Source: http://www.sf-planning.org/index.aspx?page=1070
Timestamp: 2015-07-05 13:20:08
Document Index: 391471504

Matched Legal Cases: ['Application No. 2001', 'Application No. 2002', 'Application No. 2001', 'Application No. 2000', 'Application No. 2001', 'Application No. 2001']

Meeting MinutesCommission Chambers - Room 400City Hall, 1 Dr. Carlton B. Goodlett PlaceThursday, May 2, 20021:30 PMRegular MeetingPRESENT: Baltimore, Chinchilla, Fay, Lim, SalinasABSENT: Joe and TheoharisTHE MEETING WAS CALLED TO ORDER BY PRESIDENT CHINCHILLA AT 2:06 p.m.STAFF IN ATTENDANCE: Gerald Green – Director; Larry Badiner -Zoning Administrator; Jean Paul Samaha; ; Nora Priego – Transcription Secretary; Linda Avery - Commission SecretaryA. CONSIDERATION OF ITEMS PROPOSED FOR CONTINUANCE The Commission will consider a request for continuance to a later date. The Commission may choose to continue the item to the date proposed below, to continue the item to another date, or to hear the item on this calendar. 1. 2000.0015C 2002.0015C (D. SIROIS: 415-558-6313)1005-1007 GENEVA AVENUE - north side of Geneva Avenue, between Paris and Lisbon Streets, Lot 013 in Assessor's Block 6408 - Request for Conditional Use authorization to demolish a residential unit at the second story pursuant to Planning Code Section 712.39 and to construct a four-story mixed use building with 3 residential units and a ground floor commercial space for the existing business-Apollo Heating in an NC-3 (Moderate-Scale Neighborhood Commercial) District and a 40-X Height and Bulk District. Preliminary Recommendation: Approval with Conditions (Proposed for Continuance to June 6, 2002)SPEAKER(S): NoneACTION: Continued as ProposedAYES: Baltimore, Chinchilla, Fay, Lim ABSENT: Joe, Salinas, Theoharis 2. 2002.0089D (M. WOODS: 415-558-6315)607 BELVEDERE STREET - west side between 17th and Carmel Streets, Lot 2 in Assessor’s Block 1291 - Request for Discretionary Review of Building Permit Application No. 2001/1031/2222, proposing to convert a portion of the existing garage and attic into habitable spaces; construct a two-story side addition, three new dormer windows at the attic level, and a three-story deck and stairs at the rear of the single-family dwelling in an RH-2 (Residential, House, Two-Family) District and a 40-X Height and Bulk District. Preliminary Recommendation: pending (Proposed for Continuance to June 27, 2002)SPEAKER(S): NoneACTION: Continued as ProposedAYES: Baltimore, Chinchilla, Fay, Lim ABSENT: Joe, Salinas, Theoharis 3. 2001.1202C (M. SMITH: 415-558-6322)5200 DIAMOND HEIGHTS BOULEVARD - southwest corner of Diamond Heights Boulevard and Duncan Street, Lot 001 in Assessor's Block 7521- Request for Conditional Use Authorization under Planning Code Section 209.4 to use the existing banquet room on the property as a community facility for a limited number of non-church related events, located in a RH-1(D) (Residential, House, One-Family, (Detached)) District and a 40-X Height and Bulk District. NOTE: THIS PROJECT IS BEING RE-NOTICED AND WILL APPEAR IN A FUTURE CALENDAR ONCE THAT PROCESS IS COMPLETE.SPEAKER(S): NoneB. COMMISSIONERS' QUESTIONS AND MATTERS 4. Commission MattersCommissioner Chinchilla:RE: R-MAX Request- There was a request from the project sponsor of 1880 Mission Street, which was heard by the Commission last week, for the Commissioners who voted against the project to rescind their votes.- Commissioner Chinchilla asked if any commissioner on the prevailing side of the vote wanted to rescind their vote. There were none.Re: Lateness- If any Commissioner will be late, please let the Commission Secretary know.C. DIRECTOR'S REPORT 5. Director's AnnouncementsRe: Activities going on at the Planning Department- In the past month, the Department has been experiencing problems with the computer system.- Director Green would like to let everyone know that they are dealing with the situation. - - This just has to do with receiving appropriate funding. The Director will be attending the Finance Committee to ask for the release of some funds that were originally intended to be used toward the upgrade of the network. But because of a variety of issues, the Department will be prevented to use these funds before May 15.- The system will be very inconsistent and he asks the public and the Commission for patience. 6. Review of Past Week's Events at the Board of Supervisors and Board of AppealsBOSRe: Conditional Use at 417 31st Avenue – antenna preference 1- The Board upheld the Commission's decision on a vote +9-2.Re: 20 Woodside (aka as 501 Laguna Honda) – antenna preference 1- The board upheld the Commission's decision on a +7-4.Re: Big Box Retail- The Board did not take up the legislation on big box retail.