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

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

October 13, 2011

New Page 1

 

SAN FRANCISCO

PLANNING COMMISSION

Meeting Minutes

Commission Chambers - Room 400

City Hall, 1 Dr. Carlton B. Goodlett Place

Thursday, October 13, 2011

12:00 PM

Regular Meeting

 

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

 

THE MEETING WAS CALLED TO ORDER BY PRESIDENT OLAGUE AT 12:09 p.m.

 

STAFF IN ATTENDANCE: John Rahaim – Director of Planning, Scott Sanchez – Zoning Administrator, Claudia Flores, Paul Lord, Mary Woods, Sara Vellve, Rick Crawford, Kim Durandet, and Linda 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.         2011.0864Z                                                                        (A. STARR: (415) 558-6362)

312 Connecticut Street - Zoning Map Amendments – The Commission will consider a proposed Ordinance [BF 110845] introduced by Supervisor Cohen concerning Zoning Map Sheet No. ZN08 to: 1) rezone Block No. 4035, Lot No. 003 (312 Connecticut Street) from RH-2 to NC-2; and 2) making environmental findings, Planning Code Section 302 findings, and findings of consistency with the General Plan and the Priority Policies of Planning Code Section 101.1.

Preliminary Recommendation: Approval of Proposed Ordinance to Board of Supervisors

            (Proposed for Continuance to October 20, 2011)

                               

SPEAKERS:     None

ACTION:           Continued as proposed

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

ABSENT:          Olague

 

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.         2011.0779Q                                                                 (C. LAMORENA: (415) 575-9085)

1371 – 1375 GROVE STREET - south side of Grove Street between Broderick and Divisadero Streets; Lot 031 in Assessor’s Block 1201 - Request for Condominium Conversion Subdivision to convert a three-story-over-garage, five-unit building into residential condominiums within a RM-1 (Residential, Mixed, Low Density) Zoning District and a 40-X Height and Bulk District.

Preliminary Recommendation: Approval

 

SPEAKERS:     None

ACTION:           Approved

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

ABSENT:          Olague

MOTION:           18461 

C.         COMMISSIONERS’ QUESTIONS AND MATTERS

 

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 Antonini:

I had a meeting this week with representatives of Live Nation in regards to Masonic Auditorium, that will be coming before us in one form fairly soon.  I wanted to acknowledge, I do not know if anyone has asked for an adjournment in memory of Steven Jobs and Al Davis. If that is ok with my fellow commissioners, because these individuals are both self-made individuals and are examples to show the fact that America is a land of opportunity, and if you work hard and save your money and you have an idea and you believe in that idea, you can do well.  And this is the case here, today in this Country. The third item: if any of you have been watching the baseball playoffs and also Monday Night Football, you notice the pictures in Detroit showing for the baseball field and America Park near each other. And if you followed recent history in the United States, Detroit and St. Louis have been the most economically challenged Cities in the Country, having lost large members of their population and they're able to put together the ability to create these facilities and create a spirit of community and this was evident in Detroit. It had been a long time for them on the football field and as far as baseball is concerned but there is more to it than just the facilities. We can take a lesson from some of these other facilities with capital projects that benefit the cities.  And finally, I get mailings at my dental office because I am a property owner there, of projects in the vicinity. These are not items that would necessarily come before us. They're basically items that have been sent for the permit process and the 312 notifications, because property owners have to get this. There is a situation where I lived -- we looked at the design for a particular street and it was an addition to a third floor. Most of them already have third floors, with two over the garage. The others were added in the style of the rest of the house. It looks like a pillbox on the top of here. I asked why this was this way. I ask why this does not look like the rest of this, like the Mission revival with the tile roof, and part of this addition. That is the way they did this the first time. But the staff, I don't know if this was historical or not, but planning staff said to modify this to make it look different from the rest of the house. This is a policy we have to discuss in the future. What are we going to advise the staff, as to how to handle these instances where people are making an addition to their own homes?  We're not talking about historical rated structures. People want to make an addition to their homes. Can they make this contextual?  I am not sure that we need to schedule anything today but this is a conversation we need to have in the future to see how the Commissioners feel about this because obviously, this is being done at a staff level.

