March 13, 2003

720 MOSCOW STREET (SAN FRANCISCO FIRE DEPARTMENT STATION #43) - northwest side between France and Italy Avenues, Lot 024, Assessor's Block 6338 - Finding of Consistency with the General Plan pursuant to § 4.105 of the San Francisco Charter to install a total of six (6) panel antennas and related equipment at an existing two-story, publicly-used structure (a fire station) as part of Cingular Wireless' wireless telecommunications network within a P (Public) Zoning District, and within a 40-X Height and Bulk District. As per the City & County of San Francisco's Wireless Telecommunications Services (WTS) Facilities Siting Guidelines the proposal is a Location Preference 1 (Preferred Location - Publicly-Used Structure).

Preliminary Recommendations: Finding of Consistency with the General Plan a.

SPEAKER(S): None

ACTION: Continued as proposed

AYES: Bradford Bell; Antonini; Feldstein; Hughes; S. Lee; W. Lee

ABSENT: Boyd

720 MOSCOW STREET (SAN FRANCISCO FIRE DEPARTMENT STATION #43) - northwest side between France and Italy Avenues, Lot 024, Assessor's Block 6338 - Request for Conditional Use authorization pursuant to Section 209.6(b) and 234 of the Planning Code to install a total of six (6) panel antennas and related equipment at an existing two-story, publicly-used structure (a fire station) as part of Cingular Wireless' wireless telecommunications network within a P (Public) Zoning District, and within a 40-X Height and Bulk District. As per the City & County of San Francisco's Wireless Telecommunications Services (WTS) Facilities Siting Guidelines the proposal is a Location Preference 1 (Preferred Location - Publicly-Used Structure).

Preliminary Recommendations: Approval with conditions.

SPEAKER(S): None

ACTION: Continued as proposed

AYES: Bradford Bell; Antonini; Feldstein; Hughes; S. Lee; W. Lee

529 - 21^ST AVENUE - west side between Anza and Balboa Streets, Lot 004 in Assessor's Block 1564 - Mandatory Discretionary Review under the Planning Commission's policy requiring review of housing demolition, of Demolition Permit Application No. 2002.06.14.9077 proposing to demolish a one-story single-family residence, in an RH-2 (Residential, House, Two-Family) District with a 40-X Height and Bulk District. The project also proposes the construction of a new four-story, two-family dwelling on the site.

Preliminary Recommendation: Pending

SPEAKER(S): On the Continuance Only :

(+) Christa Vetter

- Requested that the signage for the proposed project be reposted and the notification be printed in both English and Chinese.

(+) Greg Wright

- Supported what previous speaker said, and he is in favor of the continuance.

ACTION: Continued to May 1, 2003.

AYES: Bradford Bell; Antonini; Feldstein; Hughes; S. Lee; W. Lee

ABSENT: Boyd

442 - 20^TH AVENUE - east side between Geary Boulevard and Anza Street, Lot 034 in Assessor's Block 1525 - Mandatory Discretionary Review under the Planning Commission's policy requiring review of housing demolition, of Demolition Permit Application No. 9917935 proposing to demolish a two-story single-family residence, in an RM-1 (Residential, Mixed, Low Density) District and a 40-x Height and Bulk District. The project also proposes the construction of a new four-story, three-family dwelling on the site.

Preliminary Recommendation: Pending

SPEAKER(S): None

ACTION: Continued as proposed

AYES: Bradford Bell; Antonini; Feldstein; Hughes; S. Lee; W. Lee

ABSENT: Boyd

4. 2002.0967C (G. NELSON: (415) 558-6257)

2000 VAN NESS AVENUE - northeast corner of Van Ness Avenue and Jackson Street; Lot 005 in Assessor's Block 0595: Request for Conditional Use authorization pursuant to Section 209.6(b) of the Planning Code to install a total of three (3) antennas and six (6) related equipment cabinets on the roof of an 8-story, 100-foot tall commercial structure, known as the Medical Arts Building, as part of Sprint's wireless telecommunications network within an RC-4 (Residential-Commercial Combined) District, the Van Ness Special Use District and an 80-D Height and Bulk District. Per the City & County of San Francisco's Wireless Telecommunications Services (WTS) Facilities Siting Guidelines the proposal is a Preferred Location Preference 4 as it is a wholly commercial structure.

