Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Administration topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board of Appeals roundup: calendar moves, minutes adopted, Bush Street permit upheld, Filbert item continued
Summary
At its Jan. 13 meeting the Board of Appeals adopted Dec. 16 minutes, rescheduled several items, upheld a permit at 425 Bush St. after the appellant’s absence, and continued an appeal at 1760 Filbert St. to Jan. 20 following an agreement in principle.
Get email alerts on the Administration topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
The San Francisco Board of Appeals used its Jan. 13 meeting to address a variety of procedural and calendar items alongside contested appeals.
Calendar and minutes: Executive Director Cynthia Goldstein announced rescheduling of items 7a/7b (130 Second Ave.) to Feb. 3 and Item 9 (485 Terracita Blvd.; appeal No. 09-199119) to Feb. 10; the board approved the reschedule. The board also moved to adopt the minutes from Dec. 16, 2009 (vote 5–0).
425 Bush Street: Item 5 (Daniel Pan v. DBI) was recalled later in the meeting after parties were not present. With no parties appearing, President Fung moved to deny the appeal and uphold the permit; the board voted 5–0 to uphold the permit and directed staff to send a no‑show letter to the appellant.
1760 Filbert Street: Parties reported an agreement in principle on Item 11 (Augustin Fillet v. DBI). The board granted a one‑week continuance to Jan. 20 to allow the parties to finalize details; Planning staff will check whether the proposed infill portion triggers a rear‑yard variance.
Why it matters: The procedural votes determine which appeals proceed and preserve deadlines for rehearing; the upholding of a permit on a no‑show maintains DBI’s earlier determination in that matter and the continuance on Filbert signals a likely negotiated settlement ahead of an appeal hearing.
Quotes and sources: Executive Director Cynthia Goldstein announced calendar changes and President Fung called the votes adopting minutes and directing the no‑show letter.
