May 30, 2002
SAN FRANCISCO PLANNING COMMISSION
Meeting Minutes
Commission Chambers - Room 400
City Hall, 1 Dr. Carlton B. Goodlett Place
Thursday, May 30, 2002
1:30 PM
Regular Meeting
PRESENT: Baltimore, Chinchilla, Fay, Joe, Lim, Salinas, Theoharis
ABSENT: None
THE MEETING WAS CALLED TO ORDER BY VICE PRESIDENT FAY AT 1:40 p.m.
STAFF IN ATTENDANCE: Gerald Green – Director; Larry Badiner -Zoning Administrator; Kate McGee; Kelley Amdur; Art Aguilar; Michael Li; Rick Crawford; Thomas Wang; Matt Snyder; Dario Jones; 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. 2002.0474D (S. SANCHEZ: 415-558-6679)
318 29th AVENUE - east side between California and Clement Streets; Lot 046 in Assessor’s Block 1405 - Staff-initiated request for Discretionary Review of Building Permit Application 2000/10/13/2953 proposing to demolish the existing three level single family dwelling (the project also proposes the new construction of a two-unit building under separate permit). The subject property is located in an RH-2 (Residential, House, Two-Family) District and a 40-X Height and Bulk District.
Preliminary Recommendation: Take Discretionary Review and disapprove the demolition application.
(Proposed for Continuance to August 1, 2002)
SPEAKER(S): None
ACTION: Continued as Proposed
AYES: Chinchilla, Fay, Joe, Lim, Salinas, Theoharis
ABSENT: Baltimore
B. COMMISSIONERS' QUESTIONS AND MATTERS
2. Consideration of Adoption - draft minutes of May 9, 2002
SPEAKER(S): None
ACTION: Approved
AYES: Chinchilla, Fay, Joe, Lim, Salinas, Theoharis
ABSENT: Baltimore
3. Commission Matters
Commissioner Theoharis: There was an article in the Chronicle regarding the demolition cases being heard today. The article inferred that the Commission was crowding these types of cases because their (commissioner's) terms might be up by the end of June. She would like to clarify that the Commission instituted a policy that these cases would have to come before the Commission, even though they didn't have to legally, but because they deserved additional scrutiny. Because the Commission became aware that there was a backlog of these cases, they scheduled a special hearing on a 5th Thursday (fifth Thursdays are usually canceled) to handle them.
C. DIRECTOR'S REPORT
4. Director's Announcements
None
5. Review of Past Week's Events at the Board of Supervisors and Board of Appeals
BOS – None
BOA
Re: 1117 Judah Street
The Commission took Discretionary Review on September 5, 2002 and requested that the project sponsor cut back the 2nd, 3rd and 4th floors by 8 feet. The Board approved what the project sponsor had proposed to them: cut back half of the building adjacent to the DR requestor but allowed the 2nd, 3rd, and 4th floor to go back approximately 8 feet. The Board felt that there were special configurations from the DR requestor but that should not grant them a right or an easement over the adjacent property.
Re: 337-339 Mississippi Street
The Commission took Discretionary Review on December 6, 2001 and denied the dwelling merger. The Board overruled the Commission's decision stating that the market has changed and there are a lot of vacancies and rentals. This merger would create family housing, which is desperately needed.
6. (L. BADINER: 415-558-6350)
Consideration of Adoption of Commission policy on Annual Office Limitation Program – Project Construction
(Continued from Regular Meeting of May 23, 2002)
SPEAKER(S):
(-) Jul Niemier
- He is opposed to this policy. He would like the Commission to not renew or extend this policy.
(-) Mary Bobbitt
- She is opposed to the Bryant Square Project.
(-) Tom Wetzel – Mission Anti-Displacement Coalition
- He is against this policy because during the hearing of the Bryant Square project, the argument of adverse economic impacts could not be used to the benefit of the developers.
- It is shameful to allow this reasoning to go ahead because it shows that the Commission is out for the interest of the developers and not the people of the City.
(-) Sue Hestor
- There has not been enough notice of this item.
- Last week there was a different description on the agenda than this week's agenda.
- This is a major policy that needs to be discussed.
- This item should be continued
(-) Luis Granados – Mission Economic Development Association
- He asks that the Commission not take action on staff's recommendation since the recommendation will be a huge policy decision.
- He believes that projects got permits on a different set of standards. This policy should apply to projects from here forward and not retroactively.