- The president of the Board had a desire that the Director of Planning impose an action of Discretionary Review on the Home Depot proposal on Bayshore Boulevard. A Discretionary Review to allow a public hearing and to allow for appropriate conditions to be established. The Director is supportive of this.BOA – NoneD. PUBLIC COMMENT ON MATTERS WHERE THE PUBLIC HEARING HAS BEEN CLOSEDAt this time, members of the public who wish to address the Commission on agenda items that have 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 must do so at this time. Each member of the public may address the Commission for up to three minutes.NoneE. CONSIDERATION OF FINDINGS AND FINAL ACTION -- PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED 7. 2002.0090C (R. CRAWFORD: 415-558-6358) 1525 OCEAN AVENUE – between Capitol and Miramar, Assessor’s Block 6936 Lot 014. Request under Planning Code Section 161(j) for Conditional Use approval for a reduction of 3 off street parking spaces required for dwellings for a project with ground floor commercial and 3 dwelling units. This project lies within an NC-2 Small Scale Neighborhood Commercial District and within the 40-X Height and Bulk District. Preliminary Recommendation: Approval with Conditions. NOTE: On April 18, 2002, following public testimony, the Commission closed the public hearing and passed a motion of intent to disapprove by a vote of +6-0 with Commissioner Fay absent. The matter was continued to May 2, 2002, for final action.SPEAKER(S): NoneACTION: Project DisapprovedAYES: Baltimore, Chinchilla, Fay, Lim ABSENT: Joe, Salinas, TheoharisMOTION: 16394 8. 2001.0244CV (G. NELSON: 415-558-6257) 321 JUDAH STREET - south side between 8th and 9th Avenues; Lot 051 in Assessor’s Block 1845 - Request for Conditional Use authorization under Sections 161(j) and 730.39 of the Planning Code to demolish an existing two-story building containing a commercial space on the ground floor and a dwelling unit on the second floor and construct a new four-story building to contain a commercial space on the ground floor with two dwelling units above. The project seeks a reduction in the off-street parking requirement from two (2) spaces to none (0). The proposed project is within the Inner Sunset Neighborhood Commercial District and a 40-X Height and Bulk District. This project also seeks a rear yard variance to allow for a fire escape stair. Preliminary Recommendation: Approval with conditions NOTE: On April 18, 2002, following public testimony, the Commission closed the public hearing and passed a motion of intent to disapprove by a vote of +5-1, Commission Lim voted No; Commissioner Fay was absent. The matter was continued to May 2, 2002, for final action.SPEAKER(S): NoneACTION: Project DisapprovedAYES: Baltimore, Chinchilla, Fay, Lim ABSENT: Joe, Salinas, TheoharisMOTION: 16395F. REGULAR CALENDAR 9. 2002.0078Q (V. MASSEHIAN: 415-558-6363) 135 CARL STREET - south side between Shrader and Cole Streets, Lot 020 in Assessor’s Block 1272 - Request for approval of a six-unit residential conversion subdivision in an RH-3 (Residential, House, Three Family) District and a 40-X Height and Bulk District. The proposal is to change the existing six-unit building to a condominium form of ownership and does not involve expansion, alteration, or demolition of the existing building.Preliminary Recommendation: Approval SPEAKER(S): NoneACTION: ApprovedAYES: Baltimore, Chinchilla, Fay, Lim ABSENT: Joe, Salinas, TheoharisMOTION: 16396 10. 2002.300B (P. ARCE: 415-558-5986)MISSION BAY SOUTH BLOCK 41, PARCEL 1 - Request under Planning Code Section 321 (Office Development: Annual Limit) for a determination of the design quality and Project Authorization of the proposed office development for a five story building including 160,100 square feet of office space, pursuant to Planning Commission Resolution No. 14702. The Project site lies within the Mission Bay South Redevelopment Area and is classified as a Commercial Industrial District, as defined in Section 302.3 of the Mission Bay Redevelopment Plan, and is within the Height Zone 7 (HZ-7). This proposal consists of 160,100 square feet of office space, and a temporary surface parking area in Block 40, located south of the Site. Pursuant to Code Section 314, the project, which the Department has determined would result in the addition of 160,100 square feet of office use gross floor area, would require the provision of Child Care facilities. Any person may appeal this initial determination by delivering an appeal in writing to the Department within 15 days of this notice. Preliminary Recommendation: ApprovalSPEAKER(S):(+) Douglas Gardner – President, Catellus Development Corporation- He gave a PowerPoint presentation regarding Mission Bay and Catellus.ACTION: ApprovedAYES: Baltimore, Chinchilla, Fay, Lim ABSENT: Joe, Salinas, TheoharisRESOLUTION: 16398 11. 