i look forward to working with you. commissioner hillis, sorry to see you go. >> we are not letting him go. >> the subject permit does not required section 311 neighborhood notification. there is a zoning administrator bulletin dating back to june of 1996. i just reviewed the plans prior to the hearing. senior building inspector reviewed these with the planning staff as well. there is note neighborhood notification required. it was pointed out to me this evening that there are two permit involved with the project. the first is the jurisdiction request.

the second is the filling and other light well. that is also exempt from neighborhood notification because it abuts a blind wall on the adjacent property. all these projects are exempt from neighborhood notification. i'm available for any questions. president hwang: the second one is not at issue today. >> that is correct. that was limited to something that does not seem to be a concern of the jurisdiction requested. >> one building must be taller than the other building. >> yes. if i could have the overhead. crashed. there we go. this is the subject property

here, i believe. is that correct? >> [inaudible] >> the one behind the tree. that is not very useful. it looks like there questors property might be higher than the subject property. >> the kitchen on the upper level. >> that is correct. >> good evening, commissioners. i got called back and jane and he was concerned over the work. i went out there myself. it sounded like a bird building another story. it sounded like i needed to go

there. i ended up doing a site visit and i met with the architect. all the work was being done in accordance with the plan. some clarification on the rear deck. the issues with the dormers, i was there just this afternoon as well. the dormers were back 3 feet from the property line. the window in question in the bathroom is pretty high up. if you put obscure glass in there, i think that would solve it. if you are in the kitchen in another building, you will not be able to see in. i am not sure -- that is my take on it. in the questions, i would be available. >> thank you. public comment on this item?

commissioners, the matter is submitted to you. >> ok. please come to the podium. >> what i am trying to say -- >> do you have a question? >> if he wants to add something on the property, as long as you get a permit from the city, nobody will complain. >> do you have a question? it sounds like you are making an argument. >> sorry. >> i did not hear anything

about -- i received no evidence of the city erring -- this is a jurisdiction request. the rules regarding the request, and the yen timeliness of the request. -- untimeliness of the request. i do not believe there was an error. for that reason, i would be inclined to deny the request. >> i am in concurrence with that, but for a slightly different reason. the problem is a procedural one. the limitations upon taking

jurisdiction are in plaiy. the problem is one where somebody is looking at something for quite a long time. the change is sometimes not so except ago. i would note that if we were to hear this case, it would impact on the following, the kitchen windows occurred in proximity of the property line. this is a zero property line situation. the solution -- and i would not want to take jurisdiction for the reasons i stated earlier, but i would hope that the permit holder continues to put an opaque glass. and tried to have some type of finality to the situation.

>> if there are no further comments, i will move to deny the request. >> we have a motion from the president to deny this jurisdiction request. on that motion -- [roll-call vote] thank you. the boat is 5-0. this jurisdiction is -- the votes is 5-0. this jurisdiction is denied. >> item #5, courtney utt versus department of public works. the property is that 642 jones street. protesting the issue went on may 15, 2012, to elisabeth lp.

we will start with the appellant. you have seven minutes. >> my name is courtney and my friend is you're helping me. i am a little unstable today. i am here regarding the gate that was installed in the alley of december of 2010. it was installed without permit. it has been through numerous city records a few times. this is the third time i filed the case against the gates. i have a few notes regarding wide the gates is not going to work for me.

i was diagnosed last september with terminal brain cancer and i need handicapped access to the building. the rear door has handicapped access and the gates block in the alleys when it is closed people are not able to pull into the alley to pick me up. when this case was filed, it it was noted that the gate would be open from 8:00 until 5:07 days a week. the biggest problem i have had is the date is not being opened at 8:00 a.m., so let me pull out my pictures. i have drivers pick me up at 8:30.

the date is remaining closed. -- gate is remaining closed. this is on a sunday where people come to pick me up to go grocery shopping and the gate is closed and locked and it is 1:00 in the afternoon. here is another time when i was getting picked up for my mri at 8:45 in the morning. the drive for was unable to pick me up and had to pull up in the front of the building at the bus stop. the gate has a bar at the

bottom of the door. i will be on chemo for three years. i will be having in the dirt -- i will eventually be stuck in a wheelchair and there is a bar at the bottom of the door. i am not looking forward to having to go over a bar in a wheelchair. blocks to the gates is at 5 feet. i am the only one who has eight key -- a key. nobody can get into the gate unless they have a key from the outside. i do not own a car. i be needing help -- i will be needing help.

even though -- it is not always open on time and the drivers are unable to pick me up. the same thing with the groceries. i have to load and unload to the front door. at this point, it is workable. i am on a monthly chemos schedule. i get sick quite often, so there are two or three or five-day periods when i cannot leave my apartment. it would be nice to have a safer and easier access to the back door.

my oncologist, we saw a slight shrinkage of my tumor. it would down about a third of a centimeter. that is over the last eight months of keynote. my general blood of -- that is over the last eight months of chemotherapy. she is going to put me on hold after a year of chemotherapy. that is why this is a three-year process. the gate is not a bad idea. it is nice to have a safe space, but because it is not being opened, it is not helping. it is causing more trouble and a bit of stress. a lot of my friends -- it is

hard to open the gate. that has been really hard. because there is a video camera installed in the alley and 642 has hired private security, it would be nice if that would be enough to maintain the safety of the alleyway. finally, parking and waiting in the bus stop is illegal. i do not want to have to do that anymore. i need medical staff to pick me up regularly and i want to do it legally.

