Citizen Portal
Sign In

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

Get email alerts on the Neighborhood Development topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Board upholds Funston Avenue permit; applicant agrees to remove property‑line windows and investigate sewer

San Francisco Board of Appeals · October 20, 2021
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 Board of Appeals denied Rose Fang’s appeal challenging a 4‑story site permit at 1224 Funston Avenue, after the permit holder agreed to remove property‑line windows, provide a separate sewer connection, and replace the shared gate if constructed; Board voted 4–0 to deny the appeal.

On Oct. 20 the San Francisco Board of Appeals denied Rose Feng’s appeal of a building permit for 1224 Funston Avenue, concluding the permit was properly issued. Feng had argued the proposed 4‑story design would substantially reduce sunlight on an adjacent dwelling (her analysis reported average facade sunlight reductions of roughly 20–28% and a maximum 89% at one point), that three proposed openings on a property‑line wall may not comply with building code AB009, that the project’s plumbing should be separated from an adjacent shared sewer, and that construction would degrade an existing shared entrance and security.

Herman Morris Architects (project architect Toby Morris) and the permit holder described the project history, efforts to preserve an existing rear cottage and to reduce impacts, and presented an offer to the appellant that included removal of the property‑line windows, provision of a separate sewer connection for the new home, and modification of the shared gate to preserve the appellant’s security. DBI and Planning staff told the board the permit met code and that some of the appellant’s requests (new gate, work on an adjacent lot) were outside the board’s authority over this permit; DBI confirmed the permit had been reviewed by plan check and that a separate sewer could be installed and inspected by the plumbing division.

Commissioners said the project had been through multiple hearings and that the permit holder had made good‑faith changes. Commissioner Lazarus moved to deny the appeal and uphold the permit; the board voted 4–0 to deny the appeal.