Request under Planning Code Sections 320-325 (Office Development
Limitation Program) for a 15-story, 150-foot tall building with up to 48,520
gross square feet of office space, approximately 100 dwelling units, 4,800
square feet of retail space, and 70 parking spaces, to be located on the
site of an existing commercial surface parking lot.
Pursuant to Planning Code Section 313, the Department has determined
that the project would result in the net addition of approximately 48,520
square feet of gross floor area office use, requiring compliance with the
Office of Affordable Housing Production Program. The proposed project lies within a C-3-O (SD) (Downtown, Office)
District and within a 150-S Height and Bulk District.
Preliminary Recommendation: Approval with conditions
(Continued from Regular Meeting of January 25, 2001)
(Proposed for
Continuance to February 15 22,
2001)
SPEAKER(S): None
ACTION: Continued as indicated
AYES: Theoharis, Fay, Baltimore,
Chinchilla , Joe, Salinas
1c. 2000.552XBCV
(LIGHT: 558:6254)
199 NEW MONTGOMERY STREET - East side between and with secondary
frontages on Natoma and Howard Streets, Lot 21, in Assessor’s Block 3722. Request for a Conditional-Use authorization
to allow non-accessory parking. The
proposal is for the construction of a 15-story, 150-foot tall building that
would contain approximately 48,520 gross square feet of office use, 100
dwelling units, 4,800 square feet of retail use, and 70 underground parking
spaces, to be located on the site of an existing commercial surface parking
lot. The proposed project lies within
a C-3-O (SD) (Downtown, Office) District and within a 150-S Height and Bulk
District.
Preliminary Recommendation: Approval with conditions
(Continued from Regular Meeting of January 25, 2001)
(Proposed for
Continuance to February 15 22,
2001)
SPEAKER(S): None
ACTION: Continued as indicated
AYES: Theoharis, Fay, Baltimore,
Chinchilla , Joe, Salinas
1d. 2000.552XBCV
(LIGHT: 558:6254)
199 NEW MONTGOMERY STREET - East side between and with secondary
frontages on Natoma and Howard Streets, Lot 21, in Assessor’s Block 3722
-- Request under Planning Code Section 140 for a Variance for dwelling unit
exposure. The proposal is for the construction of a 15-story,
150-foot tall building that would contain approximately 48,520 gross square
feet of office use, 100 dwelling units, 4,800 square feet of retail use,
and 70 underground parking spaces, to be located on the site of an existing
commercial surface parking lot. The
proposed project lies within a C-3-O (SD) (Downtown, Office) District and
within a 150-S Height and Bulk District.
(Continued from Regular Meeting of January 25, 2001)
(Proposed for Continuance to February 15 22, 2001)
SPEAKER(S): None
ACTION: Continued as indicated
AYES: Theoharis, Fay, Baltimore,
Chinchilla , Joe, Salinas
2a.
2000.171CX
(MILLER: 558-6344)
466 BUSH STREET
- north side between Grant Avenue and Kearny Street, Lot 42 in Assessor’s
Block 270. Request for Determination
of Compliance pursuant to Section 309 with respect to a proposal to construct
a ten-story Hotel approximately 99 feet in height and containing approximately
91 guest rooms, also involving a request for exceptions to Planning Code
standards for building height and bulk (Sections 263.8 and 272, et seq.) -- in a C-3-R (Downtown
Retail) District and a 80-130-F Height and Bulk District.
Preliminary Recommendation:
Approval with conditions
(Proposed for
Continuance to February 15 22,
2001)
SPEAKER(S): None
ACTION: Continued as indicated
AYES: Theoharis, Fay, Baltimore,
Chinchilla , Joe, Salinas
2b.
2000.171CX:
(MILLER: 558-6344)
466 BUSH STREET
- north side between Grant Avenue and Kearny Street, Lot 42 in Assessor’s
Block 270. Request for authorization
of a Conditional Use for modification of a previously-imposed condition
(time limit for start of construction -- Motion No. 14797) for a HOTEL containing
approximately 91 rooms -- in a C-3-R (Downtown Retail) District and a 80-130-F
Height and Bulk District.
Preliminary
Recommendation: Approval with conditions
(Proposed for
Continuance to February 15 22,
2001)
SPEAKER(S): None
ACTION: Continued as indicated
AYES: Theoharis, Fay, Baltimore,
Chinchilla , Joe, Salinas
3a.
