June 19, 2003

SAN FRANCISCO
PLANNING COMMISSION

Meeting Minutes

Commission Chambers - Room 400
City Hall, 1 Dr. Carlton B. Goodlett Place

Thursday, June 19, 2003
1:30 PM

Regular Meeting

COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Shelley Bradford Bell, Michael J. Antonini, Edgar E. Boyd, Lisa Feldstein, Kevin Hughes, Sue Lee

COMMISSIONERS ABSENT: William L. Lee

THE MEETING WAS CALLED TO ORDER BY PRESIDENT BRADFORD BELL AT 1:50 p.m.

STAFF IN ATTENDANCE: Gerald Green - Director; Larry Badiner -Zoning Administrator; Susan Cleveland-Knowles - Deputy City Attorney; John Paul Samaha; Craig Nikitas; Dario Jones; Adam Light; Dan Sider; Ben Fu; Kate McGee; Tina Tam; Kay Simonson; Michael Smith; Mary Woods; Nora Priego - Transcription Secretary; 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. 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 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 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.

(Proposed for Continuance to June 26, 2003)

SPEAKER(S): None

ACTION: Without hearing, item continued to June 26, 2003

AYES: Antonini, Bradford Bell, Boyd, Feldstein, Hughes, S. Lee

ABSENT: W. Lee

2. 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).

Preliminary Recommendation: Approval with Conditions

(Proposed for Continuance to June 26, 2003)

SPEAKER(S): None

ACTION: Without hearing, item continued to June 26, 2003

AYES: Antonini, Bradford Bell, Boyd, Feldstein, Hughes, S. Lee

ABSENT: W. Lee

3. 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.

(Proposed for Continuance to June 26, 2003)

SPEAKER(S): None

ACTION: Without hearing, item continued to June 26, 2003

AYES: Antonini, Bradford Bell, Boyd, Feldstein, Hughes, S. Lee

ABSENT: W. Lee

4. 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 Subdistrict" 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 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

(Proposed for Continuance to June 26, 2003)

SPEAKER(S): None

ACTION: Without hearing, item continued to June 26, 2003

AYES: Antonini, Bradford Bell, Boyd, Feldstein, Hughes, S. Lee

ABSENT: W. Lee

5. 2000.1090C (M. SNYDER: (415) 558-6891)

300 SPEAR STREET - the northern half of the block bounded by Folsom Street to the north, Spear Street to the east, Harrison Street to the south, and Main Street to the west, Lot 1 in Assessor's Block 3745 - Request for (1) conditional use authorization pursuant to Planning Code Section 303 and 253 to allow construction of a building taller than 40 feet in an R (Residential) District; and (2) an exception under Section 271 of the Planning Code to permit the Project to exceed the maximum plan length. The proposed project would consist of up to 820 residential units in about 910,000 gross square feet, about 35,000 gross square feet of retail space, and up to 890 underground parking spaces. The Project would include two residential high-rises with overall heights of approximately 400 and 350 feet; and two lower buildings with an overall height of 85 feet. The project is currently within a P (Public) District and within 200-R and 105-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)

Preliminary Recommendation: Approval with Conditions

(Proposed for Continuance to June 26, 2003)

SPEAKER(S): None

ACTION: Without hearing, item continued to June 26, 2003

AYES: Antonini, Bradford Bell, Boyd, Feldstein, Hughes, S. Lee

ABSENT: W. Lee

6. 2002.1049C (K. McGEE: (415) 558-6367)

34 LELAND AVENUE - north side between Bayshore Boulevard and Alpha Street; Lot 10 in Assessor's Block 6248 - Request for Conditional Use Authorization to construct a child-care facility on the ground floor and three dwelling units above without providing the required parking, per Planning Code Section 161(j) in an NC-2 (Small-Scale Neighborhood Commercial District) Zoning District and in a 40-X Height and Bulk District.

Preliminary Recommendation: Pending

(Proposed for Continuance to July 10, 2003)

SPEAKER(S): None

ACTION: Without hearing, item continued to July 10, 2003

AYES: Antonini, Bradford Bell, Boyd, Feldstein, Hughes, S. Lee

ABSENT: W. Lee

7. 2003.0189D (G. CABREROS: (415) 558-6169)

529 21^ST AVENUE - west side between Anza and Balboa Streets, Lot 004 in Assessor's Block 1564 - Mandatory Discretionary Review per the Planning Commission's policy requiring review of all residential demolitions, 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 and a 40-X Height and Bulk District.

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

(Continued from Regular Meeting of May 22, 2003)

(Proposed for Continuance to July 10, 2003)

SPEAKER(S):

Re: Continuance

James Draper - 21^st Avenue Coalition

- The DR requestor will not be available on that date.

- He would like to have the item moved to the week of July 21, 2003.

ACTION: Without hearing, item continued to July 10, 2003

AYES: Antonini, Bradford Bell, Boyd, Feldstein, Hughes, S. Lee

ABSENT: W. Lee

8. 2003.0278C (M. SMITH: (415) 558-6322)

5810 MISSION STREET - north side of the street between Lawrence and Sickles Avenues, Lots 039, 042, and 049 in Assessor's Block 7143- Request for Conditional Use Authorization pursuant to Planning Code Sections 303 and 304 to allow the amendment of Motion No. 13347 to amend the Planned Unit Development authorization to allow for the conversion of three Below Market Rate (BMR) rental apartments into three (BMR) dwelling units for sale for owner occupancy. The conversion would affect units #202, #205, and #303 in the building, located in a NC-2 (Small-Scale Neighborhood Commercial District) and 40-X Height and Bulk District.

Preliminary Recommendation: Approval with Conditions

(Proposed for Continuance to July 10, 2003) July 24, 2003

SPEAKER(S): None

ACTION: Without hearing, item continued to July 24, 2003

AYES: Antonini, Bradford Bell, Boyd, Feldstein, Hughes, S. Lee

ABSENT: W. Lee

9a. 2002.1301CVD (M. LUELLEN: (415) 558-6478)

230-242 TURK STREET - "The Salvation Army Turk Street Center", north side between Jones and Leavenworth Streets; Lots 024 & 006 in Assessors Block 0338: Request for Conditional Use authorization pursuant to Planning Code Section 303 to construct a new mid-rise building that will contain 109 units of affordable housing for adults in recovery and older foster care youth. The project includes a gymnasium, pool, chapel and multi-purpose room on the ground floor, and social services offices, and youth recreational area on the second and third floors, all built over an underground parking level accessed from Turk Street and containing at least 32 off-street spaces. A structure containing 36 dwelling units and 74 rooms of group housing would be demolished. The subject property is in an RC-4 (Residential-Commercial Combined, High Density) District and located within the North of Market Residential Special Use District No. 1. The existing building is a contributing structure to the National Register Eligible San Francisco Apartment and Hotel District and is in an 80-120-T Height and Bulk District.

