Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Telecom Smf topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board issues split outcomes on AT&T surface‑mounted cabinets — one permit upheld, another continued
Summary
The Board upheld an excavation permit for a surface‑mounted telecommunications cabinet at 102 Virginia Avenue but continued the appeal over a proposed cabinet at 203 Quintara Street to July 2 to allow the permit holder and DPW to submit exhibits about site safety and technical concerns.
The Board of Appeals split its findings on two separate appeals involving surface‑mounted facilities (SMFs) for telecommunications equipment.
At 102 Virginia Avenue (permit 14EXC1666), appellant argued AT&T and the Department of Public Works failed to follow easement‑request procedures, and that the cabinet would incommode the public right of way and impede disabled access. Appellant asked the Board to deny the excavation permit and require AT&T to identify private alternatives, correct DPW FAQ statements about undergrounding, and improve DPW’s verification of easement mailings. AT&T counsel said the legal standard for denying an SMF permit is proof that the cabinet would incommode the public right of way, and that the record at DPW did not show that for the Virginia Avenue site. DPW and AT&T testified that easement mailings and notices were part of the application package and that AT&T followed the department’s requirements. The Board voted 4–1 to deny the appeal and uphold the permit as compliant with code.
On the Golden Gate Heights appeal for 203 Quintara Street, neighbors and the Golden Gate Heights Neighborhood Association urged revocation because the site fronts unimproved public open space the community has stewarded, criticized AT&T’s outreach and DPW’s vetting process, and argued the installation would harm the site and obstruct access. AT&T and DPW described multi‑year outreach, three box walks and earlier alternate sites that were withdrawn for technical reasons. AT&T said undergrounding large cabinets is often technically infeasible. Several commissioners expressed particular interest in technical evidence after AT&T reported it had withdrawn a prior alternate site because of erosion and safety concerns; AT&T said that finding came from a verbal pre‑construction inspection. The Board voted 3–2 to continue the Quintara appeal to July 2 and limited additional submissions to exhibits that would confirm whether the prior site was unsafe and whether DPW had communicated that information to AT&T.
The Board’s actions leave the 102 Virginia permit upheld and the 203 Quintara appeal reopened for documentary exhibits on July 2.
