To view graphic version of this page, refresh this page (F5)

Skip to page body
City and County of San Francisco

March 22, 2007

March 22, 2007

SAN FRANCISCO

PLANNING COMMISSION

Meeting Minutes

Commission Chambers - Room 400

City Hall, 1 Dr. Carlton B. Goodlett Place

Thursday, March 22, 2007

1:00 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 1:10 P.M.

STAFF IN ATTENDANCE: Dean Macris – Director of Planning, Larry Badiner – Zoning Administrator, Amit Ghosh – Chief Planner, Anmarie Rodgers, Craig Nikitas, Michelle Glueckert, Michael Li, Mary Woods, April Hesik, Jonas Ionin, Tina Tam, JimMiller, Rana Ahmadi, John Billovits, 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.

1a. 2005.0731CEKV (J. MILLER: at (415) 558-6344)

231 FRANKLIN STREET - southwest corner at Hayes Street, a through lot with additional frontage on Linden Street, Lots 2, 17 and 22 in Assessor's Block 816, in the Hayes Gough Neighborhood Commercial District and a 65-A Height and Bulk District - Request for a Conditional Use Authorization for a new 33-unit residential building with ground-floor retail use plus off-street parking. Conditional Use authorization is required for lot size in excess of 9,999 square feet and building bulk. This proposed project is also the subject of a requested Variance for commercial-serving off-street parking.

(Continued from Regular Meeting of March 15, 2007)

(Proposed for Continuance to April 5, 2007)

SPEAKERS: None

ACTION: Continued as proposed

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

NAYES: Olague

ABSENT: Alexander

1b. 2005.0731CEKV (J. MILLER: at (415) 558-6344)

231 FRANKLIN STREET - southwest corner at Hayes Street, a through lot to Linden Street, Lots 2, 17 and 22 in Assessor's Block 816, in the Hayes-Gough Neighborhood Commercial District and a 65-A Height and Bulk District. OFF-STREET PARKING VARIANCE SOUGHT - The proposal is to construct a new residential building with approximately 33 dwelling units over approximately 6,200 square feet of ground-floor commercial use. Thirty-three underground parking spaces would be provided plus one standard space and two ANA-compliant spaces on the ground floor for a total of 36 spaces to be provided.

(Continued from Regular Meeting of March 15, 2007)

(Proposed for Continuance to April 5, 2007)

SPEAKERS: None

ACTION: Continued as proposed

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

NAYES: Olague

ABSENT: Alexander

2. 2006.1080C (T. Frye: (415) 575-6822)

1029 Natoma Street - between 11th 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.

(Continued from Regular Meeting of February 8, 2007)

(Proposed for Continuance to April 12, 2007)

SPEAKERS: None

ACTION: Continued as proposed

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

NAYES: Olague

ABSENT: Alexander

3a. 2005.1062BV (M. GLUECKERT: (415) 558-6543)

650 TOWNSEND STREET - north side of Townsend Street between 7th Street and 8th Street, Lot 009 in Assessors Block 3783, in an M-2 (Heavy Industrial) Zoning District, and 65-X/100-X Height & Bulk District - Request for office allocation pursuant to Planning Code Section 321 et seq. to authorize 375,151 square feet of office space. The proposal is to convert approximately 269,680 square feet of business service and approximately 105,471 square feet of exhibition space to office space within the existing building. The existing 269,680 square feet of office space and 30,730 square feet of retail space would remain. No new construction is proposed.

Preliminary Recommendation: Approval with Conditions.

(Proposed for Continuance to April 19, 2007)

SPEAKERS: None

ACTION: Continued as proposed

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

NAYES: Olague

ABSENT: Alexander

3b. 2005.1062BV (M. GLUECKERT (415) 558-6543)

650 Townsend Street - north side of Townsend Street between 7th Street and 8th Street, Lot 009 in Assessors Block 3783, in an M-2 (Heavy Industrial) Zoning District, and 65-X/100-X Height & Bulk District. OFF-STREET PARKING VARIANCE SOUGHT - The building would contain 644,831 square feet of office space and 30,730 square feet of retail space. The proposed use would require a total of 1,373 parking spaces on the site. Currently, the site provides up to 971 parking spaces, via on-site parking and through the use of a valet parking system. A variance is required for the parking deficit of 402 spaces.

(Proposed for Continuance to April 19, 2007)

SPEAKERS: None

ACTION: Continued as proposed

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

NAYES: Olague

ABSENT: Alexander

4. 2005.0030E (V. WISE: (415) 558-5955)

3400 CESAR CHAVEZ STREET - Lot 004 of Assessor's Block 6569, bounded by 26th Street, Cesar Chavez Street, Bartlett Street, and Mission Street - Appeal of Preliminary Mitigated Negative Declaration for demolition of the existing building (most recently a retail paint store) and construction of a new four-story building with a 12,000-square-foot Walgreens store and up to three smaller retail spaces on the ground floor, as well as 60 one-, two-, and three-bedroom condominiums above. The building would be about 115,000 gross square feet in size and approximately 50 feet in height. A total of about 97 parking spaces would be provided, with most located in a basement parking garage. Access to the residential and employee parking garage would be from Bartlett Street, while access to surface-level customer parking for the retail stores would be from Cesar Chavez Street. The project site is located within an NC-3 (Moderate Scale Neighborhood Commercial) zoning district and a 50-X height and bulk district. The project site is in the Easter Neighborhoods Planning Area.

Preliminary Recommendation: Uphold Preliminary Mitigated Negative Declaration

(Continued from Regular Meeting of March 8, 2007)

(Proposed for Continuance to April 26, 2007)

SPEAKERS

Dairo Romero

- I support the continuance. There are concerns with this project.

  1. We need more time to address those concerns.

Nick Pagoulatos

- Supports the continuance.

