November 8, 2007SAN FRANCISCO
PLANNING COMMISSION
Meeting Minutes
Commission Chambers - Room 400
City Hall, 1 Dr. Carlton B. Goodlett Place
Thursday, November 8, 2007
1:30 PM
Regular Meeting
COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Alexander, Olague, Antonini, S. Lee, W. Lee, Moore and Sugaya
COMMISSIONER ABSENT: None
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, Amit Ghosh – Chief Planner, Sophie Middlebrook, Aaron Hollister, Edgar Oropeza, Dan DiBartolo, Craig Nikitas, and Linda Avery – Commission Secretary.
A. CONSIDERATION OF ITEMS PROPOSED FOR CONTINUANCE
The Commission will consider a request for continuance to a later date. The Commission may choose to continue the item to the date proposed below, to continue the item to another date, or to hear the item on this calendar.
1. 2007.0971C (M. WOODS: (415) 558-6315)
3571 SACRAMENTO STREET - south side between Locust and Laurel Streets; Lot 023, in Assessor's Block 1019 - Request for Conditional Use Authorization under Planning Code Sections 303 and 724.52 to establish a foreign language enrichment program for children, in the Sacramento Street Neighborhood Commercial District and a 40-X Height and Bulk District. The proposal is to convert a vacant retail use (formerly a women's clothing store) to a personal service use for a language enrichment program (dba Language at Play) offering classes in French, Mandarin and Spanish to children ranging in age from 1 to 10 years, as well as a retail sales component for its language program products. The proposed project will occupy the ground floor (approximately 2,000 square feet) of a two-story building.
Preliminary Recommendation: Approval with Conditions
(Proposed for Continuance to November 15, 2007)
SPEAKERS: None
ACTION: Continued as proposed
AYES: Olague, Antonini, S. Lee, W. Lee, Moore and Sugaya.
ABSENT: Alexander
2. 2007.0461C (A. HOLLISTER: (415) 575-9078)
448 BROADWAY- north side between Montgomery and Kearny Streets, Lot 011 in Assessor's Block 0144 - Request for Conditional Use Authorization to operate a business under this application between the hours of 2 AM and 6 AM. Specifically, the project proposal is to extend the hours of operation of the subject business (dba Broadway Express Pizza Restaurant ) to 3:00 AM. No construction is proposed under this application. This site is within the Broadway Neighborhood Commercial District, and a 65-A-1 Height and Bulk District.
Preliminary Recommendation: Approval with Conditions
(Continued from Regular Meeting of November 1, 2007)
(Proposed for Continuance to November 15, 2007)
SPEAKERS: None
ACTION: Continued as proposed
AYES: Olague, Antonini, S. Lee, W. Lee, Moore and Sugaya.
ABSENT: Alexander
3. 2006.0847D (K. CONNER: (415) 575-6914)
2071 43RD AVENUE - west side between Quintara Street and Pacheco Street; Lot 018 in Assessor's Block 2163 - Request for Discretionary Review of Building Permit Application No. 2006.02.23.5225, proposing construction of a third-story horizontal and vertical addition to a two story dwelling in a RH-1 (Residential, House, One-Family) District and a 40-X Height and Bulk District.
Preliminary Recommendation: Pending.
(Continued from Regular Meeting of September 6, 2007)
(Proposed for Continuance to December 13, 2007)
SPEAKERS: None
ACTION: Continued as proposed
AYES: Olague, Antonini, S. Lee, W. Lee, Moore and Sugaya.
ABSENT: Alexander
4. 2004.0548E (J. BATTIS: (415) 575-9022)
1450 15TH STREET Assessor's Block 3549, Lot 064, located at 1450 15th Street, in the Inner Mission neighborhood, between South Van Ness Avenue and Folsom Street on the northwest corner of the intersection of 15th and Shotwell Streets. The proposed project would include the demolition of the existing one-story, 20- to 26-foot-tall, approximately 8,226-square-foot(sf) industrial building, constructed in 1908, and the construction of a four-story over basement, approximately 43-foot-tall building. The proposed, approximately 32,300 gross-square-foot(gsf) building would include ten residential units on the second through fourth floors over approximately 7,100 sf of Production, Distribution, & Repair (PDR)/Business Service use on the ground and basement levels. The proposed basement level would contain a ten-space residential parking garage (about 5,600 sf) with ingress and egress from Shotwell Street. The proposed project would result in an approximately 24,000 gsf net increase in uses on the project site. The approximately 8,227-sf project site is within a Light Industrial (M-1) use district, in the Mission Alcohol Beverage Special Use District and within a 50-X height and bulk district. The proposed project would require Conditional Use authorization for the construction of residential dwellings in an M-1 zoning district pursuant to Section 215 of the San Francisco Planning Code (Planning Code); a Variance to provide less than the required number of parking spaces (Section 151); and an allowable exception for corner lots to satisfy rear yard requirements on the second floor pursuant to Planning Code Section 134(e)2).
Preliminary Recommendation: Uphold Preliminary Mitigated Negative Declaration
(Proposed for continuance to January 17, 2008)
SPEAKERS: None
ACTION: Continued as proposed
AYES: Olague, Antonini, S. Lee, W. Lee, Moore and Sugaya.
