>> you are the permit holder? >> 643 jones. >> now we can take public comment. >> i live in 691 post street. i do not understand how it is mr. flynn controls the keys to the alleyway and not our managers. i applied approximately a day after the last hearing for keys to the gate and the back door. i have been assured i will get them in the next week or two. there is another issue. in the letter i am told it is mr. flynn who controls the keys.

this cannot be. it is our building. we are the tenants affected by it, not mr. flynn. goothe other issue i would likeo bring up is the gate open or closed. i have not watched it, but two weeks running, the gate is closed. your order is affixed to the wall. it says seven days a week, and the manager does not work on the weekends, so the gate is closed. gi want to ensure your order is so vague. thank you. -- is obeyed. thank you. >> any other public comments?

please step forward. >> my apartment faces the alley way. i have also witnessed negate being closed. the whole reason the gate was installed and now is because of safety. i think mr. flynn has done and not to create safety for the alley. good -- has done enough to create safety for the alley. he has a camera to see what goes in and out. there is a private security that comes in in the evening to patrol the building and the alleyway. he says there is a property manager. you're there might be a new one, but for the past two and not -- there might be another one, but for the past two and a half months there was an 0no one on's streak. he was accosted me for my advocacy about the removal of

the gate. -- there was no one on jones street. he has accosted me for my advocacy about the removal of the gate. there is a woman who is disabled who have to crawl out of of 3 ft. space on hurricane to get out of her property that is not handicapped a sensible, so that is how to trehe treats his rest. i believe it was put up on a saturday, and the city is just as responsible for that and for him, so there is no oversight. everyone wants to fix something that is broken. it should be taken down. there is enough security

measures so the rally is safe for everybody, and they installed bars on the lower parts of the windows for the ones who live on the basement and the ones above ground also, so how much safety do we need on the l.a. -- on the alley? this has been my home for 23 years. i know the neighborhood. he does not. people could not even answer the questions about the dates and how it was constructive. goothis is our neighborhood, soi asked that he remove the gate. >> any other public comment? >> my name is barbara, and i lived at the building is being

contested. we are asking for access to the back door, where we have a ramp and we could go in, and it is at street level. if somebody can not walk very well, they do not have to go up fliive stairs to the building. my husband was recently disabled, and he has back "/

very big problem, so this is not a trivial issue. isn't is -- it is a big problem. what is interesting is the old puzzle, who is watching the watchman? the people with the most interested in keeping the gate closed are the people with the keys. the people who need the keys to be able to come and go have to go to mr. flynn and building. it took us over a month to get a request for the key, and we still do not have the keys. it is not an unreasonable situation. good we are still having to deal with getting to food and medical equipment, and it is not possible. we are asking for a permanent solution. we want access to our own building, and we want this to be granted in a way that does not have to go through so many steps it is almost impossible to get what we need. i am stressing we would like a

permanent solution. moving the geithner in -- the gate in 3 feet will solve some problems, but it is not giving us access to our own building. >> do you agree there is a security problem in the l.aalle? >> there has been a problem with people dealing drugs and all that. people do not go back there. >> any other public comment? the matter is yours. ir>> perhaps in our earlier

comment about the threshold for this particular permit, perhaps we should discuss whether we are in agreement as to what the threshold is the reagan -- is. if the situation is as it was painted, the security issues, the drug issues, prostitution issues, and other things but were occurring in the alley, i would be supportive of this taking of a public right of way. leaving it open to me it does not make sense if one buys the concept in terms of what the security issues are.

the technical side of what is being done, the exit way could go over the public way a certain degree. i think they are allowed 12 inches. they can move about 3 feet. it does not matter. and the mechanism is relatively easy to do. those are not issues. the sizing of it, preliminary analysis indicates the existing gate size probably is ok for the occupant loands. it is probably ok for accepting from both buildings. it is not necessarily ok and terms of ada -- in terms of ada

requirements. i am probably buying into the fact that ben ali does have certain issues. and whether it only occurs -- that an alley does have certain issues. what i saw was a cavalier attitude in terms of understanding who has access and being able to come in and out of a public right of way, so i am not sure what to do, whether to revoke this and be able to get somebody's attention or to find some better way of being sure people have access to public right of way.

