SAN FRANCISCO

PLANNING COMMISSION

Meeting Minutes

Commission Chambers - Room 400

City Hall, 1 Dr. Carlton B. Goodlett Place

Thursday, February 8, 2007

1:30 PM

Regular Meeting

COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Antonini, S. Lee, W. Lee, Moore, Olague and Sugaya

COMMISSIONER ABSENT: Alexander

THE MEETING WAS CALLED TO ORDER BY VICE PRESIDENT OLAGUE AT 1:35 P.M.

STAFF IN ATTENDANCE: Dean Macris – Director of Planning, Larry Badiner – Zoning Administrator, Elaine Forbes; Adam Light, Ben Fu, Jonas Ionin, Michael Li, John Billovits, Anmarie Rodgers, Aksel Olsen, Linda Avery – Commission Secretary.

• CONSIDERATION OF ITEMS PROPOSED FOR CONTINUANCE

The Commission will consider a request for continuance to a later date. The Commission may choose to continue the item to the date proposed below, to continue the item to another date, or to hear the item on this calendar.

1. 2006.0439D (C. JAROSLAWSKY (415) 558-6348)

1180 MUNICH STREET - north side between Cordova and Naples Streets; Lot 031 in Assessor's Block 6448 - Request for Discretionary Review of Building Permit Application No. 2005.12.29.1222, to extend the rear at two-levels (600 square feet) of a single-family structure and correct a Notice of Violation for an illegal rear shed, 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 as proposed.

(Proposed for Continuance to February 15, 2007)

SPEAKERS:

Steven Currier, DR requestor

-It has been wonderful working with Staff – working with Cecilia.

-Issues are being addressed through other venues. Therefore we have withdrawn our DR

ACTION: Discretionary Review withdrawn. Commission action not required.

2. 2006.1284ET (C. NIKITAS: (415) 558-6306)

CONDITIONAL USE FOR DEMOLITION OF DWELLING UNITS - a proposed ordinance amending the Planning Code, introduced by Supervisor Sophie Maxwell under Board File 061371, adding Section 317, prohibiting the demolition of residential units unless Conditional Use authorization is granted for the replacement building, making environmental findings and findings of consistency with the priority policies of planning code section 101.1 and the general plan.

Preliminary Recommendation: Pending

(Continued from Regular Meeting of January 11, 2007)

(Proposed for Continuance to February 22, 2007)

SPEAKERS: None

ACTION: Continued as proposed

AYES: Antonini, S. Lee, W. Lee, Moore, and Olague

ABSENT: Alexander and Sugaya

3. 2006.1464CX (A. Hesik: (415) 558-6602)

46-54 Geary Street - north side between Kearny Street and Grant Avenue, Lot 024 in Assessor's Block 0310 - Section 309 review to determine consistency with Appendix E to Article 11 of the Planning Code and Request for Conditional Use Authorization pursuant to Planning Code Section 212 to eliminate six congregate dwelling units formerly occupied by a convent in order to convert the second floor of the three-story building to retail use. No physical expansion of the building is proposed, although the facades of the building will be altered. The site is within the C-3-R (Downtown Retail) District and an 80-130-F Height and Bulk District.

Preliminary Recommendation:

(Proposed for Continuance to February 22, 2007)

SPEAKERS: None

ACTION: Continued as proposed

AYES: Antonini, S. Lee, W. Lee, Moore, and Olague

ABSENT: Alexander and Sugaya

4a. 2006.0741C (S. VELLVE: (415) 558-6263)

1868 VAN NESS AVENUE - southeast corner of Clay and Washington Streets; Lot 012 in Assessor's Block 0619 - Request for Conditional Use Authorization pursuant to Sections 209.7 and 303 of the Planning Code to establish an off-street parking facility (temporary) within an RC-4 (Residential Commercial Combined, High Density) District, the Van Ness Special Use District and an 80-D Height and Bulk District. The surface parking lot will provide approximately 33 parking spaces. A companion case (Case 2006.1414C) will seek to authorize the conversion of a defunct gas station (Shell). The subject case will address land use violations on the property.

Preliminary Recommendation: Approval with conditions

(Proposed for Continuance to April 5, 2007)

SPEAKERS: None

ACTION: Continued as proposed

AYES: Antonini, S. Lee, W. Lee, Moore, and Olague

ABSENT: Alexander and Sugaya

4b. 2006.1414C (S. VELLVE: (415) 558-6263)

1868 VAN NESS AVENUE - southeast corner of Clay and Washington Streets; Lot 012 in Assessor's Block 0619 - Request for Conditional Use Authorization pursuant to Sections 228.2, 228.3 and 303 of the Planning Code to convert the property's use from a gas station (Shell) within an RC-4 (Residential Commercial Combined, High Density) District, the Van Ness Special Use District, and an 80-D Height and Bulk District. The gas station ceased operation in approximately October of 2004. The subject case will address land use violations on the property. A companion case (Case 2006.0741C) will seek to establish an off-street parking facility (temporary).

Preliminary Recommendation: Approval with conditions.

(Proposed for Continuance to April 5, 2007)

SPEAKERS: None

ACTION: Continued as proposed

AYES: Antonini, S. Lee, W. Lee, Moore, and Olague

ABSENT: Alexander and Sugaya

Categories B and C were taken out of order and followed the 1:30 p.m. portion of the Regular Calendar

B. COMMISSIONERS' QUESTIONS AND MATTERS

Adoption of Commission Minutes– Charter Section 4.104 requires all commissioners to vote yes or no on all matters unless that commissioner is excused by a vote of the Commission. Commissioners may not be automatically excluded from a vote on the minutes because they did not attend the meeting.