ABSENT: Alexander
5. 2005.0937D (E. JACKSON: (415) 558-6363)
736 Valencia Street - west side, between 18th and 19th Streets, Lot 005 in Assessor's Block 3588 - Staff Initiated Discretionary Review of Building Permit Application number 2006.02.08.4114. The proposal is to construct a new mixed-use building on a lot currently containing a 22-space private surface parking lot. The proposed structure would contain 8 dwelling units with commercial space and 8 off-street parking spaces on the ground floor. The applicant requests that the Planning Commission remove the springing condition requiring community impact fees and BMR units that was previously imposed on the project. The subject property is located within the Valencia NCD (Neighborhood Commercial District) with a 50-X Height and Bulk designation.
Preliminary Recommendation: Take Discretionary Review and remove the springing condition.
(Proposed for Indefinite Continuance)
SPEAKERS: None
ACTION: Continued as proposed
AYES: Olague, Antonini, S. Lee, W. Lee, Moore and Sugaya.
ABSENT: Alexander
6. 2007.0936T (T. SULLIVAN-LENANE: (415) 558-6257)
Amendments relating to Planning Code Sections 781.8 [Board File No. 07-1217] - Ordinance introduced by Supervisor Ammiano amending Planning Code Section 781.8 to allow relocation of existing Liquor Establishment in the Mission Alcoholic Beverage Special Use Subdistrict to another location within the same Mission Alcoholic Beverage Special Use Subdistrict; and making findings.
Preliminary Recommendation: Approval.
(Continued from Regular Meeting of October 25, 2007)
Supervisor Ammiano is no longer pursuing this legislation
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.
7. Consideration of Adoption:
· Draft Minutes of Regular Special Meeting of August 30, 2007.
· Draft Minutes of Regular Meeting of October 25, 2007.
SPEAKERS: None
ACTION: Approved
AYES: Olague, Antonini, S. Lee, W. Lee, Moore and Sugaya
ABSENT: Alexander
8. 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
- I just wanted to thank those who were kind enough to take me on a tour yesterday in the Mission District and the industrial area around 16th and Alabama Streets.
- It was very enlightening. I saw first of all that it is a very active area where it's hard to find a parking place when you go out there.
- I also found out that there were a lot of different industries going on and regrettably some of the older ones were having difficulties and had drastically down sized their operations just recently.
- In many instances this was in reaction to technical advances that have come about that would allow things to be done in a different way such as printing, book binding, garment manufactures and many others.
- Others are able to introduce these new tools into their methods of production.
- The other thing that I found interesting was the line between office and production, prototyping and distribution that are often very hard to distinguish and now we have all these new tools available.
- In that regard; I hope that as we go forward with various discussions that would come up in the next few weeks, that we would be able to look at all these different things and be cognitive of the changes.
- I think that is something that I would encourage other Commissioners who have not had a chance to take advantage of seeing what is happening in various places.
- I want to thank the people who gave me that tour. I think that it was one of the most enlightening things I have had since being on the Commission.
Commissioner Olague
- I believe that next week we are going to have a report from staff on Japantown and the work that has been done in terms of the Better Neighborhoods planning process.
- I look forward to that.
- Yesterday I also took a tour in Japantown and I look forward in helping out and moving that process along.
- It was a very informative tour and there is a lot of potential there and I just hope that we are continuously informed about the process.
- Also, it looks like Proposition H has been defeated at the polls and I want to thank staff for giving us guidance and analysis.
- Joshua Switzky wrote a really detailed analysis on the impacts that the measure would have on the City.
- This week I will be meeting with Ms. Avery to discuss the special hearings that we've requested and we will be discussing when the transit discussion would take place.
- Maybe we can take a look at the Better Street program and what is being done for transportation and some kind of overview of Transit First and what it means for individual projects and the City.
- At one time, we had discussed putting together a Rules' Committee and I am just wondering if we can get some dates certain of when we can meet to discuss the rules and also possibly some procedure around staff reports.
Commissioner Alexander
- That committee was established as you and me. The idea is to put together those things and then we would come back to the rest of the Commission to discuss.
Commissioner Sugaya
- I either received a notice or saw it in the paper that there is sewer master plan being developed and I know that the PUC is holding some public workshops on Tuesday the 13th, Wednesday the 14th, and Thursday the 15th.
- I know that we keep adding to the informational hearing requests but I believe it might be good to hear what PUC had in mind.
- I was at a workshop last night concerning the master planning efforts for pier 70 and there were some comments made specifically in relation to planning and how that might affect historic resources in the pier 70 area.
- I do not know if the Port has formally asked for any participation from the Planning Department but several staff members were there, I think on their own, to see what was going on.
- I know I cannot volunteer anybody's time but it seems that someone like Tim Frye, who seems to be interested, might be allowed to at least participate with the Port's staff.
Larry Badiner, Zoning Administrator
- It is my recollection that staff has participated with Pier 70 with some scoping and in giving some ideas on moving forward.
- I think there is a participatory process with this work and we can certainly make sure that someone from preservation staff is involved with that.
Commissioner Sugaya
- I think that especially now that they are moving into this phase of the work that it would be nice to have some specific input because they are going to be discussing guidelines for preservation and new construction.
- I think that there would be efforts to try to produce some massive models and that kind of thing.
Commissioner Moore
- I am not sure who the author of the just release RFP for Treasure Island is, but it is a good one and I am not sure if Planning was involved.
