New Page 1
SAN FRANCISCO
PLANNING COMMISSION
Meeting Minutes
Commission Chambers - Room 400
City Hall, 1 Dr. Carlton B. Goodlett Place
Thursday, April 19, 2012
12:00 PM
Regular Meeting
COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Fong, Wu, Antonini, Miguel, Moore, Sugaya
COMMISSIONER ABSENT: Borden
THE MEETING WAS CALLED TO ORDER BY PRESIDENT FONG AT 12:14 PM.
STAFF IN ATTENDANCE: John Rahaim – Director of Planning, Scott Sanchez - Zoning Administrator, Thomas Wang, Rick Crawford, Sophie Hayward, Jonathan Purvis, Elizabeth Watty, Victoria Wise, Joshua Switzky, 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. 2011.0206T (S. HAYWARD: (415) 558-6372)
PLANNING CODE AMENDMENTS RELATED TO THE CREATION OF A DEFINITION OF STUDENT HOUSING - Amendments to the Planning Code Sections 102.36, 135(d)(2), 207.6(B)(3), 307(j), 317(b)(1), 317(f)(1), and 401 - Establishing a definition of Student Housing, modifying open space requirements for dwellings less than 350 square feet plus bathroom, modifying unit mix requirements for Student Housing, monitoring conversion of Student Housing to housing, and prohibiting the conversion of housing to Student Housing; 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. This item was heard by the Board of Supervisors' Land Use Committee on March 27, 2012, and based on amendments introduced by Supervisor Wiener, was referred to the Planning Commission for further review.
(Proposed for Continuance to May 17, 2012)
SPEAKERS: None
ACTION: Continued as proposed
AYES: Fong, Wu, Antonini, Miguel, Moore, Sugaya
ABSENT: Borden
2. 2011.0532T (A. STARR: (415) 558-6362)
Uses, Signs, Building Features, Floor Area Ratio, Parking, and Compliance in Specified Use Districts - The Commission will consider a proposed Ordinance [BF 110548] amending the San Francisco Planning Code by repealing Sections 136.2, 136.3, 158, 187, 249.15, 263.2, 263.3, 602.25, 602.26, 607.3 and 607.4 and amending various other Code sections to as well as additional recommendations by Planning staff. Specifically, the proposed Ordinance would (1) increase the amount of principally permitted parking spaces for dwellings in RC-4 and C-3 Districts; (2) make off-street parking requirements in the Van Ness Special Use District and RC-3 Districts consistent with those of RC-4 Districts; (3) eliminate minimum parking requirements for the Chinatown Mixed Use Districts and North Beach Neighborhood Commercial Districts; (4) allow exceptions from required parking under specified circumstances; (5) amend the restrictions on off-street parking rates and extend them to additional zoning districts, (6) revise sign, awning, canopy and marquee controls in specified zoning districts; (7) increase the permitted use size for limited corner commercial uses in RTO and RM districts, and allow reactivation of lapsed limited commercial uses in R districts; (8) revise the boundaries of and modify parking and screening requirements in the Washington-Broadway and Waterfront Special Use Districts; (9) modify controls for uses and accessory uses in Commercial and Residential-Commercial Districts; (10) permit certain exceptions from exposure and open space requirements for historic buildings; and (11) modify conformity requirements in various use districts; 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.
(Continued from Regular Meeting of April 5, 2012)
NOTE: On October 20, 2011, although informational only and no action was required, the Commission continued this item to 12/15/11
NOTE: On December 15, 2011, following public testimony, the Commission continued the matter to 2/9/12 by a vote of (+7 -0).
NOTE: On February 9, 2012, following public testimony, the Commission continued the matter to 3/1/12 by a vote of (+6 -0).
NOTE: On March 1, 2012, following public testimony, the Commission took action on a portion of the Ordinance, referred to as Phase One (Clerical Modifications; TDRs; LCUs; Bike Parking; & Signs, Awnings, & Canopies) and continued the remainder of the Ordinance to two separate hearings: 4/5/12 and 4/12/12 by a vote of (+7 -0).
NOTE: On April 5, 2012, without hearing, the Commission continued the 4/5/12 the discussion and possible action to 4/19/12.
