pre-med. announcer: but she wouldn't be here without your help. please support the united negro college fund. because a mind is a terrible thing to waste. >> good evening and welcome to the october 13th, 2010 meeting of the board of appeals. the presiding officer is president peterson.

to my left is the legal counsel for the board and we also have the legal assistance. i am the executive director. in the front row, we have representatives from a couple of city departments that we will be hearing from. on the far right is the department of building inspections presentive and also be zoning administrator. please go over the board meeting guidelines. >> the board request that you turn off all phones and pagers so they will not disturb their proceedings. please carry on conversations in the hallway.

the appellants, permit holders and respondents each have seven minutes to present their cases and three minutes for rebuttal. people must complete their comments with an seven and three minutes. members of the public not affiliated have up to three minuteseach to address the board. to assist the board in the accurate preparation of minutes, members of the public are asked not required to submit to business staff. the board welcomes your comments and suggestions. if you have questions about a rehearing, at the rules, or hearing is scheduled, please contact the staff or combine the

office. and this meeting is broadcast live on the san francisco government television. at this point, we will conduct our swearing in process. if you intend to testify, please stand, raise your right hand, and say "i do," after you are sworn in or affirmed. do you solemnly swear or affirm that the testimony you're about to give will be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth? >> thank you. we will move on to item number one, public comment. is there any member of the public that wishes to speak on an item that is not on the agenda? >> members of the commission, i

am the director of san francisco open government. last week, there was a memorandum that was read in part by commissioner garcia from the deputy city attorney to the committee. i want to make clear that this is not a legal opinion because it was not that it by the city attorney's office. this is simply a memorandum that works for this board. -- my attorney -- by an attorney that works for this board. i kept getting an image of the old road runner cartoon where the coyote would be running along and go on for the edge of the cliff and he would run for a couple of seconds before he realized where he was. it only says in 8 pages two things. one, that the qualifications listed in the state requirements that the person is being qualified and specifically

knowledgeable in the california building code and applicable local standards does not apply to the city. the rest of it goes on to say that what applies is what is in the city charter. the only qualification is that your representatives in the city make up. this is nothing but a warm body and anyone in this chamber can be qualified under those terms. to be talking to its board that has some qualification and some that did not. mr. garcia dismissed all of us saying that this is not that important for some many people turned out -- so many people.

when someone is appointed to a board, they would expected to have some of all of qualification. i think what they need to be aware of is that in most cities this is not. this is an issue that needs to be addressed. if you feel you did not get a fair shake, considering challenging the qualifications of the board of the members here in this. >> thank you.

>> last week, you openly read a version of the memorandum from the deputy city attorney. she gave for qualifications -- the qualifications. commissioner garcia was misleading the public. an opinion must be put through a very thorough process. this memo is not even signed. "the first paragraph has to do with the question that has been raised and for those of you who are interested in this as most of the would be, i believe that

the people that come before you would be very interested to note that you have the qualifications to pass judgment." you stopped and said "you have asked but not address this to a member of the board." i am the person that raised the issue and i don't put my name on the memorandum. as a matter of fact, i had to get a request for this. on some -- on september 8th, 2010, you or the one that asked. everyone that sits on this board must be -- a you made false statements by

telling the public that no one on the board asked for the opinion when in fact your the one that asked but you it intended to mislead. you are trying to blame this on the public are raising the issue of your qualifications. this is not from the city attorney. you're not qualified but he wanted to stay in your powerful position. this is on technical issues involved in -- involving the people's work. the two servants have attorney client privilege. the city has adopted the 2007 billing code and it did not amend the qualifications.

you're not qualified under the california code. thank you. >> thank you. is it any other public comment? >> good evening, commissioners. i have sat through hearing after hearing where commissioners to tepid in a tremendous amount of public service and this. a lot of it seems to of started on the issue of north point. i would like to inform the commissioners who are present in the early form of the decade

when this case first started to come before this board. this is a map showing the property. these properties have been subject to her very savage attacks and accusations to the planning commission. these are their role of houses on high street and it backs up against the north point property. where it all started was in the backyard of north point. a shed was built could tell

tenets remove into the shed and into the garage. asia was built. tenants were told to remove the shed. -- a shed was built. this was reported to the building department. the board of appeals always backs the staff because they always made the correct findings and these were legal structures and this was not a legal structure. in the meantime, this has been a

roof deck which has never been turned in by any of the neighbors. i just wanted to put it out for the commissioners. >> is there any public comment? we will move to item number icky, commissioner's comments and questions. seeing none, we will move to item number three. before you for discussion and possible adoptions are the minutes of october 6th, 2010. are there any comments? i so move to adopt the minutes of the meeting.

is there any public comment on the minutes? if you could please call the roll. >> on the motion -- >> aye. >> aye. >> aye. >> aye. >> aye. >> the vote is 5-0, those minutes are adopted. >> item number four, this is a special item. as you know, our city is switching from the taxi commission to the municipal transit authority. -- transportation authority. with the president's consent, i have invited some representatives from the mta to give you a brief update on these changes. >> afternoon, commissioners.

