Board of Appeals continues appeal over three‑story house on substandard Gottingen lot, asks for two‑story redesign

The San Francisco Board of Appeals on July 7 continued an appeal of a variance that would allow a three‑story single‑family house to be built on a legal substandard lot at 1230 Gottingen Street, directing the applicant to return with revised two‑story plans and privacy and setback changes.

The case (2020005122) involves requested variances from planning code requirements including rear‑yard standards (Planning Code §134), usable open‑space requirements (§135) and permitted obstruction/glazing rules (§136). Planning staff told the board the parcel is an existing legal substandard lot dating to at least 1935, about 392 square feet with roughly 33 feet of frontage, and that the proposal would be 28 feet tall and provide about 93 square feet of usable open space where 300 square feet is required.

Appellants, represented by Ms. Gower, said the lot is effectively unbuildable given its dimensions and warned of privacy loss, blocked airflow, potential drainage and egress concerns and the project’s outsized scale compared with surrounding two‑story houses. “This lot does not seem legal for a building,” Ms. Gower said, arguing the design would create a “spite wall” and reduce neighbors’ quality of life.

The permit holder, who identified himself as Luan, responded that the parcel is a legal substandard lot, that he researched approvals before purchase and that plumbing, ventilation and other code issues would be addressed through building permits. Architect Bill Guan said the design will comply with building codes and stressed the city’s housing shortage: “The city is very short of housing,” he said, arguing that adding a small dwelling helps address demand.

Deputy Zoning Administrator Scott Sanchez told the board that, if a variance is granted, a subsequent building‑permit application would trigger a section 3‑11 notice to nearby owners and occupants and a DBI review; he described the current hearing as a de novo review of the zoning administrator’s decision.

Commissioners were split. Commissioner Tina Chang said she sympathized with neighbors but was open to “creative ways” to add housing on substandard lots. Vice President Rick Swig, Commissioner Anne Lazarus and President Honda raised concerns that the project did not meet multiple variance findings, particularly how it fits the neighborhood and whether the proposal is materially injurious to surrounding property.

To address those concerns the board voted to continue the matter to Aug. 18 and asked the determination holder to return with revised plans that remove the third story, convert that area to usable open space set back three feet from each adjoining property line, and avoid a stair penthouse. The board also encouraged the sponsor to meet with neighbors about privacy measures and set the administrative expectation that revised plans and attachments be filed by the Thursday prior to the next hearing. Commissioners Lazarus, Chang and Vice President Swig voted aye and the motion carried.

The board directed that each side be allowed up to four pages of briefing (exclusive of plans) and three minutes of in‑person/remote oral comment at the resumed hearing. If the revised proposal is not acceptable, the board said staff should prepare draft findings to deny the variance so the commission can act without further delay.

The appeal remains pending; the next hearing is scheduled for Aug. 18 with revised plans due the Thursday before the meeting.