Planning Commission - January 7, 2016 - Minutes
SAN FRANCISCO
Meeting Minutes
Commission Chambers, Room 400
City Hall, 1 Dr. Carlton B. Goodlett Place
San Francisco, CA 94102-4689
Thursday, January 7, 2016
12:00 p.m.
Regular Meeting
COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Fong, Wu, Antonini, Hillis, Moore, Richards, Johnson
THE MEETING WAS CALLED TO ORDER BY PRESIDENT FONG AT 12:10 P.M.
STAFF IN ATTENDANCE: John Rahaim – Planning Director, Nicholas Foster, Carly Grob, Colin Clarke, Kimberly Durandet, Dan Sider, Mathew Snyder, Tina Chang, Mary Woods, Andrew Perry, Sharon Young, and Christine L. Silva – Acting Commission Secretary
SPEAKER KEY:
+ indicates a speaker in support of an item;
- indicates a speaker in opposition to an item; and
= indicates a neutral speaker or a speaker who did not indicate support or opposition
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.
None
B. CONSENT CALENDAR
All matters listed hereunder constitute a Consent Calendar, are considered to be routine by the Planning Commission, and may 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. 2015-004577CND (C. GROB: (415) 575-9138)
1170 GREEN STREET – north side between Hyde & Leavenworth Streets; Lot 012 of Assessor’s Block 0122 - Request for Condominium Conversion Subdivision to convert a three-story over garage, six-unit building into residential condominiums within a RH-3 (Residential, House, Three-Family) Zoning District and 40-X Height and Bulk District. This action constitutes the Approval Action for the project for the purposes of CEQA, pursuant to San Francisco Administrative Code Section 31.04(h).
Preliminary Recommendation: Approve
SPEAKERS: None
ACTION: Approved
AYES: Fong, Wu, Antonini, Hillis, Johnson, Moore, Richards
MOTION: 19539
2. 2012.1368C (N. FOSTER: (415) 575-9167)
1500 PACIFIC AVENUE - northwest corner of Pacific Avenue and Larkin Street, Lot 004 in Assessor’s Block 0573 - Request for Conditional Use Authorization pursuant to Planning Code Section 732.51, for a change of use from Business/Professional Use (former insurance office) to a Medical Service Use (acupuncture clinic, d.b.a. “Vickie Washington LAc”) located on the ground floor within the Pacific Avenue NCD (Neighborhood Commercial District), and 40-X Height and Bulk District. This project has been reviewed under the Community Business Priority Processing Program (CB3P). This action constitutes the Approval Action for the project for the purposes of CEQA, pursuant to San Francisco Administrative Code Section 31.04(h).
Preliminary Recommendation: Approve with Conditions
SPEAKERS: None
ACTION: Approved with Conditions
AYES: Fong, Wu, Antonini, Hillis, Johnson, Moore, Richards
MOTION: 19540
3. 2015-013731CUA (C. CLARKE: (415) 575-9184)
981 MISSION STREET - at the midblock between 6th and Mary Streets, Lot 078 in Assessor’s Block 3725 - Request for Conditional Use Authorization pursuant to Planning Code Sections 303, 210.2 and 102, for a change of use from a vacant 18,741 square foot tenant space (previously occupied by a Retail use) to an Office use, d.b.a. Covo, on the basement and mezzanine levels, with Retail remaining on the ground floor, within the C-3-S (Downtown Support - Commercial District), Central SoMa and Downtown Area Plans, and 160-F Height and Bulk District. This project has been reviewed under the Community Business Priority Processing Program (CB3P). This action constitutes the Approval Action for the project for the purposes of CEQA, pursuant to San Francisco Administrative Code Section 31.04(h).
