Letter of Determination

Transcription

1 DcOu SAN FRANCISCO PLANNING DEPARTMENT October 26, 2012 Ilene Dick Farella Braun & Martel LLP Russ Building, 235 Montgomery Street San Francisco, CA Letter of Determination Site Address: 800 Brotherhood Way Assessor s Block/Lot: 7331/005 Zoning District: RM-1 (Residential Mixed, Low Density) Staff Contact: Rick Crawford, (415) or rick.crawford@sfgov.org 1650 Mission St. Suite 400 San Francisco, CA Reception: Fax: Planning Information: Dear Ms. Dick: This letter is in response to your request for a Letter of Determination for the property at 800 Brotherhood Way. The subject property is currently vacant and is located within the RM-1 (Residential Mixed, Low Density) and RM-4 (Residential Mixed, High Density) Zoning Districts and 40-X and 130-D Height and Bulk Districts. On May 19, 2005, the Planning Commission approved a residential Planned Unit Development with up to 182 dwelling units on the property under Case No ECR (Motion No ). In your letter, you requested a determination that the approved project remains in compliance with the Conditional Use Authorization lapse-period referenced in paragraph 5 of Exhibit A, Conditions of Approval, of Planning Commission Motion No Planning Commission Motion No governs the development of the proposed Planned Unit Development on the subject property. Paragraph 5 of Exhibit A, Conditions of Approval, of Motion No states that "if there is a lapse of this use for a period of three or more years, this authorization shall become null and void and the use of the Project site shall revert to a use that is principally permitted in an RM-1 (Residential Mixed Low Density), and RM-4 (Residential Mixed, High Density) Districts." This condition is further governed by the terms of the Planning Code Section 303(c)(5)(C) which states that "the action of the Planning Commission approving a conditional use does not take effect until the appeal period is over or while the approval is under appeal." On June 16, 2005, the case was appealed to the Board of Supervisors who rejected the appeal on August 16, On September 19, 2005, neighbors to the project seeking to overturn the Planning Commission s actions in the case filed a lawsuit and then appealed the results of that lawsuit. The Court of Appeals rejected that appeal and dismissed the case on March 20, The administrative appeal and the subsequent litigation prevented the property owner from undertaking the project until the issues in dispute were resolved through the administrative appeal process and the actions of the courts.

2 Ilene Dick October 26, 2012 Farella Braun & Martel LLP Letter of Determination Russ Building, 235 Montgomery Street 800 Brotherhood Way San Francisco CA On August 7, 2009, the Zoning Administrator issued a Letter of Determination finding that there had been no lapse in the use of the Conditional Use Authorization for any period since its issuance on May 19, 2005 and that the Conditional Use Authorization remains valid. The determination was not appealed. Since that time, the project sponsor has taken additional actions to advance the project and obtain building permits for grading and construction. The Vesting Tentative Map ("VTM") for the development has been approved and remains active. The VTM was approved on September 18, 2008 and was set to expire on September 8, Subsequent actions by the State Legislature has extended the expiration date of the VTM to September 8, 2015 The property owner has submitted applications for right-of-way improvements for the project to the Department of Public Works (DPW) and Planning Department on March 26, The General Plan referral for sidewalk change and "Q" Map for the north side of Brotherhood Way west of Chumasero Drive was filed on July 20, The sidewalk width change was adopted by the Board of Supervisors in Ord on August 31, Since late 2011, the project sponsor has been negotiating a signalization agreement with San Francisco Municipal Transit Agency (MTA). Pursuant to Condition No. 9 of the Conditions of Approval, the project sponsor is required to pay for the costs of design and construction of a traffic signal at the intersection of the project s access driveway and Brotherhood Way. Furthermore, this signal is to be synchronized with the two adjacent traffic signals along Brotherhood Way at Chumasero Drive and at the Brandeis Hillel School access road. The MTA agreement sets forth the terms and conditions under which the project sponsor will construct the traffic signal, and pay MTA for design the costs (which includes synchronization), construction inspection, procurement and support, and the ongoing costs for maintenance and operation of the traffic signal. A Letter Agreement between the San Francisco Arts Commission and the project property owner to protect the Bufano sculpture adjacent to the project site during project construction was executed in April The Agreement identifies a specific site for relocation of the statue. The Agreement also sets forth specific tasks and conditions for de-installing, storing, and re-installing the sculpture at a time agreed upon by the project sponsor and the Arts Commission. Since late 2011, the project sponsor has been negotiating a Consent Agreement with the SFPUC to enable excavation and construction to occur within an SFPUC easement for water pipes. The Consent Agreement would also allow drainage ditches required for stormwater management and retaining walls for project site stability to remain within the SFPUC easement area. The project sponsor and the SFPUC both have easements for their respective uses in the area subject to the Consent Agreement. The last tree removal permit required for project construction was obtained on October 3, 2012, pursuant to DPW Director s Order No The removal was necessitated by the location of the proposed project driveway. Noting that there was no alternative to the driveway location, the Director approved removal of one Italian Stone Pine tree to be replaced with tree with two 48" box trees, with the species and location subject to approval of the DPW Bureau of Urban Forestry. SAN FRANCISCO 2 PLANNING DEPARTMENT

