Board continues appeal over locked gate at Collin Place, orders DBI accessibility review

The San Francisco Board of Appeals continued to Aug. 15 an appeal over a gate installed across Collin Place at 642 Jones Street, directing the Department of Building Inspection (DBI) to conduct an exiting and accessibility review.

Courtney Ut, the appellant, told the board she has terminal brain cancer and relies on consistent daytime access to the alley so drivers can reach the building’s rear handicap entrance for medical appointments. She said the gate, which was required by DPW to be left open during daylight hours while the permit was suspended, often remained locked and at times had been padlocked, causing missed medical pick-ups.

Deborah Shilvers, speaking for permit holder Elizabeth LP, said the gate was installed in response to recurring criminal activity in the alley (prostitution, drug use, dumped human waste) and that the San Francisco Police Department, Fire Department and Department of Public Works supported the installation. Shilvers said the owner provided a key to Ms. Ut and that the applicant had offered other accommodations, including modifying thresholds and possibly providing additional keys.

John Kwan of the Department of Public Works told the board DPW had initially pursued a street-vacation route but issued a revocable encroachment permit after consultation with police and fire given the alley’s quality-of-life issues; he said the director later ordered the gate opened during daylight hours after learning of Ms. Ut’s disability and that DPW would have enforced that requirement if notified the gate was closed during those hours.

Multiple tenants and building representatives raised both sides of the issue at the hearing: some said the gate improved safety and cleanliness, while others—particularly elderly or disabled tenants—said the gate reduced loading access and could interfere with emergency egress unless configured to meet exiting and ADA requirements. DBI staff indicated there are building-code implications for exiting and accessibility that need review.

On the record, commissioners said they supported the concept of gating to address public-safety issues but emphasized it must be accessible and meet exiting-code requirements. The board voted to continue the case to allow DBI to examine the gate's threshold, panic-exit function, dimensions for occupant load, and potential building-permit requirements; the motion passed by roll call (5–0). No new public briefing was permitted beyond DBI’s report.

The board’s continuation gives DBI time to recommend specific modifications and to report back to the Board of Appeals on whether the gate and person-door meet ADA and occupant-exit-width requirements and what changes are necessary.