Preliminary Recommendation: Approve with Conditions
SPEAKERS: = Colin Clarke – Staff presentation
= Daniel Brian – Project presentation
ACTION: After being pulled off of Consent; Approved with Conditions
AYES: Fong, Wu, Antonini, Hillis, Johnson, Moore, Richards
MOTION: 19541
4. 2015-010314CUA (K. DURANDET: (415) 575-6816)
3128 16TH STREET - north side between Valencia & Albion Streets; Lot 017 of Assessor’s Block 3555 - Request for Conditional Use Authorization, pursuant to Planning Code Sections 249.60, 303, 726.44, and 790.91, to permit the change of use of a 1,160 square foot tenant space from Retail to Restaurant (d.b.a. Tea De Chine), occupying the ground floor within the Valencia Street NC-T (Neighborhood Commercial Transit) Zoning District, Mission Alcoholic Beverage Special Use District, and 55-X Height and Bulk District. This project has been reviewed under the Community Business Priority Processing Program (CB3P). This action constitutes the Approval Action for the project for the purposes of CEQA, pursuant to San Francisco Administrative Code Section 31.04(h).
Preliminary Recommendation: Approve with Conditions
SPEAKERS: None
ACTION: Approved with Conditions
AYES: Fong, Wu, Antonini, Hillis, Johnson, Moore, Richards
MOTION: 19542
5. 2014.0599ENX (K. DURANDET: (415) 575-6816)
540 DE HARO STREET - west side between Mariposa and 18th Streets; Lot 002 of Assessor’s Block 4008 - Request for Large Project Authorization pursuant to Planning Code Section 329 to permit the demolition of the existing industrial building and the new construction of a 40 feet tall, 41,772 square foot building with 17 dwelling units, 16 off-street parking spaces and 17 Class I bicycle parking spaces. The project involves a dwelling unit mix consisting of (15) 2-bedroom, and (2) 1-bedroom units in the UMU (Urban Mixed Use) Zoning District, and 40-X Height and Bulk District. The proposed project is seeking a rear yard exception per Section 134 for the ground floor which has full lot coverage and permitted obstructions per Section 136. This action constitutes the Approval Action for the project for the purposes of CEQA, pursuant to San Francisco Administrative Code Section 31.04(h).
Preliminary Recommendation: Approve with Conditions
SPEAKERS: = Kimberly Durandet – Staff presentation
= Steve Vettel – Project presentation
= Mitchell Benjamin – Project presentation
= Marta Fry – Project presentation
- Peter Papadopoulos – Attack on City PDR conversion
= Burton Edwards – Light detriment to church
= Sara Miles – St. Gregory’s
= Jenniffer Blecha – St. Gregory’s, communication
- Mathew Priest – Communication, continue
- Jessica Anderson – St. Gregory’s
- Judith – Live Oak Street
- Beau Wrighton – Neighbor, concerns
+ Ron Miguel – Support, minimal impact to church, residential area
+ Margaret Gillete – Height concern reduction, landscaping
- Christian Acares – Development changes
ACTION: After being pulled off of Consent; Hearing and Closing public comment; Continued to March 3, 2016
AYES: Fong, Wu, Antonini, Hillis, Moore, Richards
NAYES: Johnson
C. COMMISSION MATTERS
6. Consideration of Adoption:
· Draft Minutes for December 10, 2015
· Draft Minutes for Closed Session Hearing for December 10, 2015
· Draft Minutes for December 17, 2015
SPEAKERS: None
ACTION: Adopted
AYES: Fong, Wu, Antonini, Hillis, Johnson, Moore, Richards
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 Moore:
I'd like to ask the Department, the Director, to bring back the discussion on micro-units. As I was going over old files over the holidays, I ran across a particular project where we discussed the pros and cons of micro-units back in 2012 and at that time we approved a project and I think that was 1321 Mission Street, where we had a condition that prior to going ahead and approving other micro-units, which are now becoming a very important part in the discussion of affordability, that we would revisit this particular project for its general broader benefits, and I'm not talking about community benefits, I am talking about bringing units to the market, which have a certain kind of packaging idea, where communal rooms substitute for people having their own kitchens, you have a communal library, living room, and the larger the project gets, the more it resembles dormitory housing rather than micro-units that would fall fully within the square footage of affordable housing. We had made it a condition that prior to looking at any other units, that we would look at the success, rental, lease, ownership, who is in it, price point and use that as a baseline as we look into the future. I'd like to remind us that this should be an item on our action list or something for which a special report is being prepared. I would appreciate that reasonably soon so that we can robustly incorporate it in our ongoing discussions.
