Citizen Portal
Sign In

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

Get email alerts on the Residential Development topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Neighbors Reach Partial Agreement; Board Continues Hammerton Deck Dispute to Oct. 15

San Francisco Board of Appeals · September 17, 2014
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

After extensive testimony about privacy, fire safety and construction details, the Board continued the appeal over a proposed deck and exterior staircase at 179 Hammerton Ave. Parties agreed to a firewall/lattice solution pending revised plans and a signed acceptance from the southern adjacent neighbor; matter continued to Oct. 15.

The Board of Appeals continued a contentious appeal on Sept. 17 over a proposed deck and exterior staircase at 179 Hammerton Ave. Appellant Carol Brown said the staircase would be 1.5 feet from her property, causing privacy, safety and potential fire‑code concerns for an elderly, disabled homeowner. Permit holders Scott and Shannon Dilewski defended a modest deck design and proposed mitigations including lattice and a noncombustible firewall and said relocating stairs would obstruct egress and storage access.

DBI plan‑checking staff told the board that required firewalls had not been shown on the plans and that a plan checker oversight had allowed the permit to be issued without required firewall details; they also noted headroom issues for the proposed spiral stair. Planning staff said the drawn plans meet planning code but that a firewall could trigger a Section 3.11 neighborhood notification requirement depending on height.

Over several rounds of questions the parties negotiated: Carol Brown agreed to accept a firewall and an extension of her existing lattice to the midline of the proposed spiral stair if the permit holders agreed to build the firewall from specified materials (Hardi plank/shiplap cement board) and provide a written acknowledgement from the southern adjacent neighbor. The board directed permit holders to submit revised plans and the neighbor’s written agreement; the matter was continued to Oct. 15 for the board to rule on whether required Section 3.11 notification had been satisfied.

DBI and planning staff also advised that any excavation at the property line must account for neighboring foundations and that firewalls or a 3‑foot setback could change neighborhood notification requirements. The board voted 3–0 to continue the item to Oct. 15 with those submittal conditions.