Citizen Portal
Sign In

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

Get email alerts on the Residential Development topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Planning Commission approves 3157 Steiner alteration after neighbor objections

San Francisco Planning Commission · October 16, 2008
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

The commission denied a request for discretionary review of a proposed vertical addition at 3157 Steiner and approved the project; neighbors had argued the changes would harm light, air and privacy but staff found the plans consistent with zoning and residential design guidelines.

The Planning Commission unanimously approved a proposed alteration at 3157 Steiner Street and declined to take the neighbors’ mandatory discretionary review. The project would convert an existing two‑story single‑family home into a three‑story, two‑unit building with a vertical addition and rear expansion.

Neighbors and a family representative told the commission they were surprised by outreach practices and objected to the addition’s length, the depth of the rear extension and the effect on existing light wells and mature backyard trees. Multiple speakers said outreach by the sponsor had been incomplete and reported door‑to‑door solicitations they found unwelcome.

Staff and the project architect described design changes intended to reduce impacts: expanded light wells, side setbacks larger than guideline minimums, and an organized courtyard at the site’s center to provide open space and keep the building massing compatible with adjacent structures. Staff noted the project conforms to RH‑2 zoning and the residential design guidelines and that the proposal yields the maximum density allowed on the lot while providing two affordable units on site.

After questioning by commissioners about the length of the addition, window locations, and tree protection, the commission voted to deny the discretionary review request and to approve the project as proposed. Commissioners emphasized their expectation that the sponsor continue good‑faith outreach during permit and construction stages and noted that any discretionary review or appeals could bring the project back to the commission later.