Board upholds curative permit at 2103 Pine Street despite neighbor’s appeal

The San Francisco Board of Appeals on July 22 voted 4–0 to uphold a curative building permit for work at 2103 Pine Street after neighbors raised concerns about the location of a lowered bathroom roof, flashing and a planter box foundation.

Appellant counsel Robert Capron said the permit drawings lack needed demolition and roof‑framing detail and that the final roof edge appears to intersect the neighboring windowsill rather than extend under it, raising water intrusion risks. “We need to have adequate flashing between the edge of that roof and my client's property,” Capron said, asking the board to add a condition requiring the roof be below the sill and properly flashed.

Architect Jim Valente said the plans submitted in 2002 did not match the finished construction and urged lowering the roof 8 inches to allow continuous sheet‑metal flashing. Respondent counsel Joseph Ehrlich and permit holders Chuck and Carol Tweedle said the work was permitted and inspected in 2002, the planter has been moved, and the permit was issued to remedy a notice of violation. Ehrlich also disputed claims that the project was improper, characterizing some allegations as matters for civil litigation.

DBI senior inspector Joe Duffy reviewed the notice of violation and the subsequent permit intake and plan check; he stated the building permit “appears to have been properly issued” and recommended upholding the permit. After oral argument, public comment and rebuttals, Commissioner Fung moved to uphold the permit as properly issued. The motion carried 4–0 and the board ordered that a notice of decision and order be released.

The board noted that some civil claims (for example, alleged water damage and concrete against wood contact at a planter base) may be pursued separately and are not before this panel in the permit-appeal proceeding.