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

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

June 16, 2011

SAN FRANCISCO

PLANNING COMMISSION

Meeting Minutes

 

Commission Chambers - Room 400

City Hall, 1 Dr. Carlton B. Goodlett Place

Thursday, June 16, 2011

12:00 PM

Regular Meeting

 

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

COMMISSONERS ABSENT:    Miguel and Borden

 

THE MEETING WAS CALLED TO ORDER BY PRESIDENT OLAGUE AT: 12:15 PM

 

STAFF IN ATTENDANCE: John Rahaim – Director of Planning, Scott Sanchez – Zoning Administrator, Corey Teague, Chelsea Fordham, Rich Sucre, Rick Crawford, Glen Cabreros, Michael E. Smith, Kirsten Dischinger, Linda D. Avery – Commission Secretary

 

A.                  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.         2009.0651C                                                                                   (B. Fu: (415) 558-6613)

2045-2121 EVANS STREET - west side between Cesar Chavez and Napoleon Streets, Lots 001B & 002 in Assessor’s Block 4343 - Request for Conditional Use Authorization under Planning Code Sections 157 and 303 to allow parking in excess of accessory amounts for the proposed Restaurant Depot building expansion, within the PDR-2 (Core Production, Distribution, and Repair) Zoning District and a 65-J Height and Bulk District. 

(Proposed for continuance to July 7, 2011)

 

SPEAKERS:     None

ACTION:           Without a hearing, continued to 7/7/11

            AYES:              Olague, Antonini, Fong, Moore, Sugaya

            ABSENT:          Miguel and Borden

 

 

2.         2011.0162C                                                                         (R. Sucré:  (415) 575-9108)

274 Brannan Street - north side of Brannan Street, between 2nd and Delancey Streets, Lot 073 in Assessor’s Block 3774 - Request for Conditional Use  Authorization under Planning Code Sections 712.83 and 303 to install a Wireless Transmission Facility consisting of six panel antennas and associated equipment and having a Location Preference of 2 on a six-story office building as part of the T-Mobile Wireless Telecommunications Network within the Mixed Use-Office (MUO) Zoning District, a 65-X Height and Bulk District, and the South End Historic District.

(Proposed for Continuance to September 8, 2011)

`

SPEAKERS:     None

ACTION:           Without a hearing, continued to 9/8/11

            AYES:              Olague, Antonini, Fong, Moore, Sugaya

            ABSENT:         Miguel and Borden

 

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

 

3.             2011.0186C                                                                     (C. Teague:  (415) 575-9081)

550 VALENCIA STREET - west side between 16th and 17th Streets, Lot 008 in Assessor's Block 3568 - Request for Conditional Use Authorization, pursuant to Planning Code Sections 121.2, 303, and 726.41, to allow an approximately 3,900 square foot full-service restaurant and bar (d.b.a Mohave) in the Valencia Street NCT (Neighborhood Commercial Transit) Zoning District, Mission Alcoholic Beverage Special Use Subdistrict, and 55-X Height and Bulk District.

Preliminary Recommendation: Approval with conditions

NOTE:              This item was removed from the Consent Calendar

SPEAKERS:     Bill MacNevin, James MacNevin, Oscar Grande, Peter Glikstein, Amparo Vijil, Ligia Montana

ACTION:           Following testimony, continued to 9/15/11 to allow outreach. The public hearing remains open

            AYES:              Olague, Antonini, Fong, Moore, Sugaya

            ABSENT:          Miguel and Borden

 

4.         2011.0211C                                                                     (C. Teague:  (415) 575-9081)

2499 FOLSOM STREET - east side between 20th and 21st Streets, Lot 020 in Assessor's Block 3612 - Request for Conditional Use Authorization, pursuant to Planning Code Sections 186, 303, and 710.44, to allow an approximately 780 square foot small self-service restaurant (d.b.a. Joey n Bats Coffee and Bakery) in an existing “Limited Commercial Use” space in the RH-3 (Residential, House, Three-Family) Zoning District, Mission Alcoholic Beverage Special Use Subdistrict, and 40-X Height and Bulk District.

