SAN FRANCISCO

PLANNING COMMISSION

Meeting Minutes

Commission Chambers - Room 400

City Hall, 1 Dr. Carlton B. Goodlett Place

Thursday, May 15, 2008

1:30 PM

Regular Meeting

COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Olague, Antonini, Lee, Moore and Sugaya

COMMISSIONER ABSENT: Miguel

THE MEETING WAS CALLED TO ORDER BY PRESIDENT OLAGUE AT 1:50 P.M.

STAFF IN ATTENDANCE: John Rahaim – Director of Planning, Larry Badiner – Zoning Administrator, Amit Ghosh – Chief Planner, Craig Nikitas, Diego Sanchez, Sara Vellve, Tina Tam, Glenn Cabreros, Paul Lord, Charles Rivasplata, Sandra Soto-Grondona, Ken Rich, Steve Wertheim, 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. 2007.1019C (R. CRAWFORD: 558-6358)

2400 Noriega Street - north side, northwest corner of Noriega and 31^st Avenue Lot 003 of Assessor's Block 2018 - Request for Conditional Use Authorization under Planning Code Section 711.81 to develop a Large Institutional Use (Lutheran Church of the Holy Spirit) above the ground floor and Section 711.21 Use Size greater than 3,999 square feet in an NC-2, Small Scale Neighborhood Commercial District and a 40-X Height and Bulk District. The proposal is to demolish the existing one-story church building (in a converted bank building) and construct a new 3 story building 16,866 square feet in area for the church with 11 off street parking spaces.

Preliminary Recommendation: Approval with Conditions.

(Continued from Regular Meeting of April 17, 2008)

(Proposed for Continuance to July 17, 2008)

SPEAKER(S): None

ACTION: Continued as proposed

AYES: Olague, Antonini, Lee, Moore and Sugaya

ABSENT: Miguel

2. 2007.1034C (C. TEAGUE: (415) 575-9081)

2809San Bruno Avenue - east side, between Wayland and Woolsey Streets, Lot 030 in Assessor's Block 5457 - Request for Conditional Use Authorization pursuant to Planning Code Sections 161(j) and 303 for a reduction of residential off-street parking spaces in a NC-2 (Small-Scale Neighborhood Commercial District) and a 40-X Height and Bulk District. The site currently contains 2 dwelling units and 2 off-street parking spaces. The proposal is to convert the ground floor, which currently contains one dwelling unit, into commercial space and remove the 2 off-street parking spaces. Additionally, a third floor would be constructed to add a second dwelling unit. No parking spaces are proposed for the dwelling units or commercial space.

preliminary Recommendation: Approval with Conditions

(Proposed for Continuance to May 29, 2008)

SPEAKER(S): None

ACTION: Continued as proposed

AYES: Olague, Antonini, Lee, Moore and Sugaya

ABSENT: Miguel

3. 2008.0291T (T. Sullivan-Lenane: (415) 558-6257)

Amendments to the Planning Code Section 315.5: Off-Site Affordable Housing Requirements - Ordinance introduced by Supervisor Sandoval amending the San Francisco Planning Code Section 315.5 to provide that twenty-five percent of off-site units given site permits annually may be built outside of the currently-required one-mile radius from the market-rate project, and to provide that off-site units cannot be located in industrially-zoned areas or within a quarter mile of developments containing 200 or more publicly-owned and operated affordable housing developments.

Preliminary Recommendation: Disapproval

(Continued from Regular Meeting of May 8, 2008)

(Proposed for Continuance to May 29, 2008)

SPEAKER(S): None

ACTION: Continued as proposed

AYES: Olague, Antonini, Lee, Moore and Sugaya

ABSENT: Miguel

4. ELECTION OF VICE PRESIDENT: The Commission may take action to elect a Vice President to complete the one-year term (through 2008) with the ability to continue to hold office as the Commission's Rules and Regulations and the Charter allows.

(Continued from Regular Meeting of April 10, 2008)

(Proposed for Continuance to May 22, 2008)

SPEAKER(S): None

ACTION: Continued as proposed

AYES: Olague, Antonini, Lee, Moore and Sugaya

ABSENT: Miguel

5. 2004.1245E (N. TURRELL: (415) 575-9047)
300 Grant Avenue (aka 272 and 290 Sutter Street) - - Assessor's Block 0287, Lots 013, 014 - Appeal of a Preliminary Mitigated Negative Declaration. The 10,500 square-foot project site is located at 300 Grant Avenue (aka 272-290 Sutter Street) on the northeast corner of Grant Avenue and Sutter Street. The proposed project would involve the demolition of two buildings containing approximately 35,600-square feet of retail space and construction of an approximately 111,000 gross square foot, 10-story over two-level basement, 113-foot tall building containing up to 45 residential units, 16,000 square feet of retail space, and up to 40 off-street parking spaces. The retail entrances to the proposed project would be at the corner of Grant Avenue and Sutter Street, or on the Grant Avenue or Sutter Street frontages, while the residential lobby entrance would be on Sutter Street. Access to the parking garage would be from Harlan Place off Grant Avenue. The site is zoned C-3-R (Downtown Retail) within an 80-130-F Height and Bulk District, and the Downtown Area Plan of the General Plan, and is in the Kearny-Market-Mason-Sutter Conservation District.