- It is a very good job and I am very interested to see how consultants are being selected since it is a very detailed design oriented RFP for design developing guidelines.
- We have not had a most recent update on the plan but I do hope that a very creative team would be selected and preferably one from out of town.
Commissioner Olague
- In looking at the advanced calendar, I believe that there was a request that came form Supervisor Ammiano's Office that we wait to schedule some of the Mission and Eastern Neighborhood's phase process.
C. DIRECTOR'S REPORT
9. Director's Announcements
NONE
10. Review of Past Week's Events at the Board of Supervisors and Board of Appeals
AnMarie Rodgers
Land Use Committee
A- Fringe Financial Restricted Use District – This item was heard by this Commission on September 20th and on October 16th Supervisor Ammiano submitted an official inquiry to the Building Inspection and Planning Departments asking how we would modify our procedures to gain the implementation. We informed the Board that the training was on the way and our response would be sent out this week. We will begin initiating Staff Discretionary Review of these fringe financial services to ensure proper scrutiny while the legislation is under consideration.
At the hearing this week, Supervisor Sandoval requested that the legislation be split so that the Planning Commission could considered adding another area to this restricted use district. The Supervisor would add the alcohol restricted use district that he is currently proposing in the Excelsior to the list of areas that would also be restricted for fringe financial services.
B- Interim Zoning – Conditional Use in the Eastern Neighborhoods Plan Area. This is an interim control and as such is not required to go before the Planning Commission before the Board acts. This control requires a Conditional Use and reports on 7 different topics for most uses in the Eastern Neighborhoods area. This week the Committee heard 90 minutes of testimony and continued the item to the call of the Chair.
Full Board
A- Resolution urging Hayes Street to be converted to a two-way street. Although the EIR for the Market Octavia Plan found significant and avoidable impacts to converting Hayes Street to two-way, during the adoption hearings this Commission made findings of overriding considerations in effect that the pedestrian character and safety of this street outweighed the negative traffic impacts. This non-binding resolution urges MTA to restore two-way traffic on the street. Passed
B- Ordinance modifying the definition of liquor store to remove prohibitions on grocery stores and similar uses. This week the Board passed the ordinance on first reading with an amendment that would place further prohibitions on grocery stores such that they could not sell so-called fortified liquors within these alcohol restricted use districts.
C- Introductions of :
a. Administrative Code Amendment - This would prohibit conversion of Large Tourist Hotels into condominium projects. It would also allow the Planning Commission to issue exemptions for the conversion of up to 500 units in the following two years. This ordinance lists criteria to consider for possible exemptions the [120-day] sunset period. Introduced by Supervisors Peskin, Ammiano, Daly, Maxwell, McGoldrick, and Mirkarimi.
b. Zoning Interim Moratorium on institutional uses in the Western SoMa. Urgency Ordinance which would establish interim zoning moratorium prohibiting new institutional uses in the Western SoMa Planning Area Special Use District. This would be a 45-day control. Introduced by Supervisors Peskin, Ammiano, Daly, Maxwell, McGoldrick, and Mirkarimi presented.
Larry Badiner, Zoning Administrator
Board of Appeals
A- 2616 Irving Street – Quickly Store. On October 29th this was granted a rehearing because either the project sponsor or owner had language issues and wanted a translator. It was set for November 3rd and continued because of the property owner's illness. The appellant argued that the Quickly formula retail had been established in 2006 prior to the amendments that require CU [Conditional Use] for all formula retail. Upheld requiring that Quickly seeks conditional use permit.
B- 899 North Point – The appellant did not show and the project was approved.
C- 880 – 882 Dolores Street – This was a denial of a building permit that the Planning Commission took Discretionary Review to merge two units into one. Over-ruled and approved the building permit to merge the dwelling units.
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
Marsha Garland, Director of North Beach Chamber of Commerce
- The nature of neighborhood serving retails in this country is in crisis. It has changed irreplaceably.
- We have reached a point where we must re-examine our permitted uses of ground floor commercials spaces.
E. REGULAR CALENDAR
11. 2001.0565L (Tape IA) (S. MIDDLEBROOK: (415) 558-6372)
451 Jersey Street - Noe Valley Branch Library, south side of Jersey Street between Castro and Diamond Streets, on Assessor's Block 6539, Lot 034. The building's form and detailing are primarily Classical Revival in architectural style. The property is zoned P (Public), within an RH-2 (Residential, House, Two-Family) district and a 40-X Height and Bulk District. Consideration to approve, disapprove, or approve with modifications the landmark designation of the Noe Valley Branch Library under Article 10 of the Planning Code.
Preliminary Recommendation: Approval
SPEAKERS: None
ACTION: Approved
AYES: Alexander, Olague, Antonini, S. Lee, W. Lee, Moore and Sugaya
MOTION: 17508
12. 2007.0701C (TapeIA; IB; IIA) (A. HOLLISTER: (415) 575-9078)
1400 Grant Avenue - northeast corner of Grant Avenue and Green Street, Lot 019 in Assessor's Block 0115 - Request for Conditional Use Authorization to establish a small self-service restaurant (d.b.a. Honeydoo Frozen Yogurt) of approximately 800 square feet within the existing ground-floor retail space. No physical expansion of the existing building is proposed. This site is within the North Beach Neighborhood Commercial District, and a 40-X Height and Bulk District.
