New Page 1
SAN FRANCISCO
PLANNING COMMISSION
Meeting Minutes
Commission Chambers - Room 400
City Hall, 1 Dr. Carlton B. Goodlett Place
Thursday,
December 9, 2010
10:30 AM
Regular Meeting
COMMISSIONERS
PRESENT: Miguel, Olague, Antonini, Fong, Moore, and Sugaya
COMMISSIONERS
ABSENT: Borden
THE MEETING WAS
CALLED TO ORDER BY PRESIDENT MIGUEL AT 10:38 A.M.
STAFF IN
ATTENDANCE: John Rahaim – Director of Planning, Scott Sanchez – Zoning
Administrator, Tom Disanto, Kate McGee, Christine Haw, AnMarie Rodgers,
Elizabeth Watty, 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.
2009.0649C (D.
SANCHEZ: (415) 575-9082)
2980 24TH STREET - northeast corner of Harrison and 24th
Streets, Lots 039, 040 in Assessor’s Block 4206 - Request for
Conditional Use Authorization under Planning Code Sections 727.83 and 303 to
install a wireless transmission facility consisting of six panel antennas on an
existing mixed use building within the 24th Street - Mission Street
Neighborhood Commercial Transit District and a 55-X Height and Bulk District.
Preliminary Recommendation: Approval with Conditions
(Proposed for Continuance to January 13, 2011)
SPEAKERS: None
ACTION: Continued as proposed
AYES:
Antonini, Fong, Moore, Sugaya, Olague and Miguel
ABSENT: Borden
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.
2.
Consideration of Adoption:
·
Draft Minutes of Special Joint Meeting of October 21, 2010
(Continued
from the Regular meeting of December 2, 2010)
SPEAKERS: Sue Hestor
ACTION: without hearing, continued to 1/13/11
AYES:
Antonini, Fong, Moore, Sugaya, Olague and Miguel
ABSENT: Borden
3.
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 Miguel:
I would like to introduce to everyone our newest Commissioner, the Ports' lost
our gain, Rodney Fong. Many of you worked with him over the years and -- it is a
pleasure to have a long time San Francisco family represented here, someone who
has – has been active within the city government and has been active within the
business interests of the city and understands business and manages the general
tourist business that is the
backbone of some of our economy. We welcome you Rodney.
Commissioner Fong:
Thank you so much. I'm absolutely thankful to serve the City, looking forward to
working with you and sharing comments, sharing thoughts about shaping San
Francisco. So, looking forward to it, honored. Thank you so much.
Commissioner Sugaya:
On November 18th, there was item before this Commission regarding a restaurant
that wanted to have amplified music, and it was an Italian restaurant and the
music was going to enhance the PRA singing that took place there. We were I
believe all in a good mood. It was in that context that I made the remarks that
are now is the subject of Supervisor Allioto Pier’s. I supposed that comment was
offensive to those with an Italian Heritage. Although it was not meant to be a
disparaging comment, I see now it was very inappropriate. For that I apologize
to you, to those in the audience at the time and to others who have either heard
about what I said oar seen it on S.F.G.T.V. I do not take my responsibilities as
a City Commissioner lightly, and in am no stranger to discrimination and the
derogatory words of others. We represent the entire City and should treat
members of the public with the respect they deserve. I truly regret making my
comment and hope you and the community will accept this apology. This letter
was sent to Supervisor Alliot-Pier’s Office, also a copy was delivered to
President David Chiu's office as well.
Commissioner Antonini:
I want to mention, I met with project sponsors last week on the project that
will be before us next 2201 Market Street, if I'm not mistaken on the address
which was the former S.N.C. Ford. It was informative and helpful to get a
preview of what will be before us, and I also had meeting with the Bicycle
Coalition on their plans for the next number of years. I have the pleasure of
having lunch with the new Supervisor of District 10, mel leah kohn and last
night, with the Fire Department, and there was a rather large and well
represented group on a discussion chaired by our Director on the Housing
Element. That worked out very well.
Commissioner Miguel:
The reason for cancelling the January 6th meeting is because theDepartment will
be on hiatus the last week of the year and preparation would be impossible.
C. DIRECTOR’S REPORT
4.
