Board continues Drumm Street rooftop-permit dispute after safety, notice concerns

The San Francisco Board of Appeals on Jan. 29 voted to continue an appeal over a rooftop addition at 49 Drumm Street to April 8, directing the Department of Building Inspection to perform a site visit and asking parties to file updated briefs. The vote was unanimous (4–0).

Appellant counsel Ryan Patrick told the board the permit issued to the property owner for a “new third level horizontal addition for expansion of mechanical space” was being used as an office. "This clearly isn't a mechanical room," Patrick said, and asked the board to revoke the permit or continue so engineers could inspect the work.

Permit-holder counsel Jody Knight and owner Eric Ketchum said DBI and planning had reviewed the plans and that the permit was intended to legalize mechanical/storage space and to cure a 2017 notice of violation. Knight told commissioners the application had been under review for more than a year and that the owners were willing to meet neighbors and structural engineers to address concerns.

Planning Department staffer Scott Sanchez summarized aerial and street photos and said the addition appears to have been built between mid-2017 and mid-2018. Sanchez read the planner’s approval language noting that the third-floor expansion was approved “for mechanical equipment and storage space” and must be set back 5 feet, 5 inches from the front façade.

Department of Building Inspection Inspector Joe Duffy described the permit review history: a form-3 application filed Aug. 14, 2018, reviews by structural and mechanical plan check, and an issued permit on Dec. 10, 2019 (later suspended Dec. 23). Duffy said structural review was performed and he identified an engineer listed on the drawing review. But DBI staff and Planning recommended a site visit so inspectors could verify that the constructed work matches the approved plans.

Several public commenters, including Oasis Grill's attorney Dana Andreoli and the restaurant's tenant, told the board they learned of the permit only recently and said the rooftop work has led to alleged changes in electrical and mechanical services and left the tenant unable to open a long-delayed restaurant. A structural engineer who inspected the plans briefly told the board he saw no documentation addressing vertical load for the added rooftop mass.

Commissioners said the hearing record lacked briefing from both sides and recommended re-setting a briefing schedule and ordering DBI to inspect the site and report back with clear, “tight” guidelines for what information the board should expect at the next hearing. Vice President Honda and other commissioners emphasized that DBI must confirm whether electrical work previously inspected for the restaurant was altered and whether the rooftop addition can remain or must be removed or reinforced.

The board’s motion to continue the item to April 8 instructs DBI to conduct a site visit and to provide specific inspection steps and findings so the matter can return with a materially fuller record. If DBI’s inspection finds noncompliance with the approved permit, DBI said it will enforce the notice of violation procedures, which may include requiring corrective work or filing a new enforcement action.