March 12, 2009SAN FRANCISCO
PLANNING COMMISSION
Meeting Minutes
Commission Chambers - Room 400
City Hall, 1 Dr. Carlton B. Goodlett Place
Thursday, March 12, 2009
1:30 PM
Regular Meeting
COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Miguel, Antonini, Borden, Lee, Moore, Olague, and Sugaya
THE MEETING WAS CALLED TO ORDER BY PRESIDENT MIGUEL AT 1:36 P.M.
STAFF IN ATTENDANCE: John Rahaim – Director of Planning, Larry Badiner – Zoning Administrator, Steve Wertheim, Corey Teague, Glenn Cabreros, Michael Smith, Sara Vellve, and Linda Avery – Commission Secretary.
- CONSIDERATION OF ITEMS PROPOSED FOR CONTINUANCE
The Commission will consider a request for continuance to a later date. The Commission may choose to continue the item to the date proposed below, to continue the item to another date, or to hear the item on this calendar.
1a. 2006.1065DDDD (S. VELLVE (415) 558-6263)
145-149 Buena Vista Avenue East/52 Alpine Terrace - west side between Waller Street and Duboce Avenue; Lot 005 (proposed to be lots 036 and 037) in Assessor's Block 1258 - Requests for Discretionary Review of Building Permit Application No. 2006.09.20.2886, proposing to demolish an existing garage and to construct a new four-story, three-unit building at 52 Alpine Terrace that, in addition to providing its own required parking, would provide parking for a two-unit building at 145-149 Buena Vista East (requiring a Variance, Item 2b) in an RH-3 (Residential House, Three-Family) Zoning District and a 40-X Height and Bulk District. The existing three-car garage structure at 52 Alpine Terrace would be demolished.
Preliminary Recommendation: Do not take Discretionary Review and Approve
(Continued from Regular Meeting February 19, 2009)
(Proposed for Continuance to March 26, 2009)
SPEAKERS: None
ACTION: Continued as proposed
AYES: Miguel, Olague, Antonini, Borden, Lee, Moore, and Sugaya
1b. 2006.1065V (S. VELLVE (415) 558-6263)
145-149 Buena Vista Avenue East/52 Alpine Terrace - west side between Waller Street and Duboce Avenue; Lot 005 (proposed to be lots 036 and 037) in Assessor's Block 1258 - Request for a Parking Variance for two required off-street parking spaces that would be provided on a separate lot than the dwelling units in an RH-3 (Residential House, Three-Family) Zoning District and a 40-X Height and Bulk District. The project proposes to demolish an existing garage and to construct a new four-story, three-unit building that, in addition to providing its own required parking, would provide parking for a two-unit building at 145-149 Buena Vista East. The request will be heard by the Zoning Administrator.
(continued from Regular Meeting of February 19, 2009)
(Proposed for Continuance to March 26, 2009)
SPEAKERS: None
ACTION: Continued as proposed
AYES: Miguel, Olague, Antonini, Borden, Lee, Moore, and Sugaya
2. 2008.1309D (G. CABREROS: (415) 558-6169)
2829 GREEN STREET - south side between Baker and Lyon Streets, Lot 021 in Assessor's Block 0956 - Staff-initiated Discretionary Review of Building Permit Application No. 2008.07.18.7090 proposing to infill a courtyard area at the level of the third floor of the single-family residence undergoing alteration. The alteration project with courtyard area was originally approved under Building Permit Application No. 2006.02.23.5308 in 2006. The subject building is within an RH-1 (Residential, House, One-Family) District and a 40-X Height and Bulk District.
Preliminary Recommendation: Take Discretionary Review and Disapprove.
(Proposed for Continuance to March 19, 2009)
SPEAKERS: None
ACTION: Continued to March 26, 2009
AYES: Miguel, Olague, Antonini, Borden, Lee, Moore, and Sugaya
3a. 2007.0129DDD (G. CABREROS; (415) 558-6169)
100 32nd Avenue - southeast corner of 32nd Avenue and El Camino del Mar; Lot 008 in Assessor's Block 1312 - Requests for Discretionary Review of Building Permit Application No. 2007.01.19.2027 proposing to construct a three-story side horizontal addition and to enlarge the existing partial fourth floor of the four-story, single-family residence. The subject building is within an RH-1(D) (Residential, House, One-Family, Detached) Zoning District and a 40-X Height and Bulk District.