Director’s Announcements
Director Rahaim:
I will also on behalf of staff and the department welcome Commissioner Fong to
the Commission. We look forward to working with you.
A couple of other announcements, last night, I convened a group of interested
parties on the Housing Element as President Miguel mentioned. Thank you for
coming to that meeting. It was a lively discussion. There was maybe 20-25 people
and we committed to getting out the third draft of the Housing Element in about
a month. Convening a group again to have what I hope would be the final
discussion on the details of the element in order for your consideration in
February and March. That's the current schedule that we're hoping for the
element, and this is the 2009 Housing Element and we're three weeks away from
2011 and concerned about getting this thing moved along. A reminder on Saturday
morning the Department is hosting a meeting for interested parties on our --
what we call our action plan, kind of the final stage of our reform process and
we will be reviewing in detail our proposed development review process that
was the subject of your memo last week. We have a meeting at 10:00 A.M. Saturday
at the Department and we will be putting that on your calendar in January for a
public hearing as well.
5. Review
of Past Week’s Events at the Board of Supervisors, Board of Appeals, and
Historic Preservation Commission.
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS REPORT:
At the Land Use Committee, two items were heard:
·
Conditional Use (CU) for Other Entertainment in the Van Ness SUD & RC Districts
by supervisor Alioto-Pier.
This commission heard this item last week and recommended approval. Staff also
recommended a modification to change the controls that govern uses in RC
districts. Staff recommended using C-2 use controls as had been done prior to
2008. While you agreed with the Supervisor’s intent to regulate “other
entertainment,” you asked for more time to consider the proposed RC change.
Coincidentally, we have a second ordinance before you this week sponsored by
Supervisor Mirkarimi that amends these two sections and this will allow us to
consider that change again this week. At the Land use hearing on Monday,
Supervisor Alioto-Pier modified her ordinance to require public notice under
Section 312 for “other entertainment” uses in this area. Supervisor Alioto-Pier
and the Land Use Committee agreed to sever the ordinance so that the additional
controls for “other entertainment” could move forward to the full Board but
would allow the committee to wait on the decision about the governing use
controls in the RC district until you had your discussion today.
·
CEQA
Appeal Reform.
The Land Use Committee also considered an ordinance to add regulations to the
Administrative Code that would specify procedures for appeals of neg decs and
exemptions. The proposed ordinance was considered by this Commission on
6/24/10. At that time you recommended 11 modifications. The HPC considered the
legislation on 6/16 and 7/7 at which point they concurred with your
recommendations and added 4 additional considerations. This was the fourth
hearing of the item and continued at the Land Use Committee. This week the item
was continued again. The ordinance had been amended to address the concerns of
this commission and the Historic Preservation Commission. Since you’ve heard
the ordinance, it has been amended such that appellants are not required to have
“prior participation” in order to maintain appeal rights. Some of the major
features of the ordinance as currently drafted include the following:
Appeal Deadlines: for EIR – 20 days after certification; for appeals of
a neg dec – 20 days after adoption by the Planning Commission; for exemptions –
20 days after each noticed opportunity OR if no notice is provided, within 20
days of final discretionary permit. This last question of setting the appeal
deadline at 20 days after final discretionary permit is raising concern that
appeals could be valid with the addition of a minor permit, well after
construction is underway for the project. Appeal Procedures: The
City may not approve or issue permits during an appeal (except to mitigate a
hazard); the Board must hold an appeal hearing within 30 days and act on an
appeal within 30 days of the hearing; a briefing schedule would be established
to ensure that the Board has materials in a timely manner; no requirement to
have appealed at the Planning Commission prior to an appeal to the Board; the
Board may affirm or reverse the determination with 6 votes; a tie vote is a
disapproval. Public Notice: Expands public notice of exemptions,
requires exemption notice be in writing, posted on website and mailed to
interested parties; Notice of Exemptions would also be posted on line and
mailed; EIRs would have to be available at least 14 days before certification
hearings at the Commission, and notice for area plans sponsored by the City
would not require mailed notice. Preservation: The Historic
Preservation Commission is formally included in CEQA review; HPC is to provide
comments at least 8 days prior to Planning Commission hearings; The ERO is
required to consult with the HPC for projects that implicate historic
resources. This proposed ordinance has been calendared for consideration
again this coming Monday.
