Planning Commission - June 23, 2016 - Minutes
SAN FRANCISCO
PLANNING COMMISSION
Meeting Minutes
Commission Chambers, Room 400
City Hall, 1 Dr. Carlton B. Goodlett Place
San Francisco, CA 94102-4689
Thursday, June 23, 2016
12:00 p.m.
Regular Meeting
COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Fong, Richards, Antonini, Hillis, Johnson, Moore, Wu
THE MEETING WAS CALLED TO ORDER BY PRESIDENT FONG AT 12:19 P.M.
STAFF IN ATTENDANCE: John Rahaim – Planning Director, Mathew Snyder, Claudia Flores, Paolo Ikezoe, Kimberly Durandet, Carly Grob, Wayne Farrens, Andrew Perry, SEema Adina, Claudine Asbagh, Nick Foster, Mary Woods, and Jonas P. Ionin – 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
1a. 2016-001881CUA (S. ADINA: (415) 575-8722)
99 GROVE STREET - south side between Larkin and Polk Streets; Lot 001 in Assessor’s Block 0812 (District 4) - Request for Conditional Use Authorization, pursuant to Planning Code Sections 303 and 211.2 to develop a macro Wireless Telecommunications Services (WTS) Facility for Verizon Wireless and AT&T Mobility, featuring a total of up to twenty-three (23) screened rooftop-mounted panel antennas; along with associated equipment areas, within a P (Public) Zoning District, and 80-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
SPEAKERS: None
ACTION: Approved with Conditions
AYES: Fong, Richards, Antonini, Hillis, Johnson, Moore, Wu
ABSENT: Johnson
MOTION: 19668
1b. 2015-011509CUA (S. ADINA: (415) 575-8722)
99 GROVE STREET - south side between Larkin and Polk Streets; Lot 001 in Assessor’s Block 0812 (District 4)- Request for Conditional Use Authorization, pursuant to Planning Code Sections 303 and 211.2 to develop a macro Wireless Telecommunications Services (WTS) Facility for Verizon Wireless and AT&T Mobility, featuring a total of up to twenty-three (23) screened rooftop-mounted panel antennas; along with associated equipment areas, within a P (Public) Zoning District, and 80-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
SPEAKERS: None
ACTION: Approved with Conditions
AYES: Fong, Richards, Antonini, Hillis, Johnson, Moore, Wu
ABSENT: Johnson
MOTION: 19669
C. COMMISSION MATTERS
2. Consideration of Adoption:
· Draft Minutes for June 9, 2016
SPEAKERS: None
ACTION: Adopted
AYES: Fong, Richards, Antonini, Hillis, Johnson, Moore, Wu
ABSENT: Johnson
3. Commission Comments/Questions
· Inquiries/Announcements. Without discussion, at this time Commissioners may make announcements or inquiries of staff regarding various matters of interest to the Commissioner(s).
· Future Meetings/Agendas. At this time, the Commission may discuss and take action to set the date of a Special Meeting and/or determine those items that could be placed on the agenda of the next meeting and other future meetings of the Planning Commission.