3 Ilene Dick October 26, 2012 Farella Braun & Martel LLP Letter of Determination Russ Building, 235 Montgomery Street 800 Brotherhood Way San Francisco CA Finally, the property owner has been actively pursuing grading and building permits from the Department of Building Inspection. In May 2012 and August 2012, the property owner filed Building Permit Application Nos and for rough grading permits. On September 11, 2012, the property owner filed Building Permit Applications Nos , , , , , , and for the first phase construction of the proposed dwelling units. These seven Building Permit Applications represent each of the seven building types proposed by the project. Given the above facts detailing the ongoing active pursuit of the project, and uninterrupted exercise of the Conditional Use Authorization by the property owner, the Zoning Administrator hereby determines that there has been no lapse in the use of the Conditional Use Authorization for any period since its issuance on May 19, 2005 and that the Conditional Use Authorization granted under Motion No remains valid. APPEAL: If you believe this determination represents an error in interpretation of the Planning Code or abuse in discretion by the Zoning Administrator, an appeal may be filed with the Board of Appeals within 15 days of the date of this letter. For information regarding the appeals process, please contact the Board of Appeals located at 1650 Mission Street, Room 304, San Francisco, or call (415) Sincerely, Scott F. Sanchez Zoning Administrator cc: Rick Crawford, Planner Quentin Kopp SAN FRANCISCO PLANNING DEPARTMENT

4 0 FARELLA BRAUN+MARTELLLP Attorneys At Law Russ Building I 235 Montgomery Street San Francisco/ CA T / F , Y ILENE DICK idick@tbm.com D October 4, 2012 Via scott.sanchez@sfgov.org By Hand Delivery Scott Sanchez Zoning Administrator San Francisco Planning Department 1650 Mission, 4th Floor San Francisco, CA CITY & COUNTy OF PLANNING DEPARTMENT Re: Letter of Determination 800 Brotherhood Way: Ongoing Compliance with Conditional Use I Authorization Afr ; Dear Mr. Sanchez: We are seeking a determination that the above referenced project remains in compliance with the Conditional Use authorization lapse-period referenced in paragraph 5 of Exhibit A of Planning Commission Motion No , approved on May 19, Enclosed please find a check for the $601 fee for the Letter of Determination. The project is a 121-lot subdivision, 182-unit PUD located at 800 Brotherhood Way. Condition of Approval No. 5 states: If there is a lapse of this use for a period of three or more years, this authorization shall become null and void and the use of the Project site shall revert to a use that is principally permitted in the RM-1 (Residential Mixed Low Density), and the RJvl-4 (Residential Mixed, High Density) Districts. This condition does not require that the City issue or the project sponsor obtain any particular permit within any three-year period. It only requires that there is no lapse of the use for a period of three years or more. We have made similar requests for a determination under this Condition to the Zoning Administrator since Those are attached as Exhibit A. Mr. Badiner s determinations finding that those activities have not resulted in a "lapse of this use" or "neglect to exercise it" during any period since May 2005 are attached as Exhibit B.