2000.1269RB
(BAUMAN: 558-6287)
India Basin Industrial Redevelopment Project
Area Plan Amendment - Request for a finding of consistency with
the General Plan for an amendment to the Redevelopment Plan for the India
Basin Industrial Park. The amendment
would apply to Lot 23 in Assessor’s Block 5203, 3433 Third Street. It would allow up to 50,000 gross square feet
of Retail and Business Services uses (a category that includes business
and professional offices) and would reduce the parking requirement to one
space for each 1,000 occupied square feet of Business Services space, and
one space for each 7,000 gross square feet of Telecommunication space. It would reduce the loading requirement to
one space for each 100,000 square feet of Retail, Business Services, and
Telecommunications space. This amendment
would enable the construction of a proposed development at 3433 Third Street,
which is a five-story building containing an approximately 111,000 square
feet of telecommunications switching facility; 42,000 square feet of office
space; 7,500 square feet of retail space; a 6,000-square-foot public plaza
and 73 parking spaces.
Preliminary Recommendation:
Find the proposed amendment of the Redevelopment Plan consistent with the
General Plan.
(Proposed for Continuance to March 1, 2001)
SPEAKER(S):
None
ACTION: Continued as proposed
AYES: Theoharis, Fay, Baltimore,
Chinchilla , Joe, Salinas
3b.
2000.1269RB
(BAUMAN: 558-6287)
3433 Third Street - the proposal 3433 Third Street requires
the authorization of up to 42,000 square feet of office space from the "Reserve for Smaller Buildings" established
in Planning Code Section 321 (Office Development Annual Limit).
This notice shall also set forth an initial determination of net
addition of gross square feet of office space, pursuant to Planning Code
Sections 313.4 and 314.4. The site is in the India Basin
Industrial Park Redevelopment Area, and in the M-2 Zoning District and the
65-J Height and Bulk District.
Preliminary
Recommendation: Allocate up
to
42,000 square feet of office space from the "Reserve for
Smaller Buildings."
(Proposed for Continuance to March 1, 2001)
SPEAKER(S):
None
ACTION: Continued as proposed
AYES: Theoharis, Fay, Baltimore,
Chinchilla , Joe, Salinas
4. 2000.677C
(CHIN:
575-6897)
373 BROADWAY
STREET - southeast
corner of Broadway Street and Bartol Street; Lot 018 in Assessor's Block
0164: -- Request for Conditional Use authorization pursuant to Section 714.83
of the Planning Code to install a total of twelve antennas and a base transceiver
station on an existing four-story over basement building, as part of AT&T's
wireless cellular network in the Broadway (Neighborhood Commercial) District
and a 65-A Height and Bulk District.
Preliminary Recommendation: Approval
with Conditions
(Continued from Regular Meeting of
January 18, 2001)
(Proposed for Continuance to March 8, 2001)
SPEAKER(S):
None
ACTION: Continued as proposed
AYES: Theoharis, Fay, Baltimore,
Chinchilla , Joe, Salinas
5a. 2000.190BX (LeBLANC:
558-6351)
201 SECOND STREET, southeast corner of Second Street and Howard
Street, Lot 97 in Assessor’s Block 3736, -- Request under Planning Code Sections 320-325
(Office Development Limitation Program) for a ten-story, 140-foot tall building
with a total of approximately 45,000 gross square feet including approximately
35,000 square feet of office space and 8,000 square feet of retail and/or
restaurant space. The project also
includes approximately 860 square feet of open space. This project lies within a C-3-O (SD) (Downtown
Office, Special Development) District and within the 350-S Height and Bulk
District.
Preliminary Recommendation: Pending
(Proposed for
Continuance to March 8, 2001)
SPEAKER(S):
None
ACTION: Continued as proposed
AYES: Theoharis, Fay, Baltimore,
Chinchilla , Joe, Salinas
5b.
2000.190BX
(LeBLANC: 558-6351)
201
SECOND STREET PROJECT - southeast corner of Second Street and Howard
Street, Lot 97 in Assessor’s Block 3736.
Request under (1) Planning Code Section 309 (Downtown Code) for Determinations
of Compliance and Exceptions, including an exception to the setback requirements
of Section 132.1 of the Code for a ten-story, 140-foot tall building with
a total of approximately 45,000 gross square feet including approximately
35,000 square feet of office space and 8,000 square feet of retail and/or
restaurant space. The project also
includes approximately 860 square feet of open space. This project lies within a C-3-O (SD) (Downtown
Office, Special Development) District and within the 350-S Height and Bulk
District.
Preliminary
Recommendation: Pending
(Proposed for
Continuance to March 8, 2001)
SPEAKER(S):
None
ACTION: Continued as proposed
AYES: Theoharis, Fay, Baltimore,
Chinchilla , Joe, Salinas
6. 2000.1118DDDD (NIKITAS: 558-6306)
33 WALNUT STREET - between
Pacific Avenue and Jackson Streets, Lot 002 in Assessor’s Block 0972. Request
for Discretionary Review of Building Permit Application No. 2000/05/01/9654,
proposing to demolish existing rear deck and bay window, and to add a rear
extension 19’-10" deep at the first floor and crawl space level below
and extending 15’-10" deep at the second-story with a roof deck above
and a new attic level dormer at the front of the house, 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 project as submitted
(Continued from Regular Meeting of January 18, 2001)
(DISCRETIONARY REVIEWS WITHDRAWN)
B. COMMISSIONERS'
QUESTIONS AND MATTERS
7. Consideration of Adoption - draft minutes
of January 18 and 25, 2001
ACTION:
Approved as corrected
AYES:
Theoharis, Fay, Baltimore,
Chinchilla, Joe, Salinas
8.
