Citizen Portal
Sign In

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

Get email alerts on the Neighborhood Impact topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Commission continues 3009 California Street discretionary review after privacy, light-well and massing concerns

San Francisco Planning Commission · March 23, 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

Neighbors objected to a proposed fourth-floor addition and third-floor light-well layout at 3009 California Street; commissioners directed the applicant to submit improved drawings (3D massing, fenestration, material details), clarify light-well/venting locations, and consider a two-unit design option. Matter continued to April 13 for revised plans.

The Planning Commission continued the discretionary review for a proposed rear addition and upper-floor expansion at 3009 California Street after extended public testimony and commissioner questions about massing, light wells, and mechanical venting.

Neighbors, represented by Matthew Klein and others, argued that adding a fourth floor and narrowing a light well adjacent to existing bedroom windows would reduce daylight, increase shadowing and channel bathroom and laundry exhaust next to a neighbor's primary bedroom. Staff and the residential design team responded that revisions had already been made to provide setbacks and that the Department had found the revised plans to be code compliant, but commissioners and several members of the public requested additional clarifications and rework.

Commissioners asked the applicant to provide a complete revised package including: 3D massing and elevations that show the project in context (fenestration and window openings on adjacent buildings clearly marked), explicit material and color notes, plumbing/venting routing showing that bathroom and laundry exhausts vent up rather than into side light-wells, and a clearer demonstration of how proposed setbacks reconcile with adjoining properties. Several commissioners also suggested the owner consider creating a two-unit solution (adding a legal subsidiary unit) as a public benefit given the large size of the proposal on an RH2 lot.

The Commission continued the item to April 13 with the above directions; the motion to continue carried unanimously.