>> so ms. brison the end and the permittee holder as well with the missing commissioner, if there's are 3 votes and the commissioners voting rights vote we'll allow the missing commissioner a change to vote. >> good evening i don't think i'm going to need all 6 minutes i'm not gag going to take up more time then needed i'm jackie brison first of all, i want to thank donald duffey with providing me with the actual code pertaining to what i'm going to talk about you know how to read there's no reason to recap what's writing down. what i elapsed from having dealt with the gentleman in the past

and having had other jurisdictional requests once a building permit is issued there's a public notice for 15 days allowing the public to know there's an intended to appeal. and i can't work off this magic so i'll read to you. that the permit person shall get a sign physician the following date and address of the permit person and the date of the issuance and the phone of the agency to contact the appeal and the issuance of the address and phone number of the person. i've spoken with the person taken over the permit issuance at the special permit bureau.

and she tell him that the two by 3 foot poster boards are issued to the applicant at the same time that the permit is given and that the information is written down. and mr. chiu apparently didn't post like he was supposed to you i have this letter i don't know if you have this in our packet. okay. what i want is the ipad attached. yes. all right. it's states here i have a

attached the meeting sign-in sheet with the notification map he the mailing of public notification for residential and commercial permit we presented proper notification but didn't state we posted the required notices to the public and one of the reasons for posting the notice is so people can see there's going to be a change in the use of the building. i don't know if you can make that the is that you it's not my tablet. is it up there okay >> yeah. this posting was to happen between twenty-four hour of the permit it was issued on

march 18 to remain up for 15 dazed that didn't happen i have 24 minutes left and that's it unless you have questions for me i'm sorry. >> no, thank you. we can hear from the permit holder agent. >> good evening, commissioners s i a consulting. i'm going to try to keep this quick as well. i was retained to give you history to do the plans back in 2012. we have gone through various departments that required a number of notifications i sitting here count 5 nos that went out to the neighborhoods including the property owners

and the tenants. around the property. i personally reached to the task force and have held a couple of other meetings with some of the neighbors as well as that had questions about the project. no one other than ms. brison has voiced concerns in the last two years the project is fully code compliant we're not seeking compliance within height limit and follows the rezoning of the area to the t. in addition to all the notifications and all that we had to deal with the dph that deals with the health and safety we provided the little

excavation the plan one and two survey to make sure we don't cause any health hazard to the adjacent neighbors. i actually my office is around the corner whether the poster was up or not i drive by the site i can attest i saw the poster it was up at least two weeks beyond the required notification period. i'm asking you to approve the project as is and allow to continue working if you have any questions, i'll be happy to answer them >> thank you. mr. sanchez >> thank you. good evening commissioner hurtado scott sanchez tyler within a zoning

commercial zoning district. this matter was last before the board of appeals end of the last decade in 2009 the appellant brought on appeal against a demolition and the appellant talked about the virile refugee agreed with the appellant we had concerns of the accuracy of the review the board to the call of the chair it should be on the docket. the permit holder subsequentially filed a new application in march of 2010 we were working on the zoning that came effective in the last couple of years and performed the environmental review on march 6 and mitigated a declaration for the environmental review for the project and on marine 12 the permit applications were filed

two demolition two buildings to be demolished the jurisdiction request only concerns one jurisdiction demolition so not all permits are subject of the jurisdiction request. at least i believe. following that the issuance of the negative declaration mitigated the appellant filled the appeal of the environmental determination. and it also during the time the building application section 312 last summer for thirty days no discretionary review authorization requests the planning commission heard the appeal in october and unanimously denied the appeal subsequent to that the appellant filed an appeal with the board of supervisors at that time, on a letter dated december 6th it was noted that the appeal was

timely filed. but that it really wasn't ripe because of the no final action taken on the project it didn't require an variance the what set the clock ticking for the visible rectify for the board of supervisors was the issuance of the building permits in the letter in december the building permits were issued on march 18 of this year and the board of supervisors claerntd it for a hamburger and had a hearing on the environmental review appeal and made one t f and unanimously did understand that appeal following the jurisdiction requests filed poor based on my review of this and relevant notification requirements it appears those notifications have been satisfied and in regards to the ordinances of permits that's