Commission
Matters
Theoharis: Staff to work with
Board of Supervisors' Land Use Committee.
The Committee's meeting time conflicts with Planning Commission's
hearing time.
Cow Hollow Neighborhood Association has prepared
specific neighborhood design guidelines. They are requesting a half-hour presentation before the Planning
Commission on March 22. They ultimately
are seeking endorsement for their guidelines.
Report on letter from Joe Butler regarding 567 Sanchez St.
Chinchilla:
Staff to report on office allocation
process:
1)
How much is available?
2)
How much has been applied for?
3)
Which projects are still vying for space now?
Theoharis: Requested that staff make a chart to reflect
Commissioner Chinchilla's request regarding the office space allocation
program.
C. DIRECTOR'S
REPORT
9. Director's Announcements
-
Will contact the Land Use/ Transportation
Committee of the Board to discuss the scheduling conflict.
-
Letter from Mr. Butler will be referred to
Isolde Wilson
-
Department Work Program and Budget
9.
Review of
Past Week's Events at the Board of Supervisors and Board of Appeals
-
Job Housing Linkage Alternative Legislation
-
Appeared before Housing Land Use and Transportation
Committee to respond to the moratorium language that the Board was considering
D.
REGULAR CALENDAR
11. 1997.433A
(KOMETANI: 558-6478)
22 ALTA STREET - north
side between Montgomery and Sansome Streets, Lot 34A in Assessor’s Block
106. Request for Certificate of Appropriateness authorization, under Article
10 of the Planning Code, to construct a new, one-unit, residential building,
two-stories at the front (Alta Street) elevation and five-stories at the
rear in the Telegraph Hill Historic District.
The subject property is zoned RH-3 (House, Three-Family) District
and is in a 40-X Height and Bulk District.
Preliminary
Recommendation: Approval with Conditions
(Continued from Regular Meeting of January 18, 2001)
SPEAKER(S):
John Abbot, Project Sponsor
-
Very pleased
to have the support of the Telegraph Hill Neighborhood Association
-
This property
has very unique historical/ architectural attributes
-
Took great
care in selection of the design team to preserve the historical attributes
of the property in perpetuity–in particular, the last held portion of the
garden area.
-
A conservation
easement was deeded to the recently establish North San Francisco Land Conservancy--a
new non-profit-public-benefit organization
Ed McEachron, Project Architect
-
Gave an overall
description of the project
Gerry Crowley,
former President Telegraph Hill Association
-
Advised Planning Commission that Telegraph Hill Dwellers Association no
longer opposes this project
-
Pleased that the future conservation of the property has been assured
-
Appreciated the generosity of the owner in reaching an agreement to donate
a conservation easement
-
Appreciated the guidance and directions of the Landmarks Advisory Board
through this long process
-
Thanked the neighborhood for caring deeply about this project, and their
determinations to have positive solutions
ACTION: Approved
AYES: Theoharis, Fay, Baltimore,
Chinchilla , Joe, Salinas
MOTION NO. 16086
12. 2000.1099X (CRAWFORD: 558-6358)
57
JESSIE STREET - Lot 020 in Assessor’s Block 3708. Request under Planning
Code Sections 309 Permit Review in C-3 Districts) for approval of Building
Permit No. 2001/01/05/9328S, to construct a seven-story building with two
basement levels; eighty- three (83) foot tall, 11,808 gross-square-foot
mechanical services building to support the adjacent educational institution
building of Golden Gate University. No
exceptions under Section 309 have been requested. This project lies within a C-3-O (Downtown, Office)
District and within the 500-S Height and Bulk District.
