planning. dawn kamalanathan, thank you very much for those kind remarks. i am claire meyers and this is kate and thank you for your time and reviewing our project. friends of mountain lake park playground is comprised of three momss who started to meet three years ago and we're thrilled and honored to be able to present this project to you for a number of reasons. first it's a wonderful design and sensitive to its surroundings and challenge children for generations to come. the second is the natural setting. mountain lake is a stunningly beautiful oasis in our city and as you probably know the lake itself is recognized at the birthplace of san francisco. being the only freshwater lake in the area, the site was an important place for native-americans and the first

settlement. plans for the presidio and the mission for san francisco were laid at mountain lake in the late 1700's. we the lake's current neighbors have a vision for the playground that is keeping in with its very special natural and historical context and we have a strong desire to design a unique playground that is inclusive and stimulates and delights children. the larger community has been supportive of our efforts, and in over two years of public design meetings and community events there has been an evolving positive dialogue about this project. our community and our project partners agree this is a wonderful opportunity to consciously improve the playground space with an emphasis on meeting the needs of children of all ages and abilities and to create a connection between the playground and unique natural setting.

our project partners include friends of mountain lake park, the presidio trust, presidio heights association of neighbors, neighbors for presidio planning, the san francisco department on the environment, our supervisors mark farrell and eric mar who have been skeetingly supportive and our most committed partners the recreation and park department and the san francisco parks alliance. as abigail indicated our budget is $3.15, of which $2 million has been award by the park bond. $350,000 has already been made in in-kind donations thanks to our architect and we have $750,000 left to raise to close the gap. we're going to look to our richmond district community and also neighbors from other districts who use mountain lake park and at all times during the year the park is very active and many districts not just ours will benefit from the improvement of this playground.

we have come so far since our meetings three years ago in local coffee shops and we feel really excited and encouraged and we hope you approve our project so we can get to work. thank you. >> thank you very much. >> is there any other public comment? >> good morning commissioners, meredith thomas with the san francisco parks alliance and i agree with dawn these folks have been on-point and doing all the right things to get their playground renovated and we're embarking on another set of bond projects that are going to involve a lot of community leveraging, and neighbors sweat equity and these folks are really demonstrating that to a tee. so the san francisco parks alliance joins the recreation and park department in having a high degree of confidence this will be a

spectacular playground and i want to thank them for volunteering their time for doing this, when i know busy and have other things in happening inhir lives. their lives. >> thank you. >> thank you, any other public comment? being none, public comment is closed. >> commissioner levitan. >> i want to say that i have said before i live in the house that i grew up and mountain lake was my park and i don't think you have to be an arithmetic genius to know how old this park was, to tell you that the play equipment was there when i was a kid and it's long overdue and i want to thank them, because it shows us how organic this process can be and how right it can be. you see a need and you want to fill it and they have done a great job, as dawn has just said. and what has changed as claire

said is that the demand for this park was grown a lot. when i was growing up, the presidio was a military base and nobody really used mountain lake except for the people who lived right there. now you have the presidio as a park. you have new housing at the health services hospital. you have a much more ambulatory society and mountain lake park has a tremendous demand and it's not just serving one neighborhood, but serving the entire city. so i think the process has been commendable. i am pleased to be involved, much, much on periphery and i am looking to seeing this come to fruition and so thank to the friends of mountain lake park and thank you to the department for all of your help. >> thank you. commissioner bonilla. >> let's see, i don't know if i can get close here -- i would just like to take this

opportunity to thank the -- i think it's bcj design services for their gift. i think this shows an extraordinary commitment to this project. that you would provide your services to this project and i just want to say i am really impressed with that, and want to thank you whole-heartedly for doing that. >> so noted. seeing no other questions from the commission, entertain a motion. >> so moved. >> second. >> moved and seconded. all those in favor, say aye? >> aye. >> we are now on item 8, closed session. conference with legal counsel, existing legislation. is there any public comment on this item? seeing none, public comment is closed and we need a motion.

