Skip to main content

tv   [untitled]    September 8, 2012 1:00am-1:30am PDT

1:00 am
valencia street. and who are you? >> the dr requester. >> and they're supporting your dr? the president's going to ask for the dr requester and then whoever wants to follow you can follow in the order you want.
1:01 am
the president has said no, thank you. >> okay. >> i called the project. >> good evening, commissioners, rick sucre, the item before you is for a request for discretionary review associated with a new construction of a five storey debasement mixed use building at 1050, to 1058 valencia street, the proposed project would construct 12 dwelling units, one fraikt parking spot, 24 bike kl parking spaces and a ground
1:02 am
floor restaurant measuring 1040 square feet, it would consist of 4 dwelling bedroom units of which two would be designated below market rent units, to date, the project has received many public comments, in detail, the department has received 15 comments including letters from four community groups in support of the proposed project as is and 18 comments including a petition signed by approximately 407 people and one other community group against the proposed project and in support of the discretionary review. provide today you are copies of the public comments after the publication of the report, they have a number of issues with the proposed project including design, compatibility with neighborhood character, hiekt, scale and form, relationship tos the liberty hills district and surrounding historic
1:03 am
resources, noise, dwelling unit mix and parking, since the proposed project is located in the valencia street, it is not subject to the residential design guidelines, the proposed project has been reviewed numerous times, the department finds the proposed project has been reduced in scope from the original proposal analyzed in the document, the overall mass, form and scale, we find to be appropriate given the zoning and height bulk limits, it is consistent with the mixed use character of valencia street and meets the open space requirements offered in the planning code. the subject property is not a historic resource nor is it located in an eligible historic district, it is to comply with the san francisco noise ordinance which includes guidelines for construction noise and work, finally the proposed project is a fully code compliant project and is
1:04 am
not seeking any variances or special entitlement from the planning code and is conformance with the eastern neighborhoods planning process, relative to the negative declaration, nothing of the proposed project or its surrounding circumstances have changed. as there appears to be no exceptional or extraordinary circumstances, the department finds that the proposal is consistent with the planning code and the mission area plan and recommends the commission not take discretionary review and review the project as proposed. i'm available for any questions and this concludes my presentation. thank you. >> dr requester? >> good afternoon,
1:05 am
commissioners, my name is risa title ba*m, i have lived at my home for 20 year, i have been president [inaudible] in 1984, much has changed in the neighborhood and a great sense of community has grown. in april, 2009, the architect presented his design at a liberty hill neighborhood association meeting, initial comments were at 55 feet, this building is way too tall, it is too dense and it has too many units, the loading dock and all services shouldn't be on residential hill street, the design is incompatible with the historic district and the neighborhood and it lacks parking. in june, 2010, the historic preservation commission said in review that they took issue
1:06 am
with the scale, the height and the bulk of the proposed building. they noted the lack of setback. they told the architect to work with the neighbors, the architect's response was, i guess you're stuck with me and my five storey building. at our last hearing in front of this commission on september 30, 2010, the commission told the architect not to come back with the same plans, to work with the neighbors, a compromise of three storeys was suggested. a planning department meeting on december 21 on 2010 attracted so many from the community that a larger room was required, still, the project sponsors filed plans with no alterations based on the neighbor's objections, plan changes merely reflected the
1:07 am
sponsor's economic interests, planning department comments and code. for over three and a half years, at every meeting, at every hearing, the community message has been the same. this building is too tall, too dense and incompatible with the neighborhood. there's great wisdom in san francisco's practices seeking neighborhood project support, those of us who work and live here know what will keep our community strong. we take pride in the character and the culture of our community. over 400 merchants and neighbors have signed petitions opposing this project as configured, undermine -- undermining what has made this neighborhood strong, the density of this building increasing the disturbance which will impact neighbors,
1:08 am
