Meeting
Minutes
Commission
Chambers - Room 400
City
Hall, 1 Dr. Carlton B. Goodlett Place
Thursday,
March 22, 2001
1:30
PM
Regular
Meeting
PRESENT:
Baltimore, Chinchilla, Fay, Joe, Salinas, Theoharis
ABSENT: None
THE MEETING WAS CALLED
TO ORDER BY PRESIDENT THEOHARIS AT 1:48 p.m.
STAFF IN ATTENDANCE: Gerald G. Green, Director of Planning;
Larry Badiner, Zoning Administrator; Ann Marie Rodgers; Blake Washington;
Craig Nikitas; Adam Light; Elizabeth Gordon; Rick Crawford; Pedro Arce; Dan
Sider; Sailesh; Mehra; Nora Priego, Transcription Secretary; Linda Avery,
Commission Secretary
A.
ITEMS PROPOSED FOR CONTINUANCE
1. 2000.1092C
(MEHRA: 558-6257)
3632-38
SACRAMENTO STREET - north side between Spruce and Locust Streets; Lot
9 in Assessor's Block 1011. Request for Conditional-Use Authorization pursuant
to Planning Code Section 724.53, to allow Business or Professional Service
on the first floor of the subject property and to legalize the conversion
of the second floor dwelling unit to office use in the Sacramento Street NCD
(Neighborhood Commercial District) in a 40-X Height and Bulk District.
Preliminary
Recommendation: Disapproval
(Continued from Regular Meeting of
January 11, 2001)
(Proposed for Indefinite Continuance)
SPEAKER(S): None
ACTION: Continued Indefinitely
AYES: Chinchilla,
Fay, Joe, Salinas, Theoharis
ABSENT: Baltimore
2a. 2000.1268XCV
(LIGHT: 558-6254)
663-665 SUTTER STREET - south
side between Mason and Taylor Streets, Lot 11, in Assessor’s Block 297.
Request under Planning Code Section 309 (Downtown Code) for Determinations
of Compliance and Exceptions, including an exception for a building exceeding
80 feet in a 80-130-F District (Section 263.8), and an exception to the bulk
limit (Section 270) for a new building in a C-3-G District (Section 138).
The proposal is to build an 88’-0" high, 10-level (3 below grade, 7 above
grade) structure containing a total of 92,380 square feet, including 212 parking
spaces, and approximately 41,880 square feet of recreation space (swimming
pool, gymnasium, and women’s locker room facilities) that will connect to
the rear of the existing Olympic Club which faces on Post Street.
Preliminary Recommendation: Approval
with Conditions
(Proposed for continuance
to April 5, 2001)
SPEAKER(S): None
ACTION: Continued to April 5, 2001
AYES: Chinchilla,
Fay, Joe, Salinas, Theoharis
ABSENT: Baltimore
2b. 2000.1268XCV
(LIGHT: 558-6254)
663-665 SUTTER STREET - south
side between Mason and Taylor Streets, Lot 11 in Assessor’s Block 297. Request
for a Conditional-Use Authorization for a parking garage in a C-3-G District
(Section 223(n)). See description in item (a) above. The proposal is to
build an 88’-0" high, 10-level (3 below grade, 7 above grade) structure
containing a total of 92,380 square feet, including 212 parking spaces, and
approximately 41,880 square feet of recreation space (swimming pool, gymnasium,
and women’s locker room facilities) that will connect to the rear of the existing
Olympic Club which faces on Post Street.
Preliminary Recommendation: Approval
with Conditions
(Proposed for continuance to April
5, 2001)
SPEAKER(S): None
ACTION: Continued to April 5, 2001
AYES: Chinchilla,
Fay, Joe, Salinas, Theoharis
ABSENT: Baltimore
2c. 2000.1268XCV
(LIGHT: 558-6254)
663-665 SUTTER STREET - south
side between Mason and Taylor Streets, Lot 11 in Assessor’s Block 297. Request
for a variance from the open space requirements for a new building in a C-3-G
District (Section 138). The applicant does not propose any public open
space for this project and would like to make an in-lieu payment to the open
space fund. See description in item (a) above. The proposal is to build
an 88’-0" high, 10-level (3 below grade, 7 above grade) structure containing
a total of 92,380 square feet, including 212 parking spaces, and approximately
41,880 square feet of recreation space (swimming pool, gymnasium, and women’s
locker room facilities) that will connect to the rear of the existing Olympic
Club which faces on Post Street.
Preliminary Recommendation:
Approval with Conditions
(Proposed for continuance
to April 5, 2001)
SPEAKER(S): None
ACTION: Continued to April 5, 2001
AYES: Chinchilla,
Fay, Joe, Salinas, Theoharis
ABSENT: Baltimore
3. 1999.210E
(BLOMGREN: 558-5979)
3620 ‑ 19th STREET - within
the block bound by 18th Street, Guerrero Street, 19th Street and Oakwood Street,
Assessor's Block 3587, Lots 18, 68, and 70. The proposal is an Appeal
of a Preliminary Negative Declaration. The proposed is a new construction
of five two‑, three‑, and four‑story buildings containing
a total of 43 dwelling units. The site currently has a 32-space parking lot,
which is accessed by a gate on Oakwood and a facade of an industrial building
at the 3620 19th Street frontage, which would be demolished. The new buildings
would reach a maximum height of 40 feet in a 40‑X height/bulk district.