Commissioner Borden:

Tomorrow, from 4:00 pm until 8:00 pm, we have a couple of blocks of art by Urban Solutions, an organization that works with small businesses in the Lower Fillmore.  They help them work on their business plans. This will showcase the amazing businesses across Sixth Street. This is between Market and Howard, and artists will be showing their work. The businesses will be open to walk in and discover all of these vibrant businesses. I recommend for you to come out and join us. This will show what a local organization can do to revitalize the neighborhood and how we can help this organization.

Commissioner Moore:

I would like to comment on an e-mail about Board file 11047, with improvements for small business and landscaping qualifications, a proposed ordinance by Supervisor Chiu. I am concerned about receiving this, even for a consideration. For years, all possible, reasonable codes have addressed this, and this particular draft could fall on its face, not only is this a burden for small business owners, unduly challenging historic preservation, and occurring at a time when this kind of change in the ordnance is in no one’s interest. I am not yet aware of how the staff will work on this, and they are normally very astute. They will work with the group to provide a push back and challenge. I want to give my concerns based on what has happened with the City's strong attempts to be in compliance with ADA, given that we live in a City where many buildings fall into having been built before this was the law, having to catch up  with the old and new. I will watch this very carefully and hope that the Supervisors and everyone else who will work on this will engage every possible means to fully understand the implications.

Commissioner Borden:

I did not understand the context for why this has been proposed but they have issues with people who file lawsuits against small-business owners for access issues, but maybe we could have a conversation on the topic to understand this legislation.

Commissioner Miguel:

I also received this memo, and I am concerned, having been a small business property owner in a neighborhood commercial district for well over 25 years. I thought that we were getting out of this. I will stop there, but I do believe the conversation should take place. Also, during the last week, I have had conversations regarding the project at Van Ness Avenue, some extensive conversations regarding legislation that may be going through on student housing, which will also be coming to us as well as continuing conversations with a number of people on changes to Articles 10 and 11.

Commissioner Moore:

Vice-President Miguel, could you please address what the Commission is planning to do instead of having the Small Business Commission and a subgroup of this body meet with each other because we are pushing forward with scheduling a public hearing, on the subject of formula of retail and small businesses.

Commissioner Miguel:

It is my understanding regarding this, that the parameters of this discussion have to be established first, and I don't think that there is full agreement on these parameters between the Planning and Small Business Commissions at the moment. But there is intent with both commissions to have this discussion take place.

Commissioner Moore:

Without having this discussion, we are the legislative body on this and we could create feedback from the Small Business Commission, in order to have as broad a discussion as possible.

Commissioner Miguel:

Whether or not this is a joint hearing or the hearing takes place here – this is what is in the air at the moment.

Commissioner Moore:  

I hope that we will not continue this out to next year because this is a very complex issue.

Commissioner Sugaya:

Just to continue, I would be interested in not so much the issues themselves, about small business, but more in terms of the process and why there cannot be a couple of working  committees to sort of flush this out first. I understand there would be the possibility there would have to be a public meeting of some sort announced, but I think there are enough representatives here who would volunteer for this and it could work here. I don’t know about the Small Business Commission.

Commissioner Miguel:

That is a distinct possibility.

Commissioner Sugaya:

I think that you could get a lot more done with a few than having the whole Commission.

 

D.         DIRECTOR’S REPORT

 

4.         Director’s Announcements

           

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

 

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS:

No meeting this week

BOARD OF APPEALS:

The Board of Appeals did meet last night and there was one item that may be of your interest, the project was at 524 Howard Street and it was before the Commission on June 9, [you] revoked the entitlement of 212 square feet for the project.  This was filed in 1984 and reauthorize in 1999.  They never commenced construction. If you recall, the project sponsor did not attend but they did appeal the Planning Commission's decision. It was scheduled at the Board of Appeals on August 10 of this year but they did not file an appeal brief. The Board of Appeals rescheduled this item to last night. They did not file the appeal brief for that hearing either and did not attend the hearing. The Board voted to uphold your decision. The project sponsor has 10 days to request a rehearing.

HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION:

No meeting this week   

                       

6.                                                                                                 (C. TEAGUE: (415) 575-9081)

ACTION PLAN UPDATE INFORMATIONAL PRESENTATION – Presentation and analysis regarding the first six months of the Department’s new “Preliminary Project Assessment (PPA) process.