(-/+) Tay Via – Cobletz, Patch, Duffy and Bass – Representing the Project Sponsor of First and Howard Streets
- If the Commission adopts the new policy in terms of reporting and performance, she requests that they be treated as the other projects. If not, they will come back for an extension.
(-/+) Tim Tosta – Steefel, Lefitt and Weiss
- His only concern is the message that might be sent from this policy.
- He strongly supports staff recommendation but has a suggestion that would add a further recommendation: add a provision that would declare that under the economic circumstances like the one we are going through today, that the time be eclipsed from the calculation.
(+) Jim Reuben – Reuben & Alter
- He supports the six to eight projects on the list that his firm has been working on. He is also in support of the staff recommendation and resolution as drafted.
(-) Calvin Welch – Council of Community Housing Organizations
- He has not seen the recent amendment to the recommendations from the department.
- The thrust of this amendment is to act exactly as in 1991, the question he has is what about the changes in the conditions of the laws of the City?
- If changes of conditions are to be discussed, then the full order of changes and conditions need to be discussed.
- The department needs to let the development community understand that when they come before the Commission a year or two from now, they will be required to meet the new levels of mitigations. This statement is not made clear.
(-) Robert Herr- 350 Bush Street Project and the Bryant Square Project
- The policy as revised by the Director of Planning and the Zoning Administrator is a sound policy and should be endorsed by the Commission. The language can always be improved.
(-) Oscar Grande – People Organizing to demand Environmental and Economic Rights (PODER)
- He hopes that the Commission will take no action and continue this matter to another date in order to bring more people from the community to state their comments.
(-) Doug Perry – Editor of Organized Labor
- He is worried about the economy of San Francisco since he is dependent on office building development.
- Given the current state of the economy, it is important not to discourage development because it brings jobs and revenue into the City.
ACTION: Approved with final language modifications.
AYES: Baltimore, Chinchilla, Fay, Lim, Salinas, Theoharis
NAYES: Joe
MOTION: 16418
7. (A. GHOSH: 415-558-6275)
CITY PARKING POLICY
Discussion of City's Parking Policy as defined in the Charter, General Plan and Planning Code.
SPEAKER(S):
(+/-) Sue Hestor
- There are a couple of issues related to parking: 1) where there is a reduced parking requirement, it gives a benefit to the developer yet nothing goes to MUNI; 2) there should be increased affordability requested on development projects.
(+/-) Peter Albert – Manager of Planning for San Francisco and Bay Area Rapid Transit system
- Transit oriented development makes sense for the Bay Area and San Francisco.
- It takes housing, which is very much needed, and links it to transit.
- People need a choice as well, and that is not being provided right now.
- General Plan policies make sense for San Francisco in the right location but parking is at the core of the issues.
(+/-) David Snyder – San Francisco Bicycle Coalition and Transportation for a Livable City
- CTLC is a new organization dedicated to connecting land use and transportation and improving transportation for everybody.
- The code needs to be changed to encourage more housing and more affordable housing and change the parking requirements as necessary. This will be just housing for the rich, and poor people will be thrown out of the City in larger numbers than they are now.
- Alternatives are key. MUNI is getting a lot better. The pedestrian advocates are getting stronger. The new NTA is working on a new bicycle plan. Now is the time to look at this.
(+) Tom Redoulavich – Member of the BART Board of Directors and a Founding Member of San Francisco Housing Action Coalition
- Staff is headed in the right direction.
- He is happy to encourage the department to do anything that increases ridership on BART.
- The transit system is on the mend in the City.
- The whole transportation picture needs to be looked at.
ACTION: Meeting Held. No Action Taken.
D. PUBLIC COMMENT ON AGENDA ITEMS WHERE THE PUBLIC HEARING HAS BEEN CLOSED
At this time, members of the public who wish to address the Commission on agenda items that have already been reviewed in a public hearing at which members of the public were allowed to testify and the Commission has closed the public hearing must do so at this time. Each member of the public may address the Commission for up to three minutes.
SPEAKER(S):
Re: 2141 Chestnut Street
(+) Nissim Lanvadoa –
- He supports this project because Walgreen's has been a good and long-standing neighbor.
(-) Alfonso Felder – San Francisco Neighborhood Theater Foundation
- He is not in support of this project. The majority of the neighbors would like to keep the theatre as a theatre use.
(-) Jim Maxwell – Marina Merchants Association
- Over 75% of the Marina Merchants Association is opposed to this project.