Preliminary Recommendation: Approval with conditions

(Proposed for Continuance to July 24, 2003)

SPEAKER(S): None

ACTION: Without hearing, item continued to July 24, 2003

AYES: Antonini, Bradford Bell, Boyd, Feldstein, Hughes, S. Lee

ABSENT: W. Lee

9b. 2002.1301CVD (M. LUELLEN: (415) 558-6478)

230-242 TURK STREET - "The Salvation Army Turk Street Center", north side between Jones and Leavenworth Streets; Lots 024 & 006 in Assessors Block 0338: Mandatory Discretionary Review, under the Planning Commission's Policy requiring review of all residential demolitions, of a proposal to demolish a structure containing 36 dwelling units and 74 rooms of group housing to construct 109 units of affordable housing and facilities for associated services. The subject property is in an RC-4 (Residential-Commercial Combined, High Density) District and located within the North of Market Residential Special Use District No. 1. The existing building is a contributing structure to the National Register Eligible San Francisco Apartment and Hotel District and is in an 80-120-T Height and Bulk District.

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

(Proposed for Continuance to July 24, 2003)

SPEAKER(S): None

ACTION: Without hearing, item continued to July 24, 2003

AYES: Antonini, Bradford Bell, Boyd, Feldstein, Hughes, S. Lee

ABSENT: W. Lee

9c. 2002.1301CVD (M. LUELLEN: (415) 558-6478)

230-242 TURK STREET - "The Salvation Army Turk Street Center", north side between Jones and Leavenworth Streets; Lots 024 & 006 in Assessors Block 0338: Request for a rear yard modification in accord with Section 134(f) to provide an equivalent yard area elsewhere on the lot, and for a Variance to provide 32 parking spaces where 88 are required, as part of a project to construct a new mid-rise building that will contain 109 units of affordable housing for adults in recovery and older foster care youth and facilities for associated services. The project includes a gymnasium, pool, chapel and multi-purpose room on the ground floor, and social services offices, and youth recreational area on the second and third floors, all built over an underground parking level accessed from Turk Street and containing at least 32 off-street spaces. The subject property is in an RC-4 (Residential-Commercial Combined, High Density) District and located within the North of Market Residential Special Use District No. 1. The existing building is a contributing structure to the National Register Eligible San Francisco Apartment and Hotel District and is in an 80-120-T Height and Bulk District. The Zoning Administrator will consider these requests.

(Proposed for Continuance to July 24, 2003)

SPEAKER(S): None

ACTION: Without hearing, item continued to July 24, 2003

AYES: Antonini, Bradford Bell, Boyd, Feldstein, Hughes, S. Lee

ABSENT: W. Lee

10. 2003.0193D (R. CRAWFORD: (415) 558-6358)

244 GRANADA AVENUE - East side between Ocean and Holloway Avenues. Assessor's Block 6942 Lot 039 - Mandatory Discretionary Review, under the Planning Commission's policy requiring review of housing demolition of Demolition Permit Application No. 2002.1028.0113, to demolish the existing one family house, 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 two-family building.

Preliminary Recommendation: Do Not Take Discretionary Review and Approve the Demolition Permit.

(Proposed for Continuance to August 21, 2003)

SPEAKER(S): None

ACTION: Without hearing, item continued to August 21, 2003

AYES: Antonini, Bradford Bell, Boyd, Feldstein, Hughes, S. Lee

ABSENT: W. Lee

11a. 2002.1298CV (M. LI: 9415) 558-6396)

624 LAGUNA STREET - northeast corner at Ivy Street, Lot 012 in Assessor's Block 0807 - Request for conditional use authorization to demolish a vacant one-unit residential building and to construct a four-story, 40-foot-high senior care residential facility for up to 30 residents within the Hayes-Gough Neighborhood Commercial District and a 50-X Height and Bulk District. The project is the subject of a concurrent Variance hearing before the Zoning Administrator.

Preliminary Recommendation: Approval with conditions

(Continued from Regular Meeting of May 8, 2003)

(Proposed for Continuance to August 21, 2003)

SPEAKER(S): None

ACTION: Without hearing, item continued to August 21, 2003

AYES: Antonini, Bradford Bell, Boyd, Feldstein, Hughes, S. Lee

ABSENT: W. Lee

11b. 2002.1298CV (M. LI: 9415) 558-6396)

624 LAGUNA STREET - northeast corner at Ivy Street, Lot 012 in Assessor's Block 0807 - Parking variance sought. The proposed project is the demolition of a vacant one-unit residential building and the construction of a four-story, 40-foot-high senior care facility for up to 30 residents within the Hayes-Gough Neighborhood Commercial District and a 50-X Height and Bulk District. The project is proposing to provide zero off-street parking spaces where three are required.

(Continued from Regular Meeting of May 8, 2003)

(Proposed for Continuance to August 21, 2003)

SPEAKER(S): None

ACTION: Without hearing, item continued to August 21, 2003

AYES: Antonini, Bradford Bell, Boyd, Feldstein, Hughes, S. Lee

ABSENT: W. Lee

12. 2003.0253D (G. NELSON: (415) 558-6257)

5126-5130 ANZA STREET - south side between 42^nd and 43^rd Avenue; lot 016 in Assessor's Block 1502 - Mandatory Discretionary Review, under the Planning Commission's policy requiring review of all residential demolitions, of Demolition Permit Application No. 2001.03.07.3684, proposing the demolition of a two-story two-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.

(Proposed for Continuance to September 18, 2003)

SPEAKER(S): None

ACTION: Without hearing, item continued to September 18, 2003

AYES: Antonini, Bradford Bell, Boyd, Feldstein, Hughes, S. Lee

ABSENT: W. Lee

B. COMMISSIONERS' QUESTIONS AND MATTERS

13. Commission Comments/Questions

Commission Secretary:

- The Commission will have a joint hearing with the Park and Recreation Commission on June 26, 2003, at 12:30 p.m.

Commissioner Sue Lee

- Stated her desire to establish a procedural protocol for the timely review of major projects (such as large environmental documents). Have previous Commissions requested anything similar to this?

Commission Secretary responded:

- Commissions in the past have established timeframes for the review of large documents or major projects.