Preliminary Recommendation: Uphold Preliminary Mitigated Negative Declaration

(Continued from Regular Meeting of December 6, 2007)

NOTE: On July 12, 2007, following public testimony, the Commission entertained a motion to uphold the Preliminary Mitigated Negative Declaration (PMND). The motion failed by a vote of +2 -4. Commissioner S. Lee was excused. The Commission continued the matter to September 6, 2007 by a vote +5 -1,

(Continued from Regular Meeting of April 10, 2008)

(Proposed for Continuance to June 5, 2008)

SPEAKER(S)

Sue Hestor

- Concerned about the date. The first hearing date was June last year and all of the sudden it is moving really fast. It seems that June 5 is rushing and that it is prejudicial.

Shelby Campbell

- Last time we came here the appellant's representative requested to postpone the hearing to June and we agreed to that.

Pamela Duffy

- June 12 is a satisfactory date for us.

ACTION: Continued to June 12, 2008

AYES: Olague, Antonini, Lee, Moore and Sugaya

ABSENT: Miguel

6a. 2004.1245EKVX (J. MILLER: (415) 558-6344)

300 GRANT AVENUE (aka 272 and 290 Sutter Street) - northeast corner at Sutter Street, Lots 13 and 14 in Assessor's Block 287, in a C-3-R (Downtown Retail) District and an 80-130-F Height and Bulk District - Request for review under Planning Code ("Code") Section 309 of the construction of a new, ten-story mixed-use building containing approximately 45 dwelling units, approximately 16,000 square feet of ground- and second-floor retail space, and up to 40 off-street parking spaces in a two-level underground garage, requiring the authorization of exceptions to Code standards for height above 80 feet, building bulk, rear yard, and off-street parking, as well as the granting of Variances of Code standards for dwelling-unit exposure and projections into required open area.

Preliminary Recommendation: Approval with Conditions

(Continued from Regular Meeting of April 10, 2008)

(Proposed for Continuance to June 5, 2008)

SPEAKER(S): Same as those listed for item 5

ACTION: Continued to June 12, 2008

AYES: Olague, Antonini, Lee, Moore and Sugaya

ABSENT: Miguel

6b. 2004.1245EKVX (J. MILLER: (415) 558-6344)

300 GRANT AVENUE (aka 272 and 290 Sutter Street) - northeast corner at Sutter Street, Lots 13 and 14 in Assessor's Block 287, in a C-3-R (Downtown Retail) District and an 80-130-F Height and Bulk District - Request for Variance of Planning Code standards for dwelling-unit exposure and projections into required open area in conjunction with the construction of a new, ten-story mixed-use building containing approximately 45 dwelling units, approximately 16,000 square feet of ground- and second-floor retail space, and up to 40 off-street parking spaces in a two-level underground garage.

(Continued from Regular Meeting of April 10, 2008)

(Proposed for Continuance to June 5, 2008)

SPEAKER(S): Same as those listed for item 5

ACTION: Continued to June 12, 2008

AYES: Olague, Antonini, Lee, Moore and Sugaya

ABSENT: Miguel

B. 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

Item taken off consent

7a. 2007.1470D (Tape IA) (R. CRAWFORD: (415) 558-6358)

248 Ocean Avenue - north side between Delano and Meda Avenues Lot 009 of Assessor's Block 3211 - Mandatory Discretionary Review of Demolition Permit Application 2007 1128 9152 under the Planning Commission policy requiring review of residential demolitions for demolition of a single family dwelling in an NC-1, Neighborhood Commercial, Cluster and a 40-X Height and Bulk District. The proposal is to demolish the existing two story dwelling and construct a new 4-story, mixed-use building with ground floor commercial and 5 dwelling units.

Preliminary Recommendation: Do Not Take Discretionary Review and Approve the Demolition.

SPEAKER(S)

(+)Bart Murphy

- Spoke in support of the project and the demolition.

ACTION: Did not take Discretionary Review and approved

AYES: Olague, Antonini, Lee, Moore and Sugaya

ABSENT: Miguel

7b. 2008.0502D (R. CRAWFORD: (415) 558-6358)

248 Ocean Avenue - north side between Delano and Meda Avenues Lot 009 of Assessor's Block 3211 - Mandatory Discretionary Review of New Construction Application 2007 1128 9148 under the Planning Commission policy requiring review of new construction resulting from residential demolitions for construction of a four story mixed use building with 5 dwelling units and ground floor commercial space in an NC-1, Neighborhood Commercial, Cluster and a 40-X Height and Bulk District. The proposal is to construct a four story mixed use building with 5 dwelling units and ground floor commercial space. The project includes 5 off-street parking stalls in a garage in the basement.

