Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Sidewalks topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board continues Clement Street sidewalk appeal, asks permit holder for revised plans and estimates
Summary
The San Francisco Board of Appeals continued an appeal over proposed sidewalk modifications for 7–11 Clement Street to May 9, directing the permit holder to supply revised drawings and cost estimates and asking city departments to review ADA, cross‑slope and egress issues.
The San Francisco Board of Appeals on March 21 continued a permit appeal over proposed sidewalk modifications at 7–11 Clement Street, giving the permit holder until April 26 to submit revised plans and cost estimates and setting responses from the appellant and city departments for May 3 ahead of a May 9 hearing.
The matter centers on designs offered by permit applicant Zachary Nathan to reconcile a raised storefront floor with the public sidewalk. Nathan told the board he had prepared a “warped sidewalk” option and cost estimates and that “the step at 11 Clement Street . . . was lowered from 9 inches to 5 inches.” The Department of Public Works (DPW) raised safety concerns about steep cross slopes and recommended a split‑level sidewalk or narrower encroachment. DPW’s Nick Elsner told the board that “for somebody to access the sidewalk at cross slopes ranging from 11% to 14%, the department felt that that was . . . unsafe, basically.”
Board members pressed whether the design could be changed by modifying the interior floor or by obtaining DBI variances. Several commissioners said they preferred solutions that avoid permanent gates or “split sidewalks” that could set citywide precedents. Commissioner Fung moved to continue the matter to allow the permit holder time to coordinate with DPW and DBI and to produce clearer drawings; the motion passed 4–0.
What’s next: The permit holder must file its brief with the board by April 26; the appellant and city departments must file responses by May 3. The board scheduled the matter for May 9 and asked parties to share copies of submissions with each other when filing.