Lots 68 and 70 are located in a RH‑2 (Residential House, Two‑Family)
zoning district. Lot 18 is located in a RH‑3 (Residential House, Three‑Family)
zoning district.
Preliminary Recommendation: Upheld
Preliminary Negative Declaration
(Continued from Regular Meeting of February
22, 2001)
(Proposed
for continuance to April 5, 2001)
SPEAKER(S): None
ACTION: Continued to April 5, 2001
AYES: Chinchilla,
Fay, Joe, Salinas, Theoharis
ABSENT: Baltimore
4.
1999.210C
(PURVIS: 558-6354)
3620 - 19TH STREET - north side between Oakwood
and Guerrero Streets, a through lot with frontage on Oakwood Street; Lots
18, 68 & 70 in Assessor's Block 3587. Request for Conditional-Use Approval
under Planning Code Section 304 to develop a 44-unit residential PUD (Planned
Unit Development), with exceptions from the rear yard requirements of Section
134 and density standards of Section 209.1(g) & (h), within an RH-2 (Residential,
House, 2-Family) Zoning District and an RH-3 (Residential, House, 3-Family)
Zoning District and a 40-X Height and Bulk District.
Preliminary Recommendation: Pending
(Proposed for continuance to April 5, 2001)
SPEAKER(S): None
ACTION: Continued to April 5, 2001
AYES: Chinchilla,
Fay, Joe, Salinas, Theoharis
ABSENT: Baltimore
5. 2000.1165B
(BRESSANUTTI: 558-6892)
2 HENRY ADAMS STREET - west
side, between Division Street and Alameda Street; Lot 1 in Assessor’s Block
3910. Request under Planning Code Sections 320-322 for project authorization
of an office development consisting of the conversion of up to 49,900 square
feet in an existing building (San Francisco Design Center) from wholesale
design showroom space to office space. This notice shall also set forth an
initial determination of the net addition of gross square feet of office space,
pursuant to Planning Code Section 313.4. The subject property is located
in an M-2 (Heavy Industrial) District and the Industrial Protection Zone,
and a 40-X Height and Bulk District.
Preliminary Recommendation: Pending
(Continued
from Regular Meeting of February 22, 2001)
(Proposed
for Continuance to April 5, 2001) April 12, 2001
SPEAKER(S): None
ACTION: Continued to April 12, 2001
AYES: Chinchilla,
Fay, Joe, Salinas, Theoharis
ABSENT: Baltimore
6. 2001.0034C
(WOLOSHYN: 558-6612)
1290 CHESTNUT STREET - north side at northeast corner of Van
Ness Avenue, Lot 011 in Assessor’s Block 0478. The proposed is a request for
Conditional-Use Authorization under Planning Code Section 209.8(d) to allow
office use above the ground story in an RC (Residential-Commercial Combined)
District. The proposal is to alter an existing three-story office building
(currently 30 feet in height) by adding a new fourth story to contain 262
square feet of office space resulting in a new height of 40 feet. The proposal
also includes modifications to the existing third story (reduced in size by
214 square feet) and façade alterations. The total net increase in floor
area is 48 square feet. The subject property is located in an RC-3 (Residential-Commercial
Combined, Medium Density) District and a 40-X Height and Bulk District.
Preliminary Recommendation: Approval
with Conditions
(Proposed
for Continuance to April 5, 2001)
SPEAKER(S): None
ACTION: Continued to April 5, 2001
AYES: Chinchilla,
Fay, Joe, Salinas, Theoharis
ABSENT: Baltimore
7a. 2000.264CD
(MARTIN: 558-6616)
1087 MISSISSIPPI STREET - east
side, between 23rd and 25th Streets, Lot 049 in Assessor’s Block 4224. The
proposed is a request for a Conditional-Use Authorization to allow the construction
of two dwelling units in an M-1 (Light Industrial) Zoning District and the
Industrial Protection Zone Buffer, per Planning Code Section 215(a) and Planning
Commission Resolution No. 14861, and a 40-X Height and Bulk District.
Preliminary Recommendation: Disapproval
(Proposed
for Continuance to April 5, 2001)
SPEAKER(S): None
ACTION: Continued to April 5, 2001
AYES: Chinchilla,
Fay, Joe, Salinas, Theoharis
ABSENT: Baltimore
7b. 2000.264CD
(MARTIN: 558-6616)
1087 MISSISSIPPI STREET - east
side between 23rd and 25th Streets, Lot 049 in Assessor’s Block 4224. Request
for staff-initiated Discretionary Review for the demolition of an existing,
vacant industrial building and construction of housing and office use in an
existing industrial building space in an M-1 (Light Industrial) Zoning District
and the Industrial Protection Zone Buffer per Planning Commission Resolution
Nos. 14861 and 16079; and a 40-X Height and Bulk District.
