Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/boundvolumes/529bv.pdf
Page Number: 1034

529ORD Unit: $PT1

[10-09-01 14:49:26] PGT: ORD1PP (Prelim. Print)

ORDERS

1045

529 U. S.

March 27, 2000

No. 99–8430. Browne v. United States. C. A. 6th Cir.

Certiorari denied. Reported below: 198 F. 3d 247.

No. 99–8431. Zapata v. Purdy, Warden. C. A. 5th Cir.

Certiorari denied. Reported below: 204 F. 3d 1116.

No. 99–8434. Chambers v. United States. C. A. 10th Cir.

Certiorari denied. Reported below: 197 F. 3d 465.

No. 99–8443. Rosas-Davila v. United States. C. A. 9th

Cir. Certiorari denied. Reported below: 191 F. 3d 462.

No. 99–8448. Williams v. United States. C. A. 4th Cir.

Certiorari denied. Reported below: 194 F. 3d 1307.

No. 99–697. Lambert et ux. v. City and County of San
Francisco et al. Ct. App. Cal., 1st App. Dist. Certiorari
denied.

Justice Scalia, with whom Justice Kennedy and Justice

Thomas join, dissenting.

Petitioners Claude and Micheline Lambert own the Cornell
Hotel in San Francisco. The hotel has 24 residential units and
34 tourist units. After experiencing difﬁculty renting the hotel’s
residential units, petitioners applied to the San Francisco Plan-
ning Commission for a conditional use permit to convert those
units to tourist use.* That request implicated two bodies of San
Francisco’s land-use law: the Planning Code and the Residential
Hotel Unit Conversion and Demolition Ordinance (HCO). The
Planning Code provides that a tourist hotel may not be “signiﬁ-
cantly altered, enlarged, or intensiﬁed, except upon approval of a
new conditional use application.” S. F. Planning Code, Art. 1.7,
§ 178(c) (2000). The HCO prohibits the issuance of a permit for
the conversion of units from residential to tourist use unless the
proprietor agrees to provide either one-to-one replacement for
those units or to pay a portion of the replacement costs. See
S. F. Admin. Code, ch. 41, § 41.13 (2000).

*When petitioners ﬁrst sought to convert their residential units to tourist
use, the hotel contained 31 residential units. Petitioners were successful,
however, in convincing the San Francisco Board of Permit Appeals to reclas-
sify seven of those as tourist units, producing the hotel’s conﬁguration noted
in the text.