Board of Appeals revokes permit for 945–947 Minnesota Street after finding unpermitted demolition

The San Francisco Board of Appeals voted 4–0 on Sept. 28 to grant an appeal filed by Spencer Gosch and revoke a 2019 alteration permit for 945–947 Minnesota Street, finding significant work had been done without required approvals.

Planning Department deputy zoning administrator Tina Tam told the board that an inspection showed the rear addition had been “significantly demolished and rebuilt without the benefits of a permit” and that, because the building is a contributing resource in the Dogpatch Landmark District, work of this scope triggers Planning Code Article 10 and requires a certificate of appropriateness and a yard variance. “Given the amount of demolition of historic fabric and material … a new certificate of appropriateness will be required,” Tam said.

The Department of Building Inspection informed the board that it received complaints, issued a notice of violation in May 2022, and found the contractor continued work after a stop-work order. “We issued a notice of violation,” DBI representative Matthew Green said. After a joint site visit, DBI extended the stop-work order to the entire project and forwarded the notice to code enforcement for a director’s hearing. DBI recommended that the board revoke the 2019 permit or allow the applicant to cancel it and submit a comprehensive permit capturing all work.

Appellant Spencer Gosch urged the board to order DBI to determine the legality of the contested construction and remove the addition if no permit record exists, summarizing his position: “No permit, no plans, illegal.” The project’s architect (unnamed in the transcript) disputed parts of the enforcement narrative, saying some foundation work was completed before the permit was issued and asserting that an inspector had directed the contractor to pour the foundation.

Vice President Jose Lopez moved to grant the appeal on the basis that the permit was not properly issued and to revoke the permit; the motion carried on a 4–0 vote. Commissioners John Trezvina, JR Epler and President Rick Swigg voted aye.

The board’s action leaves outstanding procedural and enforcement steps for city departments: Planning indicated the project will require a consolidated permit, a certificate of appropriateness, and likely a rare-yard variance; DBI has forwarded the notice of violation to code enforcement for a director’s hearing that could result in additional enforcement measures. The board’s vote concluded the appeal hearing without approving any construction to proceed until required approvals are obtained.