Board rejects permit to remove and replace billboard at 530 Howard Street
Loading...
Summary
The Board denied Becker Boards' permit to remove and replace an existing general‑advertising billboard at 530 Howard Street, finding Planning Code §604(h) and subsequent ordinance amendments prohibit replacing a removed general‑advertising sign; decision was 5–0.
The San Francisco Board of Appeals denied an application by Becker Boards to remove and replace a 25‑by‑40‑foot general advertising sign at 530 Howard Street, concluding the Planning Department correctly applied Planning Code §604(h) and Ordinance No. 140‑06. The vote was 5–0.
Becker Boards argued that longstanding board precedents and court decisions (including Lee/Poparova line of decisions) support replacement in kind and that the owner should not lose the right to the sign by virtue of a tenant or lease change. The property owner said it wishes to retain rights to a billboard and has historically leased space to OutFront Media; OutFront asked to participate and said it owns the sign structure.
Planning Department Deputy Scott Sanchez explained that Ordinance 140‑06 (2006) amended §604 to make clear a general advertising sign that is removed shall not be reinstalled, replaced or reconstructed at the same location and that installing a replacement sign at that location would be a "new sign" in violation of §611. Sanchez and city attorneys cited past board decisions (including the Haight Street matters) and the 2006 ordinance as having changed the code since the earlier Poparova/Lee framing and stated the current code is unambiguous.
The board debated ownership and practical consequences for property owners but concluded that the Planning Department’s interpretation of §604(h) as amended was correct and that the proposed removal/replacement constituted a prohibited new sign. Commissioner Honda (moving to deny the appeal) and colleagues voted 5–0 to deny the application.
Subject property: 530 Howard Street. Existing sign installed under a 1998 permit; parties debated lease and ownership issues; Planning cited Prop G, Ordinance 140‑06 and Planning Code §604(h).