Commissioner Antonini:
All of the Commissioners should have received some figures that I had requested and I'm very grateful to Pedro Peterson of the staff for having put this together and also, I did have forwarded to you the State Controllers’ comments from February 9th of 2016, Mac Taylor’s comments which have been around for a while, but I thought it was very important to have these available again, as we consider the Mission Area Plan and any other projects in the Eastern Neighborhoods and Mission, in particular. Anyway, short version of these figures, is what I asked to do, is to give us an accurate figure of how many housing units were analyzed in Eastern Neighborhoods, as the number of units that could be produced under the Environmental Impact Report for Eastern Neighborhoods, and also the amount of square footage that could be allow of PDR loss under the plan. So, he gave me those figures for both the preferred option and for option C, which was the one has the highest numbers above. And then I asked for how many of, in terms of units, how many units were entitled? How many were under construction? How many were completed? I didn't bother with somebody who has pulled environmental papers, which is a long way from anything else we're looking at as ones that has the highest probability of being completed and we found out those numbers were relatively low. The number of units, when they added all three together, making the assumption that somebody has an entitlement is actually going to finish the project, which it is not always the case, as we know who is around 57 percent and in the Mission it was only 44 percent, and the numbers for PDR loss were even lower. For Eastern Neighborhoods in full, it was only about 25 percent and for the Mission it was about 7 percent. Using those figures and the other caveat and this is a matter that the public has availability of this. When you read it, you have to realize this does include some projects that were entitled before the Mission neighborhoods approval was completed and therefore or they were allowed to have a legalization because they had been entitled under the former 1M zoning that was in place so, some of the ones that counted as being constructed that actually had their approvals before Eastern Neighborhoods, but in any case the bottom line it is it’s relatively low and also couple with the report that you'll read from Mac Taylor that shows a strong correlation between the amount of market rate housing built in a neighborhood, particularly low income neighborhood and the displacement. The more housing that is being built market-rate housing, the lower the rate of displacement as much as 47 percent displacement possibilities, if there is no building or very little market-rate housing, as little as 26 percent, if there is quite bit of market rate housing. I think while this is critical, we looked at any changes we may be making, we have to be very careful to allow the actual housing that has been analyzed and is planned to have any effect, which very little has been built so far, anyway hopefully, these will help us with future discussions, when questions come up, about how much has been built? How much hasn’t been built? How much is in the pipeline so I think really very grateful to Mr. Peterson for putting together the work on this.
Commissioner Richards:
I just wanted one item to note, I read the Small Business Commission last week or this week, actually voted unanimously for the chain store Formula Retail ban on Polk Street. Thank you.
D. DEPARTMENT MATTERS
4. Director’s Announcements
Director Rahaim:
No new announcements this week, other than to tell you that this week there was no change of, no revised version of the Governor’s legislation, but I will let you know what happens next week.
5. Review of Past Events at the Board of Supervisors, Board of Appeals and Historic Preservation Commission
Land Use Committee:
· 160360 Zoning Map - Rezoning Potrero HOPE SF Parcels at 25th and Connecticut Streets. Sponsor: Cohen. Staff: Snyder
On Monday the Land Use Committee considered the rezoning of 1101 Connecticut Street – or “Block X” of the Potrero Hope SF project. The proposal would rezone one of two parcels from “P” to “RM-2” and would rezone two parcels from 40-X to 50-X. The Planning Commission heard this item on May 5 of this year and voted unanimously to recommend approval to the Full Board. At the Land Use Committee there was no public comment and there were no questions or statement made by the Committee members. The Committee voted to move the item to the Full Board with a positive recommendation.
· 160694 Conveyance of Real Property - 101 Hyde Street - Mayor’s Office of Housing and Community Development - $1. Sponsor: Kim. Staff: Not Staffed
· 160550 Planning Code - Waiving Inclusionary Housing Requirements, Exempting Certain Floor Area from the Calculation of Gross Floor Area and Transferable Development Rights Requirements, and Authorizing Land Dedication at No Cost - 1066 Market Street. Sponsor: Kim. Staff: Chang
Also on the land use agenda was the Planning Code amendment Waiving Inclusionary Housing Requirements, Exempting Certain Floor Area from the Calculation of Gross Floor Area and TDR Requirements, and Authorizing Land Dedication at No Cost for the project at 1066 Market Street. The Planning Commission heard this item on June 16 of this year and voted to recommend approval to the Board of Supervisors. During public comment at the Land Use hearing there was resounding support from those who had initially opposed the project, feeling that the land dedication was a huge win for Community.
The Committee then voted unanimously to recommend the item to the Full Board with Chair Cohen stating that she wished all policy disagreements could be resolved as smoothly.
Full Board:
· 160347 General Plan Amendment – Affordable Housing Bonus Programs. Sponsor: Mayor. Staff: Dischinger. First Read, Item 8
· 160687 Planning Code - 100% Affordable Housing Bonus Programs. Sponsor: Mayor; Tang. Staff: Dischinger. First Read, Item 9
At the Full Board this week, the Supervisors considered the Planning Code and General Plan amendments for the Affordable Housing Bonus Program. When General Plan Amendment was called, Supervisor Peskin stated that he believes the language of the GPA is too broad, and should be “narrowed and tailored.” He also believes there should be input from community stakeholders to determine appropriate language for the GPA. He then noted that he intended to vote NO on the GPA and that four other board members would also be voting NO.
