Citizen Portal
Sign In

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

Get email alerts on the Building Permits topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Board halves and then reduces penalty for unpermitted bathroom work at Eighth Avenue property

Board of Appeals, City and County of San Francisco · September 30, 2009
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 reduced a penalty for unpermitted construction at 1767 Eighth Avenue after the homeowner, Linda Chang, apologized and DBI staff described work that gutted bathrooms; the Board settled on a penalty equal to three times the regular fee (vote 4–1).

The Board of Appeals reduced an investigation penalty for work without a permit at 1767 Eighth Avenue, concluding that the homeowner should receive a reduced fine after hearing mitigating circumstances.

Lawrence Kornfield of the Department of Building Inspection said an inspector found work on two floors including gutted bathrooms and that the department initially valued the unpermitted work at roughly $3,500 before lowering the valuation. "Gutted the bathrooms, remodeling without permits down to the floor joists," Kornfield said, explaining why inspection and a penalty were imposed.

Appellant Linda Chang apologized to the board and said she believed the work was a modest home-improvement project; she described hiring helpers and said she did not intend to avoid permitting. "First, I want to apologize for doing the work without the permit," Chang said, and asked the board for leniency because she said the cost equaled or exceeded the fine.

Commissioners discussed the scope of work, the department's accommodation on valuation, and do-it-yourself versus contractor responsibilities. After debate the Board voted to reduce the penalty to three times the regular fee (the lowest administratively permitted reduction in the final motion carried 4 to 1). The Board noted the department had already reduced valuation and directed DBI to process the adjusted penalty.