18. 2000.1073E (B. HELBER: (415) 558-5968)
201 FOLSOM STREET - Certification of Final Environmental Impact Report (FEIR) - The rezoning of parcels in the Rincon Hill neighborhood (the "rezoning project") and a residential development of approximately 1,500,000 gross square feet (gsf) at 201 Folsom Street (the "development" project). The property is currently used as a paved parking lot by the United States Postal Service (USPS) Annex and other government agencies for 270 vehicles. The rezoning project includes rezoning part of Lot 1 in Assessor's Block 3746 and Lots 1 and 8 in Assessor's Block 3745 from the existing P (Public) to a zoning district that allows private development. The requested rezoning is from P (Public) with height limits of 150 and 200 feet to RC-4 (Residential-Commercial Combined: High-Density) with a 300- and 400-foot height limit. In addition, a Planning Code text amendment is requested to create a new Residential/Commercial sub-district under the Rincon Hill Special Use District overlay, and amendments to the Rincon Hill Area Plan, a part of the San Francisco General Plan. The request for rezoning has been made in conjunction with development proposed at 300 Spear Street on Assessor's Block 3745, Lot 1, that would be a part of the rezoned area. The third parcel requested to be rezoned is 345 Main Street, Lot 8 in Assessor's Block 3745, the remaining privately owned lot in the existing P district. The development portion of the project would consist of up to 725 residential units (about 825,000 gsf) and about 38,000 gsf of retail space. It would include about 753 enclosed parking spaces and four loading spaces for the use of the development, and about 272 enclosed replacement parking spaces for the use of the USPS and other government agencies. An 80-foot-tall building base would cover the site. Two residential towers would rise above the building base to total heights of approximately 350 feet and 400 feet above the ground level. The project would require a subdivision of Lot 1 to separate the development site from the Postal Service Annex.
Preliminary Recommendation: Certify the EIR as a Final EIR. Please note that the public review period for the Draft EIR ended at 5 pm, December 2, 2002. Public Hearing Closed.
(Continued from Regular Meeting of June 26, 2003)
SPEAKER(S):
(+) Jim Chappell - President of SPUR
- He has read and studied the EIRs in reasonable detail and he is confident that they are adequate and correct and should be certified.
- There is a terrible shortage of housing and this is causing families to leave the city.
- There are singles that are doubling, tripling and quadrupling in units because they cannot afford to live in single units.
- He hopes that the Commission will certify the EIRs.
(+) Jeffrey Leibovitz
- The EIRs only state that the projects will not shadow South Park.
- Revenue needs to be captured from these projects.
- The EIRs are not adequate addressing the impacts this will have on the Park and Recreation properties in the Rincon Hill neighborhoods.
- The immediate parks don't have adequate facilities, and that is what he is asking the Commission to do.
(-) Reed Bement - President of the Rincon Hill Neighborhood Association
- He urges the Commission to "do the right thing".
- He believes in this area and that is why he lives there. This area should be developed.
- These projects are not in a position to be developed.
- There are still a lot of matters that have not been discussed in the EIRs.
(-) Andrew Brooks - General Manager of Baycrest Residential Association
- The Comment and Responses section of the EIR under the visual quality and urban design section shows photo simulations of alternatives B, C and D. However, all of the viewpoint locations called for in the EIR were not added.
- In the Transportation section of the EIR: under the Intersection Operating Conditions, it states that turning movement volumes were counted prior to the closure of Beale Street. CEQA requires the EIR to represent conditions as they currently exist at the time of evaluation and/or approval. New updated figures need to be included to give an accurate representation of Intersection Levels of Service. Under the Construction Traffic section, it states that the Giants Ballpark construction was not identified as a significant impact. This response is not accurate and is in error.
(-) Patrick Malone - Rincon Hill Residents
- He is here to support the Rincon Hill neighbors and request that you not certify the EIR.
- Public input has not been given and there is no comprehensive plan.
- The EIR is insufficient because it fails to adequately address the cumulative affects on the construction of the projects.
- It does not address the Bay Bridge retrofit project.
- It does not address the traffic problems that were set by the 9/11 incident.
(-) Bobbie Carter
- She lives in the SOMA area.
- She is very concerned about the EIR.
- One of the greatest concerns she has is the height of the buildings. Forty stories will definitely impact the neighborhood.
- This is a very limited area in the city that should be preserved.
- There are many issues that need to be addressed so she urges the Commission to not certify this document.
(-) Henry Kleinhenz - Baycrest
- Many of the residents who live in Rincon Hill are not against development or housing.
