12. 2003.0657C (G. CABREROS (415) 558-6169)
1730 VAN NESS AVENUE - east side between Clay and Sacramento Streets, Lot 019 in Assessor's Block 0622 - Request for Conditional Use authorization under Planning Code, to allow the expansion of an institutional use (American Buddhist Cultural Temple) (Section 209.3), the creation of a commercial space above the ground floor (Section 209.3), construction of a building exceeding 40 feet in height (Section 253), and exceptions from the prescribed bulk limits (Section 271) in an RC-4 (Residential Commercial Combined, High Density) District, the Van Ness Special Use District and an 80-D Height and Bulk District. The project would result in a four-story building up to 80 feet in height containing a sanctuary, a bookstore, group housing for monks, a dining hall, dormitory rooms for students, conference rooms, offices and various other rooms associated with the institution.
Preliminary Recommendation: Approval with Conditions
(Continued from Regular Meeting of September 2, 2004)
SPEAKER(S): None
ACTION: an appeal of the environmental Categorical Exemption was filed just prior to this hearing. Until this issue is settled, the item cannot be heard by the Planning Commission.
13a. 2004.0070D (M. SMITH: (415) 558-6322)
23 EUREKA STREET - east side between 17th and Market Streets, Lot 048 in Assessor's Block 2649 - Request for Discretionary Review of Building Permit Application No. 2004.02.12.6324, proposing to raise the existing noncomplying rear building 5'-6" to create habitable area at the ground floor. The proposal includes constructing a deck and reconfigured stairs at the front of the building and infilling the light well at the southeast corner of the building with a one-story addition. No work is proposed for the two-unit building at the front of the lot. The property is located in a 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):
(-) Bruce Bonacker - Project Architect
- The concerns are that there will be loss of sun and privacy, and a reflective glare will be produced.
- He displayed a drawing showing how the new project will impact the Discretionary Review requestor's home.
- The project sponsor has not been available to review and comment.
- The surrounding buildings are taller, but they are built as cottages instead of in the mid-block open space.
(-) Chris Christensen
- He is representing the residents of the building. He submitted a petition representing people who are opposed to the project.
- He is wondering why the structure cannot be lower. The building is already on space that should be open.
- These projects hardly ever turn out the way they were promised.
(-) Vanesa Weisbrod
- She is speaking on behalf of her grandmother.
- The proposed project would intrude on her privacy.
- Loss of light would be detrimental to her health--she is 80 years old.
- Since her grandmother cannot go out that often, she enjoys staying at home and enjoying the sunlight that comes in.
(-) Amanda Powers
- Her kitchen is what her family uses as a family room.
- The proposed project will definitely interfere with her privacy.
(-) James Hutchinson
- He has lived on 17th Street for many years.
- The proposed project will block valuable daylight.
- He does not understand how the project sponsors have been able to live in their home for eight years just fine and currently decide to expand and now the neighbors have to live in their shadow.
(-) Michael Cobb
- Mr. and Mrs. Hamil are fabulous people.
- They are not harming him in any way.
- But the people that have spoken in favor of the project, do not live close by.
(-) Juan Crovetto
- He would not like to see anything changed with the new construction.
(+) Nancy Hamil - Project Sponsor
- They have been residents of this house for 11 years.
- They simply do not have the money to purchase a new house. If they are not allowed to renovate, they will have to move out of the City.
- The increase is not that large.
- Their home is quite small.
- They have tried to minimize the impact on the neighbors.
- All of the surrounding structures will still be taller than their home even after the renovation.
- They have MUNI underground next door so there are a lot of vibrations. They are not looking for master bedrooms either.
