Commission approves Sutro Tower panel replacement after neighbors ask not to place item on consent calendar

Loading...

AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

The Planning Commission approved a mandatory discretionary review for replacement of exterior corrugated panels on Sutro Tower, after neighbors told commissioners they objected to the project being placed on the consent calendar without prior neighborhood notification.

The Planning Commission on Feb. 27 unanimously approved a mandatory discretionary review allowing replacement of exterior corrugated panels on Sutro Tower, finding the proposal meets standard conditions of approval.

The project, sponsored by Sutro Tower Inc., proposes like‑for‑like replacement of corrugated metal panels on the tower's lower horizontal trusses to remove paint that laboratory tests found contained lead. Planning Department staff recommended approval with the standard Sutro Tower conditions of approval and noted the project includes repainting the replaced panels in the tower's orange-red aviation color.

Gretel Gunther, the Planning Department project presenter, said the replacement panels "would be similar in size and shape to the existing panels" and that the project sponsor had held a community meeting on Feb. 12; the department had received one letter of support and three letters of opposition related to the project's placement on the hearing agenda.

Charlene Chen, Midtown Terrace neighborhood liaison, told the commission she had "no objection to the project itself," but objected to the unilateral placement of the mandatory discretionary review on the consent calendar without prior neighborhood notification. "My request would be that any future desire to place our mandatory discretionary review on the consent calendar be done with prior notice to the neighborhood," she said.

Commissioners asked the City Attorney and staff about whether mandatory discretionary review items may be listed on consent; the City Attorney said she would research the point and report back. Commissioner Moore noted neighborhood stewardship of the project and moved to approve the discretionary review; the motion was seconded and passed 7–0.

Planning staff said they would take the neighborhood feedback into account and coordinate with the project's sponsor on future noticing practice.