Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Permits Ownership Disputes topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board of Appeals denies jurisdiction request in Albion Street permit dispute
Summary
The San Francisco Board of Appeals on Aug. 7 denied a jurisdiction request from owners of 141–143 Albion St., finding the city did not cause them to miss the 15‑day appeal period on a permit issued to their neighbor. The board advised the owners to pursue DBI complaint and civil remedies.
The San Francisco Board of Appeals on Aug. 7 denied a jurisdiction request from the owners of 141–143 Albion Street who said a neighbor, Eric Rice, obtained a permit to enclose carport space without owners’ permission. Vice President Anne Lazarus moved to deny the request on the ground that the city neither intentionally nor inadvertently caused the owners to miss the statutory appeal deadline; the motion carried 4–0.
Lydia Chavez, who identified herself as one of the three owners at 141–143 Albion, told the board that Mr. Rice built storage units in the shared garage without a permit on or about Dec. 30, 2018, and later applied for and received a permit. "He did this without a permit, without consultation, and without notification," Chavez said, summarizing evidence she submitted, including emails from the Department of Building Inspection (DBI) and declarations she said showed prior construction.
Permit holder counsel Arthur Meerson urged the board to apply the narrow jurisdictional standard: whether the city caused the owners to file late. Meerson said the project had been discussed publicly since January 2019 and that the owners failed to file an appeal within 15 days after the permit issued. "The city did not do anything, intentionally or inadvertently, to cause the requesters to be late," Meerson said.
DBI senior building inspector Joe Duffy told the board the permit application included an easement and highlighted that DBI issued the permit based on documentation submitted at the time. Duffy said DBI could investigate and, if it later found the permit was issued in error, revoke it. Planning Department staff Scott Sanchez said converting parking to storage raised no clear planning‑code bar and suggested the dispute likely involves civil interpretation of an easement.
After extended questioning and discussion about remedies, the board concluded appellants had other remedies available, including filing a complaint with DBI and pursuing civil resolution of the easement dispute. The board denied the jurisdiction request 4–0. Commissioner Eduardo Santa Cana, Commissioner Rachel Tanner and President Rick Swig joined Lazarus in voting Aye.
The board returned the matter of the underlying permit and other remedies to DBI and recommended the owners pursue a departmental complaint if they believe the permit was issued in error.
