Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Front Setback Variance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Neighbors clash with sponsor over new garage; commission approves variance for 3733–3735 Twentieth Street
Summary
The commission approved a certificate of appropriateness and a front‑setback variance to construct a garage at 3733–3735 Twentieth Street, despite public concerns about lost on‑street parking, pedestrian safety near Dolores Park and consistency with Vision Zero and transit‑first policies.
The Historic Preservation Commission voted to approve a certificate of appropriateness and a variance allowing a new garage and related alterations at 3733–3735 Twentieth Street in the Liberty Hill landmark district.
Monica Giacamucci, case presenter, told commissioners the two‑story Stick‑Eastlake residence (circa 1880) would receive a front‑setback garage and additional habitable space beneath the existing building. The plan had been revised following Architectural Review Committee recommendations; staff recommended approval with conditions including submittal of final materials, window and door specifications, and additional review of the proposed curb cut.
The project sponsor said the neighborhood pattern includes front garages and explained engineering constraints that prevented setting the garage further back; he described design changes made to respond to the ARC. Public commenter Heidi Klein, a 25‑year neighborhood resident who said she lives in affordable housing and relies on on‑street parking, urged denial, arguing the garage would contradict city policies such as Vision Zero and "transit first," would privatize public parking and create a pedestrian safety hazard for park users.
Commissioners discussed railing orientation and parking impacts; staff indicated an amended draft motion would include a condition requiring further coordination on the curb cut and garage door. The motion to approve with conditions passed unanimously. The zoning administrator said he would revisit specific provisions raised in public comment and took the variance under advisement for due diligence review.