(-) Jack Bair – San Francisco Neighborhood Theatre Foundation
- He is speaking in favor of saving the Cinema 21 theatre.
-
(-) Mary Lester – Pacific Heights/Marina Resident
- She is in favor of saving the Cinema 21 theatre.
(+) Pamela Squires – Presidio Inn
- She owns and operates a family business within a few blocks of this project.
- She is a member of the Marina Merchants Association
- She supports the expansion of the Walgreen's.
(-) Ned Segal
- He is not in support of this project.
- There has to be a way to make a movie theatre work here.
(-) David Sulk – Elmwood Theatre Foundation
- He was able to save the Elmwood theatre from the wrecking ball.
- He was able to get low interest loans, funding from local people, find an operator, and convert the theatre form a single screen theatre into a large single screen downstairs and two small screens upstairs. The theatre is thriving.
(-) Ronald Chun
- He is a life-long resident of San Francisco.
- Saving the theatre will create a nice neighborhood and will preserve the integrity of the neighborhood.
(-) David Monks – Friends of Noe Valley
- He is here to supports his neighbors in the Marina to try to save the theatre.
- His concerns are that there will be more population, more density and these types of locations will be lost.
(-) Tom Radulovich – Member of the BART Board of Directors
- He is here to voice his support for saving the Cinema 21 theatre.
(-) Steve Kahn – Combined Art Form Entertainment
- He represents a San Francisco theatre group who has been looking to lease or buy a 10,000 to 15,000 sq. ft. space to develop a theatre, rehearsal and café use.
- It would be a shame to loose this location.
(-) Brian Chaney – Reel Cinema Group
- His group has been looking for space to bring a new concept to San Francisco.
- Single-screen theatres are making it. They are located in various cities of the United States.
- He would like the Commission to vote on keeping the Cinema 21 a theatre. He has nothing against Walgreen's, but it should stay where it is.
(-) Bent Hagemark
- He lives near the theatre as well as two Walgreen's.
- When people come to visit him from out of town, he does not take them to Walgreen's, he takes them to the movies.
- He hopes that the Commission will vote against destroying this theatre.
(+) Patricia Vaughey – Marina/Cow Hollow Merchant's Association and Marina/Cow Hollow Neighbors in Action
- She feels that the neighborhood will end up with a vacant building that will be boarded up.
(+) Ray Kaliski
- The theatre business is not viable anymore.
- Opening up a Walgreen's will also open up union construction jobs and union retail jobs when completed.
(+) Jim Reuben – Reuben and Alter
- This theatre has been closed for more than a year. The issue is not about closing down a vibrant theatre.
(-) Peter Singh – Vice President of Marina Merchants Association
- The Commission has a duty to work towards the neighborhoods. This means to try to find something better. There is already a Walgreen's in the neighborhood.
(-) Eric J. Messersmith, Esq.
- He lives in the Marina and is quite familiar with the Cinema 21 theatre.
- He is here to support saving the theatre.
(-) Sal Salma
- He has owned property on Chestnut Street for over 40 years.
- He is a member of the Marina Merchants Association.
- He has been at the theatre many times. But the theatre business is going down.
- Foot traffic is important on Chestnut Street.
(-) Denise LaPoint – San Francisco Neighborhood Theatre Foundation
- The foundation never met with the property owner because they (the property owner) are in an exclusive agreement with Walgreen's.
- She believes that there could be a variety of alternative uses to maintain the space as a theatre. None can move forward until the exclusive agreement expires or if the Commission does not approve this project.
(-) Davis Bladis
- Walgreen's provides a great deal of sundries items and he is in support of this project.
Re: 355 Country Club Drive
(-) Merriam Levy
- The current owners have made everyone believe that they are only remodeling.
- Occupants in five of the homes in the immediate vicinity have cancer. The construction will cause traffic and noise.
- She would like the Commission to vote this project down.
(-) Jon Pierucci
- Members of his family have lived on Country Club Drive for over 40 years.
- He is against this project.
(-) Bruce Selby
- He and his wife live across the street from the proposed project.
- This huge addition will destroy one of the most attractive aspects of the neighborhood--the symmetry of the neighborhood.
- It will also encourage other people to come in and building monster homes.
- He is also concerned about the neighbors who have cancer and will be affected by the construction.
(-) Roland Levy
- He lives near this proposed construction.
- This project violates many sections of the Residential Design Guidelines. For example: 1) neighborhood character; 2) volume and mass; 3) respect for the scale of the neighborhood.