Preliminary Recommendation: Do not take Discretionary Review and Approve.
(Continued from Regular Meeting of February 26, 2009)
(Proposed for Continuance to April 9, 2009)
SPEAKERS: None
ACTION: Continued as proposed
AYES: Miguel, Olague, Antonini, Borden, Lee, Moore, and Sugaya
3b. 2007.0129V (G. CABREROS: 415-558-6169)
100 32nd Avenue - southeast corner of 32nd Avenue and El Camino del Mar; Lot 008 in Assessor's Block 1312 - Request for Variances from Planning Code Sections 133, 134 and 188 to modify a required side yard, the required rear yard and a noncomplying structure. The project proposes to construct a three-story side horizontal addition and to enlarge the existing partial fourth floor of the four-story, single-family residence. The subject building is within an RH-1(D) (Residential, House, One-Family, Detached) Zoning District and a 40-X Height and Bulk District.
(Continued from Regular Meeting of February 26, 2009)
(Proposed for Continuance to April 9, 2009)
SPEAKERS: None
ACTION: Continued as proposed
AYES: Miguel, Olague, Antonini, Borden, Lee, Moore, and Sugaya
B. COMMISSIONERS' QUESTIONS AND MATTERS
4. 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:
He thanked Tom Radulovich for sending him an article that has to do with low cost design approach for lightrail. It deals with what has been done in Portland and Seattle and Charlotte to keep the cost of lightrail down. Basically is a design to budget philosophy. Where possible it tries to use existing pavement and put the streetcar lines into there. It sometimes makes the stop shorter and a lot of other steps that are innovative and have worked well in these areas. I hope it is something we can explore in the future. Geneva is a street that might lend itself to this type of thing.
Commissioner Olague:
In light of A. F. Even filed Chapter 11, is 55 Laguna going forward?
Commissioner Miguel responded:
I talked to staff there and it is definitely going forward. From what I understand, it will not be affected.
Commissioner Olague:
I'd like to know who I can talk to directly about that because I'm a little bit concerned. I want to know what the timeframe is. There was a lot of pressure around that whole project. So if you can give someone's name and number that would be great. 110 Embarcadero – I saw some emails go through, was it harry Bridges? Something about the labor Council had some concerns about the environment document; about it being a historic resource. Have you heard anything about it? Someone asked and I wouldn't know.
Commissioner Miguel:
The confusion occurred and it wasn't brought up earlier because that address had been the Steuart side address. So no one caught it from the labor movement at the time. That was the reason for the confusion.
Zoning Administrator Badiner responds:
I understand that has been appealed. There was some discussion before the Planning Commission about the labor history and plaques and stuff like that.
Commissioner Borden:
I think we all saw in the paper about the historic cottage on Lombard Street that is falling down. A number of people have emailed me and I wasn't clear about what the status of that property is.
Zoning Administrator Badiner responded:
I became aware of this Thursday or Friday last week. This is an historic building that was built in 1860. A cottage set back from the street with a magnolia tree in the front and steeply down sloping and steeply laterally sloping. It was the subject of a development proposal about five or six years ago. It was determined that it was an historic structure and I don't think the project sponsor pursued it because it would have required an EIR. But it was not a designated landmark. I believe it is listed in Here Today. It is clearly a resource. Apparently neighbors complained that they heard a noise, crashing or something like that. DBI went out and the project sponsor hired Mr. Buscovich to look at the project. I went out on Tuesday. The back floors have literally dropped into below the building. DBI has looked it and has declared an eminent safety hazard. An eminent safety hazard is a hazard that something could collapse or be damaged or could into the street or hurt someone and the only way to address that is through demolition. If there is a way to shore a building up, you don't get a demolition permit, you get a shoring permit or something like that. In DBI's estimation the only way to ensure public safety is through demolition of the project. The Zoning Administrator (myself) is in a consultative role. I signed off on the permit in consultation. I don't believe I have the power to say you can't issue this demolition permit. It is a safety issue that is properly within the Department of Building Inspection. I suspect that building will be demolished in the next day or so. I don't know if the permit has literally been issued because it was brought to my desk this morning for sign off. It was hand carried around, which is typical in an eminent safety hazard issue.