  1. Analysis from the Planning Department is inadequate [parking would negatively impact].
  2. It should wait for the Mission District's final rezoning proposal to take place.
  3. Department should analyze how market-rate projects likes this one are affecting affordable housing in the Mission.

Steve Vettel, Project Sponsor Representative

  1. We will not be available on April 26.
  2. Requested continuance to April 19 instead.

Marisol Ramos

- Supports continuance.

- I would like to see the development plan and the schedule for demolition dates.

ACTION: Continued to April 19, 2007

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

NAYES: Olague

ABSENT: Alexander

5. 2005.0030C (J. PURVIS: (415) 558-6354)

3400 CESAR CHAVEZ STREET - north side between Mission and Bartlett Streets, and extending to 26th Street; Lot 004 in Assessor's Block 6569 - Request for Conditional Use Authorization to construct a mixed-use Planned Unit Development (PUD) of up to 60 dwelling units, approximately 16,000 square feet of ground floor commercial space, with up to 97 independently accessible off-street parking spaces. This project requires Conditional Use approval for a PUD with an exception from rear yard requirements and residential density limits under Section 304 of the Planning Code, for development on a lot greater than 10,000 square feet under Sections 121.1 and 712.11, for a non-residential use size greater than 6,000 square feet under Sections 121.2 and 712.21, and for a formula retail use under Sections 703.4 and 303(i). The site is within an NC-3 (Moderate-Scale Neighborhood Commercial) Use District, and a 50-X Height and Bulk District.

Preliminary Recommendation: Approval with Conditions

(Continued from Regular Meeting of March 8, 2007)

(Proposed for Continuance to April 26, 2007)

SPEAKERS: Same as those listed on item #4

ACTION: Continued to April 19, 2007

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

NAYES: Olague

ABSENT: Alexander

5z. 2006.0616BEKX (J. MILLER: (415) 558-6344)

120 HOWARD STREET - northwest corner at Spear Street, Lot 019 in Assessor's Block 3717 - Request for review by the Planning Commission under Planning Code ( Code ) Section 309 of a four-story addition to an existing eight-story building (with a partial ninth floor) requiring exceptions. In addition, this project requires the allocation of approximately 67,310 square feet of office space pursuant to the standards of Code Section 321. The site is in C-3-O (Downtown Office) and C-3-O (SD) (Downtown Office – Special District) Districts and a 200-S Height and Bulk District.

(Continued from Regular Meeting of February 22, 2007)

(Proposed for Continuance to April 5, 2007)

SPEAKERS: None

ACTION: Continued as proposed

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

NAYES: Olague

ABSENT: Alexander

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.

6. Consideration of Adoption –

  • Draft Minutes of Special Meeting of March 9, 2007.

SPEAKERS: None

ACTION: Approved

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

ABSENT: Alexander

7. Commission Comments/Questions

  • 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 Antonini

- Received report done by San Francisco Planning Department showing new housing constructions by income levels and affordable housing types.

- It reveals that 43 percent built in the past five-year were affordable.

- This is a very good document to consider when considering what to build.

Commissioner Sugaya

- At the Recreation and Park Department hearing last week we considered a [relatively] small park for Guy Place.

- It has an amount for a design fee.

- It is important to monitor that figure because it might need supplementation.

C. DIRECTOR'S REPORT

8. Director's Announcements None

  1. Review of Past Week's Events at the Board of Supervisors and Board of Appeals.

Anmarie Rodgers of Department staff reported:

-Submitted a report on vehicles owned in the Bay Area. San Francisco has an average of 0.64 owned vehicles per household.

Land Use Committee

1- Supervisor Daly introduced amendments for Trinity Plaza [Continued to next week]

A)-Parking for commercial use set at 225 spaces.

B)-Building A: construction to meet timeline and replacement housing not to be converted to condominiums.

2- Zoning transferable development rights. Amended to include time from 20 years to 50 years. Continued to next week.

3- Planning Code Amendment for landmarking interiors of public accessible buildings was forwarded to Board with recommendation to approve.

Board of Supervisors

1- Marina Renovation Environmental Impact Review. Overturned [+8-3]

2- 869 North Point CEQA appeal was upheld; Environmental Impact Review Overturned

3- 3650 Masonic Avenue and 2130 Golden Gate Avenue CEQA appeal. Continued to next week

4- Resolution sponsor by Supervisor McGoldrick urging the Planning Commission to initiate amendment to the Housing Element of the General Plan. Sent to Land Use Committee.

5- Legislation introduction to amend Visitacion Valley Fee Ordinance to $3 per square foot. Assign to the Land Use Committee under 30-day rule for hearing.

6- Supervisor Maxwell requested special informational hearing on redevelopment of Candlestick Point.

Mr. Badiner, Zoning Administrator, reported:

Board of Appeals

- 3130 Leavenworth Street. Continued to 2 weeks.

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.

SPEAKERS

Patricia Vaughey

- Case at 2026 Lombard Avenue is at the Board of Appeals and still pending a decision.

- The Board requested a modified plan. The main issue was a lot of water under the building.

- Interesting fact that in order to drain the water, it needed to pin both sides of the building for safety reasons - [during an earthquake the building would slant].

- A case about a nail place was overturned at the Board of Appeals.

- There were many existing within the same block.

- We should have rules in the Planning Code to seek diversity of business and services in a neighborhood.

Sue Hestor

- Concerned about the Urban Design Guideline Neighborhood Commercial Area.

- Guidelines do not deal with the complexity of residential low-income rental.

- It has happened in the Mission District where a residential building has a narrow yard on the ground floor.

- It is inadequate to increase density and not change commercial guidelines. This is happening in the Market and Octavia Plan.

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. 2007.1114D (Tape IB) (A. STARR: (415) 558-6362)

3018 CALIFORNIA STREET - north side, between Lyon and Baker Streets, Lot 011 in Assessor's Block 1023 - Mandatory Discretionary Review, under the Planning Commission's policy requiring review of dwelling unit mergers, of Building Permit Application No. 2007.01.12.1591 proposing to legalize a dwelling unit merger that was done without permits in an RH-2 (Residential House, Two-Family) District and 40-X Height and Bulk District. The merger will reduce the number of legal dwelling units from two to one.

