Board of Appeals denies rehearing request from McLeod neighbors over 14420 Fifth Avenue permit

The San Francisco Board of Appeals on Oct. 25 denied a rehearing request from Bruce and Deborah McLeod over a permit issued for 14420 Fifth Avenue, ruling 5–0 that the record did not show new, material facts or a manifest injustice.

The McLeods told the board their one‑page status report was omitted from the packet for the Sept. 27 hearing and that an out‑of‑office reply proves they filed on time. They said a planning‑department witness incorrectly stated the McLeods had not reached out to planning, which changed the tone of the hearing. "Our 1 page status report was not in the board's packet," the McLeod representative said, adding that the omission and a staff statement left them feeling they had been treated unfairly.

Planning Department Deputy Zoning Administrator Tina Tam told the board her office would respond to questions about the Housing Accountability Act and the Planning Commission’s action memos, and that the revised plans were on the record. "At the September 27 hearing, my colleague Andrew Perry ... had no knowledge that the McLeods had reached out to the zoning administrator," Tam said, and she reported that the zoning administrator confirmed he had met with the McLeods but would not have changed the substance of the permit action.

Counsel for the permit holder argued the McLeods had ample notice and opportunities to present their case, noting two prior hearings and months to negotiate. He said the McLeods had not established the standard required to warrant a rehearing: "They don't show any material facts or circumstances have arisen where such facts or circumstances, if known at the time, could have affected the outcome of the original hearing."

During deliberations, commissioners acknowledged administrative mistakes — including a misread email timestamp and the late receipt of a one‑page statement — but several said those errors did not amount to a manifest injustice or alter the board’s view that the revised plans complied with code. The board voted to deny rehearing by a 5–0 vote.

The board declined to reopen the permit; the decision leaves in place the board’s prior action on the permit and closes the rehearing request. The record shows the board will continue to examine internal procedures for accepting and documenting late or out‑of‑office submittals.