Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Rehearing 3160 Jackson topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board of Appeals denies rehearing request in 3160 Jackson retaining-wall dispute
Summary
The San Francisco Board of Appeals on April 23 denied a request by Lana and John Adair for a rehearing of an earlier decision that upheld a site permit for excavation work at 3160 Jackson Street, finding the appellants did not present new or material facts that would change the prior outcome.
SAN FRANCISCO — The San Francisco Board of Appeals on April 23 denied a rehearing request from Lana and John Adair seeking further review of a site permit for excavation work at 3160 Jackson Street.
The board voted 3-0 to deny the rehearing during its April 23 meeting. President Trezvino announced the decision after hearing arguments from the appellants, their engineer, the permit holder's team and Department of Building Inspection staff.
The Adairs asked for a rehearing after their March appeal was denied. They said new material — including shoring and structural calculations that the permit holder provided only after the March hearing — warranted revisiting the board’s prior 4-0 denial. "We continue to have deep concerns about the retaining wall at the rear of our property," Lana Adair told the board, and she said the newly provided documents did not allay those concerns.
Daryl Harris, a licensed structural engineer who met with the parties before the rehearing request was filed, told the board the proposed excavation would place the bottom of the excavation about 15 feet below the Adairs’ foundation and said he remains cautious about the construction approach. "Doing this type of work for over 50 years now, and I've just never seen this approach," Harris said.
The permit holder’s architect, Steven Sutro, said the project has cleared discretionary review and that the structural matters raised are properly addressed in the Department of Building Inspection (DBI) plan-check process. "We showed up to the meeting at the Adairs' property with three engineers," Sutro said, and he added the team provided the requested documents once a written agreement about distribution was clarified.
Joseph Ospital, senior building inspector and plan review supervisor at DBI, and Joseph Chan, DBI plan review engineer, told the board that structural calculations are reviewed only after a site permit is active and not during the entitlement site-permit stage. Chan explained DBI policy: the department performs a limited SSPA (Slope and Seismic Hazardous Zone Protection Act) checklist review at the site-permit stage and performs full structural calculation reviews only after submittal as part of plan check once the permit is released from suspension.
Vice President J. R. Eppler and Commissioner Lopez both said they saw no new facts that would have changed the board’s earlier ruling that the permit had been properly issued and complied with applicable code. Eppler expressed concern that granting the rehearing could chill information sharing; Lopez said the appellants had not shown new or materially outcome-changing facts.
The board’s decision denied the rehearing request and left the site permit decision from March in place. No continuance or additional conditions were added by the board.
The Adairs had argued the permit holder withheld calculations before the earlier hearing and only provided them afterward; the permit holder countered that the full engineering review properly occurs during DBI plan check and that the site permit itself was correctly issued.
The board’s action was procedural: the board determined the rehearing standards had not been met (extraordinary circumstances, prevention of manifest injustice, or new and material facts that would have changed the earlier decision) and therefore denied the request.
The matter will proceed in accordance with DBI's review and the previously issued site permit schedule.