The question was then asked to the City Attorney about what would happen if there was a 5-5 split, because Supervisor Mar was absent. The City Attorney was not clear on whether a tied vote constituted disapproval or a failure to act. The City Attorney stated that if it was a failure to act, the GPA would come into effect after the 90 day deadline. This item was put on hold until the City Attorney could make a determination.
At the end of the hearing, the Board took up the AHBP items again. The City attorney confirmed that a 5-5 vote would constitute disapproval. There was also a question about what steps would be needed for the Planning Code Amendment to go forward if the GPA was disapproved. Supervisor Tang asked that both the GPA and PCA be continued for one week.
Supervisor Avalos then introduced following amendments which were accepted:
1) Prohibit any project using AHBP from demolishing any existing residential unit on any adjacent parcel; and
2) Urge the Planning Department to come up with a stronger business relocation program.
Supervisor Tang also introduced three amends to the Ordinance that she stated responded to the concepts in Supervisor Peskin and Mar's proposal and reflect discussions at the Land Use Committee as well. Those amends include:
1. Adding three necessary findings the 328 review process for 100% affordable project. Also changing the appeals process to the Board of Supervisors;
2. Directing the City to research and review strategies to address neighborhood variations in income levels, particularly in relation to the mixed income AHBP proposals; and
3. Adding a requirement that 100% affordable projects include neighborhood serving uses on the ground floor, including but not limited to: grocery stores, clinics, nonprofit space, community centers, and libraries.
These amendments were also accepted
The Board then voted to continue the item for one week on a 6 to 4 vote with Supervisor Mar absent. Those that voted no on the continuance were Supervisors Kim, Peskin, Campos and Avalos.
· 160534 Hearing - Appeal of Conditional Use Authorization - 32 Ord Street. Staff: Rodgers. Special Order 3:00 PM. Items 13-16
Next, the Board heard the CU appeal for 32 Ord Street. On this item, the Board voted to rescind the Planning Commission’s CU approval and modify it. The modifications included limiting the height of the planter boxes on the rear deck to 2’, and requiring transparent railing at the rear deck, amendments to the front and rear setbacks, and adjustments to the roofline. The board then voted unanimously to approve the CU.
· 160550 Planning Code - Waiving Inclusionary Housing Requirements, Exempting Certain Floor Area from the Calculation of Gross Floor Area and Transferable Development Rights Requirements, and Authorizing Land Dedication at No Cost - 1066 Market Street. Sponsor: Kim. Staff: Chang. Passed First Read
· 160694 Conveyance of Real Property - 101 Hyde Street - Mayor’s Office of Housing and Community Development - $1. Sponsor: Kim. Staff: Passed First Read
Finally the Board considered the amendments to the 1066 Market Street project, which the Board passed on first read.
Introductions:
There were no introductions of note this week.
BOARD OF APPEALS:
The Board of Appeals did meet last night, three items that maybe of interest to the Commission. First, we had appeals by the Academy of Art University for 22 Notices of Violation and Oenalty that were issued to 22 different properties. In this we established a deadline of July 1st for publication of the Existing Sites Technical Memorandum and Response to Comment with the Draft EIR. At the hearing last night, the Board of Appeals unanimously upheld our notice of violation and penalty and those deadlines remain. We on track, I am happy to say, to have those published by July 1st and we are also on track to have the certification of the EIR brought to you on July 28th. Second item is 2414 Lombard Street. You heard this as a discretionary review. It is a mandatory discretionary review for a medical cannabis dispensary known as The Apothecarium. It was heard as a DR by you last November, so it was an appeal brought forward by community groups in opposition to your approval of the project. At the hearing last night, the Board of Appeals voted 2 to 2 to deny the permit, four votes were needed to overturn a departmental action. There were – given that there were only four commissioners last night for this item, there were not sufficient votes to take action, so, by active law, you approval was upheld. The final item is the Van Ness Corridor permits to remove street trees, actually one permit to remove many street trees on the Van Ness Corridor in furtherance of the Van Ness Bus Rapid Transit Project, the appeal was the removal of trees and the board voted to uphold the permit to remove those trees.
HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION:
No Report
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: Georgia Schuttish – Collective mid-block open space
1. The rear yard mid-block open space needs residential design guidelines that preserve and protect
2. Rear yards should not be flat-lotted, cemented over and fenced off from one another but should remain part of the residential collective open space
3. Water from these yards should be allowed to percolate into the ground not into the sewer – due to a trend to hardscape and have the yard – the exterior become an extension of interior space, this issue needs guidelines
4. Other RDG considerations
- No big boxes on rear
- Prevailing rooflines in rear yards need consideration particularly if peaked roofs
- Distinction between homes on hills vs. homes on flat streets must be clearer
- Roof decks and other decks often invade privacy. Also stair penthouses
- Greater space in light wells and setbacks are needed to insure privacy and light and air than currently granted or considered
- Glazing reduction and design
(F) Speaker – Tantamont to demolition
Ozzie Rahm – Residential design guidelines
Allison Heath – EN monitoring reports
Eric Morrow – Guy Place minipark
Jessica Evans – 1st. Street, Guy Place trees
Rick Hall – EN plan
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.
6. 2015-000988CWP (C. FLORES: (415) 558-6473)
MISSION ACTION PLAN (MAP) 2020 - An Informational Update on the status of the Mission Action Plan 2020 (MAP2020). The purpose of the Mission Action Plan is to retain and attract low to moderate income residents and community-serving businesses (including Production, Distribution and Repair), artists, and nonprofits in order to strengthen and preserve the socioeconomic diversity of the Mission neighborhood.
Preliminary Recommendation: None - Informational
SPEAKERS: = Claudia Flores – Staff presentation
+ Dario Romero – Community report
+ Peter Papadopolous – Mission is ground zero for the crisis
+ Rick Hall – Appreciation to Claudia Flores
= Kate Harley – Response to questions
ACTION: None – Informational
7. (P. IKEZOE: (415) 575-9137)
2015 DOWNTOWN PLAN MONITORING REPORT - Informational presentation - Chapter 10E of the San Francisco Administrative Code requires the Planning Department to complete annual reports to measure development trends in the Downtown against the goals of the Downtown Plan of the San Francisco General Plan. The report discusses employment and development trends, transportation, housing, fiscal revenues and other topics pertaining to the Downtown C-3 district for 2015. This is an informational item only, no action is necessary. The report is available for the public at the Planning Department and can be downloaded from the website at:
http://www.sf-planning.org/ftp/files/Citywide/Downtown_Annual_Report_2015.pdf
Preliminary Recommendation: None - Informational
SPEAKERS: = Paolo Ikezoe – Staff presentation
ACTION: None - Informational
8a. 2014.1201SHD (K. DURANDET: (415) 575-6816)
2435-2445 16TH STREET - south side of 16th Street, between Florida and Bryant Streets, Lots 031 & 032 (formerly 021) in Assessor’s Block 3965 (District 9) - Adoption of Shadow Findings, pursuant to Planning Code Section 295, regarding the study that concluded the construction of a seven-story, 68-foottall mixed-use building (approximately 54,552 gsf) with 53 dwelling units, ground floor PDR and commercial space (approximately 5,961 gsf) and below grade parking (approximately 7,140 gsf) would not be adverse to the use of Franklin Square, which is under the jurisdiction of the San Francisco Recreation and Park Commission. The subject property is located within the UMU (Urban Mixed-Use Zoning District) and 68-X Height and Bulk District in the Mission Area Plan.
