parking lot going from parking lot under the vehicle parking to the public use under the other uses would trigger the notice. and so, again, the appellant has not articulated any reason why 312 is not required. >> okay. thanks. >> and i have a question, i don't think that you addressed why or how you think that the permit got issued over the counter in the first place. >> i don't have an answer for that from the staff. i mean, the permit you know, if i think that is may have been an error or a staff oversight and i don't know how it was represented to them and there were no plans, and it is just the building permit application. and so i don't know how it was represented to the planner, at the time, other than that was on the building permit application and i think that the staff made a mistake and again, you know, we have to enforce, the planning laws, and that is what we are doing here. >> and i am sure that it is in your good and how did it come to your attention that this had been issued. >> i don't know if this came

through the supervisor's office, but corey has listed the administrator, has with the compliance that were made to him and he informed me of this and i needed a notice and he drafted the suspension request and i signed it and issued it. >> thank you. >> i think that the permit was issued for a change of use. wasn't it? >> well, i mean this is, one of the zoning, and i think in the tracking system it is showing under the building permit occupancy as parking, as a parking lot. and under their tracking system and under the permit it does say the vacant lot and the mobile connection center. >> and i thought that i remember seeing something there about a change of use on the permit itself. >> yeah. >> but somehow, that did not, trigger or set up a flag for the approval process, right?

>> yeah. >> requiring further type of effort, >> i think that the staff made an error. >> okay. >> thanks. >> commissioners the matter is submitted. >> did mr. duffy want to say anything? >> okay. >> commissioners i just speak because i think that my name got mentioned somewhere along the line there. and on the notice of violation, that i heard referenced, i apologize that i don't have the copies of them with me or a copy. i believe from working on-line that there is one notice of violation issued, two complaintses and three complaints were filed and one ended up in a notice of violation, and going to the code enforcement and my recollection of this is that it was for installing the poles with lights the building use.

86 parking lot, and we have a list that get a number and sometimes we don't have every single classification for a business and so we may not have one for recycling and the plan checker used maybe the closest one and i don't know how he came up with parking garage, private, but, that is just a code, within dbi and it has nothing to do with planning codes or anything like that. so..., okay? >> thank you. >> thank you. >> i do have a question for counsel and the appellant. sorry. >> so you heard my question of the voting administrator on section 846 and what, and how does your client articulate the new use? >> in terms of... >> what actually, it was parking lot and now you are

changed and the... what was it the mobile facility, is >> the mobile recycling center. >> and do you. >> and the characterization on the application. >> the mobile recycling center. >> and you believe that it is a position, and it is your position that doing that, that is a change of use that does not subject itself to a 312. >> the type of use that is being proposed, does not trigger the 312 to provide neighborhood notification. and... >> why did, and why is it in your papers, is there the radius, notification? >> it was his initial understanding that he needs to do that and he brought in the application papers in with all of that documentation and was told that you don't need to do that and this is not a new use. >> okay. >> subsequent to that, three other planning department employees informed him the same thing and the reliance on that he entered into a five-year lease. >> what was the... could you give me the chronology of that reliance? >> when he went in initially. >> yes. >> and was told and then there were two other individuals who signed off on the back of the application and the person who

stamped in the front. >> dates. >> i don't have. >> i don't have the dates. >> and the execution of the lease. >> and you were making your reliance argument and you need some type of time proximity. >> may 31, the lease was signed. >> and when were those permit. >> all of those proceeded the execution of the lease except for the final approval stamp. they proceeded, i believe, at least two of them occurred in january. >> (inaudible). >> i can't hear you, so your attorney needs to speak or you need to speak. >> you can see on the back of the paper, everybody from the planning department signed by january 15th, and i went to finally finish it and the final stage and they said that you need to sign the lease. and so everything is done and so i don't have to do anything, and he said no you are done just bring the signed lease and

so after that we just specified something with the landlord, and i signed the lease. and that is march 31st, and based on and i have a lease and everything is approval. and and the planning department next day and they issued the permit based on what they called and what they told me,dy not do anything. >> did you do all of this by yourself? >> yes, ma'am. >> and do you remember when you went into the planning department who you spoke? >> yes, so the planning department, i went several, several times. >> do you remember the names of the people or the staff at the planning department? >> every time you go to the planning department, you not sign a planner each time that you talk different person. >> this is why i tried to follow everything what has been told me. >> right. >> every each, step and i went in the planning department and i was at least, 12 times. and based on it and the need to clarify, what is that? >> this is a recycling center

or an empty parking lot. and do we need the neighborhood notification, and somebody asked, yes and sody it and everything, i went and i did it and executed and i wanted to tell him and they didn't take it and said that if you turn it back and said, no, the lady wrote it down there is a name on it that notification is required but is not required on this purpose. and on this lot. and i said, you are sure? >> then my job is much easier, and i mean, time a little bit earlier and so after that, i went and just in case i broke, and the notification just in case i have to turn it in, everything is ready because i paid for it how it is supposed to be and every neighbor will be happy because i notified them but i cannot force the planning department to take something that i even wanted to them and they said we don't need. not one person or the other three or four person did not take me papers and so i don't know what i did wrong. >> okay. >> thank you very much. >> thank you.

