Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Sb423 4 Addison topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Project sponsors present 4 Addison under SB 423; commissioners and staff flag need for clearer submittals and neighborhood notice
Summary
Project sponsors described a proposed lot split and designs for two new residential buildings at 2 and 4 Addison Street under SB 423; commissioners praised the concept but urged clearer submittals and better neighbor notification.
Get email alerts on the Sb423 4 Addison topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Sponsors of a proposed SB 423 project at 4 Addison Street presented an informational briefing to the Planning Commission on March 27 describing a lot split and concept designs for two new houses on a Glen Park hillside lot. The presenters said the project would convert a vacant 50‑by‑100‑foot lot into two 25‑by‑100‑foot parcels: 2 Addison (single-family with ADU and JDU) and 4 Addison (two units with ADU and JDU). The sponsors said 2 Addison would remain under the 3,000‑square‑foot single-family limit with a two‑bedroom ADU and a junior ADU; 4 Addison was described as about 6,000 square feet of residential floor area, bringing total new housing on the lot to roughly 10,000 square feet.
Project sponsor Simone Katz O’Neil and collaborators said units would include elevators and roof decks and that designs were intended to respond to the sloping site and to be visually distinct while minimizing massing. “We purchased it in October 2024. It's been underutilized with no housing on the lot for as long as it's been there,” Simone Katz O’Neil said. The team noted the site is walking distance to Glen Park BART and on a bus route.
Commissioners used the informational item to discuss SB 423’s procedural requirements and to request clearer, consistent submittals. Vice President Moore and other commissioners said packets and web postings should include basic items — architect name, site plan, lot dimensions, and clear contextual maps showing adjacent buildings, windows and landscape — so commissioners, neighbors and staff can assess impacts. Moore also stressed that junior ADU rules differ from standard ADUs and asked sponsors to confirm compliance. Commissioners and staff suggested applicants who materially revise materials between posting and a hearing should allow additional review time or be continued so the commission and the public can read and respond to the revised documents.
Staff described the SB 423 hearing as informational under state law and noted applicants have up to 18 months to file a complete development application; once filed, staff will check whether the final proposal is within the 20% threshold of the initial materials posted. Commissioners framed their comments as procedural guidance rather than formal action; no vote was taken because the item was informational.