Preliminary Recommendation: Do not take Discretionary Review and approve the project as proposed.

SPEAKERS: None

ACTION: Did not take Discretionary Review and Approved

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

ABSENT: Alexander

Item 11 was taken off the Consent Calendar and heard as the first item on the Regular Calendar following item 12 a & b.

11. 2006.1131C (Tape IB) (M. SMITH: (415) 558-6322)

285 BROAD STREET - south side between Capitol and Orizaba Avenues, Lot 035 in Assessor's Block 7114 - Request for Conditional Use Authorization pursuant to Planning Code Section 121(f) to create a new lot with a lesser width than the minimum required lot width, as the result of a lot subdivision, located in a RH-1 (Residential, House, One-Family) District and 40-X Height and Bulk District.

Preliminary Recommendation: Approval with Conditions

SPEAKERS: None

ACTION: Approved

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

ABSENT: Antonini and Alexander

MOTION: 17399

12a. 2006.1219CV (Tape IB) (J. IONIN: (415) 558-6309)

610 FILLMORE STREET - northeast corner at Fell Street, Lot 018 in Assessor's Block 0821 - Request for Conditional Use Authorization to allow a  post secondary educational institution in a Residential District pursuant to Sections 209.3(i) and 303 of the Planning Code. The proposal is to replace the vacant hotel use (with 51 guest rooms and one manager's unit) with a new satellite campus for the New College of California (with two classrooms and 42 dormitory rooms), in an RM-1 (Residential, Mixed, Low Density) District, and a 50-X Height and Bulk District. The proposal is also subject to a variance.

Preliminary Recommendation: Approval with Conditions

SPEAKERS: None

ACTION: Approved

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

ABSENT: Alexander

MOTION: 17398

12b. 2006.1219CV (Tape IB) (J. IONIN: (415) 558-6309)

610 FILLMORE STREET - northeast corner at Fell Street, Lot 018 in Assessor's Block 0821, located in an RM-1 District (Residential, Mixed, Low Density) District and in a 50-X Height and Bulk District - USABLE OPEN SPACE, AND OFF-STREET PARKING VARIANCES SOUGHT: The proposal is to replace the vacant hotel use (with 51 guest rooms and one manager's unit) with a new satellite campus for the New College of California (consisting of two classrooms and a dormitory with 42 rooms). The post secondary educational institution with dormitory requires a variance from providing approximately 1,260 square feet of common usable open space and a variance from providing 11 off-street parking spaces. The proposal is also subject to a conditional use authorization.

ACTION: Zoning Administrator granted variances subject to standard conditions of approval.

  1. REGULAR CALENDAR

13. 2006.0070ET (Tape IB; IIA) (C. NIKITAS: (415) 558-6306)

CONTROLS FOR LOSS OF DWELLING UNITS - a proposed ordinance amending the Planning Code, adding Section 317, requiring a Planning Commission hearing for any project that would eliminate existing legal dwelling and live-work units through mergers, conversions, or demolitions, and making environmental findings and findings of consistency with the priority policies of Planning Code Section 101.1 and the General Plan. On November 2, 2006, the Commission adopted Resolution No. 17334, an intent to initiate a Planning Code amendment stipulating mandatory discretionary review of or Conditional Use for all residential merger, conversion, demolition and replacement building permit applications.

(Continued indefinitely on January 11, 2007, and re-advertised for this date)

Preliminary Recommendation: Adopt Resolution recommending adoption of the proposed amendment.

(Continued from Regular Meeting of March 15, 2007)

SPEAKERS

Nancy Wuerfel, Sunset Park Side Education and Action Committee

- Totally support the proposed regulations.

  1. Extremely significant to recognize how important affordable housing is in the city.
  2. This ordinance would facilitate the work of everybody.

Greg Gladstone

  1. Concerned about affecting projects that have not received full building permits.
  2. Projects take a long time in the process before getting it.
  3. Grandfather dates should be for those needing Environmental Review for applications for alteration permits.
  4. It is important to have public hearings when adopting this legislation.

McCarthy

- The demolition policy currently in place solves the problem.

- Page 7 of this proposed ordinance is not clear on how quantifying percentage.

- This ordinance is happening to fast and it is not clear. It needs transparency.

Alice

- This item should be continued.

- There are three different versions of this legislation.

- There are a lot of details on the implementation of this ordinance.

- Page 7 is not clear. This legislation needs more time to debate.

Janine New

- This is not going to solve the problems of demolition.

- It is going to affect families and buildings that need rehabilitation.

- You have the power to make decisions on individual cases.

- The proposed legislation is too broad.

Shawn

- Last year there were only 40 demolitions in the city.

  1. It is a good number for ongoing stock renovation.

- Deadline should be May 31.

Mr. Boskovich

- Staff is very effective on recognizing when demolition is needed.

- They need some power in decision making so as to not have every single case come to the Commission.

- Define what defacto demolition is on page 7 [b and c].

Bryan McGee

- The legislation is confusing.

  1. Staff said they would clarify it.
  2. Public should be able to review before approving it and have a dialogue.

Richard Hart

- This needs a separate hearing. We do want to keep affordable units.

  1. This legislation needs clarification on page 7 [b and c].

Grace Shanon

- Ordinance is confusing.

- Requested more clarity [wording] of these guidelines.

Raid

  1. Existent control should have been reviewed before writing this legislation.
  2. Costs and permits on this ordinance are hypothetical.

- It needs more clarity.

Kevin

- Requested continuance to include more clarity on this legislation.

- I am a homeowner trying to renovate my house and no constructor wants to start because it is confusing.

Henry

- We need to define what demolition is first.

- Continued to have more clarity and look at it closely.

