Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Land Use Variance topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Board upholds Telegraph Hill elevator variances but requires acoustic mitigation and engineering review

Board of Appeals · August 30, 2006
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

After hearings on noise, use and prior permit conduct, the Board of Appeals upheld rear‑yard variances to install exterior elevators at two adjacent properties and added a condition requiring a qualified acoustical engineer to verify that elevator noise will not exceed 5 decibels above ambient.

The Board of Appeals upheld variances allowing the installation of exterior elevators at 331 Filbert and 110 Alta Streets, concluding the requested variances met the five variance criteria but imposing a condition aimed at protecting neighbors from noise and vibration.

Appellant Sandra Leckvie argued the external elevators would produce vibration and persistent noise next to bedroom windows and that the owner had a pattern of unpermitted or contentious work. Zoning Administrator Larry Badner and Department of Building Inspection staff said the variances were consistent with the planning code’s allowance for home offices and that reasonable accommodations for disability and ADA/Fair Housing considerations can justify elevator access.

Owner representative Brett Gladstone proposed sound‑isolation measures, including pad isolation for the motor, acoustical treatment of the shaft and gaskets on elevator doors. Commissioners focused on whether those measures would be sufficient to prevent material detriment to adjacent properties.

The board adopted a condition requiring a qualified acoustical (sound) engineer, approved by the city, to demonstrate that elevator operation would not exceed 5 decibels above ambient sound levels at nearby residences; the engineering report is to be paid for by the variance holder and reviewed by DBI and Planning. After initial votes and procedural reconsideration, the board approved the variances with the acoustical condition.