Commissioner Borden:
Did the floor just crash recently? Is that why it is an eminent safety hazard?
Zoning Administrator Badiner:
The floor just crashed recently is my understanding. I can't verify that. Apparently, neighbors heard a noise and called DBI. I don't have the detailed history of that. There has obviously been some concern from the preservation community. There is some discussion about being that it was a balloon-framed building and whether it could be repaired. DBI does not believe that it can be. The fear is that this building crashes and it crashes into the adjacent buildings. There is some speculation, perhaps well founded, that this building was allowed to deteriorate.
Commissioner Borden:
Was there a permit for work at all pulled on that project?
Zoning Administrator Badiner:
I believe, and I'm going back into my memory, there were a couple of permits pulled in 2005 or 2006 for foundation work and for shear work. I was not in the building. People who were in the building ran out of the building because it is literally moving. You can hear it creaking. I was told when I went out there to stand over here. Don't stand over there. When it goes, it's going over there. That is how concerned people are about it. This is not the sort of thing that if we wait around three or four month to discuss it that we can assure public safety.
Commissioner Borden:
In 2005 when the permits were issued, was the property in that condition at that point?
Zoning Administrator Badiner:
I can't tell you that and I can't tell you if they did any work. I will say also that Commissioner Debra Walker (Building Inspection Commission) was out there. Senior members of the Building Department were out there looking at it. Private structural engineers were out there, and I believe a public structural engineer was out there. The consensus was that this building needs to come down. About neglect and such, I think there will be further discussions as we move forward on that issue.
Commissioner Sugaya:
Commissioner Miguel and I were at a steering committee meeting for the Japantown Neighborhood Plan Tuesday late afternoon. The sole topic was a study of the Japantown Center that 3D purchased a number of years ago. At that time 3D was engaged in developing some scenarios for how they saw the future development of the property. Given the economic down turn, 3D has now basically halted any further work with respect to what might be expected in the future. This study then took basically some of the ideas 3D had for the Center and did both a massing and scale and shadow study for different development scenarios as well as economic studies of whether those scenarios could pencil out for a developer. I guess in summary you could say that none of those scenarios presented penciled out if you were a private developer and assuming the developer would retain about 15%, in which we were reminded was a low rate of return for a developer in the first place. But I think that even the most dense proposal that was looked at \, which included a 24-story high rise residential building only returned about 1%. There will be future meetings that will address other issues like urban design and some presentation on the heritage aspects and other parts of the plan.
Commissioner Miguel:
I had not been involved with the Japantown study for a few years when I met with them because of the impact of the possible Geary BRT. This is the second meeting of the Japantown group that I have attended. They get excellent attendance and array of interested parties involved. I will say that the Planning Department staff have done an excellent job and obviously have a great deal of support and respect from the Japantown group itself. I found interesting the fact that here are all these scenarios and none of them pan out economically. But that does not mean that they have finished with their review of what can or may happen and they are still involved with transit that's planned for Geary BRT. I'm sure Commissioner will follow it. I am going to try to follow it. And at some point it will come before this Commission as an informational review.
Commissioner Moore:
I attended a meeting last Thursday after our Planning Commission meeting at Grace Cathedral where a large number of people showed up to comment on the changes proposed for the Masonic Auditorium. It was amazing that within 20 to 50 feet distance, there were about 200 people who showed up. It made me realize how dense the neighborhood is and those are people who normally do not show up here. It was quite informative to hear their concerns and to have a presentation where people spoke in a concise way about what they will be organizing to present to us at some point.
Commissioner Miguel.
I might mention that Live Nation's website shows my email and phone and David Chiu's email and phone. We have been quite inundated for some time. And also for that project, I have asked the Director if the Department would prepare in some detail a transit study as a baseline of information that this Commission will need before we even start to proceed further on it.
Commissioner Moore:
Which will hopefully be paid for by Live Nation.