Commissioner Feldstein:

- Last week there was a project in which the project sponsor believed they were offering to participate in the First Source Hiring Program and then learned that they were required to do so. The legislation states that "all Commissions shall cooperate in connection with their respective duties relative to the issuance of permits subject to this and that the Planning Department shall have total jurisdiction for the conditions imposed on the permit." She would like to have this added to the standard conditions for project where it applies.

Zoning Administrator responded:

- It is a usual practice of the department [to include this]. He will make sure that this is standardized.

Commissioner Antonini:

- He seems to believe that there is a problem expediting projects. He would like staff to find ways to expedite things; move the process faster. How can the Commission help on this?

- He appreciates receiving documents on time but he understands that it will never be possible to be 100% prepared.

Commissioner Hughes:

Re: Budget

- He wanted to know the status of the budget.

Director Green Responded:

- The Mayor's budget was presented to the Planning Department last week. Included in that budget was an enhancement on the department's budget which allowed funding of 7 vacancies that currently exist.

- He went before the Budget Committee and presented the work program, what the budget allows the department to carry out, and what the department would not be able to carry out.

- He will appear this coming Thursday to respond for the first time to the Budget Analyst's report and will report back to the Commission.

- The Board of Supervisors has found a way to come forward with additional revenue to televise Planning Commission hearings.

Commissioner Bradford Bell:

Re: Housing Element Hearing on Monday, July 21, 2003 at the Board Chambers

- There was a hearing on this item on June 5, 2003. After testimony, the Commission decided to establish a special hearing to receive more feedback on this issue.

- Since then, the Clerk of the Board's office informed the Planning Department that they will have special hearings that week so we will no longer be able to have the Housing Element hearing in the Board's chambers.

- The second option is to hold a hearing on July 31, 2003 on the Housing Element.

Commissioner Boyd:

Re: Items being continued

- He would like to set up a standard for how an item gets continued and try to avoid continuing items.

14. Consideration of Amendment of the Planning Commission Meeting Schedule for
July 31, 2003.

SPEAKER(S): None

ACTION: The Commission established July 31, 2003 for a Special Hearing.

AYES: Antonini, Bradford Bell, Boyd, Feldstein, Hughes, S. Lee

ABSENT: W. Lee

C. DIRECTOR'S REPORT

15. Director's Announcements

Re: Budget

- As the budget goes through the approval process, he will provide more details next Thursday.

16. Review of Past Week's Events at the Board of Supervisors and Board of Appeals

BOS:

Re: Land Use Committee

- Land Use Committee did not meet last week and will not meet until Monday, June 30, 2003.

Board of Supervisor's Hearing of June 17, 2003:

Re: The O'Shaugnessy Dam Negative Declaration Appeal

- There continues to be an effort to work out a solution to this issue. It was continued until this coming Tuesday, June 24. The appeal was filed by the group "Restore Hetch Hetchy" and supported by the Sierra Club.

Re: Secondary Units Environmental Exemption Appeal

As a courtesy to Supervisor Jake McGoldrick, who is out of the country and requested a continuance of this item, Supervisor Aaron Peskin, the sponsor of the legislation, agreed to continue the appeal until the July 15 meeting of the Board of Supervisors. The Commission will therefore need to continue the consideration of the legislation that is currently on the calendar for next week until after July 15.

Re: 1017 Ocean Avenue

- The Board considered the appeal of this Conditional Use authorization to install three Verizon wireless antennas on this 3-story, multi-use structure. The Board disagreed with the Commission's determination that the antennas are necessary and overturned the CU authorization by an +8-2 vote, with Hall and Dufty dissenting.

Board of Supervisors Meeting of June 24, 2003:

Re: 40-50 Lansing Street

- This is a Conditional Use appeal of an 82-unit residential project. The appeal was filed by five members of the Board of Supervisors (Daly, Ammiano, Gonzales, Sandoval and Maxwell). The appeal of the Negative Declaration decision has already been appealed and upheld unanimously by the Board of Supervisors. Now the CU appeal hearing has been set for the June 24 meeting of the Board.

Re: 3725 Buchanan Street

- This is a Conditional Use appeal of eight Verizon wireless antennas. The appeal was filed by 20% of surrounding property owners.

Budget Committee

- The Budget Committee placed $80,000 into the FY2003/04 budget of the Department of Telecommunications and Information Services for the broadcasting of Planning Commission hearings on SFGTV. They also placed $50,000 into the same budget for the Board of Permit Appeals.

BOA:

None

D. REGULAR CALENDAR

17. 2003.0437C (F. JONES: (415) 558-6477)

3817 NORIEGA STREET - southeast corner of Noriega Street and 46th Avenue, Lot 001 in Assessor's Block 2082- Request for Conditional Use Authorization under Planning Code Section 303 and 710.44 to establish a small self-service restaurant (Taqueria La Playa) within an existing vacant retail space located in a NC-1 (Neighborhood Commercial Cluster District) and a 40-X Height and Bulk District.

Preliminary Recommendation: Approval with Conditions

SPEAKER(S):

(+) Hanna Makhoul- Project Sponsor

- He appreciates the time the Commission has taken on this project.

- He hopes that the Commission will approve the project.

ACTION: Approved with Conditions as amended: delete language "selling burritos and associated products" to be more specific.

AYES: Antonini, Bradford Bell, Boyd, Feldstein, Hughes, S. Lee

ABSENT: W. Lee

MOTION: 16601

18a. 2003.0586XV (A. LIGHT: (415) 558-6254)

1 POWELL STREET - west side between Eddy and Ellis Streets, on Hallidie Plaza; Lot 5, in Assessor's Block 330 -- Request under Planning Code Section 309 (Permit Review in C-3 Districts) for a significant revision to an approved application (Case No. 2000.1140X) to accommodate a retail store, and to seismically retrofit the existing 138-foot tall, seven-story over basement building containing a ground level retail banking office with office uses on the upper floors. The revised request is for a Determination of Compliance to permit conversion of the office portion of the previously approved project to approximately 44 residential dwelling units within the existing envelope of the building. An exception to the rear yard requirement is requested. Variances are requested for Usable Open Space for Dwelling Units, Dwelling Unit Exposure requirements and Off-Street Parking requirements. The revised project would provide no off-street parking where 11 are required. The request for variances will be considered by the Zoning Administrator at the same Planning Commission hearing on June 19, 2003.