- Whatever projects go on should conform to the existing density that is already established in the Rincon Hill plan.
- He is very concerned that there will be four buildings that are too tall.
(-) Sue Hestor
- There is a lack of a plan or an analysis of this EIR.
- The EIR slides over the issue that there is no plan.
- There are other developments in the area which are either going on or are planned yet they are not mentioned in the EIR.
(-) Jo Howard
- She asked the Commission to seriously look at the impact of changing the height limit for a specific project before Rincon Hill has been evaluated.
- It is unfair to give the benefit to developers, to have more units with higher heights in the area.
- The financial district is the financial district but this project is residential housing.
ACTION: Passed a Motion of Intent to approve certification. Final language September 4, 2003.
AYES: Antonini, Bradford Bell, Boyd, Feldstein, Hughes
NAYES: S. Lee
ABSENT: W. Lee
19. 2000.1090E (B. HELBER: (415) 558-5968)
300 SPEAR STREET - Certification of Final Environmental Impact Report (FEIR) -The project includes rezoning of parcels in the Rincon Hill neighborhood (the "rezoning project") and a mixed-use development of approximately 1,560,000 gross square feet (gsf) at 300 Spear Street (the "development project"). The property is currently used as a paved parking lot for 290 vehicles. The property was formerly owned by Caltrans and under lease to Golden Gate Transit for daytime commuter bus layovers. Golden Gate Transit buses were relocated a few blocks away in 2000. The rezoning project includes rezoning Lots 1 and 8 in Assessor's Block 3745, and part of Lot 1 in Assessor's Block 3746 from the existing P (Public) to a zoning district that allows private development. The requested rezoning is from P (Public) with height limits of 105, 150 and 200 feet to RC-4 (Residential-Commercial Combined: High Density) with 300- and 400-foot height limits. In addition, a Planning Code text amendment is requested to create a new Residential/Commercial subdistrict under the Rincon Hill Special Use District overlay, and amendments to the Rincon Hill Area Plan, a part of the San Francisco General Plan. The request for rezoning has been made in conjunction with the proposed development at 201 Folsom Street on Assessor's Block 3746, Lot 1, that would be a part of the rezoned area. The third parcel requested to be rezoned is 345 Main Street, Lot 8 in Assessor's Block 3745, the remaining privately owned lot in the existing P district. The development portion of the project would consist of up to 820 residential units, about 36,000 gsf of retail and about 890 underground parking spaces. Two 80-foot-tall building bases would be built to the property lines on Spear, Folsom and Main Streets; the building bases would surround a landscaped courtyard beginning at the courtyard (third) level. Two residential towers would rise above the building bases to total heights of approximately 350 feet and 400 feet above the ground level, respectively.
Preliminary Recommendation: Certify the EIR as a Final EIR. Please note that the public review period for the Draft EIR ended at 5 pm, December 2, 2002. Public Hearing Closed.
(Continued from Regular Meeting of June 26, 2003)
SPEAKER(S): Same as those listed for item 18.
ACTION: Passed a Motion of Intent to approve certification. Final language September 4, 2003.
AYES: Antonini, Bradford Bell, Boyd, Feldstein, Hughes
NAYES: S. Lee
ABSENT: W. Lee
20a. 2000.1326MZT (M. SNYDER: (415) 558-6891)
300 SPEAR STREET, 160 HARRISON STREET (aka 365 MAIN STREET), AND 201 FOLSOM STREET (aka 314-390 MAIN STREET) - the northern half of the block bounded by Folsom, Spear Street, Harrison Street, and Main Street, Lot 1 in Assessor's Block 3745; the northeast corner of Harrison Street and Main Street, Lot 8 in Assessor's Block 3745; and the northern half of the block bounded by Harrison Street, Beale Street, Folsom Street, and Main Street, the northern half of Lot 1 in Assessor's Block 3746, respectively -- Zoning Reclassification of Property, Planning Code Text Change, and General Plan Amendments sought. The applicants have requested approvals for: (1) the reclassification of these properties from P (Public) to RC-4 (Residential-Commercial Combined, High Density), Districts and the establishment of a "Residential/Commercial Sub-district" within the Rincon Hill Special Use District under Section 249.1 of the Planning Code, pursuant to Section 302 of the Planning Code; (2) the adoption of amendments to the Rincon Hill Area Plan (part of the General Plan) pursuant to Section 340 of the Planning Code; (3) the adoption of modifications to the existing height and bulk limits, including increasing the current height limits from 200-feet, 150-feet and 105 feet to 400 feet for 201 Folsom Street and 300 Spear Street; and from 105 feet to 300 feet for 160 Harrison Street; and (4) the adoption of text change amendments to the Planning Code and General Plan that would change the requirements for density, use, usable open space, parking, parking location, street frontage , site coverage, tower separation and dwelling unit exposure, and other matters at the subject sites.
