Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Building Permit Rehearing topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
San Francisco Board of Appeals denies rehearing request over Hyde Street balcony permit
Summary
The Board of Appeals on Aug. 11 denied a rehearing request from Ellen Sang, trustee for Arza Trust, who said public records were withheld and new evidence warranted reopening a permit decision for 2642–2644 Hyde St.; the board voted 3–1 to deny after hearing public comment and testimony.
The San Francisco Board of Appeals denied a rehearing request on Aug. 11 from Ellen Sang, trustee for Arza Trust, who asked the board to re-examine a variance and permit for property at 2642–2644 Hyde Street.
Sang told the board she had new evidence and alleged that the Department of Building Inspection and the Planning Department had withheld public records connected to the project's permit, preventing effective appeal. "They continue violating my right for public records so that they can protect this illegal construction," Sang said during her allotted three minutes.
Appellants and public commenters, including Ray Hartz of San Francisco Open Government, pointed to recent press reporting about an indicted permit expediter and urged closer scrutiny of how permits and documents are handled. The permit holder's representative, and a neighboring owner who supports the permit, said earlier hearings had explored records and that no new material evidence had been presented.
Commissioners debated whether the absence of counsel at the prior hearing and the new assertions of withheld records justified reopening the matter. One commissioner said due-process questions are "always compelling," but others concluded the rehearing would not materially alter the earlier facts before the board.
On a motion to deny the rehearing request, the board recorded a 3–1 vote to deny; a notice of decision and order will be issued.
The board characterized this as a procedural rehearing request rather than a reopening based on newly discovered, material evidence. The decision closes the petition for rehearing but preserves Sang’s ability to pursue other administrative remedies noted in the board's rules.
