Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Permits Roundup topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board upholds several DBI permits and denies multiple appeals in a single session
Summary
In a largely procedural session, the Board of Appeals adopted earlier department and planning determinations, upholding a set of residential alteration permits (including four appeals grouped by 'Citizens Against Pang') and denying associated appeals by votes of 4–0.
The Nov. 13 meeting of the San Francisco Board of Appeals included a cluster of permit rulings the board described as routine code‑compliance and process matters. The board affirmed DBI and Planning Department determinations across several items and denied multiple appeals.
Highlights from the session included: • 1815–1827 Stockton Street (Appeal 13‑102): After review of revised plans dated Oct. 17, the board upheld the permit with adoption of the revised plans (4–0). • Four permits filed as appeals by a group using the name Citizens Against Pang (Appeal Nos. 13‑125 through 13‑129) — related to alteration permits at multiple addresses — were denied and the underlying permits were upheld on the basis that DBI had reviewed and found the work code‑compliant (4–0). • 555 Rockdale Drive (Appeal 30‑127): Neighbors raised concerns about underground gas leaks, light and air, and potential construction impact; planning and DBI staff explained the 03/11 notification and structural review; the board found the planning and building reviews to be correct and upheld the permit (4–0).
Board members repeatedly stressed that, while they are sympathetic to neighbor concerns, their standard of review is whether the departments erred in applying planning and building codes; when departments have followed code and the record supports the approval, the Board generally will uphold those decisions. Several matters were continued or conditioned when the board found process or fairness issues that warranted a short delay (for example, item 6 was continued one week to Nov. 20 to allow the appellant time to review a November 8 plan set).