Preliminary Recommendation: Approval with Conditions
SPEAKER(S):
Larry Haines
-
Golden Gate University has been part of the City of San Francisco for many
years
-
Computer labs need to be in a better facility,
-
The premises are outdated and need to be upgraded
-
Present structure has reached maximum capacity
-
Solution is to construct a silo building which is 88 feet long and 15 feet
wide, rising floor by floor to the side of the Golden Gate building
-
Need to integrate the existing facility with the new proposed building
ACTION: Approved per staff recommendations
AYES: Theoharis, Fay, Baltimore,
Chinchilla, Joe, Salinas
MOTION NO. 16087
13. 2000.591C
(TAM: 558-6325)
1701 37TH AVENUE - southwest corner of Moraga Street and 37th
Avenue, Lots 1 and 5 in Assessor’s Block 2012. Request for Conditional Use Authorization
under Planning Code Section 209.3(g) for the reconstruction and expansion
of an existing private elementary school (West Portal Lutheran School). The proposal is to demolish an existing one
and two-story school building and construct a new, three-story school building,
approximately 21,751 square feet. The proposal would expand the existing
school size by adding two kindergarten classrooms and approximately 60 students
and two teachers, totaling eight classrooms with a maximum student enrollment
of 240. The property lies within an RH-1 (Residential, House, One-Family)
District and 40-X Height and Bulk District
Preliminary Recommendation: Approval with conditions
SPEAKER(S):
Richard Hesselroth,
Congregational President of West Portal Lutheran Church
-
Church school is Kindergarten to the 8th grade
-
Have reached maximum capacity
- Existing building was constructed
in 1952
-
Propose to convert building to be more effective; rebuild the sanctuary
portion into classrooms
-
New building would have suitably designed student classrooms
-
All neighbors were notified correctly and timely
-
All neighbor's concerns were addressed
during different meetings
-
No double parking will be allowed
-
Made a request to the Department of Parking and Traffic to extend the white
zone on 37th Avenue by 63 feet, for a total of
128 feet, this zone is available for general neighborhood parking
when school is closed
-
New building would include more suitable receptacles and fencing that would
prevent and discourage objects, garbage, etc., from leaving their property.
Garbage is picked up twice a week.
-
New building would have a smaller ground level school. There will be a multipurpose
room inside the building and a small yard on the roof facing Sunset Boulevard
that will be noise proof
Kendal Young, Project Architect
- Gave an overall description of the project
(+) Reverend David Stachholz, Pastor
-
We help serve the community
-
The old building needs to be replaced
-
A lot of people want to enroll their kids in the school
-
Because of neighborhood concerns this project was scaled down
-
We would like to keep good relation with the community
-
We will have a new traffic plan, to improve the problems during drop-off
and pick-up times
(+)
Ed Wong
-
Supports the project
-
His children attend this school
(-)
Kathleen Woo
-
Lives close to the school
-
Speaking on behalf of a lot of elderly people in the neighborhood that could
not come to the hearing
-
This project is totally out of character
-
Adding more staff and children would obstruct the traffic
-
Project should be scaled down to 2 stories
-
Requested that the school build a fence in back of her property
(-) Glenda Kop
-
Referred to preliminary recommendation on calendar
-
Hope that the commission take in consideration all the community concerns
-
School will not be serving the needs of the children in the community
-
Scale down this project
-
Maintain the same number of students
(-) Keith Kop
-
Scope of this project would impact the neighborhood
-
His family has been living there since 1956
-
Noise is very loud
-
They (school) are about business, not about teaching
-
Scale back this project
-
Will change the character of this beautiful neighborhood
(-)
David Woo
-
Live in property adjacent to the project
-
All home owners in the neighborhood oppose this project
-
Garbage is a very delicate issue. A lots of garbage is throw on his property
-
Concerned about traffic. A lot of student's parents double park.
- Traffic is out of control
(-) Gloria Gabancho
-
Have lived in the Sunset for many years
-
This school does not serve the community. A lot the children come from other
neighborhoods
-
Massive grow in the number of students
-
No proper notification to neighbors
(-) John Shanley
-
Grew up on the neighborhood
-
Dramatic increase with the traffic around the school
-
School should compromise
(-)
Mary Jenosky
-
Lived in the area for 10 years
-
Stable, quite, family oriented neighborhood
-
Concerned about the size of the project
-
This overwhelms the character of this neighborhood
(-) Francisco Figueroa
-
Heard about the project 2 days ago
-
They are creating immense business in a residential area
(-) Sara Wong
-
Disapprove the preliminary recommendation because this project causes nuisances.
Also, there will not be accommodation for traffic and parking.
ACTION: Approved
AYES: Theoharis, Fay, Baltimore,
Chinchilla , Joe, Salinas
MOTION NO. 16088
14. 2000.682C
(BRESSANUTTI: 575-6892)
290-296
VALENCIA STREET - northwest corner of 14th Street, Lot 10 in Assessor’s
Block 3533. Request for authorization
to modify a prior conditional use authorization (Case No. 97.870C for 36
units of rental housing for seniors, including four affordable units, and
2,900 square feet of retail commercial space) to change (1) the occupancy
of the units from rental to ownership and (2) the qualifying age from 62
to 55. All other aspects of the prior conditional
use authorization would remain unchanged.
The property is in a CM (Heavy Commercial) District, and a 50-X Height
and Bulk District.
Preliminary
Recommendation: Disapproval of change from rental to ownership; approval
of change in the age qualification.