Preliminary Recommendation:  Approval with Conditions

 

SPEAKERS:     None

ACTION:           Approved

            AYES:              Olague, Antonini, Fong, Moore, Sugaya

            ABSENT:          Miguel and Borden

MOTION:           18380

 

C.         COMMISSIONERS’ QUESTIONS AND MATTERS

 

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:

Just a few comments and some questions on some general things we struggle with all the time. I think it is very important that the public understand that we often have to differentiate between negative impacts that a business will have and positive impacts.  And sometimes a lot of attention is paid to the negative side and very little to the positive side. I interpret negative impacts as impacts on light and air and traffic, perhaps causing negative effects on neighboring businesses and things like that.  Whereas positive impacts such as adding jobs and increasing property values and, you know, less crime and fewer vacancies -- I mean, these have to be addressed. My feeling is we are not obliged to mitigate a positive impact, but our job is to mitigate negative impacts. Also, when we talk about groups in the community, we have to make sure that we always get a representative sample of groups from a community and not just one group for pretense or that purports that they represent the community and that be the only group we listen to. Obviously, it is always whoever comes to us and speaks, those are the ones we hear from and the ones that do not come, we do not hear from, but we have to be really knowledgeable about who really does live within an area and who represents the area.

Finally, there has been a lot of discussion on the subject of profits and nonprofits and those sorts of things. I think what the public has to understand, and I think most of them do, is there's nothing wrong with having a profit. If you are a viable business, you probably better have a profit. For accounting purposes, a lot of times they plough the money back into equipment, you cannot spent it all in the same year. The same with a real estate acquisition - the principle is not deductible. You will by necessity show a profit. I think that if you -- just because a particular company has a profit does not mean that there is something wrong with them.  In fact, it may be that a lot of it is being funneled back into investments. Then I have questions for staff. I spoke to some of the staff regarding this, and it has to do with the Van Ness Special Use District, which we have heard a lot about but never really gotten any paper work on. We will be asked to make some decisions in regards to this without actually having the plan before us. I have asked planning staff to provide at least a memo that summarizes it; so we can read them over and understand what is actually asked here; understanding in terms of the housing for the Van Ness Special Use District; that a significant portion of the units we have asked for in the 1970's and 1980's have actually already been built; and a few more are entitled. It is important to know where we are on the goal for this plan and it (a staff summary) will satisfy a lot of it.  We may have different ideas.
Also, I want to know about exceptions.  I pointed out in the past and as for answers about the former Lincoln-Mercury Dealership that is now a theater and has parking and apparently does have some condominiums in there as well, but I wonder if the ratio is really 3to1 housing. The same with the San Francisco Ford, which regrettably may be closing, but that is an automotive dealerships that is a new business and new use of that space prior to what was there. I am wondering how we have applied this housing requirement in the past on other projects that have come forward. So those are a couple of things.

Finally, and this is also in regards to the entire California Pacific issue. I do not know if Planning can do this, and it may have to get some counseling, but we really need to have some accurate figures on charitable contributions by hospitals and kind of compare these by staff, not just by what someone brings up in discussion, which I did not necessarily think those statistics have to be used as accurate. Staff has to do the work to figure of what kind of contributions from two hospitals, such as Stanford, or California Pacific, or Catholic Healthcare West, or Kaiser, or UCSF. As we move forward on the issue, we have to move forward with good documents and good information because we cannot make informed decisions unless we have good information. I am thankful for the work staff has done, they have been doing a great job, but we have to go a little further before we can have all the facts.

Commissioner Moore:

I went to a SPUR meeting on Tuesday. Sarah Dennis was representing the Planning Department, and someone from the Mayor's Office of Housing, and someone from ABAG.  There was a strong discussion focusing on the role of the region and particularly San Francisco's role in looking at gentrification. I think we are on a very good track. It might make sense to have an abbreviated version of that particular presentation in front of the Commission. There are many challenges, obviously, of what that all means physically. There were only two sides in that discussion. Some of us had some problems with the project because it only had densification at ParkMerced and Treasure Island, but the rest of the City was spare. It would be interesting if indeed at some point, the Department could find a grant to really look with a fine tooth comb under the microscope of how intensification really physically can happen. The next question is a question to the Director. The Senate in Sacramento passed a budget last night, very late, but there is an indication that it might have an effect on the continuance of Redevelopment as we know it. As the details become more available, I asked if you could please keep us updated and what the changes mean for you and for us.