i am the director of texas services. we really appreciate this opportunity to come before you. the most important message that i want to leave you with is that we take this job very very seriously. our mission statement has only two words -- service and safety. service means that the vehicles are clean and comfortable and that some drivers are knowledgeable and pleasant and it means that the rates are fair and that a taxi will hopefully come within a reasonable amount of time. safety means that the vehicles are in good mechanical condition and the drivers are screened and trained and that there is sufficient infrastructure to respond to security issues. service and safety sound very

simple but actually they rely on a very complicated foundation. these are the kinds of values that we're trying to preserve, fresh russian pride and a living wage -- a living wage for drivers. a driver who is making a living wage will be much more pleasant and safe driving than someone who is deference the last desperate to try to make enough money to live. services and safety depends on medallion holders taking their responsibilities seriously to operated business. that is one thing i do want to emphasize. an italian is a business and a privilege and there are thousands of hard-working taxi drivers in line for those medallions. we at taxi services are eager to liberate medallions from those people who are not taking that responsibility seriously and put them into the hands of those people who will to the benefit

of the industry overall. service and safety depends on the taxi companies making an investment in quality vehicles, competent repairs, basic compliance the regulations. unless you fear that they are burdensome or unreasonable, ever since we began the oversight of the industry in march of 2009, we have been conducting a comprehensive regulatory reform effort where we are literally going line by line in consultation with the industry to make sure that we have good rules that have good reasoning and touches lightly on the industry as possible. once we set the rules, we expect that they will be complied with and it will be our job to make sure that we enforce them. safety and service depends upon our effective enforcement. you will see a lot of medallion revocations come before you.

when you see these cases, you always see the care with which the staff has prepared them. we are not trying to come out of left field and surprise people were go after people viciously or sneak up on anyone. the cases you will see either have long disciplinary histories or they represent conduct that is so unacceptable that we feel that immediate replication is called for. -- replication -- revocation is called for. and medallion is one of the few ways that a professional taxi driver can raise their professional standing. people get quizzical when you talk about a professional taxi driver. what's the big deal, some said. the want to tell you that in san

francisco, you have some of the best taxi drivers in the country. they are people with 20, 30, 40 years experience. you get a lot of new drivers coming in and out the transition through the first five years but we want to protect the sense of pride and careers that drivers have because that will serve the public the best. that is something you will feel when you get into a taxicab. one of the thing that that depends upon his face in the system. faith ford drivers and the people who are holding onto medallions who are not living up to their responsibility will be required to give them up. we are trying to enforce the rules so that people can take pride in a functional system that truly provides equal opportunity to all drivers and

applies consistently the standards and expectations that we have. we of spent the last year doing a lot of infrastructure development on our enforcement and have created a new civil service class. we have revised the penalty scheduled to make sure that this is logical and consistent. we are arranging for credit card and internet payment of penalties. we are developing a field procedures. we have found out we should the police department and to the airport. we have revised our its administrative citation book. these are all foundations that we are creating in order to establish a new system that has not been seen in san francisco before that is consistent and rational and effective. the taxi industry is a little bit complicated. i want to let you know what our

basic philosophy is. if you would like any more presentation on any more issues, we're happy to come back to you on any topic. >> thank you. is there any questions? >> thank you for the presentation. >> is in any public comment on this presentation? seeing none, we will move to item 5, please call item number 5. >> this is a jurisdiction request. the separate property is at 9 05 -- 905 and 911 union street. this is a letter asking that the board take jurisdiction.

the request was received on september 2nd. the permit holders are samantha wellington and rich and catherine behrens. the matter was continued to allow time for the permit holder to submit plans. >> with the consent, we can give each party three minutes to speak to the new material that was submitted.

>> madam chairman, commissioners. thank you for this opportunity. i would like to share my opinion on the scope and impact. on this of you, you can see the two reconfigured kitchens, the sides of the deck. on this next slide, you can see the actual reconfigured kitchens and the clear railings. on the next slide, i asked the question, do these glass railings provide a visual impairment? leslie, these are just 16 people on one of the deck just two weeks ago. it is very likely that these images would be quite different if the uriko the permit process

had been followed and was not faulty. this should have triggered public notices in review. for example, there is the construction of a deck. this is faced three city streets. there was a structural issues, new windows, an average height of 55 feet. construction was then modified engine to reconfigure a deck and cooking stations. however, at this meeting, the architect stated -- "no work was done that had to do with the was trying permit. on october 7th, the architect stated "the aesthetic modifications to the rear facade to not require a revision. this is a contradiction. there was either revisions or there was not. the commissioner's comments

were in person. the staff said they did not consider the view that public right away. how can the public expected to appeal in a timely manner if the plants are difficult for the public to interpret? the grounds for jurisdiction need not be the fault of the appellant and the city attorney says that the court can grant jurisdiction if there is a finding that the city was somehow at fault causing lateness in the jurisdiction. we believe that this is the case. the permit sinn have triggered a review a year ago. the plans were faulty. the construction was modified from the original permit. there are now two massive

modified facades made of glass and not open release -- freelance -- railings. please, the delay is not our fault. the public should be able to have careful consideration of this project. >> thank you. how have a question. i wonder if you can put the first picture up which shows the roof deck as it is today. someone needs to mention it. i can mention it. can we see the picture? can you slide this up so that we can see the day and to the people of -- said that we can see the a and b?

that is the kitchen structure. >> that is one of two kitchen structures. >> this is an example. i can see a skylight. then i can see the wall. then you have a close-up picture? >> yes.

this is an image taken a couple of days ago where it looks like the opposing attorney was meeting behind the kitchen with the facade that was reconfigured from the original permit. >> ok. thank you. >> you're welcome. >> the mind if i asked one question on the pictures? >> no, please. >> the second picture you put up? what is that on top of it? >> this is a gas heater that appears in the is it a photo

images to be hard wired into a gas line. i have never been on the property silt i don't know. there was at one time five of these. >> there's no structure over anyone's head? >> over -- other than the top. >> we can hear from the permit holder and their agent now. >> this was continued. i am samantha