Board upholds firewall permit at 792 Hayes Street; DBI told to review prior complaint

The San Francisco Board of Appeals on April 30, 2025 denied an appeal by Lan Le that sought to overturn a Department of Building Inspection and Planning-approved permit for a one‑hour fire-rated wall at 792 Hayes Street.

The appeal concerned a revision to a previously issued permit to install a one‑hour, 36‑inch‑high fire-rated wall along one side of an approved exterior stair that is adjacent to the property line. City staff and the board said the permit before the panel covered only the firewall installation and not other concerns raised by the appellant about a stair encroaching into an easement.

Joseph Ospital, senior building inspector for the Department of Building Inspection, told the board: “This this permit that was issued and the permit that I understand is appealable is the permit for the installation of the firewall only.” Corey Teague, zoning administrator for the Planning Department, reiterated that planning had reviewed and approved the firewall permit and that the work did not trigger neighborhood notification under the planning code.

Appellant Lan Le told the board she has an active complaint with DBI filed in August 2023 alleging that a prior owner cut a section of a continuous firewall without a permit and built an unpermitted staircase that connects to her landing. Le said she has a certificate of completion from 02/2002 showing the firewall once ran continuously and that a judge later granted a four‑foot prescriptive easement to the neighbor. She said she is asking only that the removal of the earlier firewall be documented and permitted: “All I'm asking is that he goes and get a permit and get it approved. That's all I'm asking for.”

The permit holder, Pat Deanda, testified that the stairs and related work were done years ago and contended he had acquired rights to the access; he said his present permits were prepared and issued through appropriate professionals. Board members pressed city staff on whether the alleged easement intrusion and the stair location were matters for DBI or for civil courts. DBI staff and the board said easement encroachment is a civil matter and not within the board’s or DBI’s permit review jurisdiction.

Vice President JR Epler moved to deny the appeal and uphold the permit, noting DBI and Planning recommended denial because the permit was code‑compliant. The motion carried 4 to 0. The board asked DBI to research the appellant’s August 2023 complaint and follow up with the parties to clarify whether prior complaints remain open or require corrective action.

Board members and city staff emphasized the narrow scope of the hearing: the panel reviewed the permit for the firewall installation, not private easement disputes. DBI advised that if Le believes there are outstanding unpermitted alterations, she should file or follow up on a complaint with DBI’s code enforcement division so the department can investigate further.