SAN FRANCISCO
PLANNING COMMISSION
Meeting Minutes
Commission Chambers - Room 400
City Hall, 1 Dr. Carlton B.
Goodlett Place
Thursday, May 12, 2011
12:00 PM
Regular Meeting
COMMISSIONERS PRESENT:
Olague, Antonini, Borden, Fong, Moore, Sugaya
COMMISSIONER ABSENT:
Miguel
THE MEETING WAS CALLED TO
ORDER BY PRESIDENT OLAGUE AT 12:09 PM
STAFF IN ATTENDANCE: John Rahaim – Director of Planning, Scott Sanchez – Zoning
Administrator, Aaron Hollister, Jonas Ionin, Chelsea Fordham, Corey Teague,
Aaron Starr, Kevin Guy, Sharon Lai, Elizabeth Watty, 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.
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
1.
2010.1114C
(M. WOODS: (415) 558-6315)
1796 UNION STREET
- northeast corner at Octavia Street; Lot 014 in Assessor’s Block 0529
- Request for Conditional
Use Authorization pursuant to Planning Code Sections 303(c) and 725.44, to
allow the establishment of an approximately 950 square-foot small self-service
restaurant (dba Lite Bite), within the Union Street Neighborhood Commercial
District and 40-X Height and Bulk District.
Preliminary Recommendation:
Approval with Conditions
SPEAKERS: None
ACTION: Approved
AYES: Antonini, Borden, Fong, Moore, Sugaya,
Olague
ABSENT: Miguel
MOTION: 18356
C.
COMMISSIONERS’ QUESTIONS AND MATTERS
2. 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.
Commission Antonini:
I participated in a meeting last night at 2740 Mission Street
with representatives from Pollo Campero. Supervisor Campos was there as well .I
think it was a productive meeting. People have a lot of questions about process;
questions about differences between the categories of fast-food and formula
retail. I think those meetings are very useful to understand what is going on
and what to expect. I want to thank everybody who participated. But I would
also like to thank staff -- and there is no big rush on this -- if there is the
ability to find out where the population density center of San Francisco is, I
think it is interesting if we know geographically where the center of San
Francisco is, but in terms of population in the District, it is probably
available. That has a bearing on some of the things we consider as to where the
densest parts of the City are. Finally: I guess, I believe we are in receipt of
something from Mr. Ionin as far as the restaurants categories. I think that will
be very helpful, because it sparked discussion last night and it is a little
confusing. I mentioned it as being reconsidered and the categories will be a
little less confusing since some of the things that were categorized as fast
food might not be categorized as fast food and vice versa. Lastly: I read an
article in the recent "Marina Times," and the author was Supervisor Farrell. It
mentions that Facebook had considered one time relocating to San Francisco. I
can check with him and others to find out more about this. It would be
interesting to find out what sort of barriers might have existed to that
decision and that could help us in our future decisions. I will get more
information on that.
Commissioner Moore:
As Commissioner Antonini was talking about clarification of
restaurant uses, I would remind the Commission that last week, Commissioner
Miguel was talking about retail -- retail pharmacy, retail what ever. It
encompasses all uses from food to pharmacy to our hardware to whatever. I think
we need some guidance on that.
Commissioner Olague:
Yes, I think we had talked about that, getting more guidance
- a work item on those issues that relate to retail.
Director Rahaim:
You are asking for what the existing definitions are and what types of uses
they encompass?
Commissioner Moore:
Why are we using types that we are not familiar with, i.e.,
retail, pharmacy, as we have last week with CVS. Note there are others coming
up with larger mixes.
Commissioner Borden: I think if we are going to talk about that, what we want
to understand is the impact on different types of retail. Not every type of
retail has the same kind of impact. I think if we were going to break down the
conversation that would be the more interesting thing to have. Obviously, if you
have pharmaceuticals, maybe there is a different impact than if you have a
clothing store. I do not know. I am just throwing it out there. Maybe there is
not. I think if we're looking at ways to delineate the definition, we might want
to look at what makes the difference. Maybe it is the hours of operation. Maybe
it is the amount of waste they cause. I am not saying we need to change
anything. I am just saying if we're going to look at retail, I think we should
look at how different types of retail within that classification impact what
neighborhoods differently.