BOARD OF APPEALS REPORT:
·
460 Townsend Street
is a Notice of Violation and Penalty (NOVP) that the Board unanimously upheld
(4-0-1) on November 3, 2010. The NOVP found that the Appellant, Academy of Art
University (AAU), established an educational service at the subject property
without benefit of building permit or conditional use authorization. The Board
voted 4-1 to deny the rehearing request.
·
1321 De Haro Street
is a variance decision letter that the Board voted 2-2-1 to uphold on November
3, 2010. The variance decision allowed an encroachment into the required rear
yard. The Board voted unanimously to deny the rehearing request.
·
Finally, the Board heard the appeal of variance decision which
granted rear yard and front setback variances to the property at 1266 Great
Highway. The Appellant argued that the proposed construction was out of
character with the neighborhood. The Permit Holder argued that the variance was
justified due to the unique characteristics of the subject, which is shallow in
depth (approximately 69 feet deep). The Board voted 3-2 to grant the appeal and
deny the variance. Four votes are needed to overturn a departmental action;
therefore, the variance was granted.
HISTORIC PRESREVATION COMMISSION REPORT:
None
6.
Department’s Budget Update
(T. DISANTO: (415) 575-9113)
Fiscal Year 2010-11 - Budget Status Update - and Fiscal Year
2011-12 Budget Priority Considerations.
SPEAKERS: None
ACTION: Informational only – no action
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:
Ms. Choy
Re:
Francisco de
Costa
Re:
Linda Chapman
Re:
E.
REGULAR CALENDAR
7.
2010.0863T
(K. McGee:
(415) 558-6367)
Amendments to the Planning Code Section 420.1-420.5: The Visitacion Valley
Community Facilities and Infrastructure Fee and Fund [Board File No. 101247]
- Ordinance introduced by Supervisor Maxwell amending Planning Code
Sections 420.1 (Findings), 420.2 (Definitions), 420.3 (Application), 420.4
(Imposition of Requirements), 420.5 (Visitacion Valley Community Facilities and
Infrastructure Fund) to update the Visitacion Valley Community Facilities and
Infrastructure Fee and Fund and to conform the program with other Area Plan fee
programs; and adopting findings, including environmental findings, Planning Code
Section 302 findings, and findings of consistency with the General Plan and the
priority policies of Planning Code Section 101.
Preliminary Recommendation: Approval.
(Continued
from Regular Meeting of November 18, 2010)
NOTE: On November 18, 2010, following
public testimony, the Commission continued this item to 12/9/10 by a vote of (+6
-0). Public hearing remains open.
SPEAKERS: In opposition: Espanola Jackson, Shirley Jones, Michael
Burk, and Francisco de Costa; In support: Fran Martin and Jim Groden
ACTION: Following testimony, continued to 2/3/11 with a recommendation
that the Supervisor continue working with all parties on the issue of fees.
AYES:
Antonini, Fong, Moore, and Olague
NAYES: Sugaya
and Miguel
ABSENT: Borden
8.
(C. HAW: (415) 558-6618)
ACADEMY OF ART UNIVERSITY (AAU) ENFORCEMENT PROGRAM UPDATE -
Informational presentation and discussion on the Academy of Art University (AAU)
housing practices and progress on the enforcement program.
Preliminary Recommendation: No Action Required
SPEAKERS: Gail Roberts, Francisco de Costa, Sara Juto, Brenda King Randal,
Linda Chapman, Sue Hestor, and David Cincotta – representing the Academy
ACTION: Informational only – no action
9.
2007.1079C
(R. Crawford: (415) 558-6358)
2295 TAYLOR STREET (aka 701 CHESTNUT STREET)
- southwest corner of Taylor and Chestnut Streets, a Lot 001, in Assessor’s
Block 0066 - Request for Conditional Use Authorization, pursuant to
Planning Code Sections 722.21 Use Size exceeding 1,999 square feet, and 722.81
Institutions, Large, to modify Planning Commission Motion 13457 in Case #
1992.400IECV severing the use of the property at 2295 Taylor Street from
that at 800 Chestnut Street and to establish a Large Institutional Use, Academy
of Art University, a post-secondary educational institution and allow use of the
building for artist studio space for graduate students of the University within
the North Beach Neighborhood Commercial District and 40-X Height and Bulk
District.
