Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Building Safety topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board conditions rear window permit at 1763 Oak to preserve bedroom egress opening
Summary
The Board of Appeals granted an appeal and conditioned an over‑the‑counter window‑replacement permit at 1763 Oak Street so that the bedroom egress opening in the replacement windows must equal the existing opening; DBI and Planning staff said rear, non‑street‑facing replacements are typically routed differently than street‑facing work.
The San Francisco Board of Appeals on July 17 granted an appeal by a neighbor and conditioned a rear window‑replacement permit at 1763 Oak Street on the requirement that the bedroom egress opening in any replacement windows be equal to the existing clear opening.
Appellant Serena Calhoun argued the permit holder’s proposed vinyl retrofit windows could reduce the clear egress opening area and compromise both safety and the building’s historic character. Calhoun said the replacement product cited in the permit paperwork had a smaller clear opening on the manufacturer’s chart than the existing wood sashes and that a retrofit installation (inset replacement) could reduce the opening further.
Holger Michel, the permit holder, said the back windows had been replaced previously and that the proposed windows were similar to other installed windows; he said the work was an over‑the‑counter replacement with no change in opening size and that the final manufacturing drawings would determine exact dimensions. DBI senior inspector Joe Duffy told the board the California Existing Building Code permits replacement windows that are the manufacturer’s largest standard that will fit in the existing opening, and emphasized DBI will not allow a replacement that makes an egress opening smaller.
Planning staff said rear, non‑street‑facing window replacements often do not require the same preservation review as street‑facing work; however, Planning and the appellant agreed consistency across a building is preferable in appearance.
The board granted the appeal but required the permit be revised to specify that the bedroom egress opening must be the same size as the existing opening to ensure code compliance and life‑safety access.
What this means: The permit can proceed if revised to meet the grafted condition on egress openings; otherwise DBI will enforce the code requirement that replacement windows not reduce egress clear openings.
Key details: The permit at issue is application 201904309355; DBI suspended the permit pending appeal and emphasized that replacement windows must be equal to or larger than the existing clear opening for required bedroom egress.
