Citizen Portal
Sign In

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

Get email alerts on the Building Permit topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Board denies building permit tied to 1269 Lombard project after finding wrong owner/parcel on application

San Francisco Board of Appeals · April 24, 2013
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

The Board of Appeals denied a permit associated with the 1269 Lombard Street project after DBI and Planning staff found the application listed the incorrect property owner and parcel; the board voted 5–0 to deny the permit and directed the applicant to refile with correct property and routing information.

The Board of Appeals voted unanimously on April 24 to deny a building permit connected to the 1269 Lombard project after Department of Building Inspection staff concluded the permit was issued under the wrong address and with the wrong designated property owner.

Appellant Rod Hanlon told the board that the permit application omitted the property owner’s authorization and that over-the-counter permits issued later had allowed construction that encroached on the rear-yard easement of an adjacent property at 1380 Greenwich. Lombard Property Company representatives (Tom Burwell and architect Charles Blozies) said project approvals had proceeded through multiple planning hearings and that clerical errors on the permit could be corrected; they stressed the project’s neighborhood benefits and pledged to work with staff to resolve issues.

DBI Inspector Donnelly (Duffy) told the board the plans show work located on the adjacent parcel and that the permit should have been filed under 1380 Greenwich; he said the work would require a new application under the correct address and that Planning should likely review the landscaping and rear-yard conditions. Planning’s Scott Sanchez acknowledged a condition in the 1986 approval requiring final landscaping review by Planning that may conflict with the built condition and recommended the board direct a corrective process.

The board found that the designated property owner and parcel were incorrect on the appealed permit and denied the permit (5–0). Members discussed requiring a new, properly routed application with clear existing-and-proposed-condition plans so Planning and DBI can evaluate compliance with prior conditions of approval.

What happens next: The applicant must refile a corrected permit for the proper parcel and owner; DBI and Planning will review the resubmission and check compliance with earlier conditions.