- Only one member of the Commission made a site visit and this same Commission member voted against this project.
- It would be a good idea for the Commissioners to make site visits.
- He hopes that the Commission will vote against this project.
(-) Cris Manitsas – Lakeshore Acres Improvement Club
- He is not an immediate neighbor but the proposed development is out of scale with the neighborhood.
- It is important to make a site visit in order to have a 3 dimensional impression of what will actually happen with this addition.
(+) Steve Vettel – Representing Project Sponsors
- Today is the first he heard that there were people in the neighborhood who are sick. He is willing to speak to every one of these people to find out what construction conditions would be acceptable to them.
- He described the layout of the construction.
(-) Ronald Chun
- He is not in support of this project.
- If this project is approved it would become a great monster home.
E. CONSIDERATION OF FINDINGS AND FINAL ACTION – PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED
8. 2001.1112D (M. WOODS: 415-558-6315)
2141 CHESTNUT STREET - south side between Steiner and Pierce Streets, Lots 20 and 21 in Assessor’s Block 490 - Requests for Discretionary Review of Building Permit Application No. 2001/1011/0487S, proposing to convert a movie theatre use, formerly Cinema 21, to a retail sales and services use for Walgreen's in an NC-2 (Small-Scale Neighborhood Commercial) District and a 40-X Height and Bulk District.
Preliminary Recommendation: Take Discretionary Review and approve the project with modifications.
NOTE: On April 18, 2002, following public testimony, the Commission closed the public hearing and entertained two motions: 1) to take Discretionary Review and disapprove the project. The motion failed to carry by a vote +3 –3. Commissioners Chinchilla, Salinas and Theoharis voted No. Commissioner Fay was absent. 2) to take Discretionary Review and Approve with staff recommendation. The motion failed to carry by a vote +3 –3. Commissioners Baltimore, Lim and Joe voted No. Commissioner Fay was absent. The matter was continued at the call of the chair to allow the absent Commissioner to participate in the final action.
SPEAKER(S): None
ACTION: Took Discretionary Review and disapproved the project
AYES: Baltimore, Joe, Lim, Salinas
NAYES: Chinchilla, Fay, Theoharis
9. 2001.0947D (T. WANG: 415-5586335)
355 COUNTRY CLUB DRIVE - south side near Huntington Drive; Lot 001 in Assessor's Block 7274 Request for Discretionary Review of Building Permit Application No. 2001/08/21/6532 to construct a second floor vertical addition, at the existing onestory, singlefamily dwelling in an RH1(D) (Residential, House, OneFamily, Detached) District and a 40X Height and Bulk District.
Preliminary Recommendation: Do not take Discretionary Review and approve the project as submitted.
(Continued from Regular Meeting of April 25, 2002)
NOTE: On April 25, 2002, following public testimony, the Commission closed the public hearing and entertained two motions: 1) to take Discretionary Review and approve the project with no more than a 900 square foot addition. The motion failed to carry by a vote of +2-3. Commissioners Baltimore, Fay and Chinchilla voted No and Commissioners Joe and Lim were absent. 2) to not take Discretionary Review and approve the project as submitted with the elimination of the double doors. The motion failed to carry by a vote of +3-2. Commissioners Salinas and Theoharis voted No and Commissioners Joe and Lim were absent. The matter was then continued to May 30, 2002 at the call of the Chair to allow the absent Commissioners to participate in the final action.
SPEAKER(S): None
ACTION: Took Discretionary Review and approved as modified: 1) The proposed second floor addition shall be limited to contain no more than 900 square feet of floor area; 2) The proposed ground floor double entry doors to the dwelling shall be redesigned with a single entry door only.
AYES: Joe, Lim, Theoharis, Salinas
NAYES: Baltimore, Chinchilla, Fay
F. REGULAR CALENDAR
10a. 2002.0314CV (J. PURVIS: 415-558-6354)
4601 3RD STREET - east side between McKinnon and Newcomb Avenues, Assessor’s Block 5306, Lots 4 and 29; Request for Conditional Use approval under Planning Code Sections 121.1 and 712.11 for development of a lot of 10,000 square feet or more. The project site is 16,000 square feet. The proposal is to construct a five-story-over-basement building with 53 units of senior housing and approximately 3,100 square feet of ground floor commercial, office community space and non-profit office space. A total of 52 parking spaces would be provided within a basement level garage, replacing all existing parking on the site, in addition to providing the Code required 11 spaces. The project would additionally require a rear yard modification. The site is within an NC-3 (Moderate-Scale Neighborhood Commercial) Zoning District and a 40-X Height and Bulk District.
