Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Appeals 1712 Castro Roof Deck topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board denies rehearing request in 1712 Castro Street roof-deck dispute
Summary
The San Francisco Board of Appeals denied a rehearing request from William Whetstone and Lindy Matula challenging a prior approval for a 226 sq. ft. roof deck at 1712 Castro Street, finding appellants did not present new material showing "manifest injustice."
Get email alerts on the Appeals 1712 Castro Roof Deck topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
The San Francisco Board of Appeals voted to deny a rehearing petition brought by William Whetstone and Lindy Matula over a roof-deck permit at 1712 Castro Street. The rehearing request sought to overturn the board's Jan. 18 decision that had granted the permit on the condition that the deck's glass railing be transparent and that the project comply with code requirements.
Appellants alleged the permit holders and respondents submitted misleading photographic evidence and mischaracterized site conditions, arguing the deck would "seriously infringe" on privacy and that respondents had been "less than truthful." "They were either disingenuous or they were completely ignorant and incompetent," Whetstone told the board, urging a new hearing.
Representatives for the permit holders countered that the record and exhibits supported the board's earlier ruling, saying a large tree in the appellants' backyard, not the proposed deck, limits light to neighboring properties. The permit holders said the roof hatch and deck placement leave the usable portion of the deck set back about 10 feet from the property line and that the project complies with the city's rules.
After public comment and discussion, Vice President Frank Fung moved to deny the rehearing request on the ground that the appellants had not presented new material showing "manifest injustice." President Daryl Honda and Commissioner Rick Swig voted in favor; the motion passed 3'0'0.
The board's denial leaves the earlier decision in place and allows the permit process for the roof deck to proceed under the prior conditions. No further board action was taken on the item at the Feb. 15 meeting.
