commissioner antonini? commissioner antonini: move to close. commissioner sugaya: second. [roll call vote] >> so moved, that motion passes unanimously. item four, draft minute meetings, 2010. the draft minutes of this special meeting of october 21, 2010, there was a typo on the calendar and draft minute meetings. these should have all been sent by email last week. vice president olague: yes. is there any public comment on this item? seeing none, public, disclosed. commissioners? commissioner moore: i read the draft minutes by email and move to approve, but i am not sure that everybody got them. vice president olague: apparently so. commissioner antonini: second. >> on that motion, commissioners -- [roll call vote] so moved, commissioners. that function passes a five-one. which places us on item 5, consideration of adoption planning commission hearing schedule for 2011. vice president olague: commissioner moore? commissioner moore: i would like to ask that the commissioners consider the following. we have a good year with solid blocks of 8 to 10 meetings and relatively few

commissioner antonini? commissioner antonini: thank you. it sounds like in reading this report, although it is gone, there has been a lot left discussions about the measurements, but i think it was ultimately decided that it was at least 1 foot 9 inches beyond what was approved. >> yes. commissioner antonini: and there is some question as to what that actually was because there has been so much dirt moved on to the front yard, it is hard to survey, although from the street i guess there is a way to do it. >> right, and the front stairs have also been modified. at all the various reference points have been thrown out as reliable, which is why we resulted to using the finished first floor at the front of the house. at the front of the house, right here, it provides an actual static reference point. these are their plans they provided, before and after. commissioner antonini: staff does this all the time, and i have to agree with your assessment. the other thing i am reading, there is also a setback problem. apparently they are 3 feet short of

commissioner antonini? commissioner antonini: thank you. for many years we have gone over the fights over the number of floors, and my contention is the envelope and the height of the envelope and its effect on the adjacent properties is what matters. if the project sponsor prefers to put in floor. for floors rather than at 3, it is their prerogative as long as it is done it in a way that is structurally sound and does not increase the impact. i like to ask some questions. the project sponsor has said that the measurement of the out facade to the front most part of the building is 26.2. i don't know if you have the measurements to substantiate that or not. >> that is the dimension on the drawing. commissioner antonini: okay. and as you go further back, the setback, and then it is stepped up, and they're coming up with 36 feet, which is lowered from the original 40 feet, and 4 feet below what is permitted. it also presented other numbers. i don't expect you to substantiate these, but they say using the same measures of the adjacent propertie

president olague: commissioner antonini? commissioner antonini: i guess i have the same concerns. it looks like he could enter the first floor with the garage independent from the rest of the house, which is generally where we want to have that entrance eliminated so you cannot use it as a second unit and you have to come into the house on the entry floor, which is the second floor, and go downstairs. i think that is what i would like to see changed in the plan so that it discourages the possibility of anybody using it as a separate unit because it is supposed to be a single-family residence. president olague: -- commissioner moore: the other thing that leads to that, it has a bathtub and it next to the game room. commissioner antonini: that could be made into a half baths. president olague: is that a motion? commissioner antonini: let me move it, not take the art and approved. entrances to the first floor -- take d.r., and eliminate entrances to the exterior from the first floor, other than the garage door or the cars, man, and turn the bathroom there into a half bath. since nobo

commissioner antonini? commissioner antonini: the other thing i kind of like for next year and i know we may not have a special hearing, although it might be good if the public could see it, too, but certainly informational on the zoning districts and for the commissioners to have all the detail because they change and of course, we were part of the changes when we went to the transit districts and gave them different names and i think it would really be good if we had those details because as we saw from the maps, there are a lot of different district. and i think some of them overlap. so it would be good if we kind of had those things and definitions of what they are. vice president olague: i cheated a little bit because i already had lengthy conversations, if anyone wonders why i seem to be sort of on top of it, you know? secretary avery: the motion before you is for approval with amendments. the sections 209, 243 and continuing the other modifications to january 13, 2011. on that motion, commissioner an

