October 18, 2001
SAN FRANCISCO PLANNING COMMISSION
Meeting Minutes
Commission Chambers - Room 400
City Hall, 1 Dr. Carlton B. Goodlett Place
Thursday, October 18, 2001
1:30 PM
Regular Meeting
PRESENT: Baltimore, Chinchilla, Fay, Joe, Lim, Salinas, Theoharis
ABSENT: None
THE MEETING WAS CALLED TO ORDER BY PRESIDENT THEOHARIS AT 1:50 p.m.
STAFF IN ATTENDANCE: Gerald G. Green, Director of Planning; Larry Badiner, Zoning Administrator; Amit Gosh; Miriam Chion; Teresa Ojeda; Dan Sirois; Vahram Massehian; Matt Snyder; Ben Fu; Dan Sider; Glenn Cabreros; Rick Crawford; 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.
1a. 2001.0781CR (VELLVE: 558-6263)
2155 – 18TH AVENUE - (San Francisco Fire Department Station #40), west side between Quintara and Rivera Streets, Lot 003, Assessor’s Block 2199 - Request for General Plan Referral to install a total of three (3) panel antennas and related equipment at an existing two-story publicly-used structure (a fire station) as part of Metro PCS’s wireless telecommunications network within a RH-1 (House, One Family) Zoning District, and within a 40-X Height and Bulk District.
Preliminary Recommendation: Finding of conformity with the General Plan.
(Proposed for Continuance to October 25, 2001)
SPEAKER(S): None
ACTION: Continued to October 25, 2001
AYES: Baltimore, Chinchilla, Fay, Joe, Lim, Salinas, Theoharis
1b. 2001.0781CR (VELLVE: 558-6263)
2155 – 18TH AVENUE - (San Francisco Fire Department Station #40), west side between Quintara and Rivera Streets, Lot 003, Assessor’s Block 2199 - Request for Conditional Use Authorization pursuant to Section 209.6(b) of the Planning Code to install a total of three (3) panel antennas and related equipment at an existing two-story publicly-used structure (a fire station) as part of Metro PCS’s wireless telecommunications network within a RH-1 (House, One Family) Zoning District, and within a 40-X Height and Bulk District. As per the City & County of San Francisco’s Wireless Telecommunications Services (WTS) Facilities Siting Guidelines the proposal is a Location Preference 1 (Preferred Location – Publicly-Used Structure).
Preliminary Recommendation: Approval with conditions
(Proposed for Continuance to October 25, 2001)
SPEAKER(S): None
ACTION: Continued to October 25, 2001
AYES: Baltimore, Chinchilla, Fay, Joe, Lim, Salinas, Theoharis
2. 2001.0540C (DiBARTOLO: 558-6291)
865 STOCKTON STREET - southwest corner at Clay and Stockton Streets; Lot 001 in Assessor’s Block 0224 - Request for Conditional Use authorization pursuant to Section 812.82 of the Planning Code to install a total of three antennas to be flush-mounted on the sides of the fourth-story balconies and to install five screened equipment cabinets to be located on the rooftop of the existing four-story structure as part of Sprint’s wireless telecommunications network within the Chinatown Residential Neighborhood Commercial District and a 65-85-N Height and Bulk District. The site is a Preference 1 (Preferred location site) per the City & County of San Francisco’s Wireless Transmission Services (WTS) Facilities Siting Guidelines
Preliminary Recommendation: Pending
(Proposed for Continuance to November 15, 2001)
SPEAKER(S): None
ACTION: Continued to November 15, 2001
AYES: Baltimore, Chinchilla, Fay, Joe, Lim, Salinas, Theoharis
3. 2001.0700C (DiBARTOLO: 558-6291)
501- 507 HOWARD STREET - southwest corner at Howard and First Streets, Lot 121 (formerly lots 1, 2, 3A, 4 and 116) in Assessor's Block 3736 - Request for temporary two year Conditional Use authorization for a public commercial surface parking lot in a C-3-0(SD) District and a 200-S Height and Bulk District. The proposal is to construct a temporary expansion to an existing parking lot on the subject vacant site. The Conditional Use authorization would be valid for two years only as an interim use. The Site consists of (5) five former lots merged into a new lot. The existing surface parking lot occupies 56% or 16,500 square feet of the 29,715 square foot newly merged lot. The proposal would expand the temporary parking use to cover the entire site. The parking capacity will be increased by 15 cars, for a total of 110 self-park spaces, including five handicapped spaces.