SPEAKER(S):
David Cincotta,
Representing Project Sponsor
-
When he first
started working on this project one of the major issues was the change from
rental to ownership
-
Reduce the
required age from 62 to 55. By doing this, it will increase those who can qualify
-
This project
is entirely privately financed. No
Federal or State subsidized funding
-
Rents for
this project were approved by the Housing Authority
(-) David Spirro
-
Lived in
the neighborhood for 24 years
-
This set
a bad precedent because they are charging such high rents
-
Rent are
over a $1,000 a month for senior
citizens
-
We support
affordable housing
-
They should
convert the lower level to retail/commercial use for non- profits
(+) Dennis Carlin, Jr.
-
His family
has invested all their life savings in this property
-
Lived in
the facility for his entire life
-
There are
currently eight Section 8 residents
-
Renters are
afraid of the neighborhood
ACTION:
Approved
AYES:
Theoharis, Fay, Baltimore, Chinchilla, Joe, Salinas
MOTION NO: 16089
15.
2000.336C
(CHIN: 575-6897)
1610 SACRAMENTO STREET, north side of Sacramento near the
northeast corner of Sacramento and Larkin; Lot 007 in Assessor’s Block 0621:-- Request for Conditional Use authorization pursuant
to Section 253 of the Planning Code to demolish a single family dwelling
and construct a five-story, 50 foot tall, eight
unit building, in a RM-3 (Residential, Mixed, Medium Density) Zoning
District and a 65-A Height and Bulk District.
Preliminary Recommendation: Approval with Conditions
SPEAKER(S):
John Sanger,
Representing Project Sponsor
-
Submitted
letters of support to the Commission
-
Only reason
this conditional use authorization is before the Commission is because section
253 of the Planning Code provides an opportunity to determine whether buildings
in excess of 40 feet are appropriate
-
in residential
areas that are zoned RM-3 and R-4. Based
on the surrounding buildings, this building has been scaled appropriately
for the neighborhood. (+) Joe O' Donaghue, Residential Builders
-
This project
is not a live work, these are condominiums
-
This is a
good project for this area
(+) Maurice Sakin
-
Supports
the project
-
Preserve
the character of the neighborhood
-
There will
not be traffic congestion
(-) Unknown Speaker
-
Impact of
demolition and construction would be very detrimental to the neighborhood
-
No appropriate
notification to the neighborhood
-
Construction
of this building will not help the housing shortage in San Francisco
(-) Dick Millett
-
Concerned
about affordable housing
-
There are
no rental units being built in the City
-
All new buildings
are condominiums
(-) Unknown Speaker
-
This site
is a very historical building
-
It is very
unfortunate that this building is going to be demolished
ACTION: Approved
AYES: Theoharis, Fay, Baltimore,
Chinchilla, Joe
NAYES: Salinas
MOTION NO.: 16090
16.
2000.1105C
(M. SNYDER: 575-6891)
128 TEXAS STREET
- west side between 17th and Mariposa Streets, Lot 32 in
Assessor’s Block
3985 -- Request for Conditional Use authorization to establish one artist
live/work unit in an existing building, currently being used as an artist
studio, in an M-1 (Light Industrial) District, a 40-X Height and Bulk District,
and an Industrial Protection Buffer Zone.
The new live/work unit would include approximately 3,000 square feet
of floor area. The proposal includes
enclosing the area in front of the building behind a 12-foot tall fence
and gate; no addition to the existing building is being proposed.
Preliminary Recommendation:
Approval with conditions
SPEAKER(S):
(+) Toffi Delayne, Artist
- Owned
property since 1982
-
Practicing
artist, her work can be seen around the City
-
Seeking permission
to live and work at this existing studio
-
As an artist,
would like to have the direct and constant access to her work
(+) Brett Gladstone, Representing Project Sponsor
-
Difficult
for artist to find a place that they can afford in the City
-
This is a
project the whole City would be happy to see
-
This project
is in a Buffer Zone
-
There is
not going to increase the building envelope. There are just 3 partitions
inside separating kitchen, bath and working area.
A fence has been put in the front yard to screen the outside parking
space from the street
-
There is
3,000 square feet of foyer and it's not being increased
-
All neighbors
are in support for this project
(-) Dick Millett, Potrero Hill
-
What kind
of precedent will this set in the future if they want to tear this out and
put a standard live work in?
-
This is one
of many other projects like it that have been build in this area
ACTION: Approved
AYES: Theoharis, Fay, Baltimore,
Chinchilla, Joe, Salinas
MOTION NO. 16091
17.
2000.824C
(YOUNG: 558-6346)
1351 GRANT AVENUE
- west side between Vallejo and Green Streets; Lot 002 in Assessor’s Block
0131. Consideration of the possible revocation of conditional use or the
possible modification of or placement of additional conditions per Planning
Code Section 303(f) of a prior authorization to allow the establishment
of a full-service restaurant and bar, approximately 3,400 square feet in
floor area, within the North Beach Neighborhood Commercial District and
40-X Height and Bulk District. The
proposal is to consider revocation, modification, or placement of additional
conditions on a conditional use authorization approved on December 17, 1998,
for the conversion of a vacant commercial space, the former Figoni Hardware
Store, into a full-service restaurant and bar, per Planning Code Sections
722.41 and 722.42. The proposed
full-service restaurant and bar is located on the ground floor level of
an existing three-story residential over commercial building. The proposal was approved under Building Permit Application No.