5. Consideration of Adoption: IIB

• Draft Minutes of Regular Meeting of October 12, 2006

SPEAKERS: None

ACTION: Approved

AYES: Antonini, S. Lee, W. Lee, Moore, Olague, and Sugaya

ABSENT: Alexander

6. Commission Comments/Questions IIB

• Inquiries/Announcements. Without discussion, at this time Commissioners may make announcements or inquiries of staff regarding various matters of interest to the Commissioner(s).
• Future Meetings/Agendas. At this time, the Commission may discuss and take action to set the date of a Special Meeting and/or determine those items that could be placed on the agenda of the next meeting and other future meetings of the Planning Commission.

Commissioner W. Lee

-Requested staff to give an update on DPW new construction approval changing policy of planning.

Commissioner Antonini

-Read information that an addition of 50% or certain amount on footage would be exempt from the condo process for the entire building.

-Would like to schedule an informational report on Department of Public Work's new policy.

-At another meeting, I would like a follow up on projects approved.

-How does Oakland del with the Medical Dispensary issues?

Commissioner Moore

-Thanked staff for gas station memo showing loss of 40 stations in the past 10 years.

-Mentioned the invitation from Planning regarding an Eastern Neighborhood meeting on the 13^th of February.

Commissioner Sugaya

-Presentation on Transbay was very exciting in terms of accomplishment.

-Requested a copy of the RFP for the Transbay.

-Attended the pre-proposal meeting for Eastern Neighborhoods and they are expecting conclusion by Spring 2008.

-I am anticipating that Eastern Neighborhood would be the same situation as the Market/Octavia Plan in terms of historic preservation and environmental impact.

-We should hear about the Eastern Neighborhood Plan by the end of this year.

Commissioner S. Lee

-Requested the work program of the budget for the current and next year.

Commissioner Olague

-Asked for a copy of follow up on approved projects.

-Encourage commissioners to read the Guardian's article on the Armory project. It helps clarify roles and perspectives.

Zoning Administrator Badiner

-DPW said that if you add certain amount of either units or footage, there is no need to go through the condominium process.

-Planning Department is saying that if a project is subject to the condominium process, an addition should not allow you to get out of the process.

-Staff is working on the update of approved projects and you all will receive the information in your packages.

Director Macris

-The EIR for Eastern Neighborhood will be published in April 2007

-Around June or July you will have an informational hearing.

-There will be no action from the Commission until the end of this year.

-I am an optimist. It will be interesting to see and hear on March 8^th if we are heading to thea right direction.

• 7.The Commission will meet to discuss whether or not they will schedule a special meeting on Thursday, March 29, 2007.

SPEAKERS: None

ACTION: There will be a special meeting on Thursday, March 29, 2007.

-Fist choice would be a joint hearing with DBI.

-If unable to have a joint hearing with DBI, schedule other items.

C. DIRECTOR'S REPORT

8. Director's Announcements (tape IIB)

- There is an article on the front page of the Wall Street Journal about the Mission Armory saying San Francisco finds pornography more acceptable than housing.

- I sent a letter to the Wall Street Journal and I am submitting a copy to Commissioners.

- Contacted people at Major's Office dealing with Treasure Island and found out that you would deal with it as a conventional redevelopment.

- You will have an informational hearing on the Treasure Island.

- Treasure Island EIR certification would be expected to come to the Commission by the end of 2008.

- Major is having town hall meeting in the Bayview on Saturday at 10am.

- Focus will be public safety, economic opportunity, education, and housing.

- I will be attending this activity with staff representatives.

9. Review of Past Week's Events at the Board of Supervisors and Board of Appeals (tape IIB)

- The Board of Supervisors adopted the Hayes Street Alcohol Special Use District.

- Supervisor Peskin introduced an amendment to the Administrative Code that will increase the pay of the Planning Commissioners.

- 5216 Third Street was heard at the Board of Appeals. This was a project to install a new advertising sign on a commercial business. From 2001 the application has been incomplete. Variance was denied.

D. GENERAL PUBLIC COMMENT – 15 MINUTES

At this time, members of the public may address the Commission on items of interest to the public that are within the subject matter jurisdiction of the Commission except agenda items. With respect to agenda items, your opportunity to address the Commission will be afforded when the item is reached in the meeting. Each member of the public may address the Commission for up to three minutes.

Patricia Vaughey

- I have a case at the Board of Appeal regarding five nail polish businesses on the same block, and nine within two blocks. The code is not looking at what is good for the neighborhood.

1. 2734 Baker Street still has a variance. The 311/312 is not out yet. The public is going to be forced to file a DR request.
2. Banana Republic wanted to rent the premises and displaced a very efficient pharmacy on Chestnut Street. They ended up not leasing the place because it was too small.
3. We have to work on special usage for this district to keep a balance of businesses and to preserve small business.

Sue Hestor

1. Regarding the Department's budget: There should be an explanation of where funds are coming from for work done and what is being done. For example the Transbay Terminal.
2. It should also include on the Department's chart who is in charge and responsible of public files.