Preliminary Recommendation: Pending
(Proposed for Continuance to November 15, 2001)
SPEAKER(S): None
ACTION: Continued to November 15, 2001
AYES: Baltimore, Chinchilla, Fay, Joe, Lim, Salinas, Theoharis
4. 2001.0499DDDD (SMITH: 558-6322)
2340 DIAMOND STREET - south side of the street between Conrad and Hiliritas Streets, Lot 030 in Assessor's Block 7552 - Requests for Discretionary Review of Building Permit Application No. 2001/02/20/2471, proposing to construct a one-story vertical addition with a second floor deck facing east, located in a RH-1 (Residential, House, One-Family) District and a 40-X Height and Bulk District.
Preliminary Recommendation: Preliminary Recommendation: Approve the Project as revised
ALL DISCRETIONARY REVIEW REQUESTS HAVE BEEN WITHDRAWN
B. COMMISSIONERS' QUESTIONS AND MATTERS
5. Commission Matters
Commissioner Salinas: Requested a hearing on unsound building reports issued by the Department of Building Inspection.
Commissioner Theoharis: The policy should be on whether we require a report when there is a demolition of a building and the elimination of affordable housing, or should we have the report on all projects.
Director Green responded that he will schedule time with DBI staff and there will be a hearing on this item on the first or second hearing of November.
Commissioner Chinchilla: Requested a report on Conditional Use Appeals.
C. DIRECTOR'S REPORT
6. Director's Announcements
- He will report on the changes to the Department's budget/work program in November
- There is a proposal that would empower residents and business owners in the neighborhood of a CU to bring an appeal to the Board of Supervisors. This would be by petition process. The language would be removed which was amended and it would require 5 Board of Supervisors to pull it up.
7. Review of Past Week's Events at the Board of Supervisors and Board of Appeals
BOS – None
BOA – None
D. REGULAR CALENDAR
8. (GREEN: 558-6411)
Discussion and consideration of proposed amendments to the Planning Commission's Inclusionary Housing Policy.
Preliminary Recommendation: Approval
(Continued from Regular Meeting of October 11, 2001)
SPEAKER(S):
(+) Joe LaTorre – Mayor's Office of Housing.
- The items that are listed in the letter he submitted to the Commission are not focused on the appropriate percentage of units or even the income levels that should be targeted.
- The purpose of this list would be to begin a process of thinking, not because there is any definite outcome.
(+) Dr. Arelious Walker – Pastor of the Church of God in Christ
- He would like to talk about affordable housing offsite (of any particular development project).
- Affordable housing in the Bay View is not going well.
- He has been trying to find a solution to this problem for years.
- He has lost up to 35 families who have moved to other areas of the Bay Area because they cannot afford housing.
(+) Marty Dalton – Private Developer – UPC Holdings
- He was thrilled when Dr. Walker came to him to build affordable housing.
- He shares the vision of Dr. Walker to move some of the inclusionary housing from market rate housing to the neighborhoods to produce affordable housing where it's most needed.
- They did an analysis by looking at the cost of production of housing in a high-rise site downtown and the cost of housing in a low-rise neighborhood offsite. This would produce more units of the same quality in a smaller amount of time.
- He would like to have the support of the Commission to formulate this mechanism and make this happen.
(+) Kelley Dearman – Haight Street Mortgage Co.
- There are a lot of people who feel that they cannot afford a home. They help people to be able to afford affordable homes.
- They have held 1 credit repair and pre-qualification seminar in the Bay View district that had great attendance.
- There are a number of people who are anxious to be homeowners in San Francisco if the opportunity presents itself.
