Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Planning commission approves discretionary review, limits elevator penthouse at 848–850 Bay Street to 4 feet above roof
Summary
The San Francisco City Planning Commission voted unanimously to take discretionary review and require the elevator penthouse at 848–850 Bay Street be no more than 4 feet above the roof, following staff concerns that the proposed penthouse would harm views in a public view corridor and public comment both for and against the project.
San Francisco City Planning Commissioners voted unanimously to take discretionary review of a rooftop elevator penthouse at 848–850 Bay Street and limited the penthouse to a maximum of 4 feet above the roof, following staff presentation and public comment.
Staff told the commission the proposed elevator penthouse sits in a public view corridor and is visible from a nearby park and the cable car right-of-way; staff described the penthouse as roughly 12 feet tall by about 4–4½ feet wide by 5 feet deep (transcript figures) and said it meets planning-code dimensional limits but does not comply with the residential design guidelines. Staff also said it had received two letters opposing the addition.
The project sponsor, Peter Iskender, told the commission he owns 848 Bay Street, that the project was approved within the 40-foot height limit and that the elevator penthouse dimension appeared on submitted drawings due to a drafting issue. Iskender said city planners had previously advised that elevator penthouses could be treated as exempt up to 16 feet, and he offered to reduce the penthouse to about 11–12 feet or pursue design mitigation — including adding trees or green roofs — to reduce its visual impact. "...we will ask to go up to 12 feet upon further review that we find out that we can even decrease it to 11 feet," he said.
Neighbors and community representatives split on the proposal. David Reyes, a resident at 814 Bay Street and a San Francisco cable car conductor, urged approval and said he did not believe the penthouse "is gonna block that view of the cable car," calling the sponsor professional and responsive. John Loughran, representing the Russian Hill Improvement Association on behalf of an absent Tom Branch, submitted a letter and argued the parapet and penthouse created a "sizable rise" above the historic row and described the addition as excessive.
Commissioners pressed the sponsor on technical questions, including whether a hydraulic elevator could be used and why the shaft required the proposed height. Iskender said the building does not yet have an installed elevator, that the system planned was electric, and that the taller shaft would ease maintenance access and preserve future flexibility for a roof deck. Commissioners who raised concern said there was no roof deck currently proposed and questioned why that flexibility was necessary.
On a staff motion to take discretionary review and approve the project per the staff recommendation — limiting the elevator penthouse to no more than 4 feet above the roof — commissioners recorded unanimous support. After the vote the sponsor thanked the commission, encouraged neighbors to raise any construction issues directly with him and said his phone number was posted at the site.
The commission closed public comment on the item and adjourned the meeting.
