New Page 1
SAN FRANCISCO
PLANNING COMMISSION
Meeting Minutes
Commission Chambers - Room 400
City Hall, 1 Dr. Carlton B. Goodlett Place
Thursday, June
23, 2011
12:00 PM
Regular Meeting
COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Olague,
Antonini, Fong, Moore, and Sugaya
COMMISSIONERS ABSENT: Miguel and
Borden
THE MEETING WAS CALLED TO ORDER BY
PRESIDENT OLAGUE AT: 12:14 PM
STAFF IN ATTENDANCE: John Rahaim - Director of Planning, Dan Sider – Acting
Zoning Administrator, Erika Lovejoy, Corey Teague, Rick Crawford, Adrian Putra,
Michael Jacinto, Kevin Guy, Susan Exline, Aaron Hollister, Erika Jackson, Sharon
Lai, Kirsten Dischinger, and Linda D. 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.
2011.0399C
(K. Guy: (415) 558-6163)
401 GROVE STREET
-
southwest corner at Gough Street, Lot 036 of Assessor’s Block 0808 - Request
for Conditional Use Authorization to allow development on a lot exceeding
10,000 square feet, and to approve a Planned Unit Development, with specific
modifications of Planning Code regulations regarding rear yard, dwelling unit
exposure, bay window dimensions, and height measurement, within the Hayes-Gough
Neighborhood Commercial Transit District and the 40-50-X Height and Bulk
District. The proposal is to demolish an existing surface parking lot and
construct a new five-story mixed-use building containing approximately 63
dwelling units, 5,000 square feet of ground floor commercial uses, and 37
off-street parking spaces within an underground garage. In 2008, a Conditional
Use Authorization and Planned Unit Development were approved for the property
for the construction of a new building containing 61 dwelling units, 10,000
square feet of ground floor commercial uses, and 39 off-street parking spaces.
The project to be considered on June 23, 2011 includes a modified program of
uses and a revised design.
Preliminary
Recommendation: Approval with Modifications
(Proposed for
Continuance to July 14, 2011)
SPEAKERS:
None
ACTION:
Continued as proposed
AYES: Olague, Antonini, Moore, and Sugaya
ABSENT: Borden, Fong, and Miguel
2.
2011.0238C
(S.
Lai: (415) 575-9087)
2390 MARKET
STREET
– northeast corner of Market and Castro Streets, Lot 015 in Assessor’s Block
3562
- Request for Conditional Use authorization under Planning Code Sections
303 and 721.83 to establish a new wireless telecommunication services facility
by adding nine antennas and associated equipment within the existing clock tower
of a retail building with a maximum height of 38 feet tall, as part of AT&T’s
wireless telecommunications network within the Upper Market Street NCD
(Neighborhood Commercial District) and 65-B Height and Bulk District.
Preliminary Recommendation:
(Proposed for
Indefinite Continuance)
SPEAKERS:
None
ACTION:
Continued as proposed
AYES: Olague, Antonini, Moore, and Sugaya
ABSENT:
Borden, Fong, and 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
3.
2010.0182T
(E. LOVEJOY: (415)
575-9026)
INTENTION TO INITIATE COMMISSION-SPONSORED PLANNING CODE AMENDMENTS RELATED
TO A PROPOSED PLANNING COMMISSION POLICY FOR STANDARDS FOR BIRD-SAFE BUILDINGS
-
Pursuant to Planning Code Section 302, the Planning Commission will consider a
Resolution of Intention to initiate amendments to the Planning Code. The
amendments are intended to a) reduce building-related hazards for San
Francisco’s resident and migrant bird species; b) establish consistent building
standards for creating bird-safe buildings; and c) provide certain exemptions
from these requirements. The proposed Ordinance would amend the Planning Code to
create a new Section, 139 Standards for Bird-Safe Buildings; and would amend
other sections, including Section 145.1; and adopting findings, including
environmental findings, Section 302 findings, and findings of consistency with
the General Plan and priority policies of Planning Code Section 101.1.