SPEAKER(S): None

ACTION: Continued as amended

AYES: Bradford Bell; Antonini; Feldstein; Hughes; S. Lee; W. Lee

965-985 GENEVA AVENUE - south side of Geneva Avenue, between London and Paris Streets, Lots 006, 007, 008, 009 and 010 in Assessor's Block 6409 - Request for Conditional Use Authorization by AT&T Wireless Services Inc. to install a wireless telecommunications facility at the former Apollo Theater pursuant to Planning Code Section 712.83, which includes the installation of six panel antennas, and associated equipment in an NC-3 (Moderate-Scale Neighborhood Commercial) District and a 65-A Height and Bulk District. The subject site is a preference 2 locations (co-location site) according to the Wireless Telecommunications Services (WTS) Siting Guidelines, 1996.

Preliminary Recommendation: Approval with conditions.

(Proposed for Continuance to March 27, 2003

SPEAKER(S): None

ACTION: Continued as proposed

AYES: Bradford Bell; Antonini; Feldstein; Hughes; S. Lee; W. Lee

ABSENT: Boyd

6. 2002.0430C (J. IONIN: (415) 558-6309)

378 10^TH AVENUE, A.K.A. 389 9^TH AVENUE AND A.K.A. 4500 GEARY BOULEVARD - northwest corner of 9^th Avenue and Geary Boulevard; Lot 035 in Assessor's Block 1441 - Request for Conditional Use authorization pursuant to Section 712.83 of the Planning Code to install a total of six antennas and related equipment for AT&T Wireless Services, on the roof of an existing three-story, 53-foot tall, industrial structure within an NC-3 (Moderate-Scale Neighborhood Commercial) District and a 40-X Height and Bulk District. Per the City & County of San Francisco's Wireless Telecommunications Services (WTS) Facilities Siting Guidelines the proposal is a Preferred Location Preference 1 as it is both a co-location site and an industrial building in an NC-3 District.

Preliminary Recommendation: Approval with conditions.

(Continued from Regular Meeting of February 27, 2003)

(Proposed for Continuance to April 3, 2003)

SPEAKER(S): None

ACTION: Continued as proposed

AYES: Bradford Bell; Antonini; Feldstein; Hughes; S. Lee; W. Lee

7. 2002.0657C (J. IONIN: (415) 558-6309)

3725 BUCHANAN STREET - west side between Beach Street and North Point Street; Lot 004 in Assessor's Block 0445A - Request for Conditional Use authorization pursuant to Section 711.83 of the Planning Code to install a total of eight antennas and related equipment for Verizon Wireless, on the roof of an existing four-story, 45-foot tall, commercial structure within an NC-2 (Small-Scale Neighborhood Commercial) District and a 40-X Height and Bulk District. Per the City & County of San Francisco's Wireless Telecommunications Services (WTS) Facilities Siting Guidelines the proposal is a Preferred Location Preference 4 as it is a commercial building in an NC-2 District.

Preliminary Recommendation: Approval with conditions.

ABSENT: Boyd

1835 19^TH AVENUE - west side between Noriega and Ortega Streets; Lot 007 in Assessor's Block 2056 - Mandatory Discretionary Review, under the Planning Commission's policy requiring review of housing demolition, of Demolition Permit Application No. 2002.10.25.9921, to demolish an existing single-family dwelling (the project also proposes the construction of a new two-family dwelling, containing three stories above the street and one basement below the street) in 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 Demolition Permit Application as submitted.

(Continued from Regular Meeting of February 27, 2003)

NOTE: On February 27, 2003, following public testimony, the Commission closed the public hearing and continued this matter to March 13, 2003 by a vote of +6 -0. Staff was instructed to review and correct inconsistencies in the reports. Commissioner William Lee was absent.

(Proposed for Continuance to April 3, 2003)

SPEAKER(S): None

ACTION: Continued as proposed

AYES: Bradford Bell; Antonini; Feldstein; Hughes; S. Lee; W. Lee

ABSENT: Boyd

107 MAYWOOD DRIVE -east side of the street between Ravenwood Drive and Brentwood Avenue, Lot 043 in Assessor's Block 3042 -Request for Discretionary Review of Building Permit Application No. 2001.02.20.2529, proposing to construct a vertical addition on an existing single-family dwelling, located in a RH-1(D) [Residential, House, One-Family (Detached)] District and a 40-X Height and Bulk District.

SPEAKER(S): None

ACTION: Approved as corrected:

Commissioner Hughes concerns related to 40-50 Lansing Street on Page 3, item a) Director's report:

- He has verified that the clerk's office hours are from 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. does close at 5:00 p.m.

AYES: Bradford-Bell; Antonini; Feldstein; Hughes; S. Lee; W. Lee

ABSENT: Boyd

Commissioner Antonini:

- Requested that the Department schedule a briefing on affordable

housing in a joint session with the Redevelopment Agency.

