Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Residential Addition topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Planning Commission approves Third Avenue addition after rejecting neighbor’s discretionary-review request
Summary
The commission denied a discretionary-review request and approved a 157-square-foot front addition at 146340 Third Ave, concluding the project did not create extraordinary circumstances concerning light and privacy; the vote was unanimous 6–0.
The San Francisco Planning Commission voted Sept. 17 to deny a discretionary-review (Doctor) request and approve a proposed 157-square-foot front addition at 146340 Third Avenue after concluding the addition would not create extraordinary or exceptional impacts on neighbors’ light or privacy.
Staff architect David Winslow presented the application and noted that the proposed addition complied with residential design guidelines related to articulation, light and privacy and observed that the addition is set off from the shared property line by two feet. The party requesting discretionary review, Daniel Church, argued the submitted plans contained errors and that the proposal would reduce midmorning light into his property and raised enforcement-history concerns.
The applicant’s representative responded that the project was thoroughly reviewed and permitted, that many earlier complained-of elements had been legalized through proper permitting and that the Doctor request lacked the specific extraordinary circumstances required for commission-level review.
After questioning by commissioners and staff clarification that the window and side-setback conditions did not meet the threshold for discretionary review, Commissioner Moore said he did not see a basis for the Doctor request and moved to approve the project. On roll call, Commissioners Chan, Diamond, Phun, Imperial, Moore and President Koppel voted aye and the motion passed 6–0.
Why it matters: The denial of the discretionary-review request confirms staff’s interpretation of the residential design guidelines for this case and allows the applicant to proceed with the modest addition, while also illustrating the commission’s role in adjudicating neighbor disputes when exception standards are claimed.
What happens next: The project may proceed under the approved building-permit process, subject to any remaining ministerial permit conditions and inspections.