SPEAKER(S): None

ACTION: Without Hearing, item continued to June 26, 2003

AYES: Antonini, Bradford Bell, Boyd, Feldstein, Hughes, S. Lee

ABSENT: W. Lee

18b. 2003.0586XV (A. LIGHT: (415) 558-6254)

1 POWELL STREET - west side between Eddy and Ellis Streets, Lot 5, in Assessor's Block 330 - Request for a variance from the Usable Open Space requirements for Dwelling Units, a variance from the Dwelling Unit Exposure requirements, and a variance from residential Off-Street Parking requirements. The proposed project is for a significant revision to an approved application (Case No. 2000.1140X) to accommodate a retail store, and to seismically retrofit the existing approximately 135-foot tall, seven-story over basement Category I building containing a ground level retail banking office with office uses on the upper floors. The office space is to be converted to approximately 44 dwelling units. The proposed project would provide no off-street parking where 11 are required. The project is located in a C-3-R (Downtown, Retail) zoning district, the Kearny-Market-Mason-Sutter Conservation District, and a 110-X height and bulk district.

SPEAKER(S): None

ACTION: Without Hearing, item continued to June 26, 2003

AYES: Antonini, Bradford Bell, Boyd, Feldstein, Hughes, S. Lee

ABSENT: W. Lee

19. 2003.0466C (D. SIDER: (415) 558-6697)

555 4^TH STREET (aka 557 4^TH STREET) - a parcel bounded by Freelon, Welsh, and Zoe Streets; Lot 119 in Assessor's Block 3776: Request for Conditional Use Authorization to allow [1] the construction of residential units pursuant to Planning Code Section 249.23(a) as a replacement for a previously approved but not yet constructed live/work units and [2] an exception to the base 50 foot height limit pursuant to Code Section 249.23(i). An exception from Dwelling Unit Exposure requirements is also requested pursuant to Code Section 249.23(f). Additionally, an administrative modification of rear yard requirements is sought from the Zoning Administrator pursuant to Code Section 249.23(d). The proposal involves the construction of 296 dwelling units, 7,000 square feet of retail space, and 312 off-street parking spaces in a new nine-story building extending to no more than 85 feet in height. As required by the Fourth and Freelon Streets SUD, affordable housing with square footage equal to 15 percent of the total residential square footage of the aforementioned project would be constructed off-site. The property is within an SLI (Service/Light Industrial) Mixed-Use Zoning District, the Fourth and Freelon Streets SUD (Special Use District) as recently established by Board of Supervisors Ordinance Number 27-03, the Mixed-Use Housing Zone as set forth in Planning Commission Resolution 16202, the proposed SES (South-End Service) District as set forth in Planning Commission Resolution Numbers 14843 and 14844, and a 50/85-X Height and Bulk District.

Preliminary Recommendation: Approval with Conditions

SPEAKER(S):

(+) Ean Burshal - Project Architect

- He gave a PowerPoint presentation on the architectural aspects of the project.

(+) Alice Barkely - Representing Project Sponsor

- She has amendments to the Conditions of Approval:

Page 32, Paragraph 31: Delete "The park shall be maintained in an appropriate fashion by the applicant and all efforts shall be made by the applicant to allow public access to the park during daylight hours while also discouraging use of the park for illicit purposes or for loitering by the homeless".

Paged 33, Paragraph 33: Delete the work "similar".

Page 35, Paragraph 57: Delete second sentence requiring submission of an annual report after the issuance of a Certificate of Final Completion and Occupancy and revised paragraph 52 to read as follows:

The Applicant shall designate two off-street parking spaces and dedicate them for use by the" City Car-Share" Program. Should the "City Car-Share" program cease to operate, the Applicant shall assign these two off-street parking spaces for the use by this successor of another similar program designated by the Zoning Administrator.

(-) Calvin Welch - San Francisco Information Clearing House

- Six months ago, the developer of this project came forward to this Commission and mentioned that the principal reason for asking for this development, that would exceed heights and bulk limits, was a tremendous benefit because affordable housing would be provided somewhere at sometime.

- He disagrees with the Director's characterization of what the law says.

- The developer is still in the same situation they were in six months ago.

- The developer has not submitted a mechanism that would assure the construction of the affordable housing which is a necessary precondition of granting the 80 foot height limit, and that is the language that this Commission put in.

(+) Alison Fuller

- She resides on 4^th Street, across the street from the project.

- She would like to have the Commission deny the multiple variances requested for this project.

- The tax payers of District 6 only have the Commission to hear their requests because the Supervisor of this district is working along with the project sponsor.

(-) Jay Bradshaw - Carpenter's Union

- They submitted information on the type of materials that should be used on this project.

- There is no affordable housing in this project.

- Do what is right for workers. Do what is right for the community.

(-) David Lupo - Carpenter's Union

- He heard from the representative of the project sponsor the kinds of materials that would be used on this project.

- There is a question regarding a relationship between an RBA Developer and a Senior Administrative Analyst in the Planning Department.

- There is a question of a conflict of interest regarding a loan to Mr. Jean Paul Samaha of Department staff.

(+) Lou Blazej

- This is a very good project for San Francisco.

- It will provide affordable housing.

- The Zoning Ordinance pursuant to the special use district requires that affordable housing be built.

- The sponsor should be commended and the Commission should approve this project.

(+) Mary Lou Beemer

- She was retained to obtain mezzanine financing and a construction lender for the project.

- The lenders are excited about the project.

- It is important to have the Conditional Use approved today, otherwise the lenders will be jeopardized.

(+) Ed Kirk - Representing Webcor Builders

- This is a quality project and they will be very proud to build it.

(+) Bob Marr - Local 3

- They are very confident that this job will be done correctly.

- All employees will have excellent benefits.

(+) Angeline O'Loughlin

- She mentioned the permit fees, school fees, property taxes, transfer taxes, etc.

- There will be a financial gain for the City.

(+) John Wolley

- He is a property owner.

- This proposal will provide funds to various organizations and this is a very good idea.

- As usual, there are people who oppose this project.

- The Commission should allow this very innovative project.

(+) Joe Cassidy - Project Sponsor

- This is the eighth hearing on this project.

- There are so many large buildings in the most desirable neighborhood in town: Pacific Heights.

- He has never seen property values go down when a project is built.

(+) Fran Rollo - Geotechnical Engineer

- The project is pile supported.

- There was a question about quality of the design.

- He stands behind the design of this building.

(+) Richie Hart

- This project had originally been designed as a live-work project.

- He has been involved in various interesting projects throughout the City.

- Smart planning and eliminating the non-profit developers is very important.

(+) Randy Shaw - Director of the Tenderloin Housing Clinic

- It is disturbing that the same people that criticized the live-work developments come up with a project that is non-profit that provides the school fees and people still oppose it.

- This seems to just be a personal dispute and not about policy.

