Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Noise topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board upholds denial of Rooster Tail noise variance after DPH measurements exceed limits
Summary
The Board of Appeals unanimously denied a restaurant owner’s appeal seeking a noise variance for rooftop ventilation equipment at 1963 Sutter St., citing Department of Public Health measurements that exceeded the City’s outdoor noise standard.
The San Francisco Board of Appeals on May 22 unanimously upheld the Department of Public Health’s denial of a noise variance for Rooster Tail Restaurant at 1963 Sutter Street, affirming DPH’s measurement and enforcement under the City’s revised noise ordinance.
Appellants Gerard Darien and Tracy Green told the Board they had passed an earlier health inspection and had upgraded equipment after a remodel but that a neighbor’s complaint and subsequent testing found noise in a light well slightly above ambient. DPH Director Rajeev Bhatia said the department uses outdoor boundary measurements tied to the use (commercial versus residential) and that in this case acoustical testing—including a consultant report—showed readings as high as "14 decibels over the ambient, taken at 10:15 at night," and a department measurement of 11 decibels over ambient in other instances. Under the City standard, a commercial use may exceed ambient by up to 8 decibels; Bhatia said the measurements were therefore 3 decibels over that limit.
Neighbors described persistent disturbance. Michiko Yamada, who lives next door, told the Board the fan had been running continuously and that DPH and the consultant had confirmed exceedances. DPH acknowledged the restaurant’s financial hardship arguments but said the department is required to enforce an objective numerical standard and is not authorized to grant variances solely for economic reasons; staff offered to work with the owners on a compliance timeline and to consider reasonable time for implementation.
Board members expressed sympathy for the businesses’ costs but also deference to the technical measurements and the public‑health rationale. Ultimately President Chris Huang moved to uphold DPH’s order based on the department’s findings; the motion carried 5–0. The Board directed that the notice of decision be released the next day.