Commissioner Antonini:
In terms of visits, I did visit with DR requestors and neighbors on Lyon Street in connection with 2608 Post, which will be with us later today. I spoke with the project sponsor on 4024 26th Street and also met with one of the project sponsors for a project that will be before us in the next couple of weeks at 430 Main/429 Beal.
Commissioner Miguel:
I also met with the people on Post Street and 26th Street. The other thing I wanted to mention was two articles from the [March 8th] New York Times Magazine has two articles that were of interest that are in our purview. One is All Boarded Up, and it deals with foreclosures. The other one is Share My Ride, which deals with care share.
C. DIRECTOR'S REPORT
5. Director's Announcements
Director Rahaim:
On Monday evening, I attended the monthly meeting of the North Beach Neighbors Community Association. That was attended by 35 people or so and had a broad range of discussions about issues pertaining to North Beach and about discretionary review (DR). On the Japantown Plan, staff is reminding me that we are planning to be here in a couple of weeks to give you a brief update on the status. Then probably in April or early May, a much more full blown presentation on that plan as well. We hope to get completed by the end of the first half of the year. Finally, I do want to spend a couple of minutes on the status of our work on Articles 10 & 11. Tara Sullivan is here as well. She has prepared a memo for you that was completed just this morning – a revised schedule. The earlier schedule that we distributed with our proposed strategy for dealing with these two articles did assume an extension on the 90-day comment period from the Board. The Board has not been willing to grant that extension so we have now revised the schedule so we can prepare this revised legislation in time for your consideration by the middle of April. You'll see that we are maintaining the advisory [working] group that we have established. We have three more meetings as well as a joint hearing with you and the Historic Preservation Commission.
Tara Sullivan:
April 14 is now our deadline, about a month from now. Like the Director said, we are having our next working group meeting number 2 on Monday. Next Wednesday, the Historic Preservation Commission is having a hearing with an extended public comment period so we are encouraging a lot of people to come to that hearing and speak to the Preservation Commission on their thoughts for Articles 10 & 11. On March 30, there will be a working group meeting number 3. On March 26, I will bring forward a very detailed informational presentation on the legislation itself and the Department's proposed changes. April 2 will be the joint hearing between the Planning and Preservation Commissions that will start at 10 a.m. Monday, the 6th of April will be the 4th and final working group meeting. Wednesday, April 8th, there will be a special hearing scheduled with the Historic Preservation Commission for their final recommendations and actions on the Board legislation. The next day, on April 9th, will be the follow up and final consideration for recommendations and actions by this commission on the Board legislation. Then it will be finalized and rolled up and sent back to the Board in time for April 14th. The working group meets at the Planning Department offices at 1650 Mission Street in one of our conference rooms at 4:30 in the afternoon.
Zoning Administrator Badiner
I want to talk about the Eastern Neighborhoods Implementation process. Staff has been meeting internally very continuously since the Eastern Neighborhoods became effective on January 19 of this year. The Eastern Neighborhoods team from Citywide has conducted a series of trainings for the Neighborhood Planning staff. The Eastern Neighborhoods transportation/trip study has gotten underway. We are starting work on a focused Showplace Square open space study as promised during the adoption language. Staff is also working with various agencies on the affordable housing and open space issues at 17th 7 Folsom, and we are working with the city's implementation agencies on infrastructure issues. Further, on an internal basis, both a select group from Eastern Neighborhoods Citywide group and NP group have been going through the code on an implementation basis looking at the pipeline projects and all other issues as we go through, and obviously on an 1800 page document, there will potentially be some issues that might need clean up. We will be coming back to you on April 23rd for a full report on all of these items, but also we will probable have a scheme proposed for how to address the corrections. It will be a combination of Zoning Administrator's Bulletin and ultimately, clean up legislation. We don't want to do 14 clean up legislations every time we discover something. We want to allow time for many of the issues to surface. We would obviously have information in your packets before then.
6. Review of Past Week's Events at the Board of Supervisors, Board of Appeals, and Historic Preservation Commission.
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
No meetings
BOARD OF APPEALS
No meeting
HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION
No meeting
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:
Joe Butler
Re: 1268 Lombard Street. Mr. Butler gave the Commission the permit history on this building.