Preliminary
Recommendation: Take Discretionary Review
(Continued from Regular Meeting of
February 22, 2001)
(Proposed
for Continuance to April 5, 2001)
SPEAKER(S): None
ACTION: Continued to April 5, 2001
AYES: Chinchilla,
Fay, Joe, Salinas, Theoharis
ABSENT: Baltimore
8. 2001.0035E
(BUFORD: 558-5973)
TAXI
PERMITS – CITYWIDE - Appeal of a Preliminary Negative Declaration.
The San Francisco Taxi Commission, City and County of San Francisco, proposes
to issue approximately 500 additional taxi permits (medallions) over the next
five years. After implementation of the project, the number of taxi permits
available in the City would increase from 1,381 to 1,881, an increase of approximately
36%. New permits may be issued if supported by a finding that additional
permits are required to meet the public convenience and necessity. Once
issued, the permits would result in 500 additional taxis in use.
Preliminary Recommendation: Uphold
Preliminary Negative Declaration
(Proposed for continuance to April 12, 2001)
SPEAKER(S): None
ACTION: Continued to April 12, 2001
AYES: Chinchilla,
Fay, Joe, Salinas, Theoharis
ABSENT: Baltimore
9. 2000.1061E
(WYCKO: 558-5972)
400 Paul
Avenue - bounded by Paul Avenue, Third Street, Bayshore Boulevard and
railroad spur track, Lot 14 of Assessor's Block 5431A. The proposal is an
Appeal of a Preliminary Negative Declaration for the demolition of
an existing, 40-foot-high warehouse/distribution building, which totals approximately
89,400 gross square feet to be replaced by a newly constructed 65-foot-high
structure with 339,300 gross square feet of space for Internet and telecommunication
equipment and 155 off-street parking spaces. The proposed facilities would
be warehouses for telecommunication switches and operational equipment that
provides data services to Internet users. The proposed project is an allowed
use within M-1 District and is situated within an Industrial Protection Zone.
Preliminary Recommendation: Uphold
Preliminary Negative Declaration
(Proposed
for continuance to April 12, 2001)
SPEAKER(S): None
ACTION: Continued to April 12, 2001
AYES: Chinchilla,
Fay, Joe, Salinas, Theoharis
ABSENT: Baltimore
10. 2000.1061C
(MARTIN: 558-6616)
400 PAUL
AVENUE - north side, between Third Street and Bayshore Boulevard, Lot
014 in Assessor's Block 5431A. Request for a Conditional-Use Authorization
under Section 271 (Bulk Limits: Special Exceptions in Districts other than
C-3) of the Planning Code to allow the construction of a telecommunications
facility exceeding the bulk requirements of Planning Code Section 270 and
to demolish an existing industrial building which has not been vacant for
more than fifteen months, in an M-1 (Light Industrial) Zoning District and
the Industrial Protection Zone, per Planning Commission Resolution No. 14861
and a 65-J Height and Bulk District.
Preliminary
Recommendation: Disapproval
(Proposed
for continuance to April 12, 2001)
SPEAKER(S): None
ACTION: Continued to April 12, 2001
AYES: Chinchilla,
Fay, Joe, Salinas, Theoharis
ABSENT: Baltimore
11. 2000.585E
(JAROSLAWSKY: 558-5970)
428 8th
STREET - Appeal of a Preliminary Negative Declaration. The property
is on Lot 002 of Assessor's Block 3757, located on the west side of 8th
Street. The proposal includes the demolition of five existing structures
on the project site and the construction of a three-story, 105,500-square-foot
structure to contain business service uses, which is a permitted use within
the district. The project site is on 8th Street with frontage
on both 8th and Converse Streets. The subject site is within an
SLI (Service Light Industrial) District and a 40-X Height and Bulk District
within the South of Market District of the City of San Francisco. Two of
the existing structures on the site are utilized as storage sheds and the
remaining three structures are vacant. The proposed new structure would entirely
encompass the subject site, be a maximum of 40 feet in height and contain
three stories. The project would include an open courtyard and 100 below-ground
parking spaces. Preliminary Recommendation: Uphold Preliminary Negative Declaration
(Proposed for continuance to June 7, 2001)
SPEAKER(S): None
ACTION: Continued to June 7, 2001
AYES: Chinchilla,
Fay, Joe, Salinas, Theoharis
ABSENT: Baltimore
12. 2000.1128DD
(WANG: 558-6335)
230 JOOST
AVENUE - north side between Baden and Congo Streets; Lot 013 in Assessor's
Block 6765. The proposal is to demolish an existing vacant, two-story, single-family
dwelling and construct a new two-story over garage, single-family dwelling
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 revised.
DISCRETIONARY REVIEW WITHDRAWN
B. COMMISSIONERS' QUESTIONS AND MATTERS
13. Consideration of Adoption - draft minutes of March 1,
2001.
SPEAKER(S): None
ACTION: Approved
AYES: Chinchilla,
Fay, Joe, Salinas, Theoharis
ABSENT: Baltimore
14. Commission Matters
None
C.
