cannot park a car there. once that lie falls apart, the requirement to provide a falls apart and we can remove this dangerous condition. she decided she wanted a curb cuts. she did the work so we want to refer it back to neighborhood parking and remove this hazardous -- reverted back to neighborhood parking and remove this hazardous condition. >> i read somewhere in there that settlement discussions have failed. >> the amount of money that was asked was excessive. andrew can respond. >> there have been settlement discussions as recently as the past week. the council went on vacation.

you will confirm there have been efforts to settle the case. there is leveraging going on here in terms of the dollars. i am sure you do not want to hear that. >> i will be brief. this is a unique circumstance. the appellant has made many arguments. there can only be one parking space on this property. however there are two parking spaces here and this of metal from the neighbors testifying there are two parking spaces, -- a vis the middle from the neighbors testify there are two parking spaces which was required by the planning commission and their approval of the project so it is clear that

there are two parking spaces here. it is clear from the building permit application as referenced to the easement, no special restrictions the the second parking space is required for the use of the adjacent property. that is not what we would do today. we typically require no special restrictions. maybe that was an oversight because the properties were under the same ownership. when you have another property and you have the nsr, that as not owned by the same property owners. that may have been an oversight at the time because the properties were under the same ownership. that is my interpretation of the facts as best as i can pull them together. this is a unique circumstance. i will be available for

additional questions. there is a curb cuts. it is clear on the plans there is an 18-foot wide curb cuts. i do not know where the allegations of the neighbor going in the dark of the night and creating a new curb cuts are coming from but that is an established curb cuts. there is a curb cut there, it is on the plans. that is -- i am available for any questions. president hwang: anything further? the matter is submitted. >> i will start by stating the obvious. there is no doubt that the joining at the hip means separation. the only reason i discussed that is -- let me back up. i find their brief is totally

compelling and the convoluted nature is something i do not feel comfortable deciding here today. the reason i brought the issue, should the parties be able to come to some resolution, this board can assist them in taking care of certain things which i am not going to mention in front of the city attorney at. however, that is the only reason i bring that up because i am not sure that i am comfortable with getting too far on a decision on this particular case.

i will leave the last thought which is along the lines of where i was going to go. i was not sure where everyone else was. if there is any chance at all of some relationship in the settlement, our best bet is to continue it. we should be able to help both parties to some extent. >> i would be open to a continuance. i would not be on the board when this came back. to give the parties -- i would like to come back at a time certain and not just be open because i think we should rule on it if those discussions

cannot be resolved. it seems like there was this -- if i were to decide right now, the continuance is an option, i would uphold the denial but given the circumstances and the unusual nature of this, i would be open to continuance to a time certain to see if there can be some resolution of this. >> i am disinclined to continue this. i fill the information i have been provided is enough to uphold the denial of the permit. i think there are some tricky questions that were raised but i do not think -- i recognize there is a pending litigation on the easement issue but to me it reads pretty clear and i am not the judge in your case fortunately perhaps for you.

in terms of the denial, obviously, the work was done without a permit and that is a problem. complying with -- that is a violation. there is something that has to be done. >> just from a practical standpoint, what happens if we deny the permit? >> we uphold the denial. the board upholds the denial. the board would have several options -- appellant would have several options. they could seek and justify a variance from the parking requirement. they could take the matter to court, the board's decision to court.

>> as far as the city, then. being a notice of violation. improvements are removed. >> it would be an enforcement action and we would move on enforcement. it would be up to the appellant and the property owner how they respond. >> this is difficult for me. i guess what i am leaning towards is upholding the denial of the permit at this point and

if the parties decide to appeal this for's decision, that is at least moving this issue for and trying to come to some sort of resolution at least of the issue before us apart from the easement issue so that would be where i am leaning. >> if we were to continue this based upon some legal resolution, it could take forever. i am somewhat uncomfortable with that also. if we were to continue this to a date certain in a relatively short time frame, would that put some additional incentive for them to find a resolution? i am thinking the time frame is one month. >> my only hesitation is i feel

this has been an issue going on for many years, a couple of years. they have had opportunities and they failed to come to resolution. they have a competent counsel serving the interests of their respective clients. if pushed, they can get to a resolution. >> i agree with that. based on what is in front of me i am comfortable of holding the denial. perhaps that would push a resolution. >> i would support a one month continuance. i am not optimistic anything would happen and this would be a result. i would be willing to give it a try. >> do you have a motion?

