were the department, in conjunction with the police department, has deemed it to be an emergency to fend off those in this case, the department received support from san francisco police department as well as our department as it relates to the installation of this gate. the mechanisms that were installed sadr satisfy the requirements. we issued the permit. subsequent to that we received an appeal to this board where the department -- permit was suspended. in her documentation we found out she had required access to the gate.

the director believes that continued closure without providing access would not be appropriate and he decided that he directed the applicant to open the gate during daylight hours. had the department known about the accessibility issues, we would have worked with the applicant to find a way to provide the access she seeks. one thing to remember is the intent for this gate is to restrict or deny access to the general public whereas she is asking for reasonable accommodations. it appears to be somewhat of a contradiction in the intent of the permit. what the department is insuring

is one is ms. utt's request for redress. a sheet asking to overturn and have the gate removed, or to hold the department and direct as to make adjustments to the permit to provide reasonable accommodation? we do not know at this point and we will seek guidance from the sport at this point. i am here to answer any questions that you may have. >> looking at the gate, except for any type of bar across the bottom and there is a limitation on the height of any threshold for ada, i'm not sure that this date is not -- 8 is not -- a datgate is not ada.

>> the panic bar is is the ability to be on the side of the block and to pull the door open. it appears that is available. once the bar is removed you can provide reasonable access from jones street onto colin place. >> are they -- >> there are quite a bit of dead end alleys in the financial

district. that provides a certain level of access because of second points of egress. >> i do have one question on the time that you have the daylight hours that are supposed to be open or openable. >> the kids are required to be open. >> -- the gates are required to be open. >> assuming this photographs are accurate, what does your department do to enforce the hours of openness during this period of suspension? >> had the department been informed we would have taken appropriate action like going out there, reviewing to ensure it was open and if it was not to my direct the applicant to open

it and there will be other actions as appropriate. we were not informed the gate was locked. >> have you or your department had direct communication with the appellant in this case regarding her access issues? >> there has been to meetings that i know that this type of approach came to dpw office and informed them of her situation. the director decided this was appropriate. >> did anyone tell her that if you have any issues with this gate and access issues to call your office? >> the gate was to be open and there was an expectation that if the condition was not satisfied she would contact the office. vice president fung: is there any public comment?

please step forward. >> good afternoon. i originally objected to the gate but on certain conditions. i think it might be appropriate to have the gates. however, the gate has been a nightmare to us. when it was the original illegal temporary gate was installed, it was chained so that not even the garbage trucks could get in. if you look at this plan that was drawn by the applicant, two or three things that worry me. >> i think it is upside down.

>> if you look this way -- thank you. i have marked on this which is not marked on any plan, there to doors on 619 -- 691 entrance. they do not show up on your plans. the first door is a tenant that is used to the lot of work and it is on the ground floor. he was given the key. as a tenant, the conditions we would ask is that everybody who wants a key should get one. this is a public street. and we have been using this, i have lived in this building for nine years. we have used the rear entrance which again is not marked on

their plan. it was marked online. there is this ada disability and exit-and cents -- exit-entrance for tenants. you have to inspect it because it is not legal. the way it was built. the second worry of mine and this is a public safety worry, if you look at my plan, i note the avis garage is on the side and the end of this elway. -- alleyway. that is 300 cars. this is a dangerous place and we

want the gate not to be locked because this is a fire escape. it should be closed, it should be locked on the outside. we want if you're on the inside to have access to get out of that alley. >> about the panic button -- what about the panic button? >> do you realize there are 70 people that live in six -- 691 and i do not know how many in 642. if there is a fire there, i am asking for the inside not be locked so we can unbolt it and we can get out. >> the panic button. tell me how that does not --

vice president fung: i think he is talking about the gates. president hwang: your name? >> i am a tenant. i did not understand what you were talking about when you were referring to avis. >> they have windows along the back. they do not have a door. they have to entrances on -- two entrances. they are on three floors and i estimate 300 cars. we have to get out of that alleyway if there is a fire. thank you. president hwang: is there any

other public comment? please step forward. >> i am the wife of the man who just spoke. we have lived at 619 post. he is 79 and i am 60. he had very bad bac problems and is now -- back problems and is now discharge. he cannot work. consider what this means for our life as permanently disabled people and i am his caretaker wife for the last three months. carrying him around, getting all the food, doing all the arrangements and getting groceries and everything.