Preliminary Recommendation: Do Not Take Discretionary Review and Approve the New Construction.

SPEAKER(S): Same as those listed on item 7a

ACTION: Did not take Discretionary Review and approved

AYES: Olague, Antonini, Lee, Moore and Sugaya

ABSENT: Miguel

C. 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.

SPEAKER(S):

John Bardis, Re: Academy of Arts University

- You continued the item for Lombard Street to August 7^th sending the signal that you are willing to continue considerations of violations of the Code that are taking place on 17 properties.

D. REGULAR CALENDAR

8. 2006.1227C (Tape IA) (R.Crawford: (415) 558-6358)

5735-5757 Mission Street- southeast side between Whittier and Oliver Streets Lots 038, 039, 040 of Assessor's Block 6473 - Request for Conditional Use Authorization under Planning Code Sections 711.11 and 711.39 to develop a lot greater than 9,999 square feet in area and to demolish residential units above the ground floor in the NC-2 Small Scale Neighborhood Commercial District and a 40-X Height and Bulk District. The project will demolish the three existing buildings on the property, containing 7 dwelling units, combine the lots into one parcel, and construct a new 4 story tall, mixed use building with 22 dwelling units, ground floor commercial space and underground parking.

Preliminary Recommendation: Approval with Conditions

SPEAKER(S)

Harold McCray, Project Sponsor

- This is a fantastic opportunity for rehabilitation of the area.

- These buildings, for the most part, are not really utilizing the full amount of the lot area.

- What we want to do is increase the density and add a nice strong value to the community.

- We would increase the residential residency by three times and provide underground on-site parking.

Steve Currier, Outer Mission Merchants and Residents Association

- Concerned about the current parking and traffic situation. One of the things previously requested was that the project sponsor work with Parking and Traffic to put in some type of pedestrian safety cross walk.

ACTION: Approved as amended with findings:

-Required an NSR

-Project sponsor agreed to all rent control and rent stabilization laws and to provide a copy to the Planning Department.

-Two new conditions as stated by staff:

Condition 11 - Project sponsor shall, within six months with a certificate of occupancy, provide the Zoning Administrator verification that the project has achieved 3-point rating of 100 points or more or a LEED NC Gold or other verification of equivalence as approved by the Director of Building Inspection Department.

Condition 12 – Project sponsor and architect are to continue working with the Department's staff to refine the façade design.

AYES: Olague, Antonini, Lee, Moore and Sugaya

ABSENT: Miguel

MOTION: 17591

9. 2007.1287C (Tape IA; IB) (D. SANCHEZ: (415) 575-9082)

2128 MISSION STREET- between 17^th and 18^th Streets, Lot 004 in Assessor's Block 3576 - Request for Conditional Use Authorization under Planning Code Sections 703.3, 703.4, 781.5 and 303 to allow a small-self service restaurant identified as a formula retail use (dba Subway) within an NC-3 (Moderate-Scale Neighborhood Commercial) Zoning District, the Mission Street Fast-Food Subdistrict and a 65-B Height and Bulk designation.

Preliminary Recommendation: Disapproval

(Continued from Regular Meeting of April 3, 2008)

SPEAKER(S)

Chirayu Patel, Project Sponsor

- We have received 14 letters from the local residents and businesses in favor of the Subway at this location.

- Having Subway in that area would improve the neighborhood by adding value with the healthy food; creating job opportunities; it would fill the vacant space.

- It would not create traffic problems based on the traffic analysis in that area.

Richas Patel

- The Subway would help revitalize the area and to move away some of the crime there.

Michael Nulty, Executive Director of Alliance for a Better District 6

- We are very much in favor of the conditional use authorization because it would serve low income people.

On the motion to approve

AYES: Antonini, Lee and Sugaya

NAYES: Moore and Olague

ABSENT: Miguel

Motion Failed

ACTION: Following hearing, continued indefinitely with public comments closed.

AYES: Olague, Antonini, Lee, Moore and Sugaya

ABSENT: Miguel

10. 2008.0135C (A. Ben-Pazi: (415) 575-9077)

1248 Leavenworth Street - - east side between Clay and Sacramento Streets, Lot 027 in Assessor's Block 0220 - Request for Conditional Use Authorization to demolish an existing residential building and to construct a new building exceeding a height of 40 feet in a Residential Zoning District. The project proposes to demolish the existing two-story over garage, two-unit residential building, and construct an approximately 48 foot high, four-story over garage building with three dwelling units. This site is in an RM-3 (Residential, Mixed, Medium Density) Zoning District and a 65-A Height and Bulk District.