>> we need a motion to adjourn to executive session. >> moved. >> is there any general public comments? being none, general public comment is closed. we're on item 10 "commissioners' matters." >> commission low. >> following up, sorry, i'm still getting over a cold. following up our hearing at the joint hearing, with the planning and rec and park commission, i do want to have a hearing in september, trying to develop a structure, where

there are opportunities for project sponsors, particularly in those districts where there is high need for open space and recreation to draw a nexus between the need for contributions by the project sponsor and teir development. and i think that presentation should be both by planning department staff, of course rec and park staff, as well as the mayor's office of economic and community development. and i would like to have that hearing at -- accounting for the summer, in september, to give both departments enough runway so that they come prepared with an analysis and a proposed structure of how that might be developed to have those opportunities presented to project sponsors,, as well as the implementation. >> i assume you want that before the full commission as

opposed to a committee? >> correct. >> and i just want to second that and thank you commissioner low for doing that, because i think if there is one thing imminently clear with the development boom, we need to work on that very quickly. >> does staff understand the request? >> yes. >> will you make sure we get a response to the request to schedule that, so we know it's moving forward? >> yes. >> thank you. seeing no other comments. >> is there any public comment on this item? being none, public comment is closed and we're on item 11 "new business, agenda setting." is there any public comment? being none, public comment is closed. we are on item 12 "communications." is there any public comment? being none, public comment is closed >> it's so lonely in here. >> i know, we're officially on

item 13, adjournment. so moved. >> thank you. are ready to begi

>> good morning. today is wednesday june 19, 2013. this is a meeting of the abatement appeals board. the first item on the agenda is roll call. president clinch, commissioner mar, commissioner mccray, commissioner mccarthy,

commissioner lee, commissioner walker and vice-president melgar is expected. we have a quorum. the next item is item b. i have and announcement. there is going to be a continuance of item b. presidio avenue. this case will not be heard today. the next item is b. the oath. please raise your right hand to be sworn. do you swear the testimony that you are about to give to be the truth to the best of your knowledge? thank you. be seated. item c. approval of minutes.

discussion and possible action for adoption of minutes of april 17, 2013. >> move to approve. >> second. >> we have a motion and a second. is there any additional public comment? seeing none, public comment is closed. >> all in favor? aye. any opposed? the minutes are approved. >> the next item b continued appeals. i want to announce that since these cases were previously heard, the appellant and department will have three minutes to present their case. item e continued appeals for jurisdiction. case no. 6772 san bruno avenue. no. 1 to no. 4.

richard thomas environment and land management. the appellant is requesting that the abatement appeals board grant jurisdiction. >> good morning. are we taking these items individually or together? individually. in case of 6772, i don't have much to add from the last time this was before you except to state that the commission asked for a detailed table with all the information and i believe we've given that today and it's attachment a. in the back of your staff report and also for your convenience we have included the staff report with the information that we believe you need to make your decision and we strongly urge you on the

basis that it's all before you that there is proper information that the appellant is given you to be able to take this case and in doing to mar our ability in both agenda item 1 and 2. and when we go to no. 2, i will be saying the same thing. thank you very much. >> question. could you clarify, are these two separate properties? >> it is and because the applications if you recall you were asking for better clarification at the last meeting. the applications are very unclear. it seems they are both tied to some manner to both properties. we did not get clarification from the property owner on that. i can't quite tell.