E. CONSENT CALENDAR

All matters listed hereunder constitute a Consent Calendar, are considered to be routine by the Planning Commission, and will be acted upon by a single roll call vote of the Commission. There will be no separate discussion of these items unless a member of the Commission, the public, or staff so requests, in which event the matter shall be removed from the Consent Calendar and considered as a separate item at this or a future hearing.

10. 2006.1008C (K. Conner: (415) 575-6914)

1515 19^th Avenue - west side, between Kirkham & Lawton Streets, Lot 4 on Assessor's Block 1865 - Request for Conditional Use Authorization under Planning Code Section 209.6(b) to install six cellular panel antennas flush mounted on the roof-top of an existing building occupied by a telephone switching facility as part of a wireless transmission network operated by Verizon Wireless. The subject property is located within the RH-2 (Residential, House, Two-Family) District and in a 40-X Height and Bulk District. Per the City & County of San Francisco's Wireless Telecommunications Services (WTS) Facilities Siting Guidelines the site is a Preferred Location Preference 1 site as it is a public-use building.

Preliminary Recommendation: Approval with conditions

SPEAKERS: None

ACTION: Approved

AYES: Antonini, S. Lee, W. Lee, Moore, and Olague

ABSENT: Alexander and Sugaya

MOTION: 17370

• REGULAR CALENDAR

11. 2003.1210C (M. Snyder: (415) 575-6891)

5600 THIRD STREET - the block bounded by Third Street on its east, Bancroft Avenue on its south, Mendell Street on its west, and Armstrong Avenue on its north, Lots 003, 005, 006, 007, 008, 009, and 011 of Assessor's Block 5421 - Informational Presentation on the design refinements for the proposed project approved under Planned Unit Development / Conditional Use Case No. 2003.1210C. The subject property is within an M-1 (Light Industrial) District and a 65-J Height and Bulk District.

(Continued from Regular Meeting of February 1, 2007)

SPEAKERS: None

ACTION: Without hearing, continued to 2/22/07

AYES: Antonini, S. Lee, W. Lee, Moore, and Olague

ABSENT: Alexander and Sugaya

12. (A. JOHN-BAPTISTE: (415) 558-6547)

PLANNING DEPARTMENT'S PROPOSED WORK PROGRAM AND BUDGET FOR FY 2007-2008 - Informational presentation on the Planning Department's Proposed Work Program and Budget for Fiscal Year 2007-2008.

SPEAKERS: None

ACTION: Without hearing, continued to 2/15/07

AYES: Antonini, S. Lee, W. Lee, Moore, and Olague

ABSENT: Alexander and Sugaya

13. 2006.1404T IA (E. FORBES: (415) 558-6417)

Planning Department Fee Amendments [File No. 06-1535]- The Planning Commission will meet to consider amendments that include reductions to select group of fees and clarifications to the public notice fee requirement.

Preliminary Recommendation: Approval

SPEAKERS: None

ACTION: Approved

AYES: Antonini, S. Lee, W. Lee, Moore, and Olague

ABSENT: Alexander and Sugaya

RESOLUTIION: 17371

14. 2007.0048D (R. CRAWFORD: (415) 558-6358)

1636 Diamond Street - west side between 28^th and 29^th Streets. Assessor's Block 7520, Lot 006 - Request for Discretionary Review of Building Permit Application No. 2006 0814 9384, the proposal is to construct a new 4-story single-family dwelling on the property. The existing dwelling will be demolished on the order of the Department of Building Inspection because of unsafe conditions 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.

SPEAKERS:

Richard Grabstin, DR Requestor

-Asked for continuance. I had a car accident today and am not in condition to proceed.

Michael, Project Sponsor

-Agreed to continue

ACTION: Without hearing, continued to 2/22/07

AYES: Antonini, S. Lee, W. Lee, Moore, and Olague

ABSENT: Alexander and Sugaya

15. 2006.1518D IA; IB (R. CRAWFORD: (415) 558-6358)

361 Moncada Way - south side between Junipero Serra Boulevard and Paloma Avenue. Assessor's Block 6904, Lot 019 - Request for Discretionary Review of Building Permit Application No. 2006 1030 6243, construct a one-story addition to the rear and a new third story to the existing two-story dwelling. The proposal would also eliminate an illegal dwelling unit on the ground floor and restore the building to single family use 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 Project.

SPEAKERS:

Richard Zawitz, DR Requestor

-This project will double the size of the house. Proportions are out of balance for this particular block.

-I provided letters and a petition signed by neighbors opposed to this project.

-Current renovations of other houses have not exceeded or changed the character of the neighborhood.

-This house would be 32 feet high versus 16 feet on most houses on the block. It would obstruct significantly the air, light and view from my house.

John Schlesinger, Project Sponsor

-Pattern of the buildings in the neighborhood are 2 and 3-story Mediterranean styles. A lot of buildings in front and behind this property are 3 stories.

-Models show no significantly impact either air, light, or character of the neighborhood.

-Requested approval of the project as designed.

-Actual height of the house would be 8 feet higher than the adjacent building which is the exact same height of Mr. Zawitz' house.

MOTION: To not take Discretionary Review and approve

AYES: Antonini, W. Lee, and Moore

NAYES: S. Lee and Olague

ABSENT: Alexander and Sugaya

RESULT: Motion failed

ACTION: There were no substitute motions. In the absence of a successful substitute motion, the project is approved as proposed.