ACTION: Did not take Discretionary Review and approved as proposed
AYES: Antonini, Bradford Bell, Hughes, S. Lee, W. Lee
NAYES: Olague
13b. 2004.0070V (M. SMITH: (415) 558-6322)
23 EUREKA STREET - east side between 17th and Market Streets, Lot 048 in Assessor's Block 2649 - Request for a rear yard variance for Building Permit Application No. 2004.02.12.6324, proposing to raise the existing non-complying rear building 5'-6" to create habitable area at the ground floor. The proposal includes constructing a deck and reconfigured stairs at the front of the building and infilling the light well at the southeast corner of the building with a one-story addition. The project is subject to a rear yard variance request for the expansion of a non-complying building that is located within the required rear yard. The property is located in a RM-1 (Residential, Mixed, Low-Density) District and a 40-X Height and Bulk District.
ACTION: The Zoning Administrator Closed the Public Hearing and granted Variance subject to standard Conditions of Approval.
14. 2004.0495D (M. SMITH: (415) 558-6322)
2142 40TH AVENUE - east side between Quintara and Rivera Streets, Lot 042 in Assessor's Block 2178 - Request for Discretionary Review of Building Permit Application No. 2003.11.17.0325, proposing to construct a two-story horizontal addition and stairs at the rear of the building and construct a one-story vertical addition on top of the building, located in a RH-1 (Residential, House, One-Family) District and a 40-X Height and Bulk District.
Preliminary Recommendation: Do Not Take Discretionary Review and approve the Project.
ACTION:
(-) Hammet Yu - Discretionary Review Requestor
- They are enjoying their family life.
- Their house is located in the back of the permit applicant's house.
- They have a 180-degree view and the proposed project would block that.
- They have no objection to the project sponsor's horizontal extension but they do object to the vertical extension.
(-) Eileen Boken
- She is opposed to the project because of the size of the project and for neighborhood character.
- When this neighborhood was built, it was designed with very few parks. The neighborhood was single-family homes.
- The back yards should be preserved for open space.
(-) Mavis Nathan
- She has never received any notification of this project. Her neighbors notified her.
- She objects to the project because the project would set a precedent in favor of much larger homes in the neighborhood.
- This will change the character of the neighborhood.
(-) Deborah Brown
- The character of the neighborhood would be disrupted if this project were approved.
- She questions how the Code would allow houses this high in this neighborhood.
- In this area of the Sunset, there are no other three-story houses.
(+) Steven Lee - Project Sponsor
- He and his wife have been living there for nine years and they want to remain in the neighborhood.
- They want more space to accommodate their family.
- There are various homes in the neighborhood that are three stories tall.
ACTION: Did not take Discretionary Review and approved the project.
AYES: Antonini, Bradford Bell, Hughes, S. Lee, W. Lee, Olague
15. 2004.0535DD (R. CRAWFORD: (415) 558-6358)
2059 23rd AVENUE - west side between Pacheco and Quintara Streets. Assessor's Block 2143 Lot 015 - Request for Discretionary Review of Building Permit Application No. 2004 0312 8471, to construct a two story addition to the rear of the existing dwelling in an RH-1 (Residential House, One Family) District, and a 40-X Height and Bulk District.
Preliminary Recommendation: Take Discretionary Review and Approve the Project with Modifications
SPEAKER(S):
(-) Ray Chang - 1st Discretionary Review Requestor
- There are only five houses on the block that have ever been renovated or extended.
- The proposed project does not fit into the character of the block or our neighborhood.
- There does not seem to be any consideration of the Residential Design Guidelines.
- If the project goes through as is, his home will be devalued.
- The project sponsor suggested painting the wall where the addition is going to be. He does not care about the color because he does not want that wall there.
(-) Marcela Roar - 2nd Discretionary Review Requestor
- None of the neighbors in the area were notified until they received notification from the City.
- They are concerned about the negative impact this construction will have on their homes, open space and the integrity of the neighborhood.
- The project should be modified by reducing the height 12 feet and the rear extension 18 feet.
- Her husband gets up at 5:30 a.m. to walk or jog so he goes to sleep early. [The way the houses are now we] can hear noises from the adjacent house. She requested that a sound wall be installed. A building inspector should also be hired to ensure that the materials used in the project are of the highest quality.
