Source: http://www.sf-planning.org/index.aspx?page=1186
Timestamp: 2013-05-19 08:44:31
Document Index: 129478203

Matched Legal Cases: ['Application No. 2004', 'Application No. 2003', 'Application No. 2004', 'Application No. 2004', 'Application No. 2004', 'Application No. 2002', 'Application No. 2002', 'Application No. 2002', 'Application No. 2004', 'Application No. 2003', 'Application No. 2004', 'Application No. 2003']

San Francisco Planning Department : October 14, 2004
/ October 14, 2004	October 14, 2004
October 14, 2004SAN FRANCISCO
COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Michael J. Antonini, Shelley Bradford Bell, Kevin Hughes, Sue Lee, William L. Lee
COMMISSIONERS ABSENT: Christina Olague
STAFF IN ATTENDANCE: Delvin Washington, Craig Nikitas; Carol Roos; Tina Tam; Matthew Snyder; May Woods; Dan Sider; Nora Priego - Transcription Secretary; Linda Avery - Commission Secretary
1. (M. FOSTER (415) 558 - 6362)
(Proposed for Continuance to December 2, 2004)
ACTION: Without hearing, item continued to December 2, 2004.
2. 2004.0760DDDD (T. TAM: (415) 558-6325)
ACTION: On calendar in error. On October 7, item was continued to December 2, 2004.
3. 2004.0076C (B. FU: (415) 558.6613)
1350 NATOMA STREET - west side, between 14th and 15th Streets, Lot 089 in Assessor's Block 3548 - Request for Conditional Use authorization pursuant to Planning Code Section 215 to allow the construction of 8 residential dwellings in the C-M (Heavy Commercial) District with a 50-X Height and Bulk Designation.
B. COMMISSIONERS' QUESTIONS AND MATTERS 4. Commission Comments/Questions
5. Discussion and possible action to adopt the recommendations for the Planning Director Search Subcommittee.
1. Discussion and possible action to develop selection criteria, a job description, and a job announcement for the position of Planning Director. The Commission determined that the job description would be edited slightly to say that the job would remain open until filled and would they begin reviewing applications December 1, 2004.
2. Discussion and possible action to develop a recruitment plan, including obtaining the services of a professional recruiter.
Commissioner Bell will work with the Commission Secretary and City Attorney to see what the process would be and whether there is someone already under contract with the city already.
3. Discussion and possible adoption of amending a regular meeting schedule for the subcommittee.
The Subcommittee calendar was revised and approved. Subcommittee will meet on October 21, 2004 and then will meet every other Thursday through December 16, 2004.
BOA Jonas Ionin attended the hearing.
Re: 4386 26th Street
- This case was related to some lot line windows.
- The conditions imposed were upheld by the BOA.
E. REGULAR CALENDAR 8. 1994.0670E (C. ROOS: (415) 558-5981)
SOUTH OF MARKET REDEVELOPMENT PLAN - Public Hearing on Draft Supplement to the FEIR for the South of Market Redevelopment Plan Amendment. The South of Market Redevelopment Plan Amendment ("Redevelopment Plan Amendment") proposes to convert the South of Market Earthquake Recovery Redevelopment Project Area to a redevelopment project area ("Project Area") and will authorize the San Francisco Redevelopment Agency ("Agency") to use tax-increment financing to alleviate physical and economic conditions of blight and to use eminent domain to alleviate these blighting conditions. The proposed amended Project Area is generally bounded by Stevenson, Mission and Natoma Streets on the north, Fifth Street on the east, Harrison and Folsom Streets on the south and Seventh Street on the west. In order to finance projects and programs that would alleviate the conditions of blight, the Redevelopment Plan Amendment would also include:
· An amended expiration date, which extends the redevelopment plan by 10 years (from June 11, 2010 to June 11, 2020); · Extended deadlines for the Agency to incur and repay indebtedness secured by tax increment funds; and
· Increase the aggregate amount of tax increment the Agency may receive (from $102,000,000 to $200,000,000) and the maximum amount of bonded indebtedness the Agency may have outstanding at any one time (from $60,000,000 to $80,000,000).