Preliminary Recommendation: Approve a draft Resolution of intention
to initiate amendments to the Planning Code and schedule a public hearing on or
after July 14, 2011 to consider the amendments.
SPEAKERS:
None
ACTION:
Approved
AYES: Olague, Antonini, Moore, and Sugaya
ABSENT:
Borden, Fong, and Miguel
MOTION: 18383
Item 4 FOLLOWED #10 AND 16
4.
2011.0250C
(C. TEAGUE: (415)
575-9081)
1453 VALENCIA STREET
- east side between 25th and 26th Street, Lot 017 in
Assessor's Block 6530 - Request for Conditional Use Authorization to
allow a 1,350 square foot massage establishment (d.b.a. La Nee Thai Massage
Therapy) in the Valencia Street Neighborhood Commercial Transit (NCT) Zoning
District and 55-X Height and Bulk District.
Preliminary Recommendation: Approval with Conditions
SPEAKERS:
None
ACTION:
Approved
AYES: Olague, Antonini, Fong, Moore, and Sugaya
ABSENT:
Borden and Miguel
MOTION: 18391
5.
2011.0364D
(R. CRAWFORD: (415) 558-6358)
1333 JONES
STREET
- west side between Clay and Washington Streets; Lot 036 in Assessor’s Block
0215C - Mandatory Discretionary Review, pursuant to Planning Code Section
317(e), of Building Permit Application No. 2011.03.30.3104, proposing to merge
two owner occupied dwelling units in a condominium building into one owner
occupied unit and reduce the number of units in the building from 129 to 128.
Both units are now and will remain occupied by the owner and their family in the
RM-4, Residential Mixed High Density District and 40X Height and Bulk District
Staff
Analysis: Full Discretionary Review
Preliminary
Recommendation: Do not take Discretionary Review and approve
SPEAKERS:
None
ACTION:
The Commission did not take DR and approved the merger
AYES: Olague, Antonini, Moore, and Sugaya
ABSENT:
Borden, Fong, and Miguel
DRA: 0220
6.
2011.0212C
(A. Putra: (415)
575-9079)
2109 MARKET STREET (aka 210 Church Street) - southwest corner of Market and Church Streets, Lot 001 in
Assessor’s Block 3543 - Request for Conditional Use Authorization,
pursuant to Planning Code Sections 703.3, and 303 to allow a formula retail use
(d.b.a. Good Feet) selling custom arch support insoles within the Upper Market
Street Neighborhood Commercial Transit District, and a 40-X/50/55-X Height and
Bulk District.
Preliminary Recommendation:
Approval with Conditions
SPEAKERS:
None
ACTION:
Approved
AYES: Olague, Antonini, Moore, and Sugaya
ABSENT:
Borden, Fong, and Miguel
MOTION: 18384
C.
COMMISSIONERS’ QUESTIONS AND MATTERS
Adoption of
Commission Minutes
– Charter Section 4.104 requires all commissioners to vote yes or no on all
matters unless that commissioner is excused by a vote of the Commission.
Commissioners may not be automatically excluded from a vote on the minutes
because they did not attend the meeting.
7.
Consideration of Adoption:
·
Draft Minutes of Regular Meeting of June, 2, 2011
·
Draft Minutes of Regular Meeting of June 9, 2011
SPEAKERS:
None
ACTION:
Approved
AYES: Olague, Antonini, Moore, and Sugaya
ABSENT:
Borden, Fong, and Miguel
8.
Commission Comments/Questions
·
Inquiries/Announcements.
Without discussion, at this time Commissioners may make announcements or
inquiries of staff regarding various matters of interest to the Commissioner(s).
·
Future Meetings/Agendas.
At this time, the Commission may discuss and take action to set the date of a
Special Meeting and/or determine those items that could be placed on the agenda
of the next meeting and other future meetings of the Planning Commission.
Commissioner Antonini:
Last night I went to the
movies on Van Ness at the AMC Theater, and decided to take a walk and have
dinner in the neighborhood. The area along Middlepoint, where we walked was
kind of troubling. Maybe we just hit a bad night. There was a lot of vacancy,
a lot of people with challenges, not in very good condition. This is just
something important that we need to note. This is an area that needs help, and
whatever we can do to increase the revitalization of that area we will be good
to find out what is going on in that area.
