Neighbors appeal new deck expansion at 120 Eastwood Drive citing privacy concerns

In a recent San Francisco city meeting, the contentious issue of a deck expansion at 120 Eastwood Drive took center stage, drawing passionate appeals from neighbors concerned about privacy and property rights. The meeting, held on July 4, 2025, featured a back-and-forth between appellants and the permit holder, William Hoskins, who argued that the expansion was necessary for structural safety.

The deck, originally measuring 4 feet by 7 feet, has been extended to 9 feet by 7 feet, raising concerns from neighbors Mike and Tamara Rasati and Yvonne Simonson. They argued that the new dimensions infringe on their privacy, allowing views into their backyards and bedrooms. Simonson emphasized the lack of documentation supporting the expansion and requested that the deck be reverted to its original size, along with a stipulation preventing further expansions without neighbor approval.

Hoskins defended the expansion, stating that the original deck was in disrepair and needed support to prevent collapse. He explained that the extension was based on recommendations from the San Francisco building inspector and followed a lengthy permitting process that included neighborhood notifications. Hoskins expressed frustration that the appellants did not participate in earlier discussions about the project.

The planning department supported Hoskins, asserting that the new deck complies with city regulations and does not significantly intrude on neighboring properties. They noted that the distance between the deck and the appellants' homes is over 70 feet, and the expansion is consistent with other decks in the area.

As the meeting progressed, structural engineer Albert Ruttia confirmed that the original cantilever design was unsafe and that the new support system was necessary. He also noted that the privacy concerns raised by the appellants were not significantly worsened by the expansion.

The meeting concluded with a call for public comment, but no additional voices were heard. The board is expected to deliberate on the appeal, weighing the neighbors' concerns against the need for structural integrity and compliance with city regulations. The outcome will determine whether the deck remains in its expanded form or reverts to its original dimensions, leaving both sides awaiting a resolution that could impact their living conditions for years to come.