commissioner hurtado: i would love to uphold the denial based on -- move to uphold the denial based on the planning department's reasons. >> i am concerned the planning department's reasons are not stated. commissioner hurtado: i'm trying to find them. >> in the notice of disapproval. commissioner hurtado: and now that mr. sanches stated them. -- sanchez stated them. >> parking be provided in the

neighbor's property. >> hixon -- section 150. once any of strain parking or loading space was provided, such of street parking or loading could not be reduced or made unusable. >> thank you. >> we have a motion to deny this appeal, hold the denial on the basis of planning code section 150 as stated by the deputy city attorney. on that motion, vice-president fung, aye, president hwang, aye. commissioner hillis.

aye. >> this passes. >> the meeting is adjourned.

>> as you all know, the german marshall fund vehicle very kind to provide us with this -- has been very kind to provided us with this opportunity to have four of their european experts in bicycle planning, bicycle

implementation and bicycle programs and they are experts on all aspects of the bicycle. and here in san francisco, you know, we are at this point trying to after a hiatus of three years because of court-ordered injunctions trying to implement our bike plan. so we all a collective goal, i believe, to increase the environmental and nick sustainability of the world around us that we participate in and especially in san francisco, but we do have a special responsibility because this place provides us with the opportunity that most other places don't. the geometry and geography of san francisco is up that it is easier for us being in a city of short trips to veil ourselves to other alternatives to the car. so when we want to reclaim the

street and the public right-of-way and the public realm for people and basic human needs of access to the humanities that urban environments provide, we have a better shot at than, say, other places where large distances have to be traversed in most american cities to kind of get to the places you want to get. here in san francisco, we have been blessed by the geometry where our trips are short where 40 years ago we realized that this was the way we will have to kind of meet our future. the iron call part of that is at the same time europe also discovered that and they made strides to towards actually implementing these alternative choices, we have found it very difficult to kind of wean ourselves from the convenience of being able to. i say it is still convenient to drive. as long as the alternatives are

not just as convenient, we won't be able to make our case about our travel modes as contribution to the detriment of the environment or to the detriment of our health as we all know the sun is by date getting madder at us and angle grier at us and we are getting fat. we got to do something about it. this is the time to do it. we have the best opportunity here with these four guests from the german marshall fund and i was hoping that supervisor chiu would be here. since he is not, why don't we get hans, i'm going to start with hans? no. we're going to start with doug johnson from m.t.c. who has been our partner in facilitating this occasion and, doug, would you please come over and say you're welcoming remarks.

>> sure. >> in the interesting of being heard, i hate to stand between you and someone named hans but i will do it nonetheless. delay may also give the supervisor a chance to catch up with us. my name is doug johnson. i'm a senior planner at the metropolitan transportation commission overseeing our programs in land use and social equity. i'm also very fortunate to be a member of the transatlantic cities network, which is a project of the german marshall fund you'll be hearing from ellen. it is a network of 25 cities, 12 in the u.s., 13 in europe, and oakland is one of those cities, but i, of course, wearing my regional hat, have looked to expand what i have been learning through the network and the opportunities that present themselves to the network and to expand that. and where better to bring a cycling delegation than to the city of san francisco, a city very much on the verge of, i

think, turning the tide in favor of cycling where there are 40-some-odd, 43-plus projects waiting in the wings for the environmental lawsuits to come to a close. so it is very exciting to have the opportunity for the delegation to come here, and i think the timely honkly, could not be -- honestly, could not be better. they have spent just over a day in the city of oakland doing a bit of a bike tour, meeting with elected officials there and a community open house last night where we had 80 folks turn out to listen to their talk. the other thing, obviously the public support and the public interest in this issue is alive and well and i think it's wonderful to see. i will also say that none of these events will be possible without some of our local sponsors. i specifically would like to call out the financial support we received from the bay area air quality management district and the city of oakland.