commissioner antonini: i am unhappy with the plans. on 4a, there is not a good view of what the front of this is good to look like. there is no detailing as to materials or colors. i think that is something we should have in our reports, because once it is approved we want to note how it is being done and the quality of the construction. i have that same picture, and it is not clear what they are doing. with the plans, the lower floor, you have a family room, a bedroom, and a garage. you have sliding doors that go outside. i assume you can access that lower floor without having to go to the rest of the house. is that true? >> you cannot have direct street access to the garage through the family room. that is an open stairwell that is accessing the family room from the primary living space on the second level. commissioner antonini: that is what i was trying to figure out. >> with direct street access through the garage -- because of the stairwell design, it is very open. commissioner antonini: as long as it is meeting our rooms. what t

commissioner antonini: aye. commissioner borden: aye. commissioner fong: aye. commissioner moore: aye. commissioner sugaya: aye. vice president olague: aye. president miguel: aye. >> you are now on item 10, case for 1 la avanzada street. those in the audience leaving the chamber, please respect that we are continuing the proceedings. >> i am rick crawford, a department staff. the case before you is mandatory discretionary review of building permits to place 16 antennas on sutro tower. you are being asked to adopt ceqa findings and to act on the dr. we send an environmental impact report by e-mail to everybody. unfortunately, there were problems with that and i do not believe it got out until this morning. i know all of the commissioners had an opportunity to review this in 2008, with the exception of commissioner fong. i apologize if you did not have a chance to review that to your liking. i would also like to bring to the commissioners' attention that we are recommending a few minor changes to the standard conditions of approval that come with every sutro towe

commissioner antonini: it seems reasonable to continue it. if it is not, it will be pulled off the calendar, i assume. vice president olague: i would like to call mr. bustos back up. have you met with the project sponsor on this item? i was wondering what those dialogues have been like. >> we got notification within 300 feet of the property where this project is being proposed. one meeting happened in the fall at mission cultural center. t mobile had a representative there and told us this was going to happen no matter what, that this was a done deal and that the meeting was basically to educate us. that was their outreach to the community. i did personally try to have a conversation. i sent an e-mail to the owner of the building expressing our opposition to it for being unsightly, undesirable, and unnecessary. he has refused to talk to me. i see him all the time. he does not approach me, does not talk to me, and has not responded to the e-mail. there has been a lot of movement in opposition to this. i mean, there was a meeting this saturday

commissioner antonini: can i restate my motion as continue to march 3? commissioner moore: i was going to ask, and this is really, and more than anything else -- very often, dr requestors defer negotiations about their projects to the representatives who are standing in for them to provide as with the expert opinion. well the relationship between mr. butler and the applicant is new, i do believe that we have that quite frequently. i have seen that many times, someone speaking on behalf of somebody we do not know. he would have the full authority to speak for the applicant. my question is -- is that something we would consider? i still believe that staff support on this particular project is the row -- is thoreau -- is thorough. i have a clear understanding about this project intends to do, how it conforms with the general plan. it does not ask for anything unusual. i feel like hanging is up for you to consider. vice president olague: the motion on the floor is for the continuance. that tick president. commissioner moore: -- that takes precedent. commissi

commissioner antonini: i have not had a chance to consider this until today. of course, it would be up to commissioner olague to comment on this, but i know, for myself, being employed full time, it would be really difficult being the president, not that the vice-president does not have a lot of things to do as well, but it seems to me it is a very time consuming position, and i would find it hard to do if i were working full time, so i'm not sure i'm supportive of the motion. commissioner moore: i would just like to add as a complement to what commissioner miguel said, the majority of us work full time, and even being here requires quite a skill and quite a commitment, so i do not believe that full time employment is indeed in contradiction to serving as president, vice president, or as commissioner -- commission member. i have been asked a number of years ago if i would consider running as vice president for also consider being appointed as commission president, and my own personal qualifications make me feel i am a stronger person being just a commissioner,