Preliminary Recommendation: Approval with Conditions

SPEAKER(S): None

ACTION: Without hearing, continued to July 10, 2008

AYES: Olague, Antonini, Lee, Moore and Sugaya

ABSENT: Miguel

11a. 2005.0298KECV (TapeIB) (S. VELLVE: (415) 558-6263)

1285 SUTTER STREET- southeast corner of Sutter Street and Van Ness Avenue; Lot 008 in Assessor's Block 0691 - Request for Conditional Use Authorization, pursuant to Sections 157, 209.8, 221.1, 253, 253.2 and 303 of the Planning Code to allow off-street parking in excess of the amount permitted as accessory parking, to permit the sale of alcoholic beverages within 1/4 mile of the Polk Street Neighborhood Commercial District, to demolish a movie theatre, and to allow the construction of a building which exceeds 40 feet in height with an exception to the bulk limits. The project proposes to construct up to 106 dwelling units with approximately 17,300 square feet of ground-floor retail/commercial space (Trader Joe's) and up to 170 below-grade off-street parking spaces. The project site is located in an RC-4 (Residential, Commercial Combined, High Density) and the Van Ness Avenue Special Use District and an 130-V Height and Bulk District.

Preliminary Recommendation: Approval with Conditions.

(Continued from Regular Meeting of April 17, 2008)

SPEAKER(S)

Tuija Catalano, Project Sponsor Representative

- The revised project is now supported by staff and has a number of additional benefits such as increased open space amenities and a greater number of 2-bedroom units.

- We have gone through a number of massing and design alternatives in the last three months.

David Jones, Architect

- We have worked closely and respectfully with the City, the neighborhood, and a wide range of experts and consultants to deliver a building which we believe would add immensely to the urban fabric and livability of the Van Ness Corridor.

- After investigating several alternatives with the Planning Department, we believe that the proposed design satisfies all of the goals expressed by the Commission resulting in a more cohesive and symmetrical building.

Michael Nulty

- Concerned that the project is not offering below market rate units.

Pierre Gasztowtt

- I'm opposed to any exception because it is not very large, and I wish the architect could make it work within the existing zoning.

Robert Hutchinson

- The January presentation was very exciting and I would like the project to return to that design proposal.

Melinda Lavalle

- Spoke in favor of the project because the mix of residential to retail is consistent with the Van Ness Corridor Plan.

Steve Randall, Owner

- I am very pleased with the project and the process that took place with the neighborhood.

ACTION: Approved with conditions as amended: that project sponsor continue working with staff on building design and streetscape design on Sutter Street.

AYES: Olague, Antonini, Lee and Sugaya

NAYES: Moore

ABSENT: Miguel

MOTION: 17592

11b. 2005.0298KECV S. VELLVE: (415) 558-6263)

1285 SUTTER STREET- southeast corner of Sutter Street and Van Ness Avenue; Lot 008 in Assessor's Block 0691 - Request for Variances, pursuant to Sections 253(c)(6), 307(g), 152, and 140 of the Planning Code to modify the rear yard requirement in the Van Ness Special Use District, to provide one off-street freight loading space where two are required, and for dwelling unit exposure for four dwelling units. The project proposes to construct up to 106 dwelling units with approximately 17,300 square feet of ground-floor retail/commercial space (Trader Joe's) and up to 170 below-grade off-street parking spaces. The project site is located in an RC-4 (Residential, Commercial Combined, High Density) and the Van Ness Avenue Special Use District and an 130-V Height and Bulk District.

(Continued from Regular Meeting of April 17, 2008)

SPEAKER(S): Same as those listed on item 11a

ACTION: Zoning Administrator closed public hearing and granted the variances subject to standard conditions of approval.

Items 12a, 12b, and 13 were called and heard together

12a. 2007.0094CEKZ(Tapes IB; IIA) (T. Tam (415) 588-6325)

1401-1417 Divisadero Street - northwest corner of Divisadero and O'Farrell Streets; Assessor's Block 1098, Lot 9 - Request for a Zoning Map amendment and a property reclassification to change the property from NC-2 (Neighborhood Commercial, Small-Scale) to NC-3 (Neighborhood Commercial, Moderate-Scale). This legislation (File Number 070546) was introduced by Supervisor Ross Mirkarimi on April 24, 2007. The property is within a 105-E Height and Bulk District.

Preliminary Recommendation: Recommend to the Board of Supervisors Approval.

SPEAKER(S)

Barbara Misgunez, President of Neighborhood Association

- We are very happy with this proposal and we would like to see the building on Divisadero demolished as soon as possible because it is a safety hazard.

- We have a lot of traffic with the hospital, schools, and community centers.

- We think that the variance for parking is really needed.

Christine Robisch, Senior Vice-President for Kaiser Foundation Hospital and Health Plan

- We are currently serving 172,000 patient members in San Francisco and we are very dedicated to be actively involved in our community. We would continue doing that.

Dr. Robert Masun, Physician Chief for Kaiser Permanente in San Francisco

- The purpose of this building is to help us improve the quality of care, service, and safety. We want to improve the coordination of our care.

- We have provided full service care for more than half a century and we provided it in a unique way to better meet the needs to some of our San Franciscans.

Alice Barkley

- The rezoning started with the input of the Community Task Force.

- Shadows would be to a maximum of 36 minutes in June.

