14. 2003.0901D (E. TOPE: (415) 558-6316)
2014 - 2016 BUCHANAN STREET - east side between California and Pine Streets; Lot 27 in Assessor's Block 651 - Mandatory Discretionary Review, under the Planning Commission's policy requiring review of dwelling unit mergers, of Building Permit Application No. 2003.07.31.0876, proposing to merge two dwelling units to create a single-family dwelling in an RH-2 (Residential, House, Two-Family) District and a 40-X Height and Bulk District.
Preliminary Recommendation: Do not take Discretionary Review and approve the project as submitted.
SPEAKER(S):
(+) Al Alaimo - Project Sponsor
- He and his wife own the property.
- He found out that the property was zoned two family. He and his wife would like to return this property to a single family home.
- He found records from 1993 showing that the property had been converted many years ago.
- He and his wife want to live on this property as a single-family home.
ACTION: Did not take Discretionary Review and approved the merger.
AYES: Antonini, Bradford Bell, Boyd, Feldstein, Hughes, S. Lee, W. Lee
15. 2003.0905D (E. TOPE: (415) 558-6316)
3874 17TH STREET - north side between Pond Street and Noe Street; Lot 075 in Assessor's Block 3564 - Mandatory Discretionary Review, under the Planning Commission's policy requiring review of all dwelling unit mergers. Building Permit Application No. 2003.01.21.5494, proposes to legalize the existing reconfiguration of a three-unit building, which was converted to two units after a house fire in 2001. This property is located in an RH-3 (Residential, House, Three-Family) District and 40-X Height and Bulk District.
Preliminary Recommendation: Do not take Discretionary Review and approve the projected as submitted.
SPEAKER(S):
(+) Catherine Anderson - Project Sponsor
- She loves her house and has done a lot of work on it to improve the property and make it beautiful.
- She is available for questions.
ACTION: Did not take Discretionary Review and approved the merger.
AYES: Antonini, Bradford Bell, Boyd, Hughes, S. Lee, W. Lee
NAYES: Feldstein
16. 2003.0872D (D. DIBARTOLO: (415 558-6291)
40 VALPARAISO STREET - north side between Taylor and Mason Streets; Lot 034 in Assessor's Block 091 - Request for Discretionary Review of Building Permit Application No. 2003.0313.9586 proposing the construction of a new approximately 820 square foot third-story addition atop the existing two-story single family dwelling unit. The subject property is located in an RM-1 (Residential, Mixed, Low-Density) District and a 40-X Height and Bulk District.
Preliminary recommendation: Take Discretionary Review and approve the project with modifications.
SPEAKER(S): None
ACTION: Without hearing, item continued to January 22, 2004
AYES: Antonini, Bradford Bell, Boyd, Feldstein, Hughes, S. Lee, W. Lee
17. 2003.1093D (G. CABREROS: (415) 558-6169)
2258 BEACH STREET - north side between Baker and Broderick Streets; Lot 009D in Assessor's Block 0915 - Request for Discretionary Review of Building Permit Application No. 2003.07.02.8662, proposing to consolidate several previous building permit applications and to authorize construction beyond the scope of said permits in order to achieve final inspection by the Department of Building Inspection. Construction under these previous building permit applications includes, but is not limited to, a new third floor, a horizontal addition to the rear of the building, and new windows and skylights added to the existing single-family residence in an RH-2 (Residential, House, Two-Family) District and a 40-X Height and Bulk District.
Preliminary Recommendation: Take Discretionary Review and approve with modifications.
SPEAKER(S):
Re: Continuance
Brad Hooper - Discretionary Review Requestor
- He wrote a letter and spoke to various people in the Planning Department regarding a continuance.
- His reason for the continuance request is because his wife is a co-owner and she needs to be present to express her feelings on this issue.
- His wife cannot be here because she recently had surgery.
- He is just asking for a little time so his wife can be here.
Gram Maloney - Attorney
- The wing wall and the parapet has already been before the Commission.
- The only issue here is the field condition and a construction technique which causes the parapet to go 18 inches higher.