The Agency would carry out a comprehensive program to alleviate the adverse effect of blight in the Project Area by implementing the following five main elements of the Redevelopment Plan Amendment's program: 1) Improve residential conditions and encourage residential activity; 2) Improve economic conditions and encourage business activity; 3) Promote area quality of life and social services; 4) Address infrastructure and transportation needs; and 5) Assure appropriate neighborhood land uses and design. Implementation of the Redevelopment Plan Amendment is expected to yield a total of 834 residential units (483 small residential units and 351 family units), 114,618 square feet of commercial development and 91,375 square feet of industrial development at build out in 2020. The implementation of the Redevelopment Plan Amendment is also expected to result in rehabilitation of 300 existing single room occupancy residential hotel units that are either vacant or have substandard living conditions.
Note: Written comments will be received at the Planning Department until 5 pm, October 14, 2004, or the end of the Public Hearing, whichever is later.
Preliminary recommendation: Public Hearing to Receive Comments. No Action Required.
(+) Ernestein Weiss
- This is a wonderful plan and the Commission should approve it.
- She assumes that this is affordable housing.
- The city needs smart development.
- Luxury apartments are not needed right now.
ACTION: Hearing Held. No Action Required. Written comments will be received at the Planning Department until 5 pm, October 14, 2004, or the end of the Public Hearing, whichever is later.
9. 2004.0585D (R. CRAWFORD: (415) 558-6358)
20 CRAGMONT AVENUE - northeast side between 12th Avenue and Oriole Way. Assessor's Block 2123B Lot 001G - Request for Discretionary Review of Building Permit Application No. 2004 0407 0748, construct a new three story single family dwelling on a vacant lot in an RH-1 (Residential House, One Family) District, and a 40-X Height and Bulk District. Preliminary Recommendation: Take Discretionary Review and Modify the Project.
10. 2004.0151D (M. WOODS: (415) 558-6315)
2250 JACKSON STREET - north side between Buchanan and Webster Streets; Lot 8 in Assessor's Block 589 - Mandatory Discretionary Review, under the Planning Commission's policy requiring review of all dwelling unit mergers, of Building Permit Application No. 2003.07.07.8857S, proposing to reduce the existing five-unit building to a two-unit building in an RH-2 (Residential, House, Two-Family) District and 40-X Height and Bulk District.
(+) Alice Barkley - Representing Project Sponsor
- One of the two criteria that the project did not meet is the function of deficiency.
- The original plan cannot support the project sponsor's family.
- She displayed a map of the original floor plan and the proposed merger floor plan.
- Staff's assessment is inaccurate because they are applying the criteria that the family will be living there.
- The lost unit will not be a hardship to the supply of housing.
- One cannot Ellis act part of a unit. The project sponsor imposed the Ellis Act on the entire building several years ago. Ever since then, the family has been living in one unit.
(+) Clad Moran
- She lives behind the proposed project.
- The project sponsors are very nice people and maintain the property very well.
- Inside the house, the area is quite small. She is surprised that the project sponsor lived there for five years.
MOTION: Take Discretionary Review and disapprove the merger.
ACTION: In the absence of a substitute motion, the proposed project is approved as proposed.
11a. 2003.0270DD (M. SNYDER: (415) 575-6891)
695 ARKANSAS STREET - east side between 20th Street and 23rd Street, Lots 25F and 26 in Assessor's Block 4099, and a portion of the 22nd right-of-way (proposed for vacation) - Request for Discretionary Review of Building Permit Application No. 2004.03.24.9479 proposing to construct horizontal and vertical additions on the south and east (rear) sides of the house, within an RH-2 (House, Two-family) District a 40-X Height and Bulk District, and a portion of the OS Height and Bulk District.
Preliminary Recommendation: Take Discretionary Review and approve the project as modified.
(-) Simon Higgitt - Discretionary Review Requestor
- The plans and the set backs are still taking about two thirds of his house.
- The extension with setbacks will diminish the sunlight to his home.
- His house will be overcome by the enormous extension to the house.
- The height and bulk of the house should be compatible to the neighborhood.
- His backyard slopes away from the proposed structure so the height will seem larger.
- He is here speaking on his own.
- There is no need for the project sponsor to request the square footage they are requesting.
- The project would join two lots because of rear yard requirements therefore projecting farther into the rear yard than the existing pattern of mid block open space.