NOTE: On April 12, 2012, following public testimony, the Commission continued the discussion and possible action on a portion of the proposed Ordinance (Phase Two) to 5/3/12 by a vote of (+5 -1) and requested that the discussion and possible action of the remainder of the Ordinance (Phase Three) be continued to a later date. For this reason, staff is now requesting that the Phase Three discussion and possible action on the proposed Ordinance be continued to May 17.
(Proposed for Continuance to May 17, 2012)
SPEAKERS: None
ACTION: Continued as proposed
AYES: Fong, Wu, Antonini, Miguel, Moore, Sugaya
ABSENT: Borden
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. 2011.1119C (T. WANG: (415) 558-6335)
855 BROTHERHOOD WAY - on the south side of Brotherhood Way between Junipero Serra and Lake Merced boulevards, Lot 025 in Assessor’s Block 7380 - Request for Conditional Use Authorization, pursuant to Planning Code Sections 209.3(j) and 303 to allow the demolition of the existing banquet/multi-purpose hall and storage areas and the construction of a new banquet/multi-purpose hall, at an existing religious institution (Richmond Masonic Temple of San Francisco), in the RH-1(D) Zoning District and a 40-X Height and Bulk District.
Preliminary Recommendation: Approval with Conditions
SPEAKERS: None
ACTION: Approved
AYES: Fong, Wu, Antonini, Miguel, Moore, Sugaya
ABSENT: Borden
MOTION: 18582
4. 2011.0393C (R. Crawford: (415) 558-6358)
455 FRANKLIN STREET - southwest corner of Franklin and Fulton Streets; Lot 031 in Assessor’s Block 0792 - Request for Conditional Use Authorization, pursuant to Planning Code Section Sections 303 and 731.83 for a proposed wireless telecommunications service facility operated by AT&T Mobility. The facility would consist of twelve roof-mounted panel antennas and eight equipment cabinets located on the roof of the building. The facility is proposed on a Location Preference 4 Site (Preferred Location - Industrial/Commercial Site) within the NCT-3 (Moderate-Scale Neighborhood Commercial Transit) Use District and a 65-X Height and Bulk District.
Preliminary Recommendation: Approval with Conditions
SPEAKERS: None
ACTION: Approved
AYES: Fong, Wu, Antonini, Miguel, Moore, Sugaya
ABSENT: Borden
MOTION: 18583
5. 2011.1084C (R. Crawford: (415) 558-6358)
800 POWELL STREET - northeast corner of Powell and California Streets; Lot 017 in Assessor’s Block 0243 - Request for Conditional Use Authorization, pursuant to Planning Code Section Sections 303 and 209.6(b) for a proposed wireless telecommunications service facility operated by AT&T Mobility. The facility would consist of six roof-mounted panel antennas and associated equipment cabinets located in the basement of the building. The facility is proposed on a Location Preference 6 Site (Preferred Location – Limited Preference Site) within the RM-4 (Residential-Mixed, High Density) Use District and a 65-X Height and Bulk District.
Preliminary Recommendation: Approval with Conditions
SPEAKERS: Jim Foters, Tedi Verhase - AT&T representative, Jim Tokas
ACTION: Approved
AYES: Fong, Wu, Antonini, Miguel, Moore, Sugaya
ABSENT: Borden
MOTION: 18585
6. 2012.0074C (S. Hayward: (415) 558-6372)
1400 Noriega Street - north side between 21st and 22nd Avenues; Lot 030 in Assessor’s Block 2028 - Request for Conditional Use Authorization, pursuant to Planning Code Sections 303 and 711.21 to convert a vacant office space into a non-profit health clinic at the ground floor and second story, (d.b.a. North East Medical Services), within an NC-2 (Small Scale Neighborhood Commercial) Zoning District and 40-X Height and Bulk District.