Commissioner Antonini:
I wish you all a Happy New Year and I am happy to report that for Christmas, Santa’s elves weren’t able to make my gift, but Santa wisely shopped American and got me a Shinola watch from Detroit which I am very proud to have and it works very well, it keeps time.
Commissioner Fong:
What did you get for Christmas Commissioner Johnson?
Commissioner Johnson:
Well, I have a lovely present coming. Happy New Year everyone, I just want to make the announcement that due to lots of really boring reasons that I am not going to announce in public, my date to have my baby has been moved up, so my last hearing for about six or eight weeks will be next Thursday, and for that reason, I have been made aware our election – officer’s election is supposed to be on or after the 15th but since next week hearing is the 14th, I’d like to ask other Commissioners if we will be ok moving up our date one day, having the election while I am still here, and to complete the announcement I will be going out, my last hearing will be next week, and will be back on March 10th.
Commissioner Fong:
Thank you and Congratulations!
Commissioner Wu:
Congratulations! I just want to ask, maybe Commission Secretary to explain procedurally what are the options that we might have and if we need at all to refer to the City Attorney.
Christine L. Silva, Acting Commission Secretary:
Commissioners, you have 3 options under Robert's Rules of Order you can temporarily suspend your rule to have a hearing on or after January 15th, you need to first make and approve motion to temporarily suspend the rule within a stated reason. So, you can temporarily suspend the rule, you need to make and approved that motion and then you would do a follow up motion to then schedule that hearing. The second option is to schedule the hearing on or after the 15th and then Commissioner Johnson in order to participate could participate via teleconference on a hearing after January 15th, and the third option is schedule the hearing after the Commissioner returns so you have a full Commission.
Commissioner Wu:
So, I'm open due to Commissioner Johnson's request, I think that it would warrant, I think
is suspending the rule and then scheduling for next week, but I want to hear what other Commissioners have to say and we may need to take public comment on this? I don't know.
Commissioner Richards:
I support the idea of suspending the rules and having the election on the 14th and have an effective vote for the 22nd.
Commissioner Antonini:
I agree I think that is the course we should take. I could make a motion but I hear that we might take public comment fist.
Commissioner Moore:
I’d support the idea just in to follow-up just to Commissioner Johnson’s comment, I'd like to remind the Director we had scheduled a hearing for February 28th particularly around Commissioner Johnson being here. The last time we notified that person as a courtesy, because they're relying on her being here that is at least required they know.
Director Rahaim:
I think you're last meeting had been the 21st. So, you moved it up by one week, we did - - your point is well-taken Commissioner, there were projects that were anticipating for the Commissioner on the 21st, we'll have to look at the calendar.
Commissioner Johnson:
Yes, It was originally on the 21st and you know babies do what they want to do. They don't care about Planning Commission.
Susan Cleveland-Knowles, Deputy City Attorney:
If I could make one comment, Deputy City attorney Susan Cleveland-Knowles, I would recommend that you just give general guidance to the Commission Secretary today, to agendize both a suspension of the rules and the vote on the election of the officers for next week, because this item isn’t on your agenda this week. So you’ll first, next week, vote to suspend the rules and then you’ll take a vote on the election of officers. So, I don't think there’s a need for a vote today.
Commissioner Wu:
So, that it's just advice to the Commission Secretary then.
Susan Cleveland-Knowles, Deputy City Attorney:
Yes, at this point.
Commissioner Wu:
So, if is okay with the President, I'd like to advise the Commission Secretary to schedule both of those votes for next week, to suspend the rule -- temporarily suspend the rule and to schedule a vote.