Preliminary Recommendation: Disapproval
(Continued from Regular Meeting of November 1, 2007)
SPEAKERS
Jeremy Paul, Project Sponsor Representative
- We were informed yesterday that there would not be a hearing today and many people interested in testifying are not here.
- You have letters and signatures in support from people in the immediate vicinity of this location.
- Grant Avenue has nothing oriented to pedestrians and this corner is particularly appropriate for this use.
- This is not frozen yogurt. It is a chilled yogurt which is a different product.
- We are not altering the historic part of this building and changes that we would make are well in context with the design of the façade.
Keith Wilson
- This is a perfect business for this location because tourists come to the area for the attractive neighborhood character and they look primarily for entertainment venues and restaurants.
Tony Gantner, North Beach Merchants Association
- Spoke in support of this application because it would bring a diverse group of people to the commercial area.
Jim Schein
- Spoke in support of the application mainly because people should be given the opportunity to attempt to succeed at their goals.
Chuck Thomas, North Beach Neighbors
- Spoke in support because this is about the welfare of the community and hoped that today's decision is not unilateral.
Marc Bruno
- There is a definitive benefit having a family business with yogurt that is going to be anti-bar, anti-alcohol, and those other uses that we do not wish to see in our neighborhood.
NanRoth
- We need policies to protect neighborhood serving businesses based on the need to maintain a decent quality of life for the residents of the area.
- I feel strongly that this should not be converted to another food and beverage site.
Mary Lipian, Co-Chair of the Planning Committee for Telegraph Hill Dwellers
- I urge you to adopt staff's recommendation to disapprove this request because of the loss of retail service sites and because we need balance in the character of the area.
- There is no CEQA review for the proposed changes. Neither they have shared those changes with the neighborhood.
June Osterberg
- Requested help to recapture the variety we had before and not have just eating and drinking places in the area.
Katherine Petrin, President of North Beach and Telegraph Hill Dweller Member
- I remind you that the real issue is that once the conditional use is approved, it will remain with the property and not with this business.
- She asked the commission to support the findings of the Planning Department staff.
Marsha Garland, North Beach Chamber and Commerce
- It is time to redefine what is neighborhood serving and what is suitable for ground floor commercial.
- The rent there is so high and some organizations tighten the process and drag it out for a long time impacting economically these small businesses.
Lynn Jefferson, North Beach Neighbors
- Spoke in support of this application because it would bring variety to that area and increase pedestrian traffic.
Santino DeRose; Owner - PGB, LLC and Crown Fortune Properties, Inc.
- I'm in support of this application and ask the Commission to place some sort of restrictions to prevent the installation of a kitchen and prohibit the sell of alcohol in order to prevent future restaurant uses.
- There would not be any alteration to the façade and we would not approve any to the historic character of the site.
AlexandriaKinkel
- Concerned about the alterations to the façade, which are shown on the drawings.
- The interior alterations would be substantial and not easily reversed for a different tenant.
Kong Wu - Owner
- Requested the commission to approve it to give him the opportunity to have a job.
ACTION: Approved
AYES: Alexander, Antonini, S. Lee, W. Lee and Sugaya
NAYES: Olague and Moore
MOTION: 17509
13. 2006.0056C (Tape IIA) (E. OROPEZA: (415) 558-6381)
317 and 331-333 Cortland Avenue - north side between Bocana and Bennington Streets; Lots 015 and 014 in Assessor's Block 5667 - Request for Conditional Use Authorization pursuant to Planning Code Sections 161(j) and 303 for the reduction of off-street parking spaces for proposed dwelling units and for existing dwelling units, to allow construction of a 2-unit mixed-use building within the NC-2 (Small-Scale Neighborhood Commercial) District and a 40 –X height and Bulk District.
Preliminary Recommendation: Approval with Conditions
SPEAKERS
Marc Tetrault, Project Sponsor Representative
- In late October, we provided a memorandum outlining the historical and architectural context for this project.
- The Planning Code does not require that off-street parking be provided for commercial spaces in this zoning district and it does require one off street space for each dwelling unit.
- If off street parking were to be required, it would severely damage the potential use of the commercial space shown on the application drawings.
- Street parking is generally abundant within a few blocks of the project site and it is located on a primary transit line within reasonable reach of multiple transit modes.
Andy Thornley, San Francisco Bicycle Coalition
- Spoke in support of this project because it brings housing to this neighborhood and support car-free tenants.
Marc Lindsell
- Spoke in support of the project because it brings housing instead of having an empty lot.
Terrie
- I have three objections: (1) the palm tree - because of the Cortland Merchants' forestation plan; (2) windows should be modified to meet the existing character, which is clear windows; and (3) no parking because many of the buildings on the block have driveways.
Ellen
- I was amused to hear that street parking is abundant and also that public transportation is so amenable we can eliminate cars.
Donna Roberts
- Opposes this project mainly because it is taking away street parking.
- We need a real parking survey and not a self-serving one from an architect.
Gordon Thrupp
- Concerned that the scale is not consistent with the existing character of Cortland corridor. It is impacting open space and blocking air and light.
- Requested that the building be lowered by 4-percent of the proposed height. Also, the height of the ground floor commercial space should be lowered by one and a half feet.