Commissioner Sugaya:
Just for the public's sake, we're talking about
establishments like CVS Pharmacy, Walgreen's, which Commissioner Miguel voiced
that in his opinion he did not know what they were. I think I know what they
are, but maybe the code does not establish what they are. I think that is where
the Commission is going, especially when we are talking about Target, or
Wal-mart, or any of the larger
establishments, and still have that mix - bigger than a department store. You
know what I mean.
President Olague:
Me and Commissioner Fong attended a brown bag lunch that was
very well attended, and it is interesting. In the conversation the idea of
manufacturing came up. According to the census at least, a high percentage of
those jobs come from here in the City. At the same time, I think there is an
effort to retain those jobs and that type of business here in the City. This is
a non-profit called SF Made, and at the end of the month, they are going to be
touring some of these local factories and that sort of thing, breweries, people
who make garments and this kind of thing. SF Made -- that is the name of the
group of people if you are interested. I think in June to July, we will be
having a talk on local manufacturing. It is not something we should rule out of
the talk about job creation and some of the other types of industry coming in.
It seems to me there is still a lot of vibrancy and potential in manufacturing.
Commissioner Borden:
Your comments reminded me that in the paper it said the
districts that would experience the most growth would be 2, 4, 6, 7, and 11.
They have greater than the median norm of population growth. I was really
surprised at four and seven. We do not have a lot of projects on that side of
the City, along with six, which we obviously knew about, and 10, which we
somewhat knew about. There is more development than we have approved there. It
will be interesting to look at the census numbers, to kind of see if there was
any growth and development in these neighborhoods or if there was more housing.
It will be interesting to figure out why -- particularly 4, 7, and 11 had such a
huge growth in their population numbers.
D. DIRECTOR’S REPORT
3.
Director’s Announcements
Director Rahaim:
Commissioners, I have one item to call to your attention.
There is a memo regarding the Japantown Better Neighborhood Plan process, and
there are community meetings coming up. There will three meetings: June 1,
June 27, and July 31. They are all happening at 1840 Sutter Street at 8:00 in
the evening. The community is looking at the details of plans that you had seen
about a year-and-a- half ago. They are looking to add and recommend changes.
These meetings will be held to get a broader community input on the plan. Again,
the meetings will be June 1, June 27, in July 31.
Scott Sanchez,
Zoning Administrator:
I just wanted to remark on the legislation sponsored by
Supervisor Mirkarimi that has become effective. Residential units seeking a
parking reduction would usually come to the Commission. That has been changed.
Now residential and commercial parking – NCR districts – can be reviewed by the
Zoning Administrator and reviewed against a set of criteria. This is under
Section 307.I.
We had a few applications submitted prior to this becoming effective. Some of
those will not be coming before you because of the legislative change. Others
will be coming before you because they required Conditional Use for other
aspects of the project. We have a hearing next week and I wanted to inform the
commission of the change.
4. Review of Past
Week’s Events at the Board of Supervisors, Board of Appeals, and Historic
Preservation Commission.
LAND USE COMMITTEE:
§
BF various Parkmerced.
This week the hearing at the land use committee focused on
updates to the draft Development Agreement and technical amendments to the
Planning Code ordinance. There was little discussion. After taking public
comment and accepting the proposed amendments to the documents, the hearing was
continued without action. The Committee will consider action on the Parkmerced
ordinances at a special Land Use Committee hearing scheduled for 9:00am on
Tuesday, May 24. At its full Board hearing next Tuesday, the Board will not
only consider the EIR Appeal-- but also if the EIR is upheld, the Board will go
on to consider all of the actions related to the Parkmerced project.
§
Housing Element. At Monday's land use committee hearing, the Board considered the draft
Housing Element. For this item, the Board has already heard the appeal of
the EIR and upheld the CEQA document with a 8-3 vote. Therefore this week
the Land Use Committee was able to take action on the draft HE. The
Committee heard public comment that was largely consistent with comments
made at the Planning Commission hearing (some expressed concern that adoption
of the housing element would result in a re-zoning of RH districts - staff
clarified that this is not part of the housing element). After public comment
the Committee thanked staff for their work, asked staff to respond to public
comments and clarify the effect of the housing element, and expressed support
for the housing element; the committee voted unanimously to recommend adoption
of the Housing Element to the full board. The Board is scheduled to vote on the
HE at next Tuesday's meeting.
FULL BOARD OF SUPERVISORS:
§
New
Legislation for 800 Presidio.
Commissioners, on April 28th,
2011 you heard legislation related to a proposed project titled the “Booker T.