Commissioner Richards:
I guess a couple of things, I saw here in the Examiner yesterday about the Mayor asking for budget cuts. I see here in the article, and I haven’t had the chance to talk to anyone about it, but he talks not having to actually start to make cuts unless there could be some type of a raise in revenue or some type of reorganization. I know this organization is part of the Mayor's Housing Group looking at process improvement and things. I think there might be some – certainly you going to find some low hanging fruit, in terms of efficiencies that are gained that we might be able to look and negate some of these cuts, I am sure the Director would be open to that. I bring that up and I am happy to participate in that effort myself. Second thing, Ms. Schuttish, I know she is here from Noe Valley, she comes nearly every week. We had a meeting with the Zoning Administrator and the Building Inspector, Mr. Casey? No, the building inspector that handles Noe Valley, I don’t recall who that is, I apologize. Duffy! And we went over four examples that she brought here, which look to be demolitions, de-facto demolitions, of the four that we found, there were two that needed I think, some more training for the planner, because the calculations were exceeded, and the Zoning Administrator was going to take that back and make sure that training was given. One of them was bona fide and the other one clearly exceeded the envelope of the house, however, it look like from the pictures they kept the right pieces of it, and its appeared that it was a demolition even though after, when the photos were taken those pieces were removed. It really, I think, it got everybody thinking about how to define demolitions in the future as a percentage how big the houses are expanded. It was a really good meeting and I really thank the Zoning Administrator and Mr. Duffy and Ms. Schuttish for taking time before Christmas to do that. One last thing, I keep hearing the word venerable and I keep hearing the word Oakland applied to it, not because everything in Oakland is venerable, but we keep having venerable businesses leaving San Francisco. Yesterday in the paper, Flax Art Store is leaving San Francisco. My fear is and I'll bring the letter to the editor, here it is, somebody called San Francisco is rapidly degenerating into a homogenized, gilded cesspool of entitlement and privilege. My fear is, that’s from the Chronicle, Mr. Stosh-Whiteless from San Francisco. We keep hearing about the businesses going away and start wondering what it’s going to be like in San Francisco in about ten years? Is it going to be the San Francisco that we know or it is going to be a gilded cesspool and it worries me, so now I have to go to Oakland to go to Flax when I want to buy something.
Commissioner Hillis:
I just wanted to point out in to Flax, because of my position as the Director of Fort Mason, Flax did open a new store at Fort Mason. It’s often ignored. I don’t know if it just doesn’t play into the narrative that things are moving into Oakland, but they got a great new 5,000 square foot store, which is pretty substantial, not as big as their 20,000 square foot store on Market Street, but it still remains in the City and it’s at Fort Mason and I invite everybody to visit it there.
Commissioner Moore:
Thank you, Commissioner Hillis, for clarifying that. Driving by Fort Mason, the sign is quite obvious that Flax is in Fort Mason. Anybody who frequents Flax knows that, knew it for quite a few months. So, kudos to you that you were able to get a 5,000 square foot store; which is sufficiently large for them to do what they do.
D. DEPARTMENT MATTERS
Director Rahaim:
Thank you, Christine. Happy New Year everyone, it’s good to be back. We’ll try to make the transition a little bit smoother. My transition has been, going from two weeks of relative calm to 100 mph on Monday morning, so the year starting as the old one ended. Two things to report to you on, one is the Mayor's Office of Housing Task Force. I think you know the Mayor convene, reconvened his Housing Task Force, I think 3 weeks ago now, and as a result asked me and Olson Lee to chair two working groups. Olson will be chairing the working group that specifically looks at the inclusionary rates, and I'll be chairing a working group that will look at process improvements and specifically the pipeline projects and how we should be doing the pipeline projects with respect any changes that might be coming to the requirements. We are convening the first meeting of that working group a week from Tuesday; Commissioner Richards is joining us, thank you for that Commissioner. I'd like to report back to you regularly on
the activities of that group as well. Second thing is that I just want to let you know, we're starting a modest initiative related to process improvements and it is specifically related to project reviews for nonprofit organizations. The staff has for a long time identified issues that we have with nonprofits who are not knowledgeable about the process because they don’t do this in the regular basis. So, we sought and received recently a grant from Friends of City Planning to hire facilitators to have a series of focus groups, to talk to small nonprofits who, about the process, and to try to identify specific improvements that we can do to our processes related to processing applications for nonprofits organizations. One of the timing questions that often comes up from nonprofits, is timing relative to their fundraising, and we get into tough gap, because they have deadlines that they have to meet with respect to their fundraising, that don't often coincide with deadline and process that we have do as the Department, so we'll be having a series of focus groups with nonprofit organizations, and again I invite the Commissioners, if a Commissioner would like to join us for one of those focus groups, we’d be more than happy to accommodate you and that concludes my presentation. Thank you.