also, the back could get worse in the future. we're still trying to digest it. i am not certain if you are familiar with the factors of these different buildings we're talking about but we're on the corner of post and jones and the building next to us is on jones. the alleys between the two buildings. when we go to get groceries, do people have this picture in their mind? when we get to get groceries, to bring them in the front door heap, we have to park the car in an illegal the sound, and look the cursor is, take them four stairs and the lobby of the building and go to the elevator. we used to be able to pull into the back alley. it is being contested and just

open the door and there is a ramp to go to the elevator. it was a lot. for a person to deal with someone who is disabled as well as all the rest of parts of our life, it is a pain. if robert has trouble walking which his back has caused a lot of problems and walking is one of them, it is much better for him to go through the alley and there is -- the door that comes into the building there goes into the basement through a ramp. it is a sloping ramp. that would be the best way for him to go into the building if it -- if he comes to the point where he needs a wheelchair. we're sympathetic that there is a lot of problems. nobody is arguing about that. in the process of this, somehow,

some other kid is set -- other considerations, i think we are being overlooked. either the gate should be removed or there should be access with keys to the gate and the gate should be opened. >> have you requested a key? >> no. we have requested a key and said -- they said they will give us a key. if we come through their with a car -- there with a car and we have to open the gate, it is a pretty busy area. this is all in the tenderloin. >> thank you. president hwang: thank you. is there any other public comment? please step forward.

>> i am the resident manager at 691 post that adjoins 642 jones. i have been -- in october i will be a manager for eight years there. my understanding is the back door of our building that goes to the alley has only -- always been an emergency exit only. if anyone has requested a key for the back door, we have made copies. since the gate has been put up, there has been controversy about the gate, about the locks on the gate, and everything has been rectified for access and exit. when you are talking about is accessible for people to get out. the two larger gates are not locked. all it takes is to move a bar in

the inside and the gate can open. there is no lock on those dates. there was a point where there was a lot on the gate. i have no idea why. i did not install the gate. i did not have a lot to do with the gates being installed and put up. all i can say is since the gates has been up, it has been a pleasure to not have to clean up the mess that was on -- in that alley on a daily basis. you know, i think we can come to some kind of agreement where there is wheelchair accessibility and all that stuff. >> it occurred to me that you are employed -- thank you. i wanted to make sure we were appropriate. >> prior to elizabeth having the building, if i did not clean

the alley, no one claimed to the alley. it was my job for almost seven years. i'm not complaining. i am just saying that it has been a major improvement and i have heard a lot of things that are not true about the gate, about it being locked on the inside. it is not locked on the inside. people can get out. people in the past have pulled their car in the back, got around, open the door, rian in -- opened the door and brought their stuff in. not everyone wants to keep. there is 36 units in that building. i do not know how many are in 642 jones. people that have been requesting a key have not been denied. and that is all i have to say. thank you. president hwang: next speaker.

>> i am a resident at 691 post st. building. i am here today to advocate that the applicant be denied a permit for the date that was installed. there was the out most willful disregard -- but most -- utmost willing this regard. there was never permit in place when the gauge was installed. that happened -- when the gate was installed. that happened on a saturday when all the offices were closed. no actions could be taken to stop the gating. the applicants were ordered to

get the appropriate permits. these instructions were ignored. in january 2012 signs were implemented for noncompliance. and on april 4, 2012, there was another hearing for the gate. the co-applicant and [inaudible] or absent from that meeting. i have an exhibit that the applicant or his agents. attached prior -- or his agents attached. this is an email from the owner of that hotel. everyone is talking about the safety hazard, i know that the applicant stated in his brief that there was a lock box. i took pictures of the gate and the gate at jones.