- Re: Transportation Authority. Is the Planning Department and the Transportation Authority coordinating all transportation and land use projects? Secondly, Does the Transportation Authority use the sales tax funds for work on the Transportation Management Account, the Transportation Demand Management Program, and the Transit [Preferential] Streets Program. It is his understanding that the Transportation Authority has not provided, or will provide, any funding to the Planning Department next year. This is of great concern to him. He is requesting that the Executive Director of the Transportation Authority to come to the Planning Commission and explain to them what his plans are regarding this funding

- Re: Harvey Rose Audit and Supervisor McGoldrick's requirement to have an advisory board oversee the implementation of it. His proposal is to have one or two commissioners work with the Planning Department and provide, through the Commissioners, to the chair of the Land Use Committee the status and cost of implementing those proposals. Requested that this be calendared next week to appoint one or two commissioners to the committee.

- Re: Housing. Requested presentations from different City agencies to ensure the better coordination of what we are doing with other City agencies and to ensure that there is available funding next year--given our budget deficit. First, from the Landmarks Board he would like the Executive Director present to the Planning Commission an overview of their roles and responsibilities. Second, he requested a presentation from the Mayor's Office of Housing. Of the five major projects that are being reviewed now, where are they in the EIR process? But more importantly, are they paying the Planning Department for this work?

- He has requested that the Director of the Redevelopment Agency come before the Commission because they have cut out some projects; like the Mid-Market EIR for next year-at least I didn't see it in the budget that was presented to us. He wants them to tell us what their priorities are and what they are paying the Planning Department next year.

- He would also like the Mayor's Office of Economic Development come and tell us what their priorities are. What funding they are providing to the community and how that ties into the planning process and the Planning Department's bottom line.

- Finally, it would be appropriate to have the Muni Director here to present and educate us on their 5 or 10 year plan, and find out what funding sources they have for the planning staff to work on some of their projects.

Commissioner Hughes:

- Requested a copy of the Department of Building Inspection's Lawful Residential Demolition Requirements and a copy of the Major Exterior Alteration Ordinance.

Commissioner Feldstein:

- Will be happy to work with Supervisor McGoldrick's Land Use Committee. It is very important that this Commission develop a close working relationship with the Board.

- Thanked Friends of Planning who offered to send any of them to a training workshop on The Role of the Planning Commissioner offered by the University of California at Davis.

- Formally announced that the Commission's Mandatory Discretionary Review and Demolition Policy will not be on calendar next week. It is now scheduled on 3/27/03.

-Neil Hart talked about Preservations Bulletins that were recently issued.

None

111 MANCHESTER STREET - east side, south of Stoneman Street, Lot 019 in Assessor's Block 5544 - Two Discretionary Review requests, the first initiated by Department Staff, pursuant to Planning Commission residential demolition policy, of Building Permit Application Number 2002.04.22.4580, which would demolish an existing single family dwelling, and the second initiated by a member the public, of Building Permit Application Number 2002.04.22.4585, which would construct a new single family dwelling on the same site. The property is located in an RH-1 (Residential, House, One-Family) District, the Bernal Heights Special Use District, and a 40-X Height and Bulk District.

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

SPEAKER(S): None

ACTION: Without hearing, continued to March 20, 2003

AYES: Bradford-Bell; Antonini; Feldstein; Hughes; S. Lee; W. Lee

ABSENT: Boyd

WIRELESS TELECOMMUNICATIONS SERVICES FACILITIES SITING GUIDELINES - Consideration of approval of a Resolution to supplement the 1996 Wireless Telecommunications Services Facilities Siting Guidelines and adopt Department policies not in the Guidelines. These policies are intended to supplement the objectives established in Resolution 14182 adopted in August 1996.

SPEAKER(S):

(+/-) Misako Hill. Cingular Wireless

- The Wireless industry is contributing to the San Francisco industry.

- The San Francisco General Plan states that the City's first goal is to maintain and expand a vibrant economy that will provide jobs and revenue.

- Metropolitan Electric Construction is an example of how a local small business is working in San Francisco. This company is located in the Bayview District and has over 90 employees, including union electricians that are dedicated to the wireless projects in the City. Metropolitan Electric Construction estimated that the wireless industry accounted for more than $10,000,000 in annual revenue in the City in 2002.

- This company gave back to the community and paid their taxes.

(+/-) Jennifer Estes, Sprint PCS

- Spoke about item 1 of the proposed resolution, community outreach and public notification.

(+/-) Doug Chuck

- Concerned about the system that is being used to notify the public.