5 0 Scott Sanchez October 4, 2012 Page 2 We are writing to update you as to the status of activities undertaken by the project sponsor since our June 25, 2009 letter. As is clear, these additional actions, combined with those activities that remain ongoing and active from our June 25, 2009 letter, confirm that there has been a continuous and active exercise of the conditional use authorization. MND Compliance The project sponsor is working with relevant City departments and consultants to implement mitigation measures identified in the MND that are required prior to and during construction. Tree Removal and Replacement Permit The last tree removal permit required for project construction was obtained on October 3, 2012, pursuant to DPW Director s Order No The removal was necessitated by the location of the proposed project driveway. Noting that there was no alternative to the driveway location, the Director approved removal of 1 Italian Stone Pine tree with two 48" box trees, with the species and location subject to approval of the DPW Bureau of Urban Forestry. Subdivision Map The Vesting Tentative Map ("VTM") remains active under a series of extensions granted by the State Legislature. At the time of its approval on September 18, 2008, the VTM had a 2 year life, resulting in an expiration date of September 8, (Govt. Code Section ). However, in June 2008, Govt. Code Section (a) was adopted, adding 1 year to the VTM life, resulting in project VTM expiration on September 8, Again in July 2009, the Legislature extended by 24 months maps that were approved before but not expired by July (Govt. Code Section (a).) This statute extended the project VTM life to September 8, And in 2011, Govt. Code Section (a) extended the expiration date an additional 2 years. Based on these statutes, the current expiration date of the VTM is September 8, Site Work Building Permits Continuous and ongoing meetings with Department of Building Inspection staff regarding soil improvement, grading, and site retaining wall design and construction, as well as building construction have occurred. Meetings with Planning staff to discuss minor modifications, exterior concepts, permitting, minor sidewalk encroachment permit and other miscellaneous items have also occurred. See Exhibit C for a list of the activities that have occurred with respect to permitting since 2009.

6 0 Scott Sanchez October 4, 2012 Page 3 Sidewalk Width Change The General Plan referral for sidewalk change and "Q" Map for the north side of Brotherhood Way west of Chumasero Drive was filed on July 20, The sidewalk width change was adopted by the Board of Supervisors in Ord on August 31, Arts Commission Agreement regarding Bufano Sculpture A Letter Agreement between the San Francisco Arts Commission and the project property owner to protect the Bufano sculpture during project construction was executed in April The Agreement identifies a specific site for relocation of the Statue. The Agreement also sets forth specific tasks and conditions for de-installing, storing and reinstalling the sculpture at a time agreed upon by the project sponsor and the Arts Commission. SFMTA Signalization Agreement Since late 2011, the project sponsor has been negotiating a signalization agreement with SFMTA. Pursuant to Condition No. 9 of the Conditions of Approval, the project sponsor is required to pay for the costs of design and construction of a traffic signal at the intersection of the project s access driveway and Brotherhood Way and to synchronize the traffic signal with the two adjacent traffic signals along Brotherhood Way at Chumasero Drive and at the Brandeis Hillel School access road. The MTA agreement sets forth the terms and conditions under which the project sponsor will construct the traffic signal, and pay MTA for the costs for design (which includes synchronization), construction inspection, procurement and support, and the ongoing costs for maintenance and operation of the traffic signal. SFPUC Consent Agreement Since late 2011, the project sponsor has been negotiating a Consent Agreement with the SFPUC to enable excavation and construction to occur within an SFPUC easement for water pipes. The Consent Agreement would also allow drainage ditches required for stormwater management and retaining walls for project site stability to remain within the SFPUC easement area. The project sponsor and the SFPUC both have easements for their respective uses in the area subject to the Consent Agreement. * ** * * * ** **** ***** ****** *********** ** ************ *********** ****** We request your determination that, based on the above facts, the sponsor s ongoing active pursuit of the project and uninterrupted exercise of the conditional use authorization remains

7 0 Scott Sanchez October 4, 2012 Page 4 valid and there has been no lapse in the use of the authorization for any period since its issuance on May 19, Thank you in advance your prompt response. If you have any questions or concerns, I can be reached at (415) or at idick@fbrn.com. Since clv. &ul Ilene Dick /L \ ID Enclosures cc: (Via w/encls.) Brian Mulqueen, Esq. Chris Hawke Steven Vettel, Esq \ /3/12