John

- Two cases not being schedule for hearing because of this legislation.

- Requested the Commission and Administrator to make decision on cases that are in the process.

Leo

- Requested explanation of Page 7 lines 10 to 15 and page 11 line 15.

- Words are so confusing and open to interpretation.

- Consider grandfather dates and projects on pipeline to be included on this legislation.

John O'Connell

- This legislation [document] needs a separate hearing itself to explain it and rework it

David

- I do not understand why you are taking this legislation into consideration.

- Current guidelines automatically restrict dwelling unit demolitions under discretionary review.

Tyrike Laris

- I have a project and everything is ready for the demolition but it is on hold because of this legislation.

- Commission and staff have done a great job with the current guidelines.

Silvan

  1. There are currently defined guidelines that are effective.

Jim Keith

  1. The Commission and staff have done an incredible job on demolitions.
  2. There is no need for changing these guidelines.
  3. We need clarity therefore it should be continued.

Joe

- This kind of legislation needs to have builders input. It does not make any sense.

- This is just pure politics. The Commission has done a wonderful job.

- We heard 40 demolitions for the past year and I would like to know the number of housing replacements for those demolitions.

Patricia Vaughey

- This is good legislation that needs some refinement.

  1. We need to look what is best for the entire city.
  2. Demolitions that happened in the last year were replaced for single occupancy units and not for families.
  3. Affordable housing is being built that is not really affordable for San Franciscans.

John Curlie

  1. Legislation is not clear
  2. Homeowners are going to be affected by it.
  3. This process would stop demolition of buildings that would put at risk safety of properties and public.

ACTION: Following hearing, continued to May 10, 2007

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

ABSENT: Alexander

14a. MISSION BAY - As part of the public hearing for items 14b & 14c, this informational presentation is included on the Mission Bay Planning Process, Design for Development Controls, and recent developments.

SPEAKERS: None

ACTION: Without hearing, continued to May 17, 2007

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

ABSENT: Alexander

14b. 2006.1536B (Tape IIB) (M. Glueckert: (415) 558-6543)

1515 THIRD STREET, AKAMISSION BAY SOUTH, BLOCK 27, PARCEL 1; AKA LOT 012 IN ASSESSORS BLOCK 8721 - application for design review and office allocation pursuant to Planning Code Section 321 et seq. to construct a new six-story building, approx. 216,491 gsf, with a total office space allocation of 202,893 sf. The building is approx. 89' in height and will provide approx. 12,169 sf of ground floor retail space. Parking will be provided on-site on Block 27, Parcels 2 and 3. The site is located in a Mission Bay Commercial-Industrial Zoning District and an HZ-5 Height District.

Preliminary Recommendation: Approve with Conditions

(Continued from Regular Meeting of February 22, 2007)

SPEAKERS: None

ACTION: Approved

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

ABSENT: Alexander

MOTION: 17400

14c. 2006.1509B (M. Glueckert: (415) 558-6543)

1455 THIRD STREET AND 455 MISSION BAY BLVD. SOUTH, AKAMISSION BAY SOUTH, BLOCK 26, PARCELS 1-3; AKA LOT 012 IN ASSESSORS BLOCK 8721 - application for design review and office allocation pursuant to Planning Code Section 321 et seq. to construct three new buildings, with a total of approx. 380,999 gsf, and a total office space allocation of 373,487 sf. Building 1 is approx. 159' in height. Buildings 2 and 3 are approx. 90' in height. Ground floor retail space will be provided in Buildings 1 and 2. Parking will be provided off-site on Block 27. The site is located in a Mission Bay Commercial-Industrial Zoning District and an HZ-5 Height District.

Preliminary Recommendation: Approve with Conditions

(Continued from Regular Meeting of February 22, 2007)

SPEAKERS: None

ACTION: Approved

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

ABSENT: Alexander

MOTION: 17401

15a. 2006.0584KXCV (M. LI: (415) 558-6396)

1407-1435 MARKET STREET AND 16-70 TENTH STREET - southwest corner of Tenth and Market Streets; Lot 041 (a portion of the former Lot 039) in Assessor's Block 3507 - Request for a Section 309 Determination of Compliance and Request for Exceptions. The proposed project is the construction of two buildings sharing a common base and containing approximately 719 dwelling units, approximately 19,000 square feet of commercial space, and a garage with a capacity of up to 668 parking spaces (578 residential spaces and 90 commercial spaces). The taller north tower, at the corner of Tenth and Market Streets, will be 35 stories and approximately 352 feet high with a 12-story, 123-foot-high base along Market Street. The shorter south tower, at the corner of Tenth and Jessie Streets, will be 19 stories and approximately 220 feet high. The two towers will be connected by a nine-story, 93-foot-high base running along Tenth Street. The project requires separation of towers, rear yard, comfort-level wind, parking, architectural vertical extension, ten percent upper tower extension, and bulk exceptions pursuant to Section 309(a).

Preliminary recommendation: Approval with conditions

(Continued from Regular Meeting of February 22, 2007)

SPEAKERS

Steve

- We are ready to present this on April 5.

ACTION: Without hearing, continued to April 5, 2007

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

NAYES: Olague

ABSENT: Alexander

15b. 2006.0584KXCV (M. LI: (415) 558-6396)

1407-1435 MARKET STREET AND 16-70 TENTH STREET - southwest corner of Tenth and Market Streets; Lot 041 (a portion of the former Lot 039) in Assessor's Block 3507 - Request for Conditional Use Authorization to (1) allow additional square footage above the base FAR of 6.0 to 1 for dwelling units that will be affordable for a minimum of 20 years to households whose incomes are within 150 percent of the median income and (2) exceed the maximum dwelling unit density ratio of one dwelling unit for every 125 square feet of lot area in connection with the mixed-used project described in Item 15a.