- The project will also be casting shadows on the northern and eastern neighbors rear yards plus intruding upon their privacy.
(-) Jean Makanna
- She lives on Arkansas Street.
- Most of the people who live in this neighborhood have lived there for about 20 years.
- The project would be disproportionate to the rest of the homes
- She is severely opposed to this project.
(-) Susan Shurman
- She has lived on Potrero Hill for about 25 years.
- She has been a member of the community garden for about 12 years.
- The project sponsor will be using space that could be used for open space.
- She is very opposed to the Variance.
- More buildings are not needed, more open space is.
(-) Jeannine Vaughan
- She has lived on Arkansas Street for about 14 years.
- She is totally opposed to this "super structure."
- This project will cut bock the light to her house.
- The community gardens have existed without any threat. Now they are threatened.
(-) Mary K. Law
- She has lived on Wisconsin Street for more than 50 years.
- The project is too big and will be a monstrosity to look at.
- This will be an encroachment on the open spaces of the "hill."
(-) Kelley Hensley
- She lives across the street from the proposed project.
- She is opposed to this project.
- When did people's personal circumstances become more important than open spaces in a neighborhood?
(-) Babette Drefke
- Potrero Hill has many dead end streets.
- Adjacent property owners are given an unfair advantage.
- It is more important to build a walkway in the area than to approve this extremely large house. It is dangerous and risky to walk in this area.
(-) Ernestein Weiss
- She does not live in the area but is a strong advocate of open space.
- Not addressing the needs of the neighbors is a very bad thing.
- The people who live surrounding this area should be allowed to enjoy the open space because that is the reason they purchased their homes.
(-) Lean Grant
- She lives across the street and is opposed to the proposed project.
- If this project should be approved, then it should be done properly.
(-) Douglas Conrad - Member of the Connecticut Friendship Garden
- He is a gardener.
- He read a letter from four gardeners who came together to write the letter.
- They are totally opposed to the project because of the loss of open space, which is very important to the neighbors.
(+) Mike Lanza - Project Sponsor
- He has been working on this project for more than three years.
- There are various neighbors who support the project.
- When he purchased his home he was told that he was able to build on the entire lot.
- He is trying very hard to lessen the impact on the back lot.
- He made an outreach to the community and tried to speak to all the people who are against the project but was not able to make any progress.
- There were community boards and negotiation as well.
(+) Alan Wilson - Project Architect
- He gave a general description of the architectural aspects of the project proving that there have been various things done to the project to lessen the impact on the neighbors.
(+) Dirck Hines - Connecticut Friendship Garden
- The project will legitimize his occupancy on 22nd Street.
- This project will secure into the future the community gardens.
- There has been a lot of emotion with this project.
(+) Suzanne Brunetti - Arkansas Street Gardens
- The majority of the members support this project.
- The project sponsor has a right to add to his house.
- The majority of the land that would be lost, the gardeners are not allowed on and will have to be torn down. The project sponsor has agreed to restore this space.
- The city land would be greatly utilized.
- The majority of the gardeners approve of this project.
(+) Linda Berlin
- She has lived in the area for about 20 years.
- She was originally opposed to the project but as she saw the plans she changed her mind and is now in support of the project.
- There have been a number of additions and expansions in the neighborhood.
- She urged the Commission to approve the plans.
(+) Lisa Riyers
- She lives in the neighborhood.
- She is speaking on behalf of herself and a neighbor who was not able to attend the hearing.
- If this project is not approved, the garden would suffer a loss because a future owner might not agree to improve it.
- She appreciates the project sponsor's family wanting to be a part of this neighborhood and the gardens.
(+) Steve Matteusky
- He has no direct relation to the project sponsor but he has seen how much they want to work with the community.
- The project sponsor has been very thorough.
(+) Ken Taymore - Attorney - Representing Project Sponsor
- He has been representing the Project Sponsor for many years.
- This unimproved lot, which is the mid-block open space, is a legal buildable lot.
- A large portion of the street needed to be taken.
- As far as process goes, there has been a lot of talk that this has not gone through the proper public process. The Project Sponsor has gone through the proper permits and public hearings.
MOTION: To take Discretionary Review and approve as modified by staff.