(+/-) Peter Mausharar, Verizon Wireless

- The Guidelines that exist today in San Francisco are some of the most comprehensive in the entire state...--the western United States for that matter.

- We have worked very diligently with Planning staff in the past to come up with some reasonable changes to these guidelines.

- We do actively update our information on the Five Year Plan for the City every six months. Sometimes, when the necessity of site comes up, we can only predict out our build plan based on budget constraints, changes in the economy, customer's complaints, service problems, etc. Our updates to the Five Year Plan are generated from this information-the areas that we need to improve by adding additional sites etc.

(+/-) Paul Albrittan, ATT Wireless

- Outlined some of their concerns about the excessive necessary requirements like noticing requirements and the retroactive application of what they consider to be an amendment to the guidelines.

(-) Doug Loranger, Snafu

- Urged the Commission to take three actions: 1) Reject the Planning Department's recommendations with respect to necessity, site compliance and coverage maps; 2) Follow the lead of President Bradford Bell at the 12/10/02 Wireless hearing and Supervisor Ammiano at the Board meeting on 2/20/03 and instruct the Planning Department to make revisions of the guidelines a priority in its 2003 Work Program Budget and propose industry fees to fund this process; and 3) Insure that the process that began over two years ago when Snafu invited members of the industry to attend their meeting with Mayor Brown on this issue, continue in a fair, reasonable, timely and comprehensive manner.

(-) Libby Kelly, Council on Wireless Technology Impacts

- Asked the Commission to consider and revise the guidelines. Also to consider the environment where this equipment would be operating.

- Electrical pollution: We now have well over 2400 licensed and permitted cellular antennas in the City.

- Cellular antennas are relatively new and scientific evidence is still emerging.

(-) Madeline Camisa

- Requested that any new modifications to the siting guidelines should re-categorize schools, hospitals, health centers, places of worship, libraries, community centers, public use structures, and mixed-use or wholly residential buildings from preference 1 sites to preference 7 sites.

(-) Stella Cheng

- Urged the Commission to listen to the citizens of San Francisco and make the right decision.

(-) Jolie Holland

- There was inadequate notification of this to the neighborhoods.

(-) Megan Sullivan

- Addressed the problem concerning the Planning Department's lack of expertise with regard to wireless space station technology issues.

(-) Ruby Chung

- Respectfully asked the Commission to revise the guidelines the right way so they would not be detrimental to residential neighborhoods. To also not approve anymore installation of antennas because we have more than enough throughout San Francisco.

(-) Frieda Humboldt

- It is very important that the City start implementing/enforcing its own code permit violations and non-compliance cases.

- The City would enforce permit violations when small business owners make them, but when wireless breaks the rules, little or nothing is done about it.

- The Planning Department resolution in front of you today does not address this issue at all. And I think it is time for change.

(-) Gordon Winiemko

- Asked the Commission to reject the resolution/permit .

(-) Bran Benson, Supervisor Ammiano's Office

- Supervisor Ammiano suggested that the Planning Commission consider having a joint hearing with the Land Use Committee of the Board of Supervisors to discuss whether or not the Planning Commission wants to take any action, and what action the Board of Supervisors would recommend.

(-) Grace Jeung

- We need to have these guidelines brought up to date and be more restrictive.

(-) Fay Adelstein

- Concerned about the health problems to humans.

- How to insure that the people of San Francisco are protected from the adverse effects of the cellular antennas?

(-) Tracey Hughes

- Asked the Commission to not approve this new resolution.

(-) David Thornheim

- Urged the Commission to hold off on adopting this resolution. Instead, work more closely with the Board of Supervisors regarding Supervisor Ammiano's resolution and the Snafu proposed amendments.

(-) Rosemarie Jair

- It will be better if the City does not allow these antennas to go on places of worship in the first place.

(-) Mark Zier

- Opposed to the new resolution.

- Asked the Commission to look into the requirements of necessity that are in this particular resolution.

(-) Arletta Sen

- Opposed to the resolution. She is for a moratorium, or the very least, broad-based regulations based on what the communities, the people of San Francisco, really do want.

(-) Todd Curtis

- Current guidelines before you have a lot of loopholes as they are presently written. They play into the sales industry efforts to install more antennas.

(-) Scott Dykes

- Opposed to the new resolution.

(+/-) Ron Miguel

- One thing that should be clarified when the guidelines are revised is the question of necessity.

(-) Lynne Elmar

- Opposes the new resolution.

(-) Mark Longwood

- Opposed to the new resolution.

(-) Stephen Eastman

- Did not get the appropriate notification about this meeting.

(-) Gloria Tulanowski

- Opposed to the new resolution.

(-) Michael Stendurg

- Opposed to the new resolution.