Secondly, yesterday there
was a decision on a item that we had before us in the past: it was 800 Presidio
and it ended up in appeals and did not sustain what the Commission had approved
which was a higher structure, and the only comment I have on that is, well I am
not a believer that the District’s Supervisor should have ultimate authority in
his or her District, as to what is going on there. But I feel we worked with
District Supervisors on planning issue and often we come up with some good
suggestions and compromises that address impact and mitigate them for their
neighborhood and still get the project approved. I am hoping that we will be
able in the future to have success working with the District Supervisors. I
think that one was a little unfortunate but we will just see what happens in the
future.
Commissioner Olague:
We’ve had a lot of success
working with the Supervisors and we can name several of them, including our work
to some extent with Supervisor Alioto-Pier on this project. We have been
working with her office for a number of years. We also talked to Supervisor
Farrell. I think the three of us had a three way conversation with them. I hope
in the future, we continue to work for the greater good of the City.
I attended a Neighborhood
Network meeting last Friday. It was a good meeting, but I forgot my notes. I
will bring them next week, because there were several issues that came up. One
was they are wondering when the comments and responses for CPMC will be released
and if there will be a fair amount of time for the public to review those
documents before the hearing.
Director Rahaim:
On that issue I’ve asked
staff to allow at least 30 days. Normally you get two weeks in advance of the
hearing to review comments and responses. We don’t know when exactly the final
hearing date will be established, but as soon as we know we will make sure the
public knows – at least a month in advance.
Commissioner Moore:
Could I ask a question
with respect to the last comment including the Director’s responses: since some
of us will use the August time to be away, I hope that responses are not coming
out then and be counted in that time; time when we will not be physically here.
I hope that will be taken into consideration.
D. DIRECTOR’S REPORT
9.
Director’s Announcements
Director Rahaim:
Last week, I believe
Commissioner Moore asked about the recent legislations that have been proposed
regarding redevelopment law. I talked to Director Fred Blackwell this week.
There was a report in the Examiner yesterday that was pretty accurate. The
bottom line is that there are two pieces of legislation on the Governor’s desk
regarding Redevelopment Agencies. They are related: 1) would eliminate the
agencies as he has proposed several months ago. The deadlines are not clear a
this point; 2) essentially would an exemption to that, that would allow some
agencies to maintain their activities, but would require them to pay the State -
pay their local school districts back for the funds that are used in
redevelopment thru tax increase and financing. As you recall, under
redevelopment law and the State, the State has to fill the gap that the tax
increment takes from the school districts, and that is the money that the
Governor is interested in, and trying to see it return to the State. So the
second piece of legislation would allow the agencies to continue under that
condition that money is returned to the school district. In that case, for the
SF Redevelopment Agency that is something like $24 million dollars. Whether
they can come up with those funds is not exactly clear at this point. And it is
also not clear what the Governor is going to do.
The second thing I want to
report to you is that I attended last night for the first time in a long time if
not ever the Western Soma Task Force Planning Group meeting. Of course they
have been meeting for many years, but as we are getting closer to the completion
of the EIR and bringing the plan in front of you, I wanted to have more intense
conversation with them about several issues. The recent stabilization policy
was the topic of interest/discussion last night as well as some other issues
that have come up in that neighborhood. I intend to attend more of their
meetings in the coming months as the plan gets close to adoption. We are
tentatively scheduled to bring it to you as an informational item in early
September.
10.
Review of Past Week’s Events at the Board of Supervisors, Board of
Appeals, and Historic Preservation Commission.
BOARD OF
SUPERVISORS:
BUDGET COMMITTEE:
§
On
Monday, the Budget and Finance Committee heard the Annual Salary and
Appropriation Ordinance for many Departments, including Planning. Director
Rahaim presented a summary of our budget, which included accomplishments from
this year, projects for next year, and summary of our $24.5 Million budget
request for next year. On Monday, the department had not reached agreement with
the Budget Analyst's recommendations. Next Monday June 27th, the department
will return to the Committee and anticipates reaching agreement with the Budget
Analyst in order to finalize the department's FY11-12 budget.
