Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Right Of Way Encroachment topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board of Appeals pauses USF encroachment dispute, asks university to locate 2004 permits
Summary
The Board continued Richard Rabbit’s appeal over a University of San Francisco fence and retaining wall encroaching on Golden Gate Avenue to May 25, asking USF to produce any 2004 permits and in‑hand documentation; DPW said about 600 square feet could be returned to the public right‑of‑way without impacting trees, while USF warned moving the retaining wall could exceed $100,000.
The San Francisco Board of Appeals on March 23 continued an appeal by neighbor Richard Rabbit that challenges a University of San Francisco retaining wall and fence that officials say encroach into the public right‑of‑way on Golden Gate Avenue. The board gave the permit holder until May 25 to produce any building or tree‑removal permits linked to a retaining‑wall project in 2004 and required a two‑page filing describing the record search.
Richard Rabbit told the board that "DPW has confirmed that 600 square feet of the public right of way can be returned to the public," and urged the commissioners to order restoration. Department of Public Works staff said their field review showed only limited opportunity to move the fence without harming tree roots or altering slope conditions; DPW’s presentation said in places the fence could be moved “6 inches to a foot and a half back” and that a roughly 100‑foot stretch adjacent to an intersection could be relocated to the property line without tree removal.
University of San Francisco counsel and facilities staff told the board the retaining wall was rebuilt in 2004 and that relocating it could be expensive and technically difficult. "If the retaining wall was involved in a relocation, it would be north of $100,000," said Mike London, USF vice president of facilities, citing a rough estimate.
Neighbors and several members of the University Terrace Association urged the board to require restoration of public space or at minimum the 600‑square‑foot giveback DPW identified. Other speakers noted long‑running neighborhood negotiations and a separate settlement that commits USF to traffic‑calming funds for the area.
Several commissioners said missing permit records were central to the dispute: planning and building staff indicated a building‑department permit may exist for work done in 2004 but that property boundaries and file searches make retrieval difficult. Commissioner Chris Huang moved for a continuance to allow the permit holder time to locate any permits for the retaining wall and for any tree removal; the board continued the matter to May 25 and directed the permit holder to submit up to two pages describing the search and any permits found the Thursday before the hearing.
The board’s action leaves in place DPW’s technical findings while creating a schedule for additional documentary review ahead of a May hearing.