9912999. There have been unresolved
complaints from the community in relation to the construction and operation
of the facilities and the possible eviction of residential tenants within
the building.
Preliminary Recommendation:
Planning Commission to schedule a subsequent hearing to consider the revocation,
modification, or placement of additional conditions on the conditional use
authorized in Motion No. 14785 under Case No. 1998.243C.
(Continued from Regular Meeting of December 7, 2000)
PROJECT WITHDRAWN
E.
SPECIAL DISCRETIONARY REVIEW HEARING
At Approximately 4:23
PM the Planning Commission convened
into a Special Discretionary Review (DR) Hearing to hear and act on Discretionary
Review matters.
18. 2000.354D
(GORDON: 558-6309)
1775 QUESADA STREET - Building
Permit Application No. 200012087607, south west side of the street between
3rd and Newhall Streets, Lot No. 034 in Assessor’s Block 5338. Request for Discretionary Review to revise
Building Permit Application No. 9718416, for construction of two new dwelling
units on two floors with a mezzanine level on a vacant lot. The proposed revisions would allow an increase
in the overall height of the structure by 1.85 feet (from 27.65 feet), an
increase in height at the front facade by 1.5 feet (from 27.5 feet to 29
feet), and an increase in the maximum roof elevation of the building by
.85 (from 35.65 feet to 37.5 feet). The
work proposed under Building Application No. 9718416 has been permitted
by both the Planning Department and Department of Building Inspection, but
not yet built. The project site
is within 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 as proposed.
(Continued from Regular
Meeting of January 25, 2001)
SPEAKER(S):
John Sanger, Project Sponsor/ DR requestor
-
Filed Discretionary
Review to expedite hearing on a project that has an existing foundation and to ensure an opportunity for
Ms. Bender to file and withdrew her DR
-
Project complies
with the Planning Code and Residential Design Guidelines independently
of any agreement
-
This case
could be confusing because of the different methods of measuring provided
under the Planning
-
Modifications
are required one way or the other
-
Plans have
been revised to reduce the roof elevations
- Maximum roof elevation would go up 1.85
feet
-
As mentioned
in the Code, this is substantially less than the permitted building envelope
in this district
-
The only
issue is the affect on Ms. Bender's view, which is the issue she raised
on her first DR
-
Second issue
is streetscape consideration under the Residential Design guidelines
-
Building
has been designed to be higher than the building on the down hill portion of the street, and lower than the building
on the up hill portion by 3.9 feet on the left and 1.2' on the right
-
In response
to the neighbors, suggested that the elevation be modified, eliminating
the perceptual difference on the first and second floor
-
Project has
substantial neighbors support
(+) Jacqueline Pitcher
-
Homeowner
in the neighborhood
-
Empty lot
has been there for sometime. It
is a haven for drug dealers
-
It is completely
open for anybody to come and do anything
-
Police Department
has been notified
-
Our neighborhood
would much safer with a building on this lot
-
This will
upgrade the neighborhood
(+) Tom Delante
-
Recommend
that the Commission approve the revised permit
-
Construction
has been going on since 1997, no work has been done since last August
-
It is very
unsightly right now
-
Would like
to see this project finalized
-
Main concern
is to have construction start again
(+) Ian Warner, Project Sponsor
-
Presented
a letter from Lu Shamp in support
of the project
(+) Joe O'Donaghue
-
Project Sponsor
bought a set of approved plans, he didn't make up these plans, and was not
aware of a private agreement.
-
When private
agreements are made they should have some method of recordation to validate
them.
(-) Christine Bender, DR requestor
- Drawings should be more specific
-
Asked to
withdrawn her DR in 1987, because Planning Department did not see any ambiguity
-
Here today
to asked and respect the time and money that was put in this project and
honor the agreement
-
Agreement
between owner
-
Submitted
several documents: 1) Proposed elevations under the current height restriction;
2) What the building will look like with the new height; 3) Maps of neighbors in support
-
Was offered
$10,000 by Mr. Warner
-
Sympathize
with everyone that wants a building to be constructed on that site
-
Her fence
has been torn down
-
Mr. Warner
does not care about anybody or the neighborhood, he only wants to build
his way
(+) Patrick Decent
- Mr. Warner attached and painted things to and on his property
-
Mr. Warner
has attach gutters to my property
-
Mr. Warner
is not being cooperative
ACTION: Do not take Discretionary Review and approve with instructions
that
staff continue to work with sponsor on design
AYES: Theoharis, Fay, Baltimore, Chinchilla, Joe, Salinas
19. 2000.654D
(YOUNG: 558-6346)
412 LOMBARD STREET - north
side between Grant Avenue and Stockton Street, Lot 010 in Assessor’s Block
0062. Request for Discretionary Review of Building Permit Application No.
2000/03/03/3468 to construct a two-story vertical addition to an existing
one-story over basement single-family dwelling in an RH-3 (Residential,
House, Three-Family) District and a 40-X Height and Bulk District.
