Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use Permits topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board of Appeals denies appeal, upholds permit for 57 Niagara
Summary
The San Francisco Board of Appeals voted 5–0 to deny an appeal of a DBI-issued alteration permit for 57 Niagara, after the Planning Department and DBI staff said the plans were properly reviewed and did not show unauthorized roof-raising; the appellant raised fire-safety and light-well concerns.
The San Francisco Board of Appeals on Jan. 6 denied an appeal of a Department of Building Inspection permit for 57 Niagara Avenue, voting 5–0 to uphold the permit.
Steve Valdez, the appellant, told the board the project’s dormers and proposed openings conflict with an existing light well and a neighboring chimney and raised fire-safety concerns, citing Administrative Bulletin 009 and measurements he said show insufficient separation. Valdez asked the board to consider lowering a raised rear roof and modifying or removing openings that could create hazards.
The permit holder, appearing as Mr. Guan, said the previous owner had left the building in poor condition and that the current owner intends to repair and make the structure safe and habitable. Mr. Guan said design changes—such as removing collar braces and adding dormers—would produce usable third-floor space and that the project team verified ceiling heights.
Scott Sanchez of the Planning Department reported that the dormers and internal demolition do not trigger the Section 311 neighborhood notice and that the department found no evidence of an unauthorized dwelling unit. Acting Deputy Director Joseph Duffy of DBI said minimum ceiling heights are required by code and recommended early inspections, but said he did not see the chimney or window issues as showing a permit should be withheld.
After discussion, Vice President Darrell Honda moved to deny the appeal on the grounds that the permits were properly issued. The motion carried unanimously.
The board’s action upholds DBI and Planning’s determinations; no additional conditions were adopted at the Board of Appeals meeting. The board’s minutes show the vote was 5–0 in favor of denying the appeal.