>> very much. >> thank you, scott sanchez and i will clarify that there is some confusion with who is told the applicant what exactly. and so, the planning department actually only reviews and approves the building permit application once and so if the second signature block on the back, the other signature is which i think was told as you know, kind of planner number two and three. and planner number four, and actually the department of building inspection which don't implement the planning code and so it appears based on what the appellant had stated that you know in reality they were told once by one staff member in error and then that is one too much. but, that is not as if it does not appear and there is evidence that they were multiple staff planners that told them different things, and certainly, the proper information was relied and that neighborhood notice was required and the notification materials were presented and it

was a mistake by one planner on staff the day that he came in for the application, that is how i understand what the applicant had said about the other signatures being on the back, those are not planning staff just for clarify. >> okay. >> yeah, i mean, to me this case is pretty clear. i, you know, i am prepared to up hold the suspension, i don't see any error, or i believe that the zoning administrator did not err with his discretion and i am prepared to up hold the suspension. >> i agree with my fellow commissioner. >> i don't think that this is

such a cut and dry case here. and i appreciate the people that came up to speak. this may not be type of business that you want to have on your corner. and or around your business, and simply because it does draw people with share shopping carts and whatnot. and i recognize it as a busy intersection and people do have concerns, but i think that the concern, as i read it, is a business that people probably don't want to have so close to them. at the same time, i am troubled by the reliance of whether you could make, i don't believe that the constitutional argument necessarily applies or

that would necessarily hold up, but i do think that on the equities that it feels i feel a little uncomfortable with how the situation came to be. and a mistake was made, and it needs to be rectified and i think that the department needs to work through that. and i am not... and i feel that i don't know if this is the way to go. and if rather than up hold, and if, and i would like to actually, mr. sanchez if you could step up for a question as i am thinking out loud. if the suspension is not up hold, or if there is, let's say that the suspension is upheld how much time would your department need to understand what the use is? and to resolve the question in your mind or in your department's mind and analyzing what the use is? >> thank you, scott sanchez planning department and so that question, that concern, is new

as of this evening, based upon the statements made by the appellant, and certainly if we have a better understanding of how the use will operate, and comply with that code requirement, and it will certainly once we get the permit application, we could process that and i would ask the staff to expedite that given that this is a something that we need to correct. and so we would try to have that as soon as possible and i would assume given the neighborhood concerns, that there would be a discretionary review, on it and a hearing at the planning commission. and again we will do our best to expedite that to the extent possible. >> and tell me more about that process and, how that review process would be triggered based on your new review? >> so the neighborhood notification, under section... >> no, no, no. i understand that. let's say, that when you take, you have heard new information tonight for the first time. and you go back to your office, tomorrow. work with the appellant to understand what it is that they came forward with on their

permit application, and come to an understanding that in fact this does not require a neighborhood notification and it fits in one of those categories on your table? >> is that possible? >> no. >> i mean... >> it is not possible. >> and any use, given that this was a vacant lot, any use. >> any use, requires neighborhood notification. >> and okay. >> my concern today is it hearing that the appellant's argument that this is a use, that does not essentially fit in any of the definitions, in the use controls for this district, which would mean then that the use is not allowed, because you can only have those uses, which are listed in the district. >> okay. >> so the p ael ant... >> so you have heard today that none of that, that that does not fit in any of the categories. >> that is the appellant's argument >> okay. >> okay. so continuance would not help this. all right. >> those are my comments and

thoughts. >> yeah, i have not in the past been totally supportive of the department when they make, errors because people make decisions based upon what occurs, and you know, they should bare up to their errors, the problem here is that it is not necessarily a numbers game in terms of how many people don't like this either. the problem here is that it was not just one of the permit wheres we saw that this was a gray area and this was clear in what should have been flagged in terms of a red flag, you know? and therefore, i am not going to hold to my normal position, that the department made an e error, they should live with it. >> what do you mean that it is clear. >> a vacant lot, anything that you do. and it is clearly that they are

asking for a change of use. >> and it is written there right on the permit. >> okay. >> okay. >> that is what i referencing is that it was not like somebody did not see, part of a drawing or something like that. to get these things. >> i got it. >> okay. >> motion? >> well, unless a vacant lot is no use at all, that you are saying that a vacant lot is a use mr. sanchez? >> scott sanchez, planning department, so we will see a vacant lot as no use. and this case, i think that the closest possible use would be a parking lot, or each going from parking to parking to recycling notice is required, one thing that i will mention in the similar case ss that so the purpose of the suspension, and the new building permit application is to do the section, 312, neighborhood notification which is also, the same essentially the same

notice that this board does for appeal hearings and i said that in the past and i will remind the board of that in terms of considering your position on this item. >> any way that you cut it, it is a new use? >> right. >> that was made clear. >> okay. >> okay. well i will move to up hold the suspension on the basis that there was no error, or abuse of discretion. >> thank you. >> so we have a motion then from the vice president, to up hold this order by the zoning administrator on the basis that there was no error, or abuse of discretion. on that motion, to up hold, commissioner fung? >> aye. >> commissioner hwang? >> reluctantly aye. >> president lazarus. >> aye. >> commissioner honda. >> aye.