Margaret Thrupp
- I'm concerned about damaging our walls with the vibration generated by the construction.
- Also, can you make a condition for their window to not be above our window seal?
Michael Smith
- It is very important to have a continuous commercial district and not have it interrupted by entrances to garages that could increase safety concerns for families with children.
- The palm tree is not a good idea because of the Cortland Avenue forestation plan. They have a nice consistent tree canopy.
ACTION: Approved with conditions:
- No palm trees.
- Continue working with staff on design and materials.
AYES: Alexander, Olague, Antonini, S. Lee, W. Lee, Moore and Sugaya
MOTION: 17510
14. 2007.0922C (S. Young: (415) 558-6346)
1926 LOMBARD STREET - north side between Webster and Buchanan Streets; Lot 006 in Assessor's Block 0493 - Request for Conditional Use Authorization under Sections 186.1(e), 712.45, and 303 of the Planning Code to allow the transfer of ABC License Type 21 from 1600 Lombard Street (previously Goldmine Liquors) to 1926 Lombard Street (d.b.a. Luigi's Delicatessen) in an NC-3 (Moderate-Scale) Neighborhood Commercial District and a 40-X Height and Bulk District. The proposal is to add off-sale liquor sales to an existing grocery store (with accessory deli) for the sale of beer, wine, and distilled spirits. The proposal will not involve an expansion of the existing building envelope.
Preliminary Recommendation: Approval with Conditions
SPEAKERS: None
ACTION: Without hearing, continued to December 13, 2007
AYES: Olague, Antonini, S. Lee, W. Lee, Moore and Sugaya.
ABSENT: Alexander
15a. 2006.1248KXCV(Tape IIA; IIB; IIIA; IIIB) (D. DIBARTOLO: (415) 558 -6291)
55 NINTH STREET - east side between Market and Mission Streets; Lot 063 in Assessor's Block 3701 - Request for a Section 309 Determination of Compliance and Request for Exceptions. The proposed project is to construct a 17 story, approximately 205 foot tall (including mechanical penthouses) new mixed-use building at the existing vacant lot, containing approximately 260 dwelling units, approximately 3,000 square feet of ground level commercial space, and a garage with a capacity of up to 113 parking spaces (98 residential spaces and 15 commercial spaces). The project requires separation of towers, rear yard, comfort-level wind, parking, and bulk exceptions pursuant to Section 309(a). The project site is located within a C-3-G (Downtown General Commercial ) District and a 200-S Height and Bulk District.
Preliminary recommendation: Approval with Conditions
(Continued from Regular Meeting of November 1, 2007)
SPEAKERS
Andrew Junius, Project Sponsor Representative
- This project has everything that this Commission has been looking for in a downtown project.
- It will have 31 BMR [Below Market Rate] units, less than one-to-one parking on site, family housing, close to transit, and it's a dense urban infield project.
- The project sponsor is very committed to this project and we believe it complies fully with the downtown development plan.
John Perkins Jr., Architect
- We have a lot of experience with high rises and LEED certified buildings and we aim to have this project certified as well.
- This is a very exciting strong urban design with the details and efficiencies of our development as a residential project with the addition of balconies and an L shape floor plate.
- We are looking at clear glass, metal treatments, and the scale steps down towards Mission Street.
- The balconies add a strong angular element creating solar shading and protection from rain. This would help window washing by the individual owner.
- We have worked with the developers before and they have been extremely conscious and concerned about the design and following through to create a strong end product.
- We support the choice of having it LEED certified and to have on-site affordable housing.
David Matchett, Chair of San Francisco Friends Meeting
- We are a religious society of friends also known as Quakers' and have a 350-year tradition of service. We own the building at 65 Ninth Street.
- We hold our worships on Sundays and Tuesday evenings. We also make our building available to a range of community organizations and other faiths for meetings and religious services - many taking place in the evenings and on weekends.
- Although we support projects that bring housing and retail spaces to our neighborhood, we have issues with traffic, safety and noise.
- There was not proper notification or attempts to meet with the neighborhood until 4 weeks ago. Just a week ago we were discussing the concerns. And although they came up with suggestions, they are not adequate remedies to the problem.
- They have designed their driveway next to our front door. We believe that entrance and exit to the garage can and should be located on Laski Street.
- The project does not incorporate the green building standards of the original buildings.
- We do not know if this building is going to be for San Franciscans as a primary residence or for corporate use.
- There are a few things that the project sponsor has incorporated into the design and we request time to keep working and redefine concerns and issues.
Dawn Moore, San Francisco Friends Meeting
- The garage of this building, being next to our worship place, is going to create a lot of noise every single day and at all times. It is an unfair burden on us.
Philip Oliver, San Francisco Friends Meeting
- The parking entrance a few feet away from our worship room is going to be impossible for us given that our method of worship is silent.
- It is a good project and we request time to come up with agreeable solutions.
Elizabeth Boardman, San Francisco Friends Meeting
- I'm concerned with the garage entrance on Ninth Street because besides the noise there is the safety hazard with the traffic coming off the highway.
Kristin Barnard, San Francisco Friends Meeting
- I urge you to withhold the approval of the permit so we can have a chance to continue conversations with the project sponsor, particularly moving the garage activity to Laski Street.
Michael Burnside, Quaker
- The project sponsor did not interact with the neighborhood and we do not know them - neither do they know us well enough to find out that silence is very important for us.
