Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Permit Enforcement topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Residents urge DBI to act on alleged "demolitions in disguise" and long-running 55 Montana dispute
Summary
Noe Valley residents told the Building Inspection Commission that alteration permits are being used to perform near-demolitions and described a long-running dispute at 55 Montana that they say left a neighbor's foundation undermined and her home mold-infested. Commissioners requested staff follow-up.
Anastasia Yovanopoulos, a Noe Valley resident, told the San Francisco Building Inspection Commission on Aug. 17 that alteration permits issued in her neighborhood increasingly resemble demolitions, with principal portions removed under the cover of a remodel permit.
"Principal portions are being removed from structures," Yovanopoulos said during general public comment, arguing the practice erodes the integrity of the San Francisco building code and can create public-safety and revenue problems for the city.
The commission heard a related, detailed complaint from Isabelle Paredes, owner of 59 Montana Street, who said a discretionary review from May 7, 2015 required the neighbor at 55 Montana to remove an illegal addition but that the requirement was not enforced. Paredes said the adjacent project later received a new permit and that inspections have failed to resolve structural and health issues at her home. "This is not acceptable," she told the Commission.
Kristi Hakim, who said she is a friend of Paredes, described mold and foundation undermining at Paredes' home, recounted visits to the DBI counter seeking easement records and said delays and record-handling raised concerns about how the case was managed.
Commissioners asked staff for an update on the 55 Montana file and for a broader hearing on cases that begin as renovations but appear to result in near-demolitions. Commissioner Walker asked specifically for a staff briefing on the department's criteria and processes for treating a project as a demolition rather than a renovation. Director Huey was asked to clarify DBI's role and interagency responsibilities in those situations.
The Commission did not take formal action; members requested that staff report back with an update on the 55 Montana file and a presentation on demolition-versus-renovation criteria at a future meeting.