Preliminary recommendation: Approval with conditions

(Continued from Regular Meeting of February 22, 2007)

SPEAKERS: Same as those listed on item # 15a

ACTION: Without hearing, continued to April 5, 2007

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

NAYES: Olague

ABSENT: Alexander

15c. 2006.0584KXCV (M. LI: (415) 558-6396)

1407-1435 MARKET STREET AND 16-70 TENTH STREET - southwest corner of Tenth and Market Streets; Lot 041 (a portion of the former Lot 039) in Assessor's Block 3507 - Request for an elevator penthouse height exemption and usable open space dimension, dwelling unit exposure, hazard-level wind, and loading entry variances in connection with the mixed-used project described in Item 15a. The request for exemptions/variances will be considered by the Zoning Administrator.

(Continued from Regular Meeting of February 22, 2007)

SPEAKERS: Same as those listed on item # 15a

ACTION: Without hearing, continued to April 5, 2007

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

NAYES: Olague

ABSENT: Alexander

16. 2006.0473CE (Tape IIA) (M. WOODS: (415) 558-6315)

2125 CHESTNUT STREET - southwest corner at Steiner Street; Lot 28 (formerly Lots 20 and 21) in Assessor's Block 0490 - Request for Conditional Use Authorization to allow a  formula retail use and for a use size greater than 3,999 square feet pursuant to Sections 121.2, 303(c), 303(i), 703.4 and 711.21 of the Planning Code. The proposal is to renovate and expand an existing retail store, currently occupied by Walgreens (a retail drug store) for occupancy by Apple Inc. (a retail computer and electronic store), which is a formula retail use, in an NC-2 (Small-Scale Neighborhood Commercial) District and a 40-X Height and Bulk District.

Preliminary Recommendation: Approval with Conditions

SPEAKERS

Joe Yotto, Project Sponsor Representative

- Project would expand to the 2nd floor.

- Parking is not included. Existing street and public parcel parking is sufficient.

- We have worked with the Planning Department and the neighborhood.

- Roof would remain to preserve historic fabric

- It would generate pedestrian traffic.

Benjamin Fay, Design Manger for Apple, Inc.

- This is a unique site.

- We have met our goal picking up glaze elements.

- It is a very discreet and enhancing design.

Patricia Vaughey

- In favor of this project.

  1. Requested a change of construction hours: 7am to 5pm

- Loading hours to 9am instead of 10am.

ACTION: Approved as amended:

-Changed Sponsor name from Apple Computers to Apple, Inc.

-Comply with construction and loading times to the extent possible.

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

EXCUSED: Sugaya

ABSENT: Alexander

MOTION: 17402

17. 2006.1347C (Tape IIA) (A. HESIK: (415) 558-6602)

1435-1445 STOCKTON STREET - west side between Vallejo and Green Streets, Lot 002 in Assessor's Block 0130 - Request for conditional use authorization to establish a retail coffee store as defined in Planning Code Section 790.102(n). The proposed use would not be a formula retail use as defined in Planning Code Section 703.3. The proposal is to modify the existing ground-floor bookstore (d.b.a.  A. Cavalli & Co. ) by adding a retail coffee store. No alcoholic beverages are proposed to be served under this application. There would be no physical expansion of the existing building. The site is within the North Beach NCD (Neighborhood Commercial District) and a 40-X Height and Bulk District.

Preliminary Recommendation: Approval with Conditions

SPEAKERS

Marcia Girling, Project Sponsor Representative

  1. Italian bookstore is trying to stay in business by incorporating coffee retail.
  2. Neighborhood supports this project.

ACTION: Approved

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

ABSENT: Alexander

MOTION: 17403

18. 2006.1515C (Tape IIA) (J. IONIN: (415) 558-6309)

1900 FILLMORE STREET - northeast corner at Bush Street, Lot 019 in Assessor's Block 0660 - Request for Conditional Use Authorization to allow a  financial service pursuant to Sections 718.49 and 303 of the Planning Code. The proposal is to convert an approximately 625 square foot storefront (currently vacant, previously operated as a nail salon) to a financial service (d.b.a.  Sterling Bank & Trust ), in the Upper Fillmore Neighborhood Commercial District, and a 40-X Height and Bulk District.

Preliminary Recommendation: Approval with Conditions.

SPEAKERS

Walter Pasly, Project Sponsor Representative

  1. Available for any questions or concerns the Commission may have.

ACTION: Approved as amended: To preserve the historic ceiling and chamber corner.

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

NAYES: Olague and Moore

ABSENT: Alexander

MOTION: 17404

19. 2006.0766EX (Tape IIA; IIB) (J. MILLER: (415) 558-6344)

345 STOCKTON STREET - west side between Post and Sutter Streets, Lot 16 in Assessor's Block 295, in a C-3-R (Downtown Retail) Zoning District and an 80-130-F Height and Bulk District - Review under Planning Code Section 309 of the renovation of an existing building (Grand Hyatt Hotel) involving a reconfiguration of the lobby and outdoor public plaza area.

Preliminary Recommendation: Approval with Conditions

(Continued from Regular Meeting of March 8, 2007)

SPEAKERS

Jim Ruben, Grand Hyatt/Project Sponsor Representative

  1. This is a relatively modest proposal to fix a space that has not worked very well over the years.
  2. In working with staff, we have come up with a program that would activate that area.
  3. It will enliven the ground floor experience at the Hotel inside the lobby and outside in the courtyard area.

Tom

- We have tried to improve pedestrian traffic.

  1. New design would encourage gathering around the fountain.

- Restaurant at the lobby of the hotel with small planters would provide a cohesive area.

Sue Hestor

- This plaza is a public space and now is going to incorporate restaurants.

  1. When the Hotel was built, it was offered to have an observation deck and it is not there.
  2. Compensation is very low; formula for the calculations should be revised.

- Analysis should show what was done in the past and that it is an illegal non-conforming use.