Washington Community Services Mixed Use Center”. At that time you took actions
approving the project with about 50 units of housing (including 24 low income
units and 24 transitional housing units for youth at risk), a community center
and a gym within a 55’ height limit. Since your action two new pieces of
legislation have been introduced at the Board. The first, was introduced by
Supervisor Farrell. It is an amendment to his original legislation for the
project. This new version would limit the height to 45’ [BF110116, version 2].
The second piece of legislation was introduced by Supervisors Mirkarimi, Mar,
and Avalos [BF 110658]. This second, proposed Ordinance would allow a 55’
building-- consistent with the project you have approved. Since you have
already considered this project, the Board has calendared both versions of the
legislation without the typical 90-day wait. Currently the Ordinances are
scheduled for a June 6th hearing before the Board Land Use Committee.
§
New hearing
request. Title:
Hearing on the San Francisco Administrative Code Article 36 regarding the
Interagency Plan Implementation Committee Annual Progress Report and San
Francisco Planning Code Section 409 regarding the Development Impact Fee
Report. Sponsors: Eric Mar
INTRODUCTIONS:
·
110116
Planning Code - Zoning Map - Presidio-Sutter Special Use District - 800 Presidio
Avenue. Ordinance
amending the San Francisco Planning Code by adding Section 259.53 to: 1)
establish the Presidio-Sutter Special Use District for property located at 800
Presidio Avenue (Assessor's Block No. 1073, Lot No. 13); 2) amend Sheet HT03 of
the Zoning Map to change the Height and Bulk District from 40-X to 45-X; and 3)
amend Sheet SU-03 of the Zoning Map to reflect the boundaries of the
Presidio-Sutter Special Use District; adopting findings, including environmental
findings, Section 302 findings, and findings of consistency with the General
Plan and the Priority Policies of Planning Code Section 101.1.
Mark Farrell,
Eric Mar,
Ross Mirkarimi
·
110482
Planning Code - Miscellaneous Technical Amendments.
Ordinance amending the San Francisco Planning Code to: 1) correct clerical
errors, make language revisions and update Sections 121.2, 134, 136.1, 142, 185,
201, 204.1, 204.2, 205, 205.1, 205.3, 207.2, 209.3, 217, 243, 303, 309, 311,
312, 317, 602.25, 602.26, 607.1, and various Sections and Tables in Articles 7
and 8; and 2) adopting findings, including findings under the California
Environmental Quality Act, Planning Code Section 302 findings, and findings of
consistency with the General Plan and Planning Code Section 101.1. Planning
Commission.
Board of Appeals
There was no hearing by the
Board of Appeals last week.
HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION:
The Commission did not meet
this week.
5.
2011.0149I
(A. HOLLISTER: (415) 575-9078)
135 MAIN
STREET
- east side between
Mission and Howard Streets; Lot 012 in Assessor’s Block 3717 - Report on
Babson College’s Abbreviated Institutional Master Plan (IMP), pursuant to
Planning Code Section 304.5. Babson College’s Abbreviated IMP contains
information on the nature and history of the institution, the location and use
of affiliated buildings, and development plans within the C-3-O (Downtown
Office) Zoning District and a 300-S Height and Bulk District. The IMP is
available for viewing on the Planning Department’s website (fromwww.sfplanning.org
click “Publications & Reports” and then “Institutional Master Plans”).
Recommended Action:
Informational presentation, no action requested.
SPEAKERS: None
ACTION: Informational presentation;
Abbreviated IMP was accepted with the close of the hearing
– no formal action was taken
E. 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: Harlan Hoffman
Re: Clarification of DPW
order presenting LHNA guidelines
Brad Paul
Re: Calendar an item to
discuss Parking in the Waterfront and Washington Street area that will affect
the American’s Cup; also restoring the MUNI connection to the Waterfront area.
Betty Foote:
Re: Why variances aren’t separated from PMND
Sue Hestor
Re: Transition to
electronic
files.
F.
REGULAR CALENDAR
6a.
2011.0063DV
(J. IONIN: (415) 558-6309)
135 El Camino del Mar
- south side between 25th Avenue and the western most entrance to the
Presidio; Lot 031 in Assessor’s Block 1334 - Request for Discretionary Review
of Building Permit Application No. 2010.01.07.4358 proposing to legalize
horizontal additions built without benefit of permit at the southeastern-most
rear portion, along the east side and over the garage at the front of the
single-family residence within an RH-1(D) (Residential House, One-Family,
Detached), Scenic Special Sign District, and 40-X Height and Bulk District.