i am not seeing any kind of lock box. that is the gate, one side opened. this is the gate, other side opened. this is the front of 642 jones. i am not seeing a lock box. when i went down the street, this is what i am seeing is a lock box. is that correct? this is on the 605 jones street building. i have a lot more to say about -- i would ask that the board denied the application -- deny for disregarding the city ordinances. he placed the tenants at risk for potentially creating a

situation for a disabled person. president hwang: thank you. any other public comments? is there any other member of the public who would like to speak? we will start with rebuttal. you have three beds. >> -- three minutes. >> thank you. i came up with a few more questions and comments. i did inform them i needed

longer hours and i was denied via email. i asked for the extension. >> which hours? >> 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. i asked for the gate to be open longer hours. during daylight. >> eight to seven or eight to 10? >> i hope -- asked for the gate to be open all the time. i was denied by the city. to follow up on the question about the lock box? where is that? i am not aware of that. nobody told me about it. where is the emergency push button?

i do not understand that, either. the elevator at 691 post holds 10 people. >> with that enable more than one person to go in one at a time? would you able -- be able to sit in a wheelchair? >> i have not tested a wheelchair. i am not in one yet. there is a lot of us you can get in the elevator. there's a lot of big furniture. it has not been a problem with so that people who have come in so far with walkers. the wide ones with the bars. i am worried about my driver is to pick me up on a consistent basis so some mornings it's great but it is not open, maybe a 40 5:00 a.m. in the morning, how can i get them to try to

pull out in the alley? my friends have given up on it and still parked in the bus stop. they're tired of trying to attempt that. i hae a lot -- have a lot of drivers and a lot of help. medical was approved a few -- medi-cal was approved a few weeks ago. thank you. >> do you have a rebuttal? >> i just wanted to conclude by repeating the fact that the initial intended use of the alley was never to be a loading zone or parking zone. if there are cars parked there

loading and unloading, they can prevent emergency vehicles from accessing the alley which was its intended purpose. i believe that some of the tenants are perturbed about a lack of -- it is an inconvenience to not able to use the alley as a loading zone but that is not what it was intended for. for us, the safety issues trumps the convenience of it being an open loading zone. we intended this gate to help the community and residents feel safer. it was included in the brief. we have many letters of support. tents were very thankful for it. >> i have a question. the intended use of a public right of way? is that described anywhere? >> that is what i am

ascertaining conversation with very-various stakeholders. >> who are the stakeholders? >> dpw and adjacent property owners. >> if the public street is used for something other than what some people called the intended use, it is hard for me to understand where you're getting the intended use peace. if it is documented somewhere it would be held for -- helpful for me to see it. i will ask dpw. >> a question came up about where the lock box is. >> it is on the building itself, not on the gate. next to the gate on the building. >> how is it attached? >> i am not familiar with all the logistics'. -- of the logistics.

the panic button is a push bar. >> is there no panic button? you just push it open, you do not have to -- ok. >> there are a lot of specific comments that i think the department would need to respond to. this is right of way. the property owners are responsible to maintain this. cleaning or damage to the road, they are responsible to maintain that. going to the various issues as it relates -- the department is

not sure that there are different reasons from different stakeholders as to why this gate needs to stay or be removed. we believe we should permit based upon police recommendation and the fire department's recommendation. and based upon a document provided by the applicant. having guards and steam cleaning to try to protect the location of certain documentation provided to us. they want a level of public safety in this portion of the right-of-way. from a disability access viewpoint, had this issue been brought to the department immediately after the issuance of the permit or during, the

department would have taken action to remedy that situation and find a resolution to insure -- at this point we are not sure that she wants the gate open 24- 7 or removed. is it truly a disability access issue or is it something else? she stated that she has been provided with rejection of their request to open the gate. this was a few days after the department took the extraordinary action -- are requiring the gate be open from 8-5. even though they depended -- the permit has been suspended. we do not believe we have the authority to further increase that requirement. that requirement. i am here to answer any