Pete Russell, Quaker Friends
- I'm concerned that this building is aiming for gold LEED certified and the current proposal does not abide by that standard.
- Trying to approve this today is premature. It is prudent to allow some time to work out the concerns about the parking garage, traffic, safety and the project sponsor's accountability.
Stephen Matchett, San Francisco Friends Meeting
- The garage entry should be moved to Laski Street. That is the same feeling of many people in the area because of the noise impacting our worship, traffic and safety.
Bruce Folsom, San Francisco Friends Meeting
- Our meetings/worship is based on silence and we look for non-violent solutions that are acquired through time and conversation. We need that time.
Paul Minault, Council for Friends Meeting
- Requested a continuance to work with project sponsor and try to resolve the issues in a creative way.
- We recommend the parking entrance on Laski Street and we feel that obstacles have been thrown up to make that street looks like an infeasible solution mostly because of the left turn.
Carol Maxwell, Friends Meeting
- Concerned about traffic, safety for children attending Friends Meetings, and accountability because they are not going to be the ultimate owners.
- They have tried to come up with mitigations but they are not sufficient enough to address those concerns.
[No name stated]
- I'm a member of a group that uses the Friends Meeting facilities and silence is very important for us.
- Traffic on Ninth Street at any hour of the day is a major northbound artery where speed and traffic is very intense.
- I would encourage you to allow the time to seek the resolution that both parties desire.
Steve, San Francisco Friends Meeting
- The opportunity to use Laski Street as a garage entrance and exit is an issue of neighborhood responsibility because that would help clean up that area and improve the neighborhood.
Daniel Fratton, Reuben and Junius
- They are asking for a continuance because of inadequate public notice and we have put up posters, and mailed and published notices went out as required by the Planning Department.
- A letter was sent on July of this year to Friends and was followed by a phone call and they declined to discuss anything further.
- The design is very similar to the last one and the neighbors made a settlement agreement with Skif' [previous developer] and received a $155 thousand dollars payment.
- We found out in October that Friends had made inquiries to this department and they did not want to talk to us until they retained an attorney, which took two weeks.
- We have made efforts to resolve their concerns and we sent a detailed offer letter and proposed changes to the front of the building as well as $45,000 dollars to sound proof the building for them so as not to be disturbed of any noise from our project.
Sue Hestor
- The Friends Meeting has repeatedly expressed concerns about noise and traffic since 2001 on any of the projects proposed in that area.
- Ninth Street is a very difficult because people are driving fast.
- It is not safe to have a garage next to a church and a place where there are disabled people and children.
Alex, INCA Development Inc.
- We have 40 years of experience doing this kind of project with 300 in Australia and throughout many cities of the United States.
- We have won awards from Australia and international federations worldwide for infield projects.
- We believe that we have given sufficient notice and time to those people who want to object.
- We are sensitive to their needs and that is why we made offers to ensure the sound proofing of the neighboring property.
- We have done traffic studies and the Planning Department has gotten all of those. It is difficult to use Laski Street.
- This is an excellent project that is providing housing with 31 affordable units.
[No name stated]
- I'm concerned that his project, as proposed, will impact the experience of worship as well as impact safety with automobile traffic.
- In my opinion, this project is not ready for approval.
Andrew, ANCA Development Inc.
- Smart growth is a huge part of what we do in the massive consideration in all the developments that we under take to add value to the community and to the city.
- This is an opportunity to address most of the City's concerns by providing affordable housing, retail spaces and it is near major transit.
MOTION: To approve with conditions that are amended:
- Per project sponsor's offer, pay $45,000 to the Friends Meeting to use their building in any way they choose but mainly for ambient noise.
- To close the 9th Street gate all day on Sundays from 6a.m. to 6p.m. and on Tuesday to leave it open with an attendant from 5:30 - 10p.m.
AYES: Antonini and W. Lee
NAYES: S. Lee, Moore, Sugaya, and Olague
ABSENT: Alexander
Motion Failed
ACTION: With public hearing closed, continued to December 13, 2007.
AYES: Olague, Antonini, S. Lee, W. Lee and Moore
NAYES: Sugaya
ABSENT: Alexander
15b. 2006.1248KXCV (D. DIBARTOLO: (415) 558 -6291)
55 NINTH STREET - east side between Market and Mission Streets; Lot 063 in Assessor's Block 3701 - Request for Conditional Use Authorization to 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, for the project described in item above.
Preliminary recommendation: Approval with conditions
(Continued from Regular Meeting of November 1, 2007)
SPEAKERS: Same as those listed on item 15a.
ACTION: With public hearing closed, continued to December 13, 2007.
AYES: Olague, Antonini, S. Lee, W. Lee and Moore
NAYES: Sugaya
ABSENT: Alexander
15c. 2006.1248KXCV (D. DIBARTOLO: (415) 558 -6291)
55 NINTH STREET - east side between Market and Mission Streets; Lot 063 in Assessor's Block 3701 - Request for usable open space dimension and dwelling unit exposure variances in connection with the mixed-used project described in item above. The request for variances will be considered by the Zoning Administrator.
(Continued from Regular Meeting of November 1, 2007)
SPEAKERS: Same as those listed on item 15a.
ACTION: Zoning Administrator closed public hearing and continued this item to
December 13, 2007.
