Planning Commission clears variance to rebuild enclosed rear porch and stairs at 1153 Guerrero Street despite neighborhood opposition

The San Francisco Planning Commission on May 8 voted unanimously to not take discretionary review and to allow the project at 1153 Guerrero Street to proceed; the zoning administrator said he intends to grant a variance with standard conditions.

The project concerns a category-A, two-unit residential building constructed in 1885. Staff architect Trent Greenan described the proposal as a reconstruction of an existing enclosed three-story rear porch and stair that encroaches on the rear yard and property line; because work exceeded repair thresholds the rebuild requires a variance under Planning Code Section 134. Staff said the porch likely existed in substantially the same footprint on Sanborn maps dating to 1919 and 1935 but that replacement — not repair — triggered the variance requirement. Greenan said staff recommended approving the replacement with code-compliant construction to address structural and egress issues raised by neighbors.

Neighbors and adjacent-property owners urged the commission to require an open external stair rather than an enclosed structure. Paul Orr, the discretionary-review requester who lives at 57 Elizabeth Street, said the porch is “structurally unsound,” described repeated drawing revisions and alleged the project caused damage to his property during construction. Multiple neighbors, including a long-term resident at 1167 Guerrero Street and Roger Miller of 55 Elizabeth Street, submitted letters or spoke in opposition, citing fire separation, light and sight-line impacts, and public-safety concerns. The record included a petition with 19 letters in opposition, staff said.

The project’s architect, Kyle Brunell, presented new architectural drawings and said the existing footprint appears on historic Sanborn maps and that the proposed reconstruction will upgrade the enclosure to meet current structural and one-hour fire-rated property-line requirements. Brunell said the documents submitted were architectural site-permit–level plans; structural engineering details remain to be provided during DBI plan check.

Commission deliberations focused on whether the proposed reconstructed enclosed stair would create worse conditions for neighbors than an open stair, and on the sufficiency of new plans and the inspection history. Several commissioners said they were satisfied the Planning Department and Historic Preservation staff had reviewed historical evidence and that updated plans and recent site inspections addressed earlier concerns about inaccurate drawings. Vice President Moore moved to not take discretionary review and approve the project as presented; the motion was seconded and passed 7–0. After the vote the Zoning Administrator stated he would close the public hearing for the variance and “intend to grant with standard conditions.”

Why it matters: The decision permits reconstruction of a long-standing rear enclosed stair and porch footprint on a property that neighbors say threatens light, separation and safety. The variance route reflects a determination that the work is a replacement (not a repair) and therefore must comply with current building and fire-code requirements, including fire-rated assemblies on property lines.

What’s next: The applicant must submit structural engineering and full construction documents for Department of Building Inspection plan check. The zoning administrator indicated the variance will be issued with standard conditions; final building permits and inspections by DBI will determine compliance with safety and fire-separation requirements.