Preliminary Recommendation: Approval with Conditions.
(Continued from Regular Meeting of May 23, 2002)
SPEAKER(S):
(+) James Blanding – President of Providence Foundation of San Francisco
- He would like to provide housing for the low to very low senior citizens.
- The parking lot of Providence Baptist Church is not utilized comepletely and that is the reason he would like to build senior housing.
- He has met with various community groups and commitees and everyone endorces the project.
(+) Rev. Calvin Jones
- This church has been in existance since the 60's.
- Every since then, they have had various forms of construction.
- Housing is now needed for seniors so they can remain in San Francisco.
(+) Refina Davis – Executive Director of the San Francisco Housing Development Corporation
- There is condition language that basicly says that all funding for the project should be subordinated except 10 percent. This was some left over boiler-plate language that can not apply in this case.
- This project should be a HUD 2 and 2 funded project. HUD requirements call for 100%.
ACTION: Approved as Modified: The word senior should be included in the land use description; and subordination language should be modified as requested by HUD.
AYES: Baltimore, Chinchilla, Joe, Lim, Salinas, Theoharis
ABSENT: Fay
MOTION: 16419
10b. 2002.0314CV (J. PURVIS: 415-558-6354)
4601 3RD STREET - east side between McKinnon and Newcomb Avenues, Assessor’s Block 5306, Lots 4 and 29 - Request for a rear yard modification for the above mixed-use project. Planning Code Section 134(a)(1) requires a rear yard of 25 percent the depth of a lot to be provided at the lowest story containing a dwelling unit, and at each succeeding story of a building. The proposed project would provide a rear yard of comparable size but within a courtyard. Section 134(e) allows for modification of the rear yard standard in certain districts subject to a hearing by the Zoning Administrator. The site is within an NC-3 (Moderate-Scale Neighborhood Commercial) Zoning District and a 40-X Height and Bulk District.
Preliminary Recommendation: Approval with Conditions.
(Continued from Regular Meeting of May 23, 2002)
SPEAKER(S): Same as those listed in item 10a.
ACTION: Zoning Administrator closed the public hearing and granted the rear yard modification.
G. DISCRETIONARY REVIEW HEARING
At Approximately 6:05 PM the Planning Commission convened into a Discretionary Review (DR) Hearing to hear and act on Discretionary Review matters.
11. 2002.0209D (M.SMITH: 415-558-6322)
138 28th STREET - north side of the street between Dolores and Church Streets, Lot 012A in Assessor's Block 6600, Pursuant to Resolution 16078, a staff initiated request for Discretionary Review of Building Permit Application No. 2001/09/26/9303, proposing to construct a one-story vertical addition and merge four dwelling units into two dwelling units in a two-story over garage, four-unit building located in a RH-2 (Residential, House, Two-Family) District and a 40-X Height and Bulk District.
Preliminary Recommendation: Take Discretionary Review and Disapprove the merger but allow the vertical addition
(Continued from Regular Meeting of May 9, 2002)
SPEAKER(S):
(+) Bob Actone – Project Architect
- The current owners would like to merge the units in order to live there a long time and raise a family.
- The building would go through a renovation process and bring it into compliance.
(+) Tom Cashir
- He and his partner purchased the property in the fall of 2000 with the intent to merge the two units.
- They are not displacing anyone. This merger will help the density of the neighborhood.
(+) Natasha Tuck
- She is the co-owner of the building.
- She and Tom Cashir have been long time renters of San Francisco and they were very excited to purchase a home and build a home for both of them.
- They intended to merge the units when they purchased it.
ACTION: Took Discretionary Review and disapproved the merger but approved the vertical addition.
AYES: Chinchilla, Joe, Lim, Salinas, Theoharis
NAYES: Baltimore
ABSENT: Fay
12. 2002.0523D (M. SMITH: 415-558-6322)
615 GENNESSEE STREET - west side of the street between Mangels and Melrose Avenues, Lot 006 in Assessor’s Block 3066, Staff initiated request for Discretionary Review of Building Permit Application No. 2001/07/31/4899, proposing to demolish the existing two-story over basement single-family dwelling. The applicant has also submitted an application to construct a two-story over garage replacement single-family dwelling that is not subject to the discretionary review. The subject property is located in an RH-1 (Residential, House, One-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):
(+) Brendan Laylor – Project Sponsor
- He would like to remain in San Francisco and the only way he can do this is to build his own house.