9. Review of Past Events at the Board of Supervisors, Board of Appeals and Historic Preservation Commission
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS:
No Report
BOARD OF APPEALS:
No Report
HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION:
Christine L. Silva, Acting Commission Secretary:
The Historic Preservation Commission did meet yesterday. They reviewed two items, a Certificate of Appropriateness at 200 Larkin Street, the Asian Museum, for a temporary art piece and a major permit to alter at 69 Maiden Lane. Both projects were approved anonymously 7 to 0.
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: (M) Speaker – AHBP
Georgia Schuttish – AHBP, Noe Valley
Rob Pool – Project Review Committee
Judith – AHBP, Mission, District 9
F. REGULAR CALENDAR
The Commission Hearing Procedures provide for presentations by staff; followed by the project sponsor team; followed by public comment for and against the proposal. Please be advised that the project sponsor team includes: the sponsor(s) or their designee, lawyers, architects, engineers, expediters, and/or other advisors.
10. 2015-018111IMP (D. SIDER: (415) 558-6697)
UC HASTINGS INSTITUTIONAL MASTER PLAN - Various properties on Assessor’s Blocks 0347 and 0348; bounded by Golden Gate Avenue on the north, McAllister Street on the south, Larkin Street on the west and Leavenworth Street on the east. Informational presentation on UC Hastings College of the Law’s Institutional Master Plan (IMP). While this hearing is consistent with the requirements of Planning Code Section 304.5, as a State educational institution, Hastings is not subject to the requirements of the Planning Code. Nonetheless, Hastings has voluntarily submitted an IMP for review and comment that contains information on the nature and history of the institution, the location and use of affiliated buildings, and development plans.
Preliminary Recommendation: None – Informational
SPEAKERS: = Dan Sider – Staff presentation
= David Seward – Project presentation
ACTION: None – Informational
11. 2009.3461CWP (M. SNYDER: (415) 575-6891
Area Plan Implementation Update and Inter-Department Plan Implementation Committee (IPIC) report - Informational presentation on the activities of the Department's Plan Implementation Group, including overview of progress toward funding infrastructure projects called for in adopted area plans and coordination with CACs. Presentation of 2016 Inter-Department Plan Implementation Committee (IPIC) Report,which includes capital planning accomplishments and recommendations for each plan area.
Preliminary Recommendation: None – Informational
SPEAKERS: = Mathew Snyder – Staff presentation
ACTION: None – Informational
12. 2015-006755CUA (O. MASRY: (415) 575-9116)
3120 MISSION STREET – along the west side of Mission Street, between Cesar Chavez Street and Precita Avenue; Lot 001A in Assessor’s Block 6574 - Request for Conditional Use Authorization, pursuant to Planning Code Sections 303 and 712.83 to develop a macro Wireless Telecommunications Services (WTS) Facility for Verizon Wireless, featuring a total of up to twelve (12) screened rooftop-mounted panel antennas; along with associated equipment areas, within a NC-3 (Neighborhood Commercial, Moderate-Scale) Zoning District, and 50-X Height and Bulk District. This action constitutes the Approval Action for the project for the purposes of CEQA, pursuant to Section 31.04(h) of the San Francisco Administrative Code.
Preliminary Recommendation: Approve with Conditions
(Continued from Regular Meeting of December 17, 2015
SPEAKERS: = Omar Masry – Staff presentation
= Peter Hillyard – Project presentation
= Anne – Structural integrity of roof
ACTION: Approved with Conditions
AYES: Fong, Wu, Antonini, Hillis, Johnson, Moore
NAYES: Richards
MOTION: 19543
13. 2015-002837CUA (T. CHANG: (415) 575-9065)
455 FELL STREET/PARCEL O - South side of Fell Street at Laguna Street; Lot 024 in Assessor’s Block 0831 - Request for Conditional Use Authorization to approve a Planned Unit Development with specific modifications to Planning Code regulations as they relate to setbacks, exposure, freight loading, open space and obstructions. The Project includes the new development on a vacant parcel reaching a maximum height of 50-feet on a vacant parcel containing 108 dwelling units, 1,200 square feet of retail, a day-care facility and 118 bicycle parking spaces (102 Class 1, 8 Class 2, and 2 Cargo spaces) within a RTO (Residential Transit Oriented) Zoning and 40-50-X Height and Bulk District. This action constitutes the Approval Action for the project for the purposes of CEQA, pursuant to San Francisco Administrative Code Section 31.04(h).
