2019-12-12 · 18 comments · 2 / 16
Troy Kashanipour · spoken · 2019-12-12 · support
Project presentation
OPPOSED - 1846 Grove StreetDear Commissioners, I am opposed to the project at 1846 Grove Street and ask that you do not approve this conditional use application or grant variances, or grant the exemption from CEQA, for the following reasons: Though the project entrance is proposed near the intersection of Fulton and Masonic, the project is listed as 1846 Grove Street, in order to try to get approved under the radar This project impacts the 17 … Dear Commissioners, I am opposed to the project at 1846 Grove Street and ask that you do not approve this conditional use application or grant variances, or grant the exemption from CEQA, for the following reasons: Though the project entrance is proposed near the intersection of Fulton and Masonic, the project is listed as 1846 Grove Street, in order to try to get approved under the radar This project impacts the 17 properties that share the property line The lot being developed is zoned RH-2 for a maximum of two housing units, not five No off-street parking is proposed in a neighborhood with a parking deficit The "flag lot" provides only a narrow access path to the street, and will be a hazard in case of an emergency evacuation due to fire The Class 3 CEQA Exemption only applies to "three new single-family units or six dwelling units in one building." The project is described as "Five new single-family units" and the diagram shows four separate buildings, not one building. This project should not be exempt from CEQA and we will be challenging this exemption if this project is approved. I have lived at this address since 1993. It is a wonderful, quiet space and I fear that our neighborhood will be negatively impacted if this project is allowed to go through. I'm all for more affordable housing, that San Francisco so desperately needs. This project will do nothing to help that issue. Thank you for your time, Michelle Dobrow 613 Masonic Ave. 94117 Western Additionshow more Julia Friedlander · spoken · 2019-12-12 · oppose
Opposition
Theo Gordon · spoken · 2019-12-12 · support
Support
John Mark Ikeda · spoken · 2019-12-12 · oppose
Opposition
Jason Chu · spoken · 2019-12-12 · oppose
Opposition
Jessica Potts Fortier · spoken · 2019-12-12 · oppose
Opposition
Joseph Sanprivio · spoken · 2019-12-12 · oppose
Opposition
Jarvis Rich · spoken · 2019-12-12 · oppose
Opposition
Henry Tang · spoken · 2019-12-12 · oppose
Opposition
Mary Yvonne · spoken · 2019-12-12 · oppose
Opposition
Melinda Schwazen · spoken · 2019-12-12 · oppose
Opposition
Meg Gray · spoken · 2019-12-12 · oppose
Opposition
Abby Kiegan · spoken · 2019-12-12 · oppose
Opposition
Brandon Keefe · spoken · 2019-12-12 · oppose
Organized Opposition
Michelle Devereaux · spoken · 2019-12-12 · oppose
Organized Opposition
Brian King · spoken · 2019-12-12 · oppose
Organized Opposition
Eric Davenport · spoken · 2019-12-12 · oppose
Opposition
2020-04-09 · 23 comments · 11 / 12
OPPOSE 1846 Grove DevelopmentSubject: OPPOSE 1846 Grove St Development Dear Commissioners: I reside on block 1187 and disapprove of the project named 1846 Grove St. This proposal is out of character with the neighborhood in terms of density and built up area, does not address the issues of privacy, fire safety during construction, protection of two treasured ancient oak trees, nor the impact of a building with no setbacks in the midst of a neigh… Subject: OPPOSE 1846 Grove St Development Dear Commissioners: I reside on block 1187 and disapprove of the project named 1846 Grove St. This proposal is out of character with the neighborhood in terms of density and built up area, does not address the issues of privacy, fire safety during construction, protection of two treasured ancient oak trees, nor the impact of a building with no setbacks in the midst of a neighborhood with communally beneficial open yards. The project developer has demonstrated a consistent unwillingness to meaningfully engage the neighborhood, opting instead to hold barely announced meetings and sudden venue changes, and to be dismissive of or give lip service to neighborhood input. The Planning Department executive summary misreports the project sponsor<U+2019>s community meeting activities and fails to record neighbors<U+2019> opposition to the project by citing only one letter; there were multiple (my neighbors and I have copies of 18 letters opposing). In the absence of meaningful engagement by the project sponsor, many residents of the neighborhood hoped their voices before and during the December 12, 2019 Commission hearing would finally be heard by the project sponsor and be acted on. Instead, the sponsor reached out to only two or three neighbors to avoid the residents of the neighborhood and, in one example, claimed his <U+201C>accommodation<U+201D> of density/built up area objections by simply merging two buildings into one to <U+201C>reduce<U+201D> density from five to four units. No change to the total number of bedrooms was made, the footprint was reduced by only 3.5%, and no front and rear setbacks were created in keeping with the neighborhood<U+2019>s