8 EXHIBIT A

9 0 FARELLA BRAUN+MARTEL LLP Attorneys At Law Russ Building/ 235 Montgomery Street San Francisco/ CA / F STEVEN L. VETTEL svettel@fbm.com D April 27, 2007 Via Hand Delivery Lawrence Badiner Zoning Administrator Planning Department 1660 Mission St., 5th Floor San Francisco, CA Re: 800 Brotherhood Way Conditional Use Permit Request for Zoning Administrator Determination Dear Mr. Badiner: I write on behalf of Olympic View Realty, the owner of the 800 Brotherhood Way property. We request that you make a determination that the Conditional Use Authorization lapse-period for this property was tolled for the duration of its administrative appeal and ensuing litigation. On May 19, 2005, the Planning Commission approved a Conditional Use Authorization under Planning Code section to allow a Planned Unit Development of up to 122 lots and 182 dwelling units on the 800 Brotherhood Way property (see Planning Commission Motion No , attached as Enclosure 1). In Exhibit A of that Authorization, the Planning Commission stated as a Condition of Approval that its authorization "shall become null and void" if "there is a lapse of this use for a period of three or more years." On June 16, 2005, the Commission s authorization was appealed to the Board of Supervisors. The Board rejected that appeal on August 16, Within 34 days, a lawsuit was filed in Superior Court against the City challenging the project s Negative Declaration and Conditional Use Authorization (see Enclosure 2). The California Court of Appeal finally dismissed that case on March 20, 2007 (see Enclosure 3). I request your determination that the lapse-period referenced in paragraph 5 of Exhibit A to the Conditional Use Authorization was tolled for the entire period between the Planning Commission s initial approval on May 19, 2005, and final judgment on appeal on March 20, Continuously during that period, the 800 Brotherhood Way Conditional Use Permit was either within its 30-day statutory "appeal period" or "under appeal." Planning Code section

10 Lawrence Badiner ( April 27, 2007 Page 2 303(c)(5)(C) states that an "action of the Planning Commission approving a conditional use does not take effect until the appeal period is over or while the approval is under appeal." Accordingly, the three year period referenced in 5 of Exhibit A to the Conditional Use Authorization should be understood to have begun on March 20, 2007, the date on which the appeal of the Conditional Use Authorization finally ended. Thank you for considering this request. Enclosed is the determination fee in the amount of $463. SLV:avd Enclosures cc: Rick Crawford Delvin Washington Steve Riter 21132\

11 () FARELLA BRAUN+MARTEL LLP Attorneys At Law Russ Building / 235 Montgomery Street San Francisco/ CA / F STEVEN L. VETTEL Svettel@fbm.com D June 25, 2009 Lawrence Badiner Zoning Administrator San Francisco Planning Department 1650 Mission Street, Suite 400 San Francisco, CA Re: 800 Brotherhood Way Case No CR Dear Mr. Badiner: This letter is to provide the Planning Department with a status report on the implementation of the 121-lot subdivision, 182-unit PUD at 800 Brotherhood Way approved by the Planning Commission on May 19, 2005, in its Motion No and to seek your determination that the project is in compliance with Condition of Approval No. 5. Condition of Approval No. 5 of the motion states: If there is a lapse of this use for a period of three or more years, this authorization shall become null and void and the use of the Project site shall revert to a use that is principally permitted in the RM-1 (Residential Mixed Low Density), and the RM-4 (Residential Mixed, High Density) Districts. Note that the condition does not mandate issuance of any particular permit within any three-year.2 period, only that there be no lapse of the use for a period of three years or more Since 2005, the owner and project sponsor have been actively pursuing implementation of the project, such that there has been no "lapse of this use" or "neglect to exercise it" during any period since May Set forth below is a summary of the numerous actions the project sponsor has pursued, and continues to pursue, during this period, indicating the sponsor s active and ongoing exercise of the conditional use authorization. The principally permitted use of the property pursuant to its RlvI-1 zoning is 418 dwelling units. The conditional use/pud approval was for site configuration and the size of the proposed single family and duplex lots. 2 The Merriam-Webster Dictionary defines lapse as: "the termination of a right or privilege through neglect to exercise it within some limit of time."