16. 2006.1528D (tape IB) (A. Hesik: (415) 558-6602)

2012-2014 Powell Street - east side between Lombard and Chestnut Streets; Lot 018B in Assessor's Block 0063 - Mandatory Discretionary Review, under the Planning Commission's policy requiring review of dwelling unit mergers, of Building Permit Application No. 2006.02.23.5322. The subject property is a two-story-over-garage building with two legal dwelling units. Although there will be no net reduction in the number of dwelling units on the property, the Planning Department has determined that the proposal is a de facto dwelling unit merger because the utility of the existing first-floor unit will be significantly reduced in order to accommodate the expansion of the second-floor unit. The subject property is within an RM-2 (Residential, Mixed, Moderate Density) District and a 40-X Height and Bulk District.

Preliminary Recommendation: Disapproval

SPEAKERS:

Jim, Project Sponsor

-Trying to find a way to redistribute space on the property and accommodate my family that includes my wife, my two-year-old son, and my in-law parents.

-Our initial intent was not to merge. We had different proposals and were denied because of the Planning Code.

-We have spoken to neighbors and they support the project.

-My son participates in neighborhood activities and we intend to stay living in this house with our family.

-The house needs a lot of work. "We just want to make it suitable for the intended use.

Paul, Architect

-We have tried working with planning staff to comply with guidelines. We are retaining 85% of the existing unit.

ACTION: Took Discretionary Review and approved requiring a contiguous, usable bathroom; reduce size of garage; and required light and air to rear bedroom

AYES: Antonini, S. Lee, W. Lee, Moore, Olague, and Sugaya

ABSENT: Alexander

17. 2006.1267C (tape IB) (B. FU: (415) 558-6613)

3269 Mission Street - east side, between Fair and Virginia Avenues, Lot 039 in Assessor's Block 5615 - Request for Conditional Use Authorization under Planning Code Sections 161(j) and 303 to allow a reduction in the off-street parking requirement for dwelling units for the construction of a new residential/commercial mixed-use building within a NC-3 (Moderate-Scale Neighborhood Commercial) District with a 40-X Height and Bulk designation.

Preliminary Recommendation:

SPEAKERS:

Russell, Architect

-You have an accurate description of the request; I am available for any questions.

ACTION: Approved

AYES: Antonini, S. Lee, Moore, Olague, and Sugaya

ABSENT: Alexander and W. Lee

MOTION: 17372

18. 2006.1282T (tape IB) (T. TAM: (415) 558-6325)

CONSIDERATION OF AMENDMENTS TO THE PLANNING CODE (Sections 316.2, 316.3, 316.4, 316.5, 316.7, and 316.8) to change procedures for Planning Commission consent calendar items in the Neighborhood Commercial and South of Market districts and for live-work units in RH and RM districts.

Preliminary Recommendation: Forward the proposed ordinance to the Board of Supervisors and recommends that Board of Supervisors adopts the amendment contained in the ordinance approved as to form by the City Attorney.

SPEAKERS: None

ACTION: Approved

AYES: Antonini, S. Lee, Moore, Olague, and Sugaya

ABSENT: Alexander and W. Lee

MOTION: 17373

19. 2006.1080C (tape IB) (T. Frye: (415) 575-6822)

1029 Natoma Street - between 11^th Street and Lafayette Street, Block 055 in Assessor's Block 3511 - Request for Conditional Use Authorization to allow the demolition of the existing single residential unit pursuant to Sections 803.5(b) and 816.13 of the Planning Code. The subject property is within an SLR (Service/Light Industrial/Residential) Zoning District, the Western SOMA Special Use District, and a 50-X Height and Bulk District. The proposal is to demolish the single residential unit and construct a new 50-foot structure that would include four units and four off-street parking spaces.

Preliminary Recommendation: Approval with conditions

Staff has requested continuance for environmental reasons.

SPEAKERS: None

ACTION: Without hearing, continued to 3/22/07

AYES: Antonini, S. Lee, W. Lee, Moore, Olague, and Sugaya

ABSENT: Alexander

20. 2006.1218C (tape IB) (J. Ionin: (415) 558-6309)

690 STANYAN STREET (A.K.A. 1878 Haight Street) -northeast corner of Stanyan and Haight Streets, Lot 006 in Assessor's Block 1228 - Request for Conditional Use Authorization pursuant to Planning Code Sections 303 and 719.56 to establish a temporary parking facility on an open lot. The proposal is to establish a public parking lot on a parcel formerly occupied by the Cala Foods parking lot. The lot would provide a total of 42 parking spaces (two handicap spaces and 40 standard spaces) The subject property is within the Haight Street Neighborhood Commercial District, the Haight Alcoholic Beverage Special Use Subdistrict, and a 50-X Height and Bulk District.

Preliminary Recommendation: Approval with conditions

SPEAKERS:

Matthew Brennan, Project Sponsor

-We are replacing a parking lot with another parking lot that has been vacant for eight months.

-It would include disabled parking and security.

-There would not be additional curb cuts. Existing parking stalls would be used.

-We have reached out to the neighborhood on this project and we have both oral and written support.

-ABC Parking has 2 locations nearby.

Kevin Wong, ABC Parking

-We would probably keep our parking lot's regular rates.

-Time of operation would probably be 8am to 8pm or 6am to 10pm with a lot attendant during hours of operation.

Joe Goldman

-I totally support the project. We need additional parking in that area.

ACTION: Approved as amended to extend the time to three (3) years.