DIRECTOR'S REPORT
15. Director's
Announcements
-
Free lecture
series
-
Resignation of Hillary Gitelman. Her new position will be
the Director of Planning for the Presidio Trust
16. Review of
Past Week's Events at the Board of Supervisors and Board of Appeals
BOA
None
BOS
- Someone
from staff is representing the Director and the Zoning Administrator at the
Transportation and Land Use Committee meeting.
- There
has been a request from the BOS to have an audit done on the management of
the Planning Department.
- There
will be a hearing before the Transportation and Land Use Committee considering
approving dot.com uses and what is the impact of those decisions. We are
concerned about the outcome.
SPEAKER(S):
Patricia
Voughey
- Hillary
Gitelman wrote a very thorough environmental report on the Presidio. Ms.
Voughey hopes that the department backs up the report.
- This report
has (now) put the department in a compromising position.
17.
Status Report for 2844 Greenwich Street
SPEAKER(S):
(+) Patricia
Voughey
- She supports
what the department has recommended.
- She would
like to know the criteria for adding the square footage.
- She recommends
that the department ok the NSR and bring it back to the building department.
(-) Calvin
Fung
- He is
a neighbor
- This has
been going on for a few years.
- They have
in the past tried to solve the lightwell issues. They are concerned about
losing the light coming into their home. He is requesting that this agreement
be kept intact and there be a NSR.
(-) Susan
Fung
- She is
Mr. Fong's cousin.
- The lightwell
is now closed off and the upper part of that lightwell is closed off. She
would like to have the lightwell stay intact.
D. REGULAR CALENDAR
18. 2001.1059R
(RODGERS: 558-6395)
1-6 MEACHAM PLACE - Meacham
Place is a narrow, dead-end alley between Hyde and Larkin in Assessor’s Block
302, access is from Post Street. The project is a consideration of a proposal
to install an iron swing gate at the entrance of Meacham Place. The project
would also involve the installation of planter boxes along the sidewalks and
back wall of the alley.
Preliminary
Recommendation: Find that proposal is not in conformity with the General Plan.
SPEAKER(S):
(+) Denise Rosser
- This proposal has been around
for many years.
- The purpose of the gate is not
for private use; it is for safety. The street is a dead-end street and there
has been a lot of illegal activity going on.
- They just want a gate to ensure
their safety.
- Every building on the street has
installed exterior lighting; the neighbors clean the street themselves, and
have put gates on windows. They have tried every measure to have the street
be safer.
- There is no reason for a service
vehicle to get into the street. The parked cars that are there block their
home access.
- She would like to have the Commission
really look at the proposal and approve the project.
(+) Captain Kevin Dillon – Commanding
Office – Police Department
- Despite their best efforts they
have been unable to control the illegal activity on the street. Unfortunately,
their proximity to the Tenderloin makes it difficult to control.
- Although there are other issues
regarding the Fire Department, which he can't provide comment on, he feels
that their only answer for safety it gating off the street.
(+) David Overdorf
- When they asked for maintenance
of the street or paving, the City mentioned that the service vehicles would
not be able to get in or out of the street.
- Now that they want a gate installed,
the City decides that it cannot approve this because it's a street for public
use.
- The neighbors have tried everything
to make this street safe.
- The City said that the neighbors
are responsible for paving it. Everyone is happy to do so but why are they
responsible for this but can't put a gate up because they are tired of the
illegal activity?
- This problem is quite severe.
He displayed pictures of how some cars park on the sidewalk and block their
gates and doors. They have called police to have these cars towed yet during
the late hours the police have limited staff.
(+) Eric Rosser
- He lives on this street with his
family. He was born and raised in San Francisco.
- There has been a deterioration
of the standard of living for many people.
- The area has an incredible amount
of illegal activity going on which has become intolerable.
- They would like the Commission
to make a decision that would improve the City.
- It is a very dangerous place for
him and his family to live.
(+) Richard Mayer
- He supports the installation of
the gate.
- One of his employees was assaulted
and robbed on this alley. They have established a policy that their employees
not walk the alley by themselves.
- His concern is that a car could
hurt an individual, who cannot be seen.
- There is a very large, high-pressure
gas line for his company and there have been a lot of individuals starting
bonfires on the street.
ACTION: Found that the proposal is not in conformity with the General
Plan. The proposal to gate the alley was disapproved.
AYES: Baltimore,
Chinchilla, Fay, Joe, Salinas, Theoharis
RESOLUTION: 16124
19. 2000.1255C
(B.WASHINGTON: 558-6263)
678 PORTOLA DRIVE - between
Sidney Way and Woodside Avenue; Lot 004 in Assessor’s Block 2892. Request
for Conditional-Use Authorization pursuant to Section 209.6(b) of the Planning
Code to install a total of nine antennas and a base transceiver station on
an existing church building as part of Nextel's wireless telecommunications
network in an RH-1 (D)(Residential, House, Single-Family, Detached) District
and a 40-X Height and Bulk District.
Preliminary Recommendation: Approval
with conditions
SPEAKER(s)
(+) Molly Gills – Nextel Communications
- This site is needed to fill in the coverage gap when Nextel
removes antenna from Sutro Tower.
- The equipment will not be visible.
