Skip to main content

tv   [untitled]    June 6, 2011 1:00pm-1:30pm PDT

1:00 pm
1:01 pm
1:02 pm
1:03 pm
1:04 pm
1:05 pm
1:06 pm
captioned by the national captioning institute --www.ncicap.org--
1:07 pm
supervisor mar: good afternoon, everyone. this is the regular meeting of land use and economic development committee for monday, june 6, 2011. to my right is supervisor:, to my left is supervisor wiener. we are also joined by supervisor mirkarimi. before i ask the clerk for announcements, let me say that there is an overflow room in the main chambers if anyone cannot get into this meeting room. are there any announcements? >> please turn off all cell phones and pagers. completed speaker cards to be included should be submitted to the clerk. items at the dupont today will
1:08 pm
appear on the june 40 the agenda. >> there are five items on the agenda today. i know that the treasure island a development agreement is one where there are a number of speakers. that is no. 3. that should be coming out much later in the agenda. for the meeting today i would like item number one. >> item #one. draft ordinance amending the san francisco planning code by adding section 259.53 to establish the presidio-sutter special use district for property located at 800 presidio avenue -- assessor's block no. 1073, lot no. 13 -- amending sheet ht03 of the zoning map to change the height and bulk district from 40-x to 55-x -- and amending sheet su-03 of the zoning map to reflect the boundaries of the presidio-sutter special use district; adopting findings, including environmental findings, section 302 findings, and findings of consistency with the general plan and the priority policies of planning code section 101.1. supervisor mirkarimi: thank you. i am pleased to submit this proposal for the longest serving african american center community.
1:09 pm
the center was established in 1919 in san francisco and its home has been there since 1952. since it has been at the same location since 1952, there would be great cause and merit for there to be some considerable enhancements of that facility and the building. there is a shortage of transitional use of housing in the city. many foster youth in this city become homeless once they turn 18. in an effort to try to reach out to this burgeoning population, of liberty had been working with the city and neighborhoods, looking for the most effective project that would help to reach the demands and interests of the surrounding community. when we to a point on the --
1:10 pm
when supervisor alioto-pier to a point on this project, i was very happy to support her in her efforts and pursuit of this particular project. once again, more than happy to lend assistance in seeing this project to fruition evidently, possibly as much as i can. i think that the western addition, which has fought for a great demographic changes in the surrounding areas, they still cry out for the kinds of needs, resources, and services that are well known for being chronically under-served in that particular region of the city. especially in the post- redevelopment area. before today is a review of this particular project it has been
1:11 pm
advanced effectively and effectively by the planning commission and i think will allow the planning department to help to give greater context to this project. of course, there are people who have strong feelings about this project on all sides. i look forward to hearing their point of view. for this project we are looking at 50 units of housing that we think are affect the formula for this project to go over and succeed effectively. fifth and yet i know there are alternatives out there to try to reduce this 59 units. -- by nine units. we will see of that meshes with the overall plan. effective, successful, i keep using that same word because we are concerned about the ability of this project to be made real based on any kind of modification.
1:12 pm
without further ado, i would go ahead and ask for the planning department to come forward. >> midafternoon, supervisors. ann marie rogers -- good afternoon, supervisors. this legislation would increase the height limit by 15 feet to label products with substantial public benefits. the project is approved by the plant commission would demolish their rundown can existing building and building new mixed use project. this project would, as the supervisor concluded, a ford up to 52 minutes of affordable housing and a program to include child care and a gymnasium. at least 24 of the units would be for low-income housing and another 24 would be for the
1:13 pm
project as proposed. allowing for density and height bonuses for projects that would be affordable housing. in the development, including design and uses, consistent with the plan for policy planning occurs, particularly with regard to the size, density, and need for affordable housing. regarding public comment, staff would like to acknowledge that in the spring of 2007 this project was proposed with 110 units. records at that time indicate 250 letters of support. prior to the hearing we have opposition to the proposal from six individuals in nearby neighborhoods. at the hearing a great number of people gave widely varying comments. but opposition from the
1:14 pm
immediate neighbors on the subject lot and resident labor groups and support for nonprofit community is fast, groups, local schools, politicians, in users of the facility. the supervisor has put in support for the project. in light of public comment they recommended approval of this ordinance but to enable the project as approved. thank you. supervisor mirkarimi: miss rogers, that was a little quick. in the planning commission the approval was on the 50 units, correct? >> correct. supervisor mirkarimi: what was the vote? >> 5 in support, one absent, one of his brigitte one opposition. supervisor mirkarimi: in that deliberation, was there any consideration of the 110 units
1:15 pm
philippine had that ever come before? >> no, there was discussion of a lower budget proposal. supervisor mirkarimi: why is that? >> because of the public benefit that they found that the project would provide given the types of housing. supervisor mirkarimi: in that public benefit community center, is that also because of the question of transitional housing provided for youth? >> yes, the commission made comments that they would appreciate the production of such housing. supervisor mirkarimi: in response to those that expressed concerns are opposition, but was the intent on trying to address those particular needs democrats when we checked with the project manager i know that the commission was responsive to the work that have happened prior to the hearing where we have already sculpted down the project significantly and come
1:16 pm
forward with a much reduced project shown by the commission. let me see supervisor mirkarimi: -- i would -- supervisor mirkarimi: i would like to see more on that project already. >> the project planner is more familiar with the history of the project. supervisor mirkarimi: very good. >> good afternoon, a supervisor. part of the sculpting process was approved during the initial certification to the general comments from the public. at that time the commission had provided some initial comments to the funding staff and public with concerns as to the mapping of the project itself. from those initial comments given by the planning commission, staff worked to shape the down-scale and specifically to address the rear of the project. supervisor mirkarimi: are we