- He feels that there is no need to go before the Commission.
ACTION: Without hearing the merits of the case, this item was continued to February 11, 2004.
AYES: Antonini, Boyd, Feldstein, Hughes, S. Lee, W. Lee
NAYES: Bradford Bell
18. 2003.0893D (G. CABREROS: (415) 558-6169)
927 LAKE STREET - south side between 10th and 11th Avenues; Lot 047 in Assessor's Block 1370 - Request for Discretionary Review of Building Permit Application No. 2003.01.10.4984, proposing to add a three-story addition to the rear of the existing three-story, single-family residence in an RH-2 (Residential, House, Two-Family) District and a 40-X Height and Bulk District.
Preliminary Recommendation: Do not take Discretionary Review and approve.
SPEAKER(S):
(-) Richard Shrieve - Discretionary Review Requestor
- He was assigned this request for Discretionary Review from the original applicants, Peter and Ann Costigan, who lived next door to the subject property.
- He respects the right for the project sponsors to expand their homes.
- He respects the architect--the architect designed an addition to his house.
- He has two reasons to the Discretionary Review: 1) he would like the Commission and staff to bear in mind the cumulative impacts on mid-block open space of other additions that could occur if this one does. There are at least three more families that are likely to expand if this one does; 2) It is important to voice the issues of the people who are most impacted, The Louie's and the Wongs. Both of these parties are here to voice their opinion.
(-) James Louie
- The 927 Lake Street owner should get together with the rest of the neighbors to have more discussions and reach a mutually acceptable conclusion.
(-) Jean Ng
- The proposed construction will limit her air circulation.
- The proposed extension would change the appearance of future structures.
- She requested that the Commission direct the project sponsor to reach an agreement with all the neighbors.
(-) Yvonne Don
- She is here to reinforce the opinion of the Discretionary Review requestors and the supporters of the DR.
- She feels that the open space is important. They considered this when they had to do a remodel.
- She displayed a map of the open space currently on the properties of the block.
(+) Rob Mackethan - Project Sponsor
- He and his wife purchased their home about 10 years ago. They now have three children and have actually "outgrown" their home. That is the reason for the expansion.
- Most of the neighbors have already made large additions to their homes.
- He feels that their addition is not out of character.
- He does not want to cause problems with the neighbors.
- He has had various conversations with his neighbors and because of these discussions his project has been scaled down.
(+) Dan Phipps - Project Architect
- He displayed images of the architectural aspects of the project.
ACTION: Did not take Discretionary Review and approved the project.
AYES: Antonini, Bradford Bell, Boyd, Feldstein, Hughes, S. Lee, W. Lee
19. 2003.0736D (J. PURVIS: (415) 558-6354)
1477 RHODE ISLAND STREET - east side south of 25th Street; Lot 026 in Assessor's Block 4282A - Request for Discretionary Review on the proposed construction of a two-family dwelling on a vacant up-sloping lot under Building Permit Application No. 2002.11.14.1384. The new building would rise to four stories over a two-car garage and is in an RH-2 (Residential, House, Two-Family) Use District and a 40-X Height and Bulk District.
Preliminary Recommendation: Do not take Discretionary Review and approve the project as revised.
SPEAKER(S): None
ACTION: Discretionary Review Withdrawn.
20. 2003.0620D (J. PURVIS: (415) 558-6354)
1532 TREAT AVENUE - west side south of Precita Avenue; Lot 006 in Assessor's Block 5524 - Mandatory Discretionary Review, under Planning Commission policy requiring review of all housing demolition permits, of Demolition Permit Application No. 2003.03.27.0853 proposing the demolition of a two-story, two-family dwelling to be replaced with a three-story, two-family dwelling in an RH-2 (Residential, House, Two-Family) Use District, a 40-X Height and Bulk District and within the Bernal Heights Special Use District.
Preliminary Recommendation: Do not take Discretionary Review and approve the project as submitted.
SPEAKER(S):
(+) Bill Pashalinsky - Project Architect
- The project sponsor and the engineer who did the soundness report are here to answer any questions.