President Olague:

We have raised this question before, the topic of tourism. Can we think about tentatively scheduling a time in September to do a presentation on that issue? I know that Commissioner Fong and others have raised it in the past? Maybe late September? I think that would give us time to prepare.

Director Rahaim:

I had an initial conversation with the Director, but I am happy to talk to him and schedule a time with him in the coming weeks. They have done some very good work, as Commissioner Fong has indicated.

President Olague:  

Great, we have been talking about over- saturation of alcohol and other items. We may want to revisit that on some levels, at some point.

 

D.         DIRECTOR’S REPORT

 

6.                   Director’s Announcements

 

Director Rahaim:

We're having a series of four public workshops related to the early stages of the Central
Corridor Plan, which is the Fourth Street Corridor Plan that we have talked to you about.
There are four community meetings in a row, June 22, 23,  24, and 25 at the Eugene Coleman Committee House on Howard Street between Fourth and Fifth Streets. We are looking at the direction that plan could go and how we can proceed in the coming months. Second, there is a Glen Park Community Plan meeting on June 22. This is the latest meeting regarding the Glen Park Plan, 6:30 until 8:30 at St. John's Elementary School on the evening of June 22.  And last, I just want to give you the highlights:  There was a memo regarding the budget in your packet.  I had asked Tom to prepare this just to let you know that the budget that you approved, after it left the Mayor's Office, there were some changes to it.  That typically happens every year, of course, and in this case what has happened is there were additions made to our budget’s General Fund allocations. That is a little unusual. But specifically, the Mayor's Office added funding as it relates to the America’s Cup for the staffing work – for the first year of work on the Master Plant – it would cover the staff costs and environmental review for the first year.  The changes also reflect changes in state grants that we received.  Again, this is not approved yet because it still has to be sent to the Board.  But I think after you approve the budget, we received $400,000 in grants from FTC related to the Central Project Corridor.

 

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

 

LAND USE COMMITTEE:

§         BF Various Executive Park.  This week the Land Use Committee considered amendments to the General Plan, Planning Code and Zoning Map that would enable mixed-use development in an area that had been zoned for suburban style office and hotel development.  Commissioners, you heard this item on May 5th at which time you recommended approval with modifications to enable the relocation of one tower one block towards the east.  An addendum to the EIR was completed to assure no new impacts were created prior to the hearing.  At this week’s hearing, the Committee considered the actions as recommended by the Planning Commission, including the relocation of a tower. The Committee made amendments to the Ordinances changing proposed Planning Code text regarding the tower location and continued the item as amended.

§         BF 110482 Misc. Code Amendments.  On August 5, 2010, the Planning Commission recommended approval of the technical modifications and amendments contained in this Ordinance.  Originally, the legislation contained amendments to issues relating to Historic Preservation.  Since Planning Commission action in August of last year, the HPC has continued to hold hearings and the PC has requested additional time to consider and dialog with HPC’s.   As the Planning Commission and Historic Preservation Commission are continuing in their dialog about historic preservation issues, all modifications related to historic preservation have been removed at the request of the Planning Commission President.  This week the Board Committee forwarded the Ordinance to the Full Board with a recommendation of approval.

§         BF 110674  Hearing on Interagency Plan Implementation Committee Annual Report.  This week our implementation staff provided the Board Committee with the mandated annual report. Planning Staff provided the same report to the Planning Commission last month.  As this item was an informational report, the Committee took no action and continued the item to the call of the chair.

 

FULL BOARD OF SUPERVISORS:

 

§         Housing Element.  On Tuesday, the Board considered the draft Housing Element.  For this item, the Board has already heard the appeal of the EIR and upheld the CEQA document with a 8-3 vote.  Without public comment or Board debate, the Housing Element also passed this week by a 8-3 vote.