12 Lawrence Badiner June 25, 2009 Page 2 MND and CEQA Litigation June 17 to Aug. 16, 2005: Sponsor and Department opposed appeal of Mitigated Negative Declaration at Board of Supervisors. The Board upheld the MND on August 16, Sept to March 2007: Defend MIND in Superior Court and on appeal at California Court of Appeal, in cooperation with City Attorney s Office. The Superior Court denied issuance of a writ of mandate on May 1, 2006 (Case No ), and the First District Court of Appeal dismissed an appeal of that decision, finally upholding the MND on March 20, 2007 (Appeal No. Al 14832). 3. June 19, 2007: Zoning Administrator determination issued determining any three-year lapse period of Condition No. 5 was tolled during the CEQA litigation. Tree Removal and Replacement Permit and Litigation 1. Fall 2006: Removal of on-site trees. 2. Jan to April 2007: Process tree removal and replacement permit through Department of Public Works and Board of Appeals for trees in the Brotherhood Way right-of-way. DPW issued its Order approving the tree removal permit on December 29, 2006 (Order No. 176,333). The Board of Appeals upheld the permit with modifications on May 2, 2007 (Appeal No ). 3. August 2007 to April 2008: Defend (with City Attorney) Board of Appeal s decision on Tree Removal Permit in Superior Court (Case No. CPF ). The Court issued its order denying a writ of mandate on April 27, No appeal was filed. Subdivision Map September 2007 to present: Application for Vesting Tentative Map filed on September 11, 2007, approved by Planning Department on August 22, DPW issued its final approval of the Vesting Tentative Map on September 18, Pursuant to California Government Code Section , the subdivision map has an initial life of 24 months, which the California legislature recently automatically extended by an additional 12 months (Sec ), such that the map has an effective life extending at least through September November 7, 2008: Zoning Administrator issues determination that the pedestrian access lots mapped in the Vesting Tentative Map comply with Condition of Approval No. 9.d, with conditions.

13 le Lawrence Badiner June 25, 2009 Page 3 Site Work Building Permits May 2008 to present: Department of Building Inspection pre-application meeting pertaining to DBI requirements for soil improvement, grading, and site retaining wall design and construction. Pre-application meeting held on May 22, 2008; final DBI response issued October 6, Street Improvement Permit March 2008 to present: Applications for Street Improvement Permit and General Plan referral "Q" Map for right-of-way improvements filed March 26, 2008 with DPW and Planning Department. Most recent revisions pertaining to the Sidewalk Improvement Permit submitted to DPW on November 12, Most recent revisions pertaining to the "Q" Map submitted to Planning Department on May 19, Arts Commission Agreement regarding Bufano Sculpture December 2007 to present: Negotiate agreement pertaining to de-installation, storage and re-installation of Bufano sculpture with San Francisco Arts Commission. Most recent project sponsor comments on draft agreement sent to Arts Commission on June 25, We seek your determination that, given the above facts indicating the sponsor s ongoing active pursuit of the project and uninterrupted exercise of the conditional use authorization, the conditional use authorization remains valid and there has been no lapse in the use of the authorization for any period since its issuance on May 19, Enclosed is the Zoning Administrator determinati9n fee in )hamount of $ Si L.V cc: Rick Crawford Ron Zeff Christopher M. Hawke Steve Riter 21132\