(-) George Robertson

- Surprised that the proposed guidelines don't have anything regarding installations on senior citizen buildings.

- What are we going to give to our children if you put these antennas on top of the schools?

- Need to look at these guidelines more carefully.

(-) Doris Linnebach

- Opposed the new resolution.

ACTION: Approved as amended:

1) Community Outreach meetings shall be required for all sites that require a conditional use authorization; a 500 foot radius will be required for mailings; the notice will include language identifying it as an announcement for a "Community Outreach Meeting on a Wireless Communication Facility proposed in your neighborhood;" and the subject building shall be posted with a notice identifying the meeting subject matter, time and place.

2) The Planning Commission shall pursue the revision of the WTS Guidelines in cooperation with the Board of Supervisor's Land Use Committee, the Telecommunications Commission, and the Commission on the Environment, when the appropriate funding and staffing has been allocated to the Planning Department.

AYES: Bradford-Bell; Antonini; Feldstein; Hughes; S. Lee; W. Lee

ABSENT: Boyd

RESOLUTION No. 16539

established in Resolution 14509 of December 1997.

- City should re-design teams and reconfigure things so that transportation could work more efficiently.

ACTION: Approved

AYES: Bradford-Bell; Antonini; Feldstein; Hughes; S. Lee

ABSENT: Boyd and W. Lee

RESOLUTION No. 16540

598 BELVEDERE STREET - northeast corner of Belvedere and 17^th Streets, Lot 048 in Assessor's Block 1279: -- Request for Conditional Use Authorization under Planning Code Sections 209.2(d) and 303 to legalize the operation of a bed and breakfast inn with no more than five guest rooms within a single-family house, in an RH-2 (Residential, House, Two-Family) District and a 40-X Height and Bulk District.

Preliminary Recommendation: Approval with conditions.

SPEAKER(S):

(+) Robert Stern, project sponsor

- Gave an overall description of the project.

- This is the kind of business that the City needs for its economic future. We are contributors to the City's revenue, to jobs in the City, to tax revenue, license revenue..., the very things that will keep this city thriving.

- Urged the Commission to authorize the operation of this bed and breakfast.

(+) Michael Henscher

- Supports this project.

(+) Ineke Ruhland

- This project is a real asset to the neighborhood.

(-) James Howells

Objected to the use of this property for a bed and breakfast because he believes it does not satisfy Section 303 of the Planning Code for the following reasons: 1) Traffic congestion; 2) Parking; and 3) Economical ramifications.

ACTION: Approved as amended:

AYES: Bradford-Bell; Antonini; Feldstein; Hughes; S. Lee

ABSENT: Boyd and W. Lee

2223 POLK STREET - northwest corner at Bonita Street, between Green and Vallejo Streets, Lot 6 in Assessor's Block 550 -- Request for Conditional Use Authorization for addition of a full bar (Type 47 ABC License) to an existing full-service restaurant ("Pesce") (Planning Code Section 723.41), in the Polk Street Neighborhood Commercial District and a 65-A Height and Bulk District. No expansion of the existing use is proposed.

SPEAKER(S):

(+) Reza Esmaili, General Manager

- Let the Commission know that he contacted the neighbor Shawn McDonald, who was the only person who made any kind of comment toward this project. They came to a resolution to put either a bicycle rack or trees in the sidewalks that he had opposition to.

ACTION: Approved as amended:

AYES: Bradford-Bell; Feldstein; Hughes; S. Lee

ABSENT: Antonini; Boyd; W. Lee

MOTION No. 16542

2031 POLK STREET - west side between Broadway and Pacific Avenue, Lot 4 in Assessor's Block 570 -- Request for Conditional Use Authorization to permit enlarging an existing full-service restaurant ("Tai Chi") (Planning Code Section 723.42), by expansion into the 800 square foot adjacent vacant commercial space, for a total of 2,840 square feet, in the Polk Street Neighborhood Commercial District and a 65-A Height and Bulk District.

SPEAKER(S): None

ACTION: Approved

AYES: Bradford-Bell; Antonini; Feldstein; Hughes; S. Lee

ABSENT: Boyd and W. Lee

MOTION No. 16543

20a. 2002.1111CV (G. NELSON: (415) 558-6257)

- This is a very interesting building and has a lot of history.

- Gave an overall description of the project.