15 16. 2007.0952C (Tape IIIB) (E. Watty: (415) 558-6620)
4841 MISSION STREET - east side between Russia and France Avenues; Lot 020 in Assessor's Block 6272 - Request for a Conditional Use Authorization, pursuant to Planning Code Sections 703.3, 703.4, and 712.44, to allow a formula retail small self-service restaurant (d.b.a. Subway) to operate within the NC-3 (Neighborhood Commercial, Moderate-Scale) District and 40-X Height and Bulk District.
Preliminary Recommendation: Approval with Conditions
SPEAKERS
Peter Sangha, Project Sponsor
- As mentioned, this location has been vacant for about a year and it needs improvement.
- We have signed a twenty year lease but it is contingent on us getting approval.
- Subway is a leader in providing healthy and affordable choices of food.
- We plan to spend about $200,000 on this project - installing new windows, doors and totally redoing the outside and inside.
- We will work with the Excelsior Action Group to place local residents into the newly created positions and we hope to have seven full-time employees.
- There is no Subway on the whole Mission and hopefully we will be a link for other people to get into this business.
Maria Cisneros, Owner of the Property
- Supported this application because the building has been vacant for a long time.
- Subway is a very healthy, affordable food and they would be enhancing the building.
Glenda Gutierrez
- Many types of businesses came to look at this building and the property owners were really committed to have a community serving business at this site.
- Approve this project.
Cristy Johnston, Director of Excelsior Action Group
- Asked approval of this application.
- As a group, we do not usually support formula retails but this particular location is different because the property owner asked for help. We like the business model and we had a community process.
Silvia Johnson
- I think this is going to be in process for about three weeks and I am trying to find the address.
- My music has a lot to do with my family history.
ACTION: Approved
AYES: Olague, Antonini, S. Lee, W. Lee and Sugaya
NAYES: Moore
ABSENT: Alexander
MOTION: 17511
17. 2007.1012D (Tape IIIB) (E. Watty: (415) 558-6620)
3947-3949 26th Street - south side between Church and Sanchez Streets, Lot 039 in Assessor's Block 6565 - Mandatory Discretionary Review, under the Planning Commission's policy requiring review of dwelling unit mergers, of Building Permit Application No. 2007.07.18.7085, which proposes to merge two existing dwelling-units into one single-family home. The property is located within an RH-2 (Residential House, Two-Family) District and a 40-X Height and Bulk District.
Preliminary Recommendation: Take Discretionary Review and disapprove the project as proposed
SPEAKERS
John Hude, Project Architect
- I request that you grant the merger for the following four reasons:
(a) 25 percent of the housing stock in San Francisco has 3 or 4 bedrooms
(b) Policy 1.2, 1.5 and 1.6 speaks of affordable housing and this unit is not affordable
(c) If granted, it fits into the prevailing density and fabric of the neighborhood
(d) The unit will be owner occupied, returning this to its original single family condition; it is not displacing anyone with the merger; and we have enthusiastic support of the neighborhood.
Paul Nasvik, Owner
- We intend to keep living there and we love our neighborhood and are very active in our community.
- We are not developers and are not doing this for profit.
- Wendy works from home as an editor and I am currently in nursing school at San Francisco State and my goal is to work at San Francisco General.
ACTION: Did not take Discretionary Review and Approved
AYES: Antonini, S. Lee, W. Lee and Moore
NAYES: Olague and Sugaya
ABSENT: Alexander
18a. 2006.1355DDV (Tape IIIB) (M. GLUECKERT: (415) 558-6543)
130 LEDYARD STREET - southwest side between Mercury Street and Thornton Avenue, Lot 002 in Assessor's Block 5398 - Request for Discretionary Review of Building Permit Application No. 2006.08.29.0915, proposing to legalize an existing deck and one-story structure at the rear of a single-family dwelling built without benefit of permit. The property is located in a 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 proposal as submitted.
SPEAKERS
Hai Ying Mai, 1st Discretionary Review Requestor
- Against this project because it is built without a permit and they did not ask the neighborhood.
- The railing is too high and I'm very concerned about our own privacy.
- Questioned whether this building meets standards.
Wendy Huang, 2nd Discretionary Review Requestor [translated]
- The distance between my house and the proposed project is 20 feet and hope they would take the deck down.
- The deck is blocking the sunlight and view and is even facing two of my bedrooms affecting privacy.
[No name stated]
- That deck was built illegally and it affects our privacy - something that is legally protected.
Jose Diaz, Project Sponsor
- I tried to work with both requestors and see what can be done to address their concerns but there is a language barrier.
- The lattice actually [helps] with the privacy for both families.
- I tried explaining that I would bring that deck up to code and cut 3 feet from the property line and 2 feet from the front.
- We had the variance hearing and they did not attend.
- The Building Department inspector came to my house and everything is okay except for minor repairs; I am doing my best.
Susan Avila
- Spoke in support because the project sponsor tried to work with requestors with no success even after recommendation to get a translator.
- The deck and the lattice actually provide privacy for both homes.
Graciela Diaz
- We do not use the deck that often. One idea is that if we are approved, we can put some plants to increase the privacy.
ACTION: Took Discretionary Review and approved requiring:
- Removal of all lattice work except the one on the left side as you face the building from the rear.
- Place vine plants to increase privacy.