Preliminary Recommendation: Adopt Findings
(Continued from Regular Meeting of June 16, 2016)
SPEAKERS: = Anmarie Rodgers – Introduction
= Kimberly Durandet – Staff report
+ (M) Speaker – Project presentation
+ Steve Vettel –
+ Sonja Trans – Support
+ Francis Mantressano – Support
= Mari Eliza – Parking add loading, PDR
- Rick Hall – Cumulative impact of little projects
- Peter Papadopolous – Ted Egan report more housing and PDR
= Dario Romero – Better design
ACTION: Adopted Findings
AYES: Fong, Richards, Antonini, Hillis, Johnson, Moore, Wu
MOTION: 19670
8b. 2014.1201ENX (K. DURANDET (415) 575-6816) 2435-2445 16TH STREET - south side of 16th Street, between Florida and Bryant Streets, Lots 031 & 032 (formerly 021) in Assessor’s Block 3965 (District 9) - Request for Large Project Authorization (LPA) pursuant to Planning Code Section 329 to demolish a 10,000-square-foot (sf), one-story, 20-foottall auto repair and services shop and to construct of a seven-story, 68-foottall mixed-use building with 53 dwelling units and 5,961 ground floor PDR and commercial space and below grade parking within the UMU (Urban Mixed Use) Zoning and 68-X Bulk Districts. Under the LPA the project is seeking exceptions for required Rear Yard (Sec. 134), Permitted Obstructions (Sec. 136), Dwelling Unit Exposure (Sec. 140), and Street Frontages (Sec. 145). 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 June 16, 2016)
SPEAKERS: Same as Item 8a.
ACTION: Approved with Conditions as amended to include:
1. The larger retail space (approximately 1600 sq. ft.) be limited to PDR;
2. Continue working with staff on the design; and
3. Replacer one off-street parking space with a carshare space
AYES: Fong, Richards, Antonini, Hillis, Johnson, Moore, Wu
MOTION: 19671
9a. 2008.0428K (C. GROB: (415) 575-9138)
300 & 350 OCTAVIA STREET - east side of Octavia Street, south of Fell Street, north of Oak Street; Assessor’s Block 0832, Lots 92 and 94 (formerly lots 025 and 026) (District 5) - Request to Adopt Shadow Findings pursuant to Planning Code Section 295 regarding a Shadow Study that concluded that the shadow cast by the proposed construction would not be adverse to the use of Patricia’s Green, land under the jurisdiction of the San Francisco Recreation and Parks Department. The Project includes the construction of two mixed-use buildings, one on Parcel M (lot 94) and one on Parcel N (lot 92). Each proposed building would contain 12 dwelling units and about 943 square feet of ground floor retail. The project site is located in the Hayes-Gough Neighborhood Commercial Transit (NCT) and 50-X Height and Bulk District.
Preliminary Recommendation: Adopt Findings
(Continued from Regular Meeting of May 5, 2016)
SPEAKERS: = Carly Grob – Staff report
= David Winslow – Octavia Blvd. Plan
+ (M) Speaker – Project presentation
- Jordy Vanderbanich – M & O policies
- Alexandra Gophin – Opposition
+ Leyla Costonova – Support
+ Gayle Baugh – Support
+ (M) Speaker – Support
+ Mathew Hume – Support
+ (M) Speaker – Support
+ Robin Levitt – Support
+ Rob Poole – Great use of space
+ Craig Hamburg – Support
+ Ryan Patterson – Support
+ Jim Warshaw – Support
ACTION: Adopted FIndings
AYES: Fong, Richards, Antonini, Johnson, Moore, Wu
RECUSED: Hillis
MOTION: 19672
9b. 2014-002330CUA (C. GROB: (415) 575-9138)
300 & 350 OCTAVIA STREET - east side of Octavia Street, south of Fell Street, north of Oak Street; Assessor’s Block 0832, Lots 92 and 94 (formerly lots 025 and 026) (District 5) - Request for Conditional Use Authorization pursuant to Planning Code Sections 207.6 and 303 to establish a dwelling unit mix with less than 40% two-bedroom units. The Project includes the construction of two mixed-use buildings, one on Parcel M (lot 94) and one on Parcel N (lot 92). Each proposed building would contain 12 dwelling units and about 943 square feet of ground floor retail. The project site is located in the Hayes-Gough Neighborhood Commercial Transit (NCT) and 50-X Height and Bulk District. This action constitutes the Approval Action for the project for 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 May 5, 2016)
SPEAKERS: Same as Item 9a.
