Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Appeals And Variances topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board of Appeals acts on multiple permit appeals and variances; rehearing and jurisdiction requests denied, Hodges Alley variance upheld
Summary
At its March 18 meeting, the San Francisco Board of Appeals denied a rehearing request for 2256 Sixth Avenue, denied a jurisdiction request for 1215 Bay Street, continued several appeals for further processing, upheld a rear‑yard variance at 26 Hodges Alley, and upheld a permit for 15 Nobles Alley; votes and continuances are detailed below.
The San Francisco Board of Appeals on March 18, 2015, considered a slate of property appeals and procedural requests and issued multiple rulings:
- Rehearing request denied (2256 Sixth Avenue). The board rejected a rehearing petition filed by Graham Bell challenging a prior decision to uphold a permit to legalize a converted unit; Commissioners voted 4–0 to deny the rehearing, finding the requested standard for "manifest injustice" was not met.
- Jurisdiction request denied (1215 Bay Street). Tenants led by Brandon Levy asked the board to take jurisdiction over a DBI‑issued permit so they could pursue an appeal and seek additional notice time. The permit holder, Johnson Chow (represented by Doug Wong), said the work was a city‑mandated abatement after a November fire. DBI said the current permit was limited to maintaining egress and life‑safety systems. The board voted 4–0 to deny jurisdiction; the record shows the board urged the permit holder to develop a clear phasing schedule and to coordinate with tenants.
- Several matters continued. The board continued an appeal for 1439 Fifth Avenue to May 13 to allow DBI time to process cancellations and any refiled plans; two matters at 1784 Sanchez Street were continued one week to March 25 with the expectation of further negotiations between parties.
- Variance at 26 Hodges Alley upheld. Appellant Melody Marr urged a modest 3‑by‑3‑foot pullback to protect light and reduce noise after a nearby landslide; the project sponsor and Planning staff said the lot’s narrow, constrained dimensions supported the variance findings. The board voted 4–0 to deny the appeal and uphold the rear‑yard variance on the ground that the five criteria for a variance had been met.
- Permit at 15 Nobles Alley upheld. Appellant Mark Bruno alleged failures to follow lead‑abatement notice requirements and presented past notices of violation; the permit holder and the contractor presented evidence that containment and notices had been posted and inspected. DBI said address‑and‑permit paperwork had been corrected; the board voted 4–0 to uphold the permit.
Taken together, the rulings show the board balancing procedural safeguards for tenants and neighbors with departmental findings about permits and zoning. Several items were continued to give DBI and Planning time to pursue inspections or allow parties to negotiate and, where required, return with revised plans.
Votes and next steps: The board issued formal motions and roll‑call votes for each item; parties unhappy with the outcomes retain administrative and judicial remedies available under local law.