(-) Eileen Bocken
- She opposes the project. She lives one block away from the project.
- The size is too massive and she is concerned with its compatibility with the other homes.
- There have been a number of transactions in the Assessor's records.
(-) Sara Del Monte
- She lives in the neighborhood.
- She does not see why the project sponsor needs to build such a monstrosity.
- The homes in the neighborhood are single-family homes.
- She treasures San Francisco enough [to oppose this].
(-) Ellen Chiang
- She was born and raised in San Francisco.
- This addition is too large for the mid-block open space.
- The area is zoned for single family homes.
(+) Rex McClain - Project Architect
- The project sponsors want to add bedrooms and a bath.
- The project sponsors have a large family.
- He feels that having four bedrooms is not an unreasonable expectation.
- Although leaving the first floor open is odd to the project sponsor, they will be using the space as a covered out door patio for their children to play when there is bad weather.
(+) Victoria Liveron
- She and her husband are planning to have another child for a total of three.
- Many of the homes in the neighborhood have gone through renovations.
- They have tried to design the smallest possible addition allowable.
- The empty space on the first floor will be used as a family room or as an enclosed play area.
(+) Alex Liveron
- The requestor's bedroom has a large top to bottom patio door where sun will not be blocked.
- They made an offer to the Discretionary Review requestors in order to deal with the issues they have.
- He has a list of things that they would like to offer to the DR requestors that is available to the Commission.
- There are support letters from the neighborhood.
ACTION: Took Discretionary Review and modified the project by: the two story horizontal rear addition is not to exceed 13 feet from the existing rear wall.
AYES: Antonini, Hughes, S. Lee, W. Lee
NAYES: Bradford Bell and Olague
16a. 2004.0323D (R. CRAWFORD: (415) 558-6358)
1644 DIAMOND STREET - west side between 28th and 29th Streets. Assessor's Block 7520 Lot 007 - Mandatory Discretionary Review, under the Planning Commission's policy requiring review of housing demolition, of Demolition Permit Application No. 2004 0303 7704, to demolish an existing single family dwelling in an RH-1 (Residential House, One Family) District, and a 40-X Height and Bulk District.
Preliminary Recommendation: Do Not Take Discretionary Review and Approve the Project.
SPEAKER(S):
(-) Steve Williams - Representing Discretionary Review Requestor
- Single-family homes are being lost.
- This housing is occupied and has been occupied since it was first purchased.
- The intention from the beginning was to destroy the house.
- The soundness report does not have accurate figures.
- The size of the lots is small and extremely substandard.
- This house should be saved. The 3-½ foot setback should be retained.
(-) Suzanne Dumont
- She is opposed to the project because it will demolish perfectly sound housing.
- This demolition should not go forward. It is just an excuse for expanding.
(-) Marilou Lascari
- She is opposed to the demolition.
- The Commission can save the wholesale [demolition] of single-family homes.
- She urged the Commission to keep small houses.
- The Residential Design Guidelines should be applied.
(-) Michael Redmond
- He has lived on Diamond Street for over 25 years.
- The houses in the area are modest and unpretentious.
- There are no other four-story houses on the block.
- The project will tower over his house and block his light and air.
- He has signed petitions from 41 neighbors who oppose the project.
(-) Winnie Siegel - Little House Committee
- She speaks for preservation.
- The Commission should decide for repair and not demolition.
- The house could be purchased as a starter home.
(-) Mrs. Anderson
- She opposes the demolition.
- There have been eight demolitions and new constructions recently.
- Because of these projects, the noise and traffic is affecting the neighborhood.
- There are no buildings that are four stories over garage.
(-) Klaus Wirsing
- The three houses on Diamond Street are a cluster of small lots.
- The new construction will dramatically change the neighborhood.
- There is a lot of anger brewing in the neighborhood.
(-) Dick Meister
- He lives on 28th Street.
- All the points have been made already.