AYES: Hughes, S. Lee, W. Lee
NAYES: Antonini and Bradford Bell
ACTION: Took Discretionary Review and approved the project with the following condition: improve path to the south of the communal garden and sponsor shall communication with the city department that has jurisdiction of that site.
11b. 2004.0270V (M. SNYDER: (415) 575-6891)
695 ARKANSAS STREET - east side between 20th Street and 23rd Street, Lots 25F and 26 in Assessor's Block 4099, and a portion of the 22nd right-of-way (proposed for vacation) - Front setback variance sought. The proposal is to construct an addition in a portion of the existing unimproved 22nd Street Right-of-Way that is proposed to be vacated and annexed to Lot 26. The addition would measure approximately 15-feet wide by 35.5-feet deep by 22.5-feet tall. Planning Code Section 132 requires that a 15-foot setback be provided in front of the dwelling. The house is built to within 2-feet of the front property line and is therefore considered non-complying. The proposal is to build the addition with the same front setback as the rest of the house. The variance will be considered by the Zoning Administrator.
ACTION: The Acting Zoning Administrator closed the public hearing. He has taken the matter under advisement.
12. 2004.0757D (T. TAM: (415) 558-6325)
707 HURON AVENUE - southeast side between Whipple and Farragut Streets, Lot 44 in Assessor's Block 7100 - Request for Discretionary Review for Building Permit Application No. 2004.01.30.5277S, to construct a new two-story rear horizontal extension to an existing two-story, single-family dwelling. The project also proposes converting the existing storage space on the ground floor into habitable area. The property is located in the RH-1 (Residential, House, One-Family) District and a 40-X Height and Bulk District.
(-) Yan Liang - Discretionary Review Requestor
- The proposed project will compromise her privacy.
- She needs her window to be open for fresh air and for light but it will be blocked with the new construction.
(+) Grace Ruiz - Project Sponsor
- She has gone through the whole plan. - The bay window is not going to affect the DR requestor's privacy at all.
- She is willing to make some modifications to the window.
(+) Steve Currier - President of the Outer Mission Residents Association
- The plans as they see them make the project fit into the neighborhood.
- The project sponsor has gone out of her way to accommodate the neighbors.
13. 2004.0606D (T. TAM: (415) 558-6325)
1874 CHURCH STREET - west side between 30th and Randall Streets, Lot 21 in Assessor's Block 6655 - Mandatory Discretionary Review, under the Planning Commission's policy requiring review of all dwelling unit mergers, of Building Permit Application No. 2004.06.23.7130, proposing to merge three dwelling units to two dwelling units in an RH-2 (Residential, House, Two-Family) District and 40-X Height and Bulk District.
(+) Ahmad Larizadeh - Representing Project Sponsor
- The project sponsor's did not want to evict the downstairs tenant.
- By making the changes, a family of four would be able to live comfortably.
(+) Anthony Felzone - Project Sponsor
- It has been the family's dream to own a home in San Francisco.
- Many of their friends are leaving the Bay Area because property is so expensive.
- His wife works for a magazine and he is an environmental planner.
- They are in an extremely competitive housing market right now.
- All the neighbors are very supportive of the project.
(+) Amy Felzone
- Her family is growing and the space has become smaller.
- They needed to leave the condo where they were living because the fees were continually going up.
ACTION: Did not take Discretionary Review and approved the merger
14a. 2004.0336D (T. TAM: (415) 558-6325)
1144 PLYMOUTH STREET - east side between Ocean and Holloway Avenues, Lot 34 in Assessor's Block 6943 - Mandatory Discretionary Review, under the Planning Commission's policy requiring review of housing demolition, of Demolition Permit Application No. 2002.09.06.5881 (dwelling at the front) to demolish an existing one-story, single-family dwelling in an RH-2 (Residential, House, Two-Family) District and a 40-X Height and Bulk District. Preliminary Recommendation: Do not take Discretionary Review and approve the project as proposed.
14b. 2004.0759D (T. TAM: (415) 558-6325)
1144 PLYMOUTH STREET - east side between Ocean and Holloway Avenues, Lot 34 in Assessor's Block 6943 - Mandatory Discretionary Review, under the Planning Commission's policy requiring review of housing demolition, of Demolition Permit Application No. 2002.09.06.5882 (dwelling at the rear) to demolish an existing one-story, single-family dwelling in an RH-2 (Residential, House, Two-Family) District and a 40-X Height and Bulk District. Preliminary Recommendation: Do not take Discretionary Review and approve the project as proposed.