Preliminary Recommendation: Approve with Conditions
SPEAKERS: = Tina Chang – Staff presentation
= Tim Dunn – Project presentation
= Paulette Tagert – Project presentation
= (M) Speaker – Project presentation
+ Jason Anderson – Fantastic project
+ Rob Pool – Support
+ Tes __ - Support
ACTION: Approved with Conditions
AYES: Fong, Wu, Antonini, Hillis, Moore, Richards
RECUSED: Johnson
MOTION: 19544
14. 2015-000865CUA (C. GROB: (415) 575-9138)
40 PLEASANT STREET - north side between Taylor & Jones Streets; Lot 021 of Assessor’s Block 0221 - Request for Conditional Use Authorization, pursuant to Planning Code Sections 209.2, 303, and 317 to convert three residential units into tourist hotel units within a RM-3 (Residential-Mixed, Medium Density) Zoning District and 65-A Height and Bulk District. The units are currently in use as short-term rentals, and the project sponsor is seeking to legalize this use. This action constitutes the Approval Action for the project for the purposes of CEQA, pursuant to San Francisco Administrative Code Section 31.04(h).
Preliminary Recommendation: Approve with Conditions Disapprove
SPEAKERS: = Carly Grob – Staff presentation
= Forest __ - Project presentation
- (F) Speaker – Lack of housing
- Charles Scott – Illegal loophole
- Peter Miller – Reject request
- Alfonso Folstino – Removes units
- Julie Fell – Precedent, loss of quality of life
- Shannon Bolt – Establish precedence, rent controlled units
- Pauly Rose – Neighborhood character
- Cynthia Gomez – Loss of housing stock policy
- Sam Dennison – Housing
- Peter Cohen – Egregious case
- Tes Welborn – STR policy
- Sue Hestor – Enforcement overdue
- Kevin Welsh – Enforcement overdue
ACTION: Disapproved
AYES: Fong, Wu, Antonini, Hillis, Johnson, Richards
RECUSED: Moore
MOTION: 19545
15a. 2012.0506CEKV (M. WOODS: (415) 558-6315)
950 GOUGH STREET - southeast corner at Eddy Street; Lots 010, 010A and 011 in Assessor’s Block 0744 - Request for Adoption of Findings pursuant to Planning Code Section 295 regarding a Shadow Study that concluded that the shadow cast by the construction of an 8-story, 80-foot tall mixed use building over one subterranean parking level, containing 95 dwelling units (including 11 on-site affordable units), and an approximately 10,000 square-foot church/sanctuary for St. Paulus Lutheran Church, would not be adverse to the use of Jefferson Square Park, land under the jurisdiction of the San Francisco Recreation and Park Department. The project site is located in a RM-4 (Residential, Mixed, High Density) District, and 80-B Height and Bulk District.
Preliminary Recommendation: Adopt Findings
SPEAKERS: = Mary Woods – Staff presentation
= Brett Dickson – Project presentation
= Steve Perry – Project presentation
- Yana Rathman – Minimize project impacts, historical resources
+ Ralph Kerstetter – St. Paul’s Church
+ Dusting Hart – St. Paul’s Church
+ Dan Solberg – St. Paul’s Church, continued strength of church/congregation
+ Larry Dannenberg – St. Paul’s Church
+ Thomas Tavis – Affordable housing component
+ Pam Dannenberg – St. Paul’s Church
+ Jim Salinas – Congregation loss of home
+ (M) Speaker – Vital to neighborhood, safety
+ Joel Koppel – Union support
- Rob Pool – Project report card
ACTION: Adopted Findings
AYES: Fong, Antonini, Hillis, Johnson, Moore, Richards
ABSENT: Wu
MOTION: 19546
15b. 2012.0506CEKV (M. WOODS: (415) 558-6315)
950 GOUGH STREET - southeast corner at Eddy Street; Lots 010, 010A and 011 in Assessor’s Block 0744 - Request for Conditional Use Authorization pursuant to Planning Code Sections 209.2, 253 and 303 to construct on a vacant lot an 8-story, 80-foot tall mixed use building over one subterranean parking level. The building would include 95 dwelling units, including 11 on-site affordable units, an approximately 10,000 square-foot church/sanctuary for St. Paulus Lutheran Church on the ground floor, 61 off-street parking spaces, and 110 bicycle parking spaces. The project site is located in a RM-4 (Residential, Mixed, High Density) District, and 80-B Height and Bulk District. This action constitutes the Approval Action for the project for the purposes of CEQA, pursuant to San Francisco Administrative Code Section 31.04(h).