- REGULAR CALENDAR
7. 2009.0001Z (S. WERTHEIM: (415) 558-6612)
1-25 DIVISION STREET AND 45 RHODE ISLAND STREET - the northern half of the block between Division, Rhode Island, De Haro, and Alameda Streets, Lots 001 and 003 in Assessor's Block 3912 – The Planning Commission will consider a Zoning Map Amendment pursuant to Planning Code Section 302 and 306.3 that would include: (1) rezoning Block 3912 / Lots 001 and 003 from PDR-1-D (PDR-1-Design) to UMU (Urban Mixed Use) on Planning Code Map Sheets ZN8. The proposed Ordinance is before the Commission so that it may recommend adoption, rejection, or adoption with modifications to the Board of Supervisors, and adopt findings, including environmental findings and findings of consistency with the General Plan and the Priority Policies of Planning Code Section 101.1.
Preliminary Recommendation: Disapprove
SPEAKERS: Alice Barkley – Representing of the Project Sponsor of the project proposed for this site, Tony Kelly – Potrero Boosters Neighborhood Association speaking against the proposed project for this site, [Un-named speaker] speaking against the proposed project for this site.
ACTION: Disapproved
AYES: Miguel, Olague, Antonini, Borden, Lee, Moore, and Sugaya
RESOLUTION: 17839
8a. 2008.1215CV (C. TEAGUE: (415) 575-9081)
827 Guerrero Street - east side between 20th Street and Liberty Street, Lot 076 in Assessor's Block 3608 - Request for Conditional Use Authorization pursuant to Planning Code Sections 209.2(a) and 303 for a 20-bed group housing facility in an RH-2 (Residential, House, Two-Family District) and a 40-X Height and Bulk District. The proposal is to convert the existing building–previously a residential care facility (dba Chateau Agape) into a group housing facility (dba The Alternative to Meds Center) with a maximum of 15 bedrooms and 20 beds and 1 off-street parking space. No changes are proposed for the existing building.
Preliminary Recommendation: Approval
(Continued from Regular Meeting of February 26, 2009)
SPEAKERS: None
ACTION: Without hearing, continued to 4/9/09
AYES: Miguel, Olague, Antonini, Borden, Lee, Moore, and Sugaya
8b. 2008.1215CV (C. TEAGUE: (415) 575-9081)
827 Guerrero Street– east side between 20th Street and Liberty Street, Lot 076 in Assessor's Block 3608 - Request for a Parking Variance pursuant to Planning Code Sections 151 and 305 to provide only 1 of the 5 required off-street parking spaces for a 20-bed group housing facility in an RH-2 (Residential, House, Two-Family District) and a 40-X Height and Bulk District. The proposal is to convert the existing building previously a residential care facility (dba Chateau Agape)–into a group housing facility (dba The Alternative to Meds Center) with a maximum of 15 bedrooms and 20 beds.
(Continued from Regular Meeting of February 26, 2009)
SPEAKERS: None
ACTION: Without hearing, continued to 4/9/09
AYES: Miguel, Olague, Antonini, Borden, Lee, Moore, and Sugaya
9 2008.0862C (G. CABREROS: (415) 558-6169)
1622-1662 BROADWAY - north side between Van Ness Avenue and Franklin Street, Lots 010 and 011 in Assessor's Block 0570 - Request for Conditional Use Authorization pursuant to Planning Code Sections 253 and 303 to allow development of a building that exceeds 40 feet in height. The project proposes new construction of a seven-story, 34-unit residential building with 49 underground parking spaces on a property currently used as a parking lot within an RM-3 (Residential, Mixed, Medium Density) Zoning District and an 80-A Height and Bulk District.
Preliminary Recommendation: Approval with Conditions
(Continued from Regular Meeting of February 12, 2009)
NOTE: On February 12, 2009, following public testimony, the Commission continued the item to 3/12/09 with instructions to Project Sponsor to meet with neighbors and refine design by a vote of +6 -0. Commissioner Moore was absent. Public hearing remains open.
