Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Wireless Permit topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board pauses decision on Leavenworth wireless permit after residents cite ‘aggregate’ visual harm
Summary
Residents appealed Public Works’ approval of a small‑cell wireless permit at 2215 Leavenworth, arguing incorrect photo simulations and cumulative visual harm to Russian Hill vistas; the board continued the matter to Sept. 13 and asked staff to prepare findings supporting a denial.
The San Francisco Board of Appeals on July 12 heard an appeal from Anne and Randall Brubaker challenging a Public Works permit that approved a personal wireless service facility at 2215 Leavenworth Street.
Appellant Anne Brubaker said the installation and neighborhood process were unequal and that the final materials omitted accurate photo simulations, arguing the site “significantly degrade[s] a block with a million tourists” and harms views toward Alcatraz and Coit Tower. Multiple neighbors and neighborhood groups described what they called an “aggregate” visual blight from utilities and small‑cell equipment along Russian Hill and urged the board to revoke the permit.
Paul Albritton, outside counsel for Verizon Wireless and speaking for the permit holder, said the application had been reviewed by Public Works, the Health Department and the Planning Department, and that the tentative and final approval processes followed the code; he acknowledged that Public Works mistakenly attached an older photo simulation to a notification email but said the correct simulations were posted and discussed in public hearings.
Planning and Public Works staff defended the approval under Article 25, telling the board the Planning Department concluded the installation would not significantly detract from the defining characteristics of the district and that cumulative impacts were considered in referral and site review. Commissioners focused their questions on whether Planning had adequately weighed cumulative impacts and whether the replacement of a pole by PG&E altered the visual baseline.
Following deliberation, Board members agreed they could not adopt a merits vote at the meeting and elected to continue the matter to Sept. 13, 2017, directing staff to prepare written findings that would support overturning the permit; the motion to continue for development of findings carried with recorded ayes by Commissioners Lazarus, Honda, Wilson and Swig.