AYES: Antonini, S. Lee, W. Lee, Moore, Olague, and Sugaya

ABSENT: Alexander

MOTION: 17374

21. 2006.1516C (tape IB) (J. Ionin: (415) 558-6309)

1881 POST STREET- southeast corner of Fillmore and Post Streets, Lots 001 and 002 in Assessor's Block 0701 - Request for Conditional Use Authorization pursuant to Planning Code Sections 303 and 186.2(a) to convert an existing food concession to a restaurant and bar on the third level of an existing multi-screen movie theater (the Sundance Kabuki Cinema, formerly known as the Kabuki Cinema). The subject property is within an NC-3 (Neighborhood Commercial, Moderate Scale) District, the Japantown Special Use District, and a 65-A Height and Bulk District.

Preliminary Recommendation: Approval with conditions

SPEAKERS: None

ACTION: Approved

AYES: S. Lee, W. Lee, Olague, and Sugaya

ABSENT: Alexander, Antonini, and Moore

MOTION: 17375

22. 2006.1403T (tape IB) (J. IONIN: (415) 558-6309)

CONSIDERATION OF AMENDMENTS TO THE PLANNING CODE (Section 306) and Administrative Code (Sections 2A.53 and 31.04) to repeal provisions that is void by their own terms and concern an alternative review process if the Planning Commission were unable to meet because a majority of its members has not been nominated, approved and sworn in to office.

Preliminary Recommendation: Review the proposed ordinance and allow the recommendation period to expire with no formal recommendation to the board of supervisors. Informational item only, no action required.

SPEAKERS: None

ACTION: Informational only. No action

23. (tapes IB & IIA) (J. IONIN: (415) 558-6309)

WTS GUIDELINES - Informational Presentation on the current status of the W.T.S. Guidelines: a brief history; preference location summary; accessory use determinations; and an overview of the supplemental guidelines adopted in 2003.

(Continued from Regular Meeting of December 14, 2006)

SPEAKERS:

Doug Loranger, Representing SNAFU

-Antennas are installed without notification to residents

-He requested that legislation be started for antenna installations to have a conditional use process

Erica Zweig

-We sent a petition with 2,000 signatures to stop the installation of the antennas in the Sunset and yet they were installed.

-I support the idea of antenna installations requiring at least a CU process.

Donal A. Lee

-Saint Paul's Church got antennas that changed the look of our neighborhood without any notification.

-I have health concerns regarding those antennas.

Paul Albritts, Attorney

-The process is to guide [companies to put in locally small antennas versus big ones.

-Any individual could request a discretionary review and the public have the opportunity to object to it.

-The checklist adopted in 1997 is working. Move it forward.

David Tornheim

-Residents are not getting notified of antenna installations.

Robert Hinish

-Give authority to regulate notifications to residents for the use of antennas on buildings other than residential.

-There are health concerns for children being exposed to radiation.

Sijbe Kiers

-I have health concerns for small children. An antenna was installed two feet away from my head.

ACTION: Informational only. No action

24. (tapes IIA & IIB) (M. Li: (415) 558-6396)

ANALYSIS OF GROUND-LEVEL WIND CURRENTS - Informational presentation on the analysis of ground-level wind currents required under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the Planning Code, including a brief history, current/emerging methodologies, and recommendations for potential short-term and long-term changes to the review process.

SPEAKERS:

Steve Atkinson

-Gave a power point presentation comparing 2003 and 2006 winds studies on the South of Market.

-Winds are 12 to 15 miles per hour.

Colin Williams

-We used wind tunnel studies to compute flow.

-It was concluded that wind flow is same as those in the 2003 and 2006 wind studies

Sue Hestor:

-Unless we have a dynamic understanding of how the wind is changing cumulatively, we may not be making the best decisions as we add housing in this area.

ACTION: Informational only. No action

7:00 P.M.

(tapes IIIA, IIIB, & IVA)

25. 2003.0347MTZU (J. BILLOVITS (415) 558-6390/A. RODGERS: (415) 558-6395)
MARKET AND OCTAVIA PLAN AMENDMENTS - The Planning Commission will hold a series of public hearings beginning on or after October 26, 2006, to consider Case No. 2003.0347EMTZ, adopting a Motion to certify the Final Environmental Impact Report and adopt CEQA Findings and consider Resolutions to adopt amendments to the San Francisco General Plan, Planning Code and Zoning Map related to the Market and Octavia Neighborhood Plan. A series of public hearings took place on October 26, 2006, Nov. 2, 2006, Nov. 9, 2006, Nov. 16, 2006,; a hearing scheduled for Dec. 7, 2006 was continued to January 11, 2007. The Commission has and will consider and receive public comment on specific aspects of the Plan and proposed amendments at each hearing.

The series of hearings was originally scheduled to culminate in a hearing to consider adoption actions on or after December 7^th, 2006. As the Nov. 16th hearing was cancelled, the Commission held hearing number four on Dec. 7, 2006; hearing number five, scheduled for December 14, 2006 was continued to January 11, 2007. The Commission scheduled additional hearings on February 8, 2007 and February 15, 2007, with adoption actions now scheduled on or after February 15, 2007.

At the hearings, the Planning Commission will consider a rezoning and public improvements program to realize the vision articulated by the community through the Market and Octavia community planning process. For more information on this six-year planning process, please visit our website at ttp://marketoctavia.betterneighborhoods.org.