- He is opposed to the demolition.
(-) Margaret Hoppe
- She lives four doors down.
- She is opposed to the monster homes going up in the neighborhood.
- She read a letter from Vicky Rosen who is opposed to the project.
- The proposal is not harmonious with the neighborhood.
(-) Mr. Anderson
- This type of redevelopment in the neighborhood is hurting it.
- If a modest addition is intended, then it should be done following all the requirements and communicating with the neighbors.
- There will be a lot of construction noise as well.
(-) Harry Jeong
- He lives across the street from the subject project.
- He requested Discretionary Review on this property.
- He sees that only cosmetic renovations need to be done to the project.
(-) Gerry Meister
- She lives on 28th Street.
- Most all of the points have been made and she wanted to echo the sentiments.
- She opposes the demolition.
(-) Peter Culley
- He is a registered Structural Engineer and has been for about 40 years.
- Many of the previous speakers have questioned the logic of the soundness report.
- He examined the site and determined that there is no hillside sliding.
- He gave a technical explanation of why the house does not need to be demolished.
(-) Joe Butler
- There is a small wide lot.
- This proposed construction will tower over the adjacent houses.
- He showed photographs of how the project would cause shadows over the neighbors.
(-) Judith Hoyem
- The planning code has priority policies to preserve existing character. It seems extremely wasteful to demolish this house.
(+) David Mielder
- There have been recommendations to reduce the a section by 12 feet and pull the house back from the property line by three feet and the new plans reflect that. The back area has been lowered an additional three feet.
- The other issue here is the rights of a property owner compared to the rights of the neighborhood.
- Since this has to be negotiated with the people that it impacts, they have made revisions to the plans to reflect their issues.
- He mentioned that although this is the developer's project, he as well and the project architect live in the neighborhood.
(+) James Lee
- He displayed a photograph showing how the soil in the back of the house is pushing the upper portion of the house.
MOTION: To continue to October 7, 2004
AYES: Antonini, Hughes, W. Lee
NAYES: Bradford Bell, S. Lee, Olague
RESULT: Motion failed
ACTION: Took Discretionary Review and disapproved the demolition.
AYES: Bradford Bell, Hughes, S. Lee, Olague
NAYES: Antonini and W. Lee
16b. 2004.0535D (R. CRAWFORD: (415) 558-6358)
1644 DIAMOND STREET - west side between 28th and 29th Streets. Assessor's Block 7520 Lot 007 - Request for Discretionary Review of Building Permit Application No. 2004 0303 7707, to construct a new single-family dwelling, four stories in height in an RH-1 (Residential House, One Family) District, and a 40-X Height and Bulk District.
Preliminary Recommendation: Do Not Take Discretionary Review and Approve the Project.
SPEAKER(S): See Speakers for 16a.
ACTION: In case the Board of Appeals overturns the Planning Commission's decision on the demolition, they [the Commission] took Discretionary Review and approved the project as modified:
1) The height of the portions of the building within twelve (12) feet of the north property line shall be reduced in height by twelve (12) feet.
2) The building shall be setback a minimum of three (3) feet from the north property line.
AYES: Antonini, Bradford Bell, Hughes, S. Lee, W. Lee, Olague
17a. 2004.0338DDDV (D. DIBARTOLO: (415) 558-6291)
755 22nd AVENUE - west side between Cabrillo and Fulton Streets: Lot 014 in Assessor's Block 1665 - Requests for Discretionary Review of Building Permit Application No. 2003.09.29.6087S, proposing to construct a three-story horizontal extension at the rear of the existing three-story single family dwelling unit and to add an additional dwelling unit at the ground floor. The rear addition would increase the structure's depth by approximately 6 feet into the rear yard 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.
(Continued from Regular Meeting of September 2, 2004)
SPEAKER(S):
(-) Steve Williams - Representing 1st Discretionary Review Requestor
- Many people of the neighborhood will speak on the importance and beauty of the mid-block open space.