14c. 2004.0758D (T. TAM: (415) 558-6325)
1144 PLYMOUTH STREET - east side between Ocean and Holloway Avenues, Lot 34 in Assessor's Block 6943 - Mandatory Discretionary Review, under the Planning Commission's policy requiring review of new construction to replace demolished housing, of Building Permit Application No. 2002.09.06.5878S, for the construction of a three-story, two-family dwelling in an RH-2 (Residential, House, Two-Family) District and 40-X Height and Bulk District.
15. 2004.0479D (T. WANG: (415) 558-6335)
10 PORTOLA DRIVE - southwest side between Fenton and Golding Lanes; Lot 021 in Assessor's Block 2826 - Request of Discretionary Review of Building Permit Application No. 2004.02.06.7278, proposing to extend the existing second and third floors towards the rear of the lot and construct a fourth story vertical addition to an existing two-story over garage, single-family dwelling in an RH-1 (Residential, House, One-Family) District and a 40-X Height and Bulk District.
(-) Lou Felthouse - Architect
- The Discretionary Review requestor has lived in the area for many years.
- He presented a 3-D image showing the proposed addition.
- The project sponsor has a beautifully landscaped rear garden.
- He displayed a PowerPoint presentation showing the shadow positions during various times of the year.
- A blank wall is what the DR requestor would be looking at if this project is approved.
(+) Patrick Owens - Project Sponsor
- There are some incorrect statements in the Discretionary Review request application.
- They provided a shadow analysis.
- They have provided all the information that the Planning Department has requested.
- There are other houses on the block that have the identical setup as their proposal. None of those houses had to make any modifications.
- They provided seven letters of support for their project.
(+) Alan Chung
- He lives on Portola Drive.
- He supports the project because the project sponsors have made a conscientious effort to accommodate the neighbors.
- He loves the neighborhood and has lived there for many years.
(+) Gail Collins
- When they purchased their house, their plan was to start a family.
- They really love their neighborhood and would like to remain in the neighborhood.
16. 2004.0765D (D. SIDER: (415) 558-6697)
3616 FOLSOM STREET - west side between Eugenia and Powhattan Avenues, Lot 004 in Assessor's Block 5651 - Mandatory Discretionary Review of Building Permit Application Number 2004.03.31.0043 proposing to (1) merge two legal dwelling units into a single dwelling unit and (2) construct additions to the side, rear, and roof of the existing building. Planning Commission Resolution Number 16053 requires a Discretionary Review hearing for all projects, which result in the removal of a legal dwelling unit. The property is located in an RH-1 (Residential, House, Single-Family) Zoning District, the Bernal Heights Special Use District, and a 40-X Height and Bulk District.
(+) Daniel Ewald - ETA Architecture
- The project sponsors are living in an attic type space.
- There will be no displacement.
(+) Sean Brady - Project Sponsor
- He and his wife are trying to stay in San Francisco.
- They were recently married.
- He hopes that the Commission will approve the merger.
17a. 2004.0097D (G. NELSON (415) 558-6257)
2070 GOLDEN GATE AVENUE - north side between Central and Lyon Streets; lot 019 in Assessor's Block 1150 - Mandatory Discretionary Review, under the Planning Commission's policy requiring review of housing demolition, of Demolition Permit Application No. 2003.09.29.6052, proposing to demolish a two-story two-family dwelling in an RH-3 (Residential, House, Three-Family) District and a 40-X Height and Bulk District. The two-family dwelling is located at the front of the lot. There are related proposals to demolish a single-family dwelling at the rear of the lot and to construct a four-story, three-family dwelling with three off-street parking spaces.
Preliminary Recommendation: Do not take Discretionary Review and approve demolition
(Continued from Regular Meeting of September 9, 2004)
NOTE: Item continued to allow the Project Sponsor to conduct community meetings. Item continued to October 7, 2004. Public hearing will remain open.
SPEAKER(S): (+) CJ Higley - Andrew and Junius - Representing Project Sponsor
- As a result of the community meetings, there were changes made to the plans.