Preliminary Recommendation: Adopt a Resolution Recommending to the Board of Supervisor's Approval of the Proposed Text, Map and General Plan Changes.
(Continued from Regular Meeting of June 26, 2003)
SPEAKER(S):
(+) Clark Manus
- He gave a powerpoint presentation on the merits of the project.
(+) Jim Chappell - President of SPUR
- There must be a public plan for improvements. There have been several changes to these projects in the last several weeks.
- The intent of the Rincon Hill plan includes tall buildings.
- Supply and demand works, and San Francisco really needs the supply of housing.
- He urges the Commission to approve these projects with conditions.
(+) Carl Shannon - Tishman Speyer Properties
- There is an empty lot that is zoned public, which is essential to the City because it will create housing--pecifically affordable housing. This project is near public transportation and will make the neighborhood works.
- Union jobs will be created.
- The project will incorporate the needs of the United Postal Service and will have retail as well.
- This project will permanently enhance property tax roles.
(+) Martin Dalton - Union Property Capital
- The area should be rezoned to include residential.
- There were 50 public meetings and the City conducted various meetings as well.
- The project creates up to 820 units, up to 140 affordable units, retail, public open space, union jobs and an enhanced streetscape.
- This project will enliven the City as well as Rincon Hill.
(+) Barbara French
- Since they began their community outreach, they contacted about 80 community organizations.
- As a result, they produced an outreach packet that include 18 written endorsements from various organizations.
(+) Amee Albertson - SF Chamber of Commerce
- The San Francisco workforce needs a place to live.
- Companies want to locate where they can find a good workforce.
- All this cannot happen if the amount of housing is not increased.
- The project will allow density in transit corridors.
(+) Stan Warren - San Francisco Building and Construction Trades Council
- Various projects were constructed with the best craftsmanship.
- These projects offer long-term benefits to the City.
(+) Mike Theriault - Iron Workers Union
- These are beautiful projects that will benefit the City greatly.
(+) Doug Perry - Building and Construction Trades Council
- The projects are good for the economy of the City as a whole.
- Employment has declined and this project will provide quality jobs to many people.
- San Francisco should maintain its regional importance in the Bay Area in regards to jobs.
(+) Jim Salinas - Carpenters Local 22
- He is here representing thousands of carpenter union workers.
- It has been his desire to always remain in San Francisco.
- He is asking for the support of the Commission to approve this project and allow jobs to be developed.
(+) Alexander Clemens - City Car Share
- He read a letter from a member of the public who could not stay but is in support of the projects.
- He also read a statement from Kate White who also could not stay but is in support of the projects.
(+) Michael Sweet
- He is a resident of South Beach.
- He is a strong advocate for this project because it will build more housing in the center of the City.
- Currently there are thousands of units in deficit in the City.
(+) Jeff Leibovitz
- He is not concerned about the loss of view he will have because of this project.
- He is concerned about the process of this project.
- He feels that this project will be appealed at the Board of Supervisors, so he asks that the Commission be very thoughtful in their deliberations. The Commission needs to be ready to standup when the time comes when this project is appealed at the Board of Supervisors, otherwise this project is destined for failure.
(+) Rev. Arelious Walker - Faith Based Housing
- Recently there were a number of units approved near the church where he is pastor.
- He asks the developers of this project not to forget the low-income residents of the various neighborhoods in San Francisco.
- This project should be approved because it will allow affordable housing units.
(+) Rev. Ted Frazier
- If there is housing in this area, it will not go to waste.
- He is speaking in favor of these projects going forward.
- He has not heard of anyone making history by doing nothing.
(+) Carl Alexander
- This project has a domino affect for the Bay View community.
- He would love to move back to San Francisco and this would be an opportunity to bring young folks back.
(+) Rev. Arnold Townsend - Faith Based Housing
- Most of the points have been made.
- This project is extremely important for San Francisco because there is a housing crisis going on.
- Yes, this project is different but is beneficial.
- It is important for working class folk to have the opportunity to purchase a home.
(+) Alvin Selva - Bayview Hope Housing
- He is in support of this project because it will allow he and his wife to own a home.
