San Francisco Board of Appeals upholds permit for 65 Normandy Terrace over neighbor objections

The San Francisco Board of Appeals voted 5–0 to deny an appeal and uphold a revision permit for 65 Normandy Terrace after hearing hours of testimony from the appellant, the permit holders, and city staff.

Christopher Chang, a neighbor and the appellant, told the board the project circumvented Cow Hollow design guidelines and misrepresented roof heights and massing. "The sponsor changed the height to 309.5 feet in the current plan to justify the expansion," Chang said, citing multiple discrepancies in the permit documents and contending the work exceeded the approved scope.

Permit-holder counsel Scott Emlidge and the Whitakers, the property owners, said the permit before the board corrects limited overreach and addresses DBI and Planning Department enforcement findings. Emlidge said the submitted revisions include a slight lowering of the elevator penthouse, removal of a notch and a small parapet reduction. "The appellant complained, planning and DBI responded, and the Whitakers have applied for a permit to address the issues," Emlidge said.

Corey Teague, zoning administrator for the Planning Department, told the board staff had consulted previous zoning administrators, reviewed original plans and concluded the permit before the board is consistent with planning code and past practice. Matthew Green and DBI staff described the November 2020 complaint, subsequent notices of violation and DBI's plan-check and site reviews that led to the revision permit now at issue. DBI staff said the permit was issued after plan review and reflected corrective measures.

Several neighbors spoke in opposition, including Vicky Lowe and Steven Chong, who said the project resulted in substantial demolition conducted before enforcement and that additional neighborhood-notification might have been appropriate. Supporters of the permit argued the revisions reduce massing in places and restore decorative elements removed during work.

After questioning and deliberation, Commissioner Chang moved to deny the appeal and uphold the permit on the basis that it had been properly issued; the motion passed 5–0.

Votes at a glance: the board adopted the teleconference resolution earlier in the meeting (motion by Commissioner Honda; carried 3–0 while one commissioner momentarily was absent); the board adopted prior meeting minutes (motion carried 5–0); and both permits under appeal at tonight's hearing were upheld by 5–0 votes.

The board’s formal finding leaves in place the revision permit as issued by the Planning Department and DBI; staff may continue to track compliance through final inspection and any outstanding enforcement steps noted in DBI records.