>> sometimes there is a change of heart, but maybe people do not understand what the construction is going to be when it is on paper. some people change their mind. >> thank you. reaction did you just looked at it from the outside or inside? >> i went inside. >> i did look at the foundation, and it is usually ok to put the sheet rock on. >> i have a question on these permits. what assurances are you relying on based on the property owner with respect to the elevators and? are you relying on a letter or the prior agreement between the parties to give a permit?

>> we are not. >> from a built-in -- from the building department point of view, we would want to make sure it meets the requirements. i believe it does not. it is not considered a shaft, because it is not more than four stories. there is a difference in the requirement for codes for new doors and openings, but usually residential elevators do not reach that.

>> thank you. >> i have some further questions for the permit holder. is there glass walls on the elevator? >> i think there are. i have not been out there. the want to join me? >> come forward, sir. >> i am the holder of the permit. my question was -- let me rephrase the question.

the elevation of your addition shows windows in the elevator shaft. >> yes, on the north side of the elevator shaft, there are windows to allow light to come in the house through those windows, so in effect, the voice way is up against the house so we do not block all the lights. my neighbor is not to the north. my neighbor is to the east. >> i understand. are there any openings in the wall to the shaft? >> no. >> the drawings are not very

expensive. you have additional documentation as to the wall construction? >> yes, the voice way is made out of steel. >> i am talking about the shaft itself. they have got insulation on inside, and they have sheet rock and that yellow board on the outside and sliding on the outside. >> thank you. >> if someone has a question for an -- for him.

it is our turn to talk and make a decision. thoughts? >> i will start off. whether the window is operable or not i do not think has any relevance. so far it seems best everything has been done according to code, and as for private and agreements, in no case would we have anything to say about that, so i want to deny the requests. >> i just want to add i did not hear any testimony or see any evidence from the city in

issuing this permit, and there was a significant amount of money spent on building the elevator, and for the reason, i am leaning in that same direction and -- the nine. >> i will take the opposite position -- denying. karzai will take the opposite position. the question is why during those e-mails the specific information on construction of the shaft was not shared. the fact is that afterwards they had an expert provide some russia now, and i except those findings. the problem this but was the only one point during the day. ambient noise is a change,

especially at night. any moving mechanism is going to create noise, and this has windows on both sides. it would have been relatively easy as they had negotiated it early on common adding more insulation, -- early on, adding more insulation. it would have been relatively easy, either facing the requests here or facing potential actions. it is a relatively simple fix. goo>> is something to be fixed privately, and our area is to

see if there was fraud, which is unfortunate. i think it goes beyond the scope, and i would urge if there could be a private remedies to do it sooner rather than later, but i do not see that we can grant jurisdiction at this. >> i think it is a problem if a neighbor forgoes the right to appeal based on the promise. we encourage neighbors to get together and settle and hopefully not appear before us. now here we are. i do think this could have taken a look at the installation before it was she dropped.

region -- it was sheetrocked. we also heard the appellant say in the proper forum his lawyers will say the agreement was not complied with, and it may be true and we are not the proper forum for that, given that it may or may not be something that causes the jurisdiction to be blown. is there a motion? >> i am going to make a motion. >> we have no way to assume -- do you have a question?

>> if it turns out the apparatus exceeds the allowable noise, there are opportunities for the neighbor to complain to those agencies and try to have something done about it during your -- done about it. his contract davis to make sure it is done correctly. i would like to see the motion that is made. as i think the same rule applies tune, mr. duffy -- applies to you, mr. duffy. >> the you have something to add? >> i would say insulation was required, and it was inspected.

there was also something asking debt they check the approved plans, so that will be dealt with in the next few days, and i can add to that complaint to make sure there was insulation put in. when he was talking about extra insulation, i think he was talking about the rules level. i can certainly add that to the complaint we got a couple days ago. you can rest assured there was insulation required. that is something you can rest assured will be looked into. >> the problem is these plans

are not very extensive. they are extremely simple. thermal insulation is not going to give you much acoustic value. >> it would not be required by what i know of. >> can i suppose something? i propose we continue this for one week. the time to do this is now before the elevator is in. if they want to put in

insulation now, now is the time to do this relatively inexpensive operation. once--- was the elevator is in, it is going to be difficult. >> i am going to oppose that, because i do not feel those types of details for him to have not applied for an appeal or take it anywhere else. that is not an issue for this board. i do not think there is any reason to grant it. i am going to oppose it.

>> i am disinclined to extend the time for making a decision on this request for similar reasons. i do feel sympathetic in operating with good faith, but i think a threat has been made to bring legal action, i am sure a very real threat. >> i appreciate your efforts i think we are in the same boat. >> i did not make the motion. >> motions for continuance always take precedence, but i am

going to move we not grant a restriction. -- not grant jurisdiction. >> on that motion, and the ninth jurisdiction. [calling votes. president goh: no. >> the vote is 3-22 to deny jurisdiction. >> we will call item no. 5 which is 11-036. this is for the property and building 146 on treasury island, and it is an appeal of an extension of a tobacco product sales and establishment permit

non march, 2011. now this is in regards to case fd-011-17, and we will start with the appellant. you have seven minutes. >> i am the attorney. the request is for the 25-day extension for the sale of tobacco items. this store was in treasure island. it was opened in 2008, and prior to that, it was on the island. the appellant has had his license for 26 years.

