Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Appeal 819 Hampshire topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board of Appeals denies tenant’s appeal, upholds window-replacement permit for 819 Hampshire Street
Summary
The San Francisco Board of Appeals denied an appeal from tenant Terry Castro seeking additional conditions on a window‑replacement permit for 819 Hampshire Street, ruling 5‑0 that the permit was properly issued; DBI urged a written agreement between parties because some permit conditions are difficult to enforce administratively.
The San Francisco Board of Appeals on a 5‑0 vote denied an appeal challenging a permit to replace street‑facing windows at 819 Hampshire Street, upholding Permit No. 202012030127 as properly issued.
Attorney Michael Zitani, representing tenant appellant Terry Castro, told the board that Castro and his two children continue to experience unsafe and disruptive construction practices related to ongoing renovation work. Zitani said the board had previously issued an order removing Castro’s unit from an earlier permit, limiting construction hours to Monday–Saturday, 7:30 a.m. to 6 p.m., and requiring 48‑hour notice for utility shutdowns; those protections, Zitani said, had not been honored. “We’re here to seek modifications to this building permit to ensure the construction is done safely and without unnecessary harassment and disruption to my client,” he said.
Castro testified that scaffolding left up for over a year previously posed security and safety risks and that the tenant needs a clear schedule and a protocol for when scaffolding is erected. “Show us a schedule, please, and tell us when it will go up, what day, what work will be accomplished, and what day it will come down,” Castro said.
Manny Alanis, the project manager and general contractor who said his company took over the project in late November, told the board two units on the property are complete and inspected and he expects interior work to finish within roughly a month. Alanis said overnight presence of workers was limited to safeguarding tools and materials and that his team can provide a scaffold schedule and stop work on request to allow tenant passage. “The most that scaffold’s gonna be up is 3 weeks,” he said, and he offered direct contact information to tenant counsel.
Planning Department staff said the permit would cure a planning enforcement case by replacing windows removed without a permit. Deputy Director Joe Duffy of the Department of Building Inspection (DBI) confirmed the permit was issued on Dec. 3, 2020, and suspended on Dec. 16, 2020, and noted prior notices of violation relating to site security. DBI staff cautioned that some conditions (for example, continuous on‑site monitoring or enforcing informal communication commitments) can be difficult for DBI to police absent evidence and recommended the parties reach a written agreement. “We can oversee it and report back, but I’m not sure what the enforcement is more than a civil issue,” Duffy told the board.
Commissioners questioned whether this permit was the same as earlier permits with board‑imposed conditions and whether DBI could realistically enforce the proposed protections. Commissioner Anne Lazarus moved to deny the appeal and uphold the permit on the basis that it was properly issued. The motion carried 5‑0.
The decision leaves the permit in place; DBI and Planning staff said they would continue oversight and that civil remedies or further enforcement actions could follow if violations continue. The board did not attach additional enforceable conditions beyond those already in departmental authority; staff recommended that the contractor and tenant formalize a short written schedule and communication protocol to reduce disputes.