SPEAKERS: Jim Reuben – Representing the Project Sponsor, Jane Winslow – Community Outreach Consultant on project team, Warmer Schmalz – Project Architect, (+) David Ruffin - Representing owners of 1690 Broadway, (+) Ali Tabidian – Pacific Heights Residents Association, (-) Pia Heapy, (-) William Grant, (-) Diane Molberg, (-) Isar Ramos, (-) Harold Young, (-) Barbara Wirth, (-) Renee Henderson, (-) Shauna Matlin and Vanessa Carrington – Neighbors United Against 1650 Broadway spoke as recognized group opposition to the proposed project for up to 15 minutes, (-) Andy Marfor, (-) Jane Bragg
ACTION: Approved as modified: The project sponsor is encouraged to work with the owner to reduce or address impacts on the adjacent property to the east (Lot 009) due to the construction impacts of the project. Such construction impacts include, but are not limited to: tie back into the adjacent foundation, property line windows and any other Fire and Building Code issues related to the project being proposed to the shared property line; the project sponsor is encouraged to explore the feasibility of providing two on-site car share spaces as part of the total approved parking count. If car share is not provided on-site, the project sponsor is encouraged to explore providing two off-site car share spaces within the immediate vicinity of the project; Construction can only occur M-E, 7 a.m. to 8 p.m. excluding time after those hours and on weekends and holidays; penthouse addition is not to exceed 100 square feet.
AYES: Miguel, Antonini, Borden, and Lee
NAYES: Olague, Moore, and Sugaya
MOTION: 17840
10. 2006.0070T (C. NIKITAS: (415) 558-6306)
IMPLEMENTATION OF Legislationto Control theLOSS OF DWELLING UNITS- Code Implementation Document - Proposed procedures and criteria to implement newly-adopted Code Section 317 requiring Planning Commission hearings for the removal of certain dwelling and live-work units. The document also sets numerical criteria, some of which are subject to administrative adjustment in response to changing economic conditions.
Preliminary Recommendation: Adoption
(Continued from Regular Meeting of February 12, 2009)
SPEAKERS: None
ACTION: Without hearing, continued to 3/26/09
AYES: Miguel, Olague, Antonini, Borden, Lee, Moore, and Sugaya
11. 2009.0021DD (M. SMITH: (415) 558-6322)
4024 26th Street – between Noe and Sanchez Streets, Lot 006 in Assessor's Block 6553 - Request for Discretionary Review of Building Permit Application No. 2008.10.03.3318, proposing to construct a one-story vertical addition, a front horizontal addition, alter the front façade, and enlarge the rear deck of a two-family dwelling, located in a RH-2 (Residential, House, Two-Family) District and a 40-X Height and Bulk District.
Preliminary Recommendation: Do not take Discretionary Review and Approve.
(Continued from Regular Meeting of March 5, 2009)
SPEAKERS: Pierre Loewe – DR Requestor, Nancy Loewe, Joe Butler – Representing the second DR Requestors (Ed Buzinky and Debra Argenbright), Ed Buzinky, Debra Argenbright, Sue Hestor – Attorney for Ed and Debra, David Marla – Project Architect, Peter Lara – Project Sponsor, Monica Lara – Project Sponsor
ACTION: Took DR and approved as modified: pull 3rd floor rear back 7 feet so rear wall alignment is the average between the two adjacent properties; match the 3rd floor light well; and the project sponsor is urged to design parking entrance to preserve existing curb cut.
AYES: Miguel, Olague, Borden, Moore, and Sugaya
NAYES: Antonini and Lee
DRA#: 0068
12. 2008.0388D (S. VELLVE: (415) 558-6263)
2608 POST STREET - north side between Lyon Street and Presidio Avenue; Lot 008 in Assessor's Block 1073 - Request for Discretionary Review of Building Permit Application No. 2006.05.31.2874 proposing to construct a new four-story building containing two dwelling units at the front of the subject lot, which currently contains a two-story structure with one dwelling unit at the rear of the lot, within an RH-3 (Residential, House, Three-Family) District and a 40-X Height and Bulk District.
Preliminary Recommendation: Do not take Discretionary Review and Approve
SPEAKERS: None
ACTION: Without hearing, continued to 4/16/09
AYES: Miguel, Olague, Borden, Lee, Moore, and Sugaya
ABSENT: Antonini
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
- directing staff to place the item on a future agenda. (Government Code Section 54954.2(a))
NONE
Adjournment: 6:34 P.M.
Adopted: June 11, 2009