§         Bf 110556 Western SoMa Community Stabilization Policy.  Supervisor Kim is the sponsor of this resolution whereby the Board would urge the Planning Commission to incorporate the policy and objectives of the Stabilization Policy into the Western SoMa Community Plan when that plan comes before you.  This Stabilization Policy developed by the Task Force would establish a metering of development with the goal of achieving the community’s desired balance of affordable housing to market-rate housing and jobs to housing.  As a resolution, the Board does not refer these items to the Commission (only Ordinances are required to wait 90-days for your deliberation).  At the Full Board hearing, Supervisor Kim introduced changes to the resolution so that the resolution no longer urges the Commission to incorporate the Western SoMa Task Forces’ Stabilization Policy but instead asks the Commission to incorporate yet to be developed policies into the plan that would ensure a balance between housing, affordable housing and jobs.  With these amendments, the Board approved the Resolution.

§         BF 101350 Parking in SoMa and Mission Bay.  The Planning Commission considered this proposed Ordinance sponsored by Supervisor Kim on April 28.  The legislation would revise parking, use, and street frontage in the Western SoMa area to conform to more contemporary policies in San Francisco.  At the hearing, the Commission voted to recommend approval with modifications.  Last week the Committee incorporated your recommended changes: including updating the Ordinance to be consistent with legislation which has passed in the past 6 months and removing all controls related to Mission Bay. This week the Board approved the Ordinance as amended.

§         BF 110658 800 Presidio/Booker T Mixed Use Development. The CEQA appeal had been calendared for this week but it was continued to June 21 so that it may be considered along with the pending CU appeal.

INTRODUCTIONS: 

  • BF 110592 Inner Clement, Outer Clement, and Geary Neighborhood Commercial Controls.  Supervisor Mar introduced an Ordinance that would amend the Planning Code:

1)       allow eating and drinking uses as principally permitted uses in the Inner Clement and Outer Clement Neighborhood Commercial Districts-- if the total street frontage dedicated to such uses does not exceed 30 percent and as conditionally permitted uses if the total street frontage dedicated to such uses exceeds 30 percent;

2)       remove the prohibition on large fast-food restaurants and prohibit formula retail pet supply stores and formula retail eating and drinking establishments in the Geary Boulevard Fast-Food Subdistrict;

3)       make video stores a principally permitted use on the ground floor in the NC-3 and the Inner Clement and Outer Clement NCD;

4)       permit a height increase of five feet to permit tall ground-floor ceiling heights in the 40-X and 50-X Height and Bulk Districts in the NC-3 Zoning District along Geary Boulevard from Scott Street to 28th Avenue.

This is a modification to an Ordinance the Supervisor had introduced a few months ago regarding Formula Retail Pet Food Stores on Geary.  This item has been tentatively scheduled for hearing on July 14.

  • BF 110590 Supervisor Cohen introduced an Ordinance that would Ordinance amend the Planning Code Section to: 1) provide a process for the reconstruction of buildings damaged or destroyed by fire or acts of God; 2) provide a retroactive operative date of August 1, 2009.
  • BF 110589  Supervisors David Chiu, John Avalos, Jane Kim, Eric Mar, Ross Mirkarimi introduced an Ordinance related to a project currently under review by the Department.  This Ordinance would create the Lombard and Scott Street Affordable Group Housing Special Use District for the real property encompassing 3151-3155 Scott Street (Assessor’s Block No. 0937, Lot No. 001), at the southwest corner of Scott and Lombard Streets, in order to facilitate the development of an affordable group housing project.  The project and accompanying Ordinance are tentatively scheduled to be before this Commission on July 14.

Board of Appeals:

There was no hearing by the Board of Appeals last week.

HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION:

The Historic Preservation Commission met yesterday.  There were two items of interest.  One was the Landmark Designation Program that was proposed by staff. The Commission adopted it, but there were two Additions. A number of people came out in support of adding The Sam Jordan Pub on Third Street.  A brief history was given about this location, the building, and the owner.  Mr. Jordan was the first African American who ran for Mayor in San Francisco in 1964.  There was a lot of support for having this building added to the designation work program. Also, the Marcus Bookstore building on Fillmore Street was added to the program. The other item of interest was the Showplace Survey Area.  The Commission removed the Axis Café from the survey area. Yesterday’s hearing was basically just on that item.  They took action saying that property did not meet the criteria to be included in the survey. The rest of the survey was continued until July 20.



 

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.

