Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Jurisdiction Request topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board grants late‑jurisdiction request for 1753 Beach Street; neighbor alleges improper notice
Summary
An owner’s attorney persuaded the Board to take late jurisdiction over a permit for 1753 Beach Street, arguing the permit was issued while the neighbor was abroad and that work includes a roof deck on common property; the permit holder says the deck is exclusively owned and intends to remove it. Board created a new appeal period.
The Board of Appeals granted a request to take late jurisdiction over a disputed building permit for 1753 Beach Street on Jan. 11, allowing the neighbor to file an appeal after claiming she missed notice while out of the country.
Attorney Andrew Zacks told the Board his client, Beth Wiesner, missed the original appeal period because the permit for an extensive remodel was pulled while she was abroad; he said the project includes a roof deck that is common area and should have required HOA authority. "My client went out of the country... she returned on November 23," Zacks said, describing an eight‑month period of negotiations between condo owners and the moment the permit was picked up.
Permit counsel Brian Soriano disputed the jurisdiction argument and submitted homeowners association covenants indicating the roof deck is the permit holder’s exclusive right. Contractor Brian Shepherd told the Board the owner intends to modify the permit to remove the roof deck because of cost concerns. Building inspector Joseph Duffy said a revision permit deleting the deck would be processed over the counter and would be appealable, but cautioned boards and neighbors to file complaints if they believe a deck encroaches on another lot.
After questions from commissioners about notice, permit pickup timing and the potential for a revision, the Board granted jurisdiction and created a new five‑day appeal period under board rules. The Board’s action allows the requester to brief the substantive ownership and notice issues during the appeal period.
No final determination on the underlying permit or the deck’s ownership was made; the Board’s ruling solely created a new opportunity to contest the permit under its late‑jurisdiction rules.
