Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Housing topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Commission signals intent to disapprove conditional use at 200 Dolores, adopts variances to proceed to refinement
Summary
A contested proposal for new residential units at 200 Dolores prompted debate over parking ratios; after neighborhood support for 1:1 parking, the commission voted 4–3 on a motion of intent to disapprove the conditional use and indicated the project will return for final action with conditions and required variances addressed.
Get email alerts on the Housing topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
A proposal to build a new 10-unit building at 200 Dolores Street and adjust an adjacent lot drew sustained debate Jan. 28 over whether the project should be allowed 1:1 off-street parking or be held to the Market and Octavia (RTO) standard of 0.75 spaces per unit.
Planning staff recommended approval with modifications and supported a conditional-use authorization for one-to-one parking because of site-specific factors including the proximity to transit and the internal parking layout; the project also requires four variances tied to a lot-line adjustment and design elements. Project sponsor David Silverman and neighborhood supporters including Peter Lewis and Tom Olsen urged approval of the staff recommendation, stressing historic preservation of the parish house and the neighborhood’s parking realities.
Several commissioners questioned setting an exception to the RTO standard on policy grounds. Commissioners Moore and others emphasized the risk of creating an inconsistent precedent that could undermine broader transit-oriented parking policies and suggested car-share mitigation. Commissioner Antonini and other supporters of the sponsor called for discretionary allowance and argued the immediate neighborhood supported 1:1 parking. After extended discussion, the commission adopted a motion of intent to disapprove the conditional use in favor of applying the 0.75 RTO ratio; the motion passed 4–3 (SEG 2440–2456). The chair noted variances would be processed, CEQA findings adapted and the item scheduled to return for final action on Feb. 11 with staff to present refined design drawings.
The effect of the motion is to require the sponsor to return with revised materials addressing design conditions and parking calculations; the commission and staff indicated they will continue working with the project sponsor on design refinements and final variance language.