ACTION: Approved

AYES: Bradford-Bell; Antonini; Feldstein; Hughes; S. Lee

ABSENT: Boyd and W. Lee

20b. 2002.1111CV (G. NELSON: (415) 558-6257)

1451-1455 HAIGHT STREET - south side between Ashbury Street and Masonic Avenue, Lot 028 in Block 1244 - Request for variances from the rear yard and non-complying structure requirements of the Planning Code to legalize a dwelling unit located in a legal non-complying structure within the required rear yard. This project also requires Conditional Use Authorization to allow the legalization of the dwelling unit without producing the required one parking space for the unit.

ACTION: Zoning Administrator closed the public hearing and granted the variance.

601 KING STREET - southeast corner at 7th Street, a through lot with frontage on Berry Street; Lots 1 and 2 in Assessor's Block 3800: Request for Conditional Use approval under Planning Code Sections 215(a) and 304 to develop a six-story mixed-use PUD (Planned Unit Development), with 250 dwelling units, up to 6,000 square feet of commercial space, and a 257-space garage, with exceptions from rear yard requirements of Section 134, with a proposed Height and Bulk District reclassification from 50-X to 65-X, and subject to Mandatory Discretionary Review, within an M-2 (Heavy Industrial) Zoning District, a 50-X Height and Bulk District, and within the Industrial Protection Zone.

Preliminary Recommendation: Approval with conditions.

SPEAKER(S):

(+) Charmaine Curtis

- Has worked on this project for a long time.

- There has been an extensive community planning process that yielded the 3 alternative land use maps that supports what we are proposing to do at 601 King St.

(+) Steve Kuklin, A.F. Evans Development, (Project Sponsor)

- Gave an overall description of the project.

(+) Brandon Thomas Bannach, San Francisco Bicycle Coalition

- Supports the project.

(+) Robert Meyers, spoke on behalf of Bill Poland, of the San Francisco Design Center

- Strongly supports this project.

- This project brings many benefits to this neighborhood and removes a dilapidated under used industrial building.

- Provides much needed housing for the city at large.

- Will make Showplace Square a safer neighborhood by having activities 24/7.

(+) Jim Chappell, SPUR

- Strongly supports this project.

- This project is entirely consistent with the planning code.

(+) July Millburn

- This project is consistent with what we all wanted in the neighborhood planning process.

- This will be an extraordinary, vital, and lovely neighborhood.

(+) Judy West

- Supports this project.

ACTION: Approved as amended:

AYES: Bradford-Bell; Antonini; Feldstein; Hughes; S. Lee

ABSENT: Boyd and W. Lee

601 KING STREET - southeast corner at 7th Street, a through lot with frontage on Berry Street; Lots 1 and 2 in Assessor's Block 3800: Mandatory Staff-initiated Discretionary Review under Planning Commission Resolution No. 16202 to demolish two industrial warehouse structures and to construct 250 units of housing within the Industrial Protection Zone and within an M-2 (Heavy Industrial) Zoning District and 50-X Height and Bulk District.

SPEAKER(S): Same as those listed under item 21a.

ACTION: Did not take DR and approved as amended:

AYES: Bradford-Bell; Antonini; Feldstein; Hughes; S. Lee

ABSENT: Boyd and W. Lee

MARKET AND OCTAVIA NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN, PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT - BRIEFING AND PUBLIC COMMENT - Staff presentation and community comments on the public review draft of the Market and Octavia Neighborhood Plan, distributed on December 17, 2002 as part of the Department's Better Neighborhoods Program - comment gathering only; no approval actions. Information available at www.betterneighborhoods.org.

SPEAKER(S):

(+/-) Chris Peterson

- Did not oppose continuance.

- Plan is great and specially like the way it deals with parking

ACTION: Without hearing, continued to March 20, 2003.

AYES: Bradford-Bell; Antonini; Feldstein; Hughes; S. Lee

ABSENT: Boyd and W. Lee

BACKGROUND NOTE: On June 27, 2002, following public testimony, the Commission closed the public hearing. The Commission entertained two motions: 1) Approve with modifications and require staff to approve design. The motion failed to carry for lack of a second; 2) Approve with modifications and require staff to approve design, bedroom mix and open space. The motion failed to carry by vote of +3 -3. Commissioners Baltimore, Joe and Salinas voted no. Commissioner Fay was absent. At the call of the Chair, the matter was continued to July 18, 2002. Following the June 27, 2002, hearing, the Mission Interim Controls were amended such that a new Conditional Use Authorization is now required. Accordingly, the Commission will conduct a new hearing during which public comment will be re-opened.

SPEAKERS ON THE CONTINUANCE ONLY:

(-) Geri Almanza

- Opposed the continuance because a lot of people took time off from their jobs to attend this meeting and we would like their time to be respected.

(-) Erick Quezada

- What are the reasons that the developers are requesting a continuance?