- The one issue outstanding is the additional five-foot setback that staff is proposing.
- He feels that the setback is not necessary and actually causes interior problems to the project.
- The biggest issue is that the five-foot setback at the garage level would not allow the third car to park there.
- He suggests a one-foot break line or a shadow line. This would serve the same purpose.
(-) Kathleen Ewing
- She agrees that the only remaining issue is the five-foot setback.
- They had meetings but decided not to do anything with the setback, but various other neighbors want the five-foot setback.
17b. 2004.0098D (G. NELSON (415) 558-6257)
2070 GOLDEN GATE AVENUE - north side between Central and Lyon Streets; lot 019 in Assessor's Block 1150 - Mandatory Discretionary Review, under the Planning Commission's policy requiring review of housing demolition, of Demolition Permit Application No. 2004.02.23.6957, proposing to demolish a one-story single-family dwelling in an RH-3 (Residential, House, Three-Family) District and a 40-X Height and Bulk District. The single-family dwelling is located at the rear of the lot. There are related proposals to demolish a two-family dwelling at the front of the lot and to construct a four-story, three-family dwelling with three off-street parking spaces.
Preliminary Recommendation: Do not take Discretionary Review and approve demolition (Continued from Regular Meeting of September 2, 2004)
SPEAKER(S): Same as those listed for Item 17a.
17c. 2004.0099D (G. NELSON (415) 558-6257)
2070 GOLDEN GATE AVENUE - north side between Central and Lyon Streets; lot 019 in Assessor's Block 1150 - Mandatory Discretionary Review, under the Planning Commission's policy requiring review of new residential building in association with residential demolition, of Building Permit Application No. 2003.09.29.6049, proposing to construct a four-story, three-family residential structure with three off-street parking spaces in an RH-3 (Residential, House, Three-Family) District and a 40-X Height and Bulk District. There are related proposals to demolish a two-family dwelling at the front of the lot and a single-family dwelling at the rear of the lot.
Preliminary Recommendation: Take Discretionary Review and approve new construction with modifications
(Continued from Regular Meeting of September 2, 2004) NOTE: Item continued to allow the Project Sponsor to conduct community meetings. Item continued to October 7, 2004. Public hearing will remain open.
ACTION: Took Discretionary Review and approved the project as modified by staff: The project shall incorporate a 5-foot setback from the main (front) facade of the building at the second, third and fourth floor levels on the left hand side of the front facade.
18. 2004.0182C (B. FU: (415) 558-6613)
1135 EVANS AVENUE - southwest corner of Evans Avenue and Middle Point Road, Lot 014, Assessor's Block 4602A - Request for Conditional Use authorization under Planning Code Sections 711.83 and 790.80 to install a wireless telecommunications facility consisting of 3 panel antennas on an existing 69-foot lattice tower and related equipment on the ground as part of Sprint PCS's wireless telecommunications network. This is a location Preference 2 (Preferred Location - Co-Location Site) according to the Wireless Telecommunications Services (WTS) Siting Guidelines and is within a NC-2 (Small-Scale Neighborhood Commercial) Zoning District and a 40-X Height and Bulk District.
(+) Ryan Crowley - Representing Project Sponsor - Sprint PCS
- This project would install antennas at the PG&E Hunters Point station.
- The location is a co-location site.
- The location currently has poor or no coverage.
- The equipment will be screened by existing foliage.
- The antennas will be installed on an existing PG&E tower.
- There were community meetings and about 400 notices were sent in trilingual languages. No one attended the meetings.
ACTION: Approved with conditions as drafted by staff.
ABSENT: Bradford Bell and Olague
MOTION: 16870
19. 2002.0954E (A. AGUILAR: (415) 558-5973)
1234 HOWARD STREET - Public Hearing on Draft Environmental Impact Report - The proposed project would involve the demolition of a vacant, light-industrial building totaling 8,250 gross square feet (gsf) and construction of a five-story residential building. The existing building proposed to be demolished is an historical resource for purposes of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) because it is rated as a Category III (Contributory) building under Article 11 of the San Francisco Planning Code, an adopted local register. The proposed building would be 33,340 gsf in building floor area and would have 18 dwelling units. The proposed project would provide 18 off-street parking spaces for the residential units. The entrance and access to the residential use and off-street parking would be from both Howard and Natoma Streets. The project site at 1234 Howard Street (Assessor's Block 3728, Lot 014) is approximately 8,250 square feet in size and located about mid-block on the northern side of Howard Street in the South of Market neighborhood in the block bounded by Howard, Eighth, Natoma, and Ninth Streets. The project site is zoned SLR (Service/Light Industrial/Residential) and within a 50-X height/bulk district.