- None of the neighbors are opposed to the project.
(+) Joe O'Donaghue
- There was no opposition to this project so there is no need to have this case before the Commission.
ACTION: Did not take Discretionary Review and approved the demolition.
AYES: Baltimore, Chinchilla, Joe, Lim, Theoharis
NAYES: Salinas
ABSENT: Fay
13. 2002.0496D (K. McGEE: 415-558-6367)
148 HAMILTON STREET - on the west side, between Silliman and Felton Streets, Lot 006 in Assessor’s Block 5931, Staff initiated request for Discretionary Review of Demolition Permit Application No. 2001.10.03.9899, proposing to demolish the existing one story over garage dwelling unit and to replace it with a new one story over garage dwelling unit. The subject property is located in an RH-1 (Residential House, Single-Family) District and in a 40-X Height and Bulk District.
Preliminary Recommendation: Do not take Discretionary Review and approve the demolition.
SPEAKER(S):
(+) Van Lee – Project Architect
- She is here to answer any questions.
ACTION: Did not take Discretionary Review and approved the demolition.
AYES: Baltimore, Chinchilla, Joe, Lim, Salinas, Theoharis
ABSENT: Fay
14. 2001.1127DD (J. VOLLMANN: (415) 558-6612)
1738 LAKE STREET - north side between 18th and 19th Avenues, Lot 008 in Assessor’s Block 1340 - Requests for Discretionary Review of Building Permit Application No. 2002/0509/6231 proposing a three-story addition at the rear and the remodeling of portions of the existing two-story over garage single-family dwelling located in an RH-1 (Residential, House, Single-Family) District and a 40-X Height and Bulk District. Although the project was originally filed under Demolition and New Construction Building Permit Applications, these were recently withdrawn and replaced by the current Alteration Building Permit Application.
Preliminary Recommendation: Do not take Discretionary Review and approve the project as revised.
SPEAKER(S): None
ACTION: Both Discretionary Review requests were withdrawn
15a. 2000.702DD (P. VOLLMAN: 415-558-6405)
2 WALL PLACE - east side, an alley north of Jackson Street between Hyde and Leavenworth Streets; Lot 013B in Assessor’s Block 0184 - Staff-initiated request for Discretionary Review of Demolition Permit Application 9918616 to demolish a one story over basement structure containing two legal units of record. The subject property is located in an RM-3 (Residential, Mixed, Medium Density) District and a 65-A Height and Bulk District. The proposed replacement building is also the subject of a Request for Discretionary Review.
Preliminary Recommendation: Do not take Discretionary Review and approve the demolition.
SPEAKER(S):
(-) Walter Hansell – Cooper, White and Cooper – Representing DR Requestor
- If this demolition is approved, the new construction will be a three-unit structure which will bock light and air to the DR requestor's home.
(-) Ivy Lee
- She is speaking for her parents who are DR requestors.
- Loosing light and air coming into her parent's home would be devastating to them.
(+) Doug Thompson – Thompson Studio Architects
- The new structure would be in complete compliance with current building and planning codes.
- The proposed project will provide three full size apartments.
- He hopes that the Commission will approve this project.
(+) Adrienna Song
- She hopes that the Commission will approve this project because it would be a dream come true for her family.
(+) Kelvin Song
- There are signatures of supporters for this project.
- He supports the approval of this project.
(+) Edward Tang
- He is here to support the project sponsors.
(+) Bob Kiyota
- He supports the approval of this project.
(+) Joe O'Donaghue – Residential Builders
- This project should be approved since the entire neighborhood is in support.
ACTION: Did not take Discretionary Review and approved the demolition
AYES: Baltimore, Joe, Lim, Theoharis
NAYES: Salinas
ABSENT: Fay, Chinchilla
15b. 2000.702DD (P. VOLLMAN: 415-558-6405)
2 WALL PLACE - Lot 013B in Assessor’s Block 0184 - Request for Discretionary Review of Permit Application 9918617 to construct a new three-story over garage building, which would contain three dwelling units of approximately 1,500 square feet each, with three off-street parking spaces. The subject property is located in an RM-3 (Residential, Mixed, Medium Density) District and a 65-A Height and Bulk District. The proposed demolition is also the subject of a Request for Discretionary Review.
