Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Public Housing Renovation topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board upholds 350 Ellis renovation permit; appellants’ accessibility and parking concerns rejected
Summary
The Board of Appeals denied an appeal by Peter Skolnick against a renovation and RAD conversion at 350 Ellis St.; TNDC and Glide described $27 million in renovations to improve accessibility and life‑safety, and the Mayor’s Office warned delays could stall HUD‑linked financing across multiple buildings.
The San Francisco Board of Appeals on Aug. 17 denied an appeal of a building permit for 350 Ellis Street and upheld the permit by a 5–0 vote.
The appeal was filed by Peter Skolnick, who spoke through an interpreter and raised multiple concerns about the proposed reconfiguration of the ground floor, arguing that the plan reduced currently large common areas used by seniors and people with disabilities and created longer, more difficult circulation paths. Skolnick said the changes would amount to discrimination against disabled tenants and asked the board to withhold the permit.
Tenderloin Neighborhood Development Corporation (TNDC) representatives told the board the building was in urgent need of life‑safety, accessibility and habitability upgrades. Don Falk, TNDC’s CEO, said the project is part of the federal Rental Assistance Demonstration (RAD) program covering 29 properties and estimated the construction budget at roughly $27,000,000. Falk said work includes sprinkler installation, seismic work, accessibility upgrades and environmental remediation and stressed the project’s goal of preserving homes for 96 seniors and people with disabilities.
Deborah Whittle of Glide Community Housing, TNDC’s partner, and Cynthia Alvarez (TNDC chief portfolio officer) described tenant outreach and mitigation steps, including offers of off‑site parking, temporary parking payments during construction and transit/ride options for displaced parking. TNDC said renovations would be phased so tenants are relocated within the building where possible; project staff estimated temporary displacements of roughly four to six months per phase.
Kate Hartley of the Mayor’s Office of Housing and Community Development (MOHCD) emphasized the urgency of the project, saying HUD financing links a group of projects and that delays on one transaction could stall work across multiple city properties. Hartley described a long backlog of deferred maintenance nationally and in San Francisco and urged denial of the appeal to protect vulnerable public‑housing residents.
Commissioners asked detailed questions about relocation logistics, vacancy projections and the size and function of community spaces. TNDC’s architect said the existing community room is about 3,000 square feet and that the proposed main community room would be roughly 593–600 square feet, supplemented by a smaller front room and enhanced lobby seating and outdoor space; commissioners noted the numerical discrepancy and sought clarification on how the differentiated spaces would serve resident needs.
After questions and deliberation the board voted 5–0 to deny the appeal and uphold the permit as properly issued. The board’s decision does not alter the current financing or the requirement for TNDC to follow building and accessibility codes; DBI and MOHCD participation in planning and construction oversight remain in effect.