- They should put the personal attacks to the side and move forward on this project.

(+) Bob Williams

- He has heard a lot of affordable housing.

- He has been homeless and now he lives in a residence hotel.

- He is in favor of this project because he will have an opportunity to live in an apartment.

- Lets cut to the chase and move forward on this project.

(+) Rebecca Dorman

- She lives in an SRO.

- She would like to have a better place to call home.

- She urges the Commission to approve this project.

(+) Sam Dodge - Central City SRO Collaborative

- He is here in support of this project because housing needs to be built at all levels.

- He is a working person and it is still hard for him to survive in this city.

- Affordable housing and workforce housing is very important.

- People who have lived in SRO hotels for many years will have the opportunity to move up to better living.

(+) Antionetta Stadlman

- She has lived on 6^th Street for the last 11 years.

- These units will allow low-income residents to live there.

- The housing situation is bad in this City.

(+) Meredith Walters - Central City SRO Collaborative

- She works with residential hotel tenants.

- There is a lot of excitement for this hotel.

- There are a lot of disabled people and seniors who cannot afford many residential hotels.

- This project is a crucial step to addressing the needs of people who are left out of other housing laws.

(+) Earl Brown

- A lot of tenants pay rents on units that don't have kitchens or private bathrooms.

- He is excited about the affordable units.

(+) Charles Breidinger

- He urges the Commission to approve this project because of the affordability component.

- He does not understand why the Carpenter's Union is against this. They are making serious allegations on this project.

(+) Sean Keighran

- There seems to be a lot of hypocrisy involved in this project.

- This project fits the wish-list of a lot of people

- There have been 2 union organizers who oppose this union-based project.

(+) Kieran Buckley

- This project should be encouraged.

- The developer is doing a lot for the City with this project.

- He is a small developer and admires the project sponsor for giving so much.

(+) Grace Kiely

- She displayed a table of the total value of the affordable component.

(+) James Nunemacher

- He supports this project because it is quite good.

- Housing is desperately needed.

- The units are not luxury units.

(+) Redmond Lyons

- He supports the project as it is being presented.

- This project shows a vision for the future.

(+) Barbara Darrett

- She supports this project.

- She submitted a report regarding a response to a project at 3003-3005 and 3007-3009 23^rd Street.

(+) Evan Hom

- She works with young children.

- This project will be a perfect location for growing families.

(+) Dan Boardman

- He supports this project because San Francisco desperately needs housing.

This project is good for the industry as well.

- He works for a union company.

(+) Elizabeth Notmore

- She is a developer and a land use attorney.

- This is one of the best affordable projects she has ever seen.

- This project will provide housing and a cash flow.

- The opponents did not want live-work so it was changed.

- It seems that there are personal issues between the project sponsor and some opponents.

(+) Andrew Smith

- The issues here are to discuss the Conditional Use questions only.

- One of these questions is: is the height limit appropriate for this area?

(+) Gary Gee

- The design of this project is very good.

- He is an architect and believes the design will be an asset.

(+) Shawn Gorman

- This project is located in the right place because there is transit nearby.

- The number of units is quite large and these are the kind of projects that need to be moved forward by the Commission.

(+) Frank Nolan - Vanguard Properties

- He is one of the many local realtors in San Francisco.

- He passed out a list of the multiple listing that shows the loft sales in District 9, South of Market area. There have been 184 sold units this year.

- There was concern that this project went from lofts to units.

- There is still a demand for lofts.

(+) Mack Burton

- The project sponsor is a very good builder of great character.

- This project should be passed.

(+) Lisa Madden

- She supports this project.

- There are a lot of benefits that this project has for the community.

- Many people will be able to afford these affordable units.

- This project will also provide jobs for union workers.

(+) Richard Johnson

- The location of this project is near many amenities and transportation.

- He hopes that the Commission will approve this project.

(+) Dennis Bruni

- This project is a "lightening rod" for the future.

- He supports the project.

(+) Angus McCarthy - Residential Builders/SOMA Pack

- When they built live-work lofts they were criticized.

- Live-work lofts are still very desirable.

- Although this project had originally been designed as a live-work project, it was changed to affordable housing units because that's what the community needed.

- He does not understand why the union is against this project.

(+) Mike Cassidy

- This project is very innovative and is a brand new thing.

(+) Joe O'Donaghue

- When he was involved in the Kaiser project, he received the same type of objections as with this project.

- Height is not bad; it depends on how the building is designed.

- This project is unique because it will provide fees to non-profits.

- This seems to be a personal issue between the project sponsor and the Local 22.

(-) Christopher Slattery - 4^th Street Neighborhood Association

- There is no guarantee that the affordable component will be placed on this project.

- The building courtyard is not open space; there are a lot of issues with light and air; etc.

- These units are substandard units.

- This project fails to respond to the neighborhood.

(-) Peter Warren

- This project is still a monstrous building.

- There will not be enough space to allow for light and air.

- The retail is very limited.

- The issue here is to decide on a legacy for future generations.

(+) did not state name

- There have been continued delays to this project.

- If this project is continually delayed, it will force the project sponsor out.

- He hopes the Commission will approve this project.

(+) Kevin Thomas - Allied Fire Protection

- His company is a union-based company.

- He has worked on various projects with Webcor.

- He hopes the Commission will approve this project.

(+) Mark Vranicar - CMI

- He will be working on this project and is very excited about it.

(+) Russel DiFiori - JW McClenahan Co.

- He will be working on this project and would like the Commission to approve it.

(+) James Goetz - ARC Electric

- They have done several projects with Webcor and are excited to be working on this.

(+) Cary White - Insurance Brocker

- This project will be delivered with a project policy.

- This is a terrific project done by a great developer.

(-) Kenton McSween

- He lives across from the project site.

- He appreciates the revisions done to this project to accommodate the neighborhood's needs.

- The community will be negatively impacted with this project.

- He would like to have this project reduced to a reasonable height.

(-) Madleine Heinser

- The project sponsor has failed to comply with the needs and issues of the community.

- There is an extreme lack of sensitivity to the neighbors.

- The height of this building is just to large for the area.

- This project should create a livable situation and it does not.

- She appreciates the Commission looking out for their interest.

(+) Elizabeth Dodd

- She lives and works close to this project.

- The project sponsor is using the tactic of "urgency" in order to go over the rights of the neighborhood.

- The Commission should approve this project but deal with every one of the issues that the neighborhood has.

(-) Blake Grenier

- She lives near the project.

- This project will make the alleys darker and more dangerous.

- She displayed a diagram of how this project will block light and air.