(+) Reverend Arnold Townsend
- They wanted to present a tangible project to show the Commissioners what they mean by moving inclusionary housing off-site where possible. This would be a good thing for the Commission to adopt as a policy.
- This would provide stability in certain communities that need it so badly.
(+) Tania Alexander – Caring and Restoration Homes/True Hope Church
- She is a native San Franciscan.
- She is one of the persons that Reverend Townsend and Dr. Walker have spoken about since she has had to move away from San Francisco because she couldn't afford to live here.
- All of the work that they (her and her husband) do with the community is done in San Francisco. Yet she has to cross two bridges in order to come to San Francisco.
(+) Lynn Sedway – Real Estate and Urban Economist and Consultant – Sedway Group
- The Commission is challenged today with the goal that many people have of producing more affordable housing.
- Her firm has worked on this for many years. It seems easy to increase the percentage of inclusionary housing. Yet this will cause less housing to be built--particularly in high-rise developments downtown.
(+) Gregory Richardson – Richardson Consultant
- He is in full support of the inclusionary process.
- In order for a City to grow, the community must be stable and have a base. Without a base there is no hope.
- All Americans have a dream to one day own a home.
- Please consider what is being put on the table and make decisions with harmony and understanding.
(+) Rev. Ed Stewart – Community Assembly of God
- He is in support of this inclusionary process.
- This will provide fine young people in his congregation to be able to find a home.
- This will help to retain energetic and viable people, encourgeing them to remain in this City.
(+) Bill Poland
- There are some aspects of Mr. Gosh's presentation that he disagrees with on costs.
- He has a housing affordability study by Recurs University that was handed out by Urban Land Institute in Boston (he submitted it to the Commissioners).
- The target of necessary housing is understated.
- There are people that want to live here that work in other cities in the Bay Area.
- Demand is very high.
(+) Pamela Duffy
- She would like to suggest that the Commission consider the inner relationships of various programs designed to deal with housing generation and housing demand through all segments of the housing consumer marketplace ranging from the very low income to the market rate consumer of housing.
(+) Calvin Welc h – Council for Community Housing Organizations
- He is here to point out that non-profits cannot build their way out of the affordability housing problem and the importance of the inclusionary zoning requirement is key. This would involve the for profit housing development sector.
- His other point is the extraordinary nature of the affordability gap.
(+) Bob Myers – Architect and City Planning Consultant
- He wanted to summarize the survey that his firm did regarding affordability and inclusionary requirements all the way from San Jose to Sacramento.
- The typical city has either no affordability requirements or 10 percent at the maximum. Only three jurisdictions exceed that by 15 percent the increased 5 percent above the 10 percent is at 100 percent of median. That is where they negotiate height, density and parking bonuses.
- The cities that are considering increasing the affordability requirements are worried that they will drive market-rate housing developers away to other communities.
(-) John Bardis
- Mr. Gosh has made an interesting case. This is a program that will help improve something that will provide housing to those who might afford it, but the cost of the program would inflate the price of the market-rate housing that would be produced by the same project.
- This would be a flaw in the program.
(+) Tim Tosta – Steffel, Levitt and Weiss
- He recognizes the great complexity and difficulty in changing a policy that has so many needs to meet.
ACTION: No Action Taken. Public Comment remains open. Item will be brought back to the Commission in November.
9. 2001.0522C (SIROIS: 558-6313)
965-985 GENEVA AVENUE - south side of Geneva Avenue between London and Paris Streets, Lots 006, 007, 008, 009, 010, Assessor’s Block 6409 - Request by Metro PCS for Conditional Use authorization to install a wireless telecommunications facility pursuant to Planning Code Section 712.83 which includes the installation of nine panel antennas, one GPS antenna and equipment cabinets at the Apollo Theater which is located in an NC-3 (Moderate-Scale Neighborhood Commercial) District and a 65-A Height and Bulk District. The subject site is a Preference Location 4.
Preliminary Recommendation: Approval with Conditions
(Continued from Regular Meeting of October 4, 2001)
SPEAKER(S):
(+) Debra Stein – Representing Sprint PCS
- This is a preference 4 site.
