A new, powerful Citizen Portal experience is ready. Switch now

Board upholds Planning suspension for 126 Mullen Ave. pending corrective permit review

February 09, 2022 | San Francisco City, San Francisco County, California


This article was created by AI summarizing key points discussed. AI makes mistakes, so for full details and context, please refer to the video of the full meeting. Please report any errors so we can fix them. Report an error »

Board upholds Planning suspension for 126 Mullen Ave. pending corrective permit review
The Board of Appeals voted 5-0 to deny an appeal seeking to lift a Planning Department suspension of an alteration permit for 126 Mullen Ave. The suspension remains in place to allow Planning and DBI to review submitted corrective plans and demolition calculations.

Appellant counsel argued that framing work had been "sistered" (new studs installed alongside existing studs) rather than fully removed, and provided demolition calculations, photos, and testimony from the permit holder and their contractor to support that the work did not meet demolition thresholds in Planning Code §3.17. The permit holder’s team said unexpected conditions had required incremental repair and that structural shoring and engineered methods were used.

Planning Deputy Zoning Administrator Tina Tam told the board that site visits and historic research uncovered inconsistencies — including an incorrect lot width on the 2016 plans, unclear existing basement ceiling heights, and evidence suggesting more removal than shown — and that the department had not received a formal corrective permit or sufficiently legible plan set submitted through Planning’s intake. DBI said inspectors had closed several complaints after inspections but also noted that the approved plans did not accurately reflect current basement conditions and that a notice of violation may be required for foundation/basement work.

Commissioners focused on the purpose of a suspension — to give Planning and DBI the documentation they need to determine whether the work exceeded permit scope — and repeatedly urged submission of a corrective permit that accurately documents as-built and existing conditions. Vice President Lazarus moved to deny the appeal, finding the zoning administrator did not err or abuse discretion in requesting the suspension pending review; the motion carried 5-0.

Planning and DBI said any corrective-permit submission should include accurate existing-condition drawings, demolition calculations, and structural documentation; Planning will include basement excavation and retaining-wall information in its review process.

View the Full Meeting & All Its Details

This article offers just a summary. Unlock complete video, transcripts, and insights as a Founder Member.

Watch full, unedited meeting videos
Search every word spoken in unlimited transcripts
AI summaries & real-time alerts (all government levels)
Permanent access to expanding government content
Access Full Meeting

30-day money-back guarantee