Board denies appeals of Monkey Brains interior permits amid heated debate over adjacent Parcel 36

The San Francisco Board of Appeals on Aug. 2 voted 5–0 to deny appeals filed by Friends of the Mission Greenway challenging two interior renovation permits for 931 and 933 Treat Avenue, ruling the permits were properly issued for interior nonstructural changes including new restrooms and an interior entry hall.

Appellant Lara Hanna, representing Friends of the Mission Greenway, urged revocation or re‑evaluation of the permits, arguing the permit applications were incomplete or misleading because the project plans identified an adjacent vacant area (Parcel 36) as a “loading area” and because the permit holders had publicly stated intentions to use the adjacent lot for loading or parking. “I find this a form of fraud, and as such, I find these permits incorrectly issued,” Hanna said, arguing use designations should have prompted Planning review.

Permit holders—including Alex Menendez and Rudy Rucker of Monkey Brains—said the permits before the board are interior tenant improvements and do not propose exterior or change‑of‑use actions; Menendez told the board, “this permit is an interior renovations permit. Has nothing to do with the outside of the building.” Planning zoning administrator Corey Teague and DBI representative Kevin Birmingham confirmed the permit scope was limited to interior nonstructural work that typically does not require Planning review, and DBI said their inspections and issuance were proper.

Public comment was extensive and polarized. Several speakers defending Mission Greenway argued that labeling Parcel 36 as a loading area on permit exhibits risks creating a record that could be used to assert rights over the adjacent lot, and noted alleged unpermitted activity (concrete poured on Parcel 36, a private gate and lock) and public‑safety concerns. Supporters of Monkey Brains emphasized the company’s community services (free internet to low‑income housing) and said the permits addressed internal ADA restrooms and path‑of‑travel improvements.

Planning staff said separate complaint investigations regarding activities on the adjacent lot and other enforcement matters are ongoing and could be the subject of later actions. DBI said if an inspector finds misrepresentations on an approved plan, DBI would issue a notice of violation and refer matters to Planning for further action.

After deliberation focused on the limited interior scope of the permits and staff findings that the permits were properly issued, President Rick Swig moved to deny the appeals; the board voted 5–0 to uphold DBI’s permit issuance. Several commissioners urged city agencies and the district office to pursue outstanding enforcement complaints and to facilitate mediation between stakeholders to defuse the ongoing dispute over Parcel 36.

The decision preserves the issued interior permits but leaves open ongoing complaint investigations and future enforcement actions regarding exterior activity and the status of Parcel 36.