Preliminary Recommendation: Disapproval
SPEAKERS: None
ACTION: CU application was withdrawn
1:30
P.M.
10.
2010.0756T
(A. RODGERS: (415) 558-6395)
Ordinance amending Planning Code Sections 124, 132.2, 144, 145, 145.1, 145.5,
150, 151.1, 155, 161, 186, 209.8, 210.3, 212, 231, 243, 253, 253.3, and
repealing Sections 175.1, 175.2, 175.3, 175.4, 175.5, and 249.26, to create
comprehensive and consistent street frontage controls. Ordinance
proposed by Supervisor Mirkarimi to create comprehensive and consistent
street frontage controls for residential districts, to create consistent ground
floor controls for industrial districts, to permit certain small corner
commercial uses in RM-3 and RM-4 districts, to modify floor area ration controls
in the Van Ness SUD, to modify conditional use authorization requirements for
buildings over 40 feet in RM and RC districts, to amend the procedure for
certain exceptions from off-street parking and loading requirements, and to
permit parking and loading exceptions to preserve historic buildings and trees.
Preliminary Recommendation: Approval with Modifications.
SPEAKERS: In support: Tom Radulovich – Livable City, Marilyn Amini,
Regina – Small Business Commission, and Jeremy Paul
ACTION: Approved amendments to sections 209.8 and 243 only. All other
proposed amendments were continued to January 13, 2011
AYES:
Antonini, Fong, Moore, Sugaya, Olague and Miguel
ABSENT: Borden
RESOLUTION: 18235
11.
2010.0970C
(E. WATTY: (415) 558-6620)
2342-2348 MARKET STREET
- north side between 16th and Castro
Streets; Lot 007 in Assessor's Block 3562 - Staff-Initiated Modification to
Conditional Use Authorization, Case No. 2008.0444C, pursuant to
Planning Code Sections 303 to enclose or remove a smoking patio in front of a
bar (dba Trigger) to mitigate complaints regarding noise. On June 26, 2008 the
Planning Commission approved 2008.0444C to expand an existing bar with other
entertainment and for a use size exceeding 2,999 square feet. The Project also
included an outdoor activity area, pursuant to Sections 721.24 and 790.70,
consisting of a front smoking patio. The Subject Property is within the Upper
Market Neighborhood Commercial District and 65-B Height and Bulk District.
Preliminary Recommendation: Approval with Conditions
SPEAKERS: In support: Jeremy Paul – representing the Project
Sponsor; In opposition: Pat Tura, David Troup, Jain, Art Gallagher, Rob
Cox, and Allen Beach Neilson
ACTION: Approved per staff recommendations
AYES:
Antonini, Fong, Moore, Sugaya, Olague and Miguel
ABSENT: Borden
MOTION: 18236
G.
PUBLIC COMMENT
At this time, members of
the public may address the Commission on items of interest to the public that
are within the subject matter jurisdiction of the Commission except agenda
items. With respect to agenda items, your opportunity to address the Commission
will be afforded when the item is reached in the meeting with one exception.
When the agenda item has already been reviewed in a public hearing at which
members of the public were allowed to testify and the Commission has closed the
public hearing, your opportunity to address the Commission must be exercised
during the Public Comment portion of the Calendar. Each member of the public
may address the Commission for up to three minutes.
The Brown Act forbids a
commission from taking action or discussing any item not appearing on the posted
agenda, including those items raised at public comment. In response to public
comment, the commission is limited to:
(1) responding
to statements made or questions posed by members of the public; or
(2) requesting
staff to report back on a matter at a subsequent meeting; or
(3)
directing staff to place the item on a future agenda. (Government Code
Section 54954.2(a))
SPEAKERS:
Manny Flores –
Carpenters Union
Re:
Expressed gratitude for the work of the Planning Commission
Adjournment:
3:12 p.m.
Adopted: January 20, 2011