character. This type of construction is not the solution we need to our housing crisis and is especially inappropriate for our block. Eliminating an open space / fire break in the center of a 100+ year old built up block deserves restrictions, not exemptions. I am also concerned about the potential catastrophic impact to the surrounding homes during a construction phase that would require welding of any sort. The homes and the fences surrounding the proposed site are made of wood and stucco and are highly flammable. There have been numerous instances in the last few years in San Francisco, Oakland and Emeryville of multimillion dollar fires during construction of residential units. Those sites were further away from existing housing than the homes that surround this site. I am enormously worried about my own home and those of all my neighbors on the blocks of Masonic, Fulton, Grove and Ashbury. Finally, this project could severely harm or cause the death of two treasured trees: the enormous Coastal Live Oak tree on the site and the California Oak that is adjacent to and in front of my home on Masonic. I believe both trees could be irreparably damaged by the proposal to direct water away from the site and into the sewers. I am very concerned that the project could cause the Live Oak tree to die, either during or post construction. My guess is that the California Oak in front of my home was planted by the first family to live next door, which would mean the tree is more than 100 years old. I cannot even begin to guess the age of the Live Oak. Suffice it to say it is <U+201C>ancient." Please vote to disapprove the project proposal for 1846 Grove. Thank you, Marian Ivan 631 Masonic Ave. San Francisco, CA 94117show more Deny approval to 1846 GROVE proposalPlanning Commissioners: Please deny approval to proposed developed labeled as at 1846 GROVE. The site is only reachable via a 3-5 foot narrow, and very long passage way. It is virtually inacessible in case of a fire or other emergency. The site is of questionable origin, and should not be a separate parcel. Construction here is opposed by virtually all neighbors. Please deny approval for this project. We don't… Planning Commissioners: Please deny approval to proposed developed labeled as at 1846 GROVE. The site is only reachable via a 3-5 foot narrow, and very long passage way. It is virtually inacessible in case of a fire or other emergency. The site is of questionable origin, and should not be a separate parcel. Construction here is opposed by virtually all neighbors. Please deny approval for this project. We don't need another handful of luxury condos. Sincerely Tes Welborn Haight Ashbury Neighborhood Councilshow more 2018-011441CUAVAR_1846 Grove_Support Letter
Hello- Please find attached letter of support for 1846 Grove regarding its Commission Hearing on April 9th. Thank you! Maria Danielides, RA
Neighbor Opposition to 1846 Grove Street ProjectDear Commissioners, I am opposed to the potential project at 1846 Grove Street. I am a homeowner on Masonic Avenue who would be directly impacted. First, the proposal is much too dense, four units when the lot is only zoned for two. The developer is proposing 0<U+2019> to 5<U+2019> lot lines/setbacks, a variance to the 15<U+2019> absolute minimum according to code. I<U+2019>m concerned about… Dear Commissioners, I am opposed to the potential project at 1846 Grove Street. I am a homeowner on Masonic Avenue who would be directly impacted. First, the proposal is much too dense, four units when the lot is only zoned for two. The developer is proposing 0<U+2019> to 5<U+2019> lot lines/setbacks, a variance to the 15<U+2019> absolute minimum according to code. I<U+2019>m concerned about rain water runoff, as the hill slopes down rather steeply to Masonic, and with less field and more buildings/concrete, less of the water will be absorbed and will instead flow into my backyard and building. I<U+2019>m also concerned about fire safety given my location directly east of the development. The winds blowing off the Pacific from west to east can at times reach 20+ mph, and although the new structures will be made with fire resistant materials, my fence and wooden house built in 1917 are not. Furthermore, the long 3<U+2019>6<U+201D> wide entry ends right behind my place, specifically my bedrooms. I worry about privacy, noisy entrances, and loud garbage cans being rolled out. Lastly, the developer continues to dismiss neighborhood input. This type of construction is not the solution we need to our housing crisis. Please vote to disapprove the proposal at 1846 Grove. Thank you, Brian Kingan 627 Masonic Aveshow more OPPOSE 1846 Grove St. DevelopmentDear Commissioners, I am a longtime resident of 1833 Fulton Street and I strongly disapprove of the development project 1846 Grove St. The project is not in line with the character of the other buildings in this neighborhood and the entrance to the project is literally a sidewalk approximately three feet wide between a house and a restaurant. This appears to be a major fire and safety hazard, not to mention, most… Dear Commissioners, I am a longtime resident of 1833 