- A site permit for the replacement housing on 2139 O'Farrell Street has been issued by the Department of Building Inspection.

- Kaiser is one of the designated medical resource centers in case of a natural disaster and it is really important for the City to have a well designed and structurally safe medical center.

ACTION: Approved

AYES: Antonini, Lee, Moore and Sugaya

EXCUSED: Olague

ABSENT: Miguel

RESOLUTION: 17593

12b. 2007.0094CEKZ (T. Tam: (415) 558-6325)

1401-1417 Divisadero Street (aka 2108 O'Farrell Street) and 2201 Geary Street (a vacant lot) - west side of Divisadero Street, between Geary Boulevard and O'Farrell Street; consisting of two lots, Lots 9 and 38 in Assessor's Block 1098 - Request for a Conditional Use authorization pursuant to Sections 271, 295, 303, 712.11, 712.21, 712.39, and 712.80 of the Planning Code to allow residential demolition on the 2^nd and 3^rd story, create a lot greater than 10,000 square feet in size, construct a non-residential use greater than 6,000 square feet in size, construct a building which exceeds 65 feet in height with an exception to the bulk limits, and establish a medial center use in the NC-3 District. The project is to demolish the existing three-story, mixed-use building (containing 21 dwelling units), merge Lot 9 with Lot 38, and construct a new six-story medical clinic and office building, approximately 75,000 square feet in size and 95 feet in height (as measured from Geary Boulevard) for Kaiser Permanente. Lot 9 (1401-1417 Divisadero Street) containing the mixed-use building is currently within a NC-2 (Neighborhood, Commercial, Small-Scale) District and Lot 38 (2201 Geary Street), a vacant lot, is within a NC-3 (Neighborhood Commercial, Moderate-Scale) District. Both lots are within a 105-E Height and Bulk District.

Preliminary Recommendation: Approve with Conditions.

SPEAKER(S): Same as those listed on item 12a

ACTION: Approved

AYES: Antonini, Lee, Moore and Sugaya

EXCUSED: Olague

ABSENT: Miguel

MOTION: 17594

13. 2007.0094CEKZ (G. Cabreros: (415) 558-6169)

1401-1417 Divisadero Street (aka 2108 O'Farrell Street) and 2201 Geary Street (a vacant lot) - west side of Divisadero Street, between Geary Boulevard and O'Farrell Street; consisting of two lots, Lots 9 and 38 in Assessor's Block 1098 - Request for Adoption of Findings pursuant to Section 295 of the Planning Code regarding a Shadow Study that concluded that the shadow cast by the construction of a six-story, 95-foot tall outpatient clinic and medical office building would not be adverse on Beiderman/O'Farrell Mini Park, land under the jurisdiction of the San Francisco Recreation and Park Department. The property is within a NC-3 (Neighborhood Commercial, Moderate-Scale) District and a 105-E Height and Bulk District.

Preliminary Recommendation: Adopt Findings.

SPEAKER(S): Same as those listed on item 12a

ACTION: Adopted findings as modified to strike the second sentence in new paragraph four  starting on May 15'

AYES: Antonini, Lee, Moore and Sugaya

EXCUSED: Olague

ABSENT: Miguel

MOTION: 17595

5:00 p.m. - - [Although the following item may be called after the listed time, it will not be call before.]

14. (Tapes IIA; IIB) (P. LORD: (415) 558-6311)

Western SoMa Citizens Planning Task ForceStrategic Analysis Memos - The second of three informational presentations of the Western SoMa Strategic Analysis Memos. This presentation covers the analysis of existing conditions for Transportation and Open Space for the Western SoMa Special Use District. These Strategic Analysis Memos provide background and analysis of conditions considered by the Task Force during the formulation of policy recommendations for a community plan that will be presented to the Planning Commission in July 2008.

SPEAKER(S)

Jim Meko, Chair – Western SoMa Citizen Task Force

- I started coming to this Commission's hearings about 15 years ago. Back then the projects were approved with the idea that the Folsom Corridor was a transit rich one.

- The reality here is that the Folsom Corridor is not transit rich. The only line there is being discontinued because of low ridership and that is because the bus comes every 30 minutes.

- We have been engaged in some serious communication with TJP and the MTA staff. It is very clear that if South of Market does not get better transit service aligned with the community plan that we are going to propose, we are going to oppose every project that comes along.

- Building housing without a good transit is going to encourage people to buy and/or use cars. And you are not going to switch that thinking based on promises.

- Western SoMa has only one official park. You would think that we would be transit rich and full of parks and open spaces.

- This is the chance to stop and get our priorities straight. I hope that you will understand why we make the recommendations that will come out in the Draft Community Plan.

Marc Solomon

- We are looking at ways that this neighborhood gets the same respect that other neighborhoods get, which is to work and live here and get home safety.

- It is critical that our planning process be informed of this – to tie the relationship between transportation and housing – to have good transit first then to work on housing.

Anthony

- Building housing without a good transit system is going to bring more cars. We have to think about that when interfacing transit on the Western SoMa Plan.