 

SPEAKERS:     Sue Hestor

ACTION:           Informational – No action required

 

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:     Linda Chapman

                        Re: 1800 South Van Ness

                        Brad Paul

                        Re: Value of LEED certification on buildings and solar panels

 

F.            REGULAR CALENDAR 

 

7.                                                                                                (C. FLORES: (415) 558-6473)

PUBLIC OUTREACH AND ENGAGEMENT IMPROVEMENT PROCESS - The Department is engaging in a Public Outreach and Engagement (POE) Improvements process in order to enhance the Department’s effective outreach and engagement of the City’s residents and businesses in the planning process and the public’s understanding of the Department’s mission and our work.  It involves three general components: 1) an assessment of our current practices, 2) development of POE guidelines and tools for more effective outreach and engagement, and 3) staff capacity building.  This informational presentation will be an overview of the results and recommendations for next steps.

Preliminary Recommendation: None Requested

 

SPEAKERS:     Paul Werner

ACTION:           Informational – No action required

 

            8.         2008.0877ETZM                                                                    (P. LORD: (415) 558-6311)

Western SoMa Community Plan - Informational Presentation #2 - Since publication of the Western SoMa Community Plan – Draft for Citizens Review on August 14, 2008, a lot of work has been carried out by members of the Western SoMa Citizens Planning Task Force (the TF), City family and the Planning Department staff. The purpose of this first presentation, in a series of two informational presentations, is to provide the Planning Commission and the public with updates on this planning process well in advance of adoption hearings in 2012.

The first informational presentation on September 8, 2011 covered three topical components of the entire Western SoMa Community planning recommendations.

       The Western SoMa Community Plan – Proposal for Adoption, 2011

       The Western SoMa Community Plan Implementation Measures

       Recommendations for the Western SoMa Community Benefits Program

 

This second informational presentation on October 13, 2011 will cover five topical components of the Western SoMa Community planning recommendations.

       The Filipino Social Heritage Special Heritage Special Use District - Background Report.

       The LGBTQ Social Heritage Special Heritage Special Use District - Background Report.

       The Western SoMa Design Standards - Draft.

       Proposed Western SoMa Planning Code Amendments - Draft.

       Proposed Western SoMa Community Stabilization Policy - Draft.

        

SPEAKERS:     Bernadett Poi, Tobi Levi, Jim Meko, Gayle Rubin, Seth Munten, Robert Kamato, Jeremy Paul, Ray Berganti, Andrew Greg, Amik Conyalis, Scott Kepier, Sue Hestor, Henry Kerkowitz, Amir Marsy

ACTION:           Informational – No action required

 

9.         2011.0051C                                                                      (M. Woods:  (415) 558-6315)

2429 CALIFORNIA STREET - south side between Fillmore and Steiner Streets; Lot 001F in Assessor’s Block 0654 - Request for Conditional Use Authorization to allow a “financial service” use (d.b.a. “Chase Bank”) and a use size greater than 2,500 square feet pursuant to Sections 121.2, 303(c), 718.21 and 718.49 of the Planning Code, in the Upper Fillmore Street Neighborhood Commercial District and a 40-X Height and Bulk District. 

Preliminary Recommendation: Approval with Conditions

(Continued from Regular Meeting of July 28, 2011)

 

SPEAKERS:     None

ACTION:           Approved

AYES:              Antonini, Borden, Fong, Sugaya

NAYES:            Moore, Miguel, Olague

MOTION:           18462 

            10.        2011.0198C                                                                        (S. Vellve: (415) 558-6263)

601 – 14th AVENUE - southwest corner of Balboa Street and 14th Avenue; Lot 001 in Assessor’s Block 1630 - Request for Conditional Use Authorization, pursuant to Planning Code Sections 209.6 and 303, to allow AT&T Mobility to locate up to six (6) WTS panel antennas in three separate faux chimney elements on the roof and related equipment in the building’s basement of the three-story institutional (Jewish Educational Society of San Francisco) building, within a RM-1 (Mixed, Low Density) District and 40-X Height and Bulk District. The site is a Location Preference 1 (school/institutional structure).