Draft Schedule for Planning Commission Hearing

This calendar gives notice that the Planning Commission will be hearing the following aspects of the Market & Octavia Plan on or after December 14, 2006. Be advised that due to the nature of the public hearings, the Commission may continue any particular hearing item and/or may not hear all items at the hearing. To confirm the final Commission Hearing schedule, on the week of the hearing please visit: http://www.sfgov.org/site/planning_meeting.asp?id=15840 or call Aksel Olsen at 558-6616.

Hearing # 6 – February 8, 2007

At this hearing, the Planning Commission may consider the following aspects of the Plan:

• Follow-Up on various Comments and Questions (continuation)
• Addenda to proposed amendment of the General Plan, Planning Code and Zoning Map, in response to public comment and Planning Commission testimony received at public hearings
• The addenda include procedures for review of projects proposed within the Market and Octavia Plan area until an historic resources survey is completed and the results of the survey are incorporated into the Market and Octavia Plan and implementing instruments.

For more information on this six-year planning process, please visit our website at http://marketoctavia.betterneighborhoods.org. In addition to providing information about the proposed General Plan, Planning Code and Zoning Map amendments, staff will also provide follow-up information on issues discussed at earlier hearings.

Plan Area

The Plan encompasses an irregularly shaped area in northeast San Francisco. It extends two to three blocks in width along Market Street for ten blocks and extends north along the former Central Freeway alignment at Octavia Boulevard for ten blocks. Along Market Street, the Plan Area boundaries extend from 11th and Larkin Streets in the east to Noe and Scott Streets in the west. The boundary jogs north along Noe Street, Duboce Avenue, Scott Street, Waller Street, Webster Street, Oak Street, Buchanan Street, and Grove Street; continues north along the former Central Freeway alignment to include the area up to Turk Street between Laguna and Franklin Streets; and east of Franklin Street jogs south to Grove and Larkin Streets. The Project Area boundary extends south of Market Street between 10th and 11th Street to Howard Street. Extending west along Howard Street, the Project Area boundaries jog along Division, Clinton, Stevenson, Fourteenth, Guerrero, and Sixteenth Streets. The Project Area is comprised of 89 Assessor's Blocks in entirety or in part, including the whole of Blocks 759, 761, 768, 770, 783, 785, 792 to 794, 806 to 809, 813 to 819, 830 to 841, 850 to 858, 863 to 876, 3501 to 3506, 3512 to 3514, 3533 to 3538, 3541 to 3545, 3556 to 3560; and portions of 3507 (lot 40), 3510 (lots 49, 57), 3511 (lots 1, 23, 25, 31, 33, 74, 75, 80, 82, and 93), and 3532 (lots 14, 19B, 35, 36, 88, 89, 90 and 91).

Specifically, the Commission will consider the following items and may take action on or after February 15, 2007.

• Case 2003.0347M - a proposed General Plan amendment that would add a new area plan, the Market and Octavia Area Plan, and make related amendments to the Commerce and Industry, Housing, Recreation and Open Space and Transportation Elements, the Civic Center Area Plan, Downtown Area Plan, South of Market Area Plan and the Land Use Index;
• Case 2003.0347T - a proposed Planning Code text amendment that would revise Planning Code controls, including controls for land use, height and bulk, building design, loading, parking and establish new fees;
• Case 2003.0347Z - a proposed Zoning Map amendment that would revise Maps 2 and 2H, 7 and 7H, and 2SU and 7SU. The proposed Planning Code text and map (Zoning Map) amendments would a) establish three new zoning districts, b) amend the Hayes-Gough, Upper Market, and Valencia Neighborhood Commercial Districts (NCDs), c) update height and bulk districts, d) establish the Market and Octavia Community Improvements Impact Fee, and e) make related revisions necessary to implement the General Plan. The proposed changes are described in greater detail in Case 2003.0347T (above).
• Case No. 2003.0347U Establishing interim procedures for Planning Department use for review of projects proposed within the Market and Octavia Plan area to protect potential historic buildings and potential eligible historic district or districts until an historic resources survey (Survey) is completed and the results of the Survey are incorporated into the Market and Octavia Plan and implementing instruments.

Together, these Commission actions are intended to implement the Market and Octavia Plan. In addition, an historic survey is currently being done of the project area; property owners considering constructing or altering a building in this area should consult with Planning Department staff to determine the historic resource status of their property. Property owners and interested parties are advised that height limits and other controls do not provide unqualified rights to development, but rather, proscribe the maximum potential building envelope that may be permitted; proposed buildings may not reach the maximum permitted building height/envelope. The Commission may also consider establishing interim procedures to guide the review of plans to construct new structures and alter existing structures to protect potentially eligible historic resources in the Plan Area prior to conclusion of an historic resources survey.

Members of the public may review a copy of the proposed amendments at the San Francisco Planning Department office at 1660 Mission Street 5th Floor, San Francisco, CA 94103, at the Public Library (the Main Library 100 Larkin St., and Harvey Milk branch library, 1 Jose Sarria Ct. (near16th & Market Sts.). An electronic copy of the proposed amendments and actions is available at http://marketoctavia.betterneighborhoods.org.