Note: Written comments will be received at the Planning Department until 5:00 p.m. on October 19, 2004.
ACTION: Meeting Held. No Commission Action Required. Written comments will continue to be received at the Planning Department until 5:00 p.m. on October 19, 2004.
20. 2003.0262E (A. AGUILAR: (415) 558-5973)
1401-1435 MARKET STREET (AKA TENTH/MARKET/MISSION STREETS MIXED-USE PROJECT) - southwest corner at 10th Street; Lot 039 in Assessor's Block 3507 - Certification of a Final Environmental Impact Report: The project site is approximately 95,000 square feet and is within the proposed Mid-Market Redevelopment Project Area. The project is to construct a 24-story, 320-foot-tall office building fronting Market Street which would provide municipal offices uses; a 21-story, 200-foot-tall market-rate housing tower fronting Tenth Street which would provide up to 250 units; and a 15-story, 150-foot-tall affordable senior housing tower would provide up to 200 units. The total gross area for the proposed project would be approximately 1,024,119 square feet (including the office component, which per a recent revision in the application by the project sponsor, is not part of the currently requested entitlements). Approximately 313 off-street parking spaces are requested. The project would require demolition of seven structures, which contain approximately 166,700 gross-square-feet of vacant office space, and the removal of 108 surface parking spaces. The property is currently within a C-3-G (Downtown General Commercial) District and 320-S, 200-S, 150-S Height and Bulk Districts.
Preliminary Recommendation: Certify the Final Environmental Impact Report. Please note that the public review period for the Draft Environmental Impact Report ended at 5:00 PM, June 28, 2004..
(Continued from Regular Meeting of September 23, 2004)
(+) Jim Buckley - Citizen's Housing
- The community has been involved in looking at the impacts.
ACTION: FEIR Certified
MOTION: 16871
21a. 2003.0262E!KXCVMRTZ (M. LI: (415) 558-6396)
1401-1435 MARKET STREET - southwest corner at 10th Street; Lot 039 in Assessor's Block 3507- Adoption of CEQA findings regarding the proposed establishment of the Tenth and Market Streets Special Use District, the construction of two residential buildings containing a total of up to 450 dwelling units, and the potential construction of an office building for occupancy by the City and County of San Francisco. The property is currently within a C-3-G (Downtown General Commercial) District and 320-S, 200-S, 150-S Height and Bulk Districts.
ACTION: Without Hearing. Item Continued to October 21, 2004.
21b. 2003.0262E!KXCVMRTZ (M. LI: (415) 558-6396)
1401-1435 MARKET STREET - southwest corner at 10th Street; Lot 039 in Assessor's Block 3507 - Request for a General Plan referral to determine if the a Planning Code text amendment, a zoning map amendment, and a General Plan amendment related to the proposed establishment of the Tenth and Market Streets Special Use District, the construction of two residential buildings containing a total of up to 450 dwelling units, the potential construction of an office building for occupancy by the City and County of San Francisco, and other related actions, including the vacation of Jessie Street, is in conformity with the objectives and policies of the General Plan. The property is currently within a C-3-G (Downtown General Commercial) District and 320-S, 200-S, 150-S Height and Bulk Districts.
Preliminary Recommendation: Determine that the proposed amendments are conformity with the objectives and policies of the General Plan
21c. 2003.0262E!KXCVMRTZ (M. LI: (415) 558-6396)
1401-1435 MARKET STREET - southwest corner at 10th Street; Lot 039 in Assessor's Block - Request for a Planning Code text amendment related to the proposed establishment of the Tenth and Market Streets Special Use District. The Planning Code text amendment consists of adding Section 249.27 to the Planning Code, which would establish the Tenth and Market Streets Special Use District and include the following provisions: (a) eliminate residential density restrictions, (b) exempt residential uses from the calculation of floor area ratio, (c) provide a height exemption of up to 30 feet for elevator and mechanical penthouses, and (d) allow residential parking up to a ratio of one independently accessible space for each dwelling unit with conditional use authorization. The property is currently within a C-3-G (Downtown General Commercial) District and 320-S, 200-S, 150-S Height and Bulk Districts.