- There have been letters of support and letters of opposition.
- There was an alternative site, yet the Apollo Theatre was a preferred site.
(+/-) Steven R. Currier – Outer Mission Residents Association
- At first, they took a position against this antenna installment. Yet after learning the conditions imposed by the Planning Department, his organization has no position on this project.
- There are some apartments at the Apollo Theatre.
- This building has been an eyesore for many years.
(+/-) Boris Delepine – Office of Supervisor Gerardo Sandoval
Good afternoon Commissioners, my name is Boris Delepine, Legislative Assistant to Supervisor Gerardo Sandoval. Last Thursday the Housing, Transportation, and Land Use Committee of the Board of Supervisors continued legislation that would place a six month moratorium on cell phone antenna installations in San Francisco for 60 days. This item was continued pending the review of installation guidelines. Members of the cell phone industry have agreed to work with the San Francisco Neighborhood Antenna-Free Union and residents, to formulate a plan to deal with this complicated issue. This working group will return in 60 days with recommendations on an overall siting plan for San Francisco as a whole. Our office is asking that you not approve this item at this time. Rather, we are asking that you consider continuing the item for 60 days. By continuing this item, we can proceed with a consistent citywide plan. Thank you.
(+) Lawrence Lee
- He is the owner of the subject building.
- This building has been vacant for over 10 years. It has been vandalized and homeless people have been living there.
- His plan is to renovate the shopping corridor of Geneva Street.
- Cell phones are no longer a luxury, they are a necessity.
- It is critical to start building up the wireless telecommunications infrastructure.
(+) Blanch Simons
- She lives next door to the subject property.
- She was the manager for many years.
- There has been vandalism at the building.
- She hopes that the Commission will approve this project.
(-) Peter del Valle
- He is a resident across the street from the subject property.
- If this project is approved, the Commission can be sure of an appeal.
ACTION: Approved as amended:
Property Maintenance. Upon approval of the conditional use authorization, the property owner shall maintain the main entrance to the building and all sidewalks abutting the subject property in a clean condition. Such maintenance shall include, at a minimum, daily litter pickup and disposal, and washing or steam cleaning of the main entrance and abutting sidewalks at least once each two weeks.
AYES: Baltimore, Chinchilla, Fay, Joe, Lim, Salinas, Theoharis
MOTION: 16262
10. 2001.0667C (MASSEHIAN: 558-6363)
3352 STEINER STREET - east side between Chestnut and Lombard Streets, Lot 022 in Assessor’s Block 0491 - Request for Conditional Use Authorization under Planning Code Section 711.43 to allow the establishment of a bakery/café (Boulange Marinette) of approximately 2,500 square feet which is considered a large fast food restaurant pursuant to Planning Code Section 790.90 in an NC-2 (Small-Scale Neighborhood Commercial District) and a 40-X Height and Bulk District.
Preliminary Recommendation: Approval with Conditions
SPEAKER(S):
(+) Alfred Sanchez
- This is a quality bakery.
- He spoke to everyone in the neighborhood as well as the various neighborhood associations and everyone supports this project.
ACTION: Approved as amended: 1) there will be no wholesale sales. 2) Property Maintenance. Upon approval of the conditional use authorization, the property owner shall maintain the main entrance to the building and all sidewalks abutting the subject property in a clean condition. Such maintenance shall include, at a minimum, daily litter pickup and disposal, and washing or steam cleaning of the main entrance and abutting sidewalks at least once each two weeks.
AYES: Baltimore, Chinchilla, Fay, Joe, Lim, Salinas, Theoharis
MOTION: 16263
11a. 2000.692CVD (M.SNYDER: 575-6891)
2200 MISSION STREET - southwest corner at 18th Street, Lot 1 in Assessor’s Block 3589 - Request for Conditional Use authorization for: (1) the development of a site larger than 9,999 square feet pursuant to Planning Code Section 712.11 and 121.1; (2) the establishment of a use that would be larger than 5,999 gross square feet pursuant to Planning Code Section 712.21 and 121.2; and (3) for the development of housing with fewer than 25-percent affordable units and for the establishment of a use that would be larger than 2,999 gross square feet pursuant to the Board of Supervisors Resolution Number 518-01 (Mission District Interim Controls). The subject lot is within an NC-3 (Neighborhood Commercial, Moderate-Scale) District, and falls both within a 50-X and 65-B Height and Bulk District.