he has never suffered one citation, which speaks volumes for his commitment. he did on one occasion half and an employee -- have and employees of some cigarettes to an undercover police officer -- an employee sell some cigarette to an undercover police officer. i have represented this family for 21 years. this is pro bono. they cannot afford a presentation. two families subsist in the store. the household are the principal employees. they have spent many hours selling items out small profits. the one feature is the coast treasure island as many people

from torus countries. people show up with licenses and passports from various countries. the store has all of the posters, including this one, which you may recognize. they have rather a effective training routine with employees, but the person who did the selling in this incident was the son of the owner who was visiting and did not benefit from the typical training the store has. in 26 years of operation, he has never suffered no citation, and there has never been any citation of a complaint. 36 individuals are in these families, which really make a living from this store. a suspension would be a rather severe economic hardship.

we calculated a proposal from the appellant -- i am not sure it is something the board would consider, but he estimates he earns a profit for 30 days, $2,025. he would much rather pay the money then be suspended, because it is difficult to build that clientele. also, there are tour buses, and it is difficult to plan for it, so that is essentially what i would like to point out. we have had somebody much committed to doing this properly, many years of operating without a single, a rather unfortunate incident involving a son, and the economic hardships that will ensue, and was this is mitigation here.

thank you. -- on less this mitigation is here -- unless this mitigation is heavier debt to. crossers greater -- thank you. >> what are the hours of operation dominant -- operation? a >> 7:00 until 10:00. >> did i read in your breeze that -- your brief that the employee was fired? is that right? >> i do not recall, but i think a more adequate description that he is not an employee. he is the son of one of the owners. he is not an employee. it is an extended family --

yemenis, and they operate these convenience stores gregor often, they have family members pitching in. >> thank you. >> i actually have a question. you said this is a tourist- heavy population. are there other stores in the vicinity? is the primary clientele tourists? is that the reason it was inserted in the breeze. >> to point out is a rather impressive record to not be cited before, because the id you typically get -- this is posted in liquor stores. people turn up with a dutch license, a passport from bolivia. it is sometimes difficult to

look at a month and the date -- it is not to make was a thing about it. it is tuesday and -- it is just to say -- that is a good point you make. >> i was understanding it differently in terms of its significance. what percentage of the sales come from cigarettes, tobacco? >> 25% to 50%. it is not necessarily universal, but at that location. >> thank you 3 good -- thank you. i am asking you a question. if you were to take a $2,500 and

decide that is an average month , and you extend that figure, we are talking about a $2,000 fine proposed, and i guess if you extend that -- let's assume you make a $1 a pack. that means you're selling 800 packs a day. is that great, or am i wrong about it being only $1 in profits? >> i think this gentleman can insert. -- can answer. he is saying, how many do you think you senll? every three months. that is how they ordered and

report, so 800 cartoons her courter, so they are selling 800 cartoons every three months. >> then it would seem more likely that profit is close to 2000 per quarter rather than in 25 days three good >> 30 days extends by those numbers -- in 25 days. >> 30 days extends by those numbers. >> what would the profit the on a single pack of cigarettes? >> more than $1. >> thank you. >> we can hear from the department now, mr. lee. >> he is here to represent the department, but he was not able to make it today.

i would like to say it is clear the appellant sold cigarettes to a minor illegally. we can suspend his tobacco license for 90 days. we are asking for a 25-day suspension. we ask that the board of holvis that penalty. another thing i want to clarify is that we are just so spending tobacco sales license. it is not a food permit -- we are just suspended tobacco sales license. it is not a food permit. they cannot sell cigarettes. >> is there any public comment on this item? seeing none, we will move into rebuttal. if you have more to add, you have three minutes of rebuttal. >> i just want to make sure

everybody understands there was just one sale. they do not do this over a long time to see if there is an inclination or a habit by the operator to sell. we do it one time, and we site you. the regulations allow up to 90 days, but is discretionary to the board. >> anything further about manama -- anything further? >> we do not know how often this store region where they were having -- we do not know where they were having under cover of people coming, so it may not have been that often. that may be why they were never caught before. >> the figures of about once a year -- to you know? parks are no sandford cisco is probably 1200 tobacco and permits. -- >> in san francisco, it is

probably 1200 tobacco permits. i am not sure if they get to that many each year. >> conditioners? the -- commissioners bowman -- commissioners? >> vice president garcia, were you about to say something? commissioner garcia: i wish the department would do an analysis of how this works out in dollar figures for an individual operator, and let's take an assumption that all the figures are exactly correct your year of 30 days was decided -- are exactly correct. 30 days was decided.

that might seem reasonable to some people, of the fact that it is the first offense, and we can all assume they did not just kesse and the first time they sold cigarettes, but we should assume that. they said they have never done it iaside from this time, and then you compare the find is someone who sells liquor to a minor region -- compare the fine to someone who sells liquor to a minor. my memory is it is something like $100, so we are saying -- maybe some people feel like this, that tobacco -- the sale of tobacco, which does not require the same kind of licensing that liquor dose, so we have to say that our

government is wrong to require all the things we do for a liquor license because when it comes time to find someone selling liquor to a minor, the offense is so much less than it is for tobacco, so if we are as a society so concerned about the sale of tobacco to a minor, maybe we should have some sense for who gets to sell tobacco and who does not, and repeatedly, every time we get the case, the reason i and other commissioners feel like it is a rough issue is because it is cut and paste. we get the same statistics about -- which are not scientific in the least thibit. it should be mostly adhered to, and it is troubling to me and