ACTION: Adopted Findings
AYES: Fong, Richards, Antonini, Johnson, Moore, Wu
RECUSED: Hillis
MOTION: 19673
9c. 2014-002330VAR (C. GROB: (415) 575-9138)
300 & 350 OCTAVIA STREET - east side of Octavia Street, south of Fell Street, north of Oak Street; Assessor’s Block 0832, Lots 92 and 94 (formerly lots 025 and 026) (District 5) - Request for Variances pursuant to Planning Code Sections 136 and 145.1 to exceed the maximum permitted dimensions for obstructions over streets and alleys, and to establish non-active uses at the ground floor. The Project includes the construction of two mixed-use buildings, one on Parcel M (lot 94) and one on Parcel N (lot 92). Each proposed building would contain 12 dwelling units and about 943 square feet of ground floor retail. The project site is located in the Hayes-Gough Neighborhood Commercial Transit (NCT) and 50-X Height and Bulk District.
(Continued from Regular Meeting of May 5, 2016)
SPEAKERS: Same as Item 9a.
ACTION: ZA Closed the public hearing and indicated an intent to Grant
10. 2016-002830CUA (W. FARRENS: (415) 575-9172)
1266 9TH AVENUE - east side between Irving Street and Lincoln Way; Lot 043 in Assessor’s Block 1742 (District 5) - Request for Conditional Use Authorization, pursuant to Planning Code Sections 303, 303.1, 703.3, and 703.4, to establish a Formula Retail use (a Restaurant dba “Lemonade”). The subject property is within the Inner Sunset NCD (Neighborhood Commercial District) 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 Section 31.04(h) of the San Francisco Administrative Code.
Preliminary Recommendation: Approve with Conditions
SPEAKERS: = Wayne Farrens – Staff report
+ Alan Jackson – Project presentation
+ (M) Speaker – Project presentation
+ Taylor Jordan – Support letters
+ Lawrence Rosenfeld – Support
ACTION: Approved with Conditions
AYES: Fong, Richards, Antonini, Hillis, Johnson, Moore, Wu
MOTION: 19674
11. 2016-000332CUA (W. FARRENS: (415) 575-9172)
2675 GEARY BOULEVARD - south side between Masonic Avenue and Lyon Street; Lot 001 in Assessor’s Block 1094 (District 5) - Request for Conditional Use Authorization, pursuant to Planning Code Sections 303, 303.1, 703.3, and 703.4, to establish a Formula Retail use (a Limited Restaurant dba “Starbucks Coffee”). The subject property is within a NC-3 (Neighborhood Commercial, Moderate Scale) 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 Section 31.04(h) of the San Francisco Administrative Code.
Preliminary Recommendation: Approve with Conditions
SPEAKERS: = Wayne Farrens – Staff report
+ Mark Loper – Project presentation
ACTION: Approved with Conditions
AYES: Fong, Richards, Antonini, Hillis, Johnson, Moore, Wu
MOTION: 19675
12. 2014.1007CUA (M. WOODS: (415) 558-6315)
2178 PINE STREET - north side between Webster and Buchanan Streets; Lot 016 in Assessor’s Block 0652 (District 2) - Request for Conditional Use Authorization, pursuant to Planning Code Sections 303 and 317, to allow the de facto demolition of a three-story, approximately 3,900 square-foot single-family house and its reconstruction as a three-story-over-garage, approximately 4,700 square-foot single-family house. The subject property is located in an RH-2 (Residential, House, Two-Family) District, and an 40-XHeight 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
SPEAKERS: = Mary Woods – Staff report
+ Yaku Askew – Project presentation
+ (M) Speaker – Response to questions
ACTION: Approved with Conditions as amended to document details unveiled and replace them
AYES: Fong, Richards, Antonini, Hillis, Johnson, Moore, Wu
MOTION: 19676
13. 2014-001343CUA (A. PERRY: (415) 575-9017)