Preliminary Recommendation: Approve with Conditions
SPEAKERS: Same as Item 15a.
ACTION: Approved with Conditions
AYES: Fong, Antonini, Hillis, Johnson, Moore, Richards
ABSENT: Wu
MOTION: 19547
15c. 2012.0506CEKV (M. WOODS: (415) 558-6315)
950 GOUGH STREET - southeast corner at Eddy Street; Lots 010, 010A and 011 in Assessor’s Block 0744 - Request for Variances from the requirements for rear yard (Planning Code Section 134), and off-street parking (Planning Code Section 151). The proposed project is to construct on a vacant lot an 8-story, 80-foot tall mixed use building over one subterranean parking level, containing 95 dwelling units (including 11 on-site affordable units), an approximately 10,000 square-foot church/sanctuary for St. Paulus Lutheran Church on the ground floor, 61 off-street parking spaces, and 110 bicycle parking spaces. The project site is located in a RM-4 (Residential, Mixed, High Density) District, and 80-B Height and Bulk District.
SPEAKERS: Same as Item 15a.
ACTION: ZA closed public comment and indicated an intent to Grant
16. 2014-000174CUA (A. PERRY: (415) 575-9017)
32 ORD STREET - west side between Ord Court and 17th Street; Lot 005 of Assessor’s Block 2626 - Request for Conditional Use Authorization, pursuant to Planning Code Sections 303, 306.7, and interim zoning controls established under Resolution 76-15, proposing a horizontal and vertical addition to a single-family home that would increase the existing square footage by more than 75% and in excess of 3,000 square feet without increasing the legal unit count, within a RH-2 (Residential House, Two-Family) Zoning District and 40-X Height and Bulk District. This notice also meets Section 311 requirements for public notification. This action constitutes the Approval Action for the project for the purposes of CEQA, pursuant to San Francisco Administrative Code Section 31.04(h).
Preliminary Recommendation: Approve with Conditions
SPEAKERS: = Andrew Perry – Staff presentation
= Jonathan Pearlman – Project presentation
- Mary ___ - Not desirable
- Rick Goldman – Interim Zoning Control
- Tom Schmidt – Compatibility, sets precedence
- Dupe Dollman – Not necessary
- Martin Verbach – Not desirable
- Dirk Aguilar – Sunlight concerns
- Sonia Rhener – Light, failed communication
- Steven Deeks – 3rd Floor extension
- Gary Weiss – Project scale, communication
- Lesley __ - Does not meet interim controls
- Susan Betrilder - Interim Zoning Controls
ACTION: After hearing and closing public comment; Continued to March 3, 2016
AYES: Fong, Antonini, Hillis, Johnson, Moore, Richards
ABSENT: Wu
G. DISCRETIONARY REVIEW CALENDAR
The Commission Discretionary Review Hearing Procedures provide for presentations by staff; followed by the DR requestor team; followed by public comment opposed to the project; followed by the project sponsor team; followed by public comment in support of the project. Please be advised that the DR requestor and project sponsor teams include: the DR requestor and sponsor or their designee, lawyers, architects, engineers, expediters, and/or other advisors.
17a. 2014.1313DRPDRM (A. PERRY: (415) 575-9017)
831 CHENERY STREET - south side of Chenery Street between Chilton and Lippard Avenues; Lot 020 in Assessor’s Block 6738 - Request for Mandatory Discretionary Review of Building Permit Application No. 2014.11.04.0619 to demolish a one-story over basement, single-family dwelling within a RH-1 (Residential House, One-Family) Zoning District and 40-X Height and Bulk District. The existing structure has not been found to be an historic resource, and would be considered an unsound building pursuant to Planning Code Section 317(d)(3)(B). This action constitutes the Approval Action for the project for the purposes of CEQA, pursuant to San Francisco Administrative Code Section 31.04(h).