Sue Hestor

- In your mind, start translating all of these into the rest of the Eastern Neighborhoods because there is very little difference with the Mission District.

Peter Albert, Deputy Director of Planning - MTA

- I just want to remind you that MTA is looking at West SoMa and the Eastern Neighborhoods holistically and making sure that we do not ignore issues that come up in the West SoMa process as it works in the Eastern Neighborhoods.

ACTION: No Action is required of the Commission. Informational item

6:00 p.m. - - [Although the following items may be called after the listed time, they will not be called before.]

15. 2004.0160EMTUZUU (Tapes IIB; IIIA; IIIB; IVA; IVB) (K. RIch (415) 558-6345)

Eastern Neighborhoods PROGRAM - This is the first of a series of public workshops at which the Planning Commission will consider the entire Eastern Neighborhoods Program and direct staff on any modifications that should be made to the proposals. At the end of the hearing series, the Commission will be requested to certify the Environmental Impact Report and take a number of additional actions to approve the Eastern Neighborhoods Program, which are described below.

Members of the public may review a copy of the proposals at the San Francisco Planning Department office at 1650 Mission Street 4^th Floor, San Francisco, CA 94103, at the Public Library (the Main Library 100 Larkin St., the Mission branch library, 300 Bartlett St., and the Potrero branch library, 1616 20th Street). An electronic copy of the proposed amendments and actions is available at http://en-hearings.sfplanning.org. Printed copies at full printing cost and CD-ROM copies at no charge are available from the Department, by contacting (415) 575-9097 or eastern.neighborhoods@sfgov.org.

Proposed Topics for Planning Commission Hearings

A list of proposed topics for each of the workshops is available on the Department's website at http://en-hearings.sfplanning.org. These topics may be changed at the direction of the Commission. 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 Eastern Neighborhoods Information line at 575-9097.

Hearing #1 – May 15, 2008 6pm time-certain (Commission workshop & public comment)

Staff will lead a discussion with the Commission on the following aspects of the four Eastern Neighborhoods Area Plans: Places for Jobs – context and needs, proposal for new policies and controls, projected results of new controls; At this hearing, Planning Department staff will present information and the Planning Commission will hear public comment on the subjects discussed at the hearing.

Preliminary Recommendation: Informational Presentation and Public Comment; No Commission Action requested at the May 15 hearing.

The Planning Commission will hold a series of public hearings beginning on May 15, 2008 to consider Case No. 2004.0160EMTUZUU, and would include adopting a Motion to certify the Final Environmental Impact Report and adopt CEQA Findings and consider resolutions to approve amendments to the San Francisco General Plan, Planning Code and Zoning Map and resolutions to approve Historic Resources Interim Procedures and Public Benefits Program and Monitoring Procedures related to the four Eastern Neighborhoods Area Plans – the Mission, Showplace Square/Potrero Hill, Central Waterfront and East SoMa Area Plans. Hearings are currently scheduled for May 15, 2008, May 22, 2008, June 5, 2008, June 12, 2008 and June 19 2008. The Commission will consider and receive public comment on specific aspects of the Plans and proposed amendments at each hearing. The series of hearings will culminate in a public hearing to consider adoption actions on or after June 19, 2008.

The project encompasses a significant proportion of the San Francisco land area in the southeast quadrant of the City, encompassing:

· East SoMa (the eastern portion of the South of Market district), bounded generally by Folsom Street on the northwest, the Rincon Hill Plan area (essentially, Second Street) on the east, Townsend Street on the south, and Fourth Street on the west, with an extension to the northwest bounded by Harrison, Seventh, Mission, Sixth (both sides), Natoma, Fifth, and Folsom Streets;

· the Mission, bounded by 13th and Division Streets on the north, Potrero Avenue on the east, César Chávez Street on the south, and Guerrero Street on the west;

· the Showplace Square/Potrero Hill district, generally bounded by Bryant Street and 10th Street on the northwest, Seventh Street on the northeast, Interstate Highway 280 (I-280) on the east, 25th and 26th Streets on the south, and Potrero Avenue on the west; and

· the Central Waterfront, bounded by Mariposa Street on the north, San Francisco Bay on the east, Islais Creek on the south, and I-280 on the west.

The project areas are comprised of the entirety or portions of 437 Assessor's Blocks. Specifically, on or after June 19, 2008, the Commission will consider the following actions:

· Case 2004.0160E – Certification of the Final Environmental Impact Report and adoption of CEQA Findings on the Eastern Neighborhoods Area Plans.