ACTION: Continued to April 19, 2007

Project Sponsor and staff to work on the design and formula changes

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

ABSENT: Alexander

20. 2006.0922I (T. Tam: (415) 558-6325)

1001 POTRERO AVENUE- east side between 22nd and 23rd Streets; Lot 1 in Assessor's Block 4151 - Public Hearing on the proposed Update to the 1987 Institutional Master Plan (IMP) for the San Francisco General Hospital Medical Center (SFGHMC). Since 1987, there have been several developments on the SFGHMC campus including but not limited to construction of two new floors for the Statewide AIDS Research Laboratory on the Pathology Building in 1990, construction of the 98,000 square-foot San Francisco Behavior Health Facility on the northern end of the campus in 1992, and the construction of the 5,500 square-foot Avon Comprehensive Breast Care Center adjacent of 22nd Street in 2004. More recently, SFGHMC proposes to construct and operate a medical helipad on the rooftop of the existing Main Hospital building and to build a new acute care hospital in compliance with California Senate Bill (SB) 1953 on the campus. SB 1953 mandates that all acute care building meet established seismic standards by 2013. A full IMP that reflects the proposed new acute care hospital development and its impacts will be prepared in the near future and be submitted separately from this update. This item is for receipt of public testimony only; no action is required. The property is in the P (Public) Use District and a 105-E Height and Bulk District.

SPEAKERS

Ron Alameda, Project Manager

- This is the first step of a sequence.

- Recognize the need to continue because of your calendar today.

- Request that you support and accomplish the time line and schedule this as early as possible.

ACTION: Without hearing, continued to May 10, 2007

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

NAYES: Olague

ABSENT: Alexander

6:00 P.M.

G. PUBLIC COMMENT ON AGENDA ITEMS WHERE THE PUBLIC HEARING HAS BEEN CLOSED (Tape IIB; IIIA)

At this time, members of the public who wish to address the Commission on agenda items that have already been reviewed in a public hearing at which members of the public were allowed to testify and the public hearing has been closed, must do so at this time. Each member of the public may address the Commission for up to three minutes.

SPEAKERS

Bridget Maley, President of Landmarks Board

  1. We reviewed the Environmental Impact Report in December.
  2. A letter was submitted in January 2005 recommending that the Historic Survey should be included in the Review.
  3. We still have concerns about it and are present today to reinforce them.

- The survey would help understand the impact to the areas in terms of historic resources.

Mrs. Bland Platt

- Encouraged the Commission not to adopt the EIR until the Historic Survey is done.

- The initial forms are done and the survey should be ready by June of this year.

- Transfer Development Rights should not go forward. It has been $20 a square foot and for Market and Octavia it would be $15.

Mary Miles, Coalition for adequate review

- You should not adopt the certification until the Historic Survey is done.

- Re-circulate the Report. You do not have the proper data for this large project.

  1. Conclusive material on transit and transportation is not supported by the data. It would not survive a court challenge.

- Parking is an impact under CEQA requirements.

Marilyn Amini

- The Final Environmental Impact Review is not adequate.

- Cumulative impacts must be considered.

- Creating three substantial zoning classifications that can be applied to other parts of the city have not been evaluated.

- The public has not been adequately notified about the impact of this project.

- Long-term plan elements are not analyzed and addressed in the Report.

Hiroshi Fukuda

- The public has to be informed about the intent of high density on the transit corridor.

  1. When the draft EIR was presented in 2005, it did not include [an analysis of] driving impacts on transit on Van Ness Avenue.
  2. We need diverse housing for this plan.
  3. The majority is going to be market-rate. We need housing for very low incomes.

Jason Henderson, Hayes Valley Neighborhood Association

- Urged the Commission to approve the report.

- I am comfortable and confident that the historic survey will be done in a timely manner.

- Suggested that the transportation component be re-visited.

Michael Wilson, Board of Directors for the Merchants of Upper Castro and Market

- We support the one-to-one ratio parking as the best interest for the neighborhood.

- The proposed reduced parking will negatively impact the current parking deficit.

Cynthia Servetnick, Co-Chair, Save the UC Berkeley Laguna Street Campus

  1. The Laguna Campus is the largest area within the Market and Octavia Plan.
  2. The Plan fails to analyze the potential loss of this historical resource with the proposed zoning.
  3. It could be done with the proposed project for 55 Laguna Street.

Tom Radulovich, San Franciscan's for a Livable City

- I'm in support of approving the Environmental Impact Report.

- San Franciscan's for a Livable City and the Coalition sent a letter requesting that you open up Haight Street for two-way traffic.

- It could be done by having a finding of overriding consideration for that street in this report.

Sue Hestor

  1. Requested that the Commission ask the Redevelopment Agency whether the lack of certification of this process delays the implementation of redeveloping parcels.
  2. I have issues with sun, view and climate quality.
  3. There are a lot of projects proposed for downtown.
  4. We do not have cumulative analysis on wind and shadow for this area.

  1. CONSIDERATION OF FINDINGS AND FINAL ACTION – PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED

21. 2003.0347E (Tape IIA) (R. AHMADI: (415)-558-5966)

Market & Octavia Neighborhood Plan - Certification of Final Environmental Impact Report - The project area lies to the west of the City's downtown financial district and sits at the junction of several neighborhoods, including, Civic Center, Hayes Valley, Western Addition, South of Market, Inner Mission, the Castro, Duboce Triangle, Eureka Valley, and Upper Market. The proposed neighborhood plan would reclassify the existing zoning from Residential Districts (R), Neighborhood Commercial Districts (NCD's), Moderate-Scale Neighborhood Commercial (NC-3), and Heavy Commercial (C-M) to Downtown General Commercial Districts (C-3-G), Residential Transit Oriented (RTO), Neighborhood Commercial Transit Districts (NCT), Neighborhood Commercial-Transit, and Moderate-Scale Mixed Use Districts (NCT-3). It would also increase height limits in certain areas and reduce height limits in other areas. The proposed zoning and height reclassifications would increase the potential for residential development in the area.