this threatens rights to peace and quiet, this is a very small lot, 35 by 85 feet, the 85 feet is on hill street. it's the same size as one residential lot and should not support so much density in a neighborhood of two, three and four storey buildings. fewer units would go a long way to reducing pending problems. unfortunately, parking is a real problem. we are all environmentally concerned but the reality is that until there is no alternative, people will need cars and a place to park them. the residents of this building will be no different. a smaller building with fewer units and parking spaces encouraging car shares would mitigate this problem. one wonders why a building that presents so many problems has gone so far in the permitting
1:09 am
process, architecture should build, not destroy the fabric of this historic community. this is an opportunity to have something special on this very prominent corner, something that serves the housing needs of san francisco and is a good fit for this community, so fixer it seems that the community inputs have been ignored, you have been ignored and the plan changes made have only been for code or economic reasons. we respectfully request that you honor the objections of over 400 of us and hope that you see the solid basis of our appeal and oppose this dr. we trust that wisdom, experience and common sense will prevail. >> thank you. are there speakers in favor of the dr? >> yeah. >> okay, i thought so. so, i've got some cards here but i'm going to let you come
1:10 am
up, so long as you're speaking in favor of the dr and if you would like the line up since there are several of you, we'll go ahead and go through, first speaker if you're ready. >> hello, commissioners, i'm stephanie weizmann, i'm the founder and artistic director of the marsh, a breeding ground for new performance, the marsh move to 968 valencia street in 1990, at that time, it was not the hip popular area it is now. it was down trauden, the marsh was instrumental in the development of our wildly popular neighborhood, a front culturing neighborhood, our hit shows brought customer tos the local restaurants and businesses, before us, many of our attendees were much more uncomfortable to venture into
1:11 am
the valencia quarter, in 1996, we purchased our building at 1062 valencia which is right next to the proposed development, we present 400 diverse performances on our two stages, provide daily after school and summer programs for youth regardless of their financial ability to pay. we are affordable. over the past 22 years in the valencia quarter, we have have been able to present at the rate we do to our community because of our hardworking approach and staff and the incredible quality of our performances, we are lean and effective, we pay our artists a living wage. i am not joking, if this proposed construction and building affects us adversely, it could put us out of business. we have no money to alleviate the problems caused by the
1:12 am
construction and the building. what happens if we cannot continue? where does this cultural institution go? where do the youth go? would you prefer to end up with another set of condos, with another arts organization down the drain? i and the marsh community of artists and supporters ask the planning commission, beg the planning commission to preserve this community jewel and to require the developer to do what we ask, the document you have in hand, as a condition of the proposed project to go forward. support us in keeping our community cultural institutions alive. thank you. >> thank you.
1:13 am
>> hi, i'm margaret gomez and i'm speaking for the dr and against this proposed project on 1050 valencia, thank you for your time. i'm a neighbor, i live 6 blocks away from where this project would happen. i live 6 blocks away pr the marsh. i am also someone who loves valencia street, the neighborhood, and what makes me so passionate about it is the culture, the vitality of the neighborhood and a lot of that is from the marsh, and as was mentioned, the marsh also contributes a lot to the economy of the neighborhood and to smaoul businesses, they go to a cafe, they go to a restaurant, and i'm also
1:14 am
someone who's been -- whose life has been impacted and changed by working at the marsh. i believe this project at 1050 valencia street would crush the marsh. i think it would be really hard for the marsh to survive the impact, the negative impact from the noise bleed and the lack of parking it would create and the bad vibe but that's kind of cosmic, i started performing as a [inaudible] performer, i've been doing this since the 80s and the first time i did a solo show was at the marsh in 1991 and the show was called memory tricks and it was a show about my mother who was a latino show girl and developed alzheimer's, the show -- it was the first time i tried this kind of performance and it developed this audience
1:15 am
and it ran for several months at the marsh and after that, i was able to perform in new york off broadway and tour the show in europe at the edinburgh fringe festival, the show was an intimate piece, it was a show that i couldn't do if this project went forward, no one could really do shows like this. a lot of the shows at the marsh are intimate, personal, i couldn't be talking about a woman with alzheimer's if you could hear jay z blasting from a party off the roof deck. kids are developing their artistic selves at the marsh, that wouldn't be happening with the construction going on, the noise and the toxicity from construction. i really hope that you will consider saving the marsh, saving the culture that comes
1:16 am