LAND USE COMMITTEE:
§
BF Various Executive Park.
This week the Land Use Committee considered amendments to the General Plan,
Planning Code and Zoning Map that would enable mixed-use development in an area
that had been zoned for suburban style office and hotel development.
Commissioners, you heard this item on May 5th at which time you recommended
approval with modifications to enable the relocation of one tower one block
towards the east. An addendum to the EIR was completed to assure no new impacts
were created prior to the hearing. Last week, the Committee made amendments
changing proposed Planning Code text regarding the tower location. This week
the Committee forwarded the Ordinances as amended.
§
BF 110268 2451 Sacramento.
The Committee also heard a Ordinance for this address that would change the
zoning for this address from (RM-1) to Upper Fillmore Street NCD. You
recommended approval of this action on February 24 of this year. Without
either public comment or Board comment, this item was forwarded with a
recommendation for approval.
§
BF 110277 Vintage Signs.
This week the Land Use Committee considered amendments to the Planning Code
introduced by Supervisor Campos that would allow for more types of signs to be
covered under the historic sign ordinance, you heard this item on June 2 at
which time you recommended approval with modifications. Supervisor Campos
incorporated your recommendations into the proposed legislation and chose the
word “vintage” to replace the word “historic.” The item, as amended, was
continued until next week’s Committee hearing.
FULL BOARD OF SUPERVISORS:
§
BF 110482 Misc. Code Amendments.
On August 5, 2010, the Commission recommended approval of the technical
modifications to the Planning Code. As the Planning Commission and Historic
Preservation Commission are continuing in their dialog about historic
preservation issues, all modifications related to historic preservation have
been removed at the request of the Planning Commission President. This week
the Board approved the Ordinance on first reading.
§
Housing Element.
On Tuesday, 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. This week, the Housing Element passed on final reading.
§
BF 101350 Parking in SoMa and Mission
Bay. This
proposed Ordinance sponsored by Supervisor Kim on April 28 would revise parking,
use, and street frontage in the Western SoMa area to conform to more
contemporary policies in San Francisco. The Commission’s April 28
recommendations were incorporated into the Ordinance. This week the Board
approved the Ordinance on Final Reading.
§
Two Appeals of 800 Presidio/Booker T Mixed Use Development.
Both appeals were filed by Steve Williams and residents of the area.
On the CEQA appeal the major points argued by the appellant included that: an
alleged “preapproval” of the project had occurred; there were issues of land use
compatibility; and that the analysis of historical resources, in particular were
not sufficient. The Department clarified that funding from the MOH in no way
impedes the City’s discretion to disapprove the project; the neighborhood was
transitional as described by the Commission and not as described by the
appellant “a small-scale 100% residential community;” and lastly that EIR found
that the project would not adversely affect this potential district because the
Center itself is not architecturally significant and is outside of any potential
historic district.
For the CU appeal, the appellants contended that the project was not consistent
with the General Plan and they pointed to select policies from the Urban Design
Element. Staff countered that contrary to appellant statements decision-makers
must base their findings on consistency with the entire GP. While individual
policies may at time conflict the final decision is whether the project is
on balance, consistent with the Plan. The Commission had considered the
plan in relation to not only the Urban Design Element but also the
Transportation, Housing, and Community Facilities Elements. And in this case
the Commission found the project consistent with the General Plan and necessary
or desirable and compatible.
After the presentations and public comment the District Supervisor, Supervisor
Farrell, made comments that he intends to apply CEQA fairly and that he found
the EIR to be adequate and accurate. With his lead statements, the Board upheld
the EIR unanimously. On the CU appeal, the Board again upheld your CU
authorization unanimously. The vote on the SUD, however, was different.