Preliminary Recommendation: Approval with Conditions

 

SPEAKERS:     Paul Werner

ACTION:           Without hearing, continued to 11/3/11

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

 

11a.      2008.0953DD                                                               (R. CRAWFORD: (415) 558-6358)

1 MCCORMICK STREET - west side, south of Pacific Avenue; Lot 048 in Assessor’s Block 0185 - Request for Discretionary Review, of Demolition Permit Application No. 2010.08.09.8400, to allow the demolition of a two-story, single-family residential building and its replacement with a three-story, single-family residential building, within the RH-1 (Residential, House, One-Family) Zoning District and 65-A Height and Bulk District.  The Zoning Administrator has reviewed the Demolition Permit Application, considers the building to be unsound, and does not require Mandatory Discretionary Review pursuant to the criteria in Planning Code Section 317(d),

Staff Analysis:  Full Discretionary Review

Preliminary Recommendation:  Do not take Discretionary Review and approve

 

SPEAKERS:     Betsy Brill, Ken Kobre, Gaye Wong, Jessie Standshaw, Damien Lillis

ACTION:           The Commission did not take Discretionary Review and approved the demolition

AYES:              Olague, Miguel, Antonini, and Borden

NAYES:            Moore

RECUSED:       Sugaya

ABSENT:          Fong

DRA:                0232 

 

11b.      2011.1065D                                                                (R. CRAWFORD: (415) 558-6358)

1 MCCORMICK STREET - west side, south of Pacific Avenue; Lot 048 in Assessor’s Block 0185 - Request for Discretionary Review of Building Permit Application No. 2010.08.09.8402, proposing to construct a new three-story single-family dwelling, within the RH-1 (Residential, House, One-Family) Zoning District and 65-A Height and Bulk District.

Staff Analysis:  Full Discretionary Review

Preliminary Recommendation:  Do not take Discretionary Review and approve

                       

SPEAKERS:     Same as those listed in item 11a.

ACTION:           The Commission did not take Discretionary Review and approved the new construction

AYES:              Olague, Miguel, Antonini, and Borden

NAYES:            Moore

RECUSED:       Sugaya

ABSENT:          Fong

DRA:                0233 

12.        2011.0837D                                                                  (K. DURANDET: (415) 575-6816)

10 LUNDYS LANE - west side between Coso Avenue and Fair Avenue; Lot 029A in Assessor’s Block 5610 - Request for Discretionary Review of Building Permit Application No. 2011.0330.3154 to convert a single-family dwelling into a two-family dwelling without changing the building envelope within a RH-2 (Residential House, Two-Family) Bernal Heights Special Use Zoning District and 40-X Height and Bulk District.

Staff Analysis:  Abbreviated Discretionary Review

Preliminary Recommendation:  Do not take Discretionary Review and approve

 

SPEAKERS:     John Soto, DR Requestor, Seth Borg, Project Architect, Rebecca Elner, Moira Denike, Kathleen Hamley, Lisa Castellanus, Barbara Simmons, Ana Hughes, San Ball,

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

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

DRA:                0234 

13.        2011.0718D                                                                   (K. DURANDET: (415) 575-6816)

1161 FOLSOM STREET - south side between 7th and 8th Streets; Lot 075 in Assessor’s Block 3755 - Request for Discretionary Review of Building Permit Application No. 2011.0103.7792 to install an auto-body spray paint booth as part of a new auto repair garage within the SLR (Service/Light Industrial/Residential) Mixed Use Zoning District and 50-X Height and Bulk District.

Staff Analysis:  Abbreviated Discretionary Review

Preliminary Recommendation:  Do not take Discretionary Review and approve

 

SPEAKERS:     Jim Jennings, Michael Andrew, L. Paul Miller, Caroline Flagiello, Glenn Walters, Lee Topar, Paul Werner, Greg Endom, Lowen Catholino, Jennifer Santos, Robert Hann, Regan Wong

ACTION:           The Commission took Discretionary Review and approved the project subject to the recommendations of the Bay Air Quality Management District; use of the spray booth are from the hours of 8:00 am to 6:00 pm, Monday-Friday; Project Sponsor and DR requestor are to continue working together to address outstanding issues; and the Project Sponsor is to continue working with Department staff.

AYES:              Olague, Miguel, Borden, Fong, and Moore

NAYES:            Sugaya

ABSENT:          Antonini

DRA:                0235 

 

G.         PUBLIC COMMENT

 

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

 

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

 

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

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

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

 

SPEAKER:      Tim Freitas and wife

                        Re: Motion # 16636 @ 3953 29th Street

 

Adjournment:    7:19 PM – In memory of Steve Jobs, Al Davis and Howard Grayson

 

Adopted:          October 27, 2011         

 

Last updated: 11/22/2011 10:19:47 AM