commissioner antonini: i have a question for staff. if we grant the extension, of course this could be built or it could be sold to someone else with the entitlement, which is for the two affordable housing units, each on the specific site, which are actually even lower than the possible density for senior housing. if i look at the design from something else they did, it looked pretty good. if we deny it, it still would be salable, but at a lower price, one would presume, because there would be no entitlement. >> commissioner, i could not necessarily speak to the selling price of the lot. the entitlements would be extinguished, so someone would need to come forward with a new project proposal. commissioner antonini: the other thing was that they would not necessarily have to have an entitlement for an affordable senior project. they could bring any kind of project for which there wanted to. perhaps someone could come up with the project were one of them was market rate and the other one was affordable. they might be able to get financi

president miguel: commissioner antonini? commissioner antonini: i realized this was only an initiation and that answers some of my concerns and it appears as if this is going to be sold will be able to use the funds for other redevelopment projects because arkt tech churlly while the towers serve a very good purpose, architecturally they're probably not our best product. i was hoping that we wouldn't see the same. this sounds like it may be commercial. it may be residential. i'm not really sure. but it sounds like the process is going to allow us to and we're only initiating the zoning change. i would hope that as we move forward, we will have more information before we actually approve the zoning change as to some ideas about what might be built there. it may be just a sale. there may not be a project yet. i don't really know. i'd like to know a little bit when we goat that point. president miguel: commissioner moore? commisioner moore: this is one of those types of lots where one would require guidelines which particularly

commissioner antonini: thank you. i would suggest this to the maker of the motion, and basically i think they make a good point of trying to create two family size to three-bedroom units, which i think is good to do their and adds to the housing stock. but what i would do is require them to match the light well, as was suggested by one of the d.r. requestor is, but in return they get their 36 feet as designed. commissioner borden: the neighbors said they actually would walk away, that this would not be appealed or anything else. my point to the neighbors is that if the light well changed enough for you, is that good enough? for me, i am just trying to get this project done today so everybody can go home and never have to think about it again, you guys start building next week or whenever. but i don't know that the incremental suggested that commissioner antonini put forward its us to that place. commissioner antonini: maybe we should ask somebody. mr. butler, if you want to speak for the d.r. requestors, i am not sure

vice president olague: commissioner antonini? commissioner antonini: i think what i am hearing from the public is that certainty is number one. let's set the calendar as far as possible and try to stick with what we have. with that in mind, i am also hearing that it is better if something is taken off that added at the last second. with that in mind, from what i have heard about our upcoming calendar, having been here till midnight last week, i like to propose the following calendar for consideration. it that we at this time had march 31 to the calendar, anticipating all of the big projects coming up, of which there are many from what i understand. that we go ahead that it, -- that we go ahead, in deference to commissioner moore, and we take off the three weeks and wrote, in september, and we at september 29 to the cabinet to try to make up for that day, and the last part would be that we do calendar thursday november 10. that is my motion. commissioner fung: that was adding november 10? commissioner antonini: yes. commission fun

commissioner antonini: i could go either way on this. i have seen many projects that have gone quite a few years and have been developed with the next upturn occurs. the fact that it is a private developer instead of a nonprofit -- they should be able to do things just as well. but i think there is a compelling case for possibly having something else be entitled on here. it is kind of a tossup for me. thank you. commissioner sugaya: sorry. i had the same issues as commissioner antonini. >> i would just like to clarify that if the commission does pass a motion of intent to disapprove, when we are drafting the findings it would be helpful to understand that the commission's goal is that the entitlements are not extended, that the entitlement is essentially revoked, and that any future project would come before us for new entitlements. we would make sure to get that in the findings. commissioner borden: i just want to say to the project sponsor -- i want to reiterate that in the climate we were in in 2006, when anybody could get a loan, it

commissioner antonini: second. commissioner moore: i was going to chime in and say i love thai the size and i am glad that it is moving into more central locations. i am in full support of it and i will welcome the expansion. >> commissioners, there is a motion and second to approve the condition. [roll call vote] so moved, commissioners. president olague: commissioner antonini? commissioner antonini: i just wanted to mention that i have to read clues myself from the next item. >> commissioners you are now on the items 12 a and b, case number 2,009.0175, and 214-2 16 17th avenue. commissioner antonini: i need to rid clues myself from this item. the product sponsor is a dental patient of mine and i have received in excess of five federal dollars for dental services. even though some of it came from a third-party carrier, the rule is regardless of the source that is deemed a conflict. so i will be back after this. commissioner moore: we have to first move to reduce them. commissioner borden: -- to rec use him. >> of