- The equipment will not cause interruption to televisions,
cordless phones, etc.
- There were community meetings at the church and 7 people
attended.
- A public notice was sent to neighbors regarding this meeting.
(+) Alicia Duke
- The Nextel project happens to be in use and hopefully will
be used soon.
- The manager of the San Francisco branch has tried every type
of possible phone there is and Nextel has proven to have a no dead zone.
- She hopes that this project will be approved.
- This would benefit the elderly and disabled.
(-) Elizabeth Mettling – Miraloma Park Improvement Club
- The church has a nursery school in the basement.
- This type of equipment is not allowed on schools so why is
it allowed on this building?
- Tower Market has equipment so she doesn't understand why
this is considered a dead zone.
- The equipment should not be allowed near children.
(-) Olie Kauffman
- His house is across the street from the church.
- It's a single-family residence; if Nextel would come to his
house, would the Commission allow that to happen (install their antenna on
it)?
- There is still scientific research that this type of equipment
is hazardous to health.
- He never received any calls or any documents regarding
this meeting. He found out about it through neighbors.
ACTION No. 1: There was a motion for the project to
be continued. It failed to move forward because it did not receive a second.
ACTION No. 2: Approved as proposed
AYES: Baltimore, Chinchilla, Fay, Joe, Theoharis
NAYES: Salinas
MOTION: 16125
20a. 2000.868CV
(NIKITAS: 558-6306)
1452 BUSH STREET - north side
through to Austin Street between Polk Street and
Van Ness Avenue, Lot 008 in Assessor’s Block 0667. Request for Conditional-Use
Authorization under Planning Code Section 253 to permit construction of a
building greater than 40 feet in height in the Van Ness Special-Use District.
The project is in an RC-4 District (Residential-Commercial High Density) and
the Van Ness Special Use District and in a 130-V Height and Bulk District.
The proposal is to demolish a vacant auto repair facility and construct a
nine-story, 85-foot-high building comprising 22 dwelling units, about 1,250
square feet of ground-floor commercial space, and 22 parking spaces.
Preliminary Recommendation: Approval
with conditions
SPEAKER(S):
(+) Jim Rubin – Rubin and Alter
- The planner was very thorough in his report so there is not
much he can add.
- There is no opposition to this project.
(+) Toby Levy – Architect
- Displayed a rendering of the project.
- She designed a building with a commercial style but at
the same time classical.
- She developed a very heavy cornice line.
- They tried to save the façade but it would eliminate a floor
of units.
ACTION: Approved with the following condition:
sponsor will continue to work with Department staff to improve the design.
AYES: Baltimore, Chinchilla, Fay, Joe, Salinas,
Theoharis
MOTION: 16126
20b. 2000.868CV
(NIKITAS: 558-6306)
1452 BUSH STREET - north side
through to Austin Street between Polk Street and Van Ness Avenue, Lot 008
in Assessor’s Block 0667. Request for a Variance under Planning Code Sections
242(c) and 307(g) to allow modification of the rear yard requirement of Section
134. A central courtyard is proposed in lieu of a rear yard. The project is
in an RC-4 District (Residential-Commercial High Density) and the Van Ness
Special-Use District and in a 130-V Height and Bulk District. The proposal
is to demolish a vacant auto repair facility and construct a nine-story, 85-foot-high
building comprising 22 dwelling units, about 1,250 square feet of ground-floor
commercial space and 22 parking spaces.
SPEAKER(S): Same as those listed for item 20a.
ACTION: Zoning Administrator closed the Public
the public hearing.
21. 2001.0043C
(LIGHT: 558-6254)
222 2ND STREET -
west side at southwest corner of Howard Street, Lot 63 in Assessor’s Block
3735. Request for a temporary two-year Conditional-Use Authorization for a
public commercial surface parking lot in a C-3-O (SD) District and a 150-350-S
Height and Bulk District. Proposal is to build a 70-space public commercial
surface parking lot on the subject vacant site. The Conditional-Use Authorization
would be valid for two years only as an interim use.
Preliminary Recommendation: Approval with Conditions
SPEAKER(S):
(+) Jim Rubin – Rubin and Alter – representing Priority Parking, the project
sponsor
- There is not much to say about paving over an empty lot and
there is no building to talk about.
- He displayed an illustration of the parking that is being
lost in the Rincon Hill area. There will be an excess of 3,000 spaces lost
with the Cal Trans retrofit.
ACTION: Approved with conditions as proposed
AYES: Baltimore, Chinchilla, Fay, Joe, Salinas,
Theoharis
MOTION: 16127
E. SPECIAL OFFICE DEVELOPMENT ANNUAL
LIMIT HEARING
At approximately 3:15 p.m. the Planning Commission convened into a Special Office Development
Annual Limit Hearing to hear and act on the large office projects being considered
under Planning Code Sections 320-325 during the 2000-2001-approval period.