1:17 pm
talking about the premise of scaling down? >> that actually occurred prior to the shelling for the eir, prior to the certification. at that point, when it got to the initial hearing, it was already been proposed the 55 seats at a reduced scale of 50 minutes. the -- 50 units. pfft if i may, as a side note, the other 10 units initially proposed were being proposed as part of a development project outside the city. supervisor mirkarimi: is there anything else further that you would like to add? >> i did have a couple of questions. there were two homeless that were adjacent or behind the back area. one is 20s -- 20-55 sutter,
1:18 pm
owned by a couple. my understanding is that the original proposal had a huge block and that the planning department and planning commission changes made significant setbacks where at least one story was pushed back significantly. are those the major innovations for that small, peach colored home? >> if i may, a supervisor, i think that they are looking ex that diagram -- they are looking at that diet -- diagram. initially the treatment was more monolithic. this was starting to set back here. also, a one story portion on this side of the building that was pushed back away from this shorter building. keep in mind where the peach
1:19 pm
colored building is, approximately one to one-and-a- half stories in height, the predominant block face, if you look at the remainder of the building, similar to character as this, it was three-four stories in building height, but it was something of an anomaly. it was acknowledged that there should be some kind of shaping to accommodate that building. >> there was an 8 ft. to 10 foot driveway separating the home and the community service center, right? >> there is a pedestrian door for the community center. that we have a garage door adjacent to that. supervisor mar: how far back as
1:20 pm
the building go to where there is a garden right now? how much more does that encroach on the open space in the back area? but believe that neighbor had a fence that fell upon and had to be resolved. >> the architect is your -- the architect is here as well. i am not quite certain to what you are speaking. supervisor mar: the second or third house from the corner. >> they are currently facing an open, rear-yard space. the proposed building and this year. -- and this year. -- ends here. supervisor mirkarimi:
1:21 pm
considering the bust of housing given the economic meltdown, there has not been a lot of building of housing. especially housing for affordable and transitional housing. if you can talk about that and where the city is that with housing being developed, that would be helpful. >> typically, new housing, according to section 315 at the time -- was at 415? it is typically required as part of the project under a certain percentage of affordable housing in development. in this case, the project was triggering 110 units, approximately, for this project to occur. in frank when they decided not to go through.
1:22 pm
however, booker t. washington decided to pursue this project for affordable housing. it definitely, i would say, in these economic times, is to be applauded, considering there is not much housing being built. transitional use and general affordable housing, i would say that it is something commendable and something that the planning commission echoed as part of their deliberations. >> to get a greater feel of the surrounding area, i know that we have diagrams, but it is important for this to be laid out. what is across the street, to the left, the right, the back, is a bit more descriptive of what the area is like on the presidio blocked. i know that across the street we have a muni building.
1:23 pm
five, six stories? >> it is a two-story building, but i believe it is also a three story building. across the street is in a location where the a lot of different neighborhood districts come together. if you are speaking to urban form, it is located at the top of a hill. it kind of reflects the national typography of the site. supervisor mirkarimi: are there any other buildings juxtaposed that are four, five, six story buildings? >> they probably occupy half of a block, but there are other large apartment buildings of a similar scale, perhaps 10 feet shorter along the avenue. supervisor mirkarimi: ok.
1:24 pm
supervisor wiener: in the planning commission discussions, there was a mixture between residential and commercial. is there a formal term the to use for that? >> i know that the jaycees the building on california might be one of the taller ones, there are buildings that might be about 45 feet tall that are very boxy. >> there was not necessarily a planning term or even a layman's term, but it seemed to be very transitional period there is a shopping complex there. it is also where the residents
1:25 pm
look across the area as well as the tail end of laurel heights on the top of the hill. supervisor mirkarimi: thank you. ms. rodgers, would you like to give more context? >> i should be able to provide more information. supervisor mirkarimi: ok, good. >> i think that this, if i could take a moment, supervisors.
1:26 pm
the graphics might be washed out, but this is an aerial photo of the block phase. this is the existing community center. this is actually where they parked the buses. the actual structure is here. two stories tall, more like a three story residential building. as for this corner here, there is a larger apartment building that is four stories tall. and along here you have more multifamily, lower density buildings ranging from a few stories to four stories. looking at it from the elevation point of view, here is
1:27 pm
the proposed community center and the apartment building on the corner. four stories tall, 45 in height. along sutter st. we have the proposed community center. here is the peak structure that supervisor mar was speaking to. this is more of a typical pattern. here is a three story building over a basement. >> the solar panels over that building, does the building cast a shadow? it looks like solar panels on the building. the big one. the big complex that is about 1 t units to the left. >> this one here? supervisor mar: yes. >> there was an analysis done
1:28 pm
for the project, but this building is on the northern portion of the block. excuse me. there may be some shadows cast during part of the year, but this is on a lower end, the southern portion of it. supervisor mar: the plot of land? how big is the plot of land in the design site? >> under the planning code, it has to be one quarter of an acre.
1:29 pm
it is approximately 22,300 square feet. supervisor marsupervisor mirkar. are there any other areas of housing development being built? >> not larger scale developments like this. supervisor mar: anything -- supervisor mirkarimi: anything over 10 units anywhere? >> nothing i can think of. supervisor mirkarimi: can you think of any affordable housing being built in the area? >> in terms of density? there are a lot that would support that destiny -- density based on the bases owning of allot itself. this is just to be the bases zoning