i'm going to move approval. >> thank you commissioner antonini. that sounds 2k3r50eu7b and reasonable. he -- that sounds fine. he'll do the communeity outreach that he always intended to do. >> thank you. as long as our motion encouraging encourages transparency and neighborhood participation in this. this is not a condition, it is a finding to -- to explore further study on restaurant categories. that's a brood subject that has to be done probably city wide for a lot of these things. >> it is my understanding and annmarie can correct me if i'm wrong, if we come up with a completely different legislation that touches on different sections of the planning code, we'll be back here anyway. >> exactly. that's fine. one other thing i'm just going to mention, although, i don't want to complicate ins this. i did have a -- complicate things, but i had a discussion i think with ann marie things changed since this was put in place in 1987. it was a redevelopment area that is no longer in place, the area between i think it is pine and geary which is now not

president miguel: commissioner antonini? commissioner antonini: i generally would be supportive on staff recommendations on these items, the first of which the garage with the 10 feet sounds reasonable. and there's no problem there. on the snout house, yeah, i actually did send an e-mail to -- about a relative in the east bay. everyone interested in garage. very trusting because they have nothing of advantage in their garage. at my point, you need a little flex nlt on this because what an actual snout house is a matter of interpretation and i think by allowing this to be looked at by us or by staff in individual instances make sense but we actually want to discourage that from being a standard but certainly there may be those examples that are pointed out and others that might be an appropriate solution because i for one don't want to make it more difficult for people to add appropriate out house. and the other point i have, if you look at section 39-l-25, 24, 25 and it deals with this north of market s.u.d. and i think it's

commissioner antonini: it has been a long process and it was interesting to see the earlier purgation. i would have been fine with a few units workings. the project sponsor has been encouraged to build a higher building and build more density and smaller units. that is what the project is. we can't go back to where we were before. i would like to see a couple of design things. if we can somehow cover up that stairwell. i know you have to have it, but the building would look nicer if you didn't look into an open stairwell from the front. and possibly we could articulate be smaller windows a little bit. and perhaps has strengthened the top of it. those are some of my design ideas. you can work with staff to make the design changes and i think the envelope seems to be fine. i did want to ask a question about this motion. it did ask that this agreement hobby codify that? >> i believe what i saw was not what we had agreed to. there is a property line window essentially. they have windows that are property line windows. i don't think they are necessary. we would matched to their light well.

commissioner antonini: i am fine with that. i think the business with the community liaisons' is understood as well. commissioner sugaya: i was going to get into some details, but i will skip it. >> are you sure? commissioner sugaya: no. >> on the motion, commissioners, to take dr and include the condition that the project sponsor provide a liaison and that the patio be limited for dining purposes only. commissioner antonini: aye. commissioner borden: aye. commissioner fong: aye. commissioner moore: aye. commissioner sugaya: aye. vice president olague: aye. >> that motion passes unanimously. this brings us to item 18, 4916 ortega street. a request for discretionary review. -- for 916 artistry. a request for discretionary review -- 916 ortega street. a request for discretionary review. commissioner sugaya: i would like a progress report for these kinds of things. vice president olague: should we take a recess? commissioner moore: let's just run with it. >> good evening, planning commission. i am the southwest team leader. we req

commissioner antonini: i believe they have that latitude with the design. >> there isa

commissioner antonini: i entirely understand. you're going to run a good operation but i am cognizant of -- of you know, bridge and tunnel problems and other things that were alluded to. that being said, i completely understand the police position and not individualized for your establishment but rather the staggering allows them to respond. if everybody out at the same time and in addition to those that may wander around the street, it is impossible to police it. this way can -- they can direct their attention to people coming out and being victims rather than perpetrators. hopefully that's not the case but others who do things. i think they can relegate their forces a little more which is staggering. i'm supportive, sounds like a plan. >> i am also supportive of the project. i wish you the best of luck. if there's a hand-some looking design. and upscale and revidal y50eu6bs revitalizes the area and we hope the security is at the utmost and for the safety of folks and the reputation of san francisco to make sure we don't have an

