Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Building Code Rehearing topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board grants rehearing for 16 Iris permit over fire‑rating concern; rehearing set for Feb. 10
Summary
The Board granted a rehearing for a contested permit at 16 Iris after the appellant presented DBI inspector remarks indicating the approved plans may not meet 1‑hour fire‑rated wall rules; the rehearing was scheduled for Feb. 10 with briefing deadlines.
The San Francisco Board of Appeals voted on Jan. 13 to grant a rehearing in an appeal over a permit for work at 16 Iris Avenue after the appellant presented technical evidence that DBI plan review may have misapplied building-code limits for a property-line wall.
Appellant Catherine (Cathy) DiVincenzi argued that DBI plan checker Irene Wong had now, according to the appellant, agreed the proposed southern wall could not qualify as the required 1‑hour fire‑rated exterior wall because an unusually large folding window made up about 33% of the wall opening; DiVincenzi said reducing that opening to 25% would allow the wall to be treated differently under the code and avoid the separate property-line firewall calculation.
Architects and DBI staff disputed whether the problem was contractual or one of measurement. Architect Yaku Askew (YU Studio) told the board the project sponsor was prepared to reduce the window size to fall below the 25% threshold, while DBI Inspector Joe Duffy explained that measurement method (angle vs. 90‑degree distance) and addendum plan‑check could resolve the issue and that senior plan checkers would likely flag any noncompliant layout in an addenda review.
After discussion that the information constituted "new information," Commissioner Frank Fung moved to grant a rehearing. The board set the rehearing for Feb. 10, 2016, directed a briefing schedule (appellant's brief due Jan. 21; permit holder's brief due Feb. 4) and agreed revised plans could be submitted if parties sought to resolve the matter before that date. The motion carried with the recorded Aye votes of President Anne Lazarus, Vice President Daryl Honda and Commissioner Rick Swig.
DBI staff said that while some technical solutions could be handled in the addenda process, a rehearing would preserve the appellant—s ability to contest the permit outcome if the addenda process did not resolve the code interpretation central to the appeal.
The rehearing will reopen the appeal on Feb. 10; the board recorded that rehearing procedure starts de novo (the rehearing resets briefing and evidence schedules).