As part of Case No. 2003.0347T, the proposed Planning Code text amendment would revise Planning Code controls, including controls for land use, height and bulk, building design, loading, parking and establish new fees. The proposed amendments are described more fully below:

Establishment of Three Zoning Districts in the Plan Area

The Transit-Oriented Residential Use District (RTO) will replace most of the RH and RM districts zoning north and south of the Market Street corridor, extending north to Turk Street, west to Noe and Scott Streets, and South to Sixteenth Street. The proposed RTO district will encourage moderate-density, multi-family, and residential infill. Because of the availability of transit service, proximity of retail and services within walking distance, and limitation on permitted parking the RTO permits the construction of some housing without accessory parking. Parking controls will establish maximum caps (instead of existing minimum requirements) and housing density will be controlled by building envelope to encourage housing within buildings in keeping with neighborhood scale. Proposed heights in Residential Transit Oriented (RTO) Districts and RH districts primarily remain 40 and 50 feet as currently classified; in some RTO areas, permitted heights will change from 50, 80 and 105 feet to 40 and 50 feet.

A Neighborhood Commercial Transit District (NCT) will overlay the Hayes-Gough Neighborhood Commercial District and portions of the Upper Market and Valencia Neighborhood Commercial Districts within the Market and Octavia neighborhood. In named NCT and NC-1 (T) districts, parking controls will establish maximum caps (instead of existing minimum requirements) and housing density will be controlled by building envelope to encourage housing above ground-floor retail uses. These districts will largely keep the existing specific use-size controls. They include current Neighborhood Commercial Districts (Hayes-Gough, portions of the Upper Market, Valencia) and several parcels currently zoned NC-1.

The Van Ness and Market Downtown Residential Special Use District (VNMDR-SUD) will permit the development of a transit-oriented, high-density, mixed-use neighborhood around the intersections of Van Ness Avenue and Market Street and South Van Ness Avenue and Mission Street. This SUD will overlay existing C-3-G districts and existing C-M districts will be rezoned to C-3-G with this new VNMDR-SUD. Parking controls will establish maximum caps (instead of existing minimum requirements) and housing density will be controlled by building envelope to encourage housing in buildings with mixed-used podiums and some residential towers at two key intersections: Market Street and Van Ness Avenue and Mission Street and South Van Ness Avenue. Proposed heights in the Van Ness and Market Downtown Residential Use District (VNMDR-SUD) will change from 120, 130, 150, 160, 200 and 320 feet to 85, 120, 200, 320 and 400 feet; towers will be permitted over a podium of 85 or 120 feet; the highest towers will be permitted in the vicinity of the Market Street/Van Ness Avenue intersections.

In the Transit-Oriented Neighborhood Commercial Use Districts (NCT), height districts will change from 50, 80 and 105 feet to primarily 55, 65 and 85 feet; these districts will be located in SoMa West and along Market Street. The NCT district will largely replace C-M and NC-3 districts. In the NCT district, parking controls will establish maximum caps (instead of existing minimum requirements) and housing density will be controlled by building envelope to encourage housing above ground-floor retail uses. These districts will largely keep the existing specific use-size controls in place in the NC-3 district. Some heights on some parcels near Brady Street will change from 105 and 60 feet to 40 feet and 85 feet on parcels surrounding a proposed public open space.

Establishment of New Fees in the Plan Area

In order to fund the community improvements identified in the Plan, the Program document proposes to establish a Development Impact Fee, requiring the growth that generates the demand for additional infrastructure and services to provide some of the revenue required to fund the improvements. The proposal establishes a development impact fee on new residential and commercial development in the Plan Area. The fee proposal is $10.00 per square foot of residential development, and $4.00 per square foot of commercial development.

To encourage the provision of necessary and desirable public infrastructure improvements and also in order to mitigate the impacts of this increased localized density, the Department has established the Van Ness and Market Neighborhood Infrastructure Fund. Developers may provide in-kind public improvements (such as open space or streetscape improvements) or proportional in-lieu contributions to this fund that will allow the city to develop these facilities. The Department estimates that no more than 6 potential development sites would benefit from participating in the program. The Department has set the value of the additional FAR at par with the current market value of historic TDR credits ($15 per square foot).

Preliminary Recommendation: Adopt the following:

· Draft Motion to Certify the EIR and adopt CEQA Findings (Case 2003.0347EE)
· Draft Resolution to amend the General Plan (Case 2003.0347M)Draft Resolution to amend the Planning Code (Case 2003.0347T)

Draft Resolution to establish interim procedures to protect potential historic landmarks and historic districts within the Market and Octavia Plan Area (Case 2003.0347U)

SPEAKERS:

David Schoop

I do not see small business fitting in the plan. Keep us in mind for future rezoning.

Calvin Welch

Urge the commission to take the draft community improvement program back and make some fundamental changes.

Betty Levitin

NCT rear yard walls on Market and West Church Street should not be higher than five feet.

Richard McRee

-There is a lack of communication to the public.

-We will be facing global warming with all these big constructions. We have to learn to use what we have.

Hiroshi Fukuda

Read a letter submitted to the Planning Commission to question City and Land Use Attorneys about notifying limit restrictions in zoning.

Alan Martinez

-Supports the approach of waiting for the Historic Survey to be used in the plan.

-The Commission has to deal with CEQA and the EIR and landmarking at some point.

Curt Holzinger

-We submitted a proposal to respond to specific needs of specific neighborhoods.

-The EIR says that this is going to alter neighborhoods to maximize housing.

Jane Becker

The building proposed for Market and Buchanan is too big for this neighborhood. It [the neighborhood] would be negatively impacted.

Sharon Williams

-There is a lack of communication. Newspapers are not updating the public on this plan.

-Parking is a big issue.

