Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Adu Policy topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board denies ADU appeal at 1421 Tenth Avenue and adopts resolution urging tenant notice and response process
Summary
The Board of Appeals denied an appeal of a permit to convert parking and storage into five ADUs at 1421 Tenth Avenue but amended and adopted a nonbinding resolution encouraging clearer tenant notice, inclusion of plans with notice, and a tenant comment‑and‑response process for ADU permits tied to seismic retrofits.
The Board of Appeals on May 8 denied an appeal by tenants at 1421 Tenth Avenue challenging a Department of Building Inspection and Planning permit to convert covered parking and storage into five accessory dwelling units as part of a mandatory soft‑story seismic retrofit. After the hearing, the board adopted a nonbinding resolution urging improved tenant notice procedures and a tenant comment‑and‑response process for such ADU projects.
Tenants and tenant counsel raised several concerns: limited time and access to plans during the appeal period, unclear notice language, potential permanent loss of parking or storage, uncertainty about ADA‑accessible parking, and whether the Costa Hawkins (Casa Hawkins) covenant’s no‑conflict provision had been satisfied. Tenants described difficulty getting timely responses from building management and asked for floor plans, clearer notices, and assurances that parking and storage would be restored.
Owner Kent Marr and counsel Ryan Patterson said the project follows the ADU/soft‑story program and planning staff’s waivers, that notices were mailed and posted as a courtesy, and that tenants who currently have parking or storage would receive equivalent spaces after construction; they also noted tenants will receive statutory compensation for temporary loss of services as required by the rent ordinance. Planning and DBI staff confirmed the permit had been routed to the necessary departments and said the plans retain six parking spaces (two front, four rear) and meet ADU program requirements.
While the board found the permit properly issued and denied the appeal 4‑0, commissioners expressed concern about communication gaps and voted to send a resolution to relevant departments and the Board of Supervisors encouraging standardized notice, inclusion of plans with notices where practicable, and a process to receive and respond to tenant inquiries. The resolution was amended on the floor to add a specific tenant response process and passed 4‑0.