2002.301B (P. ARCE: 415-558-5986)MISSION BAY SOUTH BLOCK 42, PARCEL 4 - Request under Planning Code Section 321 (Office Development: Annual Limit) for a determination of the design quality of the proposed office development for a two-story building including 80,922 square feet of office space, pursuant to Planning Commission Resolution No. 14702. The Project Site lies within the Mission Bay South Redevelopment Area and is classified as a Commercial Industrial District, as defined in Section 302.3 of the Mission Bay Redevelopment Plan, and is within the Height Zone 7 (HZ-7). This proposal consists of 80,922 square feet of office space. The proposal includes the completion of the adjacent sidewalks, (paving, planting of trees and installation of public lighting) and a temporary surface parking area in Parcel 6, located north of the Site. Pursuant to Code Section 314, the project would require the provision of Child Care facilities for an 80,922 square foot office. Any person may appeal this initial determination by delivering an appeal in writing to the Department within 15 days of this notice. Preliminary Recommendation: ApprovalSPEAKER(S): NoneACTION: ApprovedAYES: Baltimore, Chinchilla, Fay, Lim ABSENT: Joe, Salinas, TheoharisMOTION: 16397 12. 1999.457L (J. TULLY: 415-558-6372)390 LAGUNA HONDA BOULEVARD - Laguna Honda (Forest Hill) Muni Station. Assessor’s Block 2864, Lot 50. The one-story, concrete and stucco, Mission and Neoclassical Revival-styled street railway station was constructed in 1917. The proposed landmark site is the station’s original 1917 building and does not include a 1985 addition or any other aspect of Block 2864, Lot 50. The subject property is zoned P (Public) and is in an OS (Open Space) Height and Bulk District. Request for Commission approval of the proposed landmark designation, which was initiated by the Landmarks Preservation Advisory Board on January 23, 2002. Preliminary Recommendation: ApprovalSPEAKER(S): NoneACTION: ApprovedAYES: Baltimore, Chinchilla, Fay, Lim ABSENT: Joe, Salinas, TheoharisMOTION: 16399 13. 2001.0789C (M. SMITH: 415-558-6322)597-599 MONTEREY BOULEVARD - southeast corner of Monterey Boulevard and Foerster Street, Lot 028 in Assessor's Block 3116 - Request by Sprint PCS for Conditional Use Authorization under Planning Code Sections 710.83 to install a wireless telecommunication facility consisting of two antennas mounted near the northwest corner of the rooftop, one GPS antenna mounted to the southeast corner of the rooftop, and five associated equipment cabinets installed within the detached garage of a two-story mixed use building located in a NC-1 (Neighborhood Commercial Cluster) District and a 32-X Height and Bulk District. The subject site is a Limited Preference 6 site according to the Wireless Telecommunications Services (WTS) Siting Guidelines, as it is a mixed-use building in a NC-1 District.Preliminary Recommendation: Approval with ConditionsSPEAKER(S): NoneACTION: Without hearing - continued to May 23, 2002AYES: Baltimore, Chinchilla, Fay, Lim, ABSENT: Joe, Salinas, Theoharis 14a. 2002.0184CV (M. SNYDER: 415-575-6891)2196 3RD STREET - northwest corner of 3rd Street and 19th Street, Lot 30 (Previously Lots 15 and 17) of Assessor’s Block 4044 - Request for Conditional Use authorization under Planning Code Section 215 to allow the construction of 18 dwelling units within an M-2 (Heavy Industrial) District and a 50-X Height and Bulk District. The project would entail the demolition of the existing one-story auto repair business, and the construction of a new building that would contain 18-dwelling units, approximately 5,750 gross square feet of ground floor commercial space, and 23 parking spaces. The building would be approximately 50-feet or five-stories tall measured from grade level at 3rd Street. Preliminary Recommendation: Approval with Conditions SPEAKER(S): (+) Toby Levy- She described the design of the building.(+) Joe Boss – Member of the Dogpatch and Potrero Boosters- Both organizations are in support of this project.- He believes that this is an ideal project.ACTION: ApprovedAYES: Chinchilla, Fay, Lim, SalinasNAYES: BaltimoreABSENT: Joe and TheoharisMOTION: 1640014b. 2002.0184CV (M. SNYDER 415-575-6891) 2196 3RD STREET - northwest corner of 3rd and 19th Street, Lot 30 (Previously Lots 15 and 17) of Assessor’s Block 4044 - Request for a Rear Yard Variance under Planning Code Section 134(a)(1)(C) and 305, to allow the proposed building to be constructed in an "L"-shaped configuration with building having frontages on both 3rd Street and 19th Street, in an M-2 (Heavy Industrial) District and a 50-X Height and Bulk District. With this "L"-shaped configuration, a portion of the building along the 19th Street frontage would technically be within the required rear yard. SPEAKER(S): NoneACTION: Zoning Administrator closed the public hearing and granted the variance.15. 