AYES: Olague, Antonini, S. Lee, W. Lee, Moore and Sugaya
ABSENT: Alexander
18b. 2006.1355DDV (M. GLUECKERT: (415) 558-6543)
130 LEDYARD STREET - southwest side between Mercury Street and Thornton Avenue, Lot 002 in Assessor's Block 5398 – Variance request to be considered by the Zoning Administrator for rear yard, for the project proposing to legalize an existing deck and one-story structure at the rear of a single-family dwelling built without benefit of permit. The property is located in a RH-1 (Residential, House, One-Family) District, and a 40-X Height and Bulk District.
SPEAKERS: Same as those listed on item 18a.
ACTION: Zoning Administrator granted the variance with the same condition imposed from the Discretionary Review.
19. 2007.0696D (A. PUTRA: (415) 575-9079)
390 CAPISTRANO AVENUE - west side between San Juan Avenue and Santa Ysabel Avenue; Lot 013 in Assessor's Block 3150 - Request for Discretionary Review of Building Permit Application No. 2007.05.09.0766, proposing construction of a two-story, horizontal rear addition to a two-story dwelling in a RH-1 (Residential, House, One-Family) District and a 40-X Height and Bulk District.
Preliminary Recommendation: Do not take Discretionary Review and approve the project as proposed by the revised plans.
SPEAKERS: None
DISCRETIONARY REVIEW APPLICATION WITHDRAWN
20. 2007.1108D (Tape IIIB; IVA) (D. LINDSAY: (415) 558-6393)
2250 CHESTNUT STREET - northwest corner of Chestnut and Avila Streets, Lot 034 in Assessor's Block 0488A - Request for Discretionary Review of Building Permit Application No. 2007.08.09.9290, proposing to expand an existing Small Self-Service Restaurant (dba "The Grove Cafe") into a vacant retail space to the west (formerly occupied by an extension of a retail clothing store dba "Jack's"). The expansion would add approximately 660 square feet and 27 seats to the existing 48-seat restaurant and would also establish the expanded restaurant as a Full Service Restaurant. The project site is within an NC-2 Zoning District and a 40-X Height and Bulk District.
Preliminary Recommendation: Do not take Discretionary Review and approve the project as proposed.
SPEAKERS
Charles Bain, Discretionary Review Requestor
- This is about preservation of the neighborhood because we are losing spaces; preservation to all corridors.
- There is a big impact with the hours of operation. And also, parking is impossible there.
- This is a model in our neighborhood but we have reached a saturation point.
- It needs to stay the way it is and do not increase or expand it.
Jai Das
- We have a lot of tourists shopping in this neighborhood and this year has improved.
- Granting an expansion would be more competition and diversity needs to be kept.
Stefano Cassolato
- Opposes the project because parking and traffic are big issues already and this would increase it, especially on weekends.
Eric J. Messersmith
- Concerned about the saturation of restaurants in the area.
Carl Hilsz
- Main concern is the preservation of the neighborhood.
- It was mentioned that this is a modest increase and I believe that a 50 percent increase in capacity is not modest.
- If approved, I request that you allow self-service and not a full-service restaurant because of the impacts on parking and traffic.
Ken Zankel, Project Sponsor
- We are not fast food and have never applied as such.
- We are proposing no change in our service. It is going to be the same.
- As far as the 50 percent increase in our capacity -- it is below a 30 percent increase and it is under a one percent increase in the restaurant capacity in the four major block area.
- We did not throw anybody out because it has always been empty there.
- [Read letter from Supervisor Pier recommending approval].
- We have 651 petitions signed by individuals and 13 petitions from restaurants on Chestnut and Sutter Streets supporting our project.
- We are simply asking that our application be approved to add a second ADA [American Disability Act] conforming bathroom; we already have one.
- We are trying to do all these things legally -- paying rent, construction, pay insurance and add seats.
- I am local and have helped many people that started as employees and now are partners and some others gained valuable skills.
- We have contributed to the community helping various associations.
ACTION: Did not take Discretionary Review and Approved.
AYES: Olague, S. Lee, Moore and Sugaya
NAYES: Antonini and W. Lee
ABSENT: Alexander
F. PUBLIC COMMENT
At this time, members of the public may address the Commission on items of interest to the public that are within the subject matter jurisdiction of the Commission except agenda items. With respect to agenda items, your opportunity to address the Commission will be afforded when the item is reached in the meeting with one exception. When the agenda item has already been reviewed in a public hearing at which members of the public were allowed to testify and the Commission has closed the public hearing, your opportunity to address the Commission must be exercised during the Public Comment portion of the Calendar. Each member of the public may address the Commission for up to three minutes.
The Brown Act forbids a commission from taking action or discussing any item not appearing on the posted agenda, including those items raised at public comment. In response to public comment, the commission is limited to:
(1) responding to statements made or questions posed by members of the public; or
(2) requesting staff to report back on a matter at a subsequent meeting; or
(3) directing staff to place the item on a future agenda. (Government Code Section 54954.2(a))
SPEAKERS
None
Adjournment: 9:41 P.M.
THESE MINUTES WERE PROPOSED FOR ADOPTION AT THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION ON THURSDAY, December 6, 2007.
SPEAKERS: None
ACTION: Approved
AYES: Olague, Antonini, S. Lee, W. Lee, Moore 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.
