Notice of Exemptions would also be posted on line and mailed; EIRs would have to be available at least 14 days before certification hearings at the Commission, and notice for area plans sponsored by the City would not require mailed notice.  Preservation:  The Historic Preservation Commission is formally included in CEQA review; HPC is to provide comments at least 8 days prior to Planning Commission hearings; The ERO is required to consult with the HPC for projects that implicate historic resources.  This proposed ordinance has been calendared for consideration again this coming Monday.



·         460 Townsend Street is a Notice of Violation and Penalty (NOVP) that the Board unanimously upheld (4-0-1) on November 3, 2010.  The NOVP found that the Appellant, Academy of Art University (AAU), established an educational service at the subject property without benefit of building permit or conditional use authorization.  The Board voted 4-1 to deny the rehearing request.

·         1321 De Haro Street is a variance decision letter that the Board voted 2-2-1 to uphold on November 3, 2010.  The variance decision allowed an encroachment into the required rear yard.  The Board voted unanimously to deny the rehearing request.

·         Finally, the Board heard the appeal of variance decision which granted rear yard and front setback variances to the property at 1266 Great Highway.  The Appellant argued that the proposed construction was out of character with the neighborhood.  The Permit Holder argued that the variance was justified due to the unique characteristics of the subject, which is shallow in depth (approximately 69 feet deep).  The Board voted 3-2 to grant the appeal and deny the variance.  Four votes are needed to overturn a departmental action; therefore, the variance was granted.




6.         Department’s Budget Update                                 (T. DISANTO:  (415) 575-9113)

Fiscal Year 2010-11 - Budget Status Update - and Fiscal Year 2011-12 Budget Priority Considerations. 


SPEAKERS:     None

ACTION:           Informational only – no action




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.



Ms. Choy


Francisco de Costa


Linda Chapman





7.         2010.0863T                                                                      (K. McGee: (415) 558-6367)

Amendments to the Planning Code Section 420.1-420.5: The Visitacion Valley Community Facilities and Infrastructure Fee and Fund [Board File No. 101247] - Ordinance introduced by Supervisor Maxwell amending Planning Code Sections 420.1 (Findings), 420.2 (Definitions), 420.3 (Application), 420.4 (Imposition of Requirements), 420.5 (Visitacion Valley Community Facilities and Infrastructure Fund) to update the Visitacion Valley Community Facilities and Infrastructure Fee and Fund and to conform the program with other Area Plan fee programs; and adopting findings, including environmental findings, Planning Code Section 302 findings, and findings of consistency with the General Plan and the priority policies of Planning Code Section 101.

Preliminary Recommendation: Approval.

(Continued from Regular Meeting of November 18, 2010)

NOTE: On November 18, 2010, following public testimony, the Commission continued this item to 12/9/10 by a vote of (+6 -0).  Public hearing remains open.


SPEAKERS:     In opposition:  Espanola Jackson, Shirley Jones, Michael Burk, and Francisco de Costa; In support:  Fran Martin and Jim Groden

ACTION:           Following testimony, continued to 2/3/11 with a recommendation that the Supervisor continue working with all parties on the issue of fees.

AYES:              Antonini, Fong, Moore, and Olague

NAYES:            Sugaya and Miguel

ABSENT:          Borden


8.                                                                                                       (C. HAW: (415) 558-6618)

            ACADEMY OF ART UNIVERSITY (AAU) ENFORCEMENT PROGRAM UPDATE - Informational presentation and discussion on the Academy of Art University (AAU) housing practices and progress on the enforcement program. 

Preliminary Recommendation: No Action Required


SPEAKERS:     Gail Roberts, Francisco de Costa, Sara Juto, Brenda King Randal, Linda Chapman, Sue Hestor, and David Cincotta – representing the Academy

ACTION:           Informational only – no action


9.         2007.1079C                                                                (R. Crawford: (415) 558-6358)

2295 TAYLOR STREET (aka 701 CHESTNUT STREET) - southwest corner of Taylor and Chestnut Streets, a Lot 001, in Assessor’s Block 0066 - Request for Conditional Use Authorization, pursuant to Planning Code Sections 722.21 Use Size exceeding 1,999 square feet, and 722.81 Institutions, Large, to modify Planning Commission Motion 13457 in Case # 1992.400IECV severing the use of the property at 2295 Taylor Street from that  at 800 Chestnut Street and to establish a Large Institutional Use, Academy of Art University, a post-secondary educational institution and allow use of the building for artist studio space for graduate students of the University within the North Beach Neighborhood Commercial District and 40-X Height and Bulk District.

Preliminary Recommendation: Disapproval


SPEAKERS:     None

ACTION:           CU application was withdrawn


1:30 P.M.



10.        2010.0756T                                                                    (A. RODGERS: (415) 558-6395)

Ordinance amending Planning Code Sections 124, 132.2, 144, 145, 145.1, 145.5, 150, 151.1, 155, 161, 186, 209.8, 210.3, 212, 231, 243, 253, 253.3, and repealing Sections 175.1, 175.2, 175.3, 175.4, 175.5, and 249.26, to create comprehensive and consistent street frontage controls.  Ordinance proposed by Supervisor Mirkarimi to create comprehensive and consistent street frontage controls for residential districts, to create consistent ground floor controls for industrial districts, to permit certain small corner commercial uses in RM-3 and RM-4 districts, to modify floor area ration controls in the Van Ness SUD, to modify conditional use authorization requirements for buildings over 40 feet in RM and RC districts, to amend the procedure for certain exceptions from off-street parking and loading requirements, and to permit parking and loading exceptions to preserve historic buildings and trees.

Preliminary Recommendation: Approval with Modifications.


SPEAKERS:     In support:  Tom Radulovich – Livable City, Marilyn Amini, Regina – Small Business Commission, and Jeremy Paul

ACTION:           Approved amendments to sections 209.8 and 243 only.  All other proposed amendments were continued to January 13, 2011

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

ABSENT:          Borden



11.        2010.0970C                                                                         (E. WATTY: (415) 558-6620)

2342-2348 MARKET STREET - north side between 16th and Castro Streets; Lot 007 in Assessor's Block 3562 - Staff-Initiated Modification to Conditional Use Authorization, Case No. 2008.0444C, pursuant to Planning Code Sections 303 to enclose or remove a smoking patio in front of a bar (dba Trigger) to mitigate complaints regarding noise.  On June 26, 2008 the Planning Commission approved 2008.0444C to expand an existing bar with other entertainment and for a use size exceeding 2,999 square feet. The Project also included an outdoor activity area, pursuant to Sections 721.24 and 790.70, consisting of a front smoking patio.  The Subject Property is within the Upper Market Neighborhood Commercial District and 65-B Height and Bulk District.

Preliminary Recommendation: Approval with Conditions


SPEAKERS:     In support:  Jeremy Paul – representing the Project Sponsor; In opposition:  Pat Tura, David Troup, Jain, Art Gallagher, Rob Cox, and Allen Beach Neilson

ACTION:           Approved per staff recommendations

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

ABSENT:          Borden

MOTION:           18236




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))



Manny Flores – Carpenters Union

Re:       Expressed gratitude for the work of the Planning Commission


Adjournment:    3:12 p.m.


Adopted:       January 20, 2011

Last updated: 2/7/2011 1:23:12 PM