>> okay. the second question is how many orders of abatement were assessed on each property? two each? >> let's look at the tables because that will tell you on each one of the cases what there is. exhibit a is quite clear and identifies that for you. if you look at the exhibit a for 6772, it identifies for each complaint when an order of abatement was issued. the first 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, and 6, 7, 8, 9

were issued. >> okay, thank you. >> any other questions? thank you. good morning. i'm david berry for the owner and for environment land management. since we spoke the last time, as we described in the declaration of thomas, environment land management and tom have hired an attorney for substantial time to clear violations. she has met with andrew cars and had a very productive session with mr. cars to go through each of the violations and determine the steps required to clear each violation and also authorized the property management for elm

to spend substantial time also clearing all violations, taking all steps required and obtaining all permits required. i spoke yesterday with the plumber to inspect the property and give us prices and he'll return to the property for additional estimates for completion of the work. it's the plan of mr. thomas to clear all violations. the department has been very cooperative and explained the steps required to clear the violations and they have stated the various penalties that we are appealing from are negotiable or up for discussion once the violation are cleared. i have spoke with mr. thomas to discuss the case. we believe we have made some

extent moot some of the penalties that are here in this appeal. the one thing that we are confused about and we are having difficulty with were illustrated by some of the exhibits in the packet. i have pulled them out separately for your examination. i will show what you they are. basically, on one of the items that's involved in the appeal here, it's called violation 241 because those of the last two digits of the complaint numbers. this is involving the stairs of the subject property. this is in march of 2011. the building owner took the steps to fix that by getting a building permit and paid $2300. in january of this year, this

work was approved and is cleared and got a certificate of completion. two months after that, this permit approval was revoked which means penalties continue to accumulate on this even though the work has been done and an approved and the reason why because of the gerard unit is on appeal. >> thank you. >> there is no question from the commission, we'll go to public comment. >> you have a public comment, sir? >> you can come forward to the microphone, thank you. >> my name is jerald green, i'm

trying to find out r you running this concurrent with 3580 san bruno too? >> case no. 6772 which is all the units, violation on the units. >> i have a comment. this activity has been going on for four years. it's damaged from windows which are disabled in there. what was the we have going on now. mr. thomas had a proceeding. i gave you papers. he has been promising. he proceeded to fixing these windows without a permit. this is when he first proceeded. the window. this is what he calls fixing. see the hinge there? this is the next step after the hinge. now, my concern is on this, you gave him 30 days. i

received yesterday a paperwork saying that he will check the unit and he's already have been, this has been going on so many years of checking the unit of rotting windows, so many problems. hot water heater. i have a picture of that. this is him doing something without a permit. this stuff has been rolled up and seems like it keeps getting carried over. you gave him a 30 day situation. nothing happened. we've been waiting for him. did he get a permit to start on these windows? there is a disabled

in there. i have been there four years suffering. what is the next step? what was the proceeding of this? why are we wasting each other's time here? something is not real here. i have been living in the property with a disable with a horrible condition. i have someone that wants to speak here that represents disabled and represents seniors. thank you. >> thank you. >> good morning. my name is tony robles. i work with senior and disability action. we are

an organization that serves seniors and people with disabilities. our primary concern among other things is housing. we work to ensure that elders can age in place. and so much has to do with health and housing. we've been working to make sure that for instance, living conditions in hotels are improved. we work to get an ordinance passed through dbi to ensure that grab bars and working phone jacks are installed in sro hotels or residences. i got a chance to speak to mr. green and miss brown who live at the residence on san bruno avenue. there are a lot of habit ability issues;

leaks and problems with the windows. the windows are bolted down so if there were a fire or emergency, the fire department would have problems getting in, getting access. miss brown who is a resident there has some very significant health issues. she's a disabled elder who is trying to age in place. she has a care provider, but the health issues that she has, the habit ability issues in the residence makes it a difficult situation for her. the temperature going to either extremely cold to extremely hot, the moisture coming in through various leaks, leaky refrigerator, the windows that can't open, there

is problem with the windows and wiring. from what i understand, there has been on going problems with the property owner and other properties. there is a seven page article about this on going problem with this particular management ownership company that has this property that it's a long going thing. i think there is something like 300 cases that have gone to litigation over the last 10 or so years. it's nothing new and we just want to speak to this problem because it's a huge problem in san francisco, problems particularly with our elders, with a population that is aging. we have to ensure that these mechanisms that are here to serve and to ensure that our elders can age in place that