Board of Appeals denies rehearing request in 3160 Jackson Street permit dispute

The San Francisco Board of Appeals on April 23 denied a rehearing request from Lana and John Adair concerning a site permit for 3160 Jackson Street, voting 3-0 that the appellants had not shown new or different material facts or a manifest injustice that would change the board’s earlier decision.

The Adairs told the board they filed the rehearing request after receiving shoring and structural calculations that they said had been withheld during the original appeal. "We are requesting a rehearing in order to consider the information that was promised," John Adair said. He and a licensed engineer told the board they remain concerned about excavation and its proximity to an existing retaining wall.

Board members said the rehearing rules require either (1) an extraordinary case to prevent manifest injustice or (2) new, material facts that would have changed the original ruling. President Trezvino asked the appellants to explain how the newly produced calculations met that standard. The appellants said the materials were provided only after the permit was issued and that they had not had adequate time to process them before the deadline to request rehearing.

The permit holder, represented at the hearing by architect Steven Sutro, said the project advanced through discretionary review and that structural calculations had been provided to the appellants as soon as the sponsor had written confirmation of who would receive them. Sutro said the structural calculations are properly reviewed by the Department of Building Inspection (DBI) during plan check. "We wanted to give it to them immediately, but we expected this to be an ongoing discussion," Sutro said.

Joseph Ospital, senior building inspector, and plan-review engineer Joseph Chan explained DBI’s process. Chan said DBI does not perform a full structural calculation review during the site-permit phase while a permit remains under suspension; the department performs limited checks (including the SSPA — Slope and Seismic Hazardous Zone Protection — checklist) and later reviews structural calculations when the permit proceeds to plan check. "Until the permit is released from suspension, we can start review of any submittal regarding the structural," Chan said.

Vice President J. R. Epler and Commissioner Lopez both said they were sympathetic to the Adairs’ desire for transparency but found that the newly produced papers did not meet the rehearing standard. "I go to our technical rules, with respect to the rehearing request, and I see neither new facts that go to the matter that was before us... Nor do I see manifest injustice at this time," Vice President Epler said. Commissioner Lopez agreed and moved to deny the rehearing request; the board voted 3-0 to deny it.

The board’s denial preserves its earlier March decision to uphold the site permit as properly issued. The decision leaves DBI as the agency responsible for structural review during plan check, and it does not alter DBI’s stated process for assessing shoring and structural calculations.

The matter was submitted and the board moved on to the next agenda item.