14 EXHIBIT B

15 CQUIV SAN FRANCISCO PLANNING DEPARTMENT June 19, M5SionSt Sub 400 San Francisco, CA 94111a-2414 Racaptinir Steven Vettel Farelta Braun + Martel Russ Building 235 Montgomery Street, San Francisco, CA Dear Mr. Vettel: RE: Letter of Determination 800 Brotherhood Way Assessors Block ot 002 and Block 7331/1-ot 003 I am writing in response to your letter of April 27, In that letter, you requested a determination that the Conditional Use authorization lapse-period referenced in paragraph 5 of Exhibit A of Planning Commission Motion No was tolled for the duration of its administrative appeal and ensuing litigation. The subject property is within an RM-1 (Residential Mixed, Low Density) and RM-4 (Residential Mixed, High Density) Districts and within the 40-X and 130-D Height and Bulk Districts. The property is vacant and Conditional Use authorization for development of a residential Planned Unit Development with up to 182 dwelling units on the property was granted by the Planning Commission in Motion No on May 19, 2005, in case number ECR. Planning Commission Motion No governs the development of the proposed Planned Unit Development on the subject property. Paragraph 5 of Exhibit A, Conditions of Approval, of that Motion states; if there is a lapse of this use for a period of three or more years, this authorization shall become null and void and the use of the Project site shall revert to a use that is principally permitted in an RM-1 (Residential Mixed Low Density), and RM-4 (Residential Mixed, High Density) Districts. This condition is further governed by the terms of the Planning Code wherein Section 303(c)(5)(C) states, "The action of the Planning Commission approving a conditional use does not take effect until the appeal period is over or while the approval is under appeal." On June 16, 2005 the case was appealed to the Board of Supervisors who rejected the appeal on August 16, On September 19, 2005 neighbors to the project seeking to overturn the Planning Commission s actions in the case filed a lawsuit and then appealed the results of that lawsuit. The Court of Appeals rejected that appeal and dismissed the case on March 20, The administrative appeal and the subsequent litigation have prevented the property owner from undertaking the project until the issues in dispute were resolved through the administrative appeal process and the actions of the courts. Fa, Planning Irdsrmatiori 41&SSI.E3fl

16 Steven Vettel Letter of Determination Brotherhood Way. May 22, 2007 Page 2. It is therefore determined that, under the terms of the Planning Code and Planning Commission Motion No , the lapse-period Conditional Use authorization for the property was tolled for the duration of its administrative appeal and ensuing litigation and the three year period referenced in paragraph 5 of Exhibit A of Conditional Use Authorization Motion No should be understood to have begun on March 20, If anyone has substantial reason to believe that there was an error in interpretation of the provisions of the Planning Code, or abuse of discretion on the part of the Zoning Administrator, they may file an appeal with the Board of Appeals (1660 Mission Street, Room 3036 telephone: ) within fifteen (15) days of the date of this letter. I hope this letter adequately addresses the questions in your letter. If you have any questions regarding this determination, please feel free to contact Rick Crawford of my staff, (415) Sincere j/ wrence B. Badiner, Zoning Administrator cc: Rick Crawford, Planner St. Thomas More Catholic Church Congregation Beth Israel-Judea Calvary Armenian Congregational Church St. Gregory Armenian Apostolic Church KZV Armenian School Lake Merced Church of Christ Brotherhood Masonic Temple The Greek Orthodox Church of the Holy Trinity Lakeshore Acres Improvement Club Julian Lagos G:\DOCUMENTS\SW Cases\SW Detorm\800 Brotherhood Way expiration.doc SAN FRANC PLANNING DEPARTMENT

17 August 7, 2009 SAN FRANCISCO PLANNING DEPARTMENT Letter of Determination 1650 Mission St. Suite 400 San Francisco, CA Reception: Steven Vettel Fax Farella Braun k Martel LLP Russ Building, 235 Montgomery Street Planning San Francisco CA Information: RE: 800 Brotherhood Way - Case No CR Assessors Block 7331/Lot 003 and Assessor s Block 7332/Lot 002 Dear Mr. Vettel: I am writing in response to your letter of June 25, In that letter, you requested a determination that the above referenced project remains in compliance with the Conditional Use authorization lapse-period referenced in paragraph 5 of Exhibit A of Planning Commission Motion No The subject property is within an RM-1 (Residential Mixed, Low Density) and RM-4 (Residential Mixed, High Density) Districts and within the 40-X and 130-D Height and Bulk Districts. The property is vacant and Conditional Use authorization for development of a residential Planned Unit Development with up to 182 dwelling units on the property was granted by the Planning Commission in Motion No on May 19, 2005, in case number ECR. Planning Commission Motion No governs the development of the proposed Planned Unit Development on the subject property. Paragraph 5 of Exhibit A, Conditions of Approval, of that Motion states; if there is a lapse of this use for a period of three or more years, this authorization shall become null and void and the use of the Project site shall revert to a use that is principally permitted in an RM-1 (Residential Mixed Low Density), and RM-4 (Residential Mixed, High Density) Districts. This condition is further governed by the terms of the Planning Code wherein Section 303(c)(5)(C) states, "The action of the Planning Commission approving a conditional use does not take effect until the appeal period is over or while the approval is under appeal." On June 16, 2005 the case was appealed to the Board of Supervisors who rejected the appeal on August 16, On September 19, 2005 neighbors to the project seeking to overturn the Planning Commission s actions in the case filed a lawsuit and then appealed the results of that lawsuit. The Court of Appeals rejected that appeal and dismissed the case on March 20, It is the practice of the City to toll the time for expiration while a project is under legal challenge. V)\fr St)-:flC,Cic

