Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Zoning topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Board upholds zoning administrator’s determination that 425 Burnett is authorized as two units

San Francisco Board of Appeals · June 3, 2015
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

Appellants argued historical records and on-the-ground evidence show four legal units at 425 Burnett; Planning and DBI staff said contemporaneous inspections and the certificate of final completion support a two-unit authorization. The board voted 5-0 to uphold the zoning administrator's determination.

The Board of Appeals upheld a zoning administrator determination that the property at 425 Burnett Avenue is authorized as a two-unit dwelling, rejecting an appeal that sought recognition of four legal units.

Appellants presented a lengthy historical account and job-card evidence they said show four kitchens, multiple bathrooms and continuous occupancy of four distinct units dating to the building's construction in the late 1970s. Counsel and the owner asserted planning records and subsequent permit activity supported longstanding four-unit occupancy.

Planning Department staff and DBI told the board their archival records and inspection reports indicate the original permits, job cards and certificate of final completion list the building as a two-family dwelling. Planning staff said a 1978 inspection found only two dwelling units and that planning closed the enforcement inquiry at that time. DBI staff noted that building records available in their system support the two-unit classification and that some later service permits show inconsistent notations but do not demonstrate a permitted increase in unit count.

The board’s majority concluded the zoning administrator did not abuse discretion given the contemporaneous records available and voted 5-0 to uphold the letter of determination. Planning staff noted that recent accessory-dwelling legalization programs and ordinances provide limited paths to legalize some long-standing units in other contexts, but those provisions were not determinative in this case.