- This project has a lot of problems.
- Even if the project sponsor invested a major fortune to repair everything, the project would not be up to code.
ACTION: Did not take Discretionary Review and approved the demolition.
AYES: Antonini, Bradford Bell, Boyd, Feldstein, Hughes, S. Lee, W. Lee
21. 2003.1078D (K. AMDUR: (415) 558-6351)
162-164 BERNARD STREET - north side between Jones and Leavenworth Streets; Lots 036 and 037 in Assessor's Block 0156 - Mandatory Discretionary Review under the Planning Commission's policy requiring review of all dwelling unit mergers, of Building Permit Application Nos. 2003.05.07.4000 and 2003.05.07.4004, proposing to merge two dwelling units to form a single-family residence on Lot 037 and to create a new dwelling unit on the ground floor of an existing garage structure on Lot 036. Both of the subject lots are in an RH-3 (Residential, House, Three-Family) and 65-A Height and Bulk Districts.
Preliminary Recommendation: Do Not Take Discretionary Review and approve the application as submitted.
SPEAKER(S):
(+) Julia Campbell - Project Sponsor
- They have always used the property as a single-family house.
- Bernard Street is a small alley where the properties have been owned for many, many years.
- The way the property has been designed is very awkward.
- They have three children and would like to remain living in San Francisco.
- They also have support from the Russian Hill Neighbors Association because they would rather have this property converted to a single family home than have an addition constructed.
(+) Camala Moster - Project Architect
- This house is one of the earlier houses on the block and is very modest.
- Adding a second garage space to the single garage space will be an amenity.
- The space on the first floor could be used as a second unit.
ACTION: Did not take Discretionary Review and approved the merger.
AYES: Antonini, Bradford Bell, Boyd, Hughes, S. Lee, W. Lee
NAYES: Feldstein
22. 2003.1167D (M. SMITH: (415) 558-6322)
183 ST. GERMAIN AVENUE (A.K.A. 121 ST. GERMAIN AVENUE) - south side of the street near Glenbrook Avenue, Lot 018 in Assessor's Block 2722 - Request for Discretionary Review of Building Permit Application No. 2003.07.03.8801, proposing to construct a two-story single-family dwelling on a vacant lot located in a RH-1(D) (Residential, House, One-Family [Detached]) District and a 40-X Height and Bulk District.
Preliminary Recommendation: Do not take discretionary review and approve the project as modified.
SPEAKER(S): None
ACTION: Discretionary Review Withdrawn.
23. 2003.1168D (M. SMITH: (415) 558-6322)
185 ST. GERMAIN AVENUE (A.K.A. 125 ST. GERMAIN AVENUE) - south side of the street near Glenbrook Avenue, Lot 019 in Assessor's Block 2722 - Request for Discretionary Review of Building Permit Application No. 2003.07.03.8805, proposing to construct a two-story single-family dwelling on a vacant lot located in a RH-1(D) (Residential, House, One-Family [Detached]) District and a 40-X Height and Bulk District.
Preliminary Recommendation: Do not take discretionary review and approve the project as modified.
SPEAKER(S): None
ACTION: Discretionary Review Withdrawn.
24. (C. NIKITAS; (415) 558-6306)
RESIDENTIAL DEMOLITION POLICY - A proposal to modify and refine interim criteria to implement a Temporary Residential Demolition Policy requiring mandatory Discretionary Review of all dwelling unit demolitions not requiring Conditional Use authorization, with certain exceptions; to adopt a specific Soundness Determination process; and to adopt criteria for conformity with applicable General Plan policies and objectives; and a recommendation to apply this policy for an approximate six-month period, after which a long-term policy would be presented for consideration and adoption by the Commission.
Preliminary recommendation: Adopt the Temporary Residential Demolition Policy.
NOTE: On November 6, 2003, following public testimony, the Commission kept the Public Hearing open and continued this item to December 11, 2003.
SPEAKER(S):
William Abend - AIA
- The only one issue that he has is that there has been three different policies for demolitions.
- Something should be done so that the project applicant should not have to pay in order to have things revised.