18 Steven Vettel August 7, 2009 Farella Braun & Martel LLP Letter of Determination Russ Building, 235 Montgomery Street 800 Brotherhood Way San Francisco CA If you believe this determination represents an error in interpretation of the Planning Code or abuse in discretion by the Zoning Administrator, an appeal may be filed with the Board of Appeals within 15 days of the date of this letter. For information regarding the appeals process, please contact the Board of Appeals located at 1650 Mission Street, Room 304, San Francisco, or call (415) Sincerely," Lawrence B. Badiner Zoning Administrator cc: Rick Crawford, Planner Members of the Planning Commission Judge Quentin Kopp O:IDOCUMENTSISW CasesiS W Deterrnl800 Brotherhood Way expiration 2.doc SAN FRANCISCO PLANNING DEPARTMENT

19 EXHIBIT C

20 700 Brotherhood Way: Project Information (last updated ) September 21, 2012 SFDPW BKF submittal of Proposed Offsite Improvements Revision 2 (MSEP) September 11, 2012 SFDBI Building Permit submittal under 700 Brotherhood Way (block/lot) Bldg Type A (Lot 47) Application No (Receipt No: ) Bldg Type B (Lot 86) Application No (Receipt No: ) Bldg Type C (Lot 114) Application No (Receipt No: ) Bldg Type D (Lot 12) Application No (Receipt No: ) Bldg Type E (Lot 51) Application No (Receipt No: ) Bldg Type F (Lot 61) Application No (Receipt No: ) Bldg Type G (Lot 88) Application No (Receipt No: ) August 29, 2012 SFDPW BSUM Final Map submitted to BSUM by BKF August 27, 2012 SFDBI Application No Rough Grading Permit 02 - filed for plan check (2 sets) August 15, 2012 SF FAC SF Fine Arts Commission Hearing on the Right of Way design and relocation of the Bufano Peace Statue at the Brotherhood Way Right of Way. (Flecher Studios & Allison Cummings SFFAC) Unanimous board approval. August 15, 2012 SDPD Revision drawings and memo issued to Rick Crawford at SFPD to reflect changes discussed at the informal meeting. August 15, 2012 SFDBI Pre-Application Meeting Notes Approved/Finalized - Fire requirements & current code Pre-Application Meeting Date: \

21 August 10, 2012 SFDBI Application No Ri Rough Grading Permit 01 Revision 1 filed for plan check (4 sets) Address: 700 Brotherhood Way July 25, 2012 SFDPW BUF Kick off meeting at DPW with John Kwong & Carla Short to discuss right of way design July 24, 2012 SFDBI/SFFD Pre application Meeting with Jeffery Ma & Fred Stumpp, & Brian Scott to discuss project fire requirements under current code June 24, 2012 SFDBI Meeting notes from meeting with Hanson Tom issued. Initial Peer Review Comments of Rough Grading Permit 01 distributed. (comments from Tuan and Robinson & Rockridge Geotechnical) June 20, 2012 SFPD Informal Working Session with Rick Crawford at SFPD to discuss exterior concepts, permitting & mapping, minor sidewalk encroachment permit and other miscellaneous items May 22, 2012 SFDBI Application No Rough Grading Permit 01 - filed for plan check Address: 700 Brotherhood Way November 30, 2011 Pre application Meeting with Tom Le & Hanson Tom to discuss specific units at 800 Brotherhood Way October 25, 2011 Pre- application Meeting w/ Hanson Tom to discuss site related questions at 800 Brotherhood Way 21132\