 

None

 

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:     Helen Geikakis

                        Re: Hickory Alley

                        Cathleen Courtney

                        Re: Acknowledged Frank Hinman memory

 

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

 

8.         2009.0418E                                                                   (C. FORDHAM: (415) 575-9071)

PIER 36/BRANNAN STREET PROJECT - east side of The Embarcadero, in proximity to the intersections of Brannan and Townsend Streets (Lots 034,036 in Assessor’s Block 9900) – Certification of the Final Environmental Impact Report. The proposed project involves the demolition of the existing Pier 36, including 133,000 square feet (sq.ft) of pile-supported concrete and wooden decks and piles, the 35,000 sq. ft. Pier 36 warehouse building, and approximately 18,800 sq.ft. of marginal wharf which runs between Piers 30-32 and Pier 38, and construction of a new approximately 57,000 sq.ft. open space park. The proposed open space, “the Brannan Street Wharf”, would be approximately 830 feet long, and would vary in width from 10 feet to 140 feet. The construction of the proposed Brannan Street Wharf would require driving 269 new piles and reinforcing the adjacent seawall. The project site is located in a M-2 (Heavy Industrial) Zoning District and 40-X height and bulk district.

Note: The public hearing on the Draft EIR is closed. The public comment period for the Draft EIR ended on March 28, 2011. The Planning Commission does not conduct public review of Final EIRs. Public comments on the certification may be presented to the Planning Commission during the Public Comment portion of the Commission calendar.

Preliminary Recommendation: Certify the Final EIR

 

SPEAKERS:     None

ACTION:           Approved certification of the Final EIR

            AYES:              Olague, Antonini, Fong, Moore, Sugaya

            ABSENT:          Miguel and Borden

   MOTION:           18381

 

H.                  REGULAR CALENDAR 

 

9.         2011.0271C                                                                          (R. Sucré:  (415) 575-9108)

274 Brannan Street - north side of Brannan Street, between 2nd and Delancey Streets, Lot 073 in Assessor’s Block 3774 - Request for Conditional Use Authorization under Planning Code Sections 712.83 and 303 to install a Wireless Transmission Facility consisting of twelve panel antennas and associated equipment and having a Location Preference of 2 on a six-story office building as part of the AT&T Wireless Telecommunications Network within the Mixed Use-Office (MUO) Zoning District, a 65-X Height and Bulk District, and the South End Historic District.

Preliminary Recommendation:  Approval with Conditions

 

            SPEAKERS:     Tedi Vriheas of AT&T external affairs, Tony Kim of Town                                                                Consulting, Marc Dragun

ACTION:           Approved including a finding that the project sponsor is to contact the sign owner/operator about possibly limiting the hours of illuminating the sign

AYES:              Olague, Antonini, Fong, Moore, Sugaya

            ABSENT:          Miguel and Borden

   MOTION:           18382

 

            10a.      2010.0162DDV                                                           (R. CRAWFORD: (415) 558-6358)

1945 HYDE STREET - west side at Russell Street; Lot 002 in Assessor's Block 0123 - Requests for Discretionary Review of Building Permit Application No. 2010 0517 2557 proposing to convert a 58 stall parking garage to a mixed use building with 7 dwelling units, 14 parking spaces and a commercial unit.  The project will add a one-story vertical addition to the top of the building that will be setback 12 feet from the front wall and 10 feet from the rear property line within the NC-1 (Neighborhood Commercial Cluster) Zoning District and 40-X Height and Bulk District.

Staff Analysis:  Full Discretionary Review

Preliminary Recommendation:  Do not take Discretionary Review and approve

(Continued from Regular Meeting of May 19, 2011)

 

SPEAKERS:     Tim Colen, David Meckel, Michelle Sudduth, Kathleen Courtney, Scott Edmondson, Sarah Taber,  Ben DeVeres, Joe Harney, Harvey Hacker, Joanne Allen, Richard Lerner, John Willis, Zoe Brillinger, Kevin Webb, Amy Boon, Steve Vettel, Jamie Cherry

ACTION:           The Commission took DR and approved as amended: to unbundle parking; eliminate the awning; add setback footage

AYES:              Olague, Antonini, Fong, Moore, Sugaya

            ABSENT:          Miguel and Borden

   DRA:                0216

 

10b.      2010.0162DDV                                                           (R. CRAWFORD: (415) 558-6358)

1945 HYDE STREET - west side at Russell Street; Lot 002 in Assessor's Block 0123 - Request for Variance, pursuant to Planning Code Section 134 to modify the rear yard requirement in the NC-1 District. The project proposes to convert a 58 stall parking garage to a mixed use building with 7 dwelling units, 14 parking spaces and a commercial unit.  The project will add a one-story vertical addition to the top of the building that will be setback 10 feet from the rear property line where a setback of 25 feet is required within the NC-1 (Neighborhood Commercial Cluster) Zoning District and 40-X Height and Bulk District.