>> the vote is 5-0, this order is upheld on that basis, thank you. >> the last item was continued and so there is no further business and the meeting is adjourned. >> we're here to raise awareness and money and fork for

a good accuse. we have this incredible gift probably the widest range of restaurant and count ii destines in any district in the city right here in the mission intricate why don't we capture that to support the mission youths going to college that's for the food for thought. we didn't have a signature font for our orientation that's a 40-year-old organization. mission graduates have helped me to develop special as an individual they've helped me figure out and provide the tools for me that i need i feel

successful in life >> their core above emission and goal is in line with our values. the ferraris yes, we made 48 thousand >> they were on top of that it's a no-brainer for us. >> we're in and fifth year and be able to expand out and tonight is your ungrammatical truck food for thought. food truck for thought is an opportunity to eat from a variety of different vendor that are supporting the mission graduates by coming and representing at the parks >> we're giving a prude of our to give people the opportunity

to get an education. people come back and can you tell me and enjoy our food. all the vendor are xooment a portion of their precedes the money is going back in >> what's the best thing to do in terms of moving the needle for the folks we thought higher education is the tool to move young people. >> i'm also a college student i go to berkley and 90 percent of our folks are staying in college that's 40 percent hire than the afternoon. >> i'm politically to clemdz and ucla. >> just knowing we're giving back to the community. >> especially the spanish speaking population it hits

home. >> people get hungry why not eat and give

(music) >> herb theatre,open rehearsal. listen to the rehearsal. i think it is fun for them, they see our work process, our discussions, the decisions we make. it is good for us. we kind of behavior little bit when we have people in the audience. msk

(music) >> we are rehearsing for our most expensive tour; plus two concerts here. we are proud that the growth of the orchestra, and how it is expanded and it is being accepted. my ambition when i came on as music director here -- it was evident we needed absolutely excellent work. also evident to me that i thought everyone should know that. this was my purpose. and after we opened, which was a spectacular opening concert about five weeks after that the economy completely crashed. my plan -- and i'm absolutely dogmatic about my plans --were delayed slightly.

i would say that in this very difficult timefor the arts and everyone, especially the arts, it's phenomenal how new century has grown where many unfortunate organizations have stopped. during this period we got ourselves on national radio presence; we started touring, releasing cds, a dvd. we continue to tour. reputation grows and grows and grows and it has never stopped going forward. msk(music) >> the bay area knows the orchestra. you maybe take things for granted a little bit. that is simply not the case will go on the road. the audiences go crazy. they don't see vitality like this on stage. we are capable of conveying joy

when we play. msk(music) >> any performance that we do, that a program, that will be something on the program that you haven't heard before. string orchestra repertoire is pretty small. i used to be boxed into small repertoire. i kept constantly looking for new repertoire and commissioning new arrangements. if you look at the first of the program you have very early, young vibrant mendelson; fabulous opener and then you have this fabulous concerto written for us in the orchestra. is our gift. msk(music)

>> and then you have strauss, extraordinary piece. the most challenging of all. string orchestra work. 23 solo instrument, no violin section, now viola section; everybody is responsible for their part in this piece. the challenge is something that i felt not only that we could do , absolutely could do, but i wanted to show off. i can't tell you how aware i am of the audience. not only what i hear but their vibes, so strong. i have been doing this for a long time.

i kind of make them feel what i want them to feel. there is nobody in that audience or anywhere that is not going to know that particular song by the fourth note. and that is our encore on tour. by the way. i am proud to play it, we are from san francisco. we are going to play that piece no matter where we are. commiss that the commission does not permit outbursts of any kind please silence any mobile devices and speak directly into the microphone staurmd i'd like to take roll. commissioner president wu.

commissioner hillis. commissioner antonini. councilmember johnson. commissioner moore. commissioner sugaya and commissioner fung is expected to arrive later this afternoon. conspiring is your consideration for items for continuance item one at 1423 osha request for discretionary review authorization is proposed for september 11, 2014, there are no speaker cards. any public comment on the continuance calendar any public comment on that item? >> move to continue item one until september 11th and second. >> commissioners a motion and second to continue on that motion. commissioner antonini. commissioner hillis.

councilmember johnson. commissioner moore. commissioner sugaya and commissioner president wu. so moved, commissioners, that motion passes 6 to zero and places you under your consent calendar all matter listed are considered to be routine may be acted upon by a single roll call vote of the commission. there will be no separate discussion of these items there will be no separate discussion of these items of the commission, the public, or staff so requests removed from the consent calendar and considered as a separate item at this or a future hearing. . item 2 case 2013 c at 836 irving street request for conditional use there are no speaker cards. is there any public comment on item 2 >>