2002.0165C (T. TAM: 415-558-6325)2362 MARKET STREET north side of Market Street between Castro Street and 16th Street; Lot 11 in Assessor’s Block 3562 - Request for a Conditional Use authorization pursuant to Planning Code Section 721.41, 720.42, and 721.21 to allow the establishment of a full-service restaurant and bar, approximately 4,000 square feet in the Upper Market Neighborhood Commercial District and 65-B Height and Bulk District. Preliminary Recommendation: Approval with Conditions.SPEAKER(S): (+) Amad Nazad – Project Architect- He is available for questions.ACTION: ApprovedAYES: Baltimore, Chinchilla, Fay, Lim, SalinasABSENT: Joe and TheoharisMOTION: 16401Continued to the 4:00 p.m. calendar: 16. 2002.264C (M. WOODS: 415-558-6315)2548 CALIFORNIA STREET - north side, between Steiner and Pierce Streets, Lot 9 in Assessor's Block 634 - Request for Conditional Use authorization under Planning Code Sections 303, 352 and 718.39 to amend and reauthorize a previously approved Conditional Use authorization (Case No. 96.319C, Motion No. 14442) for the partial demolition of an existing residential use on the second floor of the building fronting on California Street located in the Upper Fillmore Street Neighborhood Commercial District and a 40-X Height and Bulk District. Preliminary Recommendation: Approval with conditionsSPEAKER(S):(+) Debra Stein – Representing Project sponsor- The proposed project is consistent with the height of the homes on both sides of the street.- There was a shadow analysis done and it showed that there would be no impacts.- This project will increase the size of the yard.- This project will be subject to rent control.- This project will have the exact density as required.(+) Elizabeth Tippin – Attorney Mediator- She had meetings with the DR requestor and other neighbors. As a result of these meetings there were various issues that were resolved and design changes.- She read letters from neighbors who are in support of the project.(+) Gregory Iboshi – Project Architect- He described details of the design of the proposed project.- He did a shadow report and the result was that the project would not cast any shadows on the neighboring homes.(+) Laura Cheng – Project Sponsor- She and her husband will be expanding in order for her family to live more comfortably as well as open an art gallery.- They have more than 50 neighbors who support their project.- They have been sensitive to the issues their neighbors have had.- She would like to make sure that the neighbors understand that the art gallery that they want to open will be a legitimate art gallery. Since 1976 they have been providing Asian art to customers like the Asian Art Museum, The De Young Museum, etc.- They have a warehouse in the South of Market area.(-) Steve Williams – Representing DR Requestor- The project will merge two flats together creating a vary large mansion.- This is an illegal demolition since 2/3 of the building will be destroyed.- The neighborhood support is not really there since several of the support letters are from business associates who do not live in the neighborhood.(-) Karen Fearson – DR Requestor- She lives on California Street.- The subject property has not been well kept for all the years the project sponsor has owned it.- She would like the property to be scaled down in order to be more compatible with the neighborhood.- She submitted letters and petitions from neighbors who are against this project.- She hopes that the Commission will scale down this project.(-) Jacalyn Kinney- She lives on Perine Place.- She is concerned about the size and scale of the proposed project.- She lives in a building that is one story and knows that the project will impact the street and the sidewalk as well as her home.- The street she lives on is very small and she is concerned about the traffic jams especially if there are any life-threatening emergencies.(-) Jim Scott- This request is asking for modification to plans from 5 years ago.- This design will have the back 2/3 removed--especially the sun porch.- He is not in support of this project.(-) Fran Finney- She and her husband live on Perine Place.- She believes that the height of the building is too large. The ambiance and the light will be affected.- This building will be right for a condo conversion at some point.(-) Bill Henslin- He likes the idea of having an art gallery in his neighborhood. He is also in agreement with property owners to improve their properties yet this property is too large and out of character with the neighborhood.