submitted. -- seeing none, thematter -- the matter is submitted. commissioner garcia: i move that we adopt as written. >> on the motion to adopt the findings with no changes. commissioner fung: aye. commissioner goh: aye. president peterson: aye. commissioner hwang: aye. 5-0 to adopt. >> item #5 has been withdrawn, so we will move on to item no. 6. >> calling item six, the minimart verses the department of public health. it is the appeal of a 25-day suspension of an establishment

permit imposed on june 9, 2010. the reason for suspension is selling tobacco products to minors. president peterson: you have seven minutes. >> i am here representing the department of public health on the matter. the department of public health found that they were doing business at the minimart. located in san francisco, they violated the san francisco health code, and the california penal code. his store sold cigarettes to a minor on april 242010.

-- 24, 2010. the cigarrettes, an agent of the apellant. the apellant later identified the clerk as his father-in-law. he did not ask the minor for age and identification and sold a pack of cigarrettes to the minor. they asked who was with the undercover minor at that time. the officer returned and issued a citation to the clerk for follow-up. on june 9, 2010, session 1009.66

of the san francisco health code, the establishment of 25 days, they're appealing that decision. it is worth saying here that the san francisco health code allows the suspension of the permit for tobacco sales for up to 90 days. the appellant states that his father-in-law suffers from poor vision, hearing, and a judgment, and should not be held accountable for the sale.

and that it would be financial hardships. [unintelligible] it is reasonable, and the department adds that the board denied the appeal and uphold the 25 day suspension. president peterson: can we hear from the appellant now? or the agent? >> i can't speak english very well, so it is my fault. ok. thank you.

you. commissioner fung: well, commissioners, i will make an attempt to create an accommodation to the appellant, given the fact that the economy is so bad. i would like to see a minor reduction to 20 days. commissioner garcia: i would certainly support that for the reasons you stated and obviously because the person who sold the cigarettes to the minor is here before us, and he is everything that was described in the papers. he is an elderly gentleman and very possibly made a mistake.

unintentionally. commissioner fung: if there is no further comment, i note to overall department and reduce the spam 20 days. -- i move to overrule the department. and reduce it to 20 days. president peterson: thank you. mr. pacheco: on that motion, vice president goh, commissioner garcia, president peterson, commissioner hwang.

thank you. the vote is for-1. it is overruled. president peterson: we will move on to the next item. mr. pacheco,ñ7 if you could read the next item. >> item number 7, to erect a with 1325 square feet of ground floor area. the matter was continued to allow the current person additional time pursuant to board comments. commissioner hwang: madam president, i want to disclose that i live in the same neighborhood.

there are comments from the homeowners' association. they are not the party of interest. i believe i can carry on my duties without bias and do so objectively. also, i am not in the zone where we automatically reduce ourselves in the matter before us -- recuse ourselves. president peterson: all right, ¢u ms. maurer, mr. linn, please step forward. commissioner fung: this is not provided to us. we do not have the same set that they have. >> neither do we. commissioner hwang: and i

believe the reason this was continued because -- it was because you had requested to see the plans. commissioner fung: -- >> president peterson, the last meeting, they did not have their opportunity. they had not received the plans. with your consent, them the full time. president peterson: >eyou have seven minutes for the appellant and then a total of three minutes for rare >> my name is -- with the st. francis homeowners association. we did receive drawings -- president peterson: you're speaking on behalf of yourself?

ok, thank you. >> we did receive drawings, and we responded, the homeowners' association responded, with a letter dated july 14 to the board. i am not sure all of you received this. the drawings were dropped off to theñkiñ-ñ

essentially, the plan looks like a new set of drawings, and something could be dug out, so there will be a full story on the ground floor, which is very different from what we approved. st. francis requires that the natural grade remains the way that it is. you do not dig out to property lines to make a flat lot. there were some other minor issues pointed out in the letter, but after the submission of drawings, that i responded to, that we responded to in the letter, the neighbors brought another set of drawings that were completely different, and then there was a third set of drawings that were yet again different, so the only thing i suspected about the letters that i responded to, the drawings that we responded to is that

they did not have any stamps from the building department or the planning department on them, but they definitely were the home that st. francis approved with the alterations that later happened on that same set of drawings, so there are multiple drawings floating around of the same house or different houses on the same lot. one set of drawings we wholeheartedly agree with because it is exactly what st. francis would, and there are two others. that is where we are. we just want to make sure it is truly what the planning department has, and i can review that again, which is the same set. we are ok with the project. what has gone on for the last few years is that the project sponsor may ultimately build the

house the way they see fit versus the way the planning and building department approved it, most importantly making it a three-story house as opposed to two, and then there are the setbacks and the elevation issues in turns of switching the garage doors from 12 feet them 18 feet. they hear. i have brought along three sets a different project plans. -- of different project plans. president peterson: thank you. anything else? >> my name is trudy maurer, and a new home will be directly behind where i live and where the linns live, and it was the

two of us to ask for the appeal. i want to reiterate that the neighbors accepted the same permit, the same original plan we have said to go ahead with. we are very concerned every time we appear before the group we were given to understand that everything was going to be as the original plans. that was submitted and the permit was authorized. now, one week ago, i received again a new set6z;rj what i just said, i wanted to proceduretb with the original permit with the original play and that we approved on, and the response to our brief was totally other things, nothing to do with what our goal is, so i

am asking the board if the9bda is to make sure that the plan the korea of approved, that the st. francis association has approved, actually gets built -- that the plan that we have approved. president peterson: thank you. >> good evening, commissionaires. my name is -- i am the one high your by the owner of the agent of record. -- i am the one high your by the owner, the aged of record. -- i am the one hired by the owner, the agent of record. ok? now, if you want, i could show

you some of the things we submitted to the city. a two-story car garage. president peterson: mr. linn, why do you not put that on the projector so everyone else can see it? mr. pacheco will help you. >> these plans, now, as i say, that we will comply with but never the city requires. we do not understand what they want. they should tell us what they want, and we will comply. commissioners, this building permit has been there for four

years. i have been a construction engineer for 40 years. and i know what the requirement is. thank you. we will comply with whatever the homeowners want. commissioner fung: oh, sir? sir? president peterson: victor -- >> i will give you my card. thank you very much, commissioners. commissioner fung: i have a question. >> ok. commissioner fung: do you have

this set of drawings that you submitted to the planning commission? >> i have in here. commissioner fung: ok. president peterson: why do you not come up to the microphone? >> this was approved. president peterson: -- commissioner fung: when did you give it to her? >> i hand delivered it. commissioner fung: is there a date? >> on march 29. commissioner fung: of what year?

>> 2010. commissioner fung: 2010. ok. could you give that to the department to check against their records? >> now. commissioner fung: yes, and we will ask the departmental staff whether in their records.

the permits? commissioner fung: i understand. >> commissioners, i would -- commissioner fung: rebuttal, sir. >> we will comply with what they want. commissioner fung: ok, go ahead. >> the original document. " he said, yes, they have the same copies. commissioner fung: you love a