(Continued from Regular Meeting of May 19, 2011)

 

SPEAKERS:     Same as those listed for item 10a

ACTION:           The Zoning Administrator closed the public hearing and granted the variance subject to the standard conditions of approval

 

11a.      2010.0073D                                                                   (G. CABREROS: (415) 558-6169)

671-673 26th Avenue - west side between Balboa and Anza Streets;  Lot 012 in Assessor's Block 1569 - Mandatory Discretionary Review, pursuant to Planning Code Section 317(d), of Demolition Permit Application Nos. 2009.07.24.3372 and  2009.07.24.3373, proposing to demolish two residential buildings: a two-story, single-family dwelling at the rear of the lot and a one-story, single-family dwelling towards the front of the lot within an RH-2 (Residential, House, Two-Family) District and a 40-X Height and Bulk District.

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

 

SPEAKERS:     None

ACTION:           The Commission did not take DR and approved the demolition

AYES:              Olague, Antonini, Fong, Moore, Sugaya

            ABSENT:          Miguel and Borden

   DRA:                0217

 

11b.      2011.0369D                                                                 (G. CABREROS: (415) 558-6169)

671-673 26th Avenue - west side between Balboa and Anza Streets;  Lot 012 in Assessor's Block 1569 - Mandatory Discretionary Review, pursuant to Planning Code Section 317(d), of Building Permit Application No. 2009.07.24.3370, proposing to construct a new three-story, two-unit building within an RH-2 (Residential, House, Two-Family) District and a 40-X Height and Bulk District. 

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

 

SPEAKERS:     None

ACTION:           The Commission did not take DR and approved the new construction with the understanding that the project sponsor is to continue working with staff on material and design

AYES:              Olague, Antonini, Fong, Moore, Sugaya

            ABSENT:          Miguel and Borden

   DRA:                0218

 

12.        2010.0598D                                                                         (M. SMITH: (415) 558-6322)

75 MARS STREET -  at Corbett Avenue: Lot 016 in Assessor's Block 2653 - Request for Discretionary Review of Building Permit Application No. 2010.06.15.4512, proposing to construct a one-story vertical addition, a rear horizontal addition, alter the front façade, and add a second dwelling unit to a one-story over basement, single-family dwelling within a RH-2 (Residential, House, Two-Family) Zoning District and 40-X Height and Bulk Districts.

Staff Analysis:  Abbreviated Discretionary Review            

Preliminary Recommendation:  Do not take Discretionary Review and approve

 

SPEAKERS:     Hymi Newton – DR requestor; Owen Kinsley – Project Architect, David Otto – Project Sponsor, Ben Farmangin, Mark Silva, Ted Volgas, Sterward Moulder

ACTION:           The Commission did not take DR and approved the project

AYES:              Olague, Antonini, Fong, Moore, Sugaya

            ABSENT:          Miguel and Borden

  DRA:                 0219

 

5:30 P.M.

 

13.                                                                                         (K. DISCHINGER: (415) 558-6284)

MARKET AND OCTAVIA MONITORING REPORT FOLLOW UP HEARING - members of the Market and Octavia Community Advisory Committee (CAC) will follow up on key issues identified and discussed in the Market/Octavia Plan Community Advisory Committee’s Supplemental Report. Staff will be available to respond to questions and comments.

Preliminary Recommendation: Informational item, no action requested.

(Continued from the Regular Meeting of June 2, 2011)

 

SPEAKERS:     Jason Henderson – CAC and Robin Levitt

ACTION:           Informational only – no action required

 

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

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

 

None

 

Adjournment: 6:14 PM

 

ADOPTED: July 7, 2011

 

Last updated: 7/12/2011 4:45:26 PM