- He and his wife make too much money to be allowed grants, but do not make enough to purchase market rate housing.
- This location will allow for his family to be near homes and churches.
(+) Ricardo Bell
- He is a potential homebuyer.
- He and his wife have been looking to purchase a home for the last three years and this project will give them an opportunity to do so.
- He hopes that the Commission will approve this project.
(+) Rev. Eugine Lumpkin
- Almost every month people come to him announcing that they will be moving because they could not purchase a home.
- He is looking forward to retiring and this would be an opportunity for him to purchase a home.
(+) Dave Figueroa
- He was born and raised in San Francisco.
- This project will be 100% union.
- People that will live here will be able to walk or take public transportation to work.
(+) Judith Patterson - South Bay/South Beach Citizen's Advisory Committee
- She is a fourth generation San Franciscan.
- Her husband and son work in the City.
- She is in support of these projects if they are done correctly.
- There's been no mention about schools in the neighborhood. Most of the units are two bedrooms. There are not that many units that have three bedrooms.
- The public meetings were presentations, there was no room for creative thinking or talk about what the neighborhood wants or needs.
- These buildings are too high.
(+) Shawn Leonard - NCCRC
- Rincon Hill is an underutilized neighborhood.
- The project will give a boost to the local economy.
- She urges the Commission to approve this project without further delay.
(+) George Williams - SPUR
- What is proposed now is the next logical evolution of what was proposed in 1989.
- These projects will provide lots of housing and are very well designed.
- His concern is that there is a need to make Rincon Hill a real neighborhood.
- What is needed is a sense of how the whole neighborhood will be improved.
(-) Patrick Malone
- Planners should plan for San Francisco and not for other cities.
- Although there is a need to create union jobs, these projects will last forever and should not be taken lightly.
- Development in Rincon Hill is necessary but this is just piece-meal rezoning of certain parcels.
- He is asking to be part of the community planning process for this area.
- This project is not good for the neighborhood.
(-) Reed Bement - President of the Rincon Hill Neighborhood Association
- He believes in high density housing but this area is not a "waste land".
- The area has developed quite nicely, but if there are to be improvements, they should be planned out intelligently.
- The towers totally overwhelm everything in the area.
- The towers will also create a visual block to people coming into the City.
- There are still many problems to deal with.
(+) Tim Tosta - Steefel, Levit and Weiss
- There is a list of schools that are nearby.
- They have carefully developed the plans for these projects over a number of years.
(-) Dorothy Dana
- This project, of course, will provide jobs, low-income housing, etc.
- This is not housing that will be affordable.
- Spot zoning should not be allowed just because these units supposedly will be affordable.
(-) Bobbi Carter
- She read a letter from Supervisor Chris Daly who is not supporting these projects.
- She read a letter from a member of San Francisco Beautiful who is not in support of this project.
- The area should be developed in a smart way.
(-) Sue Hestor - Rincon Hill Residents Association
- The last community meeting of Rincon Hill was July of 2001. Nearly two years. Yet according to the developers, they have been having monthly meetings with planning staff.
- This is all backwards. There is no comprehensive plan related to how pedestrians are going to move through this large area.
- How is there going to be open and desirable space?
- People are going to get in their cars and drive a couple of miles to get someplace and the Planning Department does not have a plan for this.
ACTION: Passed a motion of intent to approve.
Final Language September 4, 2003.
AYES: Antonini, Bradford Bell, Boyd, Feldstein, Hughes
NAYES: S. Lee
ABSENT: W. Lee
20b. 2000.1073C (M. SNYDER: (415) 558-6891)
201 FOLSOM STREET (aka 314-390 MAIN STREET) - the northern half of the block bounded by Folsom Street to the north, Main Street to the east, Harrison Street to the south, and Beale Street to the west, Lot 1 in Assessor's Block 3746 - Request for conditional use authorization pursuant to Planning Code Sections 303 and 253 to allow construction of a building taller than 40 feet in an R (Residential) District. The proposed Project would consist of up to 820 residential units in about 775,000 gross square feet, about 38,000 gross square feet of retail space, and up to 845 off-street parking spaces for the residential and retail uses and up to 272 replacement parking spaces for United States Postal Service. The project would include two towers that would be approximately 400 and 350-feet tall. The project is currently within a P (Public) District and within 200-R and 150-R Height and Bulk Districts. (A Public Hearing for a Planning Code Text, Map and General Plan Amendments for this site will be considered immediately before this hearing).