- He is also concerned with the loss of units.- Each of the floors can be an independent unit. - He also believes that the project can be scaled down without too much loss of space to the project sponsor.(-) Alexander Muromcew- He would have liked to have the project sponsor contact the neighbors to get their opinions.- He is strongly opposed to this because it will largely change the character of the neighborhood.(-) Judy Muromcew- She and her husband really value the homes on Perine Place.- This project will change the character of the neighborhood.- She is very concerned about the demolition and how this might affect the next door neighbors.(-) Courtney Clarkson – Pacific Heights Association and Preservation Community- This project is much too large for the neighborhood.- Since 1996, the neighbors have not been in agreement with this project. The project sponsor has gone through 6 architects yet the neighborhood is still opposed to this project.(-) Patricia Vaughey- The plans have changed radically since 1997.- She would like the Commission to approve what was submitted in 1997.- She is more concerned about the process of this case.ACTION: ApprovedAYES: Baltimore, Chinchilla, Fay, Lim, SalinasABSENT: Joe and TheoharisMOTION: 16402G. DISCRETIONARY REVIEW HEARINGAt Approximately 4:00 PM the Planning Commission convened into a Discretionary Review (DR) Hearing to hear and act on Discretionary Review matters. 17a. 2001.0190D (M. WOODS: 415-558-6315) 2548 CALIFORNIA STREET - north side between Steiner and Pierce Streets, Lot 9 in Assessor’s Block 634 - Request for Discretionary Review of Demolition Permit Application No. 2002/0214/9237, which supersedes withdrawn Demolition Permit Application No. 2001/0103/9061, proposing to demolish the existing one-story garage at the rear of the lot, facing Perine Place, in the Upper Fillmore Street Neighborhood Commercial District and a 40-X Height and Bulk District. A Variance to modify rear yard requirements was granted for the rebuilding of the garage and the construction of the new dwelling unit under Case No. 96.319V. Preliminary Recommendation: Do not take Discretionary Review and approve the project as revised. (Continued from Regular Meeting of March 21, 2002)SPEAKER(S): Same as those listed in Item 16.ACTION: Did not take Discretionary Review and Approved the Project.AYES: Baltimore, Chinchilla, Fay, Lim, SalinasABSENT: Joe and Theoharis 17b. 2001.0191D (M. WOODS: 415-558-6315) 2548 CALIFORNIA STREET - north side between Steiner and Pierce Streets, Lot 9 in Assessor’s Block 634 - Request for Discretionary Review of Building Permit Application No. 2000/0408/6762S proposing to (a) demolish and rebuild the rear portion (approximately two-thirds) of the existing two-story building, containing two dwelling units, at the front of the lot, facing California Street; (b) add a newly excavated ground level; (c) move the existing building forward by approximately 8 feet, and raise the building approximately 2 feet in order to establish a ground floor at grade level; and (d) add a partial fourth floor, in the Upper Fillmore Street Neighborhood Commercial District and a 40-X Height and Bulk District. The proposed alterations were previously approved by the City Planning Commission under Motion No. 14442 for Case No. 96.319C. Preliminary Recommendation: Do not take Discretionary Review and approve the project as revised. (Continued from Regular Meeting of March 21, 2002)SPEAKER(S): Same as those listed in item 16.ACTION: Did not take Discretionary Review and approved the project.AYES: Baltimore, Chinchilla, Fay, Lim, SalinasABSENT: Joe and Theoharis 18. 2002.0142D (T. TAM: 415- 558-6325) 14 VENTURA AVENUE - west side, between Linares and Castenada Avenues (Lot 3 in Block 2817) - Discretionary Review request for Building Permit No. 2001/10/26/1774 to allow demolition of an existing 9-foot, one-story rear extension and construction of a 25-foot, two-story rear horizontal extension. The property presently contains a single-family dwelling located in an RH-1(D) (Residential, House, One-Family, (Detached)) District.Preliminary Recommendation: Do not take Discretionary Review and approve the project as proposed. SPEAKER(S):(-) Fran X. Morse- He is against this project since he believes it is intrusive and will block sunlight to his entire house.(-) Susan Morse- She is against this project since it will block the sunlight to her home.- The project will also create a solid wall on one side of the house.(-) Dr. Dan Kelley- He has spent a lot of time in the back yard of the DR requestor's house and it is quite sunny. This project will bock the sunlight to their home.