Supervisor Farrell led with a summary of his efforts to find compromise and
concluded that all neighbors had agreed to support a 45’ building. With this he
moved to amend the SUD to allow only 45’ instead of the Commission approved 55’
project. Supervisors Wiener, Elsbernd, and Carmen Chu joined him in this motion
to amend the SUD. The motion fell short of the 6 votes needed to amend the
SUD. On the final vote of the SUD, only Supervisors Farrell and Carmen Chu
voted against the 55’ recommended by the Commission. So, the project as you
approved it remained intact after Tuesday’s hearing.
INTRODUCTIONS:
-
BF 110768
Japantown Special Use District Provisions. Supervisor Mirkarimi
introduced an Ordinance that would amend the Planning Code to Ordinance
amending the San Francisco Planning Code Section 249.31 to: 1) prohibit a
Medical Service Use or a Business or Professional Service Use on the Ground
Floor in the Area Zoned NC-2 in the Japantown Special Use District.
-
BF 110767 Alcoholic Beverages in Bowling Alleys in the Mission Alcoholic
Beverage Special Use Subdistrict.
Supervisors Kim and
Wiener introduced an Ordinance that would Ordinance amend the Planning Code
to Planning Code Section 781.8 to permit bowling alleys in the Mission
Alcoholic Beverage Special Use Subdistrict to serve alcoholic beverages.
-
BF 110777 Prohibiting Demolition of Residential Buildings.
Supervisors Mar,
Avalos, Campos, Mirkarimi and Kim introduced a proposed initiative ordinance
to be submitted to the voters at the November 8, 2011, election entitled
"Ordinance amending the San Francisco Planning Code by adding Section 317 to
prohibit the demolition of residential buildings containing 50 or more
housing units." This has been assigned to a hearing at the Rules
Committee.
Board of Appeals:
Last night, the Board of Appeals heard one case of interest to the Commission -
1787 Union Street (dba The Brickhouse). The subject project (outdoor patio at
front of a restaurant) was before the Planning Commission as a DR on January 20,
2011. At this hearing the Commission unanimously approved the project with
conditions, including limitations on seating, hours of operation and the number
of doors that could remain open to the outdoor seating area. The Board of
Supervisors did hear and rejected a CEQA appeal on the project earlier this
spring. Yesterday, the Board of Appeals heard the matter and believed that
additional measures could be adopted to address neighbor concerns regarding
noise. The Board voted to continue the item to August 10, 2011, with direction
to the Permit Holder to investigate alternative methods for addressing the noise
issues including, but not limited to, changing the operation of the doors to the
patio.
HISTORIC PRESERATION COMMISSION:
No
meeting this week
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: Sue Hestor
Re: Paperless
record retention policy
F.
REGULAR CALENDAR
11. 2009.0291EKMRSXZ & 2010.0275EKMRSZ (M. JACINTO/ K.
GUY: (415) 575-9033/ 558-6163)
151 THIRD, 670
and 676 HOWARD and 935 FOLSOM STREETS -
San Francisco Museum of Modern Art (SFMOMA) Expansion and Fire Station No. 1
Relocation and Housing Project – Informational Hearing. The project
sponsor, SFMOMA, proposes to expand the existing SFMOMA located at 151 Third
Street (Assessor Block 3722, Lot 78) and relocate Fire Station No. 1 from its
existing 676 Howard Street location (Assessor Block 3722, Lot 28) to
935 Folsom Street (Assessor Block 3753, Lot 140). The sponsor proposes
demolition of the existing 35,000-square-foot, 4-story-over-basement building at
670 Howard Street (Block 3753, Lot 27), demolition of the existing
12,000-square-foot, 2-story-with-mezannine Fire Station No. 1 at 676 Howard
Street, and vacation of a 115-by-30-foot land-locked portion of Hunt Street
located between 151 Third and 670 and 676 Howard Street to accommodate the
museum expansion. SFMOMA would construct an approximately 200-foot-tall,
230,000-square-foot building addition at the rear of the 151 Third site, on the
670-676 Howard Street parcels and the vacated Hunt Street right-of-way to house
the museum’s expanding art collections, and to create galleries to display the
Doris and Donald Fisher Collection. The proposed expansion would connect to the
existing museum and accommodate expanded gallery, public and support spaces, a
publicly-accessible renovated ground-floor, expanded restaurant, a new Howard
Street entrance, and a relocated ticketing area on the second floor with
galleries and support spaces on the floors above. The existing building at 935
Folsom Street (formerly used for apparel manufacturing and commercial laundry,
currently vacant) would be demolished, the site subdivided, and a new
15,000-square-foot, 2-story plus mezzanine replacement fire station would be
constructed on the northern portion of the parcel fronting Folsom Street.
