Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Housing Displacement topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board of Appeals denies jurisdiction request from Zambrano family over 759 Natoma permit
Summary
The San Francisco Board of Appeals denied the Zambrano family's request for jurisdiction over a December 2010 permit for foundation work and a three‑car garage at 759 Natoma, finding the owner's engineering reports and public‑safety concerns persuasive and noting tenant‑rights remedies lie primarily with the Rent Board, 4–0.
The San Francisco Board of Appeals on June 9 denied a jurisdiction request from the Zambrano family seeking to challenge a permit issued in December 2010 for structural and remodeling work at 759 Natoma Street.
Appellants' counsel Maxwell Everich told the board the family learned only in May 2011 that a permit had been issued in December and that a 60‑day notice to vacate followed; he said tenants were not told and were deprived of their 15‑day right to appeal, raising risk of permanent displacement. "Because permit holder failed to notify the Zambrano family of the issuance of the permit, they were denied their right to timely file an appeal," Everich said during oral argument.
The permit holder and representatives submitted engineering reports documenting foundation failure and said the work was necessary to protect occupant safety. Permit counsel and the property owner emphasized multiple engineers, a recorded notice of violation in the permit packet, and water‑related damage tied to an adjacent car wash. At the dais, Planning Department zoning administrator Scott Sanchez and Department of Building Inspection Senior Inspector Tom Benizelos testified the housing inspection that produced the notice was a routine common‑area inspection and that DBI had not conducted a structural investigation; Sanchez also said SLR/Western SoMa notification rules do not require tenant notice for the zoning issues identified.
Commissioners debated the legal and practical consequences. Several members expressed sympathy for the tenants but said the board must weigh potential harm from delaying a repair against the family's procedural complaint. Commissioner Fung said he found the engineer's report "compelling" and was "very worried" that granting jurisdiction could allow further sinkage that endangered residents. The board moved to deny the jurisdiction request and the motion carried 4–0.
The board's ruling denies the Zambranos a separate appeals process before the Board of Appeals on the grounds raised here; the parties were repeatedly told tenant remedies concerning displacement and relocation notices typically run through civil law processes and the Rent Board rather than the Board of Appeals. The decision leaves the underlying permit in place; any further challenges would need to proceed through the legal channels identified in the hearing record.
