issue and and and consistency that has happened here. there could be thousands of places where people are being told it is no longer valid. that is what concerns me here more than anything. there has to be a process by which -- it sounds like the process will fix this kind of thing -- but it is hard to penalize the project sponsor. it is to the letter of the permit that was granted. they were able to undo -- renew. i recognize that what seems to be the issue is the secretary of interior standards of today it versus the standards in 2001.

that is where we have always stood. when something has been approved, they follow the letter of what was required of them. it is unfortunate that perhaps it was not routed in a different way when it went up for renewal. i cannot seek penalizing the project sponsor for what is a problem that is much larger than we realize. i am glad they are coming back to fix this issue. i think it is problematic to go in that direction. people who have issues with their neighbors would start researching permits. i don't know.

it is problematic. commissioner sugaya: from my board of appeals experience, this is not the only thing. a lot of building permit appeals came to me that were similar to this. there is no vested interest. people would try to argue -- i have a vested interest because it is three-quarters of the way or completely built. legally, that does not hold water. i am not adverse to moving ahead with my alternate motion. the other issue may be that -- they are so far along and neighbors do not like it, that is what the process is about. it is also why we have appeals that had not even come to the commission.

there are issues, i think, i can assure you this is not an isolated case. it is not an isolated case to the extent that it happened that somebody got caught. i think the original permitting would not have allowed what is being -- what was built. the wording on their heads and specific things to say about restoration. this is not a facade restoration. this is not reconstructed in a way that the original permit had envisioned. so. >> if i could explain my rationale. this was a decision before me at the end of july, early august. part of the reason why we are here today, so i should explain what led up to the decision i

made. the permit was issued about a decade ago. in february of last year, they did receive an inspection to renew for a final inspection. the commence work shortly thereafter in march. it is my understanding, the photos art exhibit 11 -- exhibit 11. it may have been in japan. the question was a generic -- and they have been in june. the question was generic. it is our policy to require a new notice when something comes in for renewal. that is our policy and practice. the complaint was not made until the end of july. at the time, the significant amount of work had been completed.

we saw photographs of of very close to completion. i took the photographs and plant and i went back to the original person who reviewed them and i asked what does comply with our current requirements? i was told that yes, it would. we also -- we relied on the previous interpretation. when something has been completed, we would not require a new notice for it. i made a decision not to require a new notice. i take full responsibility for that. subsequently, we were very clear with the project sponsor that the building had be built exactly to the letter. we were very clear. the request was very observant, and noted that the ridge line protruded the frap -- the flat front of the building.

there were issues raised about the doorbell and the other details. we did discuss those with preservation. it was a line call for them as well about the bay window. ultimately, we only went forward when it was determined that this was acceptable. the proposal was acceptable. the detailing is also acceptable, as they have finally completed the building. preservation staff has reviewed the photographs. we have had numerous site visits. i do not know if it has been 160 hours of staff time, but it has been many hours. they had to file a revision permits because shaving the inches off the bridge resulted in a structural change of the building. that is what the permanent -- that is what the permit

documents. i have not heard any complaints from any of the adjacent property owners. there is a mailed notice. there were no appeals on this permit. i have yet to hear any concerns from the adjacent neighbors. the thought process i went through in making this decision -- i did wanted to make you aware of that. it is not an easy call. it was not an easy call for me. i wanted to explain that. thank you. commissioner moore: i have two questions. with the current beginning of integrating the permanent and planning department, with something like that be able to

happen today? >> it is something -- we have not started the new tracking system yet. this is something -- one of the issues we have identified. in speaking with senior and chief and deputy directors i building department, this is something they have identified as a problem already. for these permits that come in for renewal, it is my understanding that they are robbing them all to planning. commissioner moore: under the improved new system, something like this would not have happened? >> that is correct. these changes were recently implemented on their side. this should not happen again today. it was identified as an issue. commissioner moore: thank you. somehow, i would have been

interested to hear -- so we could hear of what their discussions would be, which would be very informative to me. the best decision could -- should come after their discussion. if not just for the right reasons, but for supporting this project. they have been in deliberation. that is what i would be more comfortable with. that is my own personal expression. commissioner antonini: i think we are looking at individual projects here. it seems to me that, if i'm understanding what you said, there was an existing permit from quite some time ago. the new permit was not appealed. that was my first thought, why is this even here?

when it was inspected, it was found they had followed the letter of the permit, except for the one item. the height issue. that was all that was asked to be corrected. >> there were concerned about the facade changes. photos -- it was not clear there would be in compliance. subsequent to that, they did make the changes. the department work with them to ensure the facade, in order to get the final occupancy, they would need this permit. commissioner antonini: that was all that we asked them to do. this is all fine, what you have done as far as the facades is concerned is acceptable.

that probably came later, i would expect. >> there was discussion and at that time, the initial stock position had been to not allow the bay to be extended. it is not something that is before for review. >> it predates, for one thing. >> it is not a landmark building. even under a new reduced -- review today. commissioner antonini: it would be out of their jurisdiction. it does not apply. it seems to me that project sponsors have done what they were asked to do. they did everything, and there was one error that was found, and they have corrected it. that is what is more hard to believe that about this. we are doing it after the fact.

>> that has performed. commissioner antonini: we are dealing with something that is finished. hopefully, this will not be the end of that. i am very much in support of the motion. all these technical questions about process should be dealt with at a later time. certainly not holding this project hostage. >> commissioners, the motion on the floor is to approve this project proposed. supervisor avalos. [roll call vote] 5-2, passed. thank you, commissioners. you are now at the general public comment.

>> the meeting is adjourned. >> thank you.

>> hello. 9 judge terri l. jackson. the court is now recruiting prospective civil grand jurors. our goal is to develop a pool of candidates that is inclusive of all segments of our city's population. >> the jury conducts investigations and publishes findings and recommendations. these reports them become a key part of the civic dialog on how we can make san francisco a better place to live and work. >> i want to encourage anyone that is on the fence, is considering participating as a grand jury member, to do so. >> so if you are interested in our local city government and would like to work with 18 other enthusiastic citizens committed to improving its operations, i encourage you to consider applying for service on the civil grand jury. >> for more information, visit the civil grand jury website at

sfgov.org/courts or call

>> happy new year. i think it is the year of the dragon, and happy valentine's day. i hope you all remember that today. all right, it is hard to believe -- and somebody may correct me on this. i think this is the 13th year that we have posted this event. think about all the things that have happened in those 13 years. it was a different mayor that we had. it is a thrill and honor to bring together the mayors of

these two great cities to look at the state of the cities and our region. we are delighted to have all of you here to listen, and i think there is well over 600 of you, so thank you for making this your morning. last year was the first time we had these two very special measures -- mayors together as each had just assumed the role. it will be interesting after a year on the job to hear their perspectives, and what a year it has been. we want to congratulate you, mayor lee, on your inauguration and election. and mayor kwan we are so thrilled you are here again. certainly, both of you have been

very preoccupied, so to speak. with many challenges that you really did not foresee that we met last year, and many opportunities as well. our tradition is to alternate this event between the two cities from year to year. last year, we hosted the event in san francisco, which is why we are here at the oakland convention center this year. so thank you for being our gracious host this year. we are delighted that mayor lee traveled across the bay to be here in oakland. doesn't this convention center look fantastic? it has been a great renovation throughout. really terrific asset for this city. i hope your year is off to a good start. i personally feel rather optimistic as we talk to the many