At-grade parking would be provided for 15 vehicles on the site. On the southern
portion of 935 Folsom Street, a 4-story, approximately 43-foot-tall residential
building would be constructed comprising up to 13 residential units and 10
off-street parking spaces in the building’s basement level. The 151 Third Street
site is located in a C-3-O (Downtown Office) Use District and a 500-I Height and
Bulk District. 670 Howard Street is located in a C-3-S (Downtown Support) Use
District and a 320-I/500-I Height and Bulk District. 676 Howard Street is
located in a P (Public) and a 320-I/500-I Height and Bulk District. The 935
Folsom Street parcel is located in a MUR (Mixed-Use Residential) Use District
and an 85-X/45-X Height and Bulk District, and the SOMA Youth and Family Special
Use District. The projects are subject to the California Environmental Quality
Act and would require a determination of compliance with the Downtown Plan;
vacation of Hunt Street and conveyance to SFMOMA; rezoning of 676 Howard Street
from P to
C-3-S; amendment of the Disposition and Development Agreement with the
Redevelopment Agency; lot merger; rezoning of 935 Folsom Street from MUR to P;
lot subdivision; design approval for a new public building (Arts Commission);
and demolition and building permits.
Preliminary
Recommendation: Informational only; no Commission action.
SPEAKERS: Sue
Hestor
ACTION:
Informational presentation – no action
12.
2010.0641M
(S. EXLINE; (415) 558-6332)
2011 RECREATION AND OPEN SPACE ELEMENT UPDATE
- Consideration of a Resolution of intention to initiate amendments to the
San Francisco General Plan. Pursuant to San Francisco Charter Section 4.105,
Planning Code § 340(c) and § 306.3, consideration of a Resolution of intention
to initiate an amendment to the San Francisco General Plan, a proposed revision
of the Recreation and Open Space Element. At the hearing, the Planning
Commission may consider adopting a Resolution of Intention to initiate
amendments to the General Plan, and schedule a public hearing to consider
adopting the proposed General Plan amendment.
Preliminary Recommendation: Approval
SPEAKERS:
Arthur Feinstein, Sue Hestor
ACTION:
Initiated with informational hearing schedule
AYES: Olague, Antonini, Moore, and Sugaya
ABSENT:
Borden, Fong, and Miguel
RESOLUTION:
18385
13a.
2011.0089CVX
(K.
Guy: (415) 558-6163)
55 9TH
STREET
- east side between Market and Mission Streets; Lot 066 in Assessor’s Block 3701
- Request for an amendment to the conditions of approval for a previously
approved Conditional Use authorization. Specifically, the amendment proposes
to extend the performance period for an additional three years for a previously
approved project to construct a 17-story building containing approximately 260
dwelling units, approximately 3,000 square feet of ground-floor commercial uses,
and approximately 113 off-street parking spaces. The amendment proposes no
changes to the design or intensity of the project as originally approved. The
subject property is located within the C-3-G (Downtown General Commercial)
Zoning District and the 200-S Height and Bulk District.
Preliminary
Recommendation: Approval with Conditions
(Continued from Regular Meeting of May 5, 2011)
SPEAKERS: Tay
Via and Sue Hestor
ACTION:
Approved
AYES: Olague, Antonini, Fong, Moore, and Sugaya
ABSENT:
Borden and Miguel
MOTION:
18386
13b.