Preliminary Recommendation: Approval with Conditions
SPEAKER(S):
(+) Howard Mo
- He opened a family-owned grocery store in 1987.
- He and his wife have worked very hard.
- By approving this project, there will be more housing and more local employment.
- This would be a better future for the neighborhood.
(+) T.C. Chen – Project Architect
- They are proposing a project that will improve the appearance of the area. It will maintain and not destroy the existing business. This project will also increase rental units.
- The details of the exterior are similar to the surrounding buildings.
- This project also has support from the Chinese Merchant's Association.
(+/-) Ada Chan – Mission Anti-Displacement Coalition
- There are various aspects of this project that they are in agreement with.
- They would like to have 25 percent affordability as a benchmark.
- They are neutral but she wanted to highlight both sides.
(+/-) Eric Quesada – Mission Anti-Displacement Coalition
- They know they have to work with the developers to try to get affordable housing.
- They are excited about this project in the neighborhood.
ACTION: Approved as modified: That one additional unit will be designated as an affordable unit. The affordible unit is required to be available to household’s that make between 80 and 120-percent of median income per the Guidelines set forth by HUD and the Mayor’s Office of Housing.
AYES: Baltimore, Joe, Lim, Salinas
NAYES: Fay, Chinchilla, Theoharis
MOTION: 16264
11b. 2000.692CVD (M.SNYDER: 575-6891)
2200 MISSION STREET - southwest corner at 18th Street, Lot 1 in Assessor’s Block 3589 - Mandatory Discretionary Review of a change of use from a grocery store and public parking lot to a grocery store, laundry, and apartment building. Board of Supervisors Resolution No. 518-01 requires mandatory Discretionary Review for any change of use within the Mission District. The subject lot is within an NC-3 (Neighborhood Commercial, Moderate-Scale) District, and falls both within a 50-X and 65-B Height and Bulk District.
Preliminary Recommendation: Do not take Discretionary Review and approve the project as proposed
SPEAKER(S): Same as those listed in item 11a.
ACTION: Did not take Discretionary Review. The project was approved as modified: That one additional unit will be designated as an affordable unit. The affordible unit is required to be available to household’s that make between 80 and 120-percent of median income per the Guidelines set forth by HUD and the Mayor’s Office of Housing.
AYES: Baltimore, Joe, Lim, Salinas
NAYES: Fay, Chinchilla, Theoharis
11c. 2000.692CVD (M.SNYDER: 575-6891)
2200 MISSION STREET - southwest corner at 18th Street, Lot 1 in Assessor’s Block 3589 - Request for a Rear Yard modification pursuant to Planning Code Section 134(e), which allows the Zoning Administrator to waive or modify the rear yard requirement in Neighborhood Commercial Districts. Planning Code Section 134(a)(3) requires a minimum of a 40-foot deep rear yard for the proposed project at each level where residential units would be located. The proposal would include parking within the rear yard area on the second level; the second level would include residential units on the front (Mission Street) side of the building. Because parking is not permitted in the rear yard, the second level would not be considered to have a code-complying rear yard. The subject lot is within an NC-3 (Neighborhood Commercial, Moderate-Scale) District, and falls both within a 50-X and 65-B Height and Bulk District.
SPEAKER(S): Same as those listed in item 11a.
ACTION: The Zoning Administrator granted the Variance
E. DISCRETIONARY REVIEW HEARING
At Approximately 5:10 PM the Planning Commission convened into a Discretionary Review (DR) Hearing to hear and act on Discretionary Review matters.