Preliminary Recommendation: Approval with Conditions
SPEAKERS: None
ACTION: Approved
AYES: Fong, Wu, Antonini, Miguel, Moore, Sugaya
ABSENT: Borden
MOTION: 18584
C. COMMISSIONERS’ QUESTIONS AND MATTERS
7. 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 week we had a long discussion regarding the consideration of financial institutions and formula retail. A number of speakers made some good points that I agreed with. I just want to comment a little bit on some of the things I believe in. I think the one thing that we don’t probably address at present time is the appropriateness in a neighborhood commercial district as to their formula retail. Right now the legislation is such that all neighborhood commercial districts require that formula retail have conditional use. I think each neighborhood, should be able to collectively decide what controls works best for them. In some instances the discretionary review [procedure] may be the better solution, or maybe it is conditional use. There are some neighborhoods that actually welcome properly regulated formula retail as a stimulus to the neighborhoods that are economically depressed. Another thing that I think we need to take a look at is the architectural quality and presentation of all businesses, particularly those who have logos and art that is standardized - some standard signs to just sort of see if this can part of the process. Whatever the process could be, whether it is discretionary review or a conditional use, that this be looked at carefully. I know in some instances in the East Bay where on one side of the freeway is horrible - almost no controls on signage, and the other side everything blends nicely with the context that is there. You do not even know that there is formula retail because they fit in so well. So, I think that is an important point. Also, of course, we want to make sure that we always look at everything - in particular the type of situation for the neighborhood - not just for protection, but basically what is best for the neighborhood because competition is important. Also, it is very important to make sure that we look at the individual businesses as we go forward - are they native San Francisco businesses? Do they employ San Franciscans? Are they part of our fabric, or are they from somewhere else?
Commissioner Moore:
Talking about formula retail, I have a question for the Director. It was actually quite a shock that I came across a CVS pharmacy in the Financial District on California Street [on the 400 block, on the south side] where normally we have traditional banks and historic buildings, and all of a sudden knowing how you can change to a formula use on that street, I see a CVS occupying a historical building. On top of that this CVS pharmacy is the only one that has a protruding sign on that street that no one else is allowed to have. So, I am just curious how this happened.
Secondly, I understand that the Metreon has been sold. it is obvious that has not come to this Commission once it turned out of redevelopment; and my question to the Director is when there is a change of ownership, does that mean that the entitlement that were given remains the same, or are the changes being reviewed by some else?
Commissioner Miguel:
It was my understanding that signs are non-conforming. In addition to that, during the past week, I had conversations with individual businesses and supervisors regarding projects on 9th Avenue, regarding CPMC student housing.
D. DIRECTOR’S REPORT
Director Rahaim:
Just one announcement: I think you all received the announcement that we have released the draft of the Community Safety Element of the General Plan on Wednesday in conjunction with the Anniversary of the Great Earthquake. I just want to remain you and the public what the purpose of the Community Safety Element is. It devotes a new section on response and recovery. We maximize our availability to save lives and address injuries after an event. The changes on the update are not significant but they are important to support various another departments, and an initiative is underway to increase earthquake emergency preparedness. There is number of them as you know. We will be proposing to initiate the adoption of this element at Commission in May.
8. Director’s Announcements
9. Review of Past Week’s Events at the Board of Supervisors, Board of Appeals, and Historic Preservation Commission.
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS:
No Report
BOARD OF APPEALS:
There was a case last night that the Zoning Administrator (ZA) thought would be of interest to this Commission. It was an appeal of a ZA letter to the Entertainment Commission from October 2011, for property at 1337 Grant Avenue. In this letter the ZA requested that the Entertainment Commission conditions of approval on a place of entertainment permit for the property be consistent w/ the conditions required by the Planning Commission and the conditional use that was authorized in 1997, which required that the music to be non-amplified. The appellant argued that this conditions were superseded by a 2005 conditional use to add a bar to the property and the previous tenant has operated without this limitation. The Board found that conditions of approvals from 1997 due remain in full force and upheld the ZA determination. The Board directed the appellant to file for a conditional use permit if they want to amend the previous conditions of approval. The appellant indicated they have scheduled an intake appointment to take care of that.
HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION:
The Commission [HPC] approved sharing one Commission Secretary with the Planning Commission; and established a sub-committee (Richard Johns, Diane Matsuda, and Karl Hasz) to work with the Planning Commission (or sub-committee of the Planning Commission), the currant Commission Secretary, Department staff, and DHR to develop a job description that requires, among other things, dedicated balance to the needs of both commissions, and establish other priorities of the position. The vote was unanimous.
