Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Residential Development topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board of Appeals upholds permit for three‑story addition on Seventh Avenue over neighborhood objections
Summary
The San Francisco Board of Appeals voted 4–0 to uphold a permit allowing a third‑floor addition at 246220 Seventh Avenue after neighbors called the project a ‘monster house’ that would change neighborhood character and increase square footage substantially.
The San Francisco Board of Appeals on Thursday upheld a building permit that will allow a three‑story addition at 246220 Seventh Avenue, rejecting an appeal by a group of neighbors who called the project a “monster house.” The board voted 4–0 to deny the appeal and uphold the permit on the grounds that the proposal complies with city codes and the residential design guidelines.
The appellant, Perry Chia, told the board the project would expand the home’s livable area from about 1,173 square feet to roughly 3,510 square feet (and to 4,485 square feet including an added garage), make the house the largest RH‑1 single‑family building on the block and harm neighborhood character and parking. Chia also alleged the owner was taking credit for existing, unpermitted square footage in a way that understated the new floor area and said neighbors had long opposed the scope of the plan.
The permit holders, represented in part by homeowner Daley (Deli) Wong and counsel Rick Gladstone, said the design had undergone review by planning and building staff, would include an 11‑foot setback for the added third floor and a Notice of Special Restrictions limiting the ground floor to single‑family use (no separate kitchen). Acting Zoning Administrator Scott Sanchez and planning staff told the board the project was within the permitted envelope and the department had required an NSR to reduce the risk of creating an illegal separate dwelling unit.
Board members said they were sympathetic to neighbors’ concerns about precedent and neighborhood character but found the record showed the project met applicable code and guideline tests. Commissioner Michael Garcia moved to uphold the permit “on the basis that it complies with city codes and the residential design guidelines.” The motion carried with votes from Commissioners Huang, Peterson and Fung.
The board emphasized it had considered whether the proposal created a new nonconforming condition or an unacceptable intensification, and concluded the objective code criteria and the notice of special restrictions addressed the primary concerns raised by neighbors. The approval allows the owners to proceed with the issued permit; the board noted that future enforcement or building permit inspections could address any deviations from the approved plans.
The board’s action ends the appeal at this level; the appellant declined to win a continuance to await the absent commissioner. No further conditions were added by the board beyond those on the existing permit.