(Continued
from Regular Meeting of January 18, 2001)
SPEAKER(S):
(-) Charles Thomas, DR Requestor
-
There are
some problems with the permit application
-
Lack of neighborhood
notifications
-
There are
some dimensional discrepancies and inconsistencies
-
No demolition
permit has been taken out, despite the fact that every aspect of this structure
is been changed from the foundation to the roof
-
Excessive
height
-
Does not
incorporate any lightwell
-
Cast a shadow
on his buildings
-
Would block
their view, light
-
Propose 6 foot light well deep into his property
-
bulk and
height would block all light on
the site and much of the light on the back
-
minimize
the bay windows
-
Support some
of the suggestions brought to you today, and there a many more ways to work
this out
(-) Unknown Speaker
-
Lived in
the area for 40 years
-
4 of his
windows would be blocked completely
-
Never was
asked about this building - No notification
-
Blocking
all his windows
-
Sun deck
would be blocked - No light
(-) Craig Dakino
- Property is directly behind
his apartment
-
No notification
regarding the project
-
During the
whole process there have been so many discrepancies
-
Windows would
be completely dark
-
No sunlight
(-) Barbara Fong
-
Lives adjacent
to the proposed project
-
Her property
would be affected by this construction
-
No proper
notification
-
There were
some issues that plans were going to be changed
-
This request
should be denied
-
Height limit
should be limited to the current height to preserve the light and quality
of life for the neighbors
(-) Dennis McElrath
-
Live across
the street from the project
-
Concerned
about how this project should step up the hill
-
Should be
parallel with the rest of neighborhood
-
Materials
used are not the character of North Beach
-
Roof structure
is outside the residential design guidelines
(+) Ahmad Mohazed, Project Architect
-
Will contact
neighbors and address their concerns
-
There has
been some interaction with neighbors, all were contacted
-
Remove off
the penthouse
-
This project
is within the Residential design guidelines
-
Bay windows
concern is something they will take under advisement with staff
-
He will pick
a material that will match the other
buildings
-
It won't
change the character of the neighborhood
-
Lightwell,
is it appropriate?
(+) Marsha Garland, Executive Director of the North Beach Chamber of Commerce
- Owner
has amended the project several times to try to find a situation for everyone
to be satisfied.
-
Owner should
have an opportunity to build his home that will a pleasure for him to live
in
(+) Stephano Casalaro
-
Owner has
not been too ambitious with this project
-
As long as
he follows the law, he should go ahead with the project
(+) John Sanger
-
Owner of
building across the street
-
Neighbors
were notified
-
Project is
very well designed
-
It is truly
sad if the materials are changed. What
is proposed is modern. The neighborhood
has a mixture
-
It is a nice
break
-
DR requestor
has no right to request a DR, he has violated the law
(+) Jessie Jones
-
Live about
two block from property
-
Issues raised
about light, view, material to be used in the addition--these are very trivial,
minor considerations, and should be taken into consideration after approving
the project.
ACTION: Take Discretionary
Review and approve as modified:
1) 10 foot set back on top floor
2) Staff & Sponsor to continue to work on design and material;
5 foot side yard setback on 3rd floor
3) If spiral staircase were not in the building code then no
penthouse structure would be allowed
4) Lightwell for top floor only
AYES: Theoharis, Fay, Baltimore,
Chinchilla, Joe, Salinas
20. 2000.877D (NIKITAS: 558-6306)
240
- 16TH AVENUE
- east side between California and Clement Streets, Lot 037 in Assessor’s
Block 1418, Request for Discretionary Review of Building Permit Application
No.2000/04/01/6104
proposing to add a new fourth story and a four-story
extension to the
rear of the existing building, and to reconfigure the building interior
to create a second living unit in an RH-2 (Residential, House, Two-Family)
District and a 40-X Height and Bulk District.
Preliminary Recommendation: Take Discretionary
Review and modify project per staff recommendations.
(Continued from Regular Meeting of January 18,
2001)
SPEAKER(S)
(-) Virginia McGowan, Discretionary Review requestor:
-
Property
owner parked about 5 cars in front of the property and takes the spaces
from other neighbors
-
There are
no other rentals units
-
There are
no setbacks
-
Need space
to build their fences and maintain them
-
Ground floor
behind the parking area would contain a complete studio apartment
(-) Unknown Speaker
-
Substantial
reductions should be made
-
Concerned
about parking
-
A building
of this size would be occupied by more people and there will be less parking
spaces available
(-) William Marraike
-
Family has
lived there for 40 yrs.