12. 2001.0716D (FU: 558-6613)
1199 SOUTH VAN NESS AVENUE - Northeast corner of 23rd Street and South Van Ness Avenue, Lot 025 in Assessor’s Block 3638 - Mandatory Discretionary Review of Building Permit Application Number 2001/07/16/3762 proposing to change the limited commercial use from business service to retail sales in a RH-3 (Residential, House, Three-Family) District with a 50-X height and bulk designation.
Preliminary Recommendation: Do not take Discretionary Review and approve the project as proposed.
SPEAKER(S):
(+) Mousa Aldababneh
- This is a wonderful spot to open a café.
- There are no coffee shops around this area.
- They just won an award-- the best place to meet the neighbors .
- He has letters of recommendations as well as one from Supervisor Daly.
(+) John Maimone
- He lives on South Van Ness.
- He is excited about this coffee shop opening up.
- He would like to have a commitment from the proprietor to make sure that the street will not be littered.
(+) Abraham Aldababneh
- His brother is the project sponsor.
- His brother has been running a coffee shop for the past 5 years.
- His brother is well liked by the neighbors.
ACTION: Take Discretionary Review and add the following street cleaning condition: Property Maintenance. Upon approval of the conditional use authorization, the property owner shall maintain the main entrance to the building and all sidewalks abutting the subject property in a clean condition. Such maintenance shall include, at a minimum, daily litter pickup and disposal, and washing or steam cleaning of the main entrance and abutting sidewalks at least once each two weeks.
AYES: Baltimore, Chinchilla, Fay, Joe, Lim, Salinas, Theoharis
13. 2001.0895D (SIDER: 558-6697)
3248 – 22ND STREET - north side between Mission and Bartlett Streets, Lot 009 in Assessor’s Block 3616 - Mandatory Discretionary Review of Building Permit Application Number 2001/08/02/5145 proposing to (1) change the use of ground level commercial space from other retail sales and services' (Planning Code Section 712.40) to full-service restaurant' (Planning Code Section 712.42), (2) perform interior renovations, and (3) perform façade alterations. Discretionary Review is required by Board of Supervisors Resolution Number 518-01 (Mission District Interim Controls) for any permit proposing to change the use of a property within the Mission District. The subject property is currently a vacant grocery and flower store located in an NC-3 (Moderate Scale Neighborhood Commercial) Zoning District, a 50-X Height and Bulk District, the Mission Alcoholic Beverage Special Use Sub-district, and the Mission Street Fast Food Sub-district.
Preliminary Recommendation: Do not take Discretionary Review and approve the project as proposed.
SPEAKER(S):
(+) Terry Chastain – Owner, Papa Toby's
- He started his restaurant when the area wasn't that good.
- He is an artist so he supports artists and making sure that the people enjoy their stay there.
- He hopes that the Commission approves this project.
ACTION: Take Discretionary Review and add the following street cleaning condition: Property Maintenance. Upon approval of the conditional use authorization, the property owner shall maintain the main entrance to the building and all sidewalks abutting the subject property in a clean condition. Such maintenance shall include, at a minimum, daily litter pickup and disposal, and washing or steam cleaning of the main entrance and abutting sidewalks at least once each two weeks.
AYES: Baltimore, Chinchilla, Fay, Joe, Lim, Salinas, Theoharis
14. 2001.0694D (CABREROS: 558-6169)
37 WEST CLAY STREET - south side between 22nd and 24th Avenues, Lot 033 in Assessor’s Block 1336 - Request for Discretionary Review of Building Permit Application No. 2001/0404/5988 proposing to add a third floor to an existing two-story over basement, single-family residence in an RH-1(D) (Residential, House, One-Family, Detached) District and a 40-X Height and Bulk District.
Preliminary Recommendation: Do not take Discretionary Review and approve the plans as submitted.
SPEAKER(S):
(-) Tim Falvey – DR Requestor
- He and his wife decided to file a DR after a community meeting when he realized that the project sponsor sought the approval of his neighbors on West Clay street but not the other surrounding neighbors especially the ones that would be the most impacted by this 3rd floor addition.
- Their issues are against the design since it does not meet the neighborhood design guidelines.