3639 TARAVAL STREET - south side between 46th and 47th Avenues; Lot 039 in Assessor’s Block 2379 (District 4) - Request for Conditional Use Authorization pursuant to Planning Code Sections 303, 710.48 and 710.27, to establish an Other Entertainment use with electronic amplification and hours of operation until 2 a.m. within an existing Bar (d.b.a. Riptide) that is permitted to operate until 2 a.m. currently as a continuation of an existing nonconforming use, within a NC-1 (Neighborhood Commercial, Cluster) District and 40-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
SPEAKERS: = Andrew Perry – Staff report
+ David Quimby – Project presentation
+ Mark Burbo – Critical piece of the fabric
- Melissa Reuben – Sound control
- Scott Galbrath – Sound nuisance
+ Tammy Blackstone – Sound engineering, complaint
+ Jean Fontana – Live entertainment
+ Mary Kuckles – Family and community
+ Michael Ryan – Support
+ Danny Sandro – Support
+ Rebecca Leverbach - Support
ACTION: Approved with Conditions as amended to include:
1. Hours of entertainment till 12:30 am Sun-Wed, and 2:00 am Thurs-Sat, as well as till 2:00 am on NY;s and Halloween;
2. Request the Entertainment Commission consider should attenuation measures, such as curtains, double doors and a scrambler; and
3. 6 mos lookback, in the form of a memo
AYES: Richards, Antonini, Hillis, Johnson, Wu
NAYES: Fong
ABSENT: Moore
MOTION: 19677
14. 2015-009141CUA (C. ASBAGH: 415/575-9165)
875 – 899 HOWARD STREET - south side of Howard Street, at the intersection of Howard and Fifth Streets; lot 079 of Assessor’s Block 3733 (District 6) - Request for a Conditional Use Authorization, pursuant to Planning Code Sections 210.2 and 303 to establish a Non-Retail Sales and Service Use at the ground floor. The proposal would convert 19,578 square feet of institutional use at the ground floor of 875 Howard Street and approximately 46,888 square feet of retail use at 899 Howard Street to office. In addition the proposal would re-skin and construct a new 4,415 square fourth floor penthouse at 899 Howard Street building. The project site is located in the Downtown Commercial, Support (C-3-S) Zoning District and 130-F 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
SPEAKERS: None
ACTION: Continued to July 14, 2016
AYES: Fong, Richards, Antonini, Hillis, Johnson, Moore, Wu
15a. 2015-009141OFA (C. ASBAGH: 415/575-9165)
875 – 899 HOWARD STREET - south side of Howard Street, at the intersection of Howard and Fifth Streets; lot 079 of Assessor’s Block 3733 (District 6) - Request for an Office Development Authorization pursuant to Planning Code Sections 321 and 322 for a change of use from institutional and retail uses to office and to authorize up to approximately 70,881 square feet from the Office Development Annual Limit. The proposal would convert 19,578 square feet of institutional use at the ground floor of 875 Howard Street and approximately 46,888 square feet of retail use at 899 Howard Street to office. In addition the proposal would re-skin and construct a new 4,415 square fourth floor penthouse at 899 Howard Street building. The project is located within the Downtown Commercial, Support (C-3-S) Zoning District and 130-F Height and Bulk District. This action constitutes the Approval Action for the project for purposes of CEQA, pursuant to Section 31.04(h) of the San Francisco Administrative Code.
Preliminary Recommendation: Approve with Conditions
SPEAKERS: None
ACTION: Continued to July 14, 2016
AYES: Fong, Richards, Antonini, Hillis, Johnson, Moore, Wu
15b. 2015-009141VAR (C. ASBAGH: 415/575-9165)
875 – 899 HOWARD STREET - south side of Howard Street, at the intersection of Howard and Fifth Streets; lot 079 of Assessor’s Block 3733 (District 6) - Request for a Variance from Planning Code Section 136(c)(2) for permitted obstructions. The proposal would convert 19,578 square feet of institutional use at the ground floor of 875 Howard Street and approximately 46,888 square feet of retail use at 899 Howard Street to office. In addition the proposal would re-skin and construct a new 4,415 square fourth floor penthouse at 899 Howard Street building.