Sally McDonnell

Our buildings are small and the Market-Octavia Plan would alter the neighborhood character.

Sarah Karlinsky

Complimented staff and the Commission for listening to different issues being addressed in a thoughtful ways. Move forward.

Tom Radulovich

-I would like to see this create benefits for greater housing affordability.

-Hold off on any demolitions until we have the historic survey.

-Suggested parking management from the city.

Francis Lundy

-Concerned about the loss of property value, health, view and sunlight.

Peter Lewis

-In essence the show room site on Market and Dolores is too big. Asked for lower heights from Dolores Street to 14 Street.

-Consider one-to-one parking in the Dolores neighborhood.

Bill Rusconi

The size, height and density plan proposed for Market and Buchanan does not fit the neighborhood.

Charles Marsteller

Urged the Commission to invite the Department of Emergency Services of San Francisco to share the consequences of large volume of construction in the next 20 to 25 years

Gideon Kramer

-Opposes big construction on Dolores and 14 Streets for being out of character

-Consider one-to-one parking on any new construction along Market and Dolores Street.

Scott Kuby

-UC extension is including 450 housing units. This plan would add so much density on Buchanan and Market Street.

-My concerns are health because of a former gas station, shopping, and a commuting already crowded.

Craig O'connor

Urge not to build at 1998 Market Street. It will highly impact the neighborhood.

Dennis Richards

-I support no density limit on Market Street but limit inner streets.

-We support no density limit on inner blocks if it provides permanent affordable housing for underserved populations and has conditional use.

Chris Peterson

-Urged support of the plan. Adopt it and move quickly.

-Encouraged people to bike, walk and commute to prevent global warming.

John McNulty

Urged moving the plan forward for the progress of San Francisco.

Rufino DeLeon Jr.

SOMA/West is a relatively new neighborhood. We would like to get involved with this plan.

Lynne Creighhton

Support the project. We should not wait until it pleases everybody.

David Winslav

Appreciating the process, but after six or seven years it has been refined.

Frank Noto

Sunset residents support the plan. The west side is watching closely.

Gail Baugh

Urged adoption of this plan. It would bring back families with children to the neighborhood.

Jason Henderson

-Move this plan forward.

-Conditional parking and public transportation should be strengthened.

Chris Foley

People's complaints are not about the project but their particular own benefits. They have not followed the process since the beginning.

Tim Colen

The plan deserves to be adopted. It is about housing for humans and not geology

Anna Shimko

Safeway is very supportive of the plan and appreciates the Department staff for being diligent, responsive and responsible.

Georgie Faine

-Invited to visit neighborhoods and imagine changes that would happen affecting neighborhood character.

-Modernization should happen in other parts of the city but not in historic neighborhoods.

Richard Johnson

-People are fearful of changes. They come here to demand and not compromise themselves.

-Adopt the project.

Robin Levitt

Support the plan the way it is with high density and low parking.

Ed Bernard

-The Plan process has been open, democratic and transparent.

-Adopt the plan to have a better San Francisco.

Robert Lafayt

The Plan is great because of density. The ability to have affordable housing is much more important than cars.

Sue Hestor

-This plan includes incredible density without improvement of public transportation.

-Height limits should be different whether being on the North or South side of a street. Construction proposals on Buchanan and Market are too big for the character of the neighborhood.

-Requested to hold this Plan until all these details are worked out.

Karin Monivorack

-Urged to adopt the Plan. It targets affordable housing by lowering parking and increasing density.

-The Planning Department has done good work and has tried to responsive to public needs.

John Bardis

-Developers only care about concrete and not affordable housing.

-Challenged the Commission to carefully read the proposal of this plan and amend it to truly do something for Market-Octavia.

Paul Olsen

-Thanked staff and the Commission for the work and the respect you gave to the public.

-This plan allows choices on affordability, transit, density and parking.

-We will work with the Commission and follow up promises made on this plan.

Tes Bolbar

-Many people have participated in this plan.

-This process is going to help neighborhoods with housing, retails and certainty with Zoning and Planning Codes.

ACTION: Informational only. No action

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:

Rufino DeLeon, Jr.

-On Valencia Street there are two Cannabis clubs. A third facility is being proposed within three blocks. Criminal activities have increased significantly and commercial users are leaving the area.

-It is wonderful to hear support about the Mission-Armory.

Ed Bernard

-There should be a requirement that any new construction should produce a certain percentage of energy.

Adjournment: 10:13 P.M.

THESE MINUTES WERE PROPOSED FOR ADOPTION AT THE SPECIAL MEETING OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION ON THURSDAY, May 31, 2007.

SPEAKERS: None

ACTION: Approved

AYES: Antonini, S. Lee, W. Lee, Moore, Olague, and Sugaya

ABSENT: Alexander

NOTE: Per Section 67.18 of the Administrative Code for the City and County of San Francisco, Commission minutes contain a description of the item before the Commission for discussion/consideration; a list of the public speakers with names if given, and a summary of their comments including an indication of whether they are in favor of or against the matter; and any action the Commission takes. The minutes are not the official record of a Commission hearing. The audiotape is the official record. Copies of the audiotape may be obtained by calling the Commission office at (415) 558-6415. For those with access to a computer and/or the Internet, Commission hearings are available at www.sfgov.org. Under the heading Explore, the category Government, and the City Resources section, click on SFGTV, then Video on Demand. You may select the hearing date you want and the item of your choice for a replay of the hearing.