- We tried to work with these developers, they haven't come back with any other changes to the project in the many weeks since this has been proposed. We haven't heard from them on that so we see no reason for the continuance.

(+) Joel Yodowitz

- We did send a letter to Mr. Quezada expressing the reasons why we need to continue this matter. This project is one of the first large residential projects in the Mission District following the Planning Commission's briefing on the Eastern Neighborhoods. We believe a continuance is necessary to adequately present the project to a full Commission.

(+) Aida (Ada) Chan

- Opposed continuance.

(+) Chris Selig

- We would like to proceed with the meeting today. Have both sides say whatever they have to say and that will be end of it.

ACTION: Continued to March 20, 2003

RESULT: Without a majority vote the motion failed, and without a successful alternate motion the matter will be heard today.

SPEAKER(S):

(+) Joel Yodowitz, Representing Project Sponsor

- As all of you know, this project has a very long and public history.

- The project sponsor has conducted extensive neighborhood outreach, including meeting with individuals and groups, focusing within 300 feet of the project.

- There has been multiple neighborhood meetings with invitations forward in English and Spanish, interpreters were present at each of these meetings.

- The Project Sponsor's efforts should be a model for community outreach and planning.

(+) Andrew Keller, Architect

- Gave an overall description of the project.

(-) Richard Marquez, Mission Agenda

- Mission Agenda is adamantly opposed to this project.

- Despite the Dot.com boom and bust, hundreds of working Latinos were displaced and/or evicted.

- Despite the lost of PDR jobs, despite the desperation of family housing, this struggle continues.

(-) Nick Pagoulatos

- Concerned about housing affordability in the Mission.

- This is a critical site.

- The importance here is that this is transitional land. And even though there has been a lot of work done (struggles, etc.) to finally get the 12% affordability ordinance for housing in general, the City can not stop there. We need to continue and try to find out how we can increase the number of affordable units, both through non-profit development and of course through private market development.

- Asked the Commission to look at this project very carefully and set a precedent that is fair to the community and the developers.

(-) Geri Almanza

- Asked the Commission to make the following modifications to the proposed project: 1) we need larger overall units (2 to 3 bedrooms); 2) need deeper affordability, 60% of median income does not met the needs of our community. We need more like 40% of median income; 3) we want to see that affordable units will remain affordable for the life span of the building.

(-) Aurora Amazola

- Respectfully asked the Commission to approve affordable housing for low-income, hard working people in the Mission District.

(-) Sarai Y.R., Yoco-Hop

- Opposed the proposed project unless they include more affordable housing.

(-) Yolanda Ruiz

- We need more affordable housing for families with children.

(-) Francisca Lopez

- I am here to support that this project include more affordable housing. My family has a very limited resources and I am a sick person.

(-) Margarita Mendoza

- The Planning Commission should be aware of the necessity of affordable housing that matches the needs of hard working people in the Mission.

(-) Jackie Marenco

- Oppose the project because the Mission District does not need more over priced one-room apartments. The Mission is very family oriented and needs more affordable 2 to 3 bedroom apartments.

(-) Bill Murphy

- This project does not fit in the neighborhood. It won't benefit anybody that lives there.

(-) Marcella Azucar

- Opposed the project because it is a human right to have housing.

- Many families had to leave the City because of the lack of affordable housing.

(-) Eli Gualip

- Opposed to the project.

(-) Teresa Almaguer

- Objected to this project because it does not fully address the very obvious need of affordable family housing.

(-) Jay Bradshaw

- Supports affordable housing for working class families.

(-) David McGuire

- Opposed the project.

(-) Alicia Bustos Sandoval

- Asked the Commission to not take away affordable housing for the people of the Mission.

(-) Charlie Sciammas

- Opposed the project.

(-) Katie Drelich

- Please help the people of the Mission District that have been suffering for so many years.

(-) Christina Olague (read a letter from Ms. Carmen Cruz)

- This housing project is out of our reach. People of the neighborhood could never afford to purchase any of these units.

(-) Chris Selig

- Asked the Commission to look very seriously at what affordability means?

- Asked for more family affordable units.

(-) Antonio Diaz

- This is an inappropriate site for housing.

(-) Owen Taylor

- Opposed to the proposed project because it is inappropriate and insensitive to construct extremely unaffordable housing in a neighborhood that is already in need for affordable housing.

(-) Araceli Laras

- Opposed to the project.

(-) Gloria Vasquez

- Asked the Commission to work with the people of the Mission and do not approve the project.

(+) Thomas Shuen, Co-Sponsor of the proposed project

- Respectfully asked the Commission to approve the project.