>> i appreciate those comments. i think the fact of the gate was put in a legally -- put in illegally i found to be a problem at the last hearing. i was thinking we have some consensus on the threshold question, but maybe that is not the case. today when we were talking about non-compliance of the existing gate, i kept thinking, why don't we let them start over and do everything right, and then we had to go to the threshold question -- is it appropriate to have in the done

-- to have it done. am concerned about the key issues. there are some challenges the may never be resolved, so close to concern me. i think a better route may have been to go the more difficult route to, which is to make it no longer a public access l.aalley. i am thinking out loud, and i am unclear right now where i would go with this, but if i had to decide right now, i would lead

to overturning the encroachment. >> doing away with the right to have the gate at all. >> yes, given that it is not an and save space -- not an unsafe space, and people who reside in the building feel safe. those are the people that matter right now. they live there. >> could i just clarify? if somebody has a key, the fact of the gate is open for a couple hours would be moot. is that correct? >> yes. >> if everybody who felt they haveneed access had a key, it

could be close 24 hours a day, and everybody else could open and close it as they came and went. good would that be your understanding? >> unless you need to replace theskeys, but i would allow the permit holder to pose something that would give me greater confidence in having people provide access. we already know dear sensibility of the buildings themselves is limited -- we already know the sensibilities of the building themselves are limited. gwe do not want to create a situation that i do -- add to

inaccessibility. i am willing to hear from the permit holder, how would he assure us of providing appropriate access to the tenants of both buildings? please come forward. >> there are probably 40 tenants in each building. we could give each kennan -- tenant a key when they move in. >> they have been waiting for months. >> we have given out quite a few, but we could give them 100% to every tenant, whether they need it or not. but as the other building. we have no reason not to give them a key.

it keeps people from coming into the building, so there are quite a few people. good and we cannot have security of the police force, and there is a lot of activity. we did think we were going in the right direction, but then anybody could come and go. you could leave. gowe have the design pretty well done. there are some tweaks. >> you currently have security cameras that would expose what is going on in the alley? >> i think so. >> how long have you been doing this? >> six months. 5 i think it would be great if we could use some of the footage

of the time during regular -- if you kept the gate open 24 hours and show as the footage on your security cameras and see what kind of activities are actually take place in the l.a. -- -- what kind of activities take place in the alley. what do you think of that? you can look at the tapes. icommissioner hillis: would we e able to see the alley? >> i don't know, it is endless battle. the tenants want this, then they don't. i don't know what to do any more. we have been cleaning up the alley for years.

the cameras do not stop anything. i was called one time because it was open and there was a vehicle there. i took a picture of it and the vehicle backed up and hit me. you are not supposed to park there. president hwang: is it the parking that is an issue or the illicit activities? >> mostly, i would worry about the illicit activities. we do not use it for parking, but it was pretty bad. it is mostly probably during the night. then you have to have labor open and close it and we miss it. president hwang: okay, i just wanted to see if you would be open to that suggestion. that is just my personal point of view. commissioner lazarus: you are searching for a security without a date? president hwang: gating off a

public right of way as a drastic measure. i have understood that it was done for murder nc purposes. they have had it illegal for over a year and are some disability access issues and potentially fire issues. we cannot create another problem that is not resolving a problem. if there is a problem, i want to see the basis for wanting to date in the first place. >> the cameras will not be with. there are a dozen gates in the tenderloin like this, for same reason. president hwang: but here we have people who are in the buildings who are affected that are talking about issues related to disability access, not related to safety. somebody has been in that area 23 years. i have not seen people testify about the gate. and you could have brought them in. >> the road a lot of letters. we turned the man with the exhibits -- they wrote a lot of

letters. president hwang: it is easier for me to hear them. i want to see the serious display that you have to gate off a public right away. vice president fung: i have a question, then, of mr you. commissioners? i am trying to recall, idoes the department review for the reasons behind a closure, which in this instance is the their illicit activities or undesirable activities? -vstn