- The community supports a project that is more dynamic, and will support more street traffic.

(+) Robert Scott

- He lives on Freelon Street.

- The neighborhood does want a successful project.

- The concerns are just not being addressed.

- He displayed a diagram of the proposed project and his suggestion of a more light and air oriented design.

(-) Jim Salinas

- There would be a whole lot of people supporting this project if this was a project worth supporting.

- His heart goes out to the people who live in SRO hotels.

- He is here to give moral support to the neighbors because they support affordable housing, but this project is not good for the community.

(+) Joe Morales

- He is a senior citizen with a low income, living in the Mission/Bernal Heights neighborhood.

- He has never been able to rest.

- He keeps praying that the Commission will approve this project that will benefit the low-income residents of the City.

- Affordable units should be available to people who can afford them.

(+) Tom McDoughou

- It is important to have affordable housing.

- He hopes that thousands of affordable units will be built in the City.

- An excellent builder and architect will construct this project.

(+) Christine Kuncal - 4^th Street Neighborhood Association

- She lives near the project.

- The current design is a concern for a lot of the neighbors.

- This project is good but it needs to be revised.

- This project could be changed into something dynamic.

- The project is too massive.

- Financing should not be a driver of design decisions.

(+) Tom McCarthy - member of the Carpenter's Union

- The carpenter's union supports housing constructions.

- The best thing to be done is to continue this project until all the issues and problems are cleared up.

(+) Sue Hestor

- There are a lot of inconsistencies with this project.

- The project would provide affordable housing but there is an "or" in the language.

- She is concerned about the bulk and the open space. This project is huge.

- There are a lot of unresolved issues the Commission needs to sort out.

ACTION: Hearing held, item continued to July 10, 2003.

AYES: Bradford Bell, Feldstein, Hughes, S Lee

NAYES: Boyd and Antonini

ABSENT: W. Lee

E. DISCRETIONARY REVIEW HEARING

At approximately 7:07 PM the Planning Commission convened into a Discretionary Review (DR) Hearing to hear and act on Discretionary Review matters.

20a. 2002.0933DV (B. FU: (415) 558-6613)

891 CAROLINA STREET - east side, between 20th Street and 22nd Street; Lot 027 in Assessor's Block 4097 - Request for Discretionary Review of Building Permit Application No. 2002.05.08.6090 proposing to construct a new two-story vertical and horizontal addition to the existing single-story over garage building with an attic level. The project proposes an increase from one to two dwelling units. The project is in an RH-2 (Residential, House, Two-Family) District with a 40-X Height and Bulk Designation. The proposal also requires a front setback Variance for the second story, which will be considered by the Zoning Administrator.

Preliminary Recommendation: Take Discretionary Review and approve the project with modifications.

(Continued from Regular Meeting of June 12, 2003)

NOTE: On March 20, 2003, following public testimony, the Commission closed the public hearing and continued this item to April 3, 2003 by a vote of +4-1 (Commissioner Feldstein voted No; Commissioners Boyd and Hughes were absent). Both Discretionary Review requestor and Project Sponsor were asked to explore possible alternatives to the plans. Public Hearing remains open to any new material presented.

SPEAKER(S):

(+) William Canihan, Jr. - Project Sponsor

- He hopes that the Commission will approve this project.

- He loves music and would like to have the top room designated as a music room.

(+) Bill Walters - Walters Architects

- They have gone through several meetings with the Discretionary Review requestor but there are still issues to deal with.

- The new design is not out of character with the other buildings in the neighborhood.

(+) Steven Cheechov

- He was the former owner of the subject property.

- The project is within code and is an improvement to the area.

- He can speak highly of the integrity of the project sponsor.

(+) Bill Canihan, Sr.

- The proposed change would make the house a bit taller.

(+) Karen Byrnes

- She lives next door to the subject property.

- Her house needs substantial remodeling.

- She urges the Commission to approve this project.

(+) Jennifer Hughes

- This project will improve the neighborhood.

- She is in support of this project.

- The project sponsor has done a lot to accommodate the Discretionary Review requestor.

(+) John Carney

- The reason the house looks big is because of the slope.

- The new design will make the house shorter.

(-) Julie Jackson

- She lives across the street from this project.

- This project is largely inappropriate for the neighborhood.

- Just because the house needs repairs does not mean that the house should be so massive.

(-) Richard Katz

- He lives in Potrero Hill.

- Staff has suggested taking the top off the proposed construction.

- This project will block people's light and lower their quality of life.

(-) Peter Rudolfi

- The architect has stated that the proposed construction is taller than the adjacent buildings.

- Staff has suggested taking the top floor off.

(-) Foster Reed

- He lives on Carolina Street.

- He opposes the new construction because the design fails to meet the residential design guidelines.

- The planner did a good job to recommend taking the top floor off.

(-) Ches Herbert

- He lives on Carolina Street.

- The proposed project is totally out of character with the neighborhood.

- He encourages the Commission to disapprove this project.

(-) Khris Gardner - Discretionary Review Requestor

- She has been available to work with the project sponsor and the architect on the proposed designs.

- She displayed diagrams of the proposed construction.

(-) Dick Millet

- He lives on Connecticut Street.

- Staff has made suggestions that the project sponsor has been ignoring.

(+) David Cincotta - Representing Project Sponsor

- There have been over 6 major revisions to this project.

- He thought they were able to reach an agreement.

- There has been a large number of square footage already removed from the original design.

(+) Liz Grossi

- The project sponsor has made several changes to the original design.

- The Discretionary Review requestor has made a lot of requests and the project sponsor has tried to accommodate all the requests.

- The Discretionary Review requestor does not even live in San Francisco.

ACTION: Take Discretionary Review and approve as amended: The addition is for a second unit only and not for the enlargement of the existing unit.

AYES: Antonini, Bradford Bell, Feldstein, Hughes, S. Lee

ABSENT: Boyd and W. Lee

20b. 2002.0933DV (B. FU: (415) 558-6613)

891 CAROLINA STREET - east side, between 20th Street and 22nd Street; Lot 027 in Assessor's Block 4097 - Request for a front setback Variance for the construction of a new second story in an RH-2 (Residential, House, Two-Family) District with a 40-X Height and Bulk Designation. The project proposes an increase from one to two dwelling units.

(Continued from Regular Meeting of June 12, 2003)

NOTE: On March 20, 2003, the Acting Zoning Administrator continued this item to April 3, 2003. On April 3, 2003, the Zoning Administrator continued this item to April 24, 2003. On April 24, 2003, the matter was continued to May 15, 2003)

SPEAKER(S): Same as those listed for item 20a.