thank you. >> i was not quite sure, i thought i heard you say that you have a working key to the gate. >> i signed an agreement that i would not give a copy of that key to anybody else. >> but it does work at this point? >> there was a point last december were the building manager installed a padlock on the gate. i had to call the police. >> thank you. >> this is a friend who has been

here to help me. he is here to help me out today. >> [inaudible] >> my name is eric brown. i have known courtney for 15 years. i am just here to help her out. >> thank you. we can hear from the permit holder now. >> good evening, commissioners. i am speaking on behalf of the permit holder. >> if you want to raise the microphone. >> thank you for your time this evening. we are requesting to uphold the permit as it is with no new

conditions. we want to speak about the intended use of the alley. care reason why we pursued the gate. it was never meant to be used as a loading zone. it always has been a no parking zone. its intended use -- elisabeth lp acquired642 jones in june of 2009. there were very serious problems happening in the alley, all sorts of criminal activities, from prostitution, drug dealing, drug use, people were using it as a toilet. it was a serious safety hazard. our resident manager importance to help her. she was the one who was starting

to encounter homeless people, she was accosted at one point. we had several tenants making pleas for help. after consulting with the adjacent building management, we learned these issues have been plaguing the adjacent building since 1999. collectively, the building owners felt the emergency stop- gap measure would be to install the gate. when we learned that ms. utt had access concerns, we provided her with a key to the gate. the solution worked. the criminal activities subsided considerably.

the garbage, the health hazards, and the criminal activities subsided. to my knowledge, there are only to tenants that opposed the gate. we have 34 letters that support. the community overwhelmingly supported the gate. finally, i am a little perplexed in regards to the access issue that she brings up. when i went to visit the property the other day, i did see the ramp and ada access that she referred to. that was installed for the commercial unit on the ground floor. i do not believe there is a commercial tenant in there at the moment. the elevators are not ada

accessible. it is an older building, a very narrow elevators. even if she was able to access it through that side back door, there'd be no way for her did get to her apartment on the sixth floor since the elevators are not accessible. i feel very sympathetic to ms. utt and i tried to reach out to her prior to the hearings to see if there was some accommodation we could make to not bring it to the place of this appeal, but she did not respond and she did not mention the issue with wheelchair access. as i pointed out, there would be no way for her to get a wheelchair into the elevator in her building. in conclusion, i would like to say our gate is supported by the san francisco police department, the san francisco fire department, and the department of public works. thank you.

>> i have a couple of questions. whether elevator is ada classified is not necessarily related to whether a wheelchair can access it. to be classified it, it would require a turning radius. the gate was installed without benefit of permit. what was the rationale that the property owners thought they could close off a public street with the gate? >> they felt it was an emergency measure to protect the tenants and the resident manager. there were cases of breaking and entering and one point, there was a tenant dealing drugs from a second-floor window into the

alley. the safety concerns were very serious. >> the bar across the doorway, what is the reason for the bar across the doorway? >> i am not aware of the bar. >> is there anything at the sidewalk level where that occurs? >> there is a bart that she speaks of, which would make it difficult for eight wheelchair to roll over it. i believe the property owners would be open to how to make that wheelchair accessible. but looking at the elevator, i

do not see how a wheelchair could fit into it. >> a lot of times, these doors are installed. they come with a bar across the bottom to be able to hold the frame. once it is installed, those bars are cut off. you might check into that, too. >> certainly. >> i have a couple questions. not having seen the elevator in question, but i would agree that it may not comply with current regulations, but one could fold a wheelchair and access it in order to utilize i am assuming the capacity is more than one person. i would not foreclose that as a possible way for an individual

who has a ambulatory limitations to get up to their floor. the other question i have relates to the key. how many people in the building have keys? >> to my knowledge, i believe it is just ms. utt and another tenant who requested vicky. >> why wouldn't the keys -- requested a key. >> with the building owner be willing to allow keys being copied in order to accommodate an assistant for these individuals? >> i believe is that was going to resolve the issue. i believe there might be some security concerns about who has

a key, how many keys are out there. i believe they would be open to that. that is all i have for now. >> i have a couple of questions. if you are in the alley and you want to get out, can you get out without a key? >> there is a panic button puts in place so that anyone can exit the alley. >> where is the panic button? what happened exactly? >> you just pushed out. there is a lock box on the outside. i also like to mention that on my recent visit to the alley, at the gate was open. having an open during a day

invites the same element we were trying to fight against. there were empty liquor bottles and debris already piling up having the gate open during the day. >> was that a condition of the permit? >> that was something dpw asked us to do until we had this hearing? we would prefer not to have the gates open during the day. " we still have plenty of unwanted visitors during the daytime as well. >> what about making the door ada accessible? >> i am not aure. -- sure. >> you talked about street vacation. this is a public street.

why didn't you pursue more of a street vacation or does would become a private street? >> after doing some research, we found that the other dates had similar encroachment permits. that seemed like the most straightforward way to permit the gates. there were other similar rallies would similar issues in the tenderloin that had encouragement permits. we decided that was the best route to take. -- encroachment comments. we decided that was the best route to take. >> candidates be closed, but unlocked? -- tan the gate be closed, but unlocked? >> i do not believe so? >> closed, but it is not locked. >> it sort of defeats the purpose.

>> not necessarily. if it appears that it is private, one might feel disinclined to open it. i have not driven by, i do not know what it really looks like. >> i would need to look into that. >> the restrictions -- i will hold these questions. >> good evening, commissioners. the department received an application from the applicant. there were several applications.

the challenge the applicant faced is there are multiple properties that exit onto this. an agreement must be made with each individual property owner to authorize the vacation of this portion of the right of way. planning department had specific issues. there were other challenges and obstacles in the process of a vacation. moving forward, what happens was the application determined there were other alleyways along the tenderloin that consistently receed