department, who is in support of the closure of this alleyway, and that they also provided documentation of the fire department saying that this date was appropriate for the needs of the fire department, for the local fire station. so there are backgrounds associated with the identification of an emergency order authorizing the closure of this date in this specific case. vice president fung: okay, there was no directors teetering or appeal? >> not in this case. vice president fung: okay, thank you. i'm willing to float a motion if you are willing to hear it. i am prepared to uphold the department of streets and mapping on their permit, with two conditions. one is that they procure a building permit with any

required modifications for exit paying for ada purposes, as required by the building department, and secondly that the installers of the gate, in this case the permit holder, supply keys to every unit in both buildings within one week. do you have a procedural question? president hwang: ok. >> if the date or to remain closed and locked, i would like a call box at the sidewalks of my drivers can call up to the apartment and open up so they

can pick me up to the handicapped access in the building. vice president fung: mr. duffy, you have questions, comments? >> sorry about complicating things. the moving back of 3 feet of the gate could create the level landing issue, because i believe that slopes down towards the street -- from the street towards the alley. even if they apply for a permit, i hope they get approval for it. if that permit was not approval, then the p.w. -- and the dpw would be revoked? i was looking at the gate and it's correct location, moving it, it is very hard to get that, and you have to have a level landing at the gate. i don't know if it will be a problem, but if it was, how that

would affect if they would not be able to get the building permit, on their condition, then that would revoke the permit? vice president fung: yes. >> ok, that's fine. sorry. vice president fung: counselor? >> i just want to remind everyone, including my commissioners, what would happen in the event the permit is revoked, and that the applicants would not be able to apply for the same permit for another year, and if the circumstances. unless the circumstances that lead to revocation had somehow changed. vice president fung: understood. commissioner lazarus: i am now somewhat confused. is there a gate there that is permissible? vice president fung: i believe based on the presentation made by both the building department and dpw was the main gate for

emergency vehicle stays in place. it is the person gate that moves back so as it swings out it does not swing over the sidewalk. am i correct? >> inspector duffy is correct, there might be a possibility that if the date is moved back, additional work would have to be made in the public right away to provide the level landing and other accessible features. the department would issue a supplemental permit for reconstruction of the sidewalk as appropriate to make it happen in this case. president hwang: and that is at the cost and responsibility of the applicant? >> absolutely. vice president fung: we don't want to make the situation worse in terms of accessibility. president hwang: and the supplemental permit would be appealable? >> that would be correct. at them as would be the building permit.

>> correct. vice president fung: before you leave, or my conditions clear to you? >> yes, it was, building permits required, keys be provided to all units within both buildings by the applicant, and any adjustments required to be made on the gate would be needing additional permits as appropriate to satisfy the access. vice president fung: right. president hwang: i have a friendly amendment to the motion, and its conditions would be pending the perfecting of the permit and applying for and getting them issued, etc., pending the hours of the gate to be open from 7:30 until 6:00 p.m., rather than 8:00 until 4:00 p.m., and that must be complied with. it is currently eight until

5:00. i like to extend the hours. vice president fung: until the permit is issued. president hwang: correct. vice president fung: i accept that. >> until the permits are final? vice president fung: yes. everybody has their options for further appeal. >> ok, so there are i think for conditions. one is that building permits be procured. in fact, that is already a condition of this minor sidewalk encroachment permit, but you can restate it, and that the gate installers, the permit holder, provide keys to every tenet in both buildings. vice president fung: every unit. president hwang: within one week. >> and you mentioned the requirement that all of the next sitting and load and that ada

requirements be met, by both the building and the department. vice president fung: that would be accomplished by the building permit, not a separate condition. >> and then that the powers that the gate be open to be changed to 7:30 in the morning until 6:00 p.m., seven days a week, until the permits are final. vice president fung: that is correct. >> and that would be the building permits. ok. commissioner lazarus: a clarification, the issuance of the keys one week from -- vice president fung: today. >> i think it would need to be when the board issues its decision. there is a 10-day rehearing request, and if nobody filed a request, we issue with on the 11th day. if somebody supplies a request, we would have to honor that. vice president fung: i would hope the permit holder would look at that before that time.

>> just a reminder, since this places conditions on the permit, it is as if you or granting the appeal, so it would need to be voted. -- it is as if you are printing the appeal, so it would need to be voted. >> we have a motion from the vice-president to grant this appeal, uphold the permit, with