Preliminary Recommendation: Adopt the draft resolution
21d. 2003.0262E!KXCVMRTZ (M. LI: (415) 558-6396)
1401-1435 MARKET STREET - southwest corner at 10th Street; Lot 039 in Assessor's Block 3507 - Request for a zoning map amendment related to the proposed establishment of the Tenth and Market Streets Special Use District. The zoning map amendment consists of adding the Tenth and Market Streets Special Use District to Map 7SU of the Official Zoning Maps of the City and County of San Francisco. The property is currently within a C-3-G (Downtown General Commercial) District and 320-S, 200-S, 150-S Height and Bulk Districts.
21e. 2003.0262E!KXCVMRTZ (M. LI: (415) 558-6396)
1401-1435 MARKET STREET - southwest corner at 10th Street; Lot 039 in Assessor's Block 3507 within the C-3-G (Downtown General Commercial) District and 320-S, 200-S, 150-S Height and Bulk Districts - Request for a General Plan amendment related to the proposed establishment of the Tenth and Market Streets Special Use District. The General Plan amendment consists of adding the Tenth and Market Streets Special Use District to Map 1 ("Downtown Land Use and Density Plan") of the Downtown Area Plan and adding Policy 2 to Objective 6 of the Downtown Area Plan. The property is currently within a C-3-G (Downtown General Commercial) District and 320-S, 200-S, 150-S Height and Bulk Districts.
21f. 2003.0262E!KXCVMRTZ (M. LI: (415) 558-6396)
1401-1435 MARKET STREET - southwest corner at 10th Street; Lot 039 in Assessor's Block 3507 - Request for a Section 309 Determination of Compliance and Request for Exceptions. The proposal is the construction of two residential buildings containing a total of up to 450 dwelling units as part of a larger project proposing the establishment of the Tenth and Market Streets Special Use District and the potential construction (requiring future approval) of an approximately 24-story office building approximately 420,000 square feet in area, for occupancy by the City and County of San Francisco. The residential component of the project requires separation of towers, rear yard, loading, wind, and bulk exceptions pursuant to Section 309(a). The property is currently within a C-3-G (Downtown General Commercial) District and 320-S, 200-S, 150-S Height and Bulk Districts.
21g. 2003.0262E!KXCVMRTZ (M. LI: (415) 558-6396)
1401-1435 MARKET STREET - southwest corner at 10th Street; Lot 039 in Assessor's Block 3507 - Request for conditional use authorization to provide residential parking at the Tenth Street Building exceeding an amount classified as accessory (220 residential spaces are requested where 93 independently accessible spaces would be allowed as-of-right), and to allow additional FAR above the base FAR of 6.0 to 1 for the construction of affordable dwelling units as part of a larger project proposing the establishment of the Tenth and Market Streets Special Use District, the construction of two residential buildings containing a total of up to 450 dwelling units, and the potential construction of an approximately 24-story office building approximately 420,000 square feet in area, for occupancy by the City and County of San Francisco. The property is currently within a C-3-G (Downtown General Commercial) District and 320-S, 200-S, 150-S Height and Bulk Districts.
21h. 2003.0262E!KXCVMRTZ (M. LI: (415) 558-6396)
1401-1435 MARKET STREET - southwest corner at 10th Street; Lot 039 in Assessor's Block 3507 within the C-3-G (Downtown General Commercial) District and 320-S, 200-S, 150-S Height and Bulk Districts - Permitted obstructions variance sought. The proposal is the construction of two residential buildings containing a total of up to 450 dwelling units as part of a larger project proposing the establishment of the Tenth and Market Streets Special Use District and the potential construction of an office building for occupancy by the City and County of San Francisco. Section 136(c)(19) of the Planning Code allows fences and windscreens not exceeding a height of 10 feet above grade within the required rear yard. The proposed residential buildings will include a fence/windscreen exceeding a height of 10 feet within the required rear yard. The variance will be considered by the Zoning Administrator.
Adjournment: 6:21 p.m.