22a. 1998.281BC
(GORDON: 558-6309)
185 Berry Street - bounded by Third,
Berry and Fourth Streets and China Basin Landing; Lot 5 in Assessor’s Block
3803. Request under Planning Code Section 321 for authorization to deduct
up to 120,000 square feet of office space from the City’s office development
annual limit. The property is within a M-2 (Heavy Industrial) District, the
Mixed-Use Area of the IPZ (Industrial Protection Zone), the proposed Ballpark
Vicinity Special District’s South End Office District and a 90-X Height and
Bulk District. This notice serves as public notification of the Planning
Department’s initial determination of the net addition of gross square footage
of office space per Planning Code Sections 313.4 and 314.4. Please note:
Under Case No. 98.281V, an off-street parking variance for the proposed project
was heard before the Zoning Administrator on August 23, 2000. This variance
decision is currently pending before the Zoning Administrator. In addition,
a rear yard variance, per Planning Code Section 134, for the proposed dwelling
units at this site will be heard before the Zoning Administrator on March
28, 2001, under Case No. 2001.0179V.
Preliminary
Recommendation: Pending
(Continued
from Regular Meeting of March 8, 2001)
NOTE:
On March 8, 2001, after public testimony, the Commission closed public hearing.
The item was continued at the call of the Chair to March 22, 2001. The item
continues to be subject to Commission consideration, deliberation and action.
SPEAKER(S):
(+)
David Cincotta
- He is representing the project sponsor
McCarthy and Cook and Payne Webber.
- The project will be reduced to 49,500
sf and 130 units.
- The commitment to the community would
remain the same.
- At the last hearing there was no
opposition.
- Voluntary contributions to open space
and art would remain the same.
- Although they don't have to have
a requirement for the childcare fees, they will keep the requirement and contribute.
- The funds are there to move this
project forward.
(-)
Sue Hestor
- She is protesting the hearing on
801 Market Street.
- She received information and a set
of plans today and has not had time to review.
- She did not find any information
on the revisions of 801 Market at the Planning Department.
- Although the project has kept the
same envelope, it states that it has been revised.
- This project is not ready under the Public
Records law. This case needs a continuance as an office building.
(+)
Timothy Tosta – Pacific Resources
- The document, which Ms. Hestor complains
about, was delivered to the Planning staff on Tuesday.
- Very little has changed with respect
to the project.
ACTION No. 1: Intent to Approve as revised
and continued
AYES: Baltimore, Fay, Joe
NAYES: Chinchilla, Salinas, Theoharis
ACTION No. 2: Continue both projects to
April 19, 2001. Staff will issue a new notice for 185 Berry to reflect the
revised project.
AYES: Baltimore, Chinchilla,
Salinas, Theoharis
NAYES: Fay, Joe
22b.
1998.281BC
(GORDON: 558-6309)
185 Berry
Street - bounded by Third, Berry and Fourth Streets and China Basin Landing;
Lot 5 in Assessor’s Block 3803. Request per Planning Code Section 215 for
Conditional-Use Authorization to allow 62 units of housing (totaling approximately
73,600 square feet of residential space) in a M-2 (Heavy Industrial) District
at the above-referenced address. Approximately six units (or 10%) of this
housing are proposed to be dedicated as affordable. The property is within
a M-2 (Heavy Industrial) District, the Mixed-Use Area of the IPZ (Industrial
Protection Zone), the proposed Ballpark Vicinity Special District’s South
End Office District and a 90-X Height and Bulk District. Please note: Under
Case No. 98.281V, an off-street parking variance for the proposed project
was heard before the Zoning Administrator on August 23, 2000. This variance
decision is currently pending before the Zoning Administrator. In addition,
a rear yard variance, per Planning Code Section 134, for the proposed dwelling
units at this site will be heard before the Zoning Administrator on March
28, 2001, under Case No. 2001.0179V.
Preliminary
Recommendation: Approval
(Continued
from Regular Meeting of March 8, 2001)
NOTE:
On March 8, 2001, after public testimony, the Commission closed public hearing.
The item was continued at the call of the Chair to March 22, 2001. The item
continues to be subject to Commission consideration, deliberation and action.
SPEAKER(S): See item 22a.
ACTION: See item 22a.
23a. 2000.277BXC
(CRAWFORD: 558-6358)
801 MARKET/22
FOURTH STREETS - north side of Jessie Street between Fourth and
Fifth Streets; Assessor’s Block 3705; Lot 048. Planning Code Sections 320-325
(Office Development Limitation Program) for allocation of up to 136,600 gross
square feet of office space for a 12-story building within a C-3-R
(Downtown, Retail) District and within a 160-S Height and Bulk District.
The project will add a third building to the existing Pacific Place buildings
I and II above the existing loading dock on the north side of Jessie Street
between Fourth and Fifth Streets.
Preliminary
Recommendation: Approval
(Continued
from Regular Meeting of March 8, 2001)
NOTE:
On March 8, 2001, after public testimony, the Commission closed public hearing.
The item was continued at the call of the Chair to March 22, 2001. The item
continues to be subject to Commission consideration, deliberation and action.
SPEAKER(S): See item 22a.
ACTION: See item 22a.