ACTION: Zoning Administrator closed the public hearing and has taken the matter under advisement.

21. 2003.0344D (B. FU: (415) 558-6613)

1222 REVERE AVENUE - north side of Revere Avenue between Hawes and Ingalls Streets, Lot 026 in Assessor's Block 4762 - Mandatory Discretionary Review, under the Planning Commission's Policy requiring review of all residential demolitions, of Demolition Permit Application No. 2002.11.20.1933 proposing to demolish an existing single-family dwelling in an RH-2 (Residential, House, Two-Family) District with a 40-X Height and Bulk Designation. There are related proposals for a lot subdivision to create two legal lots, and the construction of two new, two-family, two-story over garage buildings.

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

(Continued from Regular Meeting of June 5, 2003)

SPEAKER(S):

Reza Khoshnevisan - Project Architect - SIA Consulting

- There is no steel reinforcement in the foundation of the building, making it quite unstable.

- It is a dangerous situation in case of an earthquake.

- He has no problem with complying with the recommendations from staff.

ACTION: Following testimony, the Commission closed the public hearing and continued this item to July 31, 2003.

AYES: Antonini, Bradford Bell, Boyd, Feldstein, Hughes, S. Lee

ABSENT: W. Lee

22. 2003.0412D (K. McGEE: (415) 558-6367)

572 SAN JOSE AVENUE - west side between 27th and Duncan Streets, Lot 003 in Assessor's Block 6595 - Request for Discretionary Review of Building Permit Application No. 2002.11.04.0682 proposing to add a horizontal and vertical addition to a duplex and to add two parking spaces. The subject property is located 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 project as proposed.

SPEAKER(S):

Re: Continuance

Sue Hestor - Representing Discretionary Review

- She just received plans yesterday.

- She would like to have this project continued.

Ara Tehlirian - Project Sponsor

- He has submitted information to Ms. Hester in a timely matter.

- He does not understand why there is a need for continuance.

ACTION: Without hearing, item continued to June 26, 2003

AYES: Antonini, Bradford Bell, Feldstein, Hughes, S. Lee

ABSENT: Boyd and W. Lee

23. 2003.0252D (K. McGEE: (415) 558-6367)

2130 24^th STREET - north side between Rhode Island and De Haro Streets; Lot 36 in Assessor's Block 4217 - Mandatory Discretionary Review, under the Planning Commission's policy requiring review of all residential demolitions, of Building Permit Application No. 2002.12.06.2942, proposing to demolish the existing one-unit building in an RH-2 (Residential, House, Two-Family) District and 40-X Height and Bulk District.

Recommendation: Do not take Discretionary Review and approve the proposal.

SPEAKER(S):

(+) Michael Leavitt

- He has owned and lived next door to the subject property for the last 6 years.

- After the birth of their child, the tenants living at the subject property decided to move to San Diego.

- The subject property has been vacant for about one year.

- He proposes to make the one unit building into a two unit building.

- The proposed new construction will have two units with a total of 7 bedrooms. One unit will have three bedrooms and the other unit will have four bedrooms.

- The new house will follow the residential design guidelines and will be built with quality materials.

ACTION: Did not take Discretionary Review and approve the proposal.

AYES: Antonini, Bradford Bell, Boyd, Feldstein, Hughes, S. Lee

ABSENT: W. Lee

24. 2003.0316D (G. CABREROS: (415) 558-6169)

529 21^ST AVENUE - west side between Anza and Balboa Streets, Lot 004 in Assessor's Block 1564 - Request for Discretionary Review of Building Permit Application No. 2002.06.14.9075 proposing to construct a four-story, two-unit building with two parking spaces in an RH-2 (Residential, House, Two-Family) District and a 40-X Height and Bulk District.

Preliminary Recommendation: Take Discretionary Review and approve with modifications.

SPEAKER(S): None

ACTION: Without hearing, item continued to July 10, 2003

AYES: Antonini, Bradford Bell, Feldstein, Hughes, S. Lee

ABSENT: Boyd and W. Lee

25. 2002.0557D (D. SIDER: (415) 558-6697)

473 LELAND STREET - south side between Loehr and Sawyer Streets, Lot 022 in Assessor's Block 6258 - Mandatory Discretionary Review of Demolition Permit Application Number 2002.01.03.8121, which would demolish an existing single-family dwelling. A new single-family dwelling would be constructed under a separate building permit application. Pursuant to Planning Commission Policy, any residential demolition requires a mandatory Discretionary Review Hearing. The property is located in an RH-1 (Single Family Residential) Zoning District and a 40-X Height and Bulk District.

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

(Continued from Regular Meeting of June 5, 2003)

SPEAKER(S):

(+) Bill Walters - Project Architect

- He is available for questions.

ACTION: Took Discretionary Review and denied the demolition permit.

AYES: Bradford Bell, Boyd, Feldstein, Hughes, S. Lee

NAYES: Antonini

ABSENT: W. Lee

26. 2003.0293D (D. SIDER: (415) 558-6697)

1525 FOLSOM STREET - east side between Norfolk and 11^th Streets, Lot 053 in Assessor's Block 3521 - Mandatory Discretionary Review of Building Permit Application Number 2003.02.05.6758, a proposal to convert the second story of an existing two story building from that of storage into a dwelling unit. The construction of a new rear deck, stairs, and garage are also proposed. Pursuant to Planning Commission Policy, any residential demolition requires a mandatory Discretionary Review Hearing. The property is located in an SLR (Service / Light Industrial / Residential) Zoning District, the IPZ (Industrial Protection Zone) as set forth in Planning Commission Resolution Number 16202, and a 50-X Height and Bulk District.

Preliminary Recommendation: Take Discretionary Review to approve the project with

conditions.

(Continued from Regular Meeting of June 5, 2003)

SPEAKER(S):

(+) Robert Bernardin - Project Architect

- The project sponsor has been in the nightclub industry for many years.

- He has worked on a lot of nightclubs that have come before the Commission.

- The issue here is noise.

(+) Robin Reichert - 11^th Street Merchant's Association

- He has worked on various projects that came before the Planning Commission.

- This area is zoned nighttime entertainment.

- Nighttime entertainment and residential housing can work together.

(+) Mark Rennie - Attorney

- He represents various nightclubs.

- He displayed photographs of various nightclubs on Folsom Street that has residential nearby.