- This area is a real garden to all the neighbors.
- There is a history of various Discretionary Reviews in this neighborhood.
- The recent history is that his particular applicant was a Discretionary Review applicant.
- He submitted a copy of this Discretionary Review.
- There are some representatives from PAR who are here to speak against the project. They tried every effort to solve the issues.
(-) Francesca Pera - 2nd Discretionary Review Requestor
- This mid-block open space is very special for everyone on the block.
- This project would extend to the maximum allowable buildable area.
- The subject property is one of the largest on the block already.
- A proposal for a large remodel was approved by the Commission for another neighbor. However, there were conditions and reductions made to that project.
- Therefore, it would be appropriate to take Discretionary Review because the design of the project is not compatible with the neighborhood.
- The mid-block open space is a natural resource that the neighbors must protect.
(-) Sandra Fewer - 3rd Discretionary Review Requestor
- She has lived in the area for over 18 years.
- Her home is three houses away from the proposed project.
- Her back yard is comparable to a private park.
- All the neighbors have shared and respected the mid-block open space.
- Light and air enter every window of her home.
- The proposed project would be the largest house on the block.
- This project is not about six feet, it is about neighbors abiding by the process and being successful in coming to an agreement.
- The parking situation in the area will only get worse.
(-) Camille Hamilton
- Their mid-block is so rare and so exceptional that they are working hard to preserve it.
- This project cannot be decided upon on a "one size fits all" policy.
(-) David Pating
- He lives on 22nd Avenue.
- He displayed various diagrams of suggested floor plans but the project sponsor rejected them.
- He asked that the project be reduced three feet.
(-) Peter Winkelstein - PAR
- They support the Discretionary Review requestors because of the uniqueness of the open space.
(-) John Fewer
- He lives on 22nd Avenue.
- The applicant has misled the Commission on various exhibits.
(-) Jeff Pera
- He and his wife have lived in the neighborhood for about 5 years.
- They are concerned about preserving the mid-block open space.
- If approved, the project would set a precedent for other projects.
(-) Steve Artus
- He lives on 23rd Avenue.
- The neighbors have tried really hard to reach a settlement.
- He urges the Commission to take Discretionary Review.
(-) Colen Fewer
- She lives on 22nd Avenue.
- The back yard is a haven to her.
- The park in the middle of the block is spectacular.
- She asked that the Commission help them preserve it.
(-) Raymond Holland
- He lives on 23rd Avenue.
- This is the third in a line of deficit decisions.
- This is a unique open space and he hopes the Commission will grant discretionary review.
(+) Andrew Junius - Reuben and Junius - Representing Project Sponsors
- There have been a lot of misrepresentations and lies said.
- There are many neighbors who support this project.
- There have been numerous meetings and numerous design changes to deal with the issues.
- The project is only asking for six feet on the upper and lower floors.
(+) Marisa Singer
- Her clients have been very concerned about the open space in the back.
- They are also maintaining most of the Edwardian style house.
(+) Jeff Nemy - Project sponsor
- He thanked staff for all their help and support.
- Many neighbors have been able to remodel their homes and now they are telling him how to remodel his home.
- Many people have given testimonies today that are not true.
(+) Betsie Nemy - Project sponsor
- She has lived on 22nd Avenue for about 40 years.
- She has a stove that is on the back porch without even a sink. She does not even have all the things needed for a kitchen in one room.
(+) Cliff Gardner
- He has lived in the Richmond since 1997.
- He renovated his house when his family got larger.
- As he looks at the project, this is all about six feet.
- This beautiful Edwardian will be brought to modern times.
(+) Edward Lee
- He has lived in the Richmond for about 12 years.
- He is aware of the beautiful mid-block open space.
- The project is fully within the codes of San Francisco.
- He suggested that the Commission look at the facts instead of the emotional hyperbole.
- The design does not foster a negative impact as suggested by previous speakers.
(+) Tony Maurovich
- He has lived on 22nd Avenue for many years.