23b. 2000.277BXC
(CRAWFORD: 558-6358)
801 MARKET/22
FOURTH STREETS - north side of Jessie Street between Fourth and
Fifth Streets; Assessor’s Block 3705; Lot 048. Request under Planning Code
Section 309 (Downtown Code) for Determinations of Compliance, for construction
of a 12-story building including 136,600 gross square feet of office
space. This project lies within a C-3-R (Downtown, Retail) District and
within a 160-S Height and Bulk District. The project will add a third building
to the existing Pacific Place buildings I and II above the existing loading
dock on the north side of Jessie Street between Fourth and Fifth Streets.
Preliminary
Recommendation: Approval
(Continued
from Regular Meeting of March 8, 2001)
NOTE:
On March 8, 2001, after public testimony, the Commission closed public hearing.
The item was continued at the call of the Chair to March 22, 2001. The item
continues to be subject to Commission consideration, deliberation and action.
SPEAKER(S): See item 22a.
ACTION: See item 22a.
23c. 2000.277BXC
(CRAWFORD: 558-6358)
801 MARKET/22
FOURTH STREETS - north side of Jessie Street between Fourth and
Fifth Streets; Assessor’s Block 3705 Lot 048. Request under Planning Code
Section 219.c for professional or business offices not offering on-site service
to the public in a C-3-R (Downtown, Retail) District. This project lies within
a C-3-R (Downtown, Retail) District and within a 160-S Height and Bulk District.
The project will add a third building to the existing Pacific Place buildings
I and II above the existing loading dock on the north side of Jessie Street
between Fourth and Fifth Streets.
Preliminary
Recommendation: Approval
(Continued
from Regular Meeting of March 8, 2001)
NOTE:
On March 8, 2001, after public testimony, the Commission closed public hearing.
The item was continued at the call of the Chair to March 22, 2001. The item
continues to be subject to Commission consideration, deliberation and action.
SPEAKER(S): See item 22a.
ACTION: See item 22a.
4:30 p.m.
24.
(GREEN/ARCE: 558-64411/558-6332)
NEIGHBORHOOD PRESENTATION OF PROPOSED
COW HOLLOW NEIGHBORHOOD DESIGN GUIDELINES – Presentation and discussion
of proposed Cow Hollow Neighborhood Design Guidelines.
SPEAKER(S):
(+) Brooke Sampson – Neighborhood Design Guidelines Committee Chair
She provided an introduction and outline of the neighborhood
presentation that included the following:
- The goals are to present proposed Cow Hollow Neighborhood
Design Guidelines (CHNDG) to the San Francisco Planning Commission and Staff.
- To secure acceptance of the CHNDG by the Planning Commission
as Interim Design and Planning Guidelines and as being reflective of neighborhood
character as defined by the Cow Hollow Association.
- To have the Planning Commission instruct Planning Department
staff to review development projects in the Cow Hollow neighborhood against
the recommendations and policies of the CHNDG, and when appropriate, to insure
preservation of neighborhood character through the use of the Planning Commission's
discretionary authority (DR).
- Fairness and balance in preserving neighborhood character
and property rights by applying the concept of equalization.
The items that will be covered are as follows:
·
Background
and history of CHNDG preparation and level of neighborhood involvement
·
Understanding
the process for adoption of Neighborhood Character Districts
·
Presentation
of the Cow Hollow Neighborhood Design Guidelines
·
Brief comment
by neighborhood representatives
·
Respond to
Commission Questions
(+) Lou Blazej
- Zoning districts in the Cow Hollow Neighborhood (CHN) include:
RH-1 (D); RH-1 and RH-2; RM-1, 2 and 3.
- Neighborhood character involves architectural mass, scale,
rhythm design and environmental characteristics.
- Research confirms that the neighborhood character is based
primarily on building scale and lot coverage.
- Analysis of the CHN rear yard open space is very important
to the neighborhood character.
- Recommended Policies: Specific policies included in the CHNDG:
rear yards (45% rear yard open space); equalization (rear yard policy: equalization
to the more complying neighbor where adjacent neighbors exceed standard);
height (height policy: uniform height policy. The height policies for Cow
Hollow are based on the following lot slope configurations: level, steep up-sloping
lots, steep down-sloping lots)
- Other Elements of the Design Guidelines: Texture and Detailing
(exterior materials/ ornamentation); Openings (entryways and windows); Landscaping
(pruning trees; tree selection and placement for views).
- The current zoning regulations will not protect Cow Hollow
character and environmental quality. Unless something is done, the quality
of life in Cow Hollow will continue to erode.
- Needed actions: adoption of the Design Guidelines and zoning
changes.
(+) Sidney Unobskey
- He thanked all of the people who were at the hearing from
Cow Hollow to support the design guidelines and asked the Commission to support
them.
(+) Brook Simpson
- Finally, the CHN would like the Commission and staff to further
review the CHNDG document and consider the CHN request for acceptance of the
CHNDG.
- Have this matter calendared within the next three to four
weeks for a public hearing and potential action by the Planning Commission.
The action would accept the CHNDG as reflecting neighborhood character as
defined by the CHN, and instruct Planning Department staff to reference these
guidelines in reviewing projects, for projects that are subject to the Commission's
discretionary authority, and otherwise as appropriate, to insure preservation
of neighborhood character.