Preliminary Recommendation: Do not take Discretionary Review and approve the project as proposed.
SPEAKER(S): Same as those listed in item 15a.
ACTION: Did not take Discretionary Review and approved the project.
AYES: Baltimore, Joe, Lim, Theoharis
NAYES: Salinas
ABSENT: Fay, Chinchilla
16. 2002.0472D (T. TAM: 415-558-6325)
40 & 42 ORD STREET- west side between Saturn and Vulcan Streets, Lot 7 in Assessor’s Block 2626. Request for Discretionary Review for Building Permit Application No. 2001/09/20/8804 to demolish an existing two-unit building. 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 demolition.
SPEAKER(S):
(-) Sue Hestor
- Ord Street is a dead end street.
- When is the Commission going to apply the policy that implemented the Master Plan?
- She believes that this is a bad idea.
(+) Katie Taylor – Partner with Levy Design Partners
- She has been working with the neighbors regarding the design of the project.
(+) Phillip Wietied – Engineer
- He wrote the soundness report.
- Safety is the criteria for this report.
(+) Jeff Mondon
- He is an adjacent neighbor.
- He supports the demolition and the reconstruction of this home.
(+) Joe O'Donaghue – Residential Builders
- There is a difference between building inspectors and housing inspectors. He supports this project.
ACTION: Did not take Discretionary Review and approved the demolition.
AYES: Baltimore, Joe, Lim, Theoharis
NAYES: Salinas
ABSENT: Fay, Chinchilla
17. 2002.0508D (T. TAM: (415) 558-6325)
4031 19TH STREET - south side between Hartford and Noe Streets, Lot 87 in Assessor’s Block 3602. Request for Discretionary Review for Building Permit Application No. 2002/05/17/6856 to construct a new two-car garage at the front of the property. The subject property is located in an RH-3 (Residential, House, Three-Family) District and a 40-X Height and Bulk District.
Preliminary Recommendation: Do not take Discretionary Review and approve the plans as submitted.
SPEAKER(S): None
ACTION: Discretionary Review request withdrawn.
18. 2002.0525D (G. CABREROS: 415-558-6169)
61 COOK STREET - west side between Geary Boulevard and Euclid Avenue, Lot 014 in Assessor’s Block 1066. Staff-initiated request for discretionary review of Building Permit Application No. 2000/1109/5333 proposing to demolish a single-family dwelling. A new two-unit, two-story over garage building is proposed to be constructed at the subject property under a separate Building Permit Application. The subject property is located in an RH-2 (Residential, House, Two-Family) District and a 40-X Height and Bulk District.
Preliminary Recommendation: Take Discretionary Review and disapprove.
SPEAKER(S):
Joe O'Donaghue
Re: Continuance
- He feels that this project should be continued because there have been major language problems.
ACTION: Without hearing, continued to July 11, 2002.
AYES: Baltimore, Joe, Lim, Salinas, Theoharis
ABSENT: Fay, Chinchilla
19. 2002.0526D (G. CABREROS: 415-558-6169)
179 16TH AVENUE - west side between Lake and California Streets, Lot 017 in Assessor’s Block 1376. Staff-initiated request for discretionary review of Building Permit Application No. 2001/1002/9789 proposing to demolish a single-family dwelling. A new two-unit, three-story building is proposed to be constructed at the subject property under a separate Building Permit Application. 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 demolition as submitted.
SPEAKER(S):
(+) Joel Yodowitz – Reuben and Alter – Representing Project Sponsor
- The only reason this case is before the Commission is because of the demolition. No one in the neighborhood is opposed to the demolition or the reconstruction.
(+) Joe O'Donaghue – Residential Builders
- This type of procedure is very painful.
- He hopes that the Commission will approve the demolition.
ACTION: Did not take Discretionary Review and approved project.
AYES: Baltimore, Joe, Lim, Theoharis
ABSENT: Fay, Chinchilla, Salinas
20. 2002.0494D (V. MASSEHIAN: 415-558-6363)
24 BLAKE STREET - east side between Geary Boulevard and Euclid Avenue, Lot 015 in Assessor’s Block 1068. Staff-initiated request for Discretionary Review of Building Permit Application No. 2001/05/22/9783, proposing to demolish a building containing two dwelling units (one unit installed without permit). A new two-unit, three-story over garage building is proposed to be constructed at the subject property under a separate Building Permit Application. 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 demolition as submitted.
SPEAKER(S):
(+) William Altrazan – Project Architect and Project Sponsor
- This project is not sound and requires demolition.
