Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Public Comment Discretionary Review topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Noe Valley residents press commission on discretionary-review transparency; applicant raises action-memo concerns
Summary
Residents from Noe Valley told commissioners they feel kept in the dark between pre-application meetings and formal filings; a discretionary-review applicant asked the commission to clarify an action memo’s treatment of an elevator penthouse installed for a resident with a disability and to specify glazing treatment.
Several members of the public used the Nov. 12 meeting to raise concerns about project review and neighborhood change.
Nina Saltman, representing a Noe Valley group identifying itself as Protect Noe Charm, said residents are frustrated by the pace and scale of "supersized" buildings and want clearer communication during the discretionary-review process. "We are sort of kept in the dark about what happens in between the pre-op meeting and the 311," she said, and asked the commission whether reforms of the discretionary-review process were still under consideration.
Separately, Milo Werner, the discretionary-review applicant for 2720 Lyon Street, said the action memo for his case omitted a specific discussion explaining why an elevator penthouse was allowed — it was allowed, he said, because someone with a disability would live in the house — and asked that the record explicitly state that justification. He also asked that two sides of the elevator penthouse be described as transparent rather than generically "glazed." "That piece has been left out of the letter," Werner said, urging the commission to correct the action memo to prevent future misapplication.
Commissioners acknowledged the concerns and suggested staff follow up; Commissioner Richards previously encouraged the public to submit materials earlier in the week so commissioners have time to review attachments and lengthy emails.