they both came through with really substantial grants that allowed this to happen. sfmta, transportation planners also helped as well as my agency which i feel a little arm twisting back at the office. with that, i will hand it over to ellen, i would just like to find, if i can, jessica manzi, are you in this room? jessica helped a great deal to put together this program and i really appreciated all of her help and time over the last few weeks. so with that, ellen. >> thanks, doug. i want to make sure everyone can hear me. i have a love-hate relationship with microphones. i want to thank you all for coming today. this is really a wonderful turnout for us. the german marshall fund, for those of you who don't what the fund is, wire a 501 c public charity that was funded as a

gift from the german people. we were set up as an american institution to work on a broad mandate of tackling the changes that are faced by advanced industrialized societies. that is a broad mandate. we work with europe and the united states and we work on how europe and the united states can work together on the major world challenges like climate change and economic trade and development, just a number of issues the program i run goes back to the early days in the first 20 years when we were primarily a grantmaker making grants to low-cal practitioners and policymakers. i started this program about four years, five years ago now, i think, time flies, to really bring in members of our marshall memorial fellowship network of which david chiu is one of our alumni. some of our past grantees and

also the next crop of practitioners and local civic leaders who are really looking to change their home communities by looking abroad or looking to other cities to see what other cities are doing well and how that might be imported back home or translated back home. so the comparative dom particular policy program works primarily in the 25 cities that doug mentioned, but not exclusively in those cities. we really are looking for some of the best practices in education and workforce development, in integration of diverse populations and affordability and quality of life issues in cities and regions and also -- and sustainability, in which encompasses a broad range of things. it's primarily environmental sustainability. the overarching theme which i think is particularly pertinent here in the bay area is regional governance and cooperation where we try to emphasize move each of our cities that they really need to

figure out in their broader economic region, not just within their city limits. so how do you coordinate with the communities around you to advance some of these policy issues, whether it's transportation, environmental improvements, economic development, education systems, workforce training, etc. these are some of the issues that we really want to publicize the best practices so that practitioners such as ourselves can bring these ideas back home and really move an issue forward. i think here in the bay area, bringing this group of four european experts here has really been an interesting exercise for me, not knowing the city of oakland very much at all, having been to san francisco a few times, but it really is -- i do think that the communities here are poised to really be sort of going over the crest of the hill in terms of moving this issue forward. and i think hopefully these four will serve as sort of a catalyst in your community to get the community talking about what is possible and how some

of these ideas may be adapted to your local community. nothing is going to be directly importable. the european systems of governance, the mindsets and cultures are a little bit different than they are here in the u.s. but i think the ideas will spark other innovations here and adaptations of their policies that might work in an american context. so i don't want to stand too much more between you all and hans and the rest of the group, so well -- i'll pass the microphone back and then we look forward to the discussion that follows. >> thank you, ellen. why don't we do this. i had first thought that we would have presentations and then questions and answers. maybe it's four presentations, 15 minutes each, why don't we have the presentations all in a row first and then unless you have clarifying questions, hold

your questions until the very end and hopefully we will have enough time left over to have questions and answers. the first presentation is by mr. hans and i'm sure i mangled your name and you can do the same with mine. hans is an international coordinator, a is you si did i of the dutch knowledge center on traffic and transport. it's a knowledge center for expertise on cycling and other subjects. it runs the website bicyclecouncil.org and has cycling ambassadors to spread the word on dutch policy cycling abroad. prior to joining the group, he was the project leader of a 10 million euro european project, the opt tum two which stopped

the use of cars for commuting businesses and social and recreational activities by providing motorists attractive alternatives. i'm sure he has a huge amount of information to share with us. hans, please. and he needs a microphone. >> thank you. i'm very glad that i'm invited to be here which is my primary task because we are also -- the company is also the official government office to lend support to other countries to promote -- who want to promote bicycling which is