· Case 2004.0160M - Adopt General Plan amendments that would, 1) add to the General Plan four new area plans (the  Eastern Neighborhoods Area Plans ), which include the Mission, East SoMa, Showplace Square/Potrero Hill and Central Waterfront Area Plans; and 2) also make related amendments to the following portions of the existing General Plan: the Commerce and Industry Element, Recreation Element, Open Space Element, the South of Market Area Plan, the Central Waterfront Area Plan, the Northeastern Waterfront Area Plan, and the Land Use Index;

· Case 2004.0160T - Adopt Planning Code text amendments that would revise Planning Code controls, including, but not limited to controls for land use, height and bulk, building design, density, open space, and parking; establish 13 new zoning districts; amend the South Park District; RTO District, NCT Districts, and Downtown Residential Districts; and make related revisions to the Planning Code necessary to implement the General Plan as proposed to be amended and make related Planning Code Amendments pursuant to the Eastern Neighborhoods Area Plans.

· Case 2004.0160Z - Adopt Zoning Map amendments that would revise the Zoning Maps of the City and County of San Francisco. Proposed Planning Code map amendments would a) update height and bulk districts, b) apply the RTO District and PDR-2 Districts in the Eastern Neighborhoods, and c) establish 13 new zoning districts.

· Case 2004.0160U – Adopt Interim Historic Preservation procedures that would establish interim procedures for additional review of proposed changes to or demolition of historic or potentially historic resources in the Eastern Neighborhoods, pending completion of the ongoing historic resource surveys.

· Case 2004.0160UU - Adopt Monitoring and Review Procedures in order to review development activity and progress towards the Eastern Neighborhoods implementation measures.

SPEAKER(S)

Marissa Kravens, Association of Bay Area Government [ABAG]

- Tonight I am speaking on behalf of the Regional Focus Program - a collective effort of Bay Area cities, ABAB, The Metropolitan and Transportation Commission, Bay Area Air Quality Management District, and the Bay Conservation and Development Commission.

- Eastern Neighborhoods is what we called a regional priority area. We are committed to supporting and facilitating the planning and development because we believe that the local and regional partnership will benefit all 9 Bay Area counties.

- The adoption of the plan would make the area eligible for capital infrastructure funds and financing streams that helps implement the developments that the plan describes.

Michael, Mayor's Office of Economic Work Force Development

- We are not presenting today but we will be here next week to provide a second summary of the Economic Strategy with the specific focus on how it relates to the Eastern Neighborhoods Plan.

Jon Lau, Office of Supervisor Sophie Maxwell

- On behalf of the Supervisor: Congratulations for getting to this point. I respectfully submit to you that the planning and economic rational for PDR retention really has been truly made in this process, and I think we all in agreement that it is time to act.

- I am available to come every week in the interest of maintaining open communication lines between the Commission and the Land Use Committee.

Eric Quezada, Mission Anti-displacement Coalition

- It is very important that the zoning changes reflect the needs of the community and we are encouraged by the approaching balance that the planners have put forward today.

- We want to make sure that the PDR definition is not one that would provide loop holes that would stop PDR jobs. We do not want to go down that road again.

Fernando Martick

- Made references to the findings and recommendations of Backstreets Business Advisory Committee. Page 20, priority police No. 5 of Section 101 of the Code, that a diverse economic base be maintained by protecting our industrial and service sector from displacement.

Tony

- We are generally supportive of the plan but we need this plan to be balanced and not to advocate for more office space.

- For 16^th Street, build the bus lines that can deliver the people there and then we can talk about being a transit corridor.

Peggy da Silva

- Reducing the PDR is a mistake because there is a great need for space in the waterfront.

Judy West

- I'm concerned with the emphasis on parcel-by-parcel rezoning. I do not think we would have a livable neighborhood.

Calvin Welch

- Praised staff's recommendations for placing affordable housing in some sort of employment context. Often we've talked about affordable housing by itself.

- Many reports, and the most recent economic strategy report of the City and County of San Francisco, have demonstrated that the strength of our economy is its diversity.

- If we ought to develop sustainable affordable housing, PDR occupations, the preservation of industrial uses and light industrial uses, offer a real important opportunity for employment.

- It is an important point to keep in mind that who works in San Francisco should live in San Francisco.

Jeffrey Leibovitz

- I think that the presentation staff did tonight was outstanding and I think this process will move forward in a very positive manner.

Tim Colen

- Encouraged close cooperation with the Board of Supervisors so that the Land Use Committee and this Commission work closely on a parallel track to avoid sudden surprises.

Jazzie Collins

- We need SoMa to be affordable to families – retain affordable rents, viable PDR businesses, and community services to balance the entire neighborhood.

Angelina Cabande

- PDR is really important for people to be able to find employment. They should not be removed from the City.

Debra Walker

- You might want to look at some areas along Potrero Avenue as more neighborhood commercial to create walkable streets in that area.

Jaime Guerrero

- Concerned about the PDR 1-G zoning proposed for the northeast Mission because the current definition allows only day time uses. PDR retail with housing above it will bring more vitality to the area.

Peter Cohen

- Two big questions for me: How do you mediate and balance land use competition between sectors? How do you maintain a diversity of jobs and opt for new opportunities in the City?

David Lera

- If you have a reference to a color code into a zone, there should be a quick reference guide for the public to look at and refer to.