SPEAKERS: None
ACTION: ZA Continued to July 14, 2016
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.
16a. 2015-004617DRP (C. ASBAGH: (415) 575-9165)
22 MOORE PLACE - located on the east side of Moore P lace between Larkin Street and
Eastman Place, Lot 030 in Assessor’s Block 0096 (District 3) - Request for Discretionary Review of Building Permit Application No. 2015-0622-9587 proposing to convert the existing private garage into a three-story 35’6” single family dwelling within a RM-2 (Residential, Mixed, Moderate Density) Zoning District and 40-X Height and Bulk District. In addition, the Zoning Administrator will consider a Variance from the requirements for rear yard (per Section 134). This action constitutes the Approval Action for the project for purposes of CEQA, pursuant to Section 31.04(h) of the San Francisco Administrative Code.
Preliminary Recommendation: Take Discretionary Review and Approve with Modifications
SPEAKERS: = Claudine Asbagh – Staff report
- Julianna Gumm – DR presentation
- Erica Jurardo – Sunlight
+ John Kevlin – Project presentation
- Denise Gumm – Rebuttal
+ Andrew Meyer – Character questions
ACTION: Took DR and approved with the project with staff modifications and reducing the second floor roof-deck five feet from the south, three feet from the north and a maximum depth of three feet.
AYES: Fong, Richards, Antonini, Hillis, Johnson, Moore, Wu
DRA No: 0466
16b. 2015-004617VAR (C. ASBAGH: 415/575-9165)
22 MOORE PLACE - located on the east side of Moore Place between Larkin Street and Eastman Place, Lot 030 in Assessor’s Block 0096 (District 3) - Request for Variance pursuant to Planning Code Sections 134 for rear yard setback to allow the second story to be setback 15 feet from the rear yard and the third story to be setback 21 feet from the rear yard. The project is located in a RM-2 (Residential, Mixed, Moderate Density) Zoning District and 40-X Height and Bulk District.
SPEAKERS: Same as Item 16a.
ACTION: ZA Closed the public hearing and indicated an intent to Grant with CPC conditions
17. 2014-001259DRP-02 (N. FOSTER: (415) 575-9167)
60 RUSSELL STREET - north side of Russell Street, between Eastman Place and Hyde Street, Lot 009 in Assessor’s Block 0123 (District 3) - Request for Discretionary Review of Building Permit Application No. 2014.11.07.1023 proposing a two-story vertical addition to an existing one-story (over non-habitable space) structure, currently used as a single-family residence, within a RH-2 (Residential, House, Two-Family) Zoning District and 40-X Height and Bulk District. This action constitutes the Approval Action for the project for purposes of CEQA, pursuant to Section 31.04(h) of the San Francisco Administrative Code.
Staff Analysis: Abbreviated Discretionary Review
Preliminary Recommendation: Do Not Take Discretionary Review and Approve as Proposed
SPEAKERS: = Nick Foster – Staff presentation
- Matt Barusso – DR presentation 1
- Tracy Luke – DR presentation 2
- Lillian Chow – Negative impacts,compatability
- (M) Speaker – Mitigation measures
- Rachel Daly – Density
- Natara Lum – Privacy impacts
- Brittany Johnson – Eliminate stacker garage
- Lawrence Phan – Negative impacts
- John Kroas – Accurate drawings
- Allison Hau – Negative impacts
- Kathleen Courtney – Suggested improvements
- Joe Butler – Poor plans, historic resource
+ Kristen Sprinsten – Introduction
+ Philip Sprinsten – Process
+ (M) Speaker – Project presentation
+ Charles Sprinsten – Support
+ Ingrid Paulson – Support
+ Patricia Sprinsten – Support
+ Page Sprinsten – Support
+ Kate Kirett – Support
- John Barruso - Rebuttal
ACTION: After hearing and closing public comment, Continued to July 14, 2016
AYES: Fong, Richards, Hillis, Johnson, Moore, Wu
NAYES: Antonini
ABSENT: Fong, Johnson
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))
Adjournment - 8:39 P.M.
ADOPTED: JULY 7, 2016