Preliminary Recommendation: Certify the Final Environmental Impact Report.

Please note: The public review period for the Draft Environmental Impact Report is closed. The Planning Commission does not conduct public review of Final EIRs. Public comments on the certification may be presented to the Planning Commission during the Public Comment portion of the Commission calendar.

(Continued from Regular Meeting of March 8, 2007)

SPEAKERS: None

ACTION: Passed a motion of intent to certify the FEIR. Final action scheduled for April 5, 2007.

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

NAYES: Moore

ABSENT: Alexander and Sugaya

I. PUBLIC HEARING:

22. 2003.0347E (Tape IIIA; IIIB; IVA; IVB) (R. AHMADI: 414-558-5966)

Market & Octavia Neighborhood Plan - Adoption of CEQA Findings Related to EIR and Potential Project Approval Action - The project includes proposed amendments to the General Plan, Planning Code and Zoning Map. The project area lies to the west of the City's downtown financial district and sits at the junction of several neighborhoods, including, Civic Center, Hayes Valley, Western Addition, South of Market, Inner Mission, the Castro, Duboce Triangle, Eureka Valley, and Upper Market. The proposed neighborhood plan would: (1) amend the General Plan, adding 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; and (2) amend the Planning Code and Zoning Map to reclassify the existing zoning from Residential Districts (R), Neighborhood Commercial Districts (NCD's), Moderate-Scale Neighborhood Commercial (NC-3), and Heavy Commercial (C-M) to Downtown General Commercial Districts (C-3-G), Residential Transit Oriented (RTO), Neighborhood Commercial Transit Districts (NCT), Neighborhood Commercial-Transit, Moderate-Scale Mixed Use Districts (NCT-3). The project would also increase height limits in certain areas and reduce height limits in other areas, and establish new fees. The proposed zoning and height reclassifications would increase the potential for residential development in the area.

Preliminary Recommendation: Adopt CEQA Findings.

(Continued from Regular Meeting of March 8, 2007)

SPEAKERS

Joe Curtin, Castro Area Planning and Action

- I'm in support of the amendments to the plan.

- It is important to include the historic preservation survey and protection should be implemented.

Demian Quesnel Eureka Valley Planning Association

- Concerned about parking in the Eureka Valley Area.

- Homeowners are more likely to own a car than home renters.

  1. The center area of the plan would have homeownership and our neighborhood would be negatively impacted.

Dennis Richards, Duboce Triangle Neighborhood Association

  1. Supports amendments to the plan.
  2. Suggested having a design guideline booklet for developers.
  3. We would like the market based parking price be modified in the document.

Tim Dunn, Duboce Triangle Neighborhood Association

- Affordable housing is very important for our neighborhood.

- Parcels on Octavia Boulevard are funded by Caltrain and not by developers.

- Requested a commitment be made for affordable housing - not only inclusionary.

Hiroshi Fukuda, Richmond Community Association

  1. Commissioners mentioned not knowing what they are voting for.

- This plan is not ready to go forward.

Jim Haas, Civic Center

  1. I noticed that you are preoccupied with the parcels on Van Ness and Market Street.
  2. Two of those parcels belong to the City.
  3. Adjacent to Civic Center, affordable housing currently exists. The area needs wealth to increase shoppers.

Marilyn Amini

  1. This plan is not ready. You should not adopt it until you work out some details.
  2. You would be adopting transit that is not consistent with the Housing Element.

Jason Henderson, HVNA

- I'm in support of the Plan and it should be moved forward.

  1. Super inclusionary should be taken seriously. We do need affordable housing.
  2. Tall buildings help include more affordable units.

Charles Chase, San Francisco Heritage

  1. Committed to seeing that this plan is fulfilled through the completion of the survey with analysis.
  2. This is a significant improvement in terms of types of controls.
  3. The value of Transfer Development Rights for this plan is low.

Tom Radulovich, San Franciscan's for a Livable City

- I'm worried that the spirit of this plan will be lost.

- This new neighborhood is going to be different. It will be transit, walking and cycling oriented.

  1. We need a balance of private and public benefits.
  2. It is important to have inclusionary and affordable housing.

Peter Lewis, Mission Dolores Neighborhood Association

  1. Mission Dolores is the oldest neighborhood in San Francisco and is cut in half by this plan.
  2. We would like a comprehensive historic survey completed before going forward.

Mark Paez, Duboce Triangle Neighborhood Association

  1. We support the adoption of the plan only after it is informed properly by the historic survey.
  2. There are unresolved concerns about how historic preservation is going to be treated in this plan.
  3. Suggested that the Commission take into consideration having an informational hearing with historic preservation consultants.

Jim Keith

  1. With regards to Parcel I, it was an agreement and supported by the neighborhood to have a 55-foot height limit.
  2. Now the proposal is to drop the height down to 45 feet.
  3. I hope you looked at all the facts and considered that owners are committed to on- site affordable housing.

Patrick Spiers, Owner of Parcel I

  1. We did a trade and agreed on a deal with the City.
  2. We met with the neighborhood and it was suggested that we follow the guidelines of Octavia Boulevard.
  3. We should have followed the initial agreement when we purchased the property with the 55-foot height limit.

Richie Hart

- With regards to Parcel 1 - height along the corridor would not be consistent.

- The Commission was urged to keep the height limit to 55 feet on Grove Street.

Kieran Buckley

  1. Owner of Ivy Street lot, Parcel I.
  2. The proposed height of 40 feet is not going to be consistent along the corridor.
  3. The agreement was already made for 55 feet. It is important for affordable housing.

Angus McCarthy

  1. Requested the 55-foot height limit on Parcel I.
  2. The owners of the parcel have waited for over five years for this plan.

Stephen Haigh, Victorian Alliance

  1. Plan areas include many valuable historic structures.
  2. We would like the historic survey to inform the plan before the plan is adopted.