commissioner antonini: i will continue. in reading the historical report, which was interesting, a lot of these shacks were moved to other places in the past. i think there may not be that many of them left, and it would be up to the project sponsor to find the site. i am not sure that you want to put that into the motion. commissioner moore: i don't want to complicate the project. if it has not appeared before, why now? commissioner antonini: i have more to say on this. at the historical aspects are very interesting, and the fact there was an undertaker who lived there who was the undertaker to the rich and famous, that is kind of amazing that he attended to herem johnson -- hiram johnson and president harding, but that in an of itself is not enough. i don't know what the standard is to be up to preserve. in terms of the size of the structure, which was brought up by some of the d.r. requestors, i think it seems to be appropriate. i have always been in favor of people being able to accommodate their needs and make a struct

commissioner antonini. commissioner olague. thank you. commissioners, the first category on a calendar, items proposed for continuance. item 1 is 42774-2773 filbert street. the second item is case -- i am one is for -- item 1 is for 277 4-2783 filbert street. there are no other items that i am aware of being proposed for continuance. commissioner miguel: public comment on the items being proposed for continuance? >> [inaudible] i sent in a request for continuance of item three, market street. >> to what date? >> to a date after which when the process -- a private sponsor complies with section 303e. >> at this point, because i do not have any inflation, maybe we can take this up -- and it is the next item, so maybe we could take it up at the call of the item. commissioner miguel: thank you. any other public comment on the items proposed for continuance? if not, public comment is closed. >> just in regards to the first item, do we know what issues are involved here? i think this was continued once before. i'm sure it is a procedural thing.

commissioner antonini: i'm in favor of this. i think it does a number of things. it brings the parking into the realities of the changes that have been made since the beginning of the project and is reflective of that. we may in retrospect regret this some years back when we find some of these projects are under park and have trouble selling or renting, but this is unfortunately the upper limit of what is allowed in that district now, so we only should comply with that. he still has one additional car share of of what is required. also, i really liked the concept of having offsite housing. i think it serves those for whom purchased it much better than it does on site for reasons stated, and other things, particularly when it is within half a mile. we see a lot of this going on now, and it is a very good thing because it intermingles communities, but it does not try to intermingle them in the same building where sometimes it is more difficult for the people who try to -- who buy these units to be able to afford other things that they have to have. the one question

vice president olague: commissioner antonini? commissioner antonini: i am interested in hearing it tonight for the following reasons. we went for long times in the last year with five commissioners, and then we went even logger with six commissioners that were actually part of the commission. that is sort of what happens from week to week. there are times when we did not have a full commission, and more often than not somebody is not here. as for is the issue of the accuracy, as was pointed out, that would be part of the discussion of the discretionary review and would be up to the commission to decide if there are inaccuracies in the plan. i think mr. smith answered the noticing thing, so i am fine with hearing it tonight. commissioner sugaya: i just have a question for the d.r. request or. without getting into the details, what is it that we would receive from the d.r. requestors if we were to continue the item? >> what would you receive from us? commissioner sugaya: other than if we go ahead with the hearing tonight, there wil

commissioner antonini? >> i agree. although there may have been some confusion in committing all you have to do is kind of i think use zphens on this and nobody else probably has a bunch of cars parked in the front card of their homes there and it doesn't look right to me. i would say i would agree, make a motion to agree with -- take the staff recommendation, which basically gives -- take discretionary review and require one two of modifications. so the way it's written, correct me if i'm wrong, staff, they would have the option to do one of these two things. the first is to eliminate the curb cut, restore the landscaping and a new fence revise a scope of the work to include a garage insertion so they would have the option of doing one of those two things. >> second. >> ok, thank you. session. if you don't mind, if you would indulge me, we are going to continue item 23 to january 13. that his case number 2008.0021emtzw. the mission -- initiating planning codes, zoning map, and general plan amendments as part of kirk -