- Six feet will not diminish the open space.
- The project sponsor should be allowed to build as proposed.
(+) Oblio Jenkins
- The designs of the plans are great.
- The project sponsor has tried to maintain and preserve the mid-block open space.
(+) Nick Ames
- He has been to the project sponsor's home and the kitchen is in a terrible situation.
- It is important that a community come together instead of fighting each together.
(+) Allan Foster
- The project sponsor has been more than reasonable. His project should be approved.
(+) Steven Nemy
- His home in San Francisco is nice and his friends are here.
- All men are created equal.
- They are trying to make us think they are nice by creating a block party.
- They get to remodel and now they are not letting us do the same.
(+) Julia Nemy
- She is outgrowing her house.
- All men are created equal so please approve the project.
(+) Jeremy Nelson
- They support the parking variance because it allows more flexibility for parking and a more efficient use of space.
- There are no policy merits to allow independently accessible parking.
- If the parking variance is approved, he requested that it [parking] be unbundled.
MOTION 1: Do not take Discretionary Review and approve the project.
AYES: Antonini, Bradford Bell, Olague
NAYES: Hughes and S. Lee
ABSENT: W. Lee
RESULT: Motion Failed
MOTION 2: Take Discretionary Review as approve as modified: Do not extend rear wall beyond adjacent property to the North.
AYES: Hughes and S. Lee
NAYES: Antonini, Bradford Bell, Olague
ABSENT: W. Lee
RESULT: Motion Failed.
ACTION: In the absence of a substitute motion, the permit was approved as proposed.
17b. 2004.0338DDDV (D. DIBARTOLO: (415) 558-6291)
755 22nd AVENUE - west side between Cabrillo and Fulton Streets: Lot 014 in Assessor's Block 1665 - The proposal is to construct a three-story horizontal extension at the rear of the existing three-story single family dwelling unit and to add an additional dwelling unit at the ground floor. A Variance is sought from the off-street parking requirements of Section 154, as the project would provide a 2-car tandem parking configuration rather than independently accessible parking as required by the Planning Code. The subject property is within an RH-2 (Residential, House, Two-Family) District and a 40-X Height and Bulk District.
(Continued from Regular Meeting of September 2, 2004)
SPEAKERS: Same as those listed for item 17a.
ACTION: Zoning Administrator closed the public hearing and granted the variance.
18. 2004.0792D (D. DiBARTOLO: (415) 558-6291)
26 JOICE STREET - east side between California and Pine Streets: Lot 024 in Assessor's Block 0256 - Request for Discretionary Review of Building Permit Application No. 2003.02.20.7886S, proposing to construct a vertical and horizontal addition and to renovate the existing two-story single family structure. The vertical addition adds two new floor levels and the horizontal addition maintains the existing rear yard depth, while extending each floor level for the entire lot width. The subject property is within an RM-3 (Residential, Mixed, Medium-Density) District and a 40-X Height and Bulk District.
Preliminary Recommendation: Do not take Discretionary Review and approve the project.
SPEAKER(S):
(-) Madelyn Lee - representing the Discretionary Review Requestor
- She is the daughter of the Discretionary Review requestor.
- The horizontal addition will block out the sun.
- They were not aware that the person next door was going to do remodeling.
- A few months ago, there was some concern about the light.
- She is worried that the project sponsor did not talk to her mom about the project.
(+) Dennis Lee - Project Architect
- This is a very narrow property.
- They looked at different design options to meet his client's needs and respect the height and block face.
- He tried to incorporate the existing block face and height limits.
- He feels that the project does not have severe impacts on the neighbors.
(+) Mitchel Hong - Project Sponsor
- He has lived in San Francisco for more than 50 years.
- The lot is too narrow.
- He has support from the neighbors.
ACTION: Did not take Discretionary Review and approved the project
AYES: Antonini, Bradford Bell, Hughes, S. Lee, Olague
ABSENT: W. Lee
