Board upholds Planning denial of two ADUs at 345 Fulton Street

The Board of Appeals on Sept. 1 denied an appeal from a property owner seeking variances to create two accessory dwelling units at 345 Fulton St., finding the project did not meet the five statutory findings required for an exposure variance.

The applicant’s representative argued the interior courtyard and tall ceilings would yield high‑quality units despite a small 9‑by‑25‑foot portion where bay windows above reduce clear sky area. “We would hate to see the project be effectively shelved,” the project attorney said, emphasizing tall ceilings, mirrored courtyards and enlarged glazing to draw light.

Planning Department staff and the deputy zoning administrator recommended denial, saying Units 2 and 3 rely on a courtyard that does not meet code standards for exposure and are not eligible for the administrative ADU waiver. Deputy Zoning Administrator Scott Sanchez told the board the department had already relaxed exposure standards for ADUs twice and that the proposal remained short of the reduced requirements.

Commissioners debated the public‑welfare implications and precedent concerns. Some members said the units looked well‑designed; others said allowing the variance would undercut the code’s deliberate limits. Commissioner Chang moved to deny the appeal on the grounds the applicant had not satisfied the five findings in Planning Code section 305(c); the motion passed 4‑1. The board’s decision upholds the zoning administrator’s denial.

Next steps: The applicant may revise designs and reapply to meet exposure or pursue an alternate unit configuration; the board’s written decision will record the factual findings.