Remarks by Mike Chen
46 remarks on the record, newest first · Page 2 of 2
- Play at 2:10:18
“RECOMMENDATION OF APPROVAL. I AM TRYING TO DISCERN WITH COMMISSIONERS MCDONALD AND MCGARY WHAT ARE THE THINGS THAT of these just like of the of the three or four points what are the things that are objectionable what are the things that are that are um you know what what what are the things that if we took out right we would still would still be fine so i think that's that's my question and so i think my sense is that point one is fine because it's just a language thing um point two about the property owner consent thing right i think there i think there is a way to make this streamline to…”
Planning Commission · Sep 3, 2026
- Play at 2:19:01
“If I may answer, Commissioner McDonald, I think OUR ACTION AS A PLANNING COMMISSION IS THAT WE WILL SEND A RESOLUTION WITH RECOMMENDATIONS. THE RECOMMENDATIONS CAN BE VERY SPECIFIC, AS WITH LANGUAGE 1, I THINK WITH THAT FIRST POINT ABOUT CHANGING THE LANGUAGE OF WHO CAN INITIATE OR WHO CAN REQUEST AN INITIATION, BUT THEN I THINK WE CAN ALSO BE FAIRLY VAGUE AND LEAVE THAT TO THE BOARD. SO THAT'S SOMETHING THAT JUST”
Planning Commission · Sep 3, 2026
- Play at 2:19:54
“Okay, so maybe I will try this again. Sorry, President Campbell.”
Planning Commission · Sep 3, 2026
- Play at 2:21:57
“THANK YOU COMMISSIONERS AND THANK YOU STAFF. I KNOW WE PROBABLY SPEND A LOT OF TIME ON THIS. THIS IS MAYBE THE FOURTH OR FIFTH MOTION. LET'S TRY THIS AGAIN. MOTION TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL WITH THE FOLLOWING RECOMMENDATIONS. POINT ONE AS DISCUSSED BEFORE, CHANGING THE FIRST SENTENCE OF 1004.1A TO REFRASE TO SAY THE DEPARTMENT OR ANY MEMBER OF THE PUBLIC MAY REQUEST DESIGNATION. POINT TWO, I BELIEVE, IS TO Better consider the consent or opposition of the property owner in a way that does not unduly burden department staff. Yes. And then... I THINK IN TERMS OF WHAT INFORMATION WE WANT TO PUT INTO…”
Planning Commission · Sep 3, 2026
- Play at 3:07:03
“Thank you, President. I'm also supportive. This is great. If anything, I'd be like, why can't I be bigger? Can I be taller? Can we do more? This is an incredibly rare resource, and I'm very thankful that there's a lot of self-determination with the owners about what to do with this property. But the size, the location of this area is something that is quite rare. that Trader Joe's is right across the street. You're close to very high frequency transit lines. You're close to job centers, and so I think If I had a magic wand, I'd be like, make it twice as big. Put more people on there. And let…”
Planning Commission · Sep 3, 2026
- Play at 3:10:30
“UNDERSTOOD. OKAY. SO I THINK IF I UNDERSTOOD, RIGHT, IT'S FINANCING AND IT'S, YOU KNOW, RESIDENTS AND MAKING SURE RESIDENTS HAVE A CHOICE, RIGHT, OF CURRENT RESIDENTS, RIGHT, CAN GO INTO THE SENIOR HOUSING, RIGHT? YEAH, THEY HAVE.”
Planning Commission · Sep 3, 2026
- Play at 3:11:49
“UNDERSTOOD. AS YOU MENTIONED, IN ADDITION TO THOSE UNITS THERE'S ALSO 133 FAMILY BELOW MARKET RATE RENTAL UNITS. THAT'S RIGHT. GREAT. THANK YOU. THAT WAS MY ONLY QUESTION. THANK YOU.”
Planning Commission · Sep 3, 2026
- Play at 3:25:41
Not quoted here: it may name a member of the public. Hear it at the meeting.