10. (J. PURVIS: (415) 558-6354)
GENERAL ADVERTISING SIGN PROGRAM ANNUAL REPORT - Informational Presentation on the status of the Department’s General Advertising Sign Program (GASP). Planning Code Section 604.2(h) requires that the Planning Department submit to the Planning Commission and Board of Supervisor’s an annual report on the program that includes revenues, expenditures, and a progress report on the program’s activities.
SPEAKERS: None
ACTION: Information only - no action
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: Milo F. Hanke, San Francisco Beautiful,
Katherine Howard
Re: EIR for Beach Chalet
Kelley Watts
Re: EIR for Beach Chalet
Dino Adelfio
Re: The sale of Alcohol
F. REGULAR CALENDAR
11. 2011.1420C (E. Watty: (415) 558-6620)
1266 – 9TH AVENUE - east side between Lincoln Way and Irving Street; Lot 043 in Assessor’s Block 1742 - Request for Conditional Use Authorization, pursuant to Planning Code Sections 303(c), 303(i), 703.4, and 730.42, to allow a formula retail full-service restaurant (d.b.a La Boulange) within the Inner Sunset Neighborhood Commercial District (NCD) and 40-X Height and Bulk District.
Preliminary Recommendation: Approval with Conditions
(Continued from Regular Meeting of April 5, 2012)
SPEAKERS: Tom Bensel, Monica Powers, Dominic Maccormick, Louis Webb, Leah Donnelly, Heather Coppersmith, Terry Rolleri, Martin Alperen, Aidan Compton, Scott Rutigan, Michael Webb, Max Sobala, Betsy Holwitz, Catherine Meunier, Ryan Robles, Valerie Arrechea, Eric Amadei, Carlin Welch, Rob Tandee, James Haas
ACTION: Approved as modified to require the project sponsor to continue working with Department staff on the design
AYES: Fong, Wu, Antonini, Miguel, Moore, Sugaya
ABSENT: Borden
MOTION: 18586
12. 2012.0160T (S. HAYWARD: (415) 558-6372)
Amending Planning Code Section 205.4 [Board File No. 12-0125] - Ordinance introduced by Supervisor Wiener amending Planning Code Section 205.4 to allow mobile food facilities at certain types of institutions within RM, RTO, RH, and RED districts – proposed for consideration, subject to certain conditions and adoption of 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 101.1.
Preliminary Recommendation: Approval with Modifications.
SPEAKERS: Supervisor Wiener
ACTION: Approved with staff recommended modifications
AYES: Fong, Wu, Antonini, Miguel, Moore, Sugaya
ABSENT: Borden
RESOLUTION: 18587
13. 2011.0558E (V. WISE: (415) 575-9049)
Transit Effectiveness Project (TEP) - Informational Presentation by Planning Department and SFMTA staff to provide an update on the environmental review and public outreach for the SFMTA's Transit Effectiveness Project. The presentation will generally describe the Travel Time Reduction Proposals that are a major component of the TEP and include a brief overview of the Muni Rapid Program.
Preliminary Recommendation: Informational presentation, no action requested.
SPEAKERS: Sue Hestor
ACTION: Information only - no action
14. 2007.0558 MTZU (J. Switzky: (415) 575-6815)
Transit Center District Plan - Informational Presentation - Staff will provide a briefing on the Transit Center District Plan, including updates to the November 2009 Draft Plan and an overview of Plan recommendations in areas of land use, urban form, transportation, open space, historic resources, and funding for public infrastructure. This informational presentation is preparation for a public hearing, scheduled for May 3, 2012, on initiating the consideration of actions necessary to approve the Transit Center District Plan.
Preliminary Recommendation: None Required.
SPEAKERS: Jim Haas, Ruben Santiago
ACTION: Information 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))
SPEAKERS: Ruben Santiago
Re: Iconic towers in San Francisco
Adjournment: 4:52 pm
Adopted: May 17, 2012