- He hopes that the Commission will approve the demolition.
(+) Joe O'Donaghue – Residential Builders
- There is no opposition to this project and it should be approved.
ACTION: Did not take Discretionary Review and approved the demolition.
AYES: Baltimore, Joe, Lim, Salinas, Theoharis
ABSENT: Fay, Chinchilla
21. 2002.0473D (S. SANCHEZ: 415-558-6679)
535 33rd AVENUE - west side between Geary Boulevard and Anza Street; Lot 006 in Assessor’s Block 1511 - Staff-initiated request for Discretionary Review of Building Permit Application 2001/04/12/6705 proposing to demolish the existing two level single family dwelling (the project also proposes the new construction of a two-unit building under separate permit). 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):
(+) Stan Nichol – Project Sponsor
- He hopes that the Commission will approve his project.
- It has been a long process and he has spent a lot of money.
- The building is grossly un-inhabitable.
(+) Joe O'Donaghue – Residential Builders
- He supports the demolition of this building.
ACTION: Did not take Discretionary Review and approved the demolition
AYES: Baltimore, Joe, Lim, Salinas, Theoharis
ABSENT: Fay, Chinchilla
22. 2002.0799D (D. JONES: (415) 558-6477)
1 GRANDVIEW AVENUE - north side of Grand View Avenue between Grandview Terrace and Stanton Street at Market Street, Lot 011 in Assessor’s Block 2715. Staff-initiated request for discretionary review of Building Permit Application No. 2001/06/28/2620 proposing to demolish a single-family dwelling. A new three-story, single-family dwelling is proposed to be constructed at the subject property under a separate Building Permit Application. 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 demolition.
SPEAKER(S):
(-) Sal Balistreri -
- He submitted a letter to the Commissioners regarding a number of exhibits that show the proposal.
- There is no building to go in its place so he is not supporting the demolition.
- He feels that the issues need to be solved and a new building needs to be designed before a demolition is approved.
(+) Warner Schmalls – Project Architect
- The project is not before the Commission, only the demolition.
- Everything has been moving forward and there are several neighbors who support the project.
- The new building has been downscaled in order to meet the issues of the neighbors.
(+) Michael Phillips
- There are 5 neighbors here who are in support of the demolition.
(+) Sonja Richardson
- She has worked with the builder and the architect regarding the design of the new construction.
- The project sponsor has done a good job in designing a building that fits the neighborhood.
(+) Sharon Eastman
- She supports the demolition.
(+) Joe O'Donaghue – Residential Builders
- The structure is not sound in a number of locations.
ACTION: Did not take Discretionary Review and Approved the Demolition
AYES: Baltimore, Joe, Lim, Theoharis
ABSENT: Fay, Chinchilla, Salinas
23. 2002.0530D (D. JONES: (415) 558-6477)
114 OXFORD STREET - west side of Oxford Street between Silliman and Pioche Streets, Lot 004 in Assessor’s Block 5909. Staff-initiated request for discretionary review of Building Permit Application No. 2001/05/30/0240 proposing to demolish a single-family dwelling. A new two-story, single-family dwelling is proposed to be constructed at the subject property under a separate Building Permit Application. The subject property is located 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 demolition.
SPEAKER(S):
(+) David Ancorn – Associate Pastor of Portola Baptist Church and Project Sponsor
- He hopes that the Commission will approve the demolition.
- He is available to answer any questions.
(+) Joe O'Donaghue – Residential Builders
- This demolition should be approved.
ACTION: Did not take Discretionary Review and approved the demolition
AYES: Baltimore, Joe, Lim, Salinas, Theoharis
ABSENT: Fay, Chinchilla
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. 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))
Sue Hestor
Re: Public Comment
- She would like to have Public Comment at the start of the hearing.
Re: Residence Element
– She is very troubled because the Planning Department is a year over due regarding the residence element.
Joe O'Donaghue
Re: Public Comment
- He would like to have Public Comment at the start of the hearing.
Re: Demolition Policy
- This policy has always been a debate.
Adjournment: 8:38 p.m.
THE DRAFT MINUTES ARE PROPOSED FOR ADOPTION AT THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION ON THURSDAY, June 27, 2002
ACTION: Approved as Corrected
AYES: Baltimore, Chinchilla, Joe, Lim, Salinas, Theoharis
ABSENT: Fay
Last updated: 11/17/2009 10:00:08 PM