2011.0089CVX
(K. Guy: (415) 558-6163)
55 9TH
STREET
- east side between Market and Mission Streets; Lot 066 in Assessor’s Block 3701
- Request for an amendment to the conditions of approval for a previously
granted Variance. Specifically, the amendment proposes to extend the
performance period for an additional three years for a previously approved
project to construct a 17-story building containing approximately 260 dwelling
units, approximately 3,000 square feet of ground-floor commercial uses, and
approximately 113 off-street parking spaces. The amendment proposes no changes
to the design or intensity of the project as originally approved. The subject
property is located within the C-3-G (Downtown General Commercial) Zoning
District and the 200-S Height and Bulk District.
(Continued from Regular Meeting of May 5, 2011)
SPEAKERS:
Same as those listed for item 13a
ACTION:
Acting Zoning Administrator Sider closed the public
hearing and approved the extension of the performance period for an additional
three years requiring the project sponsor to draft a maintenance plan
13c.
2011.0089CVX
(K. Guy:
(415) 558-6163)
55 9TH
STREET
- east side between Market and Mission Streets; Lot 066 in Assessor’s Block 3701
- Request for an amendment to the conditions of approval for a previous
Determination of Compliance with Planning Code Section 309. Specifically,
the amendment proposes to extend the performance period for an additional three
years for a previously approved project to construct a 17-story building
containing approximately 260 dwelling units, approximately 3,000 square feet of
ground-floor commercial uses, and approximately 113 off-street parking spaces.
The amendment proposes no changes to the design or intensity of the project as
originally approved. The subject property is located within the C-3-G (Downtown
General Commercial) Zoning District and the 200-S Height and Bulk District.
Preliminary Recommendation: Approval with Conditions
Preliminary
Recommendation: Approval with Conditions
(Continued from Regular Meeting of May 5, 2011)
SPEAKERS:
Arthur Feinstein and Sue Hestor
ACTION:
Approved
AYES: Olague, Antonini, Fong, Moore, and Sugaya
ABSENT:
Borden and Miguel
MOTION:
18387
14.
2011.0293C
(A.
HOLLISTER: (415) 575-9078)
430 Bush Street
- north side between Grant Avenue and Kearny Street, Lot
037 in Assessor’s Block 0270 - Request for Conditional Use Authorization
under Planning Code Sections 227(i) and 303 for a proposed wireless
telecommunications service facility operated by AT&T Mobility. The facility
would consist of 11 antennas and associated equipment mounted on the rooftop of
the subject building. The facility is proposed on a Location Preference 2 Site
(Preferred Location – Co-Location Site) within the C-3-R (Downtown, Retail,
Commercial) Use District and an 80-A130-F Height and Bulk District.
Preliminary
Recommendation: Approval with Conditions
SPEAKERS:
AT&T Representative
ACTION:
Approved
AYES: Olague, Antonini, Fong, and Moore
ABSENT:
Borden and Miguel
REDDDDDDDD RECUSED: Sugaya
MOTION:
18389
15.
2011.0008C
(E.
Jackson: (415) 558-6363)
450 HARRISON STREET
- corner of 1st Street, Lot 031 of Assessor’s Block 3748 -
Request for Conditional Use
Authorization
pursuant to Planning Code Sections 827.31, 303, and 890.80 to install a wireless
telecommunications facility consisting of 9 new “dual band” antennas and 5 new
equipment cabinets on the rooftop of the existing 3 story “Sailor’s Union”
building which is approximately 75 feet tall. The project site is within a
RH-DTR (Rincon Hill Downtown Residential Mixed Use) Zoning District and a
85/400-R Height and Bulk District. The proposal is part of a wireless
transmission network operated by AT&T on a Location Preference 2 (Preferred
Location – Co-Location Site) according to the Wireless Telecommunications
Services (WTS) Siting Guidelines.
Preliminary Recommendation: Approval with Conditions
SPEAKERS:
AT&T Representative
ACTION:
Approved
AYES: Olague, Antonini, Fong, Moore, and Sugaya
ABSENT:
Borden and Miguel
MOTION:
18388
16.