- He is available for questions.
Jeremy Paul
- It has been a long process to develop a policy on this issue.
- The Board of Appeals is going to be looking for more than numerical criteria. They are going to be looking at the opinions from the Commission about the project that is being demolished.
- It is important for people to understand what is in front of them and this criteria will help a lot.
- People should be proactive in managing their decisions about what to do with the housing stock. This is something that should be included in the policy.
- There has to be subjective criteria as well.
Pat Buscovich
- This process needs to be thorough and this document is very thorough.
- There should be some additional check list information that needs to be incorporated: the assessor's files; the three R reports from the Building Department; all permit histories; all the records from planning including whether the building is AS, and if it is AS, all the records, etc.
- The Planning Commission should understand that the Building Department is loath to tear a building down unless it is an eminent life-safety hazard.
- There are a large class of fire-damaged buildings that need to be torn down.
Hiroshi Fukuda - Richmond Community Association
- This hearing is being held during the holidays and that is why there are not that many people here.
- Any changes in the policy should be provided in a hand out so that the public knows what the changes are.
- The policy does not address the real issue of demolition.
Sue Hestor
- This policy should be adopted and moved along.
- There are lots of demolitions before the Commission and there are a lot of units that are being lost because of these demolitions.
- There is nothing objectionable in what staff is doing.
- It is very weary on people who are trying to stay on top of the documents.
- She would like [the policy] to have added a more thorough analysis of historical research.
ACTION: Approved as Corrected and Amended:
1. On Page 2 of the case report, under SCOPE OF THE POLICY, delete the word EXACTLY in the description of projects to be exempted from the mandatory DR policy. They are: structures determined to be public hazards or structures damaged beyond feasible repair by fire, earthquake, or other act of God to be demolished and replaced exactly in kind, and recommended for demolition by the Director of the Department of Building Inspection..
2. Please note that Recommendation #2, page 3, regarding fee recovery has been revised to reflect hourly rates provided by Administration staff to reflect current costs to the Department. Note that the proposal allows 20 hours of staff time, including the initial filing fee, to be allocated to a project, without further notification of the applicant, for a total allowed billable cost of $1823.40.
3. In Recommendation #8, page 5, add "Contraction Cost Estimators" to the list of professionals allowed to author soundness reports. Also change the last sentence to read ". If the Commission rejects a Soundness Report, the Commission may require that any subsequent report for the project submitted to the Department be prepared by a new author meeting the requirements described above, not the original author."
4. Alter Recommendation #13, at the top of page 7, to read " ... submit a COMPLETED supplemental information form PROVIDED (RATHER THAN prepared) by the Department .."
5. Change Recommendation #16 to read "After an existing building is demolished, the replacement structure is built on what is briefly an infill lot. The Commission shall assess underlying zoning, neighborhood character, and surrounding unit density to encourage appropriate in-fill housing on sites in established neighborhoods, and to promote the construction of well-designed housing that preserves or enhances existing neighborhood character in conformity with the General Plan and the Residential Design Guidelines, where applicable. Therefore, the Discretionary Review of projects subject to this policy shall be advertised and noticed to include the permit application for the replacement structure, for the purpose of evaluating compliance of the project with Criteria 14 through 16. "
6. On Exhibit 2, the proposed Demolition Application Form. delete the word "exactly" in the description of buildings replaced in kind following a disaster. Also, please change the word "units" in Criterion 9 , to read, How many bedrooms are subject to rent control?" On page two of the form, the next to last paragraph needs to be revised to reflect the current hourly costs and staff hours for fee recovery, as described earlier.
7. On Exhibit 3, the Criteria Checklist, on Item 1, the last sentence of the first paragraph should read: If so, a hearing is not required , then add the words UNDER THIS POLICY.
8. Split criterion 16 into a & b, to read, does the project increase the number of housing units?, and Does the project increase the number of bedrooms on site?
AYES: Antonini, Bradford Bell, Boyd, Feldstein, Hughes, S. Lee
ABSENT: W. Lee
MOTION: 16700
