Board of Appeals upholds Paulsons' 10‑foot fence permit but orders removal of top crossbar and cables before final sign‑off

The San Francisco Board of Appeals on May 10 granted an appeal by neighbors challenging a 10‑foot cable fence at 1462 Lake Street, approving the permit only after the permit holders agree to remove a horizontal crossbar and the cables directly in front of the appellants’ dining‑room clerestory window.

Appellants Mark Levinson and Annette Feraglia told the board the Paulsons installed tall poles and cables in mid‑January and had effectively completed the 10‑foot structure before applying for a permit on Feb. 23; the permit was issued March 10, 2023 (permit number 202302232472). Annette said the poles and a top bar create new shadowing on what she described as the only west‑facing dining‑room window in the house and recalled prior property damage during 2022 permits that she said left the family wary of further work.

"They built it in January," Annette said during the hearing. "It was like a fait accompli." She added that imitation ivy on the posts could be removed but that mature vines would eventually grow and block light.

Counsel for the permit holders, Alexandra Jones of Duane Morris, framed the dispute as narrowly focused on whether the fence blocks light to the specific window. Jones said the window already faces a large camellia bush, "which severely limits the sunlight access to the window," and argued any additional shadow from the open cable fence would be minimal. Permit holder John Paulson and his design team said they had tried to avoid installing cables directly in front of the window and described the fence as an attempt to preserve the camellia while providing a barrier.

Corey Teague, zoning administrator for the Planning Department, told the board the fence sits in the buildable area of an RH‑1 lot and was reviewed and approved over the counter because it did not trigger neighborhood notice. Matthew Green of the Department of Building Inspection said the fence requires a building permit because it exceeds 6 feet; he added DBI had not issued a notice of violation because the permit holders subsequently obtained and are cooperating with the required permit process.

During testimony and an overhead review of the approved drawings, commissioners and DBI noted a discrepancy: the plans show continuous top cables, but the built fence included a solid top crossbar that is not part of the approved plans. The permit holders’ representatives agreed to remove the added top crossbar and to submit revised drawings (a special conditions permit) that omit cables in front of the window and reflect the board’s direction.

President Rick Swig moved to grant the appeal and issue the permit on the condition that the horizontal crossbar be removed in its entirety and that the permit be revised to eliminate the cables in front of the appellant’s window. Vice President Jose Lopez, Commissioner Trezyna, Commissioner Lambert and Commissioner Epler voted "Aye." The motion carried 5–0. Staff said DBI will inspect the work and follow up on revised plans.

The board’s decision leaves the permit otherwise intact while requiring the permit holders to bring the constructed work into conformity with the approved plans and the board’s stated condition. DBI indicated it would require removal of elements not shown on the approved drawings and that the permit holder must submit and obtain approval of revisions to the permit to reflect the board’s directions.