Fulton Street and I strongly disapprove of the development project 1846 Grove St. The project is not in line with the character of the other buildings in this neighborhood and the entrance to the project is literally a sidewalk approximately three feet wide between a house and a restaurant. This appears to be a major fire and safety hazard, not to mention, most likely a very difficult and lengthy construction project. In addition to not being a good place for even a single family unit, the developer is trying to make this a multi family unit. The developer has been less than friendly to the neighbors by not disclosing many details about the plans and I believe I overheard one of the developers telling a group of presumably developers or politicians that when they bought this land it was inhabited by homeless victims and drug addicts. My wife has lived in our building for 15 years and the only residents that space has had are sunbathing cats, overgrown grass, and a seemingly ancient agave plant. In fact the worst that land has looked is recently when it has plywood pieces half standing and half scattered around the plot. And bright orange fencing between some of the wood. This litter started filling up the back yard around November 2019 when the meeting signs for December were first posted. I've also noticed meeting dates being posted days before they are to take place and often being changed to a new date and location last minute. I've never been personally contacted by the project sponsor to express my opinions on this project despite promises of past hearings where the dates were shuffled around and moved. This is not a solution for the housing crisis in the city. It instead eliminates open space and a fire break around a densely crowded neighborhood with many buildings over 100 years old. My wife and I have a child on the way and this makes us very uneasy with potential fire risk. In addition to the fire risk is the logistics of construction. It seems that it will be extremely disruptive to residents and business owners nearby to support the construction of a building where the only way in and out is a three foot wide, 100 foot, or so, long sidewalk. This will seemingly take years to complete and cause further disruption on an already very busy intersection. Lastly, with COVID-19 causing so many overall health concerns it seems counterproductive to encourage construction in such a limited space. Practicing social distancing during construction, let alone afterwards seems very difficult if it is needed for longer than the next few weeks. I appreciate you taking the time to hear our concerns. Please vote to disapprove the project proposal for 1846 Grove St. in San Francisco Thank you Deric Brown 1833 Fulton St. San Francisco, CA 94117show more Melinda Tuazon · spoken · 2020-04-09 · oppose
Oppose
1846 Grove Street ProjectGreetings Commissioners, I am writing this email to you to voice my support for the proposed project at 1846 Grove Street. Given the pressing need for housing in our current crisis, this project represents good infill design. A few points of interest to note: 1. The modest scale and the limiting of the number of units 2. The judicious distribution of the massing to avoid a monolithic design 3. Simp… Greetings Commissioners, I am writing this email to you to voice my support for the proposed project at 1846 Grove Street. Given the pressing need for housing in our current crisis, this project represents good infill design. A few points of interest to note: 1. The modest scale and the limiting of the number of units 2. The judicious distribution of the massing to avoid a monolithic design 3. Simple but elegant architectural design with warm wood exteriors 4. The inward focus of the units towards the internal courtyard to preserve as much privacy as possible 5. The preservation of the oak tree and use of vegetated roofs to preserve a sense of a green space as well as nod towards sustainability The aforementioned reflect a sensitivity and thoughtfulness to the surrounding context while creating nice habitable spaces in what would otherwise remain a hovel for rats and raccoons in its current condition. Please support this project. Thanks a lot, Richard Tsaishow more Jeremy Linden · spoken · 2020-04-09 · support
Support
Michael Chen · spoken · 2020-04-09 · support
Support
Eric Davenport · spoken · 2020-04-09 · oppose
Oppose, scared
Troy Kashanipour · spoken · 2020-04-09 · support
Project presentation
Craig Rosen · spoken · 2020-04-09 · oppose
Oppose
Carmen Cruz · spoken · 2020-04-09 · support
Support
Mary Yvonne · spoken · 2020-04-09 · oppose
Oppose
Brian Vito · spoken · 2020-04-09 · support
Support
Morgan O'Hara · spoken · 2020-04-09 · oppose
What is Plan B, address safety concerns
Theo Gordon · spoken · 2020-04-09 · support
Support
Sara Ogilvie · spoken · 2020-04-09 · support
Support
Christie Marshall · spoken · 2020-04-09 · oppose
Oppose
Brandon O'Keefe · spoken · 2020-04-09 · oppose
Organized opposition presentation
Theo Randolph · spoken · 2020-04-09 · support
Support
Henry Chan · spoken · 2020-04-09 · oppose
Oppose
Laura Foote · spoken · 2020-04-09 · support
Support