a requirement of the building code so i'll defer to mr. duffey but we've heard from one party that poster was in fact installed >> mr. duffey. >> hello commissioners good evening. both the permits the occasion permit my the new construction permits were issued by dbi on mark 18, 2014 and as you heard earlier the notification process is part of our code for demolition of a building and we see those signs all over the city. we at dbi and cb issue the notice wherever their picking up the permit we don't check it's up there we assumed they do it

if we got a complaint we didn't get one. but i assume everything was followed at the permits were issued credible and the building permits are still going the process so i'll be available for any questions >> thank you. any public comment on that item? please step forward >> good evening, commissioners. my name is mr. monet i live on turk street this is in district 6 with all the new building and tearing down in my district since other parts of the city has been built and now a they're

moving sfwo to this eastern south of market and one thing i know that i see the complainant at all kinds of different community meetings. she's just like me making sure that things are done right because the people that live in the district the regular people not the nonprofits and all that stuff but people that go home at night but people that live in the neighborhoods are getting screwed so even if it's a small issue such as this about signs being put up i know i have something i am involved with coming up at the end of the month but we're making sure that we have signs up saying that the street will be close and then we noticed the dates was wrong so

we made sure we took it upon ourselves to take care of that and all the things we need to do so if the sign ways up or if it wasn't up i don't know but maybe we could find some type of solution so this doesn't happen again to make sure the sign is big enough we have seniors in that area >> thank you is there any public comment seeing none, the matter is submitted and mr. sanchez. >> you give us a lengthy review of the status of various prooerdz involved there was a 311 notice under which permit. >> there's a section 312 for

the occasion of the buildings for the new construction as well that was a demolition notification within one hundred and 50 feet of the subject property. >> okay without that was for the permit of issue then. >> that's correct and to the two other issue. >> that's correct. >> okay. then no discretionary appeal no discretionary review was filed. >> that's correct. the appellant in this case filed on appeal on the sequa determination in april and we subsequentially >> april of this year. >> april of last year this was the first of two sequa appeals and they never had notification on the permit so see if there were any discretionary review and the eventual date was the

sequa hearing was last year. >> okay. thanks. >> thanks. >> question for mr. duffey along the same lines to clarify that. >> the demolition permit has a more stringent modification of notification requirement. >> that's correct. >> what's that radius wise. >> 3 hundred feet the notification. >> thank you. >> we a may need to check that my recollection without checking the code the notification for after issuance from dbi or prior to or during review. >> your notification goes out before you issue? >> we notify when the permit is issued as well the demolition

the 311 notification during the process and the notification of intent to demolish a building so through would have been notification so ms. brison had up on the screen and that is a 3 hundred feet radius from what i remember. >> okay. thank you. >> i think it was submitted anyone have my comments. >> commissioners the question is notification and more specifically she talks about the issue of the posting. the permit holders indicated

posting usually a lot of the arithmetic take a photo to be sure it was done of the posting. i wasn't necessarily going to request a cdot here the amount of notification was extremely steven so i'm not supportive of the proper notification was here >> i agree. do you want to make a motion >> move to deny the jurisdiction request. >> okay. thank you. >> mr. pacheco. >> we have a motion to deny the both jurisdiction requests. >> on that motion from commissioner fung.

commissioner hwang. commissioner hurtado. and wanting is absent commissioner honda is recused the vote is 3 to zero and the jurisdiction is denied no appeal on those permits. thank you >> i'm going to call the next item 6 appeal 56 have an lee vs. the area mapping this is caesar chavez street protesting the april 14, 2014, to sf permit for the purposes of installing a new cabinet. it's on for hearing today but before i begin let's let the other commissioner return to the room and start the hearing in just a minute.

