Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use Permits topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board revokes Fillmore building permit, upholds DBI suspension after finding evidence of hotel use
Summary
The San Francisco Board of Appeals revoked a building permit for 124–128 Fillmore and upheld a Department of Building Inspection suspension after hearing evidence the property operated as a short‑term rental requiring conditional use authorization; both motions passed unanimously.
The San Francisco Board of Appeals voted unanimously to revoke the building permit for 124–128 Fillmore Street and to uphold a Department of Building Inspection suspension after residents and planning staff presented evidence the property had been operated as a bed‑and‑breakfast without required approvals.
Planning staff told the board the department originally reviewed and approved the variance and building permit on the basis the property contained three dwelling units. Scott Sanchez of the Planning Department told commissioners the department later learned, based on online listings and a complaint, that the Fillmore house was being marketed for minimum stays of two nights and ‘‘appears to be still being illegally operated as a bed and breakfast’’; he recommended the board deny the permit application and uphold the DBI suspension.
Appellant Deborah Stott testified she had documented online advertisements and neighborhood observations that, she said, showed the building was ‘‘running as a regular hotel without the permits.’’ Neighbors and former tenants described short‑term rentals, frequent comings and goings and alleged intimidation and evictions of long‑term residents.
Attorney Tex Ritter, representing the property owner David Nail, urged the board to treat the garage structure as a freestanding accessory building and to rely on voter‑registration evidence and leases to show that current occupants are residents. He said the owner had removed on‑line ads and that some past advertisements were placed by third‑party directories. The property owner’s counsel also cited Board precedent about freestanding structures.
After deliberation, Commissioner Robert Holland moved to revoke the permit with findings to be prepared by the city attorney and to uphold the DBI suspension; the board approved both motions 5–0. The board recorded the revocation and said formal findings would be drafted and returned to the board.