- This project will bring jobs and an opportunity to many people to own property in the City.

(+) Curtis Hagfeldt

- In support for the project.

(+) John Casner

- Supports the project.

(+) Elizabeth Shepard

- Is in support of the project.

(+) Eric Arguello

- The proposed project will enhance the neighborhood.

(-) Maria Leone

- In support of the project.

(+) Marjorie Baer

- This project will expand the possibilities of owning a place for a lot of people. No one will be displaced by this project, and the City and the neighborhood has a lot to gain from it.

(+) Patricia Delgado

- The project will be a welcome addition to the neighborhood.

(+) Carolyn Deevy

- In support of the project.

(+) Curtis Eisenberger

- In support of the project.

(+) Barbara Garrett

- Supports the project.

(+) Timothy Lee

- Personally knows the developers and he knows that they will build affordable housing for everyone.

(+) Sylvia Alvarez-Lynch

- Supports this project.

(+) John Wilson

- This project will be a positive thing for the neighborhood.

(+) Judy West

- Supports the project as proposed

(+) Dwight Dolliver

- Is in support of the project.

(+) Eva Hom

- Project will be a wonderful asset to the City of San Francisco.

(+) Al Markus

- This project offers a lot of people the opportunity to own property in the City.

(+) Milton Gaines, Project Co-Sponsor

- We (have not been and) are not the greedy, money hungry, evil businessman, and neighbor for the past 34 years.

- This project is not displacing anyone. This project is good for the Mission.

(+) Doug MacNeil

- Supports the project.

(+) Jaime Guerrero

- This project is reasonable for an empty site. It provides safety, beauty and housing.

(+) Celma Hidalgo

- It will be a good asset for my neighborhood.

(+) Brett Gladstone

- Supports the project.

(+) Kate White

- Will gladly welcome more residents to the neighborhood.

(+) Alfredo Pedroza

- Respectfully asked the Commission to approve this project.

(+) Judy Berkowitz

- Sincerely hopes that this Commission will approve this project.

(-) Ada Chan

- Opposes the proposed project.

(-) Sue Hestor

- These units are going to be marketed to people who work at the Bank of America, to doctors who work in the Bio-techno company around of it. We need some housing that is marketed to people who live in the Mission.

MOTION #1: Approve as modified by Commissioner Feldstein

RESULT: Motion Failed

23 WOOD STREET - west side between Euclid Avenue and Geary Boulevard; Lot 005 in Assessor's Block 1069 - Mandatory Discretionary Review, under the Planning Commission policy requiring review of all residential demolition permits, of Demolition Permit Application No. 2002.07.25.2322 proposing the demolition of a two-story single-family dwelling, in an RH-2 (Residential, House, Two-Family) District and a 40-X Height and Bulk District. There is a related proposal to construct a new, four-story two-family dwelling with two off-street parking spaces.

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

SPEAKER(S): None

ACTION: Without hearing, continued to April 3, 2003

PRESENT: Bradford-Bell; Antonini; Feldstein; Hughes; S. Lee; W. Lee

ABSENT: Boyd and W. Lee

2508 19^TH AVENUE - east side of the street between Ulloa and Vicente Streets, Lot 013B in Assessor's Block 2419 -Request for Discretionary Review of Building Permit Application No. 2002.03.13.1301, proposing to construct a two-story over garage single-family dwelling, located in a RH-1 (Residential, House, One-Family) District and a 40-X Height and Bulk District.

Preliminary Recommendation: Take Discretionary Review and approve with modifications

(Continued from Regular Meeting of February 27, 2003)

SPEAKER(S): None

ACTION: Without hearing, continued to March 20, 2003

PRESENT: Bradford-Bell; Antonini; Feldstein; Hughes; S. Lee; W. Lee

ABSENT: Boyd and W. Lee

1225 CAPITOL AVENUE - west side between Ocean and DeMontfort Avenues; Lot 003 in Assessor's Block 6935 - Department initiated Discretionary Review pursuant to the Planning Commission's residential demolition policy of Building Permit Application 2002.07.10.1031 proposing to demolish a single-family dwelling to be replaced by a two-family dwelling in a RH-2 (House, Two-Family) Zoning District, and a 40-X Height and Bulk District.

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

SPEAKER(S): None

ACTION: Without hearing, continued to March 27, 2003

PRESENT: Bradford-Bell; Antonini; Feldstein; Hughes; S. Lee; W. Lee

ABSENT: Boyd and W. Lee

27. 2002.1101D (D. SIROIS: (415) 558-6313)

WITHDRAWN

Planning Commission needs to go back and look at the reality of the lending of money.