ACTION: Took Discretionary Review and disapprove the project

AYES: Bradford Bell, Boyd, Feldstein, Hughes, S. Lee

NAYES: Antonini

ABSENT: W. Lee

27. 2003.0261D (T. TAM: (415) 558-6325)

4018 MORAGA STREET - north side, between 46th and 47th Avenues, Lot 25 in Block 1897 - Discretionary Review request on Building Permit No. 2002.12.12.3407s to allow a new third-story vertical addition and a two-story rear horizontal extension to an existing two-story, single-family dwelling. The property is located in the RH-1 and 40-X Height and Bulk Districts.

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

(Continued from Regular Meeting of June 5, 2003)

SPEAKER(S):

(-) Jamie Xelowski - Discretionary Review Requestor

- She purchased her home in an area she had desired for many years.

- She has a very small back yard.

- All the homes are the same height and the proposed construction will be larger.

- The proposed construction will be totally out of character with the other adjacent homes.

- She is waging a battle to keep the character and charm of her neighborhood.

(+) Bob Baum - Project Architect

- The project sponsor is doing a modest addition to their home.

- He has tried unsuccessfully to meet with the Discretionary Review requestor.

- The house required a modest extension in the rear in order to allow the top floor. This extension is where there is a staircase.

- He has tried to do the addition very carefully in order not to lose the character of the other homes.

(+) Adela Ramirez

- She lives three doors down from the proposed addition.

- She is speaking for her mother.

- She plans to live in that neighborhood for many years.

- The project sponsor has been very accommodating to the other neighbors.

(+) (name unclear)

- The project sponsor is very much of an asset to the neighborhood. They are considerate and thoughtful.

- The proposed construction does not interfere with the light and air onto her home.

- She hopes that the Commission will approve this project.

(+) Jill Chase - Project Sponsor

- She has lived in this house for 17 years.

- It has become necessary to enlarge her home.

- The most inexpensive plan was to construct an addition.

- The Discretionary Review requestor will not lose light or air because she has open fencing.

ACTION: Did not take Discretionary Review and approve the project.

AYES: Antonini, Bradford Bell, Boyd, Feldstein, Hughes, S. Lee

ABSENT: W. Lee

28. 2002.1008D (K. SIMONSON: (415) 558-6321)

3196 PACIFIC AVENUE - north side between Lyon Street and Presidio Avenue, Lot 3 in Assessor's Block 965 - Request for Discretionary Review of Building Permit Application No. 2002.07.08.0823, proposing to construct a horizontal extension at the basement, first, and second floors at the northeast corner of the existing single-family residence. The subject property is in an RH-1 (Residential, House, Single Family) District and a 40-X Height and Bulk District.

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

SPEAKER(S):

(-) Bonnie Demergasso - Discretionary Review Requestor

- She has a deeded easement that allows for light and air.

- The rear addition is in conflict with the rear yard patterns of the Neighborhood Design Guidelines.

- The construction does not meet the good neighbor gestures.

- She has a rear garden and she is in her yard most days. If she looses the light into this garden it will substantially impact her life.

- If the second story were to be removed, it would allow light and air to come into her home.

(-) Roberta Rozen

- She lives near the Discretionary Review requestor.

- The project sponsor has a very nice view and a lot of light comes into the home.

- If the proposed project is constructed it will be very close to the DR requestor's home.

- The project will make a big difference.

(+) Dan Phipps - Project Architect

- This project is in front of the Presidio wall.

- There will be a minimal negative affect on to the Discretionary Review requestor.

- There will be no air and light impact that will affect the windows of the DR requestor.

(+) Mary Conlin - Project Sponsor

- She and her husband purchased their home about four years ago.

- They started the project before they had children and now they have two.

ACTION: Did not take Discretionary Review and approved the project.

AYES: Antonini, Bradford Bell, Boyd, Feldstein, Hughes, S. Lee

ABSENT: W. Lee

29. 2002.1088D (M. SMITH: (415) 558-6322)

171 BEAVER STREET - west side of the street between Castro and 15^th Streets, Lot 087 in Assessor's Block 2614 - Mandatory Discretionary Review, under Planning Commission's policy requiring review of housing demolition, of Demolition Application No. 2002.06.26.0049, proposing to demolish an existing one-story single-family dwelling (the project also proposes the construction of a new three-story over garage, two family dwelling) in a 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.

SPEAKER(S):

(+) William Abend - AIA Architects

- He is available for questions.

(-) David Armillie

- He is in support of taking Discretionary Review because there is historical significance to the project.

- All the houses in the neighborhood have a lot of detail in their architectural design.

- The style of the house is very charming.

- He went to the Landmarks Advisory board and they expressed interest in researching whether or not this project has historical significance.

ACTION: Did not take Discretionary Review and approved the project.

AYES: Antonini, Bradford Bell, Boyd, Feldstein, Hughes, S. Lee

ABSENT: W. Lee

30. 2003.0467D (M. WOODS: (415) 558-6315)

1238 MASONIC AVENUE - east side between Waller and Haight Streets; Lot 23 in Assessor's Block 1243 - Mandatory Discretionary Review, under the Planning Commission's policy requiring review of all dwelling unit mergers, of Building Permit Application No. 2003.01.14.5103, proposing to legalize the conversion of a two-unit building to a single-family residence in an RH-3 (Residential, House, Three-Family) District and 40-X Height and Bulk District.

Preliminary Recommendation: Take Discretionary Review and disapprove the proposed dwelling unit merger.

SPEAKER(S):

(+) Alden Marsh - Project Architect

- The project sponsor purchased the property with the intent of occupying the property as a single-family home.

- Although the property is not in compliance with the zoning classification, the property is in line with current housing density found in the surrounding neighborhood.

- The dwelling unit density consists of one-family, two-family, etc.

- Removal of the authorized units will have little effect or no effect on the current mix of density in the neighborhood.

(+) Colman Burk

- He purchased the home without any idea that this would be an issue.

- Whoever did the conversion should have disclosed this issue. His realtor should have mentioned something as well.

- He asked for help from the Commission because he feels confused.

(+) Michael Fosuello

- He is here to support the project sponsor.

- There have been a lot of transfers but it was never the intent of the project sponsor to have this property converted.

- This property was valued as a single-family home.

- If there was some enforcement trying to encourage housing, then that is when this project should have been stopped.

ACTION: Took Discretionary Review and disapproved the merger

AYES: Boyd, Feldstein, Hughes, S. Lee

NAYES: Antonini, Bradford Bell

ABSENT: W. Lee

F. 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: 10:00 p.m.

THESE MINUTES ARE PROPOSED FOR ADOPTION AT THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION ON THURSDAY, SEPTEMBER 18, 2003.

SPEAKERS: None

ACTION: Approved

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

ABSENT: Boyd