- The proposed building will make this house significantly taller than the surrounding homes.
(-) Henry Shain
- He has lived on Lake Street for about 17 years.
- He knows that there are other signed letters that are opposed to this project but could not be here.
- No one on West Clay Park has ever built up.
- The project sponsor is spending a million dollars to construct guest bedrooms and it is impacting the whole neighborhood.
(-) Marlene Forde
- She lives on Lake Street.
- She really loves her neighborhood and is concerned about setting a precedent.
- This is a sweet little community and she doesn't want to see it changed.
(-) Bill Buda
- He and his wife live on Lake Street.
- They are opposed to this project because housing on West Clay Park has been the same for many years.
- He would like to keep the same structure, the same uniqueness of West Clay Park as it is.
(+) Scott Emblidge – Representing the Project Sponsor
- This is definitely a good neighborhood for families. That is why the project sponsor would like to remain here.
- There are mixed designs throughout the neighborhoods.
- The proposed project will be three stories over a basement. This third floor will have less than 1,000 square feet and because of the way the home is configured it will only add 6 feet to the height of the building. They will be building into an existing attic.
- The project sponsor has taken into account the issues that the neighbors have had and has revised their plans.
(+) Betsy Bloomenthal
- They recently moved to the Bay Area.
- In addition to having a guest room they would also like to have an office. This would cause them to loose a bedroom.
- When they first wanted to do this construction, they walked through the neighborhood with their architect to make sure that this construction to their house would fit the character of the neighborhood.
(+) Jonathan Root
- Even before they presented anything to the Building Department, he presented the plans for the construction of his home to Mr. Falve.
- They have revised the design many times.
(+) Gary Millar – Project Architect
- In designing this project, he has tried to be very sensitive to the character of the neighborhood and to the neighbors' concerns.
(+) Bea Baldeuf
- She and her husband have lived on West Clay Park for 39 years.
- She feels that the project sponsor has taken a great deal of thought with their architect to make an attractive addition.
- She supports their project.
(+) Arlene Getz
- She has lived on West Clay Park since 1950.
- She is the 3rd oldest resident of this neighborhood.
- She supports this project wholeheartedly.
(+) Milton F. Reiterman
- He has been a resident of West Clay Park for 31 years.
- He supports the project and the project sponsor and their family.
(+) Phil Arnantou
- He lives right next to the proposed addition.
- He feels that the project sponsor has totally cooperated with the neighborhood concerns.
- He supports the project.
(+) James Steyer
- This is a very nice family community.
- The project sponsor has contacted everyone asking for his or her opinions and concerns.
- He supports this project completely.
ACTION: Did not take Discretionary Review and approved the project as submitted.
AYES: Baltimore, Chinchilla, Fay, Joe, Lim, Salinas
NAYES: Theoharis
15. 2001.0891D (TAM: 558-6325)
1701 OCEAN AVENUE - on the southwest corner of Ocean and Faxon Avenues, on Lot 001 of Assessor's Block 6934 - Request for Discretionary Review of Building Permit Application No. 2001/06/18/1799 proposing a change of use from a retail space (a retail mattress store), to an office (insurance business) in a NC-2 (Neighborhood Commercial, Small-Scale) District and 40-X Height and Bulk District.
Preliminary Recommendation: Do not take Discretionary Review and approve the project as submitted.
SPEAKER(S): None
ACTION: Discretionary Review Withdrawn
16. 2001.0910D (CRAWFORD: 558-6358)
1 PALO ALTO DRIVE (AKA 1 AVANZADA AKA 250 PALO ALTO) - Assessor’s Block 2724; Lot 003 - Staff initiated Discretionary Review of Building Permit Application No. 2001/07/31/4957 for installation of three flush mount panel antennas and one GPS antenna on the third level of Sutro Tower, and installation of related equipment cabinets enclosed in the third level of the tower. This project lies within the RH-1, Residential House, One Family District and within a 40-X Height and Bulk District.
Preliminary Recommendation: Approval with Conditions.
SPEAKER(S):
(+) Debra Stein – Representing Metro PCS
- She thanked the planner for doing a great job on this project.