-
After the
1906 earthquake, SF City provided cottages
-
This is a
family neighborhood
-
In 1980,
the last cottage was demolished
-
There is
no rent control
-
All families
have 2 or 3 children
-
Economic
factors have changed
-
They are
remodeling excessively and they are changing the character of the neighborhood
(-) Unknown Speaker
- A wall would be in his bay window and would block the light
to his dining room
-
Object to
the proposed construction and hope the commission will review the plans
-
Compromise
(-) Michael McDowell
-
Proposed
changes
-
Concerned
about the foundation
-
Concerned
about violation of building codes
(-) Luci
-
Supports
a request for a setback of the fences
-
This would
set a bad precedent for future constructions
(-) Eunice Lee
-
This causes
major harm to their property
-
Sunlight
is very important for her
-
Opposes this
project
-
It is unfair
to let this kind of construction happen in the City
(-) Unknown Speaker
-
Live across
the street from project
-
Sympathize
with the neighbors objections
-
Blocks the
sunlight
(+) Project Sponsor
-
People in
SF can not afford to buy homes
-
Tried many
times to solve differences with neighbors
-
He was threatened
by a neighbor
-
Scope of
work should be revised again
ACTION: Take Discretionary Review and approve
with modifications
AYES: Theoharis, Fay, Baltimore, Chinchilla,
Joe, Salinas
21.
2000.428D
(NIKITAS : 558-6306)
1615
BRODERICK STREET
- west side between Sutter and Bush
Streets, Lot 002 in Assessor’s Block 1053, Request for Discretionary Review of Building Permit Application
No. 2000/10/06/2475 proposing to remodel an existing Group Home in
an RH-3 (Residential, House, Three-Family) District and a 40-X Height and
Bulk District.
Preliminary Recommendation: Take Discretionary Review and
approve permit with conditions.
SPEAKER(S):
(-) Rick Hoed, DR requestor
-
Do not oppose
project but request some changes be made
-
Provide a
safe environment to our clients
-
19 percent
of home care facilities are located in this area
-
Concerned
about the relation with the Sponsor
-
Security
is a major concern
-
Trash in
their back yard
-
Sponsor does
not seem to care about the character of the neighbor
-
A list of
considerations have been issued
-
Agreement
should be made between the parties concerned
(+) Patricia Vaughey
-
Were the
back steps built legally?
-
An inspection
should be done
-
There are
serious health hazards
(-) Lee Hood
-
Concerned
about illegal Activities around the empty house
-
Stairs were
altered 7 year ago
-
Concerned
that stairs are not fit to use in case of a fire
-
Only asking
that stairs should be placed within the property line
-
Re-design
should be revisited
(-) Frank Case
-
Concerned
that there is not enough insulation for noise control
-
Their quality
of life would be affected
(-) Jim Vale
-
Is there
a way to find out if the stairs where legally built?
(+) Unknown Speaker, Representing property owner
-
There were
several considerations examined
-
Felt this
was the best way to make use of their back yard
(+) Sharon Holmes
-
There are
rules in the home to keep our clients quiet
-
Our clients
have been harassed by many neighbors
-
Made several
concessions
(+) Ron Case, Architect
-
The front
stairs are badly in need of repair
-
Back stairs
were rebuild in 1994
-
Permit was
issue and approved
-
At the time
the stairs were rebuilt, they were code compliant
(-) Tom Katz
-
There should
be some design solutions
-
Residents
in the back should not be able to climb onto his property
(+) Richard Riley
-
There are
no life safety issues
-
Urge the
Commission to approve the project
ACTION:
Do not take Discretionary Review and approve permit as
submitted
AYES: Theoharis, Fay, Baltimore, Chinchilla, Joe, Salinas
22.
2001.0078D
(DiBARTOLO: 558-6291)
1831-37 STOCKTON - west side between
Lombard and Greenwich Streets, Lot 005 in Assessor’s Block 0076. Request for Discretionary Review of Building
Permit Application No. 2000/10/12/2890, to convert a four-unit building
to a three-unit building in an RM-1 (Residential, Mixed-Low Density) District
and a 40-X Height and Bulk District. Specifically,
the proposal will merge two dwelling units on the third floor.
No exterior alterations are proposed.
Preliminary Recommendation: Do not take Discretionary Review, approve building permit as
submitted
SPEAKER(S):
(+) Michael Evans
-
Appreciates
the Commission's effort to help the affordability of homes in the City
-
His property
is a small building
ACTION:
Continued to March 1, 2001
AYES:
Theoharis, Fay, Baltimore, Chinchilla, Joe,
Salinas
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))
SPEAKER(S): Patricia Vaughey
Re: 1615 Broderick
Street
Adjournment:
7:50
P.M.