Peter Cohen

  1. The plan talks in general about the building community.
  2. I am certain that there will be some refining words in this plan.
  3. There is a need for maintenance of structures and the transit analysis needs to be more specific.

Chris Foley

  1. It has been a long time. You have had five years of community input through hearings.
  2. I urge you to adopt it today.

Mary Miles, Coalition for Adequate Review

  1. It is inconsistent with the general housing element.
  2. This plan does not have any accountability for building affordable housing.
  3. Density is too high.

Sue Hestor

  1. There are a lot of projects in process around Civic Center.
  2. It is important to have a cumulative climate analysis from Mission, Van Ness, and Market to 10th Street.
  3. This housing should be for workers in the city. It should be affordable and not luxury housing.

Judy

  1. We were told in past hearings that there were no plan proposals to implement these re-zonings outside Market-Octavia.

- Answers have been misleading. There is another plan proposal for other parts of the city.

ACTION: Passed a Motion of Intent to Adopt CEQA Findings. Final Action scheduled for April 5, 2007

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

NAYES: Moore

ABSENT: Alexander and Sugaya

23. 2003.0347MTZU (J. BILLOVITS (415) 558-6390/A. RODGERS: (415) 558-6395)

MARKET AND OCTAVIA PLAN AMENDMENTS - The Planning Commission will hold a public hearing to consider additional information related to the Market and Octavia Plan and may consider adopting General Plan, Planning Code, Zoning Map amendments and adopting other actions related to the Market and Octavia Plan. 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).

Hearing # 8 – March 22, 2007 - Schedule for Planning Commission Hearing

  • Respond to Commissioner comments on Affordable Housing, Height Controls and other topics (item a)
  • Finalize Plan for Adoption (item a)
  • Consider taking action to approve resolutions adopting amendments to the General Plan, Planning Code, Zoning Map and approving interim procedures within the project area (items b, c, d, e)

The Planning Commission has held a number of public hearings to consider Case No. 2003.0347MTZU. Hearings were held on October 26, 2006, Nov. 2, 2006, Nov. 9, 2006, Nov. 16, 2006, January 11, 2007, Feb. 8, 2007, and Feb. 15, 2007. At the hearings, the Planning Commission considered various aspects of the Project, including adopting General Plan, Planning Code and Zoning Map amendments and adopting interim procedures for review of projects within the plan area 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.The Commission has considered staff presentations and public comment on specific aspects of the Plan and proposed amendments at each hearing. The Planning Commission will consider the following items and may take action on or after March 15, 2007. 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. 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.

Together, the 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. At this hearing, the Planning Commission will consider the following aspects of the Plan:

a. 2003.0347MTZU (J. BILLOVITS (415) 558-6390/A. RODGERS: (415) 558-6395)

MARKET AND OCTAVIA PLAN AMENDMENTS - Informational hearing on components of the Market and Octavia Plan. Described in item 23 above. Staff will respond to Commissioner comments and questions on affordable housing, height controls and other topics raised at earlier public hearings. The Planning Commission may also finalize the Plan for adoption of amendments to the General Plan, Planning Code, Zoning Map and adoption of interim procedures for review of projects within the Plan area.

Preliminary Recommendation: Informational Item, no action requested.

  1. 2003.0347MTZU J. BILLOVITS (415) 558-6390/A. RODGERS: (415) 558-6395)

MARKET AND OCTAVIA PLAN AMENDMENTS

Adoption of amendments to the General Plan for the area described in item 23 above. The proposed General Plan amendment 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.

Preliminary Recommendation: Adopt a Draft Resolution amending the General Plan.

c. 2003.0347MTZU (J. BILLOVITS (415) 558-6390/A. RODGERS: (415) 558-6395)

MARKET AND OCTAVIA PLAN AMENDMENTS

Adoption of amendments to the Planning Code for the area described in item 23 above. The proposed Planning Code amendment would revise Planning Code controls, including controls for land use, height and bulk, building design, loading, parking and establish new fees.

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 a Draft Resolution amending the Planning Code.

d. 2003.0347MTZU (J. BILLOVITS (415) 558-6390/A. RODGERS: (415) 558-6395)

MARKET AND OCTAVIA PLAN AMENDMENTS

Adoption of amendments to the Zoning Map for the area described in item 23 above.

The proposed Zoning Map amendment 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). 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.

Preliminary Recommendation: Adopt a Draft Resolution amending the Zoning Map.

e. 2003.0347MTZU (J. BILLOVITS (415) 558-6390/A. RODGERS: (415) 558-6395)

MARKET AND OCTAVIA PLAN AMENDMENTS - Adoption of a resolution establishing interim procedures for the area described in item 23 above. Case 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.

Preliminary Recommendation: Adopt a Draft Resolution adopting interim procedures.

SPEAKERS: Same as those listed on item #22

ACTION: Passed a Motion of Intent to Adopt. Final action scheduled for April 5, 2007

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

NAYES: Moore

ABSENT: Alexander and Sugaya

H. PUBLIC COMMENT (Tape IVB)

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

  1. directing staff to place the item on a future agenda. (Government Code Section 54954.2(a))

SPEAKERS

Sue Hestor

- Requested that the Commission reinforce the policy to make documents public at noon on Thursday preceding the scheduled hearing [a week in advance of the hearing].

Peter Cohen

- We have a concern in our neighborhood about garage additions.

- They are pocking out and intruding into the public space on pedestrian sidewalks.

- We want to find a solution to this situation.

Marilyn Amini

- Housing is not developed for transit.

- Transit should be to accommodate people living in those projects.

Adjournment: 10:40 P.M.

THESE MINUTES WERE PROPOSED FOR ADOPTION AT THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION ON THURSDAY, June 14, 2007.

SPEAKERS: None

ACTION: Approved as corrected: page 5 under Commissioner Sugaya's comments page 5 - second point to insert  relatively small .

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

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.

Last updated: 11/17/2009 10:00:27 PM