from there. it would mean so much to san francisco, it means so much to art. thank you. >> good evening, commissioners, my name is charlie veron, i'm an artist and residence at the marsh, i worked at the marsh for 21 years, i've taught at the marsh, performed at the marsh, directed at the marsh and have worked as the extra pair of eyes and ears on other shows at the marsh. the marsh has been my artistic home, the marsh has been the foundation of my career. if you count up all the audience members who have attended my shows over the 20 years, the shows i have performed and directed and helped with, we're talking about 100 thousand audience members. this makes the marsh, and then you look at other shows, bryan
1:17 am
copeland show, not a genuine black man, don read shows, we're talking about huge, huge numbers of people, the marsh is a cultural center, it is also an economic hub of the mission district, it is part of what is making the mission district economically successful. so, i think it behooves us when a big project wants to come next door to something that's working to ask, would what's working continue to work or would it be adversely affected? that's what's before you or part of what's before you this evening. and i think it's very little to ask a developer to show how his project is going to not only not impact what's working but how it's going to enhance what's already working in the neighborhood, so i say some of the burden of proof has to be
1:18 am
on the developer, not just on those of us who are concerned about what this development would do. thank you. >> hi, my name is josh cornblooth and i performed many times at the marsh and the marsh has been crucial for me to having a full time career as a performer, i also used to live around the corner from there when there was a horrible kfc on the corner that was being discussed right now, this is my first experience of a planning commission meeting and i've been impressed with the decisions you have had to made with considerations of economy and zoning and just what different concerns that people have, so i certainly of course respect the desire for someone
1:19 am
to build a building for people who have a lot more money than i do to live there on that corner. they deserve to live there. i'd like to just reinforce what the previous -- my friends previously have just said, the marsh is a very, very special place, and when you speak of such things as even of just silence, the ability for them to perform, it sounds like maybe it's an extreme thing to want total silence when you're performing but it's an essential part of what happens there, of the magic that happens at the marsh. i would encourage you to try to do whatever it is that you can to -- as charlie just said before me, to make sure that whatever happens in that corner doesn't just not kill the marsh but in fact works with it and helps it because it's a
1:20 am
treasure, it's a national treasure and it's a great part of san francisco organization that i sure hope continues to exist. thank you. >> my name's linda and i work with the marsh but i've been involved with the marsh as a board member, i was involved when they bought the building many years ago and i think what we're looking at, this process has gone on and on, we have been part of the neighborhood association but we also have sort of been waiting to see how things were playing out because this has gone on for so long that to keep jumping in and trying to decide what we need in order to have this project work for us has been very difficult. i think at this point, where the project is, we're just very, lxvery concerned that if they are moving ahead that there be some conditions that get put in writing around the
1:21 am
developer working directly with the marsh to help us mitigate the issues that are going to arise during construction and also during the time that people move in because of the outdoor space and the proximity to the building, we are a non-profit agency, we are small, we don't really have the financial wear with all to mitigate for the kind of impacts that might be coming so i hope you'll consider that when you look at the project and possibly consider some conditions that would help us address that. thank you. >> thank you. >> good afternoon. my name is peter honaka and i live near the proposed development, i appreciate you taking the time of hearing the area merchants, some of who are indicated on this map who
1:22 am
oppose this project and the concerns of the 400 people who expressed opposition to the project. of course, this hearing should not be necessary, in september, 2010, the planning commission clearly requested that the developer work with the neighbors on this project. commissioners antonini, moore and sugaya expressed particular concerns about this project. unfortunately, the developer has never tried to compromise with the neighbors, the couple of times he's been willing to meet with us, he has listened to our comments and gone ahead and filed his plans unchanged. the only significant changes he made which affixed code violations from the planning department, that is not sufficient, this project must also comply with the eastern neighbors plan and it doesn't, here are some examples. policy 123 say that is in general where residential development is permitted, the
1:23 am