okay. so we can hear from the appellants agency you have 7 minutes to present our case >> thank you. i'm eric i'm a retired attorney and i'm representing the appellant vivian lee the business impacted by the mounted facility if the appeal is denied. the issue is briefed i think the preliminary issue is very clear an alternative site was located >> can you get closer to the

microphone. >> i'm sorry the alternative site was located by at&t. it was a box walk was conducted as stated by the hearing officer and the alternative site was described at the hearing as being caesar chavez street to the side the building located on germany ray restraining order for some reason the gentleman ordered at&t to do a review and they reviewed 4 hundred to 14th century 40 germany restraining order rather than the location on caesar chavez street this was proposed on box walk with two eches representatives of at&t and subsequentially at the hearing in front of mr. crumble

that's the seeshs the issue the proposed location is will because of tree planting that's happens since the permit was requested effectively block a parking stott spot that's directly in front of the pharmacy building where the alternative site has a city owned triangle of land a city owned property it's a maintained and the side of a residence a 3 story residence with no exits issues and furthermore, the box location if i understand the requirement there is a surface mounted sfalt facility and i understand the other facility has to be a few feet away and there's certainly alp room for

that new surface mounted facility to be there completely inper diem that traffic it's 4 feet away in front of an area where parking is not permitted because that's two merger parking together on caesar chavez street. so consequentially this will have a significant impact combined with the tree planting and the current construction being done at the hospital across the street and also the change in the lanes the bike lane was added and other traffic issues that have caused the green zone area in front of the or in front of the the pharmacy to be usedless i stated this is the pharmacy in the city with a

radius that has the most easy access for the disabled. indeed at the hearing in front of many crumble the appellant submitted a petition with 25 signatures from customers and neighbors including people with disabled and also a letter from dr. jerome about the access issues. this is not mentioned in the order and indeed the first first, the appellant was notified that the wrong area was being surveyed when mr. crumble issued the order we were told to wait to appeal to this board a that's what we did the appellant tried to contact at&t and i just

found out that the brief on page 3 has a miss statement of the person she contacted she contacted after the hearing someone in the office that mr. mark recreational vice president for customer affairs and someone in that office threshold the file contained no file of a box walk he promptly >> the what. >> the box walk to decide with members of the community to determine where to place the box there was no record of the box walk and he promised to get back to her and no one contacted her nor responsive to further inquires on this matter at&t indeed has not been cooperative at all and again, the alternative is to i have

photographs if there's an issue they surveyed the wrong area if they did the correct area then i think they would agree that's a better site it impedes nothing no traffic. >> when you say impedes do you mean in commodity. >> it impedes the ability of a that parking it ruins that parking spaces. >> in come mode the public. >> yes. >> but it also the significant impact on the appellants - >> okay. thanks. >> are you finished. >> i believe i am. >> okay in the predicament holders brief they should

diagrams. >> the permit holder didn't submit a brief. >> let me finish. >> okay. >> there are diagrams of certain corners and certain things on the sidewalks do you look at those. >> if you talking about the diagrams they've sent to the appellant yes. which one where is the alternative location >> let me see if i can show you on a map. if i can put a map on the overhead? okay. now let me move - >> so turn it facing the way you'd look at it. >> all right. the proposed surface mounted

facility goes between the two trees on the far left under the sign that says a g pharmacy and that's caesar chavez >> yes. the photo is of caesar chavez the cross streets st. is germany restraining order and i have a map i ho no, i don't. >> mr. pacheco if you could make the picture darker the monitor is flickering.

it's not working? >> okay. this is well - i'm sorry okay. there you go. 3638 caesar chavez is shown on this map. and across gerrero street and the gray areas in gerrero are the center divide and across gerrero street there's a sidewalk and i drew in a triangle that's the city owned land. and there is where the surface mount facility should be placed. i have a photograph that may simply not be good enough to-

oh. there we go. the area here this is the arrow showing you can't park there this is a surface mounted facility and the public space with the trees overhanging those trees have been trimmed back in the last week and along in here by the sign the signage there no parking sign is where on the box walk and at the hearing it was proposed that the facility be mounted. >> the for ground street it what. >> the one running this way is caesar chavez and the street where you see all the traffic is gerrero. >> where is 26. >> it's up at the next corner. >> a ways away.

>> yeah.. that's why we didn't propose that. >> thank you. can i ask about the trees on the first visible that you put up. >> yes. >> would you put that back up were those newly planted trees after the permit was issued and after the permit was requested because in the permit requests there's a photograph of the site and no tree so subsequentially u subsequential to that in the last year they've planted the trees. >> so the place in between the trees that's a permitted site for the surface mounted facility is there a green strip for people coming out of the pharmacy. >> it eliminates the green zo