2008.1218C
(S. LAI: (415) 575-9087)
70 Gold Mine Drive
-
north side,
cross street Diamond Heights Boulevard, Lots 033 and 034 in Assessor’s Block
7520 - Request for Conditional Use Authorization pursuant to Planning
Code Sections 157, 204.5, 209.1, 303 and 317, to demolish a single-family house
and a detached garage, to merge lots 033 and 034, to construct three new
dwelling units, and to allow one parking space above the amount allowed as
–of-right, within the RH-1 Zoning – Residential House, One Unit per Lot and 40-X
Height and Bulk District.
Preliminary Recommendation: Approval with Conditions
(Continued from Regular Meeting of May 5, 2011)
SPEAKERS:
Cindy Reutter, George Tsang, Scott Davis, and Patrick Carroll
ACTION: Approved as amended to address paving material and a foliage
barrier on 28th Street
AYES: Olague, Antonini, Fong, Moore, and Sugaya
ABSENT:
Borden and Miguel
MOTION:
18390
5:00 PM
17.
2011.0559TZ
(C.
TEAGUE: (415) 575-9081)
INTENTION TO INITIATE DEPARTMENT-SPONSORED PLANNING CODE,
ADMINISTRATIVE CODE, AND ZONING MAP AMENDMENTS RELATED TO EASTERN NEIGHBORHOODS
-
Pursuant to Planning Code Section 302, the Planning Commission will consider a
Resolution of Intention to initiate amendments to the Planning Code,
Administrative Code, and Zoning Map. The amendments are intended to a) improve
the City’s ability to implement the goals, objectives, and policies of the
Eastern Neighborhoods Plan, b) make technical corrections to the Code, c) update
land use tables in the Eastern Neighborhoods, d) clarify language for affordable
housing tiers and the use of historic buildings in the UMU District, e) clarify
permitted modifications for Large Project Authorizations in the Eastern
Neighborhoods. Planning Code sections proposed for amendment include Sections
102.5, 121.8, 134, 135, 140, 145.1, 145.5, 151.1, 157.1, 207.1, 218, 227, 231A,
249.36, 249.37, 249.38, 329, 352, 411.3, 419.2, 419.5, 423.5, 607.2, 726, 734,
734.69, 734.69A, 734.69B, 735.1, 735.69, 735.69A, 735.69B, 736.69, 736.69A,
736.69B, 781.5, 803.3, 803.8, 803.9, 814.31, 814.49, 840, 841, 842, 843, 890.49,
890.54.
Preliminary Recommendation: Approve a draft Resolution of Intention
to initiate amendments to the Planning Code, Administrative Code, and Zoning
Map, and schedule a public hearing to consider the amendments.
SPEAKERS:
None
ACTION:
Approved initiation
AYES: Olague, Antonini, Fong, Moore, and Sugaya
ABSENT:
Borden and Miguel
RESOLUTION:
18392
18.
2011.0105T
(K. DISCHINGER: (415) 558-6284)
Amending Planning Code Inclusionary Housing controls to Add New Alternative in
Market and Octavia Plan Area [BOS FILE NO. 11-0085]
- Hearing of a proposed Ordinance that would amend the San Francisco Planning
Code by amending Section 415.5 to provide for a new land dedication alternative
in the Market and Octavia Plan Area in lieu of payment of the Affordable Housing
Fee; and adding Section 415.10 to provide for the requirements of such land
dedication; and making various findings including environmental findings,
Planning Code Section 101 and 302 findings, and General Plan consistency
findings. The Commission will consider the proposed Ordinance, introduced by
Supervisor Dufty, which would amend the Planning Code as described with
additional modifications as recommended by the Planning Department.
Preliminary
Recommendation: Approval with Modifications
(Continued
from Regular Meeting of June 9, 2011)
SPEAKERS:
Peter Cohen
ACTION:
Approved with suggestions to the Board that they look at the 40%
AYES: Olague, Antonini, Fong, Moore, and Sugaya
ABSENT:
Borden and Miguel
RESOLUTION:
18393
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:
5:36 P.M.
Adopted:
August 11, 2011