- She clarified that it is not certain that the antennas will be removed. This is a business decision that Metro PCS will make.
- Sutro Tower is a consolidated communications tower that was designed to serve the entire City.
- Sutro Tower is one of the most secure infrastructure facilities in the City of San Francisco.
- There have been some suggestions that it is necessary to put an antenna on this tower.
- This is a standard cellular antenna. It has no structural, visual or health impacts.
(-) Sean Elsbernd – Legislative Aid to Supervisor Tony Hall
- Supervisor Hall shares the concerns of the neighbors in the immediate vicinity of Sutro Tower.
- The neighborhoods near Sutro Tower are very unique neighborhoods. These neighborhoods have to deal with a large amount of antennas. Yet, how much is too much? At what point do we reach the saturation point?
(-) Shaw-Lin Chen – Homeowner and Midtown Terrace Homeowners Association
- She is speaking on behalf of the 842 homeowners in the Midtown Terrace Homeowners Association.
- Approval of this permit would bring over 240 antennas to over 5 antenna sites.
- This residential neighborhood is already saturated with antennas.
- On October 1, the neighborhood requested a meeting with the project sponsor and with Sutro Tower. The meeting occurred on October 10. The neighborhood learned that this site is not technologically necessary for Metro to deliver services to its customers. The neighbors also learned Metro customers would be better served by a system that is relatively low to the ground, more typical of the wireless industry.
- The fact that the other wireless carriers can deliver service to its customers without antennas on Sutro Tower suggests that this is technologically feasible for Metro as well.
- The neighborhood residents should not have to bear the consequences of Metro's poor planning.
- There are other safety issues regarding this proposal as well.
(-) Doris S. Linnenbach –
- Since 1966, she has been attending meetings regarding Sutro Tower.
- This tower was a television tower and an FM tower. She was never told that this tower would have so much cellular antennas.
- She would like to have the Commission take Discretionary Review and be allowed to have some meaningful dialogue with Sutro Tower.
(-) Tracey Hughes - SNAFU
- She hopes that the Commission listens to the people here who are against this project.
- All antennas need to follow the WTS Guidelines and this does not. Maybe it's tricky and it can be exempt but she is not sure.
- There are different frequencies that antennas use and it could cause problems with frequencies for 911.
- Members of the community do not have big hot shot lawyers to do their research for them.
- It's time that these antennas are stopped.
ACTION: Did not take Discretionary Review and approved the building permit with the standard conditions for facilities on Sutro Tower.
AYES: Baltimore, Chinchilla, Fay, Joe, Salinas, Theoharis
NAYES: Lim
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))
Christine Linnenbach
Re: Letters from Dr. Abdul Ashtani
- On Tuesday night she heard a wonderful broadcast by a structural engineer by the name of Abdul Ashtani, He has been commissioned by the Federal Government to investigate the World Trade Towers. This engineer worked with them pro bono to investigate Sutro Tower. He said that Sutro Tower had seen better days. It is an interesting thing to watch. Dr. Ashtani wrote two letters. She will include Dr. Ashtani's letters and a picture of Sutro Tower in a folder.
Debra Stein
Re: Structural Stability Study
- During the last hearing, the Commission heard insistently that Sutro Tower conduct additional structural stability studies. In the last nine months Sutro Tower has conducted every study that every expert has recommended they do. Sutro Tower will be submitting new building permit applications in December. At that time any member of the public (who wishes) will be invited to view that data.
- On behalf of Sutro Tower, they are amenable to holding community meetings with representatives of TPIA and Midtown Terrace before that application goes forward.
Adjournment: 6:30 p.m.
THE DRAFT MINUTES WERE PROPOSED FOR ADOPTION AT THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION ON THURSDAY, DECEMBER 6, 2001.
SPEAKERS: None
ACTION: Approved with the correction of various speakers names.
AYES: Baltimore, Joe, Lim, Salinas, Theoharis
ABSENT: Chinchilla and Fay
Last updated: 11/17/2009 10:00:13 PM
