Meeting Information

At this time, members of the public may address the Board on items of interest to the public that are within the subject matter jurisdiction of the Board except agenda items.  With respect to agenda items, your opportunity to address the Board will be afforded when the item is reached in the meeting with one exception. When the agenda item has already been reviewed in a public hearing at which members of the public were allowed to testify and the Board has closed the public hearing, your opportunity to address the Board must be exercised during the Public Comment portion of the calendar.   Each member of the public may address the Board for up to three minutes.   If it is demonstrated that comments by the public will exceed 15 minutes, the President may continue Public Comment to another time during the meeting.

Presentation to Douglas Shoemaker, Commissioner of the Board of Appeals (October 2001 to June 2004).

Public hearing, discussion and adoption of the Board of Appeals Incompatible Activities Statement as required by the San Francisco Campaign and Governmental Conduct Code § 3.218.  Copies are available at the Board office.  Please address comments to Executive Secretary Robert Feldman, Board of Appeals, 1660 Mission Street #3036, SF, CA 94103.  Telephone (415) 575-6880, fax (415) 575-6885, or email at robert.feldman@sfgov.org.

Subject property at 2775 Filbert Street.  Permit issued on May 28, 2004.  Last day to appeal was June 14, 2004.  Jurisdiction request received on July 16, 2004.  Letter from Patricia Vaughey, asking that the Board take jurisdiction over Building Permit Application No(s). 2004/05/28/5113.  Project: on single-family house, install redwood fence as per plan 10’-0” in height around property.  Permit Holder(s): Tina Bartlett.

Appeal No(s). 03-051 & 03-066, Page et al. vs. ZA.  Subject property at 21 Buena Vista East Avenue.  Letter from Andrew Zacks, attorney for appellants Ken Page et al., requesting rehearing of Appeal No(s). 03-051 & 03-066, decided June 23, 2004.  At that time, upon motion by Commissioner Shoemaker, the Board voted 3-1-1 (President Harrington dissented, Commissioner Chin absent) to uphold both determinations.  First ZA determination: that the subject property has a legal authorized use of 14 residential guest rooms and 1 dwelling unit, that residential guest rooms constitute “group housing” under § 209.2 of the Planning Code, that this group housing constitutes a permitted conditional use since it was established prior to the enactment of Conditional Use (CU) requirements for this use, and that this permitted conditional use shall be considered abandoned 3 years from the last legal date of residency of the last resident of these guest rooms.  Second ZA determination: that the proposed physical modifications to various residential guest rooms at the subject property would result in less viable guest rooms and would constitute a partial conversion of the structure to single family-use from its current legal authorized use of 14 residential guest rooms and 1 dwelling unit, in violation of Planning Code.

CATHERINE FERREIRA

& ANN FERREIRA, Appellant(s)

                        vs.

ZONING ADMINISTRATOR, Respondent

1120-1122 Vallejo Street.

Protesting the granting on Dec. 23, 2003, to Susan Lee, Jennifer Cherk & Jay Capela, Rear Yard Variance (on 2-family building: construction of an enclosed pavilion on the roof of the existing 3-story building and the enclosure of two areas at the rear of the building that are currently unenclosed).

VARIANCE CASE NO. 2003.0476DV.

Note: On March 24, 2004, the Board voted 5-0 to uphold the variance with the following condition(s): a) that the north portion of the roof be sloped to allow for more sunlight into the adjacent backyard; and b) that the front (south) elevation be redesigned to reflect the solid to void ratio of buildings of a similar nature.  On May 12, 2004, the Board voted 4-1 to grant the rehearing request by the appellants and to set the rehearing for June 30, 2004.

FOR REHEARING TODAY.

ERIC DEEDS, RICHARD HSU,

& JOMA JONES, Appellant(s)

                        vs.

ZONING ADMINISTRATOR, Respondent

116-118 Beulah Street.

Appealing a Permit Suspension Request dated March 19, 2004, addressed to Dept. of Building Inspection Director Frank Chiu, asking that Building Permit Application No(s). 2003/12/10/2000 be suspended for the following reason(s):  the permit was issued in error because it was not routed to the Planning Dept. for notification to affected tenants and owners which is required for horizontal expansions into light wells. 

FOR HEARING TODAY.

KATHERINE ROBERTS, Appellant(s)

                        vs.

DEPT. OF BUILDING INSPECTION, Respondent

PLANNING DEPT. APPROVAL

116-118 Beulah Street.

Protesting the issuance on May 27, 2004, to Eric Deeds et al., Permit to Alter a Building (on 2-unit residential building: application submittal to City Planning for review of horizontal expansion of garage into a light well; previously issued in-kind under Building Permit Application No(s). 2003/12/10/2000).

APPLICATION NO. 2004/04/13/1159.

FOR HEARING TODAY.

MACKENZIE GREEN, Appellant(s)

                        vs.

DEPT. OF BUILDING INSPECTION,

                                             Respondent

PLANNING DEPT. APPROVAL

835 Bryant Street.

Protesting the issuance on April 28, 2004, to Pacific Bonding Corporation, Permit to Alter a Building (build 10’ X 26’ modular addition off-site and attach to existing 300sf building; add new 200amp single phase main meter panel; install rain gutter between existing building and new modular addition). 

APPLICATION NO. 2004/04/28/2517.

FOR HEARING TODAY.

LAURA PERRAULT, Appellant(s)

                        vs.

ZONING ADMINISTRATOR, Respondent

32 Carson Street.

Appealing the partial denial of a Rear Yard Variance (proposal to reconstruct an existing non-complying room at the rear of the property that would include an increase in volume and a new roof form was denied; the proposal to reconstruct the same existing non-complying room at the rear without the increase in volume and without a new roof form was granted; the proposal to construct a new larger deck with a spiral staircase was also granted).

VARIANCE CASE NO. 2003.1242V.

FOR HEARING TODAY.

NASEEF MUSLEH, Appellant(s)

                        vs.

DEPT. OF BUILDING INSPECTION,

                                             Respondent

PLANNING DEPT. DISAPPROVAL

1101 Oak Street.

Appealing the denial on June 3, 2004, of Permit to Alter a Building (on multi-family/commercial building: separate clergy living quarters from pre-existing church space to establish as a separate dwelling unit).

APPLICATION NO. 2004/02/11/6167.

FOR HEARING TODAY.