Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Public Works topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board continues University of San Francisco fence/retaining‑wall encroachment appeal to March 23 and asks DPW for feasibility study
Summary
The Board continued an appeal over a USF fence and retaining‑wall encroachment on Golden Gate Avenue to March 23 and directed the Department of Public Works to assess whether portions of the fence in level areas could be moved to widen sidewalk, with a short written report due in advance.
Get email alerts on the Public Works topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Neighbors and University of San Francisco representatives squared off over a minor encroachment permit authorizing a fence, vines and a retaining wall that extend into the public right‑of‑way along the USF baseball field. Appellant Richard Rabbitt argued the Public Works Department issued the permit without neighborhood encroachment drawings and without proper consideration of a 25% encroachment threshold. USF counsel and DPW staff said the fence and retaining wall are longstanding features tied to grade and safety and cited prior inspections and neighborhood negotiations.
Several neighbors testified that the current fence limits pedestrian space along portions of Golden Gate Avenue and that the permit was issued without adequate photos of adjacent areas. USF said it had worked with the University Terrace Association on a settlement that included $1.2 million for traffic‑calming and beautification and argued the encroachment is an existing condition dating to at least 1991.
Commissioners asked DPW to evaluate whether portions of the fence that front relatively level sidewalk could be shifted inward without removing mature trees or causing structural issues with the retaining wall. The board voted 5–0 to continue the matter to March 23, requested a brief (three pages) from DPW two Thursdays before that date, and allowed three‑page reply briefs from other parties. DPW representatives said the permit is revocable and that any future improvements under the university/neighborhood process could prompt reevaluation.
