Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Shotwell 670 Appeal topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board grants neighbors’ appeal and revokes 670 Shotwell permit after finding permit was improvidently issued
Summary
The Board of Appeals granted an appeal from neighbors at 670/672 Shotwell Street, concluding the permit was improvidently issued given the unaddressed easement/CC&R issues and lack of full factual awareness; the board voted to revoke the permit and directed parties to resolve remaining civil disputes.
The Board of Appeals voted unanimously on June 26 to grant an appeal filed by neighbors of 670 Shotwell Street and to revoke a multi‑part permit issued for interior/exterior door changes and a fence at 670 Shotwell.
Neighbors Mickey and Art Christina (represented through public comment) said the permit holder removed an existing side door that provided access tied to an easement and then opened a new back door that, they said, allowed short‑term rental guests to cross into their exclusive use area. Appellants described an incident in which an overnight guest appeared on their driveway and said the work was performed without prior CC&R approvals.
Permit holder Beth Miles and her architect, Jim Zack, apologized for not obtaining some permits earlier and said the building permits were submitted and issued quickly after the complaint. Planning and DBI staff said the permits, as submitted, met planning and building code standards; both agencies noted that private easement and CC&R disputes are civil matters beyond the department codes. DBI and Planning also noted life‑safety constraints — the fire department required certain gates to maintain emergency egress.
After extended questioning about whether the permit proximately caused the loss of access and whether DBI had full information when issuing approvals, the commissioners concluded there was insufficient fact‑finding at the time of permit issuance and that the permit was improvidently granted. The board voted 5–0 to grant the appeal, reverse the permit issuance and remand for further action; staff said enforcement would likely allow a period for the parties to correct or mediate before requiring removal, with standard correction timelines to be applied.
The board urged the parties to pursue mediation and clarified that easement and CC&R enforcement are civil matters; it also instructed staff to outline a timeline for required corrections if a voluntary agreement is not reached.
