Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Enforcement topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board upholds notice of violation at 2455 Jackson Street; owner must pursue permits to legalize roof work
Summary
The Board of Appeals denied Robert Corman’s appeal of a zoning administrator notice of violation for work at 2455 Jackson Street, finding the zoning administrator did not err. DBI and Planning said the owner has not submitted a complete permit to legalize observed roof and top‑floor changes; the appeal was denied 4–0.
The San Francisco Board of Appeals on May 5 denied an appeal of a notice of violation alleging unauthorized roof and top‑floor construction at 2455 Jackson Street, voting 4–0 to uphold the zoning administrator's determination.
Appellant counsel argued the zoning hearing was premature, raised procedural objections and said the owner had been denied due process because he lacked notice of specific documentary evidence. "A fundamental element of due process is notice and opportunity to be heard," counsel asserted.
Planning and DBI staff told the board the case arose from a DBI complaint and site visit that observed extensive top‑floor and roof alterations (reframing of roof structure, added skylights, roof deck and infill of a light well) not supported by the owner’s submitted permit package. DBI confirmed a notice of violation was issued in late 2018 and that the owner has filed a building permit to address the work; DBI and Planning said that submitted plans have not yet corrected all outstanding issues.
Commissioners concluded the zoning administrator had followed the city's enforcement process and had not abused discretion. Commissioner Anne Lazarus moved to deny the appeal and uphold the notice of violation as properly issued; the motion carried 4–0.
DBI indicated the owner must submit complete architectural and structural drawings, obtain planning approval where required and pursue the permit path to legalize any work done without prior permits. An order of abatement and earlier administrative enforcement steps remain part of the record.