ACTION: Meeting held. No action required by
the Commission. However, staff is to report back in a couple of weeks with
a status report on adopting design guidelines and addressing the zoning changes.
F. SPECIAL DISCRETIONARY REVIEW HEARING
At Approximately 5:55
p.m. the Planning Commission convened into
a Special Discretionary Review (DR) Hearing.
25. 2000.1078D
(SIDER: 558-6897)
531 KANSAS
STREET - east side between Mariposa and 18th Streets, Lot 008J
in Assessor's Block 4009. Request for Discretionary Review of Building Permit
Application Number 2000/08/14/7852. The proposal is to (1) add a third story,
(2) construct a horizontal expansion of the existing first and second levels,
and (3) enlarge the rear deck of a single-family dwelling. The site is within
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 project as proposed.
(Continued from Regular Meeting of February 22, 2001)
SPEAKER(S):
(-) Frank (last name unclear)
- He is representing Lina Fernando.
- The proposed addition is not in conformance with the residential design guidelines.
- He displayed some photographs and an enlarged list of the homes built by John
Kambie.
- The concern is that all of the homes, which are adjacent, have similar rooflines.
If any of these homeowners decide to build an expansion the character of the
neighborhood would change.
- There are various neighbors who are against this project.
- Read a letter from a neighbor who is against the project.
- The project topography will change also.
(-) James Freeman
- He lives three houses down from the proposed project. He has lived in San
Francisco for many years.
- If he could afford it, he would move, but he can't.
- Does not want every other house on the street to have an addition like this.
It would destroy the look of the neighborhood.
- Many homes have had its views blocked by a project on Mariposa Street.
(-) Arthur Garassi
- He lives across the street.
- He is against the addition.
- Other neighbors mentioned to him to state that they are not in agreement either.
(-) Victoria Gomez
- She lives on Kansas Street.
- Her house is a family home since their family has owned it since it was built.
- The homes have an architectural consistency on Potrero Hill.
- The character and the beauty of the neighborhood would change if this project
is approved.
- Why would someone who has a large family purchase a 2 bedroom home?
- How can a family who is new to their neighborhood dictate what they should
accept or not.
- Please don't allow this proposal to pass.
(-) Don Canvey
- He was born on Potrero Hill.
- His dad built the homes on Kansas Street.
- Showed pictures of the homes on Kansas Street. The street is one of the most
unique streets on Potrero Hill.
- The rooflines of these homes are very uniform.
(-) Joe Boston
- He lives on Potrero Hill.
- He understands property rights and the need in the City for homes to be enlarged
due to growing families, but in this particular case there is a very uniform
architectural character to the street.
- The neighborhood will be affected by Macromedia's project.
-There are other more appropriate ways to increase housing.
(-) Linda Vida
- Her mother lives in the neighborhood that is opposed to the project.
- The project would tower over the homes adjacent to it.
- The project would change the character of the neighborhood.
- The buildings across the street are fairly new and were built to be 4-story
houses.
- The planner stated that the neighborhood had no opinion, yet there were meetings
with the owner and they stated their concerns.
(+) William Walters – Project Architect
- His office is on Potrero Hill and he has worked there for 15 years.
- He has had to be the middle person.
- He took into account the issues of both sides.
- There is a character to the homes on this street yet there are families who
are growing and require more space.
- They did plan to alter the interior to make the home more livable.
- The current bedrooms are quite small.
- He believes that the project is fine as it's designed.
ACTION No. 1: Take Discretionary Review and deny 3rd story but
allow horizontal addition.
AYES: Joe, Theoharis
NAYES: Baltimore, Chinchilla, Fay, Salinas
ACTION No. 2: Do not take DR and approve project as proposed
AYES: Baltimore, Chinchilla, Fay, Salinas
NAYES: Joe, Theoharis
26. 2000.657DDD
(MEHRA: 558-6257)
2531-33 BAKER STREET - west
side between Vallejo and Green Streets, Lot 004 in Assessor’s Block 0956.
Requests for Discretionary Review of Building Permit Application No. 2000/01/28/559
proposing to alter the existing building containing two dwelling units by
adding a horizontal extension towards the front of the lot, and by merging
the two dwelling units into one 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 application as revised.
SPEAKER(S):
(+) Tamara Fruchtman
- She doesn't believe that this project is taking a unit off the market because
the unit was vacant.
- The home is in need of repair.
- Making these improvements will make the home more in conformity with the neighborhood
design guidelines.
- She has spoken with various neighborhood groups and they approve the project.
ACTION: Continued to April 5, 2001. Staff is to provide the following
information: 1) date the building was built; 2) what was the original use;
3) what do the plans look like now that the neighbors have signed off; 4)
what is the current condition of the building; 5) what are the practical implications
of approving an expansion of a building envelope to make it a conforming,
noncomplying use.
AYES: Baltimore, Chinchilla, Fay, Joe, Salinas, Theoharis
G.
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))
SPEAKERS: None
Adjournment: 6:50 p.m.
THE DRAFT MINUTES ARE PROPOSED FOR
ADOPTION AT THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION ON THURSDAY,
APRIL 5, 2001.