Planning Commission · Sep 3, 2026
- Play at 3:27:21
“THE BOARD CHANGED THE INCLUSIONARY ZONING LEGISLATION AND THE PERCENTAGES. I WAS UNDER THE IMPRESSION IT WAS 5%, BUT IT SOUNDS LIKE THAT'S ON SITE AND IN LIEU IS DIFFERENT.”
Planning Commission · Sep 3, 2026
- Play at 3:28:13
“THANK YOU. OFF SITE IN LIEU. No, this is, I mean, I think this is quite a fascinating project, because I think when the family zoning plan came about, I think there was some question, I think, from housing advocates about, you know, whether, you know, I think there were some questions about whether the family zoning plan was so restrictive that developers would just choose to keep using the state density bonus. And so, and it's interesting, I think, I don't know if this is the first project, right, that said that. A PREVIOUSLY ENTITLED STATE DENSITY BONUS PROJECT IS NOW SAYING, OH, ACTUALLY,…”
Planning Commission · Sep 3, 2026
- Play at 4:05:38
“Thank you, and I'll be quick. I'm inclined to support the motion, but this is only my second meeting, but I think our last meeting in July, I think we had a somewhat similar DR where I think it was classified as a Class A historic resource, and so the department recommended a setback. The setback created conflicts with the neighbors, and so I don't know if this is a pattern, but something that maybe... You know, if I had a magic wand, I was like, well, maybe if we made it 10 feet, right, then we wouldn't, if the front setback were different, right, then maybe this conflict would not be…”
Planning Commission · Sep 3, 2026
- Play at 3:16
“Commissioner Chen? I would like to recuse myself from item three due to a potential conflict.”
Planning Commission · Jul 30, 2026
- Play at 6:44
Not quoted here: it may name a member of the public. Hear it at the meeting.
Planning Commission · Jul 30, 2026
- Play at 43:17
“Thank you, President Campbell. Just a quick note. I think maybe seven years ago, remember, Supervisor Catherine Stephanie had some legislation that allowed retail stores to have both a wall sign and a projecting sign, because I think at some point in the 90s that had been forbidden, but largely flouted. And there are places, if you could go to Chinatown or the Mission Street or Valencia Street, people had two signs, three signs. It was signs everywhere. No one had ever enforced it except for in cases someone had called and reported Scopo di Vino in District 2 to the planning department. So I…”
Planning Commission · Jul 30, 2026
- Play at 2:37:12
“Thank you. Quickly for staff, so let me just make sure I understand. So the project sponsor at 648 Duncan, they did not know that it was a Category A historic resource until they submitted their plans?”
Planning Commission · Jul 30, 2026
- Play at 2:37:38
“Understood. And for my understanding, the requirement is by law or by guidance to reduce the height and to enforce the setback? Where does that come from?”
Planning Commission · Jul 30, 2026
- Play at 2:38:23
“And that is required by CEQA? Is that required by city guidelines?”
Planning Commission · Jul 30, 2026
- Play at 2:38:49
“And the requirement that the city reduces the impacts to the character defining features, that is a... Is that a department process? Is that a requirement in city ordinance? I'm still trying to, I'm sorry, I'm new. I'm still trying to understand.”
Planning Commission · Jul 30, 2026
- Play at 2:39:13
“Okay. So I agree with the motion from Commissioner McGarry, I believe. I think Maybe this is a process question, but I do find it a bit regrettable that many project sponsors may not know the historic status of their property before they spend thousands of dollars and submit. Then they find out, oh, well, this new thing's happened. Now I've got to submit again. I'm very new, so I do not know, but this seems This does not seem to be very friendly for people who do want to raise kids or bring in their parents or change their family situation. And I know this is not within the scope of the DR,…”
Planning Commission · Jul 30, 2026
- Play at 2:41:04
“I suppose that makes sense by letter of the law, but in operation, I suppose it wouldn't change the decisions that they made, if that makes sense.”
Planning Commission · Jul 30, 2026
- Play at 2:42:05
“Yes, I understand that would be very expensive, very time consuming to try to analyze every single property. But I feel like the steps that we got here, it feels something could be better. But I will pause on that until a future policy discussion.”
Planning Commission · Jul 30, 2026