building height and bulk guidelines and bedroom mixed requirements should be adjusted. this fits at the missionary plan and the budget low residential area, it's bulk in area so it should be compatible with that area. policy 152, regarding noise, the proposed party depth, invite large parties will disrupt the marsh theatre and also the neighbors, it should be eliminated. valencia corridor policy, this is perhaps the most important poll osier at 32 feet wide and one block long, hill street is the small valencia corridor street, 85 feet of this project is along hill street, the developer wants to give a hill street address yet the hiekt, bulk and density of this project are inconsistent with and incompatible with the two
1:24 am
and three storey residences on hill street. policy 314, even at three storeys tall, this building would be taller than its neighbors on valencia street and of course hill street, as most of the buildings are historically significant, they will not be changing, a building will be permanently out of place, there may be taller buildings two blocks away but that is not relevant, this is a five storey build hating will tower. policy 316, this building fails to respect the hiekt, mass or design of the many exemplary historic buildings around it and finally there is an entire chapter in the missionary plan about historic preservation, this building is -- this project is surrounded by historic building all of which have been built ot the same time and coordinated with each other, it should enhance the
1:25 am
community character. thank you. >> thank you. >> may i be the first to wish you a good evening, commissioners, my name is leonard fisher, i've lived on hill street for over 30 yearsfinger i like the neighborhood when i moved in, i like the neighborhood now. we have a wonderful mix of singles, of families, of young and old, we have quiet residential streets in the unique and dynamic commercial corridor on valencia street. i'd like to see an appropriate mixed use development on this corner, it's a corner that should connect the residential and commercial aspects of this historic neighborhood and it should have some prominence in its own right, what i don't like is a building that's too tall, too dense and inconsistent with the community, even at three storeys, the project would be taller than its surroundings and with a bit of architectural
1:26 am
imagination can certainly be a prominent structure. one only has to look a half a block away at the corners of 22nd and valencia to see prominent corner buildings of two storeys or less, the social security building for example or the restaurant. the sponsor says this is the building we want to build. well, i don't want it and it's not just me, over 400 neighbors and merchants have signed petitions to date. as they say on tv, wait, there's more, besides being unacceptable to the community, the proposed project does not comply with half of the city's planning code policies, priority number two directs preservation of neighborhood character, it is all too clear that the size, the density, the noise and the other negative impacts of this proposed project are inconsistent with the surrounding community. priority number 3 promotes
1:27 am
affordable housing yet we've heard the project sponsor say recently they're looking at making these units condos, not rental units, priority 4 directs the traffic not overburden our streets or our neighborhood parking, the eir notes that the proposed project will require over 30 parking spaces which is about equal to what we have on hill street now, so it's also very clear that the project will indeed overburden our streets in parking. priority 5 addresses historic preservation, the proposed project is located at the fragile edge of the liberty hill historic district, it is surrounded by historic buildings and its presence will reduce our historical prominence by looming over it like a sore thumb, ceqa is a lower standard than the historical preservation requirements of this city, so this proposed project is unaccept to believe the
1:28 am
community as configured and is out of line with city planning authorities, it has been incredibly frustrating that the sponsors have turned a deaf ear to our community. i ask that you not do the same. thank you. >> good evening, commissioners, my name is audrey bower and i'm a resident of hill street, 1050 valencia along with 400 plus of my neighbors who have written petitions, as you will see, there is strong neighborhood consensus that the project is not right for our community and the developer has failed to work in good faith with the neighbors of the issues we have surfaced over the last three years, it will have a material negative impact through hiekt, density, design, noise and parking. the developer has designed 1050
1:29 am
valencia focusing on its compatibility with the commercial aspects of valencia street, ignoring hill street entirely, the majority of the building's frontage and impact, 85 feet is at hillside and sits at a pristinely reserved district, it is not a commercial corridor, it is not an urban street, it is a quiet suburban street that will feel the impact, 1050 valencia is not a site that exists in isolation, the developer proposes to change the residential address to 1 hill street address. according to those guidelines, the development should maintain our neighborhood identity, it should preserve our historic resources, it should be of a scale that's consistent with the neighborhood and not two storeys higher. the residential