California News

Sandoval takes aim at illegal property paving

Nov 29, 2007 3:00 AM (283 days ago) by Brent Begin, The Examiner
This story ranks Not ranked
Related Topics: SAN FRANCISCO

SAN FRANCISCO (Map, News) - It’s already illegal for city residents to pave their front yards without permission, but one supervisor’s legislation is intended to give inspectors the teeth to enforce the ban.

District 11 Supervisor Gerardo Sandoval will introduce legislation next week that would empower Planning Department inspectors to hand out or mail citations for violations of zoning regulations.

The ordinance would help remedy a problem that’s plaguing Sandoval’s district, he told The Examiner on Wednesday.

Residents are pulling out gardens and lawns from their front yards and filling them with concrete. Doing so provides an extra parking spot, but Sandoval said it has far-reaching ill effects.

This story continues below
Advertisement

“We passed a law several years ago to make it illegal, but people continue to do it,” he said. “We are in danger of becoming a concrete city.”

He said once one person on a street paves over their lawn, neighbors tend to follow suit. The trend has caught on with entire blocks.

Paving over gardens not only takes away from the beauty of a neighborhood, he said, it means rainfall has nowhere to go except into The City’s storm drains, contributing to the risk of overflow and flooding.

“Together, all these factors send a message to young people that we don’t care about the environment or them,” Sandoval said.

If passed, the Planning Department would be given a power currently wielded by the Department of Building Inspection. Sandoval said building inspectors sometimes issue citations for planning violations, but with their own caseloads to handle, many infractions fall through the cracks.

If the ordinance passes, the Planning Department would be able to levy a fine of up to $500 in what is called a director’s hearing.

The legislation is set to be introduced Tuesday before the Board of Supervisors.

bbegin@examiner.com

Add a Comment


Name: (required)
Comments:
characters left
Comments are regulated by the Terms of Use.

Comments from Examiner Readers

4:44 PM MST on Thu., Nov. 29, 2007 re: "Sandoval takes aim at illegal property paving"

Examiner Reader said:
I live in the Excelsior (Sandoval's district), and I have 75 year old neighbors across the street who are poor, and have the most beautiful front yard on the block! In fact, the older, retired people in general are taking the best care of their properties. Most of the concrete was laid out by residents who had the energy to do it themselves. Stop making excuses to justify destroying my neighborhood! And start parking in your garages instead of living in them! The fine should be much higher.

75 agree | 65 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree

1:38 PM MST on Thu., Nov. 29, 2007 re: "Sandoval takes aim at illegal property paving"

Examiner Reader said:
I'm 75 years old & live on Social Security. I can't mow and water the lawn anymore. I can't afford to hire a gardener. So my only choice is to concrete the damn garden. If Supervisor Gerardo Sandoval or any of the other Supervisor's support this crazy legislation, they can take turns and mow my lawn or just leave us homeowners alone.

60 agree | 72 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
1:01 PM MST on Thu., Nov. 29, 2007 re: "Sandoval takes aim at illegal property paving"

Examiner Reader said:
is that it? $500 fine for paving your lawn and ruining our city? it should be $50,000. after someone paves their lawn, a $500 fine is small price to pay, and can be considered an additional cost to gaining a parking space. sandoval should get his head examined. and what about a fine for the pavers/contractors who perform the work without a valid city permit???

88 agree | 71 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
10:17 AM MST on Thu., Nov. 29, 2007 re: "Sandoval takes aim at illegal property paving"

Examiner Reader said:
hmmm i cannot believe it but i actually agree with Sandoval... something must be wrong with this picture. heheeheh

84 agree | 81 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Advertisement