Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Discretionary Review topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Planning Commission approves scaled‑back redesign for 891 Carolina after neighbors demand reduced decks

San Francisco Planning Commission · July 13, 2017
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

After extensive neighborhood testimony, the commission approved a revised discretionary review for 891 Carolina Street with conditions that eliminated a prominent upper front and rear deck and reduced impacts on adjacent yards. The decision passed 5–1 with Commissioner Johnson dissenting.

The Planning Commission on July 13 approved a discretionary review for a proposed renovation and vertical addition at 891 Carolina Street, but required several modifications to address neighbors’ concerns about massing and privacy. Planning staff had found the project largely code‑compliant; the Residential Design Advisory Team had earlier requested reductions in perceived massing, and the architect revised the scheme several times.

Neighbors and community groups — including the Potrero Boosters and multiple residents — argued the fourth‑level and extended rear wall would intrude on mid‑block open space, block light and create precedent for oversized infill. The project sponsor, architect John Lam and property owner Bill Canahan, defended the design as code‑compliant, noting adjustments already incorporated after RDAT review and asserting the scheme would create two family‑sized units and return an uninhabitable property to productive use.

Commission discussion focused on massing, rooftop decks and compatibility with adjacent mid‑block open space. Commissioners proposed and adopted a motion that removes the upper front and rear decks and requires the sponsor to pull the rear massing back so it does not obstruct a neighbor’s window; the motion passed 5–1 (Commissioner Johnson opposed). The item will move to permit stage with the modifications recorded as conditions of approval.