Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Neighborhood Dispute topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board upholds 40 Montezuma fence permit over tenant's appeal citing light and mold
Summary
The Board of Appeals denied an appeal from a tenant who said a newly permitted fence at 40 Montezuma blocked light and caused mold, finding the permit valid as issued; the vote was 3-1.
The San Francisco Board of Appeals voted Feb. 21 to deny an appeal of a permit for work at 40 Montezuma Street, upholding the permit as issued by the Department of Building Inspection and planning department.
Tenant Sandra Kabidi told the board she has lived in her unit 11 years and said the new fence, built on a brick base and extending roughly 13'' to 14 feet when measured from the tenant's grade, blocks west-facing light into her bathroom and has worsened mold in the unit. Kabidi asked the board to lower the fence by 1 foot 6 inches; she also showed photos she said demonstrated the fence encroached roughly 4 inches onto her property line.
Permit holder Paul Wichterink (with co-owner Peng Leong) said the fence mostly replaced an existing element, that portions sit on a concrete retaining wall, and that he had offered compromises including translucent panels placed every second board. Planning Department representative Tina Tam told commissioners the permit was reviewed and measured on the permit-holder's side of grade and that a fence, as permitted, measured at the holder's grade did not exceed the height allowed on that side.
DBI staff said their role would be to assess structural and code triggers (including potential seismic or structural upgrades) rather than architectural design; staff also confirmed stair riser design could be altered to provide additional light without changing the fence.
After deliberation the board voted to deny the appeal and uphold the permit as issued with no conditions, by a 3-to-1 vote. Vice President Garcia moved to deny the appeal; Commissioners Fung and Albright voted yes and Commissioner Holland voted no.
The board recessed for 10 minutes after this decision. The ruling leaves the permit intact; neighbors and permit holders were urged to pursue voluntary compromise measures where feasible.
