Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Variance 312 Green topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board leaves in place controversial North Beach variance after wide neighbor opposition
Summary
After hours of testimony from more than two dozen neighbors and experts, the Board of Appeals left in place a variance allowing additions at 312 Green Street; the board's motion to overturn the zoning administrator failed and the variance stands by default due to a vacancy on the board.
The San Francisco Board of Appeals on Feb. 11 left intact a variance allowing a multi‑story rear-yard encroachment at 312 Green Street, a North Beach property that neighbors said would "double the height" of a 100‑year‑old home and harm views and an adjacent rooftop solar array.
Appellants’ counsel Ryan Patterson described the project as "a proposal to expand a small 1907 home into a 4‑story McMansion" and said the variance was unnecessary and injurious to neighbors. Architect Matt Buskovich and a certified planner presented analyses arguing the variance would alter the block's scale and reduce the value and output of nearby solar panels; Buskovich said the neighboring solar array could "lose some 80% of their value" under the sponsor's proposal.
Project sponsors Bruno and Suzanne Canter, their architect and dozens of supporters testified that the design was contextual, that they had made concessions (removing a penthouse and changing parapets), and that more than 40 letters of support exist. Planning staff recommended approval after analysis and public hearings, and the Planning Commission and Board of Supervisors had previously affirmed approvals on related items.
After deliberation the president moved to uphold the zoning administrator’s variance decision on the grounds the five required findings had been met; the board recorded a 2–1 vote that failed to overturn the ZA. Because a separate rule requires three votes to overturn a department action when there is a vacancy on the board, the ZA’s grant of the variance remains upheld by default.
The debate highlighted recurring tensions in San Francisco land‑use review: protecting existing light/air and rooftop solar versus the rights of property owners to expand and the scope of discretionary review. The board’s action resolves the appeal at this level; permit implementation and any subsequent building permits will follow standard departmental review and availability of further appeals under the city's procedures.