Staff Analysis: Full Discretionary Review
Preliminary Recommendation: Do Not Take Discretionary Review and Approve
SPEAKERS: = Andrew Perry – Staff presentation
- Lloyd Eakin – DR requestor #1
- Lesley Kinnear – DR requestor #2
- Anthony Harmio – Residential Design Guidelines
- Thomas Stone – Neighborhood character
+ Antony Pantaleoni – Project presentation
+ Tom Wallacker – Project presentation, owner
+ Mike Neumann – Flight of families from SF
+ Beth Weise – Welcome new home
ACTION: Took DR and approved with modification to remove the stair penthouse and roof deck
AYES: Fong, Antonini, Hillis, Johnson, Moore, Richards
ABSENT: Wu
DRA No: 0446
17b. 2014.1313DRP(2) (A. PERRY: (415) 575-9017)
831 CHENERY STREET - south side of Chenery Street between Chilton and Lippard Avenues; Lot 020 in Assessor’s Block 6738 - Request for Discretionary Review of Building Permit Application No. 2014.11.04.0616 to construct a new three-story over basement, single-family dwelling within a RH-1 (Residential House, One-Family) Zoning District and 40-X Height and Bulk District. This action constitutes the Approval Action for the project for the purposes of CEQA, pursuant to San Francisco Administrative Code Section 31.04(h).
Staff Analysis: Full Discretionary Review
Preliminary Recommendation: Do Not Take Discretionary Review and Approve
SPEAKERS: Same as Item 17a.
ACTION: Took DR and approved with modification to remove the stair penthouse and roof deck
AYES: Fong, Antonini, Hillis, Johnson, Moore, Richards
ABSENT: Wu
DRA No: 0446
18a. 2015-002255DRPVAR (S. YOUNG: (415) 558-6346)
3636 - 3638 WEBSTER STREET - east side between Beach Street and North Point Street; Lots 045 - 046 in Assessor’s Block 0445A - Request for Discretionary Review of Building Permit Application No. 2015.08.04.3267, proposing to legalize the construction of a one-story horizontal addition at the rear of the three-story, two-family dwelling located within a RH-2 (Residential, House, Two-Family) Zoning District and 40-X Height and Bulk District. [The proposal is in relation to Building Permit Application No. 2014.09.30.7684 to repair the existing rear addition (with sloped solarium windows) and approximately 90 square-foot rear deck, which was the subject of Board of Appeals Case No. 14-171 for work exceeding the scope of the permit.] This action constitutes the Approval Action for the project for the purposes of CEQA, pursuant to Section 31.04(h) of the San Francisco Administrative Code.
Staff Analysis: Full Discretionary Review
Preliminary Recommendation: Do Not Take Discretionary Review and Approve
SPEAKERS: = Sharon Young – Staff presentation
- Lisa Krim – DR requestor
- Karen Mulcaney – Follow the code
+ Ilene Dick – Project presentation
+ David Perry - NIMBYism
ACTION: Did not take DR, Approved as amended by ZA
AYES: Fong, Antonini, Hillis, Johnson, Moore, Richards
ABSENT: Wu
DRA No: 0447
18b. 2015-002255DRPVAR (S. YOUNG: (415) 558-6346)
3636 - 3638 WEBSTER STREET - east side between Beach Street and North Point Street; Lots 045 - 046 in Assessor’s Block 0445A - Request for a Rear Yard Variance, pursuant to Planning Code Section 134, to allow the construction of the one-story rear addition to extend approximately 6 feet into the required rear yard of 23 feet 6 inches. The project is located within a RH-2 (Residential, House, Two-Family) Zoning District and 40-X Height and Bulk District.
SPEAKERS: Same as Item 18a.
ACTION: ZA closed public comment and indicated Intent to Grant Condition to set back deck 3 feet from proposed rear building wall
H. 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: Jim Salinas – Carpenter’s Union Hiring
Adjournment - 9:03 P.M.
ADOPTED: January 21, 2016