- He read a letter from a neighbor who is also against this project.- He hopes that the Commission will revise the project in order for the DR requestor to receive more sunlight.(+) Kuo Tong – Project Sponsor- He submitted letters from neighbors who are in support of this project.- The houses surrounding his house are a bit larger and longer.- His family is growing and that is why they want to expand.- The Forrest Hill Homeowners Association is not opposed to this project.(+) Charles Ackerley – Project Architect- This extension will fit within the character of the neighborhood.- He is matching the design of the house with the design of the surrounding homes.(+) Sara Procacci- She encourages the Commission to deny the request for Discretionary Review and approve the project as presented since it will enhance the value of the properties.ACTION: Did not take Discretionary Review and approved the project as submittedAYES: Baltimore, Chinchilla, Fay, Lim, SalinasABSENT: Joe and Theoharis 19. 2001.0645D (D. JONES: 415-558-6477)839 DOLORES STREET - east side between 21st and 22nd Streets, Lot 076 in Assessor’s Block 3618 - Pursuant to Resolution 16078 a Request for Discretionary Review is required for Building Permit Application No. 2001/06/21/2117, for the proposed dwelling unit merger of two existing units into one single-family dwelling located in an RH-3 (Residential, House, Three-Family) District and a 40-X Height and Bulk District. Preliminary Recommendation: Take Discretionary Review and disapprove the merger.SPEAKER(S):(+) Ashley DeVore- She is asking the Commission to approve this merger since she had begun the lot merger before the Planning Commission's resolution that would require Discretionary Reviews for mergers.- She does not believe that she will be able to find a single-family home in San Francisco(+) Mark Toma - Architect- There are at least six single-family homes on the block- No one is being displaced.- The project sponsor would like to have this as a home for her and her family.(+) Leslie DeVore- She is very close to her daughter and would like the Commission to approve this merger since this would allow her daughter to live there with her family.(+) Denis Kerwin- He has no objection to the merger.ACTION: Motion to take Discretionary Review and approve the merger on the condition that the front doors and building façade be retained.AYES: Baltimore, Fay, LimNAYES: Chinchilla and SalinasABSENT: Joe and Theoharis RESULT: The motion failedACTION: At the Call of the Chair, the matter was continued to May 23, 2002, to allow the absent commissioners to participate in the final action. 20. 2001.0879D (S. VELLVE: 415- 558-6263) 425 COLLINGWOOD STREET - east side between 21st and 22nd Streets, Lot 023 in Assessor’s Block 2770 - Request for Discretionary Review of Building Permit Application No. 2001/06/18/1777, proposing to reconstruct two sets of stairs providing access from the two upper floors to the rear yard of a single-family home within a RH-2 (House, Two-Family) District and a 40-X Height and Bulk District. Preliminary Recommendation: Take Discretionary Review and approve the building permit application with modifications. SPEAKER(S):(-) Larry Paul – Representing the DR Requestor- One of the main issues of the DR requestor is that the proposed stair could be used as a separate entrance.-The DR requestor would like to make sure that the kitchens are removed, the utilities are kept and that the stair in fact is configured in a way so it doesn't give an easy chance for an illegal unit. - He would like to request that a Notice of Special Restriction be recorded on the property recognizing that it is only a single-family dwelling and not a multiple unit and this should be done before any other permits or approvals are granted by the City.(+) Alice Barkley – Representing Project Sponsor- She and the project architect have been working on coming up with a solution to legalize the illegal parts of the home. The project sponsor purchased the property after these units were done illegally.- The DR requestor will be allowed to go into the back yard and trim the trees. This agreement has been stated in writing.ACTION: Take Discretionary Review and approve the project with an NSR (Notice of Special Restrictions) requirement (as stated above).AYES: Baltimore, Chinchilla, Fay, Lim, SalinasABSENT: Joe, TheoharisH. PUBLIC COMMENTAt 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. 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))NoneAdjournment: 6:07THE DRAFT MINUTES ARE PROPOSED FOR ADOPTION AT THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION ON THURSDAY, May 23, 2002 ACTION: Approved AYES: Baltimore, Fay, Joe, Lim, Salinas, Theoharis ABSENT: Chinchilla Last updated: 11/17/2009 10:00:07 PM