- Urged the Commission to eliminate any reference of SLI within the East SoMa rezoning.

Ingrid Aquino

- Significant community benefits should be provided for the high density bonuses, and it should be decided by existing community members.

Steven Aiello

- Supported the UMU and allowance of student housing in the PDR design district.

- Recommended to keep the SLI in the East SoMa only as a short term strategy.

Ronald Konopaski

- It seems like the City has always been tampering with the problem we have with affordable housing.

- It seems to me that we are [undermining] the taskforce and creating more needs for affordable housing where we already have a problem by providing it. There is a conflict overall.

Angela Sinicropi

- Strongly disagreed with the PDR only zone because it is going to isolate people that have their businesses/housing along 16^th Street.

Beth Weintraub

- I oppose the proposal for the PDR only zone because the parcels designated as PDR are not large enough to create it. We need more mixed use zones.

Tony Reynolds

- Overtime, the change that occurs drives people out creating an enlargement for criminal activities.

Antje Kann

- I'm strongly opposed to PDR zoning proposed for our neighborhood, the northeast Mission, because it does not meet our needs.

Ariel Braunstein

- We need to have a reasonable policy that has safety, direct access to our parks, better transportation, open spaces, respect of PDR and affordable housing.

Steve Vettel

- I propose that the two block area on Third Street be more flexible on PDR - ground floor retail for huge parcels.

Keith Golstein

- I previously requested that you include a neighborhood commercial district on 17^th Street - from Arkansas to Mississippi Streets.

- I urge the Commission to reconsider the designation of biotechnical use on that section of 17^th Street.

Fred Snyder

- The businesses that are viable to be next to housing, you are pushing them out and you are going back to the 1950's and wanting to bring in businesses that are failing.

Kepa Askenasy

- We would like to see student housing, night time entertainment, performing art theaters, art studios, and neighborhood commercial in the area of 17^th Street.

[No name stated]

- Our area is currently zoned M-1 and it would become PDR under the proposal. I'm really worried that the proposal is too restricted and people are going to leave.

Brad Koch

- Someone has to explain what is going to happen with the non-conforming use tenants.

[No name stated]

- Industry should be taking place in the Bayview Hunter's Point because the streets are wide.

Richard Hyde

- We need more flexibility in office space for the top floors of buildings to keep the building alive as the City changes.

Alexis McNulty

- We want to keep our existing M-2 zoning at the waterfront – 24^th and Tennessee Streets. PDR zoning means that our neighborhood would be stocked with vacant buildings.

[No name stated]

- 23^rd Street from 3^rd to Louisiana Streets – We feel that the neighborhood would be better served to stay as M-2 or if it has to change, it should be the urban mixed use zoning.

Robert Meyers

- While staff proposes raising height limits on the waterfront, it is also restricting the uses. I urge that you keep the M-2 zoning or rezone this area to UMU with the innovative industry overlay.

Gillian Gillet

- Supports the 65 foot height on Cesar Chavez and building housing for all income levels. Would like to see protected pedestrian and transit oriented street frontages on Valencia Street extended to South of Cesar Chavez.

Bill Lightner

- Asked for the same flexibility the others speakers have asked for. This is the number one, creative, first class City in the world and we need to keep it that way.

Sue Hestor

- There is going to be much confusion with all the non-conforming use – live/work sites. How are you going to deal with all these housing units that are not really housing?

Ivonne

- Questioned if staff is going to give a summary at the Land Use Committee on Monday because many people may not be able to present their comments then.

ACTION: No Action is required of the Commission. Informational item

E. COMMISSIONERS' QUESTIONS AND MATTERS

16. 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.

NONE

F. DIRECTOR'S REPORT

17. Director's Announcements

NONE

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

Director Rahaim reported:

Board of Supervisors

A- The Board President (Peskin) introduced a charter amendment that would make the Landmark Board an independent body that would no longer be advisory to the Planning Commission.

G. PUBLIC COMMENT

At this time, members of the public may address the Commission on items of interest to the public that are within the subject matter jurisdiction of the Commission except agenda items. With respect to agenda items, your opportunity to address the Commission will be afforded when the item is reached in the meeting with one exception. When the agenda item has already been reviewed in a public hearing at which members of the public were allowed to testify and the Commission has closed the public hearing, your opportunity to address the Commission must be exercised during the Public Comment portion of the Calendar. Each member of the public may address the Commission for up to three minutes.

The Brown Act forbids a commission from taking action or discussing any item not appearing on the posted agenda, including those items raised at public comment. In response to public comment, the commission is limited to:

(1) responding to statements made or questions posed by members of the public; or

(2) requesting staff to report back on a matter at a subsequent meeting; or

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

SPEAKER(S)

None

Adjournment: 11:38 P.M.

THESE MINUTES WERE PROPOSED FOR ADOPTION AT THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION ON THURSDAY, July 17, 2008.

SPEAKER(S): None

ACTION: Approved

AYES: Olague, Miguel, Antonini, Borden, Lee, Moore 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.