Preliminary Recommendation: Approved as proposed
SPEAKERS: None
ACTION: Without
hearing, continued to 5/19/11
AYES: Borden, Moore, Sugaya, Olague
NAYES: Antonini and Fong
ABSENT: Miguel
6b.
2011.0063DV
(J. IONIN: (415) 558-6309)
135 El Camino del Mar
- south side between 25th Avenue and the western most entrance to the
Presidio; Lot 031 in Assessor’s Block 1334 - Request for Rear Yard and
Non-complying Structure Variances pursuant to Sections 134 and 188 of the
Planning Code to legalize additions built without benefit of permit at the
southeastern-most rear portion, along the east side and over the garage at the
front of the single-family residence. A portion of the horizontal addition at
the rear encroaches into the required rear yard within an RH-1(D) (Residential
House, One-Family, Detached), Scenic Special Sign District, and 40-X Height and
Bulk District.
SPEAKERS: None
ACTION: Without
hearing, continued to 5/19/11
AYES: Borden, Moore, Sugaya, Olague
NAYES: Antonini and Fong
ABSENT: Miguel
7.
2008.0723E
(C. FORDHAM: (415) 575-9071)
1275 – 1255 COLUMBUS AVENUE
- west side of Columbus Avenue at the southwest corner of the intersection of
Columbus Avenue, North Point, and Leavenworth Street; Lot 014 of Assessor’s
Block 0028 - Appeal of Preliminary Mitigated Negative Declaration. The
proposed project is demolition of an existing 15,852-square-foot, 32-foot-tall
office building built in 1954 and construction of a new 54,420-square-foot,
40-foot-tall, mixed-use building containing 20 residential units and 6,215
square feet of commercial space. The project site is located in a C-2 (Community
Business District) Use District, the Waterfront Special Use District No. 2, and
a 40-X Height and Bulk District.
Preliminary Recommendation: Uphold Preliminary
Mitigated Negative Declaration
SPEAKERS: Betty Foote,
Appellant, In Favor of upholding Neg Dec: Krishanti Dharmaraj, Mathew
Kamimoto, Todd Doorman; Opposed to Neg Dec: Sue Hestor, Thomas Nuyens.
ACTION: PMND was
upheld
AYES: Antonini, Borden, Fong, Moore, Sugaya,
Olague
ABSENT: Miguel
MOTION: 18357
8.
2008.0723V
(K. GUY: (415) 558-6163)
1255-1275 COLUMBUS AVENUE
- west side of Columbus Avenue at the southwest corner of the intersection of
Columbus Avenue, North Point, and Leavenworth Street; Lot 014 of Assessor’s
Block 0028 - Request for Variances: 1) Pursuant to Planning Code Section
134 to allow a series of courtyards situated along the rear property line,
where a continuous rear yard equal to 25% of the depth of the lot is required;
2) Pursuant to Section 151 of the Planning Code to provide no off-street parking
spaces for the proposed retail use, where 12 parking spaces are required, and;
3) Pursuant to Section 155(r) to allow a new 10-foot curb cut to access
off-street parking from Columbus Avenue, where no new curb cut is permitted. The
proposed project is demolition of an existing 15,852-square-foot, 32-foot-tall
office building built in 1954 and construction of a new 54,420-square-foot,
40-foot-tall, mixed-use building containing 20 residential units and 6,215
square feet of commercial space. The project site is located in a C-2 (Community
Business District) Use District, the Waterfront Special Use District No. 2, and
a 40-X Height and Bulk District.
SPEAKERS: Same as those
listed for item 7
ACTION: Zoning
Administrator Scott Sanchez closed the public hearing and granted the variances
subject to the standard conditions of approval
9.
2010.0771EC
(C. TEAGUE: (415) 575-9081)
300, 307 & 311 GAVEN
STREET -
north and south
sides of Gaven Street at the intersection of Boylston Street, Lot 032 in
Assessor's Block 5847, Lot 001 in Assessor's Block 5846, Lot 047 in Assessor's
Block 5853, and Lots 045 and 046 in Assessor's Block 5860 - Request for
Conditional Use Authorization pursuant to Planning Code Sections 209.3(g),
303, 304, and 317 to allow a Planned Unit Development (PUD) for a project
proposing to demolish a portion of an existing building on the campus of an
existing private school (dba The San Francisco School), construct a 40-foot tall
and approximately 14,000 gross square foot multi-purpose center, expand the
enrollment cap from 268 to 285 students, and to legalize the conversion of two
single-family homes from residential use to administrative school uses in the
RH-1 (Residential, House-District, One-Family) Zoning District and 40-X Height
and Bulk District. The PUD requires an exception for rear yard (Section 134) and
height measurement (Section 260).
Preliminary
Recommendation: Approval with Conditions.
SPEAKERS: Steve Morris,
Head of the school, Phil Bondi - Project Architect, In Favor: Delami
Elkins, Ki Maudi, Alice Aarons, Louise Devine, Nathan Logan, Mathew Komimoto,
Olga Banales; Opposed: Thomas Nunian
ACTION: Approved
AYES: Antonini, Borden, Fong, Moore, Sugaya,
Olague
ABSENT: Miguel
MOTION: 18358
10a.
2010.0137D
(A. STARR: (415) 558-6362)
2454-2456 BUSH
STREET
- north side between
Pierce and Scott Streets, two interior lots with access to Bush Street by an
easement; Lots 011 and 011D in Assessor’s Block 0657 - Mandatory
Discretionary Review, pursuant to Planning Code Section 317(e), of Building
Permit Application Nos. 2010.09.20.1221 and 2010.09.20.1225, proposing to merge
two existing one-story, one-unit residential buildings to one, one-story,
single-family building within the RH-3 (Residential, House, Two-Family) Zoning
District and 40-X Height and Bulk District.
Staff Analysis: Full
Discretionary Review
Preliminary Recommendation: Do
not take Discretionary Review and approve
SPEAKERS: Felton Finney -
Project Sponsor
ACTION: The
Commission did not take DR and approved the project encouraging the PS to
continue working with staff to do less glazing in the rear and provide
“something more like French doors.”
AYES: Antonini, Fong, Sugaya, Olague
ABSENT: Borden,
Miguel, and Moore
DRA: 0207
10b.
2010.0137V
(A. STARR: (415) 558-6362)
2454A-2456A BUSH STREET
- north side between Pierce and Scott Streets, two interior lots with access to
Bush Street by an easement; Lots 011 and 011D in Assessor’s Block 0657 -
Request for Rear Yard and Noncomplying Structure Variances pursuant to
Sections 134 and 188a of the Planning Code for the construction of a 17’ long by
3’ wide 1-story horizontal addition between the two existing one-story, one-unit
structures and the construction of an approximately 4’ long by 6’ wide 1-story
horizontal addition at the rear of the building furthest to the north within the
RH-3 (Residential, House, Two-Family) Zoning District and 40-X Height and Bulk
District.
SPEAKERS: Same as those
listed for item 10a.
ACTION: Zoning
Administrator Scott Sanchez closed the public hearing and granted the variances
subject to the standard conditions of approval and those adopted by the
Commission today
11.
2010.0556D
(A. Hollister:
(415) 575-9078)
1500 GRANT AVENUE
- northeast corner of
Grant Avenue and Union Street, Lot 024 in Assessor’s Block 0104 - Request for
Discretionary Review of Building Permit Application No. 2009.10.15.9053,
proposing to add a T-Mobile micro wireless telecommunications service facility
consisting of a panel antenna shrouded inside a faux vent pipe structure and
equipment cabinets. The faux vent pipe would be mounted on the rooftop of the
subject building, while the equipment cabinets would be mounted to the wall of
an existing penthouse stair structure. The subject property is located in the
North Beach Neighborhood Commercial District, the North Beach Special Use
District, the Telegraph Hill-North Beach Residential Special Use District and a
40-X Height and Bulk District.
Preliminary Recommendation: Do
not take Discretionary Review and approve the project as proposed.
Staff Analysis: Full
Discretionary Review
(Continued from Regular Meeting of
February 17, 2011)
SPEAKERS: In Favor:
Jeff Ente, Chi Hom, Julie Jaycox, Opposed: Steven Suen, Evangiline Bares, Gloria
Salazar, David Tse, Yvonne Liu, Regina Vann, Alfredo Fiore, Neutral:
Marisa Ongbhanbulya, Leri, Qiao Lien, Billie Tan, Li-Xu Li Qiong, Darla
Bernard,
ACTION: Took DR and
approved with requirement that electrical units be screened and the design
worked on by Department staff
AYES: Antonini, Borden, Fong, Sugaya, Olague
NAYES: Moore
ABSENT: Miguel
DRA: 0208
12.
2011.0194D
(S. LAI: (415) 575-9087)
4090 26TH STREET
- north side between Noe and Sanchez Streets; Lot 020 in Assessor’s Block 6553 -
Request for Discretionary Review of Building Permit Application No.
2010.10.05.2258, proposing to replace the existing deck and shed structure with
a 3-story horizontal rear extension that measures approximately 10 feet deep by
25 feet wide, to the existing three-story, single-family dwelling, located in a
RH-2 (Residential, House, Two-units per Lot) District and a 40-X Height and Bulk
District.
Staff Analysis: Abbreviated Discretionary
Review
Preliminary
Recommendation: Do not take Discretionary Review and approve
SPEAKERS: Julie Lau, Eric
Engleman, Sue Hestor
ACTION: The
Commission did not take DR and approved the project encouraging the project
sponsor to continue a dialogue with the DR requestor to try to soften the
project.
AYES: Antonini, Borden, Moore, Sugaya, Olague
ABSENT: Miguel and
Fong
DRA: 0209
5:00 PM
13.
(E.WATTY (415) 558-6620)
CALIFORNIA PACIFIC MEDICAL CENTER (CPMC) LONG RANGE DEVELOPMENT PLAN OVERVIEW
- This is the
second of four scheduled informational hearings that will provide an overview of
CPMC’s development projects. Specific topics to be discussed at this session
include an overview of the architecture, urban design, and public realm
improvements proposed at the Van Ness and Geary Campus, St. Luke’s Campus, and
Davies Campus, and an overview of the requested entitlements.
California Pacific Medical Center (CPMC) is made up of four medical centers in
San Francisco, consisting of the California Campus (previously known as the
Children’s Hospital of San Francisco), Pacific Campus (previously known as the
Pacific Presbyterian Medical Center), Davies Campus (previously Ralph K. Davies
Hospital), and St. Luke’s Campus. Three of CPMC’s four acute-care hospitals
(California, Pacific, and St. Luke’s Campus’) must be rebuilt or de-licensed in
order to comply with state law about the seismic stability of hospitals. CPMC
proposes to consolidate the acute-care services currently located at the
California and Pacific Campuses, and locate them at a new medical center at Van
Ness Avenue and Geary. The Van Ness and Geary Medical Center would include a
hospital on the west side of Van Ness Avenue ((Block 0695, Lots 005, 006) and a
new Medical Office Building on the east side of Van Ness Avenue (Block 0694,
Lots 005, 006, 007, 008, 009, 009A, 010). The sites are bounded by Franklin
Street, Post Street, Van Ness Avenue, Cedar Street, Geary Street, and Geary
Boulevard. At the St. Luke’s Campus, CPMC proposes to construct a new hospital
that will be located adjacent to the existing hospital tower on Cesar Chavez
Street (Block 6576, Lot 021). The existing hospital tower on St. Luke’s Campus
(Block 6575, Lots 001, 002) would be demolished after the new hospital is built,
operational, and patients have been transferred. In a subsequent phase, a
replacement medical office building/expansion building would be built at the
corner of Cesar Chavez and Valencia Streets. CPMC also proposes to reauthorize
their previously approved Conditional Use for the Davies Neuroscience Institute
(aka Noe Street Medical Office Building) located at 601 Duboce Street (Block
3539, Lot 001).
Preliminary
Recommendation: No Action Requested. Informational Discussion Only
SPEAKERS: In Favor:
Bob Caplin, David Meckel, John Millsap, Lance B ayer, Jason Atachi, John
Pangarzio, Tyler Krehlik, Corey Marshall, Bryan Stiles, Gloria Smith, David
Dupree, Richard May, Linda Chapman, Bryan Childs, David Dupree, Opposed:
Paul Werner, Santly Seifreid, Mark Mitchell, Amelia Loisin, Gracita Dimano,
Manuel Ang, Mely Saaundra, Michael Treece, Eugene Crenslin, Valerie Gruber, Mary
Michelucii, Jane Sandoval, Bob Buckley, Pierre Gasztowtt, Eileen Prendivill,
Reiko Furuya, Roland Anderson, Pierre Gaston, Neutral: Helene Dellanini,
Brad Paul, Lorenzo Listana, Vince Avalone, Valerie Cooper, Eugene Garlan, Sue
Hestor
ACTION: Informational
